Canon EOS R7 Mark II Sensor Upgrades

[Distinctly Average]

If the rumor is correct and the R7 Mark II heads for true 7D territory, there will be room for the R10 Mark II to move into the XXD space. The R50 is already pretty much in DRebel territory, and the R100 can continue to be awful so people have something to complain about on internet fora.

I actually think the R100 has a good place as the camera you buy to be abused. The one you are happy to leave at a camera trap for days, dangle in precious positions or modify for Astro or infrared etc.

 

[neuroanatomist]

FOX News have some vacancies, interested?

Since we're apparently all expected to believe lies that people say, Google's AI reports that, "Based on available search results, there is no specific, currently listed Japan-based correspondent for Fox News." That suggests there's an opportunity there for @mimbu. As I previously suggested, s/he seems to think only the BCN Award data matter and that those data represent the entire world (instead what they actually represent – about half of the retail sales in Japan). I can picture him/her sitting behind the anchor desk, wearing glasses to try and look smart, but needing Coke-bottle lenses in them to try and correct for a pathologically myopic world view.

 

[Dragon]

I agree with this, which is why I continue to be surprised by the fact that 39MP seems to be *THE* one thing that has been consistent in the rumors. Of all the complaints about the R7 from a birding perspective resolution seems to be well down the list. Staying at 32MP would be perfectly fine as long as you have the readout speed and AF performance expected of an up-market birding-focused body. Heck, a fully stacked 26MP sensor as in the X-H2S might even be preferable to a 39MP one as it would offer faster frame rates and deeper buffers on the same hardware.

I'm expecting an R10II to move up and get IBIS to fill that niche, but it's a similar outcome - the R7II expands the range/footprint and leaves a gap in the lineup right where the existing R7 fits.

Could be, but moving the R10 upmarket leaves a hole between it an the R50 and that is a bigger market space due to the lower price. for the xxD customer, the R7 I is still a very nice camera. The ones wanting more want quite a bit more and likely are willing to pay for that, but in spite of the popularity of the 7D II with enthusiasts, I suspect Canon sold a lot more 70D's than 7D II's. Putting IBIS in the r10 would also fatten it up and part of the beauty of the R10 (and R8) is small size and light weight. Notably, Canon doesn't make any RFs lenses without IS (other than the dual fisheye VR lens), so for the bulk of the APS-c market, IBIS is possibly somewhat redundant.

 

[Michael T]

Canon really needs a 14-50mm f2.8 for their APC. Nikon has brought one out.

 

[InternalRevenue]

For those thinking an R10ii would go up-market, how would you expect it to substantially differentiate itself from a reduced-price R7 (due to the R7ii)? Stickier autofocus and faster (but not stacked) sensor? The size would likely increase as well with the inclusion of IBIS.

 

[dwkdnvr]

For those thinking an R10ii would go up-market, how would you expect it to substantially differentiate itself from a reduced-price R7 (due to the R7ii)? Stickier autofocus and faster (but not stacked) sensor? The size would likely increase as well with the inclusion of IBIS.

It would be one or the other. *Either* they keep the existing R7 *or* they shift the R10MkII up-market to (partially) fill the gap

 

[ISO64]

In fact, it is known at least through 2024. Nikkei publishes the global market share data annually (in late summer) based on reporting from industry groups (Camera & Imaging Products Association aka CIPA, and Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association aka JEITA). Canon led the MILC market in 2022, 2023 and 2024, and given their ~8% lead in 2024 it is almost certain they led it last year, as well.


According to the industry groups (to which both Canon and Sony belong), in 2024 Canon shipped 2.05M MILCs and Sony shipped 1.63M. That year, Canon also shipped 790K DSLRs, which was about 80% of the global market.

As a reality check, the link I posted to the FujiRumors article summarizing the Nikkei report (in the other thread in which @mimbu made the same false claim) lists Canon's ILC shipments for 2024 as 2.84M units, a number that exactly matches that in Canon's FY2024 presentation.

If you do the math, it comes to one ILC every six seconds!!! (49 work weeks, 6 working days a week, two shifts a day,...) Of course, it is coming from multiple locations but still. By the time you read my blurb Canon made three cameras - and not a single R7Mk2 that we can see. ULD shipping containers are scarce beginning of June

 

[Dragon]

Canon really needs a 14-50mm f2.8 for their APC. Nikon has brought one out.

The Sigma 17-40 f/1.8 is a nice option. Interesting that it is not available in Nikon mount. That could be that Nikon doesn't want competition for their 14-50 or maybe Sigma is actually making the 14-50 for them. Licensing deals involve bilateral back scratching, and Canon has clearly given Sigma considerable space in the RF-s realm.

 

[David - Sydney]

One more thing comes to mind:
With the R7ii getting a 39 mp stacked back-side illuminated sensor (with IBIS of course) and going (way?!) upmarket, I believe there is room for a IBIS equipped R10ii. If this happens, Canon would have one the most intriguing APS-C line-up, even though the native lens portfolio is nothing to brag about.

First we hear that canon is doomed that they don't allow 3rd party lenses and now complaints that their native lens portfolio is not sufficient even though there are 3rd party options for RFs sensors.

 

[David - Sydney]

I'd love to see Canon up their sensor game, but they don't seem to want to spend the money. They should just buy Sony sensors, but they never will.

Canon has used Sony sensors in the past... for their point and shoot. Not for their DLSR/MILC though.

Dual pixel has been a core part of Canon's AF and first released it with the 70D in 2013!
Not sure when Sony actually caught up to Canon's AF but it is competitive now.
Canon's current sensors seem to be quite competitive with Sony despite the differences in manufacturing scale and are happy to fund new R&D for sensor development.
The R5's FSI sensor was still competitive against BSI Sony sensors.
We need to also accept that Canon has a good catalogue of sensors for industrial usage.

