# What’s next from Canon?



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 13, 2020)

> As with any rumor site, once products are announced the inevitable question is what’s next? I have some information about what’s next, but there is still some areas of the Canon lineup I don’t have much information about.
> *RF Lenses*
> 
> RF 50mm f/1.8 IS STM
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 13, 2020)

I don't think a 5D MKV makes sense. If you look at Canon's history, when they developed EOS, they broke compatibility for all their previous lenses unlike Nikon, because they felt they had to, to move forward. Now Canon has had the same lens standard in full frame and crop while Nikon has had multiple compatibility issues. This is less drastic; you can adapt any EF lens to the RF mount with no performance or quality hit for a reasonably low cost. In other words, the R5 + mount adapter, for all intents and purposes, IS the 5D MKV, and whatever differences remain are so minor that they don't justify a new EF body - which is contrary to the interests of promoting the RF line, anyway.


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 13, 2020)

Someone has to make the obvious remark: “cool” adapters or “cooling” adapters?


----------



## jolyonralph (Jul 13, 2020)

I'm sure Canon have a 5D Mark V design ready and waiting in case they decide to launch it, but I also suspect they're waiting to see how well the R5 does. If the R5 sells as well or better than the 5D IV did at launch then there's probably no point them launching the 5D V.


----------



## neurorx (Jul 13, 2020)

I wonder where the R1 is. Wasn't there a late 2020 or early 2021 rumor for an announcement?


----------



## Kit. (Jul 13, 2020)

There were some rumors about a new Speedlite, if I remember correctly.

Also, PowerShot G9 X iii.


----------



## mclaren777 (Jul 13, 2020)

I'm going to be really bummed if Canon doesn't release a 5DV, so much so that I'm probably going to write an email to Canon USA.

The 1DX3 just doesn't have enough resolution for my needs and the R5 is probably going to be fairly inadequate for motorsports photography (especially karting).


----------



## LRPP (Jul 13, 2020)

Maybe a Canon EOS R7 APS-C to replace the 7D MKII...


----------



## docsmith (Jul 13, 2020)

As for the rumor, I am hoping some of the higher quality EFM lenses show up. Mostly I would be interested in a higher quality general purpose zoom that has been rumored. A fairly minimal request, but I am all set with EF lenses, am still on the fence as to if I will get the R5 as I am very happy with the 5DIV. But, there is a definite need in my "small" kit for higher quality lenses.



mclaren777 said:


> I'm going to be really bummed if Canon doesn't release a 5DV, so much so that I'm probably going to write an email to Canon USA.
> 
> The 1DX3 just doesn't have enough resolution for my needs and the R5 is probably going to be fairly inadequate for motorsports photography (especially karting).



I assume this is because of AF speed/tracking? Just curious what you have seen to make this conclusion? Everything I have seen indicates that the AF speed and precision is actually very good, surprisingly good, it seems.


----------



## Gazwas (Jul 13, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> Someone has to make the obvious remark: “cool” adapters or “cooling” adapters?


Now there's a good idea......

Pulls heat directly from the sensor, extracts only so no dust gets into the sensor. As long as you use EF glass (which all cinema lenses are) and sound is off camera so not to upset the soundies it makes for a very cool (literally) adapter to me.


----------



## bbasiaga (Jul 13, 2020)

I would think that with pre-sales of the R5 'exceeding expectations', it may be a bad sign for the 5DV. I think the 1DXIII was needed because of the Olympics, and the jump to the R series was too early for this year in terms of a 1R. They needed the proven reliability of the 1D line and weren't ready to give it over to the unproven R series. So the question is then - are they confident enough in the R5 to put all their eggs in that basket for the event/wedding photographer business? Or will there be one more EF iteration while the R5 proves itself? 

Brian


----------



## neurorx (Jul 13, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> I would think that with pre-sales of the R5 'exceeding expectations', it may be a bad sign for the 5DV. I think the 1DXIII was needed because of the Olympics, and the jump to the R series was too early for this year in terms of a 1R. They needed the proven reliability of the 1D line and weren't ready to give it over to the unproven R series. So the question is then - are they confident enough in the R5 to put all their eggs in that basket for the event/wedding photographer business? Or will there be one more EF iteration while the R5 proves itself?
> 
> Brian


Is anyone concerned that mirrorless camera wont be as rugged as their DSLR counterparts? I know 1DX3 is a tank but even 5DIV level.


----------



## herein2020 (Jul 13, 2020)

One thing that seems to be next is firmware updates for the R5. According to EOSHD Canon is already adding more options to the R5. CLOG3 will be great and so will lower 8K bitrates. If they can somehow get it down to 400Mb/s it might be useable from a storage standpoint. 






Canon EOS R5 to get firmware update for Canon LOG 3 and more compressed 8K RAW recording (possibly 4K RAW too) – EOSHD.com – Filmmaking Gear and Camera Reviews







www.eoshd.com


----------



## Gazwas (Jul 13, 2020)

neurorx said:


> Is anyone concerned that mirrorless camera wont be as rugged as their DSLR counterparts? I know 1DX3 is a tank but even 5DIV level?


No mirror box or prism to worry about so I'd say just as rugged if not capable of of being even better than DSLR.


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 13, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> I would think that with pre-sales of the R5 'exceeding expectations', it may be a bad sign for the 5DV. I think the 1DXIII was needed because of the Olympics, and the jump to the R series was too early for this year in terms of a 1R. They needed the proven reliability of the 1D line and weren't ready to give it over to the unproven R series. So the question is then - are they confident enough in the R5 to put all their eggs in that basket for the event/wedding photographer business? Or will there be one more EF iteration while the R5 proves itself?



I think Canon will use the feedback from the R6 to fine-tune the firmware for the R1. Unless Canon goes with a Digic XI or a different sensor in the R1, the R6 is a nice test bed for all the features.


----------



## amorse (Jul 13, 2020)

I'm pretty curious about the higher resolution R5 equivalent - the R5 is likely enough for me, but I just don't have the cash to make a transition right now anyway, so it's a wait and see game for me whether I want to or not!


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 13, 2020)

A 180mm Macro with 8 Stops of shake compensation would be really cool.


----------



## mclaren777 (Jul 13, 2020)

docsmith said:


> I assume this is because of AF speed/tracking? Just curious what you have seen to make this conclusion? Everything I have seen indicates that the AF speed and precision is actually very good, surprisingly good, it seems.



I'm basing this off my experience with the EOS R. It's a lovely camera for people, but it's terrible for motorsports photography.


----------



## Ale_F (Jul 13, 2020)

LRPP said:


> Maybe a Canon EOS R7 APS-C to replace the 7D MKII...


R6 is not enough?


----------



## navastronia (Jul 13, 2020)

neurorx said:


> I wonder where the R1 is. Wasn't there a late 2020 or early 2021 rumor for an announcement?



I'm fine with them waiting a while, especially given the state of the (American) live sports industry.


----------



## JoTomOz (Jul 13, 2020)

24mm f/2.8?? I hope it is tiny. Would have loved a 20mm f/2


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 13, 2020)

LRPP said:


> Maybe a Canon EOS R7 APS-C to replace the 7D MKII...


Or how about an M7? I want the flagship M camera to have the features and speed of the R6, but with an M mount and 24MP APS-C sensor. I'm sure that they could make one about the size of the X-T30. And if Canon won't create an f/2.8-4 trinity of M lenses, then hopefully Sigma will, when they introduce the APS-C L-mount body and the trinity for that mount.


----------



## goldenhusky (Jul 13, 2020)

mclaren777 said:


> I'm basing this off my experience with the EOS R. It's a lovely camera for people, but it's terrible for motorsports photography.



Based on improved OVF, I am sure the R5 will be much better than the R but the concern is the EVF lag. With OVF there is no lag the image is pretty much at the speed of the light. The limiting factor is the human brain how fast the brain can process what the eyes see in a OVF. OTOH the EVF depends on the delay introduced in reading the image off the sensor, processing and displaying the image. This EVF lag will go away the day the processing speed exceeds the speed at which a human brain can process what the eyes see. Until then definitely humans can feel the lag. Now for motorsports is this good enough or not is something only the real world tests can show.


----------



## bellorusso (Jul 13, 2020)

What is up with all these STM lenses? You spend 4500 Euros on camera, thousands of Euros on cards, 15 000 on a PC, and then you go and buy yourself 300 Euro cheap lens? LOL IDK.


----------



## Anthny (Jul 13, 2020)

I'm waiting for the higher resolution R3/R5s before I upgrade from my 5DIV. Hopefully earlier next year.


----------



## bbasiaga (Jul 13, 2020)

Ale_F said:


> R6 is not enough?


lots of folks worry about pixel density. Not as many pixels per bird due to the resolution and sensor size. They'd need to get a longer lens. I never really was a pixel peeper, and I never had a 7D, but I kinda want an R6 to get soccer shots of my daughter. The 5DIII i have is only 6 fps...i can definitely benefit from 12/20. 

-Brian


----------



## bellorusso (Jul 13, 2020)

I guess, now Canon does not have excuses not to release 3-series camera, finally oriented on photographers who don't only shoot sports for agencies.
Canon EOS R3 with 100 megapixels, ISO 25, 18 stop DR, 16-bit etc... OMG. Canon, take my money now!


----------



## Andy Westwood (Jul 13, 2020)

Yes, last week was a HOT week for Canon possibly it’s best with the announcement of those stunning new bodies not to mention new lenses and convertors etc.

Those five new lenses to follow sound tasty I think I’m going to stick with my EF versions of the nifty fifty and my 70-200mm f/2.8 after all I’ll need a use for my EF / RF adapter for something.

I’m not sure I’ll use my 17-40 f/4 much anymore having experienced the sharpness of the RF 24-70 f/2.8

The RF 24mm really appeals to me and maybe the 18-45mm I guess that could be a cheaper kit lens, but it would be nice if Canon made it a red stripe f/4

I really fancy an R6 if the pennies allow, using a 1D for so many years 20MP has never bothered me and wow 102K native ISO is fantastic for a camera in its price range.

Well done to Canon you nailed it this time!


----------



## TomR (Jul 13, 2020)

bellorusso said:


> I guess, now Canon does not have excuses not to release 3-series camera, finally oriented on photographers who don't only shoot sports for agencies.
> Canon EOS R3 with 100 megapixels, ISO 25, 18 stop DR, 16-bit etc... OMG. Canon, take my money now!





bellorusso said:


> I guess, now Canon does not have excuses not to release 3-series camera, finally oriented on photographers who don't only shoot sports for agencies.
> Canon EOS R3 with 100 megapixels, ISO 25, 18 stop DR, 16-bit etc... OMG. Canon, take my money now!



18 stops dynamic range? i'd be happy with 15 at this point


----------



## VICYASA (Jul 13, 2020)

When is that EOS price drop?


----------



## Kit. (Jul 13, 2020)

bellorusso said:


> Canon EOS R3 with 100 megapixels, ISO 25, 18 stop DR, 16-bit etc... OMG. Canon, take my money now!


Will overheat after shooting 12K raw for 5 minutes.

Seriously, though, no one has such sensor tech yet.


----------



## victorshikhman (Jul 13, 2020)

Come on, Canon, give us a refresh of the EFS 17-55 F2.8. Even if it's the last EFS lens you make. You probably have the design already. Just give it to us. Take our money.


----------



## abnagfab (Jul 13, 2020)

What about an RF 11-24/4 replacement? Would love a native lens for this, as it’s one of my most used landscape and architecture lenses.


----------



## goldenhusky (Jul 13, 2020)

I feel this is where Canon is missing the point. The R5 is definitely great on paper but after seeing all the limitation with the video I don't even know why canon tried to pull off the 8k video in this body. They could have stopped at unlimited (yeah I know the stupid EU tax, few other manufacturers have ignored this and moved on. So why not you Canon?) 4k60p with some innovation (like a heat sink grip) instead Canon tried to create a marketing buzz with 8K and missed out yet again on the 4k too. They also have AA filter on the R5 (obviously we are yet to see how strong it is). 

This is what Canon could have done instead, made the R5 more of a photography product even with just 4k30p limited to 29:59 mins of recording and AA filter cancellation effect like the 5DsR and made the R6 with AA filter and great video specs (FHD @ 240fps and 4k @ 120fps with AF). IMO the R5 is a product neither an exceptional photo centric product because of AA filter nor a good hybrid camera because of video limitations. Had Canon done that they do not need to come up with another low cost body with the same 45MP sensor. Obviously it is just my opinion and I know that will not count at all at this point  I was very excited to hear the specs of R5 mostly I wanted to try my 600 f/4L V1 on this body. But after seeing there is a AA filter and priced at $3900 I did not pre-order. I guess the reports of overwhelming reports are BS like Sony and Fuji does. The R5 is already discounted if you know where to get it.


----------



## LRPP (Jul 13, 2020)

Ale_F said:


> R6 is not enough?


LOL


----------



## Twinix (Jul 13, 2020)

What about the Cinema line?


----------



## goldenhusky (Jul 13, 2020)

I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.


----------



## LRPP (Jul 13, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> Or how about an M7? I want the flagship M camera to have the features and speed of the R6, but with an M mount and 24MP APS-C sensor. I'm sure that they could make one about the size of the X-T30. And if Canon won't create an f/2.8-4 trinity of M lenses, then hopefully Sigma will, when they introduce the APS-C L-mount body and the trinity for that mount.


How its's possible to compare M series with the 7D2?


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 13, 2020)

goldenhusky said:


> This EVF lag will go away the day the processing speed exceeds the speed at which a human brain can process what the eyes see. Until then definitely humans can feel the lag.



At 120fps in the EVF I can assume the additional lag (compared to the OVF) will be no more than 1/120s. Considering that 0.1s is a very good reaction time to press the shutter button, the EVF adds less than 10%.


----------



## Twinix (Jul 13, 2020)

victorshikhman said:


> Come on, Canon, give us a refresh of the EFS 17-55 F2.8. Even if it's the last EFS lens you make. You probably have the design already. Just give it to us. Take our money.


Yes!! Really wanted to use with the cinema line, also the Canon 17-85 should get a refresh.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 13, 2020)

goldenhusky said:


> I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.




100-500 is L glass. 100-400 is not. Price.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 13, 2020)

mclaren777 said:


> and the R5 is probably going to be fairly inadequate for motorsports photography (especially karting).



Why would you say this?


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 13, 2020)

Twinix said:


> Yes!! Really wanted to use with the cinema line, also the Canon 17-85 should get a refresh.


I think EF-S line was dead even before the EF line. The last EF-S lens was in 2017, last EF - 2018. The production and sales will obviously last for quite a while, but not the development.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 13, 2020)

goldenhusky said:


> The R5 is already discounted if you know where to get it.



I got mine for $3700 @ B&H and couldn't be happier.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 13, 2020)

Ale_F said:


> R6 is not enough?



Not if you care about long lens shooting and "reach". The R6 is too low resolution and the R5 too expensive.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 13, 2020)

bellorusso said:


> What is up with all these STM lenses? You spend 4500 Euros on camera, thousands of Euros on cards, 15 000 on a PC, and then you go and buy yourself 300 Euro cheap lens? LOL IDK.



What's wrong with STM lenses? There are other people, not just the ones who can afford R5 + 100-500 for $7000. And nothing wrong with the image quality of STM lenses.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 13, 2020)

Another 100-400 type of lens and no 200-600 or a bit longer than 400mm.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Jul 13, 2020)

goldenhusky said:


> I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.



The RF 100-500 L becomes F/6.3 @ 363mm. 
https://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?t=3652591&l=it

The non L could be a 100-400 F/4.5-F/7.1, lighter and cheaper: a Tamron / Sigma competitor.


----------



## Pape (Jul 13, 2020)

neurorx said:


> Is anyone concerned that mirrorless camera wont be as rugged as their DSLR counterparts? I know 1DX3 is a tank but even 5DIV level.


R5 and R6 havent enough expensive ?


----------



## neurorx (Jul 13, 2020)

goldenhusky said:


> I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.


There was a breakdown by Gordon Laing. The 100-400 had a lower comparable f stop than the 100-500 at higher end focal lengths. I would love an affordable 200-600 f6.3.


----------



## Nelu (Jul 13, 2020)

Kit. said:


> Will overheat after shooting 12K raw for 5 minutes.
> 
> Seriously, though, no one has such sensor tech yet.


I believe you missed this: " finally oriented on photographers "
He was specifically writing that so such camera would be fine even without any video at all.


----------



## neurorx (Jul 13, 2020)

Pape said:


> R5 and R6 havent enough expensive ?


It isnt about the cost, its a camera that I know can take any environment.


----------



## Richard Anthony (Jul 13, 2020)

Kit. said:


> There were some rumors about a new Speedlite, if I remember correctly.
> 
> Also, PowerShot G9 X iii.


Canon UK told me they do not have any new speedlites in the pipe line


----------



## AlanF (Jul 13, 2020)

goldenhusky said:


> I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.


It was claimed that the 100-500 was f/5.6 at 400mm but Gordon Laing's cameralabs video has this:


----------



## Pape (Jul 13, 2020)

neurorx said:


> It isnt about the cost, its a camera that I know can take any environment.


Maybe they make R6 b version with 7d level weather seal and 2k more price  or maybe not ,their goal seems to be decrease camera lines


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 13, 2020)

goldenhusky said:


> I feel this is where Canon is missing the point. The R5 is definitely great on paper but after seeing all the limitation with the video I don't even know why canon tried to pull off the 8k video in this body. They could have stopped at unlimited (yeah I know the stupid EU tax, few other manufacturers have ignored this and moved on. So why not you Canon?) 4k60p with some innovation (like a heat sink grip) instead Canon tried to create a marketing buzz with 8K and missed out yet again on the 4k too. They also have AA filter on the R5 (obviously we are yet to see how strong it is).
> 
> This is what Canon could have done instead, made the R5 more of a photography product even with just 4k30p limited to 29:59 mins of recording and AA filter cancellation effect like the 5DsR and made the R6 with AA filter and great video specs (FHD @ 240fps and 4k @ 120fps with AF). IMO the R5 is a product neither an exceptional photo centric product because of AA filter nor a good hybrid camera because of video limitations. Had Canon done that they do not need to come up with another low cost body with the same 45MP sensor. Obviously it is just my opinion and I know that will not count at all at this point  I was very excited to hear the specs of R5 mostly I wanted to try my 600 f/4L V1 on this body. But after seeing there is a AA filter and priced at $3900 I did not pre-order. I guess the reports of overwhelming reports are BS like Sony and Fuji does. The R5 is already discounted if you know where to get it.



I would much, much rather have a situational-use 8K and 4K HFR modes in addition to the "standard" 4K/30 pixel binned mode than to not have them. And I get the AA filter thing but I think we're just going to have to wait and see how the sharpness is compared to the Z7/A7R4/etc. I don't think it's going to be a deal breaker; Canon keeps talking about how they're improving their AA and seems to be super aware of the need. They made a huge deal about this with the 1DX3.


----------



## PhotonShark (Jul 13, 2020)

goldenhusky said:


> I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm.



This looks like the non L version. It would be a game changer if it would do f5.6 to 300mm (or more). A huge temptation for APS-C users to switch to full frame if the pricing is right.

I'm currently using a 70D and the 70-300mm. This would be the perfect combo upgrade (equivalent) for me with an R6 without breaking the bank.


----------



## Twinix (Jul 13, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> I think EF-S line was dead even before the EF line. The last EF-S lens was in 2017, last EF - 2018. The production and sales will obviously last for quite a while, but not the development.


Yea, my point was just that I wan’t good aps-c glass (24-105 is too thight etc) for the cinema line with IS.


----------



## miketcool (Jul 13, 2020)

Weather sealed macro flash. Olympus made one, and I really don't want to tape up pins and not get all the sync features.



goldenhusky said:


> I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm.



Canon discussed it during their launch presentation. f/5.6 at 400mm when they were talking about engineering and design.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 13, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> I think EF-S line was dead even before the EF line. The last EF-S lens was in 2017, last EF - 2018. The production and sales will obviously last for quite a while, but not the development.


You are most probably correct. The low sellers will be closed out. I noticed now that Adorama has the EF 400mm f/5.6L on closeout. That surprised me as I would have thought it to be a strong seller because I loved the one I had. I ordered the 135mm f/2L just in case. I won't be able to afford an RF version for quite some time.


----------



## Pape (Jul 13, 2020)

I wonder if they could do R3 what is like R1 but 5 serie sized camera?
Many people doesnt need double grip and double buttons.
I never got money for those but i like dream


----------



## Chaz320 (Jul 13, 2020)

Where is this mythical 70-135mm f/2 ?????


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jul 13, 2020)

I wouldn't understand why Canon wouldn't release a 5D Mark V.

90% of the job is done.

Body and shape : just re-use the Mark IV, it's perfect
Sensor and DIGIC : just re-use the R5
AF : just re-use the AF of the 1D X III or a "lighter" version of it

Done.

I'd gladly buy such a camera. Throw at it something unique such as a feature to get rid of this AF micro-adjustment thingy and it's a dream come true.


----------



## mb66energy (Jul 13, 2020)

EOS M lens: I would really like an EF-M 15 - 60 f/4 IS lens with excellent IQ + internal zoom + focusing + 60mm outer diameter (f/4 @ 60mm = 15mm eff. aperture should support this) + 1:3 max. reproduction ratio. Just if it has a length of 100mm + 400 grams. I would pay ~600 Euro without hesitation ...


----------



## scyrene (Jul 13, 2020)

bellorusso said:


> What is up with all these STM lenses? You spend 4500 Euros on camera, thousands of Euros on cards, 15 000 on a PC, and then you go and buy yourself 300 Euro cheap lens? LOL IDK.



So a big complaint (on the forums at least) when the R and RP came along, was why all these expensive 'pro' lenses (like the 28-70 f/2) and only 'amateur' bodies. Now we have a range of bodies, a range of lenses of different levels seems sensible, no? Or did you forget the older bodies are still on sale?


----------



## davidcl0nel (Jul 13, 2020)

Maybe an 1.4x Teleconverter with RF on one and EF on the other side? To "reuse" the big whities... ?
Yesyes, i can stack them together, i know.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Jul 13, 2020)

An M50 style body with IBIS would be ideal for me. And an extra dial to make changing ISO/Aperture/Shutter Speed much faster would be a great bonus. That's it and I'll have a near perfect everyday camera.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 13, 2020)

mclaren777 said:


> I'm basing this off my experience with the EOS R. It's a lovely camera for people, but it's terrible for motorsports photography.



The R5 is far beyond the R. I am also an R owner, and I have used it for motorsports photography.

Not sure how 20 fps of 45MP with a brand new fast focusing system and an additional stop of DR as compared to the 5D MKIV isn't enough to do motorsports photography, but I'd be interested to understand what features you think it's lacking on that front?


----------



## scyrene (Jul 13, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Not if you care about long lens shooting and "reach". The R6 is too low resolution and the R5 too expensive.



Although arguably the new narrow aperture focusing capabilities means you can practicably mount longer focal lengths more cheaply, using extenders or the new budget superteles. It might tempt some people.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 13, 2020)

bellorusso said:


> What is up with all these STM lenses? You spend 4500 Euros on camera, thousands of Euros on cards, 15 000 on a PC, and then you go and buy yourself 300 Euro cheap lens? LOL IDK.



There's plenty of big, fast, expensive RF glass already available, and all of the big white EF still works perfectly with an adapter?


----------



## Franklyok (Jul 13, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> Someone has to make the obvious remark: “cool” adapters or “cooling” adapters?








There, problem solved


----------



## Franklyok (Jul 13, 2020)

Chaz320 said:


> Where is this mythical 70-135mm f/2 ?????



+1

And why not with with IS ? 

That would make me and many others to leave ef mount behind.


----------



## Alam (Jul 13, 2020)

I'm too poor for any of this, I'll get 800 f11 instead and canon, show RP user some love, update the firmware please, let me record full hd with efs lenses


----------



## jvillain (Jul 13, 2020)

LRPP said:


> Maybe a Canon EOS R7 APS-C to replace the 7D MKII...



I always thought that Canon would release at least on R camera with a crop just to see how it did. . But with the release of the F11 lenses I have now lost faith in that idea.


----------



## Alam (Jul 13, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> Or how about an M7? I want the flagship M camera to have the features and speed of the R6, but with an M mount and 24MP APS-C sensor. I'm sure that they could make one about the size of the X-T30. And if Canon won't create an f/2.8-4 trinity of M lenses, then hopefully Sigma will, when they introduce the APS-C L-mount body and the trinity for that mount.


