Rest well Canon EOS 7D series [CR2]

[LSXPhotog]

I'm OK with this. I honestly want Canon to just move forward with the RF mount instead of keeping us professional users in limbo. The obsession with people thinking they need a native mount APS-C line of lenses now is not really warranted. The adapter works so well and adds one inch of length. Just try it out and leave it on there like a mount conversion - it's what I do with the EOS R.

I'm rocking a 1DX Mark II and 7D Mark II for sports right now and I would love to switch entirely over to RF. Let's make it happen, Canon.

 

[unfocused]

These leaks about the future of the EF-S system, 90D/7Diii are not helping anyone. The information being teased is confusing, conflicting, or wildly optimistic. It's not helping anyone plan out their upgrade path, except away from Canon...

Yes. I've never felt that Canon paid that much attention to the internet buzz, but I think in this instance, they may be making a mistake by not offering some clarity to their customers. Trying to migrate 7D users to the R system or asking them to downsize their expectations is a risky strategy when Nikon is sitting there with a camera and lens combo that many people may feel is a better fit for their needs.

 

[Del Paso]

Hope it doesn't sound silly, but I could imagine the Hi-MP EOS R to be "switchable" into APS mode, and specific RF bayonet APS lenses being on offer later.

 

[victorshikhman]

Trying to migrate 7D users to the R system or asking them to downsize their expectations is a risky strategy when Nikon is sitting there with a camera and lens combo that many people may feel is a better fit for their needs.

So true. If Canon bought the d500 and rebadged it as a 7Diii, most would upgrade in an instant and be happy for years to come. The chances of a 7Dii successor beating the d500's features seem slim.

 

[Chaitanya]

If rumours are true then I hope Canon bumps the Eos X0D back to its glory days in terms of ergonomics and features.

 

[jtf]

So if I'm keeping score correctly, the replacement alternatives to a 7DIII will be the 90D, the possibly APS-C R version mentioned here?, and a sports oriented prosumer FF R to be released in 2020? It'll be interesting if all 3 become reality and available. Probably looking at a $2k price range difference between a 90D and a sports R with this new rumored body somewhere in between. Features, build quality, lens mounts, so many variables.....

 

[jeffa4444]

Canon have a crop mode on the 5DS/r, they have a crop mode on the EOS-R the difference being you can use EF-S lenses with the adaptor on the EOS-R. To address wide angle concerns Canon only needs to make specific wide angle RF lenses for crop. They would work universally for full frame cameras and crop bodies with the same back-focus.
We have seem already whether its Sony or Canon RF lenses you dont really get a size saving for certain types of lens especially fast lenses. Most 7D MKII owners are using long focal length lenses for sports or birding / wildlife so its really convergence were going to see with possibly high speed / high resolution being the biggest barriers not lens design. Lenses via the RF mount will automatically adjust crop if they are only suitable for cropped shooting as indeed they do already on the EOS-R using the adaptor.

My money is on an EOS-R type camera fulfilling the 7D MKIII and may well be a cross between the 1DX II and the 7D MKII, the whole system is still in its early days but over time like we saw with EF / EF-S we will have a universal back-focus and both EF / EF-S will get little or zero attention allowed to die slowly.

 

[AlanF]

Here's an idea - if the spiritual successor to the 7DII was a full frame R camera with a (somewhat) lower resolution sensor, maybe they could release that alongside an EF mount adaptor with a built in teleconverter. The R can focus at f/11, so with a 2x version you could effectively turn the 100-400 into an autofocusing 200-800 on a full frame with improved light collection. Releasing a full frame camera with a somewhat lower resolution to allow a much faster burst rate combined with a EF adapter/teleconverter would could tick a lot of those boxes the 7D II was filling while giving better light collecting power, and provide a better vehicle to move those with interest in crop sensors to move up to full frame and start buying RF glass. Who knows what something like that would cost, but if the 90D is moving up market I would expect the 7D II successor to do the same. Crazy ideas, I know, but if Canon's objective is to get more people buying into RF glass then moving the camera which sells the most glass to the RF mount could be one way to do it!

Several points against that. The 100-400 loses a lot of MTF with a 2xTC, f/11 makes it worse by getting well into the diffraction region at about twice the DLA, and even though it might focus at f/11, it will be slowed down.

 

[fredtuck]

How about a hybrid. A full frame Eos R with the pixel density of a 7D Mark II over the full frame but a very slow frame rate limited by a single image processor. For the Sports/Wildlife shooters the center APS-C portion of the frame can shoot at high frame rates. Also maybe 4k video only in the APS-C portion with only 24P or 30P. You then have a nice high resolution landscape camera with EF or RF lenses. The high end Eos R would then have two processors and all the bells and whistles to give a high frame in the whole frame and 4k derived from the full frame.

 

[neuroanatomist]

To me that the easy way out is to release a 7DIII with an new sensor, touchscreen, f8 points, upgraded autofocus, 12 fps and call it good...

... the 90D.

