# The next full-frame RF mount camera will be a replacement for the Canon EOS R



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 11, 2022)

> The next RF mount camera that Canon will release will be APS-C, but we can also expect a new full-frame RF mount camera in the next 6 months or so.
> The new camera will be a replacement of sorts for the original Canon EOS R, but it won’t be called the Canon EOS R Mark II. The new full-frame camera will sit below the Canon EOS R6, but will not be a new version of the Canon EOS RP. We think the rising costs in the supply chain may have delayed or nixed the rumored $899 full-frame R series camera.
> We have been told that the new camera could be announced in late 2022 or in early 2023, with a ship date coming in Q1 of 2023.
> We have seen some rumored specifications, but we aren’t confident in their accuracy, so we’ll hold off on that...



Continue reading...


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 11, 2022)

A replacement for the EOS R below the R6 ???
Disappointed.
I still believe there is a missing link between the R5 and the R6 (47 MP & 20 MP).
But let's just wait, it's a rumor, after all.


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 11, 2022)

Was hoping for RP2 first. Please have an LPE6 battery and be under $1500


----------



## Chaitanya (Aug 11, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> A replacement for the EOS R below the R6 ???
> Disappointed.
> I still believe there is a missing link between the R5 and the R6 (47 MP & 20 MP).
> But let's just wait, it's a rumor, after all.


True, given R6 was baby 1Dx and if the line continued to be small sports/wildlife oriented bodies with R being equivalent to A7 ie general purpose FF mirrorless. 

For R replacement only thing canon should do is add dual SD slot and new CPU. As things stand EOS R is a good mirrorless camera at its current price and far better than overpriced R7.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 11, 2022)

Chaitanya said:


> True, given R6 was baby 1Dx and if the line continued to be small sports/wildlife oriented bodies with R being equivalent to A7 ie general purpose FF mirrorless.
> 
> For R replacement only thing canon should do is add dual SD slot and new CPU. As things stand EOS R is a good mirrorless camera at its current price and far better than overpriced R7.


I'm very satisfied with mine, very reliable little camera for stills ( I never do video).
But it could indeed benefit from a second SD slot, an improved EVF and IBIS. But bthese added features would place it above the R6... The R6, in my opinion, lacks a top display, which I often use, and a few more MPs. As you wrote, it's more sports-wildlife oriented, and for many users, an ideal camera. But maybe not as universal as the R.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Aug 11, 2022)

Yes! That's (probably) the camera I've been waiting for, since my R has now surpassed 100.000 clicks already and I've started thinking about replacing it.

The specs will be very tricky for Canon because they obvious need to upgrade the R but they also need enough wiggle room to differentiate it from the R6. So here's my guess:


- 30-34 MP
- no IBIS
- single SD card slot
- 8-10 FPS (mechanical) and 18 FPS e-shutter
--> these specs might have to be better because the R10 would outperform the R successor...
- no Touch Bar, instead the new dial from the R7
- improved AF performance
- improved EVF --> higher refresh rate, higher resolution
- improved video specs, but I've no idea which specs would be suitable because I hardly shoot any video. 

These are just guesses based on the fact that the camera will sit underneath the R6. Of course, IBIS and Dual Card slot would be nice and welcome but from price point of view and don't see that coming.

Of course, they could drastically improve the R successor and then release a monster R6 Mk II in Q1 2023


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Aug 11, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> I'm very satisfied with mine, very reliable little camera for stills ( I never do video).


I totally agree, I love my R and it is a very capable camera. Only two things I actually miss:
- higher FPS
- but AF tracking (it's a shame there haven't been any firmware updates in the past two years or so)


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Aug 11, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> I still believe there is a missing link between the R5 and the R6 (47 MP & 20 MP).


I guess an R6 mk II will feature more Mp and will make up for the "missing link". If Canon pushes the R successor as they have pushed the R7 / R10 in terms of MP, FPS, AF than they'll definitely need to upgrade the R6 very soon.


----------



## Bob Howland (Aug 11, 2022)

How about an R6-2 with the R3 sensor and a $500 price drop?


----------



## gatabo (Aug 11, 2022)

A new FF BSI sensor (no need to be staked as it doesn't need to be super fast) with more than 30MP (but Canon shouldn't use the old sensor again) with Digic X or better at a price point between the R7 and the R6 is going (and needs) to be a good competitor against the Sony a7 IV, is the naming scheme a problem? R6.5 doesn't look good, maybe "R7 FF" could do the job  the truly big thing is the need to replace the useless touch bar with a joystick, even the weird wheel joystick combo of the R7 is far better.


----------



## Groundhog (Aug 11, 2022)

I am curious how canon will place a FF camera below the R6 - same sensor but slower/less features probably won't sell that much and any sensor with more MP could canibalize the R6 sales since that is the main complaint for many.
My guess would be a higher resolution sensor (30ish MP) but no IBIS and maybe a bit slower then the R6.


----------



## Avenger 2.0 (Aug 11, 2022)

Groundhog said:


> I am curious how canon will place a FF camera below the R6 - same sensor but slower/less features probably won't sell that much and any sensor with more MP could canibalize the R6 sales since that is the main complaint for many.
> My guess would be a higher resolution sensor (30ish MP) but no IBIS and maybe a bit slower then the R6.


Might have the same sensor as R6, but less AF options, slower FPS, lower end or no EVF, only 1 SD card slot, LP-E17 battery and no battery grip. Certainly will not be a R successor as that would place it between R5 and R6, not below R6. But doubt it will cost below €$1000 as the R10 is already there. Maybe around €$1500 like the R7?


----------



## bbasiaga (Aug 11, 2022)

It'll sure be interesting to see how they can evolve it, but keep it at a lower price point than the R6. I think the 'replacement of sorts' for the the R has a strong emphasis on the ''of sorts" part. It may turn out to be truly more of an RP replacement, just not at the super low price point due to inflation. 

I guess it could be a slower R7 with similar quality EVF (just bigger to support the FF image) and still hit a $2k price point. 

-Brian


----------



## Groundhog (Aug 11, 2022)

Avenger 2.0 said:


> Might have the same sensor as R6, but less AF options, slower FPS, lower end or no EVF, only 1 SD card slot, LP-E17 battery and no battery grip. Certainly will not be a R successor as that would place it between R5 and R6, not below R6. But doubt it will cost below €$1000 as the R10 is already there. Maybe around €$1500 like the R7?



So more like a FF-Rebel and RP successor ... but priced at R7 level with this feature set I doubt many will go for it, especially when used R6 go for less than 2k.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 11, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> How about an R6-2 with the R3 sensor and a $500 price drop?


A price drop!
Do you still believe in fairies and unicorns?


----------



## entoman (Aug 11, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> A replacement for the EOS R below the R6 ???
> Disappointed.
> I still believe there is a missing link between the R5 and the R6 (47 MP & 20 MP).
> But let's just wait, it's a rumor, after all.


Not so much a rumour, more a statement of the obvious. It's been a foregone conclusion that there will be a budget FF model below the R6, and that it will be closer in styling to the R6 than to the RP.

And yes, the missing link between the R5 and R6 is disappointing - a 30MP inbetweener would be very desirable, but would leave Canon with two problems - firstly - what would they call it?, and secondly, I suspect Canon would rather entice people to spend a bit extra on the R5, than to have an "inbetweener" cannibalise R5 sales.


----------



## entoman (Aug 11, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> I guess an R6 mk II will feature more Mp and will make up for the "missing link". If Canon pushes the R successor as they have pushed the R7 / R10 in terms of MP, FPS, AF than they'll definitely need to upgrade the R6 very soon.


The R6 is an extremely popular camera, so I don't think a Mkii version is on the cards for a year or two. Cheaper and easier for Canon to just improve the already good AF of the existing model, and add a couple of extra features via firmware updates. That way they can concentrate their resources on developing other products.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Aug 11, 2022)

I would like an R3 without any video features for $3000. They can also leave away the SD card slot and I also do not need any eye or animal detection and no electronic shutter.


----------



## entoman (Aug 11, 2022)

Groundhog said:


> I am curious how canon will place a FF camera below the R6 - same sensor but slower/less features probably won't sell that much and any sensor with more MP could canibalize the R6 sales since that is the main complaint for many.
> My guess would be a higher resolution sensor (30ish MP) but no IBIS and maybe a bit slower then the R6.


Apologies for 3 posts in a row, but...

I think it unlikely that they'll introduce a higher-spec (30ish MP) camera below the R6. More likely they'll re-use the R6 sensor, and reduce the spec in certain areas to keep the cost down. Examples could include lower res EVF, fixed screen, elimination of IBIS, elimination of mode dial and buttons (by using advanced "intelligent-auto" metering, and dispensing with P, S, A, M). I'm assuming that the camera would be aimed at budget-conscious novices, who would probably prefer a simplified camera.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 11, 2022)

entoman said:


> Apologies for 3 posts in a row, but...
> 
> I think it unlikely that they'll introduce a higher-spec (30ish MP) camera below the R6. More likely they'll re-use the R6 sensor, and reduce the spec in certain areas to keep the cost down. Examples could include lower res EVF, fixed screen, elimination of IBIS, elimination of mode dial and buttons (by using advanced "intelligent-auto" metering, and dispensing with P, S, A, M). I'm assuming that the camera would be aimed at budget-conscious novices, who would probably prefer a simplified camera.


But then it would be a replacement for the RP, not for the R.
For what I do with a camera, mostly landscapes and flowers, sometimes insects, I would neither replace the R with a lower caracteristics R II, nor witth an R6.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Aug 11, 2022)

entoman said:


> The R6 is an extremely popular camera, so I don't think a Mkii version is on the cards for a year or two.


Well, there are a lot of folks who have an R6, but there is also a big number of people who opted not to get the R6 because of the MP count or the camera being overpriced. Now with a R7 that offers higher FPS and better pixel density, especially for wildlife, I do actually think that a R6 mal II is closer than most people expect. An R6 mk II with a stacked BSI 24-26 MP sensor would intrigue / attract a great number of people, even current R6 owners.


----------



## Bob Howland (Aug 11, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> A price drop!
> Do you still believe in fairies and unicorns?


No, but I believe in competition


----------



## Bob Howland (Aug 11, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> Well, there are a lot of folks who have an R6, but there is also a big number of people who opted not to get the R6 because of the MP count or the camera being overpriced. Now with a R7 that offers higher FPS and better pixel density, especially for wildlife, I do actually think that a R6 mal II is closer than most people expect. An R6 mk II with a stacked BSI 24-26 MP sensor would intrigue / attract a great number of people, even current R6 owners.


Speaking of the R7, how about a 24MP FF camera that is externally identical and operationally very similar but selling for $1900-2000? There are dozens of ways that Canon _might_ proceed. We're all just guessing here.


----------



## mbike999 (Aug 11, 2022)

Any lens rumors on the way? So far a ton of STM zooms and two eye watering telephotos. Really looking forward to that 500/4...but guessing it won't come until the R1.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Aug 11, 2022)

...so, holiday season 2023, Canon buyers will have how many different R model lines to choose from?

...and sort of borrowing from Shakespeare (what is past is prologue)...at the height of model diversity for Canon's line of DSLRs (10-15 years ago?), how many EF (and EF-S) model lines were for sale December 2013?

...and my-oh-my how many different Canon point-and-shoot models were for sale during the 2013 holiday season?

I guess if past is prologue Canon will saturate the 2020s with Rs, eh?

1. The obvious complication: cellphone cameras
2. No place for M and EF-M? Really?!


----------



## Swerky (Aug 11, 2022)

Will not be a new RP. Ok good. we really can’t tell how it will look like. The R7 for instance surprised us a bit. But I hope it would get to be an R with a “joystick“ instead of that pad on the back, a more rounded grip like the DSLR ones and not that sharp and deep grip. One sd slot is good. Evf as it is fine but perhaps a faster one, less blackout. Less video features ok. a toned down ibis would be helpful for non stabilised lenses.


----------



## Inspired (Aug 11, 2022)

I hope like the eos R it has a top LCD screen. So ridiculous that they made them for all their DSLRs and now they don't want to give you for mirrorless . 2 card and around 32mp with a grip.


----------



## RMorgan Snapshots (Aug 11, 2022)

Personal preference, an "upgraded" R for me would be the same MP sensor (of current R) with better AF tracking of R5/6, 10-15fps mech shutter, and wheel/joystick on back. Maybe dual card slots. Basically a full frame R7 I guess. Unfortunately this isn't going to slide in below the R6 price point. I don't see how they are possibly going to do this without completely cannibalizing the current "R". I'm just not quite sure where some of Canons thinking was on some of the R line.


----------



## Juangrande (Aug 11, 2022)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


I thought the R was just a stop gap camera. I never expected Canon to continue developing the line.


----------



## jvillain (Aug 11, 2022)

How do you determine how many clicks it has?


----------



## Blue Zurich (Aug 11, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> A replacement for the EOS R below the R6 ???
> Disappointed.
> I still believe there is a missing link between the R5 and the R6 (47 MP & 20 MP).
> But let's just wait, it's a rumor, after all.


Have you used the R6? It is head and shoulders better than the R in nearly every way. MP be damned, it is one fine camera.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Aug 11, 2022)

Juangrande said:


> I thought the R was just a stop gap camera. I never expected Canon to continue developing the line.


THIS

Canon has said so themselves


----------



## mpb001 (Aug 11, 2022)

I think the R replacement should probably have like a new 32 MP sensor and IBIS. I would also guess that it would probably be of similar construction as the R6. I think at this point IBIS is expected for this class of camera and for me it’s what I am waiting for to upgrade from my 5DIV. If no ibis I would not upgrade to mirrorless.


----------



## nunataks (Aug 11, 2022)

Whatever it is, it'll retail for $1799 or $1899 since the R6 is $2499 right now, but honestly its going to be hard for them to sell this model with the features they'd have to cut from the R6. Canon *might* do a really cheap $1299 camera with barely any features, but I doubt it considering the R10 being a bit overpriced.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 11, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> Have you used the R6? It is head and shoulders better than the R in nearly every way. MP be damned, it is one fine camera.


Even for cropping?
My next camera will certainly have more, not less MP.
PS: I have used the R6 for a weekend, nice camera indeed, but not so for landscape or macro. I'm not at all into sports, and my AF uses are usually limited to static subjects. So, I guess, the R6 wouldn't be an ideal camera for me, despite having many advantages over the R.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 11, 2022)

Chaitanya said:


> True, given R6 was baby 1Dx and if the line continued to be small sports/wildlife oriented bodies with R being equivalent to A7 ie general purpose FF mirrorless.
> 
> For R replacement only thing canon should do is add dual SD slot and new CPU. As things stand EOS R is a good mirrorless camera at its current price and far better than overpriced R7.


Far better for what? For static shots of standard scenes mostly true where FF has an advantage over APS-C. For AF for tracking, for animal eyeAF, for reach and detail and for fps, it is far, far worse than the R7.


----------



## Traveler (Aug 11, 2022)

I’ll get it if it has the top LCD. 
I’m really missing it on the R6


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 11, 2022)

I see the RP as entry level full frame, the R as general purpose full frame, the R6 as general event/wedding shooters specific, the R5 as higher end general purpose full frame, and the R3 as high end event/sports full frame.

A ~$1500-$1800 R replacement would be great. ~30MP would be nice, dual card slots wouldn't be necessary, but nice to have, definitely the same processor as the R3, R5, R6. Basically make a nice camera that many of us working photogs would use when shooting tethered in a studio doing standard issue portrait/headshot/fashion/product stuff. The R3 and R6 are awesome on-location kings, and the R5 is awesome for tethered studio work, but not everybody wants or needs to drop that kind of cheddar on 2 or 3 bodies for every day tethered studio work. The R6 can be made to work, but for $2500, you're paying for a lot of features that you never use in the studio, and it's not quite enough resolution for retouching, skin smoothing, etc. The R, while long in the tooth, is nearly the perfect combination of resolution and features for every day general purpose tethered studio work. Like I said, the R5 is great, but when you're pretty much shooting every day, file sizes are something to consider. You want enough resolution to ease retouching, but not so much that you're constantly dealing with storage.


----------



## navastronia (Aug 11, 2022)

This is gonna be an EOS R Mk II in all but name. What else would it be? Low-end full-frame, but higher than the RP, and missing the features of the R6 and R5.


----------



## Daner (Aug 11, 2022)

R Mk2 = 30-32 MP BSI sensor, Digic X processor, single SD card slot, no IBIS, R5-R6 autofocus, R6 controls.

R6 Mk2 = Upgrade to R3 (24MP) sensor, AF system, and higher performance EVF.


----------



## Bob Howland (Aug 11, 2022)

Daner said:


> R Mk2 = 30-32 MP BSI sensor, Digic X processor, single SD card slot, no IBIS, R5-R6 autofocus, R6 controls.
> 
> R6 Mk2 = Upgrade to R3 (24MP) sensor, AF system, and higher performance EVF.


Except that the R Mk2 will be externally identical to the R7 meaning it has dual card slot. It will be called an R8 and the sensor will not be BSI.


----------



## Frodo (Aug 11, 2022)

An R6 Mk II would lead to dropping the R. Its too crowded in that space, unless they produced a FF camera with few features, which would equate to an RP rather than R.


----------



## Frodo (Aug 11, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> Have you used the R6? It is head and shoulders better than the R in nearly every way. MP be damned, it is one fine camera.


I have both.
The R has 
- more MP (obviously and the files are more detailed and allow more cropping)
- a top screen (which is a major difference, improving handling, and does't glare when using for astro)
- has a higher res flip screen.
So for landscape, I use the R (single card is fine) and for events and portraits I use my R6 (resolution is sufficient, the quieter shutter is helpful, and the dual cards are critical).


----------



## EverydayPhotographer (Aug 11, 2022)

Groundhog said:


> I am curious how canon will place a FF camera below the R6 - same sensor but slower/less features probably won't sell that much and any sensor with more MP could canibalize the R6 sales since that is the main complaint for many.
> My guess would be a higher resolution sensor (30ish MP) but no IBIS and maybe a bit slower then the R6.


Megapixels aren't the only way of differentiating a camera. Based on price alone, Canon clearly already views the R as being below the R6 in its hierarchy, despite the former having more resolution. Sturdier shutter with additional life, EVF performance, better sealing, more robust internal memory, buffer size, etc. also play into the equation. I will be interested to see if they decide to add IBIS in some form to a camera at this price point (assuming that this new camera occupies the same pricing space that the R does.)

As for worrying about cannibalizing sales within their own line, I am sure that Canon is savvy enough to understand that if they don't do it, someone else will. A decision to get a Canon Rwhatever instead of an R6 is more desirable than the decision to get a Nikon Z6 or 7 instead of an R6. Even small holes in the product line are holes that sales will leak out of.


----------



## AJ (Aug 11, 2022)

I wonder if there will be an astro version


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 11, 2022)

navastronia said:


> This is gonna be an EOS R Mk II in all but name. What else would it be? Low-end full-frame, but higher than the RP, and missing the features of the R6 and R5.


Rumour is it will be called R8 and RPii is R9


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 11, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> Except that the R Mk2 will be externally identical to the R7 meaning it has dual card slot. It will be called an R8 and the sensor will not be BSI.


Just don't put that wheel up top, keep it where it usually is on the Dslr's


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 11, 2022)

Wasn't the R supposed to have crap 1080? maybe now they can put in proper 1080.


----------



## Avenger 2.0 (Aug 11, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> Wasn't the R supposed to have crap 1080? maybe now they can put in proper 1080.


It was the first camera with proper (not soft) 1080p. The 4k had the 1.7x crop.

Maybe they will just include a new Touch Bar v2


----------



## unfocused (Aug 11, 2022)

Some thoughts.

Who says the R replacement has to be below the R6 in price? Yes, it probably will be, but imagine Canon putting a 32mp sensor into an R6-style body, pricing it at $2,800 and calling it good. Development costs would be next to nothing and they could keep both bodies in the lineup for the next five years or so.

If Canon wants to hit a price point below the R6, they could do so with: Single slot SD, No IBIS, No mechanical shutter. A slightly higher resolution sensor (24-32 mp) would offer buyers a choice between more features in the R6 and higher resolution in the R?.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Aug 11, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> Do not forget that the R was introduced at a much higher price than the R6 now costs, Euro 3000 for the R, Euro 2450 for the R6, that's 20% !


