Canon EOS R1 :: Is this really a Flagship Camera?

[@ThroughJoesLens]

A lot of comments from people that have never shot extensively with a Canon 1 series camera. I’m a long time Canon shooter and, DSLR-wise, have owned and used the 1Dm3, 1Dm4, 1DX, and 1DXm2. None of those cameras were about megapixels. The users this camera is for will know if it is right for them or not. I quite shooting sports and no longer need the beast. The R5m2 will be my next purchase. Thanks for a good, non biased preview of the camera. 👍🏻

[@CypressConroy]

Yes but the 1ds cameras were resolution focused

[@falxonPSN]

For all the people saying "No, Canon didn't rebadge the R1 as the R3 before its launch, after Sony launched the A1," this pretty much proves that theory. This is basically an R3 Mark II. Or perhaps the R3 was the R1 and this is the R1 Mark II.

[@3k3k3]

Well they didn't, the R3 was way to cheap and small to be considered a "1" series

[@s7654r]

Agree. Canon's hierarchy doesn't make sense.

[@pawelmod3292]

@@3k3k3 they have lowered the prices for R3 not look too stupid against A1 :)

[@trevor9934]

Back in 1998, the Canon 3, a film camera that offered the first iteration of eye tracking came out. That there was no successor could be put down to the arrival of digital and the movement to that platform. I wonder if the R3 has performed the role on prototype for the R1, putting out that next iteration of the eye tracking, but not committing the name of R1 and thus getting judged in terms of a 'flagship' model. If that was so, I can completely understand the logic.

[@Xirpzy]

Crazy that the R6 II and R8 did alot right for their price and this supposed flagship is like treading water when we already have the R3. Atleast the R5 II looks good.

[@vinnym6734]

If Jared Polin were a chef, he’d wear shirts that say: “I Use Butter”

[@cybervehicle]

"I heat up my food"

[@camcappe353]

I dont dig nothing about Jared

[@gerrya2133]

I season with salt

[@ColtonMatocha]

The size of this camera is humourous. Remember when camera brands tried to tell us that mirrorless cameras would be smaller and lighter?

[@SamA-kl6pi]

Have you seen and held previous flagships?

[@yusei151]

@@SamA-kl6pi the a1 is a flagship so like....

[@Qimchiy]

​@@SamA-kl6piIf you mean the Nikon Z9. Yeah it's massive but the Z8 is basically the same camera with the battery grip being optional.

[@jockturner1547]

They are smaller and lighter for the most part. Compare an R5 to and 5Dmkiv as they are the direct comparisons. Some professionals prefer the larger size, built in vertical grip as that reduces moving parts and potential weak points and a heavier body balances better with heavier lenses, which can be important. Mirrorless has made the size and weight more flexible and cameras have been made to accomodate for all the desired sizes and features.

[@markrigg6623]

No. They "could" be smaller actually. And indeed they can.

[@michaelcliffordphotos]

I think it makes more sense to say that a camera is optimized for a certain type of photography, or for the needs of a certain type of photographer, rather than to call it a "flagship".

[@trevor9934]

I completely agree and just wrote here at length to that effect. The word 'flagship' is far too loaded a term.

[@bigd7696]

@@trevor9934 The definition of flagship is that it is a companies major product. How is that a loaded term?

[@sergeserenkov4733]

Now all they need is to add mirror in that camera and we’re golden

[@skyscraperfan]

In Germany a brand new R3 costs 4999 Euros, while the R1 costs 7499 Euros. That is 2500 Euros more. Quite a crazy price difference for such small spec differences. AI upscaling could be a problem for editorial use.

[@MrWiseinheart]

You bring up a good point about the AI thing. I didn't hear nobody else mention that.

[@trevor9934]

To me there are big differences in the R1 over the R3, namely in terms of the extra processor to speed up focus and tracking and the use of those to come up with leading edge capabilities such as the ability to take a photo of people and prioritize them in groups. I can see photojournalists using this for political events, wedding photographer and, of course those shooting sports, especially team sports, and that takes us to the ability to follow the flow of balls between players switching between them with essentially no lag. For some, the upscaling capability may be enough for them to accept a lower pixel count and be able to upsize selected images for emphasis or large prints, such as advertising. Finally, when comparing the prices concurrently one has to take into account that the R3 has been out there for 3 years, of course there is a price drop. For MYSELF, I have no great need for those features, but I am not who this camera was aimed at, that THAT is the point. A lot of people are moaning about a camera that was never intended for them to use - more likely the R5 or R6 variants are their best bets.

[@mirko.jankovic]

@@trevor9934 OK, let's talk from my perspective like a photojournalist. If I shot football sometimes I want to crop a image (I shot it in horizontal mode but my editor needs it in vertical for opening cover of the newspaper. I need to crop it, 24MP ... when Nikon & sony are over 40MP. I love to have extra space on a picture for text on double side interview... I shot studio stuff to, fashion as well. Simply we can call R1 the superior camera over sony and nikon but if we want to be real it's not. Long time ago we had dedicated 1Ds line just because of the superiority. For sure, I can catch a sharp image with 1Ds like with R1, I am not after a camera that can shoot 1'000'000 pictures just to cache a sharp image. Simply some high end shooting are challenge and need fast delivery and not to scroll 10'000 images for a winner.