 

[Steve Balcombe]

I'm just glad I don't need to buy anything right now, because if I did I wouldn't have a clue which way to jump. I'm one of those early 7D and 7D2 owners who has since spent a small fortune on Canon lenses. I do now also have a 5D4 but what I really want is for the 7D2 to be brought up to date - and it was barely up to date on the day it was launched. Not only did the D500 beat it hollow just a few months later, but the much cheaper 80D has a better sensor which has been a source of frustration for me ever since I bought one three years ago. But the 80D is not a 7D-class body, and nor was it ever intended to be by Canon. A 90D which is just a faster, updated 80D would also not be a 7D-class body and would be of little interest to me. And of course there is nothing of any interest in the two mirrorless ranges at this point in time. So I sit back and watch, and wonder what will happen, thankful that I can go on using what I have for the foreseeable future.

 

[AlanF]

I, personally, far prefer a FF with high resolution sensor with the same pixel density as an APS-C to an APS-C. The extra field of view gives you a 1.6x gain in the size you can get on to an image and makes capturing BIF so much easier. If I were to go over to Nikon for nature photography, I would go for the D850 rather than the D500, just as I currently prefer a 5DSR to a 7DII, despite the lower fps and higher price. I realise for many, the higher price of the FF is a deal breaker.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I still don't seem to understand. Is there is a size differentce in an equivalent RF vs EF lens? Or are you talking an RF / EF vs EF-S? Then I wonder, how many 7DII shooters use EF-S lens, so that we have to care about the lens size difference? What other option for Canon there is, if they want to produce 7DIII in a mirrorless form? It can't be an M body, right? That would be too small ergonomics wise? Or it could be just a larger M body, still with an M mount? I am kind of confused

I'm confused, too. I don't think there's a difference between RF and EF in terms of lens size (people claim there is, but there are no data to support that claim). But a smaller image circle can make a big difference at short FLs. Look at the EF 11-24 f/4L vs. the EF-S 10-18mm or 10-22mm.

I do suspect a lot of 7-series shooters use EF-S lenses, 10-18/22, 17-55/2.8, 15-85. Canon has ample data on this, certainly.

I think they could make a larger M body for better ergonomics, but that would mean adapting telephoto lenses to it.

 

[tron]

... the 90D.

90D will certainly be a very nice camera. It will be very tempting for birding but I use the joystick on my 5DiV, 5DsR and 7DII and I would like to continue using it. I guess we will know in a few months...

 

[neuroanatomist]

Canon could follow the Nikon lead. If cropped lenses are produced they fit the R mount and the camera automatically crops if on a FF body. That way they have the same mount but the function is changed by what body. There is NO need for an RFs Mount as there is no mirror to hit the rear of the lens if it protrudes farther into the body for the APSC sensor. Rear caps might be universal so a bit deeper to fit all R lenses without worrying which cap for what lens.

Excellent point!

 

[neuroanatomist]

I, personally, far prefer a FF with high resolution sensor with the same pixel density as an APS-C to an APS-C. The extra field of view gives you a 1.6x gain in the size you can get on to an image and makes capturing BIF so much easier. If I were to go over to Nikon for nature photography, I would go for the D850 rather than the D500, just as I currently prefer a 5DSR to a 7DII, despite the lower fps and higher price. I realise for many, the higher price of the FF is a deal breaker.

Me, too. But Canon would likely charge well over $3K for an EOS R version of the 5DSr, whereas an APS-C camera with that pixel density will be much, much cheaper.

 

[Lurker]

Doesn't make sense to kill the 7D badge in favor of the n0D name. What happens after 90D, 100D is already taken, 91D?
Doesn't make sense to kill an open ended name like 7D in favor of n0D which has nowhere to go. Might as well kill both now and move on.

 

[Jack Douglas]

I sure hope Canon has this all sorted out because obviously there is a lot of concern, including me.

Jack

 

[AlanF]

How about a hybrid. A full frame Eos R with the pixel density of a 7D Mark II over the full frame but a very slow frame rate limited by a single image processor. For the Sports/Wildlife shooters the center APS-C portion of the frame can shoot at high frame rates. Also maybe 4k video only in the APS-C portion with only 24P or 30P. You then have a nice high resolution landscape camera with EF or RF lenses. The high end Eos R would then have two processors and all the bells and whistles to give a high frame in the whole frame and 4k derived from the full frame.

The current 7DII needs two processors for a high frame rate. The high number of focus points in the Canon DPAF of the R series requires more computation than for the much smaller number on a 7DII or 80D, and so even a newer single DIGIC processor would struggle.

 

[fredtuck]

The current 7DII needs two processors for a high frame rate. The high number of focus points in the Canon DPAF of the R series requires more computation than for the much smaller number on a 7DII or 80D, and so even a newer single DIGIC processor would struggle.

Those were DIGIC 6 processors. The new DIGIC 8 can probably handle the frame rate. As for focus points just reduce the number to the point that the DIGIC 8 can handle it.