Canon R1 Hands On First Impressions: 24 Megapixels...WHY?

[@MacawAviculture]

I have used a Canon 1Dx Mark II since 2016 for all my Macaw photos/videos. After watching dedicated bird photographers using the Canon R3, I decided to rent an R3. The eye focus tracking autofocus is incredible, so I bought one. All of my EF lenses work with the adapter, the same battery used in the 1Dx works in the R3, and the 4K video is fantastic. We all have different needs for a camera. I do not need the speed of the R1, so I will stay with the R3. Great video, thanks for sharing your experience.

[@markysng]

I personally feel that a lot of people misunderstand what a flagship model is meant to be and hence put a lot of unnecessary criticism on the R1. At the end of the day, a flagship model is supposed to meet the needs of the professionals that utilise that brand. To make an analogy, think of it like a pro-model basketball shoe, a lebron shoe is built with lebron's needs in mind and not necessarily a one-size fits all. Canon has made it clear that from the start that most of the R1's features are focused on the needs of sports photographers, photojournalists, press photographers etc. And based on my experience, canon really does dominate these genres. So if they have a huge bulk of their photographers in these areas, I think it is rightfully so that Canon's wants to make sure that the needs of their affiliated professional are met. It is their career after all. The sports and press photography industries rely on speed, which the R1 really doubles down on. Their photos are often published minutes to at most an hour after the action actually happens, and 24MP really makes things a lot easier to process. Imagine having to capture, export, edit, upload and publish in mere minutes. And the areas where these photographers work are often unpredictable with 5G coverage being spotty due to large crowds, or unreliable public wifis. Doing that with the large file size from a 45MP sensor is an absolute headache (speaking from experience). That said, not all press photographers use low MP cameras. More often than not media teams and press packs are composed of many individuals with different roles. e.g. one photographer may use a low MP camera to supply images for live coverage and breaking news updates which have to happen with greater immediacy, while others may use high MP cameras to produce better quality high resolution photos for large spreads on newsprints and post-event coverages. Thats where the resolution upscaling feature may come in handy. Besides, most people end up getting their news through their tablets and phones these days, where high resolution doesn't matter as much, so theres really not much need for a high rez images, the general public aren't gonna pixel peep news photos. You are definitely right to point out the similarities of the R5ii and the R1. What I think may be the case is that the R1 is the traditional brand flagship that caters to the needs of their professional press and sports photographers (which has always been the case of their 1 series), while the R5ii is the 'people's champion' flagship that the vast majority of cross-genre photographers will find more appealing. The 2 models do have many similarities of Canon's new tech and AI features. However, I do agree that the R1 is pretty much an 'R3ii', and current R3 users may not find it worthwhile to upgrade to the R1. That said, I do think that the R1 will get spinoff models that maybe have a higher MP sensor. I also just wanna preface what I said by acknowledging that this is only based off my understanding of the press and sports photography industry, other individuals might have different experiences.

[@markysng]

@RockPolitics and where did canon ever say that this camera was a “master of everything”? They never did. In their official release statement that this camera especially excelled in areas like “sports and news reporting”. People like you clearly misunderstand what they meant this camera to be. If Canon themselves never said it, stop pulling it out of your ass. So stop claiming that the flagships are do it all cameras. Canon’s previous flagship the 1DX was also a lower MP camera than than their 5D series. They were targeted as photojournalists as well. Flagship cameras are targeted with the needs of their professionals in mind. I have worked in news photography and sports photography and been mentored by photo editors from The Guardian, Reuters and AFP, and covered a variety of events from the London Marathon this year to various protests and rallies. 24MP is enough for most cases. Yes sometimes in specific cases, a camera with higher MP are used for large scale prints. Or maybe for designated sports photographers whose images may be used for team banners etc. But for the most part 24MP has been the sweet spot between speed and quality. I’ve already explained why smaller MP is ideal in press photography. Its up to you if you wanna remain ignorant.

[@markysng]

@RockPolitics Well I don't expect you to believe it, and frankly I don't care if you do or do not But at least have some sense of logic to realise that 45MP images take longer to send over to our photo editors. Especially when you are working with hundreds to thousands of photos in a single shoot, and often have to file, from locations with unstable and unreliable network. In extreme cases even places like warzones, where wifi is also limited. Imagine sending 500 24MP images vs 500 45MP images in such conditions. Not to mention that we have to do so within the hour for live updates. That includes the whole process from taking, basic edits, tidying up the captions, and exporting. I'm sure you have the intelligence to figure out which image size is easier to handle. And not to mention the final publication, whether it is online or in newsprint don't even need to have high resolution to begin with. Plus the target audience of such publications are also the general public, who don't necessarily pixel peep the images. So if majority of the images a press photographer produces don't need to have exceptionally high resolution, and high resolution images slow down the process anyway, whats the point of creating a photojournalist targeted camera if it doesn't meet these needs? I'm pretty sure Canon will also release a portable data transfer device soon like sony did this year, removing one of the bottlenecks in the process, and higher MP versions of the R1 will be rolled out.

[@markysng]

@RockPolitics well would you look at that! Looks like I was right. There are already rumours of a Canon R1x or R1s in the works. Given Canon’s history with the first ever 1D made which was 4MP and the 1Ds that was bumped up to 11MP. This R1x will probably be the higher MP camera y’all are looking for.

[@markysng]

@RockPolitics Also since you don’t seem to believe me… Guess what? go look at your dear friend Jeff Cable’s blog on his Olympic workflow. 20-45min to get his images to the team. Edits on the go in trains etc. Downsizes his images to 2000 pixels so that its maneagable for the team. Very similar to what I’ve shared from my experience on the pace of our workflow and final product not even needing high MP.

[@Rascallucci]

If what you are saying was valid, why would Sony and Nikon make the A1 and Z9 respectively with a high-res sensor then? I once had a debate with a pro-sports guy when I was coming from a birding angle, he said to me with all do respect there are a lot more pro-sports photographers than wildlife photographers. He was wrong and I will tell you why. In terms of professionals? Sure. But, what he had omitted was the "prosumers" portion of the market. Going back to birding for a moment, I know truckloads of people who have all the "flagship" products, not just in terms of bodies, but we are talking about multiple Big Whites here. So, my theory on why both Sony and Nikon both went with high-res sensors for their flagship cameras was they knew from analyzing their sales data, there are in fact way more prosumers or let's call them "hobby enthusiasts" out there than sports-pros. And why should we even be surprised? Just because it is a hobby, it doesn't mean people won't spend top money on it. Case in point, audiophiles. US$6.3K for the R1? That is peanuts when a high-end flagship pair of speakers could cost US$200K+. And by the way, that is before I talk about other pro photographers who shoot different disciplines/subject matters. For example, what about pros who shoot fashion? Or what about pros who shoot still life like product shots? I have been working in advertising agencies my entire life and I have gone to hundreds of shoots with and without clients. For fashion, not only will 24 MB be not enough, in fact some pros might even shoot the medium format instead of full frame. Or if you are experienced enough, you would know before the advent of digital cameras, those pros would be shooting 120 film instead. And for product shots, definitely high-res full frame at least. So, you can see how a high-res flagship camera would be in much bigger demand than what just sports-pros might need.

