# Thoughts on the Canon EOS R roadmap



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 22, 2019)

> Almost immediately after the announcement of the Canon EOS R camera and RF mount, Canonites and others were already wanting what was coming next.
> Now, the Canon Rumors community likely qualifies as a fairly advanced camera consumer. Unfortunately, the Canon Rumors community isn’t the majority of Canon camera buyers and I think enthusiasts can lose track of that from time-to-time, it’s not a slight, it’s just a reality of the camera business.
> A great source and I had a conversation recently about the future of the EOS R system, and mostly about what camera(s) to expect next. The source simply lead the conversation with “follow the money”.
> And what does that mean?
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## Silverstream (Jan 22, 2019)

Hate to say it, but it makes cents. ;-)


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 22, 2019)

Thats why many were puzzled with the first lenses to be announced, a mid level camera needs mid level lenses, and only the 24-105 L matches the pricing of the camera. The 35mm Macro is aimed at a entry level, but at least would be a reasonable choice for the R. I'd love to have the 50mm f/1.2 or 28-70 f/2, but they really outclass my R.

Fortunately, I adapt my EF lenses quite nicely and will continue to do that as long as I still use a DSLR along with the R. I happened to have a vintage 50mm f/2.5 that is available used for $100 that I like for the R, its small, light, and reasonably good. My big and heavy "L" lenses don't balance the camera well, particularly with the adapter.

I plan to get the control ring adapter before long.


----------



## transpo1 (Jan 22, 2019)

Yup, this does sound right, based on Canon's methodology. They need cheaper RF lenses *fast*, though, if this is to be successful.


----------



## flip314 (Jan 22, 2019)

This makes total sense, and probably delays any hope of the 24-70 f2.8 IS that I want to see...

I'm betting we'll see a RF 24-105 3.5-5.6 IS kit lens with the release of the lower-spec'd body, or 18-55 IS and 18-135 IS if it's APS-C.

The RF system also needs some kind of telephoto zoom. I'm sure the EF 70-300mm IS II USM could easily be converted (if nothing else, just a mount swap). That would fall into the right price range for enthusiasts. 70-200mm 2.8/4 obviously need to come out eventually for the pros.

I also think we should see some cheaper primes, maybe a 50mm 1.8 and 24mm 2.8. 35mm is probably covered right now by the macro lens, even though it's pretty expensive ($499) for an entry-level lens

What else? Portrait prime? Wide-angle zoom?


----------



## Quackator (Jan 22, 2019)

I don't expect a 1D-X class mirrorless anytime too soon, but a rather slow 
50 MP 5Ds/R model shouldn't be too much work for Canon.

Yes, I do see APS-C on the horizon much sooner as well.
The initial lens line-up set the landmark, telling all noobs 
how very professional they can get with RF, and now
cheaper cameras will bring in the harvest.

I am personally not so much interested in RF lenses, as the 
filter mount adapter gives me one ring to polarize them all......
... with EF lenses.

What I desperately want is pretty much all in the R, except
for the 5D MkIV ergonomics. That is the point where the R 
really sucks.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 22, 2019)

Canon's development cycles are quite long - longer than just about anyone else's in the industry. So to have a pro-level set of lenses and a pro-level body come to market at the same time is difficult. A schedule slip of 30 percent (quite common in the tech world) could mean a year's difference. 

Launching with $3,000 jaw-dropping lenses and a 6D2-equivalent body sort of seems to suggest this is what happened, especially if the follow-up bodies are lower-end products. 

I think it's important for us not to try to rationalize a "successful grand strategy" narrative behind everything Canon does. In point of fact, it doesn't make sense to set expectations of the new R system with 50mm f/1.2 or 28-70 F/2 monsters and then not sell a camera as good as the 5 series. This doesn't mean Canon is *******, or that it's not trying to come out with a pro body, but it likely means it wished to do so earlier and can't. But it will. When it can. I might even buy one. When a pro body comes out I'll definitely get one. From the signaling we're getting, that'll be a while.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 22, 2019)

Quackator said:


> I don't expect a 1D-X class mirrorless anytime too soon, but a rather slow
> 50 MP 5Ds/R model shouldn't be too much work for Canon.
> 
> Yes, I do see APS-C on the horizon much sooner as well.
> ...



Yeah, I could see a high-megapixel 3 fps R series as a landscape/studio rig, sort of like the 5dsr. That's a real pro market, if a slice of it. I see that because it appears Canon *could* do that with its technology, and hasn't evidenced the capability of meeting the other pro markets via its throughput.


----------



## -pekr- (Jan 22, 2019)

Could someone please explain, how EOS R could be even more lower level? What could be left off? Lower megapixel sensor does not necessarily mean less advanced sensor, right? Or are we talking APS-C EOS R machine here? I thought, that what is coming is lower specced FF body ....


----------



## flip314 (Jan 22, 2019)

-pekr- said:


> Could someone please explain, how EOS R could be even more lower level? What could be left off? Lower megapixel sensor does not necessarily mean less advanced sensor, right? Or are we talking APS-C EOS R machine here? I thought, that what is coming is lower specced FF body ....



No card slots, in-body destabilization, no controls other than the touch bar, m43 sensor, max 480p 1fps with 8x crop.


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Jan 22, 2019)

For every 5d4 or 1DX2 canon sells, they sell many more M's, rebels and xxD's at a higher profit margin. They need to fill out the bottom first before they can start selling higher end models.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 22, 2019)

The whole point of launching two stellar lenses (50 and 28-70) with the relatively average EOS R was to signal intentions for the future and to show that Canon still are leaders at lens technology even if they are somewhat runners-up on the sensor and camera technology - for now.


----------



## Cryve (Jan 22, 2019)

i dont think an eos r apsc body is likely.

there are no aps-c lenses for the eos r, only full frame lenses. i dont beleve canon will force us to use full frame lenses (which are more expensiv). what are the thoughts of the community on this?


----------



## davidhfe (Jan 22, 2019)

jolyonralph said:


> The whole point of launching two stellar lenses (50 and 28-70) with the relatively average EOS R was to signal intentions for the future and to show that Canon still are leaders at lens technology even if they are somewhat runners-up on the sensor and camera technology - for now.



It could also be a way to build up stock of what are likely to be popular lenses once a more "Pro" R model is released.

But yeah, it was likely easier for Canon to say "we are serious" with lenses (which they have continued to lead on) than with bodies. The good but not "groundbreaking" R + some exceptional lenses seems to have bought Canon a year to (hopefully) finalize sensor and processing improvements that have likely (again... hopefully?) been in the development pipeline for years.


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Jan 22, 2019)

Cryve said:


> i dont think an eos r apsc body is likely.
> 
> there are no aps-c lenses for the eos r, only full frame lenses. i dont beleve canon will force us to use full frame lenses (which are more expensiv). what are the thoughts of the community on this?



I don't think they will make RF APSC lenses but with the adapter, you can use plenty of lenses. Only having FF RF lenses mean that you have an upgrade path for anyone buying EOS R-APSC. A lower spec body and cheaper sensor will hit a target price point.


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 22, 2019)

All of these roadmap thoughts sound reasonable.
Canon has to increase the EOS R and RF market and even though I'D like to see an 5D or 1D equivalent, the entry FF and APS-C body really seem to come first.
Hopefully together with some primes of the RF 35 quality and price range. But also here midrange zooms seem to come first.


----------



## Cochese (Jan 22, 2019)

Seems reasonable that Canon would release upper tier pro-class glass with the mid-range body. All general theories aside, the R is a solid performer in its bracket and having those upper tier lenses draws people to the system. A sort of "look at me, look at what I can do" type of statement. 

Canon's way of showing they're serious and also showing what they are planning. That new 50 and the 28-70 are just those kinds of lenses. Real attention getters. Nikon hyped up their cameras in a ridiculous manner for over a month. Canon just came in and dropped their load like a 300lb gorilla.


----------



## addola (Jan 22, 2019)

I am more interested in what that rumored update would bring to the EOS R than any new camera body releases. Sony & Nikon announced firmware upgrades that would bring new features to their cameras. Fujifilm does that, too. Canon should follow suit. 

An RF-mount lens designed for APS-C sensor should physically fit a FF RF camera because the mirror won't get in the way (correct me if I am wrong)

It's interesting to see what Canon will do for the EF-M system? Could they just keep the EF-M cameras as their APS-C mirrorless camera and make an adapter for RF lenses on the EF-M bodies? There was a rumor about something like that two months ago. 

That's all I can think of. I personally will jump into full-frame mirrorless once the dust settles on Canon, Nikon & Panasonic's entry.


----------



## edoorn (Jan 22, 2019)

Well currently Sony seems to do the best in the full frame mirrorless market worldwide now, but in total camera sales this is only smaller slice of the cake. However if Canon would take too long to bring out a pro R body I could see it getting harder and harder to get a leading position in this high segment


----------



## nchoh (Jan 22, 2019)

Cryve said:


> i dont think an eos r apsc body is likely.
> 
> there are no aps-c lenses for the eos r, only full frame lenses. i dont beleve canon will force us to use full frame lenses (which are more expensiv). what are the thoughts of the community on this?



If you mean that Canon will not release an APS-C R camera because they don't have a APS-C lens like a RF-S... I think that if Canon decided that they need to be in that market, they could easily convert one or two of the existing EF-S designs into a kit lens.


----------



## The Fat Fish (Jan 22, 2019)

I'd love to see a £2000 option that competes with the Nikon Z6 & Sony A7III. 

24mp BSI sensor, IBIS, full frame 4K, 11+ FPS.


----------



## flip314 (Jan 22, 2019)

nchoh said:


> If you mean that Canon will not release an APS-C R camera because they don't have a APS-C lens like a RF-S... I think that if Canon decided that they need to be in that market, they could easily convert one or two of the existing EF-S designs into a kit lens.



I think especially if the 7d successor is APS-C we could well see RF-S lenses. I'm betting Canon already has designs for "RF-S" kit lenses. They wouldn't have the same backfocus advantage that EF-S has over EF (since the max backfocus should be fixed by the sensor position), but the smaller image circle still gives an entirely different set of design constraints.


----------



## mb66energy (Jan 22, 2019)

"one sub $1500 USD full frame mirrorless camera from Canon" - That would be great to replace my 5D i and reuse my old FD lenses on a FF camera.
Only essentials for me are: very good sensor IQ @ ~30MPix, DPAF, a body only option/body with control ring adapter, LP-E6 battery.
At this price a 2nd body is a not too expensive option (usually to avoid changing lenses which I hate).


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jan 22, 2019)

I see the logic of consumer grade FF introductions to capture the market but the thing that doesn't make sense is the opening salvo of big heavy pro glass without a body for pros. No informed amateur is going to dive on a camera body that is supported with 2-3K lenses. The whole concept of mirrorless for me is size and weight and that's why I got a M5. I think Canon should have launched the R system with something on the order of the 5D Mark IV with continuous silent shutter, dual card slots, and a reasonable frame rate. A lesser equipped R body may make cents but doesn't make sense IMO.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Jan 22, 2019)

-pekr- said:


> Could someone please explain, how EOS R could be even more lower level? What could be left off? Lower megapixel sensor does not necessarily mean less advanced sensor, right? Or are we talking APS-C EOS R machine here? I thought, that what is coming is lower specced FF body ....



6DII sensor, lower resolution EVF, no touch bar, lower fps & AF Points 



The Fat Fish said:


> I'd love to see a £2000 option that competes with the Nikon Z6 & Sony A7III.
> 
> 24mp BSI sensor, IBIS, full frame 4K, 11+ FPS.



Pick 1 or two features. I doubt they give it all for that price and that soon.

They are likely to release a lower mode Canon EOS R first. 

I'm already entertaining Sony and Panasonic next generation mirrorless camera if the next EOS R is an entry-level camera.


----------



## The Fat Fish (Jan 22, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> 6DII sensor, lower resolution EVF, no touch bar, lower fps & AF Points
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sadly I am too. Panasonic, Sony and Nikon are all competing to produce excellent value for money cameras. They have their £2000 ish range with the previously mentioned specs and a £3000 range with the same specs and a high resolution sensor. I really can't work out why Canon fail to offer the same value for money. Trouble is die hard Canon fans look down on me for even suggesting it. The DPReview 1D/5D/6D forum is a prime example of dinosaurs who are content with mediocrity.


----------



## The Fat Fish (Jan 22, 2019)

flip314 said:


> No card slots, in-body destabilization, no controls other than the touch bar, m43 sensor, max 480p 1fps with 8x crop.


The worrying thing is Canon would happily do that if they could. It seems every release is an attempt at releasing the absolute minimum they can. Such a shame, their outstanding lenses deserve better.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Jan 22, 2019)

The Fat Fish said:


> Sadly I am too. Panasonic, Sony and Nikon are all competing to produce excellent value for money cameras. They have their £2000 ish range with the previously mentioned specs and a £3000 range with the same specs and a high resolution sensor. I really can't work out why Canon fail to offer the same value for money. Trouble is die hard Canon fans look down on me for even suggesting it. The DPReview 1D/5D/6D forum is a prime example of dinosaurs who are content with mediocrity.



