More of the usual love from Canon for their red-headed stepchild, the 7-series.

ISv said:

Today my goal was to figure out what the last version of the LP 9 (particularly the DeepPRIME XD3) can actually do. First two photos of the Northern cardinal are at low ISO (there was no need for anything more of that). After that I went "nuts" experimenting (best illustrated in "Reptiles!!!). Honestly I'm very impressed - see Reptiles!

Click to expand...

Lovely series. I really like the first picture.

antonn said:

R52/R1/R1 + RF100-300/2.8, Glaucidium passerinum

Click to expand...

Beautiful shots .Well done, antonn.

MkSprintz said:

Pretty sure
R6v is likely FCC DS126933
&
Retro style R8ii FCC DS126947

Hearing 2027 is more and more likely for the R7ii.

Click to expand...

Isn't there also a DS126936 from last year not yet associated with any release?

Tone on tone. I really like this shot. Well done, ISv.

@zajicekpavel said:

This is not the case, R7M2 = FCC DS126933, R6V = FCC DS126947. see my AI analysis on the forum (previous post in another thread). You are spreading alarmist news sir. The rest of us are waiting for R7M2. Everything is going according to plan.

Click to expand...

DS126947 is limited to 64-QAM, that's entry level, even by previous 2022 standards. It doesn't make sense for an R6V

@zajicekpavel said:

This is not the case, R7M2 = FCC DS126933, R6V = FCC DS126947. see my AI analysis on the forum (previous post in another thread). You are spreading alarmist news sir. The rest of us are waiting for R7M2. Everything is going according to plan.

Click to expand...

Pretty sure
R6v is likely FCC DS126933
&
Retro style R8ii FCC DS126947

Hearing 2027 is more and more likely for the R7ii.

BroderLund said:

What is the difference between vented and active cooling? In the same way, the R5m2 is vented and needs a fan grip to keep it actively cooled?

Click to expand...

It would be great if the cooling grip worked with it.

bloblom said:

May/June is based on the assumption that the DS126933 FCC filing refers to the R7 Mark II. It's safe to assume now that it does not. All the "leaks" (glorified rumors) from the past few months are crumbling in front of your eyes.
It's completely possible that Canon announces it a month after the R6V, after all they target two very different markets so they wouldn't interfere with one another, and the R7II could be shipped out by mid-summer for birders, but there's nothing to back that release window.

I wouldn't get my hopes too high up for the R7 Mark II. Back in May 2025 the R6 Mark III was rumored to have a 24 MP stacked BSI-CMOS sensor with a DIGIC Accelerator and a faster readout than the R5 Mark II. We got none of that. It's safer to assume we'll get a refreshed sensor (possibly BSI) with faster readout without hurting dynamic range. Just enough to address, at least partly, the biggest issues with the R7 like the rolling shutter and AF performance.

Click to expand...

This is not the case, R7M2 = FCC DS126933, R6V = FCC DS126947. see my AI analysis on the forum (previous post in another thread). You are spreading alarmist news sir. The rest of us are waiting for R7M2. Everything is going according to plan.

What the AI told me about it:

Why the confusion around certification DS126933 arose
The key issue in this whole discussion is the FCC certification of model DS126933, which shows the following indicators:
•it uses the LP‑E6P battery
•it has advanced connectivity (Wi‑Fi / Bluetooth module ES204)
•its FCC confidentiality expires on June 16, 2026
This led to speculation about whether:
•it is the EOS R7 Mark II, or
•another model – for example the EOS R6 V
However, Canon traditionally:
•certifies each hardware model separately
•does not reuse one FCC code for two different cameras
Most importantly, the EOS R6 V already has its own separate certifications and leaks, with a clearly confirmed announcement time frame in May 2026.
This practically rules out DS126933 = R6 V.
Why DS126933 makes sense as the R7 Mark II
Battery
•The current EOS R7 already uses the LP‑E6P
•The R8 series uses the smaller LP‑E17, so confusion with the R8 Mark II is very unlikely
•The APS‑C “flagship” position of the R7 strongly supports retaining the LP‑E6P battery
FCC timing
Canon has a long‑established pattern of launching cameras 2–4 weeks before FCC confidentiality expires.
•expiry: June 16, 2026
•realistic announcement window:
late May – early June 2026
This exactly aligns with repeated reports from Canon Rumors, CanonWatch, and Photo Rumors.
How the EOS R6 V fits into this
The EOS R6 V:
•is a video‑focused full‑frame camera
•has no EVF
•shares its sensor with the R6 Mark III / Cinema EOS C50
•targets video creators, not wildlife or sports photographers
Canon therefore has a strong incentive to:
•first give full media attention to the R6 V (April–May)
•only then introduce the R7 Mark II, which would otherwise overshadow it in coverage
This is not a delay, but a deliberate and controlled release sequence.
So — is the R7 Mark II delayed?
Compared to early rumors from 2025 – yes, slightly.
Compared to the current plan – no.

Canon Rumors said:

There are probably some situations that it could be useful with tethered control.

Click to expand...

On the (now-sold) R50V I used it for family portraits and being able to zoom using your phone is pretty neat. My kids (both below 10 years old) massively preferred using the zoom rocker next to the shutter button to touching the lens.
I still want a smaller-than-R8 EVF-less camera, but with R8 features, like a useable fully electronic shutter. The R50V was already quite thick, which made it awkward to hold with the relatively small grip, I hope future R*V bodies have more finger depth on the front.