[@Humungojerry]

@@mirko.jankovicdo you really need all that resolution for a newspaper? you can crop in a lot if your required resolution is at most 300 dpi

[@mirko.jankovic]

@@Humungojerry shooting a WRC you want to be in a safe space, with a lens of 400mm it's a nice reach still still with a crop you are @800mm for sure. And with a image of 24MP when you crop the image you are fast at 8MP because you are dividing a picture by 4 corners. This year I tested Nikon Z9 at 2023 WRC, and I know what I am talking about it. As-well I shoot more football then rally ... but when you have a penalty on a football match and it's on other side of the pitch you want to crop the images because you are far away with (400mm 2.8).

[@soumyadipdey426]

Ahh, very suitable camera for street photography or daily vlogging.

[@NHO12209]

Personally I prefer using my Hasselblad H6D for vlogging. You know... for the meme

[@JackFN_VR64]

@@NHO12209 I use an Alexa 35 for b-roll.

[@TeddyCavachon]

I started shooting with Nikon F SLRs in 1968 and it and every top-of-the-line camera body / system has been designed to meet the needs of sports photographers with an emphasis on on maximum frame-per-second recording of action. For example the Nikon F was designed to with a removable back so it could be used with a motor drive and high capacity film magazines. My career included working as professional photographer, lab tech at National Geographic and manager of color separation and offset printing spanning 1972 - 2010. I did analog color separations with litho film and contact screens, digital scanning of transparencies for magazine printing and the transition to using digital photos in the early 2000s. Back then the rule of thumb was 300 ppi to create 2x oversampling for 150 dot-per-inch offset printing and being able do 16.5” wide x 10.75 high two-page spread in a print magazine. 24MP is more than adequate for that. The R1 isn’t a camera anyone other than a pro sports photographer really needs. All things considered I thought the R6mkII ideal for my non-professional needs, so much so I recently purchased a second body when Canon dropped the price to $1999.00 😊

[@gunnarlade4689]

I'm a Nikon shooter and I was very interested in the new Canon R1 and the features she would bring. I'm not disappointed, but surprised. "Only" the AF should has made a big jump ahead. That's a big point, but not enough to define a "Flagship Camera". And I think, my Z9 is still state of the art...and it's 2,5 years old.

[@romanpul]

I mean I‘m all in for better AF, but AF on mirrorless has come a long way over the last couple of years and I have a feeling that we’re already in the very flat area on the curve of diminishing returns for it. So sure better AF is always welcomed but how many more keepers that you wouldn’t be able to capture with a A1 or Z9 will that actually produce?

[@TA-dx8qn]

It could just as well have been called the R3 Mark II. For its target audience, this camera will deliver what it needs to deliver.

[@melvinjohnson7033]

Exactly!

[@trevor9934]

There may be a historical precedent here. Back in 1998 Canon released the Canon 3, a FF film camera with the prototype eye focus. One can argue that digital stifled its successors, but a rep at the time told me that the 3 badge was a sort of prototype for what would eventually mature into the 1 model. If that is true, I can see why Canon would do that. If they put out a feature that wasn't perfect they would get rubbished. Mind you, they get rubbished anyway!

[@linusno]

looks like a inflatable camera

[@maxw-h]

Hahahahahahaja

[@borassictime918]

Always with the size already! 😂

[@Joe-tq8fr]

Dying. …so true

[@Arcticfox7]

Fun fact, it floats

[@bananabear009]

Bigger than Fujifilm GFX with the 85mm f1.2.

[@Chris-NZ]

It would be really good if a reviewer spoke of build quality, I always felt the “R1” tag came with a very tough body for working pro’s who need their gear to stand up to a beating. Why is nobody even mentioning this in passing ?

[@costafilh0]

I agree. Not enough to be called R1. It should be called the R3 Mark II or R2 at best. Sounds like marketing BS to me. NVidia and others suffered greatly from this and ended up renaming the product because of the huge negative press it received. It seems to me that camera reviewers, even good and honest ones like yourself, are always trying to see the positive and being very light-hearted in their criticism towards camera manufacturers. I understand that you need to be polite and professional, but that observation you made about the name and packaging as a whole is very pertinent, welcome and refreshing to see. Thanks for sharing!

[@Running-withscissors]

Ive been saving for years for the R1 with high expectations. I already own an R3, and don't feel the R1 is the "big deal" I expected. Guess I should redirect that money to a new car now.

[@MrWiseinheart]

Or you know you could just save that money and keep it and not use it.😅

[@rengen8736]

@@MrWiseinheart Я думаю, он без тебя разберется, куда использовать деньги!

