# Canon EOS R6 Mark II already in prototype testing [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 31, 2022)

> A Twitter user (how2fly) with a track record that we cannot verify has reported that the Canon EOS R6 Mark II is already in prototype testing.
> This camera is reported to have a stacked sensor like what is found in the Canon EOS R3. Any variation of that image sensor would likely make its way down the product line.
> We have reported that a new full-frame camera will be coming sooner than later to replace the discontinued EOS R. Perhaps this is part of that, or nothing at all.



Continue reading...


----------



## SHAMwow (Aug 31, 2022)

Can't wait for people to put off buying an R6 now while they wait four years for this.


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 31, 2022)

Still using my 6Dii until Canon cop on and make a decent camera at a decent price with decent MP and a decent battery (lPE6). Hopefully thats the Rii or 8.


----------



## addola (Aug 31, 2022)

Canon re-used the high-end Canon 1D X Mark III sensor in the Canon R6, so I wouldn't be amazed if they reused the R3's sensor in the R6's successor.

I would expect Canon R6 successor to come sooner than usual. Canon will probably use the upgraded "accessory shoe" that was introduced in the R3, and made its way to the R7 & R10.


----------



## HMC11 (Aug 31, 2022)

The R6 ii makes more sense than an R ii at this point in time. It allows the R6 line to move up its capabilities to closer to the R5 line, and at the same time opens up the space for an R ii to fill in between an RP ii and R6 ii. This means we could have an RPii at or below the current RP price (~$1k), an R ii closer to the current R6 and possibly priced slightly below it (~$2k), and then an R6 ii priced closer to the R5, perhaps around $3k, with the R5ii edging towards $4k. The line-up, in terms of pricing would have a reasonably good spread.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Aug 31, 2022)

A stacked sensor in the R6 doesn't make sense so soon. Stacked sensors are incredibly expensive and I am not expecting them in anything but the flagships for another couple of generations at least. Now if it is a new model with a stacked crop sensor, that I could see. As it stands a stacked full frame sensor is at least 10x more expensive.


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 31, 2022)

If its over $2k, forget it.


----------



## melgross (Aug 31, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> If its over $2k, forget it.


The R6 is $2.5K, and sells very well. You’re looking for a cheaper camera, like the R.


----------



## f119a (Aug 31, 2022)

HMC11 said:


> The R6 ii makes more sense than an R ii at this point in time. It allows the R6 line to move up its capabilities to closer to the R5 line, and at the same time opens up the space for an R ii to fill in between an RP ii and R6 ii. This means we could have an RPii at or below the current RP price (~$1k), an R ii closer to the current R6 and possibly priced slightly below it (~$2k), and then an R6 ii priced closer to the R5, perhaps around $3k, with the R5ii edging towards $4k. The line-up, in terms of pricing would have a reasonably good spread.


Sony has quit the sub $1k FF market entirely when they killed A7 II, and RP is just hanging there. They probably don't think the potential sales worth the effort and cost to develop another entry level FF and I assume Nikon has similar view too.
Apparently all eyes are on vlog/video shooters and that's where the manufacturers would go


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 31, 2022)

melgross said:


> The R6 is $2.5K, and sells very well. You’re looking for a cheaper camera, like the R.



yes, but waiting for Rii / R8, which I was hoping would come first


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 31, 2022)

"A twitter user": no name, no credentials, could just be wishful thinking.
Nothing more to add...


----------



## Rocco Germani (Aug 31, 2022)

If they're making an R6II, they ought to put in some form of raw video/raw output, like the R5. Or at the very least allow access to All-I recording internally. I'm considering purchasing a Lumix S5 because I can record Blackmagic Raw externally from it and then just using my R6 for all my photo/quick turn around video needs and stuff where I need autofocus. Canon needs to step up their video game. We have C-LOG3, which is good, but IPB encoding needs to go.


----------



## speg (Aug 31, 2022)

SHAMwow said:


> Can't wait for people to put off buying an R6 now while they wait four years for this.


This is me


----------



## Daner (Aug 31, 2022)

Keep the same body and controls. Swap in the sensor, focus system, and hot shoe from the R3. Retain compatibility with the same battery grip as the R6. That would be enough if the goal is to maximize the performance while keeping the price attractive.
Of course, I would also appreciate a higher performance EVF and screen, but not having those would not be a deal-breaker for me. I'd still upgrade ASAP.


----------



## fox40phil (Aug 31, 2022)

4k60/120 Raw please! and no overheating at sunny days with 30°C please... -.- .

I also think its a R3 in a R6 Body. Maybe(!) a R5/R3 viewfinder (resolution).


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 31, 2022)

and add maybe 6-10 MP onto the joke of 20


----------



## entoman (Aug 31, 2022)

I find it difficult to see what Canon could do to *significantly* improve the R6, without the price increasing considerably.

The only regular complaint I read about the camera is that many people consider the 20MP sensor insufficient. So, what would the alternatives be? I think it's extremely unlikely that they'd use the expensive 24MP stacked sensor from the R3. They could use an "improved" version of the 30MP sensor from the R, but that may be perceived by many potential buyers as a bit long in the tooth by now. The only other viable option would seem to be a *new* 24MP sensor, but would even that provide any really *worthwhile* improvement over the existing R6 sensor?

I take the whole rumour with a large pinch of salt anyway. The rumourmonger seems to have no credentials. I also think that an R5 Mkii is more likely to appear before a R6 Mkii, or at least at the same time.

.... and despite recent rumours, I think the "R replacement" will be quietly dropped.


----------



## cayenne (Aug 31, 2022)

Geez, enough with these low end cameras.<P>
Where's the R1?


----------



## LSXPhotog (Aug 31, 2022)

I don’t believe for a second that a stacked full frame sensor will make it into a $2500 camera anytime soon. This sounds like an internet person’s dream more than a practical reality. The X-HS2 is $2,500 BECAUSE it has a stacked APS-C sensor.


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 31, 2022)

Improvements needed nonetheless. Record limit removed or increased to 1hr at least, as a compromise. No wobble. No overheating. MP increase. 

Canon should be looking at what were the main complaints about the R6 that people had and FIX them for the R6ii. Wouldn't it be great if Canon did this and reviewers struggled to find any problems. But Canon as we know, will predictably hijack their own products with their imfamous cripple hammer.


----------



## fasterquieter (Aug 31, 2022)

It would seem strange to me if they updated the R6 whilst still using the Digic X processor. If they have its successor lined up, it would seems strange to me that it wouldn't go to a flagship model first.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Aug 31, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> Improvements needed nonetheless. Record limit removed or increased to 1hr at least, as a compromise. No wobble. No overheating. MP increase.
> 
> Canon should be looking at what were the main complaints about the R6 that people had and FIX them for the R6ii. Wouldn't it be great if Canon did this and reviewers struggled to find any problems. But Canon as we know, will predictably hijack their own products with their imfamous cripple hammer.


I've put the R6 through it's paces and have ZERO complaints or shortcomings. What are the so called issues you believe people have had? Not a few from DPR I mean, it's as unreliable as PetaPixel.


----------



## entoman (Aug 31, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> Improvements needed nonetheless. Record limit removed or increased to 1hr at least, as a compromise. No wobble. No overheating. MP increase.
> 
> Canon should be looking at what were the main complaints about the R6 that people had and FIX them for the R6ii. Wouldn't it be great if Canon did this and reviewers struggled to find any problems. But Canon as we know, will predictably hijack their own products with their imfamous cripple hammer.


I would expect that all, or most of the desires you've listed would be incorporated in a "R6 Mkii", although the existing camera is a superb product as it stands.

Most of us would probably like higher specs and more bang per buck, but I'm afraid we have to accept that the so-called "cripple hammer" is one of the main reasons for Canon's huge success. They are the trade's leading experts on market segmentation. Although it can sometimes be very frustrating for buyers, Canon's policy always has been, and always will be, that if you want more, you have to pay more to get it. They're not going to cannibalise sales of a high end model if they can possibly avoid it.

*IF* there is going to be a "R replacement" *and* a "R6Mkii", it will be very interesting to see how they are priced relative to each other, and how they are differentiated in specification...


----------



## mxwphoto (Aug 31, 2022)

fasterquieter said:


> It would seem strange to me if they updated the R6 whilst still using the Digic X processor. If they have its successor lined up, it would seems strange to me that it wouldn't go to a flagship model first.


With the exception of Digic X which was introduced in the 1DX iii, all previous Digic processors were first used in consumer oriented cameras ala 8 on m50, 7 on G7x ii, etc. I would not be surprised if R ii or R6 ii gets the next gen processor first as a test bed before they stick it into their flagship.


----------



## Fran Decatta (Aug 31, 2022)

Me: Actually R6 is a dream camera that came true. It has things to improve, of course, but we have a BEAST in our hands. Its a camera that can be in our bags until it dies. 

Also me: will be great to see spec. leaks at the end of 2023  
We have at least two or three years to take profit of this camera until the new one gets out. Enjoy it meanwhile <3


----------



## unfocused (Aug 31, 2022)

A bit hard to believe, especially given the "source." If Canon were to follow its usual schedule, this is about two years too early for a replacement to the R6.

Still fun to speculate. If true, my thought would be that Canon wants to realign its R lineup. They could discontinue the R and then release a new body that is essentially the R6 without IBIS and without a second card slot and sell it for under $2,000 and then release a 24 mp R6II for around $2,800. 

On the other hand they could just release an R6II for $2,800 and use rebates to cut the price of the R6 to around $2,000, leaving both in the lineup.


----------



## esglord (Aug 31, 2022)

SHAMwow said:


> Can't wait for people to put off buying an R6 now while they wait four years for this.


I just hope I don't have to wait four years for the mk1 price drop


----------



## Juangrande (Aug 31, 2022)

Rocco Germani said:


> If they're making an R6II, they ought to put in some form of raw video/raw output, like the R5. Or at the very least allow access to All-I recording internally. I'm considering purchasing a Lumix S5 because I can record Blackmagic Raw externally from it and then just using my R6 for all my photo/quick turn around video needs and stuff where I need autofocus. Canon needs to step up their video game. We have C-LOG3, which is good, but IPB encoding needs to go.


They have stepped up. R5C for hybrid users, and a whole Cinema line. Video shooters just need to step up.


----------



## Rocco Germani (Aug 31, 2022)

Juangrande said:


> They have stepped up. R5C for hybrid users, and a whole Cinema line. Video shooters just need to step up.


Yeah no thank you. 8K is rediculous, don't need that. When you step up the resolution you need to also step up your computer specs, storage, etc. I do not want to shoot anything higher than 6K if I don't have to. I can't stand the digital look, I love emulating film, but want the flexibility of raw. Don't need no 8K. The 1DXIII has the same sensor and processor as the R6 and it can do 5.5K 12 bit raw video... Doesn't seem so hard to put it in the R6 for the people that don't want 8K raw. Resolution isn't everything, but Canon doesn't seem to get that.


----------



## amorse (Aug 31, 2022)

More like CR0?

I'd be shocked to see a release of a refreshed R6 this fast. Same for the R5. Even Sony seems to have slowed down their release schedule, so seeing Canon accelerate here seems out of place. 

I wonder if they're looking at doing a mid-cycle update to get the new hot-shoe on it if they've got a bunch of new products coming which can use the feature. Or maybe some minor component changes due to shortages etc?


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Aug 31, 2022)

Considering the source this feels like what we call a „summer hole“ rumor in Germany. But yet, I’d like to join in and give my five cents about it.

In an earlier thread I commented that a R6mkii is needed and will be released in 2023 in order to differentiate from the R successor/ R8. Most people didn’t agree with me because the R6 sales are doing quite well.

I now guess, one - and especially Canon execs - has to factor in the R sales when talking about the R6. The R sales probably have gone downhill considering the R7 & R10 have a much more sophisticated AF system. So, canon needs to either drop the R or bring an successor. And that’s the tricky part. How do upgrade the R, make it a better camera AND do not cut into the R6 sales? Imho, there are two possibilities:

1. give the R8 a great autofocus system, but leave out IBIS and maybe even cut some MP. Some would call it a cripple hammer…

2. seriously upgrade the R and upgrade the R6 to differentiate from a well specd R8 (not going to list possible improvements, that was an entirely different thread)

I’ve read a stacked sensor, a new hotshot and improved video specs could contribute to an R6mk II. Sounds great, only the stacked sensor would probably push the R6 to at least 2.800 €. This would leave room for 2.000-2.200 € R8.

So, basically, what I’m saying: the R6 doesn’t need an upgrade because it is a bad camera. It needs to be upgrade in order to have a proper, well differentiated camera line up and make room for a capable R8. 

The R8 could be the little sibling of the R5, the R6 would do the same for the R3.

Typed on my phone (which I hate) so apologize for spelling/ grammar mistakes…


----------



## Scenes (Aug 31, 2022)

And I just sold my R6 for an R5C to fix overheating.  As mentioned by other commenters a lot of these rumours don’t seem to make a lot of sense at that price point. Why would they make it better than an R5 at a lower price point?


----------



## unfocused (Aug 31, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> ...So, basically, what I’m saying: the R6 doesn’t need an upgrade because it is a bad camera. It needs to be upgrade in order to have a proper, well differentiated camera line up and make room for a capable R8.…


Aside from the word "capable," I agree with this sentence. I would call it "more modest" while others would whine that it is "crippled." (A phrase that I hate.) The only reason I can see to change the R6 is to make room in a lineup for a cheaper R replacement (R8 or whatever they choose to call it). Why would they need to give an R8 better specs than the existing R6? My guess is they would upgrade the R6 very modestly – change the sensor resolution to either 24 or 30 mp and add a few tweaks. Then subtract a few things from the R6 for the new R8 (dual card slot and IBIS come to mind), in order to hit a $2,000 price point.


----------



## entoman (Aug 31, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> Considering the source this feels like what we call a „summer hole“ rumor in Germany. But yet, I’d like to join in and give my five cents about it.
> 
> In an earlier thread I commented that a R6mkii is needed and will be released in 2023 in order to differentiate from the R successor/ R8. Most people didn’t agree with me because the R6 sales are doing quite well.
> 
> ...


I agree that Canon has to rationalise its line-up and its naming conventions. The R has become something of an oddity - I can't see much likelihood of there ever being a R ii. I'm not sure if there is any need for Canon to launch a full-frame R8 or R9 model, which name-wise would mean having an APS-C camera (the R7) stuck in the middle of the FF series. I have doubts too about whether we'll see a "R5S" hi-res model. Perhaps they might upgrade the cameras something like this:

R5 ii - 60MP, possible new processor, upgraded EVF (2024 release)
R6 ii - 28MP, upgraded EVF (2024 release)
RX - replacing RP, upgraded AF, single slot, no IBIS (2023 release)

Above these would obviously be the R3 and R1.
All models below the "RX" and R7 would be APS-C


----------



## gmon750 (Aug 31, 2022)

I don't understand the point of this. Of course every current camera that Canon has released has some next-gen version on the drawing board, or maybe even designed/built and being tested. It means that even in a pandemic with supply-chain challenges, it's great that Canon is continuing on with evolution.


----------



## entoman (Aug 31, 2022)

gmon750 said:


> I don't understand the point of this. Of course every current camera that Canon has released has some next-gen version on the drawing board, or maybe even designed/built and being tested. It means that even in a pandemic with supply-chain challenges, it's great that Canon is continuing on with evolution.


The point of this is simple:

1) Clickbait for this website and it's advertisers.

2) A bit of fun for Canon users who like to speculate about future models.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Aug 31, 2022)

I really don’t think there will be an “Rii” that’s what the R5 already is.

I do however think a more pro grade aps-c model will be made. I’m loving my R7, the speed, AF, image quality is all brilliant but… THERE WAS A REASON CANON MADE THE R7 WITHOUT BATTERY GRIB COMPATIBILITY!! I mean, why on earth would Canon really not make a little grip for their most advanced crop sensor camera..? Because that’s not the one they want the more serious photographers buying.


