# Here’s the full list of gear Canon will announce on September 5



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 31, 2018)

> *Update:* Here are the first specifications and images of the upcoming Canon EOS R and RF mount lenses.
> We finally have the full list of gear that Canon will announce on September 5, 2018.
> *Canon announcements for September 5, 2018*
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## Quackator (Aug 31, 2018)

ND and PL point towards built-in neutral density filter and PL lens mount. Looks like this is video stuff.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

Interesting implications from that list. 

The lack of an EF mount adapter strongly suggests the new camera will be able to natively mount EF lenses.

The lack of an IS designation on standard lenses suggests IBIS. 

L USM lenses are consistent with a serious, high end offering. 

No CR3 tag, so presumably this remains a rumor. If this rumor turns out to be true, there will be plenty of crow to be served on these forms.


----------



## padam (Aug 31, 2018)

It seems very clear that it will have IS in the body, that's good news. I don't expect anything earth-shattering in the very first model, but as a system it looks strong.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 31, 2018)

Am I right in assuming this rumour has no rating? Just a collection of the various tidbits? Or is it legit?


----------



## Chaitanya (Aug 31, 2018)

No new speedlight?


----------



## ffxx (Aug 31, 2018)

Quackator said:


> ND and PL point towards built-in neutral density filter and PL lens mount. Looks like this is video stuff.


Can you explain a bit more? I would love a XC15/20 interchangeable upgrade!


----------



## MrAndre (Aug 31, 2018)

Wow, this took me by surprise. If this holds true Canon goes into the mirrorless market heavy handed.

This camera must be really amazing if they think people will pay >1k $ for lenses for it. 28-70 F2 and 50 F1.2 are definitely not going to be typical prosumer lenses when it comes to price range.


----------



## Kit. (Aug 31, 2018)

Quackator said:


> and PL lens mount


Or maybe an adapter with integrated polarizer filter.


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 31, 2018)

I can not believe Canon managed to keep ALL of that such a secret until now. EOS R plus FIVE pieces of glass???? Holy crap sandwich! I hope the dual mount system is true!!!


----------



## bks54 (Aug 31, 2018)

Quackator said:


> ND and PL point towards built-in neutral density filter and PL lens mount. Looks like this is video stuff.



Yes, these seem to be adapters to mount R lenses on other mounts. Everything points to EF lenses mounting directly on the new camera.


----------



## bks54 (Aug 31, 2018)

padam said:


> It seems very clear that it will have IS in the body, that's good news. I don't expect anything earth-shattering in the very first model, but as a system it looks strong.



35 M IS is interesting. Is this a macro with additional lens IS to complement IBIS?


----------



## zim (Aug 31, 2018)

RF 35mm f/1.8 M IS

What's this a macro lens? why the only RF lens with IS ?

Ha bks54 you beat me to it


----------



## zim (Aug 31, 2018)

RF 50mm f/1.2L USM

Blimy that's put the cat among the pigeons!! and explains why no new 50 for too long

Please let this camera have rear controls like the 7/5 series!


----------



## neo302 (Aug 31, 2018)

I hope the lenses are silent. Also need flip out screen and clean hdmi.


----------



## bks54 (Aug 31, 2018)

PureClassA said:


> I can not believe Canon managed to keep ALL of that such a secret until now. EOS R plus FIVE pieces of glass???? Holy crap sandwich! I hope the dual mount system is true!!!



Canon has generated more excitement by keeping silent than Nikon did with their cheesy zzzzz teasers.


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 31, 2018)

As with any FF offering, Canon is targeting the upper end user, whether hobbiest or pro. And perhaos given the design variances we may see them come in less expensive than we imagine. Canon was not just going to make a FF M5. This had to be a whole other level of MILC for them. 



MrAndre said:


> Wow, this took me by surprise. If this holds true Canon goes into the mirrorless market heavy handed.
> 
> This camera must be really amazing if they think people will pay >1k $ for lenses for it. 28-70 F2 and 50 F1.2 are definitely not going to be typical prosumer lenses when it comes to price range.


----------



## zim (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Interesting implications from that list.
> The lack of an EF mount adapter strongly suggests the new camera will be able to natively mount EF lenses.



Or it will come later so the price of early adoption will have to include at least one lens?


----------



## vangelismm (Aug 31, 2018)




----------



## AJB (Aug 31, 2018)

bks54 said:


> 35 M IS is interesting. Is this a macro with additional lens IS to complement IBIS?





zim said:


> RF 35mm f/1.8 M IS
> 
> What's this a macro lens? why the only RF lens with IS ?



The EF Macro lenses (100L and 24-70L and maybe others) have hybrid IS (at least I think that's what the called it), where it compensates for side-to-side movements as well as angular movements. I think the point being that a tiny side-to-side movement makes a big difference when you're viewing a tiny object at a huge scale, but only makes a tiny difference when viewing a normal object at a normal scale.

I guess perhaps it has angular in-body stabilisation, and the macro lenses add the side-to-side?

Total guess though!


----------



## mppix (Aug 31, 2018)




----------



## goldenhusky (Aug 31, 2018)

Aussie shooter said:


> Am I right in assuming this rumour has no rating? Just a collection of the various tidbits? Or is it legit?



Sounds Nokishita has reported the same thing so I am assuming this is a CR4. I haven't seen so far Nokishita reported something and that did not happen but I am only following all these rumor site for probably 4 to 5 years. If anyone know an instance they are wrong plese pot it here to "adjust" people's expectations


----------



## zim (Aug 31, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> Sounds Nokishita has reported the same thing so I am assuming this is a CR4. I haven't seen so far Nokishita reported something and that did not happen but I am only following all these rumor site for probably 4 to 5 years. If anyone know an instance they are wrong plese pot it here to "adjust" people's expectations



It does feel to me like to genie is out the bottle on this one though


----------



## canonnews (Aug 31, 2018)

PureClassA said:


> I can not believe Canon managed to keep ALL of that such a secret until now. EOS R plus FIVE pieces of glass???? Holy crap sandwich! I hope the dual mount system is true!!!



to be fair. Craig leaked the EOS R, the RF mount and 24(28)-70 F2.0, and the 50mm


----------



## Stuart (Aug 31, 2018)

CR? does anything other than a Nosita post about a potential order form corroborate this?


----------



## .jan (Aug 31, 2018)

zim said:


> Or it will come later so the price of early adoption will have to include at least one lens?


Highly unlikey. I see them pull off all sorts of stunts but this seems too wild.


----------



## amorse (Aug 31, 2018)

Oh boy. Here we go! Any bets on how many pages we can get to by tomorrow?

The adapters have my attention - maybe a multi-part adapter assembly? Maybe you need two parts on the adapter assembly - one to switch to PL mount, and one part which has two versions: one which accepts an ND filter and one which doesn't? If they're building that kind of adaptability right out of the gate, I have to suspect that this camera could have some serious video capabilities...


----------



## goldenhusky (Aug 31, 2018)

Feels like finally we are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. No doubt this will generate a lot of excitation and expectations. I guess it is wise to keep expectation low. It is Canon. This time around Canon might decide to pull a 5D2 moment that would be simply awesome!!! but then I have to keep my expectation low


----------



## amorse (Aug 31, 2018)

Maybe this sort of announcement is to buck Z pre-orders for people who wanted a big-grip mirrorless camera?


----------



## goldenhusky (Aug 31, 2018)

PD-E1 suggests the camera can be powered with the USB adapter and charges the battery.


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 31, 2018)

I'm looking forward to finally making the leap to Full Frame. I'm the perfect target market for this as a former 450 to 60d and now 80d owner. I get to keep my expensive lenses I've slowly invested in that are full frame, and upgrade to my first full frame camera (assuming this is a prosumer model in the 2k -2.5k price range).

Although to me it looks like the “M.ADAP R” “M.ADAP R ND” “M.ADAP R PL” are mount adapters *for* R, so that might mean EF needs to go on the M.ADAP R. I am wondering if this mount adapter is more permanently attached to allow good weather sealing?


----------



## dominic_siu (Aug 31, 2018)

Hope the AF and high ISO on par with 5D4 then I will consider changing my 5D4 to EOS R


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> The lack of an IS designation on standard lenses suggests IBIS.



On the contrary. "RF 35mm f/1.8 M IS" - that implies there's _no_ IBIS unfortunately, doesn' it? I'm disappointed. I was hoping to eventually buy it and mount my 24-70 on it and make it stabilised. The only faint hope is in that 'M'. What is it, 'M'? An RF-mount lens also mountable on EF-M? That doesn't add up.


----------



## .jan (Aug 31, 2018)

amorse said:


> Maybe this sort of announcement is to buck Z pre-orders for people who wanted a big-grip mirrorless camera?


Don't think so. Canon don't usually rush things and the previous rumours indicating "only" three lenses for the biggest photography show always seemed a bit thin.

Additionally, I don't think Nikon is their target. At all. Both Nikon an Canon will - for now - focus on keeping people invested in their systems instead of simply adapting their legacy glass to a Sony.


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 31, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> PD-E1 suggests the camera can be powered with the USB adapter and charges the battery.


They actually already have a PD-E1 in their catalog. https://www.precisionroller.com/levers-for-canon-pde1/details_69280.html


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 31, 2018)

And Kudos to Craig! But we only started that seeing that data very recently (even from Craig) and then there was still so much conflicting data. For a release of this particular scope, that's pretty damn good on Canon. 



canonnews said:


> to be fair. Craig leaked the EOS R, the RF mount and 24(28)-70 F2.0, and the 50mm


----------



## canonnews (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> On the contrary. "RF 35mm f/1.8 M IS" - that implies there's _no_ IBIS unfortunately, doesn' it? I'm disappointed. I was hoping to eventually buy it and mount my 24-70 on it and make it stabilised. The only faint hope is in that 'M'. What is it, 'M'? An RF-mount lens also mountable on EF-M? That doesn't add up.


the "M" probably means Macro. IS for Macro or what Canon calls Hybrid IS may still be useful with IBIS


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 31, 2018)

So the adaptors are the most interesting thing. If they are adaptors for the EF glass to fit the R mount rather than the R mount being an EF mount this would be a big deal. But why would these not be called EF.ADAP R ? 

The most logical answer is that the mount IS an EF mount, but can take RF lenses which recess. I think this is an ugly hack but it does make it adaptor-free for all the adaptorphobic out there. This would make these adaptors for the R lenses to fit EOS-M cameras.

Now... That itself is a bit strange. Because of two things.

Firstly, if these adaptors have built in ND or PL filters then that reduces the amount of space for the actual lens to recess meaning the true minimum distance between rear element and sensor is going to have to be bigger than on Sony and Nikon.

Secondly, why go to all this trouble for EOS-M cameras? It gives them new features (built-in ND and PL filters) that their brand new camera doesn't have. I don't see the reason for announcing this distraction right now.


So I think it's more likely these are actually adaptors for EF lenses for the R mount.


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 31, 2018)

Also... adaptors with built-in ND or CPL would certainly count as a "sexy" solution previously mentioned!


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

AJB said:


> The EF Macro lenses (100L and 24-70L and maybe others) have hybrid IS (at least I think that's what the called it), where it compensates for side-to-side movements as well as angular movements. I think the point being that a tiny side-to-side movement makes a big difference when you're viewing a tiny object at a huge scale, but only makes a tiny difference when viewing a normal object at a normal scale.
> 
> I guess perhaps it has angular in-body stabilisation, and the macro lenses add the side-to-side?
> 
> Total guess though!



I really hope so, forgot M might stand for Macro. Although it doesn't guarantee there's IBIS, maybe it only tells that without IS the macro lens would be unusable. At the same time, 35mm shouldn't be as demanding to stabilisation as 100mm.


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 31, 2018)

Stuart said:


> CR? does anything other than a Nosita post about a potential order form corroborate this?



It would be a rare mistake for Nokishita to publish that and it not be true at this stage of the game. You can feel pretty confident enough to take it to the bank if they make a proclamation like that


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 31, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> Feels like finally we are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. No doubt this will generate a lot of excitation and expectations. I guess it is wise to keep expectation low. It is Canon. This time around Canon might decide to pull a 5D2 moment that would be simply awesome!!! but then I have to keep my expectation low



I think it's perfectly reasonable with the lenses on this list that they do just that. It probably hasn't had it's pricing finalized and isn't coming out until later this year - I'm guessing they'll just show a mockup or early model? The list shown above is from an actual order form so these are just what's going to be available in the immediate future. I know on the copier side of the business they generally update the catalog/order forms about 6 times a year. I can't imagine the photo side being all that different, I'm sure it'll be listed in the next round.


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> there will be plenty of crow to be served on these forms.



Crow served fried, baked and roasted. Possibly in stew as well.

However,

Still possible disappointment. if a high end, high mp body isn't released I will have nothing to pre-order.


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 31, 2018)

And a rumored TWO models afoot... what might the next one be? If this is the EOS R .... might we finally see the EOS C ? Or perhaps EOS S (like the 1DS higher resolution models of yesteryear)


----------



## LSXPhotog (Aug 31, 2018)

I hope even 1/3 of this is true. Unfortunately, I think the only portion may be the

EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM
EF 400mm f/2.8L IS III
EF 600mm f/4L IS III
If any of this mirrorless is true, Canon just dropped the mic on Nikon. LOL


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

bks54 said:


> Yes, these seem to be adapters to mount R lenses on other mounts. Everything points to EF lenses mounting directly on the new camera.


Rather, I suspect they are adapters to mount PL lenses on the EOS R, one of which has an ND filter option.


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 31, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> Crow served fried, baked and roasted. Possibly in stew as well.
> 
> However,
> 
> Still possible disappointment. if a high end, high mp body isn't released I will have nothing to pre-order.



You will be waiting until next year for the other model I'm pretty sure.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

> RF 35mm f/1.8 M IS
> RF 50mm f/1.2L USM
> RF 28-70mm f/2L USM
> RF 24-105mm f/4L USM



Btw, much better lens selection than that of Nikon's. f/2 must be a killer, although the bottom 28mm is a bit disappointing, better be 24 or even 20...


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 31, 2018)

I think that 28-70 F2 is a typo and its actually 2.8. Anyway, this is really exciting, hoping for some additional leaks before next week.


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 31, 2018)

Wait, they are still releasing and updating EF lenses?

Have they not heard? DSLR's will now be obsolete.


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Rather, I suspect they are adapters to mount PL lenses on the EOS R, one of which has an ND filter option.



Seems a bit odd we'd have a small MILC with PL lens mounting. Usually see those on more full featured, dedicated cinema cameras.


----------



## amorse (Aug 31, 2018)

Maybe this is one of the reasons the 70-200 III only got coatings and a paint job. I can imagine developing all of this new gear over the last several years would take a lot of time and resources - it may have made more sense to just do a refresh of the 70-200 (considering how good it still is) when you're developing all of this behind the scenes.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

blackcoffee17 said:


> I think that 28-70 F2 is a typo and its actually 2.8. Anyway, this is really exciting, hoping for some additional leaks before next week.



I hope not (if that list is true at all). 28-70 f2.8 would make it worse than classic EF 24-70 f2.8L II.
f2, on the other hand, is quite impressive, it's literally +1 stop of light, shallower DoF and cooler bokeh. That'd kill Nikon with its mediocre initial Z-mount lens selection.


----------



## Meatcurry (Aug 31, 2018)

PureClassA said:


> Seems a bit odd we'd have a small MILC with PL lens mounting. Usually see those on more full featured, dedicated cinema cameras.


Surely PL refers to Polariser? Check out this image from a Canon Patent, could 102 be a filter or speed booster? Could R refer to "revolving", Can I get a EOS R for my birthday?


----------



## amorse (Aug 31, 2018)

PureClassA said:


> Seems a bit odd we'd have a small MILC with PL lens mounting. Usually see those on more full featured, dedicated cinema cameras.


Unless this is a full featured cinema camera - this could be Canon's answer to the requests for full video features on a DSLR form factor. One of the earlier rumours did mention that one of the two cameras coming would have much more advanced video features...


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 31, 2018)

PureClassA said:


> Seems a bit odd we'd have a small MILC with PL lens mounting. Usually see those on more full featured, dedicated cinema cameras.


I'm sure the adapter is more geared towards people buying it for future R mount 5d*/1d* cameras. It instills confidence that those mounts are still going to be supported in the future. It's just an adapter, so why not release it now? It'll still be usable on this camera, even if it's not going to be used by a huge number of folks until the more professional models come out.


----------



## Josh Leavitt (Aug 31, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> Still possible disappointment. if a high end, high mp body isn't released I will have nothing to pre-order.



A lot of us have been expecting a 5DS(R) successor for a while. But it may make sense for Canon to release a high-res model as an EOS R to completely remove the mirror-slap effect. A mirrorless model seems like the way to go if they ever intended to upscale the 120MXSC sensor to full-frame (or some variant of it).


----------



## .jan (Aug 31, 2018)

amorse said:


> Unless this is a full featured cinema camera - this could be Canon's answer to the requests for full video features on a DSLR form factor. One of the earlier rumours did mention that one of the two cameras coming would have much more advanced video features...


Yeah I suspect that's what they're going for. Terrible idea though, I want a decent stills camera and not some weird hybrid where half my money goes into video features I never use.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 31, 2018)

amorse said:


> Maybe this is one of the reasons the 70-200 III only got coatings and a paint job. I can imagine developing all of this new gear over the last several years would take a lot of time and resources - it may have made more sense to just do a refresh of the 70-200 (considering how good it still is) when you're developing all of this behind the scenes.



Or maybe part of the refresh was making it more compatible with the mirrorless AF system?


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 31, 2018)

amorse said:


> Unless this is a full featured cinema camera - this could be Canon's answer to the requests for full video features on a DSLR form factor. One of the earlier rumours did mention that one of the two cameras coming would have much more advanced video features...



Granted, yes. However, this is still a stills camera first (at least all indication), so a PL mount would be a bit oddball even if it has robust cinema features. You generally see PL mounted glass on bigger bodies like black magic URSA mini sized or Canon C line sized and bigger. We're talking about a body here that is smaller than a 6D


----------



## canonnews (Aug 31, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> Feels like finally we are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. No doubt this will generate a lot of excitation and expectations. I guess it is wise to keep expectation low. It is Canon. This time around Canon might decide to pull a 5D2 moment that would be simply awesome!!! but then I have to keep my expectation low


considering that this camera is supposed to be around the size of the M50 and have M50 ergonomics people SHOULD be keeping their expectations in check.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

Meatcurry said:


> Surely PL refers to Polariser? Check out this image from a Canon Patent, could 102 be a filter or speed booster? Could R refer to "revolving", Can I get a EOS R for my birthday?



An adapter with interchangeable filters sounds interesting, especially if it's weather-sealed. I only wonder how much Canon will charge for the filters, they'll obviously be branded-only at least initially. And it must be revolving somehow otherwise CIR-PL won't be usable.


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 31, 2018)

PureClassA said:


> Granted, yes. However, this is still a stills camera first (at least all indication), so a PL mount would be a bit oddball even if it has robust cinema features. You generally see PL mounted glass on bigger bodies like black magic URSA mini sized or Canon C line sized and bigger. We're talking about a body here that is smaller than a 6D


If they want 'B' or 'C' cameras and have a lot of existing PL lenses it would be worth the investment. Think local TV stations and the like. Since it's going to be an electronic image full time (either viewfinder or flippy screen) it'll be trivial to have a video out capability for an external monitor, and be compatible with a very large amount of cinema accessories.


----------



## MARKOE PHOTOE (Aug 31, 2018)

I can only imagine how Sony, Nikon and Fuji are crapping their shorts right now.


----------



## tomscott (Aug 31, 2018)

Finally!!! Something to be excited about!


----------



## Meatcurry (Aug 31, 2018)

BG-E22, where did that come from? Not on Nokishitas list?


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

canonnews said:


> considering that this camera is supposed to be around the size of the M50 and have M50 ergonomics people SHOULD be keeping their expectations in check.



28-70 f2L sounds like a high-end glass though. It actually is the 'L'. In that list, all lenses but 35mm are Ls. Sounds like an overkill for an M50 FF successor.


----------



## canonnews (Aug 31, 2018)

PureClassA said:


> Granted, yes. However, this is still a stills camera first (at least all indication), so a PL mount would be a bit oddball even if it has robust cinema features. You generally see PL mounted glass on bigger bodies like black magic URSA mini sized or Canon C line sized and bigger. We're talking about a body here that is smaller than a 6D


the PL mention is on an adapter, not the mount and is M.ADAP R PL , which could mean a new adapter for the M's

however the PL mount also is 52mm in registration distance, so there's more than enough room from an EF/RF mount to a PL for an adapter. It could be a way to signify that canon is more serious about video with this camera than others.


----------



## Meatcurry (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> An adapter with interchangeable filters sounds interesting, especially if it's weather-sealed. I only wonder how much Canon will charge for the filters, they'll obviously be branded-only at least initially. And it must be revolving somehow otherwise CIR-PL won't be usable.


Yep, I meant the entire lens mount may revolve to accommodate EF and RF lens......."Revolving Flange"


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 31, 2018)

Meatcurry said:


> "Revolving Flange"



Are you allowed to say that in public?


----------



## Meatcurry (Aug 31, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Are you allowed to say that in public?


Its OK, I didn't say it out loud!


----------



## SV (Aug 31, 2018)

That came out of nowhere. Glad I was sitting - feeling a bit light headed!!


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

Meatcurry said:


> Yep, I meant the entire lens mount may revolve to accommodate EF and RF lens......."Revolving Flange"



Looks like there's a sea of opportunities to guess  Just from a few abbreviations.
Why would the new mount be revolving? Maybe we'll screw it in and out to get different flange distances?..


----------



## BeenThere (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Btw, much better lens selection than that of Nikon's. f/2 must be a killer, although the bottom 28mm is a bit disappointing, better be 24 or even 20...


28-70 is certainly possible. I have an old Canon EF 28-70mm f/2.8 from the 90s. An f/2 should be good wide open and excellent at f/2.8. These zooms are easier to design with a smaller zoom range and paired with one of the excellent ultra wide zooms still covers the gamut.


