Richard CR said:

Amusingly, I used the 18-150mm for those same use cases as you mention. have you tried it? I would use it with DLO though, as it needs to clean up it's mess in the corners and whatnot.

Click to expand...

I would second that. The EF-M 18-150 is a great lens for APS-C, that and the M11-22 are my most-used M lenses. There is some copy variation, the ISO12233-type tests that Bryan first posted on TDP looked quite bad, I showed him mine as I was writing the lens review for TDP, and he ordered another copy to test that gave much better results. It made perfect sense to me that Canon rehoused the optics of that lens for the RF-S version, and if I had any inclination to buy an APS-C R-series camera then I would get that lens to go with it.

EricN said:

The title uses the word "distain." Common sense should tell you it's a business decision and if it were profitable enough for Canon to produce apsc L lenses they would make it a priority to do it. Unfortunately, because of science things [there are people here who can explain much better than myself], balancing the triangle of kg /financial / quality, Canon has settled on the business model that Full-Frame is the best format to pursue with APS-C secondary. One can note the hard fact Canon doesn't produce m43 nor medium format interchangeable lens systems. If there truly is distain form Canon, it must be for m34 or medium, but I can't remember anyone posting a complaint about those two formats.

Click to expand...

I agree.
That is also likely why OP labeled their statement a rant.

For what it is worth, I also agree with the oft repeated statements of Canon's business decisions.

I'm sure we all have desires for some type of gear that Canon has not produced. Just looking at the numerous posts of future camera features can be considered as rant premonitions once some do not come into fruition.
And several will be posted and read here. The forum universe is partially powered by this energy.

AlanF said:

While @foda and @ISv are getting their spectacular close-ups of rare colourful birds, what do I get. Well, a rare scarce winter visitor Red-necked Grebe in non-breeding plumage was reported a short drive away. At 80-100m from the shore, it needed to be pointed out to me and I got one shot in focus of the dull bird in grey light of less than 400 px width at 800mm with the R5ii. Oh well, some shots are just for the record and for the twitchers they just need only to give it a tick.

Click to expand...

Nice observation. Thanks for sharing, Alan.

foda said:

The Sword-billed Hummingbird inhabits the temperate zone of the Andes from Venezuela to Bolivia and has the longest bill in relation to its body size of any bird in the world. I photographed this individual while birding in the Giles Fuertesi ProAves Reserve, Colombia, November, 2025. The yellow coloration on the throat of this female is due to pollen accumulated as it fed on the flowers of Brugmansia, Datura, Passiflora and other flowers with long corollas.

R5MkII RF200-800mm

Click to expand...

This is the first time I've seen this bird. Thank you for sharing. Great shots, Sir!

Where are the RF-S lenses?? Sigma is making them. I own 7 of them and they work just fine on the R7 and R50V. (Two of the primes were converted/replaced by Sigma from their M equivalents. I'm still waiting for a Sigma 50-140 f/2.8 DC C.) I also own[ed] an M5 and 18-150 lenses in both M and RF mounts. The lenses were OK but the M5 always felt too small. The R50V is used exclusively on a tripod or gimbal.

As for conflict within Canon, wasn't the M series selling better than the RF series when it was abandoned? The decision to abandon it must have been painful and I think it had to do with no longer having to support the EF firmware code base and moving everything to the RF code base.

While @foda and @ISv are getting their spectacular close-ups of rare colourful birds, what do I get. Well, a rare scarce winter visitor Red-necked Grebe in non-breeding plumage was reported a short drive away. At 80-100m from the shore, it needed to be pointed out to me and I got one shot in focus of the dull bird in grey light of less than 400 px width at 800mm with the R5ii. Oh well, some shots are just for the record and for the twitchers they just need only to give it a tick.

m4ndr4ke said:

All Digic X powered cameras have deep learning algorithms loaded into them.
Only two cameras actually have an extra processing unit dedicated to AI, the R5 Mark II and the R1.

Click to expand...

My comment was based on the extra AI chip for the R5-2/R1.

m4ndr4ke said:

And how exactly is that a problem..?

Click to expand...

God I hate this single level quoting... I've no clue what you're referring to.

m4ndr4ke said:

I would expect nothing less than R8 to R6 performance level for $2000. What else would we be paying for, the sensor of a R6 Mark III with R100 features level? That’s worth $800 to $1000 at best.

Click to expand...

Who knows what combination of features Canon will decide belong in their retro camera.

m4ndr4ke said:

Because it performs like a lens from the 1990’s to early 2000’s.

Click to expand...