But m6 mII already checks all that,


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 13, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> There's plenty of big, fast, expensive RF glass already available, and all of the big white EF still works perfectly with an adapter?


Canon releases a bunch of high end lenses, and people complain. Canon starts to release less expensive lenses, and people complain. *sigh*


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 13, 2020)

Franklyok said:


> +1
> 
> And why not with with IS ?
> 
> That would make me and many others to leave ef mount behind.



Why won't IBIS be good enough for this particular focal length range? This lens would already be humongous and heavy.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jul 13, 2020)

scyrene said:


> So a big complaint (on the forums at least) when the R and RP came along, was why all these expensive 'pro' lenses (like the 28-70 f/2) and only 'amateur' bodies. Now we have a range of bodies, a range of lenses of different levels seems sensible, no? Or did you forget the older bodies are still on sale?



And yet, it would have been nice to see an RF 50mm f/1.4 IS nano-USM.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 13, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> And yet, it would have been nice to see an RF 50mm f/1.4 IS nano-USM.



We are getting 1.8 in that range. I'm not sure it makes a lot of sense to carry 3 excellent 50mm primes, 2 with IS. The f/1.2 is a true flagship and the f/1.8 I'm sure will be great and reasonably sized; there's not much 2/3 of a stop gives you that justifies having a "middle" option IMO.


----------



## ReflexVE (Jul 13, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> An M50 style body with IBIS would be ideal for me. And an extra dial to make changing ISO/Aperture/Shutter Speed much faster would be a great bonus. That's it and I'll have a near perfect everyday camera.


This is pretty much what I'm looking for. Love my M50. Jealous of the new sensor and IBIS in the M6. Hoping for a Mk II as I really like the M50 form factor.


----------



## Richard Anthony (Jul 13, 2020)

yoms said:


> I wouldn't understand why Canon wouldn't release a 5D Mark V.
> 
> 90% of the job is done.
> 
> ...


I don't undserstand why you think they would want to , I mean the new R5 is the new 5d , there's nothing in it for them , thousands of bought into the RF system now , they are not going to bring out a 5D now it doesn't have a big enough following anymore .


----------



## Philrp (Jul 13, 2020)

LRPP said:


> Maybe a Canon EOS R7 APS-C to replace the 7D MKII...





Ale_F said:


> R6 is not enough?




R6 is double the price. So enough, yes, but those who want a 7D can't afford an R6


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 13, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> I don't undserstand why you think they would want to , I mean the new R5 is the new 5d , there's nothing in it for them , thousands of bought into the RF system now , they are not going to bring out a 5D now it doesn't have a major following .


The retort would be: Too expensive and lacking some feature in the R5. Perfection in everyone’s eyes is unobtainum.


----------



## bbasiaga (Jul 13, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> I don't undserstand why you think they would want to , I mean the new R5 is the new 5d , there's nothing in it for them , thousands of bought into the RF system now , they are not going to bring out a 5D now it doesn't have a major following .


I think you're off by saying it doesn't have a major following. Certainly there are tons out there and its an 'easier' upgrade for many already in the EF system. 

So i think it'll come down to one thing - how confident is canon that its mirrorless is ready to take over the mantle from DSLR? They weren't ready to hand over 1 series duties yet, but are they ready to hand over 5 series duties? 

If the answer is yes, no 5DV. If the answer isn't yes, the next question is when will they be? I think the 5DV would likely be the last of its line if we do see it. Once people get over the mental hump of EVF usage, the advantages seem so many for mirrorless that I can't imagine EF mount survives much longer.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 13, 2020)

yoms said:


> I wouldn't understand why Canon wouldn't release a 5D Mark V.
> 
> 90% of the job is done.
> 
> ...




They just did - it's the R5. I think the ship for non-mirrorless cameras at the high end from Canon has sailed.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Jul 13, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> An M50 style body with IBIS would be ideal for me. And an extra dial to make changing ISO/Aperture/Shutter Speed much faster would be a great bonus. That's it and I'll have a near perfect everyday camera.



So an M5 Mark II? Its rumored to be coming out this year .


----------



## PhotonShark (Jul 13, 2020)

Philrp said:


> R6 is double the price. So enough, yes, but those who want a 7D can't afford an R6



Not double the launch price. But yes, more expensive. $1799 (7Dii) vs $2499.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 13, 2020)

Alam said:


> But m6 mII already checks all that,


The M6-2 doesn't have a built-in viewfinder.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 13, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> I don't undserstand why you think they would want to , I mean the new R5 is the new 5d , there's nothing in it for them , thousands of bought into the RF system now , they are not going to bring out a 5D now it doesn't have a big enough following anymore .


Way to just make stuff up.

DSLRs still constitute a huge share of the market.There will not be a 100% migration to mirrorless in a single generation, if ever. 

Canon will not abandon half or more of the full frame market, especially in these highly competitive times when every manufacturer is fighting to hold on to market share.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 13, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> They just did - it's the R5. I think the ship for non-mirrorless cameras at the high end from Canon has sailed.


Time will tell, but I think that ship is loaded with a lot of 5D Vs bound for enthusiasts and professionals hands.


----------



## BakaBokeh (Jul 13, 2020)

Wish one of those UWA super fast RF Prime patents came true. i.e. RF 16mm f1.4 or RF 18mm f1.0/f1.2

A flagship EF-M camera? I will pre-order that as fast as I did the R5. Small and light, with IBIS? Yes please. I also wish for a fast ultra wide for EF-M and f2.8 zooms @ 15-45mm, 45-150mm.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 13, 2020)

LRPP said:


> How its's possible to compare M series with the 7D2?


They both have the same size sensor and can use the same lenses. The M cameras require an adapter but I'm using two Vello and one Canon adapters with a closet full of lenses on an M5, without any problems at all. The build quality and capabilities of a hypothetical M7 are a result of corporate marketing decisions.


----------



## CaMeRa QuEsT (Jul 13, 2020)

Oh Canon EF-M portrait lens, where art thou?


----------



## unfocused (Jul 13, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> ...the advantages seem so many for mirrorless that I can't imagine EF mount survives much longer...


DSLRs will always have one advantage: the speed of light. No electronic viewfinder will ever match a mirror. 

Honestly, I fail to understand the way some on this forum (not you) have an almost religious devotion to mirrorless systems. I use both. I like both. There are advantages to both. I have yet to see anyone make a solid business argument that Canon is going to walk away from the DSLR market or the EF system anytime soon.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 13, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Way to just make stuff up.
> 
> DSLRs still constitute a huge share of the market.There will not be a 100% migration to mirrorless in a single generation, if ever.
> 
> Canon will not abandon half or more of the full frame market, especially in these highly competitive times when every manufacturer is fighting to hold on to market share.



Who is producing and selling significant quantities of full-frame non-mirrorless DSLR's right now? The MSRP on the 5D MKIV is like $1k less than it was at launch. If there was a huge market for these cameras, it would reflected in price stability and new product introduction across the marketplace, not just gearheads whining for a tech upgrade.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 13, 2020)

yoms said:


> I wouldn't understand why Canon wouldn't release a 5D Mark V.
> 
> 90% of the job is done.
> 
> ...


Sounds good but it doesn't help Canon push RF glass.


----------



## ReflexVE (Jul 13, 2020)

CaMeRa QuEsT said:


> Oh Canon EF-M portrait lens, where art thou?


Isn't that what the Sigma 56mm is for?


----------



## BakaBokeh (Jul 13, 2020)

Maybe one of those cool adapters is RF to EF-M? That with a M5mkII might make the 7D crowd happy.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 13, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> I don't undserstand why you think they would want to , I mean the new R5 is the new 5d , there's nothing in it for them , thousands of bought into the RF system now , they are not going to bring out a 5D now it doesn't have a big enough following anymore .


Wrong


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 13, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> Who is producing and selling significant quantities of full-frame non-mirrorless DSLR's right now? The MSRP on the 5D MKIV is like $1k less than it was at launch. If there was a huge market for these cameras, it would reflected in price stability and new product introduction across the marketplace, not just gearheads whining for a tech upgrade.



The 5D4 (and I own one) was a lukewarm upgrade over earlier cameras at launch. Several years in it does feel a little limiting compared to what mirrorless offers. I wouldn't take the softness in it's price as an indicator. Nikon's releases seem to be doing well on that side (uh, D6 aside lol) and the 1DX3 does show canon is still making investments into DSLR autofocus technology. It does seem like a shame for Canon to never use that AF sensor in another camera?

The catch is that with the potential for global slowdowns, there might not be the market for two "5" series cameras differing only in the mirror box.


----------



## Billybob (Jul 13, 2020)

goldenhusky said:


> I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.


Mere speculation, because Canon talks to me even less than to the Northrups. 

I suspect that the 100-400 will be a 7.1 lens with lower build quality to compete against the Sigma and Tamron offerings. It will likely have a longer minimum focusing distance as well. 

As for the 100-500L hitting 5.6 at 400mm, well...sort of. If you set your aperture to increase in 1/2-stop increments, then it will be 5.6 at 400mm. If you leave it at the default 1/3 increments, the expect to see the lens go to 6.3 at 363 (result reported by Gordon Laing at CameraLabs). 

The 100-X00L lenses are all about getting reach in a compact rugged package. Before the advent of the consumer superzooms, 400mm was as long as you could go without buying an exotic. Today, the 100-400 is more intermediate than long, which I suspect is why Canon stretched it out to 500mm without making the lens appreciably bigger. It still doesn't compete (in terms of reach) with the longest consumer super lenses, but it gets you a lot closer. 

Frankly, I don't think Canon can do a superzoom in a compact package. There is the DO technology, but I don't think anyone has done a zoom employing it. So, when Canon produces a consumer lens, it will probably go to 600 (or 700mm), but it will be (at least) 1-2lbs heavier than the 100-500. 

You pay for reach, but you pay even more to put reach into a small, compact package.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 13, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Way to just make stuff up.
> 
> DSLRs still constitute a huge share of the market.There will not be a 100% migration to mirrorless in a single generation, if ever.
> 
> Canon will not abandon half or more of the full frame market, especially in these highly competitive times when every manufacturer is fighting to hold on to market share.


I don’t know whether DSLRs will survive or not. Yes, they were/are a huge share of the market, but the problem is that the ILC market has contracted horribly in the past several years and is no longer huge itself. Camera makers are fighting to survive. Hopefully, there will be DSLRs for those that want them. Sadly, there might not be a big enough market to support it all at once.


----------



## LRPP (Jul 13, 2020)

Philrp said:


> R6 is double the price. So enough, yes, but those who want a 7D can't afford an R6


20MP Full Frame vs 20MP crop 1.6. You cannot compare these two cameras in terms of getting the frame in nature photography. 7D2 owners can just move to the R5 (45MP > 17MP cropped), but in terms of budget (including wide lenses AF-S > RF or EF) it's a disaster.


----------



## Pixel (Jul 13, 2020)

neurorx said:


> Is anyone concerned that mirrorless camera wont be as rugged as their DSLR counterparts? I know 1DX3 is a tank but even 5DIV level.


You won’t have that concern anymore when you hold the R5. I’ve held one and it’s as well built as you’d expect from Canon.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 13, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> Or how about an M7? I want the flagship M camera to have the features and speed of the R6, but with an M mount and 24MP APS-C sensor. I'm sure that they could make one about the size of the X-T30. And if Canon won't create an f/2.8-4 trinity of M lenses, then hopefully Sigma will, when they introduce the APS-C L-mount body and the trinity for that mount.



Could you live with a 32MP sensor, a very fast one of which exists already?


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 13, 2020)

Billybob said:


> Mere speculation, because Canon talks to me even less than to the Northrups.
> 
> I suspect that the 100-400 will be a 7.1 lens with lower build quality to compete against the Sigma and Tamron offerings. It will likely have a longer minimum focusing distance as well.
> 
> ...


Canon had a 70-300mm DO zoom. Don’t know whether or not it was any good, but they did make a DO zoom.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jul 13, 2020)

neurorx said:


> I wonder where the R1 is. Wasn't there a late 2020 or early 2021 rumor for an announcement?



The R1 is going to have to be a leap ahead of the R5/6 and 1DX3 - I wouldn't be surprised if we have to wait at least until 2022 for an R1.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 13, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I don’t know whether DSLRs will survive or not. Yes, they were/are a huge share of the market, but the problem is that the ILC market has contracted horribly in the past several years and is no longer huge itself. Camera makers are fighting to survive. Hopefully, there will be DSLRs for those that want them. Sadly, there might not be a big enough market to support it all at once.


You see the cup as half empty yet it is still half full. 

The market has contracted but is still above historical norms and the price per unit is way higher than historically, I am sure Canon have their own analysts who have made projections that they are working to. Lets not forget R&D in one area isn't exclusive, for instance stick the R5 sensor with all the live view capabilities into a 5D V and I'd expect you to have a good selling premium product for comparatively little R&D outlay, indeed the R6 has the 1DX III sensor. 

I know I am not alone in finding looking through EVF's for hours to be nauseating, if there was a 1DXs III with the R5 sensor I'd have two of them.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 13, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> You see the cup as half empty yet it is still half full.
> 
> The market has contracted but is still above historical norms and the price per unit is way higher than historically, I am sure Canon have their own analysts who have made projections that they are working to. Lets not forget R&D in one area isn't exclusive, for instance stick the R5 sensor with all the live view capabilities into a 5D V and I'd expect you to have a good selling premium product for comparatively little R&D outlay, indeed the R6 has the 1DX III sensor.
> 
> I know I am not alone in finding looking through EVF's for hours to be nauseating, if there was a 1DXs III with the R5 sensor I'd have two of them.


I don’t see the cup either way. I understand the desire for both formats completely.  Since I have never in my life stared through an OVF or EVF for “hours at a time” I wouldn’t know what that is like. I’m sure most people wouldn’t.


----------



## drama (Jul 13, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I know I am not alone in finding looking through EVF's for hours to be nauseating, if there was a 1DXs III with the R5 sensor I'd have two of them.



I'm afraid Canon don't care if you do or don't. Looking at it from a profit point of view - what would a 5D DSLR look like today? they want to convert people to the RF mount, getting you to eventually re-buy lenses you've already bought. Well, the camera body you can have is either 45 mpx, or 20 mpx. For those saying that there's a middle ground around 32mpx, I'd gently suggest buying a 5D mk4. They haven't stopped selling them, and some people are in that market still. 

Canon don't just half-ass their market planning. There is a long term goal here, and it's to move everything over to RF - this will give you eventually faster, more powerful bodies. They've stated they want this mount to last 25 years. In turn, you're going to re-buy glass that works, so it works differently with the system. Watch them drop the RF mount cinema camera in the next 12 months, and everyone complain about that before realising the existing RF glass handles 8K resolution beautifully, and the next iteration of a C500 / C700 with native 8K becomes a practical reality. 

That negativity and resistance tug you feel is realising the marketing is working...


----------



## Eclipsed (Jul 13, 2020)

neurorx said:


> Is anyone concerned that mirrorless camera wont be as rugged as their DSLR counterparts? I know 1DX3 is a tank but even 5DIV level.


I'm not sure why eliminating a prism, glass screen, and flippy mirror would weaken a camera.


----------



## degos (Jul 13, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Canon had a 70-300mm DO zoom. Don’t know whether or not it was any good, but they did make a DO zoom.



It was awful, but that was more associated with the state of the art of DO in 2004 than a problem with the concept

It's still in the catalogue but the 70-300L beats it easily.


----------



## Alam (Jul 13, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> The M6-2 doesn't have a built-in viewfinder.


Just wondering, what is M6 detachable evf flaws? I just sold my m100 and planning to get the rumored m50mii, but i think i will miss m100 pocketable size so I'm leaning to get m6ii


----------



## BakaBokeh (Jul 13, 2020)

Alam said:


> Just wondering, what is M6 detachable evf flaws? I just sold my m100 and planning to get the rumored m50mii, but i think i will miss m100 pocketable size so I'm leaning to get m6ii


If you use on camera flash, then you'd be left with a decision. EVF or Flash?


----------



## Kjsheldo (Jul 13, 2020)

I'd love some more specialty lenses. The new Panasonic 20-50mm lens is such a great concept and if Canon made that 18-45mm an f2 or f2.8 constant, I'd be all over it. Especially if it was an f2.8 and closer to 600-grams. 

Also, why can't anyone make a 24mm f2 prime? Either f1.4 (big and heavy) or f2.8 (plastic-y and slow). Gimme more primes like that 85mm f2. Looks solidly built, great balance between speed and size.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 13, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Could you live with a 32MP sensor, a very fast one of which exists already?


I suppose that I could make do.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 13, 2020)

Alam said:


> Just wondering, what is M6 detachable evf flaws? I just sold my m100 and planning to get the rumored m50mii, but i think i will miss m100 pocketable size so I'm leaning to get m6ii



The biggest flaw is that there's no way to use both it and anything else on the hot shoe.

If they came out with a detachable EVF that had a hotshoe on top of it (somehow) that could maybe quell the complaints, if there's not something else wrong with _that _idea.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 13, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> I suppose that I could make do.



In that case, perhaps the (Cr-1 rumored) M5 MkII might fight the bill, no need for an "M7". If you can tolerate a detachable viewfinder, the M6 MkII might be close already.


----------



## Alam (Jul 13, 2020)

Alam said:


> Just wondering, what is M6 detachable evf flaws? I just sold my m100 and planning to get the rumored m50mii, but i think i will miss m100 pocketable size so I'm leaning to get m6ii





SteveC said:


> The biggest flaw is that there's no way to use both it and anything else on the hot shoe.
> 
> If they came out with a detachable EVF that had a hotshoe on top of it (somehow) that could maybe quell the complaints, if there's not something else wrong with _that _idea.



Nah, I only use it for travel, I'm not kind of professional or anything, if there's no other flaw i will pick m6 then

Thanks


----------



## Baron_Karza (Jul 13, 2020)

Sibir Lupus said:


> So an M5 Mark II? Its rumored to be coming out this year .



No, because the M5 does not have an articulating screen. M50 is exactly what I want with the 2 extras I mentioned.


----------



## bbb34 (Jul 13, 2020)

yoms said:


> I wouldn't understand why Canon wouldn't release a 5D Mark V.
> 
> 90% of the job is done.
> 
> ...



That would create a DSLR that performs much better in live view mode than when it is used with the OVF. There is no point in such a camera, if you don't use the OVF any more. View finder type and AF type are tightly coupled.

Mirrorless cameras will easily supersede DSLRs, when both, AF performance and view finders are superior. Does the R5 mark the tipping point here? Maybe! We will see very soon.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 13, 2020)

Alam said:


> Just wondering, what is M6 detachable evf flaws? I just sold my m100 and planning to get the rumored m50mii, but i think i will miss m100 pocketable size so I'm leaning to get m6ii


I have an 270EX external flash on my M5, all the time. Putting the detachable EVF on the M6-2 prevents that. I owned an M100 for about 3 weeks but its internal flash restricts the range of lenses that can be used with flash. For example, the 18-150 lens blocks the flash at 18mm and I use that lens a lot. (I have a 430EX III-RT flash on my 5D3, but that combination is much heavier than the M5/270-EX and, at 70 years old, reducing equipment weight is a priority.)


----------



## B.Harris (Jul 13, 2020)

Any more news on the 35mm f/1.2?


----------



## ReflexVE (Jul 13, 2020)

Alam said:


> Just wondering, what is M6 detachable evf flaws? I just sold my m100 and planning to get the rumored m50mii, but i think i will miss m100 pocketable size so I'm leaning to get m6ii


I got my partner a M100 setup and the size really is a tremendous advantage. It's the one thing I'm jealous of.

That said, I wouldn't trade my EVF or the ergonomics of the M50 even for that.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jul 13, 2020)

LRPP said:


> Maybe a Canon EOS R7 APS-C to replace the 7D MKII...



I really doubt Canon would do an APS-C R mount camera. They have the EF-M line for that. 

Canon have already said the R6 pretty much replaces the 6D and 7D lines.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 13, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> No, because the M5 does not have an articulating screen. M50 is exactly what I want with the 2 extras I mentioned.



Who knows, the M5 mk II might have the screen (I do wish the M6 Mk-II had one)


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 13, 2020)

drama said:


> I'm afraid Canon don't care if you do or don't. Looking at it from a profit point of view - what would a 5D DSLR look like today? they want to convert people to the RF mount, getting you to eventually re-buy lenses you've already bought. Well, the camera body you can have is either 45 mpx, or 20 mpx. For those saying that there's a middle ground around 32mpx, I'd gently suggest buying a 5D mk4. They haven't stopped selling them, and some people are in that market still.
> 
> Canon don't just half-ass their market planning. There is a long term goal here, and it's to move everything over to RF - this will give you eventually faster, more powerful bodies. They've stated they want this mount to last 25 years. In turn, you're going to re-buy glass that works, so it works differently with the system. Watch them drop the RF mount cinema camera in the next 12 months, and everyone complain about that before realising the existing RF glass handles 8K resolution beautifully, and the next iteration of a C500 / C700 with native 8K becomes a practical reality.
> 
> That negativity and resistance tug you feel is realising the marketing is working...


Maybe English isn’t your first language but I don’t know how you can infer any negativity or resistance from my post. My only user feedback was I find looking through EVF’s for extended periods nauseating, I know others do too hence the 1DX III and not an R1 yet.


----------



## FrenchFry (Jul 13, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I got mine for $3700 @ B&H and couldn't be happier.


$200 discount? How?


----------



## Pixel (Jul 13, 2020)

drama said:


> I'm afraid Canon don't care if you do or don't. Looking at it from a profit point of view - what would a 5D DSLR look like today? they want to convert people to the RF mount, getting you to eventually re-buy lenses you've already bought. Well, the camera body you can have is either 45 mpx, or 20 mpx. For those saying that there's a middle ground around 32mpx, I'd gently suggest buying a 5D mk4. They haven't stopped selling them, and some people are in that market still.
> 
> Canon don't just half-ass their market planning. There is a long term goal here, and it's to move everything over to RF - this will give you eventually faster, more powerful bodies. They've stated they want this mount to last 25 years. In turn, you're going to re-buy glass that works, so it works differently with the system. Watch them drop the RF mount cinema camera in the next 12 months, and everyone complain about that before realising the existing RF glass handles 8K resolution beautifully, and the next iteration of a C500 / C700 with native 8K becomes a practical reality.
> 
> That negativity and resistance tug you feel is realising the marketing is working...



You don’t HAVE to re-buy lenses. Your EF lenses are perfectly good to live out the rest of their lives on the R mount and you replace them when you NEED to.


----------



## Treyarnon (Jul 13, 2020)

It would be really nice to see Canon release an R mount camera aimed at stills photographers. 

Right now, if I had to replace my 5D's in a hurry (if they were stolen or dropped of a cliff or something) - the options I have for a new camera are: 5D4 (with 4 year old tech) - or move to Sony with the A7R4 (or R3). Its kind of disappointing that after 4 years and 4 RF bodies, Canon have nothing new to offer 5D users, and nothing seems to be in the pipeline either. 
[and no - a £4200 R5 is NOT a replacement for a '5D' camera]


----------



## Alam (Jul 13, 2020)

ReflexVE said:


> I got my partner a M100 setup and the size really is a tremendous advantage. It's the one thing I'm jealous of.
> 
> That said, I wouldn't trade my EVF or the ergonomics of the M50 even for that.



Yeah m100+22mmf2 is great walkaround setup, fit in my jeans pocket, still want evf that's why i sell it, my m is only for travel so i think i will pick m6 as i can live without flash, but let me see the new m camera first


----------



## ReflexVE (Jul 13, 2020)

Alam said:


> Yeah m100+22mmf2 is great walkaround setup, fit in my jeans pocket, still want evf that's why i sell it, my m is only for travel so i think i will pick m6 as i can live without flash, but let me see the new m camera first


That is literally what I set her up with and she loves it. It really is a great entry level camera.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 13, 2020)

Treyarnon said:


> It would be really nice to see Canon release an R mount camera aimed at stills photographers.
> 
> Right now, if I had to replace my 5D's in a hurry (if they were stolen or dropped of a cliff or something) - the options I have for a new camera are: 5D4 (with 4 year old tech) - or move to Sony with the A7R4 (or R3). Its kind of disappointing that after 4 years and 4 RF bodies, Canon have nothing new to offer 5D users, and nothing seems to be in the pipeline either.
> [and no - a £4200 R5 is NOT a replacement for a '5D' camera]



Just to be clear, your argument here is totally based on price? The R5 is not a 5D4 replacement because it's too expensive?