----------



## miketcool (Aug 31, 2018)

EOS R = EOS Revolution


----------



## L3onard0 (Aug 31, 2018)

Come on guys! It's clear that ND and PL stand for filters (Neutral Density and Polarizing). The three adapter are:

M.ADAP R -> no filter
M.ADAP R ND -> with ND filter
M.ADAP R PL -> with PL filter

M can stand for M mount or for Mount, as the dot after the M suggest. In the second case EF lens will need this adpter to be used on the new R mount. That is.


----------



## SV (Aug 31, 2018)

Any chance the MILC will have a global shutter?


----------



## Meatcurry (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Looks like there's a sea of opportunities to guess  Just from a few abbreviations.
> Why would the new mount be revolving? Maybe we'll screw it in and out to get different flange distances?..


This


----------



## vjlex (Aug 31, 2018)

It will be really funny (and crushing) if it turns out to be nothing more than a printer announcement.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 31, 2018)

shunsai said:


> It will be really funny (and crushing) if it turns out to be nothing more than a printer announcement.





What they meant to announce was proofed catalog pictures of their planned release, with the gear coming out in October 2019


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

L3onard0 said:


> Come on guys! It's clear that ND and PL stand for filters (Neutral Density and Polarizing). The three adapter are:
> 
> M.ADAP R -> no filter
> M.ADAP R ND -> with ND filter
> ...



There's nothing about EF though. Does it mean 'R lens adapted to _some_ mount' or '_Some_ lens adapted to R mount'?


----------



## nchoh (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> On the contrary. "RF 35mm f/1.8 M IS" - that implies there's _no_ IBIS unfortunately, doesn' it? I'm disappointed. I was hoping to eventually buy it and mount my 24-70 on it and make it stabilised. The only faint hope is in that 'M'. What is it, 'M'? An RF-mount lens also mountable on EF-M? That doesn't add up.



Perhaps the camera can use both EF-R and EF lenses. But because Canon wants to get EF-M owners to buy into their new EF-R lenses, the adaptors are for mounting the new (smaller than EF) EF-R lenses to their M bodies?


----------



## Meatcurry (Aug 31, 2018)

miketcool said:


> EOS R = EOS Revolution


Yes, to have a revolution, you need to revolve? THATS IT!!! A revolutionary revolving mount!


----------



## ksgal (Aug 31, 2018)

Damn it, I just bought a 5D Mark IV.

*Head Desk*

(love the camera, but dang it, the new shinny one will be the bomb! *LOL*)


----------



## bks54 (Aug 31, 2018)

Meatcurry said:


> BG-E22, where did that come from? Not on Nokishitas list?



It's on Nokishita's list. Grip presumably.


----------



## vjlex (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Btw, much better lens selection than that of Nikon's. f/2 must be a killer, although the bottom 28mm is a bit disappointing, better be 24 or even 20...


I previously owned the EF28-70mm L while owning the EF24-70mm L. Honestly, while those 4mm more were nice, they weren't that huge a deal. Especially if you have a separate, true wide angle lens to complement it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

L3onard0 said:


> Come on guys! It's clear that ND and PL stand for filters (Neutral Density and Polarizing). The three adapter are:
> 
> M.ADAP R -> no filter
> M.ADAP R ND -> with ND filter
> ...


What strength ND? Variable ND? Likely not enough room to swing out a filter. A slot to remove/insert
For PL, shouldn’t it be called PL-C as is the case for the drop-in supertele CPLs?

But back up a step... M.ADAP R = either adapting an EF-M lens to the R body (is that even feasible, and with an APS-C image circle who would really want to, and even if so, why make three different versions of it?
No, more likely it’s to adapt R lenses to EOS M bodies. That makes sense for an upgrade path from APS-C to FF MILC, but it also means all these discussions of the video features of the new bodies benefiting from such an adapter are moot. The latter only applies if PL is for adapting PL mount lenses to the EOS R.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

Meatcurry said:


> This



Yeah, but my technical drawing skills are really mediocre and I don't get what that means practically. Built-in rotating polariser? The whole mount rotating and changing the flange distance? From how the slits look like, it doesn't seem to be changing the flange distance by 40mm.


----------



## memoriaphoto (Aug 31, 2018)

blackcoffee17 said:


> I think that 28-70 F2 is a typo and its actually 2.8. Anyway, this is really exciting, hoping for some additional leaks before next week.



Wouldn't that be something  Though I am convinced they wouldn't release a 28-70 range at 2.8 - that's just history. Unless of course they managed to make it very small. But no, I don't think so.

It could however be a prime like RF 70/2.8. Man, all the hype and excitement for nothing. Anyway... I am fully satisfied with the R body and 50/1.2 so... eitherway this release will be spectacular...


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 31, 2018)

Top items in order of likelihood to turn this announcement sentiment completely around:
1- It has one card slot. I think this matters not at all, but apparently, it's the one critical feature for everyone commenting negatively on the new Nikons.
2- Announcement date: September 18; release date: "first half of 2019," which will mean August 2019 if precedent holds.
3- AF speed isn't as fast.
4- Lag after pressing shutter in most situations, such as current M series. (In my opinion, the biggest real, likely wrench in the works.)
5- Native EF lenses suffer one of several disadvantages, such as lowering the frames per second or preventing metering or AF during burst shooting.
6- Buffer can take 17 images and then craps out.
7- Battery life is between 200-300 shots rather than 700-00 shots (even though it'll turn out that the CIPA standards aren't realistic, and people get 400-500).
8- It takes on SD. Or it takes only CF. Or it takes only CFast. Or it takes a combination of a couple of those. In any configuration 3/4s of people will think it's dumb. 
9- It STILL uses the old format of SD, critically strangling data flow for dual card use.
10- Tony Northrup loves it. (Tony, imo, is great, but he rubs this forum the wrong way.)

You can pick 2 from above if you're an optimist, or 3 if you're a pessimist, but hold on, as it's never not happened.


----------



## nitram (Aug 31, 2018)

Meatcurry said:


> Yep, I meant the entire lens mount may revolve to accommodate EF and RF lens......."Revolving Flange"



Actually, I wonder whether RF is short for *rotating focus*. What I mean is that the focus system‘s travel can occur within the body of the camera with the sensor moving back and forth. While this might not cover the entire focus range for macro or telephoto applications, this may well reduce the complexity of construction well as reduce exterior dimensions for less specialized lenses. In this way, the new lineup could be slightly smaller than comparable lenses for the EF lineup and better compete with Sony and Nikon’s smaller form factor. It could also allow for faster autofocus speed... If two motors are working together to move between distant and near focus, it might be the design solution to avoiding the need to provide additional electrical power to the lens-based AF motor if it is not supported by the EF protocol. This would therefore be a way to not require a stronger and more powerful AF motor in the lens.


----------



## 1Zach1 (Aug 31, 2018)

I’m very interested in the R, been holding out for the 7DIII but this might be a better option to replace both my 40D and M in one camera. Hope it specs out well.


----------



## Meatcurry (Aug 31, 2018)

bks54 said:


> It's on Nokishita's list. Grip presumably.


Yep, just seen it, I guess thats one up on the Nikon Z, as their grip has no portrait controls.


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 31, 2018)

Josh Leavitt said:


> A lot of us have been expecting a 5DS(R) successor for a while. But it may make sense for Canon to release a high-res model as an EOS R to completely remove the mirror-slap effect. A mirrorless model seems like the way to go if they ever intended to upscale the 120MXSC sensor to full-frame (or some variant of it).



It would make sense to release one to compete directly with the Z7.
I think you can count on it. When it is released it will most likely have more MP. than the Z7.


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 31, 2018)

nitram said:


> Actually, I wonder whether RF is short for *rotating focus*. What I mean is that the focus system‘s travel can occur within the body of the camera with the sensor moving back and forth. While this might not cover the entire focus range for macro or telephoto applications, this may well reduce the complexity of construction well as reduce exterior dimensions for less specialized lenses. In this way, the new lineup could be slightly smaller than comparable lenses for the EF lineup and better compete with Sony and Nikon’s smaller form factor. It could also allow for faster autofocus speed... If two motors are working together to move between distant and near focus, it might be the design solution to avoiding the need to provide additional electrical power to the lens-based AF motor if it is not supported by the EF protocol. This would therefore be a way to not require a stronger and more powerful AF motor in the lens.



That was kicking around in my head too. That might explain why the 70-200 lenses were just updated too without making significant changes. Micro-adjustments to focus could actually happen within the camera while working with the lens for faster tracking, which might mean existing EF lenses would be slightly slower since the can't communicate and work the same way.


----------



## nitram (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> What strength ND? Variable ND? Likely not enough room to swing out a filter. A slot to remove/insert.



Well, electronic Liquid Crystal ND filters are expensive but they are indeed variable and AFAIK don’t move out of the way when in ‘clear’ mode.

Just as an example, Panavision showed off their LCND technology earlier this year and hope to bring it onto the market in Q1 ‘19. 



 What’s cool is that the polarity of the crystals can be precisely controlled via the input voltage. This allows for pretty fine control over the filter’s light blocking setting. If this is cheaper than Panavision’s solution or can be used on the new mirrorless offering (with improved video capabilities), I would bet that many videographers might find this system quite appealing!


----------



## JBSF (Aug 31, 2018)

OMG! Almost 100 posts without a single threat to jump ship.


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 31, 2018)

JBSF said:


> OMG! Almost 100 posts without a single threat to jump ship.


It's still early.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 31, 2018)

JBSF said:


> OMG! Almost 100 posts without a single threat to jump ship.



That will come when it turns out that it only goes to ISO 512,000 and only 119 instead of 120 at 1080p.


----------



## BeenThere (Aug 31, 2018)

[email protected] said:


> Top items in order of likelihood to turn this announcement sentiment completely around:
> 1- It has one card slot. I think this matters not at all, but apparently, it's the one critical feature for everyone commenting negatively on the new Nikons.
> 2- Announcement date: September 18; release date: "first half of 2019," which will mean August 2019 if precedent holds.
> 3- AF speed isn't as fast.
> ...


First of its class will absolutely not please everyone, especially at a $2k price point. There has to be a few issues to keep this forum alive.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> I think you can count on it. When it is released it will most likely have more MP. than the Z7.



Maybe not when it's just released, but in a time, it'll get more MPs growing. Because R may stand for Replicating pixels...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> That will come when it turns out that it only goes to ISO 512,000 and only 119 instead of 120 at 1080p.


Don't neglect the crappy 4K implementation.


----------



## nchoh (Aug 31, 2018)

PureClassA said:


> And a rumored TWO models afoot... what might the next one be? If this is the EOS R .... might we finally see the EOS C ? Or perhaps EOS S (like the 1DS higher resolution models of yesteryear)



I am guessing that if there are 2 models, one could be the EF-R that takes EF and the other a EF-R only?


----------



## Deleted member 381098 (Aug 31, 2018)

But will it make me a sandwich? I think that's the question we've really all been asking ourselves.


----------



## Meatcurry (Aug 31, 2018)

JBSF said:


> OMG! Almost 100 posts without a single threat to jump ship.


I'm jumping ship...........Sony to Canon. I'm not even trolling or a fan boy! Just waiting for the right Canon to get me back.


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Maybe not when it's just released, but in a time, it'll get more MPs growing. Because R may stand for Replicating pixels...



So we can buy the 28mp version, keep it watered and in the sun and in 6 months to a year it will mature in to a full fledged 50mp body?
When will they release the 100mm lens that we can grow to 500mm?

Now that is innovative.


----------



## rsdofny (Aug 31, 2018)

Sorry DSLR users, you need to buy a new camera to use the RF 28-70 f2.8 L zoom. Does that alienate the existing Canon users and set the stage for MLFF platform for Canon?


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

pickleshoes said:


> But will it make me a sandwich? I think that's the question we've really all been asking ourselves.



I'm definitely not asking myself the question if the new camera will make you a sandwich. But now it's on the table (the question I mean)...


----------



## nchoh (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> What strength ND? Variable ND? Likely not enough room to swing out a filter. A slot to remove/insert
> For PL, shouldn’t it be called PL-C as is the case for the drop-in supertele CPLs?
> 
> But back up a step... M.ADAP R = either adapting an EF-M lens to the R body (is that even feasible, and with an APS-C image circle who would really want to, and even if so, why make three different versions of it?
> No, more likely it’s to adapt R lenses to EOS M bodies. That makes sense for an upgrade path from APS-C to FF MILC, but it also means all these discussions of the video features of the new bodies benefiting from such an adapter are moot. The latter only applies if PL is for adapting PL mount lenses to the EOS R.



EF-M and EF-R are the new systems going forward for mirrorless. Adapters are for M-bodies to accept R lenses. In the interim, while Canon builds out a "complete" R lens line, there will be a EOS-R cameras that take both EF and EF-R lenses.

... that's my guess.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> So we can buy the 28mp version, keep it watered and in the sun and in 6 months to a year it will mature in to a full fledged 50mp body?
> When will they release the 100mm lens that we can grow to 500mm?



These are all well known inventions, especially the one that helps the lens grow. As an example, there's lots of advertised pills on the web that help grow one's self-esteem. Surely the pills must be working or nobody would buy them.

Note however that the sensor wouldn't just grow in the sunlight. You'll have to feed it somehow.


----------



## Kit. (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> For PL, shouldn’t it be called PL-C as is the case for the drop-in supertele CPLs?


Do you really need a _circular_ polarizer on a mirrorless camera with DPAF?


----------



## colorblinded (Aug 31, 2018)

bks54 said:


> Yes, these seem to be adapters to mount R lenses on other mounts. Everything points to EF lenses mounting directly on the new camera.


Assuming they really have native EF mounting. If they don't these could be three adapters for EF lenses... one plain jane, one with ND, and one with a polarizer.

Fun to speculate, we'll soon see!


----------



## BillB (Aug 31, 2018)

amorse said:


> Maybe this is one of the reasons the 70-200 III only got coatings and a paint job. I can imagine developing all of this new gear over the last several years would take a lot of time and resources - it may have made more sense to just do a refresh of the 70-200 (considering how good it still is) when you're developing all of this behind the scene





amorse said:


> Maybe this is one of the reasons the 70-200 III only got coatings and a paint job. I can imagine developing all of this new gear over the last several years would take a lot of time and resources - it may have made more sense to just do a refresh of the 70-200 (considering how good it still is) when you're developing all of this behind the scenes.


Roger Cicala has a post on his tear down of the 70-200 F4 on the Lensrental site. It''s more than coatings and a paint job.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Interesting implications from that list.
> 
> The lack of an EF mount adapter strongly suggests the new camera will be able to natively mount EF lenses.
> 
> ...



Exactly the same conclusions came to my mind when I saw this list.

So it will be one body only, other than Nikon's Z strategy, but already a list of five lenses fully designed for this R mount. In particular the 24-105mm kit shows which type of user Canon wants to address first - those who want a flexible gear with one or only a few additional lenses. Looks like a smart start into a new system, since the EF 24-105 f/4 is quite popular, and I read frequently that sales statistics prove that most system camera owner just have one zoom lens. Obviously, Canon does not want to put their bet only on a small group of enthusiasts that prefer more special lenses, including fast primes. But for those they already offer some mouth watering lenses such as the new 50mm f/1.2.

Interesting times for Canon users


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> These are all well known inventions, especially the one that helps the lens grow. As an example, there's lots of advertised pills on the web that help grow one's self-esteem. Surely the pills must be working or nobody would buy them.
> 
> Note however that the sensor wouldn't just grow in the sunlight. You'll have to feed it somehow.



I am sorry. I do not know how to respond to this without the post being deleted.
Any form of stimulation I can think of to aid in lens growth would require an "over 18" disclaimer on the website I use for posting the work.


----------



## sdz (Aug 31, 2018)

MrAndre said:


> Wow, this took me by surprise. If this holds true Canon goes into the mirrorless market heavy handed.
> 
> This camera must be really amazing if they think people will pay >1k $ for lenses for it. 28-70 F2 and 50 F1.2 are definitely not going to be typical prosumer lenses when it comes to price range.





zim said:


> Or it will come later so the price of early adoption will have to include at least one lens?



The lack of an adapter suggests a dual mount. It would make for a spectacular marketing fail to force customers to buy new lenses with thei cameras.


----------



## Street (Aug 31, 2018)

Back to the roots Canon. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_R_lens_mount


----------



## mjg79 (Aug 31, 2018)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



Fascinating to read about.

IBIS was a no brainer. Anyone who has used a 1.4 lens with IBIS on a Sony system knows this is a - in some not all cases - really useful feature. Allowing you, for example, to use ISO 1600 instead of 6400 is a huge difference and far bigger difference than can be made up with a better sensor. It was only a matter of time before Canon (and Nikon) cracked and had to offer it.

The 28-70/2 is likely to become the photojournalist and wedding photographer standard issue tool assuming it isn't too big. Combine that with IBIS and you have a potentially game changing lens.

Offering a 35/1.8 in the new mount is very smart - Sony has tried to be too clever by not offering one to drive people to buy their badly built and ridiculously overpriced 35/1.4 or else buy the Rx1R. Both canon and Nikon spotted this easy meat.

The only surprise is that we aren't seeing anything wide angle but that will come. It is there that one sees the real advantages of getting the rear most lens elements close to the sensor - look at Sony's 16-35GM v Canon 16-35L III. The Sony is smaller, lighter and has half the vignetting. It is also a complete lottery as to whether you get a good one. I have the feeling that Sony will be punished hard for their appalling quality control by both Canon and Nikon.

Given there is some possible mention of an adapter maybe RF really will be a new mount. However I thought I would offer this link to anyone confused by the notion that Canon might keep the EF mount - it's a Voigtlander lens made for Nikon F-mount (as Nikons allow mirror lock up) that gets the rear most elements right up to the sensor. The result is tiny size and outstanding quality in a 15mm lens.

http://blog.16-9.net/1236-2

If Canon takes this option it would mean that the EF mount remains which for lens like a 70-200 is preferable - such lenses are not comfortable to hold on the Sony E-mount. Compare the Ziesss Loxia 21 and Zeiss ZE classic 21 - the Loxia is so much smaller. That is the advantage of removing the mirror. It only really applies though to wide angle lenses so if Canon does retain EF mount then I think we would only see a handful of new wide angle lenses that offer a big size saving. 

But all mounts have good and bad sides. Canon will want to keep professionals happy so I am sure ergonomics with large lenses will have been considered.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Aug 31, 2018)

rsdofny said:


> Sorry DSLR users, you need to buy a new camera to use the RF 28-70 f2.8 L zoom. Does that alienate the existing Canon users and set the stage for MLFF platform for Canon?



I think there are alot of pent up demand who didn't switch to Sony/Nikon will buy FF mirrorless provided it's dual card slot, eyeAF, IBIS, DPAF, ergonomic. 24-70 F2 with a very capable FF mirrorless would make alot of photographers upgrade and switch.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Aug 31, 2018)

Meatcurry said:


> I'm jumping ship...........Sony to Canon. I'm not even trolling or a fan boy! Just waiting for the right Canon to get me back.



Why? I only see if you still have alot of Canon EF lens. It's going to be harder for Sony users with alot of native lens. Beside, Sony is releasing their A7SIII soon too


----------



## miketcool (Aug 31, 2018)

Street said:


> Back to the roots Canon.
> 
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_R_lens_mount



Great catch!


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

Kit. said:


> Do you really need a _circular_ polarizer on a mirrorless camera with DPAF?


Circular polarisers are widely used, for example, in landscape/architechture photography, mirrorlessness or DPAF are irrelevant to CIR-PL filters.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

nchoh said:


> EF-M and EF-R are the new systems going forward for mirrorless. Adapters are for M-bodies to accept R lenses. In the interim, while Canon builds out a "complete" R lens line, there will be a EOS-R cameras that take both EF and EF-R lenses.
> 
> ... that's my guess.


I agree that an adapter to use R (FF) lenses on M (APS-C) bodies makes the most sense, and is a requirement. But that begs the question...assuming the EOS R accepts EF lenses natively (because otherwise an EF-to-R adapter would be listed), what makes RF lenses different than EF? If they are different because they can result in a smaller lens/body combination by protruding into the body, they’d also protrude into the space within the RF to M adapter. But in that case, where is the room for the CPL and ND filters that are part of the adapter?


----------



## MrAndre (Aug 31, 2018)

sdz said:


> The lack of an adapter suggests a dual mount. It would make for a spectacular marketing fail to force customers to buy new lenses with thei cameras.



Yes, but they are releasing expensive RF lenses and there is only going to be one camera which you can mount them on for at least six months apparently. So Canon must think this Camera is worth a >1k $ lens, else they would have focused on more affordable lenses for this release.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

sdz said:


> The lack of an adapter suggests a dual mount. It would make for a spectacular marketing fail to force customers to buy new lenses with thei cameras.


In fact, Canon did that back in the 80s, when they came up with the completely new EF mount that was not compatible with the old mount. It was a risky bet but it worked. Btw our Canon gear never has trouble with lens connection failures, our Nikon gear (serveral cameras) produces quite frequently such errors. The advantage of the Nikon (D)SLR mount is its compatibility with older lenses but that comes with a price. I think, besides the much bigger diameter of the Z mount this could have been another reason why Nikon now pulled the plug.


----------



## Meatcurry (Aug 31, 2018)

bokehmon22 said:


> Why? I only see if you still have alot of Canon EF lens. It's going to be harder for Sony users with alot of native lens. Beside, Sony is releasing their A7SIII soon too


I have a Sony A6000 with 16-50F4, 10-18F4 and 35f1.8 and for a whole bunch of reasons would rather go back to Canon, I used to have a 70D and 450D with some decent lens and all of my favourite pics are pre Sony


----------



## esimmons (Aug 31, 2018)

ok lets pump the brakes a bit. no ratings on these rumors. CR explicitly stated they're just going to post anything, regardless of quality. so there's a good chance a lot of that list is fiction. sorry, but a lot of those items seem like fanboy dreams, not reality.


----------



## Meatcurry (Aug 31, 2018)

esimmons said:


> ok lets pump the brakes a bit. no ratings on these rumors. CR explicitly stated they're just going to post anything, regardless of quality. so there's a good chance a lot of that list is fiction. sorry, but a lot of those items seem like fanboy dreams, not reality.


