Is Canon actually going to launch RF-S lenses alongside the Canon EOS R7?

[neuroanatomist]

…at some point we may have to accept that Canon actually knows the market better than the self-appointed experts on this forum.

That’s been my point all along.

People on this forum claim DSLRs are dead. Canon knows they sell over a million of them a year, accounting for about one-fourth of all current ILC sales. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming DSLRs are dead, and Canon will go on making and selling them.

People on this forum claim the EOS M line is dead. Canon knows it’s the best-selling ILC domestically. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming the EOS M line is dead, and Canon will go on making and selling them.

People on this forum claim there is a huge demand for a 7-series APS-C MILC. Canon launched the 7D in 2009, and knew exactly how many units sold. It took them 5 years to bring out the 7DII, a longer refresh cycle than any other camera line including the 1-series. Canon knows exactly how many 7DII units sold. It’s been 8 years now, and there has been neither a 7DIII nor a mirrorless replacement. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming there is massive demand for a high-end Canon APS-C MILC, when logic shows the demand cannot be that high or Canon, who we agree knows the market better than anyone on this forum, has not seen any need to meet that supposed demand.

 

[Blue Zurich]

That’s been my point all along.

People on this forum claim DSLRs are dead. Canon knows they sell over a million of them a year, accounting for about one-fourth of all current ILC sales. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming DSLRs are dead, and Canon will go on making and selling them.

People on this forum claim the EOS M line is dead. Canon knows it’s the best-selling ILC domestically. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming the EOS M line is dead, and Canon will go on making and selling them.

People on this forum claim there is a huge demand for a 7-series APS-C MILC. Canon launched the 7D in 2009, and knew exactly how many units sold. It took them 5 years to bring out the 7DII, a longer refresh cycle than any other camera line including the 1-series. Canon knows exactly how many 7DII units sold. It’s been 8 years now, and there has been neither a 7DIII nor a mirrorless replacement. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming there is massive demand for a high-end Canon APS-C MILC, when logic shows the demand cannot be that high or Canon, who we agree knows the market better than anyone on this forum, has not seen any need to meet that supposed demand.

Wait...you actually mean that what we see around us when out and about, what our friends own and what people chat about online might not be what Canon knows?

I am shocked I tell you.

 

[Botts]

An RFS lens lineup does not make sense to me, but what do I know. The RFS would be a mirrorless equivalent of the EF-S. Wait and see, but I would only buy RF lenses so they could be used on both cropped and full frame mounts.

The more affordable RF lenses seems completely reasonable in price and the RP isn't that expensive. Given the markets move to more Prosumer, does crop make sense still?

I'm still waiting for an EOS R replacement, that thing is long in the tooth, but still packs some features that make it more desirable than an RP, but the choice still feels kind of yucky.

 

[lote82]

I'd bet dollars to doughnuts an M to EF, now RF upgrade path theory, in general is a CR thing, not a Canon thing. I have never, not once felt all of a companys lines needed to blend and merge.

Any industry. Nothing wrong with distinct, stand alone product lines.

Furthermore, are any people on CR heralding the M to RF path really in that boat? A few sure but....As always, we are a small minority and the notion Canon reads this site makes me crack up. Sorry Craig.

In a shrinking market with unpredictable future strictly seperated product lines make companies unflexible and it's more expensive to develop new products...
Sony and Nikon aren't stupid! Canon will go with RF in the same direction

 

[john1970]

The more affordable RF lenses seems completely reasonable in price and the RP isn't that expensive. Given the markets move to more Prosumer, does crop make sense still?

I'm still waiting for an EOS R replacement, that thing is long in the tooth, but still packs some features that make it more desirable than an RP, but the choice still feels kind of yucky.

I think crop makes sense for those who want a lightweight setup for wildlife. A R7 coupled with a 100-500 mm lens would be a very solid combination. Just my opinion.

 

[Czardoom]

The more affordable RF lenses seems completely reasonable in price and the RP isn't that expensive. Given the markets move to more Prosumer, does crop make sense still?

