# The Canon EOS R1 may not come until the 2nd half of 2023 [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 27, 2022)

> We have been told not to expect the Canon EOS R1 “anytime soon”, as a retailer was told not to expect it until the second half of 2023.
> With Canon and other manufacturers still suffering from inventory shortages, this shouldn’t come as much of a surprise. We also believe Canon wants to round out the lens lineup further before the EOS R1.
> The Canon EOS R1 will probably be the camera body that moves EOS-1DX series professionals to mirrorless full-time.  Some will have already moved to the Canon EOS R3, but since that camera body has been difficult to acquire,  a lot of news agencies haven’t purchased Canon mirrorless cameras yet.
> It probably makes better financial sense to address the EOS RP and EOS R replacements first, as well as rounding out the L and non-L lens lineup.
> More to come…



Continue reading...


----------



## bergstrom (Jun 27, 2022)

My switch to mirrorless hangs on the RP2. Fix everything that everyone complaned about. A mini R3 if you will.


----------



## AccipiterQ (Jun 27, 2022)

It's frustrating that they keep releasing these items before there is enough of them built to get them into folks' hands. I think they're aware of this and don't want to piss off the people that buy these things in bulk, hence the R1 delay. In the meantime, speculate on specs for this thing?

I'm calling triple card slots.


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Jun 27, 2022)

Supply chain crises or not, it shouldn’t come as much of a surprise. If Canon let R1 continue the usual release rhythm of 1DX series, the flagship shouldn't be expected until late 2023 or early 2024.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 27, 2022)

Makes me even more glad that I ordered the R3 as early as possible, rather than holding out for an R1. When it comes along, I'll likely pick one up but by then my R3 will seen >2 years of use.


----------



## entoman (Jun 27, 2022)

No big surprise. Was anyone seriously expecting it to be launched this year? If anything, the delay should prove beneficial, as Canon will have more time to study the opposition, and add features that they might otherwise have omitted. It's probably too late to make any major hardware changes (e.g. eliminating mechanical shutter), but plenty of time to perfect the firmware, minimising any bugs (although a lot of bugs only become apparent when a few thousand users have had the chance to put thousands of frames through a camera). Meanwhile anyone with an R3, R5 or R6 will already be pretty happy.


----------



## bbasiaga (Jun 27, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> My switch to mirrorless hangs on the RP2. Fix everything that everyone complaned about. A mini R3 if you will.


Very mini indeed - at that price point. 


I still hope for an R1 dev announcement end of this year, with release/shipping in 2nd half 2023. 

Wonder when the R5mkII will hit the streets? Could be around that same time. Or they may push it to 2024. 

Brian


----------



## bergstrom (Jun 27, 2022)

bbasiaga said:


> Very mini indeed - at that price point.
> 
> 
> I still hope for an R1 dev announcement end of this year, with release/shipping in 2nd half 2023.
> ...



I'd take an R6ii under 2k if they fixed all the problems and restraints it had.


----------



## mbike999 (Jun 27, 2022)

More lenses would be appreciated, especially on the telephoto end. A modern 500/4, 300/2.8 or maybe a 150-400/4 TC. Nikon seems to be the only one committed to telephotos at the moment, Canon too busy gluing teleconverters and mount adapters on EF lenses


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 27, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> I'd take an R6ii under 2k if they fixed all the problems and restraints it had.


Like me ol’ Irish Da used to say, “Wish in one hand and sh!t in the other, and see which fills up first.” 

What you call ‘restrictions’, Canon calls market segmentation. It means that if you want R3 features, you need to pay for an R3.

But good luck with your wishing…


----------



## bbasiaga (Jun 27, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> I'd take an R6ii under 2k if they fixed all the problems and restraints it had.


Who wouldn't? While we're at it, I'll take an R3vII for $3k as well! 

On another note - I've always lusted after the 1 series cameras. With the R6 performance being what it is, I can't imagine what more a one series could really give me that would make it worth 2-3x the cost. Though I may do one as a mid-life crisis gift to myself anyway . The only two 'limits' I see on the R6 that I might find benefit from removing are 1) stacked sensor and 2) larger battery. A few more MP would be OK, but I could get that from an R5. In fact, if R5vII has a stacked sensor and remains below about 50mp that may be a 'last/forever' camera for me. A battery grip could solve the battery issue. I suspect QPAF could be in the next gen as well, and while DPAF has never really let me down I'm sure there will be an improvement with QPAF. I wouldn't upgrade for just that. 

-Brian


----------



## entoman (Jun 27, 2022)

bbasiaga said:


> Wonder when the R5mkII will hit the streets? Could be around that same time. Or they may push it to 2024.


2024 at the earliest is my guess.

The R5 has plenty of life left in it and is still one of the best cameras on the market (OK, I'm biased as I've got one)..

Budget "R100" will probably be next, followed by the hi-res R5S, then the R1.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 27, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Makes me even more glad that I ordered the R3 as early as possible, rather than holding out for an R1. When it comes along, I'll likely pick one up but by then my R3 will seen >2 years of use.


Hey Neuro, just curious, what kind of stuff do you shoot? You’re a well respected member of the CR community and you have some awesome gear, so yeah, what do you like to photograph!?


----------



## entoman (Jun 27, 2022)

bbasiaga said:


> In fact, if R5vII has a stacked sensor and remains below about 50mp that may be a 'last/forever' camera for me. A battery grip could solve the battery issue. I suspect QPAF could be in the next gen as well, and while DPAF has never really let me down I'm sure there will be an improvement with QPAF. I wouldn't upgrade for just that.


I'm not easily satisfied, but as a stills-only photographer, I don't see any real need for a R5Mkii for a while.

But what I would like to see, in order to keep the camera current and improve usability, are a few firmware "feature" upgrades e.g:

eye-AF and tracking using smaller zones as a start point
low/medium/high fps options with electronic shutter
exposure bracketing with electronic shutter
button assignment to toggle between single-shot and burst

I believe that all or most of the above could easily be implemented in firmware upgrades, without affecting sales of R3 or R7, which are differentiated by many other features.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Jun 27, 2022)

I'll just keep using my R6 because it's AWESOME (for me, not you...I know)


----------



## AlanF (Jun 27, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Like me ol’ Irish Da used to say, “Wish in one hand and sh!t in the other, and see which fills up first.”
> 
> What you call ‘restrictions’, Canon calls market segmentation. It means that if you want R3 features, you need to pay for an R3.
> 
> But good luck with your wishing…


You’ll understand if I prefer to bump elbows than shake hands if we meet.


----------



## john1970 (Jun 27, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Makes me even more glad that I ordered the R3 as early as possible, rather than holding out for an R1. When it comes along, I'll likely pick one up but by then my R3 will seen >2 years of use.


Excellent point. I to have a R3 and will be glad to part with it after two years to "upgrade" to a R1. I suspect the R1 will be announced in the fall of 2023 with availability late 2023 / early 2024.


----------



## john1970 (Jun 27, 2022)

I know that Canon is listening to user feedback on the R3 for the final development of the R1. It makes sense to me that acquiring the feedback will take several months especially with the supply chain issues. I would rather have Canon delay the R1 by a few months and get the camera right than rush it to market just because buyers are becoming impatient.


----------



## Jethro (Jun 28, 2022)

john1970 said:


> I know that Canon is listening to user feedback on the R3 for the final development of the R1. It makes sense to me that acquiring the feedback will take several months especially with the supply chain issues. I would rather have Canon delay the R1 by a few months and get the camera right than rush it to market just because buyers are becoming impatient.


Given the R1 will be aimed at pros, and at getting them to make the jump to mirrorless, I'd expect there will be early versions of the R1 out with selected testers well in advance even of a development announcement. That is, probably already if they are aiming for release in 12-18 months time.

It's not a body I could ever justify buying, but my interest will be the feature set (including advances on the R3) because those are features that will likely (over time) filter down in some form into models aimed at the likes of me.


----------



## HMC11 (Jun 28, 2022)

I thought Sigma was supposed to be 'addressing' the RF mount this year? Been waiting for 3rd party lenses from Sigma and Tamron for a rather long time now, particularly the 12-24 and 100-400. Looks like the wait continues.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 28, 2022)

Jasonmc89 said:


> Hey Neuro, just curious, what kind of stuff do you shoot? You’re a well respected member of the CR community and you have some awesome gear, so yeah, what do you like to photograph!?


A mix of many subjects (which is probably why I have so many lenses!). Most of my shooting comprises birds, architecture/travel, nature and family.


----------



## bergstrom (Jun 28, 2022)

john1970 said:


> I know that Canon is listening to user feedback on the R3 for the final development of the R1. It makes sense to me that acquiring the feedback will take several months especially with the supply chain issues. I would rather have Canon delay the R1 by a few months and get the camera right than rush it to market just because buyers are becoming impatient.



I hope they were listening on the feedback on the crap RP


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 28, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> I hope they were listening on the feedback on the crap RP


LOL. Try to get a grip on reality. You can call the RP 'crap' until you're blue in the face. So can other forum-dwellers (though honestly, I don't see many complaints).

The feedback Canon's leadership is listening to is that last week the RP was the best-selling full frame camera in Japan and the 4th best-selling ILC overall in Japan (with Canon cameras also comprising the top 3).


----------



## bernie_king (Jun 28, 2022)

I expect a dev announcement early Q4 this year with release Late Q2/Early Q3 2023. I'd love to see a global shutter, but I think we'll at least get quad pixel AF, around 60mp, and a new processor (probably dual processors) around $7000.


----------



## BBarn (Jun 28, 2022)

If I was interested in the R1 I'd be asking myself what I want to shoot for the next year or two.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 28, 2022)

Canon's only deadline is the 2024 Olympics if the R1 follows the typical 1 Series timetable. If it comes in 2023, I would expect it will be late in 2023. Delivery may not come until 2024. R1 Development announcement late in 2023. Delivery first quarter of 2024. R5II in July-Sept of 2024.


----------



## navastronia (Jun 28, 2022)

I see we've gone 25 replies with no one saying "good, this gives me more time to arrange to sell a kidney." I'm disappointed in you all!


----------



## pzyber (Jun 28, 2022)

As expected then, released in before the olympics like the 1D X cameras. Never thought it would arrive before that, especially not with R3 being released.


----------



## masterpix (Jun 28, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> My switch to mirrorless hangs on the RP2. Fix everything that everyone complaned about. A mini R3 if you will.


When Canon started to "number" the R series, it seems that define the R7 right under the R6 leaves no room for "low end FF". Thus, I don't think there will be a "direct" R or RP replacements, the R10 and R100 does the "lower end" for R cameras while the R6 is the closest to the "R" replacement in a way. The RP, as "low end FF" has probably filled its place in the camera history.


----------



## masterpix (Jun 28, 2022)

navastronia said:


> I see we've gone 25 replies with no one saying "good, this gives me more time to arrange to sell a kidney." I'm disappointed in you all!


My main concern is not the camera (have the R5 and very happy with it), it is the glass needed for it. Many of the old EF lenses just don't keep with the resolution.. And by the way, I am not going to sell any kidney soon, there are other organs much more appealing (joke)


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 28, 2022)

Canon please bring it on ASAP.
Then you can concentrate on the more affordable tools 
(or bring an RP successor first  )


----------



## HMC11 (Jun 28, 2022)

masterpix said:


> ........Many of the old EF lenses just don't keep with the resolution.. And by the way, I am not going to sell any kidney soon, there are other organs much more appealing (joke)


Not sure if that is accurate. If we look only at 'resolution', my understanding is that the overall/system (ie. lens plus sensors) MTF is the product of sensor MTF and Lens MTF. So, if the R1 has an even better MTF than the R5, then the EF lens would perform even better on the R1 compared with the R5. Of course, if the MTF of the lens is poor, then that would limit the system MTF regardless of how good the sensor is. As far as I gather in terms of 'resolution', the EF lenses, particularly the L lenes, are working just fine on the R5, i.e. as good as on the R mount bodies as on the DSLR camera bodies, if not better.

As for selling organs.....wait for the R1 mark ii .


----------



## Birdshooter (Jun 28, 2022)

bbasiaga said:


> Who wouldn't? While we're at it, I'll take an R3vII for $3k as well!
> 
> On another note - I've always lusted after the 1 series cameras. With the R6 performance being what it is, I can't imagine what more a one series could really give me that would make it worth 2-3x the cost. Though I may do one as a mid-life crisis gift to myself anyway . The only two 'limits' I see on the R6 that I might find benefit from removing are 1) stacked sensor and 2) larger battery. A few more MP would be OK, but I could get that from an R5. In fact, if R5vII has a stacked sensor and remains below about 50mp that may be a 'last/forever' camera for me. A battery grip could solve the battery issue. I suspect QPAF could be in the next gen as well, and while DPAF has never really let me down I'm sure there will be an improvement with QPAF. I wouldn't upgrade for just that.
> 
> -Brian


How about better autofocus.. that's a biggy.


