# There is an APS-C RF mount camera coming [CR3]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 27, 2020)

> After months upon months of speculation, I have finally confirmed that an APS-C RF mount camera is coming, and it’s planned to be launched in the 2nd half of 2021. As for anything product-wise during the pandemic, these announcements are a moving target.
> My source has confirmed that it will be the smallest EOS R system camera, but will pack a punch for both sports shooters and videographers. I will note that “smallest” doesn’t necessarily mean that it’ll be all that much smaller than the EOS RP. The same source also said that there aren’t any plans for RF-S lenses, but that there will be lenses that will suit both the APS-C and full-frame shooter.
> The same source also said it will use a new APS-C image sensor with DPAF II, but specifications beyond that are very vague.
> The image used for this post is a mockup and not the actual camera.



Continue reading...


----------



## H. Jones (Oct 27, 2020)

This was something I was already thinking about, something like a small aperture 15-45mm full frame compatible lens would make a great, cheap wide angle zoom as well fit perfectly as a standard zoom for the crop cameras. Since mirrorless makes wide angle lenses easier to design, makes sense to expand full frame options that fit crop cameras pretty well. 

Even the 15-35mm F/2.8L IS seems like a perfect although expensive 24-56mm companion for a sports shooter with a R7.


----------



## StevenA (Oct 27, 2020)

An R7 to replace the 7dmII?


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 27, 2020)




----------



## Joules (Oct 27, 2020)

"The same source also said that there aren’t any plans for RF-S lenses"

Good so far. Sounds like an option for those looking for M6 II / 90 D reach, without paying for the high res R or compromising on ergonomics (M series) or Autofocus (EF series).

A budget option without budget crop exclusive lenses wouldn't make sense to me. Going to f/7.1 and 11 is fine for people moving from APS-C to FF, as it pretty much just compensates the difference. But on a crop body, those apertures literally are a downgrade to many of the available options. And while the 24-105 mm STM 4.0-7.1 is cheap, it is not cheaper than the brighter and longer EF-S 18-135 mm 3.5-5.6 for example.

So this to me sounds like EF-M will remain the compact form factor line and rebels are just going to fade away without a direct APS-C replacement.


----------



## flip314 (Oct 27, 2020)

I'm a little bit surprised, but I guess the pricing on full-frame cameras isn't quite going down fast enough to make them affordable to the same people buying Rebels now.

It will be interesting to see if Canon can still make the value proposition make sense without cheaper RF-s lenses. They have some cheaper full-frame zooms now, but one would think APS-C lenses could be even cheaper.


----------



## Antono Refa (Oct 27, 2020)

flip314 said:


> I'm a little bit surprised, but I guess the pricing on full-frame cameras isn't quite going down fast enough to make them affordable to the same people buying Rebels now.



This might be a 7D replacement, so the target market is more interested in long lenses, and is willing to pay.


----------



## ColinJR (Oct 27, 2020)

Cinema cameras aside, _why? _

Who want's this over full-frame? With today's processors, FF has proven to be just as performant as something like the 7D line. If you give me the "reach" argument, then I would give you the FF crop argument. If you give me the cost argument, then I point to the RP. Cheaper than that then you're going to have an up-hill battle against Fujifilm and Sony, or you know, Canon's M lineup.

I don't think it makes any sense, but maybe that's just me. I just hope they don't split their attention developing 'RF-S' lenses that are inferior in every way.

The only way it would be remotely interesting to me is if they made a really good, significantly more compact camera body with some really good, compact, L-glass (IE, competitive with Fuji's lenses), while also obviously maintaining the ability to use FF lenses. Then, maybe I'd justify one as a travel camera/backup body.

But seeing as how they never made L-glass for EF-S...

In other words, give me an RF line of APS-C lenses that can go toe-to-toe with Fuji X or GTFO.


----------



## APP (Oct 27, 2020)

I wonder if an adapter could be made to use ef-m lenses on the R7. That could make for a versatile and compact camera if able to use these lenses, and potentially sell more of those lenses, as well as bringing more people into the RF ecosystem.


----------



## zim (Oct 27, 2020)

Doesn't sound like a 7d2 replacement to me, smaller or even same size as an RP? would R6 control and button layout fit? Now if it was same size and layout of R6 but with R5 construction that would be a replacement. So this sounds to me like the start of a rebel line


----------



## Joules (Oct 27, 2020)

ColinJR said:


> If you give me the "reach" argument, then I would give you the FF crop argument. If you give me the cost argument, then I point to the RP.


And if I give you the reach, speed and cost argument combined?

The high res R may match or exceed the M6 II / 90D, but it will certainly also exceed the already hefty price of the R5. And likely not go beyong the 12 FPS mechanical. If they do a RF mount camera around 2k, with 32+ MP, 20 FPS mechanical, they can offer something that FF can't do as affordable.


----------



## Joules (Oct 27, 2020)

zim said:


> So this sounds to me like the start of a rebel line


Without lenses?


----------



## degos (Oct 27, 2020)

ColinJR said:


> Cinema cameras aside, _why? _
> 
> If you give me the "reach" argument, then I would give you the FF crop argument.



FF crop does nothing other than throw away pixels. It doesn't add any 'reach'.


----------



## ColinJR (Oct 27, 2020)

degos said:


> FF crop does nothing other than throw away pixels. It doesn't add any 'reach'.



APS-C sensors are only giving you a "crop" of you FF lens' image circle, hence the "reach". Also, APS-C sensors are more pixel-dense than FF sensors, giving them more noise, all else equal... Meaning, you might be better off cropping from a FF sensor anyway.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 27, 2020)

degos said:


> FF crop does nothing other than throw away pixels. It doesn't add any 'reach'.



But a crop sensor simply throws away light that would otherwise have fallen onto a sensor--basically throwing away pixels but earlier in the process. Of course if you use an APS-C lens that doesn't happen--the pixels are thrown away even earlier than that.

What is "reach" anyway if not the ability to PRETEND to have a longer lens by cropping the picture?


----------



## dwarven (Oct 27, 2020)

Yeahhh buddyyy. Watch out birds.

Some hopeful specs:
Joystick
~10fps still shooting
30mp sensor, like the one in the 90D/M6 II
At least one UHS-II slot, or one CFexpress slot
Video: don't care, but it will probably have at least 4k 30p
USB-C charging while shooting
Flippy, rather than tilty-flippy screen. It's way quicker for low shots and subjects that are in motion
Tight weather sealing. I wanna be able to shoot birds with God's natural softbox in the rain
IBIS: I don't care too much, but it will probably have it
An Olympus Pro Capture-like feature
120Hz mode for the EVF

I expect to pay ~$2k or a little less for this


----------



## drama (Oct 27, 2020)

I don't get it. The RP is a grand, and by that point next year, achievable for less. If you go APSC, what's the point of RF glass? Why would someone drop (let's say) 600 bucks on an APSC body that shoots faster than an RP, but then have to shell out for the expensive RF glass? What am I missing?


----------



## adigoks (Oct 27, 2020)

im into APS-C.... so BRING IT ON!!!!


----------



## dwarven (Oct 27, 2020)

drama said:


> I don't get it. The RP is a grand, and by that point next year, achievable for less. If you go APSC, what's the point of RF glass? Why would someone drop (let's say) 600 bucks on an APSC body that shoots faster than an RP, but then have to shell out for the expensive RF glass? What am I missing?



You're probably missing all of the people who use big whites on the 7D line. You're missing the fact that a higher end APS-C camera gives you reach without losing resolution, and at a cheaper price than an R5. Cropped to x1.6, even the R5 only gives you 17MP.

Third, you're missing the fact that no RF-S lenses have been rumored or announced, indicating that this camera is not going to be a Rebel spin-off of any kind. It's going to be a high end body that people will mount wildlife and sports lenses on.


----------



## mpeeps (Oct 27, 2020)

ColinJR said:


> APS-C sensors are only giving you a "crop" of you FF lens' image circle, hence the "reach". Also, APS-C sensors are more pixel-dense than FF sensors, giving them more noise, all else equal... Meaning, you might be better off cropping from a FF sensor anyway.


I will take my cropped 5dsr photos over my 7D efforts every time.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Oct 27, 2020)

degos said:


> FF crop does nothing other than throw away pixels. It doesn't add any 'reach'.



You say "throw away pixels", I say "allows me to buy cheaper lenses that get to supertele, without extenders that add cost and rob light, without photoshop". I love full frame and mostly shoot wide, but if I was a birder who liked to travel, a crop R5 with the RF 100 - 500mm would give me a 2-piece setup that gets to 800mm effective and fits in a backpack, with usable files straight off the camera. That's never been done before.


----------



## adigoks (Oct 27, 2020)

dwarven said:


> Yeahhh buddyyy. Watch out birds.
> 
> Some hopeful specs:
> Joystick
> ...



agreed.
actually M6 ii is pretty good at tracking but lacking evf is really a let down.
90D in live view is also good at tracking but using LCD to track fast moving subject is not comfortable at all
to be honest i like canon releasing R7 with its EF-M mount conterpart (M5 ii maybe? & yes i dont want EOS M line to be dead ) at the same time
just like 90D & M6 ii style.


----------



## Bob Howland (Oct 27, 2020)

The RP isn't much bigger than the M5, a little wider perhaps. So conceivably, Canon could make both an R7 and an M7 using the same sensor, the same image processing hardware, different but related firmware and different lens mounts. Does that sound completely insane?


----------



## Sharlin (Oct 27, 2020)

drama said:


> I don't get it. The RP is a grand, and by that point next year, achievable for less. If you go APSC, what's the point of RF glass? Why would someone drop (let's say) 600 bucks on an APSC body that shoots faster than an RP, but then have to shell out for the expensive RF glass? What am I missing?



7D owners mostly use FF glass anyway. Yes, RF glass is even pricier than EF glass (for now at least) but EF compatibility is there. _And_, if Canon plays their cards right, they could potentially release moderately inexpensive mid-tier RF glass that has great center resolution but the corners have CA/vignetting/distortion/require builtin correction. Already released lenses show they're prepared to do just that. _On a crop body what happens in FF corners is irrelevant._


----------



## zim (Oct 27, 2020)

Joules said:


> Without lenses?


True! For me whole thing doesn't make sense with the current line up.
Incidentally I was one that didn't think an aps-c R would ever happen. Aps-c was always really about price, my understanding is that price difference is much smaller now, those 600 & 800 lenses seemed to me to be an indicator, so what do I know!


----------



## Bob Howland (Oct 27, 2020)

mpeeps said:


> I will take my cropped 5dsr photos over my 7D efforts every time.


Assuming that the 5dsr actually can get the picture. The 7D2 has twice the FPS of the 5Ds and 5Dsr.


----------



## zim (Oct 27, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> If Canon plays their cards right,
> 
> 
> 7D owners mostly use FF glass anyway. Yes, RF glass is even pricier than EF glass (for now at least) but EF compatibility is there. _And_, if Canon plays their cards right, they could potentially release moderately inexpensive mid-tier RF glass that has great center resolution but the corners have CA/vignetting/distortion/require builtin correction. Already released lenses show they're prepared to do just that. _On a crop body what happens in FF corners is irrelevant._


Yes but why a smaller and therefore poorer handling body what is this obsession with teeny weeny


----------



## adigoks (Oct 27, 2020)

zim said:


> Yes but why a smaller and therefore poorer handling body what is this obsession with teeny weeny



even R6 is almost the same size as old rebel T_i series. being smaller is not always godd tbh


----------



## BroderLund (Oct 27, 2020)

As I am exited for the C70 I'm more interested in solid APS-C glass that fit the cinema line with AF. So they should be of solid quality, and somewhat bright. Not just "entry level" lenses for those that don't want to shell out for the FF RF lenses. Something competing with the Sigma 18-35 1.8 or along those lines.


----------



## bbasiaga (Oct 27, 2020)

This makes a lot of sense out of the recent rumor of all those wide angle lenses that don't quite have an image circle large enough for a FF sensor! You can use them on this crop camera, and if you use them on the FFs they just give some heavy vignette at the wide end (like the 24-240). 

-Brian


----------



## skp (Oct 27, 2020)

I wonder if that focal reducer they announced with the C70 will fit on here


----------



## David Soares (Oct 27, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


An APS-C sensor R camera would be great for bird photographers, especially if it is a high megapixel sensor like the 32 megapixel sensor in the 90D and the M6 Mk II. My best resolution combination for photographing small birds is the 600mm f4 Mk II with the 1.4x III and the M6 Mk II+EVF. Even with that focal length (840mm) plus the 1.6x sensor crop factor (takes it to 1,344mm equivalent), I typically still have to crop 50% or more of the image on small birds like lesser goldfinches (4.5 inch body length) even at a relatively close range of about 25 feet or so. That little 32 Mega pix sensor produces great results – high resolution and relatively low noise (ISO 1600 is very useable) - even when cropped 50%. That sensor extrapolated out to full frame size would be about 84 mega pix, a camera that doesn’t exist (yet) and if it did would probably cost upwards of US$4,000. The M6 Mk II has limitations that hopefully an R body would overcome: 1) it suffers from shutter shock with long lenses, so the electronic shutter has to be used to avoid that, 2) when the electronic shutter is used, only single frame drive mode can be used, no multi frames per second, 3) AF performance could do with improvement, 4) IBIS and finally, 5) the M6 II camera is physically small for a good grip with big lenses. An R-sized body with a vertical grip added would be a much better fit. By the way, I chose the M6 II over the 90D to avoid having to do focus micro calibration, a blessing that comes with mirrorless cameras. Perfect focus is especially critical with long lenses.


----------



## Nigel95 (Oct 27, 2020)

Great news!! Hopefully to hear about some rumored specs soon.

Would love to have the following specs:

1080 120P with DPAF
4k 60p 10 bit with DPAF
IBIS
Flip screen

''but will pack a punch sports shooters and videographers" I hope this will be a R6 but APS-C version. High end APS-C please Canon, I am willing to pay for it


----------



## MiJax (Oct 27, 2020)

Hopefully this will more than just an after-thought... considering less than a year ago they went on the record saying this wasn't going to happen. Also, this is really going to break their line up, being they will now have a FF 7D Mark II and a Crop 7D Mark II RF camera. So I'd assume the R and R6 are going to merge. Odd choices, but I do believe they'll sell cameras as there are a lot of people who love their crop bodies.


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Oct 27, 2020)

I have never doubted that Canon would launch an enthusiast APS-C camera with RF mount, sooner or later. And as someone who want a compact _and_ affordable enthusiast camera(-system), I will for sure be buying such a "sports shooters" thing to replace or supplement my current 7DII.

It is a bit disappointing the rumor says no "RF-S" lenses are planned. I was hoping for the rumored (and patented) 100-400mm f/5.6-7.1 lens, which sounds like a cool match for an "R7" type of camera (if it is an "enthusiast" but cheaper than L kind of lens). And I would love to replace f.ex. my walk-around EF-S 15-85mm and 10-22mm lenses with "RF optimized" versions either more compact with same range and quality, or better range/quality in similar size. A bit wider wideangle zoom would be really cool (9-20mm?). But I guess I can easily live with adapted EF-S lenses. And in the long run I still believe we will see APS-C lenses (and more APS-C cameras) for the RF mount.


----------



## gatabo (Oct 27, 2020)

skp said:


> I wonder if that focal reducer they announced with the C70 will fit on here


It should, but a much more affordable focal reducer, not intended just for Canon Cinema line, should be announced to make Canon DSLR APS-C user move to Canon R mirrorless easier and more affordable, moreover Canon should also create an adapter that goes 2mm inside the RF mount and allow to adapt EOS-M glass to work with future EOS R APSC cameras, it's not that easy to go inside the lens mount, but it's not impossible for Canon as the EOS- M glass "fits" at least 2mm inside the EOS R mount, that will allow a smooth transition from both DSLR and mirrorles APS-C Canon photographers.


----------



## wyotex43n (Oct 27, 2020)

StevenA said:


> An R7 to replace the 7dmII?


Lets hope!!


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Oct 27, 2020)

drama said:


> I don't get it. The RP is a grand, and by that point next year, achievable for less. If you go APSC, what's the point of RF glass? Why would someone drop (let's say) 600 bucks on an APSC body that shoots faster than an RP, but then have to shell out for the expensive RF glass? What am I missing?



Maybe you are missing that you can use EF(-S) glass too on an R-body?
And RP is not an enthusiast camera.


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Oct 27, 2020)

mpeeps said:


> I will take my cropped 5dsr photos over my 7D efforts every time.



Looking at technical quality alone, you probably have a point.
But cameras are also about the tool. And I don't think 5DSR are optimal for every kind of photography.
(and of course, there's the price too)


----------



## jvillain (Oct 27, 2020)

ColinJR said:


> APS-C sensors are only giving you a "crop" of you FF lens' image circle, hence the "reach". Also, APS-C sensors are more pixel-dense than FF sensors, giving them more noise, all else equal... Meaning, you might be better off cropping from a FF sensor anyway.



A lot of people really misunderstand the relationship of pixel density vs noise in the final image. When you have higher pixel density it means you can down sample more for final delivery. When you down sample it shrinks the noise. In the final image how much noise you actually have is basically a wash between a high density sensor and a low density sensor all other factors being equal.

Over the last 6 years or so I standardized on crop glass as I could use it both for video and stills shooting with out having to do the math on the focal length every time I switched. The crop glass is a lot cheaper as well and I am not talking the cheap F4+ stuff. I have been facing having to sell all my glass and replace it with FF even though it wouldn't do a damn thing for me. A mirrorless 7D in an RF mount would be awesome sauce for me, and I don't give a damn whether any one understands why I want it or not.


----------



## Joules (Oct 27, 2020)

ColinJR said:


> Also, APS-C sensors are more pixel-dense than FF sensors, giving them more noise, all else equal... Meaning, you might be better off cropping from a FF sensor anyway.


That's not how noise works. Crop an FF sensor to APS-C size, and you'll get the same amount of noise you would have gotten shooting APS-C. Resolution does not matter.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Oct 27, 2020)

But could they make a mirrorless 7D2? We are talking 20mp, 12fps, Well built and heavily weathersealed and finally coming in at under 3k Aus$. I don't know how they did it with the 7D2 at the price they did but without all those features at that price then you may as well just go FF.


----------



## drama (Oct 27, 2020)

Stig Nygaard said:


> Maybe you are missing that you can use EF(-S) glass too on an R-body?
> And RP is not an enthusiast camera.



RP is definitely an enthusiast camera, at least by Canon terms, and transparently marketed to compete with early A7s - released at a low spec to decelerate quickly and come down to a price that competes with Sony's entry level mirrorless. And I don't think _anyone_ is missing using EF-S glass. It's not great. And if your argument is to lose the full frame, and lose the RF Glass... I revert to my original point - why would you buy an APS-C RF mount camera?


----------



## wyotex43n (Oct 27, 2020)

Joules said:


> And if I give you the reach, speed and cost argument combined?
> 
> The high res R may match or exceed the M6 II / 90D, but it will certainly also exceed the already hefty price of the R5. And likely not go beyong the 12 FPS mechanical. If they do a RF mount camera around 2k, with 32+ MP, 20 FPS mechanical, they can offer something that FF can't do as affordable.


Especially if the noise could be better than the current crop cameras.


----------



## AccipiterQ (Oct 27, 2020)

*YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *

WAIT....what am I going to whine about now?


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Oct 27, 2020)

drama said:


> And I don't think _anyone_ is missing using EF-S glass



There are good EF-S glass. Fullframe system is too big and heavy for me (and too expensive)



drama said:


> I revert to my original point - why would you buy an APS-C RF mount camera?



