Yesterday, Adorama published a long list of supposed Canon EOS R1 specifications that provided a lot more detail on the newly-announced camera than Canon published in its development announcement. I don’t believe them.
PetaPixel published those reported specifications because as a news source, it’s our job to share information as it becomes available. In that story, we did clarify that there was a possibility that some or all of those specifications were not indicative of the actual R1 and after talking to several industry insiders and doing some digging, I don’t believe they’re accurate, as realistic as they might sound.
For starters, an Adorama representative emailed us this morning and claimed that “due to an unfortunate technical error, the Canon EOS R1 page briefly displayed unrelated specifications.” Their full statement can be read in the updated story from yesterday, but that’s the gist of it. While I believe the part where Adorama is apologizing for the incorrect information, I’m dubious that a “technical error” is the cause because those look suspiciously like a set of rumored specifications that were published on Weibo and republished by Digital Camera World in January (and by that, I mean they’re basically word for word).
Even if that weren’t the case, there are still reasons to be suspicious. The last line in the list is what stuck in my head all night: “Better than the EOS R3 and EOS R5.” Camera companies, and certainly not Canon, wouldn’t boast about new features by knocking or bringing down other cameras in their own line.
I also think it’s just too early to think that Canon already briefed dealers on the EOS R1 — it was only announced two days ago. Over the next several months, Canon will likely start to talk with dealers and the media to get them prepared for what is coming. Dealers, while regularly the source of leaks, do need to be briefed on new camera equipment because they will need to be knowledgeable enough to answer customer questions.
So why did Adorama put a bunch of unverified specifications on a product page for a new camera? I honestly don’t know.
While it is certainly possible that some of these specifications will end up being true, I think there is enough about them to warrant serious skepticism even though the way they appeared and the rationale for their removal can easily be described as bizarre. I was especially shocked about the 30 megapixels they quoted, as that felt low for a camera that Canon has been working on for at least four years — especially compared to the cameras it will try and compete against.
Image credits: Canon