I am not sure why I have loyalty for Canon camera for so long. It was I first started out but I keep disappointed with each release hoping Canon will offer something more to my need - 6DII, 5DIV, EOS R. They are all fine camera and capable of taking great pictures but just poorly value camera.

As my skills grow, I have different needs and Canon isn't providing it. 

I have already switch my lighting kit to Godox and some of my lens to Sigma Art. It's the best value for my money and best investment I've made. I think RF lens are too expensive and the difference is neglible to clients and to me. 

I'm seriously waiting for Panasonic since they have the usability of Canon (ergonomic, menu, weather sealing, highest EVF) and tech of Sony (dual IS, eyeAF, 4K, pixel shift, etc). 

I'll also give Canon EOS R a consideration too, but I won't be afraid to leave Canon for another company that can provide me with the tool I need. I am willing to pay the price for such camera too.

I also get criticize for pointing out by die hard Canon users. No camera is perfect including Sony but they shouldn't be free of criticism. I'll keep an open mind when I decided to finally jump into FF mirrorless.


----------



## dba101 (Jan 22, 2019)

The last release was full of surprises that no-one knew about.
Anything can happen.
I for one wont be jumping anywhere for negligible improvements, no ergonomics etc etc
I see far too many Sony shooters looking down fiddling around missing all the shots. Fair enough if you have time.
I prefer to crack away and bring home the goods, get paid and start over.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 22, 2019)

Cryve said:


> I don't think an eos r aps-c body is likely.
> 
> there are no aps-c lenses for the eos r, only full frame lenses. i don't believe canon will force us to use full frame lenses (which are more expensive). what are the thoughts of the community on this?



I also find this doubtful. In effect, they would be splitting the APS-C mirrorless market in two -- EOS-M and EOS-R/crop. I suppose you could have a consumer grade "M" and an enthusiast grade R-Crop, but I'm not seeing the market for the enthusiast grade R-Crop until mirrorless matures to the point where it is actually better than DSLRs for sports and action. By the time that arrives, I think it would be far more likely to have full-frame models with sufficient pixel count and an EVF that magnifies the image and makes crop sensors unnecessary for these use cases.


----------



## Viggo (Jan 22, 2019)

I’m puzzled at all comments pointing to how the RF50 and RF28-70 are a waste on the R and that they NEED a better body... there is no truth to that. There is nothing about the R that limits the RF50 for example...


----------



## unfocused (Jan 22, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> ...do not expect any sort of “niche” or “professional” mirrorless cameras prior to the release of more “entry level” products. A $4000+ camera simply doesn’t move anywhere near the volume that a sub $1500 camera would and at the end of the day, Canon needs more RF lens mount equipped cameras out there. So yes, we expect to see a model under the EOS R before we see any sort of high megapixel or “professional” full frame mirrorless camera from Canon.



While this comes as no surprise, I am not sure how much volume even a sub-$1,500 full frame camera will generate, especially given that adding a kit lens to that camera is going to set the consumer back another $1,000 for a 24-105 f4. While existing customers can use their EOS lenses with an adapter, most will eventually want to add a native mount lens and anyone new to the system will find the price of entry pretty steep. (We forum dwellers often become immune to the practical limits that most consumers live with.)

Not saying I disagree with Craig or his sources, but rather I am becoming increasingly convinced that the rapid conversion to mirrorless and imagined obsolescence of DSLRs that many on this forum foresee will occur at a much slower pace than most expect, if it occurs at all.


----------



## Josh Leavitt (Jan 22, 2019)

I'd like to see an entry-level EOS R take the form of a larger EOS M6. Save some money by dropping the EVF and just use a decent resolution touchscreen LCD; an EVF can always be added as a hot shoe attachment if desired. I think the smaller rangefinder style body and grip will sit quite well with a lot of folks hoping to use a compact full-frame mirrorless system. Provided of course, that Canon rolls out several compact RF primes and moderate aperture zooms in the near future to complement it. If they're daring, I think they could sell a so-called EOS R6 for $1299-$1399 and still make a decent profit.


----------



## SereneSpeed (Jan 22, 2019)

Just give me the ability to backup RAW files using Bluetooth, while still writing to the card on my EOS R. That’s all I ask.

I’m not here to argue about the EOS R being a pro camera - I Pay my bills with it. My 5Div collects dust now and is ‘just’ a backup body. I’ll happily wait a year or so for the ‘Pro R’, if I get RAW file redundancy.

Please Canon, give me wireless RAW backup!

(I can wish, right?)


----------



## Silverstream (Jan 22, 2019)

Personally I expect a mirrorless rebel in the next few months to fulfill that very important price level as mentioned in the article and a full frame mirrorless more akin to the 5DmkIV with IBS and a higher frame rate/servo by Summer. I don't know how many mkIVs they sell now but I am guessing that is is a fairly high volume high profit area. Add IBS, a faster frame rate, mkIV buttons and a second slot and voila. My opinion is that its an area of growing competition from Sony, Nikon, etc. The super high megapixel camera is just not that large of a market comparatively. Personally, I'm quite happy to keep the megapixels at 30.
The Servo frame rate is pathetic on the EOS R which tends me to believe that a 1DX mkII mirrorless is not going to happen soon since we would expect it to exceed the specs of what we have now obviously and I think the tech is just not there with Canon.


----------



## dak723 (Jan 22, 2019)

The Fat Fish said:


> ... I really can't work out why Canon fail to offer the same value for money. Trouble is die hard Canon fans look down on me for even suggesting it.



The point is - what do you value? The reason some folks criticize your comments is that you make sweeping generalizations that presume that everyone values what you value. Saying "Canon fail to offer the same value for money" is NOT A FACT, it is your opinion. When people state opinions as fact, they are going to get some backlash. It's that simple.

For me, Canon offers more for the money, and obviously other feel the same. Canon color and ergonomics are worth far more to me that anything Sony offers. I will soon begin dong some how-to videos, so an articulating screen is now a must have. So that is more value than the others offer. The touch screen AF point select is also a spec that I really like - that's why I traded my Olympus EM-1 for a Mark II. So that is more value from the Canon than it's competitors. 

Now, for many folks like you, those specs may not be things they value - it may be IBIS, 2 card slots or better video specs. That's a perfectly valid opinion. If you state it that way, few will mind.


----------



## dak723 (Jan 22, 2019)

SereneSpeed said:


> Just give me the ability to backup RAW files using Bluetooth, while still writing to the card on my EOS R. That’s all I ask.
> 
> I’m not here to argue about the EOS R being a pro camera - I Pay my bills with it. My 5Div collects dust now and is ‘just’ a backup body. I’ll happily wait a year or so for the ‘Pro R’, if I get RAW file redundancy.
> 
> ...



You can wish, but it might be a good idea to contact Canon directly and give them your feedback, if you haven't already.


----------



## MorganPhoto (Jan 22, 2019)

One factor that hasn't been mentioned is the need for a "halo" product. Quite often, a manufacturer releases a product to get lots of press attention and create an overall positive impression of the brand, even if it is unattainable for most buyers. An example of that in the car industry would be the Corvette or the Honda NSX. Sony has done this in the camera industry with the A9. It was an attempt to gain credibility from getting pros to adopt the body and it has been moderately successful. I think you'll see Canon release at least one entry-level (i.e. 24 megapixel sub-$2,000 consumer mirrorless camera) and one halo model to try to get some buzz in the coverage. So far, the press has been pretty negative about the EOS-R camera and Canon needs a model that will get rave reviews and create some excitement around Canon as a mirrorless brand.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Jan 22, 2019)

dba101 said:


> The last release was full of surprises that no-one knew about.
> Anything can happen.
> I for one wont be jumping anywhere for negligible improvements, no ergonomics etc etc
> I see far too many Sony shooters looking down fiddling around missing all the shots. Fair enough if you have time.
> I prefer to crack away and bring home the goods, get paid and start over.



Me too. I won't be jumping into any mirrorless with horrible ergonomic, EVF and incremental improvement. It has to be significant if I want to invest into a FF mirrorless lens system and lock myself into a camera ecosystem.

I work with a couple Sony shooters before and I don't see them stumpling. If anything it's less. You must deal with inexperience with the system.

I shot on Sony A9 a brief period of time for a wedding and it's quiet easy. No more chimping for exposure and eyeAF was really helpful when I used it. The camera have 3 custom button that I can quickly map to and their GM lens also have a custom button. If I switch to Sony, it won't be too hard even for a fast pace wedding.


----------



## riker (Jan 22, 2019)

Why is everybody so into APS-C R body?!?! It makes no sense and I very much hope Canon is not going to do that.
It should be
FF - R
APS-C - M
That's it. Just like Sony does it.
APS-C was a good thing 15 years ago when technology was kinda new and making FF sensors was complicated and expensive. We should really start leaving it behind or at least leave it to the compact size cameras.

1Dx R? I think that was a joke. Nobody wishes for that and nobody has ever expected it.
Most of us I guess is wishing for a 5Ds R with a better 50MP sensor (DR and sensitivity), 6 FPS with a switch to 25MP/10FPS and the video capabilities of the 5d4 but FF 4K. This should be no sci-fi, no magic, no unrealistic expectations.
...OK and maybe some innovation like perfectly working builtin panorama or RAW HDR.
Even 4K/60 and 1080/120 should not be that much of a rocketscience 3 years after 1Dx has it but I know at this point I'm close to just a wet dream.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 22, 2019)

Excellent one Canon (if rumors are true) of releasing an APS EOS R mount camera probably sitting between 80D - 7D MK 2 area and some good EF / EOS R glass to use on it - abeit 1.6x crop

At least Canon's got a good APS ML and FF ML system that will get better and better. As a Nikon user hope Nikon wakes up and do the same APS ML system & range of cameras - possibly a silly decision to do the Nikon 1 instead of starting a Nikon APS ML line


----------



## SereneSpeed (Jan 22, 2019)

dak723 said:


> You can wish, but it might be a good idea to contact Canon directly and give them your feedback, if you haven't already.


I have. I tried to report it as a ‘bug’. The lady laughed and recorded it as a feature request.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 22, 2019)

Silverstream said:


> Personally I expect a mirrorless rebel in the next few months to fulfill that very important price level as mentioned in the article...



They already have that market covered. It is called EOS-M. Why would they make another one in a different mount?


----------



## dominic_siu (Jan 23, 2019)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Thats why many were puzzled with the first lenses to be announced, a mid level camera needs mid level lenses, and only the 24-105 L matches the pricing of the camera. The 35mm Macro is aimed at a entry level, but at least would be a reasonable choice for the R. I'd love to have the 50mm f/1.2 or 28-70 f/2, but they really outclass my R.
> 
> Fortunately, I adapt my EF lenses quite nicely and will continue to do that as long as I still use a DSLR along with the R. I happened to have a vintage 50mm f/2.5 that is available used for $100 that I like for the R, its small, light, and reasonably good. My big and heavy "L" lenses don't balance the camera well, particularly with the adapter.
> 
> I plan to get the control ring adapter before long.


I use the control ring adapter since I got the R and it is very nice for using EF lenses on R. Finally I sold 2470 2.8 II and 85 1.4 L then buying RF2870, it is a fantastic lens.


----------



## flip314 (Jan 23, 2019)

unfocused said:


> They already have that market covered. It is called EOS-M. Why would they make another one in a different mount?



I don't see why there's an issue with this? Canon can clearly support 2 systems, and I don't think an APS-C R camera would totally cannibalize the EOS-M line. I think both could coexist just fine.

EOS M is a small form factor, and Canon clearly has size restrictions for EF-M lenses that make it difficult for certain types of lenses. EOS-M is there for the people who think mirrorless should be about size. There are a lot of people for whom this is important. They'll buy into the M system. Canon wants to make money off these people, so they will keep selling EOS M.

The ergonomics of the EOS R aren't perfect, but I still think they're MUCH closer to what I want. I don't care about size/form factor/lens size. The things I want from mirrorless are ONLY exposure preview and better AF spread. Otherwise I'm happy with DSLR. There are a lot of other people like me (despite what many people say!), including a certain group of entry-level/enthusiast buyers. It's part of why Rebels still sell when people could be buying PowerShots or even whatever m43 camera you might want to consider. If nothing else, certain people see the DSLR-type form factor as "Pro" and they want to be a "Pro." Some people will want larger cameras than EOS M, for whatever reason.

Even though most people who buy Rebels will never upgrade to FF, there's the sense that you *could* do that if you wanted. It encouraged people to buy into a system, and in some cases to buy more expensive lenses than they ever need. You buy a Rebel and a EF 70-200 because some day you REALLY WILL buy that 6D mark II to get full use of the lens (even if you really won't). Canon just made WAY more money off you than if the EF-S 55-250 had been your only choice.

Canon wants to sell RF lenses. They will be more expensive than EF-M lenses. Canon can't sell RF lenses to people who buy the M50. There are people who will never pay $2300 for a camera. They might pay $1500. They probably would pay $999, just to show off their Pro Camera (TM) to their friends. Canon wants to make money off of *these* people. That's why I believe APS-C R is inevitable. Why does Canon sell a 77D and an 80D when the 6D mark II is clearly "better"?

