Canon aiming for a $799 full-frame camera? [CR2]

[blackcoffee17]

Hmmm.. that might tend to make the M series redundant. Who would buy an M, if an M-sized FF with RF mount were available as an alternative?

If they do bring out a tiny FF model in RF mount, they'd also need to bring out at least a couple of very small lenses e.g. a pancake wideangle and a retractable kit-zoom.

I don't like the idea of a camera without an EVF and there's no way I'd buy one - rear screens are completely useless in bright sunshine, and hugely inferior when composing and studying the details of a scene - but there are plenty who feel otherwise, so a screen-only model would probably sell to the smartphone crowd.

Still huge size difference and mostly because of the lens!

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Just trying to understand/clarify.... a R6+RF100-500mm (same 20mp as 7Dii) or R5+RF800mm (45mp) are close in cost to 7Dii + EF100-400 but losing a stop. Wouldn't those 2 options meet your points (dual cards/AF/fps/weather sealing)?

No, but I do see your point.
The R6 is only 20MP or else that would be on the right track.
The R5 suggestion is not even in the same ballpark.
Other than that, some people just prefer APS-C and they will either buy from Canon or someone else.

 

[Rocky]

What can be removed from the RP to make it even cheaper? Viewfinder is the only thing I can think of.
I expect a $799 full frame RF camera to have a 1.8x 4K crop with no usable AF.

Canon is selling M50II for $600. the additional $200 should be good enough for the FF sensor , larger shutter and larger body. That will be the FF R body at $800 with the EVF.

 

[dwarven]

Saying that the quality and capabilities of the equipment used to make images doesn't matter, just shows complete naiveté.

It matters far less than you seem to think. The more you progress in photography the more you'll come to realize this.

 

[blackcoffee17]

It matters far less than you seem to think. The more you progress in photography the more you'll come to realize this.

I agree. It matters, more so in some fields like wildlife photography but often the very best photographs are not the sharpest or have the best corner sharpness or noise.
Many times the pictures winning awards are just mediocre technically, taken with 10+ year old equipment but amazing to look at.

 

[dcm]

"but why use the full frame if you need to crop every time ? Just have a cropped sensor." THIS!

If only they designed pin compatible sensors and all of the rest of the camera to automatically adjust to the different sensors…. You could put an APS-C sensor in an R5 or R6 body, maybe even an RP. /s

This is really what some of you seem to be asking for to get the same AF, etc. in the APS-C R. The sensor costs are not as different these days so you might save a small amount, but it would be in the low $100s, not $1000s.

 

[SteveC]

Canon, you’ve lost me there...

Sonyx, it's clear that Canon never had you.

As we are on to you here, suggest you troll elsewhere.

 

[blackcoffee17]

Canon is selling M50II for $600. the additional $200 should be good enough for the FF sensor , larger shutter and larger body. That will be the FF R body at $800 with the EVF.

But an M50 with a FF sensor is pretty much what the RP is.

 

[privatebydesign]

I do not get the resistance to Canon launching a new crop mirrorless system. What exactly is the problem?

No problem at all, I’m simply asking people to look at it from the perspective of Canon and say why would they?

So far the only group of people who are not currently served by Canon are ‘serious’ photographers who want more lenses than the M system has. All I am saying is given that information and the relatively small size of that group I don’t see that it makes financial sense for Canon to release bodies and dedicated lenses to compete in that space.

The other main user groups of crop cameras have Canon options already.

No resistance from me, just a question of projecting logic. Why would Canon invest precious time and resources and manufacturing capacity into yet another line of bodies and lenses when the target market is so small and they can’t keep up with production of the items they already have and are known to be in development.

 

[privatebydesign]

Pro’s pay 6000 for the new R3.
Amateurs pay 999 for the new RP.
Canon, you’ve lost me there...

STOP OVERPRICING PRO GEAR NOW!!!

Pro bodies aren’t overpriced, f2.8 zoom lenses are.

 

[bergstrom]

I don't want a crap FF camera from canon for $799. I'd rather pay $1000 for a little brother of the R5 or R3.

 

[neuroanatomist]

It matters far less than you seem to think. The more you progress in photography the more you'll come to realize this.

In that case, I look forward to you sharing all of the amazing images of subjects the size of a grain of rice, that you’ve taken without a macro lens. Or how about some stellar, close-up images of distant birds in flight that Henri Cartier-Bresson shot with his 50 mm lens. Or the stunning landscapes you’ve captured with your Fuji Instax. Or the studio portraiture you’ve done with a camera’s pop up flash for lighting. Hey, software corrects red-eye, right?

