The next full-frame RF mount camera will be a replacement for the Canon EOS R

[Czardoom]

Good points, its just a bit weird that they decided to launch exotic pro glass but the only camera it would fit on was a mediocre, gimmick-laden model. My guess is that the main reason why a more hi-end body didn't appear first is that they were having problems developing their IBIS modules. The public, rightly or wrongly were demanding IBIS, but Canon weren't ready, so they just pumped out the stop-gap low-spec R. Another indicator that they were well and truly caught on the hop, is the naming system, which leaves a gaping hole between the R5 and R6, and no clear division of names between the FF and APS models.

We get it - you don't llike the R. But pretty much every description you have come up with it only describes your bias - not the camera. "Mediocre, gimmick-laden"...that very well could describe Sony's early mirrorless full-frame ventures. Yes, the R didn't have IBIS or two card slots. Other than that it was essentially a mirrorless 5D IV - costing about $1000 less. Was the 5D IV mediocre in your mind? Gimmick-laden? Oh, I forgot, that swip bar! Everybody hated it except for those few who actually learned that you could use it as just another button. But most folks clearly didn't learn how to use it thus decided to make fun of it. I briefly owned the Sony A7 II - one of those cameras that Canon was so afraid of apparently. I wouldn't trade my R for that camera in a million years. Sure, spec lovers thought those Sonys were great, but my Sony A7 II underexposed by 1 1/2 stops, the EVF was so dim, I often reached up to take off my sunglasses, but wasn't wearing any, and the ergonomics and usability were about as bad as a camera could get. (And I won't even mention the awful weather sealing or still-not-any-good dust removal..oh, I guess i did mention it.) Yes, Canon up until that time made boring, conservative cameras that worked, were comfortable, easy to use, and did all the fundamental things as well or better than anyone (things like exposure and color...)

 

[SnowMiku]

Sometimes it’s cheaper to let a competitor spend all the R&D, innovate, and make mistakes, and then once you know where the demand is, ramp up the spending to catch up quickly and try to leapfrog. I imagine they are extremely frustrated by the supply chain constraints just when they caught up on tech. I don’t understand the naming conventions either, but others on this forum seem to make sense of them.

I was also confused at the naming conventions when I was looking to buy my first Canon DSLR, but they do make sense when you understand them. The next generation R models at this stage will probably be: R20, R7mkII, R6mkII, R5mkII, R3mkII, R1.

At the start I was confused with the 600D and 700D, I thought since 600D was the lower number it was the replacement for 700D, but then when I looked into it the 700D was the replacement for the 600D. Then you have the different names for xxxD in other countries such as Rebel and Kiss which I haven't bothered to look up.

 

[Del Paso]

We get it - you don't llike the R. But pretty much every description you have come up with it only describes your bias - not the camera. "Mediocre, gimmick-laden"...that very well could describe Sony's early mirrorless full-frame ventures. Yes, the R didn't have IBIS or two card slots. Other than that it was essentially a mirrorless 5D IV - costing about $1000 less. Was the 5D IV mediocre in your mind? Gimmick-laden? Oh, I forgot, that swip bar! Everybody hated it except for those few who actually learned that you could use it as just another button. But most folks clearly didn't learn how to use it thus decided to make fun of it. I briefly owned the Sony A7 II - one of those cameras that Canon was so afraid of apparently. I wouldn't trade my R for that camera in a million years. Sure, spec lovers thought those Sonys were great, but my Sony A7 II underexposed by 1 1/2 stops, the EVF was so dim, I often reached up to take off my sunglasses, but wasn't wearing any, and the ergonomics and usability were about as bad as a camera could get. (And I won't even mention the awful weather sealing or still-not-any-good dust removal..oh, I guess i did mention it.) Yes, Canon up until that time made boring, conservative cameras that worked, were comfortable, easy to use, and did all the fundamental things as well or better than anyone (things like exposure and color...)