----------



## Birdshooter (Jun 28, 2022)

masterpix said:


> When Canon started to "number" the R series, it seems that define the R7 right under the R6 leaves no room for "low end FF". Thus, I don't think there will be a "direct" R or RP replacements, the R10 and R100 does the "lower end" for R cameras while the R6 is the closest to the "R" replacement in a way. The RP, as "low end FF" has probably filled its place in the camera his





masterpix said:


> My main concern is not the camera (have the R5 and very happy with it), it is the glass needed for it. Many of the old EF lenses just don't keep with the resolution.. And by the way, I am not going to sell any kidney soon, there are other organs much more appealing (joke)


What EF glass does not hold up?
Every EF lens I have works better than with a DSLR so I wonder what lenses you talk about?


----------



## entoman (Jun 28, 2022)

Maximilian said:


> Canon please bring it on ASAP.
> Then you can concentrate on the more affordable tools
> (or bring an RP successor first  )


The "RP successor" already exists. It's called the R10.

The RP continues to sell well, but I don't think a FF successor is on the cards.

The R10 is cheaper, better specified and has everything that a budget camera needs.


----------



## SnowMiku (Jun 28, 2022)

I wonder what the R1 will have to segment itself from the R3? Maybe it will have a global shutter? Does the 1D/R1 market even want high MP or would they prefer around 24MP like the R3? They would have to make sure it doesn't have any freezing issues as reported by several on here with the R5/R3.


----------



## Kit. (Jun 28, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> View attachment 204380


Makes me wonder which camera was the top 1 last week.



entoman said:


> The "RP successor" already exists. It's called the R10.


No 24mm-equivalent kit zoom (yet).


----------



## SNJ Ops (Jun 28, 2022)

HMC11 said:


> Not sure if that is accurate. If we look only at 'resolution', my understanding is that the overall/system (ie. lens plus sensors) MTF is the product of sensor MTF and Lens MTF. So, if the R1 has an even better MTF than the R5, then the EF lens would perform even better on the R1 compared with the R5. Of course, if the MTF of the lens is poor, then that would limit the system MTF regardless of how good the sensor is. As far as I gather in terms of 'resolution', the EF lenses, particularly the L lenes, are working just fine on the R5, i.e. as good as on the R mount bodies as on the DSLR camera bodies, if not better.
> 
> As for selling organs.....wait for the R1 mark ii .


I own an A7RIV any weakness that a lens has just gets amplified on 61mp. An older lens can certainly be used on a higher megapixel body but you won’t get the most out of the sensor in terms of fine detail.


----------



## bergstrom (Jun 28, 2022)

entoman said:


> The "RP successor" already exists. It's called the R10.
> 
> The RP continues to sell well, but I don't think a FF successor is on the cards.
> 
> The R10 is cheaper, better specified and has everything that a budget camera needs.



Breaking news. R10 is secretly FF !


----------



## bbasiaga (Jun 28, 2022)

Birdshooter said:


> How about better autofocus.. that's a biggy.


The hit rate is so high already, I'm not sure what 'better' would look like in this case in order to make a noticeable improvement. I suppose the R3 is faster at tracking and acquisition on account of the stacked sensor. QPAF looms, at least in the rumor-verse, which could improve acquisition in some scenarios. 

What are you thinking for improvements?


----------



## VegasCameraGuy (Jun 28, 2022)

My R5 will be old enough to justify to my wife that I need a new camera! LOL


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 28, 2022)

bbasiaga said:


> The hit rate is so high already, I'm not sure what 'better' would look like in this case in order to make a noticeable improvement. I suppose the R3 is faster at tracking and acquisition on account of the stacked sensor. QPAF looms, at least in the rumor-verse, which could improve acquisition in some scenarios.
> 
> What are you thinking for improvements?


Better would be quad pixel. There are some situations where current Canon MILCs simply cannot lock focus because they are insensitive to horizontally oriented contrast features.


----------



## HMC11 (Jun 28, 2022)

SNJ Ops said:


> I own an A7RIV any weakness that a lens has just gets amplified on 61mp. An older lens can certainly be used on a higher megapixel body but you won’t get the most out of the sensor in terms of fine detail.


That is indeed true. I should have stated my assumption that the R1 is probably going to have a similar or even lower mp than the R5. In that case, a better sensor with a stronger MTF coupled with the same lens should technically perform better.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Jun 28, 2022)

Canon has stated, there will be no more R and RP variants. The numbered versions are what you get. Deal with it, it's a pretty good lineup for a new-ish system. In this economy it's never been a better time to embrace the mantra "shoot with what you have'


----------



## cayenne (Jun 28, 2022)

Well, that actually gives me a bit more time to save money towards it.
I put a few hundred back each month in savings just for BIG toys....and camera gear is mostly what I get of late.

I've depleted my toy savings pretty badly here recently, on various lenses and, believe it or not, on FILM cameras....just got a mint condition Noblex 175U medium format swing lens camera....and just missed a Fuji G617 on eBay by $25....yes, I'm a fan of 6x17 pano cameras.

Anyway, for things that need speed to shoot, I still have the 5D3...I can still shoot concerts with that....and I can start my savings again. I likely would be VERY happy with the R5, but I'll start putting back cash and likely as not be ready to get a new Canon and dive into the RF world about the time (hopefully) serious announcements on the R1 start coming out and I can then decide which would suit me best.

I'm the type that does NOT like to run up credit cards. I tend to have cash in hand whenever I buy something....
I don't go around buying piddly crap here and there....I save and save, and then when I have what I need, I'll drop sizable coin on something really nice, with never a thought of buyers remorse.

The only "credit" thing I will do....is if offered 12-24 months interest free on things. But even with that, I have cash to buy it in hand, I"ll just put that into an interest drawing account while I pay the no interest payments monthly.

OH well, its morning and I'm rambling on my fiscal philosophies....sorry.

Anyway, anxiously tracking any R1 news that comes out!!


cayenne

(ps. hope this suits the earlier poster joking about someone saying they were saving to sell a kidney for an R1, haha).


----------



## Czardoom (Jun 28, 2022)

masterpix said:


> When Canon started to "number" the R series, it seems that define the R7 right under the R6 leaves no room for "low end FF". Thus, I don't think there will be a "direct" R or RP replacements, the R10 and R100 does the "lower end" for R cameras while the R6 is the closest to the "R" replacement in a way. The RP, as "low end FF" has probably filled its place in the camera history.


I seriously doubt that Canon will choose not to offer a FF R camera costing less than the R6. The last time I checked R8 and R9 are still available. 
If the price is between the R7 and R10, then it works out just fine. Or they could just go R50 and R60. Who cares what the numbers are? They can number the cameras any way they want. The number police will be upset, but camera buyers won't care.


----------



## koenkooi (Jun 28, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> I seriously doubt that Canon will choose not to offer a FF R camera costing less than the R6. The last time I checked R8 and R9 are still available.
> If the price is between the R7 and R10, then it works out just fine. Or they could just go R50 and R60. Who cares what the numbers are? They can number the cameras any way they want. The number police will be upset, but camera buyers won't care.


Only the 'a' and 'P' are taken, so they have a bunch of the alphabet left as well


----------



## entoman (Jun 28, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> Breaking news. R10 is secretly FF !


It doesn't need to be FF 
The 24MP APS-C sensor in the R10 will produce images at least as good as the ageing 26MP FF sensor of the RP.
.... and the R10 is a far better overall camera, with the latest AF tech.
Perfect for novices or those on a low budget.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 28, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> Canon has stated, there will be no more R and RP variants. The numbered versions are what you get. Deal with it, it's a pretty good lineup for a new-ish system. In this economy it's never been a better time to embrace the mantra "shoot with what you have'


I don't recall that statement from Canon. Can you give us a source?

I'd agree that a direct replacement for the original R is unlikely. However, a replacement for the RP seems very likely, regardless of whether or not it is called an RP.


----------



## SpaceGhost (Jun 28, 2022)

Disappointed but expected. 

I really want to switch to mirrorless but taking my time so when I make the switch, I can move all my main lens over too. I love all the features of the R3 but I want at least some reasonable resolution, at least 30mp would have enticed me enough but if I'm waiting for a R1, I hope it's even higher than that. Of course, mismatching dual card slots drive me up the wall. If I can't make an exact copy at full speed on both cards, it's not really dual card slots. That's like putting Firewire on the camera.


----------



## DBounce (Jun 28, 2022)

I originally ordered the R3 at launch and received it in the first shipment. It’s a great camera. When the R1 comes I plan to preorder again. The R1 is going to be amazing. Things I want to see on the R1:

• Global shutter
• No mechanical shutter
• Built in NDs
• OpenGate mode
• Larger rear LCD
• Option for internal ProRes
• 14+ usable stops of dynamic range
• Reliable app support


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 28, 2022)

entoman said:


> The "RP successor" already exists. It's called the R10.


R10 is a compact *FF* body?
If not, it isn't an "RP successor", and you should study camera specs more carefully.

R10 is not on my scope.


entoman said:


> The RP continues to sell well, but I don't think a FF successor is on the cards.
> 
> The R10 is cheaper, better specified and has everything that a budget camera needs.


Somehow you contradict yourself.
If the R10 is so much better, why does the RP sell so well?
And if a small FF budget cam sells so well even with outdated specs, why shouldn't it be replaced sometime?

A compact FF (!) body with better sensor than the RP is the first thing to draw me into the R system.
If that market is not big enough for Canon, I'll understand. But they won't get my money. That's market economy.


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 28, 2022)

entoman said:


> It doesn't need to be FF
> The 24MP APS-C sensor in the R10 will produce images at least as good as the ageing 26MP FF sensor of the RP.


Nope!
The ageing 21 MP FF sensor of my 5D2 (sold) was way better than the newer 24 MP APS-C sensor of my 200D.
So I know what I am talking about and why I want a FF sensor. (newer and an RP sized body)


----------



## Blue Zurich (Jun 28, 2022)

unfocused said:


> I don't recall that statement from Canon. Can you give us a source?
> 
> I'd agree that a direct replacement for the original R is unlikely. However, a replacement for the RP seems very likely, regardless of whether or not it is called an RP.


I read it here! It was an interview with a Canon C Suite dude. Caveat: direct replacement can be construed as many things, the interview stated there will be no more versions of those two bodies. How's that?


----------



## unfocused (Jun 28, 2022)

Maximilian said:


> R10 is a compact *FF* body?
> If not, it isn't an "RP successor", and you should study camera specs more carefully.
> 
> R10 is not on my scope.
> ...


Of course the RP will be replaced eventually. It just may not be called "RP." The cost differential between full frame and crop sensors is no longer what it once was. It makes just as much sense for Canon to produce low cost full frame bodies as it does to produce low cost crop sensor bodies. In fact, it may make more sense, since buyers of the full frame body will be able to use their lenses on more expensive models without having to crop. 

I think Canon would like to get back to the old days when people could seamlessly trade up from the lowest cost SLR to the F1 without having to invest in new lenses to get the same field of view. 

Honestly, I felt the R7 made sense since it is clearly aimed at people seeking more "reach." But I'm perplexed by the R10.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Jun 28, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> LOL. Try to get a grip on reality. You can call the RP 'crap' until you're blue in the face. So can other forum-dwellers (though honestly, I don't see many complaints).
> 
> The feedback Canon's leadership is listening to is that last week the RP was the best-selling full frame camera in Japan and the 4th best-selling ILC overall in Japan (with Canon cameras also comprising the top 3).
> 
> View attachment 204380


When I see people post "the RP is crap" stuff, I have to wonder if they've ever actually used one. Personally, I find that it delivers a lot of bang for the buck, and it's a great, simple to use little camera. Could it be better? Sure, but I can say the same thing about pretty much every camera I've ever used, ever. Pair it with the RF/50 and the RF/16 and you have a relatively small and light kit that lets you shoot standard and wide, with a medium wide in 1.6x crop mode, and a nice portrait tight in 1.6x crop mode on the RF/50.

I can see an RPII (if they even do one) using a reworked 5D4 sensor (basically move the R sensor to the RP with maybe some tweaks/revisions) to keep costs down, and a move to more unified internal electronics (i.e. the same processors, etc as other mirrorless bodies to keep costs down) with differentiation being firmware features and body size and physical buttons.


----------



## adrian_bacon (Jun 28, 2022)

unfocused said:


> I don't recall that statement from Canon. Can you give us a source?
> 
> I'd agree that a direct replacement for the original R is unlikely. However, a replacement for the RP seems very likely, regardless of whether or not it is called an RP.


Same here, I don't recall seeing a statement either. I can see no replacement R (current R users go to either the R5 or R6), but if the RP is selling good, I can see a revision where it gets the current R sensor to keep costs low.


----------



## BBarn (Jun 28, 2022)

I don't see Canon relinquishing their share of the sub $2K FF mirrorless market. The R and/or RP will need to be replaced at some point to remain competitive in that market.


----------



## entoman (Jun 28, 2022)

Maximilian said:


> Nope!
> The ageing 21 MP FF sensor of my 5D2 (sold) was way better than the newer 24 MP APS-C sensor of my 200D.
> So I know what I am talking about and why I want a FF sensor. (newer and an RP sized body)


Nope!

What you (and I) want is not what the average RP or R10 buyer wants. Unless persuaded otherwise by influencers or salespersons, they won't care whether the camera has a APS-C sensor or a FF sensor. What they are looking for is an up to date, well specified camera that will take good enough pictures to satisfy them, and an APS-C sensor is more than good enough for that. I actually know of a couple of pro wildlife (macro) photographers who have switched from FF cameras to an even smaller sensor, i.e. M43, and others who are seriously considering the same move.

