Latest activity

EthenJ · Feb 18, 2026

davidespinosa said:
How many entry-level cameras does Canon need ?

Right now, there's the R100, R50, R10, and maybe the R50 V.

A thing to remember is that the R10 is almost 4 years old now.

That's old! It's longer than any of the M-series lasted without a refresh, or most DSLRs, or pretty much any of the R-series except for the Rp. Its looking increasingly questionable at its price point, hence it really is overdue for a refresh like the R7.

ashmadux · Feb 18, 2026

Exploreshootshare said:
It'll be interesting to see how the R10 evolves in terms of specs and pricing. The R7ii is supposedly going upmarket which might leave a gap to fill. Spec-wise I could imagine the R10ii not only getting the 32mp sensor from the R7, but also the IBIS unit. If IBIS is included I´d expect the price to go up, making pricing more difficult because the competition with these types of cameras.

This sounds...too far fetched for canon.

The crop sensors have hit a self imposed wall, which alone is half the battle for the IQ sensitive amongst us; The designs are utterly lackluster (in comparison to m50/m62 design direction), and ibis is a pipe dream; canon doesn't allow cameras under 1500.00 or so to have ibis - call it a luxury tax if you will. The r7 debuted at 1500.00, so that holds. R8 sold well so theirs no motivation for them to add ibis there.

As well, pigs have been flying for few years now, so anythings possible. But canon...nah. They just don't care enough (22f2 cough cough).

ISv · Feb 18, 2026

Freycinetia cumingiana.

Plos · Feb 18, 2026

davidespinosa said:
How many entry-level cameras does Canon need ?

Right now, there's the R100, R50, R10, and maybe the R50 V.

Right now they think it's 3. Sounds about right to me, too. One as cheap as possible, one sensible entry level and one slightly above that.

Nobody looks at the R50V for photography and the rumored R10 ii will be replacing the current R10, so stays at 3.

5 years ago they had basically 9! 90D, 77D, 850D, 250D, 2000D, 4000D! And don't forget M6 ii, M50 ii and M200.

neuroanatomist · Feb 18, 2026

Sporgon said:
I agree; what I’m suggesting is that going forward Canon could use the 3 series model number for their (even) higher mp body, and as such it would essentially be a R5S - a five series style body. I just can’t see how a version two update of the current R3 would fit into the Canon lineup without diluting the position of the R1.

I can't see an R3II of any sort, but if there's another 3-series it would have to be the R3II and would you really expect a MkII version of a gripped, low MP body to be a non-gripped, high MP body? I don't see how that makes any sense. On the other hand, Canon had the 5D series and came out with one of them that was high MP called the 5Ds. So why call a new, non-gripped high MP body an R3II instead of an R5s? I really just don't get it.

roby17269 · Feb 18, 2026

But those Leicas have a 60mp (ish) sensor... that's their native resolution. The other modes are either binning or cropping, not "native" as I would call it.
AFAIK, IMHO, etc.

Click · Feb 18, 2026

Lovely shot with the bird in the stream.

neuroanatomist · Feb 18, 2026

EthenJ said:
Whoa, what's Canon doing here? What exactly is this "enhanced Bayer array"?
It doesn't seem to be quad-Bayer like a smartphone. 54MP -> 24MP is a conspicuous 2.25X reduction, not 4X.
I can't wait for some more analysis on this.

The analysis is in. The person that posted that rumor that was passed along to CR was smokin' the ganja hard.

Sporgon · Feb 18, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
Canon knows how much profit they made from 5Ds/5DsR bodies, compared to the 1Ds series. If we see another 'high MP' body (i.e., significantly more than the R5 line) from Canon, I strongly suspect it will be in the R5-series body type and not the R3.

I agree; what I’m suggesting is that going forward Canon could use the 3 series model number for their (even) higher mp body, and as such it would essentially be a R5S - a five series style body. I just can’t see how a version two update of the current R3 would fit into the Canon lineup without diluting the position of the R1.

rukes · Feb 18, 2026

Canon Rumors said:
I hadn't thought of that! Nice. Edit incoming.

It does actually say FW, not FV. The left part of the W is squished against the middle, just like the “IV” in “III” so the same person who wrote that did that also. Probably put the tape on the cabinet then awkwardly wrote on them at an angle.

EOSR7MkII · Feb 18, 2026

Excited. I hope it will be released and available for purchase before/in early June. Wouldn't mind Tamron or especially Sigma releasing some fast APS-C lenses for the occasion. Personally hoping for an updated Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 APS-C lens, similar to how they refreshed the 18-35mm f/1.8 with the 17-40mm f/1.8 that is both much lighter and smaller.

ISv · Feb 18, 2026

Got cold last weekend and now reorganizing some old photos. This White-throated Dipper is from Bulgaria (2019). Later found more of them and got opportunity for a closer distance photos but the background is not that interesting. The golden spots in the water are algae (Spirogyra sp. I believe).

David - Sydney · Feb 18, 2026

scyrene said:
On the other hand, people who swap brands or use more than one (and I imagine both are a minority) can overestimate how much brand loyalty there is. Speaking for myself, I have no loyalty but I do have inertia. My gear does most of what I want and any gripes or dissatisfaction aren't worth the hassle and expense of starting afresh. I suspect a lot of people are likewise in the middle.