I couldn't agree more with what you wrote. I love my R, often use the swipe-bar (for artificial horizon), enjoy its reliability and sensor.
Sure, IBIS and double card-slot would have been fine, yet, the R is worth every $ I payed for.
To sum it up, the EOS R is a camera for users, less for specs. lovers, a typical Canon!

 

[LogicExtremist]

The big question is which old sensor will be recycled for the EOS R camera replacement? The majority of Canon Rf cmara bodies use recycled sensors, obviously because its cheaper to do so. They makes a few minor changes, the marketing departments call them new sensors, and all the fanboys jump on the bandwagon and shout everyone down screaming its not the same sensor lol! In reality they're just reworked older sensors. If that keeps purchase costs down too, then fine.

RP uses a reworked 6D II sensor
EOS R uses a reworked 5DIV sensor
R6 uses a reworked 1DX III sensor
R7 uses a reworked 90D/M6 II sensor

I can't see it using a 20MP R6 sensor, as there won't be much to differentiate it from the R6, and with likely lower fps and less features, that would just be a crippled R6. How many 20MP camera bodies does the RF platform need?

Will they reuse the same EOS R sensor, or might we see a new sensor that sits somewhere between the R's 20MP and R5's 45MP? An updated and improved R replacement that has ergonomics and AF performance in line with the RF bodies that came after it would likely be well received!

 

[entoman]

We get it - you don't llike the R. But pretty much every description you have come up with it only describes your bias - not the camera. "Mediocre, gimmick-laden"...that very well could describe Sony's early mirrorless full-frame ventures. Yes, the R didn't have IBIS or two card slots. Other than that it was essentially a mirrorless 5D IV - costing about $1000 less. Was the 5D IV mediocre in your mind? Gimmick-laden? Oh, I forgot, that swip bar! Everybody hated it except for those few who actually learned that you could use it as just another button. But most folks clearly didn't learn how to use it thus decided to make fun of it. I briefly owned the Sony A7 II - one of those cameras that Canon was so afraid of apparently. I wouldn't trade my R for that camera in a million years. Sure, spec lovers thought those Sonys were great, but my Sony A7 II underexposed by 1 1/2 stops, the EVF was so dim, I often reached up to take off my sunglasses, but wasn't wearing any, and the ergonomics and usability were about as bad as a camera could get. (And I won't even mention the awful weather sealing or still-not-any-good dust removal..oh, I guess i did mention it.) Yes, Canon up until that time made boring, conservative cameras that worked, were comfortable, easy to use, and did all the fundamental things as well or better than anyone (things like exposure and color...)

Well no, you don't really "get it". It's not so much that I "don't like the R", and I totally agree about the horrendous ergonomics of early Sony cameras. I just feel that the R could have been a lot better if it hadn't been rushed out. I did actually consider buying one, but after borrowing one and comparing it to my 5DMkiv I decided it made more sense to keep my DSLRs a while longer, and wait until Canon produced a "better" mirrorless camera - a decision I've never regretted. Ultimately I bought the R5, and I still own the 5DMkiv although it is overdue for replacement with another RF mount body.

To answer your other question "was the 5DMkiv mediocre?" - yes, IMO it was. Just compare it to its closest rivals the Nikon D750, D810 and D850, all of which were launched around the same time (or earlier) than the Canon, but were better specified, better performing and more reasonably priced. I was already too deeply tied into Canon (having previously owned 40D, 50D, 6D, 7D, 7DMkii, 5DMkiii and 5DS, plus several Canon L lenses), and the 5DMkiv had the best sensor that Canon made, but compared to Nikon models it was - mediocre.

In my DSLR days there were many times when, if I could have afforded it, I would have gladly switched to Nikon. I'm glad I stuck with Canon though, as their current models (R6, R5, R3, R7) are all extremely good and serve their respective customer niches very well.

 

[EverydayPhotographer]

I think it's quite possible the names R8 and R9 will be used for full-frame cameras. The R7, despite being APS-C, would sit above these full-frames if the R8 and R9 do not have IBIS or dual card slots. It would be a little odd to have an R8 be more expensive than an R7, but it could still work.