[@MrWiseinheart]

@@rengen8736 no he needs my advice, like every one else on the internet. 😅

[@tocatlian]

Hey Ted, thanks for another fantastic review! I really enjoyed your take on the new Canon R1. The term "flagship" is fascinating but feels a bit outdated, don't you think? A flagship camera would boast the best tech across the board for a manufacturer. However, with today's more specialized cameras, it's tricky to label any one model as the ultimate all-rounder. Perhaps we should call the R1 a "flagship sports camera"? It's certainly not the go-to for portraiture or landscape. The autofocus capabilities sound outstanding-hope other manufacturers are taking note! Thanks for sparking this thought-looking forward to more of your insightful reviews!

[@65Drums]

Flagship is not an outdated term. Every industry uses it. If this was called the R3ii nobody would be having this conversation. People just had certain expectations that didn’t happen with this camera.

[@axidrain]

how is it an outdated term?

[@camcamwatt]

Great video, great camera. I’m a C300 Mkiii owner and if I was a photographer I would buy this in a heartbeat for professional work. Looks epic and the specs and images are world class!

[@davisone76]

Finally, someone who gets it. Lol…. All these other people are downers.

[@peteharper3299]

I find it interesting that it's a 24mpx sensor. Really puts the world into perspective as a GFX shooter ;)

[@davisone76]

As a cinematographer, I would not want the pixels to be high. Too much grain. 24 is perfect in many ways. 24 is quicker in file management. Doesn’t take up near as much space. It’s easy to upscale the image to 96 MP instead of every image being huge and spending tons of money on different cards and hard drives, Canon chooses to not have you worry about such. Very smart.

[@m29matt]

That lens is an absolute monster! The Big Gulp of lenses 😂

[@DartzIRL]

Fifty years ago, the flagship was the F-1. And what that offered was being made of solid metal, being fully mechanical, and being reliable with things like Titanium shutter curtains. All the additional features like auto-exposure, motor-drives, data-backs and the like, you had to pay extra for to fit the accessory. You could also customise the focusing screen to your application, among other little things. The philosophy behind it on some level seems completely different, but on the other, exactly the same. It's basic objective is to improve the likelyhood that you take the photograph that gets you paid. Because when you're relying on a tool to eat, you need it to be reliable, and you need it to increase the chances of you actually getting that photo. The F-1 prioritised pure mechanical reliability, with the accessories coming second, assuming the operator new how to get the image they needed. The R1 seems to take reliability now as a given, and is focusing on instead making it easier to get the photo ---I'd be half tempted to rent one for shits and giggles and see what happens. Because I also have a T90 and that makes an interesting progression. --- Can you imagine the screaming if Canon sold this thing for 3k or the like - and made all the fancy features on it subscription extras?

[@Old-School-Liberal]

LUMIX still haven’t released their flagship cameras yet!

[@DaveGershon1]

Nice review! I shoot lots of High School and College Sports in Northern California. The new AF sounds very impressive! I would like to see how well the R1 deals with noise in high ISO shots (25600) on dark football fields, or dark gyms for basketball/volleyball. 45MP (which Nikon has in their flagship camera) would be nice, but sacrificing too much noise would be an issue. I would be happy with 24MP on the R1, choosing better noise reduction than image MP size...

[@LarryMarvin]

I thought my Z8 with the MB-N12 battery grip was a beast but this is huge.

[@aamsergie]

I think you chose the 85mm lens to make the R1 look scaled. If there was a smaller lens, it would look even more cartoonish.

[@soumyadipdey426]

RF 28mm f/2.8 STM would look just silly on it. 😂

[@falxonPSN]

I think it's only 1/3 of an inch taller than the R3.

[@JohnDrummondPhoto]

It's much lighter than the Z9 even though it's slightly bigger.

[@SuomiFinland78]

For a sport photographer, yes, it's really a flagship camera, like all the 1DX cameras by Canon.

[@melvinjohnson7033]

What a letdown after such a big buildup!

[@JackFN_VR64]

lmao, meanwhile professional formula 1 photographers are saying the R1 is incredible.

[@RayValdezPhotography]

@@JackFN_VR64 youtube kids want 100mp for a camera they will never get.

[@JackFN_VR64]

@@RayValdezPhotography not just the kids, but also the youtube camera influencer industrial complex. Here is a what a "flagship" camera is for 2024 according to youtube: 120MP fullframe global shutter 150FPS electronic, 50 mechanical uncompressed raw 16bit unlimited buffer 1/240 000th shutter 24 stops dynamic range 500 000 clean ISO, 1.5mil extended 8K120 16 bit logarithmic 4:4:4 with autofocus internal raw + prores no overheating 12 stops IBIS SD cards because cfexpress too expensive 4hr batteries because you might miss a shot if you have to change batteries too often. $2000 msrp

[@Twst704]

Were you actually going to purchase one? I know exactly what the R1 brings to the table which is why I Pre-ordered one. Sensor readout is the fastest of the “non-global shutter” group, 14 bit raw, 40 frames per sec… it’s at the top of the mountain and if you say “‘no global shutter”, well, there are some negatives that come along with that. And the A9III is still a 24 megapixel camera, with a limited ISO range. It does 30 fps,but at 12-bit compressed. If you want 14 bit raw, you must step down to 20fps. Great camera, if that’s works for you. The A1s sensor speed is slower, and although you can shoot 120fps, if you have 3rd party glass is slows down to 15 fps in come cases. So…”for me”, a Canon shooter, I need both the R1 and the R5MKII, because I sometimes need the additional megapixels. It’s always relative to the shooter, and never a “letdown”. Just my opinion..

