Canon EOS R7 Mark II & EOS R6 Mark III Announcement Delays?

[Canon Rumors]

This is just a small update on two of the most anticipated cameras coming from Canon. There’s not much here in the way of new information, but things keep hitting our inbox. We have been told that a planned dealer presentation for new Cinema EOS and EOS products that was scheduled for later this month […]

See full article...

 

[Del Paso]

If true, the R7's 2,36 million dots EVF sounds disappointing.

 

[Canon Rumors]

There will be September announcements (Confirmed)

 

[Exploreshootshare]

There will be September announcements (Confirmed)

Great timing my vacation is over by then I'll plenty of time to read all about the new gear!
I´m especially curious about the new flippy screen mechanism the R6mkiii will get according to rumors.

 

[DhlcadR6]

If true, the R7's 2,36 million dots EVF sounds disappointing.

I highly recommend go to use Sony evf from A6xxx/a7c in order to cure the allergy with 2.36M EVF.

 

[EverydayPhotographer]

Any more discussion about a resolution bump on the R6mkIII? I am intrigued by the idea of a 33/34 mpx FF camera.

 

[Maximilian]

Best thing now is to grab your (current) gear, go out and shoot.
Enjoy what you have.

 

[Del Paso]

I highly recommend go to use Sony evf from A6xxx/a7c in order to cure the allergy with 2.36M EVF.

No need for a Sony EVF, Canons with higher definition EVFs exist.

 

[AlanF]

No need for a Sony EVF, Canons with higher definition EVFs exist.

He is being ironic - those Sony EVFs reputedly stink.

 

[john1970]

Looks like Canon is moving towards Q3-Q4 announcements on an annual basis. Fine with me. Have not purchased any camera gear this year.

 

[Deleted member 387121]

If true, the R7's 2,36 million dots EVF sounds disappointing.

What is the issue with the EVF resolution? Is it because it's not as high as others?

I get it for landscape photography, or macro, or portraits, but the Canon 7 series have always been aimed at sports/action/wildlife photographers. When I'm out shooting handheld and following fast moving subjects (in my case, planes), all I'm thinking about is following the subject and framing it in the FOV. Looking at colors and details comes later in post.

 

[EricN]

What is the issue with the EVF resolution? Is it because it's not as high as others?

I get it for landscape photography, or macro, or portraits, but the Canon 7 series have always been aimed at sports/action/wildlife photographers. When I'm out shooting handheld and following fast moving subjects (in my case, planes), all I'm thinking about is following the subject and framing it in the FOV. Looking at colors and details comes later in post.

There are uses such as distant landscapes only visible behind the small opening of forest trees. Is it common? Probably not, but why limit ourselves?

 

[Del Paso]

I highly recommend go to use Sony evf from A6xxx/a7c in order to cure the allergy with 2.36M EVF.

I fell into your trap! Silly me!

 

[justaCanonuser]

If true, the R7's 2,36 million dots EVF sounds disappointing.

I don't agree: When I got my R7, I tested the EVF with my EF 85/1.2 II attached, AF and all little focusing helpers in the EFV switched off. I found out that I could focus that lens wide open surprisingly well on an eye of someone sitting relatively still, of course. The simulated focusing screen worked very good, despite the mediocre resolution of the EVF, so this told me that its resolution is sufficient to work with in real life.

One big advantage of less dots in the EVF is an extended battery life, and personally I prefer that when I am out and shoot thousands of images in nature. So I think it it would be smart by Canon to implement an EVF with about the same resolution in the MK II. But I fear that for marketing reasons they might pump it finally up to 4 mio. dots or so...

 

[justaCanonuser]

Looks like I am going to invest a bit into two upgrades in Q4 - or whenever Canon will finally ship to Europe, which seems to be less important für Canon than in the decades before. I was making up my mind to trade my 5D4 in for an R6 II, but I guess I gonna wait now for the Mk III. An upgrade of my R7 is overdue anyway, and I do hope that Canon will return to the traditional body layout with the 7 line.

 

[SnowMiku]

For those worried about the EVF resolution not being enough, you could always go back to the OVF in DSLR's until a model with a better EVF gets released

 

[Del Paso]

I don't agree: When I got my R7, I tested the EVF with my EF 85/1.2 II attached, AF and all little focusing helpers in the EFV switched off. I found out that I could focus that lens wide open surprisingly well on an eye of someone sitting relatively still, of course. The simulated focusing screen worked very good, despite the mediocre resolution of the EVF, so this told me that the its resolution is sufficient to work with in real life.

One big advantage of less dots in the EVF is an extended battery life, and personally I prefer that when I am out and shoot thousands of images in nature. So I think it it would be smart by Canon to implement an EVF with about the same resolution in the MK II. But I fear that for marketing reasons they might pump it finally up to 4 mio. dots or so...

And yet, after having bought the EOS R, I noticed after a few weeks that, instead of using it as a main camera, which was my intention, I almost always took the 5 DIV.
The quality of a viewfinder is one of the most important features for me, more than fps, MPs or video. (Maybe spoiled by Nikon F2's, Leicaflex SL2's and Leica R 6's excellent OVFs.)
But my use is totally different from yours, since I'm only exceptionally photographing wildlife. My main focus is macro, landscape or architecture, camera set on single shot...
Your arguments are convincing for wildlife, no doubt!

 

[Mike9129]

What kind of price point is the R7 II supposed to be hitting?

 

[Deleted member 387121]

There are uses such as distant landscapes only visible behind the small opening of forest trees. Is it common? Probably not, but why limit ourselves?

I said, I get it for for landscape photography. But for fast moving subjects and action, I'd rather give up EVF resolution in favor of faster response and longer battery life.

 

[Uneternal]

And yet, after having bought the EOS R, I noticed after a few weeks that, instead of using it as a main camera, which was my intention, I almost always took the 5 DIV.
The quality of a viewfinder is one of the most important features for me, more than fps, MPs or video. (Maybe spoiled by Nikon F2's, Leicaflex SL2's and Leica R 6's excellent OVFs.)
But my use is totally different from yours, since I'm only exceptionally photographing wildlife. My main focus is macro, landscape or architecture, camera set on single shot...
Your arguments are convincing for wildlife, no doubt!

Or maybe it's just because you're having a hard time of letting go what you're used to and embracing innovation. Your optical viewfinder only has disadvantages, try to shoot against bright sunlight and you get blinded, shoot in darkness and you see nothing, focus peaking or zebras are impossible, and you always have to chimp on the LCD screen to see the final image. EOS R's EVF has a higher magnification than 5D Mark IV and covers 100% of the image. While the resolution isn't extremely high, it's still like looking at a 1280x960 pixel screen which isn't too shabby (R5 has 1920x1080).
To me, the EVF and the autofocus of the EOS R were already a gamechanger compared to my older 6D. Especially for portraits where you can concentrate on composition, because the camera will nail the AF every time.