Brown said:

Is the RP still in production?

Click to expand...

There is certainly still stock in the pipeline and Canon hasn't officially retired it yet.

I would like to think that Canon would continue to sell it as long as it is still profitable.
It hits a unique price point for new full frame bodies and could easily be a stepping stone to higher end bodies once a buyer gets some RF lenses.

Sony still sells the A7iii for ~USD1700 so why not keep 3 generations of Canon bodies.

I still have mine as a backup. Mostly for workshops when I would be using manual focus or as a second body doing timelapse/star trails.

blackcoffee17 said:

This again.. Tell me how removing some video features would make the camera cheaper. The sensor still need to have fast readout to support 30FPS (the current R8), dual pixel AF, the EVF, etc. If they separate the R8 line into 2, that just means extra development and R&D cost and sales split between 2 models = higher cost per model. Removing some video codecs won't make the camera cheaper. Making an R8V only makes sense because of different ergonomics and the EVF can be dropped.

Click to expand...

There is the example of R5 and R5c where it is clear that additional video features (cinema menus, 8k60 etc) and cooling for longer recording times is specific to video at an extra cost. Even if Canon removed IBIS in the R5c. If Canon released the R5 and R5c at the same time then there would have been no reason for reviewers to find fault.

It is possible that less cooling is required if the higher end video features are not enabled so there could be a cost reduction there.
Example is the additional heatsink etc for cLog on the 5Div which was then embedded with a USD100 price increase if I recall correctly.

The Magic Lantern project showed what the 5Diii video (and stills features) was capable of if the engineers allowed it but there were caveats with over heating being one of those issues.

These are niche use cases as I agree in general that EVFs and video features ago hand-in-hand and any cost differences for codecs and firmware development/maintenance etc would be small at best.

My hummingbirds are back. They bugged out at the end of January after correctly guessing that February was going to be a bit nasty. R7 + RF 200-800.

esspy2 said:

I hope they can make the 24mm f/1.8 or the 35mm f/1.8 in retro form. Also I probably wouldn't mind if they made the 24-50mm in retro form, but I'd be happier if they released a 20-50mm f/4 though that was previously mentioned to be a power zoom lens. A smaller lens like the 16mm or the 50mm would also fit very nicely on a body like that

Click to expand...

I would vote for the 28mm f/2.8 in retro form. It is remarkably sharp across the frame and both small and inexpensive. Image stabilization (in the 24 and 35) is a nice feature, but not very "retro". The current R8 with the 28 attached is a great walk about combo.

Old Man FL/FD said:

Also perhaps a lens adapter FD to RF with some feature not in the many currently out there.

Click to expand...

Yes, a Canon branded FD adapter would be a nice addition. Also nice to add really good focus peaking with a sharpness (or coarsness) adjustment to make focusing easy with both sharp and not-so-sharp retro lenses. I use the FL 58 f/1.2 (with radioactive glass ) a fair bit and it is easier to focus on the R8 than on the R5, probably due to the larger pixels have better peaking sensitivity to lower lens sharpness.

i did jump ship to get that lumix for $1259 with the edu discount, but of course if canon releases this Immight return the lumix just so I stay in one eco system, but I gotta say that lumix s9 has amazing footage quality

I own the RF 28-70 F2L, EF 24-70 F4L, and RF 24-50mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM. Three different lenses, and 3 very different price points. One is certainly a entry level kit lens, one was a semi pro kit lens, and one is a muscle building beast that I think is best in class among all brands. They all have their use and place. Lets be honest, no one makes a good compact entry level kit zoom for full frame. Step up, or just accept it for what it is.

Nice shots, antonn.

neuroanatomist said:

The RF 28-70/2 gives you the first two in one lens, and the RF 85/2 already exists.

Personally, I view my 28-70/2 as a set of portrait primes in one lens, and the 85/1.2L DS provides what the zoom doesn't for superior bokeh.

Click to expand...

The 85 f2 is a dog outside of macro, I have it, have had it since it first launched. Terrible street lens.