Personally, I know that I will get better results in those respective use cases with my EOS R and MP-E 65, my 1D X and 600/4, EOS R and one of my TS-E or UWA zoom lenses, or my EOS R and 70-200/2.8 with a few strobes in softboxes.

But from your statement, I guess you’ve progressed so immensely far in photography that you’ve come to realize any gear could easily be used to take such images. Can’t wait for you to share the results of your profound progress in photography. Or perhaps it is only your immense ego that has led to a profound attitude of superiority…and you’ve already shared that with us.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

No problem at all, I’m simply asking people to look at it from the perspective of Canon and say why would they?

How is Canon supposed to gauge demand if nobody asks for what they want?
It is up to Canon whether to make it or not.
People here seem to understand that.

 

[IBIS M5]

Isn't it amazing that despite all their disadvantages compared to the competition, Canon manages to sell more ILCs than those competitors and has done so every year for nearly two decades? Why is that, do you think?

Currently and for the past 5 or 10 years people who buy/bought pentamirror cameras and bad evf cameras are people that don't know what they're missing or don't use the viewfinder, so almost the entire population of earth, maybe even most people on this forum.

 

[Rocky]

But an M50 with a FF sensor is pretty much what the RP is.

The selling price = manufacturing cost+ R &D + over head +profit.
The R's has been out for the while. and a old sensor is used. The R&D cost can be dropped drastically, If Profit is trimmed, then $800 FF R is possible with the feature of M50

 

[blackcoffee17]

The selling price = manufacturing cost+ R &D + over head +profit.
The R's has been out for the while. and a old sensor is used. The R&D cost can be dropped drastically, If Profit is trimmed, then $800 FF R is possible with the feature of M50

But what I meant is that an M50 with a FF sensor would be not much different from an RP. So it either needs to have fewer features or the RP will be discontinued.

 

[Sporgon]

It can't do better low-ISO DR than a 750D/T6i, for one. It also can't do better burst rate than a 750D. Both of which are nowhere near "really niche, specialist areas". Neither are 1/8000s shutter speed or 1/250s flash sync, which the x0D models do have thanks to the smaller shutter.

Low ISO DR is irrelevant as it has more than enough for the target audience +70%. Same with burst rate. 1/8000th shutter speed is niche and the difference between 1/250 flash sync and 1/180 is not only anal but irrelevant given HSS. Ironically, given your post, the actual control of flash and flash EC on the RP is excellent. I'm not defending Canon for using the 6DII sensor, I'd have preferred an on chip ADC version, but the fact is it gets the job done 95% of the time and no doubt 100% for the target audience. It is quite a nicely made product, and I could see a cheaper made and simpler product being produced in the future as a 'cheap' entry level FF, as per this thread.

 

[stevelee]

I have an S120 as well, decent but not great. Check out the G series.

I used the S120 for my travel camera for years. I had the S95 (or was it 90?) before that. I bought the G7X II when it came out and was really pleased with it. In 2019 I replaced it with the G5X II, and have appreciated its advancements. At that time I considered the M50, but decided that for my purposes, a camera that fit in my pocket was more than adequate. I use my DSLR and collection of lenses around home and when traveling by car, and the G cameras for travel.

 

[stevelee]

The canon S120 was a GREAT camera. . . a good P&S companion for a dSLR. . . .and a good camera that you could "risk" in public places and whatnot (in terms of simply losing or breaking it).

The "S" series is no longer sold. There are a few "G"s that can replace it. I had a G7 II; great little camera. . . .barely pocketable but really nice images. Current version is the Mk III. I replaced the G7 mk II (due to GAS) with a G5 mk II. . . . .an even better camera; but just on the wrong side of "pocketable". I still take the G5Xii everywhere. . .

The S120 fit my shirt pocket. The G7 II and the G5X II still fit in my pants pocket or jacket pocket. I keep the EVF down until use. I don’t use it much, but I am glad to have it out in bright sunlight when I can’t see the screen well enough to compose the shot.

 

[stevelee]

I'm not defending Canon for using the 6DII sensor, I'd have preferred an on chip ADC version, but the fact is it gets the job done 95% of the time and no doubt 100% for the target audience. It is quite a nicely made product, and I could see a cheaper made and simpler product being produced in the future as a 'cheap' entry level FF, as per this thread.

I have yet to perceive any issue with the 6D2. I have used it since about the time it came out. I read that people who underexpose by four stops don’t care for it, but I don’t do that.