Canon EOS R6 specifications [CR3]

Pape

EOS 7D MK II
Dec 31, 2018
552
336
How about taking 7d away and give more sporty R6 and RF 700mm f8 DO ,fair compensation :)?
 

reefroamer

EOS T7i
Jun 21, 2014
59
66
Fairly sure they will as the RF 35mm f/1.8 is a great offering at it's price range with both IS and Macro capabilities. With this new entry level release there will most likely be a wave of more "affordable" RF macros and zooms to back it up.
There is only so much Canon can shove out the door in a short time. I think they’ve done an amazing job in the last 15 months. Clearly, they prioritized the high-end glass. But I’m sure we’ll see much more affordable RF kit zoom lenses soon, especially to drive sales of the lower end R bodies. No question they can do these lenses, just a matter of what comes first. The cheap kits are a gateway drug to the full R system.
 

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
4,438
1,104
Give me a FAST shutter respons (unlike the R) and 20 mp and upgraded AF new sensor at 12 fps in a smaller than 1-series body and I’m jumping all over it.
 

koenkooi

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
855
634
Yep... many including me saw the RP and R as just stop gap cameras. Simply digital backs for those RF lenses. Obviously (if all this is true) canon had the lens ready go good way before they were there with the bodies. I wouldn't be surprised if the bodies of the RP and R remain the same (size wise) which would go inline that they didn't have the internals ready. And they used the R as a test for some of their newer things. Like the mode button, and MFN bar.
Both the R and RP give me the feeling of being made out of components that they had lying around already. The sensor, digic and battery all come from existing cameras. Imagine marketing asking "When is this fancy new stuff coming out?" "2020" and then asking "If you take old parts, can you hit x-mas 2018?"
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,455
1,282
Yeh, makes sene. Maybe a 24mp, so it's more like the A9ii (witch costs now $4.500). I dont think they will stick with 20mp forever..

I don't see 1-series bodies increasing res over time just because they feel they have to. I think pro sports / reportage folks have the glass they need to fill the frame. So cropping isn't a big ask for them.

1D4 = 16 MP (2009)
1DX1 = 18 MP (2012)
1DX2 = 20 MP (2016)
1DX3 = 20 MP (2020)

Now compare any other product line of Canon's over an long time period -- Rebels, XXD, 5D, 6D, etc. -- and see what happened to the res on those. Completely different story.

And with the 1DX3, surely Canon asked them to choose Hamburger A vs. Hamburger B where more resolution and less fps was on the table. That they landed on 20 MP and higher FPS is a tell of what that camp of shooters values the most.

Put another way, it would be relatively easy for them to drop a higher res sensor (say 24 like you said) into the 1DX3 and not have to touch the mirrorbox or shutter designs and keep clipping away at 1DX2 speeds. That they didn't speaks volumes about what those shooters want.

- A
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,455
1,282
Both the R and RP give me the feeling of being made out of components that they had lying around already. The sensor, digic and battery all come from existing cameras. Imagine marketing asking "When is this fancy new stuff coming out?" "2020" and then asking "If you take old parts, can you hit x-mas 2018?"

Kind of -- I'm sure there were time pressures. But I saw EOS R/RP more as a batting practice platform of:
  • What is the ergonomic setup of the future. Is touch-sensitivity, touchscreens, etc. truly going to change the game?
  • What is the right size of FF body? What doesn't make the Ark (controls-wise) if it gets constrained for real estate?
  • Dialing in the FBW lens handling future -- control rings, programmability, proprioceptive/haptic/tactile sort of feedback when you only have FBW lenses, etc.
Those three things above were not banged out or phoned in. They were ruthlessly tortured and evaluated and (for whatever reason) EOS R was the shooting experience they wanted to lead with.

So I see EOS R as an enthusiast sneak peak / first viewing of Canon's future. A driveable concept car, if you will. Based on this experience, I'm guessing low-end RF bodies will feel more EOS R/RP like (touch touch touch) and higher-end RF bodies will be bigger and some EF button/wheel creature comforts may return -- just in time for their beefier specs and internals to shine.