Has anyone else besides me noticed that all of the higher end Canon bodies are odd numbers, ie EOS 1, 1D, R1, R3, R5, 5D, etc., while all of the lower end and consumer-aimed bodies have even numbers? 6D, R6, R10, etc.? It seems that only the M series has deviated from that pattern in recent memory.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Has anyone else besides me noticed that all of the higher end Canon bodies are odd numbers, ie EOS 1, 1D, R1, R3, R5, 5D, etc., while all of the lower end and consumer-aimed bodies have even numbers? 6D, R6, R10, etc.? It seems that only the M series has deviated from that pattern in recent memory.

If that's the case the R successor can easily be named R8
But for the R9 either the camera will be odd or the naming cause it won't fit that scheme anymore

 

[SHAMwow]

We get it - you don't llike the R. But pretty much every description you have come up with it only describes your bias - not the camera. "Mediocre, gimmick-laden"...that very well could describe Sony's early mirrorless full-frame ventures. Yes, the R didn't have IBIS or two card slots. Other than that it was essentially a mirrorless 5D IV - costing about $1000 less. Was the 5D IV mediocre in your mind? Gimmick-laden? Oh, I forgot, that swip bar! Everybody hated it except for those few who actually learned that you could use it as just another button. But most folks clearly didn't learn how to use it thus decided to make fun of it. I briefly owned the Sony A7 II - one of those cameras that Canon was so afraid of apparently. I wouldn't trade my R for that camera in a million years. Sure, spec lovers thought those Sonys were great, but my Sony A7 II underexposed by 1 1/2 stops, the EVF was so dim, I often reached up to take off my sunglasses, but wasn't wearing any, and the ergonomics and usability were about as bad as a camera could get. (And I won't even mention the awful weather sealing or still-not-any-good dust removal..oh, I guess i did mention it.) Yes, Canon up until that time made boring, conservative cameras that worked, were comfortable, easy to use, and did all the fundamental things as well or better than anyone (things like exposure and color...)

No way. Strong disagree. If anyone thinks the R was a 1:1 mirrorless match to the 5D IV, they don't know their cameras very well. People who say this, say it because both cameras fit the niche role you used them for. They did not perform the same in many scenarios.

 

[AlanF]

Has anyone else besides me noticed that all of the higher end Canon bodies are odd numbers, ie EOS 1, 1D, R1, R3, R5, 5D, etc., while all of the lower end and consumer-aimed bodies have even numbers? 6D, R6, R10, etc.? It seems that only the M series has deviated from that pattern in recent memory.

Canon consider the R6 to be professional grade https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/...big-video-updates-to-it-and-the-1d-x-mark-iii

 

[Marphoto]

What is the aps-c camera subject for release now they have the R7 and R10?

 

[Mmm Toast]

I’m sure it will be the current EOS R sensor with a new processor to enable the use of Canon’s new AF, higher shutter speed and maybe no crop in 4k.

If it’s not an EOS R II, I bet they will use the R6 body, which means two card slots and no Touch Bar.

Would love an updated EVF and better performance after 6400 ISO, but I think that’s where the costs will be cut, no new sensor, no new evf, no new lcd.

Still, if my speculations were reality, I’d buy that camera.

 

[bergstrom]

What is the aps-c camera subject for release now they have the R7 and R10?

if they can make this, then there's no shortage or materials.

 

[Del Paso]

Has anyone else besides me noticed that all of the higher end Canon bodies are odd numbers, ie EOS 1, 1D, R1, R3, R5, 5D, etc., while all of the lower end and consumer-aimed bodies have even numbers? 6D, R6, R10, etc.? It seems that only the M series has deviated from that pattern in recent memory.

What about the R7?

 

[AlanF]

What about the R7?

Clearly higher end!