The other reason is the 7D line. Canon still clearly has some issues with FF sensor readout. I'm sure they will one day be solved, but I don't think that's imminent. I think there's likely to be at least one more APS-C high-fps camera. There are also wildlife folks that enjoy the extra 1.6x reach that they get. I think there's demand for a high-end APS-C R camera, at least in the short term.

Why does Prego make 50 kinds of pasta sauce? Shouldn't they just make the 2 or 3 best ones? Because nobody can agree on which the best ones are, and they can get more customers by selling all things to all people. Canon has had pretty much the same approach to DSLRs (SL2, Rebel 7, Rebel 7 Ti, 77D, 80D, 6D, 7D, 5D, 1dX). Why people think they are suddenly going to cut out the middle half of their market as they move to mirrorless, I don't understand.


----------



## DrToast (Jan 23, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



Follow the money? Is that why they launched with a $2,200 and $3,000 lens? Do they expect to sell many of those? 

I kind of have a hard time believing a lower-end body is next given the initial lenses, but hey Canon does weird things.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jan 23, 2019)

riker said:


> Why is everybody so into APS-C R body?!?! It makes no sense and I very much hope Canon is not going to do that.



Exactly. I'd be surprised if Canon does that, what's the point of having two mirrorless APS-C lines with different mounts? EFM and RFS? And incompatible lenses.

Lower-end full frame R body makes more sense, but as it was said before, even the existing few RF lenses are too cool and more expensive than such a body. I really hope next R body will be the higher-end, close to 5DSr. It'll be a fit for the RF lenses.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jan 23, 2019)

flip314 said:


> I don't see why there's an issue with this? Canon can clearly support 2 systems, and I don't think an APS-C R camera would totally cannibalize the EOS-M line. I think both could coexist just fine.



They could coexist, but would Canon get much more profit from two mirrorless APS-C lines? And if we include DSLR EFS, that'd make *three *APS-C lines.

What might make a bit more sense (but not total sense) - an RF camera with 1.3 crop factor. For birds and sports.


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Jan 23, 2019)

flip314 said:


> Why does Prego make 50 kinds of pasta sauce? Shouldn't they just make the 2 or 3 best ones? Because nobody can agree on which the best ones are, and they can get more customers by selling all things to all people.


Actually there's a well-known story in marketing about a manufacturer which reduced the number of 'flavours' of shampoo and conditioner they offered and it resulted in an _increase _in sales. How well consumer choices of either hair products or pasta sauces compare with sales of £300-£5000 hardware is another question of course.


flip314 said:


> Canon has had pretty much the same approach to DSLRs (SL2, Rebel 7, Rebel 7 Ti, 77D, 80D, 6D, 7D, 5D, 1dX). Why people think they are suddenly going to cut out the middle half of their market as they move to mirrorless, I don't understand.


The position of the 7D has long been a puzzle to me. The original 7D came along just when I was itching for something better than my 40D, and it was a perfect fit with my needs. But then we had a very long wait for the 7D2, which I think it's fair to say was slightly disappointing in some respects and has looked like second best ever since the D500 hit the market (but boy did Nikon owners wait a long time for that!). The 7D2 is well overdue for an update but there are no firm rumours of it happening. It's as if Canon isn't really all that bothered about the high end of the APS-C market. But whether or not this is true, it would surely be very unlikely that they would replace the 7D2 with a mirrorless, given how far their mirrorless technology in 2018/19 appears to lag behind the 2014 7D Mark II in the performance stakes. An RF mount replacement for the 7D2 would make sense in so many ways, but there are no indications that Canon has the technology available to do it. The only way I can see a high end APS-C launch coming from Canon before 2020 is if there is one more generation of DSLR.

It's a different situation at the 80D level though - that could easily be replaced by an RF mount body with a crop sensor.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jan 23, 2019)

Cryve said:


> i dont think an eos r apsc body is likely.
> 
> there are no aps-c lenses for the eos r, only full frame lenses. i dont beleve canon will force us to use full frame lenses (which are more expensiv). what are the thoughts of the community on this?



Where do you think the future of 7D lies-

1. With EOS-M

2. With EOS-R

3. With EOS (= with mirror)

4. Something else


----------



## Antono Refa (Jan 23, 2019)

riker said:


> Why is everybody so into APS-C R body?!?! It makes no sense and I very much hope Canon is not going to do that.
> It should be
> FF - R
> APS-C - M
> That's it. Just like Sony does it.



IMHO, Canon wouldn't do it as...

1. It doesn't provide an easy upgrade path from crop to FF - M lenses aren't mountable on R bodies.

2. Pro crop body, like the 7D, which give an extra reach with superteles. That is, unless you think the 1D X, 7D, and superteles will be EOS forever.


----------



## tron (Jan 23, 2019)

Quackator said:


> I don't expect a 1D-X class mirrorless anytime too soon, but a rather slow
> 50 MP 5Ds/R model shouldn't be too much work for Canon.
> 
> Yes, I do see APS-C on the horizon much sooner as well.
> ...


There is already a rather slow 50Mpixel Canon camera. It's time for a fast one too (see Nikon's D850).


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 23, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> 6DII sensor, lower resolution EVF, no touch bar, lower fps & AF Points
> ...



Lower fps? Perhaps it'll go negative. You push the shutter button, and it starts erasing the pictures you once had on your SD card. But not too quickly; that would take some throughput.


----------



## scottgoh (Jan 23, 2019)

sadly, having the 1dx and 5d3, i am getting the sony a7r3 instead of the r. i love to be able to continue using the canon mirrorless but the single card slot is a let down and no better R body with dual card slots.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 23, 2019)

[email protected] said:


> Excellent one Canon (if rumors are true) of releasing an APS EOS R mount camera probably sitting between 80D - 7D MK 2 area and some good EF / EOS R glass to use on it - abeit 1.6x crop
> 
> At least Canon's got a good APS ML and FF ML system that will get better and better. As a Nikon user hope Nikon wakes up and do the same APS ML system & range of cameras - possibly a silly decision to do the Nikon 1 instead of starting a Nikon APS ML line



Hmm. That gets me thinking.... [Warning: remainder is complete speculation and likely wrong...] If you have a problem where you can't release the 1DR that you want to due to silly old electronics, a decent interim strategy might be to push a crop body so that you can solve half your issue by needing to push fewer bits to the card. To tempt people into that, you might even consider a couple crop lenses, such as a 600 f/5.6 R-S. Would be roughly the size of the Nikon 500 f/5.6. This would be a brilliant way of getting some smaller "big whites" on the market without shooting their leg-sized big white market. Would be pretty much no cannibalization with the crop factor. I could get behind that sort of delaying strategy. Make it 18-20 mp, which nowadays could give the low light performance of the 2012 full frame 18mp sensors. Could probably get 7-8 fps out of that with R-level throughput. Hard to get that 600 f/5.6 crop lens out of my head now that it's inserted itself in there. A $1599 crop body and a $2499 600 f/5.6 wouldn't be a terrible sports/wildlife backup kit, thus engaging the other half of the FF pro market.


----------



## jd7 (Jan 23, 2019)

riker said:


> Why is everybody so into APS-C R body?!?! It makes no sense and I very much hope Canon is not going to do that.
> It should be
> FF - R
> APS-C - M
> ...





Antono Refa said:


> IMHO, Canon wouldn't do it as...
> 
> 1. It doesn't provide an easy upgrade path from crop to FF - M lenses aren't mountable on R bodies.
> 
> 2. Pro crop body, like the 7D, which give an extra reach with superteles. That is, unless you think the 1D X, 7D, and superteles will be EOS forever.


I like the simplicity of Riker's approach but my guess is much depends on the cost of producing a FF sensor (at scale) these days. Rebels and the like sell in relatively high volumes despite being more limited cameras than "higher end" models, which suggests there is a significant market at the price point of the Rebels, et al. Canon will want to supply that market. It will do that to some degree through the M system, but if there is a significant market at that price point which still wants "more" than small size/weight, Canon will want to supply that market. If that market is significant (and I don't know one way or the other), the question becomes can Canon supply full-frame cameras at that price point and be at least as profitable as if it supplied APS-C cameras to that market (taking into account all factors, such as extent to which confusion about RF v RF-s is likely to help or harm sales, anticipated sales volume (which will partly depend on the competition, eg if anyone else releases FF models at that price point), whether it means a more efficient production and supply chain overall, whether it materially changes R&D costs (including for related lens), etc, etc. Perhaps the time is about to come for the lower end of the market (if I can call it that) to be supplied with FF RF cameras, and APS-C will be left for those who are specifically looking for small and light? I wouldn't bet on it (apart from anything else, Canon could decide that market is still best supplied by APS-C DSLRs), but maybe? (If I recall correctly, Canon changed the market for DSLRs when it released the 300D (Rebel) at a price point which had previously been supplied only by digital compact cameras, didn't it?)

The other potential market for an RF-s camera seems to be the reach-limited crowd who are desperate for "pixels on target" (and who therefore may get a benefit from APS-C rather than simply cropping a FF shot). The first question there is whether that market is large enough to motivate Canon to go after it (as against leave it to users to pay up for the large and expensive FF gear and otherwise miss out). However, even assuming that market is large enough for Canon to go after it (and it may well but I have no idea really), the camera would need not only be RF-s but have the speed and tracking ability to satisfy users in that market. It is not obvious the technology is quite there yet for that sort of camera, and if (when?) it comes it may use an APS-C sensor but it won't be "low end".

Anyway, perhaps the key point of the original post in this thread is to emphasise that if you want to predict what Canon is going to do, you are probably better off trying to think like a business-person than like a photographer/photography enthusiast.

(And for those who might question if Canon was thinking from a business perspective in releasing a couple of high end lenses with the EOS R, my guess is they were. I don't know what Canon's reasons were, but a couple of high end lenses (halo products) generates hype, gives a sense of commitment to the system, etc. And the high end lenses seem to be far from useless on the EOS R (eg the accuracy of the EOS R's AF system plays well with the RF 50/1.2, albeit also wide aperture EF lenses) ... and the EOS R itself seems to be far from useless even if it isn't all that everyone wanted ... so it's not like what they have released is totally impractical.)


----------



## -pekr- (Jan 23, 2019)

flip314 said:


> I don't see why there's an issue with this? Canon can clearly support 2 systems, and I don't think an APS-C R camera would totally cannibalize the EOS-M line. I think both could coexist just fine.
> 
> EOS M is a small form factor, and Canon clearly has size restrictions for EF-M lenses that make it difficult for certain types of lenses. EOS-M is there for the people who think mirrorless should be about size. There are a lot of people for whom this is important. They'll buy into the M system. Canon wants to make money off these people, so they will keep selling EOS M.
> 
> ...



Let me fix one thing for you. EOS-M really feels like an afterthought nowadays. Your argument about ppl not eventually attaching expensive RF lens to EOS-M is just an excuse for an inability to do so, and is not valid imo. Canon still allows you to attach your expensive L EF lens, no matter how weird the combo might look. And yes, the reason why we've bought into 70-200/2.8 II IS was, that we could use it for our FF one day, which we did with our 5DIV.

But - nowadays and with an advent of RF lens, EF feels a little bit like a dead end - would you buy it, for the money given, if you knew, that there is an RF equivalent? Would you buy it for its advantage of possible attachability to an EOS-M body? As for me - no. That makes EOS-M less attractive in my eyes and pushes it into just PS level of camera - small, nice, still useful pocket camera with an interchangable lenses and excellent APS-C image quality as an advantage.

But - if Canon releases APS-C based R body with an RF mount, it will push EOS-M into the corner even more, imo, because there's basically no upgrade path left. If you accept those aspects, then you are of course good to go, and EOS-M is still your good travel/street combo.


----------



## Bennymiata (Jan 23, 2019)

I think the M series will continue for a long time.
In fact, I'm waiting for Canon to release an updated M5 with full sensor 4k video to replace my M5.
I also use a 5d3 for events etc. and a 70d on a gimbal for video, and each camera has its own personality.
Someone who wants a good small camera might buy an M series camera, but they wouldn't consider something the size of an R or even a crop DSLR. Tha camera market is a big and fragmented one.

DSLRs aren't going anywhere anytime soon.
They're too popular and too cheap to make compared to mirrorless cameras.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jan 23, 2019)

jd7 said:


> I like the simplicity of Riker's approach



Canon cares about profits, not simplicity.



jd7 said:


> but my guess is much depends on the cost of producing a FF sensor (at scale) these days.



AFAIK, smaller chips will always be cheaper to make than bigger chips. Same for lenses with smaller power of coverage (up to a certain focal length, which is why there aren't EF-S & EF-M superteles).



jd7 said:


> Rebels and the like sell in relatively high volumes despite being more limited cameras than "higher end" models, which suggests there is a significant market at the price point of the Rebels, et al.



Production costs play a large part here.



jd7 said:


> Canon will want to supply that market. It will do that to some degree through the M system, but if there is a significant market at that price point which still wants "more" than small size/weight, Canon will want to supply that market. If that market is significant (and I don't know one way or the other)



This is where the 7D (and probably the xxD series, to some degree) come in. If Canon can make a high performance EOS-R camera (not trivial, but I guess would be easier with a crop sensor than FF sensor), a 7D like EOS-R would be a low hanging fruit.



jd7 said:


> such as extent to which confusion about RF v RF-s is likely to help or harm sales



IMHO, it would help. With no mirror to interfere, Canon could pull the same trick Nikon did - allow photographers to mount RF-S lenses on RF bodies, and shoot in crop mode (same as it does for video), giving an easy upgrade path.



jd7 said:


> The other potential market for an RF-s camera seems to be the reach-limited crowd who are desperate for "pixels on target" (and who therefore may get a benefit from APS-C rather than simply cropping a FF shot).