----------



## SUNDOG04 (Aug 31, 2022)

melgross said:


> The R6 is $2.5K, and sells very well. You’re looking for a cheaper camera, like the R.


A Z 6II is a better buy for some people if your not using it for birding and starting out new. The R6 is excellent in all categories, but in my opinion, overpriced. For about the same price you can get a Sony A7 IV. A Z7 II offers a 45 mp sensor for just a few hundred dollars more. Not putting down the R6, just putting it in proper perspective.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2022)

Jasonmc89 said:


> I mean, why on earth would Canon really not make a little grip for their most advanced crop sensor camera..? Because that’s not the one they want the more serious photographers buying.


If they thought a grip for the R7 would be profitable, most likely they’d have made one. Possibly the grips for the 7DII and 90D didn’t sell enough units to be profitable. That rationale is far more sensible saving the grip for some future model.

I suspect the only ‘more advanced’ R7 will be the R7II in several years. Canon wants more serious photographers to buy FF cameras and the lenses for them.


----------



## vignes (Aug 31, 2022)

R6 is relatively new.
I don't think it'll be R6 II rather another line with a higher price if it has the same sensor as R3.
this would impact R3 sell. R3 has the first stacked sensor from Canon and the R&D cost would be pretty high.
They would limit some features due to the form factor and heat management.
But there is competition from crop sensor cameras with lower price point. There are many whom think stack sensor in crop format can compete with FF IQ... which is silly. Stacked sensor only gives you speed advantage which reduces AF tracking and jelo effect problems.
This could be a ticking box exercise i.e. stacked sensor with 'limitation'.


----------



## Kharan (Aug 31, 2022)

> A stacked sensor in the R6 doesn't make sense so soon. Stacked sensors are incredibly expensive and I am not expecting them in anything but the flagships for another couple of generations at least. Now if it is a new model with a stacked crop sensor, that I could see. As it stands a stacked full frame sensor is at least 10x more expensive.


Source? That doesn't seem to be the case at all, at least looking at the current offerings. The X-H2 is rumored to launch at $2,000, only a $500 retail difference (indicating probably a cost differential of $100 or so, unless Fujifilm want to eat their margins on their flagship APS camera, which seems quite unlikely). The OM-1 launched at $2,100, barely a $300 premium over the E-M1.3 (and that's not even accounting for inflation). Even if we assume that a 35mm imager is 10 times more expensive, that would indicate a cost differential of $1,000, and that number is probably waaay overblown, because you certainly don't need 10x as much DRAM to put on the chip, for starters. And sales volumes are quite small for all the involved models, so, economies of scale are out of the question as a factor.

No, Canon, Nikon and Sony can charge as much as they like for their top-end cameras because they market will bear those prices. The actual cost of the devices weighs very little into that, and the R&D costs can be spread out by employing the tech in more bodies.


----------



## Kharan (Sep 1, 2022)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


It'd make sense for the EOS R successor to be some sort of upgraded R6, or rather, a low-res R5. They could price it at $3,100 and bill it as the counterpart to the R5, with the benefits of a stacked sensor. Keep the body the same, and maybe remove the mechanical shutter for maximum cost-cutting.


----------



## Keggerius (Sep 1, 2022)

In 2013 I got the 6D because it was the smallest, lightest full frame camera. I immediately started adapting lenses from multiple older mounts to it. In 2019 I got the RP because it was the smallest, lightest full frame camera. I continued using adapted lenses, including EF lenses. Point is, I waited for seven years as every other brand got on board the IBIS train. And the truth is, I'm still waiting. Because the cheapest full frame camera with IBIS so far is the R6. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan. Of all the RF cameras so far, I think it has the best design. But it's $2500. That's $900 more than I paid for the 6D, and $1500 more than I paid for the RP. It is, quite simply, outside my budget. And any time I hear talk of not replacing the R, or replacing it but without IBIS, I see red. I don't expect an RP replacement with IBIS for a thousand dollars, that's unrealistic. But can I please, at long last, get my full frame IBIS for under $2000? Is that really too much to ask? To me, the biggest point of adapting old lenses is to help you stay within your budget. Please, Canon. I promise I'll still buy your budget RF lenses, they're all great. But it's time to finally let us full frame shooters on a budget stabilize all our old lenses that we love.


----------



## Chaitanya (Sep 1, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> and add maybe 6-10 MP onto the joke of 20


How are 20 a joke? I know quite a lot of photographers who purchased R6(over R5 and R7 and upgraded from 7D/7D II) for wildlife shooting and events who are happy with their camera and swear by it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 1, 2022)

Chaitanya said:


> How are 20 a joke? I know quite a lot of photographers who purchased R6(over R5 and R7 and upgraded from 7D/7D II) for wildlife shooting and events who are happy with their camera and swear by it.


@bergstrom wants a 50 MP R-series camera with 1-series features for that sells for not more than $1000. And a unicorn to take pictures of with it.


----------



## CanonGrunt (Sep 1, 2022)

f119a said:


> Sony has quit the sub $1k FF market entirely when they killed A7 II, and RP is just hanging there. They probably don't think the potential sales worth the effort and cost to develop another entry level FF and I assume Nikon has similar view too.
> Apparently all eyes are on vlog/video shooters and that's where the manufacturers would go


Yeah, i definitely see a world where Canon just lets the R and RP die off. Time will tell, but most people I know that are looking at the R or RP right now keep telling me they think they’ll wait for the R7 to be in stock, and they really don’t understand sensor size differences at all. Most people I know that really want full frame are getting used DSLRs, or springing for an R6. So it makes sense. My buddy just picked up a gently used 1D X MK II for $900. So it often doesn’t make a ton of sense for the R and RP market now that canon has other offerings. When they came out those were the canon mirrorless choices. Now, minus the R1 & a rebel, we pretty much have the traditional line up back again.


----------



## SnowMiku (Sep 1, 2022)

Jasonmc89 said:


> I really don’t think there will be an “Rii” that’s what the R5 already is.
> 
> I do however think a more pro grade aps-c model will be made. I’m loving my R7, the speed, AF, image quality is all brilliant but… THERE WAS A REASON CANON MADE THE R7 WITHOUT BATTERY GRIB COMPATIBILITY!! I mean, why on earth would Canon really not make a little grip for their most advanced crop sensor camera..? Because that’s not the one they want the more serious photographers buying.


I think it was the perfect opportunity for market segmentation, if you really need the battery grip then Canon wants you to buy the R5 instead of the R7.


----------



## SnowMiku (Sep 1, 2022)

Keggerius said:


> In 2013 I got the 6D because it was the smallest, lightest full frame camera. I immediately started adapting lenses from multiple older mounts to it. In 2019 I got the RP because it was the smallest, lightest full frame camera. I continued using adapted lenses, including EF lenses. Point is, I waited for seven years as every other brand got on board the IBIS train. And the truth is, I'm still waiting. Because the cheapest full frame camera with IBIS so far is the R6. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan. Of all the RF cameras so far, I think it has the best design. But it's $2500. That's $900 more than I paid for the 6D, and $1500 more than I paid for the RP. It is, quite simply, outside my budget. And any time I hear talk of not replacing the R, or replacing it but without IBIS, I see red. I don't expect an RP replacement with IBIS for a thousand dollars, that's unrealistic. But can I please, at long last, get my full frame IBIS for under $2000? Is that really too much to ask? To me, the biggest point of adapting old lenses is to help you stay within your budget. Please, Canon. I promise I'll still buy your budget RF lenses, they're all great. But it's time to finally let us full frame shooters on a budget stabilize all our old lenses that we love.


The way I stabilize my Canon 200mm f/2.8L in low light is I shoot AI Servo and Hi speed continuous, I'll get at least a few shots that's not motion blurred. For my Canon 50mm f/1.8 II I just use a fast shutter speed.


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 1, 2022)

I wonder what the chances are that it will jump to 30mp?


----------



## Blue Zurich (Sep 1, 2022)

Chaitanya said:


> How are 20 a joke? I know quite a lot of photographers who purchased R6(over R5 and R7 and upgraded from 7D/7D II) for wildlife shooting and events who are happy with their camera and swear by it.


This person must have missed how Canons flagships had certain 'low' pixel counts and no one had problems creating world class images with them.


----------



## Czardoom (Sep 1, 2022)

Jasonmc89 said:


> I really don’t think there will be an “Rii” that’s what the R5 already is.
> 
> I do however think a more pro grade aps-c model will be made. I’m loving my R7, the speed, AF, image quality is all brilliant but… THERE WAS A REASON CANON MADE THE R7 WITHOUT BATTERY GRIB COMPATIBILITY!! I mean, why on earth would Canon really not make a little grip for their most advanced crop sensor camera..? Because that’s not the one they want the more serious photographers buying.


They want more serious photographers to buy the R5 and the R3, and ultimately the R1. In fact, they probably already have the data that many 7D series users have already bought the R5 or the R3. So, I doubt very much that there will be a more pro-grade crop camera. Just a guess, of course.


----------



## Czardoom (Sep 1, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> @bergstrom wants a 50 MP R-series camera with 1-series features for that sells for not more than $1000. And a unicorn to take pictures of with it.


And most of all, a battery that lasts forever.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Sep 1, 2022)

When a new version of a camera comes out, I always fear that it will be spoiled by a higher resolution. I a glad that Canon still offers a full frame camera with "only" 21 megapixels. Those who want more megapixels, could still buy an R5, although the R5 is quite overpriced in my opinion.

What I would wish about the R6II is that it will basically become a lower resolution version of the R5 without all that additional crippleling that Canon introduced in the R6. For example it should no longer have a smaller screen than the R5 or a lower resolution EVF. It should also come with 5 GHz WIFI like the R5 and perhabs even with WIFI 6E. And it should also have a top display instead of a dial and a CFexpress card slot. Of course if both slots would be CFexpress, that would even be better. 

It should finally come with an optional battery grip that actually aligns with the camera. The current R5/R6 battery grip really does not look like a part of the camera. I can't understand that design decision. For more than $300 I would expect a perfectly fitting battery grip.


----------



## Avenger 2.0 (Sep 1, 2022)

Not going to wait for those new camera's. With inflation and bad euro/dollar ratio, that EU price might be around €3500 for the R6ii instead of the €2500 for the R6 now. Same with the Rii, will certainly be above €2000.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Sep 1, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> When a new version of a camera comes out, I always fear that it will be spoiled by a higher resolution. I a glad that Canon still offers a full frame camera with "only" 21 megapixels. Those who want more megapixels, could still buy an R5, although the R5 is quite overpriced in my opinion.


I agree with you. More MP needs more storage space, more powerful computers etc… I’m happy with the 30 MP of the R, it’s a real sweet spot. More MPs would make me have to upgrade my MacBook and/ or iPad. 



Skyscraperfan said:


> What I would wish about the R6II is that it will basically become a lower resolution version of the R5 without all that additional crippleling that Canon introduced in the R6. For example it should no longer have a smaller screen than the R5 or a lower resolution EVF. It should also come with 5 GHz WIFI like the R5 and perhabs even with WIFI 6E. And it should also have a top display instead of a dial and a CFexpress card slot. Of course if both slots would be CFexpress, that would even be better.


Here, I don’t agree. A higher resolution EVF will cost more, therefore the camera would be more expensive. CFExpress also cost more… as well as 5ghz Wifi. What would the point in having a 4.000 € R6 with 20mp and 45mp R5 for 4.500 €??? 



Skyscraperfan said:


> It should finally come with an optional battery grip that actually aligns with the camera. The current R5/R6 battery grip really does not look like a part of the camera. I can't understand that design decision. For more than $300 I would expect a perfectly fitting battery grip.


I agree with you. I saw the BG in a store attached an R6/ R5 and it did look kind of weird to me. I didn’t test it, but I can imagine the complaints are for real.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Sep 1, 2022)

Interestingly, to me it feels like most CR readers would like to upgrade the R6 so it’s very close to the R5. Funnily, that would widen the gap between the 1.000 $ RP and the pro models. Canon on the other hand is trying to close the gap between 1.000 $ and 2.500 $ R6… 

If the R6 gets an update, it’ll be a modest one to push upward just a little bit. That way canon makes room for an Allrounder type camera like the R (of course, it’s successor…whatever the name will be). A 2.000 $ R successor and a 2.500-2.800 $ R6mkii would fit in. 

At the moment, it almost looks like there is a gap from 0 $ to 2.500 $ because the R and the RP are outdated in terms of focus capabilities and e-shutter (maybe a few other things).


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 1, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> [..] It should also come with 5 GHz WIFI like the R5 and perhaps even with WIFI 6E. [..]


It took like 10 years to get 5GHz in a Canon body, so I'm not holding my breath for wifi 6E. Wifi 6 might be an option, since it's largely a software thing (e.g. WPA3 support).

I'd very much like Canon to make the wifi that is present more useful. The past few weeks I've been setting a camera trap at night to try catching a hedgehog, using the remote liveview for framing and focus area selection. The camera is 3 meters from an accesspoint, but you can only connect to it when you initiate the connection from the camera. If you use the app on your phone, it will connect over bluetooth and have the camera act as accesspoint for remote live view. The builtin AP function in the camera is flaky and has a very tiny range.

It would be nice if the app could make it connect to an existing network and it would be even better if the camera could keep wifi active in a low power mode so that you can (re)connect at will. A working auto-transfer to a local computer running EOS utility, an FTP server or even a cloud service would be even better. The current firmware says it can do that, but I haven't seen it actually upload anything.

No hedgehogs have tripped the trap yet, but lots of toads, mice and cats


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 1, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> Interestingly, to me it feels like most CR readers would like to upgrade the R6 so it’s very close to the R5. Funnily, that would widen the gap between the 1.000 $ RP and the pro models. Canon on the other hand is trying to close the gap between 1.000 $ and 2.500 $ R6…
> 
> If the R6 gets an update, it’ll be a modest one to push upward just a little bit. That way canon makes room for an Allrounder type camera like the R (of course, it’s successor…whatever the name will be). A 2.000 $ R successor and a 2.500-2.800 $ R6mkii would fit in.
> 
> At the moment, it almost looks like there is a gap from 0 $ to 2.500 $ because the R and the RP are outdated in terms of focus capabilities and e-shutter (maybe a few other things).


I sold my RP to get the R5, but I really miss having a smaller camera that can share lenses with the bigger one. I loved the combo of the 7D and original M. My M6II is having issues and can't use RF lenses, so I keep looking at used RP bodies for sale  I really hope the rumoured "vlog style" body will fit my use case (IBIS!) and be in the RP price range.

A usable e-shutter has become a must-have for me, I'm looking forward to the options available for the next summer trip


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Sep 1, 2022)

Kharan said:


> Source? That doesn't seem to be the case at all, at least looking at the current offerings. The X-H2 is rumored to launch at $2,000, only a $500 retail difference (indicating probably a cost differential of $100 or so, unless Fujifilm want to eat their margins on their flagship APS camera, which seems quite unlikely). The OM-1 launched at $2,100, barely a $300 premium over the E-M1.3 (and that's not even accounting for inflation). Even if we assume that a 35mm imager is 10 times more expensive, that would indicate a cost differential of $1,000, and that number is probably waaay overblown, because you certainly don't need 10x as much DRAM to put on the chip, for starters. And sales volumes are quite small for all the involved models, so, economies of scale are out of the question as a factor.
> 
> No, Canon, Nikon and Sony can charge as much as they like for their top-end cameras because they market will bear those prices. The actual cost of the devices weighs very little into that, and the R&D costs can be spread out by employing the tech in more bodies.



You know you the X-H2 is a crop sensor camera? Stacked crop sensors are significantly cheeper as you actually can get more than two viable sensors per wafer. These aren't even remotely comparable things. The cheapest possible stacked sensor camera just now is the Nikon Z9 followed by the Canon R3. This rumour is suggesting Canon can save significant amounts of money by putting the entire guts of the R3 into a R6 body. 