----------



## Pixel (Jul 13, 2020)

Treyarnon said:


> It would be really nice to see Canon release an R mount camera aimed at stills photographers.
> 
> Right now, if I had to replace my 5D's in a hurry (if they were stolen or dropped of a cliff or something) - the options I have for a new camera are: 5D4 (with 4 year old tech) - or move to Sony with the A7R4 (or R3). Its kind of disappointing that after 4 years and 4 RF bodies, Canon have nothing new to offer 5D users, and nothing seems to be in the pipeline either.
> [and no - a £4200 R5 is NOT a replacement for a '5D' camera]


The R5 is only $400 more expensive than the 5D4 when it was released in 2016. I’d say you’ve got a pretty fantastic stills camera in the R5 that just happens to have some phenomenal video features that you don’t have to use.


----------



## bbasiaga (Jul 13, 2020)

Treyarnon said:


> It would be really nice to see Canon release an R mount camera aimed at stills photographers.
> 
> Right now, if I had to replace my 5D's in a hurry (if they were stolen or dropped of a cliff or something) - the options I have for a new camera are: 5D4 (with 4 year old tech) - or move to Sony with the A7R4 (or R3). Its kind of disappointing that after 4 years and 4 RF bodies, Canon have nothing new to offer 5D users, and nothing seems to be in the pipeline either.
> [and no - a £4200 R5 is NOT a replacement for a '5D' camera]


Honestly curious...are you saying that last part based on price alone? Because the rest of the feature set and most of Canon's marketing seem to imply they thing it IS a 5D class camera. What else might I be missing. 

-Brian


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 13, 2020)

Treyarnon said:


> It would be really nice to see Canon release an R mount camera aimed at stills photographers.
> 
> Right now, if I had to replace my 5D's in a hurry (if they were stolen or dropped of a cliff or something) - the options I have for a new camera are: 5D4 (with 4 year old tech) - or move to Sony with the A7R4 (or R3). Its kind of disappointing that after 4 years and 4 RF bodies, Canon have nothing new to offer 5D users, and nothing seems to be in the pipeline either.
> [and no - a £4200 R5 is NOT a replacement for a '5D' camera]



I show the 5D MK IV introduced at about £3600, not sure if that's with VAT or not, but inflation nearly covers the entire gap regardless. 4 years later you get a 50% resolution increase, 1 stop DR increase, IBIS, new gen DPAF, 12 fps mechanical/20 fps electronic, and focus stacking. In what way do you not see it as a replacement?


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 13, 2020)

bbb34 said:


> That would create a DSLR that performs much better in live view mode than when it is used with the OVF. There is no point in such a camera, if you don't use the OVF any more. View finder type and AF type are tightly coupled.
> 
> Mirrorless cameras will easily supersede DSLRs, when both, AF performance and view finders are superior. Does the R5 mark the tipping point here? Maybe! We will see very soon.



Regarding viewfinder type, the 1DX3 shows there's still performance headroom in discrete PDAF modules. That said, the R5 does seem to be the first camera that challenges the big "gripped" bodies in terms of AF performance. I would expect the 1DX3 would still outperform with a big white though, purely from a power delivery standpoint though.

EVF vs OVF is not something I expect to ever be "settled" just like how there are still a lot of folks who prefer film.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 13, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Time will tell, but I think that ship is loaded with a lot of 5D Vs bound for enthusiasts and professionals hands.



Maybe so, maybe no. 

For me, my two 'full time' cameras will now be my EOS-R and my pre-ordered R5. 

Even up until this point when my go-to combo has been my 5D4 and my R, I usually grabbed the R first. The adapted glass works perfectly and the additional features it has over the 5D4 make it an obvious choice for me. I shoot outdoors all the time, mostly wildlife, so maybe people who sit in a studio or shoot weddings or whatever have needs that I don't understand. If so, I defer to their judgment.

With the R5 shipping soon there is nothing a 5D5 could offer that would interest me. I can't think of a reason why Canon would dilute their push to mirrorless by offering it. I don't see Sony supporting a redundant product line and I think Canon would do well to cut that cord and get on with it. The market share to be won is mirrorless - not old school.

If there were IQ problems when using the adapter, okay, but there aren't. Why should they do both?


----------



## AlanF (Jul 13, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> I really doubt Canon would do an APS-C R mount camera. They have the EF-M line for that.
> 
> Canon have already said the R6 pretty much replaces the 6D and 7D lines.


How on earth does does the R6 with its low density sensor replace the 7D line with its high density sensor, which is used by wild-life photographers precisely because ot its high resolution? The R5 in crop mode would do that.


----------



## bbasiaga (Jul 13, 2020)

unfocused said:


> DSLRs will always have one advantage: the speed of light. No electronic viewfinder will ever match a mirror.
> 
> Honestly, I fail to understand the way some on this forum (not you) have an almost religious devotion to mirrorless systems. I use both. I like both. There are advantages to both. I have yet to see anyone make a solid business argument that Canon is going to walk away from the DSLR market or the EF system anytime soon.


I sure see what you're saying there. And we're all just speculating at this point so the more the merrier. I guess my personal bias is that this is a small version of the film to digital conversion. People swore the digital would never overtake some advantages film had and the two would live side by side for ever. Well, film isn't totally gone yet but its relegated to a very small niche at this point. I think the cost and logistics and splitting the market between your own competing product lines just means that Canon or any other mfg won't want to maintain the two side by side for long. And as people get used to EVF vs OVF it'll just get easier. The technology will improve to the point where the differences are minimized enough, and the advantages maximized enough that the new one will just take over. I don't have a mirrorless body so I don't really know how hard that transition is. Maybe I can convince the wife to let me rent one for a week to try out. 

Only time will tell for sure!


----------



## Pixel (Jul 13, 2020)

Pixel said:


> The R5 is only $400 more expensive than the 5D4 when it was released in 2016. I’d say you’ve got a pretty fantastic stills camera in the R5 that just happens to have some phenomenal video features that you don’t have to use.





AlanF said:


> How on earth does does the R6 with its low density sensor replace the 7D line with its high density sensor, which is used by wild-life photographers precisely because ot its high resolution? The R5 in crop mode would do that.


You’re saying the sensor in the 1Dx III (same sensor in R6) is not up to snuff?


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 13, 2020)

Pixel said:


> You’re saying the sensor in the 1Dx III (same sensor in R6) is not up to snuff?



No, he's saying that that crop sensors provide an less-expensive way of getting more pixels on the subject. Folks shooting on a 1DX3 tend to have "costs more than a used car" glass hanging off of it. A 100-400 on a 24mp crop body approximates—with tradeoffs—what you're getting with big whites on a 1 series.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 13, 2020)

Pixel said:


> You’re saying the sensor in the 1Dx III (same sensor in R6) is not up to snuff?



Not for his specific application, which _requires_ higher resolution.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 13, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> People swore the digital would never overtake some advantages film had and the two would live side by side for ever. Well, film isn't totally gone yet but its relegated to a very small niche at this point. I think the cost and logistics and splitting the market between your own competing product lines just means that Canon or any other mfg won't want to maintain the two side by side for long.
> 
> I don't have a mirrorless body so I don't really know how hard that transition is. Maybe I can convince the wife to let me rent one for a week to try out.
> 
> Only time will tell for sure!




Agree.

For me the transition was about half a minute. Now I can hardly bear to look through my 7D2 or 5D4.

Who doesn't want the ability to adjust settings and instantly see what the image is going to look like?


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 13, 2020)

FrenchFry said:


> $200 discount? How?


CPW are offering $150 discount off the actual price but the big stores all do cash back so when you factor that percentage in nobody should be paying list price for anything at the moment.


----------



## ReflexVE (Jul 13, 2020)

Pixel said:


> The R5 is only $400 more expensive than the 5D4 when it was released in 2016. I’d say you’ve got a pretty fantastic stills camera in the R5 that just happens to have some phenomenal video features that you don’t have to use.


The R5 appears to be the same price it was back in 2016 once you correct for the fact that the Yen is substantially stronger against the dollar than it was in 2016 (~123:1 then vs 107:1 now).


----------



## AlanF (Jul 13, 2020)

Pixel said:


> You’re saying the sensor in the 1Dx III (same sensor in R6) is not up to snuff?


Of course I am not saying that. The low Mpx FF sensors are great for high speed data transfer and low noise at high isos. The high Mpx series FF cameras have better reach but slower performance. The 7D series have small APS-C sensors that enable high speed and high reach but at the expense of noise at high iso. The R6 is very different from a 7 series.


----------



## Richard Anthony (Jul 13, 2020)

unfocused said:


> DSLRs will always have one advantage: the speed of light. No electronic viewfinder will ever match a mirror.
> 
> Honestly, I fail to understand the way some on this forum (not you) have an almost religious devotion to mirrorless systems. I use both. I like both. There are advantages to both. I have yet to see anyone make a solid business argument that Canon is going to walk away from the DSLR market or the EF system anytime soon.


But Canon aren't developing any new EF lenses , so while they me not dropping the DSLR yet , they are certainly not interested in further developing it either , I cant see them bringing out another 1DX either the focus will be moved on to a high end R camera to replace it .


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 13, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> I'm sure Canon have a 5D Mark V design ready and waiting in case they decide to launch it, but I also suspect they're waiting to see how well the R5 does. If the R5 sells as well or better than the 5D IV did at launch then there's probably no point them launching the 5D V.


Exactly. Its a financial decision, and, with Covid still in full bloom in many countries, I don't expect Canon to risk a 5D MK V unless the R5 and R6 cameras flop. That's very unlikely, they have obviously putting a huge amount of $$$$ into PR.


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jul 13, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> I don't undserstand why you think they would want to , I mean the new R5 is the new 5d , there's nothing in it for them , thousands of bought into the RF system now , they are not going to bring out a 5D now it doesn't have a big enough following anymore .


I kinda explained why... In terms of ROI, it's an easy win. And let's not assume everybody is pleased with the R5. I'm not. And there are many more people involved in EF lenses.


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jul 13, 2020)

bbb34 said:


> That would create a DSLR that performs much better in live view mode than when it is used with the OVF. There is no point in such a camera, if you don't use the OVF any more. View finder type and AF type are tightly coupled.
> 
> Mirrorless cameras will easily supersede DSLRs, when both, AF performance and view finders are superior. Does the R5 mark the tipping point here? Maybe! We will see very soon.


You can never be superior to an OVF, by definition.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 13, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> Regarding viewfinder type, the 1DX3 shows there's still performance headroom in discrete PDAF modules. That said, the R5 does seem to be the first camera that challenges the big "gripped" bodies in terms of AF performance. I would expect the 1DX3 would still outperform with a big white though, purely from a power delivery standpoint though.
> 
> EVF vs OVF is not something I expect to ever be "settled" just like how there are still a lot of folks who prefer film.


Put a battery grip on the R5 and you have the power.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 13, 2020)

Pixel said:


> The R5 is only $400 more expensive than the 5D4 when it was released in 2016. I’d say you’ve got a pretty fantastic stills camera in the R5 that just happens to have some phenomenal video features that you don’t have to use.




Yep. And the 100-500L @ 2699 is a bargain given the 100-400L II was and still is $2100-2200 - since its debut in 2014. Given the IQ is what we hope that is.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 13, 2020)

yoms said:


> You can never be superior to an OVF, by definition.


In some respects only. The OVF does not amplify light to give a brighter image in dim conditions. You may not consider that an advantage, but I do.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 13, 2020)

Same sensor in R6 as in 1DXIII? This is what DPR writes: "T_he R6 is built around a variant of the 20MP sensor originally seen in the EOS-1D X III. Canon doesn't specify the difference but there's noticeably no mention of the R6 using the expensive '16-point' anti-aliasing filter from the flagship camera, which is a likely distinction (we'd expect the R6's AA filter to be the more conventional type)_."


----------



## ReflexVE (Jul 13, 2020)

yoms said:


> You can never be superior to an OVF, by definition.


I mean, maybe in resolution, but as someone who is near-sighted, an EVF is a huge advantage over an OVF. Previously it was difficult to not accidentally compensate for my vision when looking through an OVF and ending up with slightly out of focus pictures. Yes I know you can correct for that, but it slows you down and being able to just pick up any camera with an EVF and go without that concern is very valuable. At least to me.


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jul 13, 2020)

I just don't understand why when we talk about the 5D Mark V, some people are so keen on bashing the idea. It's like they enjoy doing so.

Can't these people understand that many of us still prefer the size, the grip, the OVF, the built-in GPS, the longer battery life, the sturdier build quality that DSLRs offer? And the ability to mount EF lenses natively and access a wider range of lenses.

Also, what about transition/overlap? You really think you stop the 5D lineup as soon as the first iteration of its mirrorless equivalent is released? FFS, Nikon is still building a film DSLR.


----------



## FrenchFry (Jul 13, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> CPW are offering $150 discount off the actual price but the big stores all do cash back so when you factor that percentage in nobody should be paying list price for anything at the moment.


Forgive my ignorance, but what is CPW?


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jul 13, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> In some respects only. The OVF does not amplify light to give a brighter image in dim conditions. You may not consider that an advantage, but I do.


Valid point.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 13, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Same sensor in R6 as in 1DXIII? This is what DPR writes: "T_he R6 is built around a variant of the 20MP sensor originally seen in the EOS-1D X III. Canon doesn't specify the difference but there's noticeably no mention of the R6 using the expensive '16-point' anti-aliasing filter from the flagship camera, which is a likely distinction (we'd expect the R6's AA filter to be the more conventional type)_."




It isn't the same sensor. It's a variation and that could mean a lot of things. I keep reading people say 'it's the same' but I can't imagine 'the same' sensor in a $6500 camera being dropped part and parcel into a $2400 offering.

Either way - I've done 20MP and it's too damn small. So there's that.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 13, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Yep. And the 100-500L @ 2699 is a bargain given the 100-400L II was and still is $2100-2200 - since its debut in 2014. Given the IQ is what we hope that is.


I have bought 3 copies of the 100-400mm II, initially at £2200, and it now down to £1400 on the grey market. I have a 100-500mm on preliminary pre-order, although I really resent its price at £2899.


----------



## Franklyok (Jul 13, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> Why won't IBIS be good enough for this particular focal length range? This lens would already be humongous and heavy.



Agree. How ever if I would have to spend 3+K on lens, i'd prefer one with IS and suffer with weight and size. I'd be 12+ year investment, after all. 

Why 70-200 with IS came before non-is version. Salesnumbers prediction, i suppose. 

However If canon ommits IS then thats fine too. Unique R lens would entice to move to R system. 

Not counterparts. I do not understand this 85 mm madness. Are they hoping for lots of "this or that" comparision reviews


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 13, 2020)

AlanF said:


> I have bought 3 copies of the 100-400mm II, initially at £2200, and it now down to £1400 on the grey market. I have a 100-500mm on preliminary pre-order, although I really resent its price at £2899.




Hi Alan!

$2,299 US in 2014 is $2,500 US now. Add in 100mm and a new mount and there we go. Reasonable in my book, but maybe a tick high. It's all going to boil down to IQ for me but I can already see myself getting the lens and new 1.4.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 13, 2020)

yoms said:


> Valid point.


And what about routine focusing directly on the sensor, allowing -6 EV images to focus. Sure you could do this in live view with an SLR, but to do so, you must give up the OVF with mirror lock up. So, would you prefer no view finder in this situation, or an EVF.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 13, 2020)

docsmith said:


> As for the rumor, I am hoping some of the higher quality EFM lenses show up. Mostly I would be interested in a higher quality general purpose zoom that has been rumored. A fairly minimal request, but I am all set with EF lenses, am still on the fence as to if I will get the R5 as I am very happy with the 5DIV. But, there is a definite need in my "small" kit for higher quality lenses.
> 
> 
> 
> I assume this is because of AF speed/tracking? Just curious what you have seen to make this conclusion? Everything I have seen indicates that the AF speed and precision is actually very good, surprisingly good, it seems.


I also get the impression that the AF speed and tracking close to being on par with the 1DX III which I find a bit surprising. 
I'm finding the 1DX III excellent for things that take up a reasonable portion of the screen but small things you start to find the limits of the 20 MP sensor. You get spoilt by the ability to crop on the 5DIV and 5DSR. The camera is powerful enough to cope with a high MP sensor. 
I wonder would they ever make a 50 MP version.
Maybe the 5R is that version. it will be interesting how the buffer is. On the 1DXIII its amazing. There is no lag at all. 
The 5R launch has been odd in that they haven't allowed any independent reviews. It will be interesting what the neutral reviews are like.
The camera (other than the price) seems to be too good to be true. Overheating on 8K seems to be an issue but you'd be stopped by the size of your memory card first.
I'd suggest a dry ice adapter for the 5R or an adapter with one of those kiddies windmills in it.


----------



## CaMeRa QuEsT (Jul 13, 2020)

ReflexVE said:


> Isn't that what the Sigma 56mm is for?



I once bought a brand spanking new Sigma 17-55/2.8 OS that could not focus to infinity. I live in a country with no Sigma authorized repair shops, so I had to disassemble the lens myself to remove a shimmy out of the focusing group so that it could do infinity. Then I found out that the lens was not well centered and had low contrast. Once bitten, twice shy. I much prefer original Canon lenses, never had any issues with them, and Canon has a very strong local presence.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 13, 2020)

yoms said:


> I kinda explained why... In terms of ROI, it's an easy win. And let's not assume everybody is pleased with the R5. I'm not. And there are many more people involved in EF lenses.



Just because the parts all exist separately doesn't mean they can bring them together in a body at a reasonable cost. There is no mirror box part short of the 1DX3 that supports the rates the 5D has. We have no idea how expensive the "grid" PDAF sensor from that camera is, how much it relies on the more expensive RGB metering sensor, etc. These "already done" parts 

You can't just assume ROI. And 5D4s didn't have to compete with a mirrorless camera. Is there production volume to support a 5D5 in a world where it's competing with an R5? Other considerations, assume the R5 is going to sell at capacity for 6 months. Where would canon rather put their supply-limited sensors? The R5 is pushing a new lens mount, which is strategically important.

Personally I'd love to see canon release:
- 5D5
- R5s (studio, high MP)
- R5c (active cooling, Dual CFexpress, more codec support, full size HDMI)
- Some crop/M cameras that have the new "Digic x" driven feature set
- An R1!

I think we'd all love to see Canon release a canon for ever use, but we're in a shrinking market, heavily supply constraint, with potential huge economic headwinds. You can't just say "The ROI is there!" even if we all want it to be the case.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 13, 2020)

neurorx said:


> Is anyone concerned that mirrorless camera wont be as rugged as their DSLR counterparts? I know 1DX3 is a tank but even 5DIV level.




I'm not. My EOS-R has been a rock and it goes everywhere.

This reviewer says the R5 is as solid as anything he's ever held in his hand.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 13, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> It isn't the same sensor. It's a variation and that could mean a lot of things. I keep reading people say 'it's the same' but I can't imagine 'the same' sensor in a $6500 camera being dropped part and parcel into a $2400 offering.
> 
> Either way - I've done 20MP and it's too damn small. So there's that.



Honestly re-using the sensor (or a "variant") could bring overall costs down since it's already developed. The sensor on those cameras is not usually as much of a headline features as the speed of the mirrorbox/shutter, AF performance and general tank-like build.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 13, 2020)

FrenchFry said:


> Forgive my ignorance, but what is CPW?



Canon Price Watch - www.canonpricewatch.com


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 13, 2020)

Oh, and let me be the first (and only) to say I'll miss the touch bar on the EOS-R. There goes my instant changing of focus zones.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jul 13, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> We are getting 1.8 in that range. I'm not sure it makes a lot of sense to carry 3 excellent 50mm primes, 2 with IS.



Canon could carry an f/1.4 IS nano-USM in place of the f/1.8.

And at one time, Canon had four different EF 50mm lenses.



twoheadedboy said:


> the f/1.8 I'm sure will be great and reasonably sized;



Neither the EF 50mm f/1.4 nor f/1.8 are great. The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art takes that spot.



twoheadedboy said:


> there's not much 2/3 of a stop gives you that justifies having a "middle" option IMO.



In contrast to having an EF 50mm f/1.2 USM, EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, EF 50mm f/1.8 STM, and 50mm f/2.5 Macro?

Canon can make a good 35mm f/2 IS USM, a good old EF 85mm f/1.8, a brand new spanking EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM, but just has to skip upgrading the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM to something that competes with either the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art or Tamron 45mm f/1.8 VC, then miss the mark again in the RF mount.


----------



## CDD28 (Jul 13, 2020)

Considering cancelling my R5 preorder now seeing that there may be a higher resolution version in the pipeline... is there any truth to this rumor? Is a high-res R5 something we'd see before 2022?


----------



## idahobill (Jul 13, 2020)

I'd be surprised and disappointed if Canon doesn't update the M50 this year, and also release at least two new EF-M lenses. The M50 has been the best selling mirrorless camera in Japan for months; it has also been the best selling mirrorless camera on Amazon U.S. for months. Therefore it is likely the best selling Canon camera, period. Canon must see the potential for more lens sales in this system and an updated model. 
I recently tried the M50 for the first time as a long time multiple Rebel series user. I've also used some Olympus mirrorless cameras. The reason for the M50's popularity was immediately apparent. I was blown away by the M50 focusing for sports. I expected that to be a weakness, but instead it delivered fast frame rates with frame after frame in perfect focus. The EVF is key for photographing action. I knew the M50 was a vlogging favorite, but as a photography tool, it is excellent. The smaller size versus even the Canon RP is a big factor for people who are increasingly deciding between carrying a camera or just their smartphone.
I agree that updating the sensor to the latest canon apc 32MP, adding IBIS, dual pixel with 4k and no crop, and adding one more dial for easier adjustment of settings would be ideal.


----------



## bergstrom (Jul 13, 2020)

I'd like an affordable 85mm 1.4 af lens for dslr.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 13, 2020)

AlanF said:


> I have bought 3 copies of the 100-400mm II, initially at £2200, and it now down to £1400 on the grey market. I have a 100-500mm on preliminary pre-order, although I really resent its price at £2899.


Why three copies of the 100-400mm II Alan? 
I have one and its a good lens but I'm not sure its much better than Sigma's or Tamrons lens competitor 150-600mm lens.
It's a flexible lens but I thought overpriced at its original price.
Is the R5 your first venture into mirrorless or do you have the R/RP
I'll be very interesting in real reviews of the R5 and the 100-500mm. Every mp and mm matters when it comes to birds.


----------



## goldenhusky (Jul 13, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> 100-500 is L glass. 100-400 is not. Price.



you are correct. I overlooked that part. Thanks for pointing that out


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 13, 2020)

FrenchFry said:


> Forgive my ignorance, but what is CPW?


Canon Price Watch, they are a way that genuine Canon dealers can somewhat circumvent Canon's minimum advertised price policy. They are 100% legitimate I have bought $10,000's of gear via them, indeed I won't buy any Canon gear without getting a quote from them first. Gordon is super fast with his follow up emails and accurate and professional, can't recommend them highly enough.









Canon Camera and Lens Deals - Canon Price Watch







www.cpricewatch.com


----------



## goldenhusky (Jul 13, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> Canon keeps talking about how they're improving their AA and seems to be super aware of the need. They made a huge deal about this with the 1DX3.



yep fingers crossed. Hope the AA filter is not that bad.


----------



## goldenhusky (Jul 13, 2020)

yoms said:


> I wouldn't understand why Canon wouldn't release a 5D Mark V.
> 
> 90% of the job is done.
> 
> ...



It is easier said than done  Regrdless if Canon thinks there is a market for 5D5 I am sure they will make one with the same 45MP sensor.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 13, 2020)

Hector1970 said:


> Why three copies of the 100-400mm II Alan?
> I have one and its a good lens but I'm not sure its much better than Sigma's or Tamrons lens competitor 150-600mm lens.
> It's a flexible lens but I thought overpriced at its original price.
> Is the R5 your first venture into mirrorless or do you have the R/RP
> I'll be very interesting in real reviews of the R5 and the 100-500mm. Every mp and mm matters when it comes to birds.


Bought one, loved it. Then bought a second for my wife to use. Bought the Sigma 150-600mm. It was so good I sold the first 100-400. Then missed the 100-400 so much I bought a third. All 3 copies were excellent. But number 3 is as tack sharp from edge to edge as the 400 DO II. I passed the R as, sorry folks, it is not up to 5DIV for BIF.


----------



## goldenhusky (Jul 13, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I got mine for $3700 @ B&H and couldn't be happier.



