scyrene said:

Not every lens is replicated across each manufacturer's lineup.

Click to expand...

Of course, I'm not saying the range will be exactly the same for the 3 lenses, but the concept of trinity zoom is so anchored into photography world, is so versatile to different kinds of photographers + can attract people to a brand instead of another one (halo lenses) that I can't see Canon shooting themselves in the foot by not competing against Sony.

We're not speaking about a big very expensive white zoom that Canon could somehow avoid like Sony is avoiding doing a 100-300 f2.8 (for now) to compete against the Canon one.

I don't care that much about wide-open corner sharpness - it's enough if it's sharp when stopped down to maybe F2. I just hope it has nice contrast and rendering and some decent MFD. No need for 0.5 macro but 0.25X would be nice.

scottburgess said:

A "big departure" can be interpreted in many ways. For example, a full-sized body not requiring an extension grip (with a pro battery). A lower-resolution sensor around 22Mp which has better low-light capability, something potentially attractive as a professional small-sensor sports body. Beginning a large-scale changeover to CF-Express across the lineup. Introducing a new flash system with the camera. Focusing the 7-series not as the top APS-C camera, but as a top hybrid vlogger camera (with extra attachment ports). Integrating the R7ii with some third-party hardware (eg: a specialized Atomos?). And so on.

Instead of specific camera features, I suggest considering what might fill a market opportunity. Having a closer-to-pro APS-C body would align with that, but so would pushing it the other direction toward amateur interests: higher resolution, lighter weight, maybe retro-styling. And don't worry about abandonment of a market segment, as Canon can always introduce a new model number to fill any empty shoes (anyone up for an R4 or R14?).

While these vaguely-reported half-rumors about the R7ii suggest it might lean toward a more premium market, I think there's too little specificity and reliability to give these rumors any weight. We're in nothing-burger territory here.

Click to expand...

Pushing the R7ii the other direction and downmarket with the ideas you presented would dramatically reduce potential sales of the unit, especially when it's not what the target market for said camera wants. It would push more wildlife and sports photographers towards the R6ii, R6iii, R5ii, and R1 thus reducing any chance of recovery or growth for the APS-C segment as a whole.

The C50 fills the niche as a hybrid vlogging camera with its photo capabilities, along with the R6 lineup including the upcoming R6iii as vlogging is video-centric. Unsure if Canon will make a video-centric unit similar to the R7 or R7ii when it's released for vloggers, it's possible if they see value in such a unit.

Walrus said:

while it won't be tack sharp corner to corner wide open as the 40 Art, it needs to be at least better then the 50 Art at f1.4

Click to expand...

Hmm I'm somewhat hoping this 45mm is similar to the 50 Art wide open, but I doubt it'll be better at all. It would be great if I were surprised, though.

Walrus said:

Camera bodies are overrated, lenses are 10 times more important

Click to expand...

To be honest, I think the transition to mirrorless changed that balance a little. The fact that EF lenses perform much better when adapted to mirrorless cameras is an example of the higher importance camera bodies have now.

Walrus said:

hot and sharp) EF 70-200 2.8 L classic (non-IS).

Click to expand...

Lucky you. My copy of that lens was crap
I even sent it to repair once, but it didn't make much of a difference, it just improved slightly. Beyond 100mm mine was crap, unless I shot it at like f/11. I could get better detail by cropping from 70mm to 200mm on the 24-70mm f/2.8 II (yes, I really tested that).

Walrus said:

Today if wideangle is really needed I have the 16 STM, small and inexpensive, but it's too wide, even a fixed 18/20mm prime would be enough for me, in Canon there's nothing cheap (20 VCM is overkill and overprice, it's a lens that would shoot no more then 50/100 pics per year, so 300/350€ is the max I would invest in it)

Click to expand...