I also suggest you look at list prices for sensors, Sony will share them with you confidentially if you are in the correct business.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Sep 1, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> Here, I don’t agree. A higher resolution EVF will cost more, therefore the camera would be more expensive. CFExpress also cost more… as well as 5ghz Wifi. What would the point in having a 4.000 € R6 with 20mp and 45mp R5 for 4.500 €???


Actually I would even buy a low megapixel version, if the price was the same. I spent €5,996 on a 1D X (the very old one), whoch only has 18 megapixels. 24 megapixels would still be okay to me, if the noise performance has improved a lot. As Canon always had a low resolution in their flagship cameras, I wonder why now lower resolution is a feature that only cheaper cameras get. At the moment the R3 has the lowest noise of all full frame cameras ever produced. Of course that is partly because of the BSI stacked sensor, but also because of the low resolution. 

Not sure if a higher resolution EVF really costs more. Are there certain costs per million pixels or so? I thought they are somehow "printed" and a higher resolution EVF just has to be a more detailed print.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 1, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> I agree with you. I saw the BG in a store attached an R6/ R5 and it did look kind of weird to me. I didn’t test it, but I can imagine the complaints are for real.


I used Canon battery grips on my T1i/500D, 7D and 5DII. The Rebel did not look like a seamless fit, the other two did, but regardless of that none of them felt nearly as comfortable as the integrated grip on the 1-series and R3. That’s because the add on grips jut out toward the back of the camera to accommodate the transversely oriented pair of batteries. Having the back of the camera be flat on the vertical grip like it is on the regular grip makes a huge difference for ergonomics, at least for me.


----------



## entoman (Sep 1, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> When a new version of a camera comes out, I always fear that it will be spoiled by a higher resolution. I a glad that Canon still offers a full frame camera with "only" 21 megapixels. Those who want more megapixels, could still buy an R5, although the R5 is quite overpriced in my opinion.
> 
> What I would wish about the R6II is that it will basically become a lower resolution version of the R5 without all that additional crippleling that Canon introduced in the R6. For example it should no longer have a smaller screen than the R5 or a lower resolution EVF. It should also come with 5 GHz WIFI like the R5 and perhabs even with WIFI 6E. And it should also have a top display instead of a dial and a CFexpress card slot. Of course if both slots would be CFexpress, that would even be better.
> 
> It should finally come with an optional battery grip that actually aligns with the camera. The current R5/R6 battery grip really does not look like a part of the camera. I can't understand that design decision. For more than $300 I would expect a perfectly fitting battery grip.


I agree with most of this. I need extra MP for some subjects/situations, so I've got an R5, but 80% of what I shoot would be fine at 24MP, and I'd estimate that 95% of users never truly need more than that. The 30MP of my 5DMkiv was a sweet spot.

The only point on which I disagree is regarding having 2 CFE slots. These cards cost upwards of GBP 200, so anyone wanting to shoot a backup set of shots to a second card is forced to pay at least GBP 400 on top of the cost of the camera. I could live with that, but I suspect it would put off a hell of a lot of prospective purchasers, who would rather have twin SD slots or one of each.


----------



## BurningPlatform (Sep 1, 2022)

The article says "...to replace the discontinued EOS R". It does not look like EOS R has been discontinued. It is on sale at least on UK Canon web shop, and many retailers.


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 1, 2022)

Chaitanya said:


> How are 20 a joke? I know quite a lot of photographers who purchased R6(over R5 and R7 and upgraded from 7D/7D II) for wildlife shooting and events who are happy with their camera and swear by it.


Event photography I can see, wildlife not so much. The ideal combination would be an R6 and an R7. I bought an R7 and already have a 5D3, which is good enough. All my high speed primes are EF, so I'll wait for the R3 sensor in an R6 body.


----------



## entoman (Sep 1, 2022)

Ozarker said:


> I wonder what the chances are that it will jump to 30mp?


It's a possibility, because Canon could re-use the 30MP sensor from the R, and probably improve it with a bit of minor "surgery". But it's an old design, appearing first in the 5DMkiv, way back in 2016, so it's long overdue for replacement.

The R6 competes directly with the 33MP Sony a7iv, and it's very likely that the upcoming Nikon Z6 iii will use the same Sony sensor, so a "R6ii" would need to have at least 28MP to be seen as competitive.

The problem for Canon is that they don't want to cannibalise sales of the R5 which has 45MP, and the answer to that is to simultaneously release higher MP versions of R5ii and R6ii. As I stated in another post, this would probably mean an R6ii with about 28MP, and a R5ii with about 60MP. Doing this would also leave a gap below the R6ii for a "budget" 20MP model with a single SD slot and no IBIS.

As for timing - I think we're looking at mid-2024, which is why I think this rumour about a R6ii being tested in the field right now is a complete load of bollox.


----------



## entoman (Sep 1, 2022)

BurningPlatform said:


> The article says "...to replace the discontinued EOS R". It does not look like EOS R has been discontinued. It is on sale at least on UK Canon web shop, and many retailers.


Leaving aside that the R6ii "rumour" is almost certainly complete BS, I think it's quite likely that **production** of the R has been discontinued for some time. It doesn't seem to have been a particularly popular model, so Canon and Canon dealers probably still hold quite large stocks, which is why it's still quite easy to find them at stores and warehouses.


----------



## m4ndr4ke (Sep 1, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> Canon should be looking at what were the main complaints about the R6 that people had


I have no idea what you’re talking about. All minimal complaints I had in the past were solved via firmware update. 


This rumour doesn’t really make much sense, I mean, not at this moment. Yes, the R3’s sensor would be the “obvious” choice for a R6 II, because the R3 is the current “high end fast camera” and they made the R6 with the sensor of the 1DX3, and to that extent I agree.

But the R6 is, by far, the camera that Canon has the least reasons to worry about. They have yet to release a higher resolution high end sports camera (R1), a high resolution “standard” camera (R5s?), and something below the R6.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Sep 1, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> Interestingly, to me it feels like most CR readers would like to upgrade the R6 so it’s very close to the R5. Funnily, that would widen the gap between the 1.000 $ RP and the pro models. Canon on the other hand is trying to close the gap between 1.000 $ and 2.500 $ R6…
> 
> If the R6 gets an update, it’ll be a modest one to push upward just a little bit. That way canon makes room for an Allrounder type camera like the R (of course, it’s successor…whatever the name will be). A 2.000 $ R successor and a 2.500-2.800 $ R6mkii would fit in.
> 
> At the moment, it almost looks like there is a gap from 0 $ to 2.500 $ because the R and the RP are outdated in terms of focus capabilities and e-shutter (maybe a few other things).


Are you inferring the R is 'more' of an allrounder than the R6? The R6 can run circles around the R imho and real world use has shown.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Sep 1, 2022)

entoman said:


> The only point on which I disagree is regarding having 2 CFE slots. These cards cost upwards of GBP 200, so anyone wanting to shoot a backup set of shots to a second card is forced to pay at least GBP 400 on top of the cost of the camera. I could live with that, but I suspect it would put off a hell of a lot of prospective purchasers, who would rather have twin SD slots or one of each.


I do not like that SD cards are so flimsy. My current camera has CF cards and I love them. I wish CFexpress cards came in smaller capacities. I do not really need 64 GB. I still use a 16 GB and a 32 GB CF card. Those cards combined are large enough for 1,500 photos in JPEG+RAW at my low resolution. As new RAW formats are smaller per megapixel, 2x32 GB would be enough for me. 64 GB are overkill unless I shoot video. 
The more I think about the pros and cons of new cameras, the more I lean towards just keeping my very old camera (I think it came out in 2011) for another few years and instead invest into new glass. I dot need video, I do not need people or animal tracking, I do not need more megapixels and on the other side I am glad that I have my OVF and a long battery life. Only IBIS is something I would like to have, but even that comes with ist downsides.


----------



## sanj (Sep 1, 2022)

Rocco Germani said:


> Yeah no thank you. 8K is rediculous, don't need that. When you step up the resolution you need to also step up your computer specs, storage, etc. I do not want to shoot anything higher than 6K if I don't have to. I can't stand the digital look, I love emulating film, but want the flexibility of raw. Don't need no 8K. The 1DXIII has the same sensor and processor as the R6 and it can do 5.5K 12 bit raw video... Doesn't seem so hard to put it in the R6 for the people that don't want 8K raw. Resolution isn't everything, but Canon doesn't seem to get that.


I want the 8k. I need the 8k. I love the 8k. I will up my computer, HDD, CF cards and everything else to work on the 8k. Resolution is not everything, but, it is FANTASTIC, obviously!!!


----------



## entoman (Sep 1, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I do not like that SD cards are so flimsy. My current camera has CF cards and I love them. I wish CFexpress cards came in smaller capacities. I do not really need 64 GB. I still use a 16 GB and a 32 GB CF card. Those cards combined are large enough for 1,500 photos in JPEG+RAW at my low resolution. As new RAW formats are smaller per megapixel, 2x32 GB would be enough for me. 64 GB are overkill unless I shoot video.
> The more I think about the pros and cons of new cameras, the more I lean towards just keeping my very old camera (I think it came out in 2011) for another few years and instead invest into new glass. I dot need video, I do not need people or animal tracking, I do not need more megapixels and on the other side I am glad that I have my OVF and a long battery life. Only IBIS is something I would like to have, but even that comes with ist downsides.


Yes SD card are a bit flimsy, although I've never broken one. They are also tiny and easily lost. But they are ridiculously cheap, and available almost anywhere, even in remote villages in the Amazon.

I assume from your handle that you shoot mostly architecture, so as you say, there is no need in your case for fast cards, high burst speeds, video or animal-eye AF tracking etc. But I'm surprised that you want IBIS, unless you shoot handheld in poor lighting.

CF cards fell from popularity primarily because it was so common for people (myself included) to bend the pins in the camera when changing cards in a hurry, so I'm glad they are a thing of the past.

Ultimately I think most new camera models will have CFE slots. The prices will eventually drop, and 64MB cards will become available.

As for keeping your DSLR, good for you. Why be a slave to fashion and spend more money than you need to, if you prefer an optical viewfinder and the many other benefits afforded with DSLRs?


----------



## sanj (Sep 1, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> When a new version of a camera comes out, I always fear that it will be spoiled by a higher resolution. I a glad that Canon still offers a full frame camera with "only" 21 megapixels. Those who want more megapixels, could still buy an R5, although the R5 is quite overpriced in my opinion.
> 
> What I would wish about the R6II is that it will basically become a lower resolution version of the R5 without all that additional crippleling that Canon introduced in the R6. For example it should no longer have a smaller screen than the R5 or a lower resolution EVF. It should also come with 5 GHz WIFI like the R5 and perhabs even with WIFI 6E. And it should also have a top display instead of a dial and a CFexpress card slot. Of course if both slots would be CFexpress, that would even be better.
> 
> It should finally come with an optional battery grip that actually aligns with the camera. The current R5/R6 battery grip really does not look like a part of the camera. I can't understand that design decision. For more than $300 I would expect a perfectly fitting battery grip.


R5 is not expensive, it is a steal for what it does.


----------



## entoman (Sep 1, 2022)

m4ndr4ke said:


> But the R6 is, by far, the camera that Canon has the least reasons to worry about.


Very true. It's very highly regarded by the people who buy it, whether pro or enthusiast. There seem to be fewer complaints about it on the internet, compared to the other RF models. Despite all the people who complain about it only having 20MP, people who actually buy the camera seem to be perfectly happy. Just because the *specification* is lower than competing Sony and Nikon models, doesn't mean that it's inferior. It's a very well designed camera, extremely simple to use, and produces pro-quality images with the minimum of fuss.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Sep 1, 2022)

I highly doubt the R6 is about to be replaced given it’s only been out two years. Those that keep banging on about 20MP either crop like mad or have shots on billboards otherwise it’s nonsense 20MP is not enough. 
My son entire wedding was shot on three R6 cameras and we have some pretty large prints that are razor sharp so if a professional wedding photographer thinks it’s enough and they are making a living from them then that cool with me. 
I personally own the R, R5 & R6. The R is now a back-up camera the R5 I use in the studio for portraiture, outside for wildlife and the R6 I use for landscape. 
Is the R6 (or for that matter the R5) perfect, no however I would struggle to see what major changes are required my main gripe being battery performance which affects both the R5 & R6. 
Sometimes in portraiture and in wildlife both the R5 & R6 struggle to grab an eye especially where there are other distractions but this is more of a nuisance than a major complaint. 
Canon do need to update the RP. The R is actually between the R5 & R6. An RII with a joystick, the AF in the R3 & R7 and the newer metering system as well at a higher frame rate would definitely push it above the R6 if it retains a sensor around 30MP plus the new hot shoe. That said in the UK the R6 is £ 2,399.00 whereas the R5 is £ 4,299.00. That’s a £ 1,900 Segway between the two meaning a camera priced around £ 3,299 is conceivable and inline with Canon moving to higher value cameras. 
Maybe that’s Canon plan to switch the R6II to a R replacement and the RII effectively a R6 replacement (Maybe an R8)


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Sep 1, 2022)

entoman said:


> I assume from your handle that you shoot mostly architecture, so as you say, there is no need in your case for fast cards, high burst speeds, video or animal-eye AF tracking etc. But I'm surprised that you want IBIS, unless you shoot handheld in poor lighting.


The best shots of architecture can be achieved during the blue hour, which had quite low light. The problem is that in many cities the use of tripods is not allowed without a written permission. In London they argue that pedestrians could fall over your tripod (complete nonsense) and in New York City they argue that with tripods terrorists could take a photo of the interior of a building from the outside. In Dubai huge areas are private property - including the streets and they simply forbid tripods. The same is true in the Docklands in London. Most observation decks around the world do not allow tripods at all. So having the otion to take a low noise handheld shot during the blue hour is a huge benefit. And even if tripods are allowed, carrying a tripod is no fun. So IBIS helps a lot.


----------



## danfaz (Sep 1, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> It should finally come with an optional battery grip that actually aligns with the camera. The current R5/R6 battery grip really does not look like a part of the camera.


Yep, totally agree. The grip on my R5 looks wonky. The R actually has a very nice grip, fits almost seamlessly with camera. They definitely put more thought into that grip.


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 1, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> Are you inferring the R is 'more' of an allrounder than the R6? The R6 can run circles around the R imho and real world use has shown.


I am positive that's the case, however, the R does have more megapickles. For the compositionally challenged it's a big deal. At least for me.


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 1, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I do not like that SD cards are so flimsy. My current camera has CF cards and I love them.[..]


Since I started using Sony Tough SD cards, I haven't had one break or drop the write protect switch. Since a few months the cheaper SF-M (150MB/s write) series is also available in the Tough format. The SF-G (299MB/s write) goes on sale every other week. But those (and the Hoodman Steel series) are close to CFexpress prices.

I still prefer CFexpress cards, it's just soooooo nice to transfer pictures from the card to your computer at close to a gigabyte per second.


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 1, 2022)

entoman said:


> Yes SD card are a bit flimsy, although I've never broken one. They are also tiny and easily lost. But they are ridiculously cheap, and available almost anywhere, even in remote villages in the Amazon[..]


I also appreciate that I can swap SD cards between my R5 and M6II in case I fill one of the cards when I'm out. But with CRAW and 128G cards, I'll run out of battery first


----------



## Chaitanya (Sep 1, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> Event photography I can see, wildlife not so much. The ideal combination would be an R6 and an R7. I bought an R7 and already have a 5D3, which is good enough. All my high speed primes are EF, so I'll wait for the R3 sensor in an R6 body.


year or so back R7 wasn't available for them and it was either R5 or R6 for wildlife so most of them went with R6(smaller file size). recently was talking with a friend who upgraded from 7D 2, overall he didnt like what R7 offered and instead paid the extra for R6. He mostly shoots with 400mm 2.8 with or without 1.4x TC, for Macro he has kept his crop DSLR(760D).