Not only. Crop + 300mm f/4 (possibly even f/2.8) would have more sales than FF + 500mm f/4, esp as some would be unable to afford the later.



jd7 said:


> The first question there is whether that market is large enough to motivate Canon to go after it (as against leave it to users to pay up for the large and expensive FF gear and otherwise miss out).



I think the 7D, esp the mkII, shows there is.



jd7 said:


> Anyway, perhaps the key point of the original post in this thread is to emphasise that if you want to predict what Canon is going to do, you are probably better off trying to think like a business-person than like a photographer/photography enthusiast.



Agreed.


----------



## cellomaster27 (Jan 23, 2019)

I think I've decided that I am going to wait for the 5D mark V. I know that's going to be a fantastic camera. It'll be better than the mark 4 obviously and there's a standard with the line that won't change. i.e. dual card slots, at least 7 fps, at least 30MP, 4K 1.6x crop, touch screen, etc..
I just think that it'll take wayyy too long to wait for canon to come out with a 5D line equivalent mirrorless and even then, they may disappoint. Besides, who here will miss the sound of the shutter??  kind of kidding but it's so satisfying at times for me photographing. 
I just have to have to talk about IBIS.. why is this such an important thing? Sure, you'll get more stabilization with sensor and lens stabilization. Or it'll be fantastic for lenses without IS.. but is it really truly that important? I can shoot plenty steady, and that came from being conscious of my body and it supporting the camera. If I shot video seriously, then I'd get a rig to really actually smooth things out. I see too many wannabe filmmakers buying cheap rigs and expecting cinema quality stuff from 4K+, IBIS.  (granted, some people get really great quality content with these cameras, but it's skills, not the rig AT ALL) It's funny to see people buy these cameras with great specs and coming out with content that could be shot with anything cheaper and simpler. Went to Best Buy and some guys were bashing canon based on specs(I agree) very vocally but they didn't know anything about the camera and what it can do for them and what lenses to get. Funny and sad. 
If canon actually comes out with something smashing with their mirrorless, then I'm in. but I really really don't see that happening for several years. My mark 3 is adding up on the milage.. I think it's slated for 2020?


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jan 23, 2019)

[email protected] said:


> Launching with $3,000 jaw-dropping lenses and a 6D2-equivalent body sort of seems to suggest this is what happened, especially if the follow-up bodies are lower-end products.
> .



Personally, I think it's quite deliberate. Canon did this with the EF mount. 50mm f1.0L....on the only body available at the time...a lowly EOS 650. 

Only a gear head will buy a £2K body to get access to £3K lenses. Most buyers of the Eos R will buy cheapie EF lenses and use the bundled EF to R adapter. Gear Heads will want native R lenses...and will pay through the nose for them. 
Canon will sell far more EOS R bodies than they will all of the collective R lenses currently available. They kind of win both ways...shift over priced R lenses to gear heads and shift buckets of Eos R bodies to everybody and anybody. Hell...even Sigma lenses work on it...


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Jan 23, 2019)

While it makes sense they need bread and butter models first, the EOS R is simply too expensive for what it offers and already should be the entry level FF mirrorless @ $1600 max. I cringe at how much more they could cripple the camera or maybe offer 1fps AF with tracking to offer even lower specs


----------



## Ladislav (Jan 23, 2019)

If the magic target is $1500, we may be there in few months if we consider grey market as well. EOS R currently sells for £1659 on HDewCameras in UK (still with "some" warranty) while it is £2349 in retail.

My one off experience buying L lens with Canon's UK employee discount also showed that you can get even lower than grey market prices and still have full EU/UK warranty. Retail prices are rip off.


----------



## JonSnow (Jan 23, 2019)

dba101 said:


> The last release was full of surprises that no-one knew about.
> Anything can happen.
> I for one wont be jumping anywhere for negligible improvements, no ergonomics etc etc
> I see far too many Sony shooters looking down fiddling around missing all the shots. Fair enough if you have time.
> I prefer to crack away and bring home the goods, get paid and start over.



Yeah sure sony users are mostly stupid and unable to use their cameras. The new realtime AF will make it even worse......

Lol


----------



## YuengLinger (Jan 23, 2019)

dba101 said:


> I see far too many Sony shooters looking down fiddling around missing all the shots. Fair enough if you have time.



And how many shots do we miss while watching all those Sony users, hmmm?


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jan 23, 2019)

Ladislav said:


> If the magic target is $1500, we may be there in few months if we consider grey market as well. EOS R currently sells for £1659 on HDewCameras in UK (still with "some" warranty) while it is £2349 in retail.
> 
> My one off experience buying L lens with Canon's UK employee discount also showed that you can get even lower than grey market prices and still have full EU/UK warranty. Retail prices are rip off.



Are there many jobs at Canon UK? If one is considering a 400LIS mkIII...it might be worth a 3 month role there...
It's a pity that HDEW don't sell the bigger whites like the 400LIS mkIII. £13K is a LOT to spend...considering there are currently no discounts on that lens.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 23, 2019)

An interesting post and commentary on the EOS-R roadmap.
Everyone is an individual.
What I am waiting for is either a better than 5D IV EOS-R and 1DR or a 7DR.
It doesn't look likely I will get any of those three anytime soon.
I considered the EOS-R while its seems quite good the lack of dual slots would rule it out for me.

For Canon I think it would make sense to bring out a range of cheaper cameras. 
They have a bit of a problem here.
If they want to sell significant volume I think it would have to be sub $1000 with a kit lens of some sort.
I can't see them achieving that with a full frame camera.
For APS-C they already have the M camera range. 
I can see Canon producing an R series APS-C cameras in the XXXD and XXD range even though it would sort of overlap. The could recycle the existing sensors and low FPS of those existing cheaper DSLRS 2000/3000D etc.
I don't know how difficult it is for Canon but it has alot of cheaper full frame lens that could be repeated for an APS-C R . Like a kit 18-55mm (Cheap version) , 70-300mm 5.6 to 6.3, 50 1.8, etc

It's potentially a bit of a mess as the DSLR versions would probably still be cheaper for a few years at least.

For me personally I'm not sure what I will do. I'm pretty happy with the 5DIV (excellent camera) ,5DSR (so-so happy) and 7DII (functional rather than good - and its going to break soon as I am well over 250,000 images on it) I'm heavily invested in Canon glass - which is really brilliant to use.
Fully silent shutter and Eye Focus would be useful to me. Higher FPS than 10 would be a bonus (A 1DXII is attractive at times but its very big - fine for special occasions but not day to day use).
I had Sony off the table as I though Canon might produce something suiting me in 2019 but that looks less likely as Canon's focus is on the bigger market and not currently on higher end user. It might be a wait and see. I'm sure Canon will hint at the longer term eventually. While cheaper cameras drag in customers so do the high end ones from an aspirational perspective. Why did I pick Canon in the first place - hard to know now so many years later but I'm sure the sight of the big whites at the big events would have sown the seeds of what I thought was best. 
I started with the basic Canon's knowing I could upgrade to better options.
If the EOS-R is the best option Canon will have for a while its all feels a bit blah!


----------



## lwan (Jan 23, 2019)

I'm getting mixed signals. Mid/entry level RF first. But high end expensive lenses to go with it, or more precisely to show off.
I guess Canon plan is not exactly what is being rumored.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jan 23, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> Personally, I think it's quite deliberate. Canon did this with the EF mount. 50mm f1.0L....on the only body available at the time...a lowly EOS 650..



The 50mm f/1.0 lens and EOS-1 pro film body were both introduced in September 1989, roughly 2 years after the EOS system was announced. See https://global.canon/en/c-museum/


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jan 23, 2019)

I think Canon made a mistake when designed the EF-M mount. 
They could have launched with the RF mount back then and make it compatible for future full frame cameras, 
but probably thought mirrorless will be only a small slice of the market and only entry level.

So they never designed it for full frame and best performance in mind. 
Now they have a system they have to maintain or drop it at some point.


----------



## wockawocka (Jan 23, 2019)

No pro body this year?

Dammit. I'll have to keep using the current one then.


----------



## The Fat Fish (Jan 23, 2019)

dak723 said:


> The point is - what do you value? The reason some folks criticize your comments is that you make sweeping generalizations that presume that everyone values what you value. Saying "Canon fail to offer the same value for money" is NOT A FACT, it is your opinion. When people state opinions as fact, they are going to get some backlash. It's that simple.
> 
> For me, Canon offers more for the money, and obviously other feel the same. Canon color and ergonomics are worth far more to me that anything Sony offers. I will soon begin dong some how-to videos, so an articulating screen is now a must have. So that is more value than the others offer. The touch screen AF point select is also a spec that I really like - that's why I traded my Olympus EM-1 for a Mark II. So that is more value from the Canon than it's competitors.
> 
> Now, for many folks like you, those specs may not be things they value - it may be IBIS, 2 card slots or better video specs. That's a perfectly valid opinion. If you state it that way, few will mind.


When assessing value I ask myself, what features can I workaround? For example something as subjective as colour can be worked around by shooting RAW. I can’t work around the horrendous video implementation without buying APS-C lenses which is absurd. Sure, overall value is subjective but the value of features can be quantified.


----------



## Nelu (Jan 23, 2019)

riker said:


> 1Dx R? I think that was a joke. Nobody wishes for that and nobody has ever expected it.


Yet another dude taking he own wishes for reality...
Where's the "Dislike" button on this forum when you need it?


----------



## Cryve (Jan 23, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> Where do you think the future of 7D lies-
> 
> 1. With EOS-M
> 
> ...



im eagerly waiting for the 7d iii. I am currently using an 80d for wildlife because the image quality (sharpness etc.) is just better, but i miss the professional features of the 7 d series. 
that beeing said i think they will release the 7d iii in a dslr format, because the continous focusing in canons mirrorles technology isnt there yet. Also there wouldnt be blackout free shooting. Another reason is that all the wildlife lenses are for the ef mount, even the new ones like the 600 f4 iii.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jan 23, 2019)

Maybe no 5DIV equivalent this year is a good thing. I've been wanting a new Sony 4K TV, but hanging on to my 10 year old Samsung while saving up for the better RF. Blow the money on the TV this year?


----------



## nchoh (Jan 23, 2019)

SereneSpeed said:


> Just give me the ability to backup RAW files using Bluetooth, while still writing to the card on my EOS R. That’s all I ask.
> 
> I’m not here to argue about the EOS R being a pro camera - I Pay my bills with it. My 5Div collects dust now and is ‘just’ a backup body. I’ll happily wait a year or so for the ‘Pro R’, if I get RAW file redundancy.
> 
> ...



IIRC Bluetooth specs are controlled by the phone companies who do not wish to afford Camera companies an easy way of uploading files to the phone.


----------



## djack41 (Jan 23, 2019)

If Canon does not release impressive professional cameras in 2019, I will sadly be done with Canon. 5d2, 5D4, and 1DX2 are long in the tooth. The EOS R is a nice camera but the specs fall well below Sony's A9, 7lll, and 7Rlll.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 23, 2019)

I'm happy with what I have and that makes me happy to wait and see what happens in the future. No rush here. What I have is still far beyond my wildest dreams 10 years ago.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 23, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> They could coexist, but would Canon get much more profit from two mirrorless APS-C lines? And if we include DSLR EFS, that'd make *three *APS-C lines.
> 
> What might make a bit more sense (but not total sense) - an RF camera with 1.3 crop factor. For birds and sports.



My suspicion is that this is exactly what they will do. Bring back an APS-H sized sensor so they can get more than double the yield per silicon wafer. Not only would the sensors be smaller and thus more numerous, any flaws would affect less sensors on that wafer so the yields should be higher. Plus digic chips don't need to be quite as beefy. 

And while making the lens cheaper by making it only cover a aps-h area, I've been thinking why not just make full sized ones? Make an 18-135 f3.5-5.6 and a 70-300, or equivalent lenses to the 18-55 + 55-250. Make them full frame so that they work fine on a bigger body so if someone wants to upgrade they can. This establishes a firm middle ground.

Another possibility is canon could also bundle the control ring adapter and have it come with the efs lenses - this could be the "cheaper bundle" with the R lenses being "the upgraded" option. EFS lenses have been shown to mostly cover a full frame but with distortion present on the outside. Almost all of them would cover an APS-H just fine with no big distortion. And APS-H is not a standard per se - it could be anything from 1.5 to 1.2 crop factors really. Just something slightly better than M would help differentiate the lines.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 23, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> Where do you think the future of 7D lies-
> 
> 1. With EOS-M
> 
> ...



5. With a 7DIII.


----------



## Ladislav (Jan 23, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> Are there many jobs at Canon UK? If one is considering a 400LIS mkIII...it might be worth a 3 month role there...
> It's a pity that HDEW don't sell the bigger whites like the 400LIS mkIII. £13K is a LOT to spend...considering there are currently no discounts on that lens.