[@michaelappleyard6300]

As a long time Nikon user, one could easily join in with the multitude R1 knockers but I think that Canon pressed all the right buttons with this model, given its primary purpose. So well done Canon. The only problem I see is that, in the hands of a skilled user, much the same results can be achieved with the Nikon Z6iii and, for the same money, the buyer will have £4300 left over to spend on lenses.

[@baljindersinghsidhu3959]

Absolutely, i agree with you.. why would an individual with a brain spend that chunk of money on R1..

[@RodrigoAReyes95]

If people can’t still take a good photo with these cameras, the camera is not the problem.

[@2cv666]

exacto

[@stephenrogers5185]

My thing that everyone is missing is the 1DX 3 is only 20MP and it was the DSLR flagship

[@_jaydirect_]

So, after watching this video, R3 vs R1… If you have the R3, is it best to just stay with what you have?

[@dps6198]

Why does every armature photographer focus on megapixels? These 'flaghship' cameras are targeted for the actual pro photographers who shoot an insane amount of images such as action events such basketball, football, conflict photography, etc. The reason for low resolution such as 24MP the camera's buffer doesn't bog down trying to process the hundreds of images in rapid fire sequence forcing the photographer to miss shots as the cameras processor attempts to keep up. Especially when shooting RAW + JPEG. If a camera has a 50MP resolution and your shooting max resolution of RAW + JPEG the processor will have its work cut out for itself. There's no internal processing of RAW as the images are taken and stored. But taking RAW + JPEG the camera, while writing RAW files to storage is also processing the JPEG images then writing them to storage. If your shooting at the highest frame rate that camera can shoot you're asking quite a bit of the camera. That's why the low resolution. You should know that if you're any kind of a 'pro' photographer. And to think you're smarter than the engineers and designers at Canon, think again. When the EOS 1Ds MkII was introduced in 2004 it had a 16.7 MP sensor and sold for $8000. No one complained. Pros cheered. If you're complaining about the low resolution then the you are NOT the target market for the R1. The professional

[@MaestroDK]

In other words: This 24 mpix for the very few that almost never does cropping - so not for birders or other wildlife photographers. Also not for landscapes. And not street due to being so big. Why have a flagship for 5% of photographers (yes I'm guessing here)? The A1 does everything right to me in comparison to this R3 Mark II. Now I can't wait to see what the A1 Mark II will be like. Very sure it won't be 24 mpix :) And the R1 is $8600 here in Denmark - LOL!

[@dps6198]

@@MaestroDK The higher the price the smaller the target customers. There are far more people that are not pros than there are pros. That's why the wider variety of affordable bodies and lenses for the hobbyist and serious amateur.

[@baljindersinghsidhu3959]

There's no point in spending money R1. Instead, go for Nikon Z6iii and put money for the best lenses.. you will get almost similar results with that.

[@jonathanellis5811]

Man. This is not what I was expecting. After all the hype and the rumors and the “the R3 is NOT our flagship” stuff? Getting an “R3 mark 2” is anticlimactic. There’s still a few minutes left in the video, but I shudder at what the price is gonna be.

[@natureredux1957]

It's not the R3ii, it is the R1.

[@jonathanellis5811]

@@natureredux1957 🤦‍♂️ watch his video and you’ll understand why I called it this.

[@Yurrtoby]

Some people don't know how to use/read correct grammar, and it's crazy. ​@jonathanellis5811

[@RayValdezPhotography]

I use the R3 for events and weddings and the low light is great. I use the R5 for photoshoots when i need the detail for retouching.

[@77dris]

I use the R6 II for events and the low light and AF is great just like the R3. I use the R6 II for photoshoots and when I need detail for retouching, I upscale using AI and get even better results than the R5 natively. And with the $2500 I saved on cams, I got a 70-200 2.8 lens! :p

[@RayValdezPhotography]

@@77dris I need to see how good the AI upscale is. I dont trust it yet.

[@77dris]

​@@RayValdezPhotography Fantastic. Even the basic "Superscale" feature in LR and Adobe Camera Raw is great for most things. I had images from the original R6 and R5 taken with the best RF lenses in portraits and landscapes, and used the basic superscale on the R6 files and then downsampled to 45 MP (I think upscale was around 90 MP). I then layered the images over the R5 45MP files and me and my buddy both viewed them without knowing which layer was which. Zoomed in to 100% on a 5k monitor at worst the R6 files looked the same as the R5 files, and more often than not (especially for portraits) the R6 files looked better/sharper/more detailed... and that was only a 20 MP camera. My buddy and I have about 30 years of pro photography and design work between us. I've also tried some free AI web tools online and got even better results (especially for landscapes). And with that said, I've had 8MP files printed on billboards and for ads on sides of buses that look amazing. I know Fro has showed 4ft x 6ft massive prints from his old 12MP crop sensor Nikon and they look amazing, even up close. At this point to me megapixels don't really matter anymore. But I will say having the slightly cleaner files and smaller files to work with is really nice. Plus the $2000+ I saved getting a new R6 II when it came out vs an R5 let me buy a new 70-200 2.8.

[@JojoJoget]

@@77drisclearly you’ve never used them before, they aren’t magic.

[@tvieso]

@@77drisSmart. Same sensor right? Just slower readout speeds.

[@MariusMutin]

Can the smart controller button be used as the record button? (would be lovely for extensive vertical shooting in my case as I always wished they doubled the record button vertically as well.)

[@RejeRush]

I'll forever say this... THE R3 WAS SUPPOSED TO BE THE R1. I think Canon saw the A1 and Z9 and switched it up last minute.

[@mwaithephoto]

and gave you the same camera lol

[@mbismbismb]

if canon saw the A1 and z9 they would have comes up with higher MP sensor like those..but they dont haha...they use upscaling AI if u need higher MP, cause not everyone wants a big MP and storage consuming files

[@jimpack9622]

@@mbismbismb need to see what an upscale file is compared to the A1-z9 file to make a determination. They are pretty much equal then the R1 would be the way to go having so much flexibility would be fantastic.