Well, I will refer to my first comment 




__





There is an APS-C RF mount camera coming [CR3]


FF crop does nothing other than throw away pixels. It doesn't add any 'reach'. You say "throw away pixels", I say "allows me to buy cheaper lenses that get to supertele, without extenders that add cost and rob light, without photoshop". I love full frame and mostly shoot wide, but if I was a...




www.canonrumors.com


----------



## Sharlin (Oct 27, 2020)

mpeeps said:


> I will take my cropped 5dsr photos over my 7D efforts every time.



If pixel surface area and (cropped) sensor surface area are equal, it makes absolutely no difference whatsoever how big the sensor is outside the cropped area. If you see objective IQ differences, they're caused by differences in sensor tech/generation, AA filter strength, or processing.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Oct 27, 2020)

gatabo said:


> It should, but a much more affordable focal reducer, not intended just for Canon Cinema line, should be announced to make Canon DSLR APS-C user move to Canon R mirrorless easier and more affordable, moreover Canon should also create an adapter that goes 2mm inside the RF mount and allow to adapt EOS-M glass to work with future EOS R APSC cameras, it's not that easy to go inside the lens mount, but it's not impossible for Canon as the EOS- M glass "fits" at least 2mm inside the EOS R mount, that will allow a smooth transition from both DSLR and mirrorles APS-C Canon photographers.


I can see no reason for somebody to want an RF-mount APS-C camera and use it with a focal reducer instead of just buying a full-frame camera.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 27, 2020)

If an R7 is coming I'd seriously consider an upgrade from my 7D2. I like to use fast crop cameras for birding...


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Oct 27, 2020)

EF-S is *******!


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 27, 2020)

But! (maybe I have missed other comments asking this already here): what will happen to the M mount then?


----------



## Otara (Oct 27, 2020)

Aussie shooter said:


> But could they make a mirrorless 7D2? We are talking 20mp, 12fps, Well built and heavily weathersealed and finally coming in at under 3k Aus$. I don't know how they did it with the 7D2 at the price they did but without all those features at that price then you may as well just go FF.



I suspect M6 II equivalent, maybe better build, with any extra features depending on the price point they're aiming for. I doubt they'd have trouble selling it, and given that camera's current price, theres probably a bit of room for improvement.


----------



## AccipiterQ (Oct 27, 2020)

ColinJR said:


> Cinema cameras aside, _why? _
> 
> Who want's this over full-frame? With today's processors, FF has proven to be just as performant as something like the 7D line. If you give me the "reach" argument, then I would give you the FF crop argument. If you give me the cost argument, then I point to the RP. Cheaper than that then you're going to have an up-hill battle against Fujifilm and Sony, or you know, Canon's M lineup.
> 
> ...



a 32MP (for isntance) R7 would have pixel density unmatched by anything Canon has produced. I'd slam the pre-order button like the fist of an angry diety the moment it went live.


----------



## Gino_FOTO (Oct 27, 2020)

Dividing the RF system into two separate sensor sizes is hardly a smart step, as the current market goes, RP is reachable enough to be considered as an entrance gate,


----------



## AccipiterQ (Oct 27, 2020)

dwarven said:


> You're probably missing all of the people who use big whites on the 7D line. You're missing the fact that a higher end APS-C camera gives you reach without losing resolution, and at a cheaper price than an R5. Cropped to x1.6, even the R5 only gives you 17MP.



exactly. My two use-cases are birdwatching, and family day trips, etc. I have a 7Dii, and I'm getting an R5. The R5 is for that day trip use-case. Cropped down it doesn't provide the pixel density of the 7Dii. If that an R7 comes out at like 32MP or something....I mean...that's a home-run.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Oct 27, 2020)

justaCanonuser said:


> But! (maybe I have missed other comments asking this already here): what will happen to the M mount then?.


I do not see this affecting the M-mount.
Especially, if they are not planning to make RF-S lenses.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 27, 2020)

Using a crop camera for tele shooting vs using a FF camera with the same center resolution delivers the same results, of course - with one exception: speed, just based on processing less sensor data - if a crop mode is not already implemented on the sensor level. It is like driving into a crowed city to buy a bottle of beer with a compact car vs a huge SUV: with the smaller car you find faster a fitting parking lot, so you are earlier back at home to drink that bottle


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 27, 2020)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I do not see this affecting the M-mount.
> Especially, if they are not planning to make RF-S lenses.


We will see - this is all rumors anyway


----------



## slclick (Oct 27, 2020)

Stig Nygaard said:


> Maybe you are missing that you can use EF(-S) glass too on an R-body?
> And RP is not an enthusiast camera.


600? Let's hope it's sealed, fast, low noise and has plenty of usable AF modes for various shooting needs. That will not be anything less than 1799 imho. The 7D crowd has needs which a 600 dollar body will never fill.


----------



## Dragon (Oct 27, 2020)

Given the hint at the feature set, this is appeasement for the 7DII whiners. The no RF-s lens comment is encouraging news for M owners. I is a tricky path to navigate, but Canon must have figured there were enough potential big whites in the mix to make this worthwhile. The 7DII crowd makes no sense to me. If you are going to spend 10 or 20 grand on glass, why not get a body (R5 or R5s) that can fully utilize it, not to mention giving you a much bigger field of view when using for what this crowd is planning?. Canon does listen to customers, so we have to assume that segment was large enough and loud enough to justify making them their very own trinket.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 27, 2020)

EOS 4 Life said:


> EF-S is *******!


Yes, maybe we will see RF-S lenses in future? Maybe with exchangeable M mount adapters as part of the lens? Not sure about the flange distances if such two crop systems would co-exist.


----------



## beastofexmoor (Oct 27, 2020)

justaCanonuser said:


> But! (maybe I have missed other comments asking this already here): what will happen to the M mount then?





EOS 4 Life said:


> I do not see this affecting the M-mount.
> Especially, if they are not planning to make RF-S lenses.



If anything this concrete bit of news (or rumor at least) would indicate that Canon has no near-term plans to replace the M system with a similar compact, consumer oriented APS-C system, which is what the "M is *******" crowd has always assumed would happen sooner rather than later. Now, that doesn't necessarily mean that Canon will continue to make significant improvements to the M system in the form of new lenses and significant upgrades to bodies, but if they do so they'll be ceding the compact, consumer priced market completely to Fuji and Sony which would be pretty astonishing given their decades long history of being the market leader in this general area.


----------



## AccipiterQ (Oct 27, 2020)

Dragon said:


> . The 7DII crowd makes no sense to me. If you are going to spend 10 or 20 grand on glass, why not get a body (R5 or R5s) that can fully utilize it, not to mention giving you a much bigger field of view when using for what this crowd is planning?. Canon does listen to customers, so we have to assume that segment was large enough and loud enough to justify making them their very own trinket.



Because the use-case for an R6 or R5 is completely different from the 7Dii (or R7)? Even cropped the R5 is only giving you 17MP. Nature/sports photographers need speed & reach. The R6/R5 have speed, but not the reach, when you're cropping down. If the R7 ends up being 32MP or whatever....that's a homerun. I'd buy one the day it drops, or mug someone that got one before they sold out.


----------



## Philrp (Oct 27, 2020)

For those who don't understand. For the same money you can get:

1- A rebel type camera with a full frame sensor
2- A 1Dx type camera with a crop sensor.

I will always pick #2, as it offers more versatility and fun for the same money.


----------



## navastronia (Oct 27, 2020)

drama said:


> RP is definitely an enthusiast camera, at least by Canon terms, and transparently marketed to compete with early A7s - released at a low spec to decelerate quickly and come down to a price that competes with Sony's entry level mirrorless. And I don't think _anyone_ is missing using EF-S glass. It's not great. And if your argument is to lose the full frame, and lose the RF Glass... I revert to my original point - why would you buy an APS-C RF mount camera?



EF-S glass is fine if you 1) buy lenses that are objectively great, like the Sigma 18-35/1.8, and 2) aren't worried about "moving up to" full frame. As someone who _did_ ditch APS-C entirely, it was a little bit of a bother to have to sell my EF-S glass. Birders who like APS-C for its reach, etc, won't be in the same position I was.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 27, 2020)

Stig Nygaard said:


> Looking at technical quality alone, you probably have a point.
> But cameras are also about the tool. And I don't think 5DSR are optimal for every kind of photography.
> (and of course, there's the price too)


The pricing for the 5DSR has really reduced now especially second hand. Besides speed/fps and high ISO performance, it is looking to be a strong set of features and has weather sealing.


----------



## degos (Oct 27, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> but if I was a birder who liked to travel, a crop R5 with the RF 100 - 500mm would give me a 2-piece setup that gets to 800mm effective and fits in a backpack



No, it gives you 100-500 with the ability to throw away 28MP if you choose 'crop'. That setting gives absolutely no focal length magic. It saves card space.

APS-C can have denser sensors because the smaller CMOS wafer size means that the proportion of sensors lost to manufacturing defects is more tolerable.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 27, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> If pixel surface area and (cropped) sensor surface area are equal, it makes absolutely no difference whatsoever how big the sensor is outside the cropped area. If you see objective IQ differences, they're caused by differences in sensor tech/generation, AA filter strength, or processing.


A cropped area from a big sensor could also be sharper and with less vignetting as the lenses are only "focused" on the centre.


----------



## dwarven (Oct 27, 2020)

Philrp said:


> For those who don't understand. For the same money you can get:
> 
> 1- A rebel type camera with a full frame sensor
> 2- A 1Dx type camera with a crop sensor.
> ...



Yeah, I'm not sure where this "full-frame is strictly better" crowd came from, but they sure are annoying, and wrong.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 27, 2020)

justaCanonuser said:


> Using a crop camera for tele shooting vs using a FF camera with the same center resolution delivers the same results, of course - with one exception: speed, just based on processing less sensor data - if a crop mode is not already implemented on the sensor level. It is like driving into a crowed city to buy a bottle of beer with a compact car vs a huge SUV: with the smaller car you find faster a fitting parking lot, so you are earlier back at home to drink that bottle


If price is not an issue then the R5's speed is more than sufficient for most shooters. 5DSR is a different story of course.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 27, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> The RP isn't much bigger than the M5, a little wider perhaps. So conceivably, Canon could make both an R7 and an M7 using the same sensor, the same image processing hardware, different but related firmware and different lens mounts. Does that sound completely insane?


Hard to imagine that ergonomic balance of a small RF mount (say RP size body) with big whites without a gimbal would be good for long periods of time


----------



## nchoh (Oct 27, 2020)

Joules said:


> Without lenses?



With the camera market the way it is, I can see Canon being careful in announcing any lenses for the APSC R camera. But I am sure that there will be at least a cheap 18-55.


----------



## Fletchahh (Oct 27, 2020)

Philrp said:


> For those who don't understand. For the same money you can get:
> 
> 1- A rebel type camera with a full frame sensor
> 2- A 1Dx type camera with a crop sensor.
> ...





navastronia said:


> EF-S glass is fine if you 1) buy lenses that are objectively great, like the Sigma 18-35/1.8, and 2) aren't worried about "moving up to" full frame. As someone who _did_ ditch APS-C entirely, it was a little bit of a bother to have to sell my EF-S glass. Birders who like APS-C for its reach, etc, won't be in the same position I was.



You two summed up the reasons why (along with doing bird photography), I'm very excited about this camera I will be most likely preordering it. Here's hoping that Sigma will come up with some high end crop sensor RF lenses in the same vein as the 18-35mm f/1.8


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 27, 2020)

The 7D series were unicorns. No wonder the birders etc loved them but where would it fit into the RF marketing strategy now? 
Weather sealed (similar to 5D), faster speed than 5D, AF from 1D series and cheap. Single card slot and high ISO noise were the differentiators.

Recycling the M6ii's sensor makes the most sense to me. 14fps/30mp fits exactly into the specs that birders are asking for. Maybe Digic X for DPAFII processing. The other option is recycling the 1DXii's sensor and mechanical shutter. Would it still be too expensive for these components cf R&D for a new sensor?

With weather sealing, either option becomes better than the R6 assuming that the AF is the same and hence sold at a higher price.

To expect speed/AF/weather sealed and a new 30mp sensor and priced cheaper than R6 is likely to be disappointed.

This is all besides the small size ergonomics for a RP sized body with big whites


----------



## twoheadedboy (Oct 27, 2020)

degos said:


> No, it gives you 100-500 with the ability to throw away 28MP if you choose 'crop'. That setting gives absolutely no focal length magic. It saves card space.
> 
> APS-C can have denser sensors because the smaller CMOS wafer size means that the proportion of sensors lost to manufacturing defects is more tolerable.



You missed the entire first part of my comment, which talks about not having to bust out the photo editor/etc. The photo quality pixel-to-pixel in daylight/ISO's is essentially identical. It's not a "free" (of caveats) extension, but extenders aren't caveat-free either, and lenses which hit those focal lengths aren't free-as-in-currency. The argument about crop sensor focal length equivalents being an invalid comparison is a scientific explanation and is not relevant to photography.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Oct 27, 2020)

dwarven said:


> Yeah, I'm not sure where this "full-frame is strictly better" crowd came from, but they sure are annoying, and wrong.


Large Format or GTFO


----------



## masterpix (Oct 27, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Question, what an APS-C sensor will do betten than than the FF R5? unless it is a 35-40MP and extra fast shooting speed (over 20FPS). I can crop 32.5MP from the FF R5 and get simialr results to the 90D. while the R5 gives 20 FPS? They need this model to be far more advnaced than the R5 to make people shift to it.


----------



## dwarven (Oct 27, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> To expect speed/AF/weather sealed and a new 30mp sensor and priced cheaper than R6 is likely to be disappointed.



Nah. I doubt it will be more than $2k. I'd expect it to compete with the Fuji X-T3, which has all the bells and whistles you've mentioned for $1500. For another ~$300 they could bump the sensor resolution and add IBIS so it would slot above the X-T3.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 27, 2020)

masterpix said:


> Question, what an APS-C sensor will do betten than than the FF R5? unless it is a 35-40MP and extra fast shooting speed (over 20FPS). I can crop 32.5MP from the FF R5 and get simialr results to the 90D. while the R5 gives 20 FPS? They need this model to be far more advnaced than the R5 to make people shift to it.


1: Less rolling shutter.
2: Higher video specs especially higher frame rates.
3: Faster flash sync speed.
4: Cost less.
5: Better magnification and framing in the viewfinder and back screen.


----------



## slclick (Oct 27, 2020)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Large Format or GTFO


rooms converted to camera obscura or GTFO (of the room that is, you're blocking my emulsion painted wallpaper.)


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 27, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> 1: Less rolling shutter.
> 2: Higher video specs especially higher frame rates.
> 3: Faster flash sync speed.
> 4: Cost less.
> 5: Better magnification and framing in the viewfinder and back screen.


Which body/sensor (price bracket) are you comparing to?
1. assuming that the read speed from the sensor is faster then the R5 which is already pretty good. Less pixels would mean a faster frame rate assuming the bus speed is the same
2. Is the 7D series known for its video capabilities? Would Canon allow a weather sealed body with great video to be cheaper than the R6?
3. I would love to have a faster flash sync speed but Canon hasn't been above 1/200s for any 5D series as far as I know. I checked and the 7Dii has 1/250s which would be nice
4. Silicon cost would be cheaper but would it be overall cheaper if you include R&D for a new sensor and a lower production runs rather than recycling M6ii/1DXii's sensor?
5. Both the EVF and rear LCD are lower resolution so they are downsampled/pixel binned/line slipped already. Would it be different with an APS-C sensor?


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 27, 2020)

dwarven said:


> Nah. I doubt it will be more than $2k. I'd expect it to compete with the Fuji X-T3, which has all the bells and whistles you've mentioned for $1500. For another ~$300 they could bump the sensor resolution and add IBIS so it would slot above the X-T3.


Does Canon want to compete with Fuji? M43 is a 2x crop vs 1.6 for APS-C and their glass reflects that sensor size.
Would people still buy a R6 if the new APS-C body is weather sealed, more mp and cheaper... with the only benefit being a full frame sensor? I guess that the 7D was exactly that compared to 6D hence me calling it a unicorn.
I am probably wrong as this is a rumour forum but Canon needs to maximise profits in a declining volume market


----------



## slclick (Oct 27, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Does Canon want to compete with Fuji? M43 is a 2x crop vs 1.6 for APS-C and their glass reflects that sensor size.
> Would people still buy a R6 if the new APS-C body is weather sealed, more mp and cheaper... with the only benefit being a full frame sensor? I guess that the 7D was exactly that compared to 6D hence me calling it a unicorn.
> I am probably wrong as this is a rumour forum but Canon needs to maximise profits in a declining volume market


The Fuji is a aps-c body fwiw.


----------



## jam05 (Oct 27, 2020)

Joules said:


> "The same source also said that there aren’t any plans for RF-S lenses"
> 
> Good so far. Sounds like an option for those looking for M6 II / 90 D reach, without paying for the high res R or compromising on ergonomics (M series) or Autofocus (EF series).
> 
> ...


M series is selling a lot more cameras than the Rebel at this time


----------



## jam05 (Oct 27, 2020)

slclick said:


> The Fuji is a aps-c body fwiw.


The Rebels outsell Fuji and so does the M50


----------



## unfocused (Oct 27, 2020)

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. Not sure why the size would matter if this is a 7DII replacement. The 7D and 5D are almost exactly the same size and I don't believe size was ever a factor in anyone's buying decision for the 7D. 

More important will be the button and joystick configuration. 

A key question will be sensor resolution and how this will compare to a high resolution full frame "R." 

Pricing will be interesting too. I would be surprised if this is priced below the R6. In fact, I expect it to fall somewhere between the R6 and R5 and probably closer to the R5 in price, if this is truly a 7D replacement. The target market for the 7D is not that price sensitive, and the lack of crop-sensor lenses makes be think this will be squarely aimed at well-heeled bird and wildlife shooters.

If Canon can get the supply chain issues resolved, should be an interesting year.


----------



## FramerMCB (Oct 27, 2020)

StevenA said:


> An R7 to replace the 7dmII?


Think of it more as the 7D Mk III - Gangnam style (e.g. Mirrorless)


----------



## tataylino (Oct 27, 2020)

It is probably beginning of the end of EOS-M line. It won't be too long before they introduce a lower end aps-c after the R7.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 27, 2020)

slclick said:


> The Fuji is a aps-c body fwiw.


Apologies. I thought it was M43


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 27, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Which body/sensor (price bracket) are you comparing to?
> 1. assuming that the read speed from the sensor is faster then the R5 which is already pretty good. Less pixels would mean a faster frame rate assuming the bus speed is the same
> 2. Is the 7D series known for its video capabilities? Would Canon allow a weather sealed body with great video to be cheaper than the R6?
> 3. I would love to have a faster flash sync speed but Canon hasn't been above 1/200s for any 5D series as far as I know. I checked and the 7Dii has 1/250s which would be nice
> ...


I was replying to the specific comment “_Question, what an APS-C sensor will do better than than the FF R5?_”. All my points are facts borne from the physics of larger vs smaller.

Regarding 5 you are missing my point, in focal length limited situations where cropping a high density ff sensor vs using a native crop sensor. In that situation using a crop sensor camera gives you a narrower fov which often aids in viewing the subject and more accurately composing the picture, it also gives higher magnification.


----------



## Skux (Oct 27, 2020)

I like the idea and it was really only a matter of time.