I hope they can make the 24mm f/1.8 or the 35mm f/1.8 in retro form. Also I probably wouldn't mind if they made the 24-50mm in retro form, but I'd be happier if they released a 20-50mm f/4 though that was previously mentioned to be a power zoom lens. A smaller lens like the 16mm or the 50mm would also fit very nicely on a body like that

One retro feature I would love to see is a built in flash.

With a lightweight portable camera such as the R8 successor, I dont want to carry an extra flash. Some snapshots e.g. into a sunset, or to get catchlights/fill without reposing simply require one, and I dont see why there can be no full frame camera with a built in flash when there can also be small pancake lenses like the 16, 28 and perhaps a new 22...I've always had Canon full frame since ~2010 but I miss my 10D flash, and was very jealous of Nikon d700 users .

The video oriented version would work well for those who don't want a flash under any circumstances e.g. because they never learned to dial in minus fec for fill...

Love it

Exploreshootshare said:

What could a R8ii offer to tempt me:
- above all: keep the weight! (well, actually, that´s not a "tempt" but absolutely essential)
- include a joystick
- protective sensor curtain
- 1/8000 first curtain shutter
- an improved battery

Click to expand...

You might be lucky with the weight, but as this is going to be an entry-level camera, Canon will swing the cripple hammer.

GMCPhotographics said:

If you are shooting with a 24mp, any lens over .65 on a Canon MFT chart will render as sharp. With a R5/R5II, anything over .8 will render sa sharp. With a R7, the lens needs to resolve over .9.

Click to expand...

Where did you get those figures from? I would like to understand them.

Exploreshootshare said:

EOS R had no IBIS or dual cards slots as well. The EVF is better sure.

I thought about keeping the EOS R as a back-up/ second cam when I got the EOS R5. But, the EOS R offers nothing the R5 doesn't have or do, the R8 does. The R8 has far superior AF compared to the EOS R, therefore I opted for the R8.

Click to expand...

Understand!
But since I have 2 R5 II, I only need a backup camera remaining in my suitcase or car should one of these fail or get lost/stolen. It wouldn't make sense for me to buy an R8, offering not much more than the R which I already own. A better AF, that's correct, but, as I known myself, if an R5 II failed, I would, as soon as possible, replace it with an R5 or R5 II. Yodobashi, BIC , WEX, the FNAC, AC Foto, B&H etc... would be happy to help!
One single card is for me too big a risk. Besides, the price difference between an R8 and a used R6 II isn't big, and the R6 has only advantages (still speaking of a pure backup camera!). I don't like small cameras, My R immediately got an accessory body bottom plate (Meike).
Size does matter, a better EVF + top LCD even more!
Tastes and needs are sooo different!

Old Man FL/FD said:

I very humbly suggest you’re not getting my main point regarding a conceptual ‘smart’ FD to RF lens adapter.

The 4 mechanical FD lens interfaces I discussed in my long post completely identify that particular lens to a FD lens compatible camera body, whether purely mechanical (F-1 (old), FTb, TLb) or ‘electronic’ (AE-1 and successors).

Of course, RF lens mount bodies do not have the corresponding mechanical FD lens interface on their side. I suggested adding both an encoder and positional solenoid to the smart FD to RF lens adapter to bridge the gap. This is basic electromechanical engineering.

The only thing in the way is the RF electrical body/lens contacts interface and their use specifications. Maybe yes, maybe no.

FD lens autofocus I won’t touch on.

Click to expand...

Well done. The last time I looked at the back of an FD lens was 1997. If you're feeling masochistic, you can explain the "New" FD mount, the bayonet mount that replaced the breech-lock mount.

Exploreshootshare said:

I think that wasn't what he had in mind. I believe he meant a "protective shutter curtain", the one that comes down in the EOS R/ R5/R6 when you turn the camera off. I really miss it as well, especially when traveling to the North Sea. It really eliminates switching a lens when being on a watt hike.

Click to expand...

That's not a protective curtain, that's the real shutter, and it's a lot more delicate than the sensor itself. I disable that functionality on every camera.

Canon Rumors said:

Canon won't put a full mechanical shutter into the 8 series.

Click to expand...

