Canon R1 has been announced

[Kayaker72]

The R1 is finally here

A link to Bryan's landing page.

I am sure some will be disappointed by the 24.2 MP resolution. But I am constantly reminded by the 24 x 18 inch prints on my wall that were cropped from 5D3 images (22 MP) that 24 MP is still a lot. Clearly Canon thinks so.

Otherwise, seems like a very nice flagship camera.

• 1/64,000 max shutter speed
• 2.7 millisecond readout speed (virtually no rolling shutter)
• 12 fps max mechanical shutter (I was thinking the R1 might not have a mechanical shutter, so happy to see this)
• 40 fps 14 bit in electronic shutter mode
• Pre-continuous shooting mode (1/2 sec)
• The necessary discussion of improved AF
• Dual CFe Type B card slots
• AF down to EV -7.5 (almost black)

Seems like an amazing camera. I am looking forward to hearing more about it.

[neuroanatomist]

I pre-ordered mine at 6:01 AM this morning. B&H said ships November 1 on my order confirmation, but now they’ve changed the product page to match the expected availability on Canon USA, which is November 26. Basically 3 years to the day from receiving my R3.

[Fast Glass]

Honestly, looking at the R1 to the R5 II. The R1 is gonna be a touch sale for many people.

The R5 II is still a fast body, still will have undoubtedly excellent AF that will probably be splitting hairs with the R1.

Even if you don't need the resolution, it comes in with a 45mp and 8K vid as a bonus and costs less.

R5 II basically out specs what matters most to most people. The things that it is not class leading is only gonna apply to select few fast action sports photographers. I think even the photo journalists are gonna find the R5 II plenty good for the money. Even if resolution is not a factor.

If you have shot things like the 1D III and 1Ds III. And shooting professionally and taking great pics with that. It's really hard to not find the R5 II good enough compared to the R1. And better in some important ways.

I'm sure the R1 is a fine camera, I'd love one. I can afford two if I wanted. But I'd probably do the same thing with the pair of 1Dx III's I had. Looking at 14k worth of equipment and still only shoot 20mp

It just didn't justify the price for me. And I'm glad the R1 is cheaper. But I think it's still not cheap enough. It should be more like a 5k body. It's not far off from a R3.

They really shot themselves in the foot with the R5 II. In ways that matter to most people. It's the obvious choice from a value and feature standpoint.

I'm not gonna be too hasty with my judgment till I see reviews and lay my hands on it. It could be the AF and noise performance is substantial. And it could justify it's existence over the R5 II.

But at any rate, for me personally with wildlife and cropping being the reality of my world. The R5 II might be the hot ticket for me.