This stuff came from Nokishita, they're a Japanese site and are never wrong, in fact most of what they post are controlled leaks.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 31, 2018)

A sneak preview of Canon's mirrorless !!


----------



## amorse (Aug 31, 2018)

BillB said:


> Roger Cicala has a post on his tear down of the 70-200 F4 on the Lensrental site. It''s more than coatings and a paint job.


Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was referring to the 70-200 *f/2.8* III rather than the 70-200 *f/4* IS II. I was under the impression that the f/2.8 was coatings and a paint job while the f/4 was much more? Unless the 2.8 was shown to receive more adjustment as well?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Kit. said:
> 
> 
> > Do you really need a _circular_ polarizer on a mirrorless camera with DPAF?
> ...


That wasn’t Kit.’s point – he was suggesting that a _circular_ polarizer is not required, i.e. it could be a _linear_ polarizer instead. However, while that would be true for CDAF, I think a linear PL wold be a problem for DPAF. The problem occurs when the the angle of polarization conflicts with the orientation of the beam splitter for PDAF. The fact that DPAF uses millions of really tiny beam splitters and off-sensor PDAF uses a few larger beam splitters doesn’t negate the problem.

With a MILC, you might have to look harder for the problem, since the cameras default to CDAF if PDAF fails meaning focus is achieved albeit more slowly, whereas on a DSLR if PDAF fails, you can’t achieve focus.


----------



## .jan (Aug 31, 2018)

esimmons said:


> ok lets pump the brakes a bit. no ratings on these rumors. CR explicitly stated they're just going to post anything, regardless of quality. so there's a good chance a lot of that list is fiction. sorry, but a lot of those items seem like fanboy dreams, not reality.


The original list comes from Nokishita though, they usually don't get a lot of things wrong, save for the occasional detail.


----------



## DaveGrice (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> On the contrary. "RF 35mm f/1.8 M IS" - that implies there's _no_ IBIS unfortunately, doesn' it? I'm disappointed. I was hoping to eventually buy it and mount my 24-70 on it and make it stabilised. The only faint hope is in that 'M'. What is it, 'M'? An RF-mount lens also mountable on EF-M? That doesn't add up.



Macro would be my guess. There's already a 35mm macro in the EF-S mount, so this has some precedent.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

One thing I still wonder, looking at this list: will Canon simply stick with their classic SLR flange distance or did they really implement an IBIS that can shift the Sensor closer to the back of an R lens? It'll be interesting to get more information about that. 

I think one of the real longterm strengths of Nikon's Z concept is the extremely short flange distance combined with a much wider Z mount. This very smart solution promises gorgeous lenses coming up for this mount.


----------



## docsmith (Aug 31, 2018)

I’ll be captain obvious for a second. 

Ok, two quick things: 
1) the overlap with existing EF lens ( 24-105 f/4, for example) implies that there is something different about RF lenses. 
2). If the EF lens can be mounted natively, it would imply complete functionality. Thus, what is the point of the RF mount?

That, to me is a bit of a paradox. It is true with EF and EF-s lenses, but that is a minor difference of where the last element could be situated. If similar to EF-s, that only really benefits shorter focal lengths. Thus is the future still EF for longer focal lengths?

What does it say about flange distance? For EF to work, it would need to be 44 mm. So they are not going to something shorter?


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

amorse said:


> Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was referring to the 70-200 *f/2.8* III rather than the 70-200 *f/4* IS II. I was under the impression that the f/2.8 was coatings and a paint job while the f/4 was much more? Unless the 2.8 was shown to receive more adjustment as well?


According to Bryan Carnathan's review of the 2.8 III you're right:

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8L-IS-III-USM-Lens.aspx


----------



## BillB (Aug 31, 2018)

amorse said:


> Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was referring to the 70-200 *f/2.8* III rather than the 70-200 *f/4* IS II. I was under the impression that the f/2.8 was coatings and a paint job while the f/4 was much more? Unless the 2.8 was shown to receive more adjustment as well?


Not sure about the F2.8, but given the changes to the F4, I think it's likely there were some major upgrades in the construction, if not the optical quality of the F2.8


----------



## MaxDiesel (Aug 31, 2018)

ffxx said:


> Can you explain a bit more? I would love a XC15/20 interchangeable upgrade!



There is such a camera rumoured to be released tho no new info as immerged in some time.


----------



## .jan (Aug 31, 2018)

justaCanonuser said:


> I think one of the real longterm strengths of Nikon's Z concept is the extremely short flange distance combined with a much wider Z mount. This very smart solution promises gorgeous lenses coming up for this mount.


This was such good marketing from Nikon, really. The Z mount is only huge next to Nikon's own F mount and Sony's E mount. It's just _one _mm wider than the EF mount.
So of course flange distance seems to be a thing, but based on the Z lenses we've seen so far, only the f/4 wide angle zoom looks exceptionally small (but then again it doesn't have an IS so the f/4 zooms from Canon and Nikon are probably not a good comparison).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

mjg79 said:


> Given there is some possible mention of an adapter maybe RF really will be a new mount. However I thought I would offer this link to anyone confused by the notion that Canon might keep the EF mount - it's a Voigtlander lens made for Nikon F-mount (as Nikons allow mirror lock up) that gets the rear most elements right up to the sensor. The result is tiny size and outstanding quality in a 15mm lens.
> http://blog.16-9.net/1236-2



Neat – hadn’t run across this lens previously. 







Bet it comes with a nice Dixie cup-style rear lens cap...


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> A sneak preview of Canon's mirrorless !!



Ha ha, like that much!


----------



## fullstop (Aug 31, 2018)

Some write 5 lenses, I count 4 ... ? 

Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 M IS
Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM
Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM
Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L USM


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> That wasn’t Kit.’s point – he was suggesting that a _circular_ polarizer is not required, i.e. it could be a _linear_ polarizer instead. However, while that would be true for CDAF, I think a linear PL wold be a problem for DPAF. The problem occurs when the the angle of polarization conflicts with the orientation of the beam splitter for PDAF. The fact that DPAF uses millions of really tiny beam splitters and off-sensor PDAF uses a few larger beam splitters doesn’t negate the problem.8
> 
> With a MILC, you might have to look harder for the problem, since the cameras default to CDAF if PDAF fails meaning focus is achieved albeit more slowly, whereas on a DSLR if PDAF fails, you can’t achieve focus.



Very true then. I forgot there are simple linear polarisers.


----------



## paulo defender (Aug 31, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> A sneak preview of Canon's mirrorless !!


This is so very, very good. 
Even if the new camera doesn't appear we should all be glad that the rumours produced this comedy gold. "Canon is *******, it's a failure!" You sir are a genius!


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 31, 2018)

fullstop said:


> Some write 5 lenses, I count 4 ... ?
> 
> Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 M IS
> Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM
> ...



You missed the Canon EOS R w/24-105mm f/4L kit 

Which is an interesting division between 'RF' and 'R' lenses


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

.jan said:


> This was such good marketing from Nikon, really. The Z mount is only huge next to Nikon's own F mount and Sony's E mount. It's just _one _mm wider than the EF mount.
> So of course flange distance seems to be a thing, but based on the Z lenses we've seen so far, only the f/4 wide angle zoom looks exceptionally small (but then again it doesn't have an IS so the f/4 zooms from Canon and Nikon are probably not a good comparison).


Well, for Nikon that was a revolution! Finally, they turn their "after lens pinhole" technology into a real lens mount  But you're right, the specs of the current Z lenses doesn't indicate that they already make full use of the possibilities they have.


----------



## mjg79 (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Neat – hadn’t run across this lens previously.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You can read a bit more here, and also about the 12mm version:

https://www.cameraquest.com/VCSL1215.htm

If you compare it to the E-mount Voigtlander 12 and 15mm lenses you can see the size ends up being about the same, it's just a question of whether the glass elements are forward of the mount (e.g. Sony), inside the mount (e.g. these for Nikon) or perhaps one might add with Leica M mount a bit of both. There's no free lunch at the end of the day! I think if Canon adopts such an approach we will see the rear parts very well protected, as you can see to a smaller scale in some of the Leica M-mount lenses. And yeah the rear lens cap would be pretty extreme!


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> You missed the Canon EOS R w/24-105mm f/4L kit
> 
> Which is an interesting division between 'RF' and 'R' lenses



Well I was the guy with the 5 lenses, but fullstop is right, it's only 4 so far. I don't think the 24-105 mm in the kit will differ from that one sold separately. So it was wishful self-deception, sorry...


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 31, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> You missed the Canon EOS R w/24-105mm f/4L kit
> 
> Which is an interesting division between 'RF' and 'R' lenses



I think the new lenses are all RF, and R in 'Canon EOS R' relates to camera model, not the lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

docsmith said:


> I’ll be captain obvious for a second.
> 
> Ok, two quick things:
> 1) the overlap with existing EF lens ( 24-105 f/4, for example) implies that there is something different about RF lenses.
> ...


Quite possibly the RF lens protrudes into the body, into the space formerly occupied by the mirror box, meaning a lens+body combo that’s about 1” / 2.5cm shorter than the current DSLR+24-105/4L IS. The lack of IS (because of IBIS) may also enable them to make the RF version smaller than the EF version. Plus, if it’s a new mount, a kit lens is needed.


----------



## DaveGrice (Aug 31, 2018)

miketcool said:


> EOS R = EOS Revolution



I'm going with "R for Reinventing Mirrorless". Oh wait... that's already taken...


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 31, 2018)

justaCanonuser said:


> Well I was the guy with the 5 lenses, but fullstop is right, it's only 4 so far. I don't think the 24-105 mm in the kit will differ from that one sold separately. So it was wishful self-deception, sorry...



I see - the initial 'R' kit has the standard 24-105 EF lens


----------



## amorse (Aug 31, 2018)

BillB said:


> Not sure about the F2.8, but given the changes to the F4, I think it's likely there were some major upgrades in the construction, if not the optical quality of the F2.8


Certainly possible that there was some un-announced construction changes, but according to Canon's announcement there were no optical changes, and no changes to lens design, AF motor, IS system. From the announcement:

"_It’s very important to be clear that the EF 70–200mm f/2.8L IS III USM lens has not changed: the glass in this lens is the same as its predecessor. The optical design itself, highlighted by one Fluorite and five UD-glass (Ultra-low Dispersion) elements, remains exactly the same as with the highly-regarded f/2.8 Version II design._ 

_The lens’ electronic design, ring-type Ultrasonic motor for AF, Image Stabilization system (3.5 stops of shake correction), and so on are likewise identical in the Version III lens to its predecessor. Mechanically, this lens remains the same as the previous model, including its weather-resistant construction._"

This was a point of significant forum ire - lots of people questioned why the lens was being updated when the rumours started, suggesting it was good enough as is. Then many complained it was not updated enough following the announcement that the only changes were updates to some lettering on the lens, the paint colour, and the coatings to reduce flare. 

My only point here (and originally) was that it made sense for Canon to avoid messing too much with this design when it is so good already, and there may have been significant design demands behinds the scenes for this laundry list of lenses rumoured today.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

Just got into the office and I'm reading all this.

Holy crap.

So if I've got this right (please straighten me out -- 8 pages of comments are too much to parse this morning):

FF mirrorless is indeed happening
One body only
IBIS potentially not there -- I see IS called out on one lens
Thin mount (I saw an adaptor line item)
Holy hell those lenses
f/2 zoom and f/1.2 prime - yowza
The L moniker lives on (no surprise)
But there's also an M designation attached to the aperture of the 35 prime. They don't do that with macro (also, f/1.8 + macro tends not to coexist), so is it another line of lens?
USM lives on, so the hope of non-FBW lenses continues (...though they might be Nano and therefore FBW)

Ridiculous. The thin mount tell will make this a 30 page thread, but I think the lenses are the real star of this announcement. Canon's pushing the boat out here. 

I still think it will be the $2k-ish 'entry' price point spec on the body, but with these lenses -- wow -- does anyone think the first body out will be 5-series spec'd instead?

- A


----------



## fullstop (Aug 31, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> A sneak preview of Canon's mirrorless !!




priceless!


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> No CR3 tag, so presumably this remains a rumor. If this rumor turns out to be true, there will be plenty of crow to be served on these forms.




Does Noki ever get it wrong? I thought they were the end-game leak store.

Am I wrong to treat this as a done deal?

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> I see - the initial 'R' kit has the standard 24-105 EF lens


Huh? No, the EOS R kit would the RF 24-105 f/4L. If it was EF, it would have had the IS designation because there is no EF 24-105mm f/4L without IS (and it would also have had the II designation because the MkI has been DC’d).


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

mjg79 said:


> You can read a bit more here, and also about the 12mm version:
> 
> https://www.cameraquest.com/VCSL1215.htm
> 
> And yeah the rear lens cap would be pretty extreme!



I'd expect a rear lens pot, not a cap...


----------



## mjg79 (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> I think the lenses are the real star of this announcement. Canon's pushing the boat out here.
> 
> - A



At the end of the day, over the long term, it is the lenses that count. Canon is right I think to push to boat out on lenses and just have one body for now.

If we look back over the past several years even fans of Canon will admit that Sony sensors have at times jumped ahead and also it has been frustrating to not have IBIS etc. But with canon there was always the overall package - i.e. build quality, service, ergonomics, accessories etc - but also underpinning it all has been the lens system and the way Canon continually refines and improves it. The L lenses remain top of the tree in almost all classes.

Over the long run debates about this or that feauture or sensor performance kind of even out but the system with the best lenses will always have support. It's also why Nikon remained popular, we can't deny that there have been some great lenses in F mount too.


----------



## fullstop (Aug 31, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> You missed the Canon EOS R w/24-105mm f/4L kit
> 
> Which is an interesting division between 'RF' and 'R' lenses




aha, i took it for a typo and thought there will only be *one* 24-105/4 lens (in kit and separate) especially as both have the "L" designation. 
A "kit" R 24-105 L *and* a "non-kit" RF 24-105 L ? strange!


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Huh? No, the EOS R kit would the RF 24-105 f/4L. If it was EF, it would have had the IS designation because there is no EF 24-105mm f/4L without IS (and it would also have had the II designation because the MkI has been DC’d).



True
Boy, all this is getting mind-spinning!


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

amorse said:


> Oh boy. Here we go! Any bets on how many pages we can get to by tomorrow?



Depends on how many more threads get started from updated news, leaks of photos, etc.

If no new thread by tomorrow, I'd guess we're in the 20-30 page range.

Once photos drop, the visual confirmation/tell that it's happening or it's over for native mounting of EF will be a 20-30 page chatterstorm alone.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> IBIS potentially not there -- I see IS called out on one lens
> Thin mount (I saw an adaptor line item)
> But there's also an M designation attached to the aperture of the 35 prime. They don't do that with macro (also, f/1.8 + macro tends not to coexist), so is it another line of lens?
> USM lives on, so the hope of non-FBW lenses continues (...though they might be Nano and therefore FBW)
> ...



Wrong on the above, I think. IS is called out on the M lens, M almost certainly means Macro (recall that this is translated from Japanese) and it makes sense for that lens to have Hybrid IS. So, I think this really supports the idea of IBIS.

The adapter designation is M.ADAP R, likely meaning an adapter to use RF lenses (FF) on EOS M (APS-C) bodies, very logical to preserve the upgrade path analogous to EF-S/EF for DSLRs. The very lack of an R.ADAP EF adapter to mount EF lenses on the EOS R pretty much confirms the EOS R will be able to mount EF lenses directly.


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 31, 2018)

justaCanonuser said:


> I'd expect a rear lens pot, not a cap...


I guess I'll have to stock up on extra ebay rear lens pots (avoiding the canon tax). I tend to swap the end cap whenever I swap the lens. I'd hate to have to carry around 2 sets of lens caps, I'd rather have all of them big and waste a bit of space.


----------



## DaveGrice (Aug 31, 2018)

ksgal said:


> Damn it, I just bought a 5D Mark IV.
> 
> *Head Desk*
> 
> (love the camera, but dang it, the new shinny one will be the bomb! *LOL*)





JBSF said:


> OMG! Almost 100 posts without a single threat to jump ship.



Wait until Sept 6th, then the carnage will begin...


----------



## amorse (Aug 31, 2018)

docsmith said:


> I’ll be captain obvious for a second.
> 
> Ok, two quick things:
> 1) the overlap with existing EF lens ( 24-105 f/4, for example) implies that there is something different about RF lenses.
> ...


Or maybe the camera has an electronically curved sensor and the RF lenses are the only ones than can take advantage of that feature (i.e. each RF lens may need a different sensor curvature). I know there was a patent earlier for an electronically curved sensor that could change shape as needed. If that were the case, a curved sensor could (maybe?) flatten out to receive input from an EF lens, but then curve to the needs of each RF lens. A curved sensor would allow different lens designs than are currently possible with EF, but a lens which needs curvature wouldn't likely work on a flat sensor camera with an EF mount.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

I am really keen to learn more about the new Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM. Past week I decided to give the EF 50mm f/1.2 a go and upgrade my mediocre EF 50mm f/1.4, but I did not yet hit the button. Now I gonna wait, definitely.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

fullstop said:


> aha, i took it for a typo and thought there will only be *one* 24-105/4 lens (in kit and separate) especially as both have the "L" designation.
> A "kit" R 24-105 L *and* a "non-kit" RF 24-105 L ? strange!


Credit where credit is due, you were entirely correct in your count of 4 lenses.


----------



## Meatcurry (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Quite possibly the RF lens protrudes into the body, into the space formerly occupied by the mirror box, meaning a lens+body combo that’s about 1” / 2.5cm shorter than the current DSLR+24-105/4L IS. The lack of IS (because of IBIS) may also enable them to make the RF version smaller than the EF version. Plus, if it’s a new mount, a kit lens is needed.


Like this?


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

amorse said:


> Or maybe the camera has an electronically curved sensor and the RF lenses are the only ones than can take advantage of that feature (i.e. each RF lens may need a different sensor curvature). I know there was a patent earlier for an electronically curved sensor that could change shape as needed. If that were the case, a curved sensor could (maybe?) flatten out to receive input from an EF lens, but then curve to the needs of each RF lens. A curved sensor would allow different lens designs than are currently possible with EF, but a lens which needs curvature wouldn't likely work on a flat sensor camera with an EF mount.



Interesting, but that would require switching between two sensor geometries both of which need to be very precise!


----------



## oXo_se (Aug 31, 2018)

I hope the EOS R body is similar to Nikons Z7, if it is I will hit the buy buttom as soon as possible. If it something like Z6 I will pass.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Don't neglect the crappy 4K implementation.



And an old-school off-chip ADC sensor a la 6D2.

- A


----------



## Uneternal (Aug 31, 2018)

Still puzzled about the letter R.
Could it simply mean "reflex" like in DSLR?
Or return, rear, retractable, rebel, etc...


----------



## Flyingskiguy (Aug 31, 2018)

Here’s an idea. 

EF lenses will mount to RF mount. RF will not mount to EF. Similar to the EF-S situation. 

The three “M.Adapt R” adapters that are listed are to adapt RF/EF lenses to the EF-M mount. This is important because the long-rumored entry level cinema camera will have an EF-M mount to suit its small/lightweight construction. BUT with the addition of one of the M.Adapt R adapters, essentially takes on the form of one of the Cxxx bodies with internal ND filters and all. 

I think this is justified because we see Canon still releasing EF-M glass, so clearly it is not an abandoned mount.


----------



## FramerMCB (Aug 31, 2018)

"Holy MILC (w/lens line-up) Batman!" This is looking more and more like the market jump they did when they released the 5D mk II. Perhaps not quite, as Sony has been in this space for a little while now. But for Canon, just WOW. Now let's see all this happen! Do we have to actually wait 3 more weeks for this [hopeful] [email protected]%#%!%????? ;-)


----------



## paulo defender (Aug 31, 2018)

Everyone always say's the best thing about mirrorless systems is you can put any manufacturers lenses on a mirrorless body because of the short flange length, but this is only an advantage to the consumer not the manufacturer. If the new body takes EF lenses natively by keeping the flange focal length the same and the RF lenses do indeed project into the body, like some older style Arri and Voigtlander glass, that would be an incredibly shrewd move on canons part, perhaps meaning that only EF and RF lenses could be used on the new body but also with an adaptor, possibly RF and already EF lenses, can be used on all the other companies mirrorless bodies. Canon then possibly protect their lens line, sell more lenses and bodies to people who own other systems and don't upset any of their pre-existing users who already have a lot of EF glass. It's not great for the consumer but it would be a very smart choice for a company. If it's all true however!


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 31, 2018)

I didn't see anyone pick up on this, maybe I missed it.

But they gave the lenses the L designation. This should be indication of the quality we can expect to see out of the glass.

Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM
Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM
Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L USM


----------



## amorse (Aug 31, 2018)

Uneternal said:


> Still puzzled about the letter R.
> Could it simply mean "reflex" like in DSLR?
> Or return, rear, retractable, rebel, etc...


Maybe they're moving to letters to designate models on mirrorless full frame mount instead of numbers a la the older 1D series? i.e. EOS R vs EOS S vs EOS X etc. Or maybe this is our new 5D SR and R stands for resolution


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> I agree that an adapter to use R (FF) lenses on M (APS-C) bodies makes the most sense, and is a requirement. But that begs the question...assuming the EOS R accepts EF lenses natively (because otherwise an EF-to-R adapter would be listed), what makes RF lenses different than EF? If they are different because they can result in a smaller lens/body combination by protruding into the body, they’d also protrude into the space within the RF to M adapter. But in that case, where is the room for the CPL and ND filters that are part of the adapter?




This this this. The mount is still a mystery, IMHO. Until I see an EF lens mount on to this thing, I don't think we know:

If it's not just a thin mount and adaptor yet to come (i.e. the EF to R adaptor exists but Canon hasn't leaked it yet*)


If it's a nested mount


If it's identical mechanically to the EF mount but has some added contacts / fancier lens communication for better DPAF performance
*It's possible that this is just a vanilla thin mount + adaptor but Canon wants to fire us up the lenses before they drop the boom that an EF adaptor is required. Hope that's not the case, but perhaps Canon had to make a thin mount body and they don't want to reveal that until everyone's already salivating over f/2 zooms and f/1.8M (whatever the hell that is), etc.