What is Canon missing out on by not using Sony?

 

[David - Sydney]

I agree with this, which is why I continue to be surprised by the fact that 39MP seems to be *THE* one thing that has been consistent in the rumors. Of all the complaints about the R7 from a birding perspective resolution seems to be well down the list. Staying at 32MP would be perfectly fine as long as you have the readout speed and AF performance expected of an up-market birding-focused body. Heck, a fully stacked 26MP sensor as in the X-H2S might even be preferable to a 39MP one as it would offer faster frame rates and deeper buffers on the same hardware.

For me, the 39MP aligns with 8k UHD. It hits a spec sheet tick box and people won't quibble the difference with DCI.

45MP (3:2) is needed for 8KDCI and the R5 hits that with internal raw recording and records UHD as well of course which is cropped. Overkill for most users.

My guess that if the sensor is stacked then the extra AF processor would be added meaning 3 bodies with it. Additional volume should decrease the unit cost and will have class leading performance but it will impact the price segmentation.

 

[SnowMiku]

I hope an R10 II comes soon after the R7 II.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

I think 2200€ is optimistic for a 39MP fully stacked sensor as it would represent unprecedented value in the market and that generally isn't what Canon does. Unfortunately, this is why the apparent 'accuracy' of the 39MP number is concerning - to me it likely means either a partially-stacked sensor and the compromises that go with it OR a much higher price than I was hoping for.

It sounds optimistic, it really does. But the 1.499 € for the R7 was also a very "optimistic" price and a great value-for-money. Yes, it wasn't the wildlife or birder cam many people had hoped for, but for 1.500 € you got great AF, 40 FPS e-shutter, high-res sensor, IBIS, joystick and some other bells and whistles. If Canon wants to keep the r7ii as a great value for money camera, 2.200 € should/ could be the limit even with a 39 mp stacked sensor.

Furthermore, it should keep its distance to the R6iii which already has rebates in some places. And please don't forget that Canon might want to attract a lot of R6/ R5 owners to get a R7ii as a second body. Therefore, going upmarket with a price increase of nearly 50% (46% or something like that) is already very bold.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

First we hear that canon is doomed that they don't allow 3rd party lenses and now complaints that their native lens portfolio is not sufficient even though there are 3rd party options for RFs sensors.

I think there is a difference between "not sufficient" and "nothing to brag about". First of all, I was talking about Canons APS-C lenses, not Sigma lenses for RF mount. Secondly, Canons RF-S lenses are ok-good, but there is nothing overwhelming or lens that screams "must-have". They are intended for people who a camera and need two lenses to coverage their range and that's it. Nothing special concerning zoom range, f-stop or extra features. There's not even a macro lens or a prime lens. That really justifies "nothing to brag about"...


Sigma lenses provide "sufficient" portfolio, even though the entire portfolio is still lacking some options. But I don´t count them as Canon portfolio since they are made by Sigma.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

The Sigma 17-40 f/1.8 is a nice option (...) and Canon has clearly given Sigma considerable space in the RF-s realm.

I do like some of the Sigma lenses for RF-s, but of the main reasons I´d prefer Canon lenses and also why I opted for the R8 as a "light" travel/ hiking setup is that all the Sigma lenses don't have a control ring. I use the control on every outing and I am so used to it. Going APS-C without control ring was/ is a definite no-go for me. Therefore, I´d need some tempting RF-S native lens options, which I absolutely don't see atm. But thats absolutely fine since the R8 works wonderfully with the contemporary 16mm, 35mm and 85mm prime lenses. I just might add the 28-70mm F2.8 to the kit.

My wife and her family are actually considering buying my father-in-law either the 23mm or the 30mm Sigma RF-S prime as a birthday gift.

 

[Stig Nygaard]

main reasons I´d prefer Canon lenses and also why I opted for the R8 as a "light" travel/ hiking setup is that all the Sigma lenses don't have a control ring.

As far as I know, all(/most?) Sigma RF-S lenses does indeed have control ring!?!

 

[Bob Howland]

Canon really needs a 14-50mm f2.8 for their APC. Nikon has brought one out.

Where is this 14-50? According to B&H, Nikon makes a 16-50 f/2.8 VR APS-C lens selling for about $900, but not a 14-50. The 18-50 Sigma, in other mounts, sells for over $200 less but has no IS. One rumor in Nikon-land is that they will be introducing a Z90 (or whatever) to compete with the R7 and/or R7-2.

 

[Billybob]

Another rumor has been "the best focusing in any APS-C camera." That is at least as important to me as a BSI,, maybe stacked or partially-stacked, sensor. Also, If the 10-2 includes IBIS, I hope it doesn't get (much) larger or heavier.

Update, hypothetical question: So are all these improvements worth a $1000 price increase?

If it has a decent buffer (3-5 sec at 30fps in non-lossy RAW) then yes!

 

[tron]

I cannot know Canon's intentions but if they upgrade R7's sensor that much it will make it desirable (including the buffer reference that was just mentioned above) even for R7 owners.

A simple resolution upgrade will not tempt existing owners.

Just my opinion of course.

EDIT: To contradict (a little) myself since I do have R7 I would add to avoid issues like the battery issue of R5 because reliability issues (even little ones) stop upgrade desires.
I will not mention DR at low ISOs since this is a birding/action camera most likely to be used at high ISOs.

 

[Bob Howland]

As far as I know, all(/most?) Sigma RF-S lenses does indeed have control ring!?!

Zooms, yes, most primes,no. That is why I think that Sigma will be overhauling their APS-C prime lens line over the next couple years.