But as it stands this only makes sense for wildlife and sports shooters. There are no APS-C lenses in the RF lineup, and nothing on the wider end (10mm) that would suit vloggers. You'll just be paying for bigger, heavier, more expensive glass that you aren't getting value from, and at that point you're better off going Sony or Fuji.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 27, 2020)

unfocused said:


> More important will be the button and joystick configuration.
> A key question will be sensor resolution and how this will compare to a high resolution full frame "R."
> Pricing will be interesting too. I would be surprised if this is priced below the R6. In fact, I expect it to fall somewhere between the R6 and R5 and probably closer to the R5 in price, if this is truly a 7D replacement. The target market for the 7D is not that price sensitive, and the lack of crop-sensor lenses makes be think this will be squarely aimed at well-heeled bird and wildlife shooters.


The joystick is a differentiator between R5/R6 but would you necessarily need it? I haven't been using the R5's joystick very much at all. Eye AF is generally picking the subject accurately so joystick is for choosing between subjects but rear touch screen could also be used. The screen may not be as useful if wearing gloves. 
The difference between 17mp (cropped R5 to APS-C) and ~20mp isn't huge and 20mp has been good for 1DX users. Cropping allows for great flexibility for composition as well. 
If the APS-C potential buyers aren't price-sensitive then perhaps if they try the R5 then it may meet their needs sufficiently.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 27, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I was replying to the specific comment “_Question, what an APS-C sensor will do betten than than the FF R5?_”. All my points are facts borne from the physics of larger vs smaller.
> 
> Regarding 5 you are missing my point, in focal length limited situations where cropping a high density ff sensor vs using a native crop sensor. In that situation using a crop sensor camera gives you a narrower fov which often aids in viewing the subject and more accurately composing the picture, it also gives higher magnification.


Agreed. I thought that your comments were replying to my post. 
I must say that the R5's ability to focus accurately on small/distant subjects is remarkable.


----------



## TMHKR (Oct 27, 2020)

ColinJR said:


> If you give me the cost argument, then I point to the RP.


Except this new DPAF II sensor will probably blow away RP's aged 6D II sensor, regardless of it being FF


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Oct 27, 2020)

mpeeps said:


> I will take my cropped 5dsr photos over my 7D efforts every time.


Slower though..


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Oct 27, 2020)

Been saying for 12 months and APS-C R7 will be released for sure. If it's a crop R5 sans 8K, at half the price then bring it on.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Oct 27, 2020)

YESSS!

Give me focus performance and frames per second on par with the R5, roughly 30MP, IBIS and good weather sealing and I’ll be happy! The only thing I definitely don’t like the sound of though, is the size.. Gotta be at least R6 size.

If you’re going to market an apsc R with only full frame lenses then it’s gotta be a high performance and robust model.


----------



## canonmike (Oct 27, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


With this rumor, I'm sure that all the sports and nature photographers' ears perked up......


----------



## canonmike (Oct 27, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> Assuming that the 5dsr actually can get the picture. The 7D2 has twice the FPS of the 5Ds and 5Dsr.


Tit for tat. Two very good arguments for both formats. Now, take your choice.


----------



## navastronia (Oct 27, 2020)

What happens when you put a 600 or 800mm f/11 lens on an APS-C R-body? 1280mm field of view, in the latter case. That's pretty cool. I wonder about how image quality would compare to using a 1.4x or 2.0x teleconverter on a shorter lens.


----------



## Robbie_B (Oct 27, 2020)

So perhaps I will keep my aps-c lenses for a while yet. Looks like an interesting few months to come. Still hoping for an M5 mk2 though but this is an interesting move from Canon. There needs to be a new route for the Rebel line. Could this be the way ahead?


----------



## goldenhusky (Oct 27, 2020)

Look at that, it is a CR3 rating. I was really looking forward for the 7d2 replacement for wildlife. I may pick one of these up at some point.

@Canon Rumors Guy
Any idea on the probable sensor resolution?, EVF, etc...


----------



## Czardoom (Oct 27, 2020)

Definitely would be interested. It's always funny to read the comments from the "you may as well get FF" crowd. I would expect that there will be 32 MP in this APS-C camera - the R5 in crop mode has 17 (and that is considerably more than the other R FF bodies). So, advantage APS-C. Although we don't know the price, I would expect it to be about 1/2 that of the R5. So, BIG advantage APS-C. I mean, the R5 sounds like a great camera, but for many of us, the price tag means we will never get it, nor ever consider it. Love it when people write, "just get an R5 if you want to replace your 7D II." Sure, if you will pay for it - and put a higher MP sensor in it!


----------



## mpeeps (Oct 27, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> If pixel surface area and (cropped) sensor surface area are equal, it makes absolutely no difference whatsoever how big the sensor is outside the cropped area. If you see objective IQ differences, they're caused by differences in sensor tech/generation, AA filter strength, or processing.


From my experience, ever since going FF with 6D then 5D3 then 5DSR, the cropped results have been better than anything I produced with the rebel and then 7D. Yes, 7D was faster, but I'm talking about a 1 on 1 comparisons according to my eyes and monitor. I never owned the 7D2 so I can't speak to that.


----------



## dwarven (Oct 27, 2020)

Czardoom said:


> Definitely would be interested. It's always funny to read the comments from the "you may as well get FF" crowd. I would expect that there will be 32 MP in this APS-C camera - the R5 in crop mode has 17 (and that is considerably more than the other R FF bodies). So, advantage APS-C. Although we don't know the price, I would expect it to be about 1/2 that of the R5. So, BIG advantage APS-C. I mean, the R5 sounds like a great camera, but for many of us, the price tag means we will never get it, nor ever consider it. Love it when people write, "just get an R5 if you want to replace your 7D II." Sure, if you will pay for it - and put a higher MP sensor in it!



Yeah, the full frame crowd is about as bad as Sony fanboys. It's not their money, they obviously aren't getting one. Their opinions are pretty much irrelevant. Also, and it might sound nuts, but some people like having two camera bodies. Yes, it's possible to own a full frame *and* a crop body. Who'd have known?


----------



## mpeeps (Oct 28, 2020)

Stig Nygaard said:


> Looking at technical quality alone, you probably have a point.
> But cameras are also about the tool. And I don't think 5DSR are optimal for every kind of photography.
> (and of course, there's the price too)


That was my point and no, the 5dsr is not optimal for every kind of photography. Noise is present at ISO settings above 800 and it's not fast. But, when you lock on and get a nicely lit shot, no matter how far away the object is (!), you can crop to your heart's delight and get great results. Took mine to Africa and got beautiful results thanks to bean bags and the great 100-400II. Bird posers were great and I got a few BIF's that were keepers. That said, I'm really excited to step up to the R5, another evolutionary step.


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 28, 2020)

navastronia said:


> What happens when you put a 600 or 800mm f/11 lens on an APS-C R-body? 1280mm field of view, in the latter case. That's pretty cool. I wonder about how image quality would compare to using a 1.4x or 2.0x teleconverter on a shorter lens.



Not only that, navastronia, but those lenses have a disadvantage on full frame sensor cameras in that they only autofocus in the crop area of the viewfinder anyway. There's something linked here. 

Fun speculation: you could have a fixed speed booster integral to the camera, and stick the 800mm DO and have an f/8 1210mm little monster that AF'd from edge to edge. This might be why those strange creatures were built. Would be totally like Canon to plan the lenses and crop body to come out at the same time, and then pirate all the camera engineers to the much-late R5 project.


----------



## Bob Howland (Oct 28, 2020)

canonmike said:


> Tit for tat. Two very good arguments for both formats. Now, take your choice.


I just bought a 5Ds, yielding to the $1300 price temptation. I also own a 5D3 and 7d, but I'm doing less of the kind of photography at which the 7d and 7D2 excels.


----------



## SnowMiku (Oct 28, 2020)

Just what I've been waiting for, none of the M mount cameras were suitable for me (Maybe that will change) but then I would still be uncertain of it's future. I was thinking of getting the RP, 90D or 850D but now I think I will wait for this and see how it turns out. I wonder if the RF 800mm F11 will be any good on the crop sensor, I'm sure people will be testing this combo out when released.
I wouldn't even have to worry about buying any other RF lenses as I've already got all the EF/EF-s lenses that I need.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 28, 2020)

dwarven said:


> You're probably missing all of the people who use big whites on the 7D line. You're missing the fact that a higher end APS-C camera gives you reach without losing resolution, and at a cheaper price than an R5. Cropped to x1.6, even the R5 only gives you 17MP.
> 
> Third, you're missing the fact that no RF-S lenses have been rumored or announced, indicating that this camera is not going to be a Rebel spin-off of any kind. It's going to be a high end body that people will mount wildlife and sports lenses on.


Yup! I see the point of an ASP-c camera. I would never see the point of RF-s lenses other than cost to the consumer. Then, they won't be much less money than the full frame non-L offerings given today. It's already been established that smart phone cameras are eating away at the low end ILC market like a fat kid eats chocolates. So no point.


----------



## Danglin52 (Oct 28, 2020)

gatabo said:


> It should, but a much more affordable focal reducer, not intended just for Canon Cinema line, should be announced to make Canon DSLR APS-C user move to Canon R mirrorless easier and more affordable, moreover Canon should also create an adapter that goes 2mm inside the RF mount and allow to adapt EOS-M glass to work with future EOS R APSC cameras, it's not that easy to go inside the lens mount, but it's not impossible for Canon as the EOS- M glass "fits" at least 2mm inside the EOS R mount, that will allow a smooth transition from both DSLR and mirrorles APS-C Canon photographers.


I had the M5 & and currently own the M6 II, ef-m 22mm, ef-m Sigma 56mm, and ef-m 18-150. I am more likely to adapt my EF lenses to the M6 II unless I am looking for a small/lighter full M package. While these lenses are acceptable, there are EF/RF mounts lenses similar or better. I would like to adapt RF lenses to an M mount but have no interest going the other direction. I liked using the M6II as a backup for my larger EF bodies - required almost no room in the bag and could adapt to all of my EF lenses if necessary.


----------



## slclick (Oct 28, 2020)

dwarven said:


> Yeah, the full frame crowd is about as bad as Sony fanboys. It's not their money, they obviously aren't getting one. Their opinions are pretty much irrelevant. Also, and it might sound nuts, but some people like having two camera bodies. Yes, it's possible to own a full frame *and* a crop body. Who'd have known?


Yep very common, at least in the 5D/7D series heyday. In fact, I'd be more than happy carrying that combo today, still haven't given up my 5D3 since no R series body appeals to me yet.


----------



## vangelismm (Oct 28, 2020)

People are assuming it will be entry level of R line just because it is aps-c....

I think will be well priced body for professional and enthusiast, who have expensive RF glass.

Nonsense buy this camera to use EF-s glass.


----------



## dwarven (Oct 28, 2020)

slclick said:


> Yep very common, at least in the 5D/7D series heyday. In fact, I'd be more than happy carrying that combo today, still haven't given up my 5D3 since no R series body appeals to me yet.



Yeah, camera bodies age very slowly it seems like. I also think EVFs aren't quite quick enough yet to give you the same experience as a real viewfinder when you shoot action. There's always some digital lag here and there, especially when your battery gets low. I traded in my DSLR for the R6, and now I miss it more than I thought I would. >_<


----------



## Maru (Oct 28, 2020)

Why someone will buy APS-C mirrorless when RP and R both are in reachable price range... dont understand the concept


----------



## sanj (Oct 28, 2020)

This makes sense only with dedicated lenses. Cheaper, lighter package.


----------



## SnowMiku (Oct 28, 2020)

Maru said:


> Why someone will buy APS-C mirrorless when RP and R both are in reachable price range... dont understand the concept



Higher FPS and more pixel density allowing you to crop further then a Full-frame.


----------



## bbasiaga (Oct 28, 2020)

sanj said:


> This makes sense only with dedicated lenses. Cheaper, lighter package.


I think a lot of those smaller lighter lens patents posted here a few weeks back will be aimed at this. They didn't quite have the full frame image circle at the wide end, so they would leave you with some vignetting like the 24-240 does on FF. But on APSc...no issue. 

-Brian


----------



## unfocused (Oct 28, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> The joystick is a differentiator between R5/R6 but would you necessarily need it? I haven't been using the R5's joystick very much at all. Eye AF is generally picking the subject accurately so joystick is for choosing between subjects but rear touch screen could also be used. The screen may not be as useful if wearing gloves.



Well, Canon put the joystick back on the R5 after removing it from the R. I assume they did so because there was consumer demand for the joystick. I have not had any experience with the R5, but with the 1DxIII I find that in certain situations with fast moving subjects, I turn off the touch controller and use the joystick, which I find to be more controllable under these conditions. I also found that the touch screen selection on the R was very difficult to control with moving subjects as well. Finally, there seemed to be a lot of vocal demand for a joystick on this forum, so taking all of these in consideration, I believe Canon will include a joystick on the R7.



David - Sydney said:


> The difference between 17mp (cropped R5 to APS-C) and ~20mp isn't huge and 20mp has been good for 1DX users. Cropping allows for great flexibility for composition as well.
> If the APS-C potential buyers aren't price-sensitive then perhaps if they try the R5 then it may meet their needs sufficiently.



That is why I believe the resolution of an R7 will be important. It needs to have sufficiently high enough resolution to make it worth purchasing for bird and wildlife photographers. The R5 with a 1.4 converter has essentially the same reach as an APS-C sensor alone, so the benefit of the APS-C sensor is in cropping when reach limited. Shooting songbirds often requires some severe cropping, so the higher the resolution the better.


----------



## navastronia (Oct 28, 2020)

Is there any reasonable chance this _won't_ be a 7D-style body?

I can't imagine an APS-C, R-mount camera only as powerful as, or styled like, an M-series or a 90D.

EDIT: Given that we already _have_ the M-series mirrorless, APS-C cameras, I mean. Doesn't make sense to me to double up on hobbiest camera lines.


----------



## Fischer (Oct 28, 2020)

That really kills the likelihood Canon will launch any new enthusiast DSLR's IMHO.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 28, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Well, Canon put the joystick back on the R5 after removing it from the R. I assume they did so because there was consumer demand for the joystick. I have not had any experience with the R5, but with the 1DxIII I find that in certain situations with fast moving subjects, I turn off the touch controller and use the joystick, which I find to be more controllable under these conditions. I also found that the touch screen selection on the R was very difficult to control with moving subjects as well. Finally, there seemed to be a lot of vocal demand for a joystick on this forum, so taking all of these in consideration, I believe Canon will include a joystick on the R7.
> 
> That is why I believe the resolution of an R7 will be important. It needs to have sufficiently high enough resolution to make it worth purchasing for bird and wildlife photographers. The R5 with a 1.4 converter has essentially the same reach as an APS-C sensor alone, so the benefit of the APS-C sensor is in cropping when reach limited. Shooting songbirds often requires some severe cropping, so the higher the resolution the better.


I don't have any issues with Canon releasing a 7D replacement in RF. I just don't believe that it will be cheap for what people want from it. The days of the 7D series being cheap/fast/good AF and weather sealed are over.... and if I am wrong then everyone wins


----------



## H. Jones (Oct 28, 2020)

I don't really think having a crop camera without crop lenses is as crazy as it sounds. Remember APS-H? The very long run of the 1D 1.3x crop range *never* had any APS-H crop lenses to fit them, and pros always were in love with those cameras. A true 7D replacement is not targeted towards an audience that wants cheap glass.


----------



## Joules (Oct 28, 2020)

jam05 said:


> M series is selling a lot more cameras than the Rebel at this time


I know. That doesn't stop people from thinking EF-M is going away due to RF. Which is what I commented on.


----------



## Antono Refa (Oct 28, 2020)

zim said:


> Aps-c was always really about price, my understanding is that price difference is much smaller now, those 600 & 800 lenses seemed to me to be an indicator, so what do I know!



Price doesn't end with the camera. A 300mm lens mounted on a crop body will have the angle of view of a 500mm lens on FF. That's where the big price difference is, along with a size & weight difference.


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Oct 28, 2020)

Skux said:


> But as it stands this only makes sense for wildlife and sports shooters. There are no APS-C lenses in the RF lineup, and nothing on the wider end (10mm) that would suit vloggers. You'll just be paying for bigger, heavier, more expensive glass that you aren't getting value from, and at that point you're better off going Sony or Fuji.



Nothing stops you from buying EF-S lenses (if you don't have it already).
That being said, Fujifilm has build a really nice APS-C mirrorless system, and seems to be serious about APS-C. Nice cameras and a wide selection of native lenses. If they had an advanced AF-technology, I would be tempted.


----------



## Joules (Oct 28, 2020)

Maru said:


> Why someone will buy APS-C mirrorless when RP and R both are in reachable price range... dont understand the concept





sanj said:


> This makes sense only with dedicated lenses. Cheaper, lighter package.


Have you even read any posts in this thread?  

A crop sensor gives Canon an option to market M6 II/90D pixel density with 20 FPS mechanical, and R5 autofocus at a price below the R5.

Doing that on the high res R will definitely cost more than the R5, since it requires 83+ MP and a 1DX III level shutter, that would only be allowed to reach full speed in crop mode. After all, even with their now amazing throughput, 83+ MP at 20 FPS seems impossible to pull off for now - at least without also going to 1DX III level pricing.

An IBIS assembly may also be more effective in a crop sensor, if you only use FF lenses on it. There's less weight to move (the sensor is less than half the size and mass of an FF one) and far, far more space to travel towards any edge.

For a high end, 7D level sports, wildlife and action camera, were cropping an R5 simply leaves some reach to be desired and even cropping the high res R will require compromising on cost at the very least, APS-C is still a good option even without dedicated lenses.


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Oct 28, 2020)

..., what an APS-C sensor will do betten than than the FF R5? ...



privatebydesign said:


> 1: Less rolling shutter.
> 2: Higher video specs especially higher frame rates.
> 3: Faster flash sync speed.
> 4: Cost less.
> 5: Better magnification and framing in the viewfinder and back screen.



Also full 14 bit depth images at high framerates (R5 only goes to 6-8 fps at 14bit).
Faster sensor-readout should be possible, and would besides less rolling shutter also potentially give you better performing EVF for action photography.
Less heat (I'm not very much into video - but some will appreciate it). EDIT: Not sure about this one.


----------



## Joules (Oct 28, 2020)

Stig Nygaard said:


> Less heat (I'm not very much into video - but some will appreciate it).


Why would that be? Even if it were less, in the smaller Form factor mentioned in the OP, even the same amount of heat as current offerings would become more challenging to deal with.


----------



## tigers media (Oct 28, 2020)

My question is this m50 $600 aps-c RP just dropped to $999 thast a 300 gap ? not much room in there for the M63? or this rf apsc , so why would you bother? that price drop of the RP over weekend pretty much killed M mount i would say or at least another nail in coffin! They would have to go M6m3 700, rf apsc 800 which is just silly if your trying to minimize products in rough profit times. Be easier to keep M50 as is, firmware upgrade the RP to R levels and keep under 1000 and everyone has a clear choice wouldn't you think specs aside for 100-200 you not going to stay with aps-c with terrible low light features for video and what pro sports shooters are running M50 haha isn't the power shot for the soccer parents. Sounds like the canon boardroom meetings are getting out of control .


----------



## zim (Oct 28, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> Price doesn't end with the camera. A 300mm lens mounted on a crop body will have the angle of view of a 500mm lens on FF. That's where the big price difference is, along with a size & weight difference.


I think you're agreeing with me!


