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

[neuroanatomist]

Canon announces development of the EOS R-CR​

Melville, NY — Canon, a global leader in imaging products, today announces the development of the EOS R-CR. This revolutionary camera is tailored to meet the specific needs of CanonRumors forum members. Featuring a newly developed high-resolution, backside-illuminated, stacked APS-C sensor with 50 megapixels, an autofocus system later to be seen in the EOS R1, and capturing 40 frames per second, this camera is designed to satisfy the totally realistic desires of the CR forum membership. “One forum member posted that there were hundreds of thousands of people who would buy this camera, so we know there is a strong market for it,“ said Canon CEO Fujio Mitarai.

Pricing for the EOS R-CR will be determined by a poll to be posted soon on the forum, and availability is expected on the sixth Tuesday in September of this year.

 

[Bob Howland]

One could ask the same questions about lenses such as the RF 600mm F4 or other specialist products.
What fraction of the market buys such lenses?

The real question is whether a product will sell in enough numbers to generate a worthwhile profit.

Or whether the Return On Investment for a product is likely to be greater than for the alternative ways of investing that money. The important question is: What are the alternatives?

 

[entoman]

Canon announces development of the EOS R-CR​

Melville, NY — Canon, a global leader in imaging products, today announces the development of the EOS R-CR. This revolutionary camera is tailored to meet the specific needs of CanonRumors forum members. Featuring a newly developed high-resolution, backside-illuminated, stacked APS-C sensor with 50 megapixels, an autofocus system later to be seen in the EOS R1, and capturing 40 frames per second, this camera is designed to satisfy the totally realistic desires of the CR forum membership. “One forum member posted that there were hundreds of thousands of people who would buy this camera, so we know there is a strong market for it,“ said Canon CEO Fujio Mitarai.

Pricing for the EOS R-CR will be determined by a poll to be posted soon on the forum, and availability is expected on the sixth Tuesday in September of this year.

I don't think anyone seriously considers that their personal "dream camera" will ever become reality. The point that some data-favouring folk miss, is that it's actually FUN to speculate and dream up wish-lists. In fact that seems to be the main thrust of the comments section.

 

[Hector1970]

Why did it take Canon 5 years to release a 7DII, longer than any other series update cycle? Why did Canon never release a 7DIII?

Canon knows things we don't, and their treatment of the 7-series does not suggest they believe it to be a 'huge winner'.

Maybe the 7DII was selling away fine and Canon didn’t feel the need to upgrade it with mirrorless on the horizon. Maybe it was a cash cow that kept on selling with no effort required on Canons part. Not sure if there are any sales facts on it. Maybe I know too many wildlife photographers / sports photographers (subset genres) but I know a good few people who own it . I have one myself, not a brilliant camera but is a tough workhorse.

 

[JasonL]

There's no need to speculate on how big the wildlife market is, I've posted real data on this in the past in another thread - https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...rf-lens-price-hike-in-japan.41321/post-927828

I've copied the relevant information below:

"Very few photography professionals shoot wildlife, it's one of the smallest subcategories of photography, see table below, from https://petapixel.com/2020/12/02/br...nsights-from-2020-to-project-trends-for-2021/ which also indicates that it's one of the lowest paying photography niches alongside portrait and family. Yes I know the stats are based on online searches instead of surveys, but they're reasonably indicative otherwise they wouldn't be used!"

So looking at your data, Sports is pretty much even with Animal, though Canon designs and produces flagship cameras for Sports? Just think of the R7 as the flagship for amateur sports and wildlife shooters.

 

[unfocused]

I don't think anyone seriously considers that their personal "dream camera" will ever become reality. The point that some data-favouring folk miss, is that it's actually FUN to speculate and dream up wish-lists. In fact that seems to be the main thrust of the comments section.

Yes. But I admit it's also fun to debate the pros and cons and to poke holes in arguments on either side. I enjoy these exchanges with you because you seem to actually read and respond to the arguments with your own logic. That's enjoyable even if it can be a little too easy at times to get wrapped up in the debate. What's amusing, but not particularly enjoyable, are those who feel the need to "win" every argument. I sometimes imagine what a living hell it must be to live with or work with those people and I am extremely grateful that I don't have to do either one.

 

[Franklyok]

It would makes sense for video, cropped "super 35".

Hopefully the lens goes "into mount" so it would make RF-mount compact.