That is a fantastic price. Enjoy capturing light when you get your camera


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 13, 2020)

goldenhusky said:


> you are correct. I overlooked that part. Thanks for pointing that out




NP - I'm actually interested to see what the price on the new one will be. You know it has to be less than the L version of the 100-400, and the prices on the 600mm and 800mm non L lenses are obscenely low.

Hopefully it renders nice images for a great price!


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 13, 2020)

goldenhusky said:


> That is a fantastic price. Enjoy capturing light when you get your camera



Call their federal sales line and sweet talk them. They discounted the camera, grip, battery, and 128GB Sandisk CFE. $,4,400 out the door with Payboo.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 13, 2020)

yoms said:


> I just don't understand why when we talk about the 5D Mark V, some people are so keen on bashing the idea. It's like they enjoy doing so.
> 
> Can't these people understand that many of us still prefer the size, the grip, the OVF, the built-in GPS, the longer battery life, the sturdier build quality that DSLRs offer? And the ability to mount EF lenses natively and access a wider range of lenses.
> 
> Also, what about transition/overlap? You really think you stop the 5D lineup as soon as the first iteration of its mirrorless equivalent is released? FFS, Nikon is still building a film DSLR.


Why is doubting there will be one considered bashing? It isn’t. It’s simply speculation either way.


----------



## goldenhusky (Jul 13, 2020)

unfocused said:


> DSLRs will always have one advantage: the speed of light. No electronic viewfinder will ever match a mirror.
> 
> Honestly, I fail to understand the way some on this forum (not you) have an almost religious devotion to mirrorless systems. I use both. I like both. There are advantages to both. I have yet to see anyone make a solid business argument that Canon is going to walk away from the DSLR market or the EF system anytime soon.



From business perspective Canon can sell RF glass of the same FL as EF mount once more . Obviously there is risk, someone might say if I have to buy all lenses again I might jump ship but IMO that is a very calculated risk from Canon especially when 5 axis image stabilization works well with R5 and R6 when using EF lenses. So people jumping ship because of a new mount at this point are very less likely plus when it comes to lenses and products working without hiccup Canon is second to none.


----------



## bytebuster (Jul 13, 2020)

Any idea (from patents filed) if the design for the new 70-200 f4 will be like the 2.8 version or a fixed size lens?


----------



## bigchicken (Jul 13, 2020)

neurorx said:


> I wonder where the R1 is. Wasn't there a late 2020 or early 2021 rumor for an announcement?


I think Canon would want to sell a few more 1DX MkIII first but I would like the R1 to be announced. If the R1 is a bit bigger than the R5 and doesn't have the recording limits with better heat dissipation I think it could be attractive to filmmakers.


----------



## bytebuster (Jul 13, 2020)

bytebuster said:


> Any idea (from patents filed) if the design for the new 70-200 f4 will be like the 2.8 version or a fixed size lens?



Never mind. Found the patent. Turns out they had filed a similar one for the f4 (collapsable zoom). Hopefully they stick with that


----------



## Maru (Jul 13, 2020)

i think they have already killed the 5D lineup... it they want R5 and its future versions to sale good then they will not do a 5DMKV and even more..they will 5DmkIV production also by 2021 end and then discontinue it eventually...


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 13, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> 100-500 is L glass. 100-400 is not. Price.



Title from the Canon USA direct store web page: "EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II USM"


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jul 13, 2020)

CDD28 said:


> Considering cancelling my R5 preorder now seeing that there may be a higher resolution version in the pipeline... is there any truth to this rumor? Is a high-res R5 something we'd see before 2022?


Who really knows? - no-one here I'd imagine - the only certain thing is that there will always be a newer camera 'just around the corner'. Sometimes you just have to pull the trigger, take the shots with what you have, and get the next one once its arrived


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 13, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Bought one, loved it. Then bought a second for my wife to use. Bought the Sigma 150-600mm. It was so good I sold the first 100-400. Then missed the 100-400 so much I bought a third. All 3 copies were excellent. But number 3 is as tack sharp from edge to edge as the 400 DO II. I passed the R as, sorry folks, it is not up to 5DIV for BIF.


An interesting relationship with the 100-400L. Glad the final copy was the best. The 1DXIII is great for BIF - would be even better with 30 more MP's. It's not designed for small birds.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 13, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> Title from the Canon USA direct store web page: "EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II USM"



He was obviously talking about the rumoured RF 100-400, not the existing EF version.


----------



## secant (Jul 13, 2020)

Personally I am looking forward to more 3rd party lenses for RF and hopefully some EF as well. Canon announcements are cool but some 3rd party lenses that are more affordable would suit the budget and needs of hobbyists and enthusiasts like me. I am specifically looking forward to Tamron expanding their FE lineups to the RF mounts, especially the 28-200mm and the 3 small F2 prime lenses. I suspect the 28-75/2.8 and 70-180/2.8 will be pretty popular as well. The Sigma 45/2.8 will be popular as well I think, but I already have the 35mm f1.8 and its just a bit too close in focal length, but I can see people that like the 45mm focal length would get this Sigma 45/2.8 small prime as well.

How about you? What are some lenses or even accessories or cameras that you look forward to?


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 13, 2020)

Alam said:


> But m6 mII already checks all that,



No weather sealing, no viewfinder, no IBIS.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Jul 13, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> No, because the M5 does not have an articulating screen. M50 is exactly what I want with the 2 extras I mentioned.



That feature should be coming to the rumored M5 Mark II as well. Canon seemed to have realized that the flip down screen on the original M5 was pretty useless for most, which is why the lower priced M50 that came out later got a fully articulating one.


----------



## brad-man (Jul 14, 2020)

I must confess, I'm disappointed about the RF 24mm f/2.8 IS STM Macro rumor. Since wide lenses are where the RF mount is supposed to shine, why is the 24mm only 2.8? Why not 2.0, or at least 2.2? I doubt the RF will be much smaller and lighter than the modestly sized EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM, so I guess it will be quite a bit sharper? Since they're calling it a macro, I suppose the MFD will be less than the 8" of the EF, but I want some speed. 2.8 is quick for a zoom at this focal length, not so much for a prime. It's too early in my RF relationship to become disillusioned...


----------



## Billybob (Jul 14, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Canon had a 70-300mm DO zoom. Don’t know whether or not it was any good, but they did make a DO zoom.


I forgot about the 70-300 DO. It wasn't very good, but it was the first--over 10-years ago--, so I suspect that Canon can do much better today.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jul 14, 2020)

yoms said:


> I wouldn't understand why Canon wouldn't release a 5D Mark V.
> 
> 90% of the job is done.
> 
> ...


What would be the cost for this new 5Dv beast? No EVF but prism/ mirror box, AF system from 1DXii (maybe?) will add significant cost even if everything else is the same. Focusing/AF will still be better (coverage/subject tracking) will still be better via live view similar to 1DXiii. It would also mean a fixed screen vs flippy on R5. OLED top screen? It may happen but would people pay USD300-500 more than R5 for it given the lower sales volume now that the R5 has been released and is moving people over to RF (including me)?


----------



## davo (Jul 14, 2020)

"Cool" adapter. An extension grip with a built in cooling fan that forces air up into body for extended 8K 4K120 performance. I think this general concept would be effective but ideally you would have dedicated air routing to the processor which is not currently there.


----------



## FrenchFry (Jul 14, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Canon Price Watch, they are a way that genuine Canon dealers can somewhat circumvent Canon's minimum advertised price policy. They are 100% legitimate I have bought $10,000's of gear via them, indeed I won't buy any Canon gear without getting a quote from them first. Gordon is super fast with his follow up emails and accurate and professional, can't recommend them highly enough.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for the tip! Sounds kind of like GreenToe, but specific to Canon. This is very useful to know!


----------



## Pixel (Jul 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> It isn't the same sensor. It's a variation and that could mean a lot of things. I keep reading people say 'it's the same' but I can't imagine 'the same' sensor in a $6500 camera being dropped part and parcel into a $2400 offering.
> 
> Either way - I've done 20MP and it's too damn small. So there's that.


The Canon rep who showed me the R5/R6 told me point blank it’s the exact same sensor. Just going off of what he said.


----------



## brad-man (Jul 14, 2020)

davo said:


> "Cool" adapter. An extension grip with a built in cooling fan that forces air up into body for extended 8K 4K120 performance. I think this general concept would be effective but ideally you would have dedicated air routing to the processor which is not currently there.


With a HEPA filter to keep out the dust, dirt & salt?


----------



## Baron_Karza (Jul 14, 2020)

Sibir Lupus said:


> That feature should be coming to the rumored M5 Mark II as well. Canon seemed to have realized that the flip down screen on the original M5 was pretty useless for most, which is why the lower priced M50 that came out later got a fully articulating one.



It would be great if it did, I guess. But that camera is just a rumor which we don't know exactly what it will be like or if it will even come out. But we do know what the M5 is and we do know what the M50 is because they both exist and the M50 is more of what I am exactly looking for. I never used the M5, so to make sure I'm not missing annoying, I'm saying an M50 with +2 features. 

At times, I do like the flip up-only screen because then I don't have to always say "look at the lens" before taking a a selfie with others in it (usually I do that at music concerts when meeting people in the band). I got so many pics like this with people looking away from the camera. Another reason I would want these smaller cameras is that it's easier for security to allow me to bring them into concerts.

Which reminds me, when people were guessing what new features would be in the R5 for photographers, I forgot to write a new type of screen.
A screen that is fully articulating, but you could also position that same screen to flip up and down. So a combo of both the M50 (R5/R6) type and the M5 (Sony A7iii) type as 1 screen. I already got the designed figured out but not sure how to patent it so i'm letting my little idea out there now.


----------



## PhotonShark (Jul 14, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> In some respects only. The OVF does not amplify light to give a brighter image in dim conditions. You may not consider that an advantage, but I do.



The EVF shows you what the sensor sees. The OVF doesn't.


----------



## TomR (Jul 14, 2020)

would love to see that 135mm 1.4 lens


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 14, 2020)

Pixel said:


> The Canon rep who showed me the R5/R6 told me point blank it’s the exact same sensor. Just going off of what he said.




One of the differences I know about for sure is that the sensor in the 1DX III has a ‘high-detail’ low-pass filter, and the R6 uses a simpler traditional low-pass filter. I'm sure there are others but don't know what they are and I doubt they will impact image quality to any degree.

All I know is 20MP is too small for me. I did 20MP in the 7D2. After 30MP in the 5D4 and R, I'll never go backwards in resolution.


----------



## RobbieHat (Jul 14, 2020)

BakaBokeh said:


> Wish one of those UWA super fast RF Prime patents came true. i.e. RF 16mm f1.4 or RF 18mm f1.0/f1.2



I would vote for wider (at least 12mm) and still pretty fast. Maybe an f2. I would love that for Astro. Astro photography is so popular now and Sigma has the canon market cornered. Sony and Nikon have awesome native options. Come on Canon! Show the stars some love. 

I would also vote for an UWA zoom (12-24mm) in the F2.8 range. Faster would be a game changer. 

Bob


----------



## BroderLund (Jul 14, 2020)

For the next M camera I'm hoping Canon is adding 10bit 422 like the R5/R6 and similar focus. 4K30 is fine for those cameras. Wouldn't expect them to have 4K60. That would really streamline the capabilities of canon video that has been really lacking and making the M line a nice "pocket" backup for the R line of cameras. Especially with the rumored clog3 for the R5/R6 which will give nicer highlight roll-off!


----------



## vangelismm (Jul 14, 2020)

brad-man said:


> I must confess, I'm disappointed about the RF 24mm f/2.8 IS STM Macro rumor. Since wide lenses are where the RF mount is supposed to shine, why is the 24mm only 2.8? Why not 2.0, or at least 2.2? I doubt the RF will be much smaller and lighter than the modestly sized EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM, so I guess it will be quite a bit sharper? Since they're calling it a macro, I suppose the MFD will be less than the 8" of the EF, but I want some speed. 2.8 is quick for a zoom at this focal length, not so much for a prime. It's too early in my RF relationship to become disillusioned...



I was looking for this comment.
Now i have no hope about the successor of the forgotten EF 20mm 2.8.

Let's hope it is cheaper than the 24mm 2.8 IS USM.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 14, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> But Canon aren't developing any new EF lenses...


That's not what "Canon" said. I can understand your confusion because the actual statement was grossly misrepresented by a number of websites seeking to score more hits. But here is what was actually said:

“_As you know, last year we launched the RF mount and EOS R system," _said Richard Shepherd, pro product marketing senior manager at Canon Europe. _"To date we’ve launched ten critically acclaimed lenses, and as it’s a new system we plan to continue this, launching more RF lenses while still fully supporting the EF lens system. And of course, should the market demand it, we are ready to create new EF lenses. But for now, our focus is on RF.” _

So all of this nonsense about Canon abandoning the EF mount can be traced to one Canon Europe employee who simply said they were concentrating on RF for the time being. 

Given the extensive EF system, it's no surprise they are comfortable pausing new lens development while they build out the RF system.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 14, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Why is doubting there will be one considered bashing? It isn’t. It’s simply speculation either way.


Well some people (not you) don't simply doubt or speculate, they seem compelled to state their opinion as though it were fact and then berate anyone who disagrees. 

None of us knows what the future will hold. I am of the opinion that DSLRs and Mirrorless can and will live side by side for the foreseeable future. I've tried to be rational about it and state the reasons for my opinion. I won't go into all of them right now, but when I weigh the arguments in favor and opposed I come out squarely on the side that says the smart business decision for Canon is likely to be to continue developing both and see how the market shakes out.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Jul 14, 2020)

mclaren777 said:


> I'm going to be really bummed if Canon doesn't release a 5DV, so much so that I'm probably going to write an email to Canon USA.
> 
> The 1DX3 just doesn't have enough resolution for my needs and the R5 is probably going to be fairly inadequate for motorsports photography (especially karting).



Why is the R5 inadequate. If you use mechanical shutter it seems like it would be far more than adequate. The e-shutter will most likely be inadequate due to sensor read speed being at best 1/60s and I see the 20fps headline as a gimmick on a non-stacked or non-global shutter sensor. But 12fps with mechanical shutter is 1DX performance with 45MP. You are too quick to dismiss an unreleased product.

FWIW I see zero need for a 5DV going forward.


----------



## Eclipsed (Jul 14, 2020)

unfocused said:


> DSLRs will always have one advantage: the speed of light. No electronic viewfinder will ever match a mirror.
> 
> Honestly, I fail to understand the way some on this forum (not you) have an almost religious devotion to mirrorless systems. I use both. I like both. There are advantages to both. I have yet to see anyone make a solid business argument that Canon is going to walk away from the DSLR market or the EF system anytime soon.



you must have amazing mind reading powers to discern “religious devotion” in people you have never met.

and without even quoting a word of evidence.


----------



## Pape (Jul 14, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Canon releases a bunch of high end lenses, and people complain. Canon starts to release less expensive lenses, and people complain. *sigh*


Good stradegy would be launch similar type L and non L same time


----------



## H. Jones (Jul 14, 2020)

I'm surprised no one has really mentioned the 18-45mm STM yet. That could be a really interesting super compact wide-angle lens for the R series. I'm thinking something along the lines of the cheap but excellent EF-S 10-18mm, but for full frame and with a little extra reach on the long end.

18mm isn't the *most* ultra wide, but 45mm is close enough to 50mm to make it a pretty good walk around lens. Pair that with the 24-105 STM or 24-240mm and you have almost all your bases covered.

Honestly, for hobbyist/consumer photogs out there, Canon is making a pretty great line up here. Pack an EOS RP in a small shoulder bag like the Think Tank Retrospective 7 with the 18-45mm, 24-240mm, and a 600mm f/11 for a vacation(ah, remember when vacations were a thing?) and you have literally everything from ultrawide to 600mm covered for your safari/zoo trip/city trip. Toss in a tiny 35mm f/1.8 and you have low-light covered for when you walk inside a museum.


----------



## tataylino (Jul 14, 2020)

Was hoping for the Canon ef-m 50mm f1.8 stm version for so long. I already have the EF version and I love it. Having it in EF-M will make it smaller and compact which will be great. I also hope it will be priced at $100.


----------



## H. Jones (Jul 14, 2020)

The EOS R5 was the perfect replacement to my secondary-body 5D mark III that I've been waiting for, so now the game is waiting for the EOS-R1 to replace my 1DX Mark II. 

Ultimately the main reason for me wanting to fully switch is RF glass. My ideal set up for paid work right now would be the 28-70mm F/2 and the RF 70-200mm f/2.8, but as long as my 1DX Mark II is in my kit, one of my cameras is limited to EF glass. 

As for lenses, I guess I'm a bit conflicted overall. I have a lot of existing RF glass(28-70, 70-200, 85 either 2 or 1.2) to buy which is going to be pricey, so I'm not sure how long it'll be before I can get to something new. But if Canon releases the 14-24mm f/1.4 or F/2 lens they've patented, that could be really exciting and would probably end up in my bag at some point. Another thing I'd love to see is a 135mm f/2 update, though I'm concerned that would end up expensive enough to offset part of what made the original 135mm so special in the first place.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 14, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Given the extensive EF system, it's no surprise they are comfortable pausing new lens development while they build out the RF system.



They will be building out the RF system for many years to come. The last EF lenses were released in 2018. Since 2018, Canon released 15 (fifteen) RF lenses and 0 (zero) EF lenses. 
My bet is we've already seen the last EF lens and the last EF camera (1DxIII). 90D was the last EF-S crop one. The M line will probably continue to live (that is being upgraded).

5DV? same elusive dream as 7DIII. I think there's a non-zero chance Canon releases it next year as a 5D line swan song, but the chance is really small IMO.

I'm moving to mirorrless and the R line, will keep all my EF lenses for now and will be upgrading slowly to the RF ones. My EF 16-35 f4LII will be the first candidate to be replaced by RF 15-35 f2.8. Don't know if and when that happens as I've already scratched the bottom with the R5 preorder.


----------



## degos (Jul 14, 2020)

bigchicken said:


> If the R1 is a bit bigger than the R5 and doesn't have the recording limits with better heat dissipation I think it could be attractive to filmmakers.



There's a whole Cine line of cameras from Canon, why can't film makers just buy those and leave our photographic cameras alone.

I don't understand this obsession with making everything into a video camera.


----------



## drama (Jul 14, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Maybe English isn’t your first language but I don’t know how you can infer any negativity or resistance from my post. My only user feedback was I find looking through EVF’s for extended periods nauseating, I know others do too hence the 1DX III and not an R1 yet.


I wasn't suggesting you were being negative. You mentioned caring about the EVF, and I used that as a jumping off point to addres your point and the wider discussion points on the board.

CR boys are very sensitive the week after an official announcement. It must be the comedown from all the news....


----------



## tataylino (Jul 14, 2020)

degos said:


> There's a whole Cine line of cameras from Canon, why can't film makers just buy those and leave our photographic cameras alone.
> 
> I don't understand this obsession with making everything into a video camera.


Maybe because it is a lot cheaper compared to Cine lines?


----------



## drama (Jul 14, 2020)

Treyarnon said:


> It would be really nice to see Canon release an R mount camera aimed at stills photographers.
> 
> Right now, if I had to replace my 5D's in a hurry (if they were stolen or dropped of a cliff or something) - the options I have for a new camera are: 5D4 (with 4 year old tech) - or move to Sony with the A7R4 (or R3). Its kind of disappointing that after 4 years and 4 RF bodies, Canon have nothing new to offer 5D users, and nothing seems to be in the pipeline either.
> [and no - a £4200 R5 is NOT a replacement for a '5D' camera]



What is it exactly that you see in a A7R4 that you don't see in an existing Canon body? And does the price differentiator make sense when you factor in new batteries, lenses, etc? Honestly curious. Because I cannot for the life of me see any logic to what you posted.


----------



## Pixel (Jul 14, 2020)

degos said:


> There's a whole Cine line of cameras from Canon, why can't film makers just buy those and leave our photographic cameras alone.
> 
> I don't understand this obsession with making everything into a video camera.


Because the overall public demand and consumption of video versus stills is thru the roof.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 14, 2020)

degos said:


> There's a whole Cine line of cameras from Canon, why can't film makers just buy those and leave our photographic cameras alone.
> 
> I don't understand this obsession with making everything into a video camera.


Unfortunately we live in a YouTube world and if you don't include useable video features in your cameras you drastically reduce potential user base for your camera. Therefore all mainstream manufacturers include video in their still cameras.

Wedding photographers generally have much more earning potential if they shoot both stills and video as an example.


----------



## alejandrobox (Jul 14, 2020)

Hello... I am the only one who misses an RF 35 mm f/1.2???


----------



## cornieleous (Jul 14, 2020)

degos said:


> There's a whole Cine line of cameras from Canon, why can't film makers just buy those and leave our photographic cameras alone.
> 
> I don't understand this obsession with making everything into a video camera.



Would you be upset if your phone could not do both? If you understand the basic technology of the various features, stills and video use the same electronics for image capture, stabilization, focus, etc. so why NOT put both in? Despite the perception, we are are not paying that much (if any) extra for video at all, and besides, the market wants both. Example: I want both in one body because stabilized lenses and body will be vastly superior for both stills and video jobs than a slower and lower spec. stills camera and separate professional camcorder with weak stabilization, or truly video centric DSLR like GH5 with a tiny sensor and weak autofocus. Not to mention I don't have 10-15K for a cinema camera and its accessories anyway.

The R5 offers incredible stills AND incredible video because it can, and costs only $400 more than the 5D4 and 5D3 which were both mostly stills cameras that were barely competent in video mode. While bringing so much more than the predecessors offered, as well as being mirrorless and having a new and better lens mount, the R5 is a better value for stills alone even if you never touched video. DPAF2 and the 1DXiii focus system plus fast stills shooting are all incredible additions for any stills photographer. For stills, the 5 series has clearly gone up market a bit due to competition, but everyone wants and is putting video and stills in one body. If you wanted just the great 5D4 sensor in a mirrorless body, well you already have it in the EOS R, and the 5D4 is still a great camera itself.

As to the technology for video vs stills, it is much the same: A high resolution sensor that can shoot 20 frames a second is only 10 frames shy of 30 fps at max sensor resolution- in this case an 8K sized sensor. Adding 10 more frames a second is a matter of a bit faster readout speed of the sensor- and the Digic X and the ADC readout hardware already needs to be a beast to do all the stills processing like HDR, DPAF, fast bursts, noise, lens corrections, etc. So it really is just two applications of the same electronic hardware- if you think stills and video are that different, you are perhaps misunderstanding how modern digital cameras work. The only "extra" is how many times the sensor can be read per second, and at the highest rate, heat. As for the other video modes below 8K, down sampling and lower video resolutions with higher frame rates use the same data bandwidth as 8K30 with different binning of pixels to share the max readout bandwidth. Maybe some engineering was spent on cooling and firmware for video, but again, referring back to the previous cameras, the R5 is borrowing from the rest of the Canon lineup and hardly making us pay that much for the "extra" of video and will be a great stills camera with features we could only dream of two years ago. Also, no one is holding you hostage to buy the R5, there are plenty of great still cameras with less video from Canon and other brands at all price points.

So please, reconsider your complaint against video in this and other cameras as if it is hurting you unless you have a logical argument. It is actually making your stills camera more capable to have hardware with this much power. If you don't want video don't use it. Or you could wait for another R that is sure to come with a different balance of features or get the R6 if you don't need high resolution. Canon is simply making a camera with wide appeal that does many things well, but it is not compromising on stills by doing so, nor did they add a big pricetag for the video features- I don't see how that argument can be made when you look at the predecessors. I suppose looking at Canon price premium in general is another argument, but according to the competition I think they are being competitive on price.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jul 14, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> The market has contracted but is still above historical norms and the price per unit is way higher than historically



Out of curiosity, higher in absolute numbers, or in cameras sold per X persons?

Higher price per unit doesn't sound all that surprising to me. Price of electronics has dropped, but there's so much more of it in a modern camera.


----------



## navastronia (Jul 14, 2020)

alejandrobox said:


> Hello... I am the only one who misses an RF 35 mm f/1.2???



nah, lots of us would want that lens


----------



## Grimbald (Jul 14, 2020)

I would love to see a compact 15-35mm f4 version... ideally >500g, similar to the Nikon 14-30. 
If you already get a smaller camera like the R5, a small landscape lens for travel with great resolution and flare resistance would be mich needed....


----------



## TPatS (Jul 14, 2020)

I'm interested to see what plans Canon has for any future EF/EF-S lenses and APS-C cameras. As much as we like to get excited about the R5/R6, Canon's APS-C DSLR cameras are still where most people getting into photography, enter the canon ecosystem. Wonder if that elusive 7D mk3 will ever come, or will there be a new EF-S 10-18mm or new 50mm F1.4....