- A


----------



## LDS (Aug 31, 2018)

A bit funny Canon "R" was the first SLR mount for Canon... about sixty years ago.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

DaveGrice said:


> Macro would be my guess. There's already a 35mm macro in the EF-S mount, so this has some precedent.




An f/1.8 Macro? Almost all 1:1 macros stop cold at f/2.8 I thought.

If it's a macro, I wonder if it's potentially only 1:2. Or has that crop feature of the inset illumination around the front element.

- A


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 31, 2018)

Flyingskiguy said:


> Here’s an idea.
> 
> EF lenses will mount to RF mount. RF will not mount to EF. Similar to the EF-S situation.
> 
> ...



This is all quite likely, but where are the ND and CPL internal adaptors for the EOS R then? If there is enough room on the back of the RF lens to have an ND filter between it and the sensor when adapted to the EOS M series, then there has to be exactly the same room available within the EOS R. I doubt this would be wasted as it would seem somewhat odd that the EOS M APS-C cameras get to use this feature and their new mirrorless FF camera doesn't.


----------



## nchoh (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> I agree that an adapter to use R (FF) lenses on M (APS-C) bodies makes the most sense, and is a requirement. But that begs the question...assuming the EOS R accepts EF lenses natively (because otherwise an EF-to-R adapter would be listed), what makes RF lenses different than EF? If they are different because they can result in a smaller lens/body combination by protruding into the body, they’d also protrude into the space within the RF to M adapter. But in that case, where is the room for the CPL and ND filters that are part of the adapter?



I don't know anything further than what has been reported on CR. I speculated that EF-R might able to accommodate a bigger sensor than EF. There have been speculations that EF-R mount through a proper design could result in smaller/lighter lenses. There is also the faster comms protocol patent. I presume that if Canon has a patent for that, they do see the need for it. ... likely it's for a faster comms. protocol although I cannot fathom why there is a need for faster communications between lens and body. 

Assuming that the flange distances for EF-R is also shorter; similar to EF-M, then there shouldn't be any protrusion. assuming that the adapters are for EF-R on M bodies, then the EF-R flange distance must be longer than EF-M flange distance, so definitely no protrusion into M body.


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> An f/1.8 Macro? Almost all 1:1 macros stop cold at f/2.8 I thought.
> 
> If it's a macro, I wonder if it's potentially only 1:2. Or has that crop feature of the inset illumination around the front element.
> 
> - A



Maybe M is now the alternative to L (luxury) and stands for mediocre


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

justaCanonuser said:


> According to Bryan Carnathan's review of the 2.8 III you're right:
> 
> https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8L-IS-III-USM-Lens.aspx




We're off-topic, but all interested in this should head to LR and read Uncle Rog's take of it. It's the same damn lens.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

amorse said:


> Or maybe the camera has an electronically curved sensor and the RF lenses are the only ones than can take advantage of that feature (i.e. each RF lens may need a different sensor curvature). I know there was a patent earlier for an electronically curved sensor that could change shape as needed. If that were the case, a curved sensor could (maybe?) flatten out to receive input from an EF lens, but then curve to the needs of each RF lens. A curved sensor would allow different lens designs than are currently possible with EF, but a lens which needs curvature wouldn't likely work on a flat sensor camera with an EF mount.


Doubtful, because the M.ADAP R is almost certainly an adapter to use RF lenses on the EOS M bodies, and that would not be possible in your scenario where the lenses require sensor curvature.


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 31, 2018)

nchoh said:


> There is also the faster comms protocol patent..



It's worth noting that you do NOT need a new physical mount to take advantage of the faster comms protocol patent as defined. It describes a series of electronic messages sent between the body and the lens to determine if it's capable of faster communication or not. If both the body and lens can talk faster, they talk faster. Otherwise it defaults to the slower speed. EF lenses right now (the new 70-200) could be using this. 

This is exactly the same as the way USB -> USB 2 evolved using exactly the same connector but a faster protocol.


----------



## Memirsbrunnr (Aug 31, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> PD-E1 suggests the camera can be powered with the USB adapter and charges the battery.


Now THAT would be something truly awesome


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> I didn't see anyone pick up on this, maybe I missed it.
> 
> But they gave the lenses the L designation. This should be indication of the quality we can expect to see out of the glass.
> 
> ...



Yes, you missed it. 3rd post in the thread.



neuroanatomist said:


> L USM lenses are consistent with a serious, high end offering.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> I see - the initial 'R' kit has the standard 24-105 EF lens




Not at all. That's not how Canon's naming works.

This one is neither EF, 'II', or IS = it's a new lens. Might be [ducking from rocks being thrown] the same optical formula as the EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM II but I doubt it -- that would require a lens tube spacer to get back to EF, so it would not be small. My guess is that it's an altogether new design.

And no IS on _that_ one -- a stone cold stabilized EF lens -- is probably the biggest tell that we're getting IBIS.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Wrong on the above, I think. IS is called out on the M lens, M almost certainly means Macro (recall that this is translated from Japanese) and it makes sense for that lens to have Hybrid IS. So, I think this really supports the idea of IBIS.




Has Canon ever used 'M' as a shorthand for Macro in their naming? I always thought that they wrote out the full word 'Macro' (which is not technically a standalone word other than for software I believe).

Agree on IBIS. No IS on the 24-105 seems like a clear tell there -- unless they really want to keep the kit zoom small.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> The adapter designation is M.ADAP R, likely meaning an adapter to use RF lenses (FF) on EOS M (APS-C) bodies, very logical to preserve the upgrade path analogous to EF-S/EF for DSLRs. The very lack of an R.ADAP EF adapter to mount EF lenses on the EOS R pretty much confirms the EOS R will be able to mount EF lenses directly.




...or Canon is winding us up and will go thin + EF adaptor and they just haven't leaked the EF adaptor yet.

I think you're probably right -- which means this will not be a thin mount body. Wow.

Sorry, just processing this now. If true, wow.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Has Canon ever used 'M' as a shorthand for Macro in their naming? I always thought that they wrote out the full word 'Macro' (which is not technically a standalone word other than for software I believe).
> 
> Agree on IBIS. No IS on the 24-105 seems like a clear tell there -- unless they really want to keep the kit zoom small.


Not suggesting Canon is using M as an abbreviation for Macro, I’m suggesting Nokish. or whoever posted the translation is doing that. Just like they listed the kit as “Canon EOS R w/24-105mm f/4L” where clearly Canon would list it as “Canon EOS R | RF 24-105mm f/4L USM Kit”.


----------



## tmc784 (Aug 31, 2018)

Let see what's going on at Sep 5 , if the FF -M must need an adapter for EF lenses, I rather keep my hands off M camera, I just wait for the new model DSLR.


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Aug 31, 2018)

May I ever see an updated 135mm L  ?


----------



## JBSF (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> We're off-topic, but all interested in this should head to LR and read Uncle Rog's take of it. It's the same damn lens.
> 
> - A



Roger states that even Canon said the two lenses are the same. But are we 100% certain? Roger said of the IS unit: "These are self-contained units that we generally don’t disassemble." I know this is wishful thinking (about IBIS), but what if Canon updated this lens with dual IS capability?


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> An f/1.8 Macro? Almost all 1:1 macros stop cold at f/2.8 I thought.
> 
> If it's a macro, I wonder if it's potentially only 1:2. Or has that crop feature of the inset illumination around the front element.
> 
> - A


You're right, the Zeiss 100mm f/2 Macro Planar stops already at 1:2 closest distance. Canon's EF 35mm macro IS STM does allow for 1:1, but that's an f/2.8 lens again (and no FF design). Maybe the possibility of moving the rear lens element closer to the sensor without the mirror box allows for a bigger image ratio with a faster than f/2.8 lens.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

JBSF said:


> Roger states that even Canon said the two lenses are the same. But are we 100% certain? Roger said of the IS unit: "These are self-contained units that we generally don’t disassemble." I know this is wishful thinking (about IBIS), but what if Canon updated this lens with dual IS capability?




Because Canon said it was the same, I believe. It's the same lens with a paint job and a coating. 

Uncle Rog: "If you think there’s an optical or performance difference, please contact me about some Tennessee Beach-front property I have for sale."

I think you'll get a lovely bump in flare control with that new coating and that's about it.

- A


----------



## psolberg (Aug 31, 2018)

So are all the lenses a "roadmap" or a day one thing? If they are out of the gate, that is pretty good of a lineup. I assume they are a going to be out day one or closely following. As others have said, I'm also interested in what makes an R lens different and what advantages it brings on an R body that cannot be attained otherwise, assuming it shares the same EF mount.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Not suggesting Canon is using M as an abbreviation for Macro, I’m suggesting Nokish. or whoever posted the translation is doing that. Just like they listed the kit as “Canon EOS R w/24-105mm f/4L” where clearly Canon would list it as “Canon EOS R | RF 24-105mm f/4L USM Kit”.


Its likely translated to Japanese from Chinese and then to English, so the terms are going to end up misleading people. It always happens that way.

When the first words are "I have taught from overseas sources what Canon confirmed with a new product announced in September. " that likely means its first translated from another language to Japanese.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> On the contrary. "RF 35mm f/1.8 M IS" - that implies there's _no_ IBIS unfortunately, doesn' it? I'm disappointed. I was hoping to eventually buy it and mount my 24-70 on it and make it stabilised. The only faint hope is in that 'M'. What is it, 'M'? An RF-mount lens also mountable on EF-M? That doesn't add up.



No, actually it doesn't imply there will be no IBIS . From what previous rumors have come up with, the "M" for this lens is a new designation for "Macro" in which a macro would need the greater functionality of in-lens IS. Also note that the kit lens doesn't have IS even though the EF 24-105 F/4 L has IS, meaning that lens will most likely rely on IBIS.


----------



## stevewhitemd (Aug 31, 2018)

The 32mm f/1.4 M lens is a big tell for me. I personally haven't used the M series cameras and frankly thought of them as 'low-end' or 'consumer' cameras. Yes, same APS-C as my 80D  But apparently Canon sells a whole lot of them and they're very popular overseas.

But I now can see an evolving strategy for Canon: the M series is the new Rebel, the R series is the new xD. The xxD cameras, APS-C, may not find an equivalent per se in the new line-up -- do we need a mirrorless pro-sumer APS-C camera? So the various M series cameras hit various price points in the consumer market (and maybe a bit above that for more serious hobbyists), and the R series cameras hit various points in the pro market (and made a bit below).

The xD, xxD, and Rebel cameras continue to go forward as long as demand is there; I'd expect Rebels to start to disappear first. I'd expect the 1DXm2 to be around for quite a while until (one day) we see an equivalent R (I'll call it the "1R"). The 5D gives way to a "5R" equivalent, and the 6D gives way to a "6R". The 7D disappears unless Canon wants a high end APS-C mirrorless.

The EF-M to RF adapter then allows a hobbyist with an M-series camera to buy RF glass for the day they move up.

Does that make sense?


----------



## .jan (Aug 31, 2018)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Its likely translated to Japanese from Chinese and then to English, so the terms are going to end up misleading people. It always happens that way.


Just out of pure curiosity, why Chinese? Leaks from a Chinese Supply Chain Source? I don't think they'd manufacture pricey stuff like this in Taiwan or China.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

JBSF said:


> Roger states that even Canon said the two lenses are the same. But are we 100% certain? Roger said of the IS unit: "These are self-contained units that we generally don’t disassemble." I know this is wishful thinking (about IBIS), but what if Canon updated this lens with dual IS capability?


Well, if you find any such difference, contact immediately R.C., since he writes "If you think there’s an optical or performance difference, please contact me about some Tennessee Beach-front property I have for sale."

But that's really off-topic here (I don't like the new whiter look, looks like a Sony lens, like a copy of the copy).


----------



## Ditboy (Aug 31, 2018)

MrAndre said:


> Wow, this took me by surprise. If this holds true Canon goes into the mirrorless market heavy handed.
> 
> This camera must be really amazing if they think people will pay >1k $ for lenses for it. 28-70 F2 and 50 F1.2 are definitely not going to be typical prosumer lenses when it comes to price range.


The 28-70 f2 will be the hot item.To have an extra stop for a general purpose lens is a wet dream for many. No need for 28 1.8, 35 1.8, 50 1.8 unless your goal is weight. Great journalism lens. Short zoom for sports. If the R camera is close to the Sony A7 II & II, Canon just brought back all the people who bought Sony cameras but were still using EF lenses. Expect lots of used Sony A7's on the market soon.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

psolberg said:


> So are all the lenses a "roadmap" or a day one thing? If they are out of the gate, that is pretty good of a lineup. I assume they are a going to be out day one or closely following. As others have said, I'm also interested in what makes an R lens different and what advantages it brings on an R body that cannot be attained otherwise, assuming it shares the same EF mount.




Canon doesn't historically lens roadmap publicly like others. Partially, this is because they've had the stability of a huge (established) EF mount ecosystem for so long. But with EF-M I don't recall a roadmap being presented (please correct me if I'm wrong).

Now it's entirely possible that Canon doesn't have the higher end sexy bits (f/1.8 Macro, f/2 zoom, f/1.2 prime) available at day one but wanted to do an 'in production but not yet available' announcement. That would add substance to the platform at launch, kick some sand on to _Nikon's_ launch, and keep the Canon faithful fired up.

But when the line items get 'named' like this in a launch document, they overwhelmingly happen. So it's less of a roadmap and more of a 'coming attractions'.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

stevewhitemd said:


> But I now can see an evolving strategy for Canon: the M series is the new Rebel, the R series is the new xD. The xxD cameras, APS-C, may not find an equivalent per se in the new line-up -- do we need a mirrorless pro-sumer APS-C camera?


Maybe M100 = Rebel/xxxD and M5 = xxD?


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

Ditboy said:


> The 28-70 f2 will be the hot item.To have an extra stop for a general purpose lens is a wet dream for many. No need for 28 1.8, 35 1.8, 50 1.8 unless your goal is weight. Great journalism lens. Short zoom for sports. If the R camera is close to the Sony A7 II & II, Canon just brought back all the people who bought Sony cameras but were still using EF lenses. Expect lots of used Sony A7's on the market soon.




Or EOS R might just be spec'd like a 6D2 and the YAPODFC folks will howl like banshees. We'll see.

- A


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Aug 31, 2018)

This is all very exciting if this list is true! ^_^ I will be getting the EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM, but still really curious about the upcoming EOS M5 Mark II!!!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

psolberg said:


> So are all the lenses a "roadmap" or a day one thing? If they are out of the gate, that is pretty good of a lineup. I assume they are a going to be out day one or closely following. As others have said, I'm also interested in what makes an R lens different and what advantages it brings on an R body that cannot be attained otherwise, assuming it shares the same EF mount.



I heard a rumor that the kitchen opens on Tuesday...









(Note that I’m not saying who’s sitting down to eat...)


----------



## DaveGrice (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> An f/1.8 Macro? Almost all 1:1 macros stop cold at f/2.8 I thought.
> 
> If it's a macro, I wonder if it's potentially only 1:2. Or has that crop feature of the inset illumination around the front element.
> 
> - A



Who knows? But if you think about it, offering a macro lens in even f/2.8 is ridiculous. No rational shooter uses f/2.8 for their depth of field when using it for close-up shooting. Having f/1.8 is just as useless as f/2.8 for real macro shooting. On the other hand, in the same way the 100L macro makes a decent portrait lens when shot at f/2.8, I would think a 35 macro would be a nice general-purpose lens with an option to shoot at f/1.8. 

Of course, I'm not just making guesses, I'm guessing at rumors... so I'm happy to be corrected once anyone knows an actual answer.


----------



## Adelino (Aug 31, 2018)

If this is true... WOW, if it is not true... @#$&!


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Maybe M100 = Rebel/xxxD and M5 = xxD?



Can we talk about the mirrorless body naming?

Worried about the initial body just being the EOS R (like EOS M's original body) and it gives us zero tell on future good/better/best segmentation.

For instance, if it comes out, is called EOS R, has spec somewhere between 6D2 and 5D4... _what's the next FF mirrorless body going to be called?_ EOS R2? Wil that be a different spec'd price point or just a sequel?

Curious if they will try this same naming game plan as EOS M (R5 / R50 / R100) when there are so many 'high end' single digit lines (1-series, 5-series, 6-series, etc.) that don't fit into that format well.

- A


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

Ditboy said:


> The 28-70 f2 will be the hot item.To have an extra stop for a general purpose lens is a wet dream for many. No need for 28 1.8, 35 1.8, 50 1.8 unless your goal is weight. Great journalism lens. Short zoom for sports. If the R camera is close to the Sony A7 II & II, Canon just brought back all the people who bought Sony cameras but were still using EF lenses. Expect lots of used Sony A7's on the market soon.



The new RF 28-70mm f/2L is really something, I agree. The question is: will it be as huge as the Leica SL 1:2.8-4/24-90mm Vario lens? Despite it is much lesser fast, it is a really hefty piece of a standard zoom (but an impressive performer).


----------



## bhf3737 (Aug 31, 2018)

Quackator said:


> ND and PL point towards built-in neutral density filter and PL lens mount. Looks like this is video stuff.


I guess the two adapters are going to have built-in netural density (ND) and polarizer (PL). If true, that is great for landscape and video.


----------



## psolberg (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> I heard a rumor that the kitchen opens on Tuesday...


lol due seriously, I've maintained the EF mount was reasonable and likely and I agreed with the reasoning. And yesterday I re-iterated that which you keep ignoring. I don't get where you think I have this bet position it was a new mount. I don't. Even yesterday you admitted it was reasonable based on the rumors to think it could be a new mount, or not. So both agree both outcomes are in fact, well possible. So while I would have teased you for you staked the position of it being EF a bit, if it didn't turn out this way as you made it very clear that was your first choice, it was a bit tongue in cheek because I know you don't know for sure.

I see both arguments for-against it. But yes, if it turns out it is an EF native mount, I'll admit you did say that was more likely.


----------



## te1973 (Aug 31, 2018)

WHAAAAAT??????

10 Years of waiting for a proper 50L either 1.2 or 1.4... AND THEN IT WON'T FIT to my 5Ds????????????? 

I WILL xxxx YOU Canon!!!!!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> For instance, if it comes out, is called EOS R, has spec somewhere between 6D2 and 5D4...


Independent of the naming scheme, I now suspect the EOS R will be closest to a 6-series level. It’s looking more like native EF mount capability and the thicker body that goes with it, which means people bought into FF DSLRs and L-series lenses may have less incentive to upgrade. That suggests a line aimed at EOS M and APS-C DSLR users looking to go FF, and that in turn suggests a $2K body-only price point.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

psolberg said:


> lol due seriously, I've maintained the EF mount was reasonable and likely and I agreed with the reasoning. And yesterday I re-iterated that which you keep ignoring. I don't get where you think I have this bet position it was a new mount. I don't. Even yesterday you admitted it was reasonable based on the rumors to think it could be a new mount, or not. So both agree both outcomes are in fact, well possible. So while I would have teased you for you staked the position of it being EF a bit, if it didn't turn out this way as you made it very clear that was your first choice, it was a bit tongue in cheek because I know you don't know for sure.
> 
> I see both arguments for-against it. But yes, if it turns out it is an EF native mount, I'll admit you did say that was more likely.


Oh, I agree...that’s why I added the bit about not saying who was sitting down to eat... 
(In fact, even though he wasn’t initially invited, I think the most likely dining guest is AvTvM/fullstop...and he’ll need at least three servings, if not a full murder.)


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

Ditboy said:


> The 28-70 f2 will be the hot item.To have an extra stop for a general purpose lens is a wet dream for many. No need for 28 1.8, 35 1.8, 50 1.8 unless your goal is weight. Great journalism lens. Short zoom for sports. If the R camera is close to the Sony A7 II & II, Canon just brought back all the people who bought Sony cameras but were still using EF lenses. Expect lots of used Sony A7's on the market soon.




+1. An f/2 zoom (if true, not a typo, etc.) is cocaine-catnip level spec trolling here. 'I have the bestest/latest hotness' types that have been moronically buying in to each gen of A7 are screaming into pillows if this lens is real.

Because they'll buy into EOS R.

And then Sony will offer an f/1.8 zoom the size of Rhode Island. 

And they'll come running back.

You know, to own the Canon people. 

- A


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

DaveGrice said:


> Who knows? But if you think about it, offering a macro lens in even f/2.8 is ridiculous. No rational shooter uses f/2.8 for their depth of field when using it for close-up shooting. Having f/1.8 is just as useless as f/2.8 for real macro shooting. On the other hand, in the same way the 100L macro makes a decent portrait lens when shot at f/2.8, I would think a 35 macro would be a nice general-purpose lens with an option to shoot at f/1.8.
> 
> Of course, I'm not just making guesses, I'm guessing at rumors... so I'm happy to be corrected once anyone knows an actual answer.


I sometimes open my EF 100mm completely to f=2.8 to get an extremely short DoF. This can produce nice effects when shooting flowers/plants, if you want a more artistic, painting-like character. Of course, many macro motifs require an as big as possible DoF (or focus stacking), so in most settings a less fast lens would be all you need. 

I personally also think that such a fast wide angle lens isn't anything I'd really need.


----------



## memoriaphoto (Aug 31, 2018)

Adelino said:


> If this is true... WOW, if it is not true... @#$&!



Yes, after all this... if it isn't true it will be the biggest anti-climax that I can think of...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

te1973 said:


> WHAAAAAT??????
> 
> 10 Years of waiting for a proper 50L either 1.2 or 1.4... AND THEN IT WON'T FIT to my 5Ds?????????????
> 
> I WILL *xxxx* YOU Canon!!!!!



*Kiss*?


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Independent of the naming scheme, I now suspect the EOS R will be closest to a 6-series level. It’s looking more like native EF mount capability and the thicker body that goes with it, which means people bought into FF DSLRs and L-series lenses may have less incentive to upgrade. That suggests a line aimed at EOS M and APS-C DSLR users looking to go FF, and that in turn suggests a $2K body-only price point.



Agree it's 6D flavored, but anything that natively takes EF will still appeal to FF SLR owners. As this forum shows, not everyone who owns wanted a thin mount body.

