The Canon EOS R6 is still scheduled to be announced in May [CR2]

[OSOK]

Hello all.

This sounds like a very exciting camera. However, the specs are just too good to be true I suspect.

First and foremost is the dual card slot.

Looking at the leaked photos, I don't see a door on the side. Thus it looks like the cards load in the bottom in the battery area. Is there space for that on this body? That is very suspect.

Secondly, this would be a big departure for Canon in the way they have structured their lineups. Maybe so...they are changing things up in the R world? That would be nice. But a $2,000 - $2,200 camera with two slots? Two-slots is clearly, 100% undeniably a very-nice-to-have pro feature, I'd argue a must-have. Cards do die here and there, and it's a gamble running one card. Lot of people shoot commercially with one card, but at the risk of losing a shoot or a customer, possibly their reputation. Canon knows this and kept the 6D line a single card for this reason. That body had plenty of space for a second card (Nikon D7000 series is smaller, yet fits 2 cards, same with Sony A9).

Finally on the cards...that feature alone makes this a huge draw for serious use (combined with speed) and unless they seriously nerf/cripple other areas to make the R5 standout in a big way other than megapixels....the R6 is going to chew into R5 sales for still shooters who don't need 45MP. I would not buy an R5 for example if the rumored specs hold up. Alledged 8K and 45mp, even other bells and whistles don't matter to many. Canon has always kept their money-making features on the 5 series for $3,200 starting price....this opens the door for many to save. This is why I don't buy this spec.

20MP ....love it! While a lot of people are bashing this, not everyone wants nor needs more. 20MP makes data storage, post-processing workflow much easier and faster than 30mp, 45mp or 50mp. 20MP is more than enough for stunning prints of any reasonable size (not talking wall-sized super landscape prints)...and more than enough for any kind of online publishing even in the 4K monitor and TV age. 20MP only lacks the ability to crop a bit more, but the trade off in speed and ease is worth it for me.

However...what kind of 20mp is this? Is this going to be the same as the 1DX's sensor? If so, will it perform the same? Processing is a big part of it. Just because it's the same doesn't mean we'll get the same dynamic range, noise etc...Something to consider. Maybe it will be better! That would be a surprise.

FPS - I believe those numbers. Which are fantastic! But....buffer and write speeds. No way 12fps mechanical and 20fps electronic is going to be medium or long burst. That's ok. After all...at $2,000~ what does one expect? Figure...set it to (gasp!) JPG and fire away....There's going to be compromises at this price point.

No AF joystick is a big deal as keeping it separated from the R5....but in the mirrorless world with improved AF technologies, is it that relevant anymore?

With so much attention given to video features these days...maybe Canon's product separation will be in video features, rather than still shooting? That would be great for us still shooters. What could we miss in the stills? Ok, lower MP EVF. No biggie. More lag in the EVF? Ok, not a deal breaker. Less AF speed and points? Ok...if it's not an action camera, no deal breaker at all. Slower sync, 1/4000, and some other stuff....nothing big time historically as far as a cripple. "Only" 20mp ....sure! I'll take it. I'm not seeing any downsides in the stills side of things so long as one doesn't want all out landscape or massive print capability.

Anyway, post is long enough. For an old-school type stills shooter who does a variety of things, if this is 2 card slot, has at least 13 stops of DR (no worse than 5D4)....I'll trade all the other perks and they've got a buyer. This is why I'm a skeptic on slots and sensor performance.

Excited to see what happens....

 

[Michael Clark]

Nah, another blatant generalisation, so who's the fanboy then? I doubt you have talked to those mysterious hundreds of thousands of satisfied ppl - you have never met or talked to in person to even something like 0.001% of them. The eventual saless success might or might not be the only aspect of the judgement of the product quality itself.

But I suppose you have?

6DII was simply a product development fiasco, no matter of its potential sales success. Canon's sensor decision for the 6DII was nothing more than a sad state of their sensor development capabilities at the certain time. You know that, I know that, we all know that. Within the certain conditions, you can take great pictures with a modern cell phone or really old photo gear. But that was absolutly not the point. After so many years of waiting (6 actually?), they have delivered camera with a sensor, which had worse low ISO DR than the APS-C 80D. Not to mention the missing ALL-I codec or headphone jack as another step back.

