The down time is here, when is the Canon momentum coming?

[angelisland]

I feel that the 24-105 f/4.0 is just fine - sharp, fast and accurate AF, good IS, no flare issues (unlike the RF 24-70 2.8 which has crazy looking flare when the sun is in the frame!!).This 24-105 is sharper than plenty of the primes I thought were good 20 years ago. Bokeh can be a little busy - but hey - it's a kit lens.
I'd like a good 50 1.4, maybe a 20-70 like Sony now has...a better 50 1.8 (like Nikon has)...
But most of all I would like the cameras to *feel* better. I feel my R5 feels cheap in the hand, back panel feels hollow, mushy recessed buttons etc. It all feels cheap (in terms of external materials) compared to the Z7s and A7r5s of the world.

 

[navastronia]

I just bought two refurbished R6s during the recent sale, so I'm covered for the time being. I'm using them for wedding photography with my set of EF and RF primes.

The next thing I can imagine buying is the RF 15-35/2.8L IS USM and the RF 70-200/2.8L IS USM next year or the year after. Maybe 3 years down the line, two more bodies. By that point, they would likely be R5 Mk IIs.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Quoting is borked now.

I think now would be a good time to address the need for RF-S lenses.

IMO, the only thing really missing is an RF-S UWA zoom (10/11 - 18/22mm). There are a growing number of RF primes (16/2.8, 28/2.8 and the STM macro lenses), and longer RF-S lenses aren’t needed.

Although I shoot FF 5DIV, I recently rented an R7. I was pleased with its performance. I do thothat the body is a but small and probably would have benefited from having an intergrated vertical grip due to its smallish size.

Very unlikely we’ll ever see a gripped APS-C body. I was surprised by the lack of a battery grip at all, though. But I guess they’re not popular – they were being given away with bodies recently.

 

[ashmadux]

It does feel like a weird time for Canon. After a few years of filling out the mirrorless, they seem to have hit a supreme level of stagnation after the R62. It can be argued it started after they dropped rfs with one of the industries worst lens selections.

Look at earlier this year .. practically everyone brought out a 50 mm 1.4. But the leader of mirrorless can't bother with it. Atrocious.

There is absolutely nothing exciting about Cannon's mid-range (low end, really) lenses and I think that's taking a lot of excitement away from the line. A closed amount and then bringing out boring slow lenses and hobbling all of the lower end bodies with no ibis, I mean I as a can of use a wouldn't recommend nom L stuff to anyone.

The treatment of the crop users has especially been egregious. The r100 is an absolute a front to consumers in general.

Canon has turned into a brand that you only get the top end or the lower crap on the bottom. Right now going for a mid-range Panasonic or Sony with a much much better huge selection of lens choices, it's just a much better deal.

 

[neuroanatomist]

they seem to have hit a supreme level of stagnation after the R62.

Yea, in the interminable time period of 7 months since the R6II launched, they’ve only managed to release/announce four bodies and four lenses. You might want to look up the definition of ‘stagnation’, I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

[VegasCameraGuy]

LOL I still have my F1 w/Motordrive from the 70's. It still works.

 

[VegasCameraGuy]

My fear is that a R5 Mark II will be released, and I'll have to make a decision to buy that or somehow hold off until the R1 shows it pretty head!

 

[angelisland]

It's in stock and shipping. Lack of compatibility with the R5 will probably keep stock levels pretty good.

Lack of compatibility… What are you talking about?

 

[neuroanatomist]

Something I\'d like that no-one\'s mentioned is a 24-105/4 MkII. The one we have just is a serious notch below the 50/1.8, 100/2.8, and 100-500 (see my SHOOTOUT tests in this site\'s lens forum).

There’s a reason that no one has mentioned a need for an RF 24-105/4 MkII – the current version is very good. I really think you should consider the strong likelihood that you have a poor/substandard copy of that lens.

Compare Canon’s theoretical MTFs, the 24-105/4 is certainly not a notch below the 50/1.8, the L zoom is better. The 100/2.8 is better than the 24-105/4, as you’d expect for a prime lens in the same price bracket as the zoom. The 100-500 is better, as your expect for a zoom costing over twice as much.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Lack of compatibility… What are you talking about?

The EL-5 flash has the new multifunction shoe, it is not compatible with the R5, R6 (or older bodies), nor with the just-launched R100 that uses the old-style hotshoe.