Similar scenario here. A few weeks ago I ran statistics of all my photographs from the last year or so, and the 16mm accounted for approximately 5% of the shots (5 point something).
By the way, I tried the 20 VCM last month, and I LOVED it. I had never tried something between 16 and 24, as I never had an ultra wide zoom lens for full-frame. I found 20mm so easy to use, I just felt it fits perfectly next to the 28mm wider end of the zoom, but I have no justification for such purchase.
I also have, at the moment, the 16-28mm f/2.8 available here for 943€, brand new, and it's tempting, but it still feels like too much money for such few shots.
I think I'd buy an RF 20mm f/2.8, if Canon made such a lens. The 16 sometimes is too wide, although I can usually manage.

SnowMiku said:

Is there a reason why the R6 series does not have the rubber grip material on the front left of the body? As a far as I know the R6 series is the only one missing it.

Click to expand...

Is it? I had no idea

DocInfoSci said:

There's probably an argument that the R8 also exists to placate those who used to buy the x0D series as well. Maybe it does double duty?

Click to expand...

For those using the xxD series, there's the R10, I had one for months, took a wedding with it, it's a war machine, has a joystick, AF is lightning fast and handles like a mini R6; I sold it for the RP as the latter, at VERY high ISO, still has a small advantage due to the FF sensor (and surely R8 is even better), so for my line of work RP/R8 it's a better backup body, even if all the other functions (for RP) are inferior to to R10's.
If I wouldn't shoot over 1600iso and/or don't need ultrawideangles, I don't see why buying a R8 over a R10 that cost nearly half of it.

Is there a reason why the R6 series does not have the rubber grip material on the front left of the body? As a far as I know the R6 series is the only one missing it.

Maximilian said:

Guys, please don't expect wonders from this old and simple optical design basis. Canon hasn't found the philosopher's stone in optical designs.
[..]
And from what I've heard the Sigmas has a busy and not so creamy bokeh.

Click to expand...

One can only hope...let's see what's coming with the various reviews and then I'll decide (considering that I want it better or on par with the 50 Art, but I own the 40 Art...so I'm pretty picky about wide open sharpness)

My interest is pure sharpness, AF absolute accuracy, especially in low light (and decent speed, but accuracy comes first), preferably well controlled flare (I don't mind few small ghosts, but contrast has to remain impeccable), close-up image sharpness not falling apart, and light gathering/transmission, which is something, unfortunately, very rarely tested by the reviewers; I'm not interested in buying this lens just for the sake of being f1.2 if the lens is actually closer to T1.8

Bokeh quality, frankly I couldn't care less, can be busy, with horrible onion rings and with cats-eye right in the middle of the frame, and I wouldn't even blink

rombe3jr said:

This R6 Mark III forum is by far the most popular on Canon Rumors. Well over 500 comments and climbing each day.

Click to expand...

I may be wrong but I think that CR previously didn't use one forum thread for all related articles. I'm not saying it's wrong, just saying that that can be the reason why this one got the most comments whereas previously it was spread among more articles (?)

If it is on par with the EF 1.2 50 I understand Canon's move: They want to profit from this lens category instead of supporting the 2nd lens market with these old EF systems which sell for ~900 bucks!

SnowMiku said:

For non IS lenses I use a shutter speed double the focal length I'm using, so for a non IS 50mm I'd shoot at 1/100sec or faster, it works for me every time. If you can hold your camera more steady then me then you can try using 1/60sec for a 50mm lens.

Click to expand...

While I tend to use the old rule shutter speed roughly equal focal length I have seen that this doesn't apply to modern digital cameras anymore. These are more in the medium format category when it comes to resolution and I think your rule is much better. And it works for "unsteady days"

Nemorino said:

pale clouded yellow
R5m2 + RF200-800 + 1.4TC
@ 1/4000s, f/11, iso 1250, 840mm
QHD crops
View attachment 226701View attachment 226702View attachment 226703View attachment 226704

Click to expand...

It looks like the female is chasing the male...

RaPhoto said:

Some backyard Red-tailed Hawk photos at ~50m in a cottonwood tree. R5mkii and RF200-800mm.