[@RayValdezPhotography]

@@Twst704 telling all that to aperson that only cares about megapixels

[@jacobh5817]

Canon more or less kept the old segmentation they already had in the DSLR days. I’m sure professional (sports) shooters will love this camera as they did with the EOS1D. Most of them select the system by the lenses they need, anyway. Wise decision to still include a mech. shutter.

[@ronrotunno2901]

The price on the R3 is dropping nicely now. Thanks R1.

[@charlesjames9783]

You have to understand the market. Canon is #1 by a huge amount. Working pros don’t care about bells and whistles. They want to pick up the new camera and have it fall immediately to hand. They want the upgrades without having to learn new menus and button layout. They need fast transfer rates to get the pics to their employers with accurate colors and quality. 1DX set the stage and Canon has stayed with that recipe. The R5 is the high megapixel monster for fashion and product shoots. Two completely different applications. The R3 is for the bells and whistles to bring the younger generation to the brand. 3 different markets that Canon understands.

[@markorchard2272]

Camera Manufactuers: "look how compact we can make mirrorless cameras" Also camera manafacturers: "well forget that..... and look how f**kin massive we can make our primes"

[@Phuzz828]

does it bring up digital id & carbon score when focusing on faces?

[@AliBubba.]

😂 Outstanding. A++

[@simonmaduxx6777]

That wasn't funny. That wasn't funny at all

[@paullanoue5228]

Anyone that was surprised at the R 1 hasn’t been following Canon for the past twenty years. This is what I expected. I expected 24 or 30 mps and the response of the neophytes to Canon would be shock and dismay. Which Canon camera has always been the do everything camera. The five series cameras! You didn’t have be Nostradamus to see this one coming.

[@anthonymedica9934]

That is my read also; Canon's going to sell gobs of these to organizations, not individuals, to be used in sports and journalism, just like they do with their telephoto primes.

[@vashahunt2077]

Extremely helpful preview! I do think the R3 mkii comment is justified but what they added is fine for me. I always thought the R3 was the real R1, canon just being too embarrassed by Nikon and Sony’s releases at the time. Yet the R3 has been superb. Would I like to have the option for 45 Megapixels at times? Yep. That’s a disappointment. However the upgraded AF, reportedly better rolling shutter and the pre-capture are all excellent upgrades if they work as promised. And the price for the first time in a long while is a happy surprise. $300 (or was it $400) 13:40 less than the original R3 price is a very nice surprise. Now if they can ship it before the end of football season….

[@waveland]

Jared Polin calls this the R3 Mark II, and though that moniker may not be entirely fair, by and large he’s probably on point. The new action following auto focus would be compelling if I ever shot sports (which I don’t-and it’s also available in the R5II) but after all the delay and hype I don’t see anything compelling, especially when I factor in how far behind it will seem in the next 12 months after Sony and Nikon roll out their next flagship offerings.

[@flowermaze___]

It’s actually kind of creepy, all the recognition tech. Imagine that if this is the consumer level tech imagine what big GOV has pointed at all of us.

[@angelotodaro1475]

I love full size cameras with integrated vertical grips. I also love using fast lenses, so larger bodies provide significantly better balance… at least for me.

[@ianclarke1636]

The R3 also has the functionality to register 10 people as priorities in the Auto Focus menu. No doubt this function will be refined in the R1 as is the eye tracking and auto focus etc... Having looked at the reviews as they currently stand, I tend to lean towards the R1 = R3 Mark II argument. Although I am a gear addict, I'm not entirely convinced that the light is worth the candle on this one. I think I'll hang on to my R3 for a while and see what the future brings.

[@ruralmontanan]

You better love 24MP if you’re going with Canon because it’s basically all they’ve got. 7 out of 9 of the cameras in their non-cinema lineup are 24MP now.

[@lesnayalesichka]

to much money for Canon's megapixel now

[@markrigg6623]

@@ruralmontanan Interesting maths🤣

[@Xirpzy]

R7 and 2 R5s. Your math doesnt add up.

[@ruralmontanan]

@@markrigg6623​​⁠R5 and R7 series are the only ones not 24MP. R100, R50, R10, R1, R3, R6, R8, all 24MP. Heck even many of their cinema cameras are 24MP, including the new C400. But talking about just the current lineup here. You better LOVE 24MP if you invest in the RF mount.

[@markrigg6623]

@ruralmontanan @24 mpx is either all Canon have or it isn't. Basically!