[@mbismbismb]

@@jimpack9622 well some reviewers already did that in the review and it looks pretty good without any compromises

[@redis8298]

If it was like that, why they still put a 24 megapixel sensor in that?

[@jarbasoliveiradearaujo5582]

It's funny that people find the Canon R1 with 24 MP strange but don't find it strange or criticize the Sony a9III, which also has 24 MP. So they say: "oh, but Sony has the a1 with 50 MP". Canon has the R5 MarkII with 45 MP and with specifications that are better than the Sony a1 today. The Canon R1 has specifications that are not currently found in its competitors.

[@fredlar9421]

A93 is global shutter running @ 120fps, please. R1 is a joke before A93.

[@IanFleming808]

The Z9 caused Canon more emotional damage than what John Mayer did to Taylor swift.

[@planetfun85]

And this guy is trying to do some damage control.

[@ranjankmsphotography]

The eye control mechanism may actually become an obstruction in focussing. Just think- while shooting, we need to move our eye ball in other parts of the frame, to compose the frame etc...in that scenario, the focus would also shift from the subject and it would need to refocus when we move the eye ball to see the subject. That's my perception, I haven't used it yet though.

[@bbasiaga]

I tried eye controlled AF in the R3. Its not for every situation, that's for sure. But it is pretty slick. It only sets where it picks the AF point to start tracking. After you are half pressing the button, it is tracking that person/car/animal for you. You don't follow it with your eye. Its like having to drag your finger on the optical button or use the joy stick to move focus points, but at light speed. If you are looking around the frame, it is not focusing the whole time. You can frame up, then look, half press and track, or look, half press to track and then frame up. Eye controlled AF is not in the way of this.

[@amermeleitor]

11:59 which camera did you use to film that segment? I ask because I have noted a big difference in the sky color between cameras. It looks like my Nikon does.

[@thegravelist]

What 35 is that? Is that the red 35 1.8 or the L? Although, I didn’t see a red ring…

[@_SYDNA_]

I was afraid they would permanently cripple the "R3 - R1 - and beyond" progression by increasing the Mpix. When I shoot sports, High ISO is king, focus is queen. Everything else pales in comparison. Everything. Doubling pixels halves the granularity of your focusing abilities. Adding a vector capable co-processor more than doubles it (depending on the Mhz and circuit width). Remember: you are no longer holding a camera. You are holding an optical computer full of edge-detection circuitry and neural network translators -- fitted with a photo sensor. The lens is still part of a camera but that box it's mounted to is not. You are right. Canon technology does crazy things with human skin. For this reason, I'll run a batch through Canon's DPP4 whenever I can get DPP4 to work. I think they moved DPP4 to an LRc plug-in to end it's lock-ups trying to keep up with all files in Windows at once. That's a very smart, very strategic move if they can preserve the original resolution technology.

[@TheBigBlueMarble]

The Canon R1 has fallen victim to the age-old and widely held bias that the most important spec by which a new camera is judged is MEGAPIXELS. If the R1 had released with all the same specs but with at least a 45MP sensor, there would be no doubt that all the "experts" would hail this as the new Canon flagship. Instead of questioning Canon's use of the term flagship, they would be talking about the fast sensor read speed, what is possibly the world's best AF, and the new upscaling and noise reduction capabilities. And the sad part is, Canon's product managers should have known this would happen.

[@justinburley8659]

The right people for this camera are going to buy it. The people bashing it for "only" 24 megapixels aren't meant to buy it.

[@WazariWazirOdyssey]

@@justinburley8659 Spot on...

[@urosjovanovic3142]

It makes perfect sense for Canon to release (another) high-speed 24mp camera, because this is literally R3mk2 OR, SHOULD WE ACTUALLY CONFIRM IT NOW, R1mk2 (The R3 being the original R1, now it's definitely clear)

[@natureredux1957]

Nope.

[@urosjovanovic3142]

@@natureredux1957 Being in denial isn't helping you at all 😂

[@JJARCHIE]

​@@urosjovanovic3142hes been going around youtube in denial

[@TizOnly1]

@@urosjovanovic3142 it was always obvious that the R3 was the R1 until the Z9 got announced and Canon got embarrassed. Today absolutely confirms that.

[@urosjovanovic3142]

@@TizOnly1 I agree, but I believe Sony's A1 was a bit bigger concern. It was quite a shock when it was released and Canon posponed their flagship release soon after, eventually releasing the "R3" which they claimed is NOT their flagship camera. And then, it took them 3 MORE YEARS to release their "flagship" R1, even though they were talking about it more than 4 years ago. Only fanboys don't get it, but it's their problem 😂😂😂

[@markysng]

Nowhere did i say that there are more sports photographers than other professional photographers. To be honest, that doesn’t even matter. Like I said, the 1 series is a specialised camera. The photographers that it is tailored to are the main priority. My point is simple. The R1 is a camera built to cater to the needs of the sports and news photographer. Canon even said it themselves that these are the areas the R1 excels at. The needs of these news photographers come into conflict with the needs of other photographers, simply because other photographers need higher resolution, which comes at the cost of slower processing rates. News photographers need that speed. The R1 is a professional sports and News camera. That has always been their definition of a flagship model since DSLR days. Not saying that Canon doesn’t care what other photographers need, but simply put this camera wasn’t built to serve their needs. Its like a taxi driver complaining that a sports car doesn’t have good fuel efficiency. It makes no sense because the two serve different purposes. Same thing here. People who obviously aren’t the target audience of the camera are complaining that it doesn’t meet what they need. The 1 series was never meant as do it all camera. It was never marketed as such. People just assumed and continued assuming even when Canon spelt it out that this camera excelled in “sports and news gathering”. How do you decide if something is successful? If it meets its goals and does what its supposed to. Most of the photographers who are using the R1 at the Olympics are happy with it. In other words the pros that it was built for are satisfied. As for the Rumours about the R1x, I do not think that Canon is doing this as a move to deal with the backlash. Like I said the Canon 1D was released in 2001 and the higher MP 1Ds was released in 2002. They have been doing this long before this backlash happened. And in fact they did release a high MP camera alongside the R1, thats the R5ii which as i pointed out, has similar tech to the R1. If you don’t feel that an upgrade from the R5 to R5ii is worth it thats totally fine. But many hybrid photographers love what the R5ii has to offer It all boils down to a simple question. What does the photographer need from a camera to get the job done? Is that camera built with your needs in mind? If not, its probably not the right camera for you. And if its not, why are you complaining about it? It was clearly built to meet the needs of someone else. Look at Peter Mckinnon’s video, he knows its not the right camera for him. Doesn’t make a big deal out of it. Read Jeff Cable’s blog, is he satisfied with it? Yes, he shares the same sentiment as me that 24MP is fine but it could maybe be pushed to 30MP. Other than that, he feels its a great camera that helps him get his job done.