FF is only really necessary for people who (like myself) often shoot in low light and/or want to exploit shallow depth of field. Few novices fit in that category.

There was no contradiction in my earlier comments - the RP is a nice camera and continues to sell well, but no model lasts forever. People crave for the latest gear, and for novices the R10 fits the bill extremely well and I predict that it will within a few months outsell the RP.

The R10 also makes an excellent and affordable lightweight backup or second body for more serious photographers, a better choice IMO than an RP. I'll bet that for typical usage most owners would be unable to tell the difference between an RP image and a R10 image. Critical users will in any case have the sense to use a modern denoise program to overcome any minor increase in noise resulting from a smaller sensor.


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 28, 2022)

entoman said:


> Nope!
> 
> What you (and I) want is not what the average RP or R10 buyer wants. Unless persuaded otherwise by influencers or salespersons, they won't care whether the camera has a APS-C sensor or a FF sensor. What they are looking for is an up to date, well specified camera that will take good enough pictures to satisfy them, and an APS-C sensor is more than good enough for that. I actually know of a couple of pro wildlife (macro) photographers who have switched from FF cameras to an even smaller sensor, i.e. M43, and others who are seriously considering the same move.
> 
> ...


That's your opinion - not mine. 

I don't want an R5 or R3 in an RP body for an RP price. I am realistic. 
The problem for me with the RP was/is that the sensor was outdated at the RP release, and the EVF was/is much too slow. 
I was fine with the rest for its price. 
The time since its release didn't make it better. And I don't want an APS-C backup camera any more. 
So if they bring a real successor - fine. If not, I'll spend my money on something else (not Canon)


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 28, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> A mix of many subjects (which is probably why I have so many lenses!). Most of my shooting comprises birds, architecture/travel, nature and family.


Cool, cheers. Same for me really minus the architecture!


----------



## entoman (Jun 28, 2022)

Maximilian said:


> That's your opinion - not mine.
> 
> I don't want an R5 or R3 in an RP body for an RP price. I am realistic.
> The problem for me with the RP was/is that the sensor was outdated at the RP release, and the EVF was/is much too slow.
> ...


You're fully entitled to disagree. I'll be very surprised if Canon bring out a FF successor to the RP, for most prospective buyers I think the R10 will take its place. So you may very well find yourself spending your money on "something else (not Canon)", and if that's your choice, I wish you well with it.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 28, 2022)

entoman said:


> Nope!
> 
> What you (and I) want is not what the average RP or R10 buyer wants. Unless persuaded otherwise by influencers or salespersons, they won't care whether the camera has a APS-C sensor or a FF sensor. What they are looking for is an up to date, well specified camera that will take good enough pictures to satisfy them, and an APS-C sensor is more than good enough for that. I actually know of a couple of pro wildlife (macro) photographers who have switched from FF cameras to an even smaller sensor, i.e. M43, and others who are seriously considering the same move.
> 
> ...


M43 is SO big in the macro world right now. I know 2 people who switched to Olympus recently. Their built in focus stacking, combined with the increased depth of field makes them awesome for macro!


----------



## entoman (Jun 28, 2022)

Jasonmc89 said:


> M43 is SO big in the macro world right now. I know 2 people who switched to Olympus recently. Their built in focus stacking, combined with the increased depth of field makes them awesome for macro!


Yes, I'd definitely consider an OM1 as a secondary system. The in-camera focus stacking and merging is a fantastic feature, especially when combined with the fast burst speed and what is probably the best image stabilisation on the market. Also there is Pro Capture, which is incredibly useful for capturing fast moving insects (or birds) at the "decisive moment". Zuiko lenses are also extremely sharp. On top of that consider that Olympus/OM Systems probably has the best weather-sealing of any brand. The only real limitation is the low megapixel count, which means you have to be pretty accurate with framing as there's little opportunity for anything other than minimal cropping.


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 28, 2022)

entoman said:


> You're fully entitled to disagree. I'll be very surprised if Canon bring out a FF successor to the RP, for most prospective buyers I think the R10 will take its place. So you may very well find yourself spending your money on "something else (not Canon)", and if that's your choice, I wish you well with it.


I think I already stated, that I am (and @bergstrom and maybe some more) maybe not a big enough market for a FF successor of an RP.
So maybe there won't be any - pity.

But I read your posts as contradictory because you argue one time into one and then into another direction.
First you argue (maybe Canon has decided) to put an R10 in the place of a (real) PR successor, which it isn't.
Then you claim that APS-C and FF sensors are not much differing. And you seem to want something more acc. to my spec list than the R10 offers.
And when I - buy empirical experience - claim your arguments wrong (APS-C versus FF sensor) you switch back to market segment argumentation which have already been settled.
Looks like a weathercock in a whirlwind to me...


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 28, 2022)

Jasonmc89 said:


> M43 is SO big in the macro world right now.


Macro world with controlled light conditions or macro world with available light?
I do the latter. I prefer bigger sensors.


----------



## mxwphoto (Jun 28, 2022)

Jasonmc89 said:


> M43 is SO big in the macro world right now. I know 2 people who switched to Olympus recently. Their built in focus stacking, combined with the increased depth of field makes them awesome for macro!


That is called using the right tool for the right job.

Want photos and video without the bulk, top end cellphone.
Want increased DOF for macro and in camera processing, m4/3.
Want longer reach for wildlife without huge added bulk, m4/3 or APS-C.
Want the absolute creamiest bokeh on your portraits, FF or larger with a fast lens.
Want the perfect all in one camera, in your dreams.


----------



## Bishop80 (Jun 28, 2022)

The R1 may not come until the 2nd half of 2023, but when can we expect the credible spec rumors to begin?


----------



## entoman (Jun 28, 2022)

Maximilian said:


> Macro world with controlled light conditions or macro world with available light?
> I'll do the latter. I'll prefer bigger sensors.


One of the pro guys I know who now shoots M43 macro focus-stacking, mostly shoots with a complex home-fabricated twin-flash setup. The other one shoots always by ambient light - when stacked images are merged, most of the luminance noise is cancelled out, and denoising software is so damn good nowadays that it's not really a problem anyway.

If I could afford to run 2 systems I'd certainly consider M43 as a secondary system for the in-camera stacking and merging, and the Pro Capture, both of which would benefit my own photography (mostly insects and birds). Like most people I upgraded years ago from APS-C to FF for the low-noise benefits (and shallow d.o.f.) but these are largely negated by modern denoise software. The only fly-in-the-ointment for me is the low megapixel count (pixel-shift is hopeless for moving subjects).

Features like Pro Capture and in-camera stack merging are unlikely to appear in FF systems for some while, as to work well they demand very fast readouts, very fast burst speeds, and huge buffers. I think the tide will turn and in the not too distant future APS-C and M43 will see a major revival.


----------



## entoman (Jun 28, 2022)

Bishop80 said:


> The R1 may not come until the 2nd half of 2023, but when can we expect the credible spec rumors to begin?


2 days prior to launch...


----------



## mxwphoto (Jun 28, 2022)

My R1 wishlist:
Quad pixel all cross type AF
BSI 38mpx HDR dual gain sensor with 1/500 flash sync and 16 stops dynamic range
60fps electronic
20fps mechanical
8k 120p, 4k 240p 1080 480p sensor width readout
Dual identical card slots (for whatever format that can handle the video load)
Huge buffer for 500 raw files
2 second pre record buffer
Pixel level adjustable motion sensor for auto trigger capture
Sensor shift star capture like with Pentax
Comes in 2 flavors, small size and a R1s(uper) version with permanent grip


----------



## entoman (Jun 28, 2022)

mxwphoto said:


> My R1 wishlist:
> Quad pixel all cross type AF
> BSI 38mpx HDR dual gain sensor with 1/500 flash sync and 16 stops dynamic range
> 60fps electronic
> ...


Wish-lists are one thing, reality is something else.  

My guess is that the R1 will have a lower specification than the Z9 and a considerably higher price... 

The main differences will probably be that Canon retains mechanical shutter and features an improved version of the eye-selection AF found in the R3. I also wouldn't be massively surprised if it featured the new-style thumbwheel from the R7. Just guessing.

Either way an R1 isn't on my wish-list - for me it would be overkill. The R5 suits me just fine, although as stated above, I'd consider M43 as a *secondary* system for the in-camera stack merging and Pro capture, which IMO are unlikely to feature in the R1 or any other FF camera for the foreseeable future.


----------



## bergstrom (Jun 28, 2022)

VegasCameraGuy said:


> My R5 will be old enough to justify to my wife that I need a new camera! LOL



R5's can break a marriage.


----------



## bergstrom (Jun 28, 2022)

koenkooi said:


> Only the 'a' and 'P' are taken, so they have a bunch of the alphabet left as well



God, I wish Canon made their cameras in Hungary. There's 46 letters in the alphabet. Only our great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great grandchildren will see the final R version coming to market.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 28, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> R5's can break a marriage.


"Marriages don't break up on account of an R5. It's just a symptom that something else is wrong."
(those who get the reference will know the R5 is not a likely subject of the response...)


----------



## InchMetric (Jun 28, 2022)

unfocused said:


> Of course the RP will be replaced eventually. It just may not be called "RP." The cost differential between full frame and crop sensors is no longer what it once was. It makes just as much sense for Canon to produce low cost full frame bodies as it does to produce low cost crop sensor bodies. In fact, it may make more sense, since buyers of the full frame body will be able to use their lenses on more expensive models without having to crop.
> 
> I think Canon would like to get back to the old days when people could seamlessly trade up from the lowest cost SLR to the F1 without having to invest in new lenses to get the same field of view.
> 
> Honestly, I felt the R7 made sense since it is clearly aimed at people seeking more "reach." But I'm perplexed by the R10.


Most insightful post I’ve seen here I’m a long time. Every single sentence bears scrutiny.


----------



## entoman (Jun 28, 2022)

unfocused said:


> I think Canon would like to get back to the old days when people could seamlessly trade up from the lowest cost SLR to the F1 without having to invest in new lenses to get the same field of view.



Yes, that would make sense for consumers, but Canon are in the business of making money, so they might actually prefer people to buy a whole new set of lenses...


unfocused said:


> Honestly, I felt the R7 made sense since it is clearly aimed at people seeking more "reach." But I'm perplexed by the R10.


Agree regarding R7. As for the R10, it serves either as a cheap spare body for established RF users, or as a base model for novices, i.e. the market previously the realm of the RP. Don't get me wrong, I like the RP, but I think within a few months it'll get crowded out by the R10, and then the RP will be quietly dropped.


----------



## The3o5FlyGuy (Jun 29, 2022)

The R6 and the R5 has already caused the price of the 1Dx Mark III to plummet. I was hoping with the R7 and the R1 dropping this year the price of a used 1Dx might drop even further. I wanted it because of some of its video features and because i wanted that unlimited buffer. I often hit the buffer even with the fastest memory cards on my R6.


----------



## sanj (Jun 29, 2022)

Cook it well Canon. Take your time. Meanwhile, R5C does it all (mostly)...


----------



## SnowMiku (Jun 29, 2022)

entoman said:


> It doesn't need to be FF
> The 24MP APS-C sensor in the R10 will produce images at least as good as the ageing 26MP FF sensor of the RP.
> .... and the R10 is a far better overall camera, with the latest AF tech.
> Perfect for novices or those on a low budget.


I wouldn't consider the R10 as a direct replacement for the RP due to the Full Frame RP vs R10 APS-C sensor.
With the RP you can get closer to the subject, for example portraits and get a more shallow depth of field, with the APS-C you will have to step back from the subject to get the same shot, with a deeper depth of field.
Or you could use an 80mm lens on an RP and 50mm lens on the R10 and shoot at the same distance, but the RP will have the more shallow depth of field at the same aperture due to the bigger lens.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 29, 2022)

Maximilian said:


> Macro world with controlled light conditions or macro world with available light?
> I do the latter. I prefer bigger sensors.


More “in the field” macro. Often greater than 1x magnification.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 29, 2022)

entoman said:


> Yes, I'd definitely consider an OM1 as a secondary system. The in-camera focus stacking and merging is a fantastic feature, especially when combined with the fast burst speed and what is probably the best image stabilisation on the market. Also there is Pro Capture, which is incredibly useful for capturing fast moving insects (or birds) at the "decisive moment". Zuiko lenses are also extremely sharp. On top of that consider that Olympus/OM Systems probably has the best weather-sealing of any brand. The only real limitation is the low megapixel count, which means you have to be pretty accurate with framing as there's little opportunity for anything other than minimal cropping.


Yeah I agree, if I have a few extra quid I’d consider getting an OM1 too. I’ve never used Canons focus bracketing though, hopefully the R7 will provide me with some new macro tools!


----------



## entoman (Jun 29, 2022)

SnowMiku said:


> I wouldn't consider the R10 as a direct replacement for the RP due to the Full Frame RP vs R10 APS-C sensor.
> With the RP you can get closer to the subject, for example portraits and get a more shallow depth of field, with the APS-C you will have to step back from the subject to get the same shot, with a deeper depth of field.
> Or you could use an 80mm lens on an RP and 50mm lens on the R10 and shoot at the same distance, but the RP will have the more shallow depth of field at the same aperture due to the bigger lens.


