Canon EOS R

Another interview about the EOS R and talk of an APS-C EOS R Body

DCWatch has posted an interview with Canon’s Executive Office for the imaging division at Canon Inc. in Japan. There were a few interesting questions and answers above and beyond what we’ve already heard since the EOS R was launched.

What does The R in EOS R mean? (Google Translated)

The development concept word for this new system is “Reimagine optical excellence.” The letter “R” took the first letter of its first word “Reimagine”. However, in the development stage, various words such as “Revert”, “Reborn”, etc. with “R” flickered with the meaning of “redefining” EOS again “to reactivate”. As a result, we have developed the concept of “Reimagine optical excellence.” And decided to use “R” for both product name and system name. I felt that I could put down the feelings of the development team well.

Asked about EOS M and EOS R and how they fit in the Canon lineup (Google translated)

That’s right. Since EOS R is a full-size system, it can not be downsized to EOS M size. EOS M has a role/existence value as an APS-C system.

While I think he’s saying that EOS M will always be an APS-C system, the EOS R form factor will not be shrunk. That doesn’t mean we won’t see an APS-C EOS R body. If we’re going to get a mirrorless replacement for the EOS 7D series, it will have to be in the EOS R form factor purely for ergonomics, build quality and usability.

When asked about the RF lenses already released (Google Translated)

There was a desire for customers to sympathize with the meaning of creating a new system. When asking the world of a new system like this, we should put out a lens that can express barely the characteristics of the system. RF28-70mm f/2L USM, RF 50mm f/1.2L USM will not be able to plan the product so far because it will be incredible size and weight if made with EF mount. It is a product that can be done because the degree of freedom of lens design has increased considerably by eliminating the mirror and shortening the back focus. As a symbolic lens symbolizing the EF mount once, I put out a lens called “EFv50mm f1.0L”. I believe that we have created a lens equivalent to this time as well.

These lenses were obviously made to show what is possible with the RF mount right out of the gate. I think Canon did a much better job flexing their muscles than Nikon did with the manual focus Noct 58mm f/0.95.

YuengLinger

EOS 6D Mark II
Dec 20, 2012
2,019
64
Southeastern USA
#2
"R" could also stand for "Reach" (as in straining to reach for something). I wonder if the actual Japanese is as poetic as these Google translations. "Reborn," "Reactivate." These terms conjure a team that had hit the wall and was desperate for a new beginning. As if they had hit a bottom, or dead-end...Let's hope they Recover and don't have a Relapse! :cool:
 
Last edited:
Aug 26, 2015
278
53
#5
RF is a universal mount just like EF (EF-S) was, so of course there will be crop bodies.
But it will take a lot of time, it does not really make sense until they have enough lenses and the AF has evolved enough to reach the 7D II level.
 

Mt Spokane Photography

Spends too much time on this forum
Mar 25, 2011
14,743
229
#6
With the ability of the R to take crop lenses, there is not much reason for a APS-C version of the R. You can get the same view by mounting a EF-S lens and a adapter, or by setting the camera to crop mode.

A 60 MP version may also have the ability to have high FPS while in crop mode, I expect to see something innovative like that for those who want high performance and are willing to accept a crop view to get it.
 

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,288
66
S Florida
#7
The reason for an APS-C version of the R is the same reason it always has been. To reduce costs and to increase performance. It is inconceivable that the 7 series will be discontinued or be produced as an M camera in its current form. While it certainly is possible that Canon will produce M mount cameras in a significantly larger form factor with various degrees of weather-sealing for the 7, XXD and Rebel series, I think the body/lens size ratio would look rather silly and the marketing division would have none of it. Also, the 7 series needs big whites. Being the happy owner of an M5, I would get giddy as a schoolgirl if Canon made some fast teles in the M mount, but I really doubt that's going to happen. That leaves the R mount...
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
1,927
171
Vancouver, BC
#8
With the ability of the R to take crop lenses, there is not much reason for a APS-C version of the R. You can get the same view by mounting a EF-S lens and a adapter, or by setting the camera to crop mode.

A 60 MP version may also have the ability to have high FPS while in crop mode, I expect to see something innovative like that for those who want high performance and are willing to accept a crop view to get it.
Except for price. If, one day, Canon wants MILC to overtake DSLR, they will need an EOS R that's $400 with a kit lens and that won't be full frame.

One could argue that's where M's headed, but a lot of people still want a bigger camera that can use EF/EFS lenses -- or maybe future RF lenses that are not L and inexpensive.
 
Jun 6, 2012
209
35
#9
If all the exclusive glass is very expensive, why even go for an even cheaper camera. Just let people have their rebels. I have yet to see one person ask for an aps-c EOS R, most people are asking for a "pro" option. Unless there is a secret place where most people are asking for lower spec cameras. Come on Canon peopel have been asking about an 5DS R II for awhile now. Make that mirrorless, add your version of IBIS and you win.
 
Oct 15, 2011
177
35
#10
I can't wrap my head around this. I can't see the logic in an EOS R crop body when the EOS-M is a perfectly fine APS-C Canon mirrorless. Who would such a camera be for?

Is it for those who want more reach with their EF lenses? Is this for people who want a 7D mirrorless equivalent? Then why not make a better, more rugged M body and use the adapter. Is it for those who want to use EF-S lenses on a mirrorless? You can already do that on EOS R with an adapter.

There don't seem to be enough RF or EF-S lenses to justify demand for a cropped RF. It still seems like a mistake not to make M lenses adaptable to R. This is doubling down on that decision.
 
Jul 12, 2011
358
3
#11
the Steve Jobs approach to market research might be best here. Whatever whining is done in these forums is just whistling upstream - Canon will do whatever the R system roadmap is and follow it at a leisurely pace. I would guess the timeframe for a top notch R body is three years and at least three iterations. Lenses are easier, but don't expect Canon to match the pace that Fuji set when they introducted the X system. in the meantime, what you see is what you get.
 
Likes: Stuart

Mt Spokane Photography

Spends too much time on this forum
Mar 25, 2011
14,743
229
#12
Except for price. If, one day, Canon wants MILC to overtake DSLR, they will need an EOS R that's $400 with a kit lens and that won't be full frame.

One could argue that's where M's headed, but a lot of people still want a bigger camera that can use EF/EFS lenses -- or maybe future RF lenses that are not L and inexpensive.
I was responding to the possible need for a 7D MK II mirrorless sucessor. Its not a low end body, and certainly a 60 mp body will be $3800, but it could also be the poor mans 1D and replace the 7D series. Its just another line of thought, maybe unlikely.
 
Likes: Talys

pj1974

EOS Rebel SL2
Oct 18, 2011
571
31
Adelaide, Australia
#13
Canon would have the exact numbers. It is very likely that most of the 'XXXD' (aka 'Rebel') DSLR owners only used and wanted the more basic lenses, e.g. 18-55, 55-250mm and a prime (e.g. 50mm f/1.8). I see the EOS M line being the MILC equivalent and/or replacement for the majority of those photographers. That is, covering both those new to photography (i.e. first interchangable lens camera purchasers) as well as those who may wish to upgrade / update to mirrorless.

The enthusiast photographers (including the majority of the XXD / 7D owners) have more specialist lenses, e.g. more prosumer zooms, ultra wide angle, more and specialist primes (e.g. macro, ultra bright lenses, etc). And I see these photographers as being in 2 camps - 1) choosing to go to a smaller size (e.g. M5, M6, M50) and 2) somewhat more likely to move to the EOS R mirrorless. Therefore there could potentially be sufficient market for an APS-C mirrorless in EOS R format. These owners are also more likely to have more than 1 camera body.

There is definitely a lot to be said for having the ergonomics of a EOS R when using certain faster / bigger lenses. I did not foresee or expect the RF mount to come with the functionality to accept EF-S lenses, but I see that as a very smart move from Canon. As someone who owns a number of EF-S lenses, as well as L lenses, the EOS R is more attractive than any FF DSLR ever was. For several years, I have been carefully factoring in a planned move to mirrorless.

I own a 80D, 7D and a M5 (amongst other bodies) and over a dozen lenses both primes and zooms - with a mix of EF, EF-S and EF-M, including some L glass. That the EOS R can readily accept all my EF and EF-S lenses makes great sense to me. Due to the ergonomics, I do not ever see me using the M5 (or similar sized body) for action: i.e. for wildlife especially birds, or sports. However a EOS R - particularly one that may have a "crop mode" that enables faster FPS is very attractive to me.

Naturally, one would expect most FF DSLR owners would transition to EOS R / RF mount (in time, or sooner if they do not yet own many EF lenses). That a range of RF mount bodies has been more than hinted at would cover most of these bases, i.e. a more budget as well as a more pro body compared to the first-on-the-scene EOS R as Canon's mirrorless FF body.

In the future I expect would be many users who would have both RF and EF-M mount bodies, one for ultimate usability and quality (RF mount) and the other based more on size (especially for the 'quick throw in a small bag' convenience). I expect some years down the track I will be in this situation... It also allows me to save up $ over time for the RF mount lenses I really want - while still being able to use my EF and EF-S lenses... and, where I want, still using my DSLRs.

Meanwhile, there will be those who only have the EOS M / EF-M bodies (for whom APS-C sized sensors, and smaller lenses are good enough). And there will be users who just use the EOS R / RF mount environment (and who may resort to using their smart phones to capture 'quick / memory snaps & videos' when they aren't carting their larger photography gear around).

Canon will be making money on all these options. Smart move, Canon.

PJ
 

Larsskv

Enthusiast with Canon related GAS
Jun 12, 2015
620
33
#14
I can't wrap my head around this. I can't see the logic in an EOS R crop body when the EOS-M is a perfectly fine APS-C Canon mirrorless. Who would such a camera be for?

Is it for those who want more reach with their EF lenses? Is this for people who want a 7D mirrorless equivalent? Then why not make a better, more rugged M body and use the adapter. Is it for those who want to use EF-S lenses on a mirrorless? You can already do that on EOS R with an adapter.

There don't seem to be enough RF or EF-S lenses to justify demand for a cropped RF. It still seems like a mistake not to make M lenses adaptable to R. This is doubling down on that decision.
Canon has one rather big problem with their M and R systems not taking the same lenses. The largest part of the market are entry level users. If the M series aim at the entry level users, then, since the M lenses can’t be used on the R, Canon lack an upgrade path to the R series. This stands in contrast to the EFS and EF line. The entry level user who wanted/needed a new lens would often buy an EF lens, which for many would also be the first step into Canon full frame cameras.

Essentially, Canon lacks an upgrade path from the M to the R, making it easier and more compelling for M users to change brands if they want full frame.

I really do believe the M series have and will cause some frustration between Canon executives and market planners. This situation may also explain Canons lack of dedication for the M series.
 
Sep 29, 2018
15
11
#15
I can't wrap my head around this. I can't see the logic in an EOS R crop body when the EOS-M is a perfectly fine APS-C Canon mirrorless. Who would such a camera be for?
I have the Canon 10-22, Sigma 18-35 & 50-100, Tamron 100-400. Sure they will all fit on the EOS-R with an adapter. So for twice the price of my 80D I can have 6 fewer megapixals. Can't imagine why I wouldn't want that. The M system will never have glass as good as the 18-35 or the 50-100. And an M hanging off the back of the 50-100 would get lost back there. Canon sold a boatload of xxD and 7D's and all those users have glass. Maybe some of them have say a 50mm EF they love. But that was an 85 equivalent back on APS-C. Use the full frame properly and all your lenses you loved are suddenly different focal lengths.

Sure Canon can play games and try to muscle people like me into rebuying all my glass as FF. But I think Canon has realized that they can't just take being dominant for granted. People have options and if you push to hard it isn't that hard to swap. Heck the Sigmas can even be mount converted.
 
Feb 25, 2015
105
33
#16
Canon has one rather big problem with their M and R systems not taking the same lenses. The largest part of the market are entry level users. If the M series aim at the entry level users, then, since the M lenses can’t be used on the R, Canon lack an upgrade path to the R series. This stands in contrast to the EFS and EF line. The entry level user who wanted/needed a new lens would often buy an EF lens, which for many would also be the first step into Canon full frame cameras.

Essentially, Canon lacks an upgrade path from the M to the R, making it easier and more compelling for M users to change brands if they want full frame.

I really do believe the M series have and will cause some frustration between Canon executives and market planners. This situation may also explain Canons lack of dedication for the M series.
Playing devils advocate here: Both the M and the R can use EF/EF-S with a native adapter.

I currently use 2 non-M lenses on my M: the MP-E65 and the 50 1.8 STM. But now that I have the EF-M 32 f1.4 the 50mm won't be used on the M that much anymore :)
 
Oct 15, 2011
177
35
#17
I have the Canon 10-22, Sigma 18-35 & 50-100, Tamron 100-400. Sure they will all fit on the EOS-R with an adapter. So for twice the price of my 80D I can have 6 fewer megapixals. Can't imagine why I wouldn't want that. The M system will never have glass as good as the 18-35 or the 50-100. And an M hanging off the back of the 50-100 would get lost back there. Canon sold a boatload of xxD and 7D's and all those users have glass. Maybe some of them have say a 50mm EF they love. But that was an 85 equivalent back on APS-C. Use the full frame properly and all your lenses you loved are suddenly different focal lengths.

Sure Canon can play games and try to muscle people like me into rebuying all my glass as FF. But I think Canon has realized that they can't just take being dominant for granted. People have options and if you push to hard it isn't that hard to swap. Heck the Sigmas can even be mount converted.
I'm really not sure what you're saying. Btw, I think you mean 6 more megapixels, right?

The M system already has glass as good as the 18-35 and the 50-100: I'm pretty sure you can use those exact lenses themselves on the M mount with the native adapter. If lens-to-body size ratio is the problem, an M50 or something a bit bigger but with the M mount seems like it would take care of that. You haven't exactly said what benefit there would be to a crop sensored R body. I'm honestly not quite sure if you're for it or against it, but from the context it kind of sounds like you're for a cropped R. What benefit exactly is it that you (or really anyone interested in such a camera) hope to gain?

a EOS R - particularly one that may have a "crop mode" that enables faster FPS is very attractive to me
This I get- a crop mode makes sense for the R. But to me, it seems that if they're going to have 2 incompatible mirrorless mounts going forward, then the 7D, XXD and XXXD lines should just adopt the M-mount. There is no benefit I can imagine to mounting an R lens to a crop sensor body.
 
Last edited:
Likes: mirage
Jul 31, 2018
296
106
#18
There is no problem at all. Canon has 2 distinct mirrorfree systems for 2 distinct market segments:
* small, light, inexpensive, APS-C = EOS M / EF-M ... with option to use all EF and EF-S lenses
* large, expensive, FF = EOS R / RF ... with option to use all EF and EF-S lenses

In reality there is no "upgrade path" from M to R needed. The habit of buying EF lenses in the past was only because the focal lengths were not available in EF-S mount, because they could not be made any smaller or less expensive for APS-C image circle.

Current owners of Rebels, xxD, 7D/II mirrorslappers plus any assortment of EF/EF-S glass have a whole number of options and "upgrade paths" within Canon EOS ecosystem, depending on their priorities and budgets

1. continue with crop DSLR and EF-S/EF glass for a few more years
a) wait for upcoming 7D III [there will be one; 2019]
b) wait for upcoming 90D [there *might* be one; 2020?]

2. go mirrorfree APS-C with EOS M system; all EF-/EF-S lenses remain fully usable, no need to buy EF-M unless desired
a) "downsize" to EOS M50 [now]
b) wait for upcoming EOS M5 II which *should be* a mirrorfree 90D [2019]

3. go mirrorfree FF with EOS R system, all EF lenses fully usable, EF-S in crop mode; no need to buy RF, unless desired
a) EOS R [now]
b) wait for lower-end, less expensive EOS R FF body [2019]
c) wait for higher-end EOS R bodies - hi rez ["mirrorfree 5DS/R II" [2019]
c) "mirrorfree 1D-X III" [spring 2020]

No problem for Canon or their customers whatsoever. Replace EF/EF-S lenses and buy RF lenses at your own schedule - when desired and available.

Many Canon customers will also keep EOS M/EF-M when they buy into RF - as a smaller, lighter, less conspicuous, less expensive secondary system.

For almost all users, EF-M / RF lenses not being interchangeable is "no real issue in real life". :)
 
Last edited:

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
74
46
116
Williamsport, PA
#19
"R" could also stand for "Reach" (as in straining to reach for something). I wonder if the actual Japanese is as poetic as these Google translations. "Reborn," "Reactivate." These terms conjure a team that had hit the wall and was desperate for a new beginning. As if they had hit a bottom, or dead-end...Let's hope they Recover and don't have a Relapse! :cool:
The RF looks like the EF system that ultimately made ALL others look like dinosaurs for 30 years. Sony has such a small form factor and throat that they will be choking going forward. They have good sensors but in real world use there is no demonstrable superiority just lab testing difference and most real photographers do not shoot in a lab. Nikon et. al laughed at the 650 and 620 until the 1 came along and they either died (Minolta) or lost all their pro market share. The R is another 30 year leap with features even Nikon is struggling with out. All EF/EFs lenses work beautifully with the R and Nikon abandoned half their AF lenses etc.
 
Jul 17, 2012
80
1
#20
There is no benefit I can imagine to mounting an R lens to a crop sensor body.
I can. If Canon comes up with a 7D-class R body, priced similarly to 7D2, I'll buy it in a heartbeat. I would not buy a similar M body.

Why? I use both APS-C and full-frame bodies, with mostly same lenses. I expect to upgrade FF ones to R series, and start collecting RF lenses. I want them to work in the crop body, too.

Why do I want a crop body in the first place? To get the speed 7D2 provides at a reasonable price (and without built-in vertical handle 1D series has). Of course if Canon makes a FF R body that's as fast and cheap as 7D2 that'd be even better, but somehow that doesn't seem likely.