If normally flange distance is 20 mm, then hopefully they makes , in RF-S case lens could be inserted into "mount pipe", with flange distance 5 - 10 mm.

 

[entoman]

Yes. But I admit it's also fun to debate the pros and cons and to poke holes in arguments on either side. I enjoy these exchanges with you because you seem to actually read and respond to the arguments with your own logic. That's enjoyable even if it can be a little too easy at times to get wrapped up in the debate. What's amusing, but not particularly enjoyable, are those who feel the need to "win" every argument. I sometimes imagine what a living hell it must be to live with or work with those people and I am extremely grateful that I don't have to do either one.

Thank you. "Winning" an argument or proving someone else wrong does seem to be what stimulates one or two prolific commenters to participate. It's particularly unfortunate because those people otherwise have a lot to offer, as they are intelligent and knowledgeable folk. But they just can't resist becoming arrogant or rude to people with less knowledge or different opinions.

 

[Dragon]

Technically possible, but would it also be economically wise?

The market is shrinking. Developing a long tele (which is not long enough) for a second mount, while good/better teles already exist in another mount, is quite odd!

As already mentioned, there is already a Tamron 18-400mm. Why isn't it available for EF-M? Maybe because Tamron doesn't see a market for this in M-system...

Yes, Tamron has an 18-400 (I have one) but is pretty chunky relative to the M system. It also doesn't focus accurately beyond about 200mm (on any camera body), so you have to switch to manual focus to get a sharp shot. Kind of sad, as the optics are actually very decent, particularly for something with that much zoom range. I tweaked Tameron and they offered to tune the lens to focus correctly on my R5, but flatly said M cameras are unsupported. Kind of interesting, given that they make an 18-200 specifically for M cameras (and the focus issue also exists with EF bodies). I still use the 18-400 with the M5 and M6 II as it is the smallest 400mm around, but the MF issue is annoying, and the lens still is not as svelte as canon could make a 100-400 by a wide margin. Given the huge number of M50s in the wild, I think such a lens would be a decent seller.

 

[lote82]

Yes, Tamron has an 18-400 (I have one) but is pretty chunky relative to the M system. It also doesn't focus accurately beyond about 200mm (on any camera body), so you have to switch to manual focus to get a sharp shot. Kind of sad, as the optics are actually very decent, particularly for something with that much zoom range. I tweaked Tameron and they offered to tune the lens to focus correctly on my R5, but flatly said M cameras are unsupported. Kind of interesting, given that they make an 18-200 specifically for M cameras (and the focus issue also exists with EF bodies). I still use the 18-400 with the M5 and M6 II as it is the smallest 400mm around, but the MF issue is annoying, and the lens still is not as svelte as canon could make a 100-400 by a wide margin. Given the huge number of M50s in the wild, I think such a lens would be a decent seller.

Very interesting! I always thought every L-lens user is already spoiled by ultimate image quality and will therefore hate such super-zooms!
I have the Tamron EF 16-300mm for quite a long time and used it extensively. Still like it very much, but since having the Canon EF 15-85mm it's not a favourite anymore. I also think such a lens would sell very well in M system. But as I stated, not offering one is maybe not a good omen for the system...
What do you think of the overall image quality? Is it usable at 400mm? The 16-300 is surprisingly sharp at some focal lengths (for ex. 16mm). But quite weak at 300mm (with F8 acceptable).

 

[Dragon]

Very interesting! I always thought every L-lens user is already spoiled by ultimate image quality and will therefore hate such super-zooms!
I have the Tamron EF 16-300mm for quite a long time and used it extensively. Still like it very much, but since having the Canon EF 15-85mm it's not a favourite anymore. I also think such a lens would sell very well in M system. But as I stated, not offering one is maybe not a good omen for the system...
What do you think of the overall image quality? Is it usable at 400mm? The 16-300 is surprisingly sharp at some focal lengths (for ex. 16mm). But quite weak at 300mm (with F8 acceptable).