#1 target for this camera are existing (both crop and FF) Canon SLR owners -- it's far easier to sell us another camera than it is to lure in new users or flip the competition. 

- A


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

te1973 said:


> WHAAAAAT??????
> 
> 10 Years of waiting for a proper 50L either 1.2 or 1.4... AND THEN IT WON'T FIT to my 5Ds?????????????
> 
> I WILL xxxx YOU Canon!!!!!


Neuroantomist posted the dead crow on the dish exactly for you...


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

DaveGrice said:


> Who knows? But if you think about it, offering a macro lens in even f/2.8 is ridiculous. No rational shooter uses f/2.8 for their depth of field when using it for close-up shooting. Having f/1.8 is just as useless as f/2.8 for real macro shooting. On the other hand, in the same way the 100L macro makes a decent portrait lens when shot at f/2.8, I would think a 35 macro would be a nice general-purpose lens with an option to shoot at f/1.8.
> 
> Of course, I'm not just making guesses, I'm guessing at rumors... so I'm happy to be corrected once anyone knows an actual answer.




+1 always cracks me up when I see someone post a macro shot wide open and a tiny tiny fraction of the shot is in field of focus. I'm almost always stopping down my macro work considerably.

But yes, a bright aperture macro lens doubles as a nice non-macro-distance lens. The 100L is a stellar short tele in that regard.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> if not a full murder.



Remains the best name of a group of a given animal. Nothing else is even close.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

te1973 said:


> WHAAAAAT??????
> 
> 10 Years of waiting for a proper 50L either 1.2 or 1.4... AND THEN IT WON'T FIT to my 5Ds?????????????
> 
> I WILL xxxx YOU Canon!!!!!




Who said it was proper? It might just be another iffy AF soft-cornered double gauss. 

It also might be a pickle jar. We'll see.

- A


----------



## mensaf (Aug 31, 2018)

These are exciting times for camera nerds.

32mm F1.4/EOS-M is getting snagged. Good chance I'm going to off the last of my l glass once the announcement actually happens and we get a spec sheet. Really interested in low light video performance with this one.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 31, 2018)

I think Canon introduced the "R" to make all people interested Reasoning about what the hell drove Canon to decide for an R. Causes a lot of stiR and fills thReads like this one. So it is all about maRketing.


----------



## slclick (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Who said it was proper? It might just be another iffy AF soft-cornered double gauss.
> 
> It also might be a pickle jar. We'll see.
> 
> - A


The question begs...will you buy a new body to get the glass you desire if this one checks all the boxes?


----------



## gkamadi (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Interesting implications from that list.
> 
> The lack of an EF mount adapter strongly suggests the new camera will be able to natively mount EF lenses.
> 
> ...


It will really be really great if EF lenses would mount natively. This is one thing I was praying for really hard!


----------



## dkangel (Aug 31, 2018)

stevewhitemd said:


> The 32mm f/1.4 M lens is a big tell for me. I personally haven't used the M series cameras and frankly thought of them as 'low-end' or 'consumer' cameras. Yes, same APS-C as my 80D  But apparently Canon sells a whole lot of them and they're very popular overseas.
> 
> But I now can see an evolving strategy for Canon: the M series is the new Rebel, the R series is the new xD. The xxD cameras, APS-C, may not find an equivalent per se in the new line-up -- do we need a mirrorless pro-sumer APS-C camera? So the various M series cameras hit various price points in the consumer market (and maybe a bit above that for more serious hobbyists), and the R series cameras hit various points in the pro market (and made a bit below).
> 
> ...



I agree with you. I am going to bet that is how it turns out around as evidenced by their release of another M series lens. I think the Canon lines will end up breaking into 2 main lines. The EF-M and the RF/EF series. The rebels, et. al will fall by the wayside eventually as Mirrorless takes over which would make the EF-S line obsolete in 5-10 years time. At least thats what my Magic 8 Ball told me today.


----------



## te1973 (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Who said it was proper? It might just be another iffy AF soft-cornered double gauss.
> 
> It also might be a pickle jar. We'll see.
> 
> - A



do not care too much about softness. 
focus shift for short distances even with live view focus is killing me
don't think this floating element whatever is still missing in 2018


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

dkangel said:


> I agree with you. I am going to bet that is how it turns out around as evidenced by their release of another M series lens. I think the Canon lines will end up breaking into 2 main lines. The EF-M and the RF/EF series. The rebels, et. al will fall by the wayside eventually as Mirrorless takes over which would make the EF-S line obsolete in 5-10 years time. At least thats what my Magic 8 Ball told me today.


----------



## freejay (Aug 31, 2018)

Well, I don't need dual card slots (  ) and I wouldn't mind using an adapter for EF lenses that much. But if it doesn't have IBIS, I'd have no reason to move away from my mirrorslapper... My hands are a bit shaky at times and I practically can't use unstabilized lenses. So with IBIS a whole new world of lenses would be open to me!


----------



## snappy604 (Aug 31, 2018)

I'm just hoping that after (sometimes impatiently) waiting this release produces a decent FF I can afford .. I was close on the 6d MkII..

Hopefully if it supports EF still, it still supports 3rd party EFs... some of my Sigma Art glass is still decent


----------



## freejay (Aug 31, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> ... I was close on the 6d MkII...



Me too...


----------



## freejay (Aug 31, 2018)

PS: I think the "M" in the 35 mm lens is just a transferring error where two characters got lost "U" & "S"...


----------



## fullstop (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Worried about the initial body just being the EOS R (like EOS M's original body)



^^^this! 

Had they called it Canon EOS R1 we'd expect "flagship FF mirrorfree camera" ... but, just like EOS M. 1 letter only seems to stand for "first body for a new mirrorfree mount".


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> +1 always cracks me up when I see someone post a macro shot wide open and a tiny tiny fraction of the shot is in field of focus. I'm almost always stopping down my macro work considerably.



On high magnifications you may be limited to wide open in order to avoid diffraction issues (eg with the MPE-65). I usually use f/2.8 on the MPE-65 combined with stacking. 

Having said that, it makes sense for a 35mm f/1.8 macro lens to be 1.8 if you consider that it's probably a great 35mm f/1.8 lens as well. Stop it down for macro. Use it wide open for low light photography.


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 31, 2018)

freejay said:


> PS: I think the "M" in the 35 mm lens is just a transferring error where two characters got lost "U" & "S"...



Makes sense. Either that or the M should be an L


----------



## fullstop (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Credit where credit is due, you were entirely correct in your count of 4 lenses.



thx. I know, i can count to 3. 


Are you sure, that
“M.ADAP R” “M.ADAP R ND” “M.ADAP R PL”

does not stand for M.[ount] ADAP[ter] R" for EF lenses? To mount EF glass on R mount? 3 versions, one basic and 2 with built-in filters, because the hollow extension tube has enough space to put a filter in? The "PL" version may have some "knob on the outside" to rotate circ. pol. filter ... it would allow adding ND or Circ.Pol for any EF-lens (!), irrespective of front lens diameter? 

Those adapters could possibly have 3 functions then
* mount adapter to make up for shorter flange distance
* filter option, especially for large front element lenses or lenses like TS/UWW without filter thread/bulbous front element bulbous it would be really nice and cut into a lot of 3rd party filter/holder makers sales ;-)
* lens foot [like EF-M/EF adapter), but with Arca-groves milled in


----------



## kirbic (Aug 31, 2018)

justaCanonuser said:


> I think Canon introduced the "R" to make all people interested Reasoning about what the hell drove Canon to decide for an R. Causes a lot of stiR and fills thReads like this one. So it is all about maRketing.



Well, my first thought was, if they are calling it "Arrrr" then why not announce it on September 19?


----------



## kirbic (Aug 31, 2018)

On a serious note, gonna watch the initial reviews carefully. I would love to ditch my 6D backup for FF mirrorless. They have to get some things really right though. AF performance and the EVF are my biggest concerns.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Aug 31, 2018)

Nikon went for a 16mm back focus, the EOS M is 18mm so I will hazard a guess the R/RF will also be 18mm (as is Sony).


----------



## Etienne (Aug 31, 2018)

Very interesting, but could still be a long wait.
If the 28-70 f/2 and/or 50 f/1.2 aren't gigantic bricks, then awesome. I suspect they will be damn big though.
An adapter with a high quality built-in variable ND would be a gift from heaven.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

slclick said:


> The question begs...will you buy a new body to get the glass you desire if this one checks all the boxes?




Not really in the market this cycle. In my head, my next camera is probably a high res rig as I want to do more landscape work.

So I somewhat thought he 5DS 2 vs. 5D5 would be my next rig decision. But as I've said many times, I don't regularly bump into the limits of my 5D3 that often, and that's more a reflection of my not pushing myself to shoot more often. But hell, I had a shoot recently were considerably downsized ISO 16000 output actually panned out all right to serve a social media need a friend had -- I was shocked. The 5D3 continues to delight me.

Back to your question: does a dream 50 on a new FF platform endear me to it? Absoutely. But it endears me to a lens portfolio and not a body. If that lens is happening, it's not going anywhere if I skip for a 6-series launch body for the 5-series feature set I am accustomed to.

Plus, if I'm honest, we've got some big family developments happening (good things but I shan't share) that may discourage a large spend in the near term.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

fullstop said:


> Are you sure, that
> “M.ADAP R” “M.ADAP R ND” “M.ADAP R PL”
> 
> does not stand for M.[ount] ADAP[ter] R" for EF lenses? To mount EF glass on R mount? 3 versions, one basic and 2 with built-in filters, because the hollow extension tube has enough space to put a filter in? The "PL" version may have some "knob on the outside" to rotate circ. pol. filter ... it would allow adding ND or Circ.Pol for any EF-lens (!), irrespective of front lens diameter?


An excellent point, certainly possible. Time will tell...

I absolutely think the EOS R has to take EF lenses, somehow. I also think it’s important for Canon to have a way to mount R lenses on EOS M bodies.

Personally, as I’ve said previously, I’d prefer a thin/small FF MILC. Still not convinced that’s what makes the most sense for Canon from a business standpoint, but we’ll see.


----------



## oXo_se (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Can we talk about the mirrorless body naming?
> 
> Worried about the initial body just being the EOS R (like EOS M's original body) and it gives us zero tell on future good/better/best segmentation.
> 
> ...


I think (hope) that EOS R is a series namn and that there are 2 body (EOS R2 and EOS R6 or R5)


----------



## ethanz (Aug 31, 2018)

13 pages in about nine hours. Wow. This rumor is exciting.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

fullstop said:


> ^^^this!
> 
> Had they called it Canon EOS R1 we'd expect "flagship FF mirrorfree camera" ... but, just like EOS M. 1 letter only seems to stand for "first body for a new mirrorfree mount".




EOS R6 would be the clearest delineation for the FF portfolio aficionados: "Hey folks, a mirrorless 6D is coming." And that also would entice us that an R5 and R1 might follow. Easy peasy for we merry Canonites to understand.

But feeding the faithful with a nomenclature system we understand has drawbacks:

Version offsets between like-spec'd mirrorless and SLRs get weird. You end up selling a 5D4 with an R5, a 6D2 with an R6 and folks might feel the R5 model is 'behind' without that 'Mark IV' to go with it. (This is petty, I admit)


It's hard for Canon to re-segment their FF portfolio with such hard orthodoxy of segments. Perhaps they _want_ these mirrorless rigs in a different setup value/price/positioning-wise than SLRs. This could be to creep more people upmarket over time, or possibly because Canon's always wanted to do this with SLRs but couldn't find a way to do it (and now mirrorless is the gateway to do this).
- A


----------



## ethanz (Aug 31, 2018)

And fullstop / Neuro are getting along, there is something magical going on with this rumor.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Aug 31, 2018)

It's fun to see plenty of Sony fanboy saying it's 5 years too late and Canon never caught up to Sony.

I'm not a fan boy but isn't competition good for everyone? They are just justifying their purchase.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

fullstop said:


> ^^^this!
> 
> Had they called it Canon EOS R1 we'd expect "flagship FF mirrorfree camera" ... but, just like EOS M. 1 letter only seems to stand for "first body for a new mirrorfree mount".




But, doing is this way -- calling it EOS R like the first EOS M -- is a slick way to say 'we haven't figured out segmentation yet'.

I just thought that Canon's considerable marketing acumen + their combined FF SLR and EOS M segmentation experience would have delivered a clearly delineated segmentation plan and (resulting) naming scheme.

- A


----------



## bks54 (Aug 31, 2018)

Not only is it amazing how Canon kept the lid on this for so long, but that even after all of this information has leaked we still don't know what this beast is (e.g. mount/flange spec).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> You end up selling a 5D4 with an R5, a 6D2 with an R6 and folks might feel the R5 model is 'behind' without that 'Mark IV' to go with it.


Yeah, like the movie from several years ago, _The Madness of King George_. The movie was about George III (king of England during the American Revolutionary War), but they removed the III from the title lest moviegoers think they missed the first two installments of the trilogy.


----------



## sdz (Aug 31, 2018)

justaCanonuser said:


> In fact, Canon did that back in the 80s, when they came up with the completely new EF mount that was not compatible with the old mount. It was a risky bet but it worked. Btw our Canon gear never has trouble with lens connection failures, our Nikon gear (serveral cameras) produces quite frequently such errors. The advantage of the Nikon (D)SLR mount is its compatibility with older lenses but that comes with a price. I think, besides the much bigger diameter of the Z mount this could have been another reason why Nikon now pulled the plug.



Well, just because the dice favored you on the first roll does not mean it will favor you on the second toss!

The EF mount works. The lenses work. Why fix something that is not broken?

Nikon, on the other hand, seemingly had good reasons to choose the novel solution.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

ethanz said:


> 13 pages in about nine hours. Wow. This rumor is exciting.




That's because Nokishita doesn't post rumors. I'm curious to know the last time they got something wrong.

- A


----------



## sdz (Aug 31, 2018)

MrAndre said:


> Yes, but they are releasing expensive RF lenses and there is only going to be one camera which you can mount them on for at least six months apparently. So Canon must think this Camera is worth a >1k $ lens, else they would have focused on more affordable lenses for this release.



But Canon wants it's new camera system to be successful -- for consumers to buy inot it. Turning a $1,900 expenditure into a $3,000 to $3,500 expenditure will depress sales. The dual mount path conserves past successes while preparing forvfuturevsuccesses. More will buy the camera because they will not need lens that have an R mount.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Yeah, like the movie from several years ago, _The Madness of King George_. The movie was about George III (king of England during the American Revolutionary War), but they removed the III from the title lest moviegoers think they missed the first two installments of the trilogy.




It seems petty for me to say an R6 and 6D2 can't be sold alongside each other... but in my day job I've seen petty/picky new product development decisions on things from nomenclature, sizing schemes, part numbers blow up into months of bickering debate.

Me: "We should call a meeting and rope everyone in to hammer this [nomenclature / sizing / etc. thing we need] out."

Business: "You are overthinking it, but okay."

Me: "I had that meeting and we have a full-scale war on our hands with 4 different orgs if we do what we planned. Here's what we need to do..."

Happens more often than you think, especially when it's a new platform instead of just a new arm of an existing system, line extension, etc. Everyone and their mother sees the new platform as a chance to re-define it in terms that they've always wanted it to be defined in.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> It seems petty for me to say an R6 and 6D2 can't be sold alongside each other... but in my day job I've seen petty/picky new product development decisions on things from nomenclature, sizing schemes, part numbers blow up into months of bickering debate.
> 
> Me: "We should call a meeting and rope everyone in to hammer this [nomenclature / sizing / etc. thing we need] out."
> 
> ...


So it's EOS R as in comp*R*omise...


----------



## amorse (Aug 31, 2018)

justaCanonuser said:


> I think Canon introduced the "R" to make all people interested Reasoning about what the hell drove Canon to decide for an R. Causes a lot of stiR and fills thReads like this one. So it is all about maRketing.


Mission accomplished I guess!


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

In other news, I can't tell if Panasonic are geniuses or fools with their news today. 

Genius = this announcement blunts any desire for Canon videographers to buy in EOS R.

Fools = their sweet rumor will get very few eyes today amidst the earthquake of buzz for this EOS R news.

(Please discuss that news on that thread. I'm just reflecting on their _timing_ vs. Canon's announcement here.)

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

Also, given my love of my 24-70 f/4L IS 0.7x macro mode and my love of wide-standard primes, I am quite possibly more interested in this 35 prime on the launch list than the 50. (Yeah, I said it.)

Quick + 28-35mm + Macro could be gold as a leave-it-on-the-camera travel/walkabout/food/street lens.

I've always thought (EF-S/EF-M's) wide + 1:1 macro is a great idea, but to have it in FF with IS and a bright f/1.8 aperture could be amazing.

- A


----------



## AlanF (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> That's because Nokishita doesn't post rumors. I'm curious to know the last time they got something wrong.
> 
> - A


There are so many posts that I am probably repeating what everyone knows as I probably have missed it, but Nokishita describes this as a grade C rumour: "*C (credible rumor)* : rumors from trustworthy sources. You can trust the rumor general, but there are many mistakes about trivial information"


----------



## dak723 (Aug 31, 2018)

fullstop said:


> thx. I know, i can count to 3.
> 
> 
> Are you sure, that
> ...


I agree. The focus of this announcement and release is for FF users - not M camera owners. M camera owners will get an adapter eventually, but the focus now must be on all of the owners of EF lenses. Canon knows that many of those EF lens owners won't be happy with an adapter, but to satisfy them a little bit, they will create two adapters that take or have filters built in. Having room for the filters implies the mount will be thinner.

I think this camera is meant for the enthusiast who seems to be clamoring for something new - (meaning smaller). I do believe that there will eventually (within the next year) be an EF mount mirrorless geared towards the pro market. Pros normally aren't going to be as impatient as enthusiasts. They can wait until their current equipment needs to be replaced.


----------



## Tangent (Aug 31, 2018)

Wow! Some random comments:

1) Glad they gave us 24-105, not 70, in the mid-range RF zoom.
2) Even if this is in the mid-20's for MP count, Topaz has a new tool called AI Gigapixel which is seriously good for uprez. Not kidding. Could tide you over until the high-rez body comes out, depending on your needs.
3) There is no way the RF 24-105 would not have IS. So either the IS got dropped from the lens designation, or there is IBIS.
4) Kinda glad I held off on the 6D mk II. But if the new cam has poor DR I'll be in a quandary.  I'm hopefully optimistic though. Gosh, what if it has the same sensor as the 6D mk II... 
5) Look for good deals on the 6D mk II this holiday shopping season!


----------



## dkangel (Aug 31, 2018)

dak723 said:


> I agree. The focus of this announcement and release is for FF users - not M camera owners. M camera owners will get an adapter eventually, but the focus now must be on all of the owners of EF lenses. Canon knows that many of those EF lens owners won't be happy with an adapter, but to satisfy them a little bit, they will create two adapters that take or have filters built in. Having room for the filters implies the mount will be thinner.



Not necessarily. Not if the new camera takes EF natively then it would make sense to create an adapter for the M Series to accept RF lenses. I guess we will see shortly.


----------



## amorse (Aug 31, 2018)

AlanF said:


> There are so many posts that I am probably repeating what everyone knows as I probably have missed it, but Nokishita describes this as a grade C rumour: "*C (credible rumor)* : rumors from trustworthy sources. You can trust the rumor general, but there are many mistakes about trivial information"


Nonsense! This forum is at fever pitch and will not calm down until Wednesday! Set expectations to maximum! 

But seriously, yes, let's take this all with a grain of salt.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

AlanF said:


> There are so many posts that I am probably repeating what everyone knows as I probably have missed it, but Nokishita describes this as a grade C rumour: "*C (credible rumor)* : rumors from trustworthy sources. You can trust the rumor general, but there are many mistakes about trivial information"




I recognize they have a credibility scale, but I'm honestly asking folks: when was the last time they got something wrong? 

Nokishita is much much less conjecture, 'what I'm hearing', etc. than it is 'here is your new camera that's coming out next week'.

(that said, I love CR Guy's work and this site is a treasure)

- A


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 31, 2018)

I wonder how they will number the new cameras.
Will they be R1, R5?
How about Rx, I am sure it would be dope.


----------



## bks54 (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> I recognize they have a credibility scale, but I'm honestly asking folks: when was the last time they got something wrong?
> 
> Nokishita is much much less conjecture, 'what I'm hearing', etc. than it is 'here is your new camera that's coming out next week'.
> 
> ...



I am sure the essence of this is correct, but perhaps there are problems or typos with the original supply chain order form they are reporting on. For example, the RF 35mm 1.8M IS could be a typo for RF 35mm 1.8 USM since the other lenses have USM designated (and the EF-M 32 has STM).


----------



## BillB (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Who said it was proper? It might just be another iffy AF soft-cornered double gauss.
> 
> It also might be a pickle jar. We'll see.
> 
> - A


I'm still wondering why a 50mm lens is RF rather than EF. Why should it have trouble with the mirror clearance requirements for EF


----------



## BeenThere (Aug 31, 2018)

BillB said:


> I'm still wondering why a 50mm lens is RF rather than EF. Why should it have trouble with the mirror clearance requirements for EF


So many have asked for this lens that Canon now knows they can sell a ton of EOS R cameras if the lens only works on the new body mount. Is this just cynical or what?


----------



## Deleted member 378664 (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> There's nothing about EF though. Does it mean 'R lens adapted to _some_ mount' or '_Some_ lens adapted to R mount'?


The Adaptor for the EOS M is called EF-EOS M adaptor. EF lenses can be adapted onto the EOS M mount
M.ADAP R could then mean M lenses can be adapted onto the R mount.

Frank


----------



## fullstop (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> I love CR Guy's work and this site is a treasure)



+100

But Craig really needs to learn Japanese.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

BillB said:


> I'm still wondering why a 50mm lens is RF rather than EF. Why should it have trouble with the mirror clearance requirements for EF




Because we don't know what this magical mount is or how it works. It could be a nested design or it could be that the new lenses retract into the space that the mirror used to occupy.

Everyone is reading what's not in this leak -- critically, there's no EF to RF adaptor listed -- as meaning that this is a full EF thickness mount. That may turn out to be a bad assumption: perhaps the ordering list was truncated? So Nokishita could have given us a 100% truthful list but our brains are harping on what's not on it. That might come back to bite us.