I don’t know where you live and what prices you have, but in Germany the EOS R was introduced with a recommended retail price of 2.520 €. I got mine in march 2019 for 2.000 € thanks to a sale and cashback. Considering how long the R kept the price above 2.000 €, I consider it quite a steal


----------



## entoman (Aug 11, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> But then it would be a replacement for the RP, not for the R.


Despite the headline, I don't see it as a "replacement" for either camera, more as a new category. The R was a big disappointment to many people - no IBIS, a gimmicky swipe-bar that no-one liked, a repurposed sensor from the 5DMkiv, and mediocre ergonomics (compared to other Canons). So I think Canon will try to wipe the slate clean and base the design on the far nicer R6.

If CR's source is correct in stating that the camera will "sit below" the R6, it's unlikely to have a better or higher MP sensor than the R6. IMO, it's more likely to keep the R6 sensor but dispense with features such as IBIS, in order to keep the price below the R6.

For the subjects you mention (landscapes, flowers, insects) the R6 is perfectly fine, and has a sensor which performs at least as well, if not better, than the one in the original R. We can all only guess at the specs of the so-called "R replacement", but if you want more MP and "extra reach" for insects and flowers, the R7 will most likely prove to be a wiser choice.


----------



## entoman (Aug 11, 2022)

Frodo said:


> An R6 Mk II would lead to dropping the R.


The R is already dead (a few corpses are still being offloaded at end-of-line prices, but I'd be extremely surprised if the R is still in production)


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 11, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> I don’t know where you live and what prices you have, but in Germany the EOS R was introduced with a recommended retail price of 2.520 €. I got mine in march 2019 for 2.000 € thanks to a sale and cashback. Considering how long the R kept the price above 2.000 €, I consider it quite a steal


You: right!
I: wrong! 
Did I have one glass of gewurztraminer (Alsace, of course) too many?


----------



## IShootBirds (Aug 11, 2022)

With the R7/R5 popularity I suspect R6 sales are down as many people turn their nose up at the 20mp even though it is a fantastic camera. Canon have a very impressive 24mp sensor in the R3 that is likely not getting a huge number of sales. It is likely they will repurpose this sensor in an upcoming camera and it makes sense to go into an R6II. They could easily release an R6II with updated AF, R3 sensor, EVF and maybe better video features. I suspect this would be a lot more popular than the current R6 and they could increase the price slightly. 

I do wonder if the R8, R9 will be FF cameras with the R7 being APSC but the R8 could easily be a camera with a refreshed Eos R sensor in an R6 or R7 style body with far better AF/ FPS at a lower price point.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 12, 2022)

Chaitanya said:


> True, given R6 was baby 1Dx and if the line continued to be small sports/wildlife oriented bodies with R being equivalent to A7 ie general purpose FF mirrorless.
> 
> For R replacement only thing canon should do is add dual SD slot and new CPU. As things stand EOS R is a good mirrorless camera at its current price and far better than overpriced R7.



R better than the R7? Really? Maybe for landscapes and portraits only. 

What features are better in the R? The 5 fps with tracking or the 1.7x cropped 4K video? 
Or the single card slot or lack of image stabilizer?

The only thing the R is better at is the full frame sensor and viewfinder resolution. 

Overpriced R7? Show me a better camera under $1500 with similar features.


----------



## navastronia (Aug 12, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> Rumour is it will be called R8 and RPii is R9



It's gonna be a little weird with the R7 being APS-C, but falling between the full frame R6 and R8, then. Just confusing for consumers.


----------



## BBarn (Aug 12, 2022)

If it's going to be an R replacement, the primary driver will be a price of around $2K. I would set expectations by gauging what $2K will get you today. Looking at the $2.5K R6, I'd ask myself what I'd give up to save $500. The second card slot? IBIS? Weather sealing? Third dial ergos? More than one of those? 

It may end up making the R6 look like an even better value (which might be one of the goals). At least for those not pixelated.


----------



## Czardoom (Aug 12, 2022)

I think it will sit below the R6, somewhere in the $1400-1600 range and will be called the R8 (who really cares except gear-heads?). The same 30 MP sensor in today's R (still an excellent sensor for those taking photos not just reading specs). It will be lacking the subject detection and FPS of the R3 , R7 and R10, and shoot maybe 8 fps mechanical, 16 fps electronic. Either single card slot & IBIS, or double card slot and no IBIS. Same size as R7, no top screen, same EVF as R7.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 12, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I would like an R3 without any video features for $3000. They can also leave away the SD card slot and I also do not need any eye or animal detection and no electronic shutter.


Surely the discussion of mirrorless cameras with no video has been debunked already. 
The EVF is a video screen so there is already a video stream to be captured. 
Electronic shutter is used for EVF and there is no mechanical cost for this in any case.
The incremental SW cost to write this to a card is small and given that that code has already been written for R3/5/6/7 etc on Digic X processor then it is a no-brainer to include it with whatever features (or not) to offer. The market will demand it anyway.

If you are saying that you want a R3 but DLSR then the 1DXiii is available for you but even that has better AF via live view.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 12, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> I totally agree, I love my R and it is a very capable camera. Only two things I actually miss:
> - higher FPS
> - but AF tracking (it's a shame there haven't been any firmware updates in the past two years or so)


The only firmware updates in the future will be for the Digic X processor and its successors.


----------



## HikeBike (Aug 12, 2022)

My guess:

- Name: R8
- Processor: DIGIC X
- MP: 32
- AF: Same as R6
- IBIS: No
- Card slots: Single UHS-II SD
- FPS: 10 mech / 15 electronic
- Top LCD: No
- Price: $1,799 USD


----------



## EverydayPhotographer (Aug 12, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> You: right!
> I: wrong!
> Did I have one glass of gewurztraminer (Alsace, of course) too many?


I did the opposite, and underestimated the price on the R. I looked up the intro price - $2,200usd - which is a couple hundred dollars higher than I recall it being. I think the price point dropped pretty quickly after introduction, but I am not sure. Either way, the price gap between it and the R6 is a little smaller than I remember it being. And I don't even have delicious Alsatian wine as an excuse. (But I do have the memory of a lovely bottle of cremant that we brought home from a winery out there that we will definitely be visiting again.)


----------



## SnowMiku (Aug 12, 2022)

I would have thought they would discontinue the R and make an RP replacement. I guess they are seeing demand for something just a little a bit cheaper then the R6.
I think they could remove the IBIS, lower res LCD and Viewfinder, less FPS and buffer for mechanical and electronic shutter, they could even turn off the continuous electronic shutter if they wanted to limit it by software. I'm not sure if they would use the same sensor as the R6 or something else. Like the R10/R7 it will probably come with the updated focus system and less restrictions on video.


----------



## Skux (Aug 12, 2022)

Sounds like it would be the equivalent of the 6D series. Take the R6, take out the 2nd card slot and IBIS, cripple the FPS and give it a resolution bump and bam, you have a midrange FF mirrorless.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 12, 2022)

From a naming nomenclature, there is only the R8/R9/R11 etc left unless R6.5 is an option. The R10 has shown that the xD, xxD, xxxD, xxxxD etc naming schemes won't be replicated. Even then the 7D was an exception being one number but APS-C. 
R8 could be R replacement
R9 could be RP replacement

The R is cheaper because it uses older/recycled tech. How would Canon price a higher megapixel sensor with current AF/fps that even the R10 has?


----------



## ThatRPguy (Aug 12, 2022)

The R is a great studio camera, as it is, but having now been using the R6 as my main wedding camera, it makes the R look dated, if I could have an R, with 2 card slots, (why not these days?) R6/7/10 level autofocus/tracking, (or thereabouts) and an updated EVF, I would be very satisfied, 

Just a thought on naming, as the convention seems to be 1-10, 1 being most pro level, it would make sense for the R.ii to become the R8, the RPii should it arrive, to be the R9, to slit in above the crop sensor R10. Just a thought.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 12, 2022)

HikeBike said:


> My guess:
> 
> - Name: R8
> - Processor: DIGIC X
> ...


This sounds about right to me. Refresh the existing sensor to the same process spec as the R7 so it gains most/all the newer DR performance, but still the same res as the R, or maybe a slight bump up to 7680x5120 so it can natively do 8K UHD (not the DCI found in the R5) so we go from ~30MP to 39MP. I could live with that. Digic X for sure, same AF as R6 is fine, no IBIS is fine with me, single SD card also totally fine. Something like that for ~$1500-$2000 I'd be totally down with for a daily tethered studio driver. It'd basically be permanently mounted to a tripod or studio stand and permanently tethered. The flash sync speed would have to be absolutely stellar, and yes, a mechanical shutter. Electronic first curtain is fine, but lots of us shoot with strobes. The way I shoot, I wouldn't care so much about the viewfinder, but the LCD screen would need to be pretty good. For studio work, I don't care about fast shooting, if you need more than 5-6 fps, then get the R6 for a little more and basically have a mirrorless 1DXIII.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 12, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> If you are saying that you want a R3 but DLSR then the 1DXiii is available for you but even that has better AF via live view.


I would love to see a 1DX IV with the stacked sensor from the R3


----------



## davidcl0nel (Aug 12, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> From a naming nomenclature, there is only the R8/R9/R11 etc left unless R6.5 is an option. The R10 has shown that the xD, xxD, xxxD, xxxxD etc naming schemes won't be replicated. Even then the 7D was an exception being one number but APS-C.
> R8 could be R replacement
> R9 could be RP replacement
> 
> The R is cheaper because it uses older/recycled tech. How would Canon price a higher megapixel sensor with current AF/fps that even the R10 has?


The tinyer aps-c model without viewfinder will be a R100 or even R1000, i think. The replacements of them will be R20, R200, R2000 in a few years.
R8 and R9 will never be used due to the fact a R7 is still aps-c, they won't add a 8 or 9 with fullframe.

I still think a R will not have a successor (there is, R6 and R5, yeah yeah different price, but all prices increased). But the entry level RP will have a replacement to have something in the sub 1000 range.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 12, 2022)

ThatRPguy said:


> The R is a great studio camera, as it is, but having now been using the R6 as my main wedding camera, it makes the R look dated, if I could have an R, with 2 card slots, (why not these days?) R6/7/10 level autofocus/tracking, (or thereabouts) and an updated EVF, I would be very satisfied,
> 
> Just a thought on naming, as the convention seems to be 1-10, 1 being most pro level, it would make sense for the R.ii to become the R8, the RPii should it arrive, to be the R9, to slit in above the crop sensor R10. Just a thought.


I have two R6s that I use on location for weddings/parties/events etc. They're nearly perfect for that sort of thing, the only thing better would be an R3, but... I could have nearly 3 R6 bodies for the cost of 1 R3. I also do a lot of studio portraiture/headshots and product, and frankly, I find myself really wanting more than 20MP for retouching skin and masking stuff out. I used to have an R but am totally kicking myself for getting rid of it. The R5 is awesome, but too expensive to buy just to have a dedicated tether rig for studio stuff. Something like the R, but updated would be great. Less than $2K, tethers great, has about 30MP, which is about the sweet spot for file size and IQ for retouching. Don't need the expense of ibis or a great viewfinder, just a reasonably inexpensive image acquisition machine.

The R7 totally could work for that sort of thing too, you could even do it fairly cheap. The R7, plus the RF35STM, RF50STM and RF85STM or the 24-105L. Tether it up, put your trigger on the hot shoe, and go to town, though I'd prefer to have the slightly shallower depth of field that would come with full frame so I can shoot up at f/5.6-f/8 with people and not have my strobes almost completely powered down, but that's just me.


----------



## Curahee (Aug 12, 2022)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


For the R IBIS is a must, Digic X and the eye AF they all are getting and replace the touch bar. No dual cards needed to keep it below R6. Lack of IBIS is what kept me from getting the R.


----------



## entoman (Aug 12, 2022)

Curahee said:


> For the R IBIS is a must, Digic X and the eye AF they all are getting and replace the touch bar. No dual cards needed to keep it below R6. Lack of IBIS is what kept me from getting the R.


IBIS is overrated.
Compare camera shake with a non-stabilised tele or macro, on a 5DMkiv, and on a R5, and you won't notice much difference.
Yes, I have both bodies and have made multiple comparison tests using stabilised and non-stabilised Canon glass.
You'll see an improvement in stabilisation if you use short focal length lenses, but with teles nearly all of the stabilisation is done with the lens, not the body.


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 12, 2022)

I want the R9 to be without wobble.


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 12, 2022)

and mayeb this, but probably not,









Sony adds anti-theft crypto signature tech to in-camera images


Sony has revealed a brand new in-camera way of stopping your photos from being stolen. The feature will be coming to the Sony a7 IV and will add a crypto-signature to images at the time of shooting. The feature also alerts you when images are manipulated. This will only be available to corporate...




www.diyphotography.net





and still no anti-theft password or something any mirrorless.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 12, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> and mayeb this, but probably not,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Did Canon have the "forensic" feature already a decode ago?


----------



## scyrene (Aug 12, 2022)

A few thoughts. Based on past behaviour, I would be surprised if they developed a wholly new sensor for a lower-end FF body - the last time would be what? The 6D mark 2? I think the R3 sensor would be out of bounds for the time being but maybe not - my guess would be a subtly revamped R or R6 sensor. IBIS could go either way, but single SD slot only I would think. If it's priced below the R6 I suppose they could save by using an inferior EVF, no top display, somewhat simplified dials, but that's less clear.


----------



## HikeBike (Aug 12, 2022)

davidcl0nel said:


> R8 and R9 will never be used due to the fact a R7 is still aps-c, they won't add a 8 or 9 with fullframe.


I think it's quite possible the names R8 and R9 will be used for full-frame cameras. The R7, despite being APS-C, would sit above these full-frames if the R8 and R9 do not have IBIS or dual card slots. It would be a little odd to have an R8 be more expensive than an R7, but it could still work.


----------



## davidcl0nel (Aug 12, 2022)

entoman said:


> IBIS is overrated.
> ... but with teles nearly all of the stabilisation is done with the lens, not the body.


So you are a Tele-guy. Great.

I like the 35 IS. The EF one on 5D3 was reliable up to 1/4sek, the RF 35 on R5 now with nearly 2seconds.
Thats incredible.... With ISO800 you can easily take snapshots in the night city and so on....
But yet I prefer a tripod.

If they add a processural de-shake/stacking-algorithm like some phones this maybe can increased even further in the future...


----------



## entoman (Aug 12, 2022)

davidcl0nel said:


> So you are a Tele-guy. Great.
> 
> I like the 35 IS. The EF one on 5D3 was reliable up to 1/4sek, the RF 35 on R5 now with nearly 2seconds.
> Thats incredible.... With ISO800 you can easily take snapshots in the night city and so on....
> ...


Incorrect conclusion - I'm not a "tele guy". I use all focal lengths from 16-800mm. Mostly handheld, but I also have 3 tripods for static subjects and situations where I have enough time to more fully explore composition and try multiple shutter/aperture/ISO variations. For me, the real purpose of a tripod is to deliberately slow me down and force me to spend more time considering the scene, rather than to minimise camera shake. I also often use a tripod when shooting with a tilt-shift lens. YMMV.

The purpose of IBIS and OIS is to minimise camera shake and/or to allow slower shutter speeds. As stated, my experience is that while wide-angle shots will benefit from IBIS (as per your example), for tele and macro shots it is of little value. There will be occasions where the small advantage gained is enough to warrant having IBIS with a non-stabilised tele or macro, but a stabilised lens (OIS) is generally much better than using an unstabilised lens in conjunction with IBIS.

The best option of course is to use a stabilised lens that works in conjunction with IBIS, providing the advantages of both systems.

I agree that "stabilisation" will continue to be improved via in-camera or post-processing software. Topaz e.g. produce a sharpening app which detects camera shake and effectively reduces it using AI to detect blur-trails and remove them.


----------



## ggab (Aug 12, 2022)

When will a true replacement for the 7DII come out?


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 12, 2022)

I'd still be happy with 30mp.

A faster continuous focus system, ibis, and animal eye detect would be great. Other than that, I'm very happy with what I already have as a 99.99% stills shooter.

I'm still at a deficit in the RF lens category. I have none. That's a much higher priority for me right now.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 12, 2022)

entoman said:


> IBIS is overrated.


Well, as a guy that uses mostly lenses that have no IS, IBIS would be wonderful for me. That is the "missing feature" I'd love to have.


----------



## entoman (Aug 12, 2022)

Ozarker said:


> I'd still be happy with 30mp.
> 
> A faster continuous focus system, ibis, and animal eye detect would be great. Other than that, I'm very happy with what I already have as a 99.99% stills shooter.
> 
> I'm still at a deficit in the RF lens category. I have none. That's a much higher priority for me right now.


Yes, and I hope you get them, but Canon is a weird company - sometimes as with the R5, R7 and R3 they surprise us with what many of us would regard as near-perfect cameras, but other times they produce cameras with limited specifications that disappoint. They are pretty good at determining the desires of niche buyers though, as well as generalists, so fingers crossed that all of us find a model in the range that suits us perfectly.

When I got my R5, I was determined to hold out and just continue with my EF glass, but having tried some of the RF glass I quickly became converted, but there are a few pitfalls that you might like to check out with other users:

The RF 100-500mm is an improvement over the EF 100-400mm, with longer max focal length, much better stabilisation, closer focusing and a marginal increase in sharpness, although there are downsides e.g. inability to use an extender at focal lengths shorter than 300mm, and a fairly hefty price tag.

The RF 800mm F11 has amazingly good stabilisation, very light weight and is compact and cheap. Downsides are the fixed F11 aperture which can be limiting in low light, and the modest build quality.

The RF 100mm macro is sharper, quieter and focuses closer than the EF version, and better stabilised, but it's a lot more expensive, and has totally different AF characteristics - disappointing early results led me to completely change my AF settings compared to those that were perfect on the EF version.


----------



## MrToes (Aug 12, 2022)

what ever happened to the HIGH MEGA PIX camera everyone was talking about ? ? ? 100MP+

www.canonrumors.com/a-high-megapixel-camera-is-coming-cr2/









100MP Canon EOS R5S is coming next year (report)


Sodium warning! A Canon EOS R5S with a 100MP sensor is coming in 2022, according to a new rumor




www.digitalcameraworld.com


----------



## HikeBike (Aug 12, 2022)

MrToes said:


> what ever happened to the HIGH MEGA PIX camera everyone was talking about ? ? ? 100MP+


I think that's still rumored to be the R5s. But, if memory serves, the rumor was later modified, and the expectation is now 75MP.


----------



## esglord (Aug 12, 2022)

My guess is they dump the unsuccessful touchbar, tweak the sensor but keep ~30MP res, incorporate similar eye AF as R6, leave it at one card slot, no top display, probably include IBIS, RP build quality, only modest video capabilities. Enthusiast stills camera for $1500-$1800. R6 continues to be the better hybrid/stills video camera with price remaining over $2000 as long as they are able. Once supply chain issues ease, they can release the lower margin sub-$1000 entry level full frame as the RP successor which will likely heavily cut corners but sell well anyway. 

I hope to buy this or the R6 in 2023


----------



## HikeBike (Aug 12, 2022)

ggab said:


> When will a true replacement for the 7DII come out?


The R7 is probably as close as you're gonna get for quite awhile. The R7 Mk II might be your real answer...in about 5 years.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 12, 2022)

davidcl0nel said:


> The tinyer aps-c model without viewfinder will be a R100 or even R1000, i think. The replacements of them will be R20, R200, R2000 in a few years.
> R8 and R9 will never be used due to the fact a R7 is still aps-c, they won't add a 8 or 9 with fullframe.
> 
> I still think a R will not have a successor (there is, R6 and R5, yeah yeah different price, but all prices increased). But the entry level RP will have a replacement to have something in the sub 1000 range.


