A little bit more about the upcoming Canon EOS R6 [CR2]

[-pekr-]

20mpx does not seem to be the way to go for those wishing to go the MILC route, coming from 5DIV or even the 6D itself. While Canon seems to introduce the upgrade path for the 5DIV crowd, R6 does not seem like an upgrade path for the 6D users. I don't believe just anyone is comfort going -6mpx.

This camera, as many said already here, seems to have another purpose. I don't expect it fall into the high-iso, high DR monster category either, where you would give up on those mpx, having e.g. 2stops advantage.

It looks more like a camera for vloggers - good to great video, occassional photos, fast transfers, posting stuff online, decently portable, flexible, affordable. I still have Tony Northrup's video in mind, describing why they chosed 6DII as their vlogging tool.

 

[Joules]

If it's the 20MP sensor in from the 1DX M3 with the 16-sample low-pass filter that might be a fantastic compromise.

On that note, has anybody already measured / compared, how big the gain between the 1DX II and III is?

 

[mb66energy]

If this camera is in the 2 kEUR / k$ region and
- video quality in FullHD is excellent / in 4k is very good both with DPAF at all fps settings
- low jello + crop mode for both FullHD & 4k + FullHD with EF-S lenses (reuse EF-S 10-22)
- it has clean stills IQ at ISO 3200 (to expect with "only" 20 MPix)
- good battery life (no LP-E17N please!)
it might be an interesting camera if I go more into video.

And I have to say that just the inferior EOS RP has decent video quality in FullHD if you use
the Technicolor Cinemastyle + crank up the sharpness by 2 or three steps.

And if we compare all that to 24x36 Agfachrome 1000 or look at Super 8 movie quality
our tools are technically a massive advancement ...

 

[Master-H]

Maybe R & RP was just intro models - not intended to form part of the permenent range. The reel models will be R5, R6, R1 etc.....

The R6 might have the 1Dx3 sensor for speed, rather than a replacment for RP

 

[Mahk43]

I really don’t think the R and RP are long lasting products.

Exactly, R and RP were designed to enter a new market, not designed to fit into a complete line up.
RP was there to gather consumers from compact cameras to 6D (including apsc and EOS-M), and it was more or less successfull
R was there to be sexy enough to take 6D/6Dii/5D consumers, and just tease pros, and I think it worked as I changed my 6Dii for the R.

Now they are introducing a range with logic numbers. Whatever is their thinking, it will be logical enough to fit the market.
For RP and R, the future is an end of production as soon as the line up will cover the needs of actual RP/R owners or market target:
- R1+R3+R5 to replace any kind of R pro owners
- R6 + R5 to replace experts owners of R or annoyed RP owners
- And maybe a R70, 80 or 90 to come in few years, with apsc sensor ?

I don't think actual R and RP owners can recognize them into this line up.
It is normal as it has been build to fit the market, not to replace an existing product.

Personnally, as I own a R since one year now, I think the product that will be very similar to actual R will be the R6mkII that will replace R6 in 2 or 3 years.
As I will not wait 2 or 3 years to buy a new camera (as I suffer from GAS and as our society push us to change as soon as possible ), I think I'll take a R5 after it cost will decrease in 2021... or, if i'm rich enough, a R1 few month after it will be released.
This is also what canon want the cosumers to do, to level up in the range with the time. For this reason also they had to make a range disconnected with actual R/RP.

A lot of people try to explain canon phylosophy comparing with other makers like SONY or PANASONIC, but it is not the major part of their thinking. A manufacturer cannot base all his strategy on aligning with others. They have to make their own decision considering benchmarking, yes a little, but also and even more technologies, engineering, production capability, financial capability, marketing, feedbacks, regulations. And it is the same for the competitors.
Except little chineses brands that make bad copies of products, no one make only decisions on benchmarking.

 

[BillB]

Sounds good. What's funny is that when the idea of this body came out 99% of the comments were similar to the one above. Now all of a sudden there's a mass departure with most folks? I don't see what changed the mindset.