----------



## Chig (Oct 28, 2020)

ColinJR said:


> Cinema cameras aside, _why? _
> 
> Who want's this over full-frame? With today's processors, FF has proven to be just as performant as something like the 7D line. If you give me the "reach" argument, then I would give you the FF crop argument. If you give me the cost argument, then I point to the RP. Cheaper than that then you're going to have an up-hill battle against Fujifilm and Sony, or you know, Canon's M lineup.
> 
> ...


This is I think aimed at wildlife / sports shooters like myself who are using cameras like the 7D mark ii with long EF lenses like the EF100-400 ii or the the EF400 f/5.6 (and teleconverters which work get with mirrorless) to give more reach especially for shooting small birds in flight. 
If I could afford it I'd buy the R5 and use it in crop mode but would prefer to have a crop sensor camera similar to the R6 in price and performance which I could just about afford and perhaps Canon will price the R7 a bit cheaper than the R6 which would be perfect for me.
I'm not interested in RF-s lenses only long telephoto (although with a speedbooster EF-RF adapter could use wide angle EF lenses like FF)


----------



## Chig (Oct 28, 2020)

zim said:


> Doesn't sound like a 7d2 replacement to me, smaller or even same size as an RP? would R6 control and button layout fit? Now if it was same size and layout of R6 but with R5 construction that would be a replacement. So this sounds to me like the start of a rebel line


Rebel line is dead , can't compete with smartphones


----------



## zim (Oct 28, 2020)

I think this is simply Canon's version of the Nikon Z50 the two companies do tend to 'mirror'  each other.
The kicker - it won't have ibis


----------



## Chig (Oct 28, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> Assuming that the 5dsr actually can get the picture. The 7D2 has twice the FPS of the 5Ds and 5Dsr.


And slow autofocus compared with 7D2


----------



## zim (Oct 28, 2020)

Chig said:


> Rebel line is dead , can't compete with smartphones


Or Canon's attempt to reinvent that market segment to something they hope the phone market will aspire to?
It's a Nikon Z50


----------



## Chig (Oct 28, 2020)

zim said:


> Yes but why a smaller and therefore poorer handling body what is this obsession with teeny weeny


Yep , my dream camera is basically the R6 with a crop sensor (and no AA filter or ibis) and hopefully a bit cheaper than the R6


----------



## Nigel95 (Oct 28, 2020)

vangelismm said:


> I think will be well priced body for professional and enthusiast, who have expensive RF glass.
> 
> Nonsense buy this camera to use EF-s glass.


The sigma 18-35mm 1.8 and Canon 60mm macro are perfectly fine EF-S lenses to pair with a capable high end aps c body. The Canon 10-18mm isn't too bad either.

What if someone already has a lot of EF-S glass? Wants a more updated hybrid body with better video specs like R5 and R6, but doesn't have the money to swap the body + several lenses to FF. The transition to FF if you have 3+ lenses to switch is very expensive. If someone wants to cover UWA, medium and short telephoto range for example and doesn't want to live with only 1 lens on new FF body.


----------



## Chig (Oct 28, 2020)

justaCanonuser said:


> If an R7 is coming I'd seriously consider an upgrade from my 7D2. I like to use fast crop cameras for birding...


Yep , basically an R6 with a high quality crop sensor and No AA filter and no ibis please !


----------



## Nigel95 (Oct 28, 2020)

Chig said:


> Yep , my dream camera is basically the R6 with a crop sensor and hopefully a bit cheaper than the R6


This is it. Couldn't ask more.


----------



## Nigel95 (Oct 28, 2020)

Chig said:


> Yep , basically an R6 with a high quality crop sensor and No AA filter and no ibis please !


I would love to have IBIS with the option to turn it off in the menu. While keeping lens stabilisation active so you have the choice if it works against you. For example with UWA video wobbles. Although maybe it's less of a problem with Aps-C than FF. You don't want IBIS because you don't need it for BIF?


----------



## Chig (Oct 28, 2020)

masterpix said:


> Question, what an APS-C sensor will do betten than than the FF R5? unless it is a 35-40MP and extra fast shooting speed (over 20FPS). I can crop 32.5MP from the FF R5 and get simialr results to the 90D. while the R5 gives 20 FPS? They need this model to be far more advnaced than the R5 to make people shift to it.


Much cheaper than the R5 just for starters and 1.6x crop of the R5 gives only 17MP , if they use 90D or similar sensor in an R6 body and same processor/specs but with ibis and AA filter left out Canon can price the R7 a bit cheaper than the R6 
Potentially faster performance than the R5 or R6 with the smaller file sizes too


----------



## Chig (Oct 28, 2020)

Nigel95 said:


> I would love to have IBIS with the option to turn it off in the menu. While keeping lens stabilisation active so you have the choice if it works against you. For example with UWA video wobbles. Although maybe it's less of a problem with Aps-C than FF. You don't want IBIS because you don't need it for BIF?


Yes exactly , I don't need ibis or an AA filter (and don't care about video )for BIF which is what many people would I think buy this camera for


----------



## Chig (Oct 28, 2020)

Skux said:


> I like the idea and it was really only a matter of time.
> 
> But as it stands this only makes sense for wildlife and sports shooters. There are no APS-C lenses in the RF lineup, and nothing on the wider end (10mm) that would suit vloggers. You'll just be paying for bigger, heavier, more expensive glass that you aren't getting value from, and at that point you're better off going Sony or Fuji.


Yep , it's just for us Birds in Flight nutters, cheap cameras are ******* !


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Oct 28, 2020)

ColinJR said:


> Cinema cameras aside, _why? _
> 
> Who want's this over full-frame? With today's processors, FF has proven to be just as performant as something like the 7D line. If you give me the "reach" argument, then I would give you the FF crop argument. If you give me the cost argument, then I point to the RP. Cheaper than that then you're going to have an up-hill battle against Fujifilm and Sony, or you know, Canon's M lineup.
> 
> ...



I think it's just you. Give me a full frame with 10fps, 45-50MP, with the latest weather sealing and AF for $2000. Until that happens, nothing can properly replace a 7D, not a $4000 R5, nor a slow RP.


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Oct 28, 2020)

Joules said:


> Why would that be? Even if it were less, in the smaller Form factor mentioned in the OP, even the same amount of heat as current offerings would become more challenging to deal with.



Granted, I'm not an expert here. I've been told there's several advantages of a small physical sensor when it comes to video. But I don't remember the details. So okay, maybe that claim is a bit questionable.


----------



## Nigel95 (Oct 28, 2020)

ColinJR said:


> If you give me the cost argument, then I point to the RP. Cheaper than that then you're going to have an up-hill battle against Fujifilm and Sony, or you know, Canon's M lineup.
> 
> I don't think it makes any sense, but maybe that's just me. I just hope they don't split their attention developing 'RF-S' lenses that are inferior in every way.
> 
> The only way it would be remotely interesting to me is if they made a really good, significantly more compact camera body with some really good, compact, L-glass (IE, competitive with Fuji's lenses), while also obviously maintaining the ability to use FF lenses. Then, maybe I'd justify one as a travel camera/backup body.


Luckily we have Sigma with decent IMO APS-C glass. There is nothing wrong with my current EF-S glass, I love it. I just want a capable high end APS-C body (like Fuji XT4 but with Canon AF). Right now I have to jump to FF for the specs I want, while I don't need the FF benefits for my style. I would love to have the R6 at that price but then I am forced to swap all my EF-S glass for FF glass. This is where the problem begins. As a hobby enthousiast I really love cameras. But a R6 or R5 with 3 FF lenses is just out of my league. I love the idea about an APS-C R body much more than a M line body. M line feels too small as a main camera ergonomics wise for me. Just a R6 with 1 decent lens doesn't cover my focal length needs.


----------



## noncho (Oct 28, 2020)

If they are not going to create APS-C lenses then... I want R7 with 1.3 APS-H crop!


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Oct 28, 2020)

SteveC said:


> But a crop sensor simply throws away light that would otherwise have fallen onto a sensor--basically throwing away pixels but earlier in the process. Of course if you use an APS-C lens that doesn't happen--the pixels are thrown away even earlier than that.
> 
> What is "reach" anyway if not the ability to PRETEND to have a longer lens by cropping the picture?


All camera formats are a crop of some sorts relative to other formats. Look at Mediaum format...or even Large Format. In large format...a 135mm lens on a 5x7" plate camera gives an effective field of view as a 26mm lens on a 35mm sensor. So the effective "reach" on a smaller sensor is very relative. If you compare the larger 8x10" frame sizes of the largest field cameras...then a 135mm focal length compares to an 18mm on a 35mm frame. A standard lens on an 8x10 is a whopping 210mm. So in theory, if we had massive resolution plate cameras (silly expensive sensors) we could have one lens (a 70-200mm f2.8 zoom) that could cover silly ultra wide (1mm) to 300mm telephoto depending on our crop down size from the massive 8x10" plate to 1.6c crop sensor. The caveate here is that the 70-200 mm f2.8 would be massive due to the image circel requirement of the 8x10" plate camera...but the maths example stands as a theoretical possibility. 

Back in the day when I used to run 1.62x crop to supplement my full frame camera bodies, I would use the same lenses on both cameras. An example of the crop maths, my 70-200 f2.8 LIS would become and effective 110-320mm f4 LIS. Or my ef 400mm f2.8 LIS became an effective 640mm f4 LIS. Then I realised that a simple 1.4x TC offered roughly the same effect at the long end, slightly shorter, but close enough. The difference being that the cropped body had a faster frame rate than my full frame camera, the AF was slightly superior natively than the full frame with a 1.4x TC and the files sizes were smaller and faster to edit en-mass. However, the 1.4 TC option was smaller, lighter and a lot cheaper.


----------



## Adrianf (Oct 28, 2020)

I'm hoping that they don't go for some silly high pixel count. I'll take dynamic range and low noise over pixel numbers any day.


----------



## Skux (Oct 28, 2020)

Stig Nygaard said:


> Nothing stops you from buying EF-S lenses (if you don't have it already).
> That being said, Fujifilm has build a really nice APS-C mirrorless system, and seems to be serious about APS-C. Nice cameras and a wide selection of native lenses. If they had an advanced AF-technology, I would be tempted.



If you're gonna buy an RF camera just to put EF-S lenses in it, you might as well get an EF-M camera.

An RF APS-C camera would need to have features like dual card slots or IBIS to make it different and better than what they already offer.


----------



## scyrene (Oct 28, 2020)

Czardoom said:


> Definitely would be interested. It's always funny to read the comments from the "you may as well get FF" crowd. I would expect that there will be 32 MP in this APS-C camera - the R5 in crop mode has 17 (and that is considerably more than the other R FF bodies). So, advantage APS-C. Although we don't know the price, I would expect it to be about 1/2 that of the R5. So, BIG advantage APS-C. I mean, the R5 sounds like a great camera, but for many of us, the price tag means we will never get it, nor ever consider it. Love it when people write, "just get an R5 if you want to replace your 7D II." Sure, if you will pay for it - and put a higher MP sensor in it!



The biggest advantage APS-C had over FF was always price.


----------



## Nigel95 (Oct 28, 2020)

Skux said:


> If you're gonna buy an RF camera just to put EF-S lenses in it, you might as well get an EF-M camera.


EF-M isn't doing it for my ergonomics wise. An APS-C R body will suit my needs much better as a main camera.

What if your happy with your current EF-S glass and it will still work on your nice new APS-C R body with decent specs? In the future you can upgrade to other RF glass if you have more budget? The EF-M lens developments over the last years (beside Sigma) isn't looking promising for me. If I buy a high end APS-C body I would like it to be a bit more future proof. And I have more trust in RF glass and system. Hopefully third party will also jump in to make APS-C RF glass. In the mean time my EF-S glass will work fine. EF-M is all about small and compact. Not something I am looking for as a main camera.


----------



## koenkooi (Oct 28, 2020)

Nigel95 said:


> EF-M isn't doing it for my ergonomics wise. An APS-C R body will suit my needs much better as a main camera.
> [..] EF-M is all about small and compact. Not something I am looking for as a main camera.



It's very hard to beat an M+32mm f/1.4 for quality/size/weight with the R system, which is why that combination sits on the living room table to take candids of the kids or put into a bag to come along with an outing. But even with Smallrig L-bracket that also beefs up the grip, the M6II isn't fun to use with 'big' lenses like the 100-400L or 180L. The R5 gives me about the same pixel density as my 7D, so I don't have a lot of use for that body anymore. An APS-C R would make my macro work easier for far away creatures like dragonflies or high magnification subjects like ants and aphids.

But at this moment I don't think an APS-C R would improve those things enough for me to spend money on it. I'm waiting for an Mx00 with eye-AF in servo mode (IBIS would be neat as well). That would make a great around-the-house camera, the R5 does the rest.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Oct 28, 2020)

I only need an APSC camera for long lenses, so don't mind not having RFS lenses.


----------



## Joules (Oct 28, 2020)

Adrianf said:


> I'm hoping that they don't go for some silly high pixel count. I'll take dynamic range and low noise over pixel numbers any day.


That's not a 'one or the other' choice though. You can get all the DR and low light performance regardless of resolution.


----------



## Antono Refa (Oct 28, 2020)

scyrene said:


> The biggest advantage APS-C had over FF was always price.



Price of the camera, the lenses, or both? My impression is MILC has taken most of the inherent difference in the camera itself.

With no mirror, part of the price difference due to smaller mirror and weaker motor is gone. So is the saving on pentamirror vs pentaprism, etc.

Smaller sensor will always be cheaper, as manufacturers get more sensors per wafer and lower % of defects, but AFAIK I've read the difference isn't what it used to be in the early DSLR era.

The rest of the difference is where the manufacturer wants it to be, e.g. one memory slot rather than two, and less RAM for buffer.


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Oct 28, 2020)

Skux said:


> If you're gonna buy an RF camera just to put EF-S lenses in it, you might as well get an EF-M camera.



I will use EF-S when there are no better choice. But I expect to add one or more long RF lenses to my collection.



Skux said:


> An RF APS-C camera would need to have features like dual card slots or IBIS to make it different and better than what they already offer.



I would definitely expect that from the rumored camera.

I also want to invest in a camerasystem I see a future in. I have never seen that in EOS-M.


----------



## Marximusprime (Oct 28, 2020)

DO WANT. I would GLADLY pay $2k for a crop-sensor version of the R5/6. 12+ FPS mechanical, IBIS, good weather sealing, DPAF II, 30ish MP (not so high that it's difficult for some lenses to resolve); that's all I need/want. The rumored size is a little concerning, but if it came with, say, the little grip extension like the RP, I'd have no problem. I found that combo to be the most comfortable camera I've ever held.
Also: to use that 800 f/11 on crop...whoo.


----------



## bbasiaga (Oct 28, 2020)

I don't really think Canon sees the M line as part of the same continuum as the rebel/dslr/RF mount line. They have rebel cameras that compete on price points with the M series, and always have. So this new APSc RF body won't be constrained by that. I don't know what the future of the M series is, but I think Canon sees it as a line for a younger audience of travelers and vloggers, parallel to their other camera lines. 

I guess I could see some APSc RF cameras coming in to replace the Rebel line at price points below the RP. Its probably necessary to go to APSc to achieve that costco kit that's $999 with a pair of kit lenses. And that is an important seller for Canon. I wonder if this first APSc will be the 7D style performance body so many are hoping for, or the first in this consumer line of MILC? 

-Brian


----------



## vangelismm (Oct 28, 2020)

Nigel95 said:


> The sigma 18-35mm 1.8 and Canon 60mm macro are perfectly fine EF-S lenses to pair with a capable high end aps c body. The Canon 10-18mm isn't too bad either.
> 
> What if someone already has a lot of EF-S glass? Wants a more updated hybrid body with better video specs like R5 and R6, but doesn't have the money to swap the body + several lenses to FF. The transition to FF if you have 3+ lenses to switch is very expensive. If someone wants to cover UWA, medium and short telephoto range for example and doesn't want to live with only 1 lens on new FF body.



I love my ef-s 24mm and the 55-250 STM.
But i still do not think it justify.


----------



## Andy Westwood (Oct 28, 2020)

Interesting what is said about the lenses to accommodate the new RF APS-C mount, this could be good news also for existing RP owners who seek cheaper glass over the great but widely expense red stripe and big whites lenses.

On the subject of AF, it looks like the future is DPAF II for all new R bodies, last week I gave my R6 its first real test shooting 2500 images over a two day fashion shoot under tricky lighting conditions. The eye AF worked very well nearly all the time, having said that I didn’t see a massive leap in performance over the firmware improved AF of the original R.

I’m not having a go at the R6 but merely suggesting the eye AF on the original R isn’t that bad for the current selling price.


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 28, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Anticipated that Canon will do this to branch their (70d, 7d) equivalent APS ML into the RF mount, hopefully with some APS RF lenses as well giving Sony and Nikon a run for their money.

Only question is what's going to happen to their existing APS ML system ? - will Canon keep investing in the EOS M mount or gradually kill it off before moving everything APS & FF under the RF mount.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Oct 28, 2020)

Judging by this rumor, I don't know if this really rules out an M5 successor. Especially seeing as the rumor mentions that no RF-S lenses will be made for this APS-C RF mount camera. I'm still hopeful for an M5 Mark II announced sometime before the 2nd quarter next year.


----------



## Nigel95 (Oct 28, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> It's very hard to beat an M+32mm f/1.4 for quality/size/weight with the R system, which is why that combination sits on the living room table to take candids of the kids or put into a bag to come along with an outing. But even with Smallrig L-bracket that also beefs up the grip, the M6II isn't fun to use with 'big' lenses like the 100-400L or 180L. The R5 gives me about the same pixel density as my 7D, so I don't have a lot of use for that body anymore. An APS-C R would make my macro work easier for far away creatures like dragonflies or high magnification subjects like ants and aphids.
> 
> But at this moment I don't think an APS-C R would improve those things enough for me to spend money on it. I'm waiting for an Mx00 with eye-AF in servo mode (IBIS would be neat as well). That would make a great around-the-house camera, the R5 does the rest.


Sure if I had a R5 and wanted something with decent IQ and travel light the M series is great. But I don't have a R5.

If there would never be an APS-C R body and a high end M7. I would had to go for that option. But if I could choose I definitely lean towards R style body with better ergonomics instead of a M7 with extra attachments to make it more comfortable to hold. As it will be my main camera don't have a R6 or R5. 

What concerns me about M line is that it doesn't seem to get much attention for new (high end) lenses. RF system will cover me much more future wise (I think) . 

It would be nice if Canon could make a high end body and introduce it both in the M and R line with same specs. So people can choose what they prefer.

If I ever wanted to jump FF I could first get some RF lenses and upgrade the body later.

Canon bring on this APS-C R body I want it!


----------



## slclick (Oct 28, 2020)

1/2 the responses seem to think it will be entry level and base/compare reasoning to the M line and the other 1/2 a 7D2 successor. Makes me think how those who come into the craft post mirrorless view things so differently. Maybe it's the curmudgeon in me. idk


----------



## Eimajm (Oct 28, 2020)

drama said:


> RP is definitely an enthusiast camera, at least by Canon terms, and transparently marketed to compete with early A7s - released at a low spec to decelerate quickly and come down to a price that competes with Sony's entry level mirrorless. And I don't think _anyone_ is missing using EF-S glass. It's not great. And if your argument is to lose the full frame, and lose the RF Glass... I revert to my original point - why would you buy an APS-C RF mount camera?