That naming system guarantees they run out of names after 10 models
I am just getting used to the RF mount
I do not care to switch again


----------



## entoman (Aug 12, 2022)

esglord said:


> My guess is they dump the unsuccessful touchbar, tweak the sensor but keep ~30MP res, incorporate similar eye AF as R6, leave it at one card slot, no top display, probably include IBIS, RP build quality, only modest video capabilities. Enthusiast stills camera for $1500-$1800. R6 continues to be the better hybrid/stills video camera with price remaining over $2000 as long as they are able. Once supply chain issues ease, they can release the lower margin sub-$1000 entry level full frame as the RP successor which will likely heavily cut corners but sell well anyway.
> 
> I hope to buy this or the R6 in 2023


Yes that's possible, but it would be competing directly with the R7 - an absolute bargain camera with 33MP, IBIS, 2 card slots and good build quality.

Which would you buy, and why?

Personally I'd choose the R7, or wait for the R6Mkii (probably 24-26MP) although I don't think that will arrive until 2024.


----------



## esglord (Aug 12, 2022)

entoman said:


> Yes that's possible, but it would be competing directly with the R7 - an absolute bargain camera with 33MP, IBIS, 2 card slots and good build quality.
> 
> Which would you buy, and why?
> 
> Personally I'd choose the R7, or wait for the R6Mkii (probably 24-26MP) although I don't think that will arrive until 2024.


I'm assuming that the earlier rumor of a camera replacing the RP for cheaper is still possible in which case this camera would need to sit above that price range. Whereas the R was a stop-gap to convince pros not to abandon Canon for Sony, its replacement will probably have limited appeal to pros with the other cameras available and coming. I imagine the R7 having two card slots and smaller size is going to appeal to both pros and enthusiasts and wildlife folks. Since I'm not a pro, dual card slots is not a necessity for me, and I don't really need the reach of APC-C, so I'd probably go with the full frame option unless there are other drawbacks. I'm still very happy with the RP. However, I will eventually pay up for the better Eye AF and bigger battery. You're not wrong though; they could probably get away with not having this camera in the lineup with the other options available.


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 12, 2022)

entoman said:


> Yes that's possible, but it would be competing directly with the R7 - an absolute bargain camera with 33MP, IBIS, 2 card slots and good build quality.
> 
> Which would you buy, and why?
> 
> Personally I'd choose the R7, or wait for the R6Mkii (probably 24-26MP) although I don't think that will arrive until 2024.


R7 is an overpriced crop. So I'll hopefully buy the R9 if canon don't criple it.


----------



## entoman (Aug 12, 2022)

esglord said:


> I'm assuming that the earlier rumor of a camera replacing the RP for cheaper is still possible in which case this camera would need to sit above that price range. Whereas the R was a stop-gap to convince pros not to abandon Canon for Sony, its replacement will probably have limited appeal to pros with the other cameras available and coming. I imagine the R7 having two card slots and smaller size is going to appeal to both pros and enthusiasts and wildlife folks. Since I'm not a pro, dual card slots is not a necessity for me, and I don't really need the reach of APC-C, so I'd probably go with the full frame option unless there are other drawbacks. I'm still very happy with the RP. However, I will eventually pay up for the better Eye AF and bigger battery. You're not wrong though; they could probably get away with not having this camera in the lineup with the other options available.


I don't think the R was intended to stop pros from switching to Sony - it was clearly an amateur camera with modest build quality, very modest specs, and a gimmicky swipe bar. It was certainly a stop-gap model though, as Canon were clearly caught off-guard by Sony and had very much underestimated the demand for mirrorless and IBIS from keen amateurs.

I do fully agree that the R7 will be bought both by pros and amateurs (although both would probably have been prepared to pay more to get R6-type controls and R6 build quality). I think the R7 will turn out to be a massive seller though, so Canon played their cards well.

The RP is a perfectly good little camera. Simple to operate, very compact, ideal for novices on a budget, and usable as an affordable backup for owners of R, R3, R5, R6, R7 etc. I even know a couple of pros who use them for certain types of work. I suspect that the replacement for the RP will have a better sensor, much better AF and a redesigned body, but it will remain very compact and lightweight, so I think it unlikely that it will have IBIS, twin slots or a bigger battery.


----------



## davidcl0nel (Aug 12, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> That naming system guarantees they run out of names after 10 models
> I am just getting used to the RF mount
> I do not care to switch again


Yes, but 10D.. 20D......90D was enough. ;-)
I think there are a little bit slower cycle in the future anyway.


----------



## cayenne (Aug 12, 2022)

Juangrande said:


> I thought the R was just a stop gap camera. I never expected Canon to continue developing the line.


Same here.

I've been eyeballing getting the Kolor Vision treatment on it and make it into an IR and UV camera....seemed it would be great for that, but I'd not want it for my "main" workhorse camera.

I'd get R5 or maybe R1 for that.


----------



## mxwphoto (Aug 12, 2022)

I would think the naming will be dependent on which sensor they stick into this camera. If they keep the R sensor unchanged, my guess is R8 or Rn(new or next) like how 1D had a 1Dn. If they stick the R6 sensor in there, then perhaps R6L(lite).

I concur on the digic X, single card slot, no IBIS, smaller buffer, and little weather sealing build with pricing estimated $1799


----------



## esglord (Aug 12, 2022)

entoman said:


> I don't think the R was intended to stop pros from switching to Sony - it was clearly an amateur camera with modest build quality, very modest specs, and a gimmicky swipe bar. It was certainly a stop-gap model though, as Canon were clearly caught off-guard by Sony and had very much underestimated the demand for mirrorless and IBIS from keen amateurs.
> 
> I do fully agree that the R7 will be bought both by pros and amateurs (although both would probably have been prepared to pay more to get R6-type controls and R6 build quality). I think the R7 will turn out to be a massive seller though, so Canon played their cards well.
> 
> The RP is a perfectly good little camera. Simple to operate, very compact, ideal for novices on a budget, and usable as an affordable backup for owners of R, R3, R5, R6, R7 etc. I even know a couple of pros who use them for certain types of work. I suspect that the replacement for the RP will have a better sensor, much better AF and a redesigned body, but it will remain very compact and lightweight, so I think it unlikely that it will have IBIS, twin slots or a bigger battery.


Even though the R won't stack up to the pro cameras coming out now, I suspect it was intended mainly for Canon-loyal, early adopter pro buyers who would keep using their DSLR's as their workhorses but didn't want to wait to try the high end glass. Canon put out eyecatching RF glass early to entice pros to try Canon mirrorless or at least convince them to wait before investing in a competing system. The R had to be good enough to appeal to pros in order to buy time to catch up on eye tracking and IBIS for the R5, etc. Anyway, that's my sense of their strategy which is obviously pure speculation. Only Canon knows for sure. Put out the high end stuff as early as they can develop it, fill in "budget" options along the way to gain market share at the lower price points, and then start to fill in with mid range product more in the next few years.


----------



## entoman (Aug 12, 2022)

esglord said:


> Even though the R won't stack up to the pro cameras coming out now, I suspect it was intended mainly for Canon-loyal, early adopter pro buyers who would keep using their DSLR's as their workhorses but didn't want to wait to try the high end glass. Canon put out eyecatching RF glass early to entice pros to try Canon mirrorless or at least convince them to wait before investing in a competing system. The R had to be good enough to appeal to pros in order to buy time to catch up on eye tracking and IBIS for the R5, etc. Anyway, that's my sense of their strategy which is obviously pure speculation. Only Canon knows for sure. Put out the high end stuff as early as they can develop it, fill in "budget" options along the way to gain market share at the lower price points, and then start to fill in with mid range product more in the next few years.


Good points, its just a bit weird that they decided to launch exotic pro glass but the only camera it would fit on was a mediocre, gimmick-laden model. My guess is that the main reason why a more hi-end body didn't appear first is that they were having problems developing their IBIS modules. The public, rightly or wrongly were demanding IBIS, but Canon weren't ready, so they just pumped out the stop-gap low-spec R. Another indicator that they were well and truly caught on the hop, is the naming system, which leaves a gaping hole between the R5 and R6, and no clear division of names between the FF and APS models.


----------



## PhotonShark (Aug 13, 2022)

Daner said:


> R6 Mk2 = Upgrade to R3 (24MP) sensor, AF system, and higher performance EVF.


Now that would be fantastic.


----------



## esglord (Aug 13, 2022)

entoman said:


> Good points, its just a bit weird that they decided to launch exotic pro glass but the only camera it would fit on was a mediocre, gimmick-laden model. My guess is that the main reason why a more hi-end body didn't appear first is that they were having problems developing their IBIS modules. The public, rightly or wrongly were demanding IBIS, but Canon weren't ready, so they just pumped out the stop-gap low-spec R. Another indicator that they were well and truly caught on the hop, is the naming system, which leaves a gaping hole between the R5 and R6, and no clear division of names between the FF and APS models.


Sometimes it’s cheaper to let a competitor spend all the R&D, innovate, and make mistakes, and then once you know where the demand is, ramp up the spending to catch up quickly and try to leapfrog. I imagine they are extremely frustrated by the supply chain constraints just when they caught up on tech. I don’t understand the naming conventions either, but others on this forum seem to make sense of them.


----------



## Czardoom (Aug 13, 2022)

entoman said:


> Good points, its just a bit weird that they decided to launch exotic pro glass but the only camera it would fit on was a mediocre, gimmick-laden model. My guess is that the main reason why a more hi-end body didn't appear first is that they were having problems developing their IBIS modules. The public, rightly or wrongly were demanding IBIS, but Canon weren't ready, so they just pumped out the stop-gap low-spec R. Another indicator that they were well and truly caught on the hop, is the naming system, which leaves a gaping hole between the R5 and R6, and no clear division of names between the FF and APS models.


We get it - you don't llike the R. But pretty much every description you have come up with it only describes your bias - not the camera. "Mediocre, gimmick-laden"...that very well could describe Sony's early mirrorless full-frame ventures. Yes, the R didn't have IBIS or two card slots. Other than that it was essentially a mirrorless 5D IV - costing about $1000 less. Was the 5D IV mediocre in your mind? Gimmick-laden? Oh, I forgot, that swip bar! Everybody hated it except for those few who actually learned that you could use it as just another button. But most folks clearly didn't learn how to use it thus decided to make fun of it. I briefly owned the Sony A7 II - one of those cameras that Canon was so afraid of apparently. I wouldn't trade my R for that camera in a million years. Sure, spec lovers thought those Sonys were great, but my Sony A7 II underexposed by 1 1/2 stops, the EVF was so dim, I often reached up to take off my sunglasses, but wasn't wearing any, and the ergonomics and usability were about as bad as a camera could get. (And I won't even mention the awful weather sealing or still-not-any-good dust removal..oh, I guess i did mention it.) Yes, Canon up until that time made boring, conservative cameras that worked, were comfortable, easy to use, and did all the fundamental things as well or better than anyone (things like exposure and color...)


----------



## SnowMiku (Aug 13, 2022)

esglord said:


> Sometimes it’s cheaper to let a competitor spend all the R&D, innovate, and make mistakes, and then once you know where the demand is, ramp up the spending to catch up quickly and try to leapfrog. I imagine they are extremely frustrated by the supply chain constraints just when they caught up on tech. I don’t understand the naming conventions either, but others on this forum seem to make sense of them.


I was also confused at the naming conventions when I was looking to buy my first Canon DSLR, but they do make sense when you understand them. The next generation R models at this stage will probably be: R20, R7mkII, R6mkII, R5mkII, R3mkII, R1.

At the start I was confused with the 600D and 700D, I thought since 600D was the lower number it was the replacement for 700D, but then when I looked into it the 700D was the replacement for the 600D. Then you have the different names for xxxD in other countries such as Rebel and Kiss which I haven't bothered to look up.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 13, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> We get it - you don't llike the R. But pretty much every description you have come up with it only describes your bias - not the camera. "Mediocre, gimmick-laden"...that very well could describe Sony's early mirrorless full-frame ventures. Yes, the R didn't have IBIS or two card slots. Other than that it was essentially a mirrorless 5D IV - costing about $1000 less. Was the 5D IV mediocre in your mind? Gimmick-laden? Oh, I forgot, that swip bar! Everybody hated it except for those few who actually learned that you could use it as just another button. But most folks clearly didn't learn how to use it thus decided to make fun of it. I briefly owned the Sony A7 II - one of those cameras that Canon was so afraid of apparently. I wouldn't trade my R for that camera in a million years. Sure, spec lovers thought those Sonys were great, but my Sony A7 II underexposed by 1 1/2 stops, the EVF was so dim, I often reached up to take off my sunglasses, but wasn't wearing any, and the ergonomics and usability were about as bad as a camera could get. (And I won't even mention the awful weather sealing or still-not-any-good dust removal..oh, I guess i did mention it.) Yes, Canon up until that time made boring, conservative cameras that worked, were comfortable, easy to use, and did all the fundamental things as well or better than anyone (things like exposure and color...)


I couldn't agree more with what you wrote. I love my R, often use the swipe-bar (for artificial horizon), enjoy its reliability and sensor.
Sure, IBIS and double card-slot would have been fine, yet, the R is worth every $ I payed for.
To sum it up, the EOS R is a camera for users, less for specs. lovers, a typical Canon!


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 13, 2022)

The big question is which old sensor will be recycled for the EOS R camera replacement? The majority of Canon Rf cmara bodies use recycled sensors, obviously because its cheaper to do so. They makes a few minor changes, the marketing departments call them new sensors, and all the fanboys jump on the bandwagon and shout everyone down screaming its not the same sensor lol! In reality they're just reworked older sensors. If that keeps purchase costs down too, then fine.

RP uses a reworked 6D II sensor
EOS R uses a reworked 5DIV sensor
R6 uses a reworked 1DX III sensor
R7 uses a reworked 90D/M6 II sensor

I can't see it using a 20MP R6 sensor, as there won't be much to differentiate it from the R6, and with likely lower fps and less features, that would just be a crippled R6. How many 20MP camera bodies does the RF platform need?

Will they reuse the same EOS R sensor, or might we see a new sensor that sits somewhere between the R's 20MP and R5's 45MP? An updated and improved R replacement that has ergonomics and AF performance in line with the RF bodies that came after it would likely be well received!


----------



## entoman (Aug 13, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> We get it - you don't llike the R. But pretty much every description you have come up with it only describes your bias - not the camera. "Mediocre, gimmick-laden"...that very well could describe Sony's early mirrorless full-frame ventures. Yes, the R didn't have IBIS or two card slots. Other than that it was essentially a mirrorless 5D IV - costing about $1000 less. Was the 5D IV mediocre in your mind? Gimmick-laden? Oh, I forgot, that swip bar! Everybody hated it except for those few who actually learned that you could use it as just another button. But most folks clearly didn't learn how to use it thus decided to make fun of it. I briefly owned the Sony A7 II - one of those cameras that Canon was so afraid of apparently. I wouldn't trade my R for that camera in a million years. Sure, spec lovers thought those Sonys were great, but my Sony A7 II underexposed by 1 1/2 stops, the EVF was so dim, I often reached up to take off my sunglasses, but wasn't wearing any, and the ergonomics and usability were about as bad as a camera could get. (And I won't even mention the awful weather sealing or still-not-any-good dust removal..oh, I guess i did mention it.) Yes, Canon up until that time made boring, conservative cameras that worked, were comfortable, easy to use, and did all the fundamental things as well or better than anyone (things like exposure and color...)


Well no, you don't really "get it". It's not so much that I "don't like the R", and I totally agree about the horrendous ergonomics of early Sony cameras. I just feel that the R could have been a lot better if it hadn't been rushed out. I did actually consider buying one, but after borrowing one and comparing it to my 5DMkiv I decided it made more sense to keep my DSLRs a while longer, and wait until Canon produced a "better" mirrorless camera - a decision I've never regretted. Ultimately I bought the R5, and I still own the 5DMkiv although it is overdue for replacement with another RF mount body.

To answer your other question "was the 5DMkiv mediocre?" - yes, IMO it was. Just compare it to its closest rivals the Nikon D750, D810 and D850, all of which were launched around the same time (or earlier) than the Canon, but were better specified, better performing and more reasonably priced. I was already too deeply tied into Canon (having previously owned 40D, 50D, 6D, 7D, 7DMkii, 5DMkiii and 5DS, plus several Canon L lenses), and the 5DMkiv had the best sensor that Canon made, but compared to Nikon models it was - mediocre.

In my DSLR days there were many times when, if I could have afforded it, I would have gladly switched to Nikon. I'm glad I stuck with Canon though, as their current models (R6, R5, R3, R7) are all extremely good and serve their respective customer niches very well.


----------



## EverydayPhotographer (Aug 13, 2022)

HikeBike said:


> I think it's quite possible the names R8 and R9 will be used for full-frame cameras. The R7, despite being APS-C, would sit above these full-frames if the R8 and R9 do not have IBIS or dual card slots. It would be a little odd to have an R8 be more expensive than an R7, but it could still work.


Has anyone else besides me noticed that all of the higher end Canon bodies are odd numbers, ie EOS 1, 1D, R1, R3, R5, 5D, etc., while all of the lower end and consumer-aimed bodies have even numbers? 6D, R6, R10, etc.? It seems that only the M series has deviated from that pattern in recent memory.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Aug 13, 2022)

EverydayPhotographer said:


> Has anyone else besides me noticed that all of the higher end Canon bodies are odd numbers, ie EOS 1, 1D, R1, R3, R5, 5D, etc., while all of the lower end and consumer-aimed bodies have even numbers? 6D, R6, R10, etc.? It seems that only the M series has deviated from that pattern in recent memory.


If that's the case the R successor can easily be named R8  
But for the R9 either the camera will be odd or the naming cause it won't fit that scheme anymore


----------



## SHAMwow (Aug 13, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> We get it - you don't llike the R. But pretty much every description you have come up with it only describes your bias - not the camera. "Mediocre, gimmick-laden"...that very well could describe Sony's early mirrorless full-frame ventures. Yes, the R didn't have IBIS or two card slots. Other than that it was essentially a mirrorless 5D IV - costing about $1000 less. Was the 5D IV mediocre in your mind? Gimmick-laden? Oh, I forgot, that swip bar! Everybody hated it except for those few who actually learned that you could use it as just another button. But most folks clearly didn't learn how to use it thus decided to make fun of it. I briefly owned the Sony A7 II - one of those cameras that Canon was so afraid of apparently. I wouldn't trade my R for that camera in a million years. Sure, spec lovers thought those Sonys were great, but my Sony A7 II underexposed by 1 1/2 stops, the EVF was so dim, I often reached up to take off my sunglasses, but wasn't wearing any, and the ergonomics and usability were about as bad as a camera could get. (And I won't even mention the awful weather sealing or still-not-any-good dust removal..oh, I guess i did mention it.) Yes, Canon up until that time made boring, conservative cameras that worked, were comfortable, easy to use, and did all the fundamental things as well or better than anyone (things like exposure and color...)


No way. Strong disagree. If anyone thinks the R was a 1:1 mirrorless match to the 5D IV, they don't know their cameras very well. People who say this, say it because both cameras fit the niche role you used them for. They did not perform the same in many scenarios.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 13, 2022)

EverydayPhotographer said:


> Has anyone else besides me noticed that all of the higher end Canon bodies are odd numbers, ie EOS 1, 1D, R1, R3, R5, 5D, etc., while all of the lower end and consumer-aimed bodies have even numbers? 6D, R6, R10, etc.? It seems that only the M series has deviated from that pattern in recent memory.


Canon consider the R6 to be professional grade https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/...big-video-updates-to-it-and-the-1d-x-mark-iii


----------



## armd (Aug 13, 2022)

What is the aps-c camera subject for release now they have the R7 and R10?


----------



## Mmm Toast (Aug 13, 2022)

I’m sure it will be the current EOS R sensor with a new processor to enable the use of Canon’s new AF, higher shutter speed and maybe no crop in 4k.

If it’s not an EOS R II, I bet they will use the R6 body, which means two card slots and no Touch Bar.

Would love an updated EVF and better performance after 6400 ISO, but I think that’s where the costs will be cut, no new sensor, no new evf, no new lcd.

Still, if my speculations were reality, I’d buy that camera.


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 13, 2022)

armd said:


> What is the aps-c camera subject for release now they have the R7 and R10?



if they can make this, then there's no shortage or materials.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 13, 2022)

EverydayPhotographer said:


> Has anyone else besides me noticed that all of the higher end Canon bodies are odd numbers, ie EOS 1, 1D, R1, R3, R5, 5D, etc., while all of the lower end and consumer-aimed bodies have even numbers? 6D, R6, R10, etc.? It seems that only the M series has deviated from that pattern in recent memory.