- A
 

gouldopfl

EOS M50
Sep 2, 2019
35
9
Can't believe I'm first to comment...

Times are good!!!
Now Canon needs to open up the TF mount specifications to Tamron and Sigma like Sony has. The current RF glass is too expe
Now Canon needs to open up the RF mount specs like Sony did so 3rd party lens makers don't have to reverse engineer. Canon's RF glass is too expensive for the hobbyist or casual user, yet they want to pull back some users who moved to Sony
 

CanonFanBoy

Really O.K. Boomer
Jan 28, 2015
4,806
2,787
Irving, Texas
Now Canon needs to open up the TF mount specifications to Tamron and Sigma like Sony has. The current RF glass is too expe

Now Canon needs to open up the RF mount specs like Sony did so 3rd party lens makers don't have to reverse engineer. Canon's RF glass is too expensive for the hobbyist or casual user, yet they want to pull back some users who moved to Sony
Tamron has said they are working on lenses for the Canon RF mount and Nikon Z. I'm sure Sigma is doing the same. I see no reason why Canon should help competitors make a competing product. It's obvious (to me anyway) that Canon isn't filing patent infringement lawsuits against these manufacturers for copying the mount. That's help enough, in my opinion.
 

HikeBike

EOS R
Feb 6, 2019
86
88
Maryland, USA
Gotcha.

So follow my very loose tea leaf assembly here. If an R5 is coming with the specs from the rumor, and this R6 is happening...

I feel pretty good in thinking our familiar product lines in 1 / 5S (res) / 5 (all-around) / 6 and possibly 7 are happening with an R in front.

And if THAT happens, where does EOS R or RP fit in that scheme? One might argue that neither do, and we might not see R2 or RP2 happen.

- A
I think you're spot on. I also suspect the 90D and Rebel lines will get killed off, with the M line being what it is.
 

mangobutter

EOS 80D
Dec 11, 2014
131
36
www.e46mango.com
So if they can make a $999 or less smaller FF body, i'm game. i don't need fast FPS, weather resistance. For that I have my XT3.

Love my RP but the only gripe I have is the small battery. That should at least be using the EOS R battery. just make the grip bigger. maybe next time around.

Loved the R when I owned it but it was still a tad too big.

if Canon made a small and light RF 20mm 2.8 (Doesn't even need IS) that would be really great.
 

mangobutter

EOS 80D
Dec 11, 2014
131
36
www.e46mango.com
Tamron has said they are working on lenses for the Canon RF mount and Nikon Z. I'm sure Sigma is doing the same. I see no reason why Canon should help competitors make a competing product. It's obvious (to me anyway) that Canon isn't filing patent infringement lawsuits against these manufacturers for copying the mount. That's help enough, in my opinion.
Yeah Canon is still the giant. They don't need to open up their mount. Other brands need to.
 

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,985
660
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
I don't see 1-series bodies increasing res over time just because they feel they have to. I think pro sports / reportage folks have the glass they need to fill the frame. So cropping isn't a big ask for them.

1D4 = 16 MP (2009)
1DX1 = 18 MP (2012)
1DX2 = 20 MP (2016)
1DX3 = 20 MP (2020)

Now compare any other product line of Canon's over an long time period -- Rebels, XXD, 5D, 6D, etc. -- and see what happened to the res on those. Completely different story.

And with the 1DX3, surely Canon asked them to choose Hamburger A vs. Hamburger B where more resolution and less fps was on the table. That they landed on 20 MP and higher FPS is a tell of what that camp of shooters values the most.

Put another way, it would be relatively easy for them to drop a higher res sensor (say 24 like you said) into the 1DX3 and not have to touch the mirrorbox or shutter designs and keep clipping away at 1DX2 speeds. That they didn't speaks volumes about what those shooters want.

