Canon highest end cameras have never participated in the Megapixel race, instead they have always used a lower pixel count to ensure fast readout, fast buffer output, etc. More data WILL be slower. Call it the R3 mk II in your head if you must, but it *is* a pro-camera, very much in line with Canon's other pro cameras. They even announced the R5mkII at the same time for people who do need the Megapixels, but apparently that's not enough, those megapixels must be branded as a 1 series or they don't count.
As for those who switched to Sony, etc. Why?
- You can get Megapixels from Canon in the R5 series. Do they need more... that's valid, but not related to megapixels in R1.
- Is Sony's sensor still lower noise? If you need that, that's valid, but again, not related to megapixel in R1 or R5.
- Are they hurt that the megapixels aren't in the 1 series? That's not really valid. That's not Canon's MO. The reduced pixel count *ensures* performance.
- Is there a feature being withheld on the high-megapixel camera? Sure, the cross type AF for now, but they'll trickle down next release. Is the competition any better here, or do they all tend to put all their features into all their cameras? I know a few years ago there was some surprise that a mid-range Nikon got some high-end feature... so it sounds like having pro features reserved for the high-end cameras for a cycle or two is standard across the industry. Does Sony not do this? I don't care about a single counter-example, but a pattern showing this is their normal business practice, otherwise the R7 and R8 having the same focus as the R3 are my Canon counter examples (reviewers seems pleasantly surprised).
So, what specifically is Canon doing / not doing to drive pro customers away? Reading Bryan's preview and he sounds super stoked to get the R5 mk II. I didn't see any complaining that the pixels weren't called R1. So, ignoring the nameplate, what's wrong with Canon's offerings?
Reply With Quote