What about the R7?


----------



## AlanF (Aug 13, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> What about the R7?


Clearly higher end!


----------



## entoman (Aug 13, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> The big question is which old sensor will be recycled for the EOS R camera replacement? The majority of Canon Rf cmara bodies use recycled sensors, obviously because its cheaper to do so. They makes a few minor changes, the marketing departments call them new sensors, and all the fanboys jump on the bandwagon and shout everyone down screaming its not the same sensor lol! In reality they're just reworked older sensors. If that keeps purchase costs down too, then fine.
> 
> RP uses a reworked 6D II sensor
> EOS R uses a reworked 5DIV sensor
> ...


Canon are difficult to predict these days.
The "R Mkii" is apparently going to sit "below" the R6 (presumably this refers to pricing).
I think we can expect significantly lower build quality, a single card slot, only modest burst speed, probably no IBIS, and they'll probably use it to test out some new ergonomic features (as with the R and R7). Low res EVF, and possibly a fixed screen? Sensor could be 20MP, certainly won't be less, but could be 24MP or another rework of the 30MP sensor?


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 13, 2022)

entoman said:


> Yes, and I hope you get them, but Canon is a weird company - sometimes as with the R5, R7 and R3 they surprise us with what many of us would regard as near-perfect cameras, but other times they produce cameras with limited specifications that disappoint. They are pretty good at determining the desires of niche buyers though, as well as generalists, so fingers crossed that all of us find a model in the range that suits us perfectly.
> 
> When I got my R5, I was determined to hold out and just continue with my EF glass, but having tried some of the RF glass I quickly became converted, but there are a few pitfalls that you might like to check out with other users:
> 
> ...


Here's to hoping! I actually had the RF 28-70, RF 50mm f1.2, and the RF 85mm f1.2. Fantastic lenses. The pandemic sank that for me.  It's going to be a good while before I can recover.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 13, 2022)

AlanF said:


> Clearly higher end!


Also in build?
And no possibility of using a battery -grip?


----------



## HMC11 (Aug 14, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> Well, there are a lot of folks who have an R6, but there is also a big number of people who opted not to get the R6 because of the MP count or the camera being overpriced. Now with a R7 that offers higher FPS and better pixel density, especially for wildlife, I do actually think that a R6 mal II is closer than most people expect. An R6 mk II with a stacked BSI 24-26 MP sensor would intrigue / attract a great number of people, even current R6 owners.


I am thinking along the same line, in that the R7 is making a strong case for wildlife and sports - significantly cheaper (than the R6), better 'reach', more MP, great AF (for the money) etc. This could well affect the sales of the R6, and hence an R6 ii seems to make better sense that an R ii at the moment. My sense is to have a sub-$1k RP ii, a close-to R6 level R ii, and a R6 ii sitting in between R6 and R5. By introducing an R ii first rather than an R6 ii would either drive the sales of the R6 even further down, or end up having a neither here nor there R ii.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 14, 2022)

Be patient friends, the kraken will be released soon!


----------



## AlanF (Aug 14, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> Also in build?
> And no possibility of using a battery -grip?


On the speculated classification that odd numbers = higher spec, then R7 must be higher spec!


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 14, 2022)

entoman said:


> Canon are difficult to predict these days.
> The "R Mkii" is apparently going to sit "below" the R6 (presumably this refers to pricing).
> I think we can expect significantly lower build quality, a single card slot, only modest burst speed, probably no IBIS, and they'll probably use it to test out some new ergonomic features (as with the R and R7). Low res EVF, and possibly a fixed screen? Sensor could be 20MP, certainly won't be less, but could be 24MP or another rework of the 30MP sensor?


That sounds like an R10, but with a full frame sensor.


----------



## entoman (Aug 14, 2022)

koenkooi said:


> That sounds like an R10, but with a full frame sensor.


Only thing for sure is that half the people here will love it, and half the people here will hate it


----------



## entoman (Aug 14, 2022)

esglord said:


> I imagine they are extremely frustrated by the supply chain constraints just when they caught up on tech.


Yes they will be, but other camera companies are in the same position. When the supply chain problems are eventually sorted, they'll benefit from a huge pent up demand, and sales will sky-rocket. Just take a look at what happened with the tourism industry - the pandemic almost destroyed it, but as soon as it subsided and we were all vaccinated, demand for holidays went through the roof. The problem for both the tourism industry and camera manufacturers is whether they can respond quickly enough to meet the demand.


----------



## yungfat (Aug 14, 2022)

It’s totally fine for me if Canon decided to reuse the 5DIV 30mp sensor.
Price below R6 is welcome. 

I was thinking to purchase an R after the announcement of R5 & R6, because of the price is so attractive,but I go with the Rp which is a gift for my wife. 

I don’t shoot video, even if I shoot, I don’t go with 4k so the huge crop doesn’t bother me at all.

After all, I believe R still a very good camera. 

Glad to see an update for it. 

Cheers!


----------



## Czardoom (Aug 14, 2022)

entoman said:


> Well no, you don't really "get it". It's not so much that I "don't like the R", and I totally agree about the horrendous ergonomics of early Sony cameras. I just feel that the R could have been a lot better if it hadn't been rushed out. I did actually consider buying one, but after borrowing one and comparing it to my 5DMkiv I decided it made more sense to keep my DSLRs a while longer, and wait until Canon produced a "better" mirrorless camera - a decision I've never regretted. Ultimately I bought the R5, and I still own the 5DMkiv although it is overdue for replacement with another RF mount body.
> 
> To answer your other question "was the 5DMkiv mediocre?" - yes, IMO it was. Just compare it to its closest rivals the Nikon D750, D810 and D850, all of which were launched around the same time (or earlier) than the Canon, but were better specified, better performing and more reasonably priced. I was already too deeply tied into Canon (having previously owned 40D, 50D, 6D, 7D, 7DMkii, 5DMkiii and 5DS, plus several Canon L lenses), and the 5DMkiv had the best sensor that Canon made, but compared to Nikon models it was - mediocre.
> 
> In my DSLR days there were many times when, if I could have afforded it, I would have gladly switched to Nikon. I'm glad I stuck with Canon though, as their current models (R6, R5, R3, R7) are all extremely good and serve their respective customer niches very well.


You make a lot of assumptions as if you know the facts, but I guess that is typical of the internet forum user. You have no idea that the R was rushed out - considering cameras take about 3 years to develop, this seems highly unlikely. I don't recall a lot of bug fixes or major problems upon release which would have given an indication of it being rushed out and a stop-gap camera. Spec wise, it seemed in line with what Canon had been offering all along.

That being said, thanks for your more detailed and thoughtful explanation without the rhetoric. If you compared the R to the Nikon offerings and found it mediocre, I can't disagree with your opinion. Mediocre is not a word I would have used for a camera that can easily be used by professionals with excelent results, but so be it. I agree totally that Nikon makes excellent cameras and anyone starting today - or at that time - could easily choose Nikon over Canon. About a year ago, not happy myself with the Canon FF choices (R5 and R6 too expensive for what I needed, RP not good enough for what I wanted) I switched from Canon to Nikon and bought the Z5, which, in my opinion, is a much better camera at that price point than the RP. When I had a chance to get a used Z7 for about $1600, I jumped at that, too, which gave me a higher MP camera for less than half the price of the R5. My main reason for jumping, was how good - and smaller and lighter - some of the Z lenses are. I like a one lens solution as I am often picture taking while also walking the dog. The 24-200mm Z lens is perhaps my favorite lens I have ever bought for that reason. Better than Canon's 24-240 - in fact, seemingly as sharp as the Canon RF 24-105 with almost twice the range. Their wide angle (14-30 f/4, if I remember correctly) was also quite compact and sharp corner to corner. I consider it a real shame that Sony has taken such a chunk out of Nikon's sales over the past few years, but that's what great marketing and having the backing of so many internet influencers can do. The only thing Nikon mirrorless lagged behind in, was AF and FPS. If you aren't into sports, birds and wildlife, Nikon mirrorless is far better than Sony at every price point level, in every respect, in my opinion. The only reason I came back to Canon in the end was, after 25 years of shooting Canon, I could not tolerate Nikon colors. Especially when fall season arrived. I just find Canon colors to be so much better - although I realize it may just be what I am used to, rather than any actual measurable spec.


----------



## john1970 (Aug 14, 2022)

Interesting development because I thought the next FF camera from Canon was going to be a high MP camera. I believe earlier rumors suggested that the next FF would be ~100 MP.

With that said, a replacement for the R and Rp makes a lot of sense. An R with an updated focusing system like the R6/R5, but at a lower price could sell quite well.


----------



## entoman (Aug 14, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> I consider it a real shame that Sony has taken such a chunk out of Nikon's sales over the past few years, but that's what great marketing and having the backing of so many internet influencers can do. The only thing Nikon mirrorless lagged behind in, was AF and FPS. If you aren't into sports, birds and wildlife, Nikon mirrorless is far better than Sony at every price point level, in every respect, in my opinion. The only reason I came back to Canon in the end was, after 25 years of shooting Canon, I could not tolerate Nikon colors. Especially when fall season arrived. I just find Canon colors to be so much better - although I realize it may just be what I am used to, rather than any actual measurable spec.


Yes it's a great shame that Nikon has lost market share - for many years they've had better (Sony) sensors than Canon, better specifications, cheaper prices and at least equal build quality and durability. I don't like Sony ergonomics or colour science, and I absolutely loathe the way they push their products via internet influencers, but I give them credit for pushing the envelope. Canon and Nikon were both stuck in a rut and fully deserved the kick up the rear that Sony gave them. Nowadays all 3 brands are producing wonderful products and we are very lucky to be so spoiled for choice.


----------



## SUNDOG04 (Aug 14, 2022)

Hoping for a sweet spot between the R5 and R6…similar to a Sony A7IV and an equivalent price tag. Not holding my breath.


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 14, 2022)

entoman said:


> Only thing for sure is that half the people here will love it, and half the people here will hate it


Schrodinger's Canon: you don't know if Canon is fine or banned-d-word until you observe the new camera release.


----------



## entoman (Aug 14, 2022)

dtaylor said:


> Schrodinger's Canon: you don't know if Canon is fine or banned-d-word until you observe the new camera release.


OMG is there a banned D-word now? Damn wokeys everywhere! We're all d-d-d-dooooooomed!


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 14, 2022)

koenkooi said:


> That sounds like an R10, but with a full frame sensor.



That would be then be canon thrash.


----------



## entoman (Aug 14, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> That would be then be canon thrash.


Canon have a nice choice of existing FF sensors to repurpose for the "R-whatever it is".

20MP from the R6 & 1Dxiii
24MP from the R3
26MP from the 6DMkii & RP
30MP from the 5DMkiv and R

The only one that hasn't already been used twice is the 24MP... and it's probably the best of the bunch.


----------



## entoman (Aug 14, 2022)

SUNDOG04 said:


> Hoping for a sweet spot between the R5 and R6…similar to a Sony A7IV and an equivalent price tag. Not holding my breath.


That could well be EXACTLY what Canon do. Hold your breath a bit longer! If the camera is going to sit "below" the R6 though, there will be a few sacrifices - single card slot, slower burst speed to name just two.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 14, 2022)

entoman said:


> Canon have a nice choice of existing FF sensors to repurpose for the "R-whatever it is".
> 
> 20MP from the R6 & 1Dxiii
> 24MP from the R3
> ...


I don’t think the R replacement will get a stacked, BSI sensor like the R3.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 14, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I would love to see a 1DX IV with the stacked sensor from the R3


Besides battery life and the OVF, how would a 1DXiv be better than the R3?


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 15, 2022)

entoman said:


> The RF 100-500mm is an improvement over the EF 100-400mm, with longer max focal length, much better stabilisation, closer focusing and a marginal increase in sharpness, although there are downsides e.g. inability to use an extender at focal lengths shorter than 300mm, and a fairly hefty price tag.
> 
> The RF 100mm macro is sharper, quieter and focuses closer than the EF version, and better stabilised, but it's a lot more expensive, and has totally different AF characteristics - disappointing early results led me to completely change my AF settings compared to those that were perfect on the EF version.


I would add that the weight is lower and the collapsed length as well if a EF1.4x TC was included. Given that the RF70-200/2.8 can't accept extenders then this is the only RF option compared to my previous EF setup (EF70-200/2.8 + 1.4/2x TCs) at the time of purchase. Definitely no regrets as I have used it far more than I expected with even significant crops giving amazing results. Also, a second hand EF100-400mm was hard to find and was keeping its pricing much higher than other EF lenses in the market. Now that a RF100-400mm is available, I think that the benefits between the two RF telephotos is less obvious especially at the price difference.

I would add that there isn't enough benefit (to me) to "upgrade" to RF versions of the EF16-35/4 and EF100mm/2.8 macro.... at least until my current ones die one way or the other. My wide angle is my workhorse lens and does everything I need perfectly. Maybe having a wider focal length would be occasionally useful but not enough to warrant upgrade. 
I don't use my macro enough to warrant an upgrade. I got it second hand and it is perfect for when I use it.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 15, 2022)

davidcl0nel said:


> The tinyer aps-c model without viewfinder will be a R100 or even R1000, i think. The replacements of them will be R20, R200, R2000 in a few years.
> R8 and R9 will never be used due to the fact a R7 is still aps-c, they won't add a 8 or 9 with fullframe.
> 
> I still think a R will not have a successor (there is, R6 and R5, yeah yeah different price, but all prices increased). But the entry level RP will have a replacement to have something in the sub 1000 range.


That is indeed a reasonable position. 
I would like a backup RF full frame camera for workshops/trips that would be small/low cost but a better sensor than the RP/6Dii. 
Frame rate/EVF and even AF etc could be subpar but I would need full frame to suit my wide angle lenses.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 15, 2022)

entoman said:


> IBIS is overrated.
> Compare camera shake with a non-stabilised tele or macro, on a 5DMkiv, and on a R5, and you won't notice much difference.
> Yes, I have both bodies and have made multiple comparison tests using stabilised and non-stabilised Canon glass.
> You'll see an improvement in stabilisation if you use short focal length lenses, but with teles nearly all of the stabilisation is done with the lens, not the body.


I had the unfortunate situation of being in Iceland for 2 weeks with lost luggage for 11 days.... so no filters or tripod :-(
IBIS was critical to handle longer exposure times hand held in this case. 
You are correct about OIS vs IBIS for long vs short focal lengths but they still work together. OIS can't handle yaw etc but with longer focal lengths IBIS can't move that far. 
That said, IBIS also reduces body shake for high mp sensors in general.
I definitely don't see it as overrated but it depends on your shooting genres.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 15, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> That naming system guarantees they run out of names after 10 models
> I am just getting used to the RF mount
> I do not care to switch again


EF = "Electro Focus"... do we know what "RF" stands for?

I think that the R mount is here for a very long time to come so switching any time soon would be highly unlikely unless you switch away from Canon.
EF started in 1987 so 35 years so far and still supported with native lenses for a long time to come.
R mount (combining FF and APS-C):
R3/5/5c/6/7/10 so far with r1/2/8/9 currently available in the single digit range.
R/Ra/RP naming convention likely to be replaced
R10 could be the start of R20/R90 etc

I think that the maximum number of EF/EF-s bodies that Canon were actively selling was 12 in 2015... 
1Dx/1Dc/5Ds/5DSr/5Diii/6D/7Dii/70D/760D/750D/100D/1200D
One could argue that 1Dc was a cinema body and that 5DS/r were basically one body but 12 is a lot and there are far less now.

I have tried to find what is the currently available EF/EF-S bodies and different retailers have different models available. This could be due to leftover inventory as well.
1DXiii/5div/6dii (5dsr in some)
90D/850D/250D/2000D/4000D (most retailers don't have all of them). Entry level models may be more available in developing countries as well.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 15, 2022)

entoman said:


> Yes that's possible, but it would be competing directly with the R7 - an absolute bargain camera with 33MP, IBIS, 2 card slots and good build quality.
> 
> Which would you buy, and why?
> 
> Personally I'd choose the R7, or wait for the R6Mkii (probably 24-26MP) although I don't think that will arrive until 2024.


The main issue with the R7 (and RF-S lenses) is that there is no wide/ultra wide angle lenses available except for adapting EF-S lenses. Happy for Canon to release native RF-S lenses made from their EF-S or EF-M range but for the moment, there is no option besides the RF16mm prime which is still 26mm ff.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 15, 2022)

entoman said:


> I don't think the R was intended to stop pros from switching to Sony - it was clearly an amateur camera with modest build quality, very modest specs, and a gimmicky swipe bar. It was certainly a stop-gap model though, as Canon were clearly caught off-guard by Sony and had very much underestimated the demand for mirrorless and IBIS from keen amateurs.


I also think that the R5/6 took longer to develop than Canon expected. They leap frogged the competition certainly put a fire under the market at the time... despite the overheating hype which was basically the only thing that competitors could point to as a major deficiency.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 15, 2022)

cayenne said:


> Same here.
> 
> I've been eyeballing getting the Kolor Vision treatment on it and make it into an IR and UV camera....seemed it would be great for that, but I'd not want it for my "main" workhorse camera.
> 
> I'd get R5 or maybe R1 for that.


Wouldn't the Ra already provide some IR capabilities given the changed filter for Ha band?


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 15, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> We get it - you don't llike the R. But pretty much every description you have come up with it only describes your bias - not the camera. "Mediocre, gimmick-laden"...that very well could describe Sony's early mirrorless full-frame ventures. Yes, the R didn't have IBIS or two card slots. Other than that it was essentially a mirrorless 5D IV - costing about $1000 less. Was the 5D IV mediocre in your mind? Gimmick-laden? Oh, I forgot, that swip bar! Everybody hated it except for those few who actually learned that you could use it as just another button. But most folks clearly didn't learn how to use it thus decided to make fun of it. I briefly owned the Sony A7 II - one of those cameras that Canon was so afraid of apparently. I wouldn't trade my R for that camera in a million years. Sure, spec lovers thought those Sonys were great, but my Sony A7 II underexposed by 1 1/2 stops, the EVF was so dim, I often reached up to take off my sunglasses, but wasn't wearing any, and the ergonomics and usability were about as bad as a camera could get. (And I won't even mention the awful weather sealing or still-not-any-good dust removal..oh, I guess i did mention it.) Yes, Canon up until that time made boring, conservative cameras that worked, were comfortable, easy to use, and did all the fundamental things as well or better than anyone (things like exposure and color...)


I always found it strange that the R was so much cheaper than the 5Div given the only major differences were battery life, OVF, dual slot. I get that it was a different market segment that it was competing in. I wonder if the 5Div will be discontinued at the same time as the R is???


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 15, 2022)

entoman said:


> To answer your other question "was the 5DMkiv mediocre?" - yes, IMO it was. Just compare it to its closest rivals the Nikon D750, D810 and D850, all of which were launched around the same time (or earlier) than the Canon, but were better specified, better performing and more reasonably priced. I was already too deeply tied into Canon (having previously owned 40D, 50D, 6D, 7D, 7DMkii, 5DMkiii and 5DS, plus several Canon L lenses), and the 5DMkiv had the best sensor that Canon made, but compared to Nikon models it was - mediocre.


The 5Div was much better than the 5Diii though. Although some saw it as an incremental update, it certainly improved all round as a body and was a worthwhile upgrade for me. I agree that there was better models from Nikon at the time. The D850 in particular. I recall seeing one and thinking "who would possible need so many pixels" until I got be R5


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 15, 2022)

yungfat said:


> It’s totally fine for me if Canon decided to reuse the 5DIV 30mp sensor.
> Price below R6 is welcome.
> 
> I was thinking to purchase an R after the announcement of R5 & R6, because of the price is so attractive,but I go with the Rp which is a gift for my wife.
> ...


I am coming to the same conclusion... 5Div sensor + Digic X would price it under the R6 as it would be recycled tech but provide a welcome fps/af update especially for video (within the rolling shutter speed limits).


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 15, 2022)

entoman said:


> OMG is there a banned D-word now? Damn wokeys everywhere! We're all d-d-d-dooooooomed!


looks like it isn't banned anymore... that said, I haven't seen it written for a long time now so perhaps that not even perceived to be the case now. 
c r i p p l e d is another one though


----------



## scyrene (Aug 15, 2022)

Ozarker said:


> Well, as a guy that uses mostly lenses that have no IS, IBIS would be wonderful for me. That is the "missing feature" I'd love to have.


