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

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

What a letdown after such a big buildup!

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

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.

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

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. 👍🏻

looks like a inflatable camera

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

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.

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.

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 ?

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".

LUMIX still haven’t released their flagship cameras yet!

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 😊

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!

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

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.

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.

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.

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...

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.

We need a Canon R1S.

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

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

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

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

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.

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!

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…

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?

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.

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.

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 😞

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.

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!

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.

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

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.

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….

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 ...

Is this camera worth the weight?

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

Yeah yeah...but that all black Doxa!!!

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"

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.

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

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

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.

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!

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?

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.

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 😅

Looks like Canon still held back.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

My dream camera 📸

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

Nikon Z8/Z9> Canon R3MkII 🙂‍↕️

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.

How Canon can be building r1 for so many years and release that? Does company have problems and will be out of the competition soon?

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

That thing is just gargantuan!

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

For sports, YES

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.

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

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

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..😊

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

I feel the same way about my R8 not using LP-E6 batteries. 😂

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

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

I think the R1 would have to have a flag and a ship on it to qualify 😃👍

Many people doubt it is.

It's definitely not an R3 Mark II, the autofocus is bonkers and the readout speed finally ends the issues with electronic shutter in certain sports. The autofocus is light years ahead. The people that won't buy it only care about pixel count, but if you have to crop, you weren't close enough... improve your skill, the camera can't help you if you don't have the basics right. Not a bad video, but a few misses on things like "same DIGIC X as the EOS R3"... DIGIC X is a series of processors, none of them are the same. The Z 9 is really its only competition as a true "pro" body, the a1 simple doesn't have the build quality or the professional power delivery for extreme conditions. The omission of the mechanical shutter on the Z 9 was a miss. So again, the only people who think this is a "letdown" or an "R3 Mark II" really don't understand what's going on here..... and again, most of them were never buying it. This camera is built around what CPS and Explorer professionals wanted, not some guy on RU-vid. The eye control AF actually works and the 0.9x EVF is a fantastic upgrade! Subtle things that make a big difference. Decent work here though and thanks for sharing your thoughts.

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

That's a big One. R5MKII far more interesting( and cheaper)

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.

The way the camera looks alone is enough to put me off if I'm being honest

A9iii can do 120fps shooting with global illumination. If they are claiming the 40fps shooting as their main selling point as feature than this is a huge failure. This would have been great for 2020 not now.

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.

Some of the very best sports photography ever was taken on Nikon F2's and F3's !!!!!! This technology is all getting utterly ridiculous in nearly every way !!!!!!

I think the word 'flagship' is just for posers. It's just so posers can tell everyone they have the flagship mobile phone, the flagship TV, flagship camera, etc. Products branded as a flagship are often bought by people with plenty of cash and no reason. Clever people buy what they need not what they want to tell everyone else they bought. Pro sports and action photographers is where the R1 is aimed at, it has a lot of great features that these people want. The R5 is perfect for some other types of Pro photographers, the R3 for others, etc. So if anything is a flagship it's all of them, they are the flagship for that need.