[@Avinash-wg7xl]

This proves that nikon z8 was way ahead of time when released

[@planetfun85]

You won't see those influencers saying this.

[@JojoJoget]

Not really, not with the A1 around.

[@ghas4151]

@@JojoJogetthe Z8 matches the A1 while costing $2500 less! 😂

[@zeiss1382]

For anyone saying if you want higher megapixels than the R1 to get the R5, you are missing the point. The R5(R5mk2) since it is not a “flagship” is given hand me down tech. A good example is the card slots. Who do you think needs dual CF b cards more. A low resolution camera? Or a high resolution camera? I rest my case.

[@bngr_bngr]

For old eyes having the eye controlled AF and a bigger resolution finder is gold. Canons flagship camera has always been a lower resolution camera for 25 years.

[@StunnafulPhotography]

Good point after listening to you. R1 seems like a R3 Mark ii. I was expecting around 40 to 50 megapixels. 🤷🏽‍♂

[@michaelbell75]

You are clueless just like Manny then. It's a mirrorless 1DX and no 1DX was ever had more than 20MP. Anyone who knows anything about Canon and their pro line knew this wasn't going to have more than 24MP

[@davekettles4371]

and you should not have been really. The canon flagship has never looked like 50MP and there is no need to change a winning formula that suits its users perfectly? `most everything else is perfect, no?

[@bryanlovephotography]

Sony's A9III still dusts the "Flagship" from Canon. The 3-year-old A1 still dunks on the R5MII. Sony glass is smaller and more portable with 3rd party glass options. Yes, there are a few novelties like the eye-detect focus system in Canon, but that's not enough to overcome Sony's innovations. The multi-angle screen alone on the A7RV and A9III alone show that Sony has been listening to its customers and delivers. I don't see a compelling argument for Canon in this day and age; they were too late to the mirrorless game and it is painfully obvious here at the apex of the camera competition. That being said, you can make amazing photos with any camera this day and age. Be grateful to live in an era where we are spoiled for choice, and go with Sony. Great video as usual, Manny!

[@jimpack9622]

@@bryanlovephotography LOL

[@ancogbernard]

The only specs that a9 stands is the global shutter and nothing more. 🥴 That multi vary angle tilting things is not a big deal it exist a long time ago but vanished cause its not really needed 🙄

[@kpopfanphotos]

I mean yeah the a9iii is absolutely beating this out. I wouldn' tsay the A1 is "dunking" on the R5ii though. The R5ii a better camera than the A1 except it's $4300 while Sony is still selling the A1 for $6500 lol. Sure the A1 is dropping in price used. When hte R5 and A1 were around before the R3 several shooters said the A1 was only slightly better in AF and there was unanimous agreement that the R3 had better auto focus than the A1. So it's still safe to assume that the R5ii is going to beat out the A1. However the A1ii is coming. I would not go so far as to say that the A1 is "dunking" on the R5ii though just because of a 5mp difference lol

[@tinyhomeliving2024]

Sony blocking 3rd party lenns from shoot at the high fps ok

[@JojoJoget]

@@ancogbernardnot helping your effort to downplay how much of a shift the A9iii is since Canon fanboys have been theorising the R1 would have a GS sensor for years now

[@oANGRYBLACKMANo]

I have the 1dx mark ii and love it. Will upgrade to the R3, thanks to the nice price drop on MPB.

[@donspradlin1944]

Me too, I’ve got the 5D mark IV and was holding out for the R1 but now that the R3 is less then half the R1 and 95% as good I think I’m going to get the R3 and wait a few years for a 35 or 40MP R1s or what ever there going to call it..

[@shade599]

My dream camera 📸

[@jakilahmoulien9070]

the noise reduction makes the pictures look as if they were processed by a phone

[@77dris]

I mean, that's just JPG noise reduction in camera. That's what they all look like. Raw will be way different.

[@jakilahmoulien9070]

@@77dris if it's not Ai enhanced then maybe.

[@glennalexon1530]

I don’t see why one would up-res an image before transmitting it. Surely the recipient is sitting at a Mac Pro running DXO or Topaz and is better equipped to edit.

[@mikemoros]

Will the R3 get any softwarre updates on autofocus, do you think?

[@EricGuizzetti-Skanska]

AWESOME VIDEO~! I will say that the eyeball feature as neat as it is, doesn't work well for me. Before your fans attack me let me quickly explain why. I shoot skateboarding, If your not looking around your likely to either get hit in the face or your camera could get wiped out. Your constantly watching for other skaters,, boards or whatever and I find that the eye tracking just was a problem for me. I do however LOVE the smart controller. I was actually looking for a higher Megapixel camera and can't find another one with that type of controller keeping me from purchasing another body. You being a man about town with experience with tons of camera have you found another camera with a smart controller?

[@Makta972]

You're wrong about the cross type focus point. Olympus has that for YEARS 😅

[@bernardlanguillier65]

Since 2016 if I am not mistaken. It's a nice feature in some situations, but the overall improvement should be limited

[@77dris]

The Olympus is full frame?

[@froknowsphoto]

@@bernardlanguillier65 oh sweet, they had full frame cross type sensors. Amazing

[@bernardlanguillier65]

@@froknowsphoto never said they did. Just that they had cross types AF sensors 7 years ago. But again, this is probably not going to make a significant difference. Although I understand there has to be something special about these cameras…

[@JojoJoget]

@@77drisirrelevant if its not

[@vinnnyn32]

The photos def had in camera noise reduction, that was one of the main features of it. I think that is mainly more for video , cuz I don’t think many of us professionally shoot JPEG/ want that artificial look for NR

[@flixbert]

I‘m really looking forward to what will be the R6 Mark III, that’s the camera that I will upgrade to in the future. I bet it will use the same R1 sensor with the improved IBIS system and I‘m hoping it will get the some of the Video recording capabilities (6k raw, clog 2). I don’t need both 45MP and 8k Video. I‘d rather take a fast 24MP sensor and either 6k or very crisp downsampled 4K.

[@ankh-lyfe]

Thank for providing an unbiased opinion. This is a nice camera. Are you using a Ninja as your monitor?

[@MannyOrtiz]

Yessir

[@hankdinardo4308]

Manny, did you guys all fly home on the same plane?