Because FF at the same pixel density is normally 1. much more expensive and 2. Slower frame rates due to the processor having to process many more pixels.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 28, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> I don't have any issues with Canon releasing a 7D replacement in RF. I just don't believe that it will be cheap for what people want from it. The days of the 7D series being cheap/fast/good AF and weather sealed are over.... and if I am wrong then everyone wins


I don't believe it will be cheap either. For it to be a true 7D replacement it has to have all the features of the R5. The days when the major cost difference between full frame and crop sensor could be ascribed to the sensor cost are long past. Making a 7D replacement significantly cheaper than the R5 would now require compromises in the feature set and that defeats the purpose of the 7 series, which was all about a full feature set in a crop sensor.


----------



## reef58 (Oct 28, 2020)

Dragon said:


> Given the hint at the feature set, this is appeasement for the 7DII whiners. The no RF-s lens comment is encouraging news for M owners. I is a tricky path to navigate, but Canon must have figured there were enough potential big whites in the mix to make this worthwhile. The 7DII crowd makes no sense to me. If you are going to spend 10 or 20 grand on glass, *why not get a body (R5 or R5s)* that can fully utilize it, not to mention giving you a much bigger field of view when using for what this crowd is planning?. Canon does listen to customers, so we have to assume that segment was large enough and loud enough to justify making them their very own trinket.



Pixel Density


----------



## Kane Clements (Oct 28, 2020)

dwarven said:


> Yeahhh buddyyy. Watch out birds.
> 
> Some hopeful specs:
> Joystick
> ...



With the exception of the MP there are cameras out there that fit the bill. X-T4 and X-T3 from Fuji. Why wait for Canon Vapourware, again.


----------



## reef58 (Oct 28, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> I don't have any issues with Canon releasing a 7D replacement in RF. I just don't believe that it will be cheap for what people want from it. The days of the 7D series being cheap/fast/good AF and weather sealed are over.... and if I am wrong then everyone wins



It will probably be priced similar to the 7d2 in the same fashion the R5 was priced similar to the 5d4. The 7d2 was introduced as nearly a $2000 camera. I would guess unless it is really high end $2199 or so.


----------



## reef58 (Oct 28, 2020)

Kane Clements said:


> With the exception of the MP there are cameras out there that fit the bill. X-T4 and X-T3 from Fuji. Why wait for Canon Vapourware, again.



Because I don't want two camera systems with different lenses batteries and chargers. And if you except the MP then you are comparing apples to oranges.


----------



## riker (Oct 28, 2020)

Joules said:


> A budget option without budget crop exclusive lenses wouldn't make sense to me.



Exactly. I'm pretty disappointed. I was hoping that with R the days of APS-C are finally over. No need for it anymore, FF is cheap, body is small.
I wish R was FF-only, and EF-M was the more portable APS-C line and that's it. It could be such a nice and clean product portfolio.
And they say EF-M will be discontinued. wtf.


----------



## Joules (Oct 28, 2020)

riker said:


> And they say EF-M will be discontinued. wtf.


Who says that though? People who mistake the M50 II as a small improvement, when it really is an upgrade in features at a reduced introduction price? That's just folks on forums, right?


----------



## SteveC (Oct 28, 2020)

GMCPhotographics said:


> All camera formats are a crop of some sorts relative to other formats. Look at Mediaum format...or even Large Format. In large format...a 135mm lens on a 5x7" plate camera gives an effective field of view as a 26mm lens on a 35mm sensor. So the effective "reach" on a smaller sensor is very relative. If you compare the larger 8x10" frame sizes of the largest field cameras...then a 135mm focal length compares to an 18mm on a 35mm frame. A standard lens on an 8x10 is a whopping 210mm. So in theory, if we had massive resolution plate cameras (silly expensive sensors) we could have one lens (a 70-200mm f2.8 zoom) that could cover silly ultra wide (1mm) to 300mm telephoto depending on our crop down size from the massive 8x10" plate to 1.6c crop sensor. The caveate here is that the 70-200 mm f2.8 would be massive due to the image circel requirement of the 8x10" plate camera...but the maths example stands as a theoretical possibility.
> 
> Back in the day when I used to run 1.62x crop to supplement my full frame camera bodies, I would use the same lenses on both cameras. An example of the crop maths, my 70-200 f2.8 LIS would become and effective 110-320mm f4 LIS. Or my ef 400mm f2.8 LIS became an effective 640mm f4 LIS. Then I realised that a simple 1.4x TC offered roughly the same effect at the long end, slightly shorter, but close enough. The difference being that the cropped body had a faster frame rate than my full frame camera, the AF was slightly superior natively than the full frame with a 1.4x TC and the files sizes were smaller and faster to edit en-mass. However, the 1.4 TC option was smaller, lighter and a lot cheaper.



Indeed. There's this wide perception that the thing we call "full frame" is "normal." It could have been anything.

I spent years doing nothing but APS-C--to me, it was normal, and all the talk about that 35mm lens being like a 56 mm on an APS-C was meaningless. To me, that 35 mm lens would be like a 22 mm lens if someone put it on a full frame, because to me what a 35 mm lens does on an APS-C is normal--i.e., what I am used to. (This is still true for me even though I've now dipped my toes into full frame. My first time with a full frame I was saying things like "Dang, this damn lens won't zoom in like it should!")


----------



## Dragon (Oct 28, 2020)

reef58 said:


> Pixel Density


Yes, I know, pixel density. I have a 90D and there are damn few lenses that will effectively use that pixel density. Also, the R5s will almost certainly have equivalent pixel density and still give you that FF field of view, so I stand by what I said above.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 28, 2020)

Joules said:


> Who says that though? People who mistake the M50 II as a small improvement, when it really is an upgrade in features at a reduced introduction price? That's just folks on forums, right?



Perhaps the people who thought if the M50 II didn't have IBIS and 32 MP (thus making it a better camera than the M6-II) the whole series was *******.

Sort of like expecting the R6 II to exceed the R1. They would never do such a thing.


----------



## Joules (Oct 28, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Perhaps the people who thought if the M50 II didn't have IBIS and 32 MP (thus making it a better camera than the M6-II) the whole series was *******.
> 
> Sort of like expecting the R6 II to exceed the R1. They would never do such a thing.


I mean, I get the thinking. The M6 II, R6 and R5 have been huge pushes forward in technology. But as you say, expecting that momentum to apply equally at the low end, is not something to be expected from Canon.

They know how to sell cameras, they know price is a key factor in that, and sold the M50 incredibly well at its current price.

Keeping that price in the successor, while also adding meaningful updates to AF and at least some improvements on video features, is not an indication of the EF-M death to me.


----------



## jkirch76 (Oct 28, 2020)

In my opinion a APS-C EOS R makes sense for all the glass that is out there.
- It could make good use of the EF-S Lenses with the adapter without compromising to much of the frame.
- Entry level Camera for possible upgrade later to other R bodies with RF and then existing Lenses out of the EF and RF lineup.

I also have an EOS M5 and though it is nice to adapt all EF lenses the key is the size of the camera. Basically it is a travel camera for me, but also due to the size of my hands I prefer the EOS R size body for handling


----------



## Antono Refa (Oct 28, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> I don't really think Canon sees the M line as part of the same continuum as the rebel/dslr/RF mount line. They have rebel cameras that compete on price points with the M series, and always have.



I'm not sure this continuum will continue to exist.

The EOS 850D is priced $750
The EOS RP is priced $900
The EOS 90D is priced at $1,200
The EOS R is priced at $1,800

So the existence of the continuum depends on lenses, e.g. the customer saving on something like the trio of kit lenses (10-18mm, 18-55mm, 55-250mm). I doubt Canon can make a 10-~20mm lens that would be both <$500 and give sufficiently good image quality for anyone with a FF camera to want to keep it. Actually, if the 18-55mm did a reasonable job on FF, the customer could dump the 10-18mm, so maybe Canon can pull off a crop RF rebel with a couple of lenses.


----------



## Nigel95 (Oct 28, 2020)

riker said:


> Exactly. I'm pretty disappointed. I was hoping that with R the days of APS-C are finally over. No need for it anymore, FF is cheap, body is small.
> I wish R was FF-only, and EF-M was the more portable APS-C line and that's it. It could be such a nice and clean product portfolio.
> And they say EF-M will be discontinued. wtf.


FF glass is cheap? Cheap compared to what? Arri lenses? Prices between APS-C and FF equivalent glass can easily be x3. 

Why do you want the R line FF only? Because you don't want a R APS-C body? Maybe other people on the planet want it.. 

It's weird if you want Aps-C that you are sort of stuck into the EF-M line(in your opinion) . It's compact and light but not always favourable for a main camera.


----------



## riker (Oct 28, 2020)

Joules said:


> Who says that though? People who mistake the M50 II as a small improvement, when it really is an upgrade in features at a reduced introduction price? That's just folks on forums, right?



Well, it was here on CR multiple times in the official news feed, not the forums. Plus looking at development pace of EF-M bodies as well as EF-M lenses tells the story pretty well. It's anything but taken seriously.


----------



## mpeeps (Oct 28, 2020)

Jasonmc89 said:


> Slower though..


True. Way more versatile, however. I like landscapes and wide angle photography too.


----------



## mpeeps (Oct 28, 2020)

dwarven said:


> Yeah, the full frame crowd is about as bad as Sony fanboys. It's not their money, they obviously aren't getting one. Their opinions are pretty much irrelevant. Also, and it might sound nuts, but some people like having two camera bodies. Yes, it's possible to own a full frame *and* a crop body. Who'd have known?


Why get defensive/offensive about this conversation? I've learned so much on this site and don't profess to be an optics engineer. I don't see anyone's opinions as being pretty much irrelevant, even yours.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Oct 28, 2020)

riker said:


> Exactly. I'm pretty disappointed. I was hoping that with R the days of APS-C are finally over. No need for it anymore, FF is cheap, body is small.
> I wish R was FF-only, and EF-M was the more portable APS-C line and that's it. It could be such a nice and clean product portfolio.
> And they say EF-M will be discontinued. wtf.



FF is not cheap. Small and slow FF is cheap with missing features like the RP. Cropped video, no dual pixel, 3 fps. People loved the 7D because offered professional features for an affordable price.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 28, 2020)

Maru said:


> Why someone will buy APS-C mirrorless when RP and R both are in reachable price range... dont understand the concept


Birders and sports shooters. That's the target marker.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Oct 28, 2020)

Maru said:


> Why someone will buy APS-C mirrorless when RP and R both are in reachable price range... dont understand the concept



Wildlife and sport photographers won't be happy with the RP shooting 3 fps. And the R is not much faster. The R5 on the other hand is unreachable in price for many. The R6 too low resolution for cropping.


----------



## AJ (Oct 28, 2020)

It's funny how, ever since the announcement of the 5D mk1 back in '05, people on internet forums like this have predicted and cheered on the demise of APSC. Every time an APSC camera is announced there is a chorus of "why do we need this, surely it's the end of the line for APSC." Yet APSC refuses to die. Despite rumors to the contrary, IQ on crop cameras, even lowly rebels, is excellent, especially when these cameras are coupled with good glass (e.g. 50/1.8). It is miles and leagues above cell phone shots, even $1000+ iphones. I think an R-mount Rebel will do well and it will present a clear upgrade path to an RP.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Oct 28, 2020)

mpeeps said:


> True. Way more versatile, however. I like landscapes and wide angle photography too.


It always depends on what the photographer wants to capture and what tools work for them. A lot of the time for birds I need a fast FPS but possibly more importantly, a buffer that clears quickly! But yes, wide angle and landscape shots suffer with crop!


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Oct 28, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Wildlife and sport photographers won't be happy with the RP shooting 3 fps. And the R is not much faster. The R5 on the other hand is unreachable in price for many. The R6 too low resolution for cropping.


Exaaaactly the way I see it too.


----------



## dwarven (Oct 28, 2020)

mpeeps said:


> Why get defensive/offensive about this conversation? I've learned so much on this site and don't profess to be an optics engineer. I don't see anyone's opinions as being pretty much irrelevant, even yours.



I get defensive when people come in and try to shame someone for not buying full frame, either through willful ignorance or elitism. The newer, cheaper full frame cameras are super gimped in some way, so there are still plenty of reasons to get a crop body. It's especially insulting when someone tells you to jUsT gEt aN Rp BrO, after you've just explained you like shooting action and birds. The RP is a great, compact camera. But it's not an action or bird camera.


----------



## mpeeps (Oct 28, 2020)

dwarven said:


> I get defensive when people come in and try to shame someone for not buying full frame. The newer, cheaper full frame cameras are super gimped in some way, so there are still plenty of reasons to get a crop body. It's especially insulting when someone tells you to jUsT gEt aN Rp BrO, after you've just explained you like shooting action and birds. The RP is a great, compact camera. But it's not an action or bird camera.


I haven't seen any shaming, just opinionating. This isn't politics, it's a photography forum. 'Nuff said!


----------



## canonmike (Oct 28, 2020)

zim said:


> Yes but why a smaller and therefore poorer handling body what is this obsession with teeny weeny


Well, Zim. Understand your position but an argument can be made for teeny weeny, too. I use both full frame and crop bodies. For yrs, I carried a 7d coupled to heavy EF zooms while hiking and doing trail maintenance. My heavy 7d and lenses kept getting banged up every time I went on trail, so I tried various ways of carrying it. Holster, straps and more, to no avail. Finally, I tried an M50 just for the heck of it. Easy to carry, small form factor body and lenses, decent picture quality for my purposes(promoting BMTA trail work and hiking) and really cheap. The M series bodies and lenses have been a game changer for trail work. Due to the nature of my work, my M50 does occasionally get banged a bit but nothing like the 7d I was carrying, primarily due to using Peak Designs capture clip, attached to my backpack straps, which keeps the body more protected, yet readily available for that sudden trail Kodak moment. An added perk is the low M series teeny weeny cost factor keeps me from crying as much when I do destroy the camera, not to mention how lighter it is to pack, when you're carrying pack gear and eqpt that already weighs 40-50 lbs. Sure, you can put any camera body in your back pack but then it doesn't get used because it's not readily accessible like a small body is. I think it's great to have different choices at our disposal and in the end, you use what works for you. For my needs, I hope they keep teeny weeny awhile longer, even while I love the new R5/R6 bodies, albeit I won't be carrying either on the trail. Too heavy, too big and too expensive to risk damaging. If the Canon community wants an R series APSC crop body, as well, I say give it to them.


----------



## reef58 (Oct 28, 2020)

Dragon said:


> Yes, I know, pixel density. I have a 90D and there are damn few lenses that will effectively use that pixel density. Also, the R5s will almost certainly have equivalent pixel density and still give you that FF field of view, so I stand by what I said above.



What you stand by does not compute. The R5 has the pixel density of approximately 17mp when compared to Canon crop sensors. The "R7" is not going to be a 17mp sensor. It will likely be twice the pixel density of the R5.


----------



## Kane Clements (Oct 28, 2020)

reef58 said:


> Because I don't want two camera systems with different lenses batteries and chargers. And if you except the MP then you are comparing apples to oranges.



I disagree with you over the MP and processor. The Canon 32 MP is 'difficult'. It needs high resolving power lenses. The 26 MP X-Trans on the Fuji kicks it out of the park.


----------



## wyotex43n (Oct 28, 2020)

Stig Nygaard said:


> ..., what an APS-C sensor will do betten than than the FF R5? ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Could you elaborate on the 14 bit comment. I thought the R5 did 14 as long as it was in mechanical shutter mode which could be up to 10 or 12 FPS. Willing to be educated.


----------



## jvillain (Oct 28, 2020)

This thread is already up to page 10. Don't tell me there is no interest in an APS-C RF mount camera.


----------



## PerKr (Oct 28, 2020)

ColinJR said:


> I don't think it makes any sense, but maybe that's just me.



Yes, that is just you (and a bunch of other people).

APS-C sensors are cheaper to make

Differentiation. As long as you have an APS-C model in the lineup, FF can be treated as a premium feature and you can charge more for the same or even worse overall performance. They have been able to charge a premium in DSLRs and now the R5 and R6 come with a much increased price compared to the 5D and 6D in many markets. Canon will want to be able to keep charging as much as possible. The RP becomes a moot point being based on older sensor tech and will, if it remains in the lineup, be seriously outperformed by a similarly priced APS-C model because it will at best be an entry-level FF body. 

because the competition offers APS-C models in their main mount.

Because FF isn't as big a deal as it was as the greatest advantage is lost; a big nice viewfinder can be had with any sensor format when you have an EVF (and that "FF look" really doesn't matter all that much to most people and to those who crave it, well, just pay a premium to get it)

Do you recognize why people bought the 7D rather than the 6D, 5D or the 1D? If not, well, too bad.

Why bother with the 135 size sensor anyway? There are larger sensors available, not like there's anything magical about this particular size. Too large to be compact when taking lenses into account and still not large enough.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 28, 2020)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Large Format or GTFO


Yeah, shut up'n shoot yer Speed Graphic  (to say it with Frank Zappa)


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Oct 28, 2020)

wyotex43n said:


> Could you elaborate on the 14 bit comment. I thought the R5 did 14 as long as it was in mechanical shutter mode which could be up to 10 or 12 FPS. Willing to be educated.



I was unable to quickly find a link/reference, but it is somewhere in specs/manual.
In H+ mode (fastest mechanical shutter mode) RAW bit depth is 13 bit.
If you lower mechanical shooting mode to H, you get the usual 14 bit depth. As far as I remember H is approx. 6-8 fps depending on other settings.

I'll update this comment if I can find the official overview of the shooting modes (But maybe others are faster than me?).

Btw, the R6 does not have this restriction. With the lower pixel count of R6, it is 14 bit all the way with mechanical shutter.

UPDATE. Here it is. Actually it is 6fps with pure mechanical shutter and 8 fps with electronic 1st curtain:


----------



## Jethro (Oct 28, 2020)

PerKr said:


> APS-C sensors are cheaper to make


Are they that much cheaper to make though? And if the R7 includes a lot of the 'pro' features from the R5, I wonder how much cheaper overall it will be. Certainly more than the R6.


----------



## degos (Oct 28, 2020)

Kane Clements said:


> I disagree with you over the MP and processor. The Canon 32 MP is 'difficult'. It needs high resolving power lenses. The 26 MP X-Trans on the Fuji kicks it out of the park.



All recent EF lenses, and presumably RF, have been designed for 100MP+ FF sensors. Or 40MP+ APS-C.

QUOTE="Jethro, post: 870362, member: 380753"]
Are they that much cheaper to make though?
[/Quote]

Yes, more sensors per wafer and therefore losses from defects see proportionally lower compared to FF sensors of identical density. That's why APS-C existed in the digital era.


----------



## ctk (Oct 28, 2020)

ColinJR said:


> Cinema cameras aside, _why? _
> 
> Who want's this over full-frame? With today's processors, FF has proven to be just as performant as something like the 7D line. If you give me the "reach" argument, then I would give you the FF crop argument. If you give me the cost argument, then I point to the RP. Cheaper than that then you're going to have an up-hill battle against Fujifilm and Sony, or you know, Canon's M lineup.
> 
> ...



I agree. To put some more spice on it, Nikon has sold about 80K Z50s. Given that they and Canon barely invested in crop DSLR systems with *millions* of units sold, I think the odds of a crop Z system going much further are very slim. Which makes RF-S, especially in the context of EF-M, that much more dubious of a proposition. Anyone who can afford RF L glass can afford FF bodies and while non L RF glass has been pretty good it's not leaps and bounds better than EF glass. 