[@mariotraversi479]

Thanks for the quick intro to the R1. One thing about Canon is that they are iterative, repetitive and predictable. That they've underwhelmed with this release is not surprising, although it's interesting to note how the roles are reversed, from the days of DSLR's, where their offerings were clearly superior to Nikon (1st full frame released in 2002 vs Nikon's D3 in 2007).. They have copied their film-days release strategy again in Mirrorless times, like the Eos3 and then 1v, with the R3 and then R1.. testing new tech on the lower level body before committing with a " flagship". Perhaps they also want to maintain sales into the future by splitting the " flagship" amongst a more sports/photojournalist model for the Olympics (R1) and a future wedding/fashion (R1S?!) version. Perhaps their sensor fabs are just a generation behind in terms of tech, and so they had to settle for a smaller sensor..? My bet is that they just want to replicate the success that their 1D and 1Ds lines had in DSLR days, and if that's the case, then besides the small minority of photojournalists, most photographers are better served with a R5II, until such time as Canon releases their higher megapixel flagship, probably in 12-18 months time. The more I read and learn about this camera, the more the AF really astounds.. the sort of stuff I wish Nikon aF would do (but sadly doesn't.. although way better than in DSLR days). So yes, it is a flagship for photojournalists (nope, the upress function does not impress that much.. native pixels are always better!) and high-megapixel users will have to wait till next year 😞

[@robert_may]

Seems like a fairly weird spec as it doesn't massively differentiate itself from the R3 in any significantly interesting way, except in price 🤔 I am curious as to why they stuck with 24MP when the R3 already offers that, and the other flagships are double the resolution. If 24MP is so critical to pro sports shooters then I'd have thought it would make more sense to offer some sort of in-camera pixel binning or downscaling option from a higher resolution sensor instead of upscaling. The new AF stuff is at least interesting and I'm curious to see how they develop that further. Edit: Typed this up before finishing the video, so yes agreed this does feel more like an R3II to me too 😅

[@ritammelgunov]

Canon offered to people even three amazing flagships covering all possible pro type of usage, but people still only complain. It's really crazy. Just I am sure mostly those ones complain who never use this type of cameras. One can be sure real pros will be very happy with one of the three flagships of Canon R1, R5II or R3. Personally I am a pro wildlife shooter. I am very interested in R5II and it's clear ro me it's the best camera for wildlife action shooting now. As for the people who are so much disappointed with the Canon's flagships, they would better go and buy flagships of other brands and forget about Canon and would never lament again in every comment. But the thing is it's very improbable these people would do so. They prefer to just lament.

[@rengen8736]

Совершенно верно! 👍

[@planetfun85]

Compared to what ?

[@frankanderson5012]

As others have said, this is more like a R3 mk2 so it makes me wonder where it leaves future updates to that. It will be due for a update soon and anything they do, they’ll have to make sure it doesn’t cut into the sales of the R1. An R3 2 with more megapixels will straight away do that, but if they don’t then how much of an upgrade is it? I think the R1 should be their flagship that competes with Nikon and Sony while the R3 series remain as a sport and journalist camera.

[@Q1890]

We need a Canon R1S.

[@MrWiseinheart]

Pretty sure they're gonna come out with one later on.

[@flowermaze___]

So the camera just does everything for the shooter? 40 frames a second? Remember when a pro photographer had to get the shot in one or two frames on film or older tech? They managed. So much for the decisive moment. Pretty much a rolling video camera and then choosing a still

[@KOKOBC]

I’m happily shooting with my A1 and still I feel like it’s too much camera for most cases, cool to see the latest and greatest from other manufacturers

[@chosenbydesign9007]

i had stroke in may tying w 1 hand great job you are doing great mr Chunk!!!!!

[@yannisvaroufakis9395]

After seeing the Canon announcement, I went out and just bought a new R3, for $3,999 delivered, including tax.

[@zeiss1382]

Good choice

[@christophercarlimages9003]

Best value for sure!

[@dominiqueschenck430]

The flagship debate is sterile and childish. Amazing camera in its own way, in the Canon way. I trust Canon. I will buy one to replace my R3.

[@awardtour93]

I think at a certain point it's a bit of feature overload. New technology is great but how much do you REALLY need to take great photos for your specific purpose / profession? Is it really worth the price tag or is what you have already good enough?

[@joshi-toshi]

agreed. the megapixel worship is honestly laughable.

[@arthur3038]

why do so many ask this monotonous question? This fantastic tool will be great fore some, maybe not for others..- todays flagship is the classic of tomorrow - and still a very super tool . we learned, that for our business often it is not not bad to skip a model and invest later in the overnext edition, unless we loose a camera by some incident ...

[@wanderlust0120]

Is this camera worth the weight?

[@kg33ydkm]

Not worth the wait and the weight

[@soumyadipdey426]

😂😂😂 nice one

[@konstantinborus5458]

Why they don't make a sensor square? The lens will cover it evenly since it already covers the longest edge of the frame. In this case you don't have to flip camera to portrait mode. Manufacturers can implement a switch which will add masking for people who wants horizontal or vertical framing visual representation. I think everybody will benefit from 35 x 35 mm format.

[@garydumas3148]

Canon seems a bit “distracted” these days, Sony & especially Nikon seem more focused in the mirrorless space?

[@GTXTi-db5xu]

cause canon is a printer company lmao

[@timothyplatt6053]

24 megapixels IS enough, BUT, it still seems a little lacking for a flagship shooter in 2024.