[@LuigiL75]

Looks like there is yet another reason for me to NOT upgrade from my 1DXMK3 🤔 4 More Megapixels just isn't going to cut it...😖

[@justinburley8659]

You're taking great photos now, right? Why can't you continue taking great photos with 4 more megapixels?

[@kpopfanphotos]

You should absolutely upgrade to the R3. You can get a used R3 for like $3400 right now. I just picked one up for $3300 and it's perfect. The R3 is straight up objectively a better camera in every regard over the 1dx3. The only advantage the 1dx3 has is marginally better battery life (it's not powering the evf electronically) and maybe like very slight weather sealing. 30fps and considerably better auto focus is worth it if you're doing anything action related. If you're just sitting in a studio yeahi t doesn't matter I suppose

[@billkigathi3492]

My only question is why they didn't stick that r5ii 45 mp sensor in there and upped the digic processing This could have differentiated it from the r3, made r5ii users proud of getting the r1 sensor and made it a full standout flagship both for sports as well as hybrid shooters 🤔 I think so many people will be torn between this, the r3 and r5mkii with the new grips beside competition between sony and nikon 😅

[@3k3k3]

Its the no compromise 1 series camera in the R series. And as often with "flagship" products you pay comparable more for the last 10% than the first 90% Those that use these cameras for a living and depend on them daily in every condition will have no issue with this and they will very likely keep the R3 as their second house and get a R5MK2 if they sometimes shoot stuff that needs higher res. As a 1DX user myself, i am however questioning if those 10% are worth it over the other stuff that the R5 MK2 brings to the table. Because the current level we are at is simply so insane high that imho you will have to be a dedicated Sports photographer or a war journalist to need a R1. And in the last case a 1DX will most likely be a better choice there.. SO MANY QUESTIONS, and thanks for the first Zoom on a Raw file.. that was interesting..

[@CORYMPHOTOS]

wish you would do another MLB or NFL video using this camera

[@nigelwest3430]

Love my R3, I won't be changing

[@thebarbermosaic]

This is the only honest vid I’ve seen and I strongly agree

[@markguerin6071]

Is there a limit to number of shots if you are adapting EF glass to either the R5 ii or the R1?

[@tinyhomeliving2024]

No there isnt i use the R6 with ef glass and no limit in the fps

[@bernardlanguillier65]

They have improved the blue of the focus boxes haven't they?

[@mikni4069]

Canon uses a separate chip in R5ii and R1 for its subject recognition so fundamentally it will work in a similar fashion like Sony, but as it’s new and not nearing 2 years it’s obviously going to have a slight edge and have a few new things too it like action priority mode, they can call it all sort of fancy stuff to make people believe it’s new and fancy but technology rarely works like that. The EVF is the same resolution as the Sony , good chances it’s made by Sony as Sony is the prime manufacturers of EVF. I still see this as MKii and I still believe the R3 was originally meant to be named R1 but got a name change because of what Sony and Nikon threw out. The eye control Af still mainly work with people with high contrast eyes, if you have low contrast eye it’s the same issue as the old it wont really work.

[@parmanduke]

Sony is very happy about the R1 lol. Noticing a pattern of Canon missing the mark the last several years. R5 overheating issues, R3 aka R1, R3ii aka R1, not allowing 3rd party lens. Canon did do pretty good on the R5ii though.

[@tinyhomeliving2024]

No 3rd party lens lol they make em and i have a couple of them too

[@ramendhiman7132]

The Z9 is still the best mirrorless in the world for me

[@mr.j5526]

I'm Sony forever, but I'm always envious of Canon's Color science

[@MaestroDK]

No such thing as "color science". FYI Sony wins in blind test. Only fansboys keep talking about Canons "color science". If you prefer the overly reddish colors that's just fine. But colors are created in post processing when converting the raw data.

[@DrNick8002]

Can't imagine Sony A mrk ii will feature

[@repair_technology]

Canon 5D mark 1 2005 and Canon 1Ds Mark 2 And also about the beautiful color reproduction with good channel separation What I suggest is to use the old technology of the combined infrared filter as in 5D classic, use denser color filters of the Bayer matrix as in old cameras, where shades were perfectly separated, but at the same time make BSI CMOS with a large size of photosensitive cells occupying the maximum frontal area of the matrix. And from here I think the photosensitivity will not fall much, relative to conventional cameras without BSI, but at the same time we will greatly benefit in color reproduction. Because many modern cameras, if they are compared with the 1ds mark 3 or 5d first, have a problem. that when you start to edit one color, all the other colors change, that there is some kind of veil that does not allow you to separate colors well and edit them separately. It comes to the ridiculous that the color from a 12-bit matrix is many times better initially and easier to edit than from a 14-bit and even 16-bit like Sony's. I see this as a big problem, we have lost something good that was in the early digital full-frame kenons. Even in 1D X, you followed the path of a weaker infrared filter in favor of higher iso, apparently compensating for color distortion by software. This is the wrong way at the root, the best way is that the ISO workers will be more modest or will not grow so fast due to the improvement of the matrix crystal and its analog-to-digital converters, but there will be pure color rendering without a veil, without mixing channels due to weak color filters. By the way, have you thought about high-quality discrete ADCs? here in the old Nikon D700 there is a group of Analog Devices chips and they still give out a very clean picture without a hint of banding (stripes when pulling shadows). I would go back to a dense IR filter and saturated color filters of the Bayer structure for honest color. which is easy to edit, but at the same time it was invested in improving the silicon itself, the converters. tires. And don't make the mistake of nikon d800, where data transmission from the matrix over the bus was compressed with losses for throughput-this is a terrible solution. Conclusion-I want a modern camera with color reproduction and ease of reacting photos in both 5d, 1ds mark 3 and some medium-format CCD. You can answer one of my guesses about Canon 5D classic 2005. This camera has a known problem with peeling off the illumination (or anti-glare coating) of the infrared filter in front of the matrix. I don't know if you did it on purpose or it was a manufacturing error - I assume that the coating was sprayed on the filter in liquid form and either the surface was not etched with chemicals for good adhesion (by the way, I know many similar mistakes where surfaces were not etched enough, starting from the manufacture of contacts of microcircuits and antireflection coatings in optics (by the way, Leica also stepped on a similar rake with Scott glass), ending with fillings in dentistry), or was not baked (for example, it had to be baked in an oven according to a certain thermal profile, But they couldn't stand the technology.) But today is not about that... I had such a 5D, bought very used, which shot amazing shots in color rendering (still the best camera I've ever had and I would dream of seeing such a color in the new kenon cameras), I didn't understand why so, and I thought that something was configured at the factory in the software differently with color channel balances And there were several other 5D 2005, 5D2, whose color was not so beautiful.. And today I bought a broken first 5d with a peeling damaged matrix filter. I knew from experience, when I tried to clean off the rest of the enlightenment on another exactly the same 5D, that after that all the pictures turn pink with the color channels skewed, black becomes magenta, white turns pink, etc. (all the problems that Leica cameras have and the 7D, 5D Mark 3, EOS R, for which I swore at you that you put too thin an infrared filter and the groom's black suit became magenta at the slightest pulling of shadows, which is unacceptable) and it seemed the only option was to replace the filter or matrix ... (all the cameras I'm discussing are Canon 5D classic 2005, just very different origins with different serial numbers) I remembered how the Nobel laureates from Russia, who discovered graphene, obtained it by gluing 3M tape onto graphite and thereby removing an almost atomic layer when peeling off. I tried to remove enlightenment in the same way in 15 passes, using a new piece of tape each time and firmly pressing it with my fingers to the matrix (I disassembled the camera) As a result, I removed all the spraying to the glass and washed it with alcohol just for the sake of interest, already thinking of buying another filter somewhere. And what was my surprise when the color rendering did not turn pink, but became like on that very first 5d, very natural, similar to film, which simply conquered me with its color with very lively shades. This color surpassed even the medium-format Hasselblad and the 1Ds Kenon series.... The serial number of the device is 730507157 Please explain why? My guess is that there were very different batches in quality and the IR filters themselves (glass in front of the CMOS matrix) or there was different software calibration by color channels or different matrices???. How was this reflected in the serial number of the device?? If you understand why in one case, without this spraying, the pictures are pink, and in the other they remain normal, please try to implement this feature in new cameras! The color reproduction is simply magnificent, while black remains black, and white remains white and there is no whitish veil like in some 5D Mark 3! Just thin (weak) You can't put an IR filter, because colors begin to distort and many modern cameras (including all from sony) sin by this, for example, greatly distorting the black color and the transmission of skin tones, but here something else turns out. Figure it out, maybe we've found a way to catch the perfect color by the tail on digital cameras. (and if I tested 1D X and its color is not even close to perfect, again, you just put a weak filter for pure high iso and tried to compensate for it programmatically, which causes pinkness and orange on the skin)