I'm still waiting for an EOS R replacement, that thing is long in the tooth, but still packs some features that make it more desirable than an RP, but the choice still feels kind of yucky.

Currently on Amazon.com, you can buy a DSLR rebel w/ kit lens for $499. You can buy the M50 w/ kit lens for $699. The RP (body only) is $999. This is why crop still makes sense, and the move to more Prosumer is still not replacing the Rebels and the M50 as Canon's best selling cameras on Amazon (and no doubt other similar retailers). For the vast majority of people, $500-700 difference is still a big deal.

 

[Czardoom]

That’s been my point all along.

People on this forum claim DSLRs are dead. Canon knows they sell over a million of them a year, accounting for about one-fourth of all current ILC sales. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming DSLRs are dead, and Canon will go on making and selling them.

People on this forum claim the EOS M line is dead. Canon knows it’s the best-selling ILC domestically. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming the EOS M line is dead, and Canon will go on making and selling them.

People on this forum claim there is a huge demand for a 7-series APS-C MILC. Canon launched the 7D in 2009, and knew exactly how many units sold. It took them 5 years to bring out the 7DII, a longer refresh cycle than any other camera line including the 1-series. Canon knows exactly how many 7DII units sold. It’s been 8 years now, and there has been neither a 7DIII nor a mirrorless replacement. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming there is massive demand for a high-end Canon APS-C MILC, when logic shows the demand cannot be that high or Canon, who we agree knows the market better than anyone on this forum, has not seen any need to meet that supposed demand.

Neuro, don;t you see, people don't want facts and data because facts and data interfere with their desire to show how smart they are. Anybody can look at the data and make reasonable deductions, but what is the fun in that? Better to show how smart you are by somehow finding a new theory, a unique interpretion, so that you stand out from the crowd! It's a "hot take" world. The more outrageous the better! You, my friend, are a party-pooper!

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I'd bet dollars to doughnuts an M to EF, now RF upgrade path theory, in general is a CR thing, not a Canon thing. I have never, not once felt all of a companys lines needed to blend and merge.

I doubt it is most people but there are people who want Canon professional mirrorless cameras but can't afford them yet.
I can see them being a little frustrated. That being said all they need is a Viltrox adapter and EF lenses until they can afford an RP.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

The more affordable RF lenses seems completely reasonable in price and the RP isn't that expensive. Given the markets move to more Prosumer, does crop make sense still?

For people who want distance that 1.6 crop will save a lot of money on lenses.
Canon did make super-telephoto more accessible with the RF 100-400, RF 100-500, RF 600 f/11, and RF 800 f/11 but those could still benefit from a 1.6 crop.
People who just want to save money are probably better off just sticking to older cameras anyway.

 

[reefroamer]

Agree. From the 1960s to the 2000s there was a single dominant 35mm SLR format, which still drives today's cameras and was preceded by the 35mm rangefinders. APS-C was created for financial and technical reasons having to do with sensor development at the time. There is no good reason why consumer level cameras have to have an APS-C sensor today as the cost differences have become insignificant.

On the other hand, the APS-C format as a viable option for enthusiasts seeking to artificially extend the "reach" of their lenses is a genie that can't be put back in the bottle. It makes sense for Canon to offer a high-end option for people who have the disposable income to buy an R7, and it appears from the increasing pace of the rumors and increased confidence of the site administrators that such a body is on its way. Skepticism is certainly justifiable, but at some point we may have to accept that Canon actually knows the market better than the self-appointed experts on this forum.

Absolutely agree. Canon just needs a viable business case and the parts supply to make an enthusiast R7. Only Canon knows if the numbers add up. I hope they do. I bought my RF 100-500 with the outside hope I could pair it someday to a good crop-sensor R-mount body someday in addition to R6. Loved the Ef 100-400 with my 7DII, but sold them recently.

 

[entoman]

I'm nearly sure there will be APS-C RF cameras and therefore also RF-S lenses. My biggest concern is if it will be really R7 like or rather R90 (or even entry model).