A rare group will be able to justify 2 systems and have the disposable income to support it. A mid priced telephoto + Z8 Nikon pairing is a good example for a particular use case.
The internet echo chamber of outrage at Canon's decisions on 3rd party glass is overblown (see what I did there... glass - blown

)

David - Sydney · Feb 18, 2026

mimbu said:
Brand loyalty has never made much sense to me, but it does seem to be an affliction that many people suffer from.

It would cost me a lot to switch and I don't think that the competition is that much ahead of Canon. I've mentioned the cost of underwater housings for instance.
I had an opportunity to switch when R mount was released but my collection of EF L lenses stopped me. I have now done what Canon wanted me to do which is to switch to RF lenses over the last 5 years. Kudos to Canon for their engineering/marketing.

mimbu said:
Over time Canon will release more RF glass, but the Canon tax will always be high and the selection will never be as good as it would be with 3rd party glass in the mix. Lenses like the Tamron 35-150/2-2.8. Amazing lens. Will Canon release something like that? Probably not. Or the Sigma 135/1.4 or 200/2. Both are good astro lenses that will never come to RF. New Sigma 105mm should come sometime soonish and since they already have a 135/1.4 I personally think they might do something crazy and bring out a 105/1.2. Of course that will never come to RF either. Then there are lenses like the Sigma 300-600/4 or the almost unbelievably small 500/5.6. Or the all in one 20-200 lens which is surprisingly good for a superzoom. None of that will come to RF either.

Sigma have a choice... they could release their current lenses in EF and use the older AF protocols but they haven't. A deliberate decision and different this time around. Sigma/Tamron don't want to annoy Canon and are happy to wait. There might be a point where that strategy changes and risk lawsuits but it isn't now.

mimbu said:
And China is only just getting started. This year we will start to see AF zoom lenses from them, and camera bodies (probably L mount) are not all that far behind.

It wasn't that long ago when I thought that China was a long way behind the Japanese suppliers. That gap is reducing and tempting.
For the money, I was happy to take a risk on AstrHori RF6/2.8 and no complaints. It is wider, faster and much cheaper than Canon's RF7-15.

If a good performance manual 14/1.4 or 14/1.8 on RF or EF mount was released then it would be a no-brainer for me. No different to my Samyang 14/2.8 decision in the past.

EthenJ · Feb 18, 2026

...The new machine supports switching between the two native resolutions of 54 million pixels and 24 million pixels, respectively, to achieve 40 shots per second And high-speed continuous shooting of 90 shots per second. It uses an enhanced Bayer array to pass through adjacent images in 24 million pixel mode! The combination of elements increases the sensitivity by about 80% compared to EOS R3...

Whoa, what's Canon doing here? What exactly is this "enhanced Bayer array"?

It doesn't seem to be quad-Bayer like a smartphone. 54MP -> 24MP is a conspicuous 2.25X reduction, not 4X.

They could be doing it in software... there's actually a lot of unpicked "low hanging fruit" in software downscaling, like the dpid algorithm that I absolutely adore for keeping sharpness: https://github.com/mergian/dpid

But they're wording it like it's done on the sensor level? Especially with the sensitivity claims?

I can't wait for some more analysis on this.

David - Sydney · Feb 18, 2026

Malm said:
Yipp, I don't like it too, but most people stick to their brand (and usually Canon knows best how the market works).

Canon have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders but not their customers. Keeping customers happy is wise though. As @scyrene says, inertia is a powerful motivator.

Malm said:
But I also see that the new(er) 3rd party lenses - from China - are relatively good for their low price, but they can only offer MF lenses for the RF mount or AF for the EF mount with adapter. If these 3rd party lenses would be available with AF for the RF mount, that would probably hurt Canons financial results a bit (and they still recover from the smartphone competition).

A manual 14/1.4 or 14/1.8 from a Chinese supplier with good performance would be an instant buy for me. Could be released on EF or RF mount and meet my needs.
I am yet to test my new AstrHori RF6/2.8 for milky way but I am happy with it for architecture.

Malm said:
Well, the lack of lenses for the RF mount is a severe issue!

Yes and no. Some customers complain loudly and some of that subset do something about it. It might shift the needle a little from a financial results perspective but isn't proving a massive issue for Canon (yet).

David - Sydney · Feb 18, 2026

mimbu said:
And Canon steadfastly refusing to allow 3rd party glass on to RF is why Canon is dead to me. It's too bad because if 3rd party glass was allowed, there is a reasonably high probability I would own an R5 II.

To be specific, RF allows 3rd party crop sensor lenses that have full access to Canon's AF/IBIS protocols.
I think that you are referring to FF lenses instead.