----------



## Curahee (Sep 1, 2022)

R6II who knows?
I want an RII with IBIS, new style hot shoe and lose the touch bar. Make it like the Canon cameras have been control wise. Does NOT need 2 cards but keep the MP as is. But IBIS is the biggest as I want to use lenses without IS and get a bit of stabilization.


----------



## Curahee (Sep 1, 2022)

unfocused said:


> Aside from the word "capable," I agree with this sentence. I would call it "more modest" while others would whine that it is "crippled." (A phrase that I hate.) The only reason I can see to change the R6 is to make room in a lineup for a cheaper R replacement (R8 or whatever they choose to call it). Why would they need to give an R8 better specs than the existing R6? My guess is they would upgrade the R6 very modestly – change the sensor resolution to either 24 or 30 mp and add a few tweaks. Then subtract a few things from the R6 for the new R8 (dual card slot and IBIS come to mind), in order to hit a $2,000 price point.


Many are mentioning remove IBIS from the new "R". IBIS is a big point in that it allows non IS lenses to have some stabilization. Keep the 1 slot vs 2 for the R6 II and what ever they want for the R6 II, but start making IBIS standard across the Canon lineup.


----------



## SHAMwow (Sep 1, 2022)

entoman said:


> I find it difficult to see what Canon could do to *significantly* improve the R6, without the price increasing considerably.
> 
> The only regular complaint I read about the camera is that many people consider the 20MP sensor insufficient. So, what would the alternatives be? I think it's extremely unlikely that they'd use the expensive 24MP stacked sensor from the R3. They could use an "improved" version of the 30MP sensor from the R, but that may be perceived by many potential buyers as a bit long in the tooth by now. The only other viable option would seem to be a *new* 24MP sensor, but would even that provide any really *worthwhile* improvement over the existing R6 sensor?
> 
> ...


Idk why but that 5d IV 30mp sensor is still my favorite. Something about how images were rendered or captured on that thing.


----------



## calfoto (Sep 1, 2022)

jeffa4444 said:


> Those that keep banging on about 20MP either crop like mad or have shots on billboards otherwise it’s nonsense 20MP is not enough.


I’ve seen photos of mine from a 5D mkIII (22.5 Mp) used on billboards and they looked just fine. And the billion dollar medical corp. who used them must have thought they worked fine as well.


----------



## calfoto (Sep 1, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> The best shots of architecture can be achieved during the blue hour, which had quite low light. The problem is that in many cities the use of tripods is not allowed without a written permission.


Curious - Are policies as restrictive for monopods?


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Sep 1, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> Event photography I can see, wildlife not so much. The ideal combination would be an R6 and an R7. I bought an R7 and already have a 5D3, which is good enough. All my high speed primes are EF, so I'll wait for the R3 sensor in an R6 body.


I know many a wildlife shooter with a R5 or R6(with the R6 being preferred) and they aren’t looking at the R7. The R7 really should have had a stacked crop sensor and R5 build quality to be a wildlife body for the 7D crowd. As it stands it a D90 like body with experimental dial placement. 

The R6 can actually shoot 20 FPS with good results and minimal rolling shutter. 20 MP is sufficient for most as most don’t crop. The common wildlife shooter sets up a perch and some food at a distance from wherever they are sitting with a R6 and (often) a EF 500mm f/4.0. The ones walking about with a 100-400/500 just get closer to fill the frame and if the frame isn’t filled with that then no amount of cropping is going to make for an acceptable image.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Sep 1, 2022)

calfoto said:


> Curious - Are policies as restrictive for monopods?


I have never tried a monopod, but at least you can keep a monopod close to your body or even hide it. The argument that somebody could stumble across your monopod and fall could not be used. To be honest I usually use a tripod anyway, because it takes some time until security tells me to stop and by then I already have my photo. At Burj Khalifa security quickly stopped me with my tripod on the crowded side. So I came back six days later from the other side, where hardly any people are. I was able to take photos for half an hour that time before security stopped me again. As a photographer you sometimes have to ignore laws that restrict your freedom to take photos. 

In France it is even illegal to take photos of the Eiffel Tower at night, because the lighting scheme is copyrighted. That would be impossible in Germany, where you can take photos of anything from a public street.


----------



## john1970 (Sep 1, 2022)

This is a very interesting post. I find it a bit odd that there are already rumors on the R6 Mk2. It would likely not be released until mid-2024. I suspect we will see a R1 before we see a R6 Mk2, but I could easily be incorrect.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 1, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> In France it is even illegal to take photos of the Eiffel Tower at night, because the lighting scheme is copyrighted.


Misinformation is never useful.

From the Eiffel Tower website:


> *Is it illegal to photograph the Tower at night? *
> Photographing the Eiffel Tower at night is not illegal at all. Any individual can take photos and share them on social networks.
> 
> But the situation is different for professionals. The Eiffel Tower’s lighting and sparkling lights are protected by copyright, so professional use of images of the Eiffel Tower at night require prior authorization and may be subject to a fee. Professionals should therefore contact the Eiffel Tower's management company to learn about conditions for using the images depending on the case.



It's like any copyright, you can use the images but you cannot profit from them without paying a fee.

From a family trip to Paris several years ago:



EOS 1D X, TS-E 17mm f/4L, 6.0 s or 0.8 s, f/11 or f/9, ISO 400


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Sep 1, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> Are you inferring the R is 'more' of an allrounder than the R6? The R6 can run circles around the R imho and real world use has shown.


I was inferring that the R successor (or whatever the name) will be more of an allaround camera than the R6 (or mk ii). 

I do agree that the R6 is superior in terms of AF, FPS, e-shutter, video specs and low light (maybe it does run circles…) but in some cases (studio, portrait, landscapes, in some cases architecture) 30 mp just outresolves the R6. If the current gets good fps and the focus capabilities, yeah it’ll be of ab Allrounder. The R6 will probably be pushed more towards to speed and great low light capabilities, two things it’s already great at.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Sep 1, 2022)

cayenne said:


> Geez, enough with these low end cameras.<P>
> Where's the R1?



Many more people are interested in these low end cameras than your $7K R1.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Sep 1, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> The best shots of architecture can be achieved during the blue hour, which had quite low light. The problem is that in many cities the use of tripods is not allowed without a written permission. In London they argue that pedestrians could fall over your tripod (complete nonsense) and in New York City they argue that with tripods terrorists could take a photo of the interior of a building from the outside. In Dubai huge areas are private property - including the streets and they simply forbid tripods. The same is true in the Docklands in London. Most observation decks around the world do not allow tripods at all. So having the otion to take a low noise handheld shot during the blue hour is a huge benefit. And even if tripods are allowed, carrying a tripod is no fun. So IBIS helps a lot.


Do you a link at hand for London? I took several shots of the Christmas lights of a tripod in 2019. Back then, there were several people using a tripod. And I’m talking about regents street and Oxford circus. 

This year, I visited London a week before the coronation jubilee. And again, there were lots of people using a tripod. 

But it’s good to know such restrictions exist. Especially for NY I’d considered an upgrade to an IBIS camera.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 1, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> Do you a link at hand for London? I took several shots of the Christmas lights of a tripod in 2019. Back then, there were several people using a tripod. And I’m talking about regents street and Oxford circus.
> 
> This year, I visited London a week before the coronation jubilee. And again, there were lots of people using a tripod.
> 
> But it’s good to know such restrictions exist. Especially for NY I’d considered an upgrade to an IBIS camera.


I have not had issues using a tripod in Europe. I've used them outdoors as well as in buildings, for example this shot of the alter in the Basel Münster was a 13 s exposure (won't be doing that with IBIS). 




EOS 1D X, TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II, 13 s, f/11, ISO 200

The only place I've been asked to stop taking pictures was here in Boston, but I did get the shot before the security guard approached me...




EOS 5D Mark II, TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II, 1/60 s, f/11, ISO 100, +10 shift

That's the Mother Church of Christian Science, their HQ is a large office building next door.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Sep 1, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> Do you a link at hand for London? I took several shots of the Christmas lights of a tripod in 2019. Back then, there were several people using a tripod. And I’m talking about regents street and Oxford circus.
> 
> This year, I visited London a week before the coronation jubilee. And again, there were lots of people using a tripod.
> 
> But it’s good to know such restrictions exist. Especially for NY I’d considered an upgrade to an IBIS camera.


The only place in London where I was really stopped while taking tripod shots where the Docklands, because there even the streets are private property, although they look like public streets. In London many areas look like public areas, although they are not. That is even true for many sidewalks along the Thames and many plazas between the skyscrapers in the City of London.
However there are also often security guards overstepping their rights: https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/...d-tripod-police-overstepping-their-boundaries
I found a threat about photography in London: https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/tripod-use-in-london.612584

In New York City I was stopped several times. For example in Times Sqaure tripods are forbidden. Even in Bryant Park I was approached by a security guy telling me that tripods are not allowed in a park. That never happened to me before in a park and I really do not understand why tripods are not allowed there. However now that you know that, you should just hide your tripod in Bryant Park until you are sure that no security guard is near you and then take out your tripod and take photos until they stop you. They will not call the police or confiscate your camera. They will you tell you to stop. One security guy even approached be on the sidewalk of Sixth Avenue and told me the sidewalk is part of the private property. So I told the guy that the laws says that the five feet closed to the street are public and only the rest of the sidewalk are private property. I totally made that up, but the security guy believed me and stopped bothering me . Maybe it would even be a good idea to print out a fake law about photography in public. Most people believe things that are printed out.


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 1, 2022)

Chaitanya said:


> year or so back R7 wasn't available for them and it was either R5 or R6 for wildlife so most of them went with R6(smaller file size). recently was talking with a friend who upgraded from 7D 2, overall he didnt like what R7 offered and instead paid the extra for R6. He mostly shoots with 400mm 2.8 with or without 1.4x TC, for Macro he has kept his crop DSLR(760D).





Photo Bunny said:


> I know many a wildlife shooter with a R5 or R6(with the R6 being preferred) and they aren’t looking at the R7. The R7 really should have had a stacked crop sensor and R5 build quality to be a wildlife body for the 7D crowd. As it stands it a D90 like body with experimental dial placement.
> 
> The R6 can actually shoot 20 FPS with good results and minimal rolling shutter. 20 MP is sufficient for most as most don’t crop. The common wildlife shooter sets up a perch and some food at a distance from wherever they are sitting with a R6 and (often) a EF 500mm f/4.0. The ones walking about with a 100-400/500 just get closer to fill the frame and if the frame isn’t filled with that then no amount of cropping is going to make for an acceptable image.


So much for emphasizing "pixels per feather". The R5 has about the same pixel size as the 7D. I would have expected it to be far more popular than the R6 for wildlife.


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 1, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> So much for emphasizing "pixels per feather". The R5 has about the same pixel size as the 7D. I would have expected it to be far more popular than the R6 for wildlife.


I have both the 7D and the R5, the R5, in crop mode, has a lot more detail than the 7D. And on the R5 you can go beyond ISO400 
The AA filter in the 7D is basically a thick layer of vaseline when you compare it to the R5.


----------



## Czardoom (Sep 1, 2022)

Daner said:


> Keep the same body and controls. Swap in the sensor, focus system, and hot shoe from the R3. Retain compatibility with the same battery grip as the R6. That would be enough if the goal is to maximize the performance while keeping the price attractive.
> Of course, I would also appreciate a higher performance EVF and screen, but not having those would not be a deal-breaker for me. I'd still upgrade ASAP.


Swap the stacked sensor from the R3 and the price will no longer be attractive. I can't see Canon putting a stacked sensor in the R6 if the R5 does not have one. So, this rumor seems total baloney.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Sep 1, 2022)

Weren't the R6 and R5 announced at the same time? Then I could imagine that the R6 II will also come with an R5 II.


----------



## bergstrom (Sep 1, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> Weren't the R6 and R5 announced at the same time? Then I could imagine that the R6 II will also come with an R5 II.




Isn't the R5c , the R5ii? Except with worse focusing?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 1, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> Isn't the R5c , the R5ii? Except with worse focusing?


Sure, just like the 1D C was the 1D X II. Except that it wasn’t.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Sep 1, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> Weren't the R6 and R5 announced at the same time? Then I could imagine that the R6 II will also come with an R5 II.


They were introduced at the same time. I can only see that happening again if they actually wait for a longer time period. I’d also guess Canon would like to create a hype/ good PR with each camera individually now, so they longer in the press focus. 

And if (only if) the R6 gets an update to revamp the camera line-up, those cameras would be on different time schedule/ cycle as well.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Sep 1, 2022)

Daner said:


> Keep the same body and controls. Swap in the sensor, focus system, and hot shoe from the R3. Retain compatibility with the same battery grip as the R6. That would be enough if the goal is to maximize the performance while keeping the price attractive.
> Of course, I would also appreciate a higher performance EVF and screen, but not having those would not be a deal-breaker for me. I'd still upgrade ASAP.


So, basically you want an R3 without the eye focus control for the price of an R6?!?! 

Not gonna happen, ever!


----------



## IShootBirds (Sep 1, 2022)

Using the R3 sensor makes sense as they have a lot of R&D costs and a production line to make them. I highly doubt they are selling many R3's so they need to recoup that investment like they did with the 1dx3 sensor on the R6. Releasing an R62 at 2999 with the R3 sensor, updated AF, new Processor etc would make it very attractive and sell very well. They could then drop the price of the R6 and sell both at the same time. I suspect the R6 sales have dropped through the floor with the R7 and R10.


----------



## IShootBirds (Sep 1, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> So, basically you want an R3 without the eye focus control for the price of an R6?!?!
> 
> Not gonna happen, ever!


Well, they kind of already did with the 1DX3 and R6 sharing the same sensor, in fact I would rather use the R6 then the 1DX3.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 1, 2022)

Photo Bunny said:


> I know many a wildlife shooter with a R5 or R6(with the R6 being preferred) and they aren’t looking at the R7. The R7 really should have had a stacked crop sensor and R5 build quality to be a wildlife body for the 7D crowd. As it stands it a D90 like body with experimental dial placement.
> 
> The R6 can actually shoot 20 FPS with good results and minimal rolling shutter. 20 MP is sufficient for most as most don’t crop. The common wildlife shooter sets up a perch and some food at a distance from wherever they are sitting with a R6 and (often) a EF 500mm f/4.0. The ones walking about with a 100-400/500 just get closer to fill the frame and if the frame isn’t filled with that then no amount of cropping is going to make for an acceptable image.


You mix with a different crowd of wild life shooters than I do. I must also be an exception as I have owned the R5, R6 and R7 for wild life photography, and the R6 is my last choice for bird photography, though sometimes first for other things. But, maybe I am not in a minority as there are 179 pages of R5 images on FM, for mainly wild life, and only 21 for the R6. Also you must consider all my images as not acceptable as I nearly always crop. By the same reasoning, any image taken on a 7DII or other crop camera must be unacceptable as it is a crop of a full frame sensor with the same lens attached and pixel pitch.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Sep 1, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> So, basically you want an R3 without the eye focus control for the price of an R6?!?!
> 
> Not gonna happen, ever!



Not really! The R6 will still have a plastic body, less weather sealing, lower resolution screen and EVF and many other features missing from the R3.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Sep 2, 2022)

AlanF said:


> You mix with a different crowd of wild life shooters than I do. I must also be an exception as I have owned the R5, R6 and R7 for wild life photography, and the R6 is my last choice for bird photography, though sometimes first for other things. But, maybe I am not in a minority as there are 179 pages of R5 images on FM, for mainly wild life, and only 21 for the R6. Also you must consider all my images as not acceptable as I nearly always crop. By the same reasoning, any image taken on a 7DII or other crop camera must be unacceptable as it is a crop of a full frame sensor with the same lens attached and pixel pitch.