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 14, 2020)

mclaren777 said:


> I'm going to be really bummed if Canon doesn't release a 5DV, so much so that I'm probably going to write an email to Canon USA.
> 
> The 1DX3 just doesn't have enough resolution for my needs and the R5 is probably going to be fairly inadequate for motorsports photography (especially karting).



Other Thant he the potential lag of the EVF and battery life, what do you think the R5 is missing for motorsports? With motorsports you panning a lot, so I don't see the lag as causing a significant problem. The battery issue can be somewhat solved by using the battery grip. Canon is usually conservative on shot count and you should get 800-1200 shots with a grip. ISO, should be on par or better than the 5d IV even with a 45mp sensor. AF, has roots in the 1dx iii a nd should blow away even the 1dx II (which I just sold). FPS, Matches my current 1dx II @ 12 FPS mechanical & 20 FPS electronic. Ergonomics, everything I read says it feels like a DSLR instead of a mirrorless. Overall, based on spec and early information this camera sounds like it blows away the 5dIV and will probably do better than a 5dV with AF points since the 5dV would use a separate sensor for AF. Not trying to rain on your parade, but I don't see Canon releasing another DSLR as long as the R5/R6 are capable of delivering on the specs, especially since you can adapt all EF lenses and they work seamlessly. I ordered the R5 to replace my 5dIV and the R6 as a possible replacement for my 1dx II.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jul 14, 2020)

yoms said:


> You can never be superior to an OVF, by definition.



Definitions are rather arbitrary. EVF can do tricks OVF can't, such as brighten the image for lenses with small max aperture, apply corrections, display B&W image, etc.


----------



## bbb34 (Jul 14, 2020)

yoms said:


> You can never be superior to an OVF, by definition.



What definition would that be?

The only parameter where an EVF cannot beat the OVF, even in theory, is propagation delay (aka lag). Nevertheless, the delay can very well be low enough not to be noticeable. In that case it is out of the equation.

What else? Brightness? Exposure simulation? Information overlays?

Of course, 'better' is subjective. But I don't see a single parameter where EVF doesn't have the _potential_ to - at least - come close enough.

Oh yes, I am aware of one, that is power consumption. The smaller the camera, the worse is the relative impact of battery weight. Do you see what that means for the anticipated R1?


----------



## bbb34 (Jul 14, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> EVF vs OVF is not something I expect to ever be "settled" just like how there are still a lot of folks who prefer film.



Sure, there will always be people who prefer an OVF. I love it myself.

But for my curiosity, do you really believe chemical film still plays a significant role in still (or motion) photography?


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 14, 2020)

yoms said:


> You can never be superior to an OVF, by definition.



For me EVFs are superior. With the MP-E65mm at 5x, an EVF is nice and bright and it gives me the option to 10x zoom to fine-tune the focus. EVFs and live-view are what make the MP-E65 usable outdoor for me.


----------



## Mark3794 (Jul 14, 2020)

Behold the prophecy from Mark:

We will probably see in 1-2 years the EOS R1, there are two possibilities: Canon goes back to being Canon and they just make another body with the 1DXmIII sensor but with integrated battery grip, top notch weathersealing and all that stuff. Or they have another sensor in the pipeline that could match sony a9 readout.

I don't really know if we will see the high-megapixel R camera, but knowing Canon they will develop a 83mp sensor just to one up everyone else.

There is a probability that the M5 mark II is coming with ibis, evf and articulating screen. Same specs as m6 mark ii.

The M50 is still, literally, the best selleing mirrorless in every place. I think they can still wait a bit before bringing a replacement.

EF-M needs a standard zoom, or a kit lens mark ii. Expect a 18-45 F2.8-4 or a 15-45 F3.5-6.3 mark II

No more EF cameras guys, probably another round of Rebels and entry levels.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 14, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Of course I am not saying that. The low Mpx FF sensors are great for high speed data transfer and low noise at high isos. The high Mpx series FF cameras have better reach but slower performance. The 7D series have small APS-C sensors that enable high speed and high reach but at the expense of noise at high iso. The R6 is very different from a 7 series.



While I agree the R6 and 7D are in substantially different niches, you get back some of that 'reach' on the former because it can AF with much narrower apertures, so you can mount longer lenses, teleconverters, and I guess even stacked teleconverters and retain (hopefully useable) AF (and without having to buy the more expensive telephoto lenses). It'll never compete on price and I guess not on weathersealing or ruggedness, but it has the high fps 7-series users are used to. (Obviously the R5 also has these features too, but at a substantially higher cost).


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jul 14, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> Definitions are rather arbitrary. EVF can do tricks OVF can't, such as brighten the image for lenses with small max aperture, apply corrections, display B&W image, etc.



Agreed, I probably should have clarified this. It seemed obvious to me, but it isn't.

To me, the viewfinder's first goal, whether optical or electronic, is a "window on reality" to show you what you're framing, what you're looking at... for real. And in that regard, you cannot do better than optical since you're directly looking at, well the real thing. There are no intermediate electronic pieces and processing. It's a direct connection between what you're framing at and your eyes/brain.

So yes, you (and others) are totally right: EVF can do tricks that OVF cannot and I totally admit that these tricks can be considered better. But that wasn't what I was thinking about in my 1st post.


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jul 14, 2020)

I love the OVF because it's the last analog piece in an all-digital practice. And that's precious.
Looking through an OVF is the only moment during the whole photography process where I feel I'm not _just_ a computer dude.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 14, 2020)

I like OVF for viewing but EVF is great for showing the image immediately so you can quickly make corrections. Sometimes you forget the settings the camera is on and you can have overexposed shots. I tend not to notice the light meter. In EVF it hits you immediately something is wrong . I always thought it a pity that image replay couldn’t be put in the viewfinder of a DSLR.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jul 14, 2020)

yoms said:


> So yes, you (and others) are totally right: EVF can do tricks that OVF cannot and I totally admit that these tricks can be considered better. But that wasn't what I was thinking about in my 1st post.



I'm not disagreeing with you. OVF is better / preferable in some situations, e.g. shorter lag & lower power consumption. I'll put good money cameras with OVF are here to stay, same as 35mm film cameras, rangefinders, and large format cameras.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 14, 2020)

PhotonShark said:


> The EVF shows you what the sensor sees.


Only if it has the same DR.


----------



## archiea (Jul 14, 2020)

canon 5r Mk II
16K video. Constant HDR, krystal Memory card, 360 pixel portrait relite and built in retouch....


----------



## bbasiaga (Jul 14, 2020)

unfocused said:


> That's not what "Canon" said. I can understand your confusion because the actual statement was grossly misrepresented by a number of websites seeking to score more hits. But here is what was actually said:
> 
> “_As you know, last year we launched the RF mount and EOS R system," _said Richard Shepherd, pro product marketing senior manager at Canon Europe. _"To date we’ve launched ten critically acclaimed lenses, and as it’s a new system we plan to continue this, launching more RF lenses while still fully supporting the EF lens system. And of course, should the market demand it, we are ready to create new EF lenses. But for now, our focus is on RF.” _
> 
> ...


You could very well be right. We're all just speculating of course. But I kind of interpreted that statement as saying 'Don't panic, you'll still get your EF gear supported with spare parts. Its fully compatible with our new mount so we'll support it for a good amount of time. But we're making a big push in to RF and if it goes like we hope we'll be moving off EF." 

that last part being the big speculation of course. A statement of reassurance so people don't go sell all their EF gear while its still valuable and before there are RF replacements to keep them in the Canon system.

-Brian


----------



## ildyria (Jul 14, 2020)

I'm patiently waiting for the RF 70-135mm f/2 L (non-IS).


----------



## scyrene (Jul 14, 2020)

TPatS said:


> I'm interested to see what plans Canon has for any future EF/EF-S lenses and APS-C cameras. As much as we like to get excited about the R5/R6, Canon's APS-C DSLR cameras are still where most people getting into photography, enter the canon ecosystem. Wonder if that elusive 7D mk3 will ever come, or will there be a new EF-S 10-18mm or new 50mm F1.4....



I think it's reasonable to assume no more EF-S lenses ever. I also happen not to expect a 7D3. Lower tier APS-C DSLRs probably have a way to go simply because they represent such a huge chunk of sales and are surely cheaper to develop. I don't know if there will be any more FF DSLRs, both sides of the argument have merits, and it could be Canon hasn't yet decided, and/or that the current global situation will have an impact on their plans. More EF lenses are possible, but I doubt there will be many. The 50mm f/1.4 would surely have been replaced by now if it was ever going to be...


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 14, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Of course I am not saying that. The low Mpx FF sensors are great for high speed data transfer and low noise at high isos. The high Mpx series FF cameras have better reach but slower performance. The 7D series have small APS-C sensors that enable high speed and high reach but at the expense of noise at high iso. The R6 is very different from a 7 series.


but then you do not need to crop anymore with Canon offering 600 & 800 f/11 long glass that cost next to nothing


----------



## JscPhoto (Jul 14, 2020)

Wonder if they scrapped the culling plugin for Lightroom. Hope not!


----------



## AlanF (Jul 14, 2020)

scyrene said:


> While I agree the R6 and 7D are in substantially different niches, you get back some of that 'reach' on the former because it can AF with much narrower apertures, so you can mount longer lenses, teleconverters, and I guess even stacked teleconverters and retain (hopefully useable) AF (and without having to buy the more expensive telephoto lenses). It'll never compete on price and I guess not on weathersealing or ruggedness, but it has the high fps 7-series users are used to. (Obviously the R5 also has these features too, but at a substantially higher cost).


The Sony experts whom I respect rave about the 24 Mpx FF A9II for its spectacular AF for birds in flight, but moan about its lack of reach compared with the A7RIII/IV series. Unless the R6 has the AF capabilities of a Sony A9, it will be of limited use for BIF with much narrower and longer lenses because you need fast shutter speeds and, in my case but not for the more agile, a reasonable field of view to keep faster flying birds in frame. An R5 in crop mode will be a very expensive replacement for the 7DII, but not the R6 as a cheaper one, fine FF camera that it is.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 14, 2020)

Kit. said:


> Only if it has the same DR.



The DR isn't the main factor. Sensor 'sees' in gamma 1.0 so to speak and it's not how we see the world. EVF shows an approximation of how you'd see it through an OVF plus optional exposure simulation. So it's obviously not 'what sensor sees' but not because of the DR.


----------



## HenryL (Jul 14, 2020)

Hector1970 said:


> I like OVF for viewing but EVF is great for showing the image immediately so you can quickly make corrections. Sometimes you forget the settings the camera is on and you can have overexposed shots. I tend not to notice the light meter. In EVF it hits you immediately something is wrong . I always thought it a pity that image replay couldn’t be put in the viewfinder of a DSLR.


This...

When I picked up my first mirrorless this year, the M6 MkII, one thing I couldn't anticipate was the convenience of playback in the viewfinder. I use reading glasses, and it annoyed me to no end when I had the diopter adjusted so I can see the OVF clearly without glasses, then having to put glasses on and off to switch from OVF to LCD to review pics. When I switch back to the 7D MkII, despite it still being superior for wildlife/BIF, I do kind of miss the EVF just for that aspect.


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 14, 2020)

HenryL said:


> This...
> 
> When I picked up my first mirrorless this year, the M6 MkII, one thing I couldn't anticipate was the convenience of playback in the viewfinder. I use reading glasses, and it annoyed me to no end when I had the diopter adjusted so I can see the OVF clearly without glasses, then having to put glasses on and off to switch from OVF to LCD to review pics. When I switch back to the 7D MkII, despite it still being superior for wildlife/BIF, I do kind of miss the EVF just for that aspect.



I had the same feeling when using the 7D yesterday instead of the RP/M6II, culling pictures is so much easier when it fills your vision.


----------



## mclaren777 (Jul 14, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> Other than the the potential lag of the EVF and battery life, what do you think the R5 is missing for motorsports? With motorsports you panning a lot, so I don't see the lag as causing a significant problem.


The lag is definitely a potential issue, as is the blackout duration. Cranking the EVF up to 120Hz might help, but then the battery life is really going to suffer.

I'm sure the R5 is going to be a fine camera for most applications, but I'm still bummed that Canon may not give us one final, amazing 5D.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 14, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> The DR isn't the main factor. Sensor 'sees' in gamma 1.0 so to speak and it's not how we see the world.


What I see in the OVF is shown in gamma 1.0 by definition, as well as the rest of the world (shown though passive optical paths, if we disregard the effects of flare).

The DR compression ("gamma") in the EVF can be applied, but then one would lose the EVF's pseudo-WYSIWYG functionality.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 14, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> Out of curiosity, higher in absolute numbers, or in cameras sold per X persons?
> 
> Higher price per unit doesn't sound all that surprising to me. Price of electronics has dropped, but there's so much more of it in a modern camera.


The sales of interchangeable lens cameras are still higher than historical norms.











This is What the History of Camera Sales Looks Like with Smartphones Included


A few months ago, we shared a chart showing how sales the camera market have changed between 1947 and 2014. The data shows that after a large spike in the




petapixel.com





This first chart only goes to 2014 because it is from a 2015 article but nicely illustrates the historical market.

This second link gives later figures and more breakdown.









Case Study: Camera & Photography Industry Statistics (2022)


In this article, our team collected the most detailed camera and photography industry statistics up to 2022. Discover how COVID has affected sales etc




shotkit.com


----------



## Mickeyess (Jul 14, 2020)

A real cool adapter for me would be one that let's me use my FD lenses.


----------



## gruhl28 (Jul 14, 2020)

I’d like to see more smaller, less expensive lenses, not super fast or bullet-proof but with decent optics, to pair with my RP.


----------



## Adam Shutter Bug (Jul 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Agree.
> 
> For me the transition was about half a minute. Now I can hardly bear to look through my 7D2 or 5D4.
> 
> Who doesn't want the ability to adjust settings and instantly see what the image is going to look like?


I did have an issue with my eye going slightly blurry and getting fatigued for a while but I am looking at monitors a lot. Now I would never want to go back to an OVF. Seeing the exposure and focus peeking is brilliant. The R has flaws but also some amazing gains. The only few for me has been rolling shutter, shutter speed and build quality not being very durable. Especially the paint finish and the metal around the mount.


----------



## Eclipsed (Jul 14, 2020)

yoms said:


> You can never be superior to an OVF, by definition.


That’s why use overhead projectors and transparencies and not electronic


unfocused said:


> Way to just make stuff up.
> 
> DSLRs still constitute a huge share of the market.There will not be a 100% migration to mirrorless in a single generation, if ever.
> 
> Canon will not abandon half or more of the full frame market, especially in these highly competitive times when every manufacturer is fighting to hold on to market share.



1. There is never a 100% of anything anywhere, ever, so your bold statement has zero meaning. There has not been a 100% migration away from autofocus, or from film, or from view cameras, or from wet glass plates. Which is irrelevant to the question at hand.
2. A "single generation" in the digital camera world is a couple years, in which case I agree with even the implication that flippy mirrors won't be obsolete or entirely out of production in a few years. Or did you mean a 20-year human generation?


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 14, 2020)

Why is the Adorama ad link overflown to article links? Or example i click the comments link on this article and goes to the Adorama post. 
It happens randomly and even after page is fully loaded. I am not sure if its deliberate to make people click by "accident" but very annoying.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 14, 2020)

yoms said:


> You can never be superior to an OVF, by definition.



Completely wrong. OVF doesn't show you the image you will ultimately get in any situation. I doesn't show you DOF for big apertures. It's too dim at small apertures. The only advantage it has over a properly implemented EVF is the battery savings, lack of delay, and other "experiential" elements of analog vs. digital. But for the act of composing a photograph, EVF is far better.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 14, 2020)

gruhl28 said:


> I’d like to see more smaller, less expensive lenses, not super fast or bullet-proof but with decent optics, to pair with my RP.


While waiting for RF lenses, there are plenty of EF lenses that will work well with an adapter. Also, there are some good values available in the used EF market.


----------



## Harold Lee (Jul 14, 2020)

The RF 18-45mm IS STM seems pretty interesting, if it's a full-frame lens.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 14, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> Completely wrong. OVF doesn't show you the image you will ultimately get in any situation. I doesn't show you DOF for big apertures. It's too dim at small apertures. *The only advantage it has over a properly implemented EVF is the battery savings, lack of delay, and other "experiential" elements of analog vs. digital.* But for the act of composing a photograph, EVF is far better.


That’s three advantages you mentioned not the only one


----------



## amorse (Jul 14, 2020)

drama said:


> What is it exactly that you see in a A7R4 that you don't see in an existing Canon body? And does the price differentiator make sense when you factor in new batteries, lenses, etc? Honestly curious. Because I cannot for the life of me see any logic to what you posted.


I agree with your statement, but I'll use it as a jump off point - one really noticeable difference between my 5DIV and a friends a7R3 was the low light exposure simulation. I'm almost always using the back screen anyway and on a tripod, and I will say that my friend's a7R3, in very low light, could see a heck of a lot more in exposure simulation than my 5DIV could see. It was enough that the camera's exposure simulation would see more than my eye could see - made composing in the dark a fair bit easier. That was really the only thing I found myself wishing I had. Definitely not a deal breaker, but it would be nice to have in the R5!


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 14, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


RF 18-45mm IS STM
RF 100-400mm IS USM

Do we know what aperture range to expect? Hoping not another pair of F7.1 lenses.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 14, 2020)

Kit. said:


> What I see in the OVF is shown in gamma 1.0 by definition, as well as the rest of the world (shown though passive optical paths, if we disregard the effects of flare).
> 
> The DR compression ("gamma") in the EVF can be applied, but then one would lose the EVF's pseudo-WYSIWYG functionality.



I think the sensor 'sees' in gamma 1.0, that is linear perception, and the human eyes are non-linear (gamma 1/2.2 or around).


----------



## scyrene (Jul 14, 2020)

AlanF said:


> The Sony experts whom I respect rave about the 24 Mpx FF A9II for its spectacular AF for birds in flight, but moan about its lack of reach compared with the A7RIII/IV series. Unless the R6 has the AF capabilities of a Sony A9, it will be of limited use for BIF with much narrower and longer lenses because you need fast shutter speeds and, in my case but not for the more agile, a reasonable field of view to keep faster flying birds in frame. An R5 in crop mode will be a very expensive replacement for the 7DII, but not the R6 as a cheaper one, fine FF camera that it is.



I didn't realise you were talking specifically about birds in flight. I would have thought "reach" was less of an issue in that subgenre (too narrow a field of view being more of a challenge in tracking as you say).


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 14, 2020)

Harold Lee said:


> The RF 18-45mm IS STM seems pretty interesting, if it's a full-frame lens.


If it’s RF, it is FF.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 14, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> That’s three advantages you mentioned not the only one



I'm grouping them into the same bucket of "it's not electronic". They have no benefits for photo composition, which is the point of a viewfinder.


----------



## Twinix (Jul 14, 2020)

degos said:


> There's a whole Cine line of cameras from Canon, why can't film makers just buy those and leave our photographic cameras alone.
> 
> I don't understand this obsession with making everything into a video camera.


B and C-camera, and nice to have one camera for two tasks.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 14, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> I think the sensor 'sees' in gamma 1.0, that is linear perception, and the human eyes are non-linear (gamma 1/2.2 or around).


The brightness perception of humans in the normal light range is logarithmic (Weber's law), which means it preserves the apparent contrast of diffuse surfaces no matter what the intensity of the illumination is.

It's somewhat different in _very_ low light due to quantum effects.

Still, I don't see what it have to do with OVF vs. EVF.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 14, 2020)

Kit. said:


> Still, I don't see what it have to do with OVF vs. EVF.


It was about your statement that EVF would show what the sensor sees if EVF had the same DR.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 14, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> It was about your statement that EVF would show what the sensor sees if EVF had the same DR.


And...?

How does it relate to that? The image on the OVF's ground glass has the "gamma" of 1.0. As well as the rest of world seen without the use of intermediate capture devices.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jul 14, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> The sales of interchangeable lens cameras are still higher than historical norms.
> 
> View attachment 191328
> 
> ...



That's in units sold, and ignoring smartphones, levels have returned to those of the mid-nineties, the market is shrinking, and that's in face of population growth. I don't envy camera manufacturers' position.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 14, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> I'm grouping them into the same bucket of "it's not electronic". They have no benefits for photo composition, which is the point of a viewfinder.


An excessive latency of EVF does affect composition I mean, you literary miss shots shooting fast action due to slow EVF. Example : Canon R. Not to kick start an argument, of course. Just pointing out that there are other benefits: when shooting with strobes for example.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 14, 2020)

Harold Lee said:


> The RF 18-45mm IS STM seems pretty interesting, if it's a full-frame lens.


How could it not be a full frame lens? All RF lenses are full frame lenses.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 14, 2020)

degos said:


> There's a whole Cine line of cameras from Canon, why can't film makers just buy those and leave our photographic cameras alone.


It isn’t film makers making the cameras. On top of that, people can’t all afford a Cine camera. Canon is supplying two markets with one machine. Very cost effective for all.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 14, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> That's in units sold, and ignoring smartphones, levels have returned to those of the mid-nineties, the market is shrinking, and that's in face of population growth. I don't envy camera manufacturers' position.


In the context of my original comment. that was in response to another comment, I was just pointing out that even with these seemingly dire reductions in numbers looking at range limited data belies the historical market numbers. If camera buyers can be motivated with new releases, as the R5 and R6 seemingly are and the Sony A7S III almost certain to do as well, even at the reduced sales volume I believe the ILC market Is still sustainable.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 14, 2020)

I would hope the RF 100-400 is in fact an L series lens. I just can't stomach buying an f/7.1 lens. F/5.6 is slow enough! I'm hoping it will be something like an f/4 at all focal lengths, with even closer MFD than the EF version II. Maybe a dream lens, and pricey, but it would be sweet, especially if it were great with an extender.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 14, 2020)

Kit. said:


> And...?
> 
> How does it relate to that? The image on the OVF's ground glass has the "gamma" of 1.0.



The question was if we could see 'what sensor sees' in the EVF if its DR was the same as in the sensor.


----------



## max (Jul 14, 2020)

waiting for the 135 f/2 to make the change


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 14, 2020)

Harold Lee said:


> The RF 18-45mm IS STM seems pretty interesting, if it's a full-frame lens.


The original version of that lens' rumor, several months ago, was that it was an f/2-4 M-mount kit lens.

Update: https://www.canonrumors.com/five-new-ef-m-lenses-for-the-eos-m-lineup-coming-cr1/


----------



## tron (Jul 14, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> I don't undserstand why you think they would want to , I mean the new R5 is the new 5d , there's nothing in it for them , thousands of bought into the RF system now , they are not going to bring out a 5D now it doesn't have a big enough following anymore .


And you know that how exactly?


----------



## Kit. (Jul 14, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> The question was if we could see 'what sensor sees' in the EVF if its DR was the same as in the sensor.


And...?


----------



## tron (Jul 14, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> Put a battery grip on the R5 and you have the power.


And lose the size advantage!


----------



## tron (Jul 14, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> They will be building out the RF system for many years to come. The last EF lenses were released in 2018. Since 2018, Canon released 15 (fifteen) RF lenses and 0 (zero) EF lenses.
> My bet is we've already seen the last EF lens and the last EF camera (1DxIII). 90D was the last EF-S crop one. The M line will probably continue to live (that is being upgraded).
> 
> 5DV? same elusive dream as 7DIII. I think there's a non-zero chance Canon releases it next year as a 5D line swan song, but the chance is really small IMO.
> ...


There is no such thing. You must have meant EF 16-35 f/4L IS. I do have both this and RF15-35 but when I want to travel light the 15-35 is an issue. and I prefer 5D4 with 16-35 (Many times it exists in a bag that also contains 5DsR behing the 500mmII). But yes I like the idea since I got EOS R mainly for 15-35 IS and 24-70 IS. No use in museums, churches interiors yet though due to covid-19...


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Ale_F said:


> R6 is not enough?



By the time one crops the 20MP of the R6 to APS-C size, one only has 7.8MP left.

The 20.2MP APS-C 7D Mark II has a sensor density equal to a 50MP FF sensor.

Compared to the $1,799 introductory price of the 7D Mark II, $3,899 is a bit steep to pay for use as a fast handling, high sensor density, built like a tank sports/action/wildlife camera. There is that rated 500,000 cycle shutter in the R5, though, compared to the 200,000 cycle rating of the 7D Mark II's shutter.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

neurorx said:


> I wonder where the R1 is. Wasn't there a late 2020 or early 2021 rumor for an announcement?






navastronia said:


> I'm fine with them waiting a while, especially given the state of the (American) live sports industry.