I'll believe it more when I can see it with my own eyes, and if this rumor is correct, we should have marketing photos in a couple days. That will be the nail in the coffin for thin/thick.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

fullstop said:


> +100
> 
> But Craig really needs to learn Japanese.




Does he? You can read Nokishita in English. 

- A


----------



## fullstop (Aug 31, 2018)

Photorex said:


> The Adaptor for the EOS M is called EF-EOS M adaptor. EF lenses can be adapted onto the EOS M mount
> M.ADAP R could then mean M lenses can be adapted onto the R mount.
> 
> Frank



I believe it stands for M.[ount] ADAP[ter].

otherwise it would probably read "EF-M" - even in google translate from Chinese to Japanese to English to German.


----------



## fullstop (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Does he? You can read Nokishita in English.




yes, but he could then understand what some of his sources are really saying. ;-)


----------



## ken (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Or EOS R might just be spec'd like a 6D2 and the YAPODFC folks will howl like banshees. We'll see.
> 
> - A


I suspect it _will_ be 6D2 specs for the first model released, but a higher resolution+dual-card model drops early next year. That would be fine. We'd see real-world reviews of the first model (giving us some insight into just how strong they'll be here, how sexy the EF solution really is) before the second becomes available, and the pre-orders for the second model will set some kind of record. (Well... maybe not in a shrinking market). But this is where _my_ "hopes and dreams" lay.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

fullstop said:


> I believe it stands for M.[ount] ADAP[ter].
> 
> otherwise it would probably read "EF-M" - even in google translate from Chinese to Japanese to English to German.




Yeah, half the buzz here are specs of the lenses and a tell of IBIS -- it's a mic drop there, beyond expectations surely -- but the other half is not seeing the words 'EF needs an adaptor to work'. If something was lost in translation or left off the list that Nokishita received and EF does in fact need an adaptor, it'll be fine but a lot of heavily vested EF folks will be bummed.

- A


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 31, 2018)

DaveGrice said:


> Who knows? But if you think about it, offering a macro lens in even f/2.8 is ridiculous. No rational shooter uses f/2.8 for their depth of field when using it for close-up shooting. Having f/1.8 is just as useless as f/2.8 for real macro shooting. On the other hand, in the same way the 100L macro makes a decent portrait lens when shot at f/2.8, I would think a 35 macro would be a nice general-purpose lens with an option to shoot at f/1.8.
> 
> Of course, I'm not just making guesses, I'm guessing at rumors... so I'm happy to be corrected once anyone knows an actual answer.




The Tamron 35 f/1.8 is practically a macro. It's useful as a dual-use carry-around lens. I like it for hikes where I'm using 1.8 sometimes and f/11 others. Wouldn't be shocked if Canon actually has Tamron manufacture parts of it or licenses that design, as it beats the pants off of most others. Sony did this with a few from that Tamron series.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

ken said:


> I suspect it _will_ be 6D2 specs for the first model released, but a higher resolution+dual-card model drops early next year. That would be fine. We'd see real-world reviews of the first model (giving us some insight into just how strong they'll be here, how sexy the EF solution really is) before the second becomes available, and the pre-orders for the second model will set some kind of record. (Well... maybe not in a shrinking market). But this is where _my_ "hopes and dreams" lay.




Yeah, but the 6D2 wasn't initially released against the headwind of _two_ 24x10+ cameras packing 4K + IBIS + EXMOR sensors.

The 6D2 spec -- esp. the actual sensor itself -- simply has to be improved upon with this first EOS R model. 

- A


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Can we talk about the mirrorless body naming?
> 
> Worried about the initial body just being the EOS R (like EOS M's original body) and it gives us zero tell on future good/better/best segmentation.
> 
> ...



I think the naming conventions are so broken, they don't matter any more so long as they are unique. I've stopped trying to derive information such as level, version, etc. from the names. It is quite apparent no one sat down in a room in 1993 and said, "Here is the system we're going to use." Instead, a product manager and their boss - who inevitably think their model is the most significant in a decade - come up with something that is slightly jarring or breaks the mold because that suits their impression of their work. We'd have to see Canon release 5 or 6 new cameras that conform to a consistent convention to indicate that they've stopped doing random stuff. Not holding breath.


----------



## bks54 (Aug 31, 2018)

Photorex said:


> The Adaptor for the EOS M is called EF-EOS M adaptor. EF lenses can be adapted onto the EOS M mount
> M.ADAP R could then mean M lenses can be adapted onto the R mount.
> 
> Frank



Nokishita says (approximately): 

"Since only "M.ADAP R" "M.ADAP R ND" "M.ADAP R PL" is written in the simple order form, the official name is unknown"
They added the (ount) to the M so that is probably just a guess on their part.

I am struggling to understand why Canon would bother to have 3 adapters for EF-M lenses to the new camera in their initial release. I don't think many people would need to do that. If you have EF-M lenses then you are likely to have a matched camera to mount them on, and there is not a lot of incentive to mount an APS-C lens on a full frame camera. Much more likely is that these three adaptors fit the new RF lenses to other cameras, and the EOS M series is the probable target. Of course they could be for mounting EF lenses on the EOS R but given all we have been talking about for days, I don't expect this to be true.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

[email protected] said:


> I think the naming conventions are so broken, they don't matter any more so long as they are unique. I've stopped trying to derive information such as level, version, etc. from the names. It is quite apparent no one sat down in a room in 1993 and said, "Here is the system we're going to use." Instead, a product manager and their boss - who inevitably think their model is the most significant in a decade - come up with something that is slightly jarring or breaks the mold because that suits their impression of their work. We'd have to see Canon release 5 or 6 new cameras that conform to a consistent convention to indicate that they've stopped doing random stuff. Not holding breath.



In crop, I agree with you. It's the naming wild west out there.

In FF, I think there's far more thought put in than you might be giving Canon credit. 5DS doesn't exactly roll off the tongue, but it shrewdly creates two premium price points for Canon and does not put high res vs. all arounder on dramatically different shelves. I think that's pretty clever in a world of good/better/best from the competitors.

- A


----------



## ken (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Yeah, but the 6D2 wasn't initially released against the headwind of _two_ 24x10+ cameras packing 4K + IBIS + EXMOR sensors.
> 
> The 6D2 spec -- esp. the actual sensor itself -- simply has to be improved upon with this first EOS R model.
> 
> - A


Agreed! I'm thinking 6D2 resolution, better sensor, single memory card, 4K (but not earth-shattering frame-rate, cropped maybe more than people wish). I think it will have IBIS based on the lens lineup as others have mentioned. So "better than a 6D2" if the AF can match the mirror-slapper's dedicated AF sensors. (Low-light AF... I hope it matches 6D2!) 

Just guessing. I know I shouldn't. But it's hard not to be a bit excited.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 31, 2018)

ethanz said:


> 13 pages in about nine hours. Wow. This rumor is exciting.



I have a 16" tall monitor. There are five scrollings per Canon Rumors page. That makes for 1040 inches (your resolution, etc. will make this different for you). In 9 hours that translates to about .002 miles per hour. Doesn't seem fast, but it's the first thread I've seen to make it onto the scale.


----------



## bks54 (Aug 31, 2018)

[email protected] said:


> The Tamron 35 f/1.8 is practically a macro. It's useful as a dual-use carry-around lens. I like it for hikes where I'm using 1.8 sometimes and f/11 others. Wouldn't be shocked if Canon actually has Tamron manufacture parts of it or licenses that design, as it beats the pants off of most others. Sony did this with a few from that Tamron series.



Also, Zeiss is rumored to release a close focus Batis 40/2 for Sony soon. Seems like there is a space to compete in.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

ken said:


> Agreed! I'm thinking 6D2 resolution, better sensor, single memory card, 4K (but not earth-shattering frame-rate, cropped maybe more than people wish). I think it will have IBIS based on the lens lineup as others have mentioned. So "better than a 6D2" if the AF can match the mirror-slapper's dedicated AF sensors. (Low-light AF... I hope it matches 6D2!)
> 
> Just guessing. I know I shouldn't. But it's hard not to be a bit excited.



Total guesses to follow.

Certainty or near-certainty:

Proper on-chip ADC sensor (your guess is as good as mine on resolution, the 26 MP of the 6D2 is fine in this price point)
DPAF (at least, could have some next-gen version of it here)
Faster fps than 6D2, say 8 or so
Some form of 4K
Some form of focus peaking
Tilty-flippy + touch
Less certain:

Two cards
4K uses DPAF
Eye AF (M50 has it...)
E-shutter option for ultra-fast shutter speeds or increased framerate
Doubt it:

No AA filter
Better low light AF than the 6D2
Faster sync speed than the 6D2
Better buffer or battery life than the 6D2
- A


----------



## herion (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Maybe not when it's just released, but in a time, it'll get more MPs growing. Because R may stand for Replicating pixels...



Like the Replicators in Stargate SG-1???


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Total guesses to follow.




In other words, it's a 6D 'Mark 2.5'

- A


----------



## Deleted member 378664 (Aug 31, 2018)

bks54 said:


> Nokishita says (approximately):
> 
> "Since only "M.ADAP R" "M.ADAP R ND" "M.ADAP R PL" is written in the simple order form, the official name is unknown"
> They added the (ount) to the M so that is probably just a guess on their part.
> ...



agreed, sounds reasonable to me. I didn't thought about the fact that it doesn't make a lot of sense to use APS-C lenses on a FF body.


----------



## amorse (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Total guesses to follow.
> 
> Certainty or near-certainty:
> 
> ...


I don't know, the rumoured specs from a few days ago were as follows:

*28MP full frame sensor*
Dual Pixel Auto Focus
IBIS (In Body Image Stabilisation)
*10fps shooting*
[email protected]
[email protected]
Priced $1,900
I think they need at least 10 fps here - even the M50 has 10 fps with AF locked, and 7.4 fps with AF active. 

Well. _*Need*_ is a strong word. I think their APS-C cameras have set some precedent to push up toward 10. Also, I hope you're right with the on-chip ADC sensor!


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 31, 2018)

bks54 said:


> Nokishita says (approximately):
> 
> "Since only "M.ADAP R" "M.ADAP R ND" "M.ADAP R PL" is written in the simple order form, the official name is unknown"
> They added the (ount) to the M so that is probably just a guess on their part.
> ...



If it was just "M.ADAP R" I would assume EF-to-R adapter. But three adapters. None of which have the letters EF. One of which has PL which I would assume is PL mount. Another with ND which I would assume is neutral density.

Is it possible these are adapters for new R lenses to dedicated cine cameras? Is the R lens line going to be optimized for both mirrorless and cinema use?

(Apologies if this theory has been floated. I can't go through all 15 pages  )


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> In other words, it's a 6D 'Mark 2.5'
> 
> - A



For a possible sub $2,000 price point, that would still be pretty good overall .


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 31, 2018)

Sibir Lupus said:


> For a possible sub $2,000 price point, that would still be pretty good overall .



Better if it's a new sensor with on-chip ADCs (better DR) and 4k that's not severely crippled like the M50.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

amorse said:


> I don't know, the rumoured specs from a few days ago were as follows:
> 
> *28MP full frame sensor*
> Dual Pixel Auto Focus
> ...




Ha, I forgot about that spec list -- I blew it off thinking it was for the M5 Mk II (i.e. that FF mirrorless wasn't coming this week). 

It's not far off, but I haaaaaaaaaate fps levels being promised with stuff turned off. MLU for a faster 1DX2 performance I understand, but turning off AF, AE, etc. to claim higher fps should be banned.

- A


----------



## AJ (Aug 31, 2018)

Did Canon ever file a patent for a 28-70/2 design? The only thing I can find is a Sony patent
https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-patents-a-new-fe-28-70mm-f2-0-lens/


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Aug 31, 2018)

dtaylor said:


> Better if it's a new sensor with on-chip ADCs (better DR) and 4k that's not severely crippled like the M50.



Agreed! I'm sure Canon knows (or at least I hope they know) that they can't pull an M50 when it comes to 4K on a nearly 2 grand camera, especially when it's competing with other cameras with good 4K at the same price point.


----------



## justawriter (Aug 31, 2018)

10 fps (with autofocus) and if it has even better high ISO NR the current offerings at the price the 6DII was released with and I just might have to give it a try.
(Nothing profound there, but I didn't want to be the only person on the forum who *HASN'T* commented on this thread.)


----------



## Lurker (Aug 31, 2018)

With all the patents Canon had around curved/curving sensors could the R be for Radial or Rounded? 

Canons new Radial Focus system using the latest in curved chip technologies making lens design easier and cheaper while making the lenses lighter and brighter than was ever possible before. Virtually eliminating any vignette from any Canon lens. 

Not one to turn their backs on the millions of Canon users already invested in the EF system canon has made it possible to lay the new sensor out perfectly flat so all current EF lenses are supported just like the are in todays mirror slapping DSLRs.

However do note, third party lens owners, you're hosed. No support for you turncoats! Except maybe Sigma whom I believe I've read has managed to get some lenses included in the Canon firmware for lens corrections. Did Sigma own a key patent on some new process or material???


----------



## Ditboy (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> On the contrary. "RF 35mm f/1.8 M IS" - that implies there's _no_ IBIS unfortunately, doesn' it? I'm disappointed. I was hoping to eventually buy it and mount my 24-70 on it and make it stabilised. The only faint hope is in that 'M'. What is it, 'M'? An RF-mount lens also mountable on EF-M? That doesn't add up.


Macro, in which case additional IS might be needed.


----------



## Ditboy (Aug 31, 2018)

LSXPhotog said:


> I hope even 1/3 of this is true. Unfortunately, I think the only portion may be the
> 
> EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM
> EF 400mm f/2.8L IS III
> ...


and gained back all of the people who switch to a Sony camera but were still using EF lenses.


----------



## Ditboy (Aug 31, 2018)

canonnews said:


> considering that this camera is supposed to be around the size of the M50 and have M50 ergonomics people SHOULD be keeping their expectations in check.


M50 ergonomics not size? Which would mean fully articulated monitor. It will have to be bigger than the M50 to use an EF mount.


----------



## Ditboy (Aug 31, 2018)

nchoh said:


> Perhaps the camera can use both EF-R and EF lenses. But because Canon wants to get EF-M owners to buy into their new EF-R lenses, the adaptors are for mounting the new (smaller than EF) EF-R lenses to their M bodies?


Previous discussions have theorized the the R lenses rear elements will protude into what was once the mirror space, if the design could benefit from it. If that is the case, the 28-70 f2 might mot be as big as imagined.


----------



## Ditboy (Aug 31, 2018)

nchoh said:


> I am guessing that if there are 2 models, one could be the EF-R that takes EF and the other a EF-R only?


Doesn't sound like it. I would guess model two is a response to the Sony A9.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Aug 31, 2018)

Ditboy said:


> Doesn't sound like it. I would guess model two is a response to the Sony A9.



If the first EOS R is rumored at around $2,000, my guess is the second one would be aimed at the A7RIII and Z7 (5D Mark IV prices).


----------



## filipe.ngra (Aug 31, 2018)

We need to be talking about 28-70 F2. This is a dream come true. I know it is not 24mm but still a f2 zoom lens (great range) L series. If the body has IBIS with, let's say 3 stop compensation, this will be the most used lens and more versatile. I will sell my L primes for this... and provably 5d mk4 too...


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 31, 2018)

filipe.ngra said:


> We need to be talking about 28-70 F2. This is a dream come true. I know it is not 24mm but still a f2 zoom lens (great range) L series. If the body has IBIS with, let's say 3 stop compensation, this will be the most used lens and more versatile. I will sell my L primes for this... and provably 5d mk4 too...



Well, I'm going to wait to see what results shows before selling anything  But yes, it's an excellent choice of launch lens. Far more inspired than the dull Nikon 24-70 f/4


----------



## fullstop (Aug 31, 2018)

filipe.ngra said:


> e need to be talking about 28-70 F2. This is a dream come true.



i'd prefer a 20-85/2.8 as a matter of fact. 28? not interested.


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 31, 2018)

filipe.ngra said:


> We need to be talking about 28-70 F2. This is a dream come true. I know it is not 24mm but still a f2 zoom lens (great range) L series. If the body has IBIS with, let's say 3 stop compensation, this will be the most used lens and more versatile. I will sell my L primes for this... and provably 5d mk4 too...



If they made a 28-70 f/2L that's not a beast in terms of size/weight (say...no worse than the 24-70 f/2.8L II), and fits on a body with IBIS, they just made a dream FF walk around/street camera.


----------



## navastronia (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Less certain:
> 
> Two cards
> 4K uses DPAF
> ...



First time I've seen anyone bring up the one feature I care about immensely.

The a9's electronic shutter has a faster scan time than any current FF mirrorless camera and is the only one quick enough (1/160) to stop motion. I've been praying Canon's FF mirrorless offerings will match or exceed the a9 in this respect, because I don't want to buy an a9 for wedding and BTS (film and TV) work, but I will if I have to in order to avoid using a DSLR and blimp.


----------



## mppix (Aug 31, 2018)

Sibir Lupus said:


> Agreed! I'm sure Canon knows (or at least I hope they know) that they can't pull an M50 when it comes to 4K on a nearly 2 grand camera, especially when it's competing with other cameras with good 4K at the same price point.



I'd expect 4K with autofocus but with crop. Finally, there will be a lot of people unhappy about the video capabilities, either because of crop, framerate, bitrate, etc... I think it is safe to say, it will be good video but not competing the Cinema EOS


----------



## Ditboy (Aug 31, 2018)

justaCanonuser said:


> In fact, Canon did that back in the 80s, when they came up with the completely new EF mount that was not compatible with the old mount. It was a risky bet but it worked. Btw our Canon gear never has trouble with lens connection failures, our Nikon gear (serveral cameras) produces quite frequently such errors. The advantage of the Nikon (D)SLR mount is its compatibility with older lenses but that comes with a price. I think, besides the much bigger diameter of the Z mount this could have been another reason why Nikon now pulled the plug.


and you still won't be able to adapt older FD lenses on the new body because of the flange distance. :-( But they work great on my M5!


----------



## Famateur (Aug 31, 2018)

[First, I'm gonna call the new mount EF-R (though it could be RF, or Henry, or In-Your-Face-Nikon-Z)]*

Could we be over-thinking(wishing) this a little?

I'm not convinced the "M" in M.ADAP has anything to do with EOS M mount. It's possible that it's just an EF to EF-R adapter that goes with the new mount, just like the EF to EF-M adapter when the EOS M was released. Perhaps the "sexiness" that was rumored is just the built-in filters.

If the EF-R mount lenses do protrude into the body, thus allowing an EF lens to attach to an EOS R body without adapter, then perhaps the adapter in this rumor is for attaching EF-R lenses to an EF mount camera?

It's interesting to note that the rumor includes super-telephoto lenses with EF mount. That would seem to indicate that EF is here to stay for a while -- at least for pros. I think that points to either A) EF lenses attaching natively to the EOS R body, or B) EF-R lenses being adaptable to future EF mount DLSRs. I'm still leaning toward a regular old EF to EF-R adapter so people can use their EF lenses on the new EF-R mount.

Whatever it turns out to be, I'm looking forward to the announcement.

_*If nothing else, Canon won't have to start the "XXX Million EF Lenses Produced" tally over again._

EDIT: Okay, it's probably called RF, if Nokishita is rarely wrong, and that's what they're posting. It's gonna suck to have to start that lens production volume number over again, though...


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

navastronia said:


> First time I've seen anyone bring up the one feature I care about immensely.
> 
> The a9's electronic shutter has a faster scan time than any current FF mirrorless camera and is the only one quick enough (1/160) to stop motion. I've been praying Canon's FF mirrorless offerings will match or exceed the a9 in this respect, because I don't want to buy an a9 for wedding and BTS (film and TV) work, but I will if I have to in order to avoid using a DSLR and blimp.




Not-at-all-bold prediction: Canon will not put some racecar sort of spec into a 6-series level camera for $2k.

And remember, the A9 was a technical showhorse and not a working camera. It had a 5 fps mechanical shutter, for the speedier stuff up to 20 fps you needed an e-shutter -- and it was problematic. Not shocked at all that the III generation of the A7 line can deliver top advertised fps through a mechanical shutter.

Bleeding edge performance -- like 1-series performance -- in a mirrorless rig is surely years away. I'm guessing that Canon will build up from the bottom with a 6-series mirrorless and then a 5-series mirrorless of some sort before they ever dream of a 1-series mirrorless setup. 

- A


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 31, 2018)

Famateur said:


> [First, I'm gonna call the new mount EF-R (though it could be RF, or Henry, or In-Your-Face-Nikon-Z)]If the EF-R mount lenses do protrude into the body, thus allowing an EF lens to attach to an EOS R body without adapter, then perhaps the adapter in this rumor is for attaching EF-R lenses to an EF mount camera?



Then the rear element would slap the mirror. UNLESS the adapter communicated the situation to the lens, the MF linkage was electronic, and the only loss that comes with stopping the element from protruding into the body would be some loss in minimum focus distance.

If that's the case...if Canon gives us two way compatibility between EF and mirrorless...wow.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

Famateur said:


> I'm not convinced the "M" in M.ADAP has anything to do with EOS M mount. It's possible that it's just an EF to EF-R adapter that goes with the new mount, just like the EF to EF-M adapter when the EOS M was released. Perhaps the "sexiness" that was rumored is just the built-in filters.




+1. I'm not saying this is what we're getting, but the jury remains out until we see this damn thing.

We could bolt EF right on these new bodies.

But it could just be an A7 / Z sort of offering with a thin mount + adaptor but Canon just made the adaptors sexy. 

- A


----------



## Daan Stam (Aug 31, 2018)

those adapters are reallly really interesting. PL and ND suggest a Seriously video focused camera


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Aug 31, 2018)

mppix said:


> I'd expect 4K with autofocus but with crop. Finally, there will be a lot of people unhappy about the video capabilities, either because of crop, framerate, bitrate, etc... I think it is safe to say, it will be good video but not competing the Cinema EOS



I can see things like high bitrate and C-log being left out for the higher priced EOS R camera coming out in the future (A7RIII/Z7 competitor). It would be a mistake if Canon did 4K cropping again (looking at you 5D Mark IV, and M50), but the BIGGEST mistake would be for them to disable DPAF when recording in 4K. As much as it would suck, people can live with a crop factor when recording in 4K, but contrast only AF in video is almost unusable.