Not all wildlife photography is birds, our experiences will, of course, be very different, that we are on a forum of any kind is the exception as it means we are incredibly geeky vs the billions of photos that go up to social media. 

I would need to see your images to deem them acceptable or not, assuredly a crop vs no crop debate could go on for pages and pages. In general, I want all my pixels on the subject and if the subject is smaller in the frame than I would like then I can get closer or compose the picture to embrace the background. 

I am sure you are not oblivious to the fact that before the D850 and R5's of the world, wildlife, and sports photographers were using 16-20 MP bodies for over a decade and those images are still in use today. R3, R6, and Z6 owners are all creating amazing images with their lowly 20ish MP bodies.

The R7 almost has to be used in mechanical, you can't fast pan in electronic with it like you can the R5 and R6. The R5 and R6 are really fantastic bodies and you can just pick the one for your budget.

I don't know how many photographers you personally engage with by actually seeing them in the wild, or giving classes, tours, etc. But I have over the last year pushed past a few hundred now and Canon folks if they aren't still on a DSLR are moving most often to the R6 because of its fantastic value.


----------



## HikeBike (Sep 2, 2022)

I honestly don't know why CR1s are even a thing on this site. Anyone could make something up which seems remotely plausible, and BAM...we have a CR1.


----------



## Exmun (Sep 2, 2022)

Two years after its debut and the R6 STILL overheats. Firmware 1.60 fixed overheating on the R5, but did nothing to cure the overheating in the R6. Mine still overheats, just from being on for a while (about an hour). I have no info to say whether the rumor is true or not, but one thing I know is that we are in need of a new version of the R6 to fix the overheating and add a few megapixels to the sensor. 

As a wedding and portrait photographer and videographer, the R6 is nearly perfect as a hybrid camera for that world. It’s great in low light and the image is astounding. The only flaws are that it overheats in video and, in certain busy photos, the lower resolution shows up. Canon has demonstrated that it has no desire to fix the R6. So they might as well create a new one with the improvements above.


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 2, 2022)

entoman said:


> R5 ii - 60MP, possible new processor, upgraded EVF (2024 release)
> R6 ii - 28MP, upgraded EVF (2024 release)
> RX - replacing RP, upgraded AF, single slot, no IBIS (2023 release)
> 
> ...


I find the 45mp R5 sensor a sweet spot. Although the Sony has more pixels, it needs to oversample to get to 8k video whereas the R5 is naturally that resolution and can provide raw (if needed). Anything above 45mp would need to handle 8k in my opinion so there is that to contend with and unless the next generation of Digic X is more efficient then Canon's bodies can't handle the oversampling heat effectively.

I would guess that a R5s is more likely to be ~82mp (upscaled from the APC-S pixel density) and be a separate line... AA filter is a tricky one to include (landscape)/exclude (portrait/video) though.

I am expecting good things from a RPii.... focus system isn't that important to me but good ISO performance would be nice to have as a second body.


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 2, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> I agree with you. More MP needs more storage space, more powerful computers etc… I’m happy with the 30 MP of the R, it’s a real sweet spot. More MPs would make me have to upgrade my MacBook and/ or iPad.


With my R5, it was an excuse to upgrade a 7 year old MBP and I have no issues with it. Consider using cRaw format if storage space is a concern.


Exploreshootshare said:


> Here, I don’t agree. A higher resolution EVF will cost more, therefore the camera would be more expensive. CFExpress also cost more… as well as 5ghz Wifi. What would the point in having a 4.000 € R6 with 20mp and 45mp R5 for 4.500 €???


You only need CFe type B for 8k30 raw and 4k120 (maybe 4k60). The heat generated is significant for sure.
See what the A1 can do with CFe Type A and even their compressed 8K still works on the faster USH-II SD card slots. 
Faster cards will clear the buffer faster but if you are recording to both SD and CFe then the slower card is the limiting factor anyway.
I expect that CFe is not needed for any body that doesn't output 8k.


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 2, 2022)

entoman said:


> The only point on which I disagree is regarding having 2 CFE slots. These cards cost upwards of GBP 200, so anyone wanting to shoot a backup set of shots to a second card is forced to pay at least GBP 400 on top of the cost of the camera. I could live with that, but I suspect it would put off a hell of a lot of prospective purchasers, who would rather have twin SD slots or one of each.


The differences in cost between the faster/fastest USH-ii cards and CFe Type B cards isn't that much. The biggest difference is the cost of the slot hardware and the heat generated. 
If the A1 can handle almost everything using 2x USH-ii SD cards then that would be an ideal situation. CFe Type A slots are a waste of space/money but the dual slot feature is a nice option I guess.


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 2, 2022)

entoman said:


> Leaving aside that the R6ii "rumour" is almost certainly complete BS, I think it's quite likely that **production** of the R has been discontinued for some time. It doesn't seem to have been a particularly popular model, so Canon and Canon dealers probably still hold quite large stocks, which is why it's still quite easy to find them at stores and warehouses.


An interesting thought but we don't have any firm evidence to support it. 
You could also say the same for the 5Div which is still on sale at a price that is way above the R. Besides OVF/EVF and battery life, I don't see that price premium being justified.


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 2, 2022)

koenkooi said:


> Since I started using Sony Tough SD cards, I haven't had one break or drop the write protect switch. Since a few months the cheaper SF-M (150MB/s write) series is also available in the Tough format. The SF-G (299MB/s write) goes on sale every other week. But those (and the Hoodman Steel series) are close to CFexpress prices.
> 
> I still prefer CFexpress cards, it's just soooooo nice to transfer pictures from the card to your computer at close to a gigabyte per second.


I agree about the Sony Tough cards. CFe cards are nice, hot and fast but I need to use my card reader whereas my MBP has a SD slot which is super simple. The only time I pull out my CFe card is recording 4k120 now.


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 2, 2022)

entoman said:


> Ultimately I think most new camera models will have CFE slots. The prices will eventually drop, and 64MB cards will become available.


I disagree. CFe card slots are expensive and hot and larger than SD card slots. More robust for sure but no need for them unless there is high res video recording involved. 
USH-ii cards are sufficient for all current bandwidth requirements. Albeit that they aren't much different in cost.
I got 128GB cards and they are sufficient for most of my shooting sessions. There have been some where I needed to go to one card because they were full which was annoying. I guess I could moved to cRaw but I am always pushing the exposure for indoor sports shots.


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 2, 2022)

Photo Bunny said:


> I know many a wildlife shooter with a R5 or R6(with the R6 being preferred) and they aren’t looking at the R7. The R7 really should have had a stacked crop sensor and R5 build quality to be a wildlife body for the 7D crowd. As it stands it a D90 like body with experimental dial placement.


I agree that the R7 is more like 90D but Canon received all the market input going from 7Dii to 90D/M6ii they needed to justify if it was the right move. 
A R7 like you describe would be priced above the R6 and maybe Canon didn't think that it would have sold so many.


----------



## Chaitanya (Sep 2, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> So much for emphasizing "pixels per feather". The R5 has about the same pixel size as the 7D. I would have expected it to be far more popular than the R6 for wildlife.


in case of R7 its overall package that's lacking(low res viewfinder(sub $1000 cameras have that viewfinder), build quality, lack of batter grip option, non-BSI sensor, rolling shutter). In SLR days only options for shooting action were either 7(originally x0) or 1 series of bodies but these days even entry level R10 can out perform SLRs both in terms of fps and buffer depth. 


David - Sydney said:


> I disagree. CFe card slots are expensive and hot and larger than SD card slots. More robust for sure but no need for them unless there is high res video recording involved.
> USH-ii cards are sufficient for all current bandwidth requirements. Albeit that they aren't much different in cost.
> I got 128GB cards and they are sufficient for most of my shooting sessions. There have been some where I needed to go to one card because they were full which was annoying. I guess I could moved to cRaw but I am always pushing the exposure for indoor sports shots.


CFxpress A might replace SD format if its adopted by manufacturers other than Sony. In case of SD its quite omnipresent in almost all sectors.


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 2, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> In France it is even illegal to take photos of the Eiffel Tower at night, because the lighting scheme is copyrighted. That would be impossible in Germany, where you can take photos of anything from a public street.


the Eiffel Tower night copyright story is correct but misleading in the sense that there has never been any enforcement of it except for commercial purposes. 
It is like the Sydney Opera House where there are copyright requirements for commercial use where it is a significant feature in the promotion. SOH has enforced their copyright over sporting teams using it (even stylised versions of it) and licensing wedding photographers but billions of selfies are just good advertising.


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 2, 2022)

Chaitanya said:


> CFxpress A might replace SD format if its adopted by manufacturers other than Sony. In case of SD its quite omnipresent in almost all sectors.


I think that it is unlikely. Type A has capacity limitations that Type B doesn't. Sony was the only manufacturer until recently and (as far as I know) there are only 2 bodies that use them and they also take USH-ii cards. As far as I know, very few A1 shooters bother with CFe cards as the USH-ii cards are fast enough.

A successor for USH-ii cards is the next question of course. SDexpress is possible but I think that CFe Type B may be more dominant given the current market for faster speeds.


----------



## Chaitanya (Sep 2, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> I think that it is unlikely. Type A has capacity limitations that Type B doesn't. Sony was the only manufacturer until recently and (as far as I know) there are only 2 bodies that use them and they also take USH-ii cards. As far as I know, very few A1 shooters bother with CFe cards as the USH-ii cards are fast enough.
> 
> A successor for USH-ii cards is the next question of course. SDexpress is possible but I think that CFe Type B may be more dominant given the current market for faster speeds.


For now SDexpress seem to be DoA(just like UHS-III) with quite a few limitations on speeds(forced to UHS-I speeds when used in non SDexpress slots and when using non SDexpress cards in SDexpress slots). Even SD cards had limitations on max size which improved overtime, as of now Exascend has CFexpress A cards upto 240GB so since its introduction there already is improvement. Even the A1 shooters I know didnt bother with CFx as it is too expensive compared to fastest UHS-II SD cards. As I said success of CFx A depends on how well industry(other than ILC sector of camera industry) adopts this format. 



https://www.sdcard.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Understanding_the_NewUHS3_WP_20170223.pdf


----------



## sanj (Sep 2, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Misinformation is never useful.
> 
> From the Eiffel Tower website:
> 
> ...


The OP is a professional. And he is taking photos for commercial purposes it seems. (Without permission, it seems.)


----------



## Jethro (Sep 2, 2022)

HikeBike said:


> I honestly don't know why CR1s are even a thing on this site. Anyone could make something up which seems remotely plausible, and BAM...we have a CR1.


Because ... it's a rumours site. At least it's a site that has actual ratings - which in this case mean:

[CR0] – Basically a joke
We don’t post these types of things very often, unless we see other sites posting something that is completely untrue and will never happen.

[CR1] – Plausible information, but from an unconfirmed source
This is information we deem as “possible”. However, the information comes from an unknown or anonymous source, so we cannot confirm its authenticity.

Obviously this one was considered 'plausible' but was unconfirmed.


----------



## makiofai (Sep 2, 2022)

Not worth to waste time to wait for such camera, 24M pixel still using in 2 years later. Too behind with the mainstream. It's better to think about to change system rather than just wait the older high-end tech to lay down onto the lower series.


----------



## Jethro (Sep 2, 2022)

makiofai said:


> Not worth to waste time to wait for such camera, 24M pixel still using in 2 years later. Too behind with the mainstream. It's better to think about to change system rather than just wait the older high-end tech to lay down onto the lower series.


I think that would be the best thing for you to do, really.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Sep 2, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> I agree that the R7 is more like 90D but Canon received all the market input going from 7Dii to 90D/M6ii they needed to justify if it was the right move.
> A R7 like you describe would be priced above the R6 and maybe Canon didn't think that it would have sold so many.


Assuredly the 90D was the better selling model. Bug maybe call it the R9 to leave yourself some room in the lineup for bigger bodies. Heck even just making the R and RP the R7 and R8.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 2, 2022)

Photo Bunny said:


> I would need to see your images to deem them acceptable or not ....


The concluding remark to your post to which I replied was:


Photo Bunny said:


> The ones walking about with a 100-400/500 just get closer to fill the frame and if the frame isn’t filled with that then no amount of cropping is going to make for an acceptable image.


which means that any amount of cropping is going to make an image unacceptable. The nub of my post was to point out that that was the inescapable conclusion from your sweeping generalization. There is no need for you to see my images to deem them acceptable or not - you have already stated in advance that they or any cropped image would not be acceptable.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Sep 2, 2022)

AlanF said:


> The concluding remark to your post to which I replied was:
> 
> which means that any amount of cropping is going to make an image unacceptable. The nub of my post was to point out that that was the inescapable conclusion from your sweeping generalization. There is no need for you to see my images to deem them acceptable or not - you have already stated in advance that they or any cropped image would not be acceptable.


That is incorrect, you can not judge an image until you have seen it while you can also make the correct statement that is you are too far away(in this case, not filling the frame) cropping isn't going to fix the image. But again, a holy war between people that find cropping acceptable and those that'll never crop would not be productive as it has been done to death here and elsewhere.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 2, 2022)

Photo Bunny said:


> That is incorrect, you can not judge an image until you have seen it while you can also make the correct statement that is you are too far away(in this case, not filling the frame) cropping isn't going to fix the image. But again, a holy war between people that find cropping acceptable and those that'll never crop would not be productive as it has been done to death here and elsewhere.


I am afraid you are not getting my message. Of course you can't judge an image until you have seen it. But, your sweeping generalization that "if the frame isn’t filled with that then no amount of cropping is going to make for an acceptable image." is saying the complete opposite of that - you are judging in advance without seeing it that an image is unacceptable because it is cropped. I have stated that clearly 3 times and will say it no more.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 2, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> Do you a link at hand for London? I took several shots of the Christmas lights of a tripod in 2019. Back then, there were several people using a tripod. And I’m talking about regents street and Oxford circus.
> 
> This year, I visited London a week before the coronation jubilee. And again, there were lots of people using a tripod.
> 
> But it’s good to know such restrictions exist. Especially for NY I’d considered an upgrade to an IBIS camera.


There’s aren’t laws forbidding tripods as such, but there are rules or restrictions in many areas where someone decides a tripod could be a ‘nuisance’. Many churches and cathedrals forbid tripod use for instance, another example that comes to mind are the walk walks on Lincoln castle.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 2, 2022)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Not really! The R6 will still have a plastic body,


Not sure; at some time I think the R6 will move to a mag alloy shell to try and persuade people to trade up.


----------



## entoman (Sep 2, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> An interesting thought but we don't have any firm evidence to support it.
> You could also say the same for the 5Div which is still on sale at a price that is way above the R. Besides OVF/EVF and battery life, I don't see that price premium being justified.


I'd have to disagree on that one. I've had both. The 5DMkiv is a full-on professional camera that can easily withstand several years of abuse in the form of temperature extremes, high humidity, rain, knocks and bangs. Mine has been bashed about, dropped onto hard surfaces and has 200K actuations, yet still functions as new. I just can't see the R surviving that sort of treatment, although I obviously can't prove it.

I only kept my R briefly, and now have the R5. The latter is better built than the R, but still not as sturdy and bullet-proof as a 5DMkiv.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 2, 2022)

entoman said:


> I only kept my R briefly, and now have the R5. The latter is better built than the R, but still not as sturdy and bullet-proof as a 5DMkiv.


Canon have to save something back to entice you to the R5II when it appears


----------



## Inspired (Sep 2, 2022)

Boy I hope they give us 24mp with the top LCD screen that should have been included in the mk1 but wasn't.


----------



## KT (Sep 2, 2022)

Fuji offers the cheapest ever stacked sensor for $2500 and that's in APS-C format. Going full-frame, the cheapest stacked sensor will be the Nikon Z9 at $5500. It's a bit unrealistic to expect Canon to take the R3 sensor anywhere below $4K which is way above the R6 price range.