[@MaestroDK]

How did you objectively measure color quality differences? What device and method was used?

[@danncorbit3623]

I am a person who needs more megapixels. I shoot different things, but wildlife pretty much demands the ability to crop. I also like high megapixels for landscape and portrait. You an make a really large print and it still looks great even when people pixel peep. At any rate, I think the R1 might be for photographers who strictly do sports which is one of the few areas where I only have passing interest. So the R5 II sounds more interesting to me. I will need to look more deeply into the capabilities but I am far more inclined to the R5 II rather than the R1. I consider the R1 a huge disappointment, but I probably just have different needs than other photographers.

[@drbeardo6960]

Get an R5 m2

[@stanleyhall2793]

I have the same needs as you.

[@jayk6194]

This always has been the case. 5 series has been the better all around camera and satisfies more people's need whereas 1 series is catered to very small population who absolutely values what 1 offers.. such as rugged build and better AF..etc..

[@danncorbit3623]

@@jayk6194 Yes, I am sure your are right. I have owned six 5D Mark II cameras (currently I have two, of which one is infrared converted) but I have never considered buying a 1D.

[@markysng]

Bet! Theres nothing wrong with being disappointed if you know that what the R1 doesn't meet your needs. I think people misjudge what a flagship camera is meant to be and put a lot of unfair criticism on the R1. At the end of the day the flagship camera is meant for the professionals that utilise that brand, and based on my experience in press photography and photojournalism, Canon really dominates this genre. I get that brands like nikon and sony have flagship cameras that 'do it all', but if a large chunk of Canon's professional photographers are in one specific genre, then making a 'do it all' flagship won't necessarily meet their needs. It would be a better strategy to meet the needs of their professionals. Which is why I think they released the R5II at the same time as the R1. The R1 functions as the brand flagship that appeals to the photojournalists and the R5II is sort of like the 'people's champion' flagship model that will appeal to the more cross-genre photographers.

[@gsanchez922]

I have the feeling that the R5 mk ii and R1 was released without all the features those camera are capable to and will get them through firmware updates

[@dakotaxu4792]

The ONLY REASON why I’m not buying this camera is because they didn’t put a high resolution sensor in it. I waited so long for this camera to come out after I found out that the R3 was a 24mp camera that I was convinced that the R1 being a flagship would at the very least have a 33mp sensor. I mean how much louder do we have to shout for Canon to hear the collective voices of the masses? Canon just doesn’t listen.

[@MaestroDK]

They are unable to do it. Plain and simple. Unless they deliberately crippled it.

[@mambiproductions8960]

Can you shoot video and take pictures at the same time on R3?

[@jeanvargas4919]

Yes

[@matthieuzglurg6015]

technically cross type autofocus has existed for almost 30 years... in DSLRs. It's when focusing collimators are able to detect a phase change in both vertical and horizontal orientation. THe beams are crossed, so it's a cross type AF. That's technically what Sony has been doing as well in their sensor : by having phase detection sensors in a grid on the sensor, you can compare horizontally and vertically. Canon does things differently with their dual pixel stuff : you can use two pixels to make a phase detection point, so that leads to pretty much phase detection across the whole sensor with an absurd amount of points. Problem, those points were single detection in the horizontal orientation. What Canon did in the R1 is that they are now using 4 pixels intead of 2 to add that vertical phase detection. So calling it quad pixel AF or cross type is in essence the exact same thing.

[@josephchan4198]

This is great if needed or buy another camera that on sale depending on needs and budget.

[@eugenekubak7857]

Canon never disappoints people are complaining butbits a new camera ill take it.

[@77dris]

I enjoy that all the rumours being bandied about by Canon Rumours and many YT channels over the past 3 years were mostly completely wrong. I think the only thing they got right were the names. Also, it seems that the old "Canon Cripple Hammer" is officially dead. They put cinema menus, cinema codecs, and Clog2 and and more into the R5 II.