I believed that Canon should allow 3rd party FF lenses for niches that Canon wasn't interested in themselves. UWA prime was one that they weren't interested in for a very long time.
With the RF14/1.4 and RF7-15, they hit 2 of the missing niches in their lineup. Canon might not have cheap options but they have coverage in that sense.
There are still some missing niches though: TS-R, long/short and 5x macro, mid priced zoom telephotos, 300/4, completion of f2 trinity, etc

AUGS · Feb 18, 2026

Edit: Current R1 firmware is 1.2.0, so I think simply FV120 = Firmware version 1.2.0.
Labelling a specific FW version (especially new) would make sense in this environment.

EthenJ · Feb 18, 2026

John Hagood said:
ref the R7 II. If it doesn't include a stacked BSI sensor, I don't see it being a big seller to those who own the R7. BSI is old tech but it is the best tech for sensors. It is sharper imaging than the Front Side Illuminated (FSI) sensors of old. What do we want? We want the sharpest image we can acquire. Just an opinion. Stacked is for the processing speeds. BSI is for the image quality.

On top of what neuro said, one indirect sharpness benefit from stacking would be more practical electronic shutter use, which means less blur from shutter shock at long focal lengths.

The current R7 has electronic first curtain as a compromise, but it doesn't complely elimate shutter shock. EFC also disables some features, like IBIS auto-leveling, that work with ES.

neuroanatomist · Feb 18, 2026

John Hagood said:
BSI is old tech but it is the best tech for sensors. It is sharper imaging than the Front Side Illuminated (FSI) sensors of old. What do we want? We want the sharpest image we can acquire. Just an opinion. Stacked is for the processing speeds. BSI is for the image quality.

Sorry, but...huh? You could argue that BSI delivers better signal-to-noise (which is true, but while relevant for smartphones it's not really relevant at pixel sizes for ILCs). But better sharpness? Can you support that claim with evidence?

The main difference that BSI can make is with noise (as above, the magnitude of benefit is inversely proportional to pixel size), and the main way that plays out for image quality is dynamic range. In a very relevant comparison, check out the R5 (FSI) vs. the R5II (stacked/BSI). You're asking for a stacked/BSI sensor in the R7II, but in fact the R5 has slightly better dynamic range than the R5II. Having said that, the difference is pretty minor and not likely to have any real-world significance, so yes – the stacked/BSI sensor is better because it has a faster readout meaning less rolling shutter (and the ability to use flash with eShutter), and those are meaningful benefits. But they come from the stacking, not the BSI (even though the latter is required for the former).

John Hagood · Feb 18, 2026

ref the R7 II. If it doesn't include a stacked BSI sensor, I don't see it being a big seller to those who own the R7. BSI is old tech but it is the best tech for sensors. It is sharper imaging than the Front Side Illuminated (FSI) sensors of old. What do we want? We want the sharpest image we can acquire. Just an opinion. Stacked is for the processing speeds. BSI is for the image quality.

John Hagood · Feb 18, 2026

John Wilde said:
"I have no information about a follow-up to cameras like the EOS R10 and EOS R100. "

A radical idea is that Canon could eventually release an R100 II that includes touchscreen, like the M100/M200 had.

roby17269 · Feb 18, 2026

mimbu said:
I think the key is to buy the new body along with whatever your "next lens" purchase was going to be. Then slowly switch over. It takes time. There's nothing wrong with owning two systems, especially if you segment the use cases somewhat. I've owned 3 or 4 different systems at the same time in the past. It keeps life interesting.

Still, given how spoilt I am

changing systems is an expensive proposition. Just going through a migration Hasselblad H -> Hasselblad X and it is painful, financially

. I do love the new toys

Counting pure ILC's (i.e. not drones, action cameras or phone cameras) I have 2 systems: FF 35mm (R5) and crop MF (X2D II 100c).
That's me sorted... more systems also means more types of accessories (batteries, memory cards, flashes, etc.) and, honestly, I do not shoot enough to justify more than I have....

mimbu said:
There are no rumors of a 105/2, but Sigma pretty clearly wants to keep doing things to elevate themselves above the Chinese makers, and they definitely want to be the go-to for astro glass. The 105/1.4 was a big deal when it came out and was a big (literally and figuratively) halo lens for Sigma at the time. Since they already have a 135/1.4, if they're going to bring out a 105 I think it will be faster. With that in mind, I'd be shocked if they weren't at least considering (and probably prototyping) a 105/1.2.

I figured, but I was facetiously serious: with me being into portraiture / fashion and me loving more teles over wides, it means I'd be truly intrigued by a lens such as the 105/1.2... and given the other interesting Sigma lenses available for L mount and Sony... pity if I had to choose a mount from scratch right now it'd probably be Nikon

but no FF Sigma for them too

Del Paso · Feb 18, 2026

Richard CR said:
Craig parses out that stuff, I'm just a peon.

Ask for a substantial raise, you deserve it!

scyrene · Feb 18, 2026

mimbu said:
Brand loyalty has never made much sense to me, but it does seem to be an affliction that many people suffer from.

On the other hand, people who swap brands or use more than one (and I imagine both are a minority) can overestimate how much brand loyalty there is. Speaking for myself, I have no loyalty but I do have inertia. My gear does most of what I want and any gripes or dissatisfaction aren't worth the hassle and expense of starting afresh. I suspect a lot of people are likewise in the middle.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics