mimbu said:

You can call it loyalty, or inertia, or whatever you wish. It's all the same thing. You keep buying from the same company even if there are potentially better options for some of what you do. A lot of people don't even educate themselves on what those options are! Like the author of the article this thread comes from, posting about how Sigma is dead to him because they don't exist on RF. Maybe expand horizons a bit.

Click to expand...

Easier said than done. I went from Canon to Sony and then back to Canon. The grass is not always greener. A company might have a better option in one area and not in another. Personally I think that most camera systems are fantastic these days and it's usually not worth switching unless you are a professional and switching will make you money. Most people would benefit more from getting out and shooting rather than worrying about the latest tech.

the pixel math at least makes sense. Downscaling the 3x3 pixel array to a 2x2 array is a 2.25x reduction, which happens to multiply by 24 to make 54.

as for 6k120 - that is technically a very similar data rate to 8k60, so should be possible on the current CFexpress implementation.

David - Sydney said:

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.

Click to expand...

Canon allows a limited subset of available APS-C glass onto RF-S. Currently two Tamron lenses and a few more from Sigma. There are no signs that the same thing will happen for FF RF which is the type of lens being discussed here.

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

Click to expand...

Personally I hope that eventually the EU forces open mounts to increase competition and improve consumer selection. Besides prying open RF and Z, it would hopefully include requiring a level playing field and thus remove the limits that Sony places on E mount for 3rd party glass. I doubt it will be Sigma or Tamron who will force this, it will probably be a well-funded Chinese maker.

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.

Click to expand...

You can call it loyalty, or inertia, or whatever you wish. It's all the same thing. You keep buying from the same company even if there are potentially better options for some of what you do. A lot of people don't even educate themselves on what those options are! Like the author of the article this thread comes from, posting about how Sigma is dead to him because they don't exist on RF. Maybe expand horizons a bit.

I don't think R3ii is available in CPS booth, but dual native resolution that isn't cropping is a welcoming move.

Plos said:

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.

Click to expand...

I don't think either the 90D or the M6II qualify as "entry level". Both very capable cameras, as is the 77D.

I had a 400mm f4 DO II and loved it. Very nice lens. I eventually sold it to buy a 200-400mm f4. Which I also love.

I think a 600 or 800mm DO would be a really great lens for birding.

Here are some samples:

ashmadux said:

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).

Click to expand...

Yeah... I would put money on an R7 sensor with no IBIS, too.

davidespinosa said:

How many entry-level cameras does Canon need ?

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

Click to expand...

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.

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.

Click to expand...

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).

Freycinetia cumingiana.

davidespinosa said:

How many entry-level cameras does Canon need ?

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

Click to expand...

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.

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

Lovely shot with the bird in the stream.

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.

Click to expand...

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

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Canon Rumors said:

I hadn't thought of that! Nice. Edit incoming.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

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).

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.

Click to expand...

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 )

mimbu said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

...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...

Click to expand...

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.

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).

Click to expand...

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).

Click to expand...

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!

Click to expand...

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).

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.

Click to expand...

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