All very understandable, but do the novices who are the target market feel the same way?
Do they know, or even care, that a full frame sensor is better in low light and for shallower d.o.f., or that a crop sensor will give more reach?


----------



## entoman (Jun 29, 2022)

Jasonmc89 said:


> Yeah I agree, if I have a few extra quid I’d consider getting an OM1 too. I’ve never used Canons focus bracketing though, hopefully the R7 will provide me with some new macro tools!


Canon's focus bracketing works well on my R5, but (for me) has 2 drawbacks:

1) the settings can't be retained via a custom mode
2) the images can only be merged in post, not in-camera


----------



## 2 cents (Jun 29, 2022)

My professional camera for my line of work is the 5D Mk4. A year ago I bought the R5 and attempted to go mirrorless. 

The R5 may have a lot of bells and whistles and improvements over the 5D Mk4, but at the end I'm still using the 5D Mk4 for my work. The R5 actually slows me down, electronic viewfinder doesn't even start near a pentaprism, and battery consumption is another big drawback.

None of these are much of a problem for my hobby work and travel, for which I use the R5. Mostly.

So, the R1 really needs to be professional grade for it to be adopted by professionals.


----------



## koenkooi (Jun 29, 2022)

entoman said:


> Canon's focus bracketing works well on my R5, but (for me) has 2 drawbacks:
> 
> 1) the settings can't be retained via a custom mode
> 2) the images can only be merged in post, not in-camera


You also can’t pick a starting position, it will force AF. I’d love to be able to set 2 focus positions and a number of shots and then have the camera do the rest.
And have a pre-shoot warning when you’re going to exceed the buffer, it will slow down a lot when that happens.


----------



## dirtyvu (Jun 29, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> My switch to mirrorless hangs on the RP2. Fix everything that everyone complaned about. A mini R3 if you will.



I think the RP is still a great secondary camera. The thing that surprised me the most about it was how much better it was at focusing compared to its DSLR equivalent (the 6D2). I still have my 6D2 and RP and with the exact same lens, the RP pretty much always took sharper pictures even on nonmoving objects (like taking photos of a soda can).

The other thing that surprised me was how much better the shutter sounds on my R5. The R5 has a pretty quiet shutter and the sound is good. The RP shutter has a thunk thunk thunk sound.


----------



## RexxReviews (Jun 29, 2022)

This means that most of you that want one won't even see it until 2024 due to stock issues, oof.


----------



## InchMetric (Jun 29, 2022)

RexxReviews said:


> This means that most of you that want one won't even see it until 2024 due to stock issues, oof.


And everyone who orders on release day will get one the first week, like always. And the “not in stock” whiners will whine.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 29, 2022)

InchMetric said:


> And everyone who orders on release day will get one the first week, like always.


No longer true. R3 preorders went live at 6a ET, people (like me) who ordered before ~9a got their cameras from the first batch, around Thanksgiving. Those ordering later than ~9a on launch day had to wait a few months.


----------



## john1970 (Jun 29, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> No longer true. R3 preorders went live at 6a ET, people (like me) who ordered before ~9a got their cameras from the first batch, around Thanksgiving. Those ordering later than ~9a on launch day had to wait a few months.


This is a valid statement and I would expect a similar situation with all future releases especially the R1.


----------



## Kit. (Jun 29, 2022)

entoman said:


> Nope!
> 
> What you (and I) want is not what the average RP or R10 buyer wants.


This looks like circular reasoning. You are trying to "prove" that RP and R10 cater to the same audience _by assuming_ that RP and R10 cater to the same audience.


----------



## entoman (Jun 29, 2022)

Kit. said:


> This looks like circular reasoning. You are trying to "prove" that RP and R10 cater to the same audience _by assuming_ that RP and R10 cater to the same audience.


No, I'm not trying to prove anything, just giving my opinion.


----------



## scyrene (Jun 29, 2022)

entoman said:


> Canon's focus bracketing works well on my R5, but (for me) has 2 drawbacks:
> 
> 1) the settings can't be retained via a custom mode
> 2) the images can only be merged in post, not in-camera


Agreed. I had hoped it was possible to merge in-camera as I'm now running an R6 without a computer, but it's not to be (and it seems there's no phone-compatible stacking software).


----------



## entoman (Jun 29, 2022)

scyrene said:


> Agreed. I had hoped it was possible to merge in-camera as I'm now running an R6 without a computer, but it's not to be (and it seems there's no phone-compatible stacking software).


It obviously varies according to how many images are in the stack, but I've been told that it takes about 15 seconds on average, for Olympus cameras to perform the merging and output the final image. The slower readout and larger individual images on a FF camera would probably drag that out to 2 minutes or longer, even with a fast processor, so that's probably why the R5 and R6 can't merge in-camera.

It would be nice to be able to check the final result at the time of taking, but for now it seems like we have to wait until we get back home on the computer before we can see how well the image works. Either that, or invest in an Olympus!


----------



## scyrene (Jun 29, 2022)

entoman said:


> It obviously varies according to how many images are in the stack, but I've been told that it takes about 15 seconds on average, for Olympus cameras to perform the merging and output the final image. The slower readout and larger individual images on a FF camera would probably drag that out to 2 minutes or longer, even with a fast processor, so that's probably why the R5 and R6 can't merge in-camera.
> 
> It would be nice to be able to check the final result at the time of taking, but for now it seems like we have to wait until we get back home on the computer before we can see how well the image works. Either that, or invest in an Olympus!


Yeah, and it's still great they offer the bracketing. Mind you, with the MP-E it would still have to be done the old-fashioned way (I still have a focusing rail somewhere!).


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 29, 2022)

entoman said:


> Canon's focus bracketing works well on my R5, but (for me) has 2 drawbacks:
> 
> 1) the settings can't be retained via a custom mode
> 2) the images can only be merged in post, not in-camera


Merging in post is what I would do anyway. I like using Zerene and that gives me the ability to retouch them then.

Does the focus bracketing work with flash??? The Olys do.


----------



## koenkooi (Jun 29, 2022)

Jasonmc89 said:


> Merging in post is what I would do anyway. I like using Zerene and that gives me the ability to retouch them then.
> 
> Does the focus bracketing work with flash??? The Olys do.


On the R5 it’s e-shutter only, which doesn’t allow flash. I haven’t looked at the R3 manual to see if that allows it.


----------



## bergstrom (Jun 29, 2022)

dirtyvu said:


> I think the RP is still a great secondary camera. The thing that surprised me the most about it was how much better it was at focusing compared to its DSLR equivalent (the 6D2). I still have my 6D2 and RP and with the exact same lens, the RP pretty much always took sharper pictures even on nonmoving objects (like taking photos of a soda can).
> 
> The other thing that surprised me was how much better the shutter sounds on my R5. The R5 has a pretty quiet shutter and the sound is good. The RP shutter has a thunk thunk thunk sound.



which is useless in a low noise event


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 29, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> which is useless in a low noise event


Try the 1D X, lol.

I really do like the full silence possible with the R3. I have silent shooting assigned to the stills/video switch.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 29, 2022)

koenkooi said:


> On the R5 it’s e-shutter only, which doesn’t allow flash. I haven’t looked at the R3 manual to see if that allows it.


That would be a shame. Really need flash for greater than 1:1 macro unless the subject is suuuuuper still.


----------



## scyrene (Jun 29, 2022)

S


Jasonmc89 said:


> That would be a shame. Really need flash for greater than 1:1 macro unless the subject is suuuuuper still.


Surely it has to be still anyway because movement between frames will cause problems with the stacking? I know you can manually tweak but it can't work miracles.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 29, 2022)

scyrene said:


> S
> 
> Surely it has to be still anyway because movement between frames will cause problems with the stacking? I know you can manually tweak but it can't work miracles.


True, but it’s more about shutter speeds. With flash I can expose the subject for the duration of the flash and have a set of images captured for a stack, maybe 30 frames, in about 5 seconds. If the subject is moving in the wind or something Zerene stacker does a good job of aligning the frames anyway and because I used flash the images are sharp.

Using ambient light at high magnifications means like 1+ second exposures!! At that level of mag it’s really hard to eliminate motion blur.


----------



## entoman (Jun 29, 2022)

scyrene said:


> Surely it has to be still anyway because movement between frames will cause problems with the stacking? I know you can manually tweak but it can't work miracles.


Depends on how steady your hands are. I'm shaky so it's a no go 

But I know a top notch focus-stacker who primarily photographs spiders in the wild with an R5. He shoots mechanical shutter with flash. He manually focuses (moving fractionally closer for successive shots), handheld without a focusing rail. I'm not sure which program he uses for merging but he does it manually to ensure great accuracy. His images are quite outstanding (I won't name him or provide a link without prior permission). And yes, he has *very* steady hands!


----------



## CanonGrunt (Jun 29, 2022)

AccipiterQ said:


> It's frustrating that they keep releasing these items before there is enough of them built to get them into folks' hands. I think they're aware of this and don't want to piss off the people that buy these things in bulk, hence the R1 delay. In the meantime, speculate on specs for this thing?
> 
> I'm calling triple card slots.


I predict it will pretty much be able to see in the dark.


----------



## CanonGrunt (Jun 29, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Makes me even more glad that I ordered the R3 as early as possible, rather than holding out for an R1. When it comes along, I'll likely pick one up but by then my R3 will seen >2 years of use.


They do like tradition at Canon…


----------



## CanonGrunt (Jun 29, 2022)

mbike999 said:


> More lenses would be appreciated, especially on the telephoto end. A modern 500/4, 300/2.8 or maybe a 150-400/4 TC. Nikon seems to be the only one committed to telephotos at the moment, Canon too busy gluing teleconverters and mount adapters on EF lenses


Would love to see those rumored DO lenses.


----------



## CanonGrunt (Jun 29, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> LOL. Try to get a grip on reality. You can call the RP 'crap' until you're blue in the face. So can other forum-dwellers (though honestly, I don't see many complaints).
> 
> The feedback Canon's leadership is listening to is that last week the RP was the best-selling full frame camera in Japan and the 4th best-selling ILC overall in Japan (with Canon cameras also comprising the top 3).
> 
> View attachment 204380


Give me an M5 MK II then….


----------



## CanonGrunt (Jun 29, 2022)

navastronia said:


> I see we've gone 25 replies with no one saying "good, this gives me more time to arrange to sell a kidney." I'm disappointed in you all!


Already sold it while the market was up. Funds are waiting in my money market account now. Just waiting on you Canon!


----------



## CanonGrunt (Jun 29, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Better would be quad pixel. There are some situations where current Canon MILCs simply cannot lock focus because they are insensitive to horizontally oriented contrast features.


I’ll be really surprised if the R1 isn’t quad. That’s a key feature to differentiate from the others with.


----------



## CanonGrunt (Jun 29, 2022)

mxwphoto said:


> My R1 wishlist:
> Quad pixel all cross type AF
> BSI 38mpx HDR dual gain sensor with 1/500 flash sync and 16 stops dynamic range
> 60fps electronic
> ...


My top three feature requests:

Duel Gain sensor 
In camera focus stacking
Quad pixel AF

I’m pretty sure it already has everything else I want and more.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Jun 29, 2022)

Just a wild guess, combined/ based on previous annoucements: 

2020: R5 and R6 
2021: R3
2022: R5c in January 
and (I´m guessing) R5s (high res) in Q4, as well as R9 (RP successor)

Guessing: 
2023: R6 Mk II, R8 (R successor) and R100
2024: R1
2025: R5 Mk II
2026: R3 Mk II and R7 Mk II

I do firmly believe that a possible R successor will be released somewhere near the timeline of R6 mk II. If the R really does get an upgrade, the R6 mk II needs to be released in order to further differentiate it from the R8 (R successor)


----------



## CanonGrunt (Jun 29, 2022)

2 cents said:


> My professional camera for my line of work is the 5D Mk4. A year ago I bought the R5 and attempted to go mirrorless.
> 
> The R5 may have a lot of bells and whistles and improvements over the 5D Mk4, but at the end I'm still using the 5D Mk4 for my work. The R5 actually slows me down, electronic viewfinder doesn't even start near a pentaprism, and battery consumption is another big drawback.
> 
> ...


Yeah. I still have my 5DsR and an R6. It just depends on the day what I’m grabbing, but the battery life is often a factor. Forget to turn off a DSLR, it doesn’t matter. Forget to turn off a mirrorless camera and that battery is dead. They drain so fast on mirrorless anyway.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 29, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> Just a wild guess, combined/ based on previous annoucements:
> 
> 2020: R5 and R6
> 2021: R3
> ...


The original R was an introduction to the system, just like the original M. I highly doubt there will be an Rii. If anything the R5 is already that camera.


----------



## entoman (Jun 29, 2022)

2 cents said:


> My professional camera for my line of work is the 5D Mk4. A year ago I bought the R5 and attempted to go mirrorless.
> 
> The R5 may have a lot of bells and whistles and improvements over the 5D Mk4, but at the end I'm still using the 5D Mk4 for my work. The R5 actually slows me down, electronic viewfinder doesn't even start near a pentaprism, and battery consumption is another big drawback.
> 
> ...