I honestly feel like the appeal of RF-S is pure contrarianism and inclusionism. I guess it's not too expensive for Canon to throw such people a bone, but I think anyone expecting more than an RF-S 15-xx variable aperture zoom is in for a rude awakening.


----------



## Hector1970 (Oct 28, 2020)

I think an R7 20FPS 24 to 30MP with a good focusing system for around $1000 would sell very well.
It will probably end up being $2500.
I think there is a market for an R7. A compact solid weatherproof body with a good grip to balance bigger lens would be great.
With what Olympus can achieve with a micro 4/3 sensor Canon could make a good machine with an APS-C sensor.
In the end it will come down to price. It will be somewhere between R6 and R5. 
The price will make or break it. If it's too close to R5 why not go full frame.
The old 7D/7DII had a "reach" advantage through the viewfinder but with EVF you can zoom in to focus and track.
A R7 could have amazing performance as the Canon digic chips would have no problem with 24 to 30 MP file size for FPS or buffer.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 28, 2020)

Kane Clements said:


> With the exception of the MP there are cameras out there that fit the bill. X-T4 and X-T3 from Fuji. Why wait for Canon Vapourware, again.


The wait for R5 was definitely worthwhile for me. I'm sure that moving to Sony (canon lenses) would been been okay but I am glad that I waited.
Vaporware? sure it was a long wait but this is CR3 which is the closest to an actual Canon announcement. A lot of discussion in this forum but no consensus about feature set and cost. A lot of very hopeful people for a lowish cost which I can't see happening.
I'm sure that the Fujis are great for what they are and are available now rather than 12 months from now with Canon. No one is suggesting that you have to wait unless you have EF/RF glass that cannot be used on Fuji so a much larger cost to switch.
How long the smaller players survive is a declining market will be fascinating to watch. Canon doesn't have to compete directly on cost.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Oct 28, 2020)

I would be very happy with an APSC camera in an R5 body. No need to be smaller. That's already smaller and lighter than a 7D.
Add a modern 24-28mp sensor with the latest AF, full width sharp 4K and price it under $2000.


----------



## reef58 (Oct 28, 2020)

Kane Clements said:


> I disagree with you over the MP and processor. The Canon 32 MP is 'difficult'. It needs high resolving power lenses. The 26 MP X-Trans on the Fuji kicks it out of the park.



I have high resolving power lenses, but what is your source for it needing them and the Fuji doesn't?


----------



## Waldo (Oct 28, 2020)

It is interesting to see the discussion here and I guess we would all love a definitive answer from Canon as to what their plans and roadmap is! From their perspective it must be very difficult - with a shrinking market it is probably hard to justify developing, manufacturing and selling two (or even four if you include EF and EF-S in the last action) ranges of lenses.

For me, I think I am looking for a quality Canon APS-C camera as an upgrade from my 600D (T3i) - initially lenses are not important as I would use my EF / EF-S lenses but moving forwards I would probably acquire new lenses developed for the camera model / range. I was getting excited about the prospect of the M5 II but this seems to be fading from the radar along with M series lens development - I guess I will pin my hopes on a suitable R series - I just wish it was not so far into the future ......!


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 29, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> I would be very happy with an APSC camera in an R5 body. No need to be smaller. That's already smaller and lighter than a 7D.
> Add a modern 24-28mp sensor with the latest AF, full width sharp 4K and price it under $2000.


Although the 7D came out at USD2k, what you are asking for is already above the R6. Full width 4K would either equate to 6+k raw (the 1DXiii's 20mp sensor is 5.5k raw) and/or downsampled 6k->4k video. With a higher res sensor and latest AF would need to push it above the R6 in pricing terms especially if weather sealing was included. Of course, it could be another unicorn like the 7D series.

I originally started with a 7D but moved to 5Diii. The 5Diii was slower (fps/AF) and couldn't focus in low light but milky way shots were actually possible. That high ISO performance was a "night and day" ;-) showing the difference between APS-C vs full frame and was worthwhile for me. The difference may not be as wide with today's technology but that was the upgrade path from APS-C to full frame. 

Comments saying that full frame proponents are elitist are misplaced. Horses for courses but the R5 (albeit at high price) combines speed/AF/mp/weather sealing/high ISO performance to keep me happy for a long time to come


----------



## Murren (Oct 29, 2020)

Would this mean Canon abandons the cheaper entry level FF RF, and replaces it with APS-C?


----------



## Czardoom (Oct 29, 2020)

zim said:


> Yes but why a smaller and therefore poorer handling body what is this obsession with teeny weeny


Because the size and weight of the camera is an important "spec." I have an "R" and also an Olympus E-M1 II. My main camera is the Olympus because of the size and weight difference. When the R6 was announced, I was seriously interested in getting one to replace my R. When the size and weight were slightly more than the R, I decided not to get one. That was the determining factor. It doesn't have to be teeny weeny, but smaller and lighter would be welcome for many.


----------



## Czardoom (Oct 29, 2020)

While not mentioned often, wider DOF is another reason to that a photographer might want an APS-C camera. About 6 years ago, I went from a crop rebel to the FF 6D. Very happy to be "upgrading"! Found out that it wasn't always the "upgrade" that I thought it would be. Found out it is really just another system alternative. For landscapes, it worked great - although there were times that I missed the extra reach. But what I really missed was the wide DOF. I shoot a lot of flowers. Not pure macro, but fairly close up. I found with an FF camera, I could not - in many cases - get the shot I could get with my crop rebel. Ended up getting a crop camera after all, and in those 6 years have owned both APS-C and M4/3. So, while FF certainly has advantages in many areas, it may not be the right camera in certain situations. And that is why some people want and need APS-C. Because it does some things FF can't do as well.


----------



## Czardoom (Oct 29, 2020)

Murren said:


> Would this mean Canon abandons the cheaper entry level FF RF, and replaces it with APS-C?


No. No reason.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 29, 2020)

Murren said:


> Would this mean Canon abandons the cheaper entry level FF RF, and replaces it with APS-C?


There is a marketing segment where Canon can state that the RP is the cheapest entry point into the RF multi-verse. Just like there are cheaper BMW/Audi/etc models to get people into their ecosystem. I can see a segment where there is both APS-C and full frame RF but they would need to have similar spec levels corresponding to their marketing segment. A 7D equivalent would between R6 and R5, and a cheaper one (with M6ii/90D sensor) in the RP body at an entry level.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 29, 2020)

Czardoom said:


> While not mentioned often, wider DOF is another reason to that a photographer might want an APS-C camera. About 6 years ago, I went from a crop rebel to the FF 6D. Very happy to be "upgrading"! Found out that it wasn't always the "upgrade" that I thought it would be. Found out it is really just another system alternative. For landscapes, it worked great - although there were times that I missed the extra reach. But what I really missed was the wide DOF. I shoot a lot of flowers. Not pure macro, but fairly close up. I found with an FF camera, I could not - in many cases - get the shot I could get with my crop rebel. Ended up getting a crop camera after all, and in those 6 years have owned both APS-C and M4/3. So, while FF certainly has advantages in many areas, it may not be the right camera in certain situations. And that is why some people want and need APS-C. Because it does some things FF can't do as well.


I didn't notice that issue moving from 7D to 5Diii. With crop you would be further away with the APS-C so not really in closeup range which can be useful not to disturb small subjects. But doesn't full frame give you the option of shallower depth of field but you can always close your aperture when you choose? APS-C won't give you the option of shallower DOF compared to FF.


----------



## Chig (Oct 29, 2020)

Really hope this is a 7D style camera suitable for Birds in Flight and Macro
My hoped for specs :
Basically the R6 body and feature set including the Digic X processor and DPAFii
Aps-c sensor : either the 32mp one from 90D or preferably a new higher quality one of similar mp but better low light performance
No AA filter
No IBIS
In camera focus bracketing/stacking
Automatic exposure compensation would be a great option, for example when the camera detects the subject such as a bird is dark or light coloured it automatically tweaks the iso up or down as appropriate (I often find I'm shooting say seabirds which are white mostly and a dark coloured bird suddenly appears and I can't adjust my exposure compensation in time)
Similar or slightly lower price than R6
Pop up flash is always useful too
Are you listening Canon ?
Please, pretty please !


----------



## drama (Oct 29, 2020)

Eimajm said:


> Because FF at the same pixel density is normally 1. much more expensive and 2. Slower frame rates due to the processor having to process many more pixels.


...but you're not buying a full frame camera. You're buying an APS-C sensor camera. Just one with an RF mount, engineered for full frame glass. Unless we're getting some RF-S lenses, I just don't see how it works - am I being dense? what am I missing?


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Oct 29, 2020)

Murren said:


> Would this mean Canon abandons the cheaper entry level FF RF, and replaces it with APS-C?


No. Different cameras for different uses.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Oct 29, 2020)

Chig said:


> Really hope this is a 7D style camera suitable for Birds in Flight and Macro
> My hoped for specs :
> Basically the R6 body and feature set including the Digic X processor and DPAFii
> Aps-c sensor : either the 32mp one from 90D or preferably a new higher quality one of similar mp but better low light performance
> ...


Spot on.


----------



## LRPP (Oct 29, 2020)

Canon 2972C005 (RF body to EF, *EF-S* lenses mount adapter) is a real product you can buy
Canon 6098B002 (M body to EF, EF-S lenses mount adapter) is a real product you can buy
Canon M body to RF lenses mount adapter doesn't exist
Canon EF body to RF lenses mount adapter doesn't exist

It seems the future of the (two) APS-C lines has been already written by Canon.


----------



## yeahright (Oct 29, 2020)

drama said:


> ...but you're not buying a full frame camera. You're buying an APS-C sensor camera. Just one with an RF mount, engineered for full frame glass. Unless we're getting some RF-S lenses, I just don't see how it works - am I being dense? what am I missing?


The birders and wildlife photographers get higher pixel density and framerates with an APS-C body, and save unnecessary space on memory cards and hard drives as compared to a full frame sensor, and all else being equal, the body will be considerably cheaper. Essentially the same reason that there was both the 5Ds and the 7DII. The cost-aware buyers have a path for starting into RF-Mount ILCs with a cheap APS-C body and adapted EF-S glass, but over the course of time can buy one or the other RF lens and later upgrade their body to full frame. The slow, low pixel density and not very rugged RP requiring expensive RF mount full frame lenses from the start does not cater to both of these groups.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Oct 29, 2020)

Maru said:


> Why someone will buy APS-C mirrorless when RP and R both are in reachable price range... dont understand the concept


You obviously dont shoot wildlife.


----------



## peters (Oct 29, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> This might be a 7D replacement, so the target market is more interested in long lenses, and is willing to pay.


If it is realy a very small camera, I dont think its a 7D replacement. The 7D is often used for sports or wildlife - so its more of a professional body with good ergonomics and not a travel-friendly, small body. If its even smaller than the RP, there is not much room for a good viewfinder or lots of buttons. This points at a travel camera and maybe a cheaper camera. My guess is, that there will be a true 7D replacement as well. But who knows =D

I wonder though, why this camera is a good idea - if there are no smaller RF-S lenses, than the small body size is not realy that useful. If you have to put full-frame lenss to the camera, it becomse a rather big and heavy package. I thing a small APS-C Body is REALY appealing, if you can pair small APS-C lenses with it. (the other end would be professional sports camer with an aps-c sensor - than a big body is usefull which is used with big lenses)


----------



## AlanF (Oct 29, 2020)

A good comparison for prices and use would be the Nikon D850 and D500. Both class leading and built like tanks. The APS-C is much loved by birders because it has the same density of pixels (and "reach") of the FF; faster fps (10 vs 7, ungripped); smaller file size; unlimited buffer vs limited; and much cheaper. These points have been proposed by posters here for the R7 vs R5 and are real.


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Oct 29, 2020)

peters said:


> If it is realy a very small camera, I dont think its a 7D replacement.



That part also worries me a bit. But still the rumor says it is "for sports shooters".

I have a system build around my 7DII because it is an "affordable" and great high-end tool for advanced users which you can build a relative compact and light system around. Size and weight is very important for me, but I'm primarily thinking about the lenses when I say so. Ergonomics and handling is the most important when it comes to the body.

I have 10 lenses, and when out shooting, I typically carry 3-4 lenses in my camerabag together with the camera. So the weight of camerabody is kind of negligible, it is weight and size of lenses that matters.
I often wish my camerabag was lighter. So I'm hoping I can at least get a good advanced APS-C mirrorless tool I can keep same or similar set of lenses to. So it at least not gets more heavy than it is know.

I think I have relatively small hands, and holding f.ex. an 90D (I had it for a short period) actually better suits my hands in size then the 7DII. Both 90D and 7DII has joystick and various controls/buttons placed nice for your fingers, _but_ I *greatly *prefer the wheel on back of the 7DII, the 90D's multicontroller/quickwheel is very frustrating for me to use.

But that RP looks scaringly small, also compared to 90D. So wonder if that can work well ergonomically and give us enough conveniently located buttons/controls for fast and direct adjustments? ... But I will probably take what I can get and hopefully get used to it.


----------



## Marximusprime (Oct 29, 2020)

Stig Nygaard said:


> That part also worries me a bit. But still the rumor says it is "for sports shooters".
> 
> I have a system build around my 7DII because it is an "affordable" and great high-end tool for advanced users which you can build a relative compact and light system around. Size and weight is very important for me, but I'm primarily thinking about the lenses when I say so. Ergonomics and handling is the most important when it comes to the body.
> 
> ...




Have you tried the RP with the grip extension? It's fantastic for my hands, and I like the 7D Mark II.


----------



## koenkooi (Oct 29, 2020)

Marximusprime said:


> Have you tried the RP with the grip extension? It's fantastic for my hands, and I like the 7D Mark II.



Another +1 here for the EG-E1, it made the RP usable for me, coming from an original 7D.


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Oct 29, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> Another +1 here for the EG-E1, it made the RP usable for me, coming from an original 7D.



I haven't. But yes, maybe there will also be a grip for new APS-C camera if it really is a "sports shooter".


----------



## peters (Oct 29, 2020)

Stig Nygaard said:


> That part also worries me a bit. But still the rumor says it is "for sports shooters".
> 
> I have a system build around my 7DII because it is an "affordable" and great high-end tool for advanced users which you can build a relative compact and light system around. Size and weight is very important for me, but I'm primarily thinking about the lenses when I say so. Ergonomics and handling is the most important when it comes to the body.
> 
> ...


Jeah, I agree on the body size. The RP is realy tiny, great for travel, but shooting with it for a longer time cant be great. The R5 is not even that great - in my opinion the viewfinder should be bigger and its missing dedicated ISO and WB buttons on the right shoulder. But I am coming from a 1DX, so I learned to love big viewfinders :-D


----------



## Bert63 (Oct 29, 2020)

drama said:


> I don't get it. The RP is a grand, and by that point next year, achievable for less. If you go APSC, what's the point of RF glass? Why would someone drop (let's say) 600 bucks on an APSC body that shoots faster than an RP, but then have to shell out for the expensive RF glass? What am I missing?


 The RP **AND** the 24-105 is $999 at BB right now.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 29, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> The RP **AND** the 24-105 is $999 at BB right now.



to clarify, that's the Non-L version!


----------



## djack41 (Oct 29, 2020)

ColinJR said:


> Cinema cameras aside, _why? _
> 
> Who want's this over full-frame? With today's processors, FF has proven to be just as performant as something like the 7D line. If you give me the "reach" argument, then I would give you the FF crop argument. If you give me the cost argument, then I point to the RP. Cheaper than that then you're going to have an up-hill battle against Fujifilm and Sony, or you know, Canon's M lineup.
> 
> ...


For us wildlife photographers, it is a fact that an image taken with an APS-C has higher IQ than full frame with same MP cropped to a similar perspective. It is all about number of MPs actually on the subject. Full frames have some advantages but it is best to minimize cropping.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 29, 2020)

djack41 said:


> For us wildlife photographers, it is a fact that an image taken with an APS-C has higher IQ than full frame with same MP cropped to a similar perspective. It is all about number of MPs actually on the subject. Full frames have some advantages but it is best to minimize cropping.



Imagine, then, a hypothetical 83MP full frame, which would crop down to 32MP--that's as dense as any existing Canon sensor. Would your objection still stand?

The R5 crops down to 17MP which isn't all that much worse than the 21 MP the 7D gives you. But maybe even that hit is unacceptable, if so, I can't argue with that.

I certainly wouldn't want to try cropping the R6, though! Or even the R (assuming it were otherwise suitable for you, which...it really isn't).


----------



## Bert63 (Oct 29, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> You say "throw away pixels", I say "allows me to buy cheaper lenses that get to supertele, without extenders that add cost and rob light, without photoshop". I love full frame and mostly shoot wide, but if I was a birder who liked to travel, a crop R5 with the RF 100 - 500mm would give me a 2-piece setup that gets to 800mm effective and fits in a backpack, with usable files straight off the camera. That's never been done before.




My go-to combo has been the 100-400L II and 1.4X III since I moved from the 7D2 to the 5D4 years ago.

Now I shoot the same combo on the R5 and in crop mode you’re at roughly 1000mm at f8. Awesome. With animal eye AF composition has never been easier so...


----------



## amfoto1 (Oct 29, 2020)

APP said:


> I wonder if an adapter could be made to use ef-m lenses on the R7. That could make for a versatile and compact camera if able to use these lenses, and potentially sell more of those lenses, as well as bringing more people into the RF ecosystem.



No.

Such an adapter isn't practical, due to the lens registers (bayonet flange to focal plane) distances of the RF and EF-M mounts:

RF lens register: 20mm
EF-M lens register: 18mm

For an EF-M lens to be used on an RF-mount camera would require optical correction, which would spoil image quality, unless very high end (expensive!) optics were used in the adapter.

Canon faced a similar conundrum way back when they went from the old FD/FL mount to today's EF mount. They briefly made a top-of-the line FD to EF adapter with optics.... but it was terribly expensive and also acted as a 1.26X teleconverter. I don't know the original list price for the Canon FD to EF adapter, but it cost more than many of the lenses it was designed to adapt! Today it's a rarity and collectible, often brings upwards of $1000 US when one comes on the market. And, while its teleconverter effect might have been welcome with telephotos, it would make wide angles less wide.

There are affordable FD to EF adapters today, from various third party manufacturers. To keep the price reasonable, they use lower quality optics that pretty much ruins images made with them.

It would be possible to do the opposite though... to fit an RF lens to an EF-M camera, although the 2mm difference in the registers leaves very little room for an adapter.

EF/EF-S lenses for Canon DSLRs have a much longer register: 44mm. That allows them to easily be fitted to either EF-M or RF mount cameras with a simple adapter that requires no optics, so doesn't harm image quality.


----------



## yeahright (Oct 29, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Imagine, then, a hypothetical 83MP full frame, which would crop down to 32MP--that's as dense as any existing Canon sensor. Would your objection still stand?
> 
> The R5 crops down to 17MP which isn't all that much worse than the 21 MP the 7D gives you. But maybe even that hit is unacceptable, if so, I can't argue with that.
> 
> I certainly wouldn't want to try cropping the R6, though! Or even the R (assuming it were otherwise suitable for you, which...it really isn't).


I would guess that birders want a large leap in technology over the 7DII 7 years after its launch in 2014, and not pay over twice the price (R5 vs. 7DII) for fewer pixels on subject. So if Canon delivers a hypothetical full frame 83MP body without compromising the 20 fps at the price of the 7D series cameras I think not many crop-shooters among the birders would complain and happily switch over to full frame. But that option is not on the horizon. The ratio of pixels on subject to price (body AND lens) should be much BETTER in 2021 than 2014, not worse.