Unfortunately, it was 3 years ago, otherwise I would not need to shop on HDEW... I had this opportunity through friend of friend and saved £700+ on 70-200 Mk.II. At that time they had some limits on how many items and total value they can shop per year and not everything was available / eligible - big whites and 1D bodies were not available for sure.


----------



## Chuckmet (Jan 23, 2019)

Silverstream said:


> Personally I expect a mirrorless rebel in the next few months to fulfill that very important price level as mentioned in the article and a full frame mirrorless more akin to the 5DmkIV with IBS and a higher frame rate/servo by Summer. I don't know how many mkIVs they sell now but I am guessing that is is a fairly high volume high profit area. Add IBS, a faster frame rate, mkIV buttons and a second slot and voila. My opinion is that its an area of growing competition from Sony, Nikon, etc. The super high megapixel camera is just not that large of a market comparatively. Personally, I'm quite happy to keep the megapixels at 30.
> The Servo frame rate is pathetic on the EOS R which tends me to believe that a 1DX mkII mirrorless is not going to happen soon since we would expect it to exceed the specs of what we have now obviously and I think the tech is just not there with Canon.



Isn't the M50 the mirrorless Rebel?


----------



## LesC (Jan 23, 2019)

Chuckmet said:


> Isn't the M50 the mirrorless Rebel?



That's what I was thinking ... why bother with an APSC EOS R when you can have exactly that in a much smaller body?


----------



## wockawocka (Jan 23, 2019)

I'm expecitng a pre April budget body and in June/July 'Two months till release' 5 series smorgasboard of a High MP R and a 5D5 + 5D5r release along with three new lenses, likely to be a 24-70, 70-200 and 35mm all in RF mount.

I don't see Canon sitting still on this front and it gives them time for a Mirrorless 1D launch. I say this because the Current R model is almost there anyway. If it wasn't for the lack of Joystick and dual cards I'd say it is the same as the 5D4 anyway.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 23, 2019)

wockawocka said:


> I'm expecitng a pre April budget body and in June/July 'Two months till release' 5 series smorgasboard of a High MP R and a 5D5 + 5D5r release along with three new lenses, likely to be a 27-70, 70-200 and 35mm all in RF mount.
> 
> I don't see Canon sitting still on this front and it gives them time for a Mirrorless 1D launch. I say this because the Current R model is almost there anyway. If it wasn't for the lack of Joystick and dual cards I'd say it is the same as the 5D4 anyway.


No real comment on this other than to say "I really liked your real-world use Canon R review". I hope the firmware release expected soon includes the ability to reduce the focal points. That would essentially fix the d-pad not being able to be used as a less effective joystick.


----------



## wockawocka (Jan 23, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> No real comment on this other than to say "I really liked your real-world use Canon R review. I hope the firmware release expected soon includes the ability to reduce the focal points. That would essentially fix the d-pad not being able to be used as a less effective joystick.



Thanks Criscokkat!


----------



## c.d.embrey (Jan 23, 2019)

*What I hope to see* is a EOS R style replacement for the *EOS 80D* and the *EOS 7D Mark II, *plus some wide primes*, *aimed at the enthusiast and pro*. What I expect to see* is a *Full Frame Rebe*l, a kit zoom and lots of slow (f/4-f/8) convenience zoom lenses (18-100, 100-200, 200-600, etc).

Canon's problem is that there is no longer a large entry-level market that will buy crop cameras.Enthusiasts want either Full-Frame or the Not-Really-Medium Format Fuji 50S/50R cameras.


----------



## 6degrees (Jan 23, 2019)

Even the first version of Canon R is not good. Who is going to buy even cheaper version?

Canon RF 50mm F1.2 L is for pro but Canon R is poorly designed.


----------



## ykn123 (Jan 23, 2019)

Well, give me a decent AF Servo Tracking with more than the current EOS-R frames per second - that's all i need in addition to what i got with my R. So far, i leave any mirrorless canon at home ( i own a m50 as well) , if i'm out with my dogs every day. "Action" shots are just not possible with these cameras. The m50 actually has a decent fps in one shot AF as has the R - but in bad light conditions / high iso , i don't like the APS-C m50 and it's results and the R is just not capable of tracking fast moving targets.


----------



## Adelino (Jan 23, 2019)

Ladislav said:


> If the magic target is $1500, we may be there in few months if we consider grey market as well. EOS R currently sells for £1659 on HDewCameras in UK (still with "some" warranty) while it is £2349 in retail.
> 
> My one off experience buying L lens with Canon's UK employee discount also showed that you can get even lower than grey market prices and still have full EU/UK warranty. Retail prices are rip off.



You cannot compare employee price discounts to full retail. I used to work for REI (outdoor shop in USA) we bought prodeal at 25-35% of retail cost or maybe at most 50% on some items like bicycles. That's almost like saying become CEO of Canon and they give you cameras for free. Or as Bill Nighy as Billy Mack said in Love Actually*,* “Hiya kids. Here is an important message from your Uncle Bill. Don't buy drugs. Become a pop star, and they give you them for free!”


----------



## Adelino (Jan 23, 2019)

6degrees said:


> Even the first version of Canon R is not good. Who is going to buy even cheaper version?
> 
> Canon RF 50mm F1.2 L is for pro but Canon R is poorly designed.


People who want a less expensive Canon mirrorless.


----------



## Adelino (Jan 23, 2019)

nchoh said:


> IIRC Bluetooth specs are controlled by the phone companies who do not wish to afford Camera companies an easy way of uploading files to the phone.


Bluetooth is managed by the Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG), which has more than 30,000 member companies in the areas of telecommunication, computing, networking, and consumer electronics. I think it's fairly open.


----------



## Adelino (Jan 23, 2019)

There was an item about a FF mirrorless 26 MP camera in certification, that sounds liek an R with 6D2 sensor. The 6D2 sensor inventory may be high and could keep costs down, 1300 USD would be great.


----------



## Paul Gilchrist (Jan 23, 2019)

Viggo said:


> I’m puzzled at all comments pointing to how the RF50 and RF28-70 are a waste on the R and that they NEED a better body... there is no truth to that. There is nothing about the R that limits the RF50 for example...



Lack of IBIS limits it for me


----------



## Kit. (Jan 23, 2019)

c.d.embrey said:


> *What I hope to see* is a EOS R style replacement for the *EOS 80D* and the *EOS 7D Mark II, *plus some wide primes*, *aimed at the enthusiast and pro*. What I expect to see* is a *Full Frame Rebe*l, a kit zoom and lots of slow (f/4-f/8) convenience zoom lenses (18-100, 100-200, 200-600, etc).


What I *hope* to see is a *Full Frame Rebel*, and not APS-C RF cameras or lenses. Not that I'd buy that Rebel (maybe yes, maybe no), but I think it would be good for the industry. My first Canon camera was a full frame Rebel, by the way.

What I *expect* to see is *still no G7X III* for the next 3 months.


----------



## Adelino (Jan 23, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> Where do you think the future of 7D lies-
> 
> 1. With EOS-M
> 
> ...



Merge with 80D. 90D or 7DIII will have flippy screen and be tough and fast maybe not as tough as full 7D2 though.


----------



## Adelino (Jan 23, 2019)

Kit. said:


> What I *hope* to see is a *Full Frame Rebel*, and not APS-C RF cameras or lenses. Not that I'd buy that Rebel (maybe yes, maybe no), but I think it would be good for the industry. My first Canon camera was a full frame Rebel, by the way.
> 
> What I *expect* to see is *still no G7X III* for the next 3 months.



I am right there with ya! My first was a FF Rebel as well, back in the John McEnroe era. I would be all in on a FF Rebel R MAYBE  
Also looking forward to G7XIII with DPAF and what else?


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 23, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> And while making the lens cheaper by making it only cover a aps-h area...


??????? What ???????????


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 23, 2019)

Kit. said:


> What I *hope* to see is a *Full Frame Rebel*, and not APS-C RF cameras or lenses. Not that I'd buy that Rebel (maybe yes, maybe no), but I think it would be good for the industry. My first Canon camera was a full frame Rebel, by the way.
> 
> What I *expect* to see is *still no G7X III* for the next 3 months.


I'd buy a FF Rebel.


----------



## Chuckmet (Jan 23, 2019)

Kit. said:


> What I *hope* to see is a *Full Frame Rebel*, and not APS-C RF cameras or lenses. Not that I'd buy that Rebel (maybe yes, maybe no), but I think it would be good for the industry. My first Canon camera was a full frame Rebel, by the way.
> 
> Rebel's have never been full frame, always APS-C from the inception. 6D is the closest thing to a full frame Rebel.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 23, 2019)

nchoh said:


> IIRC Bluetooth specs are controlled by the phone companies who do not wish to afford Camera companies an easy way of uploading files to the phone.


As far as I know (and I know a lot), there is nothing in Bluetooth specs that would specifically preclude Canon from uploading RAWs. Bluetooth just doesn't have enough bandwidth for it to be practicable. It would take several minutes to transfer one file.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 23, 2019)

Chuckmet said:


> Rebel's have never been full frame, always APS-C from the inception. 6D is the closest thing to a full frame Rebel.


That's not true.

The first EOS Rebel was full frame.

The one that I owned was not even the first model in the Rebel line. It was the 7th. Rebel G.


----------



## JBSF (Jan 23, 2019)

I use 7D and 7D2 with longer lenses, including 100-400 mark 2, to photograph birds and insects. Tens of thousands of photographers use those body/lens combinations for nature and sports, and anybody who thinks they will ultimately be required to mount lenses of that size on an fiddly little M body (I own one) has never used one of those lenses. I'm guessing that Canon either will continue to make DSLRs to satifsy that niche, or they will make an APS-C R body for the purpose. Otherwise all of those photographers will be forced to buy a high-MP FF R body for twice the price of a 7D in order to get enough pixels on their subjects to be able to crop. I'm not sure that would be a wise business decision. I am satisfied with the 7D2 for now, but I would like to see an APS-C R body if for no reason but to eliminate the need for AFMA.


----------



## dba101 (Jan 23, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> And how many shots do we miss while watching all those Sony users, hmmm?



The clue is in my comment


----------



## DVaNu (Jan 23, 2019)

With its first EOS R iteration, Canon sent out a clear message: "We're maybe hopping a bit behind but this is what the future has to bring". Especially with the new RF mount and lenses, they were spot on and it looks promising. This first model was certainly not what some might have expected of it (me included) but it was good and advanced enough to convince not only new Canon customers but quite some enthusiasts and (semi-)professionals to give it a shot and more over to be amazed by the lenses and some of some features of the EOS R. In my opinion Canon will for now follow the money as suggested in the article and will release some sort of "lower value" entry level model (the original EOS R being a "higher value"entry level) to expand the R and RF system client base. A high level pro R "flagship" model(1Dx equivalent) will and should by all means take much more time to be developed, tested and released to make sure it will have the most advanced and fine-tuned mirrorless technology available BUT.... I think that some might share my opinion when I say that Canon should and should really not wait too long to release an "all-round" Pro R model (between entry level and a high level Flagship model), shaped at the level of the 5DIV and 5Ds(r) and aimed at the serious enthusiast and professionals, looking to adding an equivalent mirrorless to pair up with their existing DSLR 's and/or to replace some DSLR's all together. This body should by all means be aiming at becoming a true Sony competitor or at least be the model that puts Canon completely on track on the mirrorless market, which unfortunately is not the case yet. Features that should be included in this all-round Pro model: Double card slots, IBIS, higher FPS (on all levels - but not as high as current 1Dx), 45+ MegaPix sensor, better DR, non cropped 4K video, improved ergonomics with at least a joystick of some sort or an improved version of the touch bar. Features such a more advanced body with integrated battery grip, even higher FPS, higher MegaPix, 8(K vid?), completely redesigned AF system, some new features, should be kept for the high level Pro model to be released as the last iteration of their mirrorless offer. 
Of course this is what I'd like to see and what make sense in my opinion but I'm sure Canon has already planned out their path and offer for the next 3 to 4 years to come.... and good that we don't know too much about it otherwise it would completely spoil the fun of CR and this forum, wouldn't it? .....

Time will tell, I guess.....


----------



## 6degrees (Jan 24, 2019)

Adelino said:


> People who want a less expensive Canon mirrorless.


Canon needs to deliver R body to match RF 50mm F1.2, otherwise no serious pro will buy RF 50mm F1.2, not even talking about to compete with Sony a7r3.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jan 24, 2019)

Kit. said:


> That's not true.
> 
> The first EOS Rebel was full frame.
> 
> The one that I owned was not even the first model in the Rebel line. It was the 7th. Rebel G.



Are you referring to this: https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/film190.html ? If you are, I should point out that this is a film camera and (almost) everybody else on this site is referring to DSLRs.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Jan 24, 2019)

Kit. said:


> My first Canon camera was a full frame Rebel, by the way.



I bought my son a Full Frame Film Rebel when he was shooting for his school's newspaper.  Today he uses a Samsung 10S + instead of Canon IL Cameras.


----------



## Nelu (Jan 24, 2019)

Kit. said:


> That's not true.
> 
> The first EOS Rebel was full frame.
> 
> The one that I owned was not even the first model in the Rebel line. It was the 7th. Rebel G.


