ohm said:

Is it really the same, though? China has gotten to this point through all of our factories and companies moving entire work forces to China, giving them complete access and often financing to all the machines and buildings and tech necessary to make things we used to make. Japan's optical industry didn't start like that. China got everything for free, and it is remarkable that it has taken them this long to design and create lenses of their own despite the traitorous actions of our industries.

Click to expand...

I think you underestimate the intelligence and learning ability of the Chinese.
That they took shortcuts doesn't change that.
Besides, German industry copied the English industry in the past, the Japanese learned as well by analysing achievements by other nations etc...
Most first Japanese cameras looked strangely like Contax and Leica models.
And it's no secret that the US Intelligence is known for spying on EU and Asian industry.
It's a constant and continuing process.

The spec for the new R6iii is a bit meh...and underwhelming. I think like everybody esle, I was expecting Canon to push Stacked sensors across the upper range of cameras.
The EVF resolution is a really good thing. However, the increase in sensor resolution really closes the gap between the R5ii and the R6ii. In a side by side comparision between the R5ii files and the R6iii files there will be hardly any noticable real world difference in captured detail. Effectively the R6iii becomes a R5 mki....ie an R5 without a stacked sensor.
I'm also wondering if Canon's game plan here is to sell non R5 users two cameras and not one. The R5ii is effectively Canon's "do it all exceptionally well" camera. Where as the R6iii isn't so sports / high fps orientated, so if you buy this camera then you'll probably need a R7ii as well.
It also makes users of the R5ii think more carefully what camera they choose for their 2nd camera. From Canon's perpective, its a R6iii or a R7ii. However as consumers, we have new/old stock and lightly used S/H R5 mki and R6ii to consider too.

Any news if the existing battery grip will work on the R6-3? or if there is a New Flippy screen?

kypr.eos said:

€599 for the 45mm f/1.2? I think you forgot to type the 1 in front of the 599…

Click to expand...

I think you'll find that this is Canons new "nifty 50". It'll be the lens we see on all the future product pictures of cameras going forwards. Canon will make a ton of these and sell them like sweeties. Finally! A standard prime to be proud of.

You seem to have the misconception that lower resolution means less noise

Canon Rumors said:

The RF 45mm f/1.2 STM may actually launch at €499. At least the contradiction is in the right direction.

Click to expand...

What? That’s less than the 35mm!

Okay, I hate to say this, but I think it’s time to start lowering expectations…

I know we’ve had an early price leak, but originally I expected this kind of lens to be priced at something like 799€ to 1099€, which then we’d be able to purchase at 25 to 35% less in a good day, but this is completely different.

frankchn said:

I think this should be considered a successor to the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM. It is about the same price point (after inflation) and a third of a stop faster and a bit wider in terms of field of view. It won't have any of the L lens build or weather sealing or USM, but that's fine given the price point.

Click to expand...

Sounds like you’re right.
Not really wider though, if the 48.5mm patent is confirmed, but it's understandable they'll avoid having two lenses named "RF 50mm f/1.2" in the market.

David - Sydney said:

My rf70-200/2.8 and rf100-500 would challenge that assertion. Even my rf14-35/4 extends out a little but i prefer it to my ef16-35/4

Click to expand...

Those are not external focus lenses. Only the zoom is external. They also don't extend and retract when powering the camera on and off.

ZiemJank said:

If I read these rumors correctly, then R63 would be a downgrade from R62 for me.

• More rolling shutter.
• Lower max ISO.
• Need to buy CF card.
• Not even the accelerator.
• Slower processing of larger files in post.

Why to spend €3000 for that?

I hope for some surprise. Maybe at least faster readout.

Click to expand...

I am interested to know where the rolling shutter information come from. Can you enlighten? Also, wouldn't faster readout means less rolling shutter?

Philnick said:

Anyone else notice the radio silence on the R7/II? I think Canon is at war internally between (I) those who see the R7 as an "any lens telextender" and want it to have a full-size R5 body and (II) those who have used the R7 as their main camera since it came out and just want a BSI/Stacked sensor with the controls left where they are. Two different audiences - and while group I may have more money to spend on each camera, group II represents more users - including me.

Click to expand...

You have a nice theory, but very unlikely that it is correct. The design of a camera is a long process, decisions about size, layout and buttons of the R7 Mk II have been taken and implemented quite some time ago. These are not discussions/ decisions that take place in the last months before the release of a new camera.

The posts on DPReview and Petapixel have details about the process of designing an new camera:
DPReview: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5...it-wants-to-be-the-porsche-911-of-photography
Petapixel: https://petapixel.com/2025/10/16/the-people-who-make-your-photography-dreams-a-reality/

davidespinosa said:

Internal zoom is available for the 70-200 in both black and white:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1858405-REG/canon_6593c002_rf_70_200mm_f_2_8_l.html

Click to expand...

"Indeed, the RF lenses are expensive. I still use my 100-400 II, the 70-200 II f/4, the TS-E 24 II, and the 16-35 f/4. "

Of course it is about f/4 and not f/2.8

If I read these rumors correctly, then R63 would be a downgrade from R62 for me.

• More rolling shutter.
• Lower max ISO.
• Need to buy CF card.
• Not even the accelerator.
• Slower processing of larger files in post.

Why to spend €3000 for that?

I hope for some surprise. Maybe at least faster readout.

I love my EF 50mm f/1.4 for the unique "look" and this RF 45mm f/1.2 should be a really fun lens too

Enough with the megapixel madness.








When did photography become a megapixel race instead of a quest for beauty, light, and emotion?





Today we see cameras that cost $3,000–$4,000… yet the moment you raise the ISO, the image looks like it came from a $500 camera.