 

[entoman]

The big question is which old sensor will be recycled for the EOS R camera replacement? The majority of Canon Rf cmara bodies use recycled sensors, obviously because its cheaper to do so. They makes a few minor changes, the marketing departments call them new sensors, and all the fanboys jump on the bandwagon and shout everyone down screaming its not the same sensor lol! In reality they're just reworked older sensors. If that keeps purchase costs down too, then fine.

RP uses a reworked 6D II sensor
EOS R uses a reworked 5DIV sensor
R6 uses a reworked 1DX III sensor
R7 uses a reworked 90D/M6 II sensor

I can't see it using a 20MP R6 sensor, as there won't be much to differentiate it from the R6, and with likely lower fps and less features, that would just be a crippled R6. How many 20MP camera bodies does the RF platform need?

Will they reuse the same EOS R sensor, or might we see a new sensor that sits somewhere between the R's 20MP and R5's 45MP? An updated and improved R replacement that has ergonomics and AF performance in line with the RF bodies that came after it would likely be well received!

Canon are difficult to predict these days.
The "R Mkii" is apparently going to sit "below" the R6 (presumably this refers to pricing).
I think we can expect significantly lower build quality, a single card slot, only modest burst speed, probably no IBIS, and they'll probably use it to test out some new ergonomic features (as with the R and R7). Low res EVF, and possibly a fixed screen? Sensor could be 20MP, certainly won't be less, but could be 24MP or another rework of the 30MP sensor?

 

[Ozarker]

Yes, and I hope you get them, but Canon is a weird company - sometimes as with the R5, R7 and R3 they surprise us with what many of us would regard as near-perfect cameras, but other times they produce cameras with limited specifications that disappoint. They are pretty good at determining the desires of niche buyers though, as well as generalists, so fingers crossed that all of us find a model in the range that suits us perfectly.

When I got my R5, I was determined to hold out and just continue with my EF glass, but having tried some of the RF glass I quickly became converted, but there are a few pitfalls that you might like to check out with other users:

The RF 100-500mm is an improvement over the EF 100-400mm, with longer max focal length, much better stabilisation, closer focusing and a marginal increase in sharpness, although there are downsides e.g. inability to use an extender at focal lengths shorter than 300mm, and a fairly hefty price tag.

The RF 800mm F11 has amazingly good stabilisation, very light weight and is compact and cheap. Downsides are the fixed F11 aperture which can be limiting in low light, and the modest build quality.

The RF 100mm macro is sharper, quieter and focuses closer than the EF version, and better stabilised, but it's a lot more expensive, and has totally different AF characteristics - disappointing early results led me to completely change my AF settings compared to those that were perfect on the EF version.

Here's to hoping! I actually had the RF 28-70, RF 50mm f1.2, and the RF 85mm f1.2. Fantastic lenses. The pandemic sank that for me. It's going to be a good while before I can recover.

 

[Del Paso]

Clearly higher end!

Also in build?
And no possibility of using a battery -grip?

 

[HMC11]

Well, there are a lot of folks who have an R6, but there is also a big number of people who opted not to get the R6 because of the MP count or the camera being overpriced. Now with a R7 that offers higher FPS and better pixel density, especially for wildlife, I do actually think that a R6 mal II is closer than most people expect. An R6 mk II with a stacked BSI 24-26 MP sensor would intrigue / attract a great number of people, even current R6 owners.

I am thinking along the same line, in that the R7 is making a strong case for wildlife and sports - significantly cheaper (than the R6), better 'reach', more MP, great AF (for the money) etc. This could well affect the sales of the R6, and hence an R6 ii seems to make better sense that an R ii at the moment. My sense is to have a sub-$1k RP ii, a close-to R6 level R ii, and a R6 ii sitting in between R6 and R5. By introducing an R ii first rather than an R6 ii would either drive the sales of the R6 even further down, or end up having a neither here nor there R ii.

 

[Del Paso]

Be patient friends, the kraken will be released soon!

 

[AlanF]

Also in build?
And no possibility of using a battery -grip?

On the speculated classification that odd numbers = higher spec, then R7 must be higher spec!