----------



## navastronia (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Not-at-all-bold prediction: Canon will not put some racecar sort of spec into a 6-series level camera for $2k.
> 
> And remember, the A9 was a technical showhorse and not a working camera. It had a 5 fps mechanical shutter, for the speedier stuff up to 20 fps you needed an e-shutter -- and it was problematic. Not shocked at all that the III generation of the A7 line can deliver top advertised fps through a mechanical shutter.
> 
> ...



From everything I read, though, there was nothing especially problematic about the a9's e-shutter. Did you hear differently? It didn't work with flash units, which bummed a lot of people out, but that's all I know.

Understandable to not have a blazing fast e-shutter in a $2K body, but if Canon doesn't put one in their $3,500-$4,000 "5 series-ish" pro body coming next year, I'll be pretty mad


----------



## Nado (Aug 31, 2018)

The R will have a retractable sensor accommodating various flange distances per different mounts.


----------



## Famateur (Aug 31, 2018)

I've been waiting to make the move to full frame for a long time. A full-frame version of my 70D was what I was hoping for, and it basically arrived in the 6DII. Between lack of funds*, an off-chip ADC and AF points clustered near the center of the frame, I decided to wait to see what might come later. Here's hoping the EOS R has:

1) Current (or new) Generation Sensor (on-chip ADC, DPAF)
2) Fully Articulating Touchscreen
3) 7+ FPS (with AF tracking)
4) Accepts my EF lenses
5) Reasonable battery and EVF performance

Pretty much anything else** is gravy to me. By the time I have any money scraped together, I'll either get a 6DII for dirt-cheap, or the long-term street price will have settled down on the EOS-R. No rush for me...( low funds notwithstanding, I still enjoy the results from my 70D).



_* Damned litigious ex...
** Okay, I admit I'd really like to try a good eye-AF. _


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

Famateur said:


> I'm not convinced the "M" in M.ADAP has anything to do with EOS M mount. It's possible that it's just an EF to EF-R adapter that goes with the new mount, just like the EF to EF-M adapter when the EOS M was released. Perhaps the "sexiness" that was rumored is just the built-in filters.




Also, whatever camera or lenses it is for, if it has those slick rear drop-in filters (or possibly is a fixed filter for each adaptor, which seems nuts), I had a question:

We use 52mm DI filters on the superwhites for a few reasons if memory serves, but one is that the front elements are ginormous and we don't want to have to buy 100-150mm diameter circular filters to cover for them. So Canon nicely put in the 52mm DI option for (I thought) most of them.

But those are only possible in a weather sealed lens because I believe most of those front elements are weather sealed. The problem is that a lot of lenses, including L glass in more pedestrian focal lengths (16-35, 24-70, etc.) requires a front filter to achieve complete weather sealing on a lens -- either the front element is not inherently sealed or the threads themselves (if left naked) are a path of fluid/dirt/dust ingress.

So here's my question: if these new adaptors indeed have filters in the back, _don't we still need to front-filter most of our lenses anyway_ just for weather-sealing? If so, why bother with this filtered adaptor idea?

- A


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Aug 31, 2018)

Famateur said:


> [First, I'm gonna call the new mount EF-R (though it could be RF, or Henry, or In-Your-Face-Nikon-Z)]*
> 
> _*If nothing else, Canon won't have to start the "XXX Million EF Lenses Produced" tally over again._
> 
> EDIT: Okay, it's probably called RF, if Nokishita is rarely wrong, and that's what they're posting. It's gonna suck to have to start that lens production volume number over again, though...



They don't have to start the number again. Seeing as new EF lenses are being released along with the RF lenses, Canon clearly has no plans to slow EF lens development anytime soon. So if anything, Canon may just combine numbers and state "XXX Million Lenses Produced" to incorporate the new RF lenses, EF-M lenses (if they are not already doing so) and PL mount cinema lenses.


----------



## mppix (Aug 31, 2018)

Sibir Lupus said:


> I can see things like high bitrate and C-log being left out for the higher priced EOS R camera coming out in the future (A7RIII/Z7 competitor). It would be a mistake if Canon did 4K cropping again (looking at you 5D Mark IV, and M50), but the BIGGEST mistake would be for them to disable DPAF when recording in 4K. As much as it would suck, people can live with a crop factor when recording in 4K, but contrast only AF in video is almost unusable.



Agreed - A lot depends on the memory card. Its safe to assume it is not CF. Canon seems to align things with the CF Association that pretty much dropped CFast and moved to CFexpress (that is too new for Canon standards). So SD card it is, UHD-? I think we can safely assume SDexpress is too new too.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

navastronia said:


> From everything I read, though, there was nothing especially problematic about the a9's e-shutter. Did you hear differently? It didn't work with flash units, which bummed a lot of people out, but that's all I know.
> 
> Understandable to not have a blazing fast e-shutter in a $2K body, but if Canon doesn't put one in their $3,500-$4,000 "5 series-ish" pro body coming next year, I'll be pretty mad




I'm not the ringer on this, but someone here surely is. 

I always heard it was stadium lighting for sports giving it fits -- there was very odd color banding that occurred as each sub-segment of the frame was recorded. Here is the DPR take after Fro Knows Photo posted a 'problem' video:

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7370859353/sony-a9-banding-reported-by-fro-fact-or-fiction

And there are jello shutter concerns to be spoken to. 

I'm not opposed to an e-shutter at all, but only to do things I can't with a mechanical shutter. I wouldn't hesitate to use it for that once a year need to shoot 1/16000 or 1/32000, but I still want a full fps possible mechanical shutter to do general shooting.

- A


----------



## fullstop (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> We could bolt EF right on these new bodies.



i still believe it will take a simple adapter. Canon will not miss out ion the "small body option"


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Aug 31, 2018)

mppix said:


> Agreed - A lot depends on the memory card. Its safe to assume it is not CF. Canon seems to align things with the CF Association that pretty much dropped CFast and moved to CFexpress (that is too new for Canon standards). So SD card it is, UHD-? I think we can safely assume SDexpress is too new too.



My guess would be SD UHS-II. The BIG question regarding storage though, will it have duel card slots? Current rumors are saying no though :/.


----------



## macroMike (Aug 31, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Looks like there's a sea of opportunities to guess  Just from a few abbreviations.
> Why would the new mount be revolving? Maybe we'll screw it in and out to get different flange distances?..


I think "RF" may be "recessed flange". The EF mount is on the outside at 44mm, and the new mount is recessed and closer to the sensor. RF lens will extend into the body by 20 mm or so. Just guessing.


----------



## knight427 (Aug 31, 2018)

As a current 6D owner and committed ametuer, here is my exhaustive list of requirements:

$2k launch price point (but I'll probably wait to either buy used, refurb or wait for holiday sales in 2019)
Sensor is clearly better than 6D2, but doesn't have to match 5D4 
Doesn't catch on fire or cause rabies

That's pretty much it.


----------



## dkangel (Aug 31, 2018)

Photorex said:


> The Adaptor for the EOS M is called EF-EOS M adaptor. EF lenses can be adapted onto the EOS M mount
> M.ADAP R could then mean M lenses can be adapted onto the R mount.
> 
> Frank


I think its the other way around but I could be wrong.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

fullstop said:


> i still believe it will take a simple adapter. Canon will not miss out ion the "small body option"




With zero slow/small lenses to avail itself of this small opportunity. 

I'm not saying that's proof it will be full EF, but it seems odd to launch a 'small' body with a slate of big glass like this. Surely you launch a 'small' platform with a pancake, a 35 f/2.8, a special 'designed to be small' zoom (i.e. 24-50 f/variable), etc. None of those are on offer here.

- A


----------



## AlanF (Aug 31, 2018)

RF = Reply Frenzy


----------



## Flyingskiguy (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> If so, why bother with this filtered adaptor idea?
> 
> - A



A filter in the adapter can be used with multiple lenses of varying front diameter. One could have one CPL that works on 72, 77, and 82mm etc front elements without having to own multiple sizes of CPLs or mess with step up/down rings that interfere with lens hoods. Same for NDs. As a video shooter this would really streamline switching lenses in the field. Basically for the same reason the cinema bodies have internal NDs. 

What would be _really cool _would be if the ND in the adapter is a variable ND.


----------



## Isaacheus (Aug 31, 2018)

bokehmon22 said:


> It's fun to see plenty of Sony fanboy saying it's 5 years too late and Canon never caught up to Sony.
> 
> I'm not a fan boy but isn't competition good for everyone? They are just justifying their purchase.



As someone who half jumped over to Sony with the a7r3, I'm pretty keen to see what Canon are willing to put into their ff mirrorless cameras. I kept my Canon lenses and old 6d, so it really comes down to which option fits my uses best

The competition should be great for the options overall, if Canon do go all out. It'll worry the other manufacturers, which hopefully means more improvements


----------



## scyrene (Aug 31, 2018)

justaCanonuser said:


> I sometimes open my EF 100mm completely to f=2.8 to get an extremely short DoF. This can produce nice effects when shooting flowers/plants, if you want a more artistic, painting-like character. Of course, many macro motifs require an as big as possible DoF (or focus stacking), so in most settings a less fast lens would be all you need.



+1


----------



## clbayley (Aug 31, 2018)

I haven't seen it mentioned yet...but assuming the mount allows a recessed R lens, but also accepts EF lens, should it not also be able to accept EF-S lens? 15-85 on FF?

Just thinking out loud...

CB


----------



## fullstop (Aug 31, 2018)

Flyingskiguy said:


> A filter in the adapter can be used with multiple lenses of varying front diameter. One could have one CPL that works on 72, 77, and 82mm etc front elements without having to own multiple sizes of CPLs or mess with step up/down rings that interfere with lens hoods. Same for NDs. As a video shooter this would really streamline switching lenses in the field. Basically for the same reason the cinema bodies have internal NDs.
> 
> What would be _really cool _would be if the ND in the adapter is a variable ND.



exactly.


----------



## dkangel (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> +1. I'm not saying this is what we're getting, but the jury remains out until we see this damn thing.
> 
> We could bolt EF right on these new bodies.
> 
> ...



I am going to differ. Unless it is truly an adapter for EF to RF mount of which I am hoping against there is only 1 logical conclusion - an mount to match RF to EOS-M cameras. It doesn't make sense the other way (crop lenses on ff bodies). I hope I am right


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

knight427 said:


> Doesn't catch on fire or cause rabies




Dammit. We always overlook hydrophobia and spontaneous combustion. Good get.

I design products for a living, and now I want to write the above as a design input for everything I make. I might get some pushback from Quality on needing to order a family of rabid raccoons and some napalm for V&V, though. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

Flyingskiguy said:


> A filter in the adapter can be used with multiple lenses of varying front diameter. One could have one CPL that works on 72, 77, and 82mm etc front elements without having to own multiple sizes of CPLs or mess with step up/down rings that interfere with lens hoods. Same for NDs. As a video shooter this would really streamline switching lenses in the field. Basically for the same reason the cinema bodies have internal NDs.
> 
> What would be _really cool _would be if the ND in the adapter is a variable ND.




I get the convenience angle completely, but does this not mean that choosing to use the feature (instead of front-filtering) means that you are voluntarily walking away from weather sealing?

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

clbayley said:


> I haven't seen it mentioned yet...but assuming the mount allows a recessed R lens, but also accepts EF lens, should it not also be able to accept EF-S lens? 15-85 on FF?
> 
> Just thinking out loud...
> 
> CB




No reason why it shouldn't without a mirror back there. The firmware/metering/etc. will have to downshift into crop mode to work properly (you don't want blacked out corners messing with metering), but yes, it should work.

I asked this question previously about an EF to [new mount] adaptor: the answer from the team here was if EF works, so should EF-S.

- A


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 31, 2018)

There's the new 50mm!!!


----------



## Famateur (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> So here's my question: if these new adaptors indeed have filters in the back, don't we still need to front-filter most of our lenses anyway just for weather-sealing? If so, why bother with this filtered adaptor idea?
> 
> - A



Great question!

I wonder what the solution will be...


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

CanonFanBoy said:


> There's *the* new 50mm!!!




Hold your tongue, my good man. 

You talk like it's the only one we're going to get. A pox on that idea. 

- A


----------



## bks54 (Aug 31, 2018)

From Nokishita on Twitter (translated): The names of Canon RF lenses other than 50 mm were confirmed by "RF 35 mm F 1.8 Macro IS STM" "RF 28 - 70 mm F 2 L USM" "RF 24 - 105 mm F 4 L IS USM


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

CR Guy, can you confirm the form of the source here? Some folks are claiming a lens roadmap was outed today, while others make it sound an ordering form surfaced. 

Can you settle which one it was?

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

Oh snap. The good ship IBIS might have just taken a knife in the ribs:




We knew the macro had IS, but the lack of it on the 24-105 was a pretty clear tell IBIS was on the camera.

IS is on the 24-105 now. Ruh roh.

- A


----------



## bks54 (Aug 31, 2018)

bks54 said:


> From Nokishita on Twitter (translated): The names of Canon RF lenses other than 50 mm were confirmed by "RF 35 mm F 1.8 Macro IS STM" "RF 28 - 70 mm F 2 L USM" "RF 24 - 105 mm F 4 L IS USM



So maybe this indicates no IBIS.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

The M on the 35mm is apparently confirm as Macro now. Same tweet.

STM as well. That'll be a (relatively) inexpensive lens, $500-ish one would think.

- A


----------



## BillB (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> With zero slow/small lenses to avail itself of this small opportunity.
> 
> I'm not saying that's proof it will be full EF, but it seems odd to launch a 'small' body with a slate of big glass like this. Surely you launch a 'small' platform with a pancake, a 35 f/2.8, a special 'designed to be small' zoom (i.e. 24-50 f/variable), etc. None of those are on offer here.
> 
> - A


Sometime, Canon may come up with its version of small, but I don't think this is the time. f2.0 normal zooms and f1.2 normal lenses are headed in another direction, or so it seems to me.


----------



## knight427 (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Oh snap. The good ship IBIS might have just taken a knife in the ribs:
> 
> View attachment 180013
> 
> ...



Crap, I better audit my requirements document:



knight427 said:


> $2k launch price point (but I'll probably wait to either buy used, refurb or wait for holiday sales in 2019)
> Sensor is clearly better than 6D2, but doesn't have to match 5D4
> Doesn't catch on fire or cause rabies



Nope, I'm still good.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2018)

fullstop said:


> i'd prefer a 20-85/2.8 as a matter of fact. 28? not interested.


No doubt the first of many ways in which Canon's FF MILC system will fail to meet your expectations.


----------



## Flyingskiguy (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> I get the convenience angle completely, but does this not mean that choosing to use the feature (instead of front-filtering) means that you are voluntarily walking away from weather sealing?
> 
> - A



Again, it's really no different than the cinema bodies with internal NDs. You can still put a clear filter over the front element, and many people do - not just for weather sealing, but to protect from damage. It's not really an either/or scenario.


----------



## arbitrage (Aug 31, 2018)

Is there a chance that the "name may be different" for the 600/4 IS III may point to it actually being the 600 f/4 DO we've all been waiting for?? Come on Canon...don't do this to me...I just sold off all my Canon bodies...I just ordered a 500PF.....do I now have to repurchase a 1DX2 and the 600DO.....aaaarrrrggghhhh


----------



## Kit. (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> We knew the macro had IS, but the lack of it on the 24-105 was a pretty clear tell IBIS was on the camera.
> 
> IS is on the 24-105 now. Ruh roh.


105 is probably too long to compensate with just IBIS.


----------



## Hector1970 (Aug 31, 2018)

Canon are certainly making us curious. I don't think it will blow us away but hopefully its a pretty decent camera.
Its an important camera for Canon.
If its not received well I think it will dent alot of confidence in them.
Hopefully they've taken the time to make something a photographer would enjoy using and take advantage of some of mirrorless's benefits.
The whole mount thing seems a bit strange.
If its optimised for EF and adapts to suit mirrorless lens it will be interesting how does that work and does it work well.
I'd be in the market for a mirrorless FF camera but it would need to be tempting.


----------



## Tangent (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> The M on the 35mm is apparently confirm as Macro now. Same tweet.
> 
> STM as well. That'll be a (relatively) inexpensive lens, $500-ish one would think.
> 
> - A



The Nikon Z announcement lacked a reasonably inexpensive smallish lens. Canon has one. Hopefully it will be small enough that you could store the R camera in your bag with the RF 35 1.8 IS macro attached for quick grab shots or the R camera with the 35 1.8 alone in a small bag for compact carry. Sort of like the 40 2.8 in EF now. Probably not that small, but otoh a good part of the lens will be below the flange.


----------



## BillB (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> No reason why it shouldn't without a mirror back there. The firmware/metering/etc. will have to downshift into crop mode to work properly (you don't want blacked out corners messing with metering), but yes, it should work.
> 
> I asked this question previously about an EF to [new mount] adaptor: the answer from the team here was if EF works, so should EF-S.
> 
> - A[/QUOTE





Kit. said:


> 105 is probably too long to compensate with just IBIS.


Yup. IS + IBIS = belt and suspenders (fingers crossed)


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Aug 31, 2018)

Kit. said:


> 105 is probably too long to compensate with just IBIS.



Good point, and I'm hoping that's the case.


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 31, 2018)

Lot of talk on here regarding video function on the pending (and assumed future model. What we know (at least rumored) is there will be a "regular" resolution model (seems this one) of about mid-20s and another that would come in 2019 with resolution in the 40s. To me it would seem to make more sense to have the 20-something MP model be more accommodating to video. Bigger pixel pitch should give better low light performance and you only need 8.8MP to make 4K. Assuming a full sensor readout, you'd have some binning but obviously that has been achieved before with extremely good results -vs- a massive crop factor akin to apsc. I can't see it being as high as the 5D4 since the 5D4 is 30MP. All that said, it may be possible the video specs could be better on the "lower end" model than the one we see in 2019 with higher res. I just hope we can actually get a clean 4k out via HDMI this time, because it's still frustrating I can't do it with my 1DX2.


----------



## Rutkowskilens (Aug 31, 2018)

The mount should be called FFS Fast as F..CK 
Im not going crazy about all these mirrorless for now i believe in my 1DX .
But I need to Say With big S SONY have great focus !
I will buy mirrorless but only if CANON will decide take a big step and give us 4K 60fps! Who agree ?


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 31, 2018)

clbayley said:


> I haven't seen it mentioned yet...but assuming the mount allows a recessed R lens, but also accepts EF lens, should it not also be able to accept EF-S lens? 15-85 on FF?



Imaging circle. EF-S lenses are designed for APS-C. Some might work, others will severely vignette.


----------



## RGF (Aug 31, 2018)

looks impressive. what is the G-22? Also surprised that 28-70 R is F2. That will be one huge lens.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 31, 2018)

arbitrage said:


> Is there a chance that the "name may be different" for the 600/4 IS III may point to it actually being the 600 f/4 DO we've all been waiting for?? Come on Canon...don't do this to me...I just sold off all my Canon bodies...I just ordered a 500PF.....do I now have to repurchase a 1DX2 and the 600DO.....aaaarrrrggghhhh


I thought you had held on to your 400mm DO II and 600mm II, and it was Canon's inferior AF that made you sell the bodies?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 31, 2018)

Rutkowskilens said:


> I will buy mirrorless but only if CANON will decide take a big step and give us 4K 60fps! Who agree ?



Shrug, it makes no difference to me. It could come without video or with 8k 120p; I wouldn’t use it


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Aug 31, 2018)

dtaylor said:


> Imaging circle. EF-S lenses are designed for APS-C. Some might work, others will severely vignette.



A 1.6 times crop mode could always be used on the FF sensor to allow for EF-S lens usage. On the Sony A7RII, it will automatically switch to crop mode when an E mount APS-C lens is attached.


----------



## djack41 (Aug 31, 2018)

Quackator said:


> ND and PL point towards built-in neutral density filter and PL lens mount. Looks like this is video stuff.[/QUOTE
> 
> EOS R............as in 5DSR. A 50 MP sensor?


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

Tangent said:


> The Nikon Z announcement lacked a reasonably inexpensive smallish lens. Canon has one. Hopefully it will be small enough that you could store the R camera in your bag with the RF 35 1.8 IS macro attached for quick grab shots or the R camera with the 35 1.8 alone in a small bag for compact carry. Sort of like the 40 2.8 in EF now. Probably not that small, but otoh a good part of the lens will be below the flange.




I'm assuming its EF 35 f/2 IS USM sized in my head. Might be a bad assumption.

- A


----------



## bks54 (Aug 31, 2018)

RGF said:


> looks impressive. what is the G-22? Also surprised that 28-70 R is F2. That will be one huge lens.


BG-22 Battery Grip


----------



## BillB (Aug 31, 2018)

If these are adapters to put RF lenses on EOS M cameras they would seem to raise the question of where video is going in the M line, and we are waiting on an M5 MarkII. Interesting.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

RGF said:


> looks impressive. what is the G-22? Also surprised that 28-70 R is F2. That will be one huge lens.




We presume that's BG-22 (i.e. a grip)

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2018)

dtaylor said:


> Imaging circle. EF-S lenses are designed for APS-C. Some might work, others will severely vignette.




Offer a crop mode. Nikon and Sony both do. This is a fairly easy thing to implement, and now that the mirror is gone + EF is (possibly) native compatible, there's no reason not to.

If we are reading the tea leaves here incorrectly and it's a thin body + EF adaptor, then it would be thin body + EF/*EF-S* adaptor. Nothing mechanically would be a problem with EF-S on that adaptor if the mirror is gone.

- A


----------



## BillB (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> I'm assuming its EF 35 f/2 IS USM sized in my head. Might be a bad assumption.
> 
> - A


With the RF mount, most likely the 35mm isn't retrofocus, but I don't know how much difference that will make. Canon's lens selection seems intended to highlight the possibilities of the new mount.