View attachment 226707View attachment 226708View attachment 226709View attachment 226710

Click to expand...

Great shots!

AlanF said:

Blackheaded Gull (R5ii/200-800mm).

View attachment 226669View attachment 226670

Click to expand...

I like the second too.. But it's not in par with the great first one!

Click said:

Lovely series, ISv.

Click to expand...

Thanks Click!

I love the compact size and if the weight and price specs are correct it'll sell in dozens. The lens looks quite similar to the RF 35/24mm F1.8. I don´t expect it to have a .5 macro feature, so hopefully the AF motor is faster. If the center is sharp and the bokeh renders nicely, it shouldn't be any issue if the corners are a bit softer.

For me to swap the 50mm VCM it would have to check all boxes, but especially the AF speed. If not, I´m sticking with the VCM.

roby17269 said:

I guess I am confused by the parallels you are making?
And I guess Canon's numbering patterns do not help...

But to me the 6 lineage would be: 6D -> 6D II -> RP -> R8...
While the 5 lineage has remained more or less linear (the R is a bit of an outlier), the 6 lineage seems to have split into 8 and new 6 (R6 -> R6 II -> R6 III) that slots between the 8 and the 5.

By the way, I sympathize with your some of your considerations, being myself a non-pro prosumer who likes pro features

Click to expand...

Hello! My thinking is this:

At the advent of the R6 / R5 there was no other R camera beyond the R and RP. RP clearly is a 6D2 successor, but I felt that the mantle moved to the R6 when it arrived and the RP simply... remained. So, in my mind, when July 9, 2020 came around the R6 was the natural successor because it had the number 6 and was priced below the R5. It cost more, yes, but so did everything Canon released around that time.

Fast forward to 2025 and I'd agree with your thinking -- or, at least, I wouldn't disagree in many conversation spaces. There's probably an argument that the R8 also exists to placate those who used to buy the x0D series as well. Maybe it does double duty?

Having owned the 80D (well, it was my wife's and now my son's), I felt it was a fun, geeky, and relatively affordable alternative to the much more expensive full frames: it gave the "feel" of an "upscale camera" as seen in the hands of the well-heeled out on holiday, like that stranger who steps onto a float plane in Alaska with their 5Dx amidst the sea of people clutching their Best Buy bodies. Canon kind of lost that feel with the R transition, I think, although cameras like the R8 are probably their attempt to at least slot in a price equivalent. I don't think the R8 spiritually captures what was happening, but it sits at a good price point in the catalog. They'd do well, I feel, to make a mini R5 body in crop form and re-introduce the X0D series as an X0R line -- and that's where the new video functionality they've been pushing for the new gen would fit very, very comfortably for people like my kiddo and his friends. But I agree, it also fills that 6D character as well -- competent, trade-offs, but serves. Someone mentioned earlier here that the R6 is kind of the 5D of yesteryear and the R5 is something new (or maybe the new 5DS/R?), in which case the R8 is now definitely the 6D equivalent.

I'll say this, though, because it's probably not obvious from my limited chatter here: I've had the privilege since 2005 to use a multitude of Canon's digital bodies -- either through ownership or via family and friends. I think they're all great for their time and serve a need or scratch an itch in one way or the other. They all take great photos when used well. I wouldn't turn down the chance to play with any! 600mm of big glass on a Rebel is so much fun, especially if you bring it along with a pal and pretend it's your serious body for the day. (And the memories it captures today are just as good as when it first hit my bag.)

And yes, the R6 captured a special place in my heart. Like the Rebel and my Mac 512ke, I'll probably never part with it even though I eventually will move forward with the times.

I’m interested. The 50mm 1.8 always feels just a wee bit too tight to me, and there’s nothing wrong with a faster max aperture. Especially not these days when even “cheap” lenses are sharp wide-open.

SnowMiku said:

Could this possibly be a replacement for the Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM?

Click to expand...

I think it wont be. ASPC lens always need a higher resolution.