It doesn't necessarily follow that APS-C RF cameras would result in RF-S lenses, except maybe for one or two compact kit lenses, because there are already many compact and lightweight RF lenses that would perfectly complement an APS-C body, e.g:

RF 16mm F2.8
RF 35mm F2.8 macro
RF 24-240mm F4-6.3
RF 85mm F2 macro
RF 600mm F11
RF 800mm F11

Multiply the focal length of the above lenses by 1.6x and you end up with a very solid and very affordable collection of lightweight lenses covering everything from 25mm-1280mm in full frame equivalents. All that is missing is an ultra-wide zoom, which could be one of the two kit lenses.

If the imaginary "R7" is a Rebel or 90D replacement, the above lenses are probably enough to satisfy potential purchasers.

If the imaginary "R7" is a serious sports/ wildlife tool, just use existing hi-end RF lenses, and get greater reach from using shorter and lighter focal lengths.

 

[lote82]

That’s been my point all along.

People on this forum claim DSLRs are dead. Canon knows they sell over a million of them a year, accounting for about one-fourth of all current ILC sales. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming DSLRs are dead, and Canon will go on making and selling them.

People on this forum claim the EOS M line is dead. Canon knows it’s the best-selling ILC domestically. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming the EOS M line is dead, and Canon will go on making and selling them.

People on this forum claim there is a huge demand for a 7-series APS-C MILC. Canon launched the 7D in 2009, and knew exactly how many units sold. It took them 5 years to bring out the 7DII, a longer refresh cycle than any other camera line including the 1-series. Canon knows exactly how many 7DII units sold. It’s been 8 years now, and there has been neither a 7DIII nor a mirrorless replacement. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming there is massive demand for a high-end Canon APS-C MILC, when logic shows the demand cannot be that high or Canon, who we agree knows the market better than anyone on this forum, has not seen any need to meet that supposed demand.

This site is about rumors. And rumors are about the future and NOT what's now! You cannot predict the future only by looking what's now. If something is selling well TODAY doesn't mean it's also selling well in the FUTURE. Canon (and some self announced experts!) can make prognoses by a lot of data only they have. But data can fail, and therefore prognoses can fail. In the end some human (manager) has to decide which way to go. And he can also fail. No one can predict the future (except self announced experts of course!)

 

[reefroamer]

It doesn't necessarily follow that APS-C RF cameras would result in RF-S lenses, except maybe for one or two compact kit lenses, because there are already many compact and lightweight RF lenses that would perfectly complement an APS-C body, e.g:

RF 16mm F2.8
RF 35mm F2.8 macro
RF 24-240mm F4-6.3
RF 85mm F2 macro
RF 600mm F11
RF 800mm F11

Multiply the focal length of the above lenses by 1.6x and you end up with a very solid and very affordable collection of lightweight lenses covering everything from 25mm-1280mm in full frame equivalents. All that is missing is an ultra-wide zoom, which could be one of the two kit lenses.

If the imaginary "R7" is a Rebel or 90D replacement, the above lenses are probably enough to satisfy potential purchasers.

If the imaginary "R7" is a serious sports/ wildlife tool, just use existing hi-end RF lenses, and get greater reach from using shorter and lighter focal lengths.

And there is the fact that existing EF-S 10-18 and 10-22 lenses can be easily adapted for ultra wide needs. I don’t think that’s where an R7 would be targeted, but I doubt it would be an impediment to sales, especially early on.

 

[Dragon]

I seriously doubt there will ever be an APS-C mirrorless Rebel, much as some people here might want one. Times have changed since the first Rebel was introduced in 2003 for $899 body, $999 kit, with a 6mp sensor. The Rebel line was wildly popular, but in 2007 the first iPhone launched. And the photography market changed. Today, more than 2 billion iPhones — all with cameras — have been sold, plus all the Android smartphones. For people who want a better camera to explore more serious photography there’s the now-$899 Canon EOS RP. It’s a little long in the tooth, but still a great entry point with an easy upgrade path in the modern Canon mirrorless full-frame system. So what does Canon (and the entry level camera customer) really have to gain from cheaper mirrorless Rebel with a cropped sensor? I just seriously doubt there’s much more gold to mine in that market with any ILC.