- A
Couple things on this I've been pondering. It's true, the people who by-in-large REALLY use these cameras don't really care about a huge MP bump. In order to give it a good refresh though, Canon elected to create a new AA filter they claim presents the sharpness equivalent of 24MP under the older AA filter. Ok. Fine. Again, they aren't necessarily targeting 1DX2 people to upgrade. There are still a lot of happy 1DX users out there (Where y'at Neuro?! ;-)). And the AF improvements alone are what those guys really really want and now they have it in the DX3. Secondly, given all this new info in the last 2-3 days, it really isn't surprising AT ALL now they didn't bump it higher as clearly Canon has been busy as hell with it's real focus on this new RF line with a 45MP sensor and still to come 83MP sensor we've heard tales of... and 20MP is now a proven formula for Canon on the video specs given what else we know of the 1DX2 and now 1DX3. And that same sensor can be produced in MUCH greater quantities now than just the DX3, which clearly Canon had in mind all along in their planning. I dont recall if Canon used the prior 20MP DX2 sensor in any other body. Maybe the 6D2?? Cant recall.
 

jd7

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 3, 2013
794
159
These are intriguing rumors! Some of my thoughts to add to the mix:

  • Name -- If it truly will be called the R6, I think it's 95% likely that it's intended to fill the RF-equivalent slot of what the 6D is in the EF world. More precisely, it would fill the entry-level role for the RF mount. This also leads me to agree with the probability that the RP is a one-off.

  • Sensor -- Using a 20MP sensor would point to re-using the 1DXIII sensor, which I think could be likely. It makes sense in terms of maximizing economies of scale in production. The original 6D also received a splendid sensor (some considered better than its 5D sibling at the time). Image quality alone was not held back then, and I see no reason why it would be held back now. I see no shortage of other ways the camera can be nerfed to maintain product position.

    That said, it would be disappointing-but-possible that the 20MP sensor could be reused from 6DI. While I think it's unlikely, it would be a differentiation counterpoint to the FPS and other rumored features. Remember how long the 18MP crop sensor persisted in Canon models? :O

  • Performance -- While many are saying the rumored specs are just too good for an "entry-level" RF MILC, when compared against the price/performance of similar Sony and Nikon MILCs, it doesn't seem crazy to me -- especially if the RP fades away without an encore. Comparing processing throughput to high-end bodies is also useless because...M6II.

Personally, I'm salivating at the possibility of the R5 (along with probably a gazillion others). If it has a fully articulating screen, and 5D-level performance, I don't really care how much it will cost. I will save for it. And love it. :)

Even if these rumors turn out to be total codswallop, just reading them with CR2.5 and CR3 attached is satisfyingly exciting and will have been totally worth it.
Given the rumoured specs on the R5, and Canon's usual naming scheme having lower numbers indicating a camera (at least broadly) higher up the tree, it does seem like the R6 is likely to be the mirrorless 6D level camera, with the R5 being something like the 5D level camera. However, if that's right, I'm a bit surprised the R5's sensor resolution is as much as 45 MP. It seems like a lot of pixels for a camera meant to be a great all-rounder, but maybe I'm wrong about that in this day and age? And, if the R6 is meant to be the 6D level equivalent, I'm surprised its sensor resolution is as low 20 MP. As a 6D II owner, I don't like the idea of going back to 20 MP from 26 MP even if I was otherwise interested in the R6. The 30 MP of the EOS R seems more appealing, but then I'd miss out on the other things the R6 looks like it will bring to the table over the R. And I would have thought many EOS R owners, with their 30 MP sensors, would similarly not be keen on dropping back to 20 MP, leaving them deciding to pay up for the R5 or stick with their R.

Also, if the R6 specs are correct, it doesn't sound like a camera which would be priced like an RP even if it can be made as small as an RP. And if it is as small as an RP, I question whether it would really fit as the mirrorless 6D level camera. As much as I tend towards smaller cameras, that would seem just too small. Given Canon's usual naming scheme for cameras, I do think it sounds like we won't get an EOS R mark II, with the EOS R making way for EOS Rx cameras. However, particularly if Canon doesn't plan to release an APS-C RF mount camera, perhaps the RP line will continue as something similar to the EOS 100D/200D line?

