My bet:
→ R7 with sensor close to global shutter readout / 32 Mpix (enough for APS-C IMO) / S&F mode would be a cool tool - and please keep the auto level feature which is insanely helpful for me.
→ R8 V as a refresh of the R8
→ 3rd camera? ???

R7 with similar ergonomics would be interesting as 2nd body to my R7. R8 V is interesting but the small battery and the missing IBIS makes it much less usable.
Just trying to learn/understand my LAOWA 180mm Macro (EF): IBIS of the R7 helped me to get sharp shots at 1/4 s which is insane. Auto level helps a lot to concentrate on breathing etc to get the right moment for shutter release.

AlanF said:

40Mpx is only 11% more linear resolution than 32.5Mpx, and each 40Mpx pixel is only 10% narrower so it's not going to make much difference in the DLA, the demands on lens resolution etc. It will make no difference to the S/N and high iso when you look at the whole image, because they are independent of pixel size. And if you pixel peep and look at the engineering S/N, each pixel will have only 10% less S/N, ie, less than 1/6th stop.

Click to expand...

I agree, it is not much of a linear resolution increase, and I didn't consider that this also means that the noise ratio is only going to be affected by a small amount. However, 40MP enables one wonderful thing: 8k video! I didn't want to get my hopes up about open gate even when the consensus was still on an unchanged 32.5MP resolution, but 8k (hopefully @60p) will allow cropping into any video footage and still get ≥4k resolution. I may not need or even use 8k video at all for now, but future me, 2-3 years down the line, may be very appreciative of the fact that this new APS-C flagship will be capable of doing so. And I would imagine that many wildlife videographers will make heavy use of this as well, as long as lighting conditions permit.

Now this is pure speculation from my side, but it was a thought that I had recently, and I think it could be worth mentioning: Could the R7 Mark II become the first camera that natively supports CF Express Type B 4.0 speeds and cards?

Cool. :-|
Will it have vastly improved AF over my hugely disappointing R7? If so, I'll buy it, otherwise I'll pick up a refurbed R6ii, sell my R7 and be done with buying new bodies for now.

EOSR7MkII said:

Did you personally ever have any experiences with taking pictures with the sun visible in the frame without ND filters, with or without damaging your sensor?

Click to expand...

No, I have no experience. It's quite possible you will not get a single piece of data requested here for your research, and most unlikely you well get enough data to analyse quantitatively.

AlanF said:

Sun damage will vary as the strength of the sunlight and other variables that vary from user to user, including the camera in particular. You would have to standardise conditions otherwise a community project would give random data and you would need a very large number of users to provide data to fit to an equation. So, the best way to satisfy your curiosity would be to do a time course on your R7 under controlled conditions. Then do it on an R5ii or R1 to see the effects of stacking and FSI vs BSI for example.

Click to expand...

You are absolutely right, I fully agree that there are many, many variables to consider. However, I think that for the purpose of finding some rough guide rails for those reading this thread in the future, the amount of variables should be kept as simple as possible. Think about how many beginner photographers struggle with just the three variables of the exposure triangle, so if this is to become a "rule of thumb", it must be as simple as possible, to not mentally overload photographers (imagine them pulling out their phone calculators to check for how long they can point their camera at the sun).

You mentioned different cameras, and while I can agree that different sensors may have different temperature limits, however based on some physical similarities (similar quantum efficiency) and roughly comparable features such as sensor thickness and materials, I would assume that this at most introduces a difference of a factor of 2. Unfortunately, I do not have the type of money to do a controlled "experiment" (aka destroying sensors) with my R7, and an R5 Mark II or R1 etc. to compare the effects of non-stacking to stacking and FSI vs. BSI . If a large number of people responded here, we would be able to see such trends emerging, and could draw some conclusions, although as mentioned, I expect the effect to be limited to maybe a factor of 2. But I think that trying to incorporate too many factors may also be the reason why such a rule of thumb has not been created yet, because it would simply require too large of a sample size to be conclusive and quantitatively evaluate the contribution and scaling relation of each variable. Moreover, many people may also feel uneasy sharing the exact time and date of the picture, as well as the location (in order to calculate the exact solar irradiance and obtain ground-level light intensity based on historical weather data etc.). So instead, I intend to keep it simple and focus on the main ones - as mentioned, f-number and exposure time.

However, after some consideration, within the initial post, I did add "time of day and weather conditions" to the list of values to be commented by those of you who would like to contribute to this little project, since this can in fact play a large role, and I can then roughly correct for that when compiling the data into the formula once some experience reports of you all came in.

I'd like to re-emphasize, this by no means is meant to be exact science. I expect uncertainties at the order of 2-5x, or even larger. However, it would already be helpful to know, if I have a certain aperture value, can I point my camera at the midday sun for only less than 1-2 seconds, or 10-20 seconds, or 100-200 seconds? This is the type of accuracy (at the level of order of magnitude) I am hoping to achieve with this data collection and the rule of thumb that I am hoping to turn it into.

Did you personally ever have any experiences with taking pictures with the sun visible in the frame without ND filters, with or without damaging your sensor?