[@nicolasd8714]

R1 series : Sport, press photographer (like R3 mark 1) R3 series : ? high mega pixel? HDR? => or no future like in EF R5 series : Landscape, portrait, video R7 series : APS-C photographers + animals Other R7+ series : APSC beginner

[@destinyangel5]

Spot on Manny with you instincts regarding R1 , it's a R3 MK II . The R3 was meant to be R1 but the super powerful Z9 spooked Canon at the time .One of the tells is the rear screen on the back of R1 its good but still too simplified, it needed to be even better than R3 rear screen, like sort of a bit bigger thiner border on bezel , or more functional axis movements not just flip out to left this is very limiting , to differentiate and justify the pro price. If I pay Canon more, I want bigger screen better functionality the best screen in it's class and not just the same same as R3 R6II or R5MkII.

[@kpopfanphotos]

You do know that the Z9 came out after the R3 right? The R3 came out in November 2021. The Z9 released almost exactly a month later. It's very obvious it was Sony's A1 that made them pivot. They couldn't change the name to the R3 for a camera they hadn't seen yet. The Z9 is a great camera, but should probably at least get the timeline right on this. The A1 came out in January 2021 😂

[@destinyangel5]

@@kpopfanphotos You need to understand what the public know and what's coming and what's already been developed are two different things . Camera manufactures have intel and spies and find out things before the everyday public do, so they can stay competitive in the market . EG like the future Z6IV has most likely has already been developed. The Z6III was made over a year ago but only made known to public a few weeks ago . It was in hands of select few in testing phases for months and months .

[@jaimeduncan6167]

Looks fantastic, but it's not the "kill them all" high-resolution 120 fps camera many were expecting. The new R5 on the other hand looks more dominant.

[@lavinads2306]

just Nikon❤

[@castieldiallo2945]

24mp? So what? Its designed for journalists with a the required lenses. The flagship Canon DSLR cams have a similar resolution. They were, and are, good enough. Too much squarking from people who will never buy the R1. Children.

[@DrWasim]

The last five seconds of the video 🔥

[@dabozzcrg]

I mean, at the end of the day this seems to be a tool that is going to take perfect pictures and might make other models morew affordable, so what's to nag about.

[@ThaGhettoBlaster]

don't be surprised if they drastically alter this camera before release in November due to the negative backlash. watch the megapixels go up somehow

[@lbiggs4067]

Enjoy your holiday.

[@Roysphotos8]

Damn theese new canon cameras look like an unbeatable levaaithan. There old cameras are insane. Canon is screwed again. Wow

[@bigboi36]

Great video bro! I can see that all inclusive was much needed. well deserved.

[@DelDelap]

I shoot Sony A1 after swapping from Canon, I was hoping Canon would have put more MP into the R1, i think this is a missed opertunity for Canon. epesially with some of the other features they have put into the camera, also £6999.00 in the UK is over priced.

[@s7654r]

This is the biggest and heaviest 24MP camera in the world. And one of the most expensive

[@tinyhomeliving2024]

The 1dx mk3 used 20mp

[@felixhug6503]

Typically, Pro Sports & Journalists dont need high resolution. The 1s often get released for the Olympic games and are tailor made with that in mind. They would have a lot of features you only may need in those scenarios. High resolution is not necessairly one of them. Speed on all levels is. AF, data transfer, image output etc. 6000/4000 pix is still super high for those needs. However i have not seen the camera yet. Its def not something i need. For my pro needs the R5 is a better fit.

[@Shawns_snapshots]

Sony A1 still sitting pretty.

[@DieHardEddieEdwards]

How do you figure given the Z8 and R5 II pretty much do the same thing as the A1 for way less? As a Sony shooter, I feel kinda screwed.

[@Shawns_snapshots]

@@DieHardEddieEdwards The a1 did what they can do four years ago. you also need to consider the price of the whole system instead of just the body. Canon L lenses are a lot more expensive than GM, With a few exceptions. Nikon and canon also have way lens lens options.

[@DieHardEddieEdwards]

@@Shawns_snapshots I’m considering that I want a 45MP body with a stacked sensor and for the other brands that’s $3500-$4200 and for Sony it’s $6500, even with a 4 year old camera.

[@Roysphotos8]

@@DieHardEddieEdwardsu got your moneys worth over the years in 15 years these ppl got your camera usage. U just cant do math. Stick to photography

[@DieHardEddieEdwards]

@@Roysphotos8 This post is incoherent.

[@Makta972]

The R3 is still the best imo

[@pkennethv]

What can the R3 do better than the R1?

[@Makta972]

@@pkennethv It's way cheaper and VERY close to the R1. Funny thing is the rear screen is better on the R3 too. The R1 is just a R3 mk1.5

[@kpopfanphotos]

@@pkennethv it's half the price and is 95% of the R1 is what it does better

[@oje101]

I think the R5 mii is Canons true flagship

[@MrEddieNunez]

Great video bro

[@travissmarion]

Can't wait for the Sony A1 II at this point. Honestly the Sony A1 right now is still better IMO than the Canon R1. 50 megapixels at 30 frames per second.

[@ErikWithaK63]

Im going to wait for the a1ii with built in battery grip, and then i will decide. Canon imo screwed up on the r1.

[@AzarathGirl123]

Either this is the R3mk2 or the R3mk1 was the original R1

[@_SYDNA_]

I think the R3 is the concept model for the R1. They invested a lot of software development time in the R3. Once they had it dialed in visa vi what the customer could adapt to they invested a whole lot of capital for hardware in the R1. I think they kind of skunked Sony along the way by keeping the R3 a little humble. Now Sony can't turn back.

[@PatrikSkiffardFoto]

Then disregard that it says R1 just looking at the specs its a pretty damn awesome camera!

[@mastermanphoto]

100% agreed that the R1 is just an R3 Mk II. IMO, Canon panicked and released the original R1 as the R3, but then later realized development was too far along to catch up to the Sony Alpha 1 so they just shoved the same sensor and autofocus that would have gone into R3 Mk II into what has become the R1 and then updated some ergonomics and released it.

[@deltaboy2011]

I don't eve know why they did this when they should have use the same sensor thats put in the R5 MK2 which has 45 mp!

[@skyscraperfan]

What still bothers me is that Canon optimizes its high end cameras for sports and action. That feels very niche to me. A fast readout speed comes at the expense of less dynamic range. So I wish Canon brought a camera that really is optimized for the highest image quality. The names R2 and R4 would still be available for such a camera. In Germany an R1 costs 50% or €2500 more than the R3. That seems excessive. I am quite underwhelmed by the R1. I expected something that would blow my mind and the R1 is not that. I can't see any non action situation where the R1 delivers a better photo than the R6 II, which costs less than 30% of the R1 in Germany. That's a €5300 difference. Enough money for two lenses.

[@Bigcookfilms]

It's a great camera but it was overhyped and that's why the release seems mid.