You're comparing apples to oranges here. He was clearly refering to digital cameras, not film cameras.
Of course, any 35mm film camera was a "full frame" camera but this doesn't have anything to do with the topic: we're talking about digital cameras, be they DSLR's or mirrorless.


----------



## Yasko (Jan 24, 2019)

KeithBreazeal said:


> I see the logic of consumer grade FF introductions to capture the market but the thing that doesn't make sense is the opening salvo of big heavy pro glass without a body for pros. No informed amateur is going to dive on a camera body that is supported with 2-3K lenses. The whole concept of mirrorless for me is size and weight and that's why I got a M5. I think Canon should have launched the R system with something on the order of the 5D Mark IV with continuous silent shutter, dual card slots, and a reasonable frame rate. A lesser equipped R body may make cents but doesn't make sense IMO.



Again, if you want a FF mirrorless with sharp and large aperture lenses, you will end up with a prime in the 35-50 mm region and f/2-2.8 or you will end up with large and heavy glass. That‘s just not scaling this heavily with the flange distance.
Still, having a pancake prime with a mirrorless is an intriguing option! You just have to know why that‘s the only option to be really compact...
Of course a small aperture built-in kit lens FF camera would be possible, but still not the zoom range as with smaller cameras (larger image circle on FF) and the shame of having a FF sensor without being able to change the lens .


----------



## Pape (Jan 24, 2019)

I am hoping canon made breakthrough how expand aps-c density sensor to full frame and how make it cheap . 
So they kind of putting 7d and 5dr to same body , aps-c when on crop mode.
Without weather sealing and partly plastic body so price would be like 1000$
Time to make that mirrorless is cheaper claim as true 

Hey i am allowed to dream


----------



## Ladislav (Jan 24, 2019)

Adelino said:


> You cannot compare employee price discounts to full retail. I used to work for REI (outdoor shop in USA) we bought prodeal at 25-35% of retail cost or maybe at most 50% on some items like bicycles. That's almost like saying become CEO of Canon and they give you cameras for free. Or as Bill Nighy as Billy Mack said in Love Actually*,* “Hiya kids. Here is an important message from your Uncle Bill. Don't buy drugs. Become a pop star, and they give you them for free!”



I don't care that much about employee discount - that was just example showing the margin. I compare HDEW in UK, which is a UK based business where you can collect in person so it is not some invisible eshop. They don't seem to take their stock from Canon UK or Canon EU but they provide "standard 1-year manufacturers warranty" whatever that means and folks have previously mentioned that invoicing is also not an issue. You still get many Canon products up to 30% cheeper than in official retail. So what are we paying for those additional 30%.

Example. In November 2017 I bought 5DIV for £2269 while in retail it was £3299. It is still £2999 in retail while HDEW currently offers it for £1729. I don't see what I get for those additional £1200? I may get additional year or two of warranty and option to go for finance instead of pay everything immediately but that is not worthy that unbelievable price hike.

And there is no problem registering products from HDEW for CPS.

Edit: Now I see that HDEW gives 3 years warranty for 5DIV as well.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 24, 2019)

Bob Howland said:


> Are you referring to this: https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/film190.html ? If you are, I should point out that this is a film camera and (almost) everybody else on this site is referring to DSLRs.





Nelu said:


> You're comparing apples to oranges here. He was clearly refering to digital cameras, not film cameras.
> Of course, any 35mm film camera was a "full frame" camera but this doesn't have anything to do with the topic: we're talking about digital cameras, be they DSLR's or mirrorless.


Maybe you should have read the comment he/she was answering to?



c.d.embrey said:


> I bought my son a Full Frame Film Rebel when he was shooting for his school's newspaper.  Today he uses a Samsung 10S + instead of Canon IL Cameras.


I bet he is also a bit older.

An entry-level ILC is more of a status symbol than of an image capturing device. Of course, it also captures better images, at better range of scenes and lighting conditions, with better manual controls, but that's what makes it a status symbol. It would be unlikely to happen if it were just a black brick.


----------



## Viggo (Jan 24, 2019)

Paul Gilchrist said:


> Lack of IBIS limits it for me


The lack of IBIS does not make the 50 a waste with the R. It might be more applications where you can shoot with that combo, but what I meant is that you can absolutely get the most out of the 50 when using the R, no other body will make that lens better than the results you get with the R.


----------



## Viggo (Jan 24, 2019)

The new Olympus seems to transfer raw via Bluetooth?


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 24, 2019)

If Canon are to produce an APS-C EOS R body they may decide to bundle it with a lens that is technically a FF lens but is only really of high(ish) quality within the APS-C area - something like a slowish RF 17-50. The lens would technically work on a FF body but with more pronounced optical issues towards the edges. With in-body lens corrections this wouldn't be such a big issue for many. 

Such a lens would be light and cheap, would work perfectly well for the APS-C bodies and, within limitations, would work OK as a cheap wide zoom for those who then upgrade to FF.

When Canon introduced their APS Film cameras they did exactly this. The EF 22-55mm lens for the APS film cameras was a full-frame lens (bear in mind that the crop for APS film was less than the crop for APS digital though)


----------



## dak723 (Jan 24, 2019)

Kit. said:


> ....
> An entry-level ILC is more of a status symbol than of an image capturing device. Of course, it also captures better images, at better range of scenes and lighting conditions, with better manual controls, but that's what makes it a status symbol. It would be unlikely to happen if it were just a black brick.



Oh, yes, people are really impressed when you buy the cheapest ILC. "Hey, everybody, look at my Rebel!"

No, people buy expensive things for status. 

It should be noted that the biggest difference in low end and higher end cameras is in more rugged build quality, weather sealing, and additional specs and options. The IQ is usually the same or very similar - even comparing APS-C and FF. I've owned both, taken the same shots with both, and if you shoot in any kind of daylight (even sunset light), and don't print large, the photos look identical. So that entry level camera is an *inexpensive* way to take high-level photos with an ILC, not a status symbol, in my opinion.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 24, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> ??????? What ???????????


yeah, it wouldn't really save much, and you'd take away the upgrade the body at anytime argument. That's why I think just using consumer grade full frame is more likely, even if they use a sensor between 1.2 and 1.4 reduction and call it aps-h.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 24, 2019)

Pape said:


> I am hoping canon made breakthrough how expand aps-c density sensor to full frame and how make it cheap .
> So they kind of putting 7d and 5dr to same body , aps-c when on crop mode.
> Without weather sealing and partly plastic body so price would be like 1000$
> Time to make that mirrorless is cheaper claim as true
> ...


I wonder if that's reasonably possible? I'm sure there's some shooters who would love a 5Ds like sensor that could only do 3 fps at full size but would do 10fps if you shrunk it down. There's be less data coming off and thus a lessor amount of processing power/bandwidth needed. I'm sure there are plenty of users who would pay a premium price to do both.


----------



## tinaundmaxim (Jan 24, 2019)

Seems plausible, and sad the same time. Of course, Canon will milk the cashcow with cheaper cameras a bit longer. But honestly, I think Canon is moving more and more to be an entry-level camera manufacturer. Don´t get me wrong, Canon has some fine gear, but deploying new iterations of the same APS-C cameras with some few more MPix isn´t the kind of thing that defines a "class leading" camera manufacturer anymore. It´s things like the implementation of DualPixel Autofocus (which is really, really awesome on a 5D Mark IV). It´s things like Eye-Tracking in Servo... or two card slots 

So my hope is still up for a mirrorless 5D Mark IV equivalent with IBIS in 2019. A pro model without IBIS would be a big disappointment. Every one else has it. It would be like building a car and just don´t fit in seatbelts.


----------



## wockawocka (Jan 24, 2019)

I've given this some more thought and I think it's very possible we'll see the budget body alongside the higher mp body (but with dual cards and a stick).

I'd be fine with that if I could pixel bin. I made do with the 5Dsr for a couple of years while the 5D4 was being readied for release.


----------



## Equinox (Jan 24, 2019)

In all honesty I would love Canon to out out a high MP (50-80)EOS R as soon as possible so that I could jump from my 5D4, although I don't think a Canon should do that. They need to wait, develop their tech further so that when they release their first pro mirrorlesss body it's a knockout. They've needed a product like this since 5Dmk2, not saying their high end products since then have been bad just that they haven't revolutionised. Currently Canon has best ergonomics (apart from the R) , menus, colour (if you shoot jpeg only) and best lenses compared to the competition, they need to up their game in all other respects. If they don't up their ga,e severely with first pro mirrorless body they will continue to slide down the scale to a camera manufacturer of good quality mid range cameras and not the top of the line Luxurious camera manufacturer that I assume majority of us once believed they were.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 24, 2019)

dak723 said:


> Oh, yes, people are really impressed when you buy the cheapest ILC. "Hey, everybody, look at my Rebel!"
> 
> No, people buy expensive things for status.


Are you going to buy your kid an X1D?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 24, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> I don't know how difficult it is for Canon but it has alot of cheaper full frame lens that could be repeated for an APS-C R . Like a kit 18-55mm (Cheap version) , 70-300mm 5.6 to 6.3, 50 1.8, etc



I don't think Canon has ever made an 18-55mm full frame lens.



Paul Gilchrist said:


> Lack of IBIS limits it for me



That, plus either your inability or unwillingness to stabilize the camera properly.




SereneSpeed said:


> Just give me the ability to backup RAW files using Bluetooth, while still writing to the card on my EOS R. That’s all I ask.
> 
> I’m not here to argue about the EOS R being a pro camera - I Pay my bills with it. My 5Div collects dust now and is ‘just’ a backup body. I’ll happily wait a year or so for the ‘Pro R’, if I get RAW file redundancy.
> 
> Please Canon, give me wireless RAW backup!



So you're saying you don't mind if it takes 20 minutes per photo (due to the bandwidth limits of Bluetooth) and you have to change camera batteries every 3-5 frames?




Antono Refa said:


> IMHO, Canon wouldn't do it as...
> 
> 1. It doesn't provide an easy upgrade path from crop to FF - M lenses aren't mountable on R bodies.
> 
> 2. Pro crop body, like the 7D, which give an extra reach with superteles. That is, unless you think the 1D X, 7D, and superteles will be EOS forever.



R bodies and lenses _are_ EOS, they're just not EF mount.




-pekr- said:


> Let me fix one thing for you. EOS-M really feels like an afterthought nowadays.
> 
> But - nowadays and with an advent of RF lens, EF feels a little bit like a dead end - would you buy it, for the money given, if you knew, that there is an RF equivalent? Would you buy it for its advantage of possible attachability to an EOS-M body? As for me - no. That makes EOS-M less attractive in my eyes and pushes it into just PS level of camera - small, nice, still useful pocket camera with an interchangable lenses and excellent APS-C image quality as an advantage.
> 
> But - if Canon releases APS-C based R body with an RF mount, it will push EOS-M into the corner even more, imo, because there's basically no upgrade path left. If you accept those aspects, then you are of course good to go, and EOS-M is still your good travel/street combo.



EOS-M are the best selling system cameras in Japan. It's not going anywhere anytime soon.




cellomaster27 said:


> I just think that it'll take wayyy too long to wait for canon to come out with a 5D line equivalent mirrorless and even then, they may disappoint. Besides, who here will miss the sound of the shutter??  kind of kidding but it's so satisfying at times for me photographing.



I think you mean the sound of the mirror? Most mirrorless cameras, including the EOS R, still have a shutter.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 24, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> yeah, it wouldn't really save much, and you'd take away the upgrade the body at anytime argument. That's why I think just using consumer grade full frame is more likely, even if they use a sensor between 1.2 and 1.4 reduction and call it aps-h.


But then it wouldn't be FF.
None of it would save $.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 24, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> But then it wouldn't be FF.
> None of it would save $.


The sensor is the most expensive part of a camera. One standard 8 inch wafer yields at most 20 full frame sensors, assuming there is not a flaw (which there almost always is). An APS-H sized sensor could have between 50-100 sensors, depending on the exact size they choose (I think the number was 67 if the same as what used to be in the 1d). The same wafer can hold over 400 aps-c sized ones. A flaw that affects a small percentage of the wafer might kill several sensors on the full frame platter, but might only effect 1-10 out of 400+ aps-c sized ones because a flaw anywhere will invalidate the whole sensor. So the yields are better the smaller that you get. These numbers *come directly from a canon whitepaper*, it's simple math to compute the maximum amount of rectangular shapes that can fit on the 8 inch platter everyone from Intel on down use to make any type of computer chip, which is what a sensor is. Smaller = more. 

So yes, a smaller sensor would be less expensive to produce. The less expensive something is, the greater chance of selling more, so the volume production makes it cheaper still. 

Just because the mount can handle up to a full frame doesn't mean it has to be full frame sensor. Just because the lens is full frame doesn't mean it can't be used by a sensor smaller than full frame.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 24, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> SereneSpeed said:
> 
> 
> > Just give me the ability to backup RAW files using Bluetooth, while still writing to the card on my EOS R. That’s all I ask.
> ...