EricN said:

Could you share photos of the patches of white?

Click to expand...

Sure! I attached the image. Taken with the lens cover mounted (i.e., complete darkness) and at ISO 100 (30 second long exposure). Does that image help decide whether it is sun damage or caused by something else?

And while I'm at it, I gotta ask... have you by chance taken any photos in the past that contain the sun in the frame and could contribute any values (exposure, f-number, weather & time of day)?

SilverBox said:

I really liked the x70 as a pocketable companion to my x100f but it was slooooooow. Would be nice to get another small format camera from Fuji that had just a few of the contemporary features of the x100 line

Click to expand...

I have still X70 as back up camera. I prefer 28 mm equivalent lens for back up. Lack of EVF is a big minus and video isn’t today’s standard, but otherwise it’s still a nice camera.

riker said:

You think the 85/1.2 is so much better than the 85/1.4 VCM? I'd choose the later anytime.

I remember when EF 85/1.4 came out and absolutely destroyed the 85/1.2 II (have to admit it was considerably older).
I now see many ppl actually changing from 50/1.2 to 50/1.4.
I'm guessing same happening with 85/1.2 vs 1.4.

As long as you have a brilliant L lens with great IQ+AF, nobody cares for that tiny extra aperture and nobody wants the extra price and weight.
OK, not nobody, just very very few.

Click to expand...

I care, but I'm a bokewhore

Exploreshootshare said:

I meant Rii as a successor to the original EOS R. I know, it is never ever gonna happen...oh wait, maybe in 2068 as a retro version to celebrate 50 years RF mount. But that camera would be my personal dream concerning size and weight (or maybe even a bit lighter).

Click to expand...

Sorry, I was reading too fast
Yeah let's wait for 2068. But I wonder if there will be any cameras

40 MP crop translates to 102 MP FF, which is coincidentally the right number for 12k video. I smell an R5s (possibly packaged as an R3 II for power reasons) in the offing.

Richard CR said:

If Canon is doing their own stacked sensors even just the top photodiode substrate, then they should be able to do BSI without stacking. the cost difference assuming they have good yield rates - which they should by now, wouldn't be that significant.

Click to expand...

You missed my point. Stacked and BSI sensors are both more an advanced packaging issue than a fab issue. Just because Canon can fab a BSI sensor does not mean they have the packaging capacity to make lots of them. Challenges in advanced packaging are not limited to Canon https://wccftech.com/tsmcs-advanced...-the-firm-is-now-looking-to-outsource-orders/ and https://wccftech.com/nvidia-alone-has-tsmc-advanced-packaging-lines-booked-for-several-years-ahead/ The entire semiconductor industry is scrambling to increase capacity (at least in part due to AI) and the bottleneck is forecasted to last for some time (measured in years, not months).

EOSR7MkII said:

My username may give it away, but I am extremely excited about this piece of news (or rather, rumors). I had hoped for a BSI and stacked sensor, the latter of which was pretty much a given in order to deliver 40FPS at full 14 bits of depth.

But didn't dare dreaming about 40MP, which, in my eyes, Canon would only do if they could actually improve SNR and high ISO performance. Seems like they may have achieved just that! This will be an amazing powerhouse. Can't wait to see it announced, hopefully with some great APS-C lenses to follow by Canon, Sigma and Tamron!

Click to expand...

40Mpx is only 11% more linear resolution than 32.5Mpx, and each 40Mpx pixel is only 10% narrower so it's not going to make much difference in the DLA, the demands on lens resolution etc. It will make no difference to the S/N and high iso when you look at the whole image, because they are independent of pixel size. And if you pixel peep and look at the engineering S/N, each pixel will have only 10% less S/N, ie, less than 1/6th stop.

gdanmitchell said:

The good news is — I guess — is that if we extrapolate the photosite density of the APS-C sensor… Canon might eventually catch up with the 60MP FF sensors that Sony has had for a few years… as Sony is rumored to go beyond that.

Swell.

Click to expand...

Extrapolating a 40Mpx sensor to FF gives 102Mpx. The current 32.5Mpx extrapolates to 83Mpx which is already higher than the Sony 60Mpx sensor. In fact, the ancient EOS 90D and the M equivalent had 32.5Mpx APS-C years ago.

40mp stacked sensor? I need to change my pants!

If this is true, it could be the answer to my dreams for an airshow/planespotting/wildlife camera (with the 100-500mm) without having to spend $10K on an A1 II setup. Of course, it'd have to have a healthy buffer and hopefully a CFe card slot to eat all those pixels in a high FPS burst.

I hope the 100-500mm can resolve that insane pixel density well enough.

I hope it is 40mp just to see another wave of upset 7D DSLR fans. I want to see a post in 2030 of someon explaining why they're still waiting to switch over to mirrorless.

riker said:

You think the 85/1.2 is so much better than the 85/1.4 VCM? I'd choose the later anytime.

I remember when EF 85/1.4 came out and absolutely destroyed the 85/1.2 II (have to admit it was considerably older).
I now see many ppl actually changing from 50/1.2 to 50/1.4.
I'm guessing same happening with 85/1.2 vs 1.4.

As long as you have a brilliant L lens with great IQ+AF, nobody cares for that tiny extra aperture and nobody wants the extra price and weight.
OK, not nobody, just very very few.

Click to expand...

I don't know a single photographer who shoots portraits, nudes or weddings who has sold a 1.2 and bought a 1.4. It's logical that someone would prefer the 1.4 because of the price, or because the 1.2 is not the ideal weight for roaming the streets. Or because they shoot videos. I have a Sigma EF 35 1.4 with an adapter and a Canon RF 35 1.8 (good for travel + macro) and I'm waiting for the 1.2.

My username may give it away, but I am extremely excited about this piece of news (or rather, rumors). I had hoped for a BSI and stacked sensor, the latter of which was pretty much a given in order to deliver 40FPS at full 14 bits of depth.

But didn't dare dreaming about 40MP, which, in my eyes, Canon would only do if they could actually improve SNR and high ISO performance. Seems like they may have achieved just that! This will be an amazing powerhouse. Can't wait to see it announced, hopefully with some great APS-C lenses to follow by Canon, Sigma and Tamron!

Canon Rumors said:

In the first half of 2026, we are going to see new APS-C cameras announced. One of them will be the EOS R7 Mark II. It's possible that we will see them before the end of February for the CP+ show in Japan. I expect a bigger splash from Canon this year than the PowerShot […]

See full article...

Click to expand...

The good news is — I guess — is that if we extrapolate the photosite density of the APS-C sensor… Canon might eventually catch up with the 60MP FF sensors that Sony has had for a few years… as Sony is rumored to go beyond that.

Swell.

Interesting strategy, making bodies smaller and lenses heavier. Personally not a fan of front heavy setups even though I'd love a 35mm 1.2.

Sigma's 35mm 1.2 II is 750g which is sensible. Can't not compare.

swingman said:

Would have been better with 32.5 stacked sensor.

Click to expand...

"The number “40” would be good for the marketing department."

I agree. It's harder to convince a casual observer that a sensor is "new improved" if the megapixels stays the same.

ISv said:

This should be old photo, they don't winter in Germany and the bird is in breeding plumage (they breed in Germany).

Click to expand...

Indeed, these pictures are from the same day in May:
R5 + 200-800 + 1.4 TC
pied avocet chicks

Very nice shots. I really like the first one. The lighting is beautiful, and you can see the texture of the clouds in the sky in the background.

mimbu said:

The only BSI sensors Canon has used in R cameras thus far have been stacked ones. Will Canon finally move to non-stacked BSI, and do it first in the R7 II rather than the R6 III? Maybe? It's more likely than a fully stacked sensor, but I personally wouldn't bet on it happening. For whatever reason, Canon seems perfectly happy sticking to FSI sensors.

Click to expand...

If they bump it to 40 MP and decide the speed of a stacked sensor is not needed, then I can see them using BSI. The 1-4-type sensor in the PowerShot V1 (made by Canon, AFAIK) is BSI, and has the same pixel size as the current (but older) R7. Benefits of BSI are most evident with pixels <2 µm, but there does appear to be some modest benefit with the 3.2 µm pixels of the V1 sensor, so there should be more with the ~3 µm pixels in a 40 MP APS-C sensor.

R5m2+ 200-800 + 1.4 TC
@ 1/4000s, f/13, iso 1600

riker said:

You think the 85/1.2 is so much better than the 85/1.4 VCM? I'd choose the later anytime.

I remember when EF 85/1.4 came out and absolutely destroyed the 85/1.2 II (have to admit it was considerably older).
I now see many ppl actually changing from 50/1.2 to 50/1.4.
I'm guessing same happening with 85/1.2 vs 1.4.

As long as you have a brilliant L lens with great IQ+AF, nobody cares for that tiny extra aperture and nobody wants the extra price and weight.
OK, not nobody, just very very few.

Click to expand...

How "many people" did you actually see replacing their RF 1,2/50 with a 1,4/50?
Sorry, but I cannot blindly trust such generalisations.
And, according to your statement, Sigma, Nikon, Viltrox , Voigtländer etc... would have fully misunderstood the demand for a 1,2/35mm.
It's ok if you don't want/need f/1,2, but saying that nobody (or just "very very few") wants such a lens is a subjective opinion, and not at all a fact!

Canon Rumors said:

I think if Canon was going to do this, we're going to see Canon's first BSI and/or stacked APS-C image sensor.

Click to expand...

It's still very expensive to produce stacked sensors due to the fact that they have to be stacked. That involves fabbing multiple sensor layers and then (literally) bonding them together in a very precise process. This is why it was never going to happen for the R6 III to get the R3 sensor, and it's why it does not make sense for the R7 to get a fully stacked sensor.

The only BSI sensors Canon has used in R cameras thus far have been stacked ones. Will Canon finally move to non-stacked BSI, and do it first in the R7 II rather than the R6 III? Maybe? It's more likely than a fully stacked sensor, but I personally wouldn't bet on it happening. For whatever reason, Canon seems perfectly happy sticking to FSI sensors.