The 18-400 is quite sharp at 400mm if carefully focused. The attached files are sample 100% crops. The first one (label) is on the M6 II (manually focused) with a Kenko 2x TC (i.e. 800mm at 80 MP FF equiv) and default LR sharpening. The second (boat) is bare lens autofocused at 400mm on an M5 with a little help from Topaz Sharpen. The AF is not terrible (at least if you do enough tweaking on Tap In console), but it is always just a little off at the long end and when accurately focused, the glass is very good (particularly in the center). There is substantial CA in periphery, so the sides and corners are fairly soft, but that part of the lens is not used with a TC so the TC performance is quite good. It doesn't compete with the EF 100-400 II, but it is not all that far off, at least in the center, and it is much smaller and lighter (but still not nearly as small and light as Canon could make a 100-400 M lens). That is the news on my copy. YMMV. BTW, I have an EF 800L f/5.6 and also an RF 800 f/11. Again, the L wins the IQ battle, but not by all that much and the portability difference is huge. L lenses have excellent quality, but they are not always practical to lug to the destination and thus the attractiveness of the M system.

 

[entoman]

The 18-400 is quite sharp at 400mm if carefully focused.

I've got no experience with this lens, but it seems odd that it apparently focuses accurately at short focal lengths, but poorly at long focal lengths.

Could it be that it does actually focus poorly at *all* focal lengths, but that the deeper d.o.f. at shorter focal lengths is enough to cover the error?

MILCs are supposed to achieve accurate focus with all lenses. I'd guess that any error that creeps in is either due to the focus-motors continuing to operate *after* focus has been achieved; or is due to lag in the signal between the camera body and the lens circuitry.

 

[Dragon]

I've got no experience with this lens, but it seems odd that it apparently focuses accurately at short focal lengths, but poorly at long focal lengths.

Could it be that it does actually focus poorly at *all* focal lengths, but that the deeper d.o.f. at shorter focal lengths is enough to cover the error?

MILCs are supposed to achieve accurate focus with all lenses. I'd guess that any error that creeps in is either due to the focus-motors continuing to operate *after* focus has been achieved; or is due to lag in the signal between the camera body and the lens circuitry.

No, it focuses accurately up to about 200mm and then it reliably focuses a little beyond the subject no matter whether the camera is SLR or Mirrorless. It never was really right and initially required a lot of tweaking on the Tap In console to get it right with an SLR, but after a firmware upgrade, there is just no getting it on the money. At this point, I use it only on the M cameras and just manually focus it for the long end. The manual focus is a little stiff at the long end and that may be the source of the issue if the motors don't have enough torque. When Tamron said they didn't support the M cameras with the lens and wanted a camera body to tune it to for any supported camera, I gave up the quest since the focus inaccuracy is pretty much the same independent of body or camera type. The issue may be only with my lens, but I have a suspicion that Tamron would say the AF is in spec as it is close, but not cigar. Too bad, because the glass itself is very good for a lens of this type. Another copy may well produce different results, but I don't love it enough to buy another copy to see and further, another copy may not be as sharp as this one no matter how it is focused . Actually, there is one exception where it does seem to focus correctly (no matter how it is tweaked on the Tap In) and that is the 5 DSR in live view, which uses contrast detection and keeps nudging the focus until it is peaked. DPAF seems to work more like SLR focus in that it measures the error and tells the lens where to go, but doesn't go beyond the focus point and hunt back and forth to peak the focus like contrast detect does. DPAF is more accurate than SLR, because there is no opportunity for error between measurement and the sensor, but it still seems to be sensitive to lenses not doing what they are told. Lenses designed for SLR work fine on DPAF, but many of them are very unhappy with contrast detect, because they are not designed for the incremental tweaking that is involved. At least that is my observation.

 

[TonyPM]

Canon desperately needs an RF Rebel!
Good Af, stabilisation, good APSC image quality, without going overboard with the price.

In the last years of the efs mount canon came up with some pretty nice lenses for it.

They should think about that.

 

[David - Sydney]

That said, smartphones are rapidly catching up in places where compact cameras shine. Perhaps it won't be long before smartphones become a viable alternative to a crop sensor and FF is the better option for most professionals and enthusiasts.

Smartphones are already a viable alternative to the detriment of the compact camera segment. I personally only use my R5/lenses where using my smartphone wouldn't get acceptable shots given their computational photographic algorithms. Canon are happy with the M product line but focusing (boom tish) on FF/R mount for long term profitability and selling more RF lenses

 

[David - Sydney]

Maybe the 7DII was selling away fine and Canon didn’t feel the need to upgrade it with mirrorless on the horizon. Maybe it was a cash cow that kept on selling with no effort required on Canons part. Not sure if there are any sales facts on it. Maybe I know too many wildlife photographers / sports photographers (subset genres) but I know a good few people who own it . I have one myself, not a brilliant camera but is a tough workhorse.