It's definitely handy. I've done some casual testing with my R6 and the EF 100L macro and 24-105 L mk I and both benefit from it; the latter especially, as its IS was an older type that never gave me as much benefit; IBIS effectively makes up the difference.


----------



## JeffHou16 (Aug 15, 2022)

The reasonable specs for the RII (just in my opinion):
1. a new sensor around 30mp (similar to R)
2. 8-12 fps (between R and R6)
3. IBIS
4. cropped 4k 60p
5. clog but no clog 3 (may also not allow us to have custom video settings like R)
6. same evf resolution as R and R6
7. probably just single card slot
8. $1,699 (similar to A7C)

overall it should be an all-rounder camera for enthusiast but not professionals, or a backup camera for professionals. I hope it'll be equiped with dual slots (I'll consider getting one if so) but that might make R6's price no longer competitive.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 15, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> looks like it isn't banned anymore... that said, I haven't seen it written for a long time now so perhaps that not even perceived to be the case now.
> c r i p p l e d is another one though


The Canon cripple hammer has struck much harder with the RF mount as the mirrorless format allows them to cripple lenses more then ever before. We're really seeing this with many of Canon's consumer-grade lenses.

Most likely, the collapse of the camera market (around 90% reduction) and the loss of the lower end of the market to smartphones is forcing photography back into a niche interest, and driving Canon to focus more on the high end enthusiast and pro lenses. the expensive and high profit margin L series lenses, which is what they stated they want to do.







This appears to be leading to greater cost-cutting measures and higher prices on many consumer lenses. In the past Canon really only crippled their camera bodies to achieve 'market segmentation', but now they've started on their lenses. Enough said... 

The idea of selling a heavily software corrected plastic consumer lens such as the Canon RF24mm F1.8 MACRO IS STM which has 11% rectilinear distortion for USD $599, or even worse overseas at AUD $1,049 (USD $747) or £719 (USD $872) is a complete joke. Canon, giving you less for more!


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 15, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> The Canon cripple hammer has struck much harder with the RF mount as the mirrorless format allows them to cripple lenses more then ever before. We're really seeing this with many of Canon's consumer-grade lenses.
> 
> Most likely, the collapse of the camera market (around 90% reduction) and the loss of the lower end of the market to smartphones is forcing photography back into a niche interest, and driving Canon to focus more on the high end enthusiast and pro lenses. the expensive and high profit margin L series lenses, which is what they stated they want to do.
> This appears to be leading to greater cost-cutting measures and higher prices on many consumer lenses. In the past Canon really only crippled their camera bodies to achieve 'market segmentation', but now they've started on their lenses. Enough said...
> ...


Hmmm, I am not sure that I follow your logic. "Cripple hammer" is a derogatory phrase to say that Canon has withheld features from a camera body deliberately to hit a market niche where a simple firmware change could unlock them. Canon has certainly done this in the past and - I believe - is a common marketing strategy for any product. Car manufacturers have been doing it for years.
I have no issue with it except where it wouldn't hurt their market eg electronic shutter noise/eshutter speeds <20fps and remapping of the Rate button.

Enabling cheaper/smaller/lighter lenses with greater focal lengths based on computational corrections is actually adding features that couldn't be possible in the past. Having 14mm focal length with 77mm filter thread is remarkable!
What price Canon charges for them is a different story but I don't think that there is anything stopping you from using adapted EF/EF-S lenses instead if they are too expensive for you. The market will respond if there is no demand due to over pricing.

The world has some weird business models now....
Adobe sells SW on subscription to have cash flow certainty but bundled LR/PS at a price that seems ridiculously cheap compared to the past SW licenses.
Apple sells hardware and gives away SW updates for free
Amazon sells widgets but has a paid subscription for freight and gives away video contact for free
Tesla sells cars with SW updates and some are paid subscrptions


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 15, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> The 5Div was much better than the 5Diii though. Although some saw it as an incremental update, it certainly improved all round as a body and was a worthwhile upgrade for me. I agree that there was better models from Nikon at the time. The D850 in particular. I recall seeing one and thinking "who would possible need so many pixels" until I got be R5


When it became time for me to switch to digital, I was far more tempted by the Nikon 850 than by the EOS 5 DIII.
But the Canon lens offer was THE argument in favour of Canon in the end. I wanted a 24mm TS, and a tele-zoom. Nikon could not compete optically with the 24 TSE II or with the 100-400 L II. I never regretted my decision, even less after having replaced the 5 D III with the 5 D IV, which represented indeed an improvement, mostly its sensor, not just an incremental one.
PS: for a very short lapse of time, I had a Sony. I just hated it for its menu and so-called ergonomy... They seem to have improved in the meantime.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 15, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Hmmm, I am not sure that I follow your logic. "Cripple hammer" is a derogatory phrase to say that Canon has withheld features from a camera body deliberately to hit a market niche where a simple firmware change could unlock them. Canon has certainly done this in the past and - I believe - is a common marketing strategy for any product. Car manufacturers have been doing it for years.
> I have no issue with it except where it wouldn't hurt their market eg electronic shutter noise/eshutter speeds <20fps and remapping of the Rate button.
> 
> Enabling cheaper/smaller/lighter lenses with greater focal lengths based on computational corrections is actually adding features that couldn't be possible in the past. Having 14mm focal length with 77mm filter thread is remarkable!
> ...


The way that some lenses are crippled is that they're a regression from their EF or EF-S counterparts, they're either darker, more distorted or stripped back in functionality. There are some great new RF lenses that aren't L-series lenses, but some of them only offer benefits to specific photography niche uses, such as personal travel photography, where portability (size/weight) trumps image quality.

The RF 16mm f/2.8 and 24mm f/1.8 macro are really poor excuses for lenses in that they can't be used for the majority of genres those UW focal lengths are used for. The reality is that these are just lenses for vlogging/Youtube and casual travel/hiking photos to share on social media. and they're great for that purpose.

I'm not sure how Canon can take an EF-M lens like the EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 STM IS, and copy it to make the Canon RF-S 18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM, but somehow make it darker on the wide end? Must have saved a few cents somewhere. 

Once Canon was no longer constrained by the minimum DSLR aperture necessary for AF to function, or the real-world view of an OVF, some of their consumer lenses got darker or more distorted, simply because mirrorless camera bodies can work with less! It's not like the consumer EF and EF-S lenses were so outstanding that they could be crippled a bit more without losing something. Using a crippled lens that can do less does eat into whatever gains are delivered by the new camera body technology, meaning that the potential of the camera tech isn't fully realised , because it's a classic case three steps forward, two steps back.

Like you said, there's nothing stopping people from continuing to use adapted EF/EF-S glass, and waiting until Canon releases a more comprehensive range of lenses that offer more choices. That's kind of an amusing idea when third-party RF mount AF lenses are progressively decreasing in number for some strange reason, but as the brand-loyal strongly assure us, there's nothing to see here! If there's no compelling reason to pay very premium prices for good L-series RF glass, or put up with the compromises of consumer RF lenses, then people are better off saving their money for now. Having an almost total monopoly in the RF lens market means buyers are backed into a situation of either buying consumer lenses with whatever compromises Canon's cripple hammer chooses to inflict, or paying for brilliant but mostly overpriced RF L lenses.

I've done what any reasonable person would do, bought the RF lenses that suit my _needs_, got an adapter for my EF lenses, and ignored the RF lenses in my _wants _category that may be nice to have, but are either overpriced, aren't good value for money, lack the image quality I require, or that don't give me much over my EF lenses for all the additional cost.

Right now I'm patiently waiting to see if the promised Canon 150-600mm lens ever arrives and if it's is going to be any good...


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 15, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> EF = "Electro Focus"... do we know what "RF" stands for?


Reimagined Focus


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 15, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> R10 could be the start of R20/R90 etc


The 10D was announced in 2003
Canon ran out of names in 2019 with the 90D


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 15, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Besides battery life and the OVF, how would a 1DXiv be better than the R3?


It just needs to be better than the 1DX III assuming there is still a large enough DSLR market
Most of the development cost is already absorbed by the R3


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 15, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> The way that some lenses are crippled is that they're a regression from their EF or EF-S counterparts, they're either darker, more distorted or stripped back in functionality.


EF 16-35 f/2.8 -> RF 15-35 f/2.8 IS
EF 35 f/2 ->RF 35 f/1.8 Macro
EF 70-300 -> RF 100-400
EF 100-400 -> RF 100-500


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Aug 15, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> The RF 16mm f/2.8 and 24mm f/1.8 macro are really poor excuses for lenses in that they can't be used for the majority of genres those UW focal lengths are used for. The reality is that these are just lenses for vlogging/Youtube and casual travel/hiking photos to share on social media. and they're great for that purpose.


It's so weird that you complain about the 16mm and the 24mm and then point out what they are great for. Those lenses were designed for those exact purposes and they are great for their intended use. Furthermore, they are a bargain and good value for money. Btw, you can use for the "genres UW focal lengths are used for" on top of their intended purposes. 

If you want UW lenses for perfect astro shots or great landscaping images, go for the 15-35mm or the 14-35mm, they'll serve your needs. 

To put in a different way: nobody would purchase the 15-35mm for vlogging and than complain about the weight and the fact you can't shoot handheld on a gimbal because it's too heavy. I can hear those people now: 
"For that kind of money I'd expect a super light UWA zoom..."


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Aug 15, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> The 10D was announced in 2003
> Canon ran out of names in 2019 with the 90D


Well, I thought product cycles will be longer with mirrorless. And if they add a mkII to every second model (R10, R10 mkII then followed by R20) or go for double digits (R10, R11, R20, R22...) Canon will be on the safe side for another 50 years. 

I guess there a lot more things that Canon really has to worry about then their numbering scheme.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Aug 15, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> You make a lot of assumptions as if you know the facts, but I guess that is typical of the internet forum user. You have no idea that the R was rushed out - considering cameras take about 3 years to develop, this seems highly unlikely. I don't recall a lot of bug fixes or major problems upon release which would have given an indication of it being rushed out and a stop-gap camera. Spec wise, it seemed in line with what Canon had been offering all along.


Nobody knows for sure, that's true and you're right about that. But when the camera did come out in 2018, it did feel like a it was rushed. The...
- mechanical FPS was a nightmare
- (silent) e-shutter only worked/ works for single shots
- eye-AF was so bad, it wasn't even noticeable
- ergonomics were far from perfect (changed with the R5/6) 
- video specs were far worse compared to the competition... 

All these things make you question: Why was this camera released at that point? Imho, I thought Canon felt the pressure because Sonys sales were overwhelming and Nikon was about to introduce the Z-Mount. Furthermore, the L-mount alliance started... Canon would have been the only company without a mirrorless full-frame camera. Therefore, I do believe the camera was rushed and they could have done a much better job and have and much easier launch with more enjoyable critics. 

But, only Canon knows what they did and why, we can only speculate.


----------



## masterpix (Aug 15, 2022)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


OK, we have the R3-semi flagship, the R5 megapixel, the R6 which is working horse, and R7 the R3 in APS sensor, and the R10 which is the R-rebel. So where will we slide the new R/RP version? it can be R8 or R9 cause we "go down the line", but it needs to be lower htan the R6 but higher than the R10. So, if it is R8 it will be closer to the R6/R7 and if R9 then closer to the R10 with FF sensor. The space and differences are getting narrower as we speak. Personally I would go to the R9 more than the R8 cause the R8 (with the advance in technology since the R5/R6 came out) is too close to the R6 to really make the margin needed to be a "different" camera.


----------



## Curahee (Aug 15, 2022)

entoman said:


> IBIS is overrated.
> Compare camera shake with a non-stabilised tele or macro, on a 5DMkiv, and on a R5, and you won't notice much difference.
> Yes, I have both bodies and have made multiple comparison tests using stabilised and non-stabilised Canon glass.
> You'll see an improvement in stabilisation if you use short focal length lenses, but with teles nearly all of the stabilisation is done with the lens, not the body.


There are many non IS lenses that it would be great to have IBIS. Think FD, FL and R lenses and hundreds of other Non-IS lenses. If the lens has IS that is not required but for all other lenses this would be huge and make using them far more enjoyable, especially older telephoto lenses including many EF lenses and even some RF lenses without IS like the 28-70, the 50mm f1.2 and 85mm f1.2.


----------



## entoman (Aug 15, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> I had the unfortunate situation of being in Iceland for 2 weeks with lost luggage for 11 days.... so no filters or tripod :-(
> IBIS was critical to handle longer exposure times hand held in this case.
> You are correct about OIS vs IBIS for long vs short focal lengths but they still work together. OIS can't handle yaw etc but with longer focal lengths IBIS can't move that far.
> That said, IBIS also reduces body shake for high mp sensors in general.
> I definitely don't see it as overrated but it depends on your shooting genres.


Yes, "overrated" depends on shooting genres, and much more importantly - on whether you are using wideangles, medium teles, or long focal lengths.
IBIS and OIS working in conjunction yields the best results, but with teles and macros almost all of the work is done by the OIS.
With wideangles IBIS certainly has benefits.
With *unstabilised* teles and macros, IBIS alone makes very little difference in my experience - maybe 1 stop at best (depending on the user's "shakiness").
I think some have misinterpreted my use of the word "overrated" - I wasn't implying that it is valueless, just that it isn't as effective (with unstabilised teles) as some folk are led to believe.


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 15, 2022)

entoman said:


> Only thing for sure is that half the people here will love it, and half the people here will hate it



already some reviews are complaining about the R10 video AF. For a new camera , thats piss poor, and a middle finger from canon to customers.


----------



## entoman (Aug 15, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> already some reviews are complaining about the R10 video AF. For a new camera , thats piss poor, and a middle finger from canon to customers.


I'm not a video guy, so it's not really something I can comment on.

As a stills shooter specialising in macro and wildlife, I think the R3, R5 and R6 are all stunning cameras - and very much in their favour is the fact that the controls are almost identical on each, which makes it much easier (for me) to switch back and forth between models without "muscle-memory" issues.

The different ergonomics of the R7, R10 and RP make them undesirable to me, but I'm looking forward (admittedly with some trepidation) to seeing the "R replacement", and how it compares to the R6, as a potential backup to my R5.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 15, 2022)

masterpix said:


> OK, we have the R3-semi flagship, the R5 megapixel, the R6 which is working horse, and R7 the R3 in APS sensor, and the R10 which is the R-rebel. So where will we slide the new R/RP version? it can be R8 or R9 cause we "go down the line", but it needs to be lower htan the R6 but higher than the R10. So, if it is R8 it will be closer to the R6/R7 and if R9 then closer to the R10 with FF sensor. The space and differences are getting narrower as we speak. Personally I would go to the R9 more than the R8 cause the R8 (with the advance in technology since the R5/R6 came out) is too close to the R6 to really make the margin needed to be a "different" camera.


I am not convinced it would make much sense but Canon could easily make a cheaper R6 with a smaller buffer, one card slot, and no IBIS.
Call it an R6 P or something like that


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 15, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> already some reviews are complaining about the R10 video AF. For a new camera , thats piss poor, and a middle finger from canon to customers.



People complain about every camera Canon makes.
I do not remember the last one that people did not complain about.
The R10 video is better than pretty much anything else in its price category.


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 15, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> People complain about every camera Canon makes.
> I do not remember the last one that people did not complain about.
> The R10 video is better than pretty much anything else in its price category.



If they're sacrificing focus to meet a price point, then they shouldn't make a product.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 15, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> If they're sacrificing focus to meet a price point, then they shouldn't make a product.


Then most of Canon's competition should not exist at all.
Only Sony matches Canon's autofocus.


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 15, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Then most of Canon's competition should not exist at all.
> Only Sony matches Canon's autofocus.


you shouldn't have great AF on one canon model and crap on another. It should be consistent.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 15, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> you shouldn't have great AF on one canon model and crap on another. It should be consistent.


Crap?
Did you test it or do you rely on the internet?
Are these sources reliable, like for instance TDP?


----------



## entoman (Aug 15, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> People complain about every camera Canon makes.
> I do not remember the last one that people did not complain about.


Yep, and people complain about every camera made by Nikon, Sony, Panasonic and OM Systems too.

I guess we all just want more, more, more, for less, less, less.


----------



## entoman (Aug 15, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> you shouldn't have great AF on one canon model and crap on another. It should be consistent.


It's inevitable that newer models will have better AF than older ones, that's just progress.
It's also a fact of life that you won't get hi-end performance from a budget camera, because the best AF systems require very expensive processors.

Also, manufacturers have to stop their budget models from cannibalising more expensive ones in their range.

So it would be unrealistic e.g. to expect R3 performance from an R7 or R10.

Canon do a pretty good job though, even with their budget models (I'm talking stills here, not qualified to comment on video)


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 15, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> Crap?
> Did you test it or do you rely on the internet?
> Are these sources reliable, like for instance TDP?



Oh, rely on internet. Listen very carefully about R10 AF.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 15, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> Oh, rely on internet. Listen very carefully about R10 AF.


DPR? Lol. Maybe they’ve learned something since their last review I viewed, when they didn’t understand how Canon’s automatic AF point selection works so they bashed it even though it was functioning as designed (which is different from the Sony/Nikon cameras they’re used to), and when they configured the Servo AF in a way Canon recommend against (because they couldn’t be bothered to RTFM) and bashed the tracking performance. 

But sure, rely on the internet.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Aug 15, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Surely the discussion of mirrorless cameras with no video has been debunked already.
> The EVF is a video screen so there is already a video stream to be captured.
> Electronic shutter is used for EVF and there is no mechanical cost for this in any case.
> The incremental SW cost to write this to a card is small and given that that code has already been written for R3/5/6/7 etc on Digic X processor then it is a no-brainer to include it with whatever features (or not) to offer. The market will demand it anyway.
> ...


The costs of a feature are not really an argument when it comes to Canon. Canon is famous for its "cripple hammer". They leave away some functions that could be cheap and easy to add - sometimes even via firmware - to offer a cheaper option. That makes a lot of sense for a manufacturer. People have different budgets and different needs. The way to maximize profit is selling everybody the most expensive camera they can afford. Some people will always buy the best option with all the features and others might be willing to pay half the price for a camera with less options. 

For Canon it would be very cheap to include some professional video specs like time code and a few more codes into cameras like the R3, but that would cannibalize some of the really professional video camera that cost much more. That could also work in the other direction: Taking an R3 and stripping it off a lot of features to make sure that many people would still buy the real R3 for those features, but the lower spec camera could be offered much cheaper that the higher spec one without cannibalizing it. So it is not about what a feature like video costs Canon, but what it is worth to the customer. 

The main reason why I would like a mirrorless camera is IBIS. I wish there would be Canon DSLRs with IBIS. That would be the best of two worlds. I would also love to have the sensor of the R3, which still is the best performing low light sensor on the whole full frame market. I understand the physical limitations of a DSLR though. In order for a 7 or 8 stop IBIS to work, the image circle has to be much larger and therefore the mirror would also have to grow, but than it would no longer fit within the flange distance of the DSLR. So basically a new mount would have to be invented. One with a larger flange distance than the EF mount has. That would result in even worse optical formulas than the EF mount has. Exactly the opposite direction of the RF mount, which has a shorter flange distance and allows better optical formulas. So in a DLSR with EF mount a strong IBIS could only work in Live View, but than you would practically use the DSLR as a mirrorless camera, just without an EVF.

Sadly photography is all about compromises. Even cameras manufacturers admit that after using the sensor for a while, it warms up and the images noise increases. That really is one of the worst compromises. A degrading image quality just because a camera warms up while I compose my shot. I think DSLRs should still have their place for situations where they can play their advantages, Just last month I bought a new EF lens, because I still believe in that system. That lens even is made of metal. Sooner or later I will probaly carry both a DSLR and a mirrorless camera on all of my trips.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 15, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> DPR? Lol. Maybe they’ve learned something since their last review I viewed, when they didn’t understand how Canon’s automatic AF point selection works so they bashed it even though it was functioning as designed (which is different from the Sony/Nikon cameras they’re used to), and when they configured the Servo AF in a way Canon recommend against (because they couldn’t be bothered to RTFM) and bashed the tracking performance.
> 
> But sure, rely on the internet.