Agreed. I love my R5 but the EVF lag definitely causes me to miss shots that I would have achieved with my 5DMkiv. I also feel that the so-called WYSIWYG "advantage" of EVFs is greatly overstated, as the eye adapts to the ambient light and can easily be misled by the brightness of the EVF image. I prefer to rely on the histogram (which could easily have been incorporated as an OVF overlay in DSLRs). The larger DSLR body with its deeper grip also suits my hands better than the R5.

But those caveats aside, I still prefer the R5 - I find the clatter of mirrors from other people's DSLRs distracting, and it's loud enough to scare off many of the insects and birds that I photograph. The RF lenses are also sharper, lighter and have faster AF compared to their EF nearest counterparts. Battery consumption is a pain, but I always carried a couple of spares anyway, even when armed with the DSLR.


----------



## entoman (Jun 29, 2022)

Exploreshootshare said:


> Just a wild guess, combined/ based on previous annoucements:
> 
> 2020: R5 and R6
> 2021: R3
> ...


My guess:

I don't think there will be a "R" successor, although it would be nice to have a 30MP model slotted between the R5 and R6.

2023: R100 (APS-C), R5s (hi-res stills orientated)
2024: lots of new RF lenses, and R1 launch prior to Olympics
2025: R5Mkii, R6Mkii and an "Astro" model
2026: not brave enough to guess that far ahead...


----------



## john1970 (Jun 29, 2022)

entoman said:


> My guess:
> 
> I don't think there will be a "R" successor, although it would be nice to have a 30MP model slotted between the R5 and R6.
> 
> ...


My guesses (this is always a fun game to play):

R5S (high-resolution R5): announced Q4 2022 with availability Q1 2023
R1: announced Q4 2023 with availability Q1 2024 (similar to what was done for the 1Dx Mk3)
R5 Mk2: announce Q3 2024 and availability Q4 2024


----------



## Hector1970 (Jun 29, 2022)

I'd say supply chain systems have messed up development of new products. I'd have thought with the World Cup later this year that the R1 would make an appearance. It may be in the wild but I'd have thought it would have been Canon's target to have it on sale for it. 
I've made the mirrorless move with the R5 (all AlanF's fault) so I'm not in such a rush for an R1 anymore. 
It will be interesting if Canon do much with the R5 in terms of software upgrades.
The R1 will have to improve on the R3 and R5. The MP count will be interesting.
Once you go beyond 20MP camera it's hard to settle for 20 MP
The 1DXIII is a great camera but would have been far better if it had been 30 MP.
I certainly think once the R1 arrives Canon will struggle to improve again on it. Between Glass, Sensors , Focusing and FPS its hard to see much room for great leap forwards.


----------



## entoman (Jun 29, 2022)

Hector1970 said:


> I've made the mirrorless move with the R5 (all AlanF's fault) so I'm not in such a rush for an R1 anymore.


Yeah, I blame Alan for making me buy the RF 100-500mm 


Hector1970 said:


> I certainly think once the R1 arrives Canon will struggle to improve again on it. Between Glass, Sensors , Focusing and FPS its hard to see much room for great leap forwards.


The "great leaps forward" will I think be largely confined to AI tech - and that is much easier to incorporate with smaller sensors (just look what phones can do), so within a few years I think we'll see a move towards M43 or even smaller formats. Olympus make well come to regret handing over to OM Systems.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jun 29, 2022)

entoman said:


> Yeah, I blame Alan for making me buy the RF 100-500mm
> 
> The "great leaps forward" will I think be largely confined to AI tech - and that is much easier to incorporate with smaller sensors (just look what phones can do), so within a few years I think we'll see a move towards M43 or even smaller formats. Olympus make well come to regret handing over to OM Systems.


I got the 100-500mm too  . He has alot to answer for.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 29, 2022)

Hector1970 said:


> I got the 100-500mm too  . He has alot to answer for.


He now wants you to also get the RF 100-400. You have been warned.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jun 30, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> I'd take an R6ii under 2k if they fixed all the problems and restraints it had.


The R6 doesn't have any real issues anymore. The firmware updates have corrected the initial bugs it had and it is now quite the capable unit. Shoots fast, tracks well, produces quality images, ie ergonomically close to perfect (could be a smidge bigger but that is not going to happen), battery life is surprisingly acceptable (I get a thousand shots per battery most of the time). Not sure what issues are left


----------



## Czardoom (Jun 30, 2022)

Aussie shooter said:


> ..... Not sure what issues are left


The issues aren't with the camera. The issues are with the whiners.


----------



## HMC11 (Jun 30, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> The issues aren't with the camera. The issues are with the whiners.


And here is one more piece of whining….. I love practically everything about the R6 except for the 20mp sensor. Yes, it is from the 1DX3, and its performance is very good. However, having been used to 26mpx and later 30mpx FF cameras, I just find it psychologically hard to go to 20mp, particularly when wildlife photography is within my range of interests (and moderate cropping is needed). I have settled for the R5, which is more than I need. A R6 mark ii with 30mp would probably be close to perfect for me, until there is something else to whine about, of course .


----------



## SnowMiku (Jun 30, 2022)

CanonGrunt said:


> Yeah. I still have my 5DsR and an R6. It just depends on the day what I’m grabbing, but the battery life is often a factor. Forget to turn off a DSLR, it doesn’t matter. Forget to turn off a mirrorless camera and that battery is dead. They drain so fast on mirrorless anyway.


I'm always accidently bumping buttons on my M5 while walking around turning on the EVF so I have to remember to switch it off or be very careful, with my 90D it doesn't matter when I bump any buttons.


----------



## dirtyvu (Jun 30, 2022)

HMC11 said:


> And here is one more piece of whining….. I love practically everything about the R6 except for the 20mp sensor. Yes, it is from the 1DX3, and its performance is very good. However, having been used to 26mpx and later 30mpx FF cameras, I just find it psychologically hard to go to 20mp, particularly when wildlife photography is within my range of interests (and moderate cropping is needed). I have settled for the R5, which is more than I need. A R6 mark ii with 30mp would probably be close to perfect for me, until there is something else to whine about, of course .


it's so awful that you had to setting for an R5.... /s first world problems


----------



## HMC11 (Jun 30, 2022)

dirtyvu said:


> it's so awful that you had to setting for an R5.... /s first world problems


You are right. The way I put it sounds awful. Thank you. It's more like having to decide between R5 & R6, and the R5 means putting off a lens till much later, if at all.


----------



## bergstrom (Jun 30, 2022)

Aussie shooter said:


> The R6 doesn't have any real issues anymore. The firmware updates have corrected the initial bugs it had and it is now quite the capable unit. Shoots fast, tracks well, produces quality images, ie ergonomically close to perfect (could be a smidge bigger but that is not going to happen), battery life is surprisingly acceptable (I get a thousand shots per battery most of the time). Not sure what issues are left


overheating completely gone?


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jun 30, 2022)

bergstrom said:


> overheating completely gone?


For the most part from what I have read. Certainly enough for it to not really be an issue that hampers anything. Tbh though I don't do video so can't state definitively one way or the other.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 30, 2022)

Aussie shooter said:


> The R6 doesn't have any real issues anymore. The firmware updates have corrected the initial bugs it had and it is now quite the capable unit. Shoots fast, tracks well, produces quality images, ie ergonomically close to perfect (could be a smidge bigger but that is not going to happen), battery life is surprisingly acceptable (I get a thousand shots per battery most of the time). Not sure what issues are left


What lenses are you using to get 1000 shots? Are you using ES at 20 fps? I don't get many at all with the RF 100-400mm and need to check out if it is the lens or the camera.


----------



## bbasiaga (Jun 30, 2022)

The3o5FlyGuy said:


> The R6 and the R5 has already caused the price of the 1Dx Mark III to plummet. I was hoping with the R7 and the R1 dropping this year the price of a used 1Dx might drop even further. I wanted it because of some of its video features and because i wanted that unlimited buffer. I often hit the buffer even with the fastest memory cards on my R6.


I'm genuinely curious what subjects you are shooting and settings you are using to hit the buffer on the R6 so often? I'm using UHS- II v60 cards, and I can hold the shutter down for about 12 seconds in mechanical shutter mode before it starts to slow down because of the buffer, and about 8ish seconds in e-shutter. And at the end of that I have a ton too many images to sort through and most of them look the same. I shoot full size raws to both cards. I have not tried v90s. 

-Brian


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 30, 2022)

As a reach-limited wildlife guy, I'm sorry we won't see the R1 sooner, but not surprised, given Canon's flagship of 4-5 years. 2023 might be optimistic. Not that I thought the R1 was going to be high-res (like some appear to believe despite all precedent). 

My hope is that there is an R5-ish variant that comes out sometime with >60mp without suffering any slow-downs. 

The R3 is nice, but the datastream thin for cropping into 1/8th of the frame.

This does make me start to think, though, about the possibility of having a dedicated Z9 for that little 800mm f/6.3, and use R5s for everything <=600mm. Would actually be cheaper than buying the new RF "superteleconverter" big whites. Then you guys would stop hearing me complain about being reach limited. Maybe you all should chip in.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 1, 2022)

AlanF said:


> What lenses are you using to get 1000 shots? Are you using ES at 20 fps? I don't get many at all with the RF 100-400mm and need to check out if it is the lens or the camera.


I get that with the 70-200 (EF). A little less with my sigma 150-600c. But yes. That is at high frame rates and little to no chimping. Just straight up shooting. If I chimp that number drops significantly to maybe 5 or 600


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 1, 2022)

bbasiaga said:


> I'm genuinely curious what subjects you are shooting and settings you are using to hit the buffer on the R6 so often? I'm using UHS- II v60 cards, and I can hold the shutter down for about 12 seconds in mechanical shutter mode before it starts to slow down because of the buffer, and about 8ish seconds in e-shutter. And at the end of that I have a ton too many images to sort through and most of them look the same. I shoot full size raws to both cards. I have not tried v90s.
> 
> -Brian


I guess it's all about shooting style. I am currently using uhs-1 cards and rarely hit the buffer. I can't deal with the consequences of spray and pray shooting. Dealing with several thousand images after a few hours shooting is not my idea of fun so I am very picky about when I pull the trigger.


----------



## bbasiaga (Jul 1, 2022)

Aussie shooter said:


> I guess it's all about shooting style. I am currently using uhs-1 cards and rarely hit the buffer. I can't deal with the consequences of spray and pray shooting. Dealing with several thousand images after a few hours shooting is not my idea of fun so I am very picky about when I pull the trigger.


yes, same. The speed of the camera and buffer depth have forced me to learn trigger discipline. 

-Brian


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 1, 2022)

bbasiaga said:


> yes, same. The speed of the camera and buffer depth have forced me to learn trigger discipline.
> 
> -Brian


The buffer on the R5 is so good, I seldom hit a card's limits, but sometimes I really want more. Last week I was in a kayak in the Penobscot bay taking pictures of porpoises that were coming very close. They don't like to get near people/boats. They're very hard to photograph because they pop up randomly, and when you're at 840 effective focal length in a rocking boat, and you don't know here your target will pop up for 0.2 seconds, you want to be able to do a little spray-and-pray. No dishonor in that in this case. I was hitting buffer more than half the time, using the initial surfacing to (sometimes) establish autofocus and hope there was a second surfacing 20 feet ahead of the animal in a couple seconds.

It's times like those - admittedly rare - that you really want CFexpress, rather than SD. But - as a guy who tests a lot of CFexpress cards for review purposes - I have to say that the difference between the top 20 percent of CFexpress cards and the bottom 20 percent of CFexpress cards isn't that big. (about 20 percent more images for the better cards in 30 seconds of shooting). The bigger deal is to be shooting CFexpress rather than SD in these rare cases.

-Tig 
PS: Yeah, I know that's not a picture of a porpoise below. None of them came out adequately well. The harbor seals were friendlier to the R5....


----------



## angelisland (Jul 2, 2022)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


So fictional camera won’t be out for a while…


----------



## entoman (Jul 2, 2022)

[email protected] said:


> As a reach-limited wildlife guy, I'm sorry we won't see the R1 sooner, but not surprised, given Canon's flagship of 4-5 years. 2023 might be optimistic. Not that I thought the R1 was going to be high-res (like some appear to believe despite all precedent).


If the R1 *isn't* hi-res, what do you think it will offer to differentiate it from the R3?

I don't think it will have global shutter (Canon will let other brands play beta-testers on that front), but even if it did, would that really make people pay 25-50% more, when the R3 is already extremely capable and only lacking in terms of resolution?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 2, 2022)

entoman said:


> If the R1 *isn't* hi-res, what do you think it will offer to differentiate it from the R3?
> 
> I don't think it will have global shutter (Canon will let other brands play beta-testers on that front), but even if it did, would that really make people pay 25-50% more, when the R3 is already extremely capable and only lacking in terms of resolution?


QPAF and a few more MP. And a ‘1’ in the name.


----------



## Jethro (Jul 3, 2022)

I suspect that the R1 will end up being as reassuringly similar as possible to the EOS 1Dx III, to tempt across as many of the remaining 1 series users to the RF mount as possible. Including as many of the R3 features as the current 1 series users have been impressed by, and (yes) some extra MP to differentiate it.