----------



## Kane Clements (Oct 29, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> The wait for R5 was definitely worthwhile for me. I'm sure that moving to Sony (canon lenses) would been been okay but I am glad that I waited.
> Vaporware? sure it was a long wait but this is CR3 which is the closest to an actual Canon announcement. A lot of discussion in this forum but no consensus about feature set and cost. A lot of very hopeful people for a lowish cost which I can't see happening.
> I'm sure that the Fujis are great for what they are and are available now rather than 12 months from now with Canon. No one is suggesting that you have to wait unless you have EF/RF glass that cannot be used on Fuji so a much larger cost to switch.
> How long the smaller players survive is a declining market will be fascinating to watch. Canon doesn't have to compete directly on cost.



There is an EF to Fuji XF Adaptor that works well. Agreed no such product for RF to Fuji XF. If you don't know what Fuji does, take a look at the X-T4 . You might be surprised.


----------



## Kane Clements (Oct 29, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I have high resolving power lenses, but what is your source for it needing them and the Fuji doesn't?



Fuji FX glass is designed for the X series. The 32 MB Canon sensor packs in a lot of pixels and the need for high resolving power lenses to cope on for example the M6 II and the 90D is well documented. Christoper Frost Photography on YouTube (great channel if you haven't seen it he mostly reviews lenses and been at it for ten years) has a video dealing with the issue in relation to the M6 Mk II. Worth a look. 

No camera is perfect and each brand has their foibles. I'd invite you, in no more than a spirit of curiosity, to take a look at what Fuji has achieved with their crop sensor. DP review of the X-T4 and X-S10 give balanced roundups on YouTube and their site. 

You might be surprised.


----------



## Bert63 (Oct 29, 2020)

SteveC said:


> to clarify, that's the Non-L version!



I knew that, that’s why I didn’t include an L you TIT!


----------



## Dragon (Oct 29, 2020)

reef58 said:


> What you stand by does not compute. The R5 has the pixel density of approximately 17mp when compared to Canon crop sensors. The "R7" is not going to be a 17mp sensor. It will likely be twice the pixel density of the R5.


Reread my post. I said R5s. It will likely be in the 80 MP range, so essentially the same as the 90D/M6 II. The current R5 is 17 MP in crop, but due to the better AAF, it competes well with the 7D II.


----------



## Dragon (Oct 29, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> I'm not sure this continuum will continue to exist.
> 
> The EOS 850D is priced $750
> The EOS RP is priced $900
> ...


An 18-55 FF lens would be quite large and VERY expensive if any good.


----------



## David - Sydney (Oct 29, 2020)

Kane Clements said:


> There is an EF to Fuji XF Adaptor that works well. Agreed no such product for RF to Fuji XF. If you don't know what Fuji does, take a look at the X-T4 . You might be surprised.


Given my investment into the R5/RF mount this year (including housing), I think that my future purchases will be limited for the foreseeable time


----------



## slclick (Oct 29, 2020)

I would think most posters here have a sizable cache of Canon glass, steering them into another system such as Fuji for a supposed marginal gain is not a position I'd like to be in myself. All that selling and buying of lenses, what a gamble and pain. With Canon's close to stellar reputation for lenses, something Fuji has only garnered for one or two, I think not. Now, supplementing your Canon FF gear with a crop Fuji for different needs? Sure, have at it.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 29, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I knew that, that’s why I didn’t include an L you TIT!



 YOU knew it. And I knew it...but maybe others didn't realize it!


----------



## wyotex43n (Oct 29, 2020)

Stig Nygaard said:


> I was unable to quickly find a link/reference, but it is somewhere in specs/manual.
> In H+ mode (fastest mechanical shutter mode) RAW bit depth is 13 bit.
> If you lower mechanical shooting mode to H, you get the usual 14 bit depth. As far as I remember H is approx. 6-8 fps depending on other settings.
> 
> ...


Thanks, That clears thing up, but now I may have more questions. May take me a while to word the question. 

All the more reason to have a high megapixel crop camera with high frame rate.


----------



## Bert63 (Oct 30, 2020)

I see Canon beginning their replacement of the Rebel line - it has to happen eventually and I see Canon wanting it done sooner than later.

A 7D2 replacement would have to be really cheap to be an alternative to the R6, and if loaded with the options that most (I) would want it would be unlikely. The specs people want would put it too close or beyond the R6 in price and I just don’t see it.

My EOS-R is easily as good as my 5D4 for shooting perched birds and slow moving wildlife, and if you learn how to manage it the slow burst rate can be prompted to capture all but the fastest BIF shooting. It isn’t easy and faster is better (thus my R5 purchase) but the IQ out of the R is top-notch.

For me, there is no benefit of shooting a APS-C rather than a FF for wildlife these days aside from the hope that it might come in a little cheaper. Like I said in another post, if I throw my 100-400L and my 1.4X on my R5 and put it into crop mode then I’m shooting 1000mm equivalent @ f8.

It will be interesting to see what kind of APS-C mirrorless Canon comes out with - whether it’ll be a beginning of the end for the current Rebel line (likely) or a 7D2 replacement (not as likely IMO).

Either way, regardless of the specs, after shooting FF since 2016 and now having the R5, I can’t imagine a product that would turn my head unless it was super cheap and I don’t see a 7D2-like camera being cheap at all.


----------



## Bert63 (Oct 30, 2020)

AccipiterQ said:


> Because the use-case for an R6 or R5 is completely different from the 7Dii (or R7)? Even cropped the R5 is only giving you 17MP. Nature/sports photographers need speed & reach. The R6/R5 have speed, but not the reach, when you're cropping down. If the R7 ends up being 32MP or whatever....that's a homerun. I'd buy one the day it drops, or mug someone that got one before they sold out.



At what price? Which specs do you want?


----------



## Bert63 (Oct 30, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> Assuming that the 5dsr actually can get the picture. The 7D2 has twice the FPS of the 5Ds and 5Dsr.


 
I shoot pretty much nothing but wildlife and my keeper rate went up drastically when I switched to the 5D4 from the 7D2.

The 7D2 was a decent camera. I like mine although it mostly sits on the shelf these days. I found the high framerate useful but the number of keepers I get out of the 5D4 (and later the EOS-R and R5) is easily twice the number I got from my 7D2.

The 7D2 is lauded and it was a good camera but it isn’t the holy grail it seems to have grown into over time. The autofocus often can’t keep up with the FPS, and it’s low light performance is lacking for someone who shoots in the Pacific Northwest. Hitting the bottom of the buffer is common and the write time to clear it is far too long.

Never mind that the 20MP forces your composition to be on point if you hope to crop in any meaningful way.

The 1.6 crop factor of the APS-C and added ‘reach’ realized from it are not worth the trade off you can get from a good full frame IMO. 

This new mirrorless R7 or whatever will have to be carefully spec’d to not to approach or outprice the R6 otherwise I don’t see the point. If they scrimp on features to keep the price competitive, again, I don’t see the point.

Very interesting to see what comes out of this.


----------



## Dragon (Oct 30, 2020)

drama said:


> I don't get it. The RP is a grand, and by that point next year, achievable for less. If you go APSC, what's the point of RF glass? Why would someone drop (let's say) 600 bucks on an APSC body that shoots faster than an RP, but then have to shell out for the expensive RF glass? What am I missing?


This body will not be 600 bucks. If it does what the 7D II crowd is wanting, the tag will be closer to $2500. The 17 MP crop on the R5 is as sharp as a 7DII, thanks to the new AAF, and the R5 outperforms the 7D II in every other way. These guys are looking for 90D pixel density with all the bells and whistles. I suspect the R5s will be released first and it will have essentially the same pixel density, so then the argument will be down to price and maybe a few FPS difference. The crop frame makes little sense to me, but the 7D II crowd is very loud and they do buy big whites, so maybe Canon figures the lens sales will make it worthwhile.


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Oct 30, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> A 7D2 replacement would have to be really cheap to be an alternative to the R6, and if loaded with the options that most (I) would want it would be unlikely. The specs people want would put it too close or beyond the R6 in price and I just don’t see it.



Size/weight/price (size/weight of the whole system, not so much the camera ifself).
If the R6 was a crop-camera I would have bought it. Also at same price, although that is pretty much as much as I'm ready to pay for a camera.


----------



## Joules (Oct 30, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> Assuming that the 5dsr actually can get the picture. The 7D2 has twice the FPS of the 5Ds and 5Dsr.


Well, the high res R (R5 s / R3) will have a sped up crop mode, I suspect. Just like in the M6 II, which does 14 FPS 32.5 MP mechanical, and also 30 FPS 18 MP electronic in crop mode. I am actually a little sad that the R5 didn't get that, since especially the pre-shutter-press capture seems like something I'd like if I were to invest that much into a body.

Depending on just how much Canon improves the next Iteration of sensors over the already great advancement found in the R5, the high res R may actually be a superset of a potential R7. But, of course that will come with a price, and for purely mechanical shooting, I believe the R7 will maintain an advantage.

Just, with the capabilities of mirrorless, it's not going to be the same situation as the 7D II vs 5Ds.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 30, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I see Canon beginning their replacement of the Rebel line - it has to happen eventually and I see Canon wanting it done sooner than later.



I am assuming that by "Rebel" you mean the XXXXD and XXXD lines. The 7D wouldn't be a Rebel, certainly not that kind of Rebel, so this camera (that most are assuming is the path into mirrorless for the 7D owners) has nothing to do with the Rebel line.

The real replacement for the Rebels is the M series. Think about it; the typical Rebel customer won't care about the small selection of lenses; they probably bought only one kit lens (18-55) anyway...or maybe both of the kit lenses (adding the 70-300) to give them more focal length options.

That's what I did. The only thing odd about me as a Rebel customer was that I also picked up the 100 mm (no L) macro, to take pictures of coins. (And I still use that lens and a three-digit Rebel for that, 24 MP being fantastic for that job.) And of course I moved up in the world to an M6-II and an R5. But I started out as a typical Rebel customer and believe me it would have made no difference to me back then if it had been an M series. In fact, I probably would have preferred it, since the flapping mirror thing always struck me as a kludge.


----------



## Kane Clements (Oct 30, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Given my investment into the R5/RF mount this year (including housing), I think that my future purchases will be limited for the foreseeable time



OK fair point. Doing the full Fuji X-T4 plus four lenses made my bank balance look pretty anaemic. Though two were used as new. Are you planning to eat before January


----------



## Bert63 (Oct 30, 2020)

SteveC said:


> I am assuming that by "Rebel" you mean the XXXXD and XXXD lines. The 7D wouldn't be a Rebel, certainly not that kind of Rebel, so this camera (that most are assuming is the path into mirrorless for the 7D owners) has nothing to do with the Rebel line.
> 
> The real replacement for the Rebels is the M series. Think about it; the typical Rebel customer won't care about the small selection of lenses; they probably bought only one kit lens (18-55) anyway...or maybe both of the kit lenses (adding the 70-300) to give them more focal length options.
> 
> That's what I did. The only thing odd about me as a Rebel customer was that I also picked up the 100 mm (no L) macro, to take pictures of coins. (And I still use that lens and a three-digit Rebel for that, 24 MP being fantastic for that job.) And of course I moved up in the world to an M6-II and an R5. But I started out as a typical Rebel customer and believe me it would have made no difference to me back then if it had been an M series. In fact, I probably would have preferred it, since the flapping mirror thing always struck me as a kludge.



Good post. As usual.


----------



## Bert63 (Oct 30, 2020)

Stig Nygaard said:


> Size/weight/price (size/weight of the whole system, not so much the camera ifself).
> If the R6 was a crop-camera I would have bought it. Also at same price, although that is pretty much as much as I'm ready to pay for a camera.



1 - checked your Flickr and you've got some really nice shots over there. 

2 - why would you not choose a FF? What is it you like about the crop bodies?

3 - I've been carrying my wildlife setup so long that weight isn't even an issue. The R5/EOS-R is as small a camera I would ever want to hold and I've added grips to both for better feel.


----------



## reef58 (Oct 30, 2020)

Dragon said:


> Reread my post. I said R5s. It will likely be in the 80 MP range, so essentially the same as the 90D/M6 II. The current R5 is 17 MP in crop, but due to the better AAF, it competes well with the 7D II.





Kane Clements said:


> Fuji FX glass is designed for the X series. The 32 MB Canon sensor packs in a lot of pixels and the need for high resolving power lenses to cope on for example the M6 II and the 90D is well documented. Christoper Frost Photography on YouTube (great channel if you haven't seen it he mostly reviews lenses and been at it for ten years) has a video dealing with the issue in relation to the M6 Mk II. Worth a look.
> 
> No camera is perfect and each brand has their foibles. I'd invite you, in no more than a spirit of curiosity, to take a look at what Fuji has achieved with their crop sensor. DP review of the X-T4 and X-S10 give balanced roundups on YouTube and their site.
> 
> You might be surprised.



I wouldn't be surprised. You assume I am unfamiliar with Fuji, I am not. I just don't want one. They as are most other brands are fully capable in their own way. If I were to buy a Fuji it would be the Medium Format not the XT. I have for instance a 500f4 I can use with a Canon crop body but not a fuji, so why would you suggest I buy a Fuji? I am just showing the point buying a Fuji because you like them is not for everyone. If I had not lenses or my main camera a 1dx3 then maybe I would consider a Fuji XT, but more likely I would be looking at the Sony offering possibly Nikon.


----------



## reef58 (Oct 30, 2020)

Dragon said:


> Reread my post. I said R5s. It will likely be in the 80 MP range, so essentially the same as the 90D/M6 II. The current R5 is 17 MP in crop, but due to the better AAF, it competes well with the 7D II.



1) Fair enough if a full frame is released with the same pixel density as the R7 then I will certainly lean that way. I don't need 20fps, but would like 10. I find 20fps on the 1dx3 in ES mode to make the culling process too time consuming. 

2) I am not comparing the new R5 to the old as dirt 7d2. I would suspect the R7 would get the sensor upgrades as the other modern Canon offerings. A fair comparison is the 7d2 vs the 5d3. Which one I would chose between those would depend on the circumstances.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Oct 30, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Indeed. There's this wide perception that the thing we call "full frame" is "normal." It could have been anything.
> 
> I spent years doing nothing but APS-C--to me, it was normal, and all the talk about that 35mm lens being like a 56 mm on an APS-C was meaningless. To me, that 35 mm lens would be like a 22 mm lens if someone put it on a full frame, because to me what a 35 mm lens does on an APS-C is normal--i.e., what I am used to. (This is still true for me even though I've now dipped my toes into full frame. My first time with a full frame I was saying things like "Dang, this damn lens won't zoom in like it should!")


Yep!
In the movie / fiilm industry there's a lot of talk about the magic reportage look of a 24mm lens. Put that focal length through the crop equivelent that's widely used...you end up with roughly as 35mm angle of view. So that "classic movie look" is in fact Cartier Bresson's favorite full frame focal length. Go figure! Nothing new, nothing special there! Which is why my three main wedding photography lenses are a 35mm f1.4 standard lens, an 85 f1.2 tele and a 16-35mm f2.8 Wide. Gimme thouse three lenses on three fullf rame bodies and I can pretty much cover 99% of the shots I'll need. Throw in a few special fisheye and longer tele shots and that's my bag.


----------



## Maru (Oct 30, 2020)

everyone needs 90d feature + mirrorless together on aps-c mirrorless within $1k-$1.5k... its not happening as a> they wouldn't like to go bankrupt b> they wouldn't like to kill R/RP and half of R6 market


----------



## Kane Clements (Oct 30, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I wouldn't be surprised. You assume I am unfamiliar with Fuji, I am not. I just don't want one. They as are most other brands are fully capable in their own way. If I were to buy a Fuji it would be the Medium Format not the XT. I have for instance a 500f4 I can use with a Canon crop body but not a fuji, so why would you suggest I buy a Fuji? I am just showing the point buying a Fuji because you like them is not for everyone. If I had not lenses or my main camera a 1dx3 then maybe I would consider a Fuji XT, but more likely I would be looking at the Sony offering possibly Nikon.



Hi Reef58

I didn't know much about Fuji before I started researching to switch. I changed largely out of frustration, because Canon can't provide me with the camera I want.

I did know I wanted a mirrorless high performance, weather sealed, robust , twin card, crop sensor body, with a DSLR type centre EVF. I ruled out micro four thirds. At the moment Fuji is *THE* game in town. I appreciate that Fuji won't be for everyone. If I was minted, which I'm not, I'd grab an R5 and a couple of lenses in a shot. And a big part of me would love a Fuji medium format.

Oh. And Fringer do an adaptor. You could use the 500 f4 on a Fuji X-T4. On the other hand you could save yourself the expense and loan the lens to me.   . I'd test it out for you. Honest!!


----------



## Bert63 (Oct 30, 2020)

navastronia said:


> What happens when you put a 600 or 800mm f/11 lens on an APS-C R-body? 1280mm field of view, in the latter case. That's pretty cool. I wonder about how image quality would compare to using a 1.4x or 2.0x teleconverter on a shorter lens.




Given I can shoot at almost 1000mm in crop mode on my R5 at f8 using the 100-400L II and a 1.4X III and get great results, the 800mm f11 with it's 22 foot minimum focal length fell completely off the interest scale.


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Oct 30, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> 1 - checked your Flickr and you've got some really nice shots over there.



Thanks  



Bert63 said:


> 2 - why would you not choose a FF? What is it you like about the crop bodies?
> 3 - I've been carrying my wildlife setup so long that weight isn't even an issue. The R5/EOS-R is as small a camera I would ever want to hold and I've added grips to both for better feel.



It's all about convenience. I think my bag gets plenty heavy and stuffed with 3 or 4 lenses in it. Sometime I also try to get room for a drone (foldable Mavic Pro) in the bag. So in the end I just want my equipment more compact and light.
Of course I know I can get better technical quality from fullframe, but even at same cost, convenience will win for me. Especially when traveling, which is a pretty important "use case" for me.


----------



## Dragon (Oct 30, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I wouldn't be surprised. You assume I am unfamiliar with Fuji, I am not. I just don't want one. They as are most other brands are fully capable in their own way. If I were to buy a Fuji it would be the Medium Format not the XT. I have for instance a 500f4 I can use with a Canon crop body but not a fuji, so why would you suggest I buy a Fuji? I am just showing the point buying a Fuji because you like them is not for everyone. If I had not lenses or my main camera a 1dx3 then maybe I would consider a Fuji XT, but more likely I would be looking at the Sony offering possibly Nikon.


And then there is that rumored RF 1200 f/8 L coming down the pike .


----------



## Kane Clements (Oct 30, 2020)

Maru said:


> everyone needs 90d feature + mirrorless together on aps-c mirrorless within $1k-$1.5k... its not happening as a> they wouldn't like to go bankrupt b> they wouldn't like to kill R/RP and half of R6 market



Hi Maru.

Look at the Fuji X-T3 and X-T4. You can get them in that price range and they will outperform the very lame and unreliable 90D.


----------



## Maru (Oct 30, 2020)

Kane Clements said:


> Hi Maru.
> 
> Look at the Fuji X-T3 and X-T4. You can get them in that price range and they will outperform the very lame and unreliable 90D.


True Kane... it will be perfect if Canon does something like Fuji


----------



## wyotex43n (Oct 30, 2020)

Dragon said:


> I suspect the R5s will be released first and it will have essentially the same pixel density, so then the argument will be down to price and maybe a few FPS difference.