[@deltaboy2011]

Yeah considering even Sony A74 FF has 33mp. The R version has 61. At least make this flagship 45 or more. Sony A1 has 50. Nikon 45mp, Fuji is 102mp. And considering the size of thìs camera…should definitely have more.

[@timothyplatt6053]

@@deltaboy2011 Totally. NOT That 24 isn't enough.. I shoot some older Fuji sensors X-Trans 3 ( which is 24mp APSC) and they're magic .. but they're also 10 years old and not "flagship" 24 just doesn't seem like enough being that the competition, and even some of their own cameras, have way more.

[@deltaboy2011]

@@timothyplatt6053 even the newly released eos 5 mark 2 has 45mp…wtf!

[@timothyplatt6053]

@@deltaboy2011 I'm sure the claim will be better low light? dunno.

[@deltaboy2011]

@@timothyplatt6053 will see.

[@baekmedier]

People dont get that this camera is the best camera in the world... beacause it doesent have higher numbers than before :) But in use this camera will be the best camera ever, not on paper.. but when used. And most people wont ever get to try it :P

[@jorgepinogarciadelasbayonas]

LOL! The best? Maybe for Canon shooters.

[@Jimmybeakble]

​@@jorgepinogarciadelasbayonas Maybe.. Im not "only" a canon shooter.. I rent the best camera for the job im hired for. Sometimes thats a canon, and some times its not. My statement still stands.

[@johnblunt1834]

Well, it's plus 2kg in weight I would guess, so professional. It is for a limited professional market, and the odd enthusiast with money. Not something you would want to 'tow' around too far on your shoulder for fun. I use a pro Canon camera, but would I buy an R1? No, my personal joy is turning most computer controls off, so not for me. A Hasselblad large format (X2D) would be more my choice (Image stabilisation, dynamic range, etc). But with the focusing system it has; the R1 is very impressive.

[@CGPhotos]

Do i buy an R1 or used R3 for my second body. Im leaning towards R3

[@erichstocker8358]

Thing look bigger and just as heavy as a DSLR. Canon should have just continued to make DSLR if they keep making their mirrorless cameras bigger and heavier.

[@harryvuemedia5106]

Yea, its Canon's Flagship camera and its basically just an R3 mark ii. At this point, Canon users are better off getting an R3 for a $4,500 usd price tag than the R1. The R1 is a huge disappointment since its Canon's flagship camera.

[@kpopfanphotos]

Lol funnily enough it's even worse than that. I mean if you want new yeah sure. I had a R3 from release and I actually sold it about 6 months ago to catch the high price still before it dropped with news of the R1 getting closer. Well then rumors started coming in from canon rumors (which usually are like 90% accurate for camera releases) and I started questioning if it was even worth it. As the rumors got closer and it the leaks said it was 33mp, then 30mp, and then 24mp I said "this is stupid if it's 24mp still I might as well go get a R3 for almost half the price again" so I found a used one barely had even been used but I think someone sold it because of what I thought too. Got it for $3300 USD. Works perfectly. Almost considered going out and getting a 2nd one honestly at this price haha. R3 for $3300 is insane. So I'm pretty happy, but disappointed with Canon. But what I did want was basically what the R5ii is so.. can't be too disappointed lol.

[@harryvuemedia5106]

@@kpopfanphotos I don't blame ya. Canon should have at least made their R1 have a 45 mp sensor to really separate it. Canon barely discount their cameras and for them to drop the R3 price tag this low is a great buy for anyone wanting an R3 right now. People right now should wait it out for the future R1 mark ii that may have a 45 mp sensor. The R5 mark ii seems to be the better of the two cameras right now. Although some friends aren't going to upgrade from their R5 because they don't shoot videos with it. Sony would be in the same situation too if their future A1-ii comes out with a Rolling Shutter sensor. But Im pretty sure they are going to stick a Global Shutter sensor and raise the FPS to 60 to convince users that its worth the upgrade. Likely will be more pricier too which im guessing about $7,500.00 USD.

[@cdiderich]

To me the question will be whether the R1 autofocus is worth about $3'500,- for what I am shooting [sports: tennis, athletics, alpine ski, volleyball, handball, ...] (the difference between buying an R1 and selling an R3). Based on what I have seen, listened to, and read, at the moment the answer to this question for me is NO! I probably will spend that money (which I already had budgeted) on new lenses (especially the 100-300/2.8 and/or the to be announced 200-500/4). By the way, the camera has many nice features, when comparing to the R3, like dual CF express card, larger EVF, lock on cards door, backlit buttons, ... but I would not be willing to pay extra for any of those features. And then there are even (apparently) things that are missing, like the 195 fps high speed burst shooting, or the LCD resolution going down on the R3.

[@ericnathanguel]

I'm a full-time pro but don't need a camera like that. If anything, the R5 Mk II is what I am thinking about. It seems "flagship" cameras have always been geared toward sports shooters, and I don't shoot sports.

[@justwideman]

Gonna be a sports killa camera, R5 for landscape and studio print needs.