I think that wasn't what he had in mind. I believe he meant a "protective shutter curtain", the one that comes down in the EOS R/ R5/R6 when you turn the camera off. I really miss it as well, especially when traveling to the North Sea. It really eliminates switching a lens when being on a watt hike.


I can make to without a mechanical shutter, but I don't like having to switch to "silent mode" when shooting 1/8000 which happens occasionally when shooting with the 50mm F1.4 L VCM in daylight.

Del Paso said:

Maybe strange...for many.
But for me, the R8 is the least tempting camera in Canon's FF range.
No IBIS, no dual SD/CF, very low definition EVF and a size requiring a body prosthesis if you have normal sized hands (like the EOS R and RP).

Click to expand...

EOS R had no IBIS or dual cards slots as well. The EVF is better sure.

Del Paso said:

Sure, the sensor is excellent, the size appeals to many (me excluded), the price is very reasonable. As a backup, in case (very improbable!) my EOS R fails, ok!

Click to expand...

I thought about keeping the EOS R as a back-up/ second cam when I got the EOS R5. But, the EOS R offers nothing the R5 doesn't have or do, the R8 does. The R8 has far superior AF compared to the EOS R, therefore I opted for the R8.

For me, the R5 is the absolute perfect camera that checks all my boxes, but it leaves one thing to be desired: a small, compact and lightweight design. (I know the R5 I absolutely not designed to be like that). Enter, the R8. It is the greatest camera for hiking, very long walks and a ff camera when you have near to zero space to pack a camera. I don't use is that often, because the R5 mostly gets the call, but I really enjoy the weight when I use it.

What could a R8ii offer to tempt me:
- above all: keep the weight! (well, actually, that´s not a "tempt" but absolutely essential)
- include a joystick
- protective sensor curtain
- 1/8000 first curtain shutter
- an improved battery

I´m really not interested in a retro camera but if Canon manages to keep good ergonomics, add a joystick and improve the R8 with a few slews I might pick it up ALTHOUGH it is a retro camera and not BECAUSE it is a retro camera.

R3 + RF600/4 (first +TC1.4), Apus apus

Uneternal said:

Before I actually see Canon deviating from their classic form factors, I expect an R8 housing with just a silver top. Remember, they did that with a special edition of the RP, too.

Wouldn't be too bad, tho:

View attachment 228961

Click to expand...

I actually like that look

Del Paso said:

Maybe strange...for many.
But for me, the R8 is the least tempting camera in Canon's FF range.
No IBIS, no dual SD/CF, very low definition EVF and a size requiring a body prosthesis if you have normal sized hands (like the EOS R and RP).
Sure, the sensor is excellent, the size appeals to many (me excluded), the price is very reasonable. As a backup, in case (very improbable!) my EOS R fails, ok!

Click to expand...

I would not want it as my main camera. But IMO it’s great for travel, where the small size and weight are great benefits. Personally, when traveling I do mainly tripod shooting, and what handheld shooting I do is usually just pulling the camera from a shoulder bag, taking a few shots, then putting it back in the bag. That means ergonomics can take a back seat to portability.

I think we can look to the past to get an idea of what Canon might do with the R7 Mk II.

The Canon 7D Mark II features advanced, pro-level autofocus tracking with a dedicated 150,000-pixel RGB + IR metering sensor to aid focus, similar to the 1D X's Intelligent Tracking and Recognition (iTR) system. While not technically a separate "coprocessor" chip dedicated solely to focus calculations, the 7D II uses dual DIGIC 6 image processors to handle high-speed 10 fps shooting and advanced AF calculations simultaneously.

eero said:

But what were the products that had poor sales? For example, EVF-DC2 was only working with a couple of M series cameras that probably were not Canon's most-selling anyway. It might sell much better if the smaller V cameras end up selling well, especially if there will be more of them in the future. EVFs are crucial when shooting details in bright outdoor situations, in my opinion.

Click to expand...

I suspect a reason the EVF-DC2 might have sold poorly would be the $250 price tag, over 30% of the cost of the M6 that it launched alongside.

I got mine in a kit with the M6II, around the time the camera was discontinued in 2022. I paid only $30 more than the body-only price for a kit with the M15-45 and the EVF.