DP Review seems pretty clueless to me in general.
Also, Chris usually does not film himself.
Usually, Jordan records him so this does not tell us anything about how the R10 compares with the autofocus in other cameras.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 15, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> For Canon it would be very cheap


We have no idea what anything costs.


----------



## dolina (Aug 15, 2022)

This is the timeline of full frame EOS bodies

1-Series

2001 1D 2002 Winter Olympics
2004 1D Mark II for 2004 Summer Olympics
2005 1D Mark IIn for 2006 Winter Olympics
2007 1D Mark III for 2008 Summer Olympics
2009 1D Mark IV for 2010 Winter Olympics
2012 1D X for 2012 Summer Olympics
2016 1D X Mark II for 2016 Summer Olympics
2020 1D X Mark III for 2020 Summer Olympics
2024 R1 (?) for 2024 Summer Olympics
5-Series

2005 5D
2008 5D Mark II
2012 5D Mark III
2016 5D Mark IV
2020 R5
2024 R5 Mark II (?)
6-Series

2012 6D
2017 6D Mark II
2020 R6
2024 R6 Mark II (?)
R-Series

2018 EOS R
2022 EOS R Mark II (?) or 2023
RP-Series

2019 EOS RP
2023 EOS RP Mark II (?) or 2024
I suspect that Canon & Nikon may discontinue production of dSLR bodies, lenses and accessories by 2024.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 15, 2022)

dolina said:


> This is the timeline of full frame EF bodies
> 
> 1D X
> 
> ...


Nice to see dolina again.
It is interesting that there is no discernible pattern to the release schedule of the 6 series.
We could potentially see an R6 II at any time.
I am not sure that it would make much sense for one to come out before an R5 II though.


----------



## dolina (Aug 15, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Nice to see dolina again.
> It is interesting that there is no discernible pattern to the release schedule of the 6 series.
> We could potentially see an R6 II at any time.
> I am not sure that it would make much sense for one to come out before an R5 II though.


Thanks for missing me. I edited my post to give it more order. (?) signifies a future body.

If I were to hazard a guess 2024 will be the year R1, R5 Mark 2 & R6 Mark 2 will be out.

My preference though is that each year will have Canon pushing out a full frame body.

Example

2022 R Mark II
2023 RP Mark II
2024 R1
2025 R5 Mark II
2026 R6
In light of weakening of sales of ILCs, personally I'd prefer less full frame SKUs

For EF mount we have

1D X
5D
6D
With RF mount we have

R1 (?)
R3
R5
R6
R
RP


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 15, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> Oh, rely on internet. Listen very carefully about R10 AF.


DPR?
That's what you call reliable?


----------



## Bob Howland (Aug 15, 2022)

dolina said:


> This is the timeline of full frame EOS bodies
> 
> 1-Series
> 
> ...


What about the R3?


----------



## AlanF (Aug 15, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> DPR?
> That's what you call reliable?


He’s very reliable - he complains about every Canon.


----------



## dolina (Aug 15, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> What about the R3?


Not enough data points.

EOS 3D was never a dSLR line.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 15, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> The 10D was announced in 2003
> Canon ran out of names in 2019 with the 90D


Not really.. There is no reason why the xxD had to x0D eg The 77D comes to mind. They could have had another 9 models (91D/92D etc) let alone mark 2/3/4 etc


----------



## dolina (Aug 15, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Not really.. There is no reason why the xxD had to x0D eg The 77D comes to mind. They could have had another 9 models (91D/92D etc) let alone mark 2/3/4 etc



$899.99 77D & $1199 90D have different price points. 

The 2016 80D shared the same price point as the 2019 90D.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> The way that some lenses are crippled is that they're a regression from their EF or EF-S counterparts, they're either darker, more distorted or stripped back in functionality. There are some great new RF lenses that aren't L-series lenses, but some of them only offer benefits to specific photography niche uses, such as personal travel photography, where portability (size/weight) trumps image quality.


There are many new RF lenses and most (excluding the 600/800L primes) offer something unique ie over their EF counterparts. For me, the RF70-200mm/2.8 is so much better than my previous EF equivalent due to size/weight. No issues with weather sealing with the extending front element. No need for a tripod ring IMHO as the weight balance can be handled easily by the body tripod mount. I haven't seen any image quality issues and focusing is fast due to RF connectivity. Lots of other examples as well. The RF14-35mm/4 and RF100mm macro have additional features (focal length/magnification) but I don't need the extra features so I haven't updated from EF.


LogicExtremist said:


> The RF 16mm f/2.8 and 24mm f/1.8 macro are really poor excuses for lenses in that they can't be used for the majority of genres those UW focal lengths are used for. The reality is that these are just lenses for vlogging/Youtube and casual travel/hiking photos to share on social media. and they're great for that purpose.


Canon haven't released a decent UAW astrolandscape lens... arguably ever. the RF16/RF24mm are perfect for their intended purpose which you have described. What genre can't they do?


LogicExtremist said:


> Once Canon was no longer constrained by the minimum DSLR aperture necessary for AF to function, or the real-world view of an OVF, some of their consumer lenses got darker or more distorted, simply because mirrorless camera bodies can work with less! It's not like the consumer EF and EF-S lenses were so outstanding that they could be crippled a bit more without losing something. Using a crippled lens that can do less does eat into whatever gains are delivered by the new camera body technology, meaning that the potential of the camera tech isn't fully realised , because it's a classic case three steps forward, two steps back.


It did enable unique lenses like the 600/800 f11 primes though. Given the sensor improvements over time for ISO performance, darker lenses aren't the same problem as they used to be. I would rather than a grainy shot that is sharp than miss it completely


LogicExtremist said:


> Like you said, there's nothing stopping people from continuing to use adapted EF/EF-S glass, and waiting until Canon releases a more comprehensive range of lenses that offer more choices. That's kind of an amusing idea when third-party RF mount AF lenses are progressively decreasing in number for some strange reason, but as the brand-loyal strongly assure us, there's nothing to see here! If there's no compelling reason to pay very premium prices for good L-series RF glass, or put up with the compromises of consumer RF lenses, then people are better off saving their money for now. Having an almost total monopoly in the RF lens market means buyers are backed into a situation of either buying consumer lenses with whatever compromises Canon's cripple hammer chooses to inflict, or paying for brilliant but mostly overpriced RF L lenses.


The RF lenses are expensive but mostly offer additional features over their EF counterparts. Canon is maximising their ROI for new products. Migration to R mount is exactly that... a migration over time. Options of RF lenses or adapted EF lenses or second hand gives 3 different price points for users. Getting them to buy a body is the first step to an eventual replacement of their lenses which is the greater dollar cost. Otherwise Canon would have had a greater problem of switchers to other systems


LogicExtremist said:


> I've done what any reasonable person would do, bought the RF lenses that suit my _needs_, got an adapter for my EF lenses, and ignored the RF lenses in my _wants _category that may be nice to have, but are either overpriced, aren't good value for money, lack the image quality I require, or that don't give me much over my EF lenses for all the additional cost.


I completely agree with you on this... but I have no complaints about the new RF lenses except that they are expensive. They are still selling well so Canon's strategy is working even as lower end bodies etc are being decimated by smart phones.


LogicExtremist said:


> Right now I'm patiently waiting to see if the promised Canon 150-600mm lens ever arrives and if it's is going to be any good...


Was it ever promised? Can you point this out for me? I can't see it ever being released personally. The RF100-500mm is wonderful. Put a 1.4TC on it and the only downside is that it is from 300mm so you are missing 150-300mm range but get an extra 100mm on the long end. 
But (I hear you say) that it isn't bright enough or as heavy as the Sigma.... well that is true but you can always adapt that lens perfectly. The eye AF will work perfectly


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 16, 2022)

dolina said:


> $899.99 77D & $1199 90D have different price points.
> 
> The 2016 80D shared the same price point as the 2019 90D.


that is true but my point was about the numbering scheme as a previous poster had said that there was no other numbers after 90D


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 16, 2022)

dolina said:


> Thanks for missing me. I edited my post to give it more order. (?) signifies a future body.
> 
> If I were to hazard a guess 2024 will be the year R1, R5 Mark 2 & R6 Mark 2 will be out.


I am still thinking about what extra features a R5ii would have over the R5.... They have basically removed the overheating debate now and added more video features especially compression etc. R5C for dedicated video. R3 gives faster frame rates if you need them.

There are niggling issues like eshutter noise/lower frame speeds/rate button remap etc but I'm not sure about serious feature upgrades. Adding an AF-on controller could be interesting but not a deal breaker. Stacked/BSI sensor would be a big step up but may cannibalise the R1.


----------



## dolina (Aug 16, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> that is true but my point was about the numbering scheme as a previous poster had said that there was no other numbers after 90D


Given that EF system will be phased out by mid 20s then the 2019 90D will be the last of its product line.

Canon was attempting to have a EF body at an increment of ~$100 apart of each product line. It is probable that this not saleable anymore given smartphones and the EOS RP selling for $999.

Odds are with RF system there will be fewer APS-C bodies & more full frame bodies.


----------



## dolina (Aug 16, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> I am still thinking about what extra features a R5ii would have over the R5.... They have basically removed the overheating debate now and added more video features especially compression etc. R5C for dedicated video. R3 gives faster frame rates if you need them.
> 
> There are niggling issues like eshutter noise/lower frame speeds/rate button remap etc but I'm not sure about serious feature upgrades. Adding an AF-on controller could be interesting but not a deal breaker. Stacked/BSI sensor would be a big step up but may cannibalise the R1.


I wouldn't even bother thinking about it as that's 2 years from now.

Better to imagine what projects you can do today with the products that ca be bought today.

If I skipped the 2014 7D2 & 2015 5DsR and was as prolific in shooting from 2008-2013 as today I'd be enticed to upgrade from

- 2009 1D4 to 2021 R3
- 2008 5D2 to 2020 R5
- 2009 7D to 2022 R7

A 1 decade upgrade cycle makes sense to me with hobby photography


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 16, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> The costs of a feature are not really an argument when it comes to Canon. Canon is famous for its "cripple hammer". They leave away some functions that could be cheap and easy to add - sometimes even via firmware - to offer a cheaper option. That makes a lot of sense for a manufacturer. People have different budgets and different needs. The way to maximize profit is selling everybody the most expensive camera they can afford. Some people will always buy the best option with all the features and others might be willing to pay half the price for a camera with less options.


Canon used to be famous for deliberately choosing which features to add/remove. The whole point of Magic Lantern was to unlock what the 5Diii could do. That changed with the R5/Digic X with the engineers pushing all the boundaries. Free firmware upgrades have added features as well over time so Canon is adding value to existing customers... that is excellent customer service in my opinion. Canon will always have a market segmentation strategy - as every product line has. Do you similarly complain about car product lines?

Note that Canon (and Sony/Nikon etc) are pushing sales into the higher priced/featured products as their lower end market is being decimated. That is the only way to still in the camera business. My phone is used more and more except when I cannot use it for certain genres. I am amazed at the advances of computational photography! The main selling point for new phones is their cameras. Horses for courses.



Skyscraperfan said:


> For Canon it would be very cheap to include some professional video specs like time code and a few more codes into cameras like the R3, but that would cannibalize some of the really professional video camera that cost much more. That could also work in the other direction: Taking an R3 and stripping it off a lot of features to make sure that many people would still buy the real R3 for those features, but the lower spec camera could be offered much cheaper that the higher spec one without cannibalizing it. So it is not about what a feature like video costs Canon, but what it is worth to the customer.


Sure but I am not sure what you mean by "the real R3". It is a sum of its parts and is general enough to appeal to a narrow-ish range of users


Skyscraperfan said:


> The main reason why I would like a mirrorless camera is IBIS. I wish there would be Canon DSLRs with IBIS. That would be the best of two worlds. I would also love to have the sensor of the R3, which still is the best performing low light sensor on the whole full frame market. I understand the physical limitations of a DSLR though. In order for a 7 or 8 stop IBIS to work, the image circle has to be much larger and therefore the mirror would also have to grow, but than it would no longer fit within the flange distance of the DSLR. So basically a new mount would have to be invented. One with a larger flange distance than the EF mount has. That would result in even worse optical formulas than the EF mount has. Exactly the opposite direction of the RF mount, which has a shorter flange distance and allows better optical formulas. So in a DLSR with EF mount a strong IBIS could only work in Live View, but than you would practically use the DSLR as a mirrorless camera, just without an EVF.


That is why the 1Dxiii's best AF is via liveview. Ergonomically unsatisfactory but Canon decided to put the best bits that they could into one final 1 series body. I can't see a new DLSR being released again - at least at the high end. Those users will expect the latest technology/features/reliability and mirrorless is the way of the future


Skyscraperfan said:


> Sadly photography is all about compromises. Even cameras manufacturers admit that after using the sensor for a while, it warms up and the images noise increases. That really is one of the worst compromises. A degrading image quality just because a camera warms up while I compose my shot.


I would suggest that the incremental thermal noise difference during sensor warmup would be minor. Astro cameras have built in coolers for the sensors to reduce thermal noise but that is a highly specialised and expensive genre!


Skyscraperfan said:


> I think DSLRs should still have their place for situations where they can play their advantages, Just last month I bought a new EF lens, because I still believe in that system. That lens even is made of metal. Sooner or later I will probaly carry both a DSLR and a mirrorless camera on all of my trips.


EF lenses are still wonderful and work perfectly with mirrorless bodies. 
Metal vs industrial plastics is a different argument. You may feel that it is more solid/heavy etc but there has been no evidence that RF lenses are less sturdy. The weight/size etc difference is a major factor to encourage EF lens owners to upgrade where it makes sense to RF.
After upgrading to the R5, I would never go back to a DLSR. YMMV of course but I think that most R5 would agree with me.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 16, 2022)

dolina said:


> Given that EF system will be phased out by mid 20s then the 2019 90D will be the last of its product line.
> 
> Canon was attempting to have a EF body at an increment of ~$100 apart of each product line. It is probable that this not saleable anymore given smartphones and the EOS RP selling for $999.
> 
> Odds are with RF system there will be fewer APS-C bodies & more full frame bodies.


I agree. Given that smart phones can easily be >USD1000 then $100 either way doesn't make a sense to compete in general in high income countries
Still, in low income markets, that differentiation can be very important so we will see what happens. 
I was always surprised by the cruise line photographers using very cheap bodies/lenses. They "focus" on lighting to maximise the quality up to the print size and make a very healthy profit in that area.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 16, 2022)

dolina said:


> I wouldn't even bother thinking about it as that's 2 years from now.
> 
> Better to imagine what projects you can do today with the products that ca be bought today.
> 
> ...


Sure, that makes sense but Canon will have a release cycle with R bodies as they did with DLSRs. I buy Lexus cars and upgrade every 7-10 years as they just don't have issues in my experience. I could buy something cheaper and replace every 3-4 years but that wouldn't mean that it is overall cheaper with depreciation.

I am planning to keep my R5 for a long time and it certainly has few limitations for my needs/wants. I still have 3 years of warranty left anyway.

Canon will want to entice users to upgrade... The 5Div was seen as incremental over 5Diii though without must-have features.


----------



## dolina (Aug 16, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> I agree. Given that smart phones can easily be >USD1000 then $100 either way doesn't make a sense to compete in general in high income countries
> Still, in low income markets, that differentiation can be very important so we will see what happens.
> I was always surprised by the cruise line photographers using very cheap bodies/lenses. They "focus" on lighting to maximise the quality up to the print size and make a very healthy profit in that area.


Too many factors are stacked against dedicated still cameras.

utility
convenience
always with you
able to shoot, process and share all from 1 device without need for PC, Photoshop & fiber internet
upgrades are "pushed" rather than "pull"
upgrades can be paid amortized over 3 years or longer through a telco plan
It's a luxury item for hobbyists and more of a commercial/industrial tool for working photogs.

If I could do a redo I'd replace per dozen years rather than everytime the next model comes out.


----------



## dolina (Aug 16, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Sure, that makes sense but Canon will have a release cycle with R bodies as they did with DLSRs. I buy Lexus cars and upgrade every 7-10 years as they just don't have issues in my experience. I could buy something cheaper and replace every 3-4 years but that wouldn't mean that it is overall cheaper with depreciation.
> 
> I am planning to keep my R5 for a long time and it certainly has few limitations for my needs/wants. I still have 3 years of warranty left anyway.
> 
> Canon will want to entice users to upgrade... The 5Div was seen as incremental over 5Diii though without must-have features.


I'd shorted my upgrade cycle if I used it daily. Last time I picked up any camera was 4 years ago.

If I drove my Lexus 4 years ago I would not bother upgrading until it hit 100,000km.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 16, 2022)

dolina said:


> Too many factors are stacked against dedicated still cameras.
> 
> utility
> convenience
> ...


Note that the phone hardware is amortised over the contract period with the carrier. The carrier pays the OEM for the full amount. Paying a monthly hardware cost seems cheaper compared to up front payment. I won't be upgrading my iphone this year and will save AUD1000 by waiting another year.

SW upgrades on phones are pushed out over time but look virtually seamless from one phone to a new one so the OEM needs to show more HW improvements (eg facial recognition etc).

And not just still cameras.... I recorded 90 minute 4k video of my daughter's wedding with a iphone on a tripod.. barely got warm and no recording time limits. It was just... simple.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 16, 2022)

dolina said:


> I'd shorted my upgrade cycle if I used it daily. Last time I picked up any camera was 4 years ago.
> 
> If I drove my Lexus 4 years ago I would not bother upgrading until it hit 100,000km.


Lexus replaced free (labour and parts) a dashboard on a 9 year old IS250 because the plastic was tacky and deemed to be poor quality. Completely unexpected and got my loyalty.
My RC350 is currently 6 years old and have 95,000km on it and no issues. Will last at least 2-3 more years for me before I get a EV. How much I spend then will be a great question.... but we are off topic!


----------



## dolina (Aug 16, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Note that the phone hardware is amortised over the contract period with the carrier. The carrier pays the OEM for the full amount. Paying a monthly hardware cost seems cheaper compared to up front payment. I won't be upgrading my iphone this year and will save AUD1000 by waiting another year.
> 
> SW upgrades on phones are pushed out over time but look virtually seamless from one phone to a new one so the OEM needs to show more HW improvements (eg facial recognition etc).
> 
> And not just still cameras.... I recorded 90 minute 4k video of my daughter's wedding with a iphone on a tripod.. barely got warm and no recording time limits. It was just... simple.


Back end is not that important than what is direct to user.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 16, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> excluding the 600/800L primes


Those never had EF equivalents


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 16, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Was it ever promised? Can you point this out for me? I can't see it ever being released personally.


It was never promised but there are several patented versions.
It would be a very different lens than the RF 100-500 L, so both lenses could exist.
However, Canon would want to entice people into buying sets of zooms and they seem too close for that.
On the other hand, most people seem to choose either the RF 600 f/11 or the RF 800 f/11.
Very few people seem to choose both and Canon does not seem to care which one.


----------



## dolina (Aug 16, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> It was never promised but there are several patented versions.
> It would be a very different lens than the RF 100-500 L, so both lenses could exist.
> However, Canon would want to entice people into buying sets of zooms and they seem too close for that.
> On the other hand, most people seem to choose either the RF 600 f/11 or the RF 800 f/11.
> Very few people seem to choose both and Canon does not seem to care which one.


If I was 2x my age today I'd go with the 1kg lens and less than 1kg bodies.

My experience tells me that if you put money into good gear the photos you take will be stolen by a-holes.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 16, 2022)

entoman said:


> It's inevitable that newer models will have better AF than older ones, that's just progress.
> It's also a fact of life that you won't get hi-end performance from a budget camera, because the best AF systems require very expensive processors.
> 
> Also, manufacturers have to stop their budget models from cannibalising more expensive ones in their range.
> ...


We're hearing, again, from people who unrealistically expect flagship performance in low end bodies.  I'm seeing a reemergence of the "cripple hammer" tripe.

I have an R. While I'd like it to have flagship performance, even a dummy like me knows I ain't paid for it. It seems many who've never tried some gear are the most critical, relying on YouTubers to do the thinking for them, then trotting out the ideas they watched as their own personal knowledge. Makes them feel smart.