I am sure that the 7Dii did have a cash cow period of time but then went into decline. It is still available for sale as a kit at B&H "Canon EOS 7D DSLR Camera with 18-135mm Kit" but discontinued everywhere else I could see. Perhaps B&H still have some stock in their warehouse to get rid of.
Canon would have their sales figures but no one else besides the retailers. Only BCN publishes that data from about half of the Japanese retailers.

 

[David - Sydney]

You beat me to it. The number of professional photographers is miniscule compared to the number of amateurs, and the photographic genres and motivations of amateurs will be completely different, e.g. it's highly unlikely that "weddings" or "portraits" would be at the top of the list.

I'd guess that the most popular subjects with amateurs would be, in descending order:

Selfies
Family
Travel
Landscape
Animals
Sports
Portrait
Food
Wedding

... and how many amateurs photograph "fashion"?

I would suggest for amateur togs....
Selfies - 99% would be via smartphone now. Although I have taken a 16mm selfie with my R5 with articulated screen out - it wasn't great. Crop sensor for reach would be unlikely
Family - Majority by smartphone but prosumers shooting family events for sure
Travel - I see a mix... smartphones for sure but some prosumers. For me, the difference would be a "record shot" vs a creative shot
Landscape - definitely a category for prosumers including seascape, waterfalls and cityscapes
Animals - zoos and wildlife for prosumers
Sports - prosumers for indoor sports and telephoto shots of kids sports would be a larger segment of prosumers as smartphones aren't great in low light/telephoto
Portrait - informal portraits (including fashion?) are mostly by smartphone but certainly some prosumers are doing portrait shoots
Food - instagrammers use smartphones. Professional togs for sure. Is there much food photography by prosumers?
Wedding - prosumers doing freebies but most couples would spring for a professional if they could afford it. Secondary prosumers or specific parts of the wedding eg reception for sure

I'd also add
- Architecture (not real estate)
- Macro (wildlife and other), astro (deep and wide angle plus events like eclipses) for prosumer togs towards to bottom
- Specialty niches of urban decay and trains/ planes/ automobiles

 

[Otara]

I am sure that the 7Dii did have a cash cow period of time but then went into decline. It is still available for sale as a kit at B&H "Canon EOS 7D DSLR Camera with 18-135mm Kit" but discontinued everywhere else I could see. Perhaps B&H still have some stock in their warehouse to get rid of.
Canon would have their sales figures but no one else besides the retailers. Only BCN publishes that data from about half of the Japanese retailers.

Im not as sure, I think it did OK but not as well as the 7D. Which is why we didnt see the III and why we havent seen Canon release a true equivalent to the 150-600mm zooms. They were popularish 'budget' options but not profitable enough they thought they needed to go into that price area.

 

[lote82]

Im not as sure, I think it did OK but not as well as the 7D. Which is why we didnt see the III and why we havent seen Canon release a true equivalent to the 150-600mm zooms. They were popularish 'budget' options but not profitable enough they thought they needed to go into that price area.

150-600 is indeed a very useful zoomrange. Very good not only for wildlife but also for near-macro and landscape shots (and portrait). There are quite a lot of options by other manufacturers (Tamron, Sigma). Maybe Canon was just too late developing one and now the market is saturated. I have the Sigma 150-600mm Cont. and use it only on 7D II. So I don't know how it performs on FF. All I can say (for APS-C) it's a fantastic lens which I highly recommend. Towards 600mm it gets a bit softer but still good (stopped down very good). It's also quite sharp in the corners (on APS-C).

 

[okaro]

If they only plan to release the R7 as APS-C then there wouldn't be much point in making RF-S lenses as the 7 series is aimed at professional telephoto wildlife and sports. I can only see the RF-S lens happening if they replace the M series with RF equivalents. Or they could make lenses with a APS-C image circle and label it as RF but that would be confusing for the rumored entry level RF full frame bodies.

People do not buy cameras for single use only. Even if they are interested mainly on wildlife or sports photography they generally also want to do general photography and they need lenses for that full frame lenses in general are too heavy and expensive. Now 16 mm is basically only practical affordable general purpose lens that works with APS-C.

Also R7 is not intended to be a professional camera but something for a serious hobby photographer like 7D was. Professionals will want a full frame camera.