Then it was mostly video people, now stills people are posting about how they feel about 20mp. It isn't about anybody changing their mind.

 

[scyrene]

I am sooo right there with you, but if the new specs are true, no top screen, lesser build quality and lower res evf, it sounds more like an RP, which probably means no battery / vertical grip, 1/4000 max shutter and slower flash sync. But maybe the next camera announced will be the EOS R mark II? It would just be so nice to have a pro stills focused camera with a manageable pixel count, for me that is 20-30. Or maybe the new info is crap and it'll be awesome!

What makes you think there will be an R mark II? The introduction of numbering with the R5 suggests they are following the DSLR naming scheme, with 6 as the cheaper model below 5. Where would an RII fit?

 

[scyrene]

I completely agree with you here. The R6 seems like a full frame 7D. Basically an entry level full frame mirrorless sports/wildlife camera with great low light capability. I also see the R as the true successor to the original 6D (which is what I upgraded from).

Forgive me, I never owned a 7D, but weren't the advantages of it that on a budget you could have excellent AF, high fps, and solid build quality? The R6 rumour doesn't give it higher fps than the R5, the build quality sounds lesser, and though nothing has been said about its AF, there's no reason to believe it'll be better. So in what way is it a FF RF equivalent of the 7 series?

 

[scyrene]

I have seen many posts here saying low mpex means the camera can be better at higher ISO. Is that correct? And if it correct, will the camera not be good at high ISO? thx

Sadly it's one of those myths that won't die. For stills, pixel level noise is higher the smaller the pixels, but image level noise is not, and you can apply finer noise reduction to higher MP files, so they may end up cleaner. A minor caveat is, if this is the 1DxIII sensor, they've tweaked the filters a bit I believe, so it may be a touch better (unless they've also done that to te new R5 sensor too). As has been pointed out many times for a long while, high ISO performance in raw images hasn't improved much in years, and cannot get much better even in princple, due to physical limitations.

 

[scyrene]

I dunno why there's so much confusion and consternation. If Canon is making a budget model then it makes sense for them to use an existing sensor - if it is 20MP that strongly implies the one from the 1Dx3. So it has lower resolution than the RP and R - but I agree with those above who suggest these were merely introductory models, using existing sensors to get the R line going. If the strategy is now to mirrow the DSLR lineup even vaguely, then a cheaper model than the R5 makes sense; expecting a brand new sensor is asking a bit much. Incidentally, 'lower' models can have higher resolution, it's happened elsewhere in the lineup.

As for it being a videocentric model, I personally doubt that but have no real insight there.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

yeah, I hear you. I am so sorry. Unlikely.

Dual card slots in one of the compromises I am not going to afford. If released with a single card slot I am out

 

[justaCanonuser]

Is this seen as an RP replacement? If so it's a hard sell trying to push a lower megapixel sensor than the one the RP already has.

Either it's a A7S class camera or it's lower than the RP. But then dual card slots?

I do hope that it will be a low light beast. If yes, 20-24 MP would be for me the sweet spot of 35mm sensors anyway. Btw I am editor of a German physics journal and just had currently an interesting talk with someone working in smartphone's camera R&D area. From physicist to physicist, he told me, that from his perspective the MP race of today in the FF camera market is pure nonsense for most users (diffraction blur, motion blur on pixel level etc.). I agreed. High MP count can make sense, if you shoot with a lot of light in studio @ f =< 4.0 or so (depending on the pixel pitch) and want to print a huge wall paper. But in most user cases it'll only create gigantic images files that contain not more real image information than files from sensor with moderate MP. Those files only boost the already big CO2 footprint of digital processing (today's silicon processors based on von Neumann-Zuse design are more heating than digital devices, because of massive energy losses).

 

[justaCanonuser]

Really looking forward to picking up a used R for under $1k. I have no interest in the R6 because I have a guess they are sticking some variant of the original 6d sensor in it.

I guess they use the new 1D-X III sensors.

