CR1 is by definition unconfirmed. Using ‘unconfirmed’ in the title of a CR1-labeled post really makes this seem more like pure conjecture.Unconfirmed Canon EOS R7 Specifications [CR1]
You are mixing up the rumors. The specifications are unconfirmed and CR1. But...CR1 is by definition unconfirmed. Using ‘unconfirmed’ in the title of a CR1-labeled post really makes this seem more like pure conjecture.
Canon Rumors said:We have confirmed that the camera will be called the “EOS R7” and it will come this year, Q4 being most likely.
@neuroanatomist is being perfectly logical grammatically. The title has Unconfirmed Canon EOS R7 Specifications, which consists of a compound noun "Canon EOS R7 Specifications" and an adjective "Unconfirmed". It's those specifications that are unconfirmed. Adding [CR1] is using a pleonasm: "Grammar and Rhetoric. The use of more words in a sentence or clause than are necessary to express the meaning; redundancy of expression either as a fault of style, or as a rhetorical figure used for emphasis or clarity."You are mixing up the rumors. The specifications are unconfirmed and CR1. But...
And when were anything but 1 series bodies NOT mixed media (or single card)?They really need to start kicking out dual CF Express card bodies. It is a nasty precedence to see mixed media bodies, though most especially concerning on the R3 and R7(which assumedly is also built for speed).
Not sure I'd call this one a "fact". They went on the record shortly after the 90D saying that the future was not in crop sensors. All but completely killing any 7D3 rumors. Personally, I think they hated how many people looked down to the 7D2 instead of looking up to the 1Dx. The 7D2 was too good for its place in the line.Let’s not forget that the 7D series was so successful that Canon didn’t bother releasing a MkIII model and instead brought out a 90D with many of the 7-series features. Also fact.
The only problem with that person's claim is it doesn't account for all the hundreds of thousands of sales of the R5s and R6s. As such, the actual sales will likely be much lower than what would have been possible prior to the R5/R6.Hundreds of thousands of bird & wildlife photographers that would snap up this camera? Not fact, merely your opinion.
Sorry, you seem to have missed my point. As I said, the specifications are unconfirmed. But, as other Canon Rumors Posts have indicated the planned release of an R7 is confirmed. Neuro, through his numerous posts, has made it clear he doubts that an R7 will ever materialize. He's entitled to that opinion, but as more rumors materialize, it is becoming increasingly likely that his opinion is wrong.@neuroanatomist is being perfectly logical grammatically. The title has Unconfirmed Canon EOS R7 Specifications, which consists of a compound noun "Canon EOS R7 Specifications" and an adjective "Unconfirmed". It's those specifications that are unconfirmed. Adding [CR1] is using a pleonasm: "Grammar and Rhetoric. The use of more words in a sentence or clause than are necessary to express the meaning; redundancy of expression either as a fault of style, or as a rhetorical figure used for emphasis or clarity."
The ‘let’s not forget how successful’ bits are mocking the post to which I was replying. My point is that even though many people on this forum really like the 7-series (as did I, although I far preferred the 1D X that I bought to replace my 5DII/7D combo), the line was apparently not a priority for Canon.Not sure I'd call this one a "fact". They went on the record shortly after the 90D saying that the future was not in crop sensors. All but completely killing any 7D3 rumors. Personally, I think they hated how many people looked down to the 7D2 instead of looking up to the 1Dx. The 7D2 was too good for its place in the line.
His suggestion was that even people who already bought an R5/R6 would also buy an R7. Hundreds of thousands of them, apparently. LOL.The only problem with that person's claim is it doesn't account for all the hundreds of thousands of sales of the R5s and R6s. As such, the actual sales will likely be much lower than what would have been possible prior to the R5/R6.
That is certainly possible. It’s also been observed that the forum has been rather quiet lately. A quiet forum does not generate revenue. Rumors that generate clicks generate revenue. While I believe the 7-series was not particularly profitable for Canon, I believe rumors about an upcoming 7-series MILC are profitable for this site. I will leave the dot connecting to you.Sorry, you seem to have missed my point. As I said, the specifications are unconfirmed. But, as other Canon Rumors Posts have indicated the planned release of an R7 is confirmed. Neuro, through his numerous posts, has made it clear he doubts that an R7 will ever materialize. He's entitled to that opinion, but as more rumors materialize, it is becoming increasingly likely that his opinion is wrong.