[@photofair37]

Canon flagships have been lower res models since the earliest days. The last DSLR flagship was the EOS 1Dx Mk III with 21mp. So I do not mind that the R1 is at 24mp puts it inline with Sony a9 III. However I feel like Canon should have faster frame rates that compete fully with the a9 III and they really don't. Sony decided to have their Flagship be a high res camera as did Nikon but if we are honest in the Nikon example. The Z8 and Z9 are pretty darn close so the same argument about "flagship" can be made there as well. I have heard many reviewers describe the R1 as an R3 Mk II and I have to agree, especially since the new R5 mk II has a lot of the R1 features. I suspect that Canon will unlock new features yet undisclosed that might push the R1 far enough ahead of the R3 to give more of a true flagship feel. The R3 does not have the accelerator chip. The new AF is brilliant and it absolutely crushes Nikons AF system and bests Sony as well.

[@raylenesenke7504]

I shoot with a csnon 1dx on drag racing this is my hobby hwve you tryed this ?

[@stubones]

This camera isn’t for people upgrading from the R3… it’s for people who currently use a 1DX iii… hopefully I can now get my hands on an R3 to replace my R6 ii…

[@asheeshkchopra]

Thanks Ted. Trust your reviews and views …how would you compare it with other flagship bodies around? Just curious. 😊

[@anorak211]

I've got that facial recognition thing on my Sony compact HX99 that I've had for 4 years!

[@Fontsman-14]

I remember when mirrorless was generally lighter and more compact. This will save on gym fees!

[@davidlewis5929]

I don't think it is time to redefine "Flagship Camera" as the "Flagship Cameras" from everyone else were the top feature specs those manufactures had at the time of the release. The only reason why anyone would question if "Flagship Camera" needs to be redefined is because Canon is so far behind and the "Flagship Cameras" from Sony and Nikon seem less impressive in their lineups because of newer release from them but the "Flagship Cameras" are 3.5 (A1) and 2.5 (Z9) years old at this point.

[@rengen8736]

Canon отстаёт, ты чего несёшь-то? 😂 Ты бредишь?

[@mikebenning2409]

Nice, the new R3 Mk II. When comes the R1?

[@vitorguimaraes6443]

I can't understand why there is so much enthusiasm about the new camera models because since 2017 when the Nikon D850 came out, something with better image quality has not yet appeared, this is an improvement, in other words: what matters, they haven't managed to improve, at least in this image format.

[@massimoconcimedia612]

The one thing I like is the Size. Wish Sony made bigger camera bodies with built in battery grip.

[@marcobaddog2776]

The only thing that makes sense to me is ……there’s a R1 DS COMING to address the megapixel issue other wise the r1 is just a r3 mk2..then what’s the point buy the newly announced rain over and a R6 mk2 and a holiday or 2 with the change..😊

[@robsmith6794]

I have a 5D Mkiv and am looking to move to mirrorless. The trouble is Canon is overpriced for what it provides. Other camera manufacturers give you more for less. In the case of Nikon I can get the Z8 for around £1500 less than the new Canon R5 Mkii and the Z8 has much better specs. I won't buy Sony as every product I have ever purchased from them has failed just out of warranty.

[@KieranCoughlanWicklow]

I never really thought of the 1D series as a flagship just their pro sports camera, so MP for a lot of sports photographers wouldn't be as important as say landscape/product or even fashion photography. Also for the volume those guys shoot 45MP would lead to massive storage headaches. I honestly think 24mp is perfect resolution excessive cropping make for lazy composition

[@christophercarlimages9003]

But culling and storing redundant images at 40 fps isn't time consuming 🤣

[@UnconventionalReasoning]

Is the R3II a "flagship" camera? What is a flagship camera anyway? I might say that the Z9 was more anticipated than the R3II. The Z9 was filling a need, the R3II was fixing a Canon lie.

[@nigelwest3430]

As an amateur there is nothing about the R1 that makes me want to upgrade from my R3

[@TEN21Portraits]

Nikon Z8/Z9> Canon R3MkII 🙂‍↕️

[@christophercarlimages9003]

Absolutely

[@AliBubba.]

😂 that thing with the lens looks like a flotational device... looks like something you would reenter earth's atmosphere in

[@thomasphillips5850]

I am a little surprised about the pixel count. Look at Nikon they have 4 cameras available with 45 mm egs. I think Canon might be a little late to the party. Maybe they should have looked at 35-40 megs, I think people might feel a little better about that. I know (film times) I left nikon for Canon when the F 1 came out. I don't see that happening now. Great video thanks

[@philscanlan7321]

Flagship is definitely an outdated term these days, with so many incredible cameras available it’s quite hard for companies to truly differentiate the functional capacity of a flagship camera vs their other models unless the flagship really punches above its weight. In my mind, flagship means ‘this camera is the technological and mechanical peak of what our company can produce right now’. This ethos seems to apply to Sony’s A1 and Nikon’s Z9, but Canon’s pro cameras basically fall into categories of work, and you pick the right camera for the job you do. R1 is basically a sports/news journalism camera that you expect to survive rough use and perform reliably at its full functionality in harsh environments and temperature extremes. In my opinion, the R5ii seems to fit the flagship ethos better than the R1 on a technological level, but not on the build quality/functional performance level. It would have have been amazing if Canon offered an R1 and R1s (like they did with the 1D and 1Ds before the 2012). The R1 being the sports/news journalism 24mp version and the R1s squeezing the absolute maximum performance and reliability out of the 45mp R5ii sensor with the 1 series reliability. Then users could choose which suits their work better, many pros likely buying one of both or one and then an R3 or R5ii as a 2nd camera. I’ve seen so many comments regarding the R1 falling short of expectations, and I have to agree when you consider the competition. But two models of the R1 would have been a great way around that.

