I actually want 45mp on a crop camera.
Why? The 'extra reach' of the crop?
Upvote
0
I actually want 45mp on a crop camera.
I don't see how Canon can replace all those Rebels they sell at Costco without RF-S bodies. I suppose they could greatly expand the M line, but that doesn't offer much of an upgrade path to RF, which seems like it'd be a critical goal. The nice thing here is that RF-S bodies in this case would pair well with the higher res R bodies going forward since they'd actually be able to mount -S lenses, unlike with EF-S
Looking at the M design language, it would seem to me that if Canon came out with a higher end EOS M camera, it would likely be with IBIS rather than weather sealing. Of course Canon could also come out with an aps-c R camera to replace the 7D as a bird shooter. But with the introduction of the R5 and R6 together with the 600 and 800 and extenders, is an R aps-c camera needed to assume the role of a 7D?
Price hopefully a bit less than the R6.
Yep, that. I love my 10Dx, but I really miss the "croppability" of higher density sensors.Why? The 'extra reach' of the crop?
Not really, given that it's an R6 with a crop sensor but a bit more processing power needed due to the higher res. One should trade off against the other. And look how cheap the 32.5 MP 10 fps 90D is in comparison.With those specs? That would be a surprise.
You've articulated the problem nicely. It almost feels like Canon rushed the M system into production so they'd have something in the mirrorless realm, figuring that mirrorless would be dominated by small cameras and small sensors. Then, decided there was a market for full frame mirrorless and decided to jump into that in a big way, but realized that to fully take advantage of mirrorless they'd need an entirely new full frame mount since the M mount was unsuitable for full frame, so had to roll the dice on yet another mount.The nice thing about both EF-M and EF-S is they provided an upgrade path to better lenses. I had the terrible kit 18-55 I on my 20D. A while after I got a 60D, and ended up putting a 28-70L on it, knowing I was probably going to move to full frame. And now, I'll probably just stick with an adaptor on a mirrorless body. It's really nice that literally every lens in my bag can be mounted on a R/5/6.
The "problem" with RF on a small body is it's a huge mount. Even RF-S lenses would likely be super chunky at the back. You're just not gonna get something like the EF-M 22 on RF. There'll be a size difference.
EF-M messes with that. So either Canon:
- Has research showing that crop buyers don't move to full frame as often as we all think and will just keep 2 systems
- Plans to consolidate the two somehow
- Hasn't figured out their long term plan yet?
Wouldn't bet on it. We've generally got lots of big expensive "legacy mount" lenses that we want to keep using. My 500mm f/4 Mk II didn't stop working when the RF mount came out...
Did you sell it to finance the R5? It's such a great camera. I had it out in the yard day before yesterday on my new econo-gimbal birding.
I think you'll be thrilled with the R5. I went from the 5D4 to the EOS-R and had about a three second adjustment period to learn to love the EVF, but the transition in that regard was painless. Some of the other features - like 'touch and drag' auto-focus and edge to edge focus area will win you over before you take the first picture.
I only speak for me obviously but as a former 7D2 shooter I don't understand why people dwell on the crop bodies for wildlife. Aside from the extra reach (which I overcame using the 1.4X) I don't see the attraction. When I head out the door birding (which is almost what I do exclusively) I'm carrying the 5D4 or EOS-R.
They are superior than the 7D2 in every single way except FPS.
YMMV..
I can't speak to the R, but the 5D4 relegated my 7D2 to backup (closet) status as well while I had both. AF and tracking are both superior (by a lot) on the 5D4, and even though it netted fewer "pixels on target" than the crop, the final output was better IMHO. Damn, y'all makin' me get all misty over selling my baby.... Did you hear that Canon and B&H? Save me save me get my R5 out the door.I only speak for me obviously but as a former 7D2 shooter I don't understand why people dwell on the crop bodies for wildlife. Aside from the extra reach (which I overcame using the 1.4X) I don't see the attraction. When I head out the door birding (which is almost what I do exclusively) I'm carrying the 5D4 or EOS-R.
They are superior than the 7D2 in every single way except FPS.
YMMV..
Been there, done that - I've had great fun with my 100-400mm mounted to my M6 Mk II.And it would work on an M body just as well.
I sometimes run out of reach with a 500mm f/4 Mk II mounted to my 7D Mk II via my 2x converter - 1600mm of effective reach before taking cropping/Pixels Per Duck into account.Aside from the extra reach (which I overcame using the 1.4X) I don't see the attraction.