 

[Del Paso]

I do hope that it will be a low light beast. If yes, 20-24 MP would be for me the sweet spot of 35mm sensors anyway. Btw I am editor of a German physics journal and just had currently an interesting talk with someone working in smartphone's camera R&D area. From physicist to physicist, he told me, that from his perspective the MP race of today in the FF camera market is pure nonsense for most users (diffraction blur, motion blur on pixel level etc.). I agreed. High MP count can make sense, if you shoot with a lot of light in studio @ f =< 4.0 or so (depending on the pixel pitch) and want to print a huge wall paper. But in most user cases it'll only create gigantic images files that contain not more real image information than files from sensor with moderate MP. Those files only boost the already big CO2 footprint of digital processing (today's silicon processors based on von Neumann-Zuse design are more heating than digital devices, because of massive energy losses).

Couldn't agree more...

 

[jolyonralph]

I do hope that it will be a low light beast. If yes, 20-24 MP would be for me the sweet spot of 35mm sensors anyway. Btw I am editor of a German physics journal and just had currently an interesting talk with someone working in smartphone's camera R&D area. From physicist to physicist, he told me, that from his perspective the MP race of today in the FF camera market is pure nonsense for most users (diffraction blur, motion blur on pixel level etc.). I agreed. High MP count can make sense, if you shoot with a lot of light in studio @ f =< 4.0 or so (depending on the pixel pitch) and want to print a huge wall paper. But in most user cases it'll only create gigantic images files that contain not more real image information than files from sensor with moderate MP. Those files only boost the already big CO2 footprint of digital processing (today's silicon processors based on von Neumann-Zuse design are more heating than digital devices, because of massive energy losses).

The main advantage of high megapixel sensors is having far more flexibility to crop.

 

[slclick]

Then it was mostly video people, now stills people are posting about how they feel about 20mp. It isn't about anybody changing their mind.

Oh I didn't see a poll., Thanks

 

[knight427]

I have a 6D which is dying and getting old. I will buy this camera if they can put pixel shift in it. 90% of the time I am fine with 20mp. But it would be nice to be able to get like 60mp files too. That would probably be my prefect camera, well my perfect camera would do pixel shift and high DR in a single file. That would save me a bunch of time, on my landscape photos.

I'm also a 6D owner hoping the R6 will be my next camera. I hadn't thought about pixel shift, that would be a great option for landscape. I don't think it is likely though.

For me, 20 MP is attractive if it delivers on being a near top of the line sensor. The lower resolution presumably opens up the higher frame rates without needing as much processing power (justifying a lower price).As others have said, I'd rather have the higher fps than +4 MP for my birding and kids sports. The larger pixels also offer an advantage to my Milky Way landscape photography.

The only advantage of a dual card slot for me is conditional on it offering one SD and one CF Express slot. This way I could bide my time with my existing cards and wait for CF Express to come down in price.

I'm not worried about build quality, I trust Canon will do enough for my armature needs. EVF needs to be great, but I can accept less than the best if it's under $2,000. AF needs to take Sony's approach, where all the cameras get essentially the same software capabilities, I would expect the R6 to offer fewer customization options and some level of cripple relative to the R5. I know I won't get world-class AF for my birding, but I hope it is better than the 5D3 I'm currently borrowing (being better than my 6D is too low a bar to even consider).

 

[slclick]

I think when it all shakes out, there are going to be enough various bodies in the R system for most everyone. It will take a year or so but it will happen. The majority of complaining will be that the model certain people will want won't be the first in line for release so once again, patience.

 

[MORphoto.net]

What makes you think there will be an R mark II? The introduction of numbering with the R5 suggests they are following the DSLR naming scheme, with 6 as the cheaper model below 5. Where would an RII fit?

I’m not suggesting there will be, but who knows? I doubt there will be, but maybe, I don’t know...

 

[slclick]

I’m not suggesting there will be, but who knows? I doubt there will be, but maybe, I don’t know...

Nah, the R was a public beta. A very good one but my hunch is that the R and RP will sell out of stock and the line will be numbered from there forward. We might see the body production lines for those being used in other models.