I hope this means the R10 II would go a bit more upmarket as well with the R7 battery, similar size to the 90D, and no IBIS to cut down on costs.

Could this possibly be a replacement for the Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM?

SorenS said:

How come Canon don't do a RF 50 mm with IS!?

Click to expand...

For non IS lenses I use a shutter speed double the focal length I'm using, so for a non IS 50mm I'd shoot at 1/100sec or faster, it works for me every time. If you can hold your camera more steady then me then you can try using 1/60sec for a 50mm lens.

dcm said:

Learned something new today. Dropped the image in the Cornell Merlin app with my location and got Great Blue Heron, changed the location to Cambridge, England (just a guess) and got Grey Heron. The regions don't overlap, but the birds are similar. GBH is a larger bird, has a longer, S shaped neck when not extended, and rufous thigh/wrist colors ver when sus whiter on the GH. That can be hard to tell from an image.

Click to expand...

Actually, that is a way how it is supposed to work. Find distinguishing features in an image, dérive list of possible birds, look at location, trim the list, look at time of year, trim further... Rearrange the list by "merit function" and display candidate(s). You do not need the year - try entering date in the future, as long as location and date match established probability of bird it will be considered. If you do not select the location list is longer, but still trimmed to about 4-5 suggestions. Sometimes it is scary how accurate it can be. But, it is also often entertaining in its misses.
My favorite is "Explore" functionality for new location, for my upcoming trips. Avoids expecting grey herons where great blue live

Welcome back Michael

Michael Clark said:

What cheaper model has been released since the RP with the RP's spec sheet?

Click to expand...

I didn't state that. "The RP is a mirrorless 6Dii and still being sold."
I was pointing out that Canon is happy to leave the RP in their marketing lineup long after the R/R6 etc have disappeared even though it is considered older tech with essentially the same sensor from the 6Dii. I am happy for Canon to leave the RP in their lineup and I bought one as my backup body. Kudos to Canon for selling the cheapest full frame body.

Michael Clark said:

The EOS R was cheaper than the R6 and R5 by the time the R6 & R5 came out, not more expensive.

Click to expand...

Again, I didn't state that the R was cheaper or more expensive
"The EOS R was selling for a long time after the R6/R5 were released."
How was I incorrect in my actual comment?
My point was that Canon was happy to leave the R (and the 5Div) in their lineup for a long time after the R5/R6 was released as a data point supporting my original suggestion that Canon should leave the R5 in their lineup for some time to come.

Michael Clark said:

But if the R6 comes with a 30+ MP sensor for around the same price as the R5 is currently commanding on the NEW market, the R5 will disappear from authorized Canon dealers' shelves.

Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not.
The R5 still has features that the R6iii can't or won't have. We won't know for sure until the R6iii is released. I appreciate the extra pixels in the R5 over my previous 5Div's 30mp. Perhaps others will too. Canon has amortised their R5 R&D costs so there will be higher unit profit on it vs a newer body. Should users complain if we have more choice??
Canon is still selling the R5 in parallel with the R5ii even though it is more than a year after the latter's release.

Michael Clark said:

If an older, higher end model is selling new for less than the newer mid-tier product with the same basic capabilities, then dealers will continue to stock the older model as long as Canon will let them because it's easier to sell an older model with the same capabilities if it's cheaper than the newer model.
If an older, higher end model is selling new for more than the newer mid-tier product with the same basic capabilities, then dealers will not continue to stock the older model because it's very hard to sell an older model when there's a newer model on their shelves that can do the same thing and is priced lower. They'll return those units to Canon for credit. Canon will then use them for parts sources for the next seven years or so until they drop that model from official support.

Click to expand...

I agree that the price will either be higher or lower... why is that a problem for users? Dealers won't care as long as they sell stuff.
It is up to Canon to decide what is in their lineup and at what price they sell to dealers (and marketing rebates)
If users want one and one dealer doesn't have it then they will buy from another.