The EL-5 is hardware compatible with the R5C, but not supported in firmware yet. It works on newer bodies (R3, R7, etc), though with the exception of the newest (R6II, R8) there are some quirks like the AF Assist LED only fires at full power. I see that on my R3, while on my R8 the flash’s LED AF assist varies with scene brightness.

Old flashes are forward-compatible, though. So the 600EX, 270EX, etc., can mount directly in the multifunction shoe of the newer cameras. There is an adapter (AD-E1) but that’s only needed to provide a weather-sealed connection to an older, sealed flash like the 600EX.

Except for the R50, which has the new shoe but lacks the pins for the old flashes. So the R50 can use the EL-5, but requires the AD-E1 for an older flash.

Geez, reading that it’s apparent that Canon’s current flash compatibility is a nightmare. It’s like old Nikon AF lenses where a motor in the camera body drove some of them but not all bodies had that motor, and you needed a chart to see which lenses worked with which bodies.

 

[David - Sydney]

"bringing a R5 with thermal problem has been stupid"... is this really still a thing?
The R5 broke so many boundaries and had a thermal time limit on only 3 video modes... and it got longer with subsequent firmware updates! The A1 still can't record one minute of 8K raw.

 

[john1970]

I would expect a large push in Q4 2023 and Q1 2024 before the summer Olympics.

 

[David - Sydney]

Agreed. The 5.2mm fisheye hit CR a day before its announcement the next day. RF-S lenses weren't on the roadmap mostly because the rumours of APS-C bodies were fairly relaxed. The length of time some of these roadmap lenses have been there but not announced is a very long time.

If CR really want to match forecast vs reality, they should put the date that the lens was added to the roadmap and then the date of announcement... let's not let conjecture get in the way of good statistical analysis!

 

[David - Sydney]

The R5 battery capacity is about the same (within 10%) of the Sony A1. The difference is the efficiency of the processor and other power items. CFe Type B will use more than Type A/SD card I believe so that is one difference with the A1.
A new generation narrower line width processor would make a big difference.

 

[David - Sydney]

What RF-S lenses are missing? Clearly the wide angle (<~29mm ff) are missing but anything longer is handled by RF/EF adapted lenses.

 

[David - Sydney]

What's the story with the weird reply to comments setup?? Much prefer the previous version or at least provide an option to toggle which you prefer to see

 

[neuroanatomist]

CRguy is aware and looking into it.

 

[Juangrande]

I would love to see that! The R5 is too small for comfortable finger dexterity when using. It takes me too much time to operate the controls and they are too close together so I fumble. With the 5Dmk4 body the controls were spread out more and so much easier, faster, and more comfortable to reach the buttons. And I don’t have particularly large hands, although they are not small. I’d rather have to stretch my fingers to reach a control then retract them, which hurts when you have carpal tunnel and arthritis.

 

[danfaz]

The EL-5 will not work on the R5.

 

[woodman411]

It does feel like a weird time for Canon. After a few years of filling out the mirrorless, they seem to have hit a supreme level of stagnation after the R62. It can be argued it started after they dropped rfs with one of the industries worst lens selections.

Look at earlier this year .. practically everyone brought out a 50 mm 1.4. But the leader of mirrorless can't bother with it. Atrocious.

There is absolutely nothing exciting about Cannon's mid-range (low end, really) lenses and I think that's taking a lot of excitement away from the line. A closed amount and then bringing out boring slow lenses and hobbling all of the lower end bodies with no ibis, I mean I as a can of use a wouldn't recommend nom L stuff to anyone.

The treatment of the crop users has especially been egregious. The r100 is an absolute a front to consumers in general.

Canon has turned into a brand that you only get the top end or the lower crap on the bottom. Right now going for a mid-range Panasonic or Sony with a much much better huge selection of lens choices, it's just a much better deal.

I'm looking at things from the opposite angle: during this "period of calm", Canon has been significantly dropping prices through its refurbished arm, for example, the original R6 going for $1,299 and RF 100-400 for $379, if that isn't exciting mid-range value, what is? (the downside I noticed is that the resale value of used R6's dropped significantly) In the meantime, EF lenses keep dropping in price too, I just got a pristine EF 85 f/1.2 II for less than $800 (slow but accurate AF and stabilized on the R6). To me, it's a great time to be bargain hunting, you can probably find deals on EF 50 f/1.4 primes if you don't mind the adapter, I certainly don't as long as the AF works well.

In regards to crop, yes there can be more RFS lenses, but it takes time to build out the lineup, and RFS was introduced only last year.