Canon EOS R1 Specifications [CR2]

[koenkooi]

I'll be blunt... a global shutter is stupid for a photography focused camera. A couple of legitimate NFL Sony pros I know feel the same way. It's great for the YouTube/Grifter crowd though.

As an engineer, the idea of a global shutter appeals to me very much. Zero readout time beats fast readout

As a hobby photographer, I just want to use flash and ES together, which the R3 can already do. And since I’m using ES on the R8/R5 already, I don’t care that much about DR, I’m already down 2 bits of resolution. So GS versus stacked doesn’t matter to me, both would be a big improvement already.

If I Canon would release 2 identical cameras, one with GS and one with a stacked sensor, I’d probably pick the stacked sensor one, since it would be a lot cheaper!

 

[neuroanatomist]

This seems to be 5 times faster than the sensor in the R3, so a nice improvement, just not as impressive as a global shutter would be.

Are you impressed by the dynamic range penalty and base ISO 250 of the global shutter sensor on the a9III?

I’m not.

 

[Del Paso]

I'll be blunt... a global shutter is stupid for a photography focused camera. A couple of legitimate NFL Sony pros I know feel the same way. It's great for the YouTube/Grifter crowd though.

The real question is what matters: pleasing the youtubers or actual users?
Canon will certainly have opted for the second group, at the "risk" of facing irrelevant criticism from the first one.

 

[koenkooi]

Are you impressed by the dynamic range penalty and base ISO 250 of the global shutter sensor on the a9III?

I’m not.

I wouldn’t say I’m impressed, but I’m using 12-bit CRAW at high ISO already, so I’m not sure if shots from an A9III would be worse than my R8, at ISO800 and up.

But given a choice, I’m leaning towards preferring R3 levels of performance and not towards GS.
I’ll go shoot with my 1D today, that effectively has a GS as well

 

[GMCPhotographics]

This rumoured spec sheet certainly reads like a very impressive camera!
At the end of the day it doesn't matter if this camera has a rolling shutter or a global shutter. What matters are pristine photos without rolling shutter artifacts creating odd elements in photos. If Canon are able to crack this issue with theri regular rolling electronic shutter, then they have a competative advantage in the market because they get to re-use their existing sensor tech.
I see this spec list is claiming a higher dynamic range and 16 bit RAW files.

 

[FaolainWolf]

The GOOD: I'm very glad the RUMOR is that global shutter isn't part of the package. Image quality matters more than anything and, if Sony is any indication, global shutter isn't ready to provide that.

The BAD: This seems like a pretty small step up from the R3. It's about what I would expect an R3ii to be. Perhaps this is verification that the R3 was really the R1, then was renamed at the last minute. Great camera . . but for birds, we need more than 24MP . . . or even 30MP.

 

[john1970]

Are you impressed by the dynamic range penalty and base ISO 250 of the global shutter sensor on the a9III?

I’m not.

..and neither am I!

 

[DrD]

The new A9 III is very unimpressive in head-to-head comparisons with both other Sony bodies and the Canon R3 (having watched Jared Polin's real world test).

On a more specific note, getting back to R1 specs - 2 hopeful amendments I hope to see: (1) hardware ports - full HDMI please and not a mini or a micro (as per the R3 and R5 etc.), and (2) software upgrade - include CLog2 as standard to maximize the full DR of the new sensor.

 

[docsmith]

"(<0.8 microsecond read time)"

Is this perhaps meant to be milliseconds? 0.8 milliseconds would still be industry leading. Microseconds is 1000 times faster.

Borrowed from a AlanF post:



And doing some math, but the R3 was reported as having 1/180th sec readout time, which is 5.5 milliseconds. The R5 was reported as ~1/60th readout time, which is 16.6 milliseconds, slightly different than above, but the same ballpark.

 

[Mike9129]

Its interesting that this is the spec theyre putting on the camera. Its kinda nudging into the R3 segment and not creating its own. Frankly tho, the specs are fantastic if they turn out to be true.

I wonder if the R3\'s role in the lineup will be changed going forwards.

 

[David - Sydney]

I'll be blunt... a global shutter is stupid for a photography focused camera. A couple of legitimate NFL Sony pros I know feel the same way. It's great for the YouTube/Grifter crowd though.

Isn’t just the implementation that is the issue? The a9iii uses half a billion pixel as the storage for the global read. If the storage was behind a full normal (or in canons case the dual pixel) then the iso/ dynamic range wouldn’t be impacted.
Fast enough sequential read would be equivalent in any case.
Canon produced the best FSI sensor in the R5 and -if the rumour is correct- the best BSI stacked sequential read sensor

 

[Bahrd]

If the readout is fast enough (which it will be), there won't be any rolling shutter effect.

Technically - no.
In the rolling shutter case, pixels register a scene in different times. If anything moves with a speed comparable with the readout speed the artifacts will be visible.
So, "fast enough" is only relative and thus not compatible with the absolute:

won't be any rolling shutter.

 

[Maximilian]

I like the idea of not so much MP.
And I suppose I'll be drooling for that sensor and the new AF capabilities.

If the readout is fast enough (which it will be), there won't be any rolling shutter effect. You also get the bonus of not losing image quality by going the global shutter route.

That's what I suppose, too.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

If the readout is fast enough (which it will be), there won't be any rolling shutter effect. You also get the bonus of not losing image quality by going the global shutter route.

If the DR is supposed to be better than the R5 and R3 then it is better than a mechanical shutter.
That would be unprecedented.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Looks like a winner to me. Solid resolution at 30 MP, DGO with excellent dynamic range, high-speed as well.

With DGO enabled the read out speed would be twice as slow.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

As an engineer, the idea of a global shutter appeals to me very much. Zero readout time beats fast readout

Global shutter doesn't imply zero readout time. It implies zero time between reading different rows.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I'll be blunt... a global shutter is stupid for a photography focused camera. A couple of legitimate NFL Sony pros I know feel the same way. It's great for the YouTube/Grifter crowd though.

Sony has the a1 as an alternative.
I do not think it was a bad decision to put a global shutter in the a9 III.
They just should not claim that there is no DR penalty.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I am sure people will be disapointed with the 30mpx but I see this as a good upgrade from the R3 and is more than enough for what I do

Then they should call it the R3 II.
The only way it would make sense to me to call this the R1 is if they put their existing 19 MP global shutter full-frame sensor in the R3 II.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

If I Canon would release 2 identical cameras, one with GS and one with a stacked sensor, I’d probably pick the stacked sensor one, since it would be a lot cheaper!

That depends on the MP.
The a1 and a9 III cost pretty much the same.

 

[koenkooi]

Global shutter doesn't imply zero readout time. It implies zero time between reading different rows.

Yes, I was very imprecise in my comment, I meant row to row, not picture to picture.