----------



## dolina (Aug 16, 2022)

Ozarker said:


> We're hearing, again, from people who unrealistically expect flagship performance in low end bodies.  I'm seeing a reemergence of the "cripple hammer" tripe.
> 
> I have an R. While I'd like it to have flagship performance, even a dummy like me knows I ain't paid for it.


This is my 1st time to read the term 'cripple hammer' and I googled it and it is most popularlly used with Canon gear.

Weird.

Having said I am glad there are still people who understand you get what you paid for.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> There are many new RF lenses and most (excluding the 600/800L primes) offer something unique ie over their EF counterparts. For me, the RF70-200mm/2.8 is so much better than my previous EF equivalent due to size/weight. No issues with weather sealing with the extending front element. No need for a tripod ring IMHO as the weight balance can be handled easily by the body tripod mount. I haven't seen any image quality issues and focusing is fast due to RF connectivity. Lots of other examples as well. The RF14-35mm/4 and RF100mm macro have additional features (focal length/magnification) but I don't need the extra features so I haven't updated from EF.
> 
> Canon haven't released a decent UAW astrolandscape lens... arguably ever. the RF16/RF24mm are perfect for their intended purpose which you have described. What genre can't they do?
> 
> ...


Unfortunately the 16mm and 24mm primes don't do well for the main things UW are used for such as landscape, real estate, architecture, and everything lese that needs corner sharpness. Good light travel/hiking lenses though. We know from reviews that the 16mm is not good for video, it struggles with holding focus on a moving subject, so only good for fixed distance focus video such as talking head/Youtube/vlogging. Agreed Canon has never released a decent astro lens, most use third-party lenses.

Saw a review by Gordon Laing of the RF vs EF 100 L macro, the new lens has some limitations. It's reported it suffers from focus shift, which is a deal breaker for many macro photographers. The inclusion of focus-by-wire is questionable on a macro lens, as these are often manually focussed and there's no tactile feedback that its at the end of the range when doing macro at maximum magnification. The optical stabilisation on the EF 100mm f/2.8 L Macro is a whole stop better that the RF version. The RF version is sharper wide open at f/2.8, especially at the edges, but at f/4, and even more so at real macro apertures such as f/8 to f/11 they're virtually identical. The RF lens also doesn't take teleconverters even though the EF lens can (didn't know that was a thing). The RF lens has 1.4x magnification which is a bonus, and a pointless SA control. Watching the video, in the portrait photos, to my eye the bokeh is a bit smoother on the EF macro lens.






I've seen criticisms of the RF 70-200mm f/2.8L, namely around the sacrifice of internal focussing for size/weight, the fact that it doesn't take a teleconverter, and that the zoom ring takes too many turns to be useful for fast-paced photography such as sports and events. 

Whether the RF 100mm f/2.8L macro or RF 70-200mm f/2.8L are compelling enough to get the owners of their EF equivalents to upgrade is a matter of debate, and whether pros realise any significant benefit for the additional outlay of money is questionable. It's mainly enthusiasts that constantly shell out for new gear. As you mention, the expensive lenses do sell, but we live in a materialistic society where people buy lots of crap they don't need to soothe themselves psychologically and emotionally, or just love playing with tech gear, so that's really more of an indictment on how good the marketing is, not how great the gear is. It's been argued that Nikon makes better cameras than Sony, but Sony has eaten into Nikon's market share because they market more aggressively, and use lots of influencers to promote their products. Canon does have some really awesome lenses that sell well, but the pro market who upgrade infrequently is tiny compared to the bigger market of prosumers, enthusiasts, hobbyists, gear heads and tech dabblers, some of who would bot even utilise a portion of their gear's capabilities.

The point I'm making here is that all lens designs involve compromises and limitations of some sort, and these can change from one model lens to the other. Only by being aware of what they are can photographers select what best matches their needs and budgets. For gear collectors that's a moot point because it's all about 'buying the best tech', a very ambiguous criteria, which raises their hackles when any real-world limitations are pointed out.

The RF 600mm and 800mm f/11 are a unique set of compromises that offer as you rightly state, the possibility of grainy photos rather than no photos is significant. They do put those long focal lengths into the reach of budget photography. Whether people would be happy with that. or frustrated with the lower image quality is a matter of subjective preference.

The 'promised' Canon 150-600mm would be more accurately described as 'rumoured', you're right there. Then again, many of these rumours are a means of baiting to get expectations up and fixation on the new release of products into the market. Works great for Canon! This site is proof of how much that catches many people's interest. Canon marketing should be paying the owners of this site for drumming up interest in new Canon products lol!


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 16, 2022)

excluding the 600/800L primes 


EOS 4 Life said:


> Those never had EF equivalents


Are you referring to the 600/800 f11 primes (which are not L lenses) or the EF600/4L and EF800/5.6L that I was referring to which have RF equivalents at an unprecedented markup of ~25% over their EF primes? 

Those RF L primes have very little advantage over their EF equivalent especially when the price increase is included in the calculation.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> It's so weird that you complain about the 16mm and the 24mm and then point out what they are great for. Those lenses were designed for those exact purposes and they are great for their intended use. Furthermore, they are a bargain and good value for money. Btw, you can use for the "genres UW focal lengths are used for" on top of their intended purposes.
> 
> If you want UW lenses for perfect astro shots or great landscaping images, go for the 15-35mm or the 14-35mm, they'll serve your needs.
> 
> ...


Not weird at all, just pointing out the basic fact that many gear heads and fan boys don't want to acknowledge, that different lenses are used for different purposes, and optimised for different purposes within their focal length. These lenses are good for certain things that UWs are used for, and bad for the majority of other uses that the 16mm and 24mm focal lengths are used for. You pay for what you get, though the 24mm is stupidly overpriced for what it is judging on specs alone. When people think that a super-small and super-distorted heavily software corrected RF 16mm f/2.8 is a substitute for other 16mm zooms or primes, then there's something seriously wrong with their understanding of what the gear is designed for. Scary thought is that some people did vlog with RF 14-35L lenses before the tiny RF 16mm f/2.8, so it does have it's niche.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> EF 16-35 f/2.8 -> RF 15-35 f/2.8 IS
> EF 35 f/2 ->RF 35 f/1.8 Macro
> EF 70-300 -> RF 100-400
> EF 100-400 -> RF 100-500


Operative word is 'some', I didn't say all! There are many decent improvements, and I agree with the ones you've listed.  
I'd also add the RF 24-105L f/4 to your list, though some say the difference is small, I can see it.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> Unfortunately the 16mm and 24mm primes don't do well for the main things UW are used for such as landscape, real estate, architecture, and everything lese that needs corner sharpness. Good light travel/hiking lenses though. We know from reviews that the 16mm is not good for video, it struggles with holding focus on a moving subject, so only good for fixed distance focus video such as talking head/Youtube/vlogging. Agreed Canon has never released a decent astro lens, most use third-party lenses.


I am not sure what you are expecting from a USD300 lens even if it is a prime. Corner sharpness has been compromised to have a small/inexpensive lens. The only other prime I can think of that has good corner sharpness at that pricepoint is the Samyang EF14mm manual focus. Are there others?



LogicExtremist said:


> Saw a review by Gordon Laing of the RF vs EF 100 L macro, the new lens has some limitations. It's reported it suffers from focus shift, which is a deal breaker for many macro photographers. The inclusion of focus-by-wire is questionable on a macro lens, as these are often manually focussed and there's no tactile feedback that its at the end of the range when doing macro at maximum magnification. The optical stabilisation on the EF 100mm f/2.8 L Macro is a whole stop better that the RF version. The RF version is sharper wide open at f/2.8, especially at the edges, but at f/4, and even more so at real macro apertures such as f/8 to f/11 they're virtually identical. The RF lens also doesn't take teleconverters even though the EF lens can (didn't know that was a thing). The RF lens has 1.4x magnification which is a bonus, and a pointless SA control. Watching the video, in the portrait photos, to my eye the bokeh is a bit smoother on the EF macro lens.


There are definitely pros and cons for the RF100mm. The strange one for me was the focus shift issue. For portraits, it would still be a very nice lens though.


LogicExtremist said:


> I've seen criticisms of the RF 70-200mm f/2.8L, namely around the sacrifice of internal focussing for size/weight, the fact that it doesn't take a teleconverter, and that the zoom ring takes too many turns to be useful for fast-paced photography such as sports and events.


Yes, the lack of TC support pushed me to get the RF100-500mm but the size/weight is a big plus for me. I haven't noticed a big issue with the zoom ring turn though.
Canon upsized my investment but I have no regrets now.


LogicExtremist said:


> The RF 600mm and 800mm f/11 are a unique set of compromises that offer as you rightly state, the possibility of grainy photos rather than no photos is significant. They do put those long focal lengths into the reach of budget photography. Whether people would be happy with that. or frustrated with the lower image quality is a matter of subjective preference.


Just a gateway lens.... who knows, they may then get a RF100-500mm or even a EF/RF 600mm in the future


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Aug 16, 2022)

entoman said:


> IBIS is overrated.
> Compare camera shake with a non-stabilised tele or macro, on a 5DMkiv, and on a R5, and you won't notice much difference.
> Yes, I have both bodies and have made multiple comparison tests using stabilised and non-stabilised Canon glass.
> You'll see an improvement in stabilisation if you use short focal length lenses, but with teles nearly all of the stabilisation is done with the lens, not the body.


That is true. The longer the focal length is, the less effective IBIS is. However in the darkness you never can have enough stops of IBIS even for wide angle shots. Each additional stop allows you to lower the ISO or narrow the aperture to get a greater depth of field. Many lenses have their maximum sharpness around f/5.6 or even f/8 and the ability to take handheld shots for a full second allows you to take better low light photos where tripods are not allowed. My main focus are skyscrapers for example. Whole Downtown Dubai for example is owned by a company that does not allow any tripods even on the streets without a special permission by them. Even in New York City or London you run into problems with a tripod. Those cities are very tripod unfriendly. My normal approach is to take tripod shots anyway until security stops me, but getting the same shots handheld would be great. Observation decks are also an example. Most observation decks do not allow tripods, but during the blue hour you get the best shots. So it still makes a huge difference to me if I have 4,5,6,7 or 8 stops of stabilization. Each additional stop basically doubles the amount of available light. I already own the EF 35mm f/2 IS with four stops of stabilization, which allows me to take night shots at ISO 100, if there are enough city lights, but a few more stops could allow me to use f/4 or take night shots in even darker situations. I am getting older and older and having to use a tripod less often is a huge advantage.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 16, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> That is true. The longer the focal length is, the less effective IBIS is. However in the darkness you never can have enough stops of IBIS even for wide angle shots. Each additional stop allows you to lower the ISO or narrow the aperture to get a greater depth of field. Many lenses have their maximum sharpness around f/5.6 or even f/8 and the ability to take handheld shots for a full second allows you to take better low light photos where tripods are not allowed. My main focus are skyscrapers for example. Whole Downtown Dubai for example is owned by a company that does not allow any tripods even on the streets without a special permission by them. Even in New York City or London you run into problems with a tripod. Those cities are very tripod unfriendly. My normal approach is to take tripod shots anyway until security stops me, but getting the same shots handheld would be great. Observation decks are also an example. Most observation decks do not allow tripods, but during the blue hour you get the best shots. So it still makes a huge difference to me if I have 4,5,6,7 or 8 stops of stabilization. Each additional stop basically doubles the amount of available light. I already own the EF 35mm f/2 IS with four stops of stabilization, which allows me to take night shots at ISO 100, if there are enough city lights, but a few more stops could allow me to use f/4 or take night shots in even darker situations. I am getting older and older and having to use a tripod less often is a huge advantage.


For your use case, something like Topaz Denoise or DxO pureRAW might allow you to get similar quality at higher ISO values.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> That is true. The longer the focal length is, the less effective IBIS is. However in the darkness you never can have enough stops of IBIS even for wide angle shots. Each additional stop allows you to lower the ISO or narrow the aperture to get a greater depth of field. Many lenses have their maximum sharpness around f/5.6 or even f/8 and the ability to take handheld shots for a full second allows you to take better low light photos where tripods are not allowed. My main focus are skyscrapers for example. Whole Downtown Dubai for example is owned by a company that does not allow any tripods even on the streets without a special permission by them. Even in New York City or London you run into problems with a tripod. Those cities are very tripod unfriendly. My normal approach is to take tripod shots anyway until security stops me, but getting the same shots handheld would be great. Observation decks are also an example. Most observation decks do not allow tripods, but during the blue hour you get the best shots. So it still makes a huge difference to me if I have 4,5,6,7 or 8 stops of stabilization. Each additional stop basically doubles the amount of available light. I already own the EF 35mm f/2 IS with four stops of stabilization, which allows me to take night shots at ISO 100, if there are enough city lights, but a few more stops could allow me to use f/4 or take night shots in even darker situations. I am getting older and older and having to use a tripod less often is a huge advantage.


The problem is the lower shutter speeds seem to make the new higher megapixel cameras more prone to shutter shock, blurring the images. Since long exposures don't work on anything moving, and electronic shutter can't be used in that scenario either, that constrains what can be used where.. I can't imagine that having IBIS system with an unsecured sensor that can slide around that is only being held in place by electromagnetic force would help at all with shutter shock issues. It's probably half the problem. 

With all the fuss that people make about IBIS and auto tracking of human/animal eyes and cars on photography forums, you'd almost think that every second person was a pro sports or wildlife photographer shooting handheld in low light!


----------



## dolina (Aug 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> The problem is the lower shutter speeds seem to make the new higher megapixel cameras more prone to shutter shock, blurring the images. Since long exposures don't work on anything moving, and electronic shutter can't be used in that scenario either, that constrains what can be used where.. I can't imagine that having IBIS system with an unsecured sensor that can slide around that is only being held in place by electromagnetic force would help at all with shutter shock issues. It's probably half the problem.
> 
> With all the fuss that people make about IBIS and auto tracking of human/animal eyes and cars on photography forums, you'd almost think that every second person was a pro sports or wildlife photographer shooting handheld in low light!


Wouldn't IBIS cover that?


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

dolina said:


> Wouldn't IBIS cover that?


I don't think that IBIS can respond fast enough to counteract shutter shock, especially at very high fps burst shooting, that's why we're seeing the problem of shutter shock even with EFCS, where the first frame is in focus, but the rest of the frames in a burst won't be.


----------



## dolina (Aug 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> I don't think that IBIS can respond fast enough to counteract shutter shock, especially at very high fps burst shooting, that's why we're seeing the problem of shutter shock even with EFCS, where the first frame is in focus, but the rest of the frames in a burst won't be.


Is it so bad that working photogs are not buying R3, R5 & R7 bodies?


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> With all the fuss that people make about IBIS and auto tracking of human/animal eyes and cars on photography forums, you'd almost think that every second person was a pro sports or wildlife photographer shooting handheld in low light!


Maybe not all of us are "pro" (however you want to define it) but we want to get good value out our gear and the limited opportunities we have to use it. Going on a 3 hour puffin photoshoot in Iceland was fantastic and the keeper rate was amazingly good. High wind to start with was playing havoc with the RF100-500mm extended so it was surprising to get so many sharp shots.

I am unlikely to do it again given the cost and serious travel time to get there. Puffins are only in the northern hemisphere so it will be close to a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for me. Eye-AF and R5/RF100-500mm has meant some great memories for both me and many other friends and family here that have never seen them before. That in itself justifies my outlay and using my previous 5Div+EF70-200mm+2xTC couldn't have got close to the same outcome.

https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/show-your-bird-portraits.1280/page-1306#post-939308


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 16, 2022)

dolina said:


> Wouldn't IBIS cover that?


Canon IS systems (both ILIS and IBIS) seem to make shutter shock worse in the 1/60s - 1/160s range, image quality drastically improves both when using faster shutter speeds (duh....) but also when using lower shutter speeds. Switching to electronic shutter or EFCS also helps.

The EF600III is to date the only lens to have received a firmware upgrade to alleviate that, all other IS lenses and IBIS bodies are still affected :/


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

dolina said:


> Is it so bad that working photogs are not buying R3, R5 & R7 bodies?


Not that bad at all, but enough to get quite a few complaints across several forums if you do a search on "Canon shutter shock". It's harder to conduct heat out of a sensor mounted on a moving sliding frame, remember the overheating problems with R5?

It's really just the same old point as always, every design feature has trade-offs, pros and cons. If people understand that, then it's expected something will be discovered that's less than ideal, namely because nothing is 'perfect'. The quicker people come to terms with that fact that all design involves compromises, the less disappointed they'll be with the way things work in the physical world! 

If people want the benefits of IBIS, expect downsides to that too. Some people don't need IBIS and therefore don't want the compromises it brings. Everyone has different needs.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Maybe not all of us are "pro" (however you want to define it) but we want to get good value out our gear and the limited opportunities we have to use it. Going on a 3 hour puffin photoshoot in Iceland was fantastic and the keeper rate was amazingly good. High wind to start with was playing havoc with the RF100-500mm extended so it was surprising to get so many sharp shots.
> 
> I am unlikely to do it again given the cost and serious travel time to get there. Puffins are only in the northern hemisphere so it will be close to a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for me. Eye-AF and R5/RF100-500mm has meant some great memories for both me and many other friends and family here that have never seen them before. That in itself justifies my outlay and using my previous 5Div+EF70-200mm+2xTC couldn't have got close to the same outcome.
> 
> https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/show-your-bird-portraits.1280/page-1306#post-939308


Perfect case for the new tech capabilities, wildlife in challenging conditions, and such a wonderful opportunity of a lifetime! Definitely worth it, hope you got some really cool pictures, pardon the pun! What you're pointed out here is that people need the right tools for the photographic task at hand, and having helpful tech makes the task easier. 

My joke about every second person being a pro sports/wildlife photog was a dig about how mission critical the tech is for some. The most amusing thing I see on forums is that tech enthusiasts insist they need the latest tech to be able to take decent pictures in their favourite genre. Meanwhile, pros are out there earning good money with lesser spec equipment. Each to their own I guess, no judgement there. There's a lot of marketing hype creating artificial demand, putting out the false narrative that people need the latest equipment to be able to take decent photos, and that they need to update it regularly. What they don't say is that is what you should do if you're a technology early adopter, and if you're a photographer, you'd be better travelling somewhere interesting, taking classes too improve skills, or practice more.

What I do wonder about the people who fuss about tech they don't use or need in their camera bodies, especially if it's only applicable to specific genres of photography. It's more "fear of missing out". Canon flagship cameras all worked fine, even when they lacked IBIS that Sony did feature. Forums sometimes resemble schoolyard chatter - Sony has BSI sensors, I want one too, blah, blah, blah. As digitalcameraworld.com explains "_Do BSI sensors make a difference? They do, but despite the hype that often goes with them, it’s typically a percentage gain in photosite size and efficiency that does definitely improve sensitivity and image quality, but is not necessarily a game changer_."

My simple point is that some genres of photography do need tech like IBIS, some don't. It's not a necessity, any more than AF tracking is if you shoot still subjects.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> The problem is the lower shutter speeds seem to make the new higher megapixel cameras more prone to shutter shock, blurring the images. Since long exposures don't work on anything moving, and electronic shutter can't be used in that scenario either, that constrains what can be used where.. I can't imagine that having IBIS system with an unsecured sensor that can slide around that is only being held in place by electromagnetic force would help at all with shutter shock issues. It's probably half the problem.
> 
> With all the fuss that people make about IBIS and auto tracking of human/animal eyes and cars on photography forums, you'd almost think that every second person was a pro sports or wildlife photographer shooting handheld in low light!


The reports for shuttershock are for the R7 not the high resolution R5, and it's due to the design of the shutter combined with the very high fps in EFCS and not the camera resolution. It's not due to the IBIS either because some EF lenses are immune to it. The ES modes on the R7, R5 and R3 can be used for single shots at long exposures.

