Apart from the 100-500 and the extending 70-200, it's basically no different to how extenders worked for EF, is it?
Apologies if I'm misconstruing what you say but I don't see it that way at all. They had a limited choice of sensor for the R6, they went with one that wasn't too old but that wasn't a new development.
Again lots of conjectures, statements without proofs and many "I believes".I have no proof to that, but I'm ready to bet that there are more prosumers then pros with an R5 in the bag, and more pros then prosumers with a R6 in the bag.
(most of) Serious (and non-serious) prosumers usually like the latest tech because of the passion, have money to buy it because they have another job and so they don't have to "justify" the price and the amortisation, and in the context of those two cameras, rarely care about R5 files being huge, they actually enjoy higher resolutions.
Meanwhile (most of) pros buy tech they need and not tech they want, they invest money in new gear only if new stuff is getting them more money by doing new or better things and so being able to rise prices towards customers, and in the context of those two cameras, many appreciate a smaller file if they don't need to print in big sizes, and a much lower price while retaining 95% of the "pro" features of the R5 like ibis, double card slot, LP-E6 batteries and a proper grip to house two of them, joystick, back dial so total 3 physical dials on the body, etc. And they probably appreciate (I surely do) having the double card slots taking the same card shape, and not two different ones.
I come back to what I was saying in previous post, Canon makes its marketing segmentation choices, surely trying to steer various category of shooters towards certain body and lenses, to maximise their profits, but it's not Canon that decides what's pro, prosumer or amateur for you, but YOU decide in which category falls FOR YOU each item they sell. Prosumers or plain simple (rich) amateurs can buy R1 (and they do, trust me), and pros can buy RP's or even (not exaggerating with R100) a R10, which I also had and it's a war machine, it handles like a mini R6.
If you do exclusively studio headshots, R10 (or R50; R100 s*cks, we all agree ahahah) it's much more then anything you would ever need.
I'd stop "psychoanalysing" Canon marketing choices, who cares if R6 III is tailored by them, in their opinion, for pros, prosumers or amateurs? If it's not for you, in ypur opinion, whatever is the shooting category you feel you're in, just look elsewhere, in Canon or outside Canon
Google tells me that a good chunk of the world’s population also does but not the majority of countries
I hope so. If ISO 100 -> 64000 gets me the same or better outcome than ISO 100 -> 102400 then I agree and stand silent! I want that to be true. It would be epic. By as arbitrary as those limits are, ground truth for the R6 I and II is 102400 with real world noise, shadow, etc. Unless ISO 64000 on the c50 chip is just bonkers it still cuts off at 64000 and likely the lesser numbers are also relative in quality. We do see these differences in older chips as well, and sometimes a high quality noise is better than no shot for personal enjoyment.
"Discover the power, unleash your passion"
Could it mean something really interesting will be announced? Or an RF 50mm f/1,8 III?
When they fit. Until then, it's another lens purchase and less room in the bag potentially depending on one's interest. But first world problems, eh?
And small potatoes in my concern. It just piles on the loss of easy instant manual focus, or it probably wouldn't have been noticed by me.They had several choices -- the 6D / RP sensor, the R sensor, (probably) the 1D II sensor, and the 1D III sensor. They chose the best (as in most all-around performant) of the bunch.
The high 2nd hand price of the ef100-400 and the cost of the 1.4x extender meant that the rf100-500 was a better choice for me. Lighter and shorter as well. I never thought that I would use those focal lengths as much as I have
The RF100-500 is great for size/weight but that came after the RF70-200/2.8 in 2020.
The new one dropped almost 40% weight to 1070gm vs 1480gm for the EF70-200/2.8 plus shorter as well
It was an instant buy for me and approved by my wife who reminds me all the time about "can't you get a smaller kit of gear?". I even bought it on special before I had a R body to mount it on!
I haven't seen much furore about this (some complaints yes).
One would hope people have got used to this, since it has been the case for a while now: the faster the sensor, the worse the dynamic range at low ISO, that's the trade off we incur into with current sensor technology.
The decrease in dynamic range is is small and usually imperceptible apart in very specific scenarios... but more dynamic range gives you more good image data that, if correctly processed, can lead to (marginally) better final conversions.
The increase in speed tends to be much more visible and it has other positive side effects apart from the immediate increase of FPS, such as better AF.
Choose your poison
I think my banter with Scott_7D captures my worries/hopes. I hear you saying they're unfounded, based on your experience with the R5. In which case, my pre-release concerns may all blow away on the wind this November! And I guess I'd say the R6 spirit remains good.
Not that it matters -- extra features are extra features, no complaints. I just haven't seen anyone talk about the C50 for stills. But we're going to find out, aren't we?! In days. And as mentioned with Scott, what does ISO 100 -> 64000 mean for stills in this sensor as compared to what the R6 series has enjoyed for 100 -> 102400? i.e., is 10K on a C50 chip the same or better as 10k on the R6 chip? Is it or more like 8K? Maybe it's all the same or better. Maybe 10k on the c50 chip is like 15k on the R6 chip? Translated to the real world: maybe I can catch that end of day picture on the R6.3 with my long lens and extender with the same or better noise and shadow detail as what I could on my R6. In which case, I'm just fretting. Experience, however, says this won't be the case. Experience says the day will end earlier. But hey, people can make better videos. My kid would be happy. 
I´m currently looking to purchase a used EF 135mm F2. I have been looking at this lens on the used market for nearly two years now and it always around 600 €, sometimes 550 €. It hasn't lost any value since I started looking.
The lens really sparked my interest and I could use for school plays, sports and especially for a golden wedding I am shooting next year. This golden wedding made my decision to purchase it. The RF is too expensive for my limited use case, but I´m really looking forward to the EF and I'm curious to shoot with it
You're welcome!
