Better would be quad pixel. There are some situations where current Canon MILCs simply cannot lock focus because they are insensitive to horizontally oriented contrast features.The hit rate is so high already, I'm not sure what 'better' would look like in this case in order to make a noticeable improvement. I suppose the R3 is faster at tracking and acquisition on account of the stacked sensor. QPAF looms, at least in the rumor-verse, which could improve acquisition in some scenarios.
What are you thinking for improvements?
That is indeed true. I should have stated my assumption that the R1 is probably going to have a similar or even lower mp than the R5. In that case, a better sensor with a stronger MTF coupled with the same lens should technically perform better.I own an A7RIV any weakness that a lens has just gets amplified on 61mp. An older lens can certainly be used on a higher megapixel body but you won’t get the most out of the sensor in terms of fine detail.
I seriously doubt that Canon will choose not to offer a FF R camera costing less than the R6. The last time I checked R8 and R9 are still available.When Canon started to "number" the R series, it seems that define the R7 right under the R6 leaves no room for "low end FF". Thus, I don't think there will be a "direct" R or RP replacements, the R10 and R100 does the "lower end" for R cameras while the R6 is the closest to the "R" replacement in a way. The RP, as "low end FF" has probably filled its place in the camera history.
Only the 'a' and 'P' are taken, so they have a bunch of the alphabet left as wellI seriously doubt that Canon will choose not to offer a FF R camera costing less than the R6. The last time I checked R8 and R9 are still available.
If the price is between the R7 and R10, then it works out just fine. Or they could just go R50 and R60. Who cares what the numbers are? They can number the cameras any way they want. The number police will be upset, but camera buyers won't care.
It doesn't need to be FFBreaking news. R10 is secretly FF !
I don't recall that statement from Canon. Can you give us a source?Canon has stated, there will be no more R and RP variants. The numbered versions are what you get. Deal with it, it's a pretty good lineup for a new-ish system. In this economy it's never been a better time to embrace the mantra "shoot with what you have'
R10 is a compact FF body?The "RP successor" already exists. It's called the R10.
Somehow you contradict yourself.The RP continues to sell well, but I don't think a FF successor is on the cards.
The R10 is cheaper, better specified and has everything that a budget camera needs.
Nope!It doesn't need to be FF
The 24MP APS-C sensor in the R10 will produce images at least as good as the ageing 26MP FF sensor of the RP.
I read it here! It was an interview with a Canon C Suite dude. Caveat: direct replacement can be construed as many things, the interview stated there will be no more versions of those two bodies. How's that?I don't recall that statement from Canon. Can you give us a source?
I'd agree that a direct replacement for the original R is unlikely. However, a replacement for the RP seems very likely, regardless of whether or not it is called an RP.
Of course the RP will be replaced eventually. It just may not be called "RP." The cost differential between full frame and crop sensors is no longer what it once was. It makes just as much sense for Canon to produce low cost full frame bodies as it does to produce low cost crop sensor bodies. In fact, it may make more sense, since buyers of the full frame body will be able to use their lenses on more expensive models without having to crop.R10 is a compact FF body?
If not, it isn't an "RP successor", and you should study camera specs more carefully.
R10 is not on my scope.
Somehow you contradict yourself.
If the R10 is so much better, why does the RP sell so well?
And if a small FF budget cam sells so well even with outdated specs, why shouldn't it be replaced sometime?
A compact FF (!) body with better sensor than the RP is the first thing to draw me into the R system.
If that market is not big enough for Canon, I'll understand. But they won't get my money. That's market economy.
When I see people post "the RP is crap" stuff, I have to wonder if they've ever actually used one. Personally, I find that it delivers a lot of bang for the buck, and it's a great, simple to use little camera. Could it be better? Sure, but I can say the same thing about pretty much every camera I've ever used, ever. Pair it with the RF/50 and the RF/16 and you have a relatively small and light kit that lets you shoot standard and wide, with a medium wide in 1.6x crop mode, and a nice portrait tight in 1.6x crop mode on the RF/50.LOL. Try to get a grip on reality. You can call the RP 'crap' until you're blue in the face. So can other forum-dwellers (though honestly, I don't see many complaints).
The feedback Canon's leadership is listening to is that last week the RP was the best-selling full frame camera in Japan and the 4th best-selling ILC overall in Japan (with Canon cameras also comprising the top 3).
View attachment 204380
Same here, I don't recall seeing a statement either. I can see no replacement R (current R users go to either the R5 or R6), but if the RP is selling good, I can see a revision where it gets the current R sensor to keep costs low.I don't recall that statement from Canon. Can you give us a source?
I'd agree that a direct replacement for the original R is unlikely. However, a replacement for the RP seems very likely, regardless of whether or not it is called an RP.
Nope!Nope!
The ageing 21 MP FF sensor of my 5D2 (sold) was way better than the newer 24 MP APS-C sensor of my 200D.
So I know what I am talking about and why I want a FF sensor. (newer and an RP sized body)
That's your opinion - not mine.Nope!
What you (and I) want is not what the average RP or R10 buyer wants. Unless persuaded otherwise by influencers or salespersons, they won't care whether the camera has a APS-C sensor or a FF sensor. What they are looking for is an up to date, well specified camera that will take good enough pictures to satisfy them, and an APS-C sensor is more than good enough for that. I actually know of a couple of pro wildlife (macro) photographers who have switched from FF cameras to an even smaller sensor, i.e. M43, and others who are seriously considering the same move.
FF is only really necessary for people who (like myself) often shoot in low light and/or want to exploit shallow depth of field. Few novices fit in that category.
There was no contradiction in my earlier comments - the RP is a nice camera and continues to sell well, but no model lasts forever. People crave for the latest gear, and for novices the R10 fits the bill extremely well and I predict that it will within a few months outsell the RP.
The R10 also makes an excellent and affordable lightweight backup or second body for more serious photographers, a better choice IMO than an RP. I'll bet that for typical usage most owners would be unable to tell the difference between an RP image and a R10 image. Critical users will in any case have the sense to use a modern denoise program to overcome any minor increase in noise resulting from a smaller sensor.