----------



## Andreos (Aug 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> And an old-school off-chip ADC sensor a la 6D2.
> - A



If fear this will be the case, the camera will be DOA for a lot of people if turns out this way. I really hope Canon steps up to the plate on this one.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 31, 2018)

So some of these lenses have USM (ring USM i believe). Does that mean they will have full time manual focus override and no focus by wire? That would be amazing!


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 31, 2018)

Well. Just woke up and all I can say is wow. This seems legit. If so what a bombshell. If all is as it seems the canon's 'Sexy solution' is a phenomonal effort of engineering and forethought. But for me the important question remains. Ergonomics. This thing could be the most highly specced camera ever seen but if it feels like a Sony I wouldn't touch it with a 10ft barge pole. And other than ergonomics I want to know what the EVF is like. I haven't had the opportunity to look at an A73 or A9 EVF but all the others I have looked through have not been sufficient.


----------



## Otara (Sep 1, 2018)

The amount of detail without any pics or CR3 is leaving me a bit baffled too. I hope its true, but this all seems very odd.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

blackcoffee17 said:


> So some of these lenses have USM (ring USM i believe). Does that mean they will have full time manual focus override and no focus by wire? That would be amazing!




RIng USM = highly likely will do what you want (though there are a few FBW ring USM lenses if I recall, the 85 f/1.2L II being one of them)

Nano USM = likely won't do what you want (only two so far, and both were FBW)

But both above the above (and the old Micro USM) just get listed in the name as 'USM', so we won't know until launch.

Strong +1 on Ring USM + mechanical override. There's just something proprioceptive, tactile, etc. about it that I strongly prefer.

- A


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Sep 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> RIng USM = highly likely will do what you want (though there are a few FBW ring USM lenses if I recall, the 85 f/1.2L II being one of them)
> 
> Nano USM = likely won't do what you want (only two so far, and both were FBW)
> 
> ...



I think the micro USM works only for small and light lens elements so i'm pretty confident these will be ring USM's.


----------



## ken (Sep 1, 2018)

Aussie shooter said:


> Well. Just woke up and all I can say is wow. This seems legit. If so what a bombshell. If all is as it seems the canon's 'Sexy solution' is a phenomonal effort of engineering and forethought. But for me the important question remains. Ergonomics. This thing could be the most highly specced camera ever seen but if it feels like a Sony I wouldn't touch it with a 10ft barge pole. And other than ergonomics I want to know what the EVF is like. I haven't had the opportunity to look at an A73 or A9 EVF but all the others I have looked through have not been sufficient.



I agree on older Sony models but I played with an A7iii recently and thought "I like the feel of this". I was switching between my 6D, an M50 and an A7iii. If you think the 6D is too small, you won't like the other two at all. The M50 was way too small for me to enjoy using for more than occasional shots (like my a6000). If I didn't own the a6000, I'd get an M50 just to have something small enough to carry almost anywhere. I don't love the size, but sometimes the smallness is needed. (Sneaking it into concerts...) I'm happy with the size of my 6D but I found the thickness increase of the A7iii (up from the the older A7ii, which I wasn't crazy about) made it feel pretty darn usable. I think I could really get used to it. 

So my hope is that this new Canon is at least the size of the A7iii.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

Caution was warranted. Huge news if true. 

THIN MOUNT + ADAPTOR?!




Noon Japan time is a little under 4 hours from now. I'd be hitting refresh on Nokishita's Twitter feed around then.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

I wanted Full EF mount, but this makes more sense. Why have a 3-SKU solution for EF-M?

- A


----------



## Aussie shooter (Sep 1, 2018)

ken said:


> I agree on older Sony models but I played with an A7iii recently and thought "I like the feel of this". I was switching between my 6D, an M50 and an A7iii. If you think the 6D is too small, you won't like the other two at all. The M50 was way too small for me to enjoy using for more than occasional shots (like my a6000). If I didn't own the a6000, I'd get an M50 just to have something small enough to carry almost anywhere. I don't love the size, but sometimes the smallness is needed. (Sneaking it into concerts...) I'm happy with the size of my 6D but I found the thickness increase of the A7iii (up from the the older A7ii, which I wasn't crazy about) made it feel pretty darn usable. I think I could really get used to it.
> 
> So my hope is that this new Canon is at least the size of the A7iii.



I shoot with a 7d2 and find that perfect. Any smaller(ie 6d) is a compromise. I can accept that if it is really small and i get the benifit of a major size advantage but if that were the case I would go the whole hog and use an M5 etc. If I were to consider a full frame it would have to at least feel as good and have as good a button layout as a 7d2.. and that is where I think it may fall down for me unfortunately.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

Seems like we're getting the big reveal in a few hours.

This thread will hit 50 pages tonight if CR guy just pumps the imminent to be posted pics into this thread.

- A


----------



## Aussie shooter (Sep 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Seems like we're getting the big reveal in a few hours.
> 
> This thread will hit 50 pages tonight if CR guy just pumps the imminent to be posted pics into this thread.
> 
> - A


Yep. Pics are everything now. We need to see this thing.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Offer a crop mode. Nikon and Sony both do. This is a fairly easy thing to implement, and now that the mirror is gone + EF is (possibly) native compatible, there's no reason not to.
> 
> If we are reading the tea leaves here incorrectly and it's a thin body + EF adaptor, then it would be thin body + EF/*EF-S* adaptor. Nothing mechanically would be a problem with EF-S on that adaptor if the mirror is gone.
> 
> - A



But do they want customers buying cheaper EF-S lenses instead of these new R lenses? Depends on relative pricing and how generous they're feeling, I guess.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Sep 1, 2018)

And of course we need to know what the card situation will be. Personally I hope for two SD cards. They are so fast now and more reliable than the big cards.


----------



## vangelismm (Sep 1, 2018)

Yes! EF to R adapter.


----------



## dkangel (Sep 1, 2018)

Guess my magic 8 ball was broken. Sigh. Preferred native mount.


----------



## hmatthes (Sep 1, 2018)

scyrene said:


> But do they want customers buying cheaper EF-S lenses instead of these new R lenses? Depends on relative pricing and how generous they're feeling, I guess.


I doubt people would buy EF-S instead of their RF counterpart (waste that much of the sensor!) BUT I will use a little EF-S pancake when wanting a stealth EOS-R for street photography (where megapixels mean naught!)


----------



## fullstop (Sep 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Caution was warranted. Huge news if true.
> 
> THIN MOUNT + ADAPTOR?!
> 
> ...



lol. as i said. 

Canon will not miss out on chance for small bodies. Canon read s this forum. They know i want one. And milllions and millions of other potential customers want as SMALL mirrorfree system too. .-)


----------



## goldenhusky (Sep 1, 2018)

Here are my speculations
The new mount will be called the RF mount
The future might be RF and EF-M Vs today's EF and EF-S
In order to use RF lenses on EF-M cameras you would need a new adapter. I am assuming the RF mount diameter will be 54mm same as the EF mount. (EF-M mount diameter is 44mm)
M.ADAP R --> Regular EF-M to RF adapter
M.ADAP R ND --> EF-M to RF adapter with ND filter (variable most likely)
M.ADAP R PL --> EF-M to RF adapter with CPL filter

Is there any patent from Canon for an electronic variable ND filter or an electronic CPL? if so that would make sense for the 3 variants of the filter. But it does not makes sense to make such filters for the EF-M mount.
Either way if the ND and CPL are electronic filters or not and if that is indeed the RF to EF-M addpter with filters Canon might have some plans for a great EF-M video camera in the future

On the specs of the camera
Most likely the new Full frame MILC is a lower end body i.e. the equivalent of 6D series.
Only one card slot. Hope they use SD UHS ll. I don't think Canon will use cFast or CFExpress in a lower end body but I would not be surprised if they decided to use CF cards. I know this might flare up a lot of criticism but most Canon 7D, 5D and 1D users should have CF cards already. one beauty of CF compared to SD card is CF is better at sustaining read and write speed at least in my practical use.
~28 MP.
7-10 FPS.
Variangle LCD display 50-50 chance.
4K30fps 50-50 chance.
If 4K is true chances of MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 are 50-50
AF in stills have to wait and see how this compares with DSLRs and other MILC competitors. I would not be surprised even if AF does not live up to 6D2 level.
DPAF in 1080p is obvious but 4K is 50-50 chance.
Don't be surprised 4k has the crop like 5D4. If this is a 24, 26 or 28 MP sensor then the crop factor will be less than 5D4
Lens mount might be thick same as EF mount.
RF mount will be same as EF but the RF lenses might protrude in to the body (meaning the mount is not at the rear end instead at about 28-32mm from the rear end in to the body of the RF lenses wherever necessary) to make a short flange distance. I know a lot of folks will hate this size camera but I don't. In fact I would like this body if this is as big as a 80D or a 6D2 because that will mean better ergonomics for me. I know that does suits all. I do not believe in the notion of MILC is for small bodys.
If the RF mount will be indeed like I guessed the overall length with a wide angle lens mounted on the body will be on par with other MILC systems. At the same time will not have an unnecessary empty tube at the end on the normal to tele lenses like other mirrorless lenses which will will the lens size competition
Since the RF mount can take EF lenses there is no need or a RF to EF adapter.
BG-E22 is body grip for this new camera. Sounds obvious.
I hope RF lenses are not Focus By Wire. If it is FBW I will whine about that but I will adapt them anyway 

If body is in deed a lower end body then RF 28-70F/2L and RF 50F1.2L does not makes sense but that will make sense as soon as Canon comes up with the next high end body.

That is a very conservative expectation knowing Canon is too conservative but I will be here bashing  Canon if they do not even live up to these specs. That applies only for the camera specs not about the RF mount or adapters.

Disclaimer: All specifications are my wildest speculations and are subject to change without notice

Now these specs are true that will disappoint a lot of people and Canon is ******* will be heard all over the place but Canon will sell them by boat load because it is Canon well... may be not this time around.


----------



## filipe.ngra (Sep 1, 2018)

Am i completely in a different perspective? I will buy a new body ONLY because the new 28-70 F2...

I REALLY don't care about the body, if it will be between 6dmk2 and 5dmk4 sensor it will be good enough for me. The big news is the lens... it's an L lens... it's a zoom... and it's F2.0... 

And still... no one is talking about this...


----------



## fullstop (Sep 1, 2018)

filipe.ngra said:


> Am i completely in a different perspective? I will buy a new body ONLY because the new 28-70 F2...
> 
> I REALLY don't care about the body, if it will be between 6dmk2 and 5dmk4 sensor it will be good enough for me. The big news is the lens... it's an L lens... it's a zoom... and it's F2.0...
> 
> And still... no one is talking about this...




why is f/2.0 so important to you? I'd prefer a 20-85/4.0 any day over a 28-70/2.0 .


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

THERE IT IS


----------



## Diltiazem (Sep 1, 2018)

Okay, pictures and some specs. 

https://www.nokishita-camera.com/2018/09/eos-r.html


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Sep 1, 2018)

Diltiazem said:


> Okay, pictures and some specs.
> 
> https://www.nokishita-camera.com/2018/09/eos-r.html



Holy $#^%@!!!!! O_O

It looks like they go the body right for sure (large grip, large EFV, etc), and a tilty flippy screen!  Sadly no native EF mount, but the adapters look thinner then the EF-M-EF adapter. Confirmed RF macro lens along with 3 RF L lenses for launch. This is getting very exciting!!!!!!!


----------



## bks54 (Sep 1, 2018)

Registration is 20 mm so adapters will be 2 mm shorter than M adapter.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Sep 1, 2018)

Overall, sounds like 5DMkIV mirrorless. But the sensor is slightly larger (30.3 vs 30.1)

Dust-proof and waterproof?
Obviously no IBIS.
No joystick but a mysterious multifunction bar.
Adapter with drop-in filters isn't really sexy, but not too bad. I'm not sure if you can rotate a polariser. What exactly does the control ring control?
Articulating screen!

Overall, no IBIS is bad, but with the lenses it still looks very strong against what Nikon offers.


----------



## psolberg (Sep 1, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Oh, I agree...that’s why I added the bit about not saying who was sitting down to eat...
> (In fact, even though he wasn’t initially invited, I think the most likely dining guest is AvTvM/fullstop...and he’ll need at least three servings, if not a full murder.)


I don't know who that is but...ooops






I think you'll be needing these. just give me your paypay


----------



## bks54 (Sep 1, 2018)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Overall, sounds like 5DMkIV mirrorless. But the sensor is slightly larger (30.3 vs 30.1)
> 
> Dust-proof and waterproof?
> Obviously no IBIS.
> ...



Control ring is probably a customizable ring to control a parameter of choice such as exposure compensation, ISO, aperture etc.; each lens has one of these too. So you can do this with adapted EF lenses too. Samsung had that function on their Mirrorless lenses and Nikon has a limited version on the Zs.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Sep 1, 2018)

Canon has done the right thing. New mount. It was a difficult decision. But the correct decision.


----------



## Refurb7 (Sep 1, 2018)

josephandrews222 said:


> Canon has done the right thing. New mount. It was a difficult decision. But the correct decision.


I agree.


----------



## hmatthes (Sep 1, 2018)

1/8000, ISO to at least 40,000, Mfn button by main button, great top LCD, but no focus nubbin on back? 
The Achilles heal of the 6D series is focus point choosing without a joystick — and Canon continues this mistake while A7III and Z6 do not. 
But look at the size reduction in the 24-105 lenses!
I’m excited for their first offering and will upgrade as needed.


----------



## goldenhusky (Sep 1, 2018)

hmatthes said:


> 1/8000, ISO to at least 40,000, Mfn button by main button, great top LCD, but no focus nubbin on back?
> The Achilles heal of the 6D series is focus point choosing without a joystick — and Canon continues this mistake while A7III and Z6 do not.
> But look at the size reduction in the 24-105 lenses!
> I’m excited for their first offering and will upgrade as needed.



The LCD touch screen can be used as a trackpad. I really liked that on Canon M5. It is lot more easier that using the joystick. One side is touching the LCD screen with nose or by mistake. One has to be little careful on that alone. Otherwise the trackpad is better in every way compared to the joystick.


----------



## Famateur (Sep 1, 2018)

Andreos said:


> If fear this will be the case, the camera will be DOA for a lot of people if turns out this way. I really hope Canon steps up to the plate on this one.



Perhaps the 6DII got the older generation sensor (instead of 80D/5DIV generation with on-chip ADC) so there was more incentive to choose the EOS-R once they're both in the sales lineup.


----------



## Famateur (Sep 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Caution was warranted. Huge news if true.
> 
> THIN MOUNT + ADAPTOR?!
> 
> ...




I had a feeling it would be a simple EF to EOS R adapter (like what Canon did with EF to EOS M). It's a little disappointing because I was really interested in how Canon might have allowed for both native EF and RF lenses. But...Ockham's razor, I figured...

On another note, huzzah for the articulating screen and ample grip-to-lens finger room!!!


----------



## Famateur (Sep 1, 2018)

Looking at the adapters in the Nokishita picture, the knurled grip of the middle one would imply that it can be rotated. I'm guessing that's the polarizing filter version. The one on the right, I assume is the ND version. It's shape implies, to me, that perhaps the filter is removable for varying ND strength.

Perhaps this is obvious to everyone by now, though. I don't speak/read Japanese...


----------



## Famateur (Sep 1, 2018)

Random-late-at-night thought: Is that shoulder screen an LCD, or do you think it could be E-Ink (like Kindle reader)?

Probably not, but it would be kinda cool. 


Other-random-thoughts:

Damn. That size comparison with the DSLR, including 24-105 lens, is pretty incredible.
So looking forward to sample images from the 28-70 F2!
Think it'll do finger-swipe viewfinder AF selection? I don't see why not. If so, that could make up for no joystick...
Can't wait to see the official specs next week!

Fun, fun, fun...


----------



## RGF (Sep 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> We presume that's BG-22 (i.e. a grip)
> 
> - A



I found that after I posted


----------



## Famateur (Sep 1, 2018)

Never really cared much about video, but might as well be the first (I think) to say it: Headphone Jack.


----------



## Famateur (Sep 1, 2018)

Anyone have an English translation? Is that EV -6? As in, focuses to -6 EV?

Takes LP-E6(N) battery...just like 70D, 80D, 5DIV and 6DII. Nice. It's the little things...


----------



## Jethro (Sep 1, 2018)

Famateur said:


> Perhaps the 6DII got the older generation sensor (instead of 80D/5DIV generation with on-chip ADC) so there was more incentive to choose the EOS-R once they're both in the sales lineup.


And (depending upon the EOS-R's full specs) raises the Q of whether there will ever be a 6DIII.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 1, 2018)

fullstop said:


> i still believe it will take a simple adapter. Canon will not miss out ion the "small body option"


I don’t often agree with fullstop (well actually never) but I do agree here. Personally I think that one of the appeals of mirrorless is the smaller and slimmer body profile, and there’s no way I can see Canon produce a FF mirrorless that has the same girth as a dslr.

Is it possible that the “sexy” solution to the flange distance adapter could be that it’s built into the camera: to use an EF lens you press a release button on the body and by twisting the mount itself it cams outwards and locks into the new, outer position ? I’m sure it would still be possible engineering-wise to keep this strong, lightproof and weather proof.


----------



## fullstop (Sep 1, 2018)

hehehe. no mirrorslapping and no convoluted moving mechanical mount contraptions and shenanigans. 

just a simple 24mm long air-filled hollow tube with wiring-thru. plus a drop-in filter option and/or a multi-functional extra ring. that's all it takes.


----------



## blobmonster (Sep 1, 2018)

I'm not that interested in mirrorless yet (will prefer to upgrade my aging 5d with a 5d4) and I would have much preferred a native EF mount as it suits my more modest upgrade budget.

That said.....*wow, full frame* *f2 zooms are on the way*!!!!!


----------



## jd7 (Sep 1, 2018)

blobmonster said:


> I'm not that interested in mirrorless yet (will prefer to upgrade my aging 5d with a 5d4) and I would have much preferred a native EF mount as it suits my more modest upgrade budget.
> 
> That said.....*wow, full frame* *f2 zooms are on the way*!!!!!


I feel similarly. I am not particularly interested in getting a mirrorless camera (at least at this point), but those RF lenses are certainly attention grabbing! I feel like Canon is providing one lens to show the RF system isn't going to miss out on high quality primes (50 1.2L), one lens to show it will get more moderately priced primes too (35 1.8 macro - and yes, I'm just guessing about price), one lens for a good walk around zoom (24-105 4L IS) and one lens to perhaps say mirrorless really can allow lenses which weren't practical before (28-70 2L).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 1, 2018)

psolberg said:


> I don't know who that is but...ooops
> View attachment 180026


Yep, some crow for me. 

On the plus side, this may be my new travel camera.


----------



## hmatthes (Sep 1, 2018)

Famateur said:


> the knurled grip of the middle one would imply that it can be rotated. I'm guessing that's the polarizing filter version


or, like the RF lenses with their third rotating color, perhaps this provides a third wheel for EF lenses... Yahoo if so, if programmable, if exposure compensation...


----------



## TAF (Sep 1, 2018)

I anxiously await the opportunity to fondle one, and the pricing.

It would be a fantastic event to find them in stock on B+H on Wednesday


----------



## DaveGrice (Sep 3, 2018)

DaveGrice said:


> Wait until Sept 6th, then the carnage will begin...



Apparently I was overly-conservative...


----------



## tron (Sep 3, 2018)

Famateur said:


> Random-late-at-night thought: Is that shoulder screen an LCD, or do you think it could be E-Ink (like Kindle reader)?
> 
> Probably not, but it would be kinda cool.
> 
> ...


I hope that you see the scaled up version of EOS R with the 24-105 (the one where the flash hot shoe of the two cameras have the same size. Because there was a scaled down photo of the EOS R with 24-105 vs 5DMk4 with 24-105.
By the way the difference is only the difference of the two cameras. The new 24-105 may be 1 cm shorter than EF24-105 II but it has the same size and weight with the version 1 EF24-105 f/4L IS. So no big deal there.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 4, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> That wasn’t Kit.’s point – he was suggesting that a _circular_ polarizer is not required, i.e. it could be a _linear_ polarizer instead. However, while that would be true for CDAF, I think a linear PL wold be a problem for DPAF. The problem occurs when the the angle of polarization conflicts with the orientation of the beam splitter for PDAF. The fact that DPAF uses millions of really tiny beam splitters and off-sensor PDAF uses a few larger beam splitters doesn’t negate the problem.



Please help me understand terminology. I'm assuming that there is not some entity of circular light that would be passed by a _circular_ filter, blocking all that straight light.

Does the "circular" just refer to the shape of the filter, that allows one to rotate it to change the orientation of the polarization? If so, since all the polarizing filters I've seen have been round, what are the alternatives? Might a built-in filter be fixed in a position that normally would darken skies and reduce glare on the water and such?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 4, 2018)

stevelee said:


> Please help me understand terminology. I'm assuming that there is not some entity of circular light that would be passed by a _circular_ filter, blocking all that straight light.
> 
> Does the "circular" just refer to the shape of the filter, that allows one to rotate it to change the orientation of the polarization? If so, since all the polarizing filters I've seen have been round, what are the alternatives? Might a built-in filter be fixed in a position that normally would darken skies and reduce glare on the water and such?


Nothing to do with shape, there are round linear polarizers and square circular polarizers.  Also, you need to be able to rotate the polarizer (whether linear or circular) to accommodate the angle of the illumination you’re trying to polarize (e.g. if the sun is low or high in the sky).

A circular polarizer is a stack of a linear polarizer with a quarter-wave plate behind it, the latter circularizes the linearly-polarized light, which eliminates the problem of linearly-polarized light interacting with a beam splitter where the angle of polarization will affect how much light is passed into each resulting output (on and off-sensor phase AF, but also the dedicated metering sensor in a DSLR, are behind beam splitters).

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/polarizers.html


----------



## stevelee (Sep 5, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> A circular polarizer is a stack of a linear polarizer with a quarter-wave plate behind it, the latter circularizes the linearly-polarized light, which eliminates the problem of linearly-polarized light interacting with a beam splitter where the angle of polarization will affect how much light is passed into each resulting output (on and off-sensor phase AF, but also the dedicated metering sensor in a DSLR, are behind beam splitters).
> 
> http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/polarizers.html



Thanks.


----------