Facts aside, I agree with your comments about fuss. Like life in general, you get the most out of it by doing what you are good at, avoiding what you are bad at, and finding workarounds for difficulties. These camera fusspots must be glass-half-empty critics in general. Just get the best out of your gear by making the most of it.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

AlanF said:


> The reports for shuttershock are for the R7 not the high resolution R5, and it's due to the design of the shutter combined with the very high fps in EFCS and not the camera resolution. It's not due to the IBIS either because some EF lenses are immune to it. The ES modes on the R7, R5 and R3 can be used for single shots at long exposures.
> 
> Facts aside, I agree with your comments about fuss. Like life in general, you get the most out of it by doing what you are good at, avoiding what you are bad at, and finding workarounds for difficulties. These camera fusspots must be glass-half-empty critics in general. Just get the best out of your gear by making the most of it.


Thanks for the clarification.  

Would the high pixel density of the R7 play a role in making it more sensitive to less than perfect technique. I remember reading about the 5DSr having a bit of a steeper learning curve than lower MP DSLRs because any small movement would move the subject across more pixels with such a fine pixel pitch, that images were easier to blur?

I was really just wondering about the stability of a floating IBIS sensor when the whole camera body was being shaken by the shutter movement. The degree it would be moved around (perhaps none?) would determine whether it was an issue or not I guess.

It's quite interesting that some EF lenses are unaffected by it. That would suggest that the shutter shock phenomenon is some sort of an interplay between the lens and camera body then?


----------



## AlanF (Aug 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> Thanks for the clarification.
> 
> Would the high pixel density of the R7 play a role in making it more sensitive to less than perfect technique. I remember reading about the 5DSr having a bit of a steeper learning curve than lower MP DSLRs because any small movement would move the subject across more pixels with such a fine pixel pitch, that images were easier to blur?
> 
> ...


If you crop out the same number of pixels from each of a high resolution and low resolution sensor of the same size, then the more the motion blur, the aberration, the noise etc from the high resolution because you are magnifying it more and looking just at a smaller portion of the image. But if you crop out the same size from each in mm then there will be the same motion blur, aberration noise etc. Similarly, if you print the whole of the frame from a high resolution sensor and low resolution sensor, you have the same amount of the movement across both.

Taken to an extreme, a 1 pixel FF sensor will never show any motion blur because you wont see anything but a single shade of colour. What this extreme example tells you is that if your sensor has insufficient resolution, you might not see motion blur of fine detail but you wouldn't be seeing the detail anyway.

If you you use a very high resolution sensor because you need to crop, then you do need good technique.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 16, 2022)

AlanF said:


> If you crop out the same number of pixels from each of a high resolution and low resolution sensor of the same size, then the more the motion blur, the aberration, the noise etc from the high resolution because you are magnifying it more and looking just at a smaller portion of the image. But if you crop out the same size from each in mm then there will be the same motion blur, aberration noise etc. Similarly, if you print the whole of the frame from a high resolution sensor and low resolution sensor, you have the same amount of the movement across both.
> 
> Taken to an extreme, a 1 pixel FF sensor will never show any motion blur because you wont see anything but a single shade of colour. What this extreme example tells you is that if your sensor has insufficient resolution, you might not see motion blur of fine detail but you wouldn't be seeing the detail anyway.
> 
> If you you use a very high resolution sensor because you need to crop, then you do need good technique.


Which, for me, means getting an R3 or R5 instead of an Rs...


----------



## masterpix (Aug 16, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I am not convinced it would make much sense but Canon could easily make a cheaper R6 with a smaller buffer, one card slot, and no IBIS.
> Call it an R6 P or something like that


I agree, the problem is basically: "what else can we remove from the R6 to make it even cheaper" and at the same time, still keep the R6 a competitive camera. If the two are too close to each other, than what is the point?


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

AlanF said:


> If you crop out the same number of pixels from each of a high resolution and low resolution sensor of the same size, then the more the motion blur, the aberration, the noise etc from the high resolution because you are magnifying it more and looking just at a smaller portion of the image. But if you crop out the same size from each in mm then there will be the same motion blur, aberration noise etc. Similarly, if you print the whole of the frame from a high resolution sensor and low resolution sensor, you have the same amount of the movement across both.
> 
> Taken to an extreme, a 1 pixel FF sensor will never show any motion blur because you wont see anything but a single shade of colour. What this extreme example tells you is that if your sensor has insufficient resolution, you might not see motion blur of fine detail but you wouldn't be seeing the detail anyway.
> 
> If you you use a very high resolution sensor because you need to crop, then you do need good technique.


Excellent explanation, thanks! That makes sense.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

masterpix said:


> I agree, the problem is basically: "what else can we remove from the R6 to make it even cheaper" and at the same time, still keep the R6 a competitive camera. If the two are too close to each other, than what is the point?


I'd be happy with an EOS R replacement that's a R6 body minus the IBIS, minus the second card slot, with a much lower burst rate (maybe half @ 6fps mechanical shutter, 10fps ES), smaller frame buffer, with a higher MP sensor (even the old 5D Mk IV/EOS R one,) and more basic video (1080p120fps, 4K 30fps). I'm not sure how much that would bring the cost down though.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> Excellent explanation, thanks! That makes sense.


Thanks - I work hard at my explanations.


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> I'd be happy with an EOS R replacement that's a R6 body minus the IBIS, minus the second card slot, with a much lower burst rate (maybe half @ 6fps mechanical shutter, 10fps ES), smaller frame buffer, with a higher MP sensor (even the old 5D Mk IV/EOS R one,) and more basic video (1080p120fps, 4K 30fps). I'm not sure how much that would bring the cost down though.


If the mk IV sensor could be made on newer equipment, it would be slightly less noise and a bit faster. However from a prosumer standpoint I am not sure how to reconcile the '12 megapixels more' resolution vs the r6. 

Perhaps if they came out with an r6 II shortly thereafter using the chip from the r3 - but now what's the difference between it and an R3? 

My gut tells me they drop the r6 to about 2k, and release the replacement r (r8?) at 100 dollars more than the R7. Improve the fps slightly, bring it on par for their other R series cameras in eye detection, and just target it as a less capable r5. If you want speed on a budget get the r6, if you want more resolution get the r8. 

Or... they just live with the fact that the R6 is going to be cannibalized. Maybe the replacement for the R is the... R6 II? New sensor takes it up to 28-30mp range, same specs for the most part, sell it for roughly the same price. Capture even more of the mirrorless market share to sell more lenses. Sometime around the end of 2023 we expect the r5 mkII to be anounced anyhow with a release 4-6 months later. It won't be a far cry different from the 5d vs 6d series. The 6d seemed a great value in comparison to the 5dIII but seemed much worse than the 5dIV which came out not too long after. The future RP replacement at the low end could be the current R6 sensor with cheaper everything around it.


----------



## gruhl28 (Aug 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> I'd be happy with an EOS R replacement that's a R6 body minus the IBIS, minus the second card slot, with a much lower burst rate (maybe half @ 6fps mechanical shutter, 10fps ES), smaller frame buffer, with a higher MP sensor (even the old 5D Mk IV/EOS R one,) and more basic video (1080p120fps, 4K 30fps). I'm not sure how much that would bring the cost down though.


This is what I want too, except I do want IBIS.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

AlanF said:


> Thanks - I work hard at my explanations.


You're damn good at them too, I learn a lot!


----------



## dolina (Aug 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> Not that bad at all, but enough to get quite a few complaints across several forums if you do a search on "Canon shutter shock". It's harder to conduct heat out of a sensor mounted on a moving sliding frame, remember the overheating problems with R5?
> 
> It's really just the same old point as always, every design feature has trade-offs, pros and cons. If people understand that, then it's expected something will be discovered that's less than ideal, namely because nothing is 'perfect'. The quicker people come to terms with that fact that all design involves compromises, the less disappointed they'll be with the way things work in the physical world!
> 
> If people want the benefits of IBIS, expect downsides to that too. Some people don't need IBIS and therefore don't want the compromises it brings. Everyone has different needs.



In other words people are just looking for something to complain about?


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

dolina said:


> In other words people are just looking for something to complain about?


In other words, people are reluctant to hear objective analysis of inanimate object they're emotionally attached to!  They're just products with their inherent limitations, just like every other tool. Buying into the marketing hype and believing that 'newer is always better' and you have to have the latest gear to do good photography, without an objective analysis of the their pros and cons is an irrational and emotive way of dealing with technology.

I get it though, in a consumerist culture, many people lead materialistic lives and just buy any crap to feel good. A new gadget provides a powerful but temporary rush of serotonin, stimulating the reward centres of the brain. It soon fades and people then seek validation from others that their purchased product is worthy. When there's an ego identification with a brand through attachment to one's purchases, it just becomes a form of substitute tribalism which creates the fanboy phenomenon. In the light of the psychological investment in inanimate objects, anyone objectively describing the limitations of said products is seen as making harsh negative comments. It's a bit like people getting upset when someone explains that a dump truck isn't great handling curves at high speed and a sports car isn't ideal for carrying a few tons of sand!


----------



## dolina (Aug 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> In other words, people are reluctant to hear objective analysis of inanimate object they're emotionally attached to!  They're just products with their inherent limitations, just like every other tool. Buying into the marketing hype and believing that 'newer is always better' and you have to have the latest gear to do good photography, without an objective analysis of the their pros and cons is an irrational and emotive way of dealing with technology.
> 
> I get it though, in a consumerist culture, many people lead materialistic lives and just buy any crap to feel good. A new gadget provides a powerful but temporary rush of serotonin, stimulating the reward centres of the brain. It soon fades and people then seek validation from others that their purchased product is worthy. When there's an ego identification with a brand through attachment to one's purchases, it just becomes a form of substitute tribalism which creates the fanboy phenomenon. In the light of the psychological investment in inanimate objects, anyone objectively describing the limitations of said products is seen as making harsh negative comments. It's a bit like people getting upset when someone explains that a dump truck isn't great handling curves at high speed and a sports car isn't ideal for carrying a few tons of sand!



In other words, just take photos and share them as the audience into arguing vis a vis is aging & slowly dying off.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

dolina said:


> In other words, just take photos and share them as the audience into arguing vis a vis is aging & slowly dying off.


Well, sort of, the whole point of photography ultimately IS to take photos, either for one's own enjoyment, or for sharing with others for their enjoyment, either freely or as a paid vocation!  

I'll let you in on a secret, the argumentative old people on the internet come from the population of argumentative younger people, who grow older, get more grumpy and take the place of their predecessors, so they never reduce in number, and nature retains its balance!


----------



## dolina (Aug 16, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> Well, sort of, the whole point of photography ultimately IS to take photos, either for one's own enjoyment, or for sharing with others for their enjoyment, either freely or as a paid vocation!
> 
> I'll let you in on a secret, the argumentative old people on the internet come from the population of argumentative younger people, who grow older, get more grumpy and take the place of their predecessors, so they never reduce in number, and nature retains its balance!



That's under the assumption that there are enough young people, to replenish with, who are inclined to spend the money that they do not have. 

I've seen many photo forums shut down without warning largely because the users

- age & die
- change of hobbies
- change of occupation

I would not be surprised if CR has a high churn rate.

About a decade ago I did a survey on 1 dozen photo forums and 1 consistent thing I saw was almost everyone was born prior to 1970. Those born after were but a handful.


----------



## LogicExtremist (Aug 16, 2022)

dolina said:


> That's under the assumption that there are enough young people, to replenish with, who are inclined to spend the money that they do not have.
> 
> I've seen many photo forums shut down without warning largely because the users
> 
> ...


Yes, discussing the matter seriously, the concern is that there is a real problem with social isolation with the younger generations, and an increase in the prevalence of mental health issues. It's projected mental health will become the leading health problem ahead of chronic cardiovascular health issues in the western world. 

To quote the World Health Organisation "_Mental health conditions are increasing worldwide. Mainly because of demographic changes, there has been a 13% rise in mental health conditions and substance use disorders in the last decade (to 2017). Mental health conditions now cause 1 in 5 years lived with disability. Around 20% of the world’s children and adolescents have a mental health condition, with suicide the second leading cause of death among 15-29-year-olds. Approximately one in five people in post-conflict settings have a mental health condition_."

Engaging with nature and people is important for people's mental health. Forums, despite their failings, are online global communities where people can share thoughts, ideas and interests. The right ones also provide good mental stimulation and opportunities for learning. It's kind of curious that many more older people are using the technology to interact, rather than younger people. I have no idea what the turnover rate is at CR, the thing is that many people just read forums but don't join. For forums to survive, in my mind, they need to be welcoming to beginners, and supportive of them, sharing knowledge and experience, being real community.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Aug 16, 2022)

I understand the "cropping to the same size" argument, but as I am quite a pixel peeper, it would quite frustrate me to have slightly blurry high resolution images that may still look okay when printed or downsampled to 24 megapixels. If you have a high resolution camera, that might change the way you do photos, because suddenly having a tripod for example might deliver sharper images while on the 24 megapixel camera the difference was so visible in most situations. As a result you might carry a tripod more often, use faster shutter speeds, lower ISO or higher apartures than you would do on a 24 megapixel camera. My current camera only has 18 megapixels and that influences my style of taking photos. I know they (only) need to be sharp at 18 megapixels.

I am thinking about buying an R7 as a second camera though for certain situations where it could give me sharper photos or more reach without much addional work. Just for the 5% or so of shots where my ancient camera struggles a little. It is nice to see how cheap the R7 is. Many expected a price far over $2,000 as it is something like the flagship crop camera. It would be interesting to see how often I would use it on city trips. Obviously not all the time unless I have a lot of spare batteries.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 16, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> People complain about every camera Canon makes.
> I do not remember the last one that people did not complain about.
> The R10 video is better than pretty much anything else in its price category.


Personally, I find that reviewers tend to fall into a couple of different categories: The reviewer that recognizes that the camera is aimed at a specific audience, accepts the camera for what it is, gives a nice overview of the features, notes any potential gotchas for the intended audience of the camera and leaves it at that. Then there is the reviewer that expects every camera released to deliver the moon, at a price of free, or near free. They seem not to agree with market segmentation, or be unaware of it. If the camera doesn't do what they think it should do, it's garbage and not worth buying. This is a form of bias, but not as bad as the last type of reviewer, which is the biased camera reviewer. That type of reviewer tends to be a user of one specific brand and all reviews are through the lens of owning and using that reviewers favorite camera.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 16, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Nice to see dolina again.
> It is interesting that there is no discernible pattern to the release schedule of the 6 series.
> We could potentially see an R6 II at any time.
> I am not sure that it would make much sense for one to come out before an R5 II though.


I'd love to see an R6 with the same features it has now, but with the R3 sensor. The 1DXIII sensor should have been 24MP. I understand Canon's rational and desire not to go there then, but 24MP has kind of been the resolution entry point for a while now.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 16, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> excluding the 600/800L primes
> 
> Are you referring to the 600/800 f11 primes (which are not L lenses) or the EF600/4L and EF800/5.6L that I was referring to which have RF equivalents at an unprecedented markup of ~25% over their EF primes?
> 
> Those RF L primes have very little advantage over their EF equivalent especially when the price increase is included in the calculation.


As far as I know, the only advantage of the RF 600 f/4 L is the stabilization.
That can lead to more sharp photos which could be a big advantage to the target market.
The RF 800 f/5.6 L is arguably a step backward in image quality, but it did address the main complaints people had about the EF version.
I am not in the target market and I have not seen much of a reaction from the target market one way or the other.
Most of the folks I have heard complain would not buy either lens.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 16, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Just a gateway lens.... who knows, they may then get a RF100-500mm or even a EF/RF 600mm in the future


To me, there is just too big a gap between the RF 100-400 and RF 100-500 which is 4 x more expensive.
Also between the RF 600 f/11 and RF 600 f/4 which is 20 x more expensive.
Likewise the RF 800 f/11 and RF 800 f/5.6 which is 21 x more expensive.
There needs to be a more affordable middle tier that buyers at the entry-level can reasonably rise to.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Aug 16, 2022)

dolina said:


> Is it so bad that working photogs are not buying R3, R5 & R7 bodies?


No, but those three cameras are really good using their electronic shutters.


----------



## entoman (Aug 16, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> To me, there is just too big a gap between the RF 100-400 and RF 100-500 which is 4 x more expensive.
> Also between the RF 600 f/11 and RF 600 f/4 which is 20 x more expensive.
> Likewise the RF 800 f/11 and RF 800 f/5.6 which is 21 x more expensive.
> There needs to be a more affordable middle tier that buyers at the entry-level can reasonably rise to.


Absolutely agree - it's one extreme or the other.

Whatever happened to middle-of-the-road lenses with "normal" maximum apertures and sensible prices?

It's not only entry-level users who want middle-tier lenses...


----------



## dolina (Aug 16, 2022)

entoman said:


> Absolutely agree - it's one extreme or the other.
> 
> Whatever happened to middle-of-the-road lenses with "normal" maximum apertures and sensible prices?
> 
> It's not only entry-level users who want middle-tier lenses...


We're in year 4 of the RF system.

I expect what you want to happen to occur by year 2024 when I expect the EF system to cease production.

If I was strap for cash I'd keep to the EF system as the secondary market has a lot of bargain finds that is being liquidated by hobbyists who babied their gear to make room for RF full fame bodies and RF L glass.

At the end of the day non-photogs viewing your output will be more interested in the aesthetic beauty rather gear & settings used.


----------



## cayenne (Aug 17, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> Yes, discussing the matter seriously, the concern is that there is a real problem with social isolation with the younger generations, and an increase in the prevalence of mental health issues. It's projected mental health will become the leading health problem ahead of chronic cardiovascular health issues in the western world.
> 
> To quote the World Health Organisation "_Mental health conditions are increasing worldwide. Mainly because of demographic changes, there has been a 13% rise in mental health conditions and substance use disorders in the last decade (to 2017). Mental health conditions now cause 1 in 5 years lived with disability. Around 20% of the world’s children and adolescents have a mental health condition, with suicide the second leading cause of death among 15-29-year-olds. Approximately one in five people in post-conflict settings have a mental health condition_."
> 
> Engaging with nature and people is important for people's mental health. Forums, despite their failings, are online global communities where people can share thoughts, ideas and interests. The right ones also provide good mental stimulation and opportunities for learning. It's kind of curious that many more older people are using the technology to interact, rather than younger people. I have no idea what the turnover rate is at CR, the thing is that many people just read forums but don't join. For forums to survive, in my mind, they need to be welcoming to beginners, and supportive of them, sharing knowledge and experience, being real community.


Social isolation with younger generations?
Hmm...I'm kinda blaming it on social media....heads stuck in phones all day and not interacting with anyone really in "meat space".

The other day I was out, saw a young couple on what appeared to be a first date type thing...rather than looking at each other, talking and getting to know each other, the guy and the girl mostly seemed to have their heads stuck in a phone.

Sad.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Aug 21, 2022)

I’m anxiously checking this site every day hoping for rumored specs for the Eos R successor. I wouldn’t even care if they were CR0 or CR 1


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 21, 2022)

AlanF said:


> Thanks - I work hard at my explanations.


And always in a friendly way...


----------



## codym90 (Aug 21, 2022)

I sure hope so. I loved the R, just wish it had 2 card slots.
-Cody McCracken
Johnson City Wedding Photographer


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 23, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> I’m anxiously checking this site every day hoping for rumored specs for the Eos R successor. I wouldn’t even care if they were CR0 or CR 1



Me everyday waiting for R8 / R9 news!


----------



## entoman (Aug 27, 2022)

codym90 said:


> I sure hope so. I loved the R, just wish it had 2 card slots.
> -Cody McCracken
> Johnson City Wedding Photographer



It's all a case of where the camera slots into the range - will it be above or below the R6 in terms of price?

It would be nice to have a 30MP camera in between the R5 and R6, with IBIS and 2 slots, but that might cannibalise R5 sales, so I'm guessing it will sit below the R6.

In which case, unlikely to have 2 slots, unfortunately.

If it has a 30MP sensor and IBIS, I'd consider it as a backup to my R5, even if it only has one slot.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 27, 2022)

cayenne said:


> Social isolation with younger generations?
> Hmm...I'm kinda blaming it on social media....heads stuck in phones all day and not interacting with anyone really in "meat space".
> 
> The other day I was out, saw a young couple on what appeared to be a first date type thing...rather than looking at each other, talking and getting to know each other, the guy and the girl mostly seemed to have their heads stuck in a phone.
> ...


As long as they weren't talking to each other using their cellphones...
This will be the next step!


----------