The timeline for the 1-series has been totally wrecked by the postponement and possible eventual cancellation of the XXXII Olympiad in Japan, as well as the lack of sports on almost all levels during most of 2020. I doubt even Canon knows at this point when an R1 will emerge.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

neurorx said:


> I wonder where the R1 is. Wasn't there a late 2020 or early 2021 rumor for an announcement?





bellorusso said:


> What is up with all these STM lenses? You spend 4500 Euros on camera, thousands of Euros on cards, 15 000 on a PC, and then you go and buy yourself 300 Euro cheap lens? LOL IDK.



They've already released many premium lenses along with two lower end bodies. Now they're releasing two higher end bodies to go with existing lenses and several lower end lenses to go with existing bodies.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Andy Westwood said:


> Yes, last week was a HOT week for Canon possibly it’s best with the announcement of those stunning new bodies not to mention new lenses and convertors etc.
> 
> Those five new lenses to follow sound tasty I think I’m going to stick with my EF versions of the nifty fifty and my 70-200mm f/2.8 after all I’ll need a use for my EF / RF adapter for something.
> 
> ...



The EF 17-40mm f/4 L has been showing it's weaknesses since digital sensors passed about 10MP or so. It's still a decent lens for the price as long as one intends the output for web use and smaller display sizes. And it is still built like a tank to take a beating in tough environments. 

I'm surprised they didn't remove it from the catalog after the introduction of the EF 16-35mm f/4. Once remaining stocks run out, they probably will officially mark it discontinued.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

victorshikhman said:


> Come on, Canon, give us a refresh of the EFS 17-55 F2.8. Even if it's the last EFS lens you make. You probably have the design already. Just give it to us. Take our money.






Twinix said:


> Yes!! Really wanted to use with the cinema line, also the Canon 17-85 should get a refresh.






Quarkcharmed said:


> I think EF-S line was dead even before the EF line. The last EF-S lens was in 2017, last EF - 2018. The production and sales will obviously last for quite a while, but not the development.



That ship sailed a long time ago.

Canon has not released a premium APS-C only constant aperture zoom lens since 2006 when they rolled out your EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS.

The closest they've come to releasing a premium APS-C only prime lens was the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM in 2012, unless one counts the Macros with built-in ring light EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM and EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS STM released in 2017 and 2016, respectively.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> At 120fps in the EVF I can assume the additional lag (compared to the OVF) will be no more than 1/120s. Considering that 0.1s is a very good reaction time to press the shutter button, the EVF adds less than 10%.



You might be mistaken in that assumption. It's not necessary for the EVF to display one frame before the sensor begins collecting the light for the next frame. There could be multiple frames in various points of the image pipeline between sensor and EVF all at the same time, just as there are multiple images in the camera's buffer while writing bursts to a memory card.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I got mine for $3700 @ B&H and couldn't be happier.



Via CPW?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

AlanF said:


> It was claimed that the 100-500 was f/5.6 at 400mm but Gordon Laing's cameralabs video has this:
> View attachment 191314






miketcool said:


> Canon discussed it during their launch presentation. f/5.6 at 400mm when they were talking about engineering and design.




The disparate results could be due to differences in methodology.

Maximum apertures are not "stairsteps" as focal length increases, they are slopes.

How one decides where to put the crossover line between f/5.6 and f/6.3 affects the results.

Is f/5.6000001 considered already f/6.3? Probably not since "f/5.6" is rounded from the actual result of (√2)^5 = 5.657...

Is f/6.2999999 considered still f/5.6? Maybe, since (√2)^5.333... = 6.349...

Or is the dividing line halfway between, at about f/6.0? [ (√2)^5.16667 = 5.9932...]


----------



## Proscribo (Jul 14, 2020)

yoms said:


> I wouldn't understand why Canon wouldn't release a 5D Mark V.
> 
> 90% of the job is done.
> 
> ...


How much light goes to the AF sensor on a typical DSLR? What if you just ditched the separate AF module altogether and used the image sensor for AF, the 1DXIII already uses a CMOS sensor in place of the more traditional line sensor.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

PhotonShark said:


> This looks like the non L version. It would be a game changer if it would do f5.6 to 300mm (or more). A huge temptation for APS-C users to switch to full frame if the pricing is right.
> 
> I'm currently using a 70D and the 70-300mm. This would be the perfect combo upgrade (equivalent) for me with an R6 without breaking the bank.



Yes. Canon's strategy for what lower cost lenses they introduce seems to be precisely aimed at getting APS-C, and even Micro Four-Thirds, shooters to move to RF.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Twinix said:


> Yea, my point was just that I wan’t good aps-c glass (24-105 is too thight etc) for the cinema line with IS.



Then buy CN-E lenses.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 14, 2020)

tron said:


> And you know that how exactly?


Because he says so. How dare you suggest facts or logic should be involved.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 14, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Via CPW?



No, just good old fashioned begging.

Me - do you guys do military discount?

B&H - only for active duty.

Me - so the Sailor who has been in two days gets a discount, but barnacles like me who did 30 years get nothing?

B&H - hold on one minute and let's see what we can do..

lol...


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> You are most probably correct. The low sellers will be closed out. I noticed now that Adorama has the EF 400mm f/5.6L on closeout. That surprised me as I would have thought it to be a strong seller because I loved the one I had. I ordered the 135mm f/2L just in case. I won't be able to afford an RF version for quite some time.



I was under the impression Canon officially discontinued the EF 400mm f/5.6 a while back.

Maybe not.

It is still listed at Canon USA's website, though it has been showing as out of stock there for forever.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Chaz320 said:


> Where is this mythical 70-135mm f/2 ?????



It seems to me someone on a previous post here at Canon Rumors "wished" for a 70-135mm f/2 and ever since then there has been a small group that is vocal about why Canon hasn't yet mentioned a lens they think they were "promised."


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

yoms said:


> I wouldn't understand why Canon wouldn't release a 5D Mark V.
> 
> 90% of the job is done.
> 
> ...



Because it would still cost them several millions of additional dollars just in distribution and inventory costs when almost all of the 5D Mark V cameras they sell would probably have been R5 sales had the 5D Mark V not been created? What other company is producing a "5D Mark V" type of EF mount camera to compete with Canon that they would need to be concerned about protecting those lost sales?

Sure, for the few of us who would rather have an OVF 5D Mark V than an EVF R5, the lack of a 5D Mark V is disappointing. But Canon likely correctly assumes that there are not enough of us who would buy one to cover the additional cost of making and distributing/inventorying a 5D Mark V in addition to the R5. Or even if they could "break even" on the additional cost, the resources they would use to produce and sell a 5D Mark V could have probably given them higher returns if directed to developing other projects.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

mb66energy said:


> EOS M lens: I would really like an EF-M 15 - 60 f/4 IS lens with excellent IQ + internal zoom + focusing + 60mm outer diameter (f/4 @ 60mm = 15mm eff. aperture should support this) + 1:3 max. reproduction ratio. Just if it has a length of 100mm + 400 grams. I would pay ~600 Euro without hesitation ...



The size of the front element of wide angle lenses is driven more by how much vignetting can be tolerated, rather than by the effective aperture (entrance pupil) size.

There's a much greater difference between how much of the entrance pupil can be seen by _all of the points in the field of view_ compared to how much of the entrance pupil can only be seen by _some points within the field of view _with wide angle lenses than with longer focal length lenses. It's also why the front elements of a wide angle APS-C only lens can be smaller than the front element of a FF lens with the same focal length and maximum aperture and not vignette more.

In many cases, the curvature of the front element of a very wide angle lens blocks light from one side of the field of view from falling on the opposite side of the front of the lens.


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jul 14, 2020)

Proscribo said:


> How much light goes to the AF sensor on a typical DSLR? What if you just ditched the separate AF module altogether and used the image sensor for AF, the 1DXIII already uses a CMOS sensor in place of the more traditional line sensor.


Technically, you cannot do what you suggest while shooting through the OVF. You have to have a separate AF module when using an OVF.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

scyrene said:


> Although arguably the new narrow aperture focusing capabilities means you can practicably mount longer focal lengths more cheaply, using extenders or the new budget superteles. It might tempt some people.



Being able to focus at narrower apertures in bright light does nothing for reducing subject motion in dimmer light, which is where much of sports is shot. You need dramatically better high ISO performance,on the order of the number of stops between f/2.8 and f/11, for that.


One reason the 7D and 7D Mark II, even with all of their shortcomings, were so popular is that they allowed one to shoot many field sports under lights at night or indoors in gyms with a $2,000 70-200/2.8 instead of requiring a $5,000 300/2.8 to get the same reach with a FF camera.

Circa 2016:

1D X Mark II + EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS II = $12,100 USD and one still needs another body + 70-200 for when the action gets closer.

7D Mark II + EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II = $4,000 USD


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> Why won't IBIS be good enough for this particular focal length range? This lens would already be humongous and heavy.



IBIS is less effective as the field of view narrows. The sensor must move twice as far to compensate for the same amount of angular movement with a lens that has twice the focal length as another lens. The maximum allowable amount of sensor movement is limited by the size of the image circle, so...


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> The M6-2 doesn't have a built-in viewfinder.



Nor the ability to use the hot shoe for external flash control at the same time as the ability to have an eye-level viewfinder.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Way to just make stuff up.
> 
> DSLRs still constitute a huge share of the market.There will not be a 100% migration to mirrorless in a single generation, if ever.
> 
> Canon will not abandon half or more of the full frame market, especially in these highly competitive times when every manufacturer is fighting to hold on to market share.



On the other hand, who is making an EF mount camera like what the 5D Mark V would be that can steal customers away from Canon if they don't produce a 5D Mark V? Most users who want a 5D Mark V will eventually "settle" for an R5. A lot really depends upon how good the improved EVF is for shooting sports/action.


----------



## Proscribo (Jul 14, 2020)

yoms said:


> Technically, you cannot do what you suggest while shooting through the OVF. You have to have a separate AF module when using an OVF.


Why not?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

BakaBokeh said:


> Maybe one of those cool adapters is RF to EF-M? That with a M5mkII might make the 7D crowd happy.



Not physically possible. Though the EF-M registration distance is 18mm compared to the RF registration distance of 20mm, the smaller throat diameter of the EF-M mount leaves no room for the lugs of the RF mount that are more than 2mm thick to protrude past the EF-M flange.


----------



## BakaBokeh (Jul 14, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Not physically possible. Though the EF-M registration distance is 18mm compared to the RF registration distance of 20mm, the smaller throat diameter of the EF-M mount leaves no room for the lugs of the RF mount that are more than 2mm thick to protrude past the EF-M flange.


It would have to be an optical solution.


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jul 14, 2020)

Proscribo said:


> Why not?



You need to focus while seeing composing and seeing through the OVF, I think you agree with that. That means that the sensor is hidden by the mirror mechanism. So the light cannot hit the sensor, therefore you cannot focus using the sensor since it's not illuminated by light.

Sony tried the translucent mirror box, but well can't say it was a success. Could they have improved or did they decide not to bother because they dedicated themselves only to the A7 series, who knows...


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Could you live with a 32MP sensor, a very fast one of which exists already?



Only if the AF performance and shutter life rating is better than the 90D and only if it has a built in viewfinder that the M6 Mark II lacks.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Canon had a 70-300mm DO zoom. Don’t know whether or not it was any good, but they did make a DO zoom.



It wasn't near as good as what it cost. The only thing it was good for was (sometimes) getting into stadiums/arenas for sports/concert events as a ticket buying guest with a 300mm lens without going over the allowable lens length.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> The R1 is going to have to be a leap ahead of the R5/6 and 1DX3 - I wouldn't be surprised if we have to wait at least until 2022 for an R1.



Or maybe late 2021 if the 2022 Winter Olympics are not delayed.


----------



## Proscribo (Jul 14, 2020)

yoms said:


> You need to focus while seeing composing and seeing through the OVF, I think you agree with that. That means that the sensor is hidden by the mirror mechanism. So the light cannot hit the sensor, therefore you cannot focus using the sensor since it's not illuminated by light.
> 
> Sony tried the translucent mirror box, but well can't say it was a success. Could they have improved or did they decide not to bother because they dedicated themselves only to the A7 series, who knows...


The mirror already is translucent. The AF module sits *below *the mirror box and there is second mirror behind the main one. Question just is can DPAF work with that amount of light.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Alam said:


> Just wondering, what is M6 detachable evf flaws? I just sold my m100 and planning to get the rumored m50mii, but i think i will miss m100 pocketable size so I'm leaning to get m6ii






BakaBokeh said:


> If you use on camera flash, then you'd be left with a decision. EVF or Flash?



Since it has no PC port, you can't use an eye-level viewfinder and control off camera flash at the same time. 

The external EVF also wouldn't last one game on the sidelines of most field sports.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

bbb34 said:


> That would create a DSLR that performs much better in live view mode than when it is used with the OVF. There is no point in such a camera, if you don't use the OVF any more.



I wonder what Canon thinks about the sales number for the 90D? After all, many folks say it performs much better in LV than with the OVF...


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Treyarnon said:


> It would be really nice to see Canon release an R mount camera aimed at stills photographers.
> 
> Right now, if I had to replace my 5D's in a hurry (if they were stolen or dropped of a cliff or something) - the options I have for a new camera are: 5D4 (with 4 year old tech) - or move to Sony with the A7R4 (or R3). Its kind of disappointing that after 4 years and 4 RF bodies, Canon have nothing new to offer 5D users, and nothing seems to be in the pipeline either.
> [and no - a £4200 R5 is NOT a replacement for a '5D' camera]






davidhfe said:


> Just to be clear, your argument here is totally based on price? The R5 is not a 5D4 replacement because it's too expensive?



What if Canon knows they would need to price the 5D Mark V at the same level as the R5 to make it financially feasible for them? A lot has changed in the world's economic climate since 2016.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

ReflexVE said:


> The R5 appears to be the same price it was back in 2016 once you correct for the fact that the Yen is substantially stronger against the dollar than it was in 2016 (~123:1 then vs 107:1 now).



Maybe to a point. 

But Canon's pricing of the 1D X Mark II in 2016 at $5,999, versus $6,499 for the 1D X and 1D X Mark III in 2012 and 2020, respectively, indicates that the price adjustment in 2016 was more of a reaction to perceived competition from the Nikon D5, which for the first time ever had better AF than Canon's current flagship body, than it was a reaction to the value of the yen vs. USD.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> Put a battery grip on the R5 and you have the power.



Not really. The body and the power regulators it uses is still only providing the lens with the reduced power of a system designed for a 7.2V two-cell Li-Ion battery compared to the power of system designed around a 10.8V three-cell Li-Ion battery.


----------



## bbb34 (Jul 14, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> I wonder what Canon thinks about the sales number for the 90D? After all, many folks say it performs much better in LV than with the OVF...



I don't know what Canon thinks, but

if I was Canon, and I was able to make great profit from a DSLR that everybody mostly uses in live view mode, I would hurrry to shift the business to mirrorless in order to make more profit out of the same market.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Franklyok said:


> Agree. How ever if I would have to spend 3+K on lens, i'd prefer one with IS and suffer with weight and size. I'd be 12+ year investment, after all.
> 
> Why 70-200 with IS came before non-is version. Salesnumbers prediction, i suppose.
> 
> ...



Maybe because Canon knows they sell a LOT more 85mm prime lenses than 100mm, 135mm, 180mm, and 200mm primes combined? And that they sell enough of each of the f/1.2, f/1.4, and f/1.8 variations to make them all worth doing?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Hector1970 said:


> The 5R launch has been odd in that they haven't allowed any independent reviews. It will be interesting what the neutral reviews are like.



In the past most independent reviewers who had access before the cameras were out in the wild got very limited time with pre-production models at press events hosted by Canon. For the 5D Mark IV (or maybe it was the 1D X Mark II, or both), it was held in Hawaii. For the 90D/6D Mark II, it was held outside of Atlanta at an auto racing road course. Notice that even before the emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, Canon was spending less on such events than they had in the past. These events allowed many different invitees to get a chance to look at the new cameras using a relatively few number of bodies, as they were passed from one to the next every couple of hours.

With the current situation dominated by COVID and resulting travel and large meeting restrictions, Canon wasn't able to host any such event(s). Getting bodies from one reviewer to the next via couriers would have taken much longer and allowed the reviewers to have almost a full day to do whatever they wished with the bodies without Canon representatives being present to insure the reviewers followed the agreements they signed in order to be allowed to attend the hosted events. Things such as no saving raw files, etc. would not have been enforceable.


----------



## Franklyok (Jul 14, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Maybe because Canon knows they sell a LOT more 85mm prime lenses than 100mm, 135mm, 180mm, and 200mm primes combined? And that they sell enough of each of the f/1.2, f/1.4, and f/1.8 variations to make them all worth doing?



Agree, this must be it. And 70-135 f2 would be one lens to rule them all . I have old ef 85, and could kick it another 5 years. R Body alone and counterpart lens ( RF 85 ) are not compelling enough to update gear. 

Hows that ef 200 f2 IS going btw. Nobody complained about size and weight back then.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

CaMeRa QuEsT said:


> I once bought a brand spanking new Sigma 17-55/2.8 OS that could not focus to infinity. I live in a country with no Sigma authorized repair shops, so I had to disassemble the lens myself to remove a shimmy out of the focusing group so that it could do infinity. Then I found out that the lens was not well centered and had low contrast. Once bitten, twice shy. I much prefer original Canon lenses, never had any issues with them, and Canon has a very strong local presence.



Sigma's "Global Vision" lenses (Art, Sports, and Contemporary series) are entirely different animals than their pre-Global Vision offerings. There's still a small gap between them and Canon lenses in terms of AF accuracy and consistency, but almost none in terms of optical image quality.


----------



## Franklyok (Jul 14, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> Why won't IBIS be good enough for this particular focal length range? This lens would already be humongous and heavy.


Uh,

It about image circle nowadays. Even 28-70 does not have IS, and still gets 8 stop ibis. Now i got this. 









5 lenses that get 8 stops of stabilization on the Canon EOS R5 and R6


Plus 5 more lenses that deliver 7 stops, 6.5 stops and 6 stops of stabilization on the Canon EOS R5 and R6




www.digitalcameraworld.com


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

bergstrom said:


> I'd like an affordable 85mm 1.4 af lens for dslr.



Any EF mount 85mm f/1.4 lens for anywhere near the same price as the EF 85mm f/1.8 would almost certainly suffer from worse IQ at all common apertures. 

Compare the IQ of the first and second generations of the 16-35/2.8 to the 16-35/4. The f/2.8 lenses sold for about 50% more and still couldn't match the IQ of the f/4. 

The EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L III is more competitive in terms of IQ with the EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS, especially on the edges of the frame, but doesn't match it at f/4 or f/5.6 in the center except at 28mm, which is both lenses weakest point as tested by DxO Labs. But the 2.8 III also sells for more than twice as much as the f/4.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I'm not. My EOS-R has been a rock and it goes everywhere.
> 
> This reviewer says the R5 is as solid as anything he's ever held in his hand.



That reviewer is also a paid endorser of Canon products.

Though I'd expect that the R5 will be just as rugged as the 5D Mark IV, if not even more rugged.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Franklyok said:


> Agree, this must be it. And 70-135 f2 would be one lens to rule them all . I have old ef 85, and could kick it another 5 years. R Body alone and counterpart lens ( RF 85 ) are not compelling enough to update gear.
> 
> Hows that ef 200 f2 IS going btw. Nobody complained about size and weight back then.



As much as I salivate at the prospect of owning an EF 85mm f/1.4 L IS, I cannot justify paying that price for what it offers over the EF 85mm f/1.8 I bought used for a steal at $150 a few years ago. It's a very good lens!

The 70-135/2 is a unicorn that, as far as I can tell, Canon has never said anything about. It got started here at Canon Rumors when someone added a 70-135mm f/2 to their wish list of possible RF mount lenses.

Plenty of folks complained about the size and weight, not to mention PRICE, of the EF 200mm f/2 L IS! Especially when compared to the size/weight/price of the EF 200mm f/2.8 L II. If only the 200/2.8 had IS!


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

StoicalEtcher said:


> Who really knows? - no-one here I'd imagine - the only certain thing is that there will always be a newer camera 'just around the corner'. Sometimes you just have to pull the trigger, take the shots with what you have, and get the next one once its arrived



That was easier for many folks when Canon held the line on price for the full length of most camera's time in the catalog. It meant they could use a camera for a couple of years and sell it when they wanted a newer model without taking a bath. Now that Canon has seemed to have adopted Sony's strategy of lowering the price of older models and leaving them in the catalog longer, that is not so much the case. Try selling a lightly used 5D Mark IV today for anywhere near what it cost you new in 2016-17!


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

brad-man said:


> I must confess, I'm disappointed about the RF 24mm f/2.8 IS STM Macro rumor. Since wide lenses are where the RF mount is supposed to shine, why is the 24mm only 2.8? Why not 2.0, or at least 2.2? I doubt the RF will be much smaller and lighter than the modestly sized EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM, so I guess it will be quite a bit sharper? Since they're calling it a macro, I suppose the MFD will be less than the 8" of the EF, but I want some speed. 2.8 is quick for a zoom at this focal length, not so much for a prime. It's too early in my RF relationship to become disillusioned...




An EF 28mm lens is required to use a retrofocus design because it is shorter than the EF mount 44mm registration distance.

WIth a 20mm registration distance for the RF mount, a 28mm lens can be a more conventional design. 

I'd expect an RF 28mm f/2.8 IS STM to be both smaller and have better overall IQ than the EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM. 

I'd also be very surprised if Canon does not release an RF 24mm f/1.4 L within the next year or so.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> What would be the cost for this new 5Dv beast? No EVF but prism/ mirror box, AF system from 1DXii (maybe?) will add significant cost even if everything else is the same. Focusing/AF will still be better (coverage/subject tracking) will still be better via live view similar to 1DXiii. It would also mean a fixed screen vs flippy on R5. OLED top screen? It may happen but would people pay USD300-500 more than R5 for it given the lower sales volume now that the R5 has been released and is moving people over to RF (including me)?



Too many folks want them to put Rolex parts inside and still charge a Timex price.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Pixel said:


> The Canon rep who showed me the R5/R6 told me point blank it’s the exact same sensor. Just going off of what he said.



Probably it is the same bare sensor. Most definitely it has different microlenses to account for the varying edge angles between a 44mm registration distance and a 20mm registration distance. Thus different filter stack in front of the microlenses, including the low pass filter.


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jul 14, 2020)

Proscribo said:


> The mirror already is translucent. The AF module sits *below *the mirror box and there is second mirror behind the main one. Question just is can DPAF work with that amount of light.


As I wrote, Sony had something like this but they completely gave up on the system (A99 series) if that's a clue.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> One of the differences I know about for sure is that the sensor in the 1DX III has a ‘high-detail’ low-pass filter, and the R6 uses a simpler traditional low-pass filter. I'm sure there are others but don't know what they are and I doubt they will impact image quality to any degree.
> 
> All I know is 20MP is too small for me. I did 20MP in the 7D2. After 30MP in the 5D4 and R, I'll never go backwards in resolution.



The 20MP sensor of the 7D Mark II has the same pixel density as a 50MP FF sensor, though. That's denser than both the 5D Mark IV and the EOS R.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Mr Majestyk said:


> Why is the R5 inadequate. If you use mechanical shutter it seems like it would be far more than adequate. The e-shutter will most likely be inadequate due to sensor read speed being at best 1/60s and I see the 20fps headline as a gimmick on a non-stacked or non-global shutter sensor. But 12fps with mechanical shutter is 1DX performance with 45MP. You are too quick to dismiss an unreleased product.
> 
> FWIW I see zero need for a 5DV going forward.



How can a sensor that only reads out at 60fps do full sensor width video at 120fps? 

Or how can a mechanical shutter with curtain transit times in the neighborhood of 2.5 milliseconds (the 1D X Mark II, 1D X, and 7D Mark II all have curtain transit times of around 2.5-2.7ms) be that much better than a sensor that can read out at, say, 240fps? (1/400 = 2.5ms, 1/240 = 4.17ms)

Yes, there will be more rolling shutter effect at 20fps with the e-shutter. But it will not be anywhere near as bad as a sensor that can only read out 60fps. (1/60 = 16.67ms, 1/120 = 8.33ms)


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

Eclipsed said:


> you must have amazing mind reading powers to discern “religious devotion” in people you have never met.
> 
> and without even quoting a word of evidence.