Very true. On the other hand, there is some risk for the site owners/administrators if they push rumors that are completely fabricated, as one would hope it would eventually catch up to them. As for this specific rumor though, I would say that the list of "specifications" are just common sense items that either your or I or anyone else who follows this site could have come up with.That is certainly possible. It’s also been observed that the forum has been rather quiet lately. A quiet forum does not generate revenue. Rumors that generate clicks generate revenue. While I believe the 7-series was not particularly profitable for Canon, I believe rumors about an upcoming 7-series MILC are profitable for this site. I will leave the dot connecting to you.
Hopefully the rumors are true as it has been a quiet year from Canon. No idea if the 7 series was profitable for Canon. I own the 7DII and know alot of people who have owned it, I'd have thought it sold quite well but I've never seen any data on it. Not sure I've ever loved my 7DII but its been well used for sport. I hadn't consider an R7 previously but I'm curious. If it were 32 MP that would be good for nature photograph. R3 I didn't find attractive, I had hoped for 30MP minimum to justify it as a purchase for my needs. It's expensive for what it is and felt a stop-gap to the R1. Hopefully R1 rumours will arrive soon, it should generate some revenue and give me something to dream about until the price tag is confirmed.That is certainly possible. It’s also been observed that the forum has been rather quiet lately. A quiet forum does not generate revenue. Rumors that generate clicks generate revenue. While I believe the 7-series was not particularly profitable for Canon, I believe rumors about an upcoming 7-series MILC are profitable for this site. I will leave the dot connecting to you.
I agree, which means some logical person here could easily have emailed in this ‘hot tip’ to the site admin. No need for fabrication. It wouldn’t surprise me if the site receives many such ‘hot tips’ from specibators sending in their (wet) dream camera description.As for this specific rumor though, I would say that the list of "specifications" are just common sense items that either your or I or anyone else who follows this site could have come up with.
Bodies like the R5 ideally should also be dual CF Express. But I can understand that some or most of that user group don’t need their backup card at full speed, so it is easily forgiven.And when were anything but 1 series bodies NOT mixed media (or single card)?
...I sincerely hope it's NOT 32.5MP. First, this is not a "nice balanced resolution for APS-C". In fact, far from it. This is the highest pixel density of ANY sensor being used today in an interchangeable lens camera...Such ultra pixel dense sensor limits usable high ISO and makes the camera more susceptible to shake blur. And it's simply not necessary for a camera of this type...
And it really started in August 2007, when Nikon introduced the D3 and D300 simultaneously. Both were 12MP and used very similar focusing systems. The D3 was FF and the D300 was crop and about half the price. An advantage of the D3 over the D300 was having slightly higher battery voltage and therefore being able to drive long lenses faster. A lot of Nikon pros owned a pair of D3's and a D300 using a D3 most of the time and the D300 when they really needed extra reach.Actually, it is exactly what is necessary for a camera of this type. An R7 would be a specialist camera aimed at bird and wildlife photographers who simply can never get enough pixels on target. There will always be a tradeoff with high pixel density, but most buyers understand that and the tradeoffs are shrinking with modern sensors. Even with the 1.6 magnification, coupled with a 1.4 converter on something like the 100-500 zoom, many users would still be cropping their images significantly because they are distance limited and some subjects (like songbirds) are small anyway.
This is not meant to substitute for the R5, R6 or R3, it is meant to be a companion body. Use the full frame in poor light and sacrifice some resolution. Use the crop R7 in good light when you need more "reach."
I am not sure that CFe Type A will take off in the market either. Only 3 Sony bodies (high end) are using combined Type A/SD cards today and until very recently only Sony was making them. They are expensive and have smaller capacity than Type B and are limited to a single lane so slower as well. As the A1 doesn't do 8K raw (only compressed) then it doesn't need the full bandwidth that the R5 can record at.I agree. With CFExpress is already out in the market, both cards & cameras, CF Express type A makes more sense then SD Express or UHS-III.