In other words, the entire world is only as you see it? No one else has any other view of the world than your own?

I know no such thing. The 6D Mark II is a highly capable low light camera compared to most other cameras in use at the time it was introduced. For the price it is an awful lot of camera that basically matches the previous generation 5D Mark III. (The only real spec sheet differences are 1/4000 instead of 1/8000 minimum exposure time and 1/3 stop slower X-sync.)

You can simply bet, that if Canon would have better sensor back then, 6DII would be basically equipped with the sensor generation planned for the 1DXIII, R5 or R6 - as the whole generation seems to share certain characteristics. It's no shame to admit, that Canon was simply behind its competition. Maybe even that simple fact has lead to the advancements we are going to get with the new generation of cameras.

You're free to throw away your money making such bets. I'm not going to be so foolish.

The fact is that, in terms of the spec sheet, Canon had better sensors available at the time and chose not to use one of them. Are you forgetting that to hear the internet critics who probably never even shot with a 6D Mark II tell it back then, the original 6D had a better sensor than the 6D Mark II?

 

[Michael Clark]

Could you please take Mr. Clark and have some picnic somewhere? There is nothing more to suggest, if you are not able to freaking understand as simple thing as the ability to crop.

No, I should just not need more than 3 posts to explain, that if I want to crop, then I want to crop, without the eventual need to consider other aspect. It's just similar argument when guys were telling those requesting 4K video, what do they need it for, if they produce FHD content. For the sake of being able to crop.

It shouldn't take near countless explanations to get you to understand that if the subject detail is not present in the image, it does not matter how many blurry pixels one has one will be limited in their ability to crop.

 

[padam]

Looking at the leaked photos, I don't see a door on the side. Thus it looks like the cards load in the bottom in the battery area. Is there space for that on this body? That is very suspect.

Not sure what you are looking at, but there are no leaked photos from this camera at all.
There is only written information.
We can only look at the new button layout on the R5, and you can see how they have moved one button away to make more space for the card slots, I can see them using a similar button layout on the R6 as well.

And I think hoping that the dynamic range will be as good as a 5D IV or EOS R is the false hope. I think this is exactly where they are going to differentiate it, keeping it crippled but it will still pose as a credible upgrade over an older 6D or 6D Mark II.

You have a limited dynamic range like those cameras, but you don't have to worry about the single card slot anymore. Also beats every non-7D crop sensor camera as well in that regard.

Of course I might be wrong, but if I am not than there is a fair bit of overlap between the R and R6

The R would have:
-better dynamic range
-better stills resolution
-better EVF
-better screen
-better build
-Canon Log
-ALL-I codec
-10-bit output
-top LCD display

The R6 would have
-IBIS
-dual card slots
-better ISO
-better burst rate
-better video frame rates
-lesser (or nonexistent) 4k crop factor
-mode dial
-no touchbar
-lighter
-smaller

I have no idea about the batteries, but if they move away the card slots, then they might be able to share them (so it would be the updated LP-E6NH)
If the sensor has the better dynamic range, then it would be priced much higher than the R, which does not make that much sense with the cheaper build.

 

[raphael lencrerot]

I hope it will be based on the same sensor technology than the R5 (or 1dxm3). If it is the case it will be a killer and will sell like hell.
Conversely if they use a crap sensor tech to provide a 6d2 like, it will be a very very bad move from Canon...

 

[Michael Clark]

Not sure what you are looking at, but there are no leaked photos from this camera at all.
There is only written information.
We can only look at the new button layout on the R5, and you can see how they have moved one button away to make more space for the card slots, I can see them using a similar button layout on the R6 as well.

And I think hoping that the dynamic range will be as good as a 5D IV or EOS R is the false hope. I think this is exactly where they are going to differentiate it, keeping it crippled but it will still pose as a credible upgrade over an older 6D or 6D Mark II.

You have a limited dynamic range like those cameras, but you don't have to worry about the single card slot anymore. Also beats every non-7D crop sensor camera as well in that regard.