I've seen thousands upon thousands of such posts. Do you wish us to quote all of them?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

PhotonShark said:


> The EVF shows you what the sensor sees. The OVF doesn't.



But what the sensor sees and what the final image looks like aren't necessarily the same thing. For anyone who shoots raw and post-processes expertly to account for the unique properties of a specific scene, WYSIWYG is not that true.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 14, 2020)

tataylino said:


> Maybe because it is a lot cheaper compared to Cine lines?



Do you expect to get Mercedes-Benz features and performance for a Kia price?

Do you expect to get Tag-Heuer features and performance for a Timex price?

Why would you expect to get Cine camera/lens features and performance for an RF or EF price?


----------



## ColinJR (Jul 14, 2020)

I'm a little surprised we don't have the 50 1.8 yet. That being said, an 18-45 would be tremendously useful for real estate photography. It would be great if it were a proper update to the 17-40 L lens.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 14, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> That was easier for many folks when Canon held the line on price for the full length of most camera's time in the catalog. It meant they could use a camera for a couple of years and sell it when they wanted a newer model without taking a bath. Now that Canon has seemed to have adopted Sony's strategy of lowering the price of older models and leaving them in the catalog longer, that is not so much the case. Try selling a lightly used 5D Mark IV today for anywhere near what it cost you new in 2016-17!



My 5D4 is cherry. I mean, really. I baby my gear as it is but I’m not exaggerating when I say there isn’t a mark on it. Anywhere. Shutter actuations are low because I have a truckload of cameras bodies and they all get used.

When I began R5 and possible 100-500L shopping I thought of selling my 7D2, 5D4, and maybe even my EOS-R to offset the hit. I don’t need to, I will just have to get a bigger shelf. But in the process of feeling it out I discovered there is no real market for these bodies unless you want to give them away. I think Adorama wanted to give $1000 for a ‘best case’ EOS-R.

No thanks. I’ll keep all my bodies and use them for decoration before I let them go for that kind of money. That’s why I still have every body I’ve ever bought. Every lens too - even the really horrible ones hahaha...

I mean, what kind of idiot owns a 70-300 AND a 75-300 hmmm? It gets worse, oh yes.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 14, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The 20MP sensor of the 7D Mark II has the same pixel density as a 50MP FF sensor, though. That's denser than both the 5D Mark IV and the EOS R.



This is true and a great point BUT when I went from my 7D2 to my 5D4 my keeper rate improved to the point I felt like I was cheating.

I still shoot my 7D2 from time to time and when I go to crop I’m always disappointed with the results in relation to my 5D4 or EOS-R.

I’m very anxious to see what the 20MP in the R6 can do but I know that if I opted for the R6 instead of the R5 I’d have buyer’s remorse and always wonder ‘what if..’

Besides, I’m looking forward to heating my house when I shoot 8K on my R5. I won’t even have to turn on the heat this winter. /s


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 14, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> But what the sensor sees and what the final image looks like aren't necessarily the same thing. For anyone who shoots raw and post-processes expertly to account for the unique properties of a specific scene, WYSIWYG is not that true.



I can tell you this from my experience.

When I shoot my EOS-R (and again, I shoot wildlife 99.99999 percent of the time) the ability to see the changes to my settings as I look through the eyepiece is as close to the actual image result as you can get. Shooting under to save highlights while balancing what you’ll be able to recover in post is ten times easier (for me) when shooting the EVF vice the OVF.

On my 5D4 I adjust and hope. I’m not the guy who can just ‘click-click’ a couple of this or that and nail the exposure every time - especially when I’m walking through the woods and the light is different every two steps. I usually make my best guess and take a test shot and see what the back panel tells me and go from there. If you’re shooting birds the second try usually isn’t going to happen.

With The EVF my confidence is increased ten-fold that I’m going to be close on the first shot - and with wildlife that’s often all you get. For ME (and only me) it has made me a better photographer because I’ve learned things looking through the EVF that I use when I go back to the OVF on my 5D4.

If my OVF on my 5D4 was as big and open as my EVF on my EOS-R I might feel differently. After shooting the R for a couple of days when I pick up the 5D4 I feel like I’m looking through a pooly lit tunnel when I look through the eyepiece.

YMMV.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 14, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> I was under the impression Canon officially discontinued the EF 400mm f/5.6 a while back.
> 
> Maybe not.
> 
> It is still listed at Canon USA's website, though it has been showing as out of stock there for forever.


It is listed as "closeout" at Adorama. But, Adorama no longer carries the EF 200mm f/2.8 either and B&H apparently has some. So maybe it is just Adorama choosing not to sell it anymore.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 15, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> On the other hand, who is making an EF mount camera like what the 5D Mark V would be that can steal customers away from Canon if they don't produce a 5D Mark V? Most users who want a 5D Mark V will eventually "settle" for an R5. A lot really depends upon how good the improved EVF is for shooting sports/action.


Good points. I suppose if both Canon and Nikon were to quit developing DSLRs that would leave users with little choice. But, they would still have to weigh their ability to get customers to migrate vs. losing customers who simply choose not to buy into the mirrorless market.

Would DSLR users, who skew older, simply hang on to their existing bodies or drop photography as a hobby altogether? I'm in my mid-sixties. I'm good for probably another generation of professional level cameras, but after I retire in a couple of years, and quit doing any professional photography, I don't know what choices I will make; and I'm a serious GAS addict.

Certainly there would be some potential 5DV buyers who, if they don't have that option, choose instead to keep their money in their wallet or spend it in other ways. 

Of course, you are correct in that a lot depends on how good the improved EVF is, but I'm not sure that is the only factor. I come down squarely on the side of Canon wanting to hedge their bets. Especially because the roadmap is pretty clear and the marginal improvements likely to show up in a 5DV already exist in other models, so the incremental costs may not be that high. Only time will tell if I'm right or wrong.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 15, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> How can a sensor that only reads out at 60fps do full sensor width video at 120fps?
> 
> Or how can a mechanical shutter with curtain transit times in the neighborhood of 2.5 milliseconds (the 1D X Mark II, 1D X, and 7D Mark II all have curtain transit times of around 2.5-2.7ms) be that much better than a sensor that can read out at, say, 240fps? (1/400 = 2.5ms, 1/240 = 4.17ms)
> 
> Yes, there will be more rolling shutter effect at 20fps with the e-shutter. But it will not be anywhere near as bad as a sensor that can only read out 60fps. (1/60 = 16.67ms, 1/120 = 8.33ms)



And there's more to the e-shutter than speed; Anyone who's clicked away on a DLSR at a quiet event only to receive glares from people over the noise will appreciate it.

On the technical stuff, keep in mind all these read modes have different reading/binning/bit depths. The 4K120 is not reading 45mp x 14 bit x 120fps, for instance: It's going to be a binned 10 bit read. The 8K raw (35mp DCI crop x 12 bit x 30) is probably right at the limit for this bad boy.

Edit: Related if anyone has seen an example of a full list of video and stills modes, with bitrates and sampling techniques, I'd love to see it. DPReview came close but was missing bitrates and stills modes. I expect there are a whole boatloads of asterisks. Will probably need to wait for the white paper or manual.


----------



## ReflexVE (Jul 15, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> My 5D4 is cherry. I mean, really. I baby my gear as it is but I’m not exaggerating when I say there isn’t a mark on it. Anywhere. Shutter actuations are low because I have a truckload of cameras bodies and they all get used.
> 
> When I began R5 and possible 100-500L shopping I thought of selling my 7D2, 5D4, and maybe even my EOS-R to offset the hit. I don’t need to, I will just have to get a bigger shelf. But in the process of feeling it out I discovered there is no real market for these bodies unless you want to give them away. I think Adorama wanted to give $1000 for a ‘best case’ EOS-R.
> 
> ...


Alms for the poor! Alms for the poor! (Alms = FF EOS R in this instance)


----------



## usern4cr (Jul 15, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Canon Price Watch, they are a way that genuine Canon dealers can somewhat circumvent Canon's minimum advertised price policy. They are 100% legitimate I have bought $10,000's of gear via them, indeed I won't buy any Canon gear without getting a quote from them first. Gordon is super fast with his follow up emails and accurate and professional, can't recommend them highly enough.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is the first I've heard of CPW (thanks for the post). But how are they able to sell unopened-new-in-the-box RF lenses with 1yr US(I assume) warranties at such discounted prices when all the places I've seen have to stick to MSRP? I'd be glad to take advantage of these lens deals, but what is the risk? (FYI - I'm in Kentucky)


----------



## unfocused (Jul 15, 2020)

usern4cr said:


> This is the first I've heard of CPW (thanks for the post). But how are they able to sell unopened-new-in-the-box RF lenses with 1yr US(I assume) warranties at such discounted prices when all the places I've seen have to stick to MSRP? I'd be glad to take advantage of these lens deals, but what is the risk? (FYI - I'm in Kentucky)


No risk. CPW doesn't sell anything. He acts as a middleman for Canon dealers who are willing to offer discounted prices. 

Canon requires all dealers to follow MAP pricing (Not MSRP). MAP means Minimum Advertised Price. Under MAP dealers cannot *advertise* a price below MSRP, but there is no restriction on them *accepting* a lower price. When you contact CPW to express an interest in buying a product at the discounted street price, you will receive a response from Gordon at CPW that has the contact information for dealers willing to sell at the street price (often he has several dealers with different deals). You then contact the dealer and they send you an invoice at the street price. 

Essentially, it's an internet equivalent of walking into a dealership and asking the dealer if they can "do better" than the MSRP. Canon does not prohibit dealers from accepting less than MSRP, they just don't want dealers advertising a product for less than MSRP.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 15, 2020)

usern4cr said:


> This is the first I've heard of CPW (thanks for the post). But how are they able to sell unopened-new-in-the-box RF lenses with 1yr US(I assume) warranties at such discounted prices when all the places I've seen have to stick to MSRP? I'd be glad to take advantage of these lens deals, but what is the risk? (FYI - I'm in Kentucky)


As unfocused says CPW don’t actually sell anything, they merely put an authorized Canon dealer and you in touch with each other via email, you buy the item direct from the brick and mortar Canon dealer.

It is 100% genuine and legitimate, after you email Gordon (CPW) a Canon dealer emails you. I have spent close to $20,000 doing this (two 1DX II’s and several lenses) and I have never had an issue even when I have needed subsequent repairs, the item just goes direct to Canon USA as it would if you bought it locally or from B&H.

There is no risk, it is a proven safe and trustworthy method.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 15, 2020)

Getting back to the original subject "What's Next from Canon."

2021 will be the year of the DSLR.

5DV:
Same sensor as R5;
Smart Controller from 1DX III
Same card configuration as R5
First ever IBIS in a Canon DSLR
12 fps mechanical shutter
Autofocus with animal eye detect
Flip Screen

7DIII
Canon shocks everyone by offering a new 7D model
90 D sensor but with improved low pass filter similar to the 1DxIII
Smart Controller
Same card configuration as R5
IBIS
14 fps mechanical shutter
Autofocus with animal eye detect
Flip Screen
Uncertain at this time if the 7DIII will be have an integrated grip and use the 1DxIII battery.

New EF-CR lenses
Canon introduces the following as the first three in their new series of EF-CR lens series:
24-105 F4 IS;
24-70 F2.8;
70-200 F2.8 IS

Lenses are basically identical to existing EF lenses with the addition of a programmable control ring that offers the same customization options as the RF lens series. The 5DV and 7DIII come from the factory with the ability to use the new Control Ring lenses. The 1DX III is updated via a firmware upgrade. Canon announces they will be offering new Control Ring versions of many of their EF lenses over the next few years.

Fun to dream. Nothing here would be impossible or even difficult for Canon to do. But, it would cause many heads to explode.


----------



## victorshikhman (Jul 15, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Getting back to the original subject "What's Next from Canon."
> 
> 2021 will be the year of the DSLR.
> 
> ...



Don't forget an EF-S 17-55mm F/2.8 IS II. And as long as we're dreaming, I'd like it with weather sealing.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 15, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> Out of curiosity, higher in absolute numbers, or in cameras sold per X persons?
> 
> Higher price per unit doesn't sound all that surprising to me. Price of electronics has dropped, but there's so much more of it in a modern camera.



Interchangeable lens cameras are still selling at higher levels, in terms of units sold, than in, say, the year 2000 before the digital revolution took off around 2003-2005. The first few generations of digital cameras came with remarkable amounts of improvements from one to the next, so many folks were willing to replace their cameras every couple of years. 

As the technology has matured, the rate of improvement has also slowed. Thus replacement cycles have gotten longer. 

A 5D Mark III purchased in 2012 is still a relatively good stills camera compared to the latest offerings eight years later at the beginning of 2020. 

That same $3,499 ($3,929 adjusted for inflation in 2020) 5D Mark III in early 2012 (22.3MP. ISO 12560, 6fps) was an astounding leap over _anything_ available eight years earlier in Q1 of 2004. The $8,000 ($12K in 2020) 11.1MP FF 1Ds was limited to ISO 1250, 3fps with a 10 shot buffer. The $4,500 ($6,141 in 2020) APS-C 1D Mark II "high speed sports body" was an 8.2MP body limited to ISO 1600 and 8 fps with a buffer of 20 raw or 40 JPEGs!


----------



## jolyonralph (Jul 15, 2020)

Proscribo said:


> The mirror already is translucent. The AF module sits *below *the mirror box and there is second mirror behind the main one. Question just is can DPAF work with that amount of light.



This isn't new.









Canon EOS RT - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





But honestly, this isn't going to happen. No-one is investing in SLR technology now.

These conversations all sound like what Horse & Cart enthusiasts might have said at the time of the introduction of the motor car, eg "But what if they designed a hybrid cart that lifted up the horses when the combustion engine was enabled?"


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 15, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Good points. I suppose if both Canon and Nikon were to quit developing DSLRs that would leave users with little choice. But, they would still have to weigh their ability to get customers to migrate vs. losing customers who simply choose not to buy into the mirrorless market.
> 
> Would DSLR users, who skew older, simply hang on to their existing bodies or drop photography as a hobby altogether? I'm in my mid-sixties. I'm good for probably another generation of professional level cameras, but after I retire in a couple of years, and quit doing any professional photography, I don't know what choices I will make; and I'm a serious GAS addict.
> 
> ...



I'm in the same boat with regard to how much longer I'll be doing anything that requires keeping up with the camera/lens arms race, so I might or might not jump to mirrorless anytime soon, if ever. For the most part I'm pretty happy with what I've currently got. But honestly, if I don't spend the money needed to buy an R5, I'll probably spend that same money on EF lenses... so Canon gets my money either way. They probably know this about most shooters who will choose to stay behind in the EF ecosystem.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 15, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> And there's more to the e-shutter than speed; Anyone who's clicked away on a DLSR at a quiet event only to receive glares from people over the noise will appreciate it.



With the mirror locked up in LV (DSLR) or with mirrorless mechanical shutters the sound is much less intrusive than when a mirror is cycling between each frame. Not that I made any comment regarding comparative noise between mechanical and electronic shutters, only about their relative transit times across the sensor.




davidhfe said:


> On the technical stuff, keep in mind all these read modes have different reading/binning/bit depths. The 4K120 is not reading 45mp x 14 bit x 120fps, for instance: It's going to be a binned 10 bit read. The 8K raw (35mp DCI crop x 12 bit x 30) is probably right at the limit for this bad boy.
> 
> Edit: Related if anyone has seen an example of a full list of video and stills modes, with bitrates and sampling techniques, I'd love to see it. DPReview came close but was missing bitrates and stills modes. I expect there are a whole boatloads of asterisks. Will probably need to wait for the white paper or manual.



How many bits the sensor readout is coded into doesn't happen until the DAC and doesn't affect the sensor analog readout speed. As for binning, every photosite must be read individually before binning, which is generally done in the main image processor _after_ demosaicing which, again, has nothing to do with sensor readout speed. Line skipping does allow some lines to not be read, but when cropping the center of the frame, all lines that contribute any photosites to the image must be fully read from one side to the other including the parts on either end not used in the cropped image.


----------



## usern4cr (Jul 15, 2020)

unfocused said:


> No risk. CPW doesn't sell anything. He acts as a middleman for Canon dealers who are willing to offer discounted prices.
> 
> Canon requires all dealers to follow MAP pricing (Not MSRP). MAP means Minimum Advertised Price. Under MAP dealers cannot *advertise* a price below MSRP, but there is no restriction on them *accepting* a lower price. When you contact CPW to express an interest in buying a product at the discounted street price, you will receive a response from Gordon at CPW that has the contact information for dealers willing to sell at the street price (often he has several dealers with different deals). You then contact the dealer and they send you an invoice at the street price.
> 
> Essentially, it's an internet equivalent of walking into a dealership and asking the dealer if they can "do better" than the MSRP. Canon does not prohibit dealers from accepting less than MSRP, they just don't want dealers advertising a product for less than MSRP.


Thank you privatebydesign and unfocused for posting this. Now I understand what's going on. I will proceed to contact Gordon at CPW and see what happens.


----------



## Twinix (Jul 15, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Then buy CN-E lenses.


Yea, the 18-80 is just a little bit expensive as of now..


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 15, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Getting back to the original subject "What's Next from Canon."
> 
> 2021 will be the year of the DSLR.
> 
> ...


While I love the control ring, I don't think I'd rebuy an EF lens just for that reason. However, it would be nice for new buyers. It's a cool feature, but I just don't know that it would be compelling enough for the price difference. Who knows? IS on an EF 135mm f/2L and other non-image stabilized EF lenses (24-70) would be more compelling for me. Maybe IS *and* a control ring? I just think it would bump those lenses up closer to the RF lens price. By then it becomes almost moot.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 15, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Being able to focus at narrower apertures in bright light does nothing for reducing subject motion in dimmer light, which is where much of sports is shot. You need dramatically better high ISO performance,on the order of the number of stops between f/2.8 and f/11, for that.
> 
> 
> One reason the 7D and 7D Mark II, even with all of their shortcomings, were so popular is that they allowed one to shoot many field sports under lights at night or indoors in gyms with a $2,000 70-200/2.8 instead of requiring a $5,000 300/2.8 to get the same reach with a FF camera.
> ...



Fair enough. I didn't have sport in mind, I've never shot it. There's no ideal replacement for the 7D, but wishful thinking on the part of those who'd like an upgrade doesn't make it any more likely.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 15, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> IBIS is less effective as the field of view narrows. The sensor must move twice as far to compensate for the same amount of angular movement with a lens that has twice the focal length as another lens. The maximum allowable amount of sensor movement is limited by the size of the image circle, so...



I've been wondering, and I may as well voice it here, about the IBIS thing. The presss releases said something like, we can do 8 stops because the lens's IS unit is constantly communicating back and forth with the body, but then some non-IS RF lenses can do it too, and it's something to do with a larger projected image circle. Does this imply that EF lenses with larger image circles will have the same outcome? Or do the RF lenses have gyroscopes even without an IS unit, to make it more accurate?


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 15, 2020)

scyrene said:


> I've been wondering, and I may as well voice it here, about the IBIS thing. The presss releases said something like, we can do 8 stops because the lens's IS unit is constantly communicating back and forth with the body, but then some non-IS RF lenses can do it too, and it's something to do with a larger projected image circle. Does this imply that EF lenses with larger image circles will have the same outcome? Or do the RF lenses have gyroscopes even without an IS unit, to make it more accurate?



In one of the store Q&A panels Rudy Winston mentioned that a lens like the EF200mm/2.8 would see an "improvement" with IBIS, which gives me some more confidence in for other EF lenses.
Looking at the EF-RF adapters on my desk, the baffles in those are pretty big, so I fear those will cut off large parts of the image circle. As for builtin sensors, it wouldn't surprise me if Canon would add a combined gyro+accel sensor to all lenses, the impact on cost would be minimal if the same chip is used in all future lenses.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 15, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> In one of the store Q&A panels Rudy Winston mentioned that a lens like the EF200mm/2.8 would see an "improvement" with IBIS, which gives me some more confidence in for other EF lenses.
> Looking at the EF-RF adapters on my desk, the baffles in those are pretty big, so I fear those will cut off large parts of the image circle. As for builtin sensors, it wouldn't surprise me if Canon would add a combined gyro+accel sensor to all lenses, the impact on cost would be minimal if the same chip is used in all future lenses.



Intriguing! Hopefully more information will be released at some point.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 15, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> While I love the control ring, I don't think I'd rebuy an EF lens just for that reason. However, it would be nice for new buyers. It's a cool feature, but I just don't know that it would be compelling enough for the price difference. Who knows? IS on an EF 135mm f/2L and other non-image stabilized EF lenses (24-70) would be more compelling for me. Maybe IS *and* a control ring? I just think it would bump those lenses up closer to the RF lens price. By then it becomes almost moot.


Agree. That alone isn't going to cause people to upgrade their lenses. I was just thinking of features that Canon might carry over from one format to the other and the control ring is something they could easily carry over to the EF system at little cost. 

This goes to my core principle that Canon wants to compete with itself by using the R and DSLR systems to cross fertilize one another. They have said they don't have separate DSLR and R development teams, but use the same team for both formats. 

I think Canon wants camera buyers to go shopping thinking: "Do I want to buy into the Canon R system or the Canon DSLR system?" rather than have them thinking: "Do I want to buy a Canon or a Nikon or a Sony?" 

They've come out with an R5 that has a lot of people thinking about buying into the R system. Six months from now, they'll come out with a 5DV that will have R buyers thinking maybe they want to have the the 5D too.


----------



## bbasiaga (Jul 15, 2020)

scyrene said:


> I've been wondering, and I may as well voice it here, about the IBIS thing. The presss releases said something like, we can do 8 stops because the lens's IS unit is constantly communicating back and forth with the body, but then some non-IS RF lenses can do it too, and it's something to do with a larger projected image circle. Does this imply that EF lenses with larger image circles will have the same outcome? Or do the RF lenses have gyroscopes even without an IS unit, to make it more accurate?


I believe any lens benefits from IBIS. The lens is projecting a circle of light (image circle) that is big enough to cover the whole sensor. Some lenses it is just barely big enough, others it extends farther (a good conceptual go-by is lenses that vignette don't have a very large image circle, and those that are full brightness to the corners probably have a larger image circle). 

So the larger the circle, the more you can wiggle the sensor around and stay within it, and there fore the more stops of IS you get. I'm sure someone could go dig through patents and figure out which lenses have what size image circles and make predictions on which end of the spectrum of IBIS stops they will get. But that guy won't be me.

A lens with IS has to be able to communicate with the IBIS system, in order to make sure the moves they make are complimentary. This communication may not be as sophisticated between EF lenses and R bodies as it is between RF lenses and R bodies, i'm guessing simply on account of this feature wasn't available in EF and the R system might have some stuff specifically programmed for it. But it works and adds something to all lenses. 

-Brian


----------



## scyrene (Jul 15, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> I believe any lens benefits from IBIS. The lens is projecting a circle of light (image circle) that is big enough to cover the whole sensor. Some lenses it is just barely big enough, others it extends farther (a good conceptual go-by is lenses that vignette don't have a very large image circle, and those that are full brightness to the corners probably have a larger image circle).
> 
> So the larger the circle, the more you can wiggle the sensor around and stay within it, and there fore the more stops of IS you get. I'm sure someone could go dig through patents and figure out which lenses have what size image circles and make predictions on which end of the spectrum of IBIS stops they will get. But that guy won't be me.
> 
> ...



Thanks. It would be great if at some point (eventually) a table could be drawn up with the rough possibilities for each lens/focal length. I also wonder how EF IS lenses would cope - whether one would be obliged to turn off either ILIS or IBIS in order to prevent them fighting each other.

I had been hoping to get a 90D but the prices have remained static, and although the extra resolution still tempts me (for birds), I'm also drawn in the opposite direction with a 1-series equivalent sensor and this extra stabilisation (for macro and miscellaneous photography). The R6 is a good entry point for the R system for me, but there's no rush given there's no stock until August, according to the retailer I'd go with.


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 15, 2020)

scyrene said:


> [..]I also wonder how EF IS lenses would cope - whether one would be obliged to turn off either ILIS or IBIS in order to prevent them fighting each other.[..]