Obviously there is a lot we don't know yet even if the rumours are true, eg ergonomics, AF performance, battery life, etc, so we will have to see in due course. Maybe the new sensors will perform so well that the idea of going back to 20 MP from 26 MP or 30 MP won't seem a big deal. At least for now though, I feel confused about where the R6 really fits in. Maybe it's targeted at videographers more than stills shooters, and it doesn't really have an equivalent in Canon's DSLR lineup?

(BTW I've printed as large as 45' x 30' from my old Canon 6D and I'm happy with how those have come up, so I would agree 20 MP really is enough for many, perhaps most, purposes. However, I certainly wouldn't have been unhappy to have had a bit more resolution for those prints - and of course more MP does help with flexibility to crop.)
 
Jan 30, 2020
7
1
Any news on video bit depth / color sampling? Nobody seems to be asking about that either. Did I miss something?
 

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,985
660
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
Given the rumoured specs on the R5, and Canon's usual naming scheme having lower numbers indicating a camera (at least broadly) higher up the tree, it does seem like the R6 is likely to be the mirrorless 6D level camera, with the R5 being something like the 5D level camera. However, if that's right, I'm a bit surprised the R5's sensor resolution is as much as 45 MP. It seems like a lot of pixels for a camera meant to be a great all-rounder, but maybe I'm wrong about that in this day and age? And, if the R6 is meant to be the 6D level equivalent, I'm surprised its sensor resolution is as low 20 MP. As a 6D II owner, I don't like the idea of going back to 20 MP from 26 MP even if I was otherwise interested in the R6. The 30 MP of the EOS R seems more appealing, but then I'd miss out on the other things the R6 looks like it will bring to the table over the R. And I would have thought many EOS R owners, with their 30 MP sensors, would similarly not be keen on dropping back to 20 MP, leaving them deciding to pay up for the R5 or stick with their R.

Also, if the R6 specs are correct, it doesn't sound like a camera which would be priced like an RP even if it can be made as small as an RP. And if it is as small as an RP, I question whether it would really fit as the mirrorless 6D level camera. As much as I tend towards smaller cameras, that would seem just too small. Given Canon's usual naming scheme for cameras, I do think it sounds like we won't get an EOS R mark II, with the EOS R making way for EOS Rx cameras. However, particularly if Canon doesn't plan to release an APS-C RF mount camera, perhaps the RP line will continue as something similar to the EOS 100D/200D line?

Obviously there is a lot we don't know yet even if the rumours are true, eg ergonomics, AF performance, battery life, etc, so we will have to see in due course. Maybe the new sensors will perform so well that the idea of going back to 20 MP from 26 MP or 30 MP won't seem a big deal. At least for now though, I feel confused about where the R6 really fits in. Maybe it's targeted at videographers more than stills shooters, and it doesn't really have an equivalent in Canon's DSLR lineup?

(BTW I've printed as large as 45' x 30' from my old Canon 6D and I'm happy with how those have come up, so I would agree 20 MP really is enough for many, perhaps most, purposes. However, I certainly wouldn't have been unhappy to have had a bit more resolution for those prints - and of course more MP does help with flexibility to crop.)
Given the name R6, any of us would be forgiven for thinking it a 6D replacement. It might be. It might not. But as there has been much discussion already about pricing or where it would sit in the line, it seems highly unlikely this would be a RP successor under $999. The usage of the1DX3 sensor along with the few rumored video specs and the previous rumors about Canon making a challenger to the a7s .... well it could be this one. Regardless, it seems more like a $1500 model than $899. Hopefully we know everything by CP+
 
  • Like
Reactions: jd7 and Pape
Jan 30, 2020
7
1
No need to guess. Canon has already pegged this at least at 10bit422 CLog out over HDMI to externals based on the EOS R and the 1DX3. Expect at least that on these new ones.
No doubt about that. But internal vs external is a big difference to me and it is very quiet with respect to that. Anyway, we will know in a couple of weeks whether the choice for a new hybrid has become easy or not :)