A couple of EOS R cameras that can be considered “pro” are in the pipeline [CR1]

[scyrene]

"Pro" for Canon is an excuse to put the price even higher. The EOS R is grossly overpriced for what it is and these cameras will no doubt continue the trend. For 2 or 3 other manufacturers you can get great dynamic range, IBIS, excellent video features, dual card slots (in 2), fast FPS and more for £1600-£2000. The EOS R gives you none of that for £2350. It's not a bad camera but it's a very overpriced camera. If they reduced it to around £1400-£1500 it would make way for a £2000ish camera that can actually compete in specs vs price.

If they're able to sell enough (by their standards, presumably to make a healthy profit), why would they charge less? If competitors offer "better value" yet customers don't select those products, then they are de facto competing. They're a business, not a charity.

 

[flip314]

Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Are you from Calgary? That actually explains a lot.

 

[scyrene]

I should note however that a sub-$100 smartphone took THESE PHOTOS BELOW which means you really DO NOT have to spend $6000+ on a pro-level stills/video camera at all !!!

If these shots satisfy you, then that's great. Smartphones can take great photos, and are more capable with every passing year. That being said, to my eye it's clear these were taken with a tiny sensor (whether phone or compact camera), and they don't in my opinion approach the image quality possible with more expensive equipment.

 

[slclick]

Are you from Calgary? That actually explains a lot.

Cowtown!

 

[slclick]

"Pro" for Canon is an excuse to put the price even higher. The EOS R is grossly overpriced for what it is and these cameras will no doubt continue the trend. For 2 or 3 other manufacturers you can get great dynamic range, IBIS, excellent video features, dual card slots (in 2), fast FPS and more for £1600-£2000. The EOS R gives you none of that for £2350. It's not a bad camera but it's a very overpriced camera. If they reduced it to around £1400-£1500 it would make way for a £2000ish camera that can actually compete in specs vs price.

USD $1899 R, $1199 RP, hardly grossly overpriced, some would say an incredible bargain. I think it's somewhere in the middle. A good value. Still, I'm waiting for the 5D version and if not, the 5D5, mirror or no mirror, that's not what gets my attention (although I prefer OVF based upon my experience with an Olympus Pen and the M5)

 

[sanj]

I do not get the point of this post. We all know pro R is in the making....

 

[CanoKnight]

https://ymcinema.com/2019/05/06/canon-cinema-business-shows-17-drop-in-sales/

After ALL that Canon have done to protect their precious little cinema eos system -- this happens ?? LMAO.

 

[Ozarker]

If they're able to sell enough (by their standards, presumably to make a healthy profit), why would they charge less? If competitors offer "better value" yet customers don't select those products, then they are de facto competing. They're a business, not a charity.

Pay no attention. People like that are constantly complaining about being ripped off and see any profit at all as evil... even as they freely spend their money.

 

[Ozarker]

===
I should note however that a sub-$100 smartphone took THESE PHOTOS BELOW which means you really DO NOT have to spend $6000+ on a pro-level stills/video camera at all !!!

Nobody HAS TO spend $6,000 on a PROFESSIONAL rig to take photos. However, THOSE PHOTOS ABOVE, taken with the $100 smart phone, ain't..........

 

[HarryFilm]

Are you from Calgary? That actually explains a lot.

---

Naaahhh! I was born in and live in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada where it's a balmy, shorts and t-shirt wearing 20 Celcius while Calgary was -2 Celcius this morning at 6:00 am in the Southeast portion of the city where I stayed. I just got back yesterday from Snowmageddon Territory (Calgary!) and took those photos during the weekend and on the drive out back towards Vancouver!

--

AND....that reaaaaalllly teeny tiny sensor on my sub-$100 smartphone took relatively DECENT photos which won't match any APS-C or Full-Frame sensor ....BUT.... it WAS less than $100 !!!! Plus it was much more convenient to carry than the Canon 1Dx Mk2 I usually use.

 

[Trey T]

Interested in a prosumer body. If it would happen to be the 7DII replacement, is it going to be full frame? Or APS-C in a R body? What I am looking forward in a 2 years period is a 5DIV replacement, not a companion camera the R itself is.

Canon have keyed in their path forward to “consolidate”. I suspect they will move all of their R line to FF sensors and utilize the lower res 1D FF sensor. If that’s the case, the 7D replacement will be doomed.

 

[unfocused]

I do not get the point of this post. We all know pro R is in the making....

Lots of people like the technology as much as they like the photography. Reading about, speculating about and arguing about what is coming down the pike is the driving force behind this site. Posting each bit of new information or even repackaging old information drives users to read and post on this site. Advertisers pay money to serve up ads to the people who take part in these threads. Canon Rumors Guy makes money off those advertisers. He gets to buy Leicas and take trips to Africa from those ad revenues and we get to argue endlessly about triva. What's not to understand?

 

[HarryFilm]

Nobody HAS TO spend $6,000 on a PROFESSIONAL rig to take photos. However, THOSE PHOTOS ABOVE, taken with the $100 smart phone, ain't..........

From a qualitative point of view ... NO they are NOT professional photos but ARE THESE professional photos?

What specifically makes a photo UNPROFESSIONAL in YOUR opinion?
.
Please do tell us the specific attributes which contribute to the term "Unprofessional Photos"!
.
P.S. Do remember to goto FULL SCREEN so you see the ENTIRE photo because the initial CanonRumors photo display page CUTS OFF the bottom and top part of the photos.
.

 

[Ozarker]

From a qualitative point of view ... NO they are NOT professional photos but ARE THESE professional photos?