[@Bo_Hazem]

Sony A1 II having an easy task. This is like an R3 1.5 at best.

[@michaelbell75]

...and Canon still dominates every major sporting events by a mile 😃 They will the upcoming Olympics too.

[@Bo_Hazem]

@@michaelbell75 Every non-Canon camera there is at least using a Sony sensor like Nikon, you know? 😏

[@kpopfanphotos]

@@michaelbell75 even as a Canon shooter this is dumb lol. Lots of news agencies have swapped to Sony.

[@michaelbell75]

@@kpopfanphotos they have? Which ones?

[@MaestroDK]

@@michaelbell75 Won't last forever if they keep producing pro bodies like R1. TImes are changing, last photo I saw of a White House press meeting showed almost nothing but Sony cameras.

[@JoeElementz]

No point upgrading or even buying this R1 currently you will pay half the price of the R1 for and R3 with 99.9% similarities

[@marcgilles4520]

What do you think about the R5 MKII? Are you going to review any of the new cameras?

[@TomasRamoska]

Honestly, I'm not the target audience for this camera so I don't care 😂 I do wedding photography R6 line is perfect for my kind of job. 24mpx is plenty and editing goes much faster.

[@tdawg719]

It’s pretty clear what’s happening. Canon wants this. This product exist to sell more of another product. In this case the r5 mk2. Apple does this. Other companies do also. If every influencer is saying the same exact thing then it’s a page from the play book. Now they can’t make it a complete miss so they do have to have some reasons to buy it so people with unlimited money will still buy it but make no mistake. This is intentional.

[@rafayeledama]

I keep saying pixel count in a camera is crucial. It is pointless for the R1 to have 24Megapixels and be more expensive than the R5 Mk 2 that has 45 megapixels, worse off is being the canon flagship camera, this transfers the competition to be between Nikon and Sony... For me, the best camera from Canon currently is the R5 Mk 2, and needs to be the Canon flagship Camera. Canon has sacrificed a lot of megapixels in the R1 to make up for shooting speed for sports photography.... But, is it worth it? Most of the photos will end up in trash with that rediculous speed despite filling up the memory...

[@officialbrandoncoleman]

I'm here for the C log 2 😁😁

[@Nehallad]

When did you start sport photography 😂

[@harryburnett7086]

Manny with your guns 💪🏼 💪🏼 this camera could be a 10 lb er and you could lift it with a pinkie lol 😂

[@keeganflahive1604]

I have about $12,000 into glass and 2 canon cameras. R5 and R7. I have been on back order for 9 months for the RF 200-800. And now the R1 and R5 release and it’s disappointing. The R1 has no identity and it’s crazy expensive. The R5 Mk2 is crazy expensive and has a new battery and grip which are also expensive. I’ll be dropping $5k on a new setup for that. Along with the no third party lineup for lens, super expensive and sometimes crippled RF L lens. Man I am close to switching off Canon entirely.

[@urosjovanovic3142]

@@keeganflahive1604 Since there's no 3rd party option for the R mount, a lot of people spent a lot of money on Canon glass. That's great for Canon, but I believe something like half of their users would've switched to other brands if it wasn't just too expensive for them to do that. In this age, there are so many great cameras, but professional photographers naturally want the best possible equipment. Sony took a huge part of Nikon's users away, but now Nikon has an incredible line of cameras and lenses and many people are coming back or switching from other brands. If A1mk2 and Z9mk2 hit the right spot, I don't doubt a lot of professionals will have no problem moving away from Canon. Not to mention the possibility of other cameras shocking the market, like Z7mk3, A7mk5, A7S4 or something completely new... What an exciting time to be a photographer! 🙂

[@dariocannone1406]

I'm a 10 year Sony user and I guarantee that the grass here is not that much greener. The A1 and A7R5 are heavily crippled with 4k pixel binning and quite a lot of artifacts. The A1ii will have some heavy limitations to avoid competing with the Venice 2 (8k60p) and the A7R6 will just be the 107mpx monster with even greater video limitations... And prices are just slitghly less crazy than Canon's. We are all in the same boat. I'm dreaming of a Nikon Z8 but I've invested too much in Sony glasses so now I'm effed up, can't switch.

[@ghas4151]

The Nikon Z8 is crazy good value when you compare it to the competition. We cannot deny now that Nikon has absolutely shaken the market.

[@JeffsonMassena]

Hello

[@makmak69L7]

Everything could have worked better with the R1 if it was not marketed before as the master of everything and the jack of all trades. Expectations were so high, specially after releasing the A1 and the Z9. It is sad and a missed opportunity for Canon. 24mp? Seriously?!!!

[@Xirpzy]

Definitly an R3 II. That being said, having heard from sports and motorsport photographers... They take literally thousands of photos so the file size does make a big difference. 24mp is enough for the pros. With a proper lens, you shouldnt need to crop that much. For those photographers the lower res sensor actually makes alot of sense. What doesnt make much sense though is the price, calling it the R1 and flagship.

[@bbasiaga]

If rumors are true, it will be just a tad bit more than the A9III price wise, with practically the same rolling shutter performance, significantly better high ISO performance, and an integrated grip. I'm not happy with the prices of these thing either, but I think the pricing is consistent with today's market, unfortunately.

[@TooGood79]

Nice commentary Manny. Probably the more preferred of all R1 vids so far. I am a sports photographer and I agree with your assessment. The R5ii will be the way I go. It does make your workflow easier using 24mp vs 45mp files, however for $2k less with the same AF abilities and 21 more megapixels (for cropping) also the same 30fps (40 like my R6II has would have been nice) It’s not that difficult of a decision imo. Thanks for the vid.

[@JessDemant]

I'm tired of all the specifications, because today all top models can do what most people need, but if it really should have had something that showed the future, it would have been Global Shutter ! ! !

[@MaestroDK]

24 mpix. Meh. Even sport photographers can benefit from the cropping options that a higher resolution sensor provides. The A1 still seems preferable to me as you have nice cropping options and the option to go "light" (no grip + smaller lenses). And should 24 mpix be is enough I'd rather prefer the A9III due to its global shutter.

[@courtney727ray]

Upgrade the R5 ii to a Slightly larger pro body with a battery that is strong enough to power all lenses and we are good. You can even call it whatever you want. R1X R1S, Or R5 Plus. 😂

[@LunaBelAir]

I dont wanna sound like a negative Nancy but camera industry needs some dramatic changes and improvements. This camera has nothing innovative or special. What about increasing the dynamic range for example or something that actually benefits the photography community..? Good video though Manny, enjoyed it. 🔥