[@astrodysseus]

3:54 I still remember where the sell pitch for mirrorless camera was smaller and lighter 😅

[@kenweir5630]

No camera manufacture ever said that the reason for going mirrorless was to reduce weight and size, however a result of going mirrorless does give the oppertunity to reduce weight and size. Most mirrorless cameras and new lenses are much lighter than the DLSR counterparts.

[@astrodysseus]

@@kenweir5630 Oh yes they did, but that's ok :)

[@aerisurvey4934]

On spot about the mechanical shutter.. fully agree. This nonsense of fully electronic with that stupid sound, like a cellphone, it doesn´t feel right, doesn´t feel a camera and aside of that, the mechanical is still very usefull, as the electronic can´t solve all the scenarios, so calling flagship camera, like the Z9, that can´t handle all the scenarios, is just ridiculous. Well done Canon, and well spotted Ted.

[@djack4125]

If only it had more MPs. 24 mp is behind the times and in-camera jpeg upscaling is silly.

[@michaelscoots]

Why did they downgrade the back screen resolution from the R3? It’s like half the resolution.

[@davisone76]

I believe the in body upscale is 96 MP not 45 MP. Just saying. Big difference and I have seen the difference and it’s awesome!! This camera is a beast. Don’t believe the down hype.

[@creativegreatsvisuals]

In 4k 60p is there any time limits ? What are the time limits in 6k 24k raw ?

[@j4nv]

They tried hard to not let it look like a mirrorless camera.

[@michaelscoots]

Was hoping for a higher flash synch speed - the main reason I would upgrade.

[@TheTensecondz]

R1 probably feels like R3 II probably because R3 was intended to be R1. We can call this version as R1 II and call it a day!

[@TomReichner]

Ted, FYI, "Canon" is singular. Hence, saying "Canon are ..... " is incorrect. You should say "Canon is ..... " when referring to the corporation. Otherwise, you are extremely well-spoken, that is why this grammatical gaffe of yours is so surprising to hear.

[@kenschwarz8057]

Does anybody use his own money to buy such a camera? On the margin, the price hardly matters if you have camera operators coming off the 1Dx and a bunch of expensive glass. Who would switch a department from Canon to something else? This seems like a highly credible offering, making it easier than ever for sports photographers to get a publication worthy shot. The R52 is a different story. I expect that this is directed at independent pros and amateurs who are much more likely to change systems to something that better meets their needs (lighter weight, fewer lenses to carry, faster workflow). It seems ironic to me that the people to whom the “flagship” prestige matters least are most likely to actually buy the R1, and the people who buy something else are so worked up about it!

[@EnDosRuedasUK]

The more I learn about all these new flagship cameras at the end of 2024, the more I love and appreciate my Nikon Z9 launched at the end of 2021

[@naga2015kk]

Let redefine what a flagship camera. "We have to consulate SONY."

[@mikewinburn]

Flagship? Yes… but only because Canon says it is for them… can’t argue with that. Flagship as i see it?….ummm… well, i was excited enough about the upgrade from my 1DX2 to the 1DX3 (but i felt robbed considering the mpx count on the 1DX3 - especially since the R6 was right on its heals, and RP had an even better count.) The upgrade from 1DX3 or R1…not so much. For my money, I’m waiting for the R1mk2. Felt robbed already with the 24 mpx. 30-36 min will be my next canon flagship purchase. Im old school i guess… started my photography with the Nikon FE (still use it); and first DSLR was RebeL T1i (with that I could take stills along with video, by the way - as i could with my 1D4, if i recall… i dont need 30 or 40 fps. I need picture quality to true flagship photography cameras (phase 1; Hasselblad X2D); lowlight cleanliness, and high mega pixel count along with that. THAT would be worth my upgrade this time around. Here’s holding out hope for a photography camera instead of a video camera with nice photography features thrown in.

[@ryanvacation7319]

Looks like Canon still held back.

[@iconicon3108]

It's not hard to tell ;that by the heading your disappointed. I'm not a Canon fan, however, like everyone else, I'd loved for Canon to give their best cause this is a flagship. Something is wrong somewhere. You can't hype a Camera like that then disappoint everyone else.

[@dps6198]

Of course it is. All the talking heads saying it isn't because it doesn't have a 60 mp sensor is total rubbish.

[@MartinFroland]

Jared Polin "of all people".... LOL. Boths Yours reviews are very interesting