As a wildlife photographer I was hoping for more MP, I probably would have been happy with around 32-35MP. Instead, I will be looking at the R5 mkII to go with my R3. I do not need 40 fps and rarely use 30 fps in the R3 going more often with 15 fps as the sweet sppot.
I'm really glad they ran the R3 first. They really took a flying leap with some of the new features in AF and the user interface, and they needed to see if the user could adapt. They also needed feedback on some of the failsafes and defaults they built into the R3-onward platform. I'm going to miss my R3, but as I used it I could feel it yearning to be more in the new areas it had established. There is so much potential in that platform but there are serious roadbloacks in terms of computational speed, decision sets and the silicon itself. Reading the specs you can tell they went after those three things and went after them hard. As some who has worked in deep data science, I will tell you: those things do not come easy. When you pick this up and find yourself saying "Now I just shoot it" you are experiencing the fruits of that.
Canon shooter here. I currently use the Canon R3. I will be upgrading to the Canon R1 and will also purchase a Canon R5 MkII. My Canon R3 is a true beast, and I shoot sports on a regular basis. With that being said, I love my Canon R3 but will be purchasing, as I said before, the Canon R1. Some people are saying that there will not be a continuation of the Canon R3. I can believe this. And here's my reasoning why. A part of me wants to think that the Canon R3 was a phenomenal TEST BED because a lot of the features that are in the R3 have shown up in the R5 MkII. And by them doing this, it just proves that if they wanted to, they could have put more resolution and a bigger sensor into the Canon R1. Because when you think about it, the R5 Mark II has a 45 megapixel sensor with a lot of the specs that are in the R3 and a few that are also in the R1. Just think about that for a moment and marinate on that, and let me know what your thoughts are, if any, from anybody who reads this. In closing, I will say this. Possibly, in four more years, when the Canon R1 MkII arrives, don't be surprised if it has possibly a 33 or 36 or even 40 megapixel sensor. And honestly, it doesn't even need a global shutter.
An argument can certainly be made. However I still know action sport photographers who still shoot on 1Dx with 18MP. Most also live with big 400mm primes, so for a lot of them, 24MP is more than enough and more resolution hinders their cull and upload times. Gonna be a contentious topic for sure.
Thanks for the first look. It would be good to have evaluations and opinions from professional sports photographers on the R1 - does it meet their needs? Does it offer more and better than other models? They’ll be the ones to judge if this is the flagship they’ve been waiting for.
Thanks for watching Alan! We look forward to testing it more once we have a final production unit and getting input from sports photographers, especially after the summer Olympics.
This Camera looks so awesome! Would love to add the R1 as an ACam to my R3, which is an absolute beast. Throw in a C400 and Im set lol! 6K is the sweet spot for video resolution and Im fully happy with 24MP for stills, I've never had a client ask me for higher resolution, and image have been printed on billboards and the side of buildings with less resolution. I could see if you shot wildlife and needed to crop heavily, or printed huge fine art prints of highly detailed landscapes (Medium format is better for that any way) but, no one needs 61 megapixels for social media, online, and 98% of print...
I im waiting for the youtube guys and girls to make a R1 as a B cam and a c400 as a A cam review and match the two camreas and show if they would work together for video productions. C-log 2 in both cameras, 24 MP and 26MP sensors.. sharpeness and colors should match since the sensors are somewhat alike.
As a Canon dealer, we had support from Canon Canada to get pre-production access in our city for a couple of days. Still a short period to go over 2 major cameras. But, we were fortunate not to be quite as pressed for time as the content creators who went on the Canon USA press trip.
You mentioned that the R1 is Canon's ultimate camera, the best of the best; however, the R1's LCD screen is 2.1 MP instead of the R3's 4.1 MP LCD screen. Really Canon?
Ummm… 24mp, only? Yeah… no! There’s no reason to not have put this out with 30, 36…even 50mp. Let’s be real… just like a user can select 24 raw, or jpeg small (8mp files), on could option for 50mp raw for card 1, and 20mp card 2…. As needed. Canon optioned not to offer it… just crazy to me. Let’s hope they get brave and put out an R1s with exactly this option sans moire filters. 100% they’ll have my money then. I’ll be skipping the R1… not a strong upgrade from th 1DX3 in my opinion. However…. C80?! Now thats an upgrade! Pre-ordered!!!