And those existing 1 series users will almost certainly love it as much as their compatriots did in the lengthy testing phase that preceded its announcement. Netizens on the other hand, and certain camera review sites, will be underwhelmed by the lack of innovation and ambition, declare _meh_ and threaten to switch brands. [CR3]


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 3, 2022)

entoman said:


> If the R1 *isn't* hi-res, what do you think it will offer to differentiate it from the R3?
> 
> I don't think it will have global shutter (Canon will let other brands play beta-testers on that front), but even if it did, would that really make people pay 25-50% more, when the R3 is already extremely capable and only lacking in terms of resolution?


I bet the R1 will have matching card slots.


----------



## entoman (Jul 3, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> QPAF and a few more MP. And a ‘1’ in the name.


Do you think that is enough to get people to choose it over the R3? I think it will take a lot more to convince people it would be a better choice than the R3, considering a likely 25% or more step up in price.

Also, considering the presence of the 46MP Nikon Z9, and the likely launch of a new Sony (A1 variant possibly with integrated grip and other improvements?), I just can't see the R1 having less than 40MP.

Sure, there will be a number of amateurs who will buy it just because it's called "R1", but how many pros will think it's worth paying extra over the R3?

My guess is that it will at the very least have 45MP, twin CFE-B slots, eye-select AF, some kind of "pre-capture", QPAF and ultra-fast readout that eliminates rolling shutter. It will also probably have to have 8K and an efficient cooling system. Even then, if we are waiting, as seems likely, until early 2024 for the launch, what on Earth will Sony and Nikon introduce in the meantime?


----------



## AlanF (Jul 3, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> He now wants you to also get the RF 100-400. You have been warned.


@entoman @Hector1970 Do you regret the RF 100-500mm? Best telephoto for me ever, and it's nice having the RF 100-400mm for when I want something smaller and lighter with me.


----------



## bernie_king (Jul 3, 2022)

I think the R1 will be around 50-60mp. I don't expect global shutter, but do expect Quad Pixel AF. The argument that the 1DX cameras were low res really doesn't hold water with the R3 in the mix. There is already a high-speed, spectacular focusing, low mp (for quick uploads by pros), camera available. No reason to have two. I also don't expect the R1 to command 25-50% over the R3. I expect it to clock in about 7K. When it does, I'll have the preorder in the moment it's available. My R3 needs a big brother . My R5 is great, but I'm in love with the ergos and battery performance from my R3, not to mention the stacked sensor.


----------



## entoman (Jul 3, 2022)

AlanF said:


> Do you regret the RF 100-500mm? Best telephoto for me ever, and it's nice having the RF 100-400mm for when I want something smaller and lighter with me.


I haven't really had sufficient time to test it Alan - I bought it now rather than later, to beat impending price increases. I got it primarily for birding and safari photography, but those are mostly winter activities for me, so I haven't had the chance to put it through its paces yet. First impressions are good though - it focuses faster than my old EF 100-400mm and is near-silent in operation. The stabilisation when used on my R5 is also noticeably better than with the EF 100-400mm, and the sharpness is impressive, even stopped down to F16, although I suspect I'll mainly be shooting at full aperture when the birding and safari season starts.

In the meantime I'm mainly photographing butterflies, grasshoppers, hemipterans etc, using my newly acquired RF 100mm macro. Of course, the RF 100-500mm is far from ideal for those subjects as it only focuses down to about 1:3 scale at 500mm and much lower reproduction ratios at the shorter end. I can see that it might be fine for your dragonfly-in-flight work, but for butterflies I find the RF 100mm much easier to manoeuvre, much lighter to carry and it focuses close enough for even the smallest insects. Most of the time, despite getting clumsier as I get older, I can get close enough with the 100mm without scaring the insects away. I'd still love to have a lightweight, stabilised 180 or 200mm RF macro though, should Canon ever decide to produce one!


----------



## RonH (Jul 3, 2022)

Hi

I believe that Canon is doing extremely well with their releases. Both Canon and Nikon let Sony have a pretty big head start in this phase of camera development, so it is impresses me that there is at least a good argument that Canon has caught up with Sony. In terms of backlog of supply, I am sure that Canon will make a lot of profit on each RF800 and RF1200 when they eventually make them, so I would expect them to fill these orders before doing anything else. 

I'm not sure how much development it is worth putting into cheaper (sub £2k) cameras, as the AI development within better (and even average) smart phones is becoming so good? There will always be a niche; I am sure there are still a lot of people with darkrooms developing photos from very cheap very old analogue cameras (hooray), but the drive from Canon, Nikon, Sony et al, will need to be the opportunity to take photos you can't get with your phone.

My experience of this development is from my excellent Nikon D750 to my current R5. I have photos taken recently under torch light 10K ISO in South Africa. My view is that with DxO noise reduction processing in all cases, the R5 photos offer more detail than 1200 ISO on the D750.

If I had to bet; in 5 years infra red night vision will be dead; large sensors will be so sensitive owls in flight at midnight in colour will be possible!

Just keep enjoying taking pictures.

Very best wishes

Ron


----------



## AlanF (Jul 3, 2022)

RonH said:


> Hi
> 
> I believe that Canon is doing extremely well with their releases. Both Canon and Nikon let Sony have a pretty big head start in this phase of camera development, so it is impresses me that there is at least a good argument that Canon has caught up with Sony. In terms of backlog of supply, I am sure that Canon will make a lot of profit on each RF800 and RF1200 when they eventually make them, so I would expect them to fill these orders before doing anything else.
> 
> ...


I'm a founder member of the DxO noise reduction fan club and the R5 is my favourite camera. But, it's no better at high iso than, for example, the Nikon D850 with DxO. The noise at high iso is due to the noise in the light flux itself and modern sensors are so quantum efficient that there is very little room for further improvement.


----------



## kaihp (Jul 4, 2022)

Sorry, catching up to 5-6 pages of comments in one fell swoop.



bbasiaga said:


> The hit rate is so high already, I'm not sure what 'better' would look like in this case in order to make a noticeable improvement. I suppose the R3 is faster at tracking and acquisition on account of the stacked sensor. QPAF looms, at least in the rumor-verse, which could improve acquisition in some scenarios.


So far I am *not* impresssed by the R3's hit rate for _things at speed_. Something's afoot, and I haven't had time to figure out the problem: I took the R3 + the EF 200-400mm to the MotoGP race in the Netherlands the other weekend and had _abyssmal_ hit rates 7% in focus when the bikes were going through a chicane (it had time to pick up focus and detect the motorcycles). I haven't had time to go through the ~2.500 images from the first day. Topic for seperate post, though.



neuroanatomist said:


> Better would be quad pixel. There are some situations where current Canon MILCs simply cannot lock focus because they are insensitive to horizontally oriented contrast features.


My guess is that we'll at least QPAF and Global Shutter for an R1. Identical memory slots hopefully too. I have no ideas on whether it would be a 'high' or 'low' resolution sensor (and frankly I have no bone in that contest).



neuroanatomist said:


> No longer true. R3 preorders went live at 6a ET, people (like me) who ordered before ~9a got their cameras from the first batch, around Thanksgiving. Those ordering later than ~9a on launch day had to wait a few months.


That's US only. I preordered on the day of the development announcement (the first day I could pre-order here in Denmark) and waited 425 days to get the camera.



entoman said:


> Agreed. I love my R5 but the EVF lag definitely causes me to miss shots that I would have achieved with my 5DMkiv.


I found with the R3 that I have to keep the EVF close to my cheek so it "detects" my eye and keeps the EVF turned on, otherwise it takes too long to turn on the EVF. It's mostly a matter of habit (I look over the VF/lens to decide on the subject and then "dive in" with my eye to take the shot.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 4, 2022)

AlanF said:


> @entoman @Hector1970 Do you regret the RF 100-500mm? Best telephoto for me ever, and it's nice having the RF 100-400mm for when I want something smaller and lighter with me.


No regrets. I am enjoying the 100-500mm. Still getting used to the R5. Eye focus is very useful, I have Eye and Spot back button set up. Still trying to get the best settings for me. I am only using the viewfinder and I have a lag from eye reaching the viewfinder to it operating. Maybe a second or so but frustrating. If I hold down a back button while raising it up it’s not such an issue. I need to adjust some settings perhaps. Nice to be able to significantly crop versus a 1DXIII. I haven’t really tested the R5 yet. BIF I’m not getting right, some practice required. Happy so far with the R5. I haven’t updated the firmware. I look forward to really putting it through its paces. I haven’t adapted RF lens to it yet.


----------



## kaihp (Jul 4, 2022)

Hector1970 said:


> No regrets. I am enjoying the 100-500mm. Still getting used to the R5. Eye focus is very useful, I have Eye and Spot back button set up. Still trying to get the best settings for me. I am only using the viewfinder and I have a lag from eye reaching the viewfinder to it operating. Maybe a second or so but frustrating.


Id' say sub-second, but still frustrating. As stated in my post above, my workaround is to keep the EVF next to my cheek so it thinks I am looking through it.


----------



## entoman (Jul 4, 2022)

kaihp said:


> I found with the R3 that I have to keep the EVF close to my cheek so it "detects" my eye and keeps the EVF turned on, otherwise it takes too long to turn on the EVF. It's mostly a matter of habit (I look over the VF/lens to decide on the subject and then "dive in" with my eye to take the shot.


Yes that can be a workaround with the R5 too, but when I've got a heavy lens attached my arms need a rest. I just want to be able to quickly raise the camera to my eye, and not have to wait for the EVF to light up. The best workaround I've found is to hit the d.o.f. button (or any other button that *doesn't* activate AF) as I raise the camera. Then the EVF and metering are active by the time the camera is at my eye.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 5, 2022)

entoman said:


> If the R1 *isn't* hi-res, what do you think it will offer to differentiate it from the R3?
> 
> I don't think it will have global shutter (Canon will let other brands play beta-testers on that front), but even if it did, would that really make people pay 25-50% more, when the R3 is already extremely capable and only lacking in terms of resolution?



The others' comments on some things are likely to be the draws. Quad pixel; matching slots; maybe even a tilty-flippy (whooshing sound as we all clutch our pearls and then think of manly things to think); faster processor, which translates into better noise and sharpness file cooking for plain-speaking people; more bits at faster frame rates; the removal of pupil tracking; the re-addition of the tracking nipple from the 1d3; not a global shutter, but a speedy-enough sensor speed so rolling shutter is not noticeable, thus avoiding various global shutter sensor disadvantages; probably 36 megapixels for the sole purpose of getting 8k video capabilities, but don't be surprised if it's 24 mp. 

Between now and then there will be a 5 series addition and/or an R5 Mark II. That'll be your high-res horse. When it comes around, jump on it. 

-Tig (who's speculation is relentlessly proven wrong)


----------



## entoman (Jul 5, 2022)

[email protected] said:


> The others' comments on some things are likely to be the draws. Quad pixel; matching slots; maybe even a tilty-flippy (whooshing sound as we all clutch our pearls and then think of manly things to think); faster processor, which translates into better noise and sharpness file cooking for plain-speaking people; more bits at faster frame rates; the removal of pupil tracking; the re-addition of the tracking nipple from the 1d3; not a global shutter, but a speedy-enough sensor speed so rolling shutter is not noticeable, thus avoiding various global shutter sensor disadvantages; probably 36 megapixels for the sole purpose of getting 8k video capabilities, but don't be surprised if it's 24 mp.
> 
> Between now and then there will be a 5 series addition and/or an R5 Mark II. That'll be your high-res horse. When it comes around, jump on it.
> 
> -Tig (who's speculation is relentlessly proven wrong)


Interesting that you think pupil tracking will be dropped. A failed experiment? I still think they'll include it (it can always be turned off). I do think it makes a lot of sense to include the AF nipple from the 1Dxiii. Tilty-flippy is I fear just a dream. I think many will regard it as outdated on release, if it doesn't have 8K.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 5, 2022)

entoman said:


> Interesting that you think pupil tracking will be dropped. A failed experiment? I still think they'll include it (it can always be turned off). I do think it makes a lot of sense to include the AF nipple from the 1Dxiii. Tilty-flippy is I fear just a dream. I think many will regard it as outdated on release, if it doesn't have 8K.


Eye-controlled AF on the R3 works very well for me, at least in reasonable use cases. I suspect Tig is recalling that the feature made it's debut in the EOS A2E and was offered in several other EOS models including the EOS 3, but notably _not_ in the EOS 1-series film cameras. In some ways, the job was easier in film camera days, because the camera just had to determine the closest pre-defined AF point to where your eye was pointed and make that AF point active. Now, there effectively aren't fixed AF points anymore, you can focus anywhere in the scene. In my experience, the system works best if you're using it to guide other selection algorithms the camera has available. So if I'm trying to use eye-controlled AF to select one flower in a field as my subject, it doesn't do a great job – the smart controller is much more effective and faster. But if my three kids are running around outside, eye-controlled AF very effectively allows me to shift the focus among them for face detection to take over, and fire off bursts where each kid is in focus. Same is true on an athletic field. I think if Canon excludes eye-controlled AF from the R1, it will be due to their conservative mindset. After using the feature, I think it functions well enough for use in the 1-series. I expect that feedback Canon has received on the R3 from professional users will be factored into the decision for the R1 (a decision that needs/needed to be made relatively early, since there are significant hardware implications).