I'd love to see a "Enhanced Vertical Grip" that had contacts for data transfer as well as battery. You could elect to have a second card that is copied to with every shot, and it would be an optional add on for prosumer or consumer level cameras. If you need it to work on both at the same time, have a pro level camera.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 24, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> The sensor is the most expensive part of a camera. One standard 8 inch wafer yields at most 20 full frame sensors, assuming there is not a flaw (which there almost always is). An APS-H sized sensor could have between 50-100 sensors, depending on the exact size they choose (I think the number was 67 if the same as what used to be in the 1d). The same wafer can hold over 400 aps-c sized ones. A flaw that affects a small percentage of the wafer might kill several sensors on the full frame platter, but might only effect 1-10 out of 400+ aps-c sized ones because a flaw anywhere will invalidate the whole sensor. So the yields are better the smaller that you get. These numbers *come directly from a canon whitepaper*, it's simple math to compute the maximum amount of rectangular shapes that can fit on the 8 inch platter everyone from Intel on down use to make any type of computer chip, which is what a sensor is. Smaller = more.
> 
> So yes, a smaller sensor would be less expensive to produce. The less expensive something is, the greater chance of selling more, so the volume production makes it cheaper still.
> 
> Just because the mount can handle up to a full frame doesn't mean it has to be full frame sensor. Just because the lens is full frame doesn't mean it can't be used by a sensor smaller than full frame.



1. Your assertion was that making lenses for an APS-H sensor would be less expensive than making lenses for a FF camera. Not true.
2. "The wafer would yield more sensors" is your other assertion. Are all uncut sheets the same size to begin with? Highly doubtful in my mind, but I have no idea. I would assume it would be optimized for size / yield and less scrap anyway.
3. Then you don't mention other costs to Canon to bring yet another line to market: R&D, manufacturing, warehousing, shipping, labor force size, employee benefits, marketing, packaging, additional mfg. capacity, etc.

"The less expensive something is, the greater chance of selling more." You assume the market exists and that there is a viable market for an APS-H sized sensor and (specifically) lenses manufactured especially for APS-H sensors. Um, why APS-H would require it's own lens line to begin with is bewildering to me. Seems it would use the same mount (RF) and just be a matter of the sensor being smaller and the image circle covering more, or the whole sensor... exactly what APS-C does now with EF lenses.


----------



## wockawocka (Jan 24, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> I'd love to see a "Enhanced Vertical Grip" that had contacts for data transfer as well as battery. You could elect to have a second card that is copied to with every shot, and it would be an optional add on for prosumer or consumer level cameras. If you need it to work on both at the same time, have a pro level camera.



Nice idea.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 25, 2019)

Built in SSD would be nice... in addition to a card slot.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Jan 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Maybe you should have read the comment he/she was answering to?
> 
> 
> I bet he is also a bit older.
> .



He's not a child anymore. And he has put away childish things  People worth impressing are not impressed with cameras


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 25, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> 1. Your assertion was that making lenses for an APS-H sensor would be less expensive than making lenses for a FF camera. Not true.
> 2. "The wafer would yield more sensors" is your other assertion. Are all uncut sheets the same size to begin with? Highly doubtful in my mind, but I have no idea. I would assume it would be optimized for size / yield and less scrap anyway.
> 3. Then you don't mention other costs to Canon to bring yet another line to market: R&D, manufacturing, warehousing, shipping, labor force size, employee benefits, marketing, packaging, additional mfg. capacity, etc.
> 
> "The less expensive something is, the greater chance of selling more." You assume the market exists and that there is a viable market for an APS-H sized sensor and (specifically) lenses manufactured especially for APS-H sensors. Um, why APS-H would require it's own lens line to begin with is bewildering to me. Seems it would use the same mount (RF) and just be a matter of the sensor being smaller and the image circle covering more, or the whole sensor... exactly what APS-C does now with EF lenses.


Did you even read my post? While they could, I argued that they would not make a APS-H lens. They would/could make consumer grade lens like the patents we saw posted today, but have a sensor that is cheaper because of size/yield.

The wafer sizes are industry standards. At the time this canon white paper came out (http://www.robgalbraith.com/images/canon_full-frame_cmos_white_paper.pdf) the standard was 200mm wafers, or roughly 8 inches. The industry has upgraded to 300 mm wafers for many computer chips but there are issues scaling up to 450mm with lithography taking too long to be economical. There are different layers added on for image sensing chips so I’m not sure if they have upgraded to those larger processes. The nature of making silicon wafers involves spinning the wafers to ensure a molecule level even surface so they are always circular . I was off in my number for how many aps-c chips fit, canons number was 200. If they made a aps-h sensor the same size as the one in the 1d, they could fit 46 (ie half the cost, other than dev time). If they made them at a 1.4 crop aps-h, it would be up around 80. 

Presumably any sensor made for this market would be massed produced the same way as the current dslr aps-c cameras are, from higher end 7d all the way down to the cheapest rebels. Building out consumer grade lenses that are R mount full frame allows a user to upgrade to larger sensor R mount camera at some point in the future. Canon has always tried to artificially segment their markets. Even if they only kept aps-c and full frame they still are going to create r mount versions at lower price points. Even if very very few of their users ever get anything more than the kit lenses, the fact that they could put better lenses on is a big motivating factor in purchases.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 25, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> My suspicion is that this is exactly what they will do. Bring back an APS-H sized sensor so they can get more than double the yield per silicon wafer. Not only would the sensors be smaller and thus more numerous, any flaws would affect less sensors on that wafer so the yields should be higher. Plus digic chips don't need to be quite as beefy.
> 
> And while making the lens cheaper by making it only cover a aps-h area, I've been thinking why not just make full sized ones? Make an 18-135 f3.5-5.6 and a 70-300, or equivalent lenses to the 18-55 + 55-250. Make them full frame so that they work fine on a bigger body so if someone wants to upgrade they can. This establishes a firm middle ground.
> 
> Another possibility is canon could also bundle the control ring adapter and have it come with the efs lenses - t





criscokkat said:


> Did you even read my post? While they could, I argued that they would not make a APS-H lens. They would/could make consumer grade lens like the patents we saw posted today, but have a sensor that is cheaper because of size/yield.
> 
> The wafer sizes are industry standards. At the time this canon white paper came out (http://www.robgalbraith.com/images/canon_full-frame_cmos_white_paper.pdf) the standard was 200mm wafers, or roughly 8 inches. The industry has upgraded to 300 mm wafers for many computer chips but there are issues scaling up to 450mm with lithography taking too long to be economical. There are different layers added on for image sensing chips so I’m not sure if they have upgraded to those larger processes. The nature of making silicon wafers involves spinning the wafers to ensure a molecule level even surface so they are always circular . I was off in my number for how many aps-c chips fit, canons number was 200. If they made a aps-h sensor the same size as the one in the 1d, they could fit 46 (ie half the cost, other than dev time). If they made them at a 1.4 crop aps-h, it would be up around 80.
> 
> Presumably any sensor made for this market would be massed produced the same way as the current dslr aps-c cameras are, from higher end 7d all the way down to the cheapest rebels. Building out consumer grade lenses that are R mount full frame allows a user to upgrade to larger sensor R mount camera at some point in the future. Canon has always tried to artificially segment their markets. Even if they only kept aps-c and full frame they still are going to create r mount versions at lower price points. Even if very very few of their users ever get anything more than the kit lenses, the fact that they could put better lenses on is a big motivating factor in purchases.



Yeah, I read your post. Did you?



criscokkat said:


> My suspicion is that this is exactly what they will do. Bring back an APS-H sized sensor so they can get more than double the yield per silicon wafer. Not only would the sensors be smaller and thus more numerous, any flaws would affect less sensors on that wafer so the yields should be higher. Plus digic chips don't need to be quite as beefy.
> 
> And while making the lens cheaper by making it only cover a aps-h area, I've been thinking why not just make full sized ones? Make an 18-135 f3.5-5.6 and a 70-300, or equivalent lenses to the 18-55 + 55-250. Make them full frame so that they work fine on a bigger body so if someone wants to upgrade they can. This establishes a firm middle ground.



You actually argued that Canon *would* bring back APS-H... to include lenses just for APS-H. Then you say, "Why not just make them full size (lenses)?" So that people could upgrade. Isn't that what you said?

You said bringing back APS-H would save $. To which I . Then you said it wouldn't save much. So yeah, I read it.

There is more to fabricating a camera than cutting out the sensor from the wafer. BTW: What does that cost? Per sensor, I mean.

First there has to be a market for it to make it viable no matter what the cost. Is there? You and I have no idea.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jan 25, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> I'd love to see a "Enhanced Vertical Grip" that had contacts for data transfer as well as battery. You could elect to have a second card that is copied to with every shot, and it would be an optional add on for prosumer or consumer level cameras. If you need it to work on both at the same time, have a pro level camera.




If they build a board and software for multiple card slots, i would personally rather they actually populate that card slot in the body rather route traces to pads in the the battery compartment and make you buy a grip to use them.


----------



## SereneSpeed (Jan 25, 2019)

SereneSpeed said:


> Just give me the ability to backup RAW files using Bluetooth, while still writing to the card on my EOS R. That’s all I ask.
> 
> I’m not here to argue about the EOS R being a pro camera - I Pay my bills with it. My 5Div collects dust now and is ‘just’ a backup body. I’ll happily wait a year or so for the ‘Pro R’, if I get RAW file redundancy.
> 
> ...





Michael Clark said:


> So you're saying you don't mind if it takes 20 minutes per photo (due to the bandwidth limits of Bluetooth) and you have to change camera batteries every 3-5 frames?




It takes 4 seconds to transfer a RAW file over bluetooth.

I've shot entire sessions and then used the same battery to transfer the files into CaptureOne using Camera Connect. Hundreds of images.

Do I think Canon will implement the change I want? No. No chance. But it's not because image transfer is limited to 900 images an hour, or 400+ RAW image transfers per battery charge cycle (using Camera Connect).


----------



## Kit. (Jan 25, 2019)

SereneSpeed said:


> It takes 4 seconds to transfer a RAW file over bluetooth.


It doesn't, unless you mean "+HS", which is actually a Bluetooth-initiated WiFi transfer.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 25, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> If they build a board and software for multiple card slots, i would personally rather they actually populate that card slot in the body rather route traces to pads in the the battery compartment and make you buy a grip to use them.


They could have a Thunderbolt connection to the Enhanced Grip and put a M.2 slot into the grip, _as well as_ an additional DSP to speed up AI autofocus.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 25, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> The sensor is the most expensive part of a camera. One standard 8 inch wafer yields at most 20 full frame sensors, assuming there is not a flaw (which there almost always is).


At which cost _per wafer_? Around $3k? Less?

A FF senor is not particularly cheap, but is unlikely the most expensive part of a camera. The most expensive part of a camera is likely R&D amortization.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> At which cost _per wafer_? Around $3k? Less?
> 
> A FF senor is not particularly cheap, but is unlikely the most expensive part of a camera. The most expensive part of a camera is likely R&D amortization.


The most expensive part in Material costs, yes. I'd agree that on paper R&D is a larger part of it for sure. That's actually why I'm 100% positive we will see rebel priced R mount models sooner rather than later, to spread the cost of R&D for the mount an new technologies. And as more of those mainstream cheaper models are sold in much larger quantities the cost comes down significantly. If the developed a new sensor between the Full Frame and 1.6 crop APS-C, I'd imagine it would be around 1.4 or 1.3, and would be used in *everything*. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't do it though. However I think that developing a 1.3 sensor would be the way to get a mostly 1dx speed camera out the door a little sooner, for many of the same reasons why it was easier to do so years ago when they first introduced it. It's all about how fast they can get the data off the chip and process it. having the same basic sensor in much slower, cheaper, mass market devices is just a way to pay off all the R&D for the bleeding edge.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> At which cost _per wafer_? Around $3k? Less?
> 
> A FF senor is not particularly cheap, but is unlikely the most expensive part of a camera. The most expensive part of a camera is likely R&D amortization.



One might argue that R&D amortization is not a "part", in the sense that you can't order a replacement _R&D amortization_ if the one inside your camera breaks, but rather a portion of the expense of producing a camera.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 25, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Built in SSD would be nice... in addition to a card slot.



There's no fundamental difference between the way the flash memory in a memory card wears out and the way the flash memory in an SSD wears out. It's much easier to replace a memory card than an internal SSD soldered to the main board when that point comes.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 25, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> The most expensive part in Material costs, yes. I'd agree that on paper R&D is a larger part of it for sure. That's actually why I'm 100% positive we will see rebel priced R mount models sooner rather than later, to spread the cost of R&D for the mount an new technologies. And as more of those mainstream cheaper models are sold in much larger quantities the cost comes down significantly. If the developed a new sensor between the Full Frame and 1.6 crop APS-C, I'd imagine it would be around 1.4 or 1.3, and would be used in *everything*. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't do it though.


They have already tried it with the original 1D series. I don't see any reason for them to return to it now, as it would be an uncommon sensor size with no clear market positioning, which means huge R&D costs unlikely to be paid off.



criscokkat said:


> However I think that developing a 1.3 sensor would be the way to get a mostly 1dx speed camera out the door a little sooner,


I don't see how. It's not like they need a smaller _mirror_ that could be flipped faster, and the sensor size alone has little effect on data transfer rates.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jan 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> At which cost _per wafer_? Around $3k? Less?
> 
> A FF senor is not particularly cheap, but is unlikely the most expensive part of a camera. The most expensive part of a camera is likely R&D amortization.