If they are truly considering a boosted and refreshed R6 II, I would think they are more likely to cannibalize other features from the R3 such as AF and hot shoe, etc.. but not the sensor.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Sep 2, 2022)

KT said:


> Fuji offers the cheapest ever stacked sensor for $2500 and that's in APS-C format. Going full-frame, the cheapest stacked sensor will be the Nikon Z9 at $5500. It's a bit unrealistic to expect Canon to take the R3 sensor anywhere below $4K which is way above the R6 price range.
> 
> If they are truly considering a boosted and refreshed R6 II, I would think they are more likely to cannibalize other features from the R3 such as AF and hot shoe, etc.. but not the sensor.


The same wishful thinking is on the Nikon side with people thinking the Z6iii and Z7iii and all future Nikon cameras will have stacked sensors. Stacked sensors are monstrously expensive, they are what'll set apart the flagships for a decade.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 2, 2022)

KT said:


> Fuji offers the cheapest ever stacked sensor for $2500 and that's in APS-C format. Going full-frame, the cheapest stacked sensor will be the Nikon Z9 at $5500. It's a bit unrealistic to expect Canon to take the R3 sensor anywhere below $4K which is way above the R6 price range.
> 
> If they are truly considering a boosted and refreshed R6 II, I would think they are more likely to cannibalize other features from the R3 such as AF and hot shoe, etc.. but not the sensor.


The Sony A9 II is FF stacked sensor and cheaper than the Z9. I don’t know what you mean by giving it the R3 AF?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 2, 2022)

AlanF said:


> The Sony A9 II is FF stacked sensor and cheaper than the Z9. I don’t know what you mean by giving it the R3 AF?


For tracking fast subjects, the R3 has the advantage of the AF system sampling the sensor at twice the frequency of other cameras with the same basic AF system. The faster sampling is possible because of the stacked sensor.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 2, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> For tracking fast subjects, the R3 has the advantage of the AF system sampling the sensor at twice the frequency of other cameras with the same basic AF system. The faster sampling is possible because of the stacked sensor.


What I didn't understand was that he said it was unrealistic for Canon to put the R3 stacked sensor in the R6 (II) but wanted it to have the AF of the R3. The R3 also has a more powerful battery, which in the 1D series drives the AF faster, another difference.


----------



## Chaitanya (Sep 2, 2022)

KT said:


> Fuji offers the cheapest ever stacked sensor for $2500 and that's in APS-C format. Going full-frame, the cheapest stacked sensor will be the Nikon Z9 at $5500. It's a bit unrealistic to expect Canon to take the R3 sensor anywhere below $4K which is way above the R6 price range.
> 
> If they are truly considering a boosted and refreshed R6 II, I would think they are more likely to cannibalize other features from the R3 such as AF and hot shoe, etc.. but not the sensor.


BSI sensors certainly are not that expensive, Fuji XT30 mk II a sub $1000 camera has BSI sensor while only Canon camera with BSI sensor(in this case stacked) is R3. We can at the very least wish for BSI sensor with R6 replacement.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Sep 2, 2022)

Daner said:


> Keep the same body and controls. Swap in the sensor, focus system, and hot shoe from the R3. Retain compatibility with the same battery grip as the R6. That would be enough if the goal is to maximize the performance while keeping the price attractive.
> Of course, I would also appreciate a higher performance EVF and screen, but not having those would not be a deal-breaker for me. I'd still upgrade ASAP.


I'd love to see this. Just take the R3 sensor as is and put it in the body of an R6 with the current R6 body and change the hotshoe over to the new accessory shoe, with maybe minor tweaks to the firmware for functionality along with a bit better heat management for the video shooters. Keep the price the same. We get a bit more resolution, way more dynamic range, better video performance, but otherwise it's the same "entry level" event, concert, sports camera.

I'd drop the R and just put the R sensor with maybe a couple tweaks into the RP with maybe minor tweaks for an RP update if they want to retain the entry level full frame. If not, then drop the RP and figure out where the R users are going to go, or release a full frame replacement (R8, who knows) in the $1500 to $2000 range with the R5 sensor and the R5 gets a new sensor in the ~60MP range, then an R5r also gets released with at least 12000x8000 pixels, though at this stage, anything more than 6000x4000 really is to address specific usage scenarios because 20-30MP covers the vast majority of resolution needs that most of us actually need. I know we all want more resolution, but really, unless you're printing really huge (almost nobody), or doing extensive post work (again, niche use), for general use photography, how much more resolution do you really need? I'd almost rather see Canon standardize on a handful of resolutions and work to optimize them for the best performance, then differentiate their camera line with features and functionality/form factor. Having a whole pile of different sensors is expensive to manufacture, get it down to 2, maybe 3 full frame and at most two crop sensors. Right now they have no less than 5 different full frame sensors (in terms of resolution), and at least 4 or 5 unique crop sensors. That's a lot of chip making overhead.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Sep 2, 2022)

SnowMiku said:


> I think it was the perfect opportunity for market segmentation, if you really need the battery grip then Canon wants you to buy the R5 instead of the R7.


But I want crop! 

You used to be able to buy grips for rebel series DSLRs for Christ sakes!


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Sep 2, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> If they thought a grip for the R7 would be profitable, most likely they’d have made one. Possibly the grips for the 7DII and 90D didn’t sell enough units to be profitable. That rationale is far more sensible saving the grip for some future model.
> 
> I suspect the only ‘more advanced’ R7 will be the R7II in several years. Canon wants more serious photographers to buy FF cameras and the lenses for them.


I can’t see how a grip for the R7 wouldn’t be profitable. 

Just make the R7 compatible with the already existing bg r10 grip.


----------



## snapshot (Sep 2, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> I think that it is unlikely. Type A has capacity limitations that Type B doesn't. Sony was the only manufacturer until recently and (as far as I know) there are only 2 bodies that use them and they also take USH-ii cards. As far as I know, very few A1 shooters bother with CFe cards as the USH-ii cards are fast enough.
> 
> A successor for USH-ii cards is the next question of course. SDexpress is possible but I think that CFe Type B may be more dominant given the current market for faster speeds.


Thought a: no reason to want something other than SD unless you need more write speed.
Thought b: I thnk my CFe Type B card generates too much heat for many SD applications.


----------



## entoman (Sep 2, 2022)

Inspired said:


> Boy I hope they give us 24mp with the top LCD screen that should have been included in the mk1 but wasn't.


I have the R5, and I've occasionally used an R6 belonging to a friend. I greatly prefer the simple mode dial on the R6.

The combined LCD and mode dial on the R5 requires the user to first press the centre of the mode dial and then to rotate it, while watching the modes appear one at a time in the LCD. This is slower and more cumbersome than the R6 method. Furthermore, there is a lag in the time it takes each mode to display, and it's easy at first, to turn the R5 dial in the wrong direction and get the wrong mode.


----------



## Czardoom (Sep 2, 2022)

AlanF said:


> I am afraid you are not getting my message. Of course you can't judge an image until you have seen it. But, your sweeping generalization that "if the frame isn’t filled with that then no amount of cropping is going to make for an acceptable image." is saying the complete opposite of that - you are judging in advance without seeing it that an image is unacceptable because it is cropped. I have stated that clearly 3 times and will say it no more.


Repeating the obvious to someone who is biased and ridiculously closed-minded is a waste of time, as you are finding out. And the more they repeat their silly "proclamations," the more they lose their credibility.


----------



## entoman (Sep 2, 2022)

Chaitanya said:


> CFxpress A might replace SD format if its adopted by manufacturers other than Sony. In case of SD its quite omnipresent in almost all sectors.


IMO the chances of other manufacturers adopting CFExpress A are somewhere below *zero*.

Over the years, Sony have made some weird choices over media - remember floppy disks, CD-R and memory sticks?
They chose CFE-A this time because it enabled them to squeeze SD into the same slots, but I doubt if many Sony owners use CFE-A cards - my guess, based on speaking to a few Sony BIF photographer friends, is that most think SD is fast enough.

All the other brands have already made their choices and are unlikely to change:
CFExpress B for the highest performance models.
SD for less demanding models.


----------



## entoman (Sep 2, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> For tracking fast subjects, the R3 has the advantage of the AF system sampling the sensor at twice the frequency of other cameras with the same basic AF system. The faster sampling is possible because of the stacked sensor.


Very true. However, I'd dare to suggest that lens design has far greater impact on AF speed and tracking than sampling frequency.

For subjects at a fairly constant distance, but moving *across* the frame, faster sampling speeds will certainly enable faster and more accurate tracking.

But, in the case of subjects that are moving rapidly towards, or away from the camera, many lenses have problems keeping up, because the AF motors can't move the lens elements fast enough.


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 2, 2022)

AlanF said:


> What I didn't understand was that he said it was unrealistic for Canon to put the R3 stacked sensor in the R6 (II) but wanted it to have the AF of the R3. The R3 also has a more powerful battery, which in the 1D series drives the AF faster, another difference.


10.8V for the R3 vs 7.2V for the R5 etc. That's been standard operating procedure for both Nikon and Canon cameras for decades, although the voltage difference wasn't usually this large.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 2, 2022)

Jasonmc89 said:


> I can’t see how a grip for the R7 wouldn’t be profitable.
> 
> Just make the R7 compatible with the already existing bg r10 grip.


You should really tell Canon, you clearly know way more about this complicated camera-y stuff than they do.


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 2, 2022)

entoman said:


> I have the R5, and I've occasionally used an R6 belonging to a friend. I greatly prefer the simple mode dial on the R6.
> 
> The combined LCD and mode dial on the R5 requires the user to first press the centre of the mode dial and then to rotate it, while watching the modes appear one at a time in the LCD. This is slower and more cumbersome than the R6 method. Furthermore, there is a lag in the time it takes each mode to display, and it's easy at first, to turn the R5 dial in the wrong direction and get the wrong mode.


You can customize which modes are available and leave out the ones you don’t want.


----------



## entoman (Sep 2, 2022)

koenkooi said:


> You can customize which modes are available and leave out the ones you don’t want.


Yes, I do, but that still gives me 5 modes to cycle through - *C1, C2, C3* and *M* (for me), and *P* in case I pass the camera to a friend or colleague who isn't familiar with it.

I still much prefer the simple dial of the R6.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 2, 2022)

entoman said:


> Yes, I do, but that still gives me 5 modes to cycle through - *C1, C2, C3* and *M* (for me), and *P* in case I pass the camera to a friend or colleague who isn't familiar with it.
> 
> I still much prefer the simple dial of the R6.


Can mode switching be assigned to the M.Fn button as a can on the R3 (and 1-series)? I find that to be the fastest way to cycle through the modes (just four for me, yours minus P).


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Sep 2, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> You should really tell Canon, you clearly know way more about this complicated camera-y stuff than they do.


It’s not about knowing complicated camera-y stuff. But thanks for the sarky comment.

It’s a design feature, that as a customer of crop sensor cameras, I am disappointed their highest performing crop sensor camera can’t accept a battery grip. As are many others. You used to be able to buy a grip for a rebel series DSLR…


----------



## AlanF (Sep 2, 2022)

entoman said:


> I have the R5, and I've occasionally used an R6 belonging to a friend. I greatly prefer the simple mode dial on the R6.
> 
> The combined LCD and mode dial on the R5 requires the user to first press the centre of the mode dial and then to rotate it, while watching the modes appear one at a time in the LCD. This is slower and more cumbersome than the R6 method. Furthermore, there is a lag in the time it takes each mode to display, and it's easy at first, to turn the R5 dial in the wrong direction and get the wrong mode.


I used to prefer the R6 and now R7 mechanical mode dial. On the R5, I have assigned mode dial to the M-fn button and it cycles through C1, C2 and C3, and then the last mode set, usually Fv for me. I now prefer this, but my wife is more used to C1-C3 on the R7.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 2, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Can mode switching be assigned to the M.Fn button as a can on the R3 (and 1-series)? I find that to be the fastest way to cycle through the modes (just four for me, yours minus P).


Yes, I answered this as you were posting and we overlapped in the ether. We can cycle through in milliseconds using M-fn.


----------



## KT (Sep 2, 2022)

AlanF said:


> The Sony A9 II is FF stacked sensor and cheaper than the Z9. I don’t know what you mean by giving it the R3 AF?


I was referring to the Eye AF in the R3 which could be offered in a mid-level body like the R6 II without breaking the bank.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 2, 2022)

Jasonmc89 said:


> It’s not about knowing complicated camera-y stuff. But thanks for the sarky comment.
> 
> It’s a design feature, that as a customer of crop sensor cameras, I am disappointed their highest performing crop sensor camera can’t accept a battery grip. As are many others. You used to be able to buy a grip for a rebel series DSLR…


You have every right to be disappointed. Canon made the decision to not offer a grip for the R7. You say you're sure it would have been profitable, my point is that Canon is in a far better position to have that information...and they decided not to make a grip. I think your original argument, that they designed the R7 without a grip to induce buyers to not get the R7 but to get the non-existent 'pro-grade APS-C model', is ludicrous. Far more logical to make a grip for every model where it would be profitable. That's what for-profit companies do, try to maximize profit. The fact that they decided to not offer a grip is a pretty sure indicator they didn't think it would sell well enough.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 2, 2022)

KT said:


> I was referring to the Eye AF in the R3 which could be offered in a mid-level body like the R6 II without breaking the bank.


Lots of Canon MILCs have Eye AF. I think you mean Eye-controlled AF, which is something different. That's a non-trivial feature requiring a larger VF assembly with multiple sensors. Highly doubt we'll see one in an R6-level body, ever. Maybe an R5-level body. Maybe.


----------



## Daner (Sep 2, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> So, basically you want an R3 without the eye focus control for the price of an R6?!?!
> 
> Not gonna happen, ever!


That isn't what I was suggesting.
The R3 has many additional features that drive costs. Eye-AF. The optical sensor on the joystick. Double sets of controls. The battery grip. Additional ports. Higher resolution EVF and screen. Higher fps with both mechanical and electronic shutter. The R6 body has none of these, and I would happily forego them if it meant a smaller, lighter, less expensive camera than the R3 but with the same potential IQ. Higher price than the R6 would also be acceptable, as long as it stays meaningfully below the R5.


----------



## bernie_king (Sep 2, 2022)

Daner said:


> That isn't what I was suggesting.
> The R3 has many additional features that drive costs. Eye-AF. The optical sensor on the joystick. Double sets of controls. The battery grip. Additional ports. Higher resolution EVF and screen. Higher fps with both mechanical and electronic shutter. The R6 body has none of these, and I would happily forego them if it meant a smaller, lighter, less expensive camera than the R3 but with the same potential IQ. Higher price than the R6 would also be acceptable, as long as it stays meaningfully below the R5.


The R3 also has faster AF, and that comes as a result of the faster stacked sensor. The stacked sensor is the source of most of the cost differential. If there were an R6 II at this point, I wouldn't expect a stacked sensor. Maybe a few more pixels, etc... but there not going to make an Almost R3 and charge $4000 less for that camera. They would probably lose money. All that being said, I am 99% sure this is a fake rumor. I don't believe Canon is ready to replace the R6 right now. There are still some holes to be filled in the lineup before they start replacing existing cameras that still have strong sales. I don't believe the R5 & R6 will see replacements until we see an R1 and something between the R6 & R5


----------



## entoman (Sep 3, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Can mode switching be assigned to the M.Fn button as a can on the R3 (and 1-series)? I find that to be the fastest way to cycle through the modes (just four for me, yours minus P).


Yes it can, but I've assigned Mfn to cycle AF modes (zones) instead, because I often need to change AF modes very quickly, especially when photographing birds and insects. A lot of people assign the AF/ON and/or * buttons to do this, but I just find using the Mfn to cycle through the settings suits my way of working.

I criticised the R5 method of changing exposure modes, but it isn't a big problem, I just prefer the R6 method.