I really like the Smart Controller from the 1D X III. It's on the R3, I see no reason it wouldn't be used on the R1. When not using eye-control, if there's a faster way to move the AF point around, I can't imagine what it would be. Perhaps the R1 will add customizations, e.g. tracking speed like for a computer mouse/trackpad, and if the selection stop at the frame edge or wraps to the other side (as could be selected for the multi-controller on the 1-series DSLRs). 

My guess is we will see an articulating LCD on the R1. Again, feedback from R3 users will be a factor.

IMO, the R1 won't be high-res. As Tig suggests, there will be an R5 version with a high MP count to meet that desire/need. What 'low res' means is TBD. Perhaps 8K will play a role in that, Canon certainly knows use cases better than me (for me, the R1 will be for shooting stills, not video, and even then I wouldn't shoot 8K if I could).


----------



## kaihp (Jul 6, 2022)

[email protected] said:


> probably 36 megapixels for the sole purpose of getting 8k video capabilities, but don't be surprised if it's 24 mp.


8K will require least 39.3Mpixels or more likely 44.7Mpixels - hence the 45MP for the R5. (7680 x 5120 for 4x FHD, if 8192 on the long side it'd be 8192x5462 so 44.7Mpixels)



neuroanatomist said:


> Eye-controlled AF on the R3 works very well for me, at least in reasonable use cases. [...]
> 
> But if my three kids are running around outside, eye-controlled AF very effectively allows me to shift the focus among them for face detection to take over, and fire off bursts where each kid is in focus. Same is true on an athletic field. I think if Canon excludes eye-controlled AF from the R1, it will be due to their conservative mindset. After using the feature, I think it functions well enough for use in the 1-series.


So far my experience with eye-control is less good, when using it with multiple subjects (vehicles) in combination with the automatic vehicle subject detection.
Despite training the tracking algorithm several times, the camera thinks that I'm looking above and to the right of where my focus is. Eventually I turned it off and used the center+4 helper points as starting point for the tracking algorithm. I need to get out and test several lenses to rule out the particular lens (200-400mm) as a contributing factor.


----------



## dirtyvu (Jul 7, 2022)

[email protected] said:


> The buffer on the R5 is so good, I seldom hit a card's limits, but sometimes I really want more. Last week I was in a kayak in the Penobscot bay taking pictures of porpoises that were coming very close. They don't like to get near people/boats. They're very hard to photograph because they pop up randomly, and when you're at 840 effective focal length in a rocking boat, and you don't know here your target will pop up for 0.2 seconds, you want to be able to do a little spray-and-pray. No dishonor in that in this case. I was hitting buffer more than half the time, using the initial surfacing to (sometimes) establish autofocus and hope there was a second surfacing 20 feet ahead of the animal in a couple seconds.
> 
> It's times like those - admittedly rare - that you really want CFexpress, rather than SD. But - as a guy who tests a lot of CFexpress cards for review purposes - I have to say that the difference between the top 20 percent of CFexpress cards and the bottom 20 percent of CFexpress cards isn't that big. (about 20 percent more images for the better cards in 30 seconds of shooting). The bigger deal is to be shooting CFexpress rather than SD in these rare cases.
> 
> ...


I love my R5 but I don't think the buffer is that good. The reason why the R5 seems to have a big buffer is because the CFExpress cards are so fast. But switch to the 20fps mode and you will easily hit the buffer very quickly. Now, because the cards write so fast, it's not a major nuisance like the Sony A7R3 (which I also owned). On the A7R3, once you hit the limit, the camera is practically useless. And it takes well over a minute to go from a full buffer to an empty buffer on the A7R3 where the R5 can clear the buffer in a few seconds because of the blazing fast CFExpress cards.

And I don't know if people notice this behavior with the buffer (I use Sony Tough cards with my R5; not saying that it matters, just giving some context). When I hit the buffer limit, it will seem to pause for a bit where it's not doing anything. And then the buffer clears quickly. But that pause is very strange.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 7, 2022)

Jasonmc89 said:


> Merging in post is what I would do anyway. I like using Zerene and that gives me the ability to retouch them then.


In general I prefer to do merging, stitching, etc., on the computer rather than to take something prebaked from the camera. I have been known to shoot HDRs and panoramas with my iPhone if I don't have a real camera along, but that is a make-do situation.


----------



## AutoMatters (Jul 7, 2022)

mbike999 said:


> More lenses would be appreciated, especially on the telephoto end. A modern 500/4, 300/2.8 or maybe a 150-400/4 TC. Nikon seems to be the only one committed to telephotos at the moment, Canon too busy gluing teleconverters and mount adapters on EF lenses


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 7, 2022)

mbike999 said:


> More lenses would be appreciated, especially on the telephoto end. A modern 500/4, 300/2.8 or maybe a 150-400/4 TC. Nikon seems to be the only one committed to telephotos at the moment, Canon too busy gluing teleconverters and mount adapters on EF lenses


If I had bought a R3 instead of a Z9 on my switch to mirrorless, I would have been gutted by the lacklustre big whites that made it to RF, especially after such a fantastic RF 100-500. Canon's big glass will always have a special place in my heart, but they can do way better than upcycling the EF 400 and EF 600 into RF models then glued teleconverter models. 

I very much hope to see some impressive showings from Canon, after all, they are the market leader and there is a bloody good chance I'll want to come back for the R1 Mk3/4 era and the refresh of the super tele's.


----------



## entoman (Jul 10, 2022)

dirtyvu said:


> I love my R5 but I don't think the buffer is that good. The reason why the R5 seems to have a big buffer is because the CFExpress cards are so fast. But switch to the 20fps mode and you will easily hit the buffer very quickly. Now, because the cards write so fast, it's not a major nuisance like the Sony A7R3 (which I also owned). On the A7R3, once you hit the limit, the camera is practically useless. And it takes well over a minute to go from a full buffer to an empty buffer on the A7R3 where the R5 can clear the buffer in a few seconds because of the blazing fast CFExpress cards.
> 
> And I don't know if people notice this behavior with the buffer (I use Sony Tough cards with my R5; not saying that it matters, just giving some context). When I hit the buffer limit, it will seem to pause for a bit where it's not doing anything. And then the buffer clears quickly. But that pause is very strange.


I also sometimes get buffering problems when shooting a series of short 1 second 20fps bursts on the R5. Not sure what you mean when you say "that pause is very strange" - my R5 just completely locks up, and the only way to get it going again is to drop the battery and reboot. Fortunately it doesn't happen very often. The problem isn't restricted to the R5 either - I've got a friend who has exactly the same issue with his Z9.


----------



## GoldWing (Jul 12, 2022)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


It will be obsolete by time it comes out. Canon missed the boat.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 12, 2022)

GoldWing said:


> It will be obsolete by time it comes out. Canon missed the boat.


I hit the boat hit you on the head as you were bobbing in the water. At least, that’s one possible explanation for your inane perseveration.


----------



## JohnC (Jul 13, 2022)

I recently purchased an R3. I’ve used various top of line bodies over the years…R3 passes them all in my opinion. Sony has a good product, but I don’t think they score as well overall. We will see what the market says and if it is any different than what it has said for years now.


----------



## dirtyvu (Jul 13, 2022)

entoman said:


> I also sometimes get buffering problems when shooting a series of short 1 second 20fps bursts on the R5. Not sure what you mean when you say "that pause is very strange" - my R5 just completely locks up, and the only way to get it going again is to drop the battery and reboot. Fortunately it doesn't happen very often. The problem isn't restricted to the R5 either - I've got a friend who has exactly the same issue with his Z9.



I've never had it lock up. so when I say a "pause", I'm meaning it's not linear and instant. like imagine climbing a hill to a sharp point and then descending linearly off that point. that's behavior i would expect.

but in the "pause", it's more like a roller coaster climbing to a peak, it gets to that peak and kind of stops for a second or two and then it plunges. when I hit the buffer on the R5, it kind of pauses at the peak, and then all of a sudden it writes them all down really fast.


----------



## scottburgess (Jul 21, 2022)

For a professional camera, I'd like to see a Stops option on histograms, a feature easily added to camera software:
John Sadowsky's version of Linear Stop Histogram.


----------



## kaihp (Jul 21, 2022)

scottburgess said:


> For a professional camera, I'd like to see a Stops option on histograms, a feature easily added to camera software:
> John Sadowsky's version of Linear Stop Histogram.


John has some good points (as an engineer I like the log scale), but I fear that the current scaling is too ingrained in most people.


----------



## tpatana (Aug 2, 2022)

So about 12-18 month until I could get R1.... makes me wonder if I should get R3 to replace my 1DX.


----------



## navastronia (Aug 3, 2022)

Getting an R1 or an R3 (and it will either be one or the other) really depends on whether I want to move to a single-body camera solution or not. I currently shoot with a pair of EOS RPs for events, theatre photos, and weddings, and while it would be a major change to go from 2 low-end bodies with fast primes to a high-end body with a fast zoom (like the 28-70), I might be willing to do it. That setup would probably cost me 10K, though, even after selling my old gear.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 3, 2022)

navastronia said:


> Getting an R1 or an R3 (and it will either be one or the other) really depends on whether I want to move to a single-body camera solution or not. I currently shoot with a pair of EOS RPs for events, theatre photos, and weddings, and while it would be a major change to go from 2 low-end bodies with fast primes to a high-end body with a fast zoom (like the 28-70), I might be willing to do it. That setup would probably cost me 10K, though, even after selling my old gear.


For the use cases you mention, an R5 is a lower cost option that sacrifices little to nothing (And I say that one who shoots with both an R3 and an R5).


----------



## kaihp (Aug 3, 2022)

tpatana said:


> So about 12-18 month until I could get R1.... makes me wonder if I should get R3 to replace my 1DX.


I moved from an 1DX to the R3. It's damn fast, but I'm still strugglig to learn how to take advantage of all the improvements. Getting there is definitely a journey.

For example, I haven't touched any of the AF modes yet.


----------



## navastronia (Aug 3, 2022)

unfocused said:


> For the use cases you mention, an R5 is a lower cost option that sacrifices little to nothing (And I say that one who shoots with both an R3 and an R5).



Great point, but . . . Is it vain and irrational that I really want a body with a built in vertical grip? Oh, it is? OK, yes, I suspected this


----------



## tpatana (Aug 3, 2022)

I use R5 with grip. Built-in is nicer but I have no complaints on R5 with grip.


----------



## USMarineCorpsVet (Aug 17, 2022)

SnowMiku said:


> I wonder what the R1 will have to segment itself from the R3? Maybe it will have a global shutter? Does the 1D/R1 market even want high MP or would they prefer around 24MP like the R3? They would have to make sure it doesn't have any freezing issues as reported by several on here with the R5/R3.


Why would they make an R1 the exact same resolution as the R3, especially when the competition is putting out 45mpx flagship cameras. I think the R3 is merely a stop gap camera. The value for 6K doesn't come close to the Z9 or A1.


----------



## dolina (Aug 17, 2022)

EOS R1 to be used by 2024 Summer Olympics makes sense.

If I cannot wait then the less than 1 year old 2021 EOS R3 would be what I'd buy today.

What other RF L lenses are needed by within 23 months?

Listed below are *possible* candidates

RF L Primes

 RF 500mm f/4L IS USM
 RF 400mm f/5.6L IS USM
 RF 300mm f/4L IS USM
 RF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM
 RF 200mm f/2L IS USM
 RF 200mm f/2.8L IS USM
 RF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM
 RF 135mm f/2L USM
 RF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM
 RF 35mm f/1.4L USM
 RF 24mm f/1.4L USM
 RF 14mm f/2.8L USM
RF L Zooms

 RF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x
 RF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM
 RF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM
 RF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM
 RF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Lens
 RF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens
 RF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM
 RF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
 RF 14-35mm f/4L USM
 RF 15-35mm f/2.8L USM
 RF 11-24mm f/4L USM
 RF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM


----------



## USMarineCorpsVet (Aug 17, 2022)

An R1 needs to offer more than eye focus and 24mpx to differentiate itself from a $6K R3. Canon is already behind the competition and another 24mpx body another year down the road will be more underwhelming than the R3 was....


----------



## kaihp (Aug 17, 2022)

dolina said:


> EOS R1 to be used by 2024 Summer Olympics makes sense.
> 
> If I cannot wait then the less than 1 year old 2021 EOS R3 would be what I'd buy today.
> 
> ...


Did you just change EF for RF on that list?

Since the EF to RF transition gives Canon a 'clean' map of possible lenses, I would expect them to take different choices over their EF lens map.
LIke, choosing not to launch 70-200 non-IS zooms.

For example, the EF 400 5.6L and the 300 4L designs are very old, I highly doubt that Canon will make new designs for RF. The EF 200-400mm is probably replaced by the RF 100-500mm zoom, in the eyes of Canon (even though they never said that). Same can be said to those demanding a 200-600mm zoom.

Personally, I've been puzzled by the lack of the 300/2.8L and 500/4L, but I am putting it down to lack of (sufficient) demand.


----------



## dolina (Aug 17, 2022)

kaihp said:


> Did you just change EF for RF on that list?
> 
> Since the EF to RF transition gives Canon a 'clean' map of possible lenses, I would expect them to take different choices over their EF lens map.
> LIke, choosing not to launch 70-200 non-IS zooms.
> ...