I do plan on getting the 20-50 lens an use it on the R8, maybe zooming through Camera Connect will work...

DocInfoSci said:

But it took the version II to beat it, as I recall. And that came out years later, right? So for the era, it was top notch for amateurs.

Click to expand...

DocInfoSci said:

It was a fraction of the price, so for kids and bird curious folk it was a palatable entry. Canon had long since clawed back the R&D costs and it didn't kill them to keep this one on tap as a gateway drug to more serious L products.

Click to expand...

The first version of the EF 100-400mm came out in 1998, 5 years after the prime, with 2 stops of IS. It was just as sharp in the centre - which is what you mainly use for bird photography - and weaker at the edges (see https://photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/612-canon400f56ff and https://photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/896-canon100400f4556is2 the opticallimits original site and its earlier reviews). In the 2000s, the prime was about $1200 and the zoom about $1400. The zoom with all its advantages had won by then, and was hardly more expensive. However, Art Morris's website, birdsasart, was very influential and he was a staunch proponent of the 400 prime, and he initially ran down the zoom. But, eventually he changed his mind and went over to the original zoom. Mind you, he was one of the first to go to Nikon and then Sony. So, you are not right! The first version bettered it, and the magnificent EF 100-400mm II rendered it totally obsolete. The 500/4.6 was OK for BIF when you are at 1/3200s and don't need IS. But for hand held shooting in other than good light, a tripod or support was essential, and if you have ever tried to focus a hand held 400mm lens without IS, it is very difficult as the image darts all over the view finder.

Change the shutterspeed limit directly without diving into menus.

Great photos, as always!

It better have a modern display like Nikon and Sony have! Otherwise a big disappointment… Canon finally needs to carry up with the Display functionality !

riker said:

Size and weight.
I have an R5m2. I'm definitely not considering another fullsize body.
Plus, think about it. If you have fullsize and a compact, you have 3 options when needing to decide what to take. 1) full 2) compact 3) full+compact. It's great to have the option to just take the compact for a family happening, street photo, hiking, whatever.

I might be over-explaining - you buy compact camera because it is compact and a fullsize body is not an alternative.

Click to expand...

Ok, that is understandable.

I may be wrong but the size and weight difference i expect to see would be quite small to an R6, because of same battery, IBIS, cooling vents....
Ok, you'd lose the EVF bulge...
But for Photo i really want a VF, optical or otherwise, i tried multiple cameras without it, i prefer a Viewfinder.

Perhaps an R10 or R7 (1000 € on sale if you are patient) could also be a nice small camera with the plus of giving all your lenses a different field of view.
And the R7 even has the same battery as your R5II, so no problem there.

I have the origial R and an R6II for FF use, and R7 and R10 for APSc.

So i always have to choose what to bring (decisions, decisions... ;-)

But if your heart longs for this R6V i wish you get what you are looking for!

R52/R1/R1 + RF100-300/2.8, Glaucidium passerinum

This would have to be considerably smaller with higher IQ than a 200-600 f/6.3 to make sense. Still would prefer a zoom at this range for wildlife. Currently shooting with the 200-800 and the reach is great.

What I'd really want to see is a 100-300 f/4L that would shave off most of the 2.8's weight and price.

ISO 10 000, f8.0, EV -1 1/3, 1/800s! Nikon D500?! Well, NikonD500 x DxO DeepPRIME XD3 !

This is really bad news regarding the R7M2. What about the other articles about how the R7 2 is already being tested etc.? None of this will be true?

Today my goal was to figure out what the last version of the LP 9 (particularly the DeepPRIME XD3) can actually do. First two photos of the Northern cardinal are at low ISO (there was no need for anything more of that). After that I went "nuts" experimenting (best illustrated in "Reptiles!!!). Honestly I'm very impressed - see Reptiles!

AlanF said:

Your getting the R5ii and RF 200-800mm has definitely paid off as your recent shots have shown.

Click to expand...

I did notice the change but didn't know there is a change of the hardware...

With Canon releasing an updated version of the Cine-Servo 50-1000 I thought I should bring this up again. I don't for the life of me understand why there would not be a market for a decent, modern, native glass lens that has something like a 50-500mm zoom range, built in Drop-in filter slot, and built in 1.4x tele-extender. It would not have to be fast, f/6.3 or so would be enough at the tele end, and not really have to be very light. It could sell for $7k or even anything up to almost $10k and people would really use it quite a bit for wildlife video. There really isn't anything that fits this niche now. Most people that don't have access to the $70k cine lenses use something like the Sigma 60-600 just because there really isn't anything in between.

Bob Howland said:

In defense of rocker zoom switches, among my excess of equipment, I own a Canon Vixia HFG60 camcorder. (I think Neuro owns one also.) The zoom is controlled by an onboard rocker switch that is extremely difficult to use well. That problem disappeared when I started using a Manfrotto LANC Controller with it's own superb rocker switch. The controller also has a dial which controls the speed of the zoom throughout the rocker switch's range. With that controller it is possible to have reliably controlled zooms from glacially slow to lightning fast.

Click to expand...

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.

Bob Howland said:

This raises a few questions. Do any MILC hybrid cameras have a LANC input? Does it seem likely that any will have one? Does anybody care whether they do or not?

Click to expand...

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.

GMCPhotographics said:

It’s fair to say then that the R8II is likely to also share the same 32.5mp sensor with IBIS

Click to expand...

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.