An upmarket R7 in the $2,000-$2,500 range might make more sense, if Canon sees enough potential buyers to justify the expense of bringing it to market. I’m skeptical Canon can even make that case, though personally I’d love to see a competent R7 described by this rumor.

I live on a tourist destination island where 10 years ago it was common to see visitors lugging around Rebel-type cameras. Today, not so much. nearly everyone is snapping away with their very adequate smartphone cameras. Sure, I rarely see anyone with a serious camera-lens combo, but when I do it’s not an inexpensive Rebel-type. I just think that time has gone. We’ll see what Canon thinks. I could be wrong.

It must also be remembered that the $899 spent on the original rebel is now worth $1,402, which is over $100 more than an RP with a 24-105 kit lens. The only issue is that the RP is long in the tooth and needs a more competent replacement. That same math puts the M50 mark II at $448 in 2003 $, or almost exactly half the price of that original rebel. The term "entry level camera" needs to be thought about before being loosely tossed around, particularly when mobile phones are going for north of $1,000.

 

[lote82]

It doesn't necessarily follow that APS-C RF cameras would result in RF-S lenses, except maybe for one or two compact kit lenses, because there are already many compact and lightweight RF lenses that would perfectly complement an APS-C body, e.g:

RF 16mm F2.8
RF 35mm F2.8 macro
RF 24-240mm F4-6.3
RF 85mm F2 macro
RF 600mm F11
RF 800mm F11

Multiply the focal length of the above lenses by 1.6x and you end up with a very solid and very affordable collection of lightweight lenses covering everything from 25mm-1280mm in full frame equivalents. All that is missing is an ultra-wide zoom, which could be one of the two kit lenses.

If the imaginary "R7" is a Rebel or 90D replacement, the above lenses are probably enough to satisfy potential purchasers.

If the imaginary "R7" is a serious sports/ wildlife tool, just use existing hi-end RF lenses, and get greater reach from using shorter and lighter focal lengths.

I don't care about lenses. I already have all I need as EF and EF-S an zero problem with adapting them! A new ultra wide zoom or general purpose zoom (like 15-85) as RF-S would be nice, but I don't need it. Right now I only care about cameras. By the way... Even if Canon decides not to build RF-S lenses, maybe some other manufacturer will!

 

[John Wilde]

That’s been my point all along.

People on this forum claim DSLRs are dead. Canon knows they sell over a million of them a year, accounting for about one-fourth of all current ILC sales. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming DSLRs are dead, and Canon will go on making and selling them.

People on this forum claim the EOS M line is dead. Canon knows it’s the best-selling ILC domestically. So people who believe their own opinions over facts and data will keep claiming the EOS M line is dead, and Canon will go on making and selling them.

I think the big long-term question is "Will Canon allow DSLRs and/or M to slowly wither away by not continuing to develop new models of them?

 

[lote82]

I think crop makes sense for those who want a lightweight setup for wildlife. A R7 coupled with a 100-500 mm lens would be a very solid combination. Just my opinion.

Some hardcore "data" and "facts" fascists won't stop telling you there is no market for this and/or it's only your opinion...
But I'm with you!

 

[lote82]

216 comments on a rumor with zero credibility strongly indicates that there is no market for this rumor ... Ask [B]neuroanatomist[/B] for further explanation!

 

[Dragon]

216 comments on a rumor with zero credibility strongly indicates that there is no market for this rumor ... Ask [B]neuroanatomist[/B] for further explanation!

216 comments spread over little more that a dozen commenters strongly indicates --- nothing! (with due credit to Shakespeare).

 

[lote82]

216 comments spread over little more that a dozen commenters strongly indicates --- nothing! (with due credit to Shakespeare).

So... You wrote here for "nothing"?
Sounds like sadly waste of time!
Maybe you should find a hobby... I find photographing quite relaxing!