It isn't unreasonable to consider that over 90% of EF L lenses will transition to the RF mount.

Others could be equivalents to what Nikon/Sony/Sigma/Tamron/Tokina unique focal lengths.

So far that's what is happening now.

As for the non-IS zooms I see it being scheduled for release by mid 2020s.

EF 400 5.6L and the 300 4L could see a new optical design for the RF mount.

300/2.8L and 500/4L I expect it to be out before the 2024 Games


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 17, 2022)

dolina said:


> As for the non-IS zooms I see it being scheduled for release by mid 2020s.


The EF 70-200/2.8L IS was updated twice, the non-IS version was never updated after the IS version launched. There won’t be non-IS 70-200 zooms in RF, there’s no point. 



dolina said:


> EF 400 5.6L and the 300 4L could see a new optical design for the RF mount.


Sure, they _could_. In the same way, you and I _could_ both win the lottery tomorrow. In reality, those old designs became unpopular after the 100-400 came out, which is why the latter saw an update and the primes did not. The 100-500 replaces all of them (but I don’t agree with @kaihp that it replaces the 200-400, that lens in in a completely different class). 



dolina said:


> 300/2.8L and 500/4L I expect it to be out before the 2024 Games


Sooner, I hope!


----------



## dolina (Aug 17, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> The EF 70-200/2.8L IS was updated twice, the non-IS version was never updated after the IS version launched. There won’t be non-IS 70-200 zooms in RF, there’s no point.
> 
> 
> Sure, they _could_. In the same way, you and I _could_ both win the lottery tomorrow. In reality, those old designs became unpopular after the 100-400 came out, which is why the latter saw an update and the primes did not. The 100-500 replaces all of them (but I don’t agree with @kaihp that it replaces the 200-400, that lens in in a completely different class).
> ...


Canon kept specific EF lens SKUs unchanged for decades to provide a cheap alternative and to capture whatever money from users who couldn't get the higher-end lens.

Something to dissuade users from going Sigma, Tamron or Tokina.

This can be easily identified by the street price of the lens as compared to the 3rd party alternatives.

Not everyone can buy the latest and greatest on the drop of a hat.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 17, 2022)

dolina said:


> Canon kept specific EF lens SKUs unchanged for decades to provide a cheap alternative and to capture whatever money from users who couldn't get the higher-end lens.
> 
> Something to dissuade users from going Sigma, Tamron or Tokina.
> 
> ...


Are you suggesting that new RF non-IS versions of the 70-200 zooms would somehow serve as cheap alternatives to the IS versions? Sorry, but LOL. Still not seeing the point of non-IS versions. Same story for the telephoto primes. 

Canon could easily keep those lenses unchanged because the development was a sunk cost. That would not be the case for new RF versions, which is why we won't see them. Canon wants people to buy the RF 100-500L with extenders, and for those without sufficient funds they offer the RF 100-400, 600/11 and 800/11.


----------



## dolina (Aug 17, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Are you suggesting that new RF non-IS versions of the 70-200 zooms would somehow serve as cheap alternatives to the IS versions? Sorry, but LOL. Still not seeing the point of non-IS versions. Same story for the telephoto primes.
> 
> Canon could easily keep those lenses unchanged because the development was a sunk cost. That would not be the case for new RF versions, which is why we won't see them. Canon wants people to buy the RF 100-500L with extenders, and for those without sufficient funds they offer the RF 100-400, 600/11 and 800/11.


I would like to clarify that I never said that there are RF non-IS versions of the 70-200 zooms today or more general telephoto zooms that fits within 70-300mm range. I expect those to come before year 2030.

Look at this from a price strategy point of view that covers all price points. It may come to a surprise to many but not everyone can afford the latest & greatest at the drop of the hat. Canon is interested in offering goods to all users.

Take the most basic of focal lengths: the 50mm

Low-end <$180

1987 EF 50mm f/1.8
1990 EF 50mm f/1.8 II
2015 EF 50mm f/1.8 STM
2020 RF 50mm F1.8 STM
Mid-end ~$399

1993 EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
202? RF 50mm f/1.4 STM(?)
High-end >$1,000

1989 EF 50mm f/1.0L USM
2006 EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
2018 RF 50mm f/1.2L USM
Doing this Canon catered to low, medium and high ends of the market. Updates are only made when design & manufacturing cost improvements are possible.

As Canon has a generous margin this allows 3rd party lens brands like Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, etc exists.

Historically the EF bodies does the same

APS-C has 8 product lines that ranges from entry $389 to top end $1,799.
Full frame has 4 product lines that ranges from entry $1,999 to top end $6,499.
RF bodies is continuing this as well

Full frame has 6 product lines that ranges from entry $999 to top end $5,999
APS-C has 2 product lines that ranges at $949 & $1,499.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 17, 2022)

dolina said:


> I would like to clarify that I never said that there are RF non-IS versions of the 70-200 zooms today or more general telephoto zooms that fits within 70-300mm range. I expect those to come before year 2030.


You suggested there _will be_ RF non-IS versions of the 70-200 zooms. I disagree, and nothing you've said supports the idea that such lenses will ever be made or explains why they would be made. Especially given that IBIS is much less effective at telephoto focal lengths, dropping OIS is a big functional hit. You just put them on a list that appears to be a straight port of the current lineup with only the first letter of the lens designation changed. That list also included an RF 24-70/2.8...honestly, given there is currently an RF 24-70/2.8 IS, do you really expect a non-IS version of that lens to be released in the next 3 years, as you stated? Sorry, but that's just silly. Granted, you said 'possible' lenses but if you think it's possible Canon will release non-IS versions of the RF 14-35/4 IS and 15-35/2.8 IS, for example, then you are barking up the wrong tree or just plain barking mad.



dolina said:


> Look at this from a price strategy point of view that covers all price points. It may come to a surprise to many but not everyone can afford the latest & greatest at the drop of the hat. Canon is interested in offering goods to these users.
> 
> Take the most basic of focal lengths: the 50mm
> 
> ...


The 'low end' of the 70-200 zooms was the 70-200/4 non-IS, and that's the only one of them that was <$1,000 at launch. Today, there is already the RF 100-400 that lists at $650. There's not going to be an RF 70-200/4 non-IS. Period.

It seems to be your contention that Canon will simply clone the EF lineup into RF versions. Of course, there will be several equivalent lenses, but Canon will not clone the full list and I'd expect most of the RF counterparts to offer improvements in some areas (e.g. broader zoom ranges) with compromises in others (e.g. slower variable apertures), as we've already seen.


----------



## dolina (Aug 17, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> You suggested there _will be_ RF non-IS versions of the 70-200 zooms. I disagree, and nothing you've said supports the idea that such lenses will ever be made or explains why they would be made. Especially given that IBIS is much less effective at telephoto focal lengths, dropping OIS is a big functional hit. You just put them on a list that appears to be a straight port of the current lineup with only the first letter of the lens designation changed. That list also included an RF 24-70/2.8...honestly, given there is currently an RF 24-70/2.8 IS, do you really expect a non-IS version of that lens to be released in the next 3 years, as you stated? Sorry, but that's just silly. Granted, you said 'possible' lenses but if you think it's possible Canon will release non-IS versions of the RF 14-35/4 IS and 15-35/2.8 IS, for example, then you are barking up the wrong tree or just plain barking mad.
> 
> 
> The 'low end' of the 70-200 zooms was the 70-200/4 non-IS, and that's the only one of them that was <$1,000 at launch. Today, there is already the RF 100-400 that lists at $650. There's not going to be an RF 70-200/4 non-IS. Period.
> ...



You are ignoring other people's requirement and buying power.

Everything you said only considers your ability to buy whatever you want.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 17, 2022)

dolina said:


> You are ignoring other people's ability to buy. Everything you said only considers your ability to buy whatever you want.


That's not the point. You made the point that Canon has kept some old EF lenses in the lineup because they are cheap alternatives to the newer designs. There _aren't_ any old RF lenses to keep in the lineup as cheap alternatives, the mount itself is only 5 years old.


----------



## dolina (Aug 17, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> That's not the point. You made the point that Canon has kept some old EF lenses in the lineup because they are cheap alternatives to the newer designs. There _aren't_ any old RF lenses to keep in the lineup as cheap alternatives, the mount itself is only 5 years old.



Are you intentionally being obnoxious, disingenuous to make me spend time to provide citations or are you that unaware that the older lenses in the timeline I provided gets discontinued shortly after the newer model comes out?

That's what your sentences communicates.

I have repeatedly said that the RF mount will get more lenses in the future. I even listed these possible RF L lenses out.

Below are actual lens SKUs that can be bought off the shelf now.

Some are straight EF to RF copies

EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM
RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
Some are expanded as flange focal distance allows it

EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM
Some specific zooms are moved from L to non-L product line

EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM
The RF mount was announced in September 2018. As of this posting it is less than 4 years old.







CR: Canon’s roadmap includes 32 new lenses by 2026 according to Canon’s CEO​Before year 2030 I expect the majority of any of these RF lenses to come out. I do not include non-L lenses as these are not part of my interests.

RF L Primes

 RF 500mm f/4L IS USM
 RF 400mm f/5.6L IS USM
 RF 300mm f/4L IS USM
 RF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM
 RF 200mm f/2L IS USM
 RF 200mm f/2.8L IS USM
 RF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM
 RF 135mm f/2L USM
 RF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM
 RF 35mm f/1.4L USM
 RF 24mm f/1.4L USM
 RF 14mm f/2.8L USM
RF L Zooms

 RF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x
 RF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM
 RF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM
 RF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM
 RF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Lens
 RF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens
 RF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM
 RF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
 RF 14-35mm f/4L USM
 RF 15-35mm f/2.8L USM
 RF 11-24mm f/4L USM
 RF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM
I am surprised that Canon did not make the RF 50L & RF 85L have f/1.0 or wider aperture.

There is the

Leica Noctilux-M 50mm f/0.95 ASPH
Nikon NIKKOR Z 58mm f/0.95 S Noct


----------



## kaihp (Aug 17, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> The 100-500 replaces all of them (but I don’t agree with @kaihp that it replaces the 200-400, that lens in in a completely different class).


Definitely in different cost classes 

I have no insight into how Canon plans their lens roadmap or which RF lenses 'covers' old EF lenses, so you could very well be right.

I have no bones to pick in this debate, as it is just idle speculation on my side (I already have the EF 200-400mm) reflecting on the non-appearance of a RF 200-400 lenses. Only the future can tell how Canon slices the market.

Just a pity that the EF 200-400mm appears not to take external TCs well


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 18, 2022)

dolina said:


> Are you intentionally being obnoxious, disingenuous to make me spend time to provide citations or are you that unaware that the older lenses in the timeline I provided gets discontinued shortly after the newer model comes out?
> 
> That's what your sentences communicates.


You are misreading it, or you are misrepresenting your own statements. I am simply saying there will not be 70-200mm non-IS lenses in the RF mount. You keep listing them as probable forthcoming lenses. It's not going to happen. The only rationale you offered for the existence of the EF 70-200 non-IS versions is that Canon kept them around because they were older, cheaper lenses that competed with 3rd party offerings. The 70-200/2.8 is from 1995, the 70-200/4 is from 1999. They were never updated (as non-IS versions, I mean – the IS versions were released then those were updated 1-2 times). Those old designs were not discontinued because they were cheap, because the designs were old and the R&D expenses were long recouped…and most importantly there was no need to replace them because the IS versions were available. 



dolina said:


> I have repeatedly said that the RF mount will get more lenses in the future. I even listed these possible RF L lenses out.


Yes, you have. Of course there will be more RF lenses. Who is arguing that point? It's your list that is of questionable accuracy. As @kaihp pointed out initially, you simply listed EF lenses but changed EF to RF. That's not consistent with reality. The above lenses I mentioned are evidence of that. You list an RF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM as a likely lens. Seriously? There is already a 100-500L that is an expanded FL range of the 100-400L I/II. There is a 100-400 non-L. There won't be an RF 100-400L. To suggest there will be merely makes you look foolish and makes if easy to treat your list as worthless, lazy speculation.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 18, 2022)

dolina said:


> [..]
> 
> Some are straight EF to RF copies
> 
> ...


The 70-200 isn't not a straight copy, as evidenced by the telescoping zoom design in the RF. The replacement for the 100-400*L* is the 100-500*L*, not the 100-400 non-L. The 100-400 non-L seems to replace the EF 70-300 non-L.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 18, 2022)

dolina said:


> Look at this from a price strategy point of view that covers all price points. It may come to a surprise to many but not everyone can afford the latest & greatest at the drop of the hat. Canon is interested in offering goods to all users.
> …
> Doing this Canon catered to low, medium and high ends of the market.


The market today is far different from the market 10-20 years ago. Canon may not approach today’s market with the same strategy they employed two decades ago.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 18, 2022)

koenkooi said:


> The 70-200 isn't not a straight copy, as evidenced by the telescoping zoom design in the RF. The replacement for the 100-400*L* is the 100-500*L*, not the 100-400 non-L. The 100-400 non-L seems to replace the EF 70-300 non-L.


The only RF lenses that are essentially straight copies are the 24-105/4L, the RF-S 18-150 and the 400/600 superteles. The others are all new designs.


----------