Of course I might be wrong, but if I am not than there is a fair bit of overlap between the R and R6

The R would have:
-better dynamic range
-better stills resolution
-better EVF
-better screen
-better build
-Canon Log
-ALL-I codec
-10-bit output
-top LCD display

The R6 would have
-IBIS
-dual card slots
-better ISO
-better burst rate
-better video frame rates
-lesser (or nonexistent) 4k crop factor
-mode dial
-no touchbar
-lighter
-smaller

I have no idea about the batteries, but if they move away the card slots, then they might be able to share them (so it would be the updated LP-E6NH)
If the sensor has the better dynamic range, then it would be priced much higher than the R, which does not make that much sense with the cheaper build.

Both the 6D (2012) and 6D Mark II (2016) have marginally better DR than the 5D Mark III (2012). Yes, the 5D Mark IV showed significant improvement in low ISO DR in 2016, so the 6D Mark II was only a single generation behind the 5-series. The 6D, introduced later in the same year as the 5D Mark III gave up nothing in terms of DR to the same generation 5D Mark III!

 

[padam]

Both the 6D (2012) and 6D Mark II (2016) have marginally better DR than the 5D Mark III (2012). Yes, the 5D Mark IV showed significant improvement in low ISO DR in 2016, so the 6D Mark II was only a single generation behind the 5-series. The 6D, introduced later in the same year as the 5D Mark III gave up nothing in terms of DR to the same generation 5D Mark III!

Exactly, at that time the two cameras weren't far away in terms of DR, but Canon has decided to change that in the next generation. And no, the 6D Mark II was not a generation behind, it was using a completely new sensor with Dual-Pixel AF, but with cost savings.
Will they keep doing that? Since it is a new sensor we won't actually know from just the bare specs, we can only guess whether it will include Canon Log, if it doesn't, then the DR difference might remain the same. I also expect the rolling shutter to be bad, so even if it does have uncropped 4k30p mode, it might not have DPAF, so it will be advisable to use the 1.4x crop instead. 1080p 120fps won't likely to have AF either.
They have made substantial changes with the card slots video specs and IBIS, making it even better at high ISO as well, so it is not like they haven't lifted this class significantly compared to past models (the 6D Mark II really wasn't much different over the 6D, apart from a slightly better AF with more points and slightly better burst rate, few more megapixels with a tilting touchscreen and DPAF), but wanting everything is unrealistic for this class of camera from Canon.

All the other speculations ignore the "lower your expectations" part, expecting a "giant killer" on the video front, having Canon Log like on the EOS R, and it is likely that will be limited right from the sensor level, and it will very much keep the EOS R relevant as well.

 

[derpderp]

Here is an updated list without the R3 since it doesn't seem to fit:

R1 - 1DX Mirrorless Replacement
R5 - 5D Replacement
R5S - 5DS Replacement
R6 - Video focused body but with less resolution to protect the R5 6D replacement
R8 R7 - Entry level FF Canon Mirrorless (aka RP Mark II) or entry level APSC mirrorless (replacing the M series)

FTFY. No reason to reinvent the hierarchy or nomenclature since most Canon users are familiar with the old system and there's nothing wrong with it. With regards to the R or RP, it's in my opinion that they are one-off cameras to bridge the DSLR and mirrorless lines. Canon had great RF lenses but no body to attach them to, so they rushed out with the R and RP while the truly professional bodies were still in development.

 

[SteveC]

FTFY. No reason to reinvent the hierarchy or nomenclature since most Canon users are familiar with the old system and there's nothing wrong with it. With regards to the R or RP, it's in my opinion that they are one-off cameras to bridge the DSLR and mirrorless lines. Canon had great RF lenses but no body to attach them to, so they rushed out with the R and RP while the truly professional bodies were still in development.

Except that there's no way in Hell they are going to ditch the M Series. They may, if they take leave of their senses, produce a crop sensor R camera, but even if they do that, the Ms remain.

 

[derpderp]

Except that there's no way in Hell they are going to ditch the M Series. They may, if they take leave of their senses, produce a crop sensor R camera, but even if they do that, the Ms remain.