----------



## KT (Sep 3, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lots of Canon MILCs have Eye AF. I think you mean Eye-controlled AF, which is something different. That's a non-trivial feature requiring a larger VF assembly with multiple sensors. Highly doubt we'll see one in an R6-level body, ever. Maybe an R5-level body. Maybe.


Yes, I meant Eye-controlled AF not eye AF, was hoping to see this feature trickle down to a mid-level camera but as you said it's probably too expensive to offer anywhere below R3 / R1 kind of body.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 3, 2022)

KT said:


> Yes, I meant Eye-controlled AF not eye AF, was hoping to see this feature trickle down to a mid-level camera but as you said it's probably too expensive to offer anywhere below R3 / R1 kind of body.


I’ve found it to be disappointing in real world use. Unless they really improve it, I won’t miss it in the least. I’m sure others will disagree, but I don’t care about it. Now, eye AF is another story entirely.


----------



## Fischer (Sep 3, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> Still using my 6Dii until Canon cop on and make a decent camera at a decent price with decent MP and a decent battery (lPE6). Hopefully thats the Rii or 8.


R6 is a great affordable camera - and a lot better than the 6DII (which I have also used). Battery life is very good too. One spare is all you will need for a day’s intensive shooting.


----------



## Fischer (Sep 3, 2022)

entoman said:


> I find it difficult to see what Canon could do to *significantly* improve the R6, without the price increasing considerably.
> 
> The only regular complaint I read about the camera is that many people consider the 20MP sensor insufficient.


The 20 MPIX is on the small size, but digital software-enlargement such as Gigapixel AI has come a very long way and I am very impressed by how few times I miss having more pixels (even if I’m a pixel hog and just holding out with the R6 while waiting for the much-rumoured-never-appearing high MPIX R).


----------



## Videoboy (Sep 3, 2022)

R6c anyone?


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 3, 2022)

Before buying my R7, I seriously considered an OM Systems OM-1. Last Spring, DP Review did a comparison of the OM-1 and Canon's R3 shooting indoor hockey. The results were as expected, with most of the differences being a result of the large differences in sensor sizes. The thing that was striking was the enormous difference in price. The R3 plus a 70-200 f/2.8 was 2.3 times the OM-1 and their 40-150 f/2.8. Assuming that OM systems is making a profit on the OM-1, is the R3 grotesquely overpriced and could OM systems make a 24MP FF with all the OM-1 features and sell it profitably at $3200? Could Canon do the same thing with an R6-2?


----------



## Avenger 2.0 (Sep 3, 2022)

Exmun said:


> Two years after its debut and the R6 STILL overheats. Firmware 1.60 fixed overheating on the R5, but did nothing to cure the overheating in the R6. Mine still overheats, just from being on for a while (about an hour). I have no info to say whether the rumor is true or not, but one thing I know is that we are in need of a new version of the R6 to fix the overheating and add a few megapixels to the sensor.
> 
> As a wedding and portrait photographer and videographer, the R6 is nearly perfect as a hybrid camera for that world. It’s great in low light and the image is astounding. The only flaws are that it overheats in video and, in certain busy photos, the lower resolution shows up. Canon has demonstrated that it has no desire to fix the R6. So they might as well create a new one with the improvements above.


You are right, but to me it looks like they don't fix this to not cannibalize R5 sales. So a R6ii will certainly be crippled in some (new) way for the same reasons.


----------



## Rumours not rumors (Sep 3, 2022)

If Canon wants me to jump off my EF mount 90D's over to mirrorless, they would have to offer a 90D equivalent in all respects with perhaps a small drop in pixels BUT it MUST have a battery grip or forget it... no battery grip on the R7 was an instant deal breaker on a camera that consumes more power than a matching DSLR. Ideally I would love a 90D (both of mine have battery grips) with the low light / high ISO performance of a R6 (which has a battery grip) and I'd be grabbing my cheque book. Canon could easily have provided for a grip on the R7 but it seems obvious they held back to buffer the R6. There's plenty of budget DSLR models that have grips available, and the absurdly high price of some Canon grips indicates they must be a profitable cash cow in their own right. A grip is pretty much a couple of mouldings screwed together and a small amount of wiring yet they often cost more than a zoom lens - go figure. The grip not only gives me more shot capacity but also something meaty to grab. If I am forced to get off EF for a toy sized mirrorless, I would have to consider possibly going to Sony because of the availability of 3rd party lens makers like SIGMA. The moment a model of anything electronic hits the shelves, it is on the path to being made obsolete by a new model at some stage so to dumb down a newer model to protect an older model is just plain stupid, not helped by the goofy R numbering leaving no room from something between the 20MP R6 and the 45MP R5. Would have made sense to call the R5 a R4 so there was some wiggle room inbetween. There was no genuine need to try to carry over the numbering system of EF mount models into mirrorless. Who cares if a mirrorless equivalent of a 5D was called a R5 or R4? If they had used R50 and R60 instead of R5 and R6, there'd be more numbers to play with. It was no secret that Sharp used to discontinue microwave oven models when they hit the top selling position as it gave them a launch pad to introduce a new model when customers asked about the previous. Canon not encouraging 3rd party glass makers has huge potential to backfire on them; better to sell a body and no lens than nothing at all. The world has grown tired of companies trying to create monopolies and vote with their feet. Oh and I couldn't care less about video specs. I just want a camera than shoots photos rapidly in low light with minimal image noise. 4K video in a DSLR is as useful to me as an inflatable dart board. </ falls off soap box >


----------



## entoman (Sep 3, 2022)

Rumours not rumors said:


> If Canon wants me to jump off my EF mount 90D's over to mirrorless, they would have to offer a 90D equivalent in all respects with perhaps a small drop in pixels BUT it MUST have a battery grip or forget it... no battery grip on the R7 was an instant deal breaker on a camera that consumes more power than a matching DSLR. Ideally I would love a 90D (both of mine have battery grips) with the low light / high ISO performance of a R6 (which has a battery grip) and I'd be grabbing my cheque book. Canon could easily have provided for a grip on the R7 but it seems obvious they held back to buffer the R6. (....)


It seems to me that most pros and some sports/wildlife photographers want an integral grip, rather than an add-on. Without knowing the sales figures, I'd also chance my arm by saying that the vast majority of enthusiast users never buy a grip because a) they are ridiculously overpriced, and b) they add too much bulk and weight. The solution IMO is not to provide us with battery grips, but to dispense with the need for them!

*Canon really needs to find a way to reduce battery consumption and/or provide batteries that last longer between charging cycles*. I understand the desire for continuity, but it seems crazy to me that the R5/6 use basically the same battery as was used in early 5 and 7 series DSLRs. Of course, it's not just the batteries themselves that are the problem - Canon circuitry simply isn't as efficient as that used by Sony, who manage to squeeze a lot more shots out of a battery.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 3, 2022)

entoman said:


> It seems to me that most pros and some sports/wildlife photographers want an integral grip, rather than an add-on. Without knowing the sales figures, I'd also chance my arm by saying that the vast majority of enthusiast users never buy a grip because a) they are ridiculously overpriced, and b) they add too much bulk and weight. The solution IMO is not to provide us with battery grips, but to dispense with the need for them!
> 
> *Canon really needs to find a way to reduce battery consumption and/or provide batteries that last longer between charging cycles*. I understand the desire for continuity, but it seems crazy to me that the R5/6 use basically the same battery as was used in early 5 and 7 series DSLRs. Of course, it's not just the batteries themselves that are the problem - Canon circuitry simply isn't as efficient as that used by Sony, who manage to squeeze a lot more shots out of a battery.


If the only reason for a grip is for it to carry a second battery then why not simply carry a spare or two in your pocket - much cheaper and lighter? Canon could make it better by reducing the cost of the over-priced LP-E6NH.


----------



## entoman (Sep 3, 2022)

AlanF said:


> If the only reason for a grip is for it to carry a second battery then why not simply carry a spare or two in your pocket - much cheaper and lighter? Canon could make it better by reducing the cost of the over-priced LP-E6NH.


I always carry at least 2, usually 3, fully charged batteries for a full day's shooting. Usually I get about halfway through the second battery and that's enough, but on major shoots I've had to resort to the third battery on several occasions. All genuine LP-E6NH. And I've got the camera setup to economise with minimum EVF and screen usage etc.

1) it's a damn nuisance having to swap out batteries when there's a lot of action taking place.

2) wildlife and wilderness photographers very often find ourselves in remote places in the world where recharging facilities are either extremely limited, or plain non-existent, so we need maximum shots per battery charge.

3) Canon really needs to get their act together and either improve their circuitry, or provide a longer lasting battery.

CIPA figures - shots per charge:

Canon R5 - 320
Canon R6 - 360
Nikon Z6ii - 410
Nikon Z7ii - 420
Sony a7iv - 580
Sony a7Riv - 670


----------



## john1970 (Sep 4, 2022)

Serious question: Would manufacturers typically have prototypes in testing two years prior to commercial launch?

For me it make sense that Canon could be testing a few different prototypes for a successor to the R6.


----------



## MiJax (Sep 4, 2022)

john1970 said:


> Serious question: Would manufacturers typically have prototypes in testing two years prior to commercial launch?
> 
> For me it make sense that Canon could be testing a few different prototypes for a successor to the R6.


We normally don't hear about people testing them until about 8 months prior to release/announcement. But I'm sure the internal testing occurs before that. 

Don't put too much stock in the source, How to Fly, someone mentioned his Twitter account had like 30 tweets in the last 10 years.



entoman said:


> I always carry at least 2, usually 3, fully charged batteries for a full day's shooting. Usually I get about halfway through the second battery and that's enough, but on major shoots I've had to resort to the third battery on several occasions. All genuine LP-E6NH. And I've got the camera setup to economise with minimum EVF and screen usage etc.
> 
> 1) it's a damn nuisance having to swap out batteries when there's a lot of action taking place.
> 
> ...


Canon is very low in comparison for reasons I can accept, smaller capacity batteries that are backwards compatible, and better EVF performance (Sony dumbs down the EVF resolution for shooting to save battery and CPU cycles). 

If they created a new non-backwards compatible battery I'd bet, they would be significantly closer or better. As well, a lot of the limitations would be removed like frame rate under a certain capacity level. However, they chose to dumb down the camera a little to save people on the expense. Again, that's a good choice, IMO.


----------



## sanj (Sep 4, 2022)

entoman said:


> I always carry at least 2, usually 3, fully charged batteries for a full day's shooting. Usually I get about halfway through the second battery and that's enough, but on major shoots I've had to resort to the third battery on several occasions. All genuine LP-E6NH. And I've got the camera setup to economise with minimum EVF and screen usage etc.
> 
> 1) it's a damn nuisance having to swap out batteries when there's a lot of action taking place.
> 
> ...


It takes 10 seconds to change a battery and with proper anticipation, changing batteries is not a problem. No.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 4, 2022)

Rumours not rumors said:


> Ideally I would love a 90D with the low light / high ISO performance of a R6


Not physically possible?


----------



## entoman (Sep 4, 2022)

sanj said:


> It takes 10 seconds to change a battery and with proper anticipation, changing batteries is not a problem. No.


Some people are happy to accept atrocious performance from Canon's batteries, that's their choice. I've been using Canon gear for 11 years and have spent a great deal of money on it, but I'm not blinded by brand loyalty. When Canon (or any other brand) excels, I'm the first to praise them, but when they significantly underperform compared to other brands, I'll slam them.


----------



## Del Paso (Sep 4, 2022)

entoman said:


> Some people are happy to accept atrocious performance from Canon's batteries, that's their choice. I've been using Canon gear for 11 years and have spent a great deal of money on it, but I'm not blinded by brand loyalty. When Canon (or any other brand) excels, I'm the first to praise them, but when they significantly underperform compared to other brands, I'll slam them.


Is it the batteries, or is it the cameras?
My 5 D IV is a real "battery-eater", unlike my EOS R. I've never succeeded to get more than 450 shots (no bursts!) from the 5 D IV, but more than 800 from the R (no bursts).
My issue is rather durability of the batteries, 2-3 years max. despite careful use and energy efficient settings.
Leica M 240 battery: 8,5 years old, and still good...but horribly expensive when replacement is needed.


----------



## entoman (Sep 4, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> Is it the batteries, or is it the cameras?
> My 5 D IV is a real "battery-eater", unlike my EOS R. I've never succeeded to get more than 450 shots (no bursts!) from the 5 D IV, but more than 800 from the R (no bursts).
> My issue is rather durability of the batteries, 2-3 years max. despite careful use and energy efficient settings.
> Leica M 240 battery: 8,5 years old, and still good...but horribly expensive when replacement is needed.


3 things really:

Battery performance - this would probably require Canon to develop a physically larger battery, ruling out backwards compatibility, but it's feasible they could squeeze more performance and longevity per charge while retaining the same battery format. There are valid arguments in favour of backwards compatibility, but personally I'd rather that Canon just moved on, and produced the next generation of cameras, using larger and better batteries.

Camera electronics - unfortunately Canon lag behind Sony by a considerable margin here, which is unsurprising, given Sony's long history with electronics. I'm no expert on electronics, but from what I've read and heard, Sony uses much more advanced circuitry than Canon, which places less demand on batteries.

Usage - some photographers will leave a camera turned on for long periods, or spend long periods with finger half-pressed on the shutter, in anticipation of a shot. Some photographers will set the camera to the fastest refresh rate, and have the EVF and sleep timers set to 3 minutes or longer. Others will only switch the camera on just prior to taking a shot, and then turn it off until the next shot. Some will be shooting mainly single shots, some shooting long bursts, some shooting video. Shooting style has a great impact on shots-per-charge.

My R5 battery life roughly corresponds with the CIPA figure of 320 shots per charge.
My 5DMkiv battery life averages about 600 shots per charge (LP-E6NH in both cases).

Regarding durability, I think 2 years is an acceptable lifespan, but a lot will depend on how many recharge cycles the batteries get.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Sep 4, 2022)

Setting a CR1 record for posts and time at the top of the page it looks like = slow news period


----------



## entoman (Sep 4, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> Setting a CR1 record for posts and time at the top of the page it looks like = slow news period


Yeah, but no thread ever sticks to the original subject, we all go off at a tangent, and try to find something else to discuss.


----------



## john1970 (Sep 4, 2022)

MiJax said:


> We normally don't hear about people testing them until about 8 months prior to release/announcement. But I'm sure the internal testing occurs before that.
> 
> Don't put too much stock in the source, How to Fly, someone mentioned his Twitter account had like 30 tweets in the last 10 years.
> 
> ...


I agree. I can easily foresee internal prototype testing a few different versions being performed 18-24 months in advance of a commercial release date. Maybe we will get a BSI (non-stacked) sensor for the R6II?


----------



## Blue Zurich (Sep 4, 2022)

entoman said:


> Yeah, but no thread ever sticks to the original subject, we all go off at a tangent, and try to find something else to discuss.


In this forum there is no try only do.


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 5, 2022)

entoman said:


> I'd have to disagree on that one. I've had both. The 5DMkiv is a full-on professional camera that can easily withstand several years of abuse in the form of temperature extremes, high humidity, rain, knocks and bangs. Mine has been bashed about, dropped onto hard surfaces and has 200K actuations, yet still functions as new. I just can't see the R surviving that sort of treatment, although I obviously can't prove it.
> 
> I only kept my R briefly, and now have the R5. The latter is better built than the R, but still not as sturdy and bullet-proof as a 5DMkiv.


I agree that my 5Div felt more sturdy but was also heavier so whether it actually is more sturdy is an interesting discussion. I haven't been hearing about R5's hotshoe being damaged easily. I have dropped R5 once and no problems. The exception is the hotshoe on the R5 which seems to be damaged too often.

For actuations, keep in mind that the 5Div is rated at 150k whereas the R5 is 500k. I am certainly going through actuations faster than my 5Div.
Noting that the R5 has mechanical FPS at double the 5Div.


