There are currently 3 EOS R system cameras coming in the second half of 2022 [CR2]

It is a lot of fun. Often spend summer evenings at one of the local reservoirs shooting them. A friend of mine sat with me a couple of times with his 300f2.8 and you could almost hear his arms burning. Still, he persevered and got a few nice shots, He now uses a lighter lens. Ont the plus side, once you get the hang of swifts everything else feels slow.
I've attempted swifts and definitely agree a lighter setup wins. The only thing I found harder was dragonflies!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,099
12,863
I think you've misinterpreted my post. What I'm saying is that it's cheaper to make a camera with a built-in EVF, than to produce one without an EVF and then have to buy a clip-on EVF to make it usable for any scene containing action or careful composition. The ridiculous £250 price of the Canon EVF-DC2 accessory makes this abundantly clear.
Cheaper for the consumer to buy, not cheaper for Canon to make. I suspect a cheaper camera and an expensive accessory bought by a small fraction of customers is actually more profitable for Canon.

There was an M6 MkII but not an M5 MkII. Think about that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,099
12,863
which it is.
Say the people who claim the earth is flat.

Sorry, no one but you cares what you think Canon did wrong. Buyers get to decide, and Canon listens to their purchases. The fact that the RP remains a best-selling camera close to 3 years after its launch means the number of people who share your view is not meaningful as far as Canon is concerned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
What do I mean by "more efficient" ?

It's more efficient because it is much easier and quicker to judge composition, exposure, bokeh, depth of field, focus and everything else. The image in an EVF is brighter, clearer and magnified, infintely better IMO than peering at a small screen at arms length.

Using an EVF (or OVF) also means that the camera will be braced against the face, reducing camera shake, and making it a great deal easier to track a moving subject.
EVFs aren't intrinsically better quality, and you've stated in this thread you think a pop up would be better than an add-on, which seems self-contradictory. I already addressed and largely agree with your point re ergonomic stability, but that's beside your point (that the EVF gives superior compositional potential).

If as you later state you're just concerned that omitting the EVF will trickle up to higher level bodies, I'd say don't worry - it's unlikely, doesn't logically follow, and you don't need to defend such fears by claiming your preferred way of shooting is objectively better (because it's not, and it's irrelevant).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

So Canon will bring in 3 cameras many ppl will lament upon, myself probably included, when I hear about the removal of the EVF. Would like to see the M6 II successor, with an R mount, plus an EVF, similar to Sony A7c. No wonder it got Red dot award, looks really neat.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,099
12,863
If as you later state you're just concerned that omitting the EVF will trickle up to higher level bodies, I'd say don't worry - it's unlikely, doesn't logically follow, and you don't need to defend such fears by claiming your preferred way of shooting is objectively better (because it's not, and it's irrelevant).
^^This.

It's like claiming that because APS-C cameras sell more units that FF cameras, you're concerned that Canon will stop making FF cameras and you think they should't because you think FF cameras are better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

Hector1970

CR Pro
Mar 22, 2012
1,554
1,162
I don't mind them bringing out cheaper full frame R's. It makes complete sense.
Bringing out nothing better than the existing R5 is a bit conservative.
I thought they would do a R5DR.
I guess they need to grow the user base.
The users they are targeting this year don't suit the bulk of the lens they've produced so far.
A year of consolidation perhaps
 
Upvote 0
So the R5s and R1 will not come until 2023... and no APS-C glass ever, or maybe merely only a single kit lens? A single crop camera model does not deserves a entire line of crop glass...

It's not going to be a single APS-C camera imo. EOS M is mostly dead with the new releases and they imo want ppl to bring into an RF mound world, even if cameras are going to be a bit bigger.
 
Upvote 0

tron

CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
5,222
1,616
What I would like to see as new cameras (but it will not happen):

R5s (I believe we will have to wait much longer for this)
A R3 like camera with 45Mp sensor (too soon I know )
R7 (maybe but they may start with a mid-level variant like R70?)

I know, I know! I mentioned: "I would like". OK! I will wait 5 years! It's good for my wallet anyway! :D

For now my R5 is being used in a little strange way: Behind a 500mm 4L IS II/2XIII/EOS-R-EF adaptor or behind a RF 24-70L 2.8L IS lens.

But it's not my fault that I use it in a car and the above mentioned tele-combination is very sharp :D
... or that D850 and D500 combine well with 500mm 5.6PF :p
 
Upvote 0

unfocused

Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Jul 20, 2010
7,184
5,483
70
Springfield, IL
www.thecuriouseye.com
Yes I fully realise that there are millions who have never used a viewfinder, and I'd go so far as to say that I'm sure their images suffer as a result of using a camera that way. And sure, manufacturers are just responding to that demand. But I feel that manufacturers also have a *responsibility* to ensure that their products are fit for purpose. And IMO, a stills camera without a viewfinder is not fit for purpose, unless that purpose is to produce technically poor and badly composed snaps.
So basically, you would impose your own viewpoint on all other consumers. And, you would impose your viewpoint even if it means that consumers who can't afford to buy a camera that includes a viewfinder wouldn't be able to get any camera at all. And, those who don't see the need for a viewfinder would be forced to pay for one because you personally can only take "technically poor and badly composed snaps" without a viewfinder.