What specifically makes a photo UNPROFESSIONAL in YOUR opinion?
.
Please do tell us the specific attributes which contribute to the term "Unprofessional Photos"!
.
P.S. Do remember to goto FULL SCREEN so you see the ENTIRE photo because the initial CanonRumors photo display page CUTS OFF the bottom and top part of the photos.
.

THESE ain't the same photos. BTW: I NEVER said the others were NOT PROFESSIONAL. That is the INFERENCE you've drawn FROM AN INCOMPLETE SENTENCE. However, your comparing the results from a $100 phone to a $6K pro rig IS SILLY AS ALL HECK... when you imply they are anywhere near each other in quality. Or is that not what you were doing? BUT SINCE YOU ASKED: No. A pro would have got the horizon straight at least in post.

 

[ColinJR]

First, let's keep in mind that this is a CR1.

That said, it sounds reasonable.

A high resolution R "replacement" for the 5Ds has always made sense. The use case of the 5Ds series is well-suited to the advantages of mirrorless.

Having a "pro" level R that is sports oriented, but not a replacement for the 1Dx will allow Canon to test the waters and get a sense as to whether or not sports shooters want to try mirrorless. Low risk and cautious move for Canon with a base that doesn't react kindly to having its cheese moved.

Modifying this portion of my comments, because I re-read CR Guy's post. He's not saying it's a replacement for the 7D, but rather a companion body to the 1Dx III, just as the 7DII has served some as a companion or second body to the 1Dx II.

Laying out my reasoning below as to why I don't see this as a substitute for the 7DIII.

(However, it's not logical to term this a replacement for the 7D. The appeal of the 7D is the crop sensor and additional perceived reach it offers in situations where the user is distance limited. A full frame mirrorless with less resolution than the EOS R loses that advantage. It's bound to disappoint the 7D base.

Plus, the price point of a full frame EOS R with more features than the current R will be higher than the 7D. A camera that's likely to come it at $1,000 more than the 7D can't be targeted to 7D buyers.

So, I consider that conjecture dead wrong.

Canon has a real dilemma with the 7D series. They've spoiled us. We won't be satisfied with a downgrade to an upgraded 90D. An APS-C sensor R mount camera seems unlikely, but the M mount is ill-suited to the 7D user base. Best choice is to simply release a 7DIII with a few slight improvements (latest sensor technology, touch screen, wifi, etc.) and call it good for another 5 years or so until the market shakes out.

What if a 7D R (full frame) body really embraced using crop modes? Or, maybe Canon will release a 1.6x teleconverter adapter along side a mirrorless 7D? Given the embrace of a variety of cool adapters when the R was released, I wouldn't be surprised...

 

[HarryFilm]

THESE ain't the same photos. BTW: I NEVER said the others were NOT PROFESSIONAL. That is the INFERENCE you've drawn FROM AN INCOMPLETE SENTENCE. However, your comparing the results from a $100 phone to a $6K pro rig IS SILLY AS ALL HECK... when you imply they are anywhere near each other in quality. Or is that not what you were doing? BUT SINCE YOU ASKED: No. A pro would have got the horizon straight at least in post.

===

My floor is tilted

THESE ain't the same photos. BTW: I NEVER said the others were NOT PROFESSIONAL. That is the INFERENCE you've drawn FROM AN INCOMPLETE SENTENCE. However, your comparing the results from a $100 phone to a $6K pro rig IS SILLY AS ALL HECK... when you imply they are anywhere near each other in quality. Or is that not what you were doing? BUT SINCE YOU ASKED: No. A pro would have got the horizon straight at least in post.

---

My photo edit room floor is tilted ... ;-) ...

and for MORE tilted photos ... try these!



.

 

[Ozarker]

===

My floor is tilted


---

My photo edit room floor is tilted ... ;-) ...

.

Professionals make money with their photographic work. It is IMPOSSIBLE for a photo to, itself, be a professional.

 

[Baron_Karza]

From a qualitative point of view ... NO they are NOT professional photos but ARE THESE professional photos?

What specifically makes a photo UNPROFESSIONAL in YOUR opinion?
.
Please do tell us the specific attributes which contribute to the term "Unprofessional Photos"!
.
P.S. Do remember to goto FULL SCREEN so you see the ENTIRE photo because the initial CanonRumors photo display page CUTS OFF the bottom and top part of the photos.
.

I do not get the point of this post.

(sorry, couldn't resist! )

 

[jeanluc]

I'm patiently waiting for a 5D-equivalent R-body. I absolutely love my 5DM3 and while I am quite excited with what Canon is doing (particularly with the R-lenses) I want a 5D-equivalent R-body that doesn't sacrifice what my 5D dSLR is so good at. Battery life, joystick, dials, and instant-on/click performance.

I'm happy with the current resolution of the 5DM4. I'm not interested in massive pixels.

You should think about a now less expensive 5D4 then. If you like your 5D3, you'll love the 5D4. It is a big step up from the 5D3 in every way....resolution, dual pixel AF, touch screen and much better files with respect to DR, low light, and none of the 5D3 banding. I'm switching to RF not because the EF lenses or the 5D4 are inadequate, but because there is little doubt the next hi-res body will be RF.

Having said that, coming from 5D bodies, the R body takes about an hour to get used to. The layout is a little different, but just as fast once you spend some time with it. I now even like the Touch Bar (I use it to zoom in/out for very accurate focus.

 

[unfocused]

...A pro would have got the horizon straight at least in post.

Now that was rude.