Retro R8 II would be a nice street photography camera.

But they need to level up the RF 50mm 1.8. It's not good enough for any camera body that costs over 1k. The 35mm 1.8 is great if you don't count the crude focus motor.

AlanF said:

There was still a cult of the EF 400 f/5.6 L when the EF 100-400 II came out. I suppose the built-in lens hood and kudos of owning a prime. made up for the 3.5m close focus, lack of IS and being less sharp even on Canon's own MTF charts.

Click to expand...

This built-in lens shade is something I miss in Canon lenses.
Canon used it extremely sparingly. I never understood why.
Instead of unlocking, turning around the hood before putting a longer lens back into the bag, you just pushed it back. Faster and much more practical.
But the EF 400 f/5,6 never tempted me, I far preferred the excellent EF 100-400 L II.

homebodyMacro2 said:

I will say, I'm a bit envious of Nikon's "slightly slower" supertelephoto lineup
400 f/4.5
600 f/6.3
800 f/6.3

The latter is shockingly affordable. I feel like Canon is really missing out on this part of the supertelephoto market - Canon's RF 800 f/5.6 L is listed for 18k right now vs. $6k for Nikon's f/6.3.

I hope Canon will release some primes like this in the near future.

Click to expand...

They are shockingly hand holdable as well, which is also a major part of their attraction.

AlanF said:

There was still a cult of the EF 400 f/5.6 L when the EF 100-400 II came out. I suppose the built-in lens hood and kudos of owning a prime. made up for the 3.5m close focus, lack of IS and being less sharp even on Canon's own MTF charts.

Click to expand...

The EF 400 f/5.6 is one lens that fell short of my hopes, mainly because of its lack of IS (and as someone above reminded me, the long MFD). That's what pushed me to get the 500 f/4 and aside from the cost, I never regretted it.

OT: For whatever it's worth, Canon released their quarterly financial results on April 23.

Well, if it is true that the R7 MII won't be released until 2027, it follows the slow release and constant release date changes of the 7D MII. This June will be 4 years since the R7 was released and Canon really needs to update their top of the line APS camera, desperately. And why update the R8 when it's only 3 years old and the R6 MII and R5 MII were just released? Whereas the "flagship APS" R7 is 4 years old and lacking many advanced features(can't even put a grip on it!). Many photographers can't wait to purchase the R7 MII.

P-visie said:

“On that topic, make focus peaking easier to see in all situations. There are still situations that I have hard time with it. That could be a me problem.”

You are not the only one having this problem. I have the same issue with the R5 Mk II and the R5.

Click to expand...

What I'd like to see is a dedicated button in the grip for getting magnified view at the focus point. It would have to be straight under a finger in normal hand position and have enough resistance it doesn't get pushed by accident. Just release it and you are back in normal view. The current is a bit difficult to find with thumb and having it in different location in different bodies doesn't help.

neuroanatomist said:

To each their own. To me, It’s not very helpful if I have to take my eye away from the viewfinder and look over the top of the camera to see that information. I’d much rather have it right in front of my eye when I want it.

Click to expand...

Exactly and that is just software. To each their own setting ;-)

Rafał said:

I would love to see this retro/nostalgia go away and have a futuristic design for once.

Click to expand...

Maybe the Sigma BF is for you?

neuroanatomist said:

Yes, I have an HF G60. I bought it after the G70 launched, and picked the older version for the larger sensor. I suspect Canon stopped using that in the Vixia line because it was 'too close' to the XA professional cameras. To me, it seems like the G60 is most of an XA camcorder except the XLR handle. The other reason is that I was replacing a Vixia HF M41 for which I had the mini-hotshoe shotgun mic, and for some reason Canon dropped the mini-hotshoe from the G70 (even though all the G-series camcorders before had it).

The rocker on the camcorder is not ideal, I agree. I was unaware of the Manfrotto LANC controller, thanks much for the mention – I have the MVR901EPLA in my cart for my next order. I already use a Manfrotto 608 Nitrotech fluid head, so it's perfect.


The C50 and C80 have a LANC input. The R50 V has a 2.5mm jack but it's for the E3 remote trigger and I doubt it would work with a LANC controller.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I've come to the same conclusion. The postings by a certain Atticuslake were informative. I don't understand why Canon doesn't mention it in their manuals. Sometimes Canon (and others) are just too coy for their own good. There are lots of LANC controllers. I found another one by Libec that I bought then forgot about. It's much cheaper and works well but is less versatile.

GMCPhotographics said:

If canon puts the R6III's sensor into an R8II....they will need to re-look at the power source / battery. If they are redesigning the casing / body then it makes sense to jump to a LP-E6NH.
It's the screen and the EVF that consume to power, not the IBIS. Sure IBIS uses a bit more but it's insignificant compared to the rear screen and EVF.

Click to expand...

Indeed. It will be a shame if they have to increase the size and weight of the R8ii to accommodate a bigger battery and IBIS. The current R8's form factor is a major reason why I reach for it much more often than another FF camera body for hiking.