As far as I'm concerned, Canon can offer any camera they want in any configuration they want. If I don't care for that configuration (and I personally would never buy a camera without a viewfinder) I just won't buy it, but I won't deny others that option. Heck, I would never buy an RP, but that doesn't mean I think Canon shouldn't make one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Upvote 0

AlanF

Desperately seeking birds
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
12,355
22,534
They are fun too. To be fair, some species do hover for a nano second, like these, so are a tad easier than a swift. Handheld on a 7D2 using manual focus.

View attachment 202269
That's at least as good as any DIF I have ever shot if not sharper. But, the AF of the R5 is good enough to catch them in flight. In fact, I bought the R5 after testing it with the adapted EF 100-400mm II, and there are lots of shots in our dragonflies thread. Here is a thread I devoted to it. https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...rf-100-500mm-for-dragonflies-in-flight.40622/
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,998
2,438
UK
EVFs aren't intrinsically better quality, and you've stated in this thread you think a pop up would be better than an add-on, which seems self-contradictory. I already addressed and largely agree with your point re ergonomic stability, but that's beside your point (that the EVF gives superior compositional potential).

If as you later state you're just concerned that omitting the EVF will trickle up to higher level bodies, I'd say don't worry - it's unlikely, doesn't logically follow, and you don't need to defend such fears by claiming your preferred way of shooting is objectively better (because it's not, and it's irrelevant).
We'll have to agree to disagree - I believe that shooting with an EVF *is* objectively better than using a small screen at arms length, for reasons I've already stated several times.
 
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,998
2,438
UK
So basically, you would impose your own viewpoint on all other consumers. And, you would impose your viewpoint even if it means that consumers who can't afford to buy a camera that includes a viewfinder wouldn't be able to get any camera at all. And, those who don't see the need for a viewfinder would be forced to pay for one because you personally can only take "technically poor and badly composed snaps" without a viewfinder.

As far as I'm concerned, Canon can offer any camera they want in any configuration they want. If I don't care for that configuration (and I personally would never buy a camera without a viewfinder) I just won't buy it, but I won't deny others that option. Heck, I would never buy an RP, but that doesn't mean I think Canon shouldn't make one.
Well we are all "imposing our own viewpoint" merely by making comments on a forum...

People are free to make choices, including bad ones.
 
Upvote 0

Deleted

7D2
Sep 30, 2021
111
340
That's at least as good as any DIF I have ever shot if not sharper. But, the AF of the R5 is good enough to catch them in flight. In fact, I bought the R5 after testing it with the adapted EF 100-400mm II, and there are lots of shots in our dragonflies thread. Here is a thread I devoted to it. https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...rf-100-500mm-for-dragonflies-in-flight.40622/
Thanks Alan. I’ve seen that thread and you have some amazing shots. The old 7D2 does AF on dragons OK but nowhere near as well as the R5. Hopefully if an R7 arrives that will be just as good. Currently I am reluctant to get an R5 as my current FF, a 5D4, barely comes off the dusty shelf. I guess I have got comfortable with the crop setup I use. Have use an R5 quite a lot and have been amazed by what it can do in every way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
An add on EVF may not be elegant, but it will allow the camera without an EVF to be sold at that lower price point that Canon may be aiming for, while also giving those who want an EVF the chance to buy the lowest cost R camera. I briefly owned the M6 II and bought the add-on EVF and it worked great for me. I bought the add-on EVF used, so it cost me less than $250. If they offer the low cost R camera without an EVF at all - than that would be a camera I would never buy - even for 50 bucks. There's no way I can hold the camera at arm's length and take the shot along with the fact that you can't see the screen in many lighting conditions. So no EVF means no buy. Add-on EVF means potential buy.

Yes, yes, and when I want to add small Flash or transmitter, I am screwed, as the hot-shoe is occupied by an EVF. If we want a form of M6 II, EVF should be moved to the side, as with Sony A7c imo, to allow such a design form.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
It would be interesting to see a RP mark ii... probably without an EVF for size/cost and be a bridge from phone cameras to full frame.
For me, it could be a great backup body or one where I could use it for star trails overnight. A second hand RP would be another option as well.

Please don't invoke the devil here, or Canon will get a wild idea to refurbish more of the 6D II sensors :)
 
Upvote 0