That's an excellent idea Maybe this pandemic (and the resulting economic fallout) would drive them to do just that.

 

[Fast351]

Question for you guys that are smarter than I am: Dual card slots are mostly a still feature right? (Does video record to both cards at the same time?)

If it is, wouldn't that suggest that the sensor would be something still photographers would get excited about? Perhaps even the entire camera? Otherwise why include double card slots if this thing is targeted at video.

Just a thought.

 

[mangobutter]

What I want in the R6:

20MP/Low light supremacy
Compact as possible (RP body size or slightly smaller)

that's it. Don't need 4k/60 (just introduces heat)
Don't need IBIS (though i'm sure it'll come with it, driving up the cost)
Would like a photo-centered camera.

No company is really putting those out these days. Everything has to do 4k/60 with 4:2:2 10 bit due to youtube vloggers which account for 1% of the market. This drives up costs and introduces compromises into the system. heat and noise. Don't make cameras for kids in basements. Make cameras for experienced adult photographers! my 2 cents.

Original 5D owner since the year 2005.

 

[herein2020]

FTFY. No reason to reinvent the hierarchy or nomenclature since most Canon users are familiar with the old system and there's nothing wrong with it. With regards to the R or RP, it's in my opinion that they are one-off cameras to bridge the DSLR and mirrorless lines. Canon had great RF lenses but no body to attach them to, so they rushed out with the R and RP while the truly professional bodies were still in development.

This has been beaten to death...but there is no way Canon is going to have the lowest entry level FF resolution camera out of all of the manufacturers, or waste dual card slots on an entry level camera, or have one of the only FF entry level camera that can do 4K 60FPS (a spec by the way that beats many flagship cameras); the R6 with the specs listed so far is above entry level and leaves room for an entry below it unless they no longer consider FF to be entry level at all and expect buyers to stick with the M series which still contradicts the previous market position for the 6D.

Producing a crop sensor R camera also makes no sense because there are no cheap lenses to go with it; which would still place the bar for FF entry above any price point in the past.

 

[derpderp]

This has been beaten to death...but there is no way Canon is going to have the lowest entry level FF resolution camera out of all of the manufacturers, or waste dual card slots on an entry level camera, or have one of the only FF entry level camera that can do 4K 60FPS (a spec by the way that beats many flagship cameras); the R6 with the specs listed so far is above entry level and leaves room for an entry below it unless they no longer consider FF to be entry level at all and expect buyers to stick with the M series which still contradicts the previous market position for the 6D.

Producing a crop sensor R camera also makes no sense because there are no cheap lenses to go with it; which would still place the bar for FF entry above any price point in the past.

Please don't take rumored specs as gospel. There is no proof that the 'R6' will actually offer 4K60 in any shape or form (cropped/uncropped/crippled) yet. Regardless, it's a given that so called 'entry-level' FF ML cameras should be providing a minimum of 4K60 by now. The Sony A7III (which is an 'entry-level' FF ML camera) has been providing excellent 4K30 since 2018.

Also, why wouldn't Canon want to offer the lowest entry level FF camera out of all the manufacturers (to entice more people to the RF system), or place dual card slots on them (which has been offered on comparable bodies from other manufacturers)?

IMHO, an APSC R camera is probably a long shot, but not unrealistic if Canon is keen to provide a one-mount solution. People buy into the M system because its compact and fairly affordable, but there's no path for them to upgrade organically since the M mount is incompatible with the RF/EF mount. An APSC R camera fills in the gap just nicely. Again, more users of the RF mount = more RF lenses being purchased = more $$ for Canon.

 

[Michael Clark]

IMHO, an APSC R camera is probably a long shot, but not unrealistic if Canon is keen to provide a one-mount solution. People buy into the M system because its compact and fairly affordable, but there's no path for them to upgrade organically since the M mount is incompatible with the RF/EF mount. An APSC R camera fills in the gap just nicely. Again, more users of the RF mount = more RF lenses being purchased = more $$ for Canon.

Au contraire mon frère.

The EF-M cameras are perfectly compatible with EF and EF-S lenses.