And a major goal of R&D, which is a "non-recurring expense", is to reduce the "recurring expenses", especially in items being sold in the thousands or tens of thousands of units.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> They have already tried it with the original 1D series. I don't see any reason for them to return to it now, as it would be an uncommon sensor size with no clear market positioning, which means huge R&D costs unlikely to be paid off.
> 
> 
> I don't see how. It's not like they need a smaller _mirror_ that could be flipped faster, and the sensor size alone has little effect on data transfer rates.



The market positioning of a sensor like this would be something used in every R-mount consumer camera, much like APS-C EF-S sensors are now. This way there would be a clear market delineation between EF-M, consumer level aps-H, and Pro level. If they did a 1dx speed camera using the smaller sensor they'd probably price it/name it as a more expensive 7d type camera to differentiate. A smaller sensor with a lower pixel count would be faster offloading data, and would require less cpu computational horsepower to determine focus and display in the viewfinder. I'm thinking something like 26-28 megs. Most likely the next pro full frame R camera is going to have much more than 30.

But my point on this is that it would be a whole line of cameras, all using the same R-Mount lenses. Probably priced a little higher than the current line, because it's a "step up" from aps-c, but not as expensive as full frame. My main reasoning for this speculation is simply because Canon likes to differentiate the market, but at the same time this gives them an actual improvement above competition. This might also explain why the R came in at a price higher than everyone expected, simply because they wanted room underneath it that allowed price increases also. People would balk at a R version of an APS-C 80d at 13-1400 but they would probably be ok with that price increase if the sensor was larger.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 25, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> There's no fundamental difference between the way the flash memory in a memory card wears out and the way the flash memory in an SSD wears out. It's much easier to replace a memory card than an internal SSD soldered to the main board when that point comes.


Eh. Don't know why it would have to be soldered in. Could also be removable.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 25, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Eh. Don't know why it would have to be soldered in. Could also be removable.



Either way, the camera is going to have to be opened up to get to it. There's no fundamental difference between the memory chips in an SSD and the memory chips in a removable memory card. Why make it more complicated?


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 25, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Either way, the camera is going to have to be opened up to get to it. There's no fundamental difference between the memory chips in an SSD and the memory chips in a removable memory card. Why make it more complicated?


SSD will get smaller and smaller. I open my camera now to pull the CF/SD cards. Samsung has a 512gb ssd about the same size as an SD card and it is much faster. No big deal, but I think it could be removable and would be nice. Just what the doctor ordered for those 4k/8k video guys and burst shooters. Downloads a full HD movie in 3 seconds. "Samsung claims that the PM971-NVMe SSD offers read and write speeds of up to 1500MB/s and 900MB/s respectively." So why? Because and why not. Don't see how it would be more complicated at all. No reason at all it couldn't be housed to plug in and out like an SD card. https://gadgets.ndtv.com/laptops/ne...lest-512gb-ssd-that-weighs-just-1-gram-844105

So if there is no "fundamental difference" then I vote for the postage stamp sized SSD with 1500mb/s speed over SD any day. Power draw be damned.


----------



## dhachey77 (Jan 25, 2019)

OK, a $1,500 APS-C body with $3,000 lenses doesn't light my fire. Faced with buying all new lenses for the Canon mirrorless, it doesn't really matter which system I buy into. I'm mid way into a transition to a Sony system. I currently have a Canon 1D X and 5D4, with about 10 Canon lenses, and Sony A73 and A7RII bodies with about 8 lenses. I don't see myself buying any more Canon gear as these two fine bodies meet all my needs. I'm keeping the Canon system for wildlife and nature photography, and the Sony system for portraiture and travel work.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jan 25, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> SSD will get smaller and smaller. I open my camera now to pull the CF/SD cards. Samsung has a 512gb ssd about the same size as an SD card and it is much faster. No big deal, but I think it could be removable and would be nice. Just what the doctor ordered for those 4k/8k video guys and burst shooters. Downloads a full HD movie in 3 seconds. "Samsung claims that the PM971-NVMe SSD offers read and write speeds of up to 1500MB/s and 900MB/s respectively." So why? Because and why not. Don't see how it would be more complicated at all. No reason at all it couldn't be housed to plug in and out like an SD card. https://gadgets.ndtv.com/laptops/ne...lest-512gb-ssd-that-weighs-just-1-gram-844105
> 
> So if there is no "fundamental difference" then I vote for the postage stamp sized SSD with 1500mb/s speed over SD any day.





CanonFanBoy said:


> Built in SSD would be nice... in addition to a card slot.



So are you asking for an SSD memory card slot or a built-in SSD?

No, you do not "open the camera" to get to the memory card. You open the memory card door. There's a _big_ difference, dozens of screws, specialized tools, and a lot of skill involved between that and a "built in SSD."

"Samsung has a 512gb ssd about the same size as an SD card and it is much faster."

Have you ever looked at the performance of XQD and CFast memory cards? They're a lot faster than SD cards, too. And they are user removable memory cards that are already used in many cameras.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 25, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> The market positioning of a sensor like this would be something used in every R-mount consumer camera, much like APS-C EF-S sensors are now. This way there would be a clear market delineation between EF-M, consumer level aps-H, and Pro level. If they did a 1dx speed camera using the smaller sensor they'd probably price it/name it as a more expensive 7d type camera to differentiate. A smaller sensor with a lower pixel count would be faster offloading data, and would require less cpu computational horsepower to determine focus and display in the viewfinder. I'm thinking something like 26-28 megs. Most likely the next pro full frame R camera is going to have much more than 30.
> 
> But my point on this is that it would be a whole line of cameras, all using the same R-Mount lenses. Probably priced a little higher than the current line, because it's a "step up" from aps-c, but not as expensive as full frame. My main reasoning for this speculation is simply because Canon likes to differentiate the market, but at the same time this gives them an actual improvement above competition. This might also explain why the R came in at a price higher than everyone expected, simply because they wanted room underneath it that allowed price increases also. People would balk at a R version of an APS-C 80d at 13-1400 but they would probably be ok with that price increase if the sensor was larger.


80D is currently selling at $1000. 6DII is currently selling at $1300. I don't see a market for your "consumer level aps-H" camera.


----------



## Pape (Jan 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> 80D is currently selling at $1000. 6DII is currently selling at $1300. I don't see a market for your "consumer level aps-H" camera.


and 6dii is half pro it can be made cheaper


----------



## Architect1776 (Jan 25, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



People forget the EOS 1 was out 2 years after the EOS cameras were introduced.
Yet in that period there were L lenses and pretty incredible ones introduced to show what could be done.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> 80D is currently selling at $1000. 6DII is currently selling at $1300. I don't see a market for your "consumer level aps-H" camera.


Yes. No room for a "consumer" grade camera. On the other hand, while I hate to feed the fantasies of APS-H fans, It would be interesting if, in five years or so when the limitations of mirrorless are less severe, if Canon were to put out a sports oriented "R" camera along the lines of a 7D, but with a 1.3 crop sensor.

Interesting, but highly unlikely, as improvements in both full frame and APS-C have already converged to the point where the image-quality space occupied by a APS-H sensor would be too narrow for any real benefit.


----------



## Ian K (Jan 25, 2019)

Give me an R-7DII and a RF 100-400L and I will be happy.

On the other end I want an RF 11-24 f/4 L


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> 80D is currently selling at $1000. 6DII is currently selling at $1300. I don't see a market for your "consumer level aps-H" camera.


Do you hear your own logic here? The 70D is selling for 700. I don't see a market for the 80D. The 6D is selling for 900. I don't see a market for the 6DII. 

I think there'd be a market for it. Larger sensor, more light, eye focus & other mirrorless features, slightly higher price. The 60D's original list price was 1399. They lowered it with the 70d and 80d to 1199. No reason an improved camera with an improved sensor and mount wouldn't be able to be priced back at 1399 for the body. It would also be priced under the R by a good amount. Canon's been pretty coy as to any specs as to the cheaper R-Mount camera they will announce soon. To my knowledge they have not confirmed that it's a full frame camera, just that it's an R mount.


----------



## criscokkat (Jan 25, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Yes. No room for a "consumer" grade camera. On the other hand, while I hate to feed the fantasies of APS-H fans, It would be interesting if, in five years or so when the limitations of mirrorless are less severe, if Canon were to put out a sports oriented "R" camera along the lines of a 7D, but with a 1.3 crop sensor.
> 
> Interesting, but highly unlikely, as improvements in both full frame and APS-C have already converged to the point where the image-quality space occupied by a APS-H sensor would be too narrow for any real benefit.


I'd love to see that. I think if it happens it will happen with the first R-Mount camera that's not full frame because everything following it will be based on the same sensor, just like the current aps-c line all uses the same sensor (more or less, some use older versions of same sensor). We should know in a couple of months when they announce the cheaper R-mount camera.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 25, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> Do you hear your own logic here? The 70D is selling for 700.


Used, no warranty? Thanks.

The logic is simple: the price difference between APS-C cameras and FF cameras is not large enough to justify wasting money on development of a nonstandard intermediate sensor format and of a "standard" and "wide" zoom lenses for it. People who think APS-C is not good enough for them will buy FF anyway. Or even MF.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 25, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> So are you asking for an SSD memory card slot or a built-in SSD?
> 
> No, you do not "open the camera" to get to the memory card. You open the memory card door. There's a _big_ difference, dozens of screws, specialized tools, and a lot of skill involved between that and a "built in SSD."
> 
> ...



I'm no asking for anything. I just said I think it would be nice. You don't have to agree.


----------



## ashmadux (Jan 26, 2019)

flip314 said:


> No card slots, in-body destabilization, no controls other than the touch bar, m43 sensor, max 480p 1fps with 8x crop.



bwajajajaj


----------



## bf (Jan 27, 2019)

I agree with those mentioned $3K lenses of this new mount. Unless Canon can show a range of light, compact, and affordable lenses with acceptable quality ...this system would not become everyones.
In contrast, if the quality is the only thing that Canon can optimize in this wider mount, they better release a flagship body for ASAP.


----------



## Paul Gilchrist (Jan 30, 2019)

Viggo said:


> The lack of IBIS does not make the 50 a waste with the R. It might be more applications where you can shoot with that combo, but what I meant is that you can absolutely get the most out of the 50 when using the R, no other body will make that lens better than the results you get with the R.



Agreed when using a tripod or high shutter speed, but I mainly do hand held low light shooting, and can't achieve 5 stops by just holding the camera more steady, like I could with IBIS.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jan 30, 2019)

bf said:


> I agree with those mentioned $3K lenses of this new mount. Unless Canon can show a range of light, compact, and affordable lenses with acceptable quality ...this system would not become everyones.



Hmm. Even if the system transmutated sewage water into unicorn tears, it would not become everyone’s.


----------



## flip314 (Jan 30, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Hmm. Even if the system transmutated sewage water into unicorn tears, it would not become everyone’s.



Why couldn't Canon build a more compact body instead? _I_ don't need to transmute sewage, so neither should anyone else!


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 30, 2019)

flip314 said:


> Why couldn't Canon build a more compact body instead? _I_ don't need to transmute sewage, so neither should anyone else!


There's always the M for compact. It looks like the R is already decent size and is certainly more compact than my 5D Mark III. I might have to find a local store and hold one to see for myself. Have you held one yet? I need to get out and do that. Below is from Camerasize.com Looks pretty compact to me. I don't see how it can be made much smaller with the FF mount.


----------



## Pape (Jan 31, 2019)

Been thinking about this R camera thing and M cameras.
I dont think we never see R mount consumer camera . M is consumer and canon dont want R user photorgraphers to use cheap M lenses on their camera .
To ensure this M flange distance is shorter.
I think canon wants sell only 5k priced bodyes RP sport and Highpixel R5. There wont be anymore low pixel 5 or 6 or 7 cameras,cause they eat profit and increase only design expenses.
Canon eos R vanishes from production after they release eos RP. it was meant just temporary 0 camera to prevent peoples escaping to nikon z
RP is P cause there can be only one 1,untill mirrorless autofocus is better


----------



## Architect1776 (Feb 1, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Hmm. Even if the system transmutated sewage water into unicorn tears, it would not become everyone’s.



You are right.
Perhaps the person wanting something small and light with interchangeable lenses would be drawn to the M system. I know I am and am saving to get the next iteration of the M5. The 7D and L lenses are great but at times are heavy for snapshots around the house and other occasions. Also it is less intimidating. Not everyone needs a full blown and pro featured camera.


----------



## Pape (Feb 11, 2019)

I think they should change whole viewfinder consept on cameras .
Viewfinder should be moved to left corner so you can get better vision for left eye .
There would be old fashioned mechanical cross hair aimer for left eye to center camera.
you know how difficult its aim flying bird with long tube.if you dont get it immediately to view ,then you need check with other eye where it went.
Electrical viewfinder for right eye would be just 1000 pixel one to show profile lines for composition and AF red dots .
You dont really need see all details or colors to take photograph .All that is away from shooting speed .and photoediting speed
Like two different viewfinder mode ,normal mode and low resolution sketch mode ,would be nice option.


----------