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 5, 2022)

MiJax said:


> Canon is very low in comparison for reasons I can accept, smaller capacity batteries that are backwards compatible, and better EVF performance (Sony dumbs down the EVF resolution for shooting to save battery and CPU cycles).
> 
> If they created a new non-backwards compatible battery I'd bet, they would be significantly closer or better. As well, a lot of the limitations would be removed like frame rate under a certain capacity level. However, they chose to dumb down the camera a little to save people on the expense. Again, that's a good choice, IMO.


Sony does have tricks in the EVF to reduce default power usage but Sony's processor does seem to be more efficient in gross terms compared to the R5. Sony doesn't use CFe Type B which are generate a lot of heat (power consumption). I haven't seen a comparison of battery life when only SD card is used.

Canon upped their battery capacity by 14% with the R5/6. Sony have 7% more capacity but have much greater CIPA numbers. I get that CIPA doesn't equal real life for most shooters but it is a direct comparison between models. Canon's issue is processing efficiency overall.
LP-E6N = 1865 mAh 
LP-E6NH = 2130 mAh +14%
Sony NP-FZ100 = 2280mAh +7%


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 5, 2022)

entoman said:


> *Canon really needs to find a way to reduce battery consumption and/or provide batteries that last longer between charging cycles*. I understand the desire for continuity, but it seems crazy to me that the R5/6 use basically the same battery as was used in early 5 and 7 series DSLRs. Of course, it's not just the batteries themselves that are the problem - Canon circuitry simply isn't as efficient as that used by Sony, who manage to squeeze a lot more shots out of a battery.


Canon squeezed in 14% more capacity with the R5/6 LP-E6NH but is still 7% less than the Sony battery. 
CIPA differences are >>>7% so the gross comparison is that the issue is Canon's processor efficiency and storage (CFe Type B vs SD/CFe Type A).
Canon's biggest power efficiency gain would be for the Digic Xii to use a smaller nm fab and more SoC like Apple's M1 chip variants. A change to the CFe spec for lower heat generation would also assist greatly.

When I need to use a LP-E6N instead of E6NH, the battery length seems to be much lower than the 14% difference would indicate so maybe there are more efficiencies in the power management as well. It is also likely that my older batteries have seen more cycles and decreased capacity over time.
It is interesting that my DJI M3P batteries are also "intelligent" and have had firmware updates at the same time as controller/drone firmware updates but I have never seen this with Canon batteries.

LP-E6N = 1865 mAh 
LP-E6NH = 2130 mAh +14%
Sony NP-FZ100 = 2280mAh +7%


----------



## MiJax (Sep 5, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Sony does have tricks in the EVF to reduce default power usage but Sony's processor does seem to be more efficient in gross terms compared to the R5. Sony doesn't use CFe Type B which are generate a lot of heat (power consumption). I haven't seen a comparison of battery life when only SD card is used.
> 
> Canon upped their battery capacity by 14% with the R5/6. Sony have 7% more capacity but have much greater CIPA numbers. I get that CIPA doesn't equal real life for most shooters but it is a direct comparison between models. Canon's issue is processing efficiency overall.
> LP-E6N = 1865 mAh
> ...


Thanks for posting, I was under the impression the capacity difference was greater. But this also brings up a point I forgot to mention prior, I'd bet Sony manipulates the tests. The tests include shooting and turning the camera off and then back on for every shot. If a company were too slow to the boot up time and use less power, they could significantly improve the CIPA number, but in regular use the user would likely be unhappy with that tradeoff. I've shot side by side with a Sony A1 user and the batteries didn't have a significant difference at the end of the day. However, note, our cameras weren't configured in a comparative way. Also of note, if you compare how long the R5 and A1 record video on one battery it is very similar. 

Again, thanks for clearing up the capacity though, I definitely missed it there.


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 5, 2022)

MiJax said:


> Thanks for posting, I was under the impression the capacity difference was greater. But this also brings up a point I forgot to mention prior, I'd bet Sony manipulates the tests. The tests include shooting and turning the camera off and then back on for every shot. If a company were too slow to the boot up time and use less power, they could significantly improve the CIPA number, but in regular use the user would likely be unhappy with that tradeoff. I've shot side by side with a Sony A1 user and the batteries didn't have a significant difference at the end of the day. However, note, our cameras weren't configured in a comparative way. Also of note, if you compare how long the R5 and A1 record video on one battery it is very similar.
> 
> Again, thanks for clearing up the capacity though, I definitely missed it there.


I guess that all OEMs will adjust their base config to better meet the tests. You can certainly increase the EVF refresh rate on the R5 at the detriment of battery life. So far, I haven't felt the need to do it though.
One battery was sufficient for my 5Div for a indoor sports session (maybe 1600 shots). I need 2 batteries for the R5 (closer to 2000 shots). Not a major hassle. I am taking more shots with the R5 due to faster burst.


----------



## Chaitanya (Sep 5, 2022)

entoman said:


> I always carry at least 2, usually 3, fully charged batteries for a full day's shooting. Usually I get about halfway through the second battery and that's enough, but on major shoots I've had to resort to the third battery on several occasions. All genuine LP-E6NH. And I've got the camera setup to economise with minimum EVF and screen usage etc.
> 
> 1) it's a damn nuisance having to swap out batteries when there's a lot of action taking place.
> 
> ...


EOS R3 - 620 shots from larger battery. 
Nikon Z9 - 770
Sony a1 - 530 (on much smaller battery with option to double it via grip).


MiJax said:


> Canon is very low in comparison for reasons I can accept, smaller capacity batteries that are backwards compatible, and better EVF performance (Sony dumbs down the EVF resolution for shooting to save battery and CPU cycles).


Sony made a switch to FZ100 series of batteries at one point and in the long run that higher capacity battery(still similarly sized to Canon LP-E6 series) along with improvements in efficiency has helped a lot. In past Canon has changed batteries to improve things and they are generally ruthless about it so not sure why stick with LP-E6 now.


----------



## InchMetric (Sep 5, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> In France it is even illegal to take photos of the Eiffel Tower at night, because the lighting scheme is copyrighted. That would be impossible in Germany, where you can take photos of anything from a public street.


This IP attorney is doubtful that is true.


----------



## Del Paso (Sep 5, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I have never tried a monopod, but at least you can keep a monopod close to your body or even hide it. The argument that somebody could stumble across your monopod and fall could not be used. To be honest I usually use a tripod anyway, because it takes some time until security tells me to stop and by then I already have my photo. At Burj Khalifa security quickly stopped me with my tripod on the crowded side. So I came back six days later from the other side, where hardly any people are. I was able to take photos for half an hour that time before security stopped me again. As a photographer you sometimes have to ignore laws that restrict your freedom to take photos.
> 
> In France it is even illegal to take photos of the Eiffel Tower at night, because the lighting scheme is copyrighted. That would be impossible in Germany, where you can take photos of anything from a public street.


France, (Tour Eiffel by night): absolutely correct, but French police is tolerant in case of private use.
Germany, whatever can be seen from a public place: absolutely correct!
Of course, this does not necessarily apply to people, whose right of privacy is protected by law.


----------



## TAF (Sep 5, 2022)

Why might Canon be ‘rushing’ out an R6M2? Perhaps there are components that are no longer available required for the R6 design, so they‘ve redesigned the internals using more readily available parts.

Expect more of that sort of thing in the coming years in many sectors of the electronics industry.


----------



## entoman (Sep 5, 2022)

TAF said:


> Perhaps there are components that are no longer available required for the R6 design, so they‘ve redesigned the internals using more readily available parts.


Possibly, but I think that this clickbait "rumour" from a very dubious source is pure BS, and that a R6ii is another 2 years away and will have a 24MP or 30MP sensor.


----------



## Johnw (Sep 5, 2022)

entoman said:


> a R6ii is another 2 years away



I 100% agree and I just purchased an R6 last month. No reason for anyone in the market for an R6 to be waiting at this point, the stock on the Mark I barely just became stable lol.


----------



## David - Sydney (Sep 6, 2022)

MiJax said:


> Thanks for posting, I was under the impression the capacity difference was greater. But this also brings up a point I forgot to mention prior, I'd bet Sony manipulates the tests. The tests include shooting and turning the camera off and then back on for every shot. If a company were too slow to the boot up time and use less power, they could significantly improve the CIPA number, but in regular use the user would likely be unhappy with that tradeoff. I've shot side by side with a Sony A1 user and the batteries didn't have a significant difference at the end of the day. However, note, our cameras weren't configured in a comparative way. Also of note, if you compare how long the R5 and A1 record video on one battery it is very similar.
> 
> Again, thanks for clearing up the capacity though, I definitely missed it there.


I forgot to mention that the Sony battery is ~1.5% larger physically than the Canon battery using gross dimensions but gives a clear message that the battery volumes are pretty much the same. 
Battery intelligence may be different of course but the overall issue is not the battery but the downstream power usage in Canon cameras.


----------



## MiJax (Sep 6, 2022)

Johnw said:


> I 100% agree and I just purchased an R6 last month. No reason for anyone in the market for an R6 to be waiting at this point, the stock on the Mark I barely just became stable lol.


Yes and no, I definitely wouldn't be waiting for an R6 II, but I might wait for a price drop. 
With the R7, something tells me R6's may start gathering on shelves, and if that happens fall-winter sales could start. Still a long shot, but definitely a possibility.


----------



## GoldWing (Sep 6, 2022)

What about the R1


----------



## Shaun Gibbs (Sep 6, 2022)

SHAMwow said:


> Can't wait for people to put off buying an R6 now while they wait four years for this.


Get real. Three years at the most.


----------



## codym90 (Sep 6, 2022)

There's only a couple things I'd change with my R6 honestly. I'd like just a few more Megapixels honestly. Everything else is more than fine. I'll be excited to see what all specs the Mark 2 would even have. Overall I'm pretty satisfied with my R6.
-Cody McCracken
Boudoir Photography West Virginia


----------



## JasonL (Sep 6, 2022)

Stacked 30mpx sensor would be phenomenal.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Sep 6, 2022)

Oh I just noticed this is a rumour from Twitter user (how2fly).... aye, also claimed the Nikon Z8 was coming out in August and it'll be next and that the Z7iii and Z6iii will come next year. They aren't even remotely reliable nor trusted, everything they post is absolute nonsense. That the R6ii will have a stacked sensor tracks with their other ludicrous claims.


----------



## entoman (Sep 8, 2022)

GoldWing said:


> What about the R1


That will be released in July 2022, and will have a 200MP sensor, global shutter and shoot at 43,000fps (Twitter user (how2fly)).....


----------



## mpb001 (Sep 10, 2022)

I think Canon needs perhaps something like a R6 with around 30-32MP at this point. Nikon and Sony have all but abandoned the 24-26 MP sensors. To stay competitive, Canon must deliver on a higher than 20-26 MP camera. I can see a potential for one with the build quality of a R6 with IBIS. Virtually all mid to upper grade mirrorless cameras are coming with IBIS now.


----------



## entoman (Sep 13, 2022)

mpb001 said:


> I think Canon needs perhaps something like a R6 with around 30-32MP at this point. Nikon and Sony have all but abandoned the 24-26 MP sensors. To stay competitive, Canon must deliver on a higher than 20-26 MP camera. I can see a potential for one with the build quality of a R6 with IBIS. Virtually all mid to upper grade mirrorless cameras are coming with IBIS now.


Yes, it would be great to have a 30MP model sitting between the R5 and R6, but that would pose a problem with the name - what would they call it? Also there is the problem that an in-between model might cannibalise sales of the R5. I think this R6ii rumour is pure click-bait baloney.

IMO it will be 2 years before we see a replacement for the R6ii, and most likely it will be launched simultaneously with the R5ii. Both will have new more powerful processors, both may possibly have newer more powerful batteries, and the sensors will likely be stacked - 30MP for the R6ii and 60MP for the R5ii. The 20MP slot will then become available for a couple of new budget models - one video-orientated, and the other a typical hybrid design, and both with single SD card slots.


----------



## cayenne (Sep 13, 2022)

entoman said:


> Yes, it would be great to have a 30MP model sitting between the R5 and R6, but that would pose a problem with the name - what would they call it? Also there is the problem that an in-between model might cannibalise sales of the R5. I think this R6ii rumour is pure click-bait baloney.
> 
> IMO it will be 2 years before we see a replacement for the R6ii, and most likely it will be launched simultaneously with the R5ii. Both will have new more powerful processors, both may possibly have newer more powerful batteries, and the sensors will likely be stacked - 30MP for the R6ii and 60MP for the R5ii. The 20MP slot will then become available for a couple of new budget models - one video-orientated, and the other a typical hybrid design, and both with single SD card slots.


Since the R5 is older than the R6...why would we not see an update for the R5 first?

C


----------



## entoman (Sep 13, 2022)

cayenne said:


> Since the R5 is older than the R6...why would we not see an update for the R5 first?
> 
> C


R5 isn't older than R6, both were launched on the same day, i.e. 09 July 2020.

It's possible that the R5ii could be released before the R6ii, but I think they'll either be simultaneous, or very close together.


----------



## Cyborx (Oct 24, 2022)

Some other Canon logics: 

Let’s make the R6, 20 mpixels - 2400 euro’s.
Let’s make the R3, 24 mpixels - 6000 euro’s.
Let’s make the R6II 24 mpixels .. 

Wonder what R3 owners might feel right now.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 24, 2022)

Cyborx said:


> Some other Canon logics:
> 
> Let’s make the R6, 20 mpixels - 2400 euro’s.
> Let’s make the R3, 24 mpixels - 6000 euro’s.
> ...


I’m quite happy with my R3, thanks. But then, I’m not foolish enough to think that the number of MPs is the only camera spec that matters.


----------



## takesome1 (Oct 25, 2022)

Cyborx said:


> Some other Canon logics:
> 
> Let’s make the R6, 20 mpixels - 2400 euro’s.
> Let’s make the R3, 24 mpixels - 6000 euro’s.
> ...


Amused by silly logic.


----------



## SwissFrank (Oct 25, 2022)

Cyborx said:


> Wonder what R3 owners might feel right now.


I think they'd be astonished that anyone thinks their main criteria for a camera is the pixels per dollar.



Cyborx said:


> Could afford two R3's and RF glass, but I just don't think Canon deserves my money with these ridiculous pricing.


The sales volume is down 90% from the 1990s and 2000s, so fixed costs are amortized across far smaller production runs. What is ridiculous about this to you?

I share your apparent interest in not just performance but price/performance, but I've bought my RF outfit all mint used, before the April price increases, and can probably sell it for what I paid. So the net cost to me in the short term is nearly zero and medium-term probably low as well given a slower product replacement cycle that I forecast. I'd agree that used EF gear purchased today will probably lose less money in absolute terms than used RF, considering how much the EF prices have already fallen. However in most cases the lower image quality means you're getting less for less money: not a bad trade, if price/performance is of more interest than mere performance.

I also had a 16-lens EF system and can do about the same shooting with a 7-lens RF system. I also had bought my EOS-1Ds MkI, MkII, and MkIII for over $7500 each when they were new, and probably got less than $1500 for each when I sold them. The R5 was less than half of that. I also went through three generations of trinity zooms, for instance, for the EF in 20 years, each being a large improvement over the previous generation, whose value fell substantially. I'm not sure there is a case to be made that in general EF gear was cheaper to own current models of, per year, for a given range of apertures and focal lengths, even if you set aside the lower image quality. You're implying that Canon for some reason suddenly got "ridiculous" with pricing with RF but I think I spent more money in absolute terms on EF than I will on RF and there's utterly no question which outfit is making better photos.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 25, 2022)

Cyborx said:


> Some other Canon logics:
> 
> Let’s make the R6, 20 mpixels - 2400 euro’s.
> Let’s make the R3, 24 mpixels - 6000 euro’s.
> ...


Canon EOS M200, 24 Mpixels - 569,00 €


----------