Exactly, If the FPS is twice what an R5s is going to be at half the price then it will be attractive to people who shoot wildlife. If it is 10% faster and only 10% cheaper it won't be. My new R5 produces about the same level of detail on bird shots with a higher hit rate and less noise than my 7dmk11. If indeed there is an R7 with the right price performance ratio I would consider it as a second camera. Maybe Canon will put the R5 sensor in a cooled body and we will all shoot 8k stills at 30FPS


----------



## reef58 (Oct 30, 2020)

Kane Clements said:


> Hi Reef58
> 
> I didn't know much about Fuji before I started researching to switch. I changed largely out of frustration, because Canon can't provide me with the camera I want.
> 
> ...



I am a Canon guy and pretty much believe all of the major companies provide gear that is more than adequate to get the job done. I really have no desire for an XT4 although I am sure it works plenty good enough. If I were to supplement my Canon they only considerations are in order, Fuji 100mp MF, Nikon d850/d500, and Sony A7r4. About the only one I really check out is the 100mp Fuji. I figured I would wait until Caon release the high MP Canon 5 series. The r5 is also tempting.

I am in the minority I am sure, but I plan to keep shooting video with the 1dx3 and considered the r5 for still only.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Oct 31, 2020)

Kane Clements said:


> Hi Reef58
> 
> I didn't know much about Fuji before I started researching to switch. I changed largely out of frustration, because Canon can't provide me with the camera I want.
> 
> ...



I hear what you are saying. However, Canon are the market leaders in terms of unit sales (by quite some margin) so the lenses (not so much the bodies) will always retain a lot of their value on the used market. At the moment, the semi-pro / pro camera market is at a tipping point of DSLR vs Mirrorless. The newest top tier camera from Canon is always going to be expensive. For me, while I'd like a R5...I don't have the budget to drop £3500 on one, regardless of how good it is. My current 5D3's are still serving me well and taking great pictures and my lens portfilio covers everything that I could wish for. I shoot weddings, portraits, family events, large events, wildlife and landscapes. So my lens shelf covers a lot of needs and has a lot of speciality lenses. Jumping over to mirrorless isn't a current priority for me, but an indiction for future me. When the price of the R5 drops to a more sane level and every one is bored of it...and hankering from a mkII....then that will be when I buy a pair of them. My current 5D3 is already as technologically advanced as I need. I don't need more resolution...or fps. I already have a great live view system. The R6 looks nice too...but why buy something that is very simular to what I've already got and using? The EOS Rp and R were a poor handling camera and it's AF was sub par with my current equipement. But it paved the way for the next gen camera bodies which are of more interest to me. However, for me...this covid pandemic and 2nd wave have pretty much nuked my photographic income this year and it's not a time for me to be spending large quatities of cash for a "nice to have". There is nothing in the R5 / R6 / Mirrorless cameras that will enable me to take more sellable photos than my current gear offers (sure..in some cases, slightly easier maybe, but not better or higher priced). Your situation and needs might vary...but that's my current take.


----------



## Kane Clements (Oct 31, 2020)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I hear what you are saying. However, Canon are the market leaders in terms of unit sales (by quite some margin) so the lenses (not so much the bodies) will always retain a lot of their value on the used market. At the moment, the semi-pro / pro camera market is at a tipping point of DSLR vs Mirrorless. The newest top tier camera from Canon is always going to be expensive. For me, while I'd like a R5...I don't have the budget to drop £3500 on one, regardless of how good it is. My current 5D3's are still serving me well and taking great pictures and my lens portfilio covers everything that I could wish for. I shoot weddings, portraits, family events, large events, wildlife and landscapes. So my lens shelf covers a lot of needs and has a lot of speciality lenses. Jumping over to mirrorless isn't a current priority for me, but an indiction for future me. When the price of the R5 drops to a more sane level and every one is bored of it...and hankering from a mkII....then that will be when I buy a pair of them. My current 5D3 is already as technologically advanced as I need. I don't need more resolution...or fps. I already have a great live view system. The R6 looks nice too...but why buy something that is very simular to what I've already got and using? The EOS Rp and R were a poor handling camera and it's AF was sub par with my current equipement. But it paved the way for the next gen camera bodies which are of more interest to me. However, for me...this covid pandemic and 2nd wave have pretty much nuked my photographic income this year and it's not a time for me to be spending large quatities of cash for a "nice to have". There is nothing in the R5 / R6 / Mirrorless cameras that will enable me to take more sellable photos than my current gear offers (sure..in some cases, slightly easier maybe, but not better or higher priced). Your situation and needs might vary...but that's my current take.



Hi. Good points well made and probably reflects the circumstances of many in the photography world. Had I been in your shoes with a brace of 5D3s and lens collection I wouldn’t have been in the market for a new body or open to changing systems. And now I have invested I am not planning to change or upgrade for a long time. (Apart from buying the forthcoming Fuji 70-300 for which I’m already saving).

And therein lies a problem for the camera makers. They earn their crust making stuff and in part rely on the hype of informal marketing channels like Canon Rumours or Fuji Rumours or Mac Rumours etc. to generate excitement. That also helps build brand loyalty reinforced by the money people have already sunk into their gear. 

Whereas if ones kit works and isn’t clapped out it will keep on doing the job as well as on the day you got it. Unless there is some amazing feature that as you point out would make your images worth more, why drop a load of cash on new?

Best wishes and all that.

K


----------



## amfoto1 (Nov 1, 2020)

Just because Canon says there won't be any RF-S lenses doesn't mean there won't be RF lenses specifically designed for APS-C crop sensor R-series cameras. In fact, Canon recently patented an RF 15-70mm that appears to be a lens for crop cameras. Not all patents end up being manufactured, but this tells us Canon is at least considering offering one or more crop RF lenses.

What the "no RF-S lenses" statement probably means is that with the new RF cameras Canon sees no need for a bayonet mount variant designed to prevent the crop lens from being mounted on a full frame camera. Instead they will simply program the FF camera to self-crop any time it detects a crop lens has been mounted (and hopefully will still allow the user to switch back to full frame, if they wish, in spite of the likelihood of vignetting). This is pretty much what all other manufacturers have been doing for years with both their DSLRs and mirrorless FF cameras.

Canon's approach with EF and EF-S lenses might have made sense in 2004 when they first introduced cameras and lenses that used the EF-S variant of the EF mount. But this is no longer necessary. Today's FF cameras have so much more resolution than 2004 cameras that they can tolerate a crop much better. Also, originally one of the key reasons for the EF-S mount was to allow for optical designs that would partially intrude inside the camera, which would physically interfere with a DSLR's mirror actiion and potentially cause damage to both camera and lens. With mirrorless cameras, there's no mirror moving around in there and no such problem.


----------



## Maru (Nov 1, 2020)

My point of view is ...current market is more cost driven than feature {even though we talk about features a lot here but most normal users go by cost first}..RF-S doesnt have a opening slot unless they put it around $500 range {that will take out lot of features too}... Canon will not kill its current line up of RP->R->R6->R5 and any feature less than R/RP makes it a junk camera... so it will be around 2.5k and thats not an APSC for regular users and doesnt leave much gap with the King R5


----------



## Czardoom (Nov 1, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> I didn't notice that issue moving from 7D to 5Diii. With crop you would be further away with the APS-C so not really in closeup range which can be useful not to disturb small subjects. But doesn't full frame give you the option of shallower depth of field but you can always close your aperture when you choose? APS-C won't give you the option of shallower DOF compared to FF.


As is always the case, it depends on what you shoot. With my m4/3rds system, I routinely need an aperture of f/11, f/13 or even more to get an entire flower - or two or more flowers next to each other - in focus. So, I have no way to get f/26 with my FF camera to get the same DOF. I do have an FF camera if I need shallow DOF, but need a crop camera to get the wider DOF that I need far more often (almost never, if ever, need a shallower DOF than I get with my crop cameras).


----------



## Dragon (Nov 1, 2020)

Maru said:


> My point of view is ...current market is more cost driven than feature {even though we talk about features a lot here but most normal users go by cost first}..RF-S doesnt have a opening slot unless they put it around $500 range {that will take out lot of features too}... Canon will not kill its current line up of RP->R->R6->R5 and any feature less than R/RP makes it a junk camera... so it will be around 2.5k and thats not an APSC for regular users and doesnt leave much gap with the King R5


That was the number I came up with. Given the suggested long lead time, I think this is a just-in-case project. I.e. just-in-case the R5s doesn't pacify the 7d II crowd. The R5s will certainly be first and then we will see.


----------



## Czardoom (Nov 1, 2020)

drama said:


> ...but you're not buying a full frame camera. You're buying an APS-C sensor camera. Just one with an RF mount, engineered for full frame glass. Unless we're getting some RF-S lenses, I just don't see how it works - am I being dense? what am I missing?



I works the same way as all the many folks who bought a crop DSLR and then used EF lenses on it. All the folks wanting more reach and high quality glass. Just guessing, but I would think that the majority of 7d owners owned primarily or exlusively EF lenses. SInce an RF lens can be designed to be a wider angle lens for FF while at the same time being a normal angle lens for crop, there is no reason to create a second line of lenses made only for crop.


----------



## David - Sydney (Nov 1, 2020)

Czardoom said:


> I works the same way as all the many folks who bought a crop DSLR and then used EF lenses on it. All the folks wanting more reach and high quality glass. Just guessing, but I would think that the majority of 7d owners owned primarily or exlusively EF lenses. SInce an RF lens can be designed to be a wider angle lens for FF while at the same time being a normal angle lens for crop, there is no reason to create a second line of lenses made only for crop.


I needed to get a wide angle EF-S lens as the EF wide angle weren't designed for APC-S sensors (and too expensive).


----------



## David - Sydney (Nov 1, 2020)

GMCPhotographics said:


> My current 5D3's are still serving me well and taking great pictures and my lens portfilio covers everything that I could wish for. I shoot weddings, portraits, family events, large events, wildlife and landscapes. So my lens shelf covers a lot of needs and has a lot of speciality lenses. Jumping over to mirrorless isn't a current priority for me, but an indiction for future me. When the price of the R5 drops to a more sane level and every one is bored of it...and hankering from a mkII....then that will be when I buy a pair of them. My current 5D3 is already as technologically advanced as I need. I don't need more resolution...or fps. I already have a great live view system. The R6 looks nice too...but why buy something that is very simular to what I've already got and using? The EOS Rp and R were a poor handling camera and it's AF was sub par with my current equipement. But it paved the way for the next gen camera bodies which are of more interest to me. However, for me...this covid pandemic and 2nd wave have pretty much nuked my photographic income this year and it's not a time for me to be spending large quatities of cash for a "nice to have". There is nothing in the R5 / R6 / Mirrorless cameras that will enable me to take more sellable photos than my current gear offers (sure..in some cases, slightly easier maybe, but not better or higher priced). Your situation and needs might vary...but that's my current take.


I was happy with my 5Diii until a 5Div came up cheap second hand. Something to consider as it was an overall significant improvement... much more than I expected. The changeover cost wasn't a lot of money and I was able to sell that 5Div for more than I bought it for when I migrated to the R5. 
The biggest improvement with the R5 is the eye AF and across the whole sensor especially for sports/action. No recomposing anymore. Keeper rate is much higher than with my 5Diii/iv but this could come down to my lack of skill at the time. Lots of cream on the cake for fps/buffer/cropability. Smaller size body is not that important to me but the smaller lenses (70-200 and 100-500mm) do make a difference

Appreciate that revenue is taking a hit at the moment for future purchases. I am pretty cleaned out at the moment.


----------



## Maru (Nov 1, 2020)

Dragon said:


> That was the number I came up with. Given the suggested long lead time, I think this is a just-in-case project. I.e. just-in-case the R5s doesn't pacify the 7d II crowd. The R5s will certainly be first and then we will see.


Agreed


----------



## Dragon (Nov 2, 2020)

Czardoom said:


> I works the same way as all the many folks who bought a crop DSLR and then used EF lenses on it. All the folks wanting more reach and high quality glass. Just guessing, but I would think that the majority of 7d owners owned primarily or exlusively EF lenses. SInce an RF lens can be designed to be a wider angle lens for FF while at the same time being a normal angle lens for crop, there is no reason to create a second line of lenses made only for crop.


Other than the issue of price, that only works if the crop frame has higher pixel density than the FF. With an R5s likely coming down the pike, I doubt that will be case, so we are down to the only reason for the camera being to save a couple of grand on body to be used with $10k lenses. Seems like a pretty thin case.


----------



## zim (Nov 2, 2020)

Czardoom said:


> I works the same way as all the many folks who bought a crop DSLR and then used EF lenses on it. All the folks wanting more reach and high quality glass. Just guessing, but I would think that the majority of 7d owners owned primarily or exlusively EF lenses. SInce an RF lens can be designed to be a wider angle lens for FF while at the same time being a normal angle lens for crop, there is no reason to create a second line of lenses made only for crop.


Correct


----------



## zim (Nov 2, 2020)

Maru said:


> Agreed


I'd agree if the rumour said same size/build as R5 but this thing might be smaller than an RP (no bigger apparently) with all that implies for control layout and handling. Will that satisfy the 7d crowd?
This still feels like the SL2 of the RF line with a few cheap lenses to follow but it's easy to pick holes in that!
I find this whole rumour confusing and contradictory.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Nov 2, 2020)

Dragon said:


> Other than the issue of price, that only works if the crop frame has higher pixel density than the FF. With an R5s likely coming down the pike, I doubt that will be case, so we are down to the only reason for the camera being to save a couple of grand on body to be used with $10k lenses. Seems like a pretty thin case.


Not quite. I ran a sigma 150-600 on my 7d2 and for a price of 4k Australian i had a field of view equivalent to a FF with nearly 1000mm of focal length. That is a pretty damn affordable wildlife setup.


----------



## ColinJR (Nov 2, 2020)

PerKr said:


> Yes, that is just you (and a bunch of other people).
> 
> APS-C sensors are cheaper to make
> 
> ...



I bought a 7D over a 6D many moons ago... Always sort of regretted it, although the 7D did handle better. 

Anyways, speaking of sensor size, given the size of the RF mount and lenses, I wonder if Canon could cram a larger sensor in there and still make it work—I mean, Sony basically crammed a FF sensor into an APS-C mount... Perhaps something not unlike what APS-H was to APS-C, but for full frame. I would certainly be interested in that.


----------



## Dragon (Nov 3, 2020)

Aussie shooter said:


> Not quite. I ran a sigma 150-600 on my 7d2 and for a price of 4k Australian i had a field of view equivalent to a FF with nearly 1000mm of focal length. That is a pretty damn affordable wildlife setup.


All well and good, but you won't get any more out of that Sigma with 90D than you did with the 7D2, because it isn't there to get. As resolution goes up on camera bodies, you start hitting the limits of a lot of lenses. I have a 90D and a LOT of EF and EF-s lenses and the list of lenses that do a 33MP crop frame justice is very short and for the most part very pricey. Also, the DLA of the 90D is f/5.2, so your Sigma is well into diffraction limiting territory at the long end. My previous comment was based on those observations. It is easier to increase resolution on the sensor than it is on lenses. The high end RF lenses were clearly made to support an R5s so we don't yet even know what their limiting resolution is because Roger doesn't have a test setup for RF yet. We do know that they aren't cheap.


----------



## Dragon (Nov 3, 2020)

zim said:


> I'd agree if the rumour said same size/build as R5 but this thing might be smaller than an RP (no bigger apparently) with all that implies for control layout and handling. Will that satisfy the 7d crowd?
> This still feels like the SL2 of the RF line with a few cheap lenses to follow but it's easy to pick holes in that!
> I find this whole rumour confusing and contradictory.


Agreed. It is an early rumor, so maybe a couple of factoids and a healthy dose of wishful thinking on the rumor generator's part. A proper 7D2 replacement actually needs to be in body the size of an R5 or it will be useless for swinging big whites and it will need all the bells and whistles with the exception of 8k. That is why I pegged it a $2500. This is most likely a rumor regarding a project that has been assigned, but the project may be to have several different options available in the late 2021 time frame just in case. A limited view into a project that included both a 7D2 replacement and an SL3 (or even RP) replacement, for example, would generate confusion and contradiction.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Nov 6, 2020)

Dear Canon: here are 15 pages now of wishful thinking about an R7. C'mon, let's go for it


----------



## Aussie shooter (Nov 7, 2020)

Dragon said:


> All well and good, but you won't get any more out of that Sigma with 90D than you did with the 7D2, because it isn't there to get. As resolution goes up on camera bodies, you start hitting the limits of a lot of lenses. I have a 90D and a LOT of EF and EF-s lenses and the list of lenses that do a 33MP crop frame justice is very short and for the most part very pricey. Also, the DLA of the 90D is f/5.2, so your Sigma is well into diffraction limiting territory at the long end. My previous comment was based on those observations. It is easier to increase resolution on the sensor than it is on lenses. The high end RF lenses were clearly made to support an R5s so we don't yet even know what their limiting resolution is because Roger doesn't have a test setup for RF yet. We do know that they aren't cheap.


Yes but you said the only reason people would buy the 'R7' is to save a couple of grand on a body that you would use with 10k lenses. That is simply NOT the case. People would be looking at it in order to save a couple of grand on the body and to pair with sub 3k(RF,EF or third party superzooms) lenses which combine to make an effective(and professionally) capable wildlife/sports rig at a very affordable price. Most people are not going to run 10k big whites on a c crop sports body. That is not what happened with the 7d2. And just because you may be entering DLA territory is not a reason to write anything off. You don't actually lose resolution with after DLA kicks in. You just don't gain resolution at the same rate as pixel density increases


----------



## CanonOregon (Nov 16, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> This might be a 7D replacement, so the target market is more interested in long lenses, and is willing to pay.


Exactly, the technology, over six years later, can certainly make an APS-C 'R' more interesting. I understand the 'crop' of a full frame thought, but the cost of an R5 to crop an APS-C issue against the cost of building an APS-C could be very interesting, as was the initial cost of a 7d vs. 5d models. It's been very popular for years, even six years later.


----------



## geo07 (Dec 4, 2020)

[QUOTE = "Canon Rumours Guy, message: 869964, membre: 1"]
Continuer la lecture...
[/CITATION]I am intrested by this camera. Actually, i have the RP. I hope canon produce some wide angle for this format contrary to what they advertise; a 12-24 or something like that would be appreciated...


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Dec 5, 2020)

how could you make an RF-S lens. the RF lens mount is already really close to the sensor


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Dec 5, 2020)

zim said:


> Doesn't sound like a 7d2 replacement to me, smaller or even same size as an RP? would R6 control and button layout fit? Now if it was same size and layout of R6 but with R5 construction that would be a replacement. So this sounds to me like the start of a rebel line


The R5 is meant to replace the 5d line right? then where does the R6 come in. replacement for the 6d?.. hopefully not, so I don't think it will replace the 7d mk ii

And I Don't think a rebel series equivalent of mirrorless cameras deserves lenses like the 28-70 f2 and 14-21 f1.4. it pains me to see a 24-70 f2.8L on a Canon T5


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Dec 5, 2020)

dwarven said:


> You're probably missing all of the people who use big whites on the 7D line. You're missing the fact that a higher end APS-C camera gives you reach without losing resolution, and at a cheaper price than an R5. Cropped to x1.6, even the R5 only gives you 17MP.
> 
> Third, you're missing the fact that no RF-S lenses have been rumored or announced, indicating that this camera is not going to be a Rebel spin-off of any kind. It's going to be a high end body that people will mount wildlife and sports lenses on.


 Do EF-S lenses fit on the 7D Mark ii?


----------