I've been trying to piece together that info using all the Q&A panels and announcements, and I this is my current understanding:

If an IS lens is detected, the IBIS toggle in the menu disappears
For an EF IS lens IBIS will do rotational corrections
For an EF IS lens IBIS will do "low frequency" shift corrections, e.g. breathing, docked boat motion, etc.
For an EF IS lens IBIS will *not* do "high frequency" aka 'shake' corrections
I would love to see the Canon white paper on this, the patents that Canonnews has looked at cover way too many options


----------



## mb66energy (Jul 15, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The size of the front element of wide angle lenses is driven more by how much vignetting can be tolerated, rather than by the effective aperture (entrance pupil) size.
> 
> There's a much greater difference between how much of the entrance pupil can be seen by _all of the points in the field of view_ compared to how much of the entrance pupil can only be seen by _some points within the field of view _with wide angle lenses than with longer focal length lenses. It's also why the front elements of a wide angle APS-C only lens can be smaller than the front element of a FF lens with the same focal length and maximum aperture and not vignette more.
> 
> In many cases, the curvature of the front element of a very wide angle lens blocks light from one side of the field of view from falling on the opposite side of the front of the lens.


You are right about that - but I hope they find a formula where the effective aperture position is closer to the front lens in the wide position which would allow a smaller diameter. If I look into my 70-200 f/4 lens I "see" the aperture blades closer to the front element in the 70mm setting compared to 200mm.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 15, 2020)

The R6 and R5 sound like fantastic cameras. I would like to see an R with IBIS. The R5 is too much for my use. The R6 isn't enough megapixels for me. That said, Maybe there will be an Rs with the rumored high megapixel sensor. Not an R5s, but an Rs, with IBIS. I can get by just fine with my R, but I would like an R with IBIS.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 15, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> A 5D Mark III purchased in 2012 is still a relatively good stills camera



Can confirm!


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 15, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> My 5D4 is cherry. I mean, really. I baby my gear as it is but I’m not exaggerating when I say there isn’t a mark on it. Anywhere. Shutter actuations are low because I have a truckload of cameras bodies and they all get used.
> 
> When I began R5 and possible 100-500L shopping I thought of selling my 7D2, 5D4, and maybe even my EOS-R to offset the hit. I don’t need to, I will just have to get a bigger shelf. But in the process of feeling it out I discovered there is no real market for these bodies unless you want to give them away. I think Adorama wanted to give $1000 for a ‘best case’ EOS-R.
> 
> ...


I have to say that I recycle the stuff that is no longer used, even if the price is terrible. If it’s not used and just taking up space in the closet, what’s the point? Waiting for the antique market to recognize value is not going to work with mass produced camera equipment. Give it away (somebody can probably use it) to possibly a student or sell it for current market. Your spouse will appreciate your selfless actions and give some leeway when acquiring the next toy.


----------



## CaMeRa QuEsT (Jul 15, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Sigma's "Global Vision" lenses (Art, Sports, and Contemporary series) are entirely different animals than their pre-Global Vision offerings. There's still a small gap between them and Canon lenses in terms of AF accuracy and consistency, but almost none in terms of optical image quality.



I keep reading mentions of similar QC issues with the newer "Global Vision" lines everywhere. also, the 56mm is $400+, that's too much to pay for a 3rd party APS-C short tele that uses aspherics and yet has very heavy distortion levels. I believe that Canon can do much better for the same price.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 15, 2020)

scyrene said:


> Can confirm!


+1


----------



## degos (Jul 15, 2020)

CaMeRa QuEsT said:


> I keep reading mentions of similar QC issues with the newer "Global Vision" lines everywhere



Global Vision encompasses the whole equivalent range of Canon lenses , from junk like the 50mm 1.8 right up to the L series. So compare like for like.


----------



## degos (Jul 15, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Yes, there will be more rolling shutter effect at 20fps with the e-shutter.



It's not rolling shutter if it's electronically read...

The effect might be similar but it's a different phenomenon


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 15, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> I have to say that I recycle the stuff that is no longer used, even if the price is terrible. If it’s not used and just taking up space in the closet, what’s the point? Waiting for the antique market to recognize value is not going to work with mass produced camera equipment. Give it away (somebody can probably use it) to possibly a student or sell it for current market. Your spouse will appreciate your selfless actions and give some leeway when acquiring the next toy.



I like my old stuff.. We have space and my wife also understands the value of a dollar. If I’m shooting some ridiculous time lapse and pull out the 40D or 70D and leave it clicking away somewhere I’m less worried than if I leave my 5D4 or EOS-R in the same situation.

My only point was that I’m not willing to give my items away for a pittance just so that entity (be it Adorama or whoever) can then turn it for a profit.


----------



## bigchicken (Jul 15, 2020)

degos said:


> There's a whole Cine line of cameras from Canon, why can't film makers just buy those and leave our photographic cameras alone.
> 
> I don't understand this obsession with making everything into a video camera.


Because the R5 and to some extent R6 are out of reach for enthusiasts on price, the pros who buy them rather than a Hasselblad are content creators/wedding photographers etc. and those segments are all hybrid photo/video. They often can't afford the Cine range which is more expensive and need to take photos. Also phones take photos and videos, to some extent the competing device with any camera these days, photo or cine.


----------



## Adam Shutter Bug (Jul 15, 2020)

bigchicken said:


> Because the R5 and to some extent R6 are out of reach for enthusiasts on price, the pros who buy them rather than a Hasselblad are content creators/wedding photographers etc. and those segments are all hybrid photo/video. They often can't afford the Cine range which is more expensive and need to take photos. Also phones take photos and videos, to some extent the competing device with any camera these days, photo or cine.


Careful you could be interpreted as calling the R5 an enthusiast camera aimed at low budget cinematographers (jk)


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 15, 2020)

Twinix said:


> Yea, the 18-80 is just a little bit expensive as of now..



Then don't complain that your Timex isn't a Rolex.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 15, 2020)

scyrene said:


> Fair enough. I didn't have sport in mind, I've never shot it. There's no ideal replacement for the 7D, but wishful thinking on the part of those who'd like an upgrade doesn't make it any more likely.



Agreed. No matter how much we wish for one, apparently we're not getting one. Ditto for the Nikon D500. But there's nothing currently on the market that makes sense as a replacement in terms of "reach", speed, durability, and price. Just the 7D Mark II with a 90D sensor in it would make the vast majority of us very happy, though eye/animal AF would also be nice. IBIS isn't much of a factor for sports/action due to the need for short exposure times.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 15, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> With the mirror locked up in LV (DSLR) or with mirrorless mechanical shutters the sound is much less intrusive than when a mirror is cycling between each frame. Not that I made any comment regarding comparative noise between mechanical and electronic shutters, only about their relative transit times across the sensor.



Point taken—was just rounding out the benefits a bit.



Michael Clark said:


> How many bits the sensor readout is coded into doesn't happen until the DAC and doesn't affect the sensor analog readout speed. As for binning, every photosite must be read individually before binning, which is generally done in the main image processor _after_ demosaicing which, again, has nothing to do with sensor readout speed. Line skipping does allow some lines to not be read, but when cropping the center of the frame, all lines that contribute any photosites to the image must be fully read from one side to the other including the parts on either end not used in the cropped image.



I actually might be totally wrong on my understanding of how this works. I thought both methods (binning and read depth) affected performance (thermal and read speed)

*With depth*, the way I've always thought about it was in terms of math It's easier to add up a lot of low precision numbers, than a few high precision numbers:

300+200+100+200 is faster to add than
683+539

Likewise, you can read 45 megapixels at 10, 12 or 14 bits. It takes the sensor less time to amplify, do the ADC at a lower precision, increasing read speed.

*With binning*, even though you've got to deal with photons hitting every pixel, the way a CMOS sensor reads you can do a computationally cheap summing of values, before ADC. If you're summing 4 values, that's 1/4 the ADC that needs to be done. As to demosiacing, my understanding is that binned photo sites necessarily need to be *adjacent* so you can bin the 4 red pixels together and then de-mosaic.

The R5 sensor appears to be be able to do:

- Standard/Mechanical - 9fps @ 14bit
- H+ Mode - Mechanical - 12fps @ 13 bit
- Electronic - 20fps @ 12 bit
- DCI Crop - 30fps @ 12 bit
- DCI Crop - 60fps @ 10bit (is this a binned mode?)
- Binned - up to 120fps @ 10bit

So, it appears based off the modes canon has published* both sampling and depth play a part in speed. I'm a designer who reads camera forums for fun, so I'm a nerd about this stuff, but by no means an expert. If anyone has an idiot's guide to this I would love to be pointed to it.

*https://www.canon-europe.com/cameras/eos-r5/specifications/


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 15, 2020)

degos said:


> It's not rolling shutter if it's electronically read...
> 
> The effect might be similar but it's a different phenomenon



It's the exact same effect: there's a temporal shift between when the top and when the bottom (or vice-versa, depending on which way the curtains move or the sensoris read out) of the sensor records the scene.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 15, 2020)

scyrene said:


> I've been wondering, and I may as well voice it here, about the IBIS thing. The presss releases said something like, we can do 8 stops because the lens's IS unit is constantly communicating back and forth with the body, but then some non-IS RF lenses can do it too, and it's something to do with a larger projected image circle. Does this imply that EF lenses with larger image circles will have the same outcome? Or do the RF lenses have gyroscopes even without an IS unit, to make it more accurate?



I've not seen any white papers nor other technical accounts of how Canon is doing this with their hybrid IBIS/LBIS system. As the focal length increases, the amount of sensor movement either must increase or the lens based IS unit takes more of the load than with a comparable number of stops in a shorter focal length.

Also, keep in mind that "8 stops" of compensation may mean you can do 1/3 second instead of 1/800 with an 800mm lens, but that does not necessarily translate to 8 seconds instead of 1/30 with a 30mm lens. The longer the total time, the more the maximum limits of overall movement in any single direction come into play. If one shooter can keep the camera within the "cone of correction" for a full 8 seconds, even if they are oscillating at a much higher frequency, they will be more successful than another shooter who may have a much lower rate of movement in a single direction that does not stay within the "cone of correction".


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 15, 2020)

scyrene said:


> Thanks. It would be great if at some point (eventually) a table could be drawn up with the rough possibilities for each lens/focal length. I also wonder how EF IS lenses would cope - whether one would be obliged to turn off either ILIS or IBIS in order to prevent them fighting each other.
> 
> I had been hoping to get a 90D but the prices have remained static, and although the extra resolution still tempts me (for birds), I'm also drawn in the opposite direction with a 1-series equivalent sensor and this extra stabilisation (for macro and miscellaneous photography). The R6 is a good entry point for the R system for me, but there's no rush given there's no stock until August, according to the retailer I'd go with.



Canon has already pretty much said that IBIS can be used with IS in all EF lenses used with an R5 or R6 via a Canon EF→RF adapter. They have not said exactly how much additional benefit may be gained for each specific EF lens with IS in this scenario.

They've also hinted at the idea that some of the latest IS lenses have better support for the RF IBIS system already built-in to them, particularly the "III" versions of the Big Whites. Based on past history, I consider this highly likely. 

Canon has often silently included capability for a future planned feature in current products for several years before the future feature is revealed. 

When the first IS lens was unveiled in 1995, it turned out that all bodies introduced since 1992 had the capability to control IS already inside of them. When the "self-pointing" 470EX-AI flash was introduced (admittedly sort of a gimmick that hasn't caught on), most bodies rolled out for about three years prior, other than lower end Rebels, already had the ability to work with it.


----------



## Franklyok (Jul 15, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> But what the sensor sees and what the final image looks like aren't necessarily the same thing. For anyone who shoots raw and post-processes expertly to account for the unique properties of a specific scene, WYSIWYG is not that true.



Does anyone know, what the EVF lag / delay is. 110 ms has been in the past. Does R5 or R6 make less lag?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 15, 2020)

CaMeRa QuEsT said:


> I keep reading mentions of similar QC issues with the newer "Global Vision" lines everywhere. also, the 56mm is $400+, that's too much to pay for a 3rd party APS-C short tele that uses aspherics and yet has very heavy distortion levels. I believe that Canon can do much better for the same price.



Canon might "be able" to do better at that price, but so far they have chosen not to do so. The 1993 EF 50mm f/1.4 costs as much or more and doesn't perform as well as the Sigma.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 16, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I like my old stuff.. We have space and my wife also understands the value of a dollar. If I’m shooting some ridiculous time lapse and pull out the 40D or 70D and leave it clicking away somewhere I’m less worried than if I leave my 5D4 or EOS-R in the same situation.
> 
> My only point was that I’m not willing to give my items away for a pittance just so that entity (be it Adorama or whoever) can then turn it for a profit.



Yeah, I won't sell them to for-profit retailers who only offer $200-300 for a body they're currently selling used for $600. Especially when I hear reports (maybe well founded, maybe not) that they almost always lowball the online estimate when they actually receive the goods.

I do loan them out long term to my nephews and the art/photography department at a local high school. I haven't seen my Rebel XTi in several years, nor my 7D in over a year. Ditto for several EF-S lenses and old 90s era EF kit lenses (38-80mm, anyone?). The 7D or EF 28-135mm that's with it will probably be destroyed by some clueless sophomore one day, and I'm OK with that.

But I can't let go of my 50D!


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 16, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> Point taken—was just rounding out the benefits a bit.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Re: Depth. There are no "numbers" until the signal is digitized. Analog signals are just levels of energy between a minimum and maximum value that can be at any number of near infinite levels in between. Those points are not rounded to the nearest integer as analog values. There can be no quantization of the signal until it is digitized. The time it takes to read out a sensor is based on how fast each voltage from each sensel (photosite/pixel well) can be measured just before it is digitized.

Re: Binning. CMOS sensors read out line by line. Each line must be read out from one end to the other for the image processor to be able to make sense out of what photosite was in which location. Now consider that the four sensel RG-GB blocks needed due to the Bayer mask are not in sequence on the same line, they're in lines of RGRGRGRGRGRGRGRGRGRGRGRGRGRGRGRG sensels that are directly above lines of GBGBGBGBGBGBGBGBGBGBGBGBGBGBGBGB sensels.

If you are binning by a factor of four, your first block of four "red" pixels are spread out separated by "green" pixels over the first and third line on the sensor. There are no "red" filtered sensels that are adjacent to another "red" filtered sensel with a standard Bayer mask. They're certainly not four adjacent "red" filtered sensels on the same line. It's my understanding, and I could be wrong about this, that non-adjacent values can't be read out and combined before quantization, particularly if parallel processing is involved.

(I say "red" instead of red because, the near countless diagrams with Bayer masks made up of red, green, and blue squares that appear all over the internet notwithstanding, there are no color filter arrays in modern digital cameras that have filters centered on 640nm light that we perceive as red, just as our long wavelength "red" cones in our retinas are not most sensitive to 640nm light. In the case of our retinas, the L- cones we call "red" are most sensitive to light at around 564nm which we perceive as a kind of greenish yellow. In the case of our Bayer masks, most have "red" filters that are most transmissive at around 590-600nm, which we perceive as an orangish version of yellow. But the trichromatic theories of "Red, Green, and Blue" cones in our retinas, as well as our trichromatic color reproduction systems that use Red, Yellow, and Blue as primary colors, were well established long before we were able to accurately measure exactly which wavelengths of light to which each of the three types of cones in our retinas are most sensitive.)

*When sampling and bit depth play a part in speed, it is related to the speed at which the image processor can process the data after it has been digitized as discrete values for each individual photosite on the sensor. It's not the speed at which the sensor can be read out that affects different performance at different bit depths and resolutions, at least not for still images.* Remember, the actual uncompressed raw data preserves the individual values for every photosite on the sensor for still images. (I have no idea how that works for video.)


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 16, 2020)

mb66energy said:


> You are right about that - but I hope they find a formula where the effective aperture position is closer to the front lens in the wide position which would allow a smaller diameter. If I look into my 70-200 f/4 lens I "see" the aperture blades closer to the front element in the 70mm setting compared to 200mm.




What you think you see is due more to differences in magnification between the front element and the physical aperture diaphragm at various zoom settings than the actual distances involved. That's why the "true" aperture is the size of the entrance pupil as measured from in front of the lens, not the actual size of the physical diaphragm inside the lens.


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 16, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> [..]The R5 sensor appears to be be able to do:
> 
> - Standard/Mechanical - 9fps @ 14bit
> - H+ Mode - Mechanical - 12fps @ 13 bit
> ...



Nice find on the 13-bit! I'm very curious how that affects the signal on the low end, my current struggle is a variant of 'coal bbq next to white awning: bumblebee on flower in direct sunlight. The black 'fur' on bumblebees is really dark, trying to do ETTR tends to blow out one or more of the colour channels. 
My current workaround is having white flowers, blowing out the highlights is less noticable, especially when they're outside the DoF.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 16, 2020)

max said:


> waiting for the 135 f/2 to make the change



Why wait? IBIS will probably give you at least two or three stops Tv when using the EF 135mm f/2 L via an EF→RF spacer thingy.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 16, 2020)

BakaBokeh said:


> It would have to be an optical solution.



Then it is no longer an adapter, it is a mild teleconverter. Pretty much all such devices magnify the image as well as allow for infinity focus.


----------



## Twinix (Jul 16, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Then don't complain that your Timex isn't a Rolex.


Im sorry if a Canon version of the Nikon 16-80 2.8-4, Fujifilm 16-80 4 or 16-55 2.8, Sony 18-105 4 etc is impossible for Canon to make and therefor unrealistic to want.
So where is my complaining?


----------



## Franklyok (Jul 16, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Why wait? IBIS will probably give you at least two or three stops Tv when using the EF 135mm f/2 L via an EF→RF spacer thingy.



Ef135 f2 is 24 years old. 

Lots of things has happened. 

How about dual af motor: usm and stm?

How about no focus breathing?

How about competition doing 1.8 ?


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 16, 2020)

Franklyok said:


> Ef135 f2 is 24 years old.
> 
> Lots of things has happened.
> 
> ...


I am genuinely keen to understand how all of the above may improve outcomes for a photographer?


----------



## Whowe (Jul 16, 2020)

Pixel said:


> You won’t have that concern anymore when you hold the R5. I’ve held one and it’s as well built as you’d expect from Canon.


Why would a mirrorless camera be less rugged? There are less moving parts (mirror system), no separate focusing sensor, etc. It does have a small display for the EVF, but I have not heard anyone with concerns regarding that as far as durability. I know many mirrorless have been built small, light and not rugged or weather sealed, but that doesn't mean there is an inherent problem with building them tough.


----------



## Franklyok (Jul 16, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> I am genuinely keen to understand how all of the above may improve outcomes for a photographer?



F 1.8 does not ring a bell? 

Sigma has 105mm f1. 4 with 105mm thread. I am sure canon could do better. 

And in general how about future proofing gear purchases. Would you buy 24 year old tech as new?


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 16, 2020)

Franklyok said:


> F 1.8 does not ring a bell?
> 
> Sigma has 105mm f1. 4 with 105mm thread. I am sure canon could do better.
> 
> And in general how about future proofing gear purchases. Would you buy 24 year old tech as new?


++++ F 1.8 does not ring a bell?
A.M.: Yeah... 1/3 of a stop faster @135mm. So...?

++++Sigma has 105mm f1. 4 with 105mm thread.
A.M.: and....?

++++ And in general how about future proofing gear purchases. Would you buy 24 year old tech as new?
A.M.: I absolutely would if the lens offers a unique rendition, amazing colours and contrasty, vivid imagery.
Just FYI: I have a first hand experience with Sigma 135/1.8 Art and Sigma 105/1.4 Art. Sold and never looked back since.


----------



## BakaBokeh (Jul 16, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Then it is no longer an adapter, it is a mild teleconverter. Pretty much all such devices magnify the image as well as allow for infinity focus.


If it lets me use RF lenses on an EF-M camera, it's "adapting" one mount to another. But feel free to call it whatever you want.


----------



## mb66energy (Jul 16, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> What you think you see is due more to differences in magnification between the front element and the physical aperture diaphragm at various zoom settings than the actual distances involved. That's why the "true" aperture is the size of the entrance pupil as measured from in front of the lens, not the actual size of the physical diaphragm inside the lens.


Maybe - I should X-ray the lens but I do not want to damage its chips 
Wasn't the old 24-70 2.8 EF lens designed that the lens hood worked perfect for all focal lengths
by shifting the (effective) principle plane for 24mm to the front? The effective aperture should be located
in or close to the principle plane.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 16, 2020)

Franklyok said:


> And in general how about future proofing gear purchases. Would you buy 24 year old tech as new?



If it meets my needs I most certainly would (and have).

The optics in the EF 135mm f/2 L still produce images no other lens can duplicate. Who cares how old the design is?

Sure, there are newer lenses with a more "clinical" look that can reproduce the edges and corners of a flat test chart at relatively close distance better than the EF 135mm f/2 L.

But who buys camera gear to be the best "flat test chart shooter" the world has ever seen?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 16, 2020)

mb66energy said:


> Maybe - I should X-ray the lens but I do not want to damage its chips
> Wasn't the old 24-70 2.8 EF lens designed that the lens hood worked perfect for all focal lengths
> by shifting the (effective) principle plane for 24mm to the front? The effective aperture should be located
> in or close to the principle plane.



The EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L is a retrofocus design from one end of the focal length range to the other. This means the rear parts of the lens are like a telephoto design turned around backwards.

The lens is fully extended at 24mm and fully retracted at 70mm. This is unlike many designs with focal length ranges that start out shorter than a mount's registration distance but go past the registration distance by the longest focal length in the lens' range (such as all of the 18-55mm variants that start out retrofocus at the wide end but move some groups in one direction while moving other groups in the opposite direction as the focal length is increased and are not retrofocus by the time they are at their longest focal lengths).

The hood attaches to the main barrel as the secondary barrel extends and retracts inside the stationary hood.

This means the front element is much nearer the front of the hood at 24mm and furthest from the front of the hood at 70mm.

I'm not sure if the hood works "perfectly" at every focal length, but it certainly provides much narrower coverage at 70mm than at 24mm.

I still use mine regularly.

As to the "effective aperture" (more properly called the entrance pupil), its location does not correspond to the physical location of the diaphragm any more than its size is the same as the physical diaphragm. The size and location of the entrance pupil are determined by the effect of all of the lens elements between the physical diaphragm and the front of the lens. The size and location of the exit pupil are determined by the effect of all of the lens elements between the physical diaphragm and the rear of the lens.


----------



## MartinF. (Jul 17, 2020)

Uhh - being the owner of a 6D (and a fair collection of EF lenses) I am looking for a replacement/upgrade in a few years from now. I am looking in the direction of a 5DmkIV - that will for sure be an upgrade. Price wise it is also within reach, and I do hope for an 5DmkV, giving me a chance to pick up a 5DmkIV new or slightly used for a fair price.
I find the R6 not really to be and upgrade for the 6D in terms of resolution and place in the EOS R lineup. And R5 is very expensive and a video overkill for a stills photographer. And going on the R-route I will need a RF 24-70 f/2.8 and that is expensive too.
My plan is 5DmkIV - and then, 8 to 10 years from now a R-series R5, or even better a "R3" (or something) a R6 priced R5 focused on stills.


----------



## Franklyok (Jul 17, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> ++++ F 1.8 does not ring a bell?
> A.M.: Yeah... 1/3 of a stop faster @135mm. So...?
> 
> ++++Sigma has 105mm f1. 4 with 105mm thread.
> ...



Well I got my 135 covered by 70-200. I will rely on 70-200 untill Canon sets up competition to Sigma 50-100 ( FF 75 - 135+ smting ) F1.8 ... And thanks for the Sigma comments. I'll stay away.


----------



## max (Jul 17, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> If it meets my needs I most certainly would (and have).
> 
> The optics in the EF 135mm f/2 L still produce images no other lens can duplicate. Who cares how old the design is?
> 
> ...


(you were responding to my 135mm comment)
I just think that adapters are not the same... I have an EOS M sries and hate having to use adapters.
And the control wheel thingy.
I wouldn't mind the exact same optics. I use primarly 50mm 1.2L and 135 f/2L 90% of the time on a 5D3.


----------



## glofo (Jul 18, 2020)

Kit. said:


> There were some rumors about a new Speedlite, if I remember correctly.
> 
> Also, PowerShot G9 X iii.


As someone who is switching from the Nikon DSLR ecosystem to the Canon R ecosystem, I’m actually most interested in a new speedlite! The lenses are all there for my needs right now.


----------



## Jstnelson (Jul 31, 2020)

I’m dying to get a rumored release date for an RF 35mm L
I just switched to the RF 35mm 1.8 from adapting the EF 35mm 1.4L ii so I could finally have an all native RF kit and.. the 1.8 is great. It’s small. Sharp enough. But I need an L! F1.2 please!


----------