No can present a valid argument if the word "Cropping' is taken out 🤡🤡. Its a SPORTS CAMERA for F-sake!!....Sports shooters DON'T need high MP, and i am happy that canon DID"NT follow the High-MP hype. And many photographers who are NOT sports photographers have PROVED that 24mp is enough even for 6x4 or 8x10 feet size printouts. IF you want high MP look to the R5,also a very capable and excellent camera, don't vent out your frustration on the R1.
Ummm … no… one can get a nice 8x10ft print from the 1D4 as well…it’s 16 mp. only a sucker would suggest the quality on a 50mp 8x10ft print is not vastly better than the 20mp 8x10ft print. (Not suggesting this what you were saying, though; didn’t mean it that way.) My opinion … drop the R5 line… put it all in the R1 as a true flagship for photography, and videophiles can purchase the C80. It costs less and vastly outperforms both the R5 and the R1.
@@mikewinburn putting everything into the R1 and dropping the R5 line defeats the purpose, then you're alienating the sports shooters, they "DONT" need high MP. There is a need for High MP camera but its not in the R1. Hence R5 existence is important. I have seen photographers printing out of crop sensors files and still not noticing the difference. R1 is a sports camera. R5 is an All-rounder. Both have importance.
@@justinjames403- agreed, that it can be done the way canon does it… R1 for sports R5 for photogs… However, that’s old school thinking. Canon needs to get with the game. Have we not heard of “settings”? Your main contention is to justify low mp count for sports. 10000% agreed. But right now, I can change the output on my 20px 1DX3 and output 16, 12, or even 8mp files… on the fly, at that! Canon can, but choose not to, make a true Flagship 50mp R1, and allow me to switch to low mp output if I need it, without sacrifice quality or features when I want to use 50 mpx… This would continue to meet the sports shooters need, and now R5 users would not lack the full exposure features, GPS, weather sealing, build quality as the R1 gets. And, for heavens sake… put a theft deterrent feature in. You telling me you wouldn’t buy this camera if it were optioned for you? Yeah… like I said, canon needs to stop thinking old school business models; right now, they’re playing “catch-up” and the R1 puts them even further behind.
@@mikewinburn Having high MP is NOT the "Flagship" title-deciding factor. If there is a high MP Pro-Body camera, it would cannibalize the R5, then those user base will be alienated, why would they pay 7 or 8K $ for features that was available on R5? Like I said, that camera is an All-rounder, not a specialist camera. Personally I would prefer Speed over MP. I would have preferred a 30mp on the R1 but the current 24mp is also enough. Canon doesn't need to play catch-up. Their old-school ways ARE what's setting them apart and preventing them from joining the rat-race. R1 is by all means a deserving "Flagship" title holder. Enough Megapixel (24 MP) 40fps shooting (Uncompressed 14bit Raw) Dual CF-Express Type B slots Pro-Body (integrated vertical grip) Accurate and Fast AF Tracking All those Video Features (6K Raw @ 60p, CLog2 etc) Tell me which other company model have ALL of these, not just High MP. People need to understand the definition of a Flagship first. A True flagship is the one who handles EVERY aspect of the camera, NOT just having high MP and bottlenecking others. R1 is fully worthy to be in the same category as Nikon Z9 or Sony A1, Coz its handling aspects, which these two are compromising on.