I would love to see this retro/nostalgia go away and have a futuristic design for once.

Swamp Sparrow and GBH

Andreasb said:

Sorry but I see this as a distraction and a bit of a waste of time, but that's just me, I guess, whatever turns your fancy.

Click to expand...

Years ago, a Canon exec said they had a "full-lineup strategy", meaning something for everyone. It makes sense for them to do something to address the retro camera niche.

I will say, I'm a bit envious of Nikon's "slightly slower" supertelephoto lineup
400 f/4.5
600 f/6.3
800 f/6.3

The latter is shockingly affordable. I feel like Canon is really missing out on this part of the supertelephoto market - Canon's RF 800 f/5.6 L is listed for 18k right now vs. $6k for Nikon's f/6.3.

I hope Canon will release some primes like this in the near future.

SD+microsd? Dual microsd for what I care, I have already been using microsd cards with 5Dm4! Who uses fullsize sd anyway?? Now that you mentioned it, I forgot to rant about SD card slot for years now. It just needs extra adapter for microsd, adding an extra point of failure. Of course we use microsd, as we need microsd everywhere, drones, drone remotes, action cams, and how knows what. You want your cards to be compatible with all your equipment.

28/2.8 retro version? I'm in.

45/1.2 and 35/1.8 retro versions? Meh...I'd rather see new lenses developed, 28/1.8 and the previously rumored 55/1.8. 100/2.

HMC11 said:

If the R8ii sticks with the current form factor and hence a LP-E17 battery, I would struggle to see how they can implement IBIS. As it is, the R8 already has a relatively low CIPA rating of 150-220 (standard to power-saving modes using EVF). Adding IBIS would reduce that further, let alone having overheating occuring (much) earlier. These might make the camera potentially rather frustrating to use.

Click to expand...

The R6III (which also sports this 33.5mp sensor) is far worse with it's power consumption than the previous R6ii. The R6II's sensor was a very frugal sensor power wise and even that sensor in the R8 still munches through the LP-E17 battery at an alarming rate. From the reports that I've heared from an active wedding photographer who's just traded one of their older R5's for a R6III (and uses a R6II), the R6III's battery usage is a lot worse than the R6II and is in the R5's zone.
For me, if im shooting a R5, I take 2 batteries and spare...I'll usually use about 1 battery completely and a second battery about half, maybe three quarters.
My R6II, I can pretty much shoot the whole gig on one battery and still have some jiuce spare. but I take a spare just in case. With my R8, I would take 4 batteries and use most of them. Thankfully they are small, light and cheap.
If canon puts the R6III's sensor into an R8II....they will need to re-look at the power source / battery. If they are redesigning the casing / body then it makes sense to jump to a LP-E6NH.
It's the screen and the EVF that consume to power, not the IBIS. Sure IBIS uses a bit more but it's insignificant compared to the rear screen and EVF.

I just want an update to the EOS M6 mkii when it comes to compact size and features. To make it retro, give it a waist-level viewfinder screen that can convert into a viewfinder with a prism. In waist-level mode it’s just the image on the screen. With the viewfinder installed it displays all your information as well. I want a retro tool for street photography.

Brown said:

Would a single SD card even be fast enough for a decent pre-capture buffer?

Click to expand...

Has nothing to do with the number of SD cards. The R8 already has pre-capture. I just want it to save the result in normal CR3 files as opposed to the proprietary package that it uses now.

Brown said:

Would a single SD card even be fast enough for a decent pre-capture buffer?

Click to expand...

Why would two slots make it faster? In any case, the buffer size is what matters more. With current memory market conditions, I would not count on big buffers.

Fanitullen said:

Keep the battery, one card-slot and no ibis. Just update the sensor and processor and add the new pre-capture.

Click to expand...

Would a single SD card even be fast enough for a decent pre-capture buffer?

I just played with the Canon R1 for the first time. What a viewfinder, it's like using an a good OVF in daylight. Manual focus was such a breeze. Could we have one of those on the retro camera. With some more MF Voigtländer optics

mb66energy said:

Distance scale etc are the reason I like EF lenses! Keeps the viewfinder a little bit cleaner.

Click to expand...

To each their own. To me, It’s not very helpful if I have to take my eye away from the viewfinder and look over the top of the camera to see that information. I’d much rather have it right in front of my eye when I want it.

AlanF said:

Yes if you want 300mm or so as a maximum but not if you want to go to to 420mm or 600mm with TCs.

Click to expand...

True. You could get out to 400 mm f5.6 with the 70-200 f2.8, but beyond that focal length you need a longer lens. Maybe this is why Canon is considering the 500 mm f5.6. Personally a RF 400 mm f4 DO with a built-in TC would be more flexible, but you can't get everything.

I hope they keep everything on the outside of the R8 II as it is now, except I would want a tilt screen instead of the flip out. And keep the low weight (or make it even lighter). I just love the D-pad. It's one of the best features on this camera, IMO.
BTW. I hate joysticks.

Keep the battery, one card-slot and no ibis. Just update the sensor and processor and add the new pre-capture.