Do you meant to say that the RF 45mm doesn't need software to correct its image? Otherwise I'm perplexed about what's special about lenses from the 1990s-2000s.

blackcoffee17 said:

The R&D is already done, so removing it from a camera won't reduce costs. There is no extra chip used at all, except on the R5/R1. The rest of the cameras are just using normal Digic X. Actually designing and creating a new chip for a camera selling in limited numbers would increase cost, not reduce it.

Click to expand...

I was thinking of the R1/R5-2 (ball tracking, etc.)

Be aware that not all "DIGIC <foo>" are the same. The "X" is more symbolic of a platform or capability, it isn't a single chip design that gets re-used. Why do I say that? Because it is well established that Canon have used the same DIGIC name across multiple camera lineups that have very different chips when you do a tear down. What I'm saying is that DIGIC X might be a 8 core x 2GHz CPU in the R5-2 but in the R50, it might be 4x1.8 + 4x1.6. Don't take it for granted that all DIGIC X chips are the same. There are good technical reasons for why that wouldn't be the case.

Stig Nygaard said:

I know it is not related to the EOS-M system discussion, but an RF-S lens I wish more than anything else that Canon would make, is a modern mirrorless replacement of the "prosumer quality" RF-S 15-85mm. And yes, the 15mm is very important, but also give it some reach. If not 15-85mm then at least 15-70mm. I recently had an accident with my old 15-85mm and afterwards photos had an unsharp area in the right side of the lens. And while maybe not everyone would notice, it definitely annoyed me enough to stop using it. I tried using EF-S 17-55/2.8 and Sigma 17-40/1.8 instead, but while they definitely are good lenses for some purposes, they just wasn't anywhere near the 15-85mm as a general purpose zoom. So I found myself suddenly bringing my Powershot G5 X II on all my casual walks instead of my EOS R7. I have a lot of RF lenses, but my RF mount camera was suddenly very uninteresting without the 15-85mm as my bread and potatoes lens.

I was lucky, I recently found a new good used copy of the 15-85mm. The seller claims he only (bought and) used the lens on a 2-week vacation in 2011. And I have no reason not to believe him. But better still, would be an updated modern RF-mount version.

Click to expand...

there's been a 17-70 in patent applications for ages.

I'd love that lens as it would be a great range for both crop and full frame

but the 15-85 or equivalent, without a doubt.

Amusingly, I used the 18-150mm for those same use cases as you mention. have you tried it? I would use it with DLO though, as it needs to clean up it's mess in the corners and whatnot.

I know it is not related to the EOS-M system discussion, but an RF-S lens I wish more than anything else that Canon would make, is a modern mirrorless replacement of the "prosumer quality" RF-S 15-85mm. And yes, the 15mm is very important, but also give it some reach. If not 15-85mm then at least 15-70mm. I recently had an accident with my old 15-85mm and afterwards photos had an unsharp area in the right side of the lens. And while maybe not everyone would notice, it definitely annoyed me enough to stop using it. I tried using EF-S 17-55/2.8 and Sigma 17-40/1.8 instead, but while they definitely are good lenses for some purposes, they just wasn't anywhere near the 15-85mm as a general purpose zoom. So I found myself suddenly bringing my Powershot G5 X II on all my casual walks instead of my EOS R7. I have a lot of RF lenses, but my RF mount camera was suddenly very uninteresting without the 15-85mm as my bread and potatoes lens.

I was lucky, I recently found a new good used copy of the 15-85mm. The seller claims he only (bought and) used the lens on a 2-week vacation in 2011. And I have no reason not to believe him. But better still, would be an updated modern RF-mount version.

Zadak said:

How is Canon's battery/shots HALVED for using EVF. Am I high or something?

Click to expand...

Canon USA lists two values for each screen: EVF in 120Hz (smooth) is much more power hungry than the LCD (which tops at 60Hz). I don't know with which settings the Sony specs are measured.

Battery life EVF / LCD 630 / 750 270 / 510

Click to expand...

How is Canon's battery/shots HALVED for using EVF. Am I high or something?

This is an interesting bird that has been captured really well.

The Sword-billed Hummingbird inhabits the temperate zone of the Andes from Venezuela to Bolivia and has the longest bill in relation to its body size of any bird in the world. I photographed this individual while birding in the Giles Fuertesi ProAves Reserve, Colombia, November, 2025. The yellow coloration on the throat of this female is due to pollen accumulated as it fed on the flowers of Brugmansia, Datura, Passiflora and other flowers with long corollas.

R5MkII RF200-800mm

It'll be lovely if there's powered adapters to turn FD lenses into AF-S capable.

neuroanatomist said:

Your overall argument that the bottom of the market is eroding and cameras are moving upmarket is based on your assertion that MILC prices are 'exploding'. That data show that assertion to be false. It was true through 2022, but in 2023 the MILC average unit price fell from its 2022 peak down to ~$800, and it remained flat for 2024. For the first 10 months of 2025, it was ~$750 but factoring in the difference in relative currency adjusts that to...wait for it...$800.

View attachment 227065

"The next couple months will be telling." LOL, so now you're asserting that even though the average unit price has been flat for the past 34 months, the next two months will prove you right. Really?

But speaking of ignoring things, the topic of this thread is a Sony camera, and about Sony's camera sales you stated, "A large part of the Sony customer base isn't hobbyist like what you see here. Their base is comprized of content creators and Youtuber's using their cameras to try and make a living." You were asked by @P-visie to provide data to support that assertion (who, you may notice, provided a source for their own data), and you ignored that request (but proceeded to double down on your previous, failed attempt to support a point with data).

I will repeat my closing line from that previous thread:

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that the unit % was growing more than the value % in the last CIPA numbers as well, but I didn't really get into them - I will wait until the entire year is done to get all pretty with graphs - but this is a good one to hightlight next jan when we have the full year data.

I'll start filling in the historical data so we can get into this more. thanks for the info and idea.

CJaurelius said:

That is exactly the point. Why leave our features that imrove the camera if they don't const much, if anything to implement them?

Click to expand...

I forget where I heard it, but someone said that for Sony to do 7K / Open Gate would require codec modifications and that was a possible reason why Sony didn't want to do it.

Don't take that as gospel though, seems odd that Sony would have such a brittle codec.

EricN said:

If a cooling liquid was used can it not create additional problems related to the liquid's movement?

Click to expand...

Possible vibration, but probably manageable with careful hydrodynamics. It is not a likely path unless sensor power levels go considerably higher, but it is a possible means for aggressive cooling. For reference, an Nvidia RTX5090 chip is smaller than a FF sensor (760 sq mm) with 92 billion transistors and it sucks 600 watts plus. Cooling is either by heat pipe (evaporative cooling) or water cooling depending on the card design. Needless to say, there are big fans and radiators involved in transferring all that heat to the air, but key is the amount of heat that can be effectively removed from so small an area while keeping the chip under 100 deg. C.

Dragon said:

For liquid cooling, you wouldn't immerse the sensor in liquid, but rather attach a thin liquid chamber to the back side (i.e. the non-illuminated side) with very small and light tubes to carry the liquid to a heat sink (either the body of the camera of a small radiator). A micro pump would be required, but would only be needed when the sensor was getting too hot. Mechanically complicated, but it could actually be quite small and light. Water has the highest specific heat of handy liquids (ammonia is higher, but it is nasty and needs pressurization), so the most likely choice. The Canon patent is clearly aimed at mechanical simplicity, which makes sense, but liquid cooling is possible. High specific heat is important for maximum heat transfer with minimum mass of fluid.

Click to expand...

If a cooling liquid was used can it not create additional problems related to the liquid's movement?

Richard CR said:

That would make life considerably more difficult. From what I gather from Canon's patents on cooling, they want as low as possible the amount of friction or dampening on the sensor. that would make IBIS's life even more difficult.

then, how would you do it? liquid cool the backside of the sensor platform in something like non-conductive fluorinert? You couldn't put it at the front of the sensor, or refraction would cause so many issues.

I can't see how liquid cooling an IBIS sensor would work - if the camera didn't have IBIS though, sure, tons of things could be done.

Click to expand...

For liquid cooling, you wouldn't immerse the sensor in liquid, but rather attach a thin liquid chamber to the back side (i.e. the non-illuminated side) with very small and light tubes to carry the liquid to a heat sink (either the body of the camera of a small radiator). A micro pump would be required, but would only be needed when the sensor was getting too hot. Mechanically complicated, but it could actually be quite small and light. Water has the highest specific heat of handy liquids (ammonia is higher, but it is nasty and needs pressurization), so the most likely choice. The Canon patent is clearly aimed at mechanical simplicity, which makes sense, but liquid cooling is possible. High specific heat is important for maximum heat transfer with minimum mass of fluid.

becceric said:

The OP admitted to that rant, did not state a "Canon must or I switch" demand, and did in my mind seem to understand
that Canon made their choice. This would imply awareness of Canon's marketplace standing and strategies for that.

Therefore while anyone is fully entitled to respond with Canon knows better than individuals on how best to retain/increase their business position, that, as my current response, is a road travelled down so often that the trip has become tedious.

Regardless, I still read virtually all new posts since new info and forum members experiences/photos keep me mentally involved with all sorts of photography.

Click to expand...

The title uses the word "distain." Common sense should tell you it's a business decision and if it were profitable enough for Canon to produce apsc L lenses they would make it a priority to do it. Unfortunately, because of science things [there are people here who can explain much better than myself], balancing the triangle of kg /financial / quality, Canon has settled on the business model that Full-Frame is the best format to pursue with APS-C secondary. One can note the hard fact Canon doesn't produce m43 nor medium format interchangeable lens systems. If there truly is distain form Canon, it must be for m34 or medium, but I can't remember anyone posting a complaint about those two formats.

Planterz said:

I didn't mean APS-C supertelephotos. There aren't any 3rd party APS-C supertelephotos for any mount by any brand except the Tamron and Sigma 300mm superzooms, so I don't know what you might think I'd be talking about. I meant only that Canon isn't allowing 3rd party lenses that would encroach on their own lens sales. RF or RF-S. And defnitely no supertelephotos.

My fault for bad wording, but that's no reason to be a prick about it.

Click to expand...

"I meant only that Canon isn't allowing 3rd party lenses that would encroach on their own lens sales."

Read what you said reeeeeaaaal slow Clem. The answer is staring you straight in the face.

Why do you demand that Canon allow other companies get a slice of their potential profits without the investment? You don't own a business, do you? Never spent millions on R&D. So you don't understand at all how sophmorishly entitled your rant is. Me a prick? You expect Canon to put at risk their investment and the jobs of it's employees because YOU want a cheaper 3rd party alternative.

"But Sony and Nikon do it!" So tf what? They aren't numero uno, either.

CJaurelius said:

As usual you try to pick out one item and ignore the overall argument as it was more nuanced.

And I think the point I was making still stands today. Right now the latest CIPA report shows the value of all cameras shipped up on a price per unit year to date. The next couple months will be telling.

Click to expand...

Your overall argument that the bottom of the market is eroding and cameras are moving upmarket is based on your assertion that MILC prices are 'exploding'. The data show that assertion to be false. It was true through 2022, but in 2023 the MILC average unit price fell from its 2022 peak down to ~$800, and it remained flat for 2024. For the first 10 months of 2025, it was ~$750 but factoring in the difference in relative currency adjusts that to...wait for it...$800.



"The next couple months will be telling." LOL, so now you're asserting that even though the average unit price has been flat for the past 34 months, the next two months will prove you right. Really?

But speaking of ignoring things, the topic of this thread is a Sony camera, and about Sony's camera sales you stated, "A large part of the Sony customer base isn't hobbyist like what you see here. Their base is comprized of content creators and Youtuber's using their cameras to try and make a living." You were asked by @P-visie to provide data to support that assertion (who, you may notice, provided a source for their own data), and you ignored that request (but proceeded to double down on your previous, failed attempt to support a point with data).

I will repeat my closing line from that previous thread:

You keep playing, but you’re not very good at this.

Click to expand...

Edit: I made a mistake in the original plot. While the average MILC unit price was flat into 2025 based on correction for the yen-to-USD exchange rate, the plot itself is in yen, and while the price dropped to ¥120K in 2023 and stayed there for 2024, it has dropped to ¥110K for the first 10 months of this year. The revised plot reflects that (and further emphasizes how incorrect it would be to conclude that MILC prices are 'exploding').

neuroanatomist said:

As long as it stays inside. LHe is also used to cool the coils in an MRI (an NMR with a bigger bore), like this 7 T / 30 cm bore magnet I 'bought' (with corporate funds, obviously) for small-animal imaging.

Click to expand...

that's one heck of a failure. good thing it went boom at 4am when people weren't around.

DhlcadR6 said:

I'm curious if it'll be better to use oil/liquid cool. The fluid itself can dampen the sensor, and wouldn't the cooling be more effective as there's more surface to conduct the heat away from CMOS.

Click to expand...

That would make life considerably more difficult. From what I gather from Canon's patents on cooling, they want as low as possible the amount of friction or dampening on the sensor. that would make IBIS's life even more difficult.

then, how would you do it? liquid cool the backside of the sensor platform in something like non-conductive fluorinert? You couldn't put it at the front of the sensor, or refraction would cause so many issues.

I can't see how liquid cooling an IBIS sensor would work - if the camera didn't have IBIS though, sure, tons of things could be done.