@@justinjames403 - i like your line of reasoning. i agree MP count alone does NOT a flagship make :) Agreed, 24mp is "enough"... just as 12mp was enough, and 16 mpx was enough... in its day. While i would also wholeheartedly as you say, "A True flagship is the one who handles EVERY aspect of the camera".. however, i would only add it needs to be able to do this *at the highest levels of capabilities*. The R1's got some nice specs - but doesn't excel in all areas and is not at the peak of performance for TODAY. Anyone can settle for "enough" - but why settle when you can have above and beyond? I think you'd agree. I want to be able to use high fps - when i need them (rarely shoot past 10 on my current set up), and high mpx when i need them - (current set up is the same for years: (the best the camera had to offer| L-RAW card 1 + small-jpeg on the other card (along with video capture on this card.... never changed it since 1DX2 purchase.) So, no, not flagship level for me... lacking the best of what TODAY offers... of course, if Canon says it is for them... then it is for them... but not for me. So, i'll be holding onto my 1DX2, and 1DX3, and perhaps the R1mk2 will be ready for the moniker and my next photography upgrade. By the way, maybe we're miscommunicating on the R1/R5 thought? Merging the R5 with the R1 will in *NO WAY* alienate R5 users - the flagship R1 i refer to, having merged the R5 will have all the capabilities of the current R5mk2... and provide all the capabilities of the R1 on top. This, my friend would be a flagship photo camera. Both sets of users would only benefit from the merger - - the same way we 1D4 users benefitted from the merger of the 1D4 and the 1DX line. And we gladly paid more the 1DX series over the 1D line - - - because it offered a lot more. i respect your willingness to be satisfied with what Canon has provided - as long as it meets your need - whose else opinion matters, right? Enjoy it. I'd only submit, just remember, there's a whole lot of us whose opinion simply see it differently than you. Now; in the meantime - i pre-ordered the C80... a worthy upgrade to the R3, R5, AND the C70. That was forward thinking - and they'll make killing off it for sure. thanks for engaging and sharing your well received thoughts on the R1
What a disappointing flagship tbh! Canon didn't get the memo about mirrorless systems being smaller (plus that flippy screen that is useless for photography). Canon cameras and lenses keep getting bigger and bigger. I frankly don't get their strategy, on one had the have premium fast glass that is absolutely massive and on the other end cheap glass, there's no middle range priced lenses that offer good value. BTW it's called Football Canon, not retarded soccer
As a wildlife photographer I was hoping for more MP, I probably would have been happy with around 32-35MP. Instead, I will be looking at the R5 mkII to go with my R3. I do not need 40 fps and rarely use 30 fps in the R3 going more often with 15 fps as the sweet sppot.
I'm really glad they ran the R3 first. They really took a flying leap with some of the new features in AF and the user interface, and they needed to see if the user could adapt. They also needed feedback on some of the failsafes and defaults they built into the R3-onward platform. I'm going to miss my R3, but as I used it I could feel it yearning to be more in the new areas it had established. There is so much potential in that platform but there are serious roadbloacks in terms of computational speed, decision sets and the silicon itself. Reading the specs you can tell they went after those three things and went after them hard. As some who has worked in deep data science, I will tell you: those things do not come easy. When you pick this up and find yourself saying "Now I just shoot it" you are experiencing the fruits of that.
Canon shooter here. I currently use the Canon R3. I will be upgrading to the Canon R1 and will also purchase a Canon R5 MkII. My Canon R3 is a true beast, and I shoot sports on a regular basis. With that being said, I love my Canon R3 but will be purchasing, as I said before, the Canon R1. Some people are saying that there will not be a continuation of the Canon R3. I can believe this. And here's my reasoning why. A part of me wants to think that the Canon R3 was a phenomenal TEST BED because a lot of the features that are in the R3 have shown up in the R5 MkII. And by them doing this, it just proves that if they wanted to, they could have put more resolution and a bigger sensor into the Canon R1. Because when you think about it, the R5 Mark II has a 45 megapixel sensor with a lot of the specs that are in the R3 and a few that are also in the R1. Just think about that for a moment and marinate on that, and let me know what your thoughts are, if any, from anybody who reads this. In closing, I will say this. Possibly, in four more years, when the Canon R1 MkII arrives, don't be surprised if it has possibly a 33 or 36 or even 40 megapixel sensor. And honestly, it doesn't even need a global shutter.
Don’t you think this camera should have a higher resolution like the Nikon flagship?
An argument can certainly be made. However I still know action sport photographers who still shoot on 1Dx with 18MP. Most also live with big 400mm primes, so for a lot of them, 24MP is more than enough and more resolution hinders their cull and upload times. Gonna be a contentious topic for sure.
Thanks for the first look. It would be good to have evaluations and opinions from professional sports photographers on the R1 - does it meet their needs? Does it offer more and better than other models? They’ll be the ones to judge if this is the flagship they’ve been waiting for.
Thanks for watching Alan! We look forward to testing it more once we have a final production unit and getting input from sports photographers, especially after the summer Olympics.
This comes up short for an expensive flagship from canon.
Very good review. I would choose this over a9iii. Im sure the DR and low noise are top notch!