Noise everywhere. Plastic skin tones. Oversharpened details that kill the soul of the photo.





Meanwhile, look at cameras like the Canon R3 or the Sony FX3 — “only” 12 or 24 megapixels, but absolute monsters in low light.


Clean shadows, incredible dynamic range, natural color, and pure image texture that feels cinematic even straight out of camera.


They prove what really matters: less noise, not more pixels.





And now, rumors say the Canon R6 Mark III might arrive next year.


If Canon keeps the R3-style sensor — that would make sense. That’s evolution.


But if they jump on the “more megapixels” hype again… well, they can keep it.


Because I don’t need 45MP of noise — I need 24MP of perfection.





Photography is not about counting pixels. It’s about capturing feelings.


And feelings don’t need 60 megapixels to shine.

David - Sydney said:

My rf70-200/2.8 and rf100-500 would challenge that assertion. Even my rf14-35/4 extends out a little but i prefer it to my ef16-35/4

Click to expand...

Those are external zoom, not external focus. The length of the lens doesn't change when you move the focus point from MFD to infinity.

Michael Clark said:

I'm glad your thumb is long enough to reach it. Not everyone's is.

Click to expand...

Nonsense. The two locations are the same distance from the top right corner of the camera.

Michael Clark said:

Leave the top tier APS-C body alone! Let it match the top tier FF bodies!

If you want that goofy one-off abomination, ask them to put it on the R10 Mark II.

Click to expand...

Right - and go down to an entry level toy with lower resolution, no IBIS, a tiny battery, etc. etc.. No thanks.

"Leaving the top-tier APS-C body alone" and "letting it match the top tier FF bodies" are mutually-exclusive, since the actual top-tier APS-C body is the current R7 - not your imagined R5 with an APS-C sensor.

You appear to be saying "leave my imaginary camera alone" - the camera you're lusting after doesn't exist - it's a unicorn - so it can't be "left alone."

I suspect that Canon sells more R7 bodies than R5s. You may have more to spend on a camera, but there are a lot of us peasants turning out good work with our R7s. (I link to some of my work in my signature.)

Tom R5R7 said:

If the R5 offered 32.5 mpx in APS-C "crop" mode, there would be no need for me to have an R7. At least not for me. But it does not because that would require that the R5 have about 83 megapixels. (1.6^2 * 32.5).

Also, as the flagship APS-C body, it ought to share its design and ruggedness with mid/high end bodies like the R5 series.

Click to expand...

Agree as to your first paragraph, disagree about the second. Smaller size and lighter weight is a major selling point for APS-C. Bulking up the camera (and making it substantially more expensive) would turn off a large part of its current user base.

Letting it take a battery grip would let it be better balanced when using heavy lenses, but still let it be smaller when desired. I wouldn't object to giving it a second rear dial in the traditional location next to the display.

Just give it a BSI/Stacked sensor and a sensor shield for while changing lenses if you're taking out the mechanical shutter.

m4ndr4ke said:

...
The same with pre capture, only the R5 Mark II and the R1 have real pre capture, all other cameras released so far are a PITA to use it.
...

Click to expand...

It's funny how many people say that, and yet, the original method with all the shots in a "group" is so much easier if your pre-capture sequence has only one or two keepers (as mine often do), or if you have no keepers (probably 50% of mine fall into this category). Erase the whole sequence - easy. Choose one or two and save them to their own file - easy. The issue is, as usual, when something new comes along, people can't figure out how to do it right.

David - Sydney said:

My rf70-200/2.8 and rf100-500 would challenge that assertion. Even my rf14-35/4 extends out a little but i prefer it to my ef16-35/4

Click to expand...

Is rf70-200/2.8 external focus or external zoom or both of them? I only have 70-200F4.

Anyone else notice the radio silence on the R7/II? I think Canon is at war internally between (I) those who see the R7 as an "any lens telextender" and want it to have a full-size R5 body and (II) those who have used the R7 as their main camera since it came out and just want a BSI/Stacked sensor with the controls left where they are. Two different audiences - and while group I may have more money to spend on each camera, group II represents more users - including me.

I don't want a bigger, heavier camera just so the larger full-frame lenses feel better balanced. Let the R7/II take a battery grip - that would solve that problem without making everyone carry a heavier camera all the time.

For those who want the rear dial in the traditional location next to the rear screen, put one there as well. (That would also take care of the "one control wheel too few" gripe.) But leave the existing controls alone.

Give it a BSI/Stacked sensor for low-light and fast readout.

If you're going to take out the mechanical shutter because you've sped up readout, give us a sensor shield that closes while changing lenses.

Viola! Everyone should be happy and you can stop dithering.

Anyone else notice the radio silence on the R7/II? I think Canon is at war internally between (I) those who see the R7 as an "any lens telextender" and want it to have a full-size R5 body and (II) those who have used the R7 as their main camera since it came out and just want a BSI/Stacked sensor with the controls left where they are. Two different audiences - and while group I may have more money to spend on each camera, group II represents more users - including me.

I don't want a bigger, heavier camera just so the larger full-frame lenses feel better balanced. Let the R7/II take a battery grip - that would solve that problem without making everyone carry a heavier camera all the time.

For those who want the rear dial in the traditional location next to the rear screen, put one there as well. (That would also take care of the "one control wheel too few" gripe.) But leave the existing controls alone.

Give it a BSI/Stacked sensor for low-light and fast readout.

If you're going to take out the mechanical shutter because you've sped up readout, give us a sensor shield that closes while changing lenses.

Viola! Everyone should be happy and you can stop dithering.

Photos.PhilOlenick.com - Been using Canon since 1968 (doing photography since 1958).