Canon aiming for a $799 full-frame camera? [CR2]

So this is clearly the price of the R3, right guys? Maybe if we all collectively believe it, then it will just have to be true

Nikon, will release the Z-9 tomorrow for $900! Quick Canon, you better undercut it with the R3 NOW or you'll regret it!!!

I know there are a small handful of users that will still argue the benefit of a crop sensor, but if you have a full frame camera coming in at under $1000, I think those hoping for an RF mount APS-C camera are SOL.

In part because of improved wafer yields, the cost difference between crop and ff sensors has become a matter of tens of dollars. I don't know if this ceases to be true in more complex, modern sensors, but this was true in the waning days of the DSLR. So offering crop is more a way to differentiate product lines and "nerf" things than it is a cost savings. BUT doing so practically requires having a secondary line of lenses, and THAT'S costly.

On the other hand, a cynic could say that going into the crop market could be useful if you wanted to drive a stake through the heart of Fuji once and for all. But you'd have to offer a better value proposition to really kill them; and that would imply high quality glass, rather than kit quality glass.

This is a long way of saying that Neuro is likely right.

neuroanatomist said:

I know there are a small handful of users that will still argue the benefit of a crop sensor, but if you have a full frame camera coming in at under $1000, I think those hoping for an RF mount APS-C camera are SOL.

Click to expand...

The only really compelling reasons I have seen for the APS-C format are overall camera size, cost, and focal length limitations.

Canon address the size with the M system, which even though it doesn't have some specific lenses people want it does have the lenses most people need and actually buy.

The cost is dealt with two fold, the M series for people that want smaller and cheaper, and if this new body comes out then with that. The new body would suit almost everybody that is looking for a 'real camera' but was pushed into the Rebel market because of price.

The focal length 'limitation' is somewhat addressed by the RF 600 and RF 800 f11's. And anybody that has seen AlanF's pixel level comparisons of those lenses and much more expensive lenses along with TC convertor use would be foolish to dismiss the f11 aspect because the high iso capabilities of the R5 and R6 are pretty outstanding.

Taken as a whole, and given the 7D market was never regularly replaced which implies the sales were not particularly high, I don't really see the advantage for Canon, or users, who think about an RF crop camera.

neuroanatomist said:

I know there are a small handful of users that will still argue the benefit of a crop sensor, but if you have a full frame camera coming in at under $1000, I think those hoping for an RF mount APS-C camera are SOL.

Click to expand...

Not sure about a benefit, but at least to me a crop body with a good, 90D/7D2/M62 level feature set is much more attractive a value proposition than a FF one that otherwise piles compromises on top of compromises à la the RP.

Sharlin said:

Not sure about a benefit, but at least to me a crop body with a good, 90D/7D2/M62 level feature set is much more attractiveve a value proposition than a FF one that otherwise piles compromises on top of compromises à la the RP.

Click to expand...

I kind of like the 'dumbed down' feature set you get with cheaper cameras. Maybe that's because I come from an age where the most expensive cameras had few features anyway. But at the end of the day I want reliable AF, consistent AE, independent control over shutter speed, aperture, and iso, and the ability to capture RAW. Anything else I really don't care too much about.

That's a crazy price point. I can't help but wonder what build/feature compromises would need to be made to get the price that far down. Regardless, I'm sure they'd sell loads of them.

While a 800 $ sounds great for entry level, I'm more concerned about how Canon will fill the gap between entry level and R6. If the R doesn't get a successor, there'd be a huge whole.

R? entry level 800 $
RP entry level 1.000 $ (eventual successor at 1.200 $)
R6 semi-pro 2.500 $


I´d actually see at least one opening for an R successor, maybe even too if they'd find a way to differentiate the cameras enough. Kind a like Sonys lineup in this point.

neuroanatomist said:

I know there are a small handful of users that will still argue the benefit of a crop sensor, but if you have a full frame camera coming in at under $1000, I think those hoping for an RF mount APS-C camera are SOL.

Click to expand...

The big problem is the lack of affordable/light-weight/good image quality* kit lenses

This isn't the age of your father's EF 28-85 lens - lenses good enough for FF sensors these days are HARD to do properly.

I look forward to Canon proving me wrong on this though.


*as the saying goes, choose any two.

it's still not going to be a good value compared to the z5. Canon's cheap full frame mirrorless will definitely (continue to) have a mediocre viewfinder, no ibis and no weather sealing.

Given that the pre-pandemic street price for the RP was around $900, an $800 entry-level camera doesn't sound all that unreasonable to me once we emerge from these crazy times.

IBIS M5 said:

it's still not going to be a good value compared to the z5. Canon's cheap full frame mirrorless will definitely (continue to) have a mediocre viewfinder, no ibis and no weather sealing.

Click to expand...

Isn't it amazing that despite all their disadvantages compared to the competition, Canon manages to sell more ILCs than those competitors and has done so every year for nearly two decades? Why is that, do you think?

$799 full frame? What will be the downsides?

IBIS M5 said:

it's still not going to be a good value compared to the z5. Canon's cheap full frame mirrorless will definitely (continue to) have a mediocre viewfinder, no ibis and no weather sealing.

Click to expand...

Even older generation EVF’s are much better than Rebel style pentamirrors. Rebel’s, whilst not being listed as ‘weatherproof’, which is a made up bullshi! term anyway, are very robust and easily up to most users need for durability.

The RP dropped down to $899 during the holidays.
It would make more sense to me to make a new model in the RP body for $1K and drop the price of the RP.
I guess they could make an entry-level camera in the R body.
The price of the R will not drop to $799 for a while.

Exploreshootshare said:

While a 800 $ sounds great for entry level, I'm more concerned about how Canon will fill the gap between entry level and R6. If the R doesn't get a successor, there'd be a huge whole...

Click to expand...

And a huge hole too. Sorry, couldn't help myself.

Of course they could fill it by just keeping the R in the lineup, as it's still a great camera. I do agree that eventually they may slot something between the entry level body/bodies and the R6, but I don't see them in any hurry as the current R fills the need pretty well. The problem, as I see it, is that the R is equal to or better than the R6 in some respects (most notably the 30mp sensor) and the features that would need to be shed for a replacement to fit in under the R6 are already not on the R (IBIS and dual card slot) so I'm not sure what a new model would have/not have that isn't already met by the R.

amorse said:

That's a crazy price point. I can't help but wonder what build/feature compromises would need to be made to get the price that far down. Regardless, I'm sure they'd sell loads of them.

Click to expand...

I can't wait to hear all the people whine about how a $799 full-frame camera is crippled.

neuroanatomist said:

I know there are a small handful of users that will still argue the benefit of a crop sensor, but if you have a full frame camera coming in at under $1000, I think those hoping for an RF mount APS-C camera are SOL.

Click to expand...

Yeah! Let's get this fight started!