Wish they adopted the same LCD articulation of the a9III
This Camera looks so awesome! Would love to add the R1 as an ACam to my R3, which is an absolute beast. Throw in a C400 and Im set lol! 6K is the sweet spot for video resolution and Im fully happy with 24MP for stills, I've never had a client ask me for higher resolution, and image have been printed on billboards and the side of buildings with less resolution. I could see if you shot wildlife and needed to crop heavily, or printed huge fine art prints of highly detailed landscapes (Medium format is better for that any way) but, no one needs 61 megapixels for social media, online, and 98% of print...
For the price sony’s a1, a9III and nikon’s Z8, Z6III look way better options also I think the R5 mark II is the real flagship in Canon R lineup
Video was shot w Sony cams!
Sadly we only got the one copy so couldn't record talking points with it. x( However all of the footage shot on the R1 is labeled.
I im waiting for the youtube guys and girls to make a R1 as a B cam and a c400 as a A cam review and match the two camreas and show if they would work together for video productions.
C-log 2 in both cameras, 24 MP and 26MP sensors.. sharpeness and colors should match since the sensors are somewhat alike.
How’d you guys get lucky enough to test things on home turf when everyone else had to fly to Phoenix to use the cameras for 2 hours?
As a Canon dealer, we had support from Canon Canada to get pre-production access in our city for a couple of days. Still a short period to go over 2 major cameras. But, we were fortunate not to be quite as pressed for time as the content creators who went on the Canon USA press trip.
Unfortunately no global shutter 😢
Wasn't that confirmed already that there wouldn't be one ?
@@nekogami87 Yes unfortunately!
GS is proven to be crap in low light. Low light sports games would be a nightmare
You mentioned that the R1 is Canon's ultimate camera, the best of the best; however, the R1's LCD screen is 2.1 MP instead of the R3's 4.1 MP LCD screen. Really Canon?
The viewfinder of R1 is 9.44 million pixels, maybe it's to save power, or the screen has better colors and quality I guess.
Rather a better viewfinder than screen for action
Ummm… 24mp, only? Yeah… no!
There’s no reason to not have put this out with 30, 36…even 50mp.
Let’s be real… just like a user can select 24 raw, or jpeg small (8mp files), on could option for 50mp raw for card 1, and 20mp card 2…. As needed.
Canon optioned not to offer it… just crazy to me.
Let’s hope they get brave and put out an R1s with exactly this option sans moire filters. 100% they’ll have my money then.
I’ll be skipping the R1… not a strong upgrade from th 1DX3 in my opinion.
However…. C80?! Now thats an upgrade! Pre-ordered!!!
No can present a valid argument if the word "Cropping' is taken out 🤡🤡. Its a SPORTS CAMERA for F-sake!!....Sports shooters DON'T need high MP, and i am happy that canon DID"NT follow the High-MP hype. And many photographers who are NOT sports photographers have PROVED that 24mp is enough even for 6x4 or 8x10 feet size printouts. IF you want high MP look to the R5,also a very capable and excellent camera, don't vent out your frustration on the R1.
Ummm … no… one can get a nice 8x10ft print from the 1D4 as well…it’s 16 mp.
only a sucker would suggest the quality on a 50mp 8x10ft print is not vastly better than the 20mp 8x10ft print. (Not suggesting this what you were saying, though; didn’t mean it that way.)
My opinion … drop the R5 line… put it all in the R1 as a true flagship for photography, and videophiles can purchase the C80. It costs less and vastly outperforms both the R5 and the R1.
@@mikewinburn putting everything into the R1 and dropping the R5 line defeats the purpose, then you're alienating the sports shooters, they "DONT" need high MP. There is a need for High MP camera but its not in the R1. Hence R5 existence is important. I have seen photographers printing out of crop sensors files and still not noticing the difference. R1 is a sports camera. R5 is an All-rounder. Both have importance.
@@justinjames403- agreed, that it can be done the way canon does it… R1 for sports R5 for photogs…
However, that’s old school thinking. Canon needs to get with the game.
Have we not heard of “settings”?
Your main contention is to justify low mp count for sports. 10000% agreed. But right now, I can change the output on my 20px 1DX3 and output 16, 12, or even 8mp files… on the fly, at that!
Canon can, but choose not to, make a true Flagship 50mp R1, and allow me to switch to low mp output if I need it, without sacrifice quality or features when I want to use 50 mpx…
This would continue to meet the sports shooters need, and now R5 users would not lack the full exposure features, GPS, weather sealing, build quality as the R1 gets. And, for heavens sake… put a theft deterrent feature in.
You telling me you wouldn’t buy this camera if it were optioned for you?
Yeah… like I said, canon needs to stop thinking old school business models; right now, they’re playing “catch-up” and the R1 puts them even further behind.
@@mikewinburn Having high MP is NOT the "Flagship" title-deciding factor. If there is a high MP Pro-Body camera, it would cannibalize the R5, then those user base will be alienated, why would they pay 7 or 8K $ for features that was available on R5? Like I said, that camera is an All-rounder, not a specialist camera.
Personally I would prefer Speed over MP. I would have preferred a 30mp on the R1 but the current 24mp is also enough.
Canon doesn't need to play catch-up. Their old-school ways ARE what's setting them apart and preventing them from joining the rat-race. R1 is by all means a deserving "Flagship" title holder.
Enough Megapixel (24 MP)
40fps shooting (Uncompressed 14bit Raw)
Dual CF-Express Type B slots
Pro-Body (integrated vertical grip)
Accurate and Fast AF Tracking
All those Video Features (6K Raw @ 60p, CLog2 etc)
Tell me which other company model have ALL of these, not just High MP.
People need to understand the definition of a Flagship first. A True flagship is the one who handles EVERY aspect of the camera, NOT just having high MP and bottlenecking others.
R1 is fully worthy to be in the same category as Nikon Z9 or Sony A1, Coz its handling aspects, which these two are compromising on.
@@justinjames403 - i like your line of reasoning.
i agree MP count alone does NOT a flagship make :) Agreed, 24mp is "enough"... just as 12mp was enough, and 16 mpx was enough... in its day.
While i would also wholeheartedly as you say, "A True flagship is the one who handles EVERY aspect of the camera".. however, i would only add it needs to be able to do this *at the highest levels of capabilities*.
The R1's got some nice specs - but doesn't excel in all areas and is not at the peak of performance for TODAY. Anyone can settle for "enough" - but why settle when you can have above and beyond? I think you'd agree. I want to be able to use high fps - when i need them (rarely shoot past 10 on my current set up), and high mpx when i need them - (current set up is the same for years: (the best the camera had to offer| L-RAW card 1 + small-jpeg on the other card (along with video capture on this card.... never changed it since 1DX2 purchase.)
So, no, not flagship level for me... lacking the best of what TODAY offers... of course, if Canon says it is for them... then it is for them... but not for me.
So, i'll be holding onto my 1DX2, and 1DX3, and perhaps the R1mk2 will be ready for the moniker and my next photography upgrade.
By the way, maybe we're miscommunicating on the R1/R5 thought? Merging the R5 with the R1 will in *NO WAY* alienate R5 users - the flagship R1 i refer to, having merged the R5 will have all the capabilities of the current R5mk2... and provide all the capabilities of the R1 on top. This, my friend would be a flagship photo camera.
Both sets of users would only benefit from the merger - - the same way we 1D4 users benefitted from the merger of the 1D4 and the 1DX line. And we gladly paid more the 1DX series over the 1D line - - - because it offered a lot more.
i respect your willingness to be satisfied with what Canon has provided - as long as it meets your need - whose else opinion matters, right? Enjoy it.
I'd only submit, just remember, there's a whole lot of us whose opinion simply see it differently than you.
Now; in the meantime - i pre-ordered the C80... a worthy upgrade to the R3, R5, AND the C70. That was forward thinking - and they'll make killing off it for sure.
thanks for engaging and sharing your well received thoughts on the R1
Where is the global shutter, Canon? Sony still the leading innovation camera company.
We look forward to running comparisons once we have final production units available.
A9III VS Z6III VS R3 mark II(R1)
how †hîs gliders flY wî†hoü† †aîl...!?
What a disappointing flagship tbh! Canon didn't get the memo about mirrorless systems being smaller (plus that flippy screen that is useless for photography). Canon cameras and lenses keep getting bigger and bigger. I frankly don't get their strategy, on one had the have premium fast glass that is absolutely massive and on the other end cheap glass, there's no middle range priced lenses that offer good value. BTW it's called Football Canon, not retarded soccer