Thoughts on the Canon EOS R roadmap

Feb 7, 2013
32
4
Excellent one Canon (if rumors are true) of releasing an APS EOS R mount camera probably sitting between 80D - 7D MK 2 area and some good EF / EOS R glass to use on it - abeit 1.6x crop

At least Canon's got a good APS ML and FF ML system that will get better and better. As a Nikon user hope Nikon wakes up and do the same APS ML system & range of cameras - possibly a silly decision to do the Nikon 1 instead of starting a Nikon APS ML line
 

dominic_siu

EOS R, RF2870, EF100400II
Aug 31, 2018
15
10
Thats why many were puzzled with the first lenses to be announced, a mid level camera needs mid level lenses, and only the 24-105 L matches the pricing of the camera. The 35mm Macro is aimed at a entry level, but at least would be a reasonable choice for the R. I'd love to have the 50mm f/1.2 or 28-70 f/2, but they really outclass my R.

Fortunately, I adapt my EF lenses quite nicely and will continue to do that as long as I still use a DSLR along with the R. I happened to have a vintage 50mm f/2.5 that is available used for $100 that I like for the R, its small, light, and reasonably good. My big and heavy "L" lenses don't balance the camera well, particularly with the adapter.

I plan to get the control ring adapter before long.
I use the control ring adapter since I got the R and it is very nice for using EF lenses on R. Finally I sold 2470 2.8 II and 85 1.4 L then buying RF2870, it is a fantastic lens.
 

flip314

EOS 80D
Sep 26, 2018
122
124
They already have that market covered. It is called EOS-M. Why would they make another one in a different mount?
I don't see why there's an issue with this? Canon can clearly support 2 systems, and I don't think an APS-C R camera would totally cannibalize the EOS-M line. I think both could coexist just fine.

EOS M is a small form factor, and Canon clearly has size restrictions for EF-M lenses that make it difficult for certain types of lenses. EOS-M is there for the people who think mirrorless should be about size. There are a lot of people for whom this is important. They'll buy into the M system. Canon wants to make money off these people, so they will keep selling EOS M.

The ergonomics of the EOS R aren't perfect, but I still think they're MUCH closer to what I want. I don't care about size/form factor/lens size. The things I want from mirrorless are ONLY exposure preview and better AF spread. Otherwise I'm happy with DSLR. There are a lot of other people like me (despite what many people say!), including a certain group of entry-level/enthusiast buyers. It's part of why Rebels still sell when people could be buying PowerShots or even whatever m43 camera you might want to consider. If nothing else, certain people see the DSLR-type form factor as "Pro" and they want to be a "Pro." Some people will want larger cameras than EOS M, for whatever reason.

Even though most people who buy Rebels will never upgrade to FF, there's the sense that you *could* do that if you wanted. It encouraged people to buy into a system, and in some cases to buy more expensive lenses than they ever need. You buy a Rebel and a EF 70-200 because some day you REALLY WILL buy that 6D mark II to get full use of the lens (even if you really won't). Canon just made WAY more money off you than if the EF-S 55-250 had been your only choice.

Canon wants to sell RF lenses. They will be more expensive than EF-M lenses. Canon can't sell RF lenses to people who buy the M50. There are people who will never pay $2300 for a camera. They might pay $1500. They probably would pay $999, just to show off their Pro Camera (TM) to their friends. Canon wants to make money off of *these* people. That's why I believe APS-C R is inevitable. Why does Canon sell a 77D and an 80D when the 6D mark II is clearly "better"?

The other reason is the 7D line. Canon still clearly has some issues with FF sensor readout. I'm sure they will one day be solved, but I don't think that's imminent. I think there's likely to be at least one more APS-C high-fps camera. There are also wildlife folks that enjoy the extra 1.6x reach that they get. I think there's demand for a high-end APS-C R camera, at least in the short term.

Why does Prego make 50 kinds of pasta sauce? Shouldn't they just make the 2 or 3 best ones? Because nobody can agree on which the best ones are, and they can get more customers by selling all things to all people. Canon has had pretty much the same approach to DSLRs (SL2, Rebel 7, Rebel 7 Ti, 77D, 80D, 6D, 7D, 5D, 1dX). Why people think they are suddenly going to cut out the middle half of their market as they move to mirrorless, I don't understand.
 

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
314
204
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
Why is everybody so into APS-C R body?!?! It makes no sense and I very much hope Canon is not going to do that.
Exactly. I'd be surprised if Canon does that, what's the point of having two mirrorless APS-C lines with different mounts? EFM and RFS? And incompatible lenses.

Lower-end full frame R body makes more sense, but as it was said before, even the existing few RF lenses are too cool and more expensive than such a body. I really hope next R body will be the higher-end, close to 5DSr. It'll be a fit for the RF lenses.
 
Reactions: Aaron D

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
314
204
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
I don't see why there's an issue with this? Canon can clearly support 2 systems, and I don't think an APS-C R camera would totally cannibalize the EOS-M line. I think both could coexist just fine.
They could coexist, but would Canon get much more profit from two mirrorless APS-C lines? And if we include DSLR EFS, that'd make three APS-C lines.

What might make a bit more sense (but not total sense) - an RF camera with 1.3 crop factor. For birds and sports.
 

Steve Balcombe

Too much gear
Aug 1, 2014
164
29
Why does Prego make 50 kinds of pasta sauce? Shouldn't they just make the 2 or 3 best ones? Because nobody can agree on which the best ones are, and they can get more customers by selling all things to all people.
Actually there's a well-known story in marketing about a manufacturer which reduced the number of 'flavours' of shampoo and conditioner they offered and it resulted in an increase in sales. How well consumer choices of either hair products or pasta sauces compare with sales of £300-£5000 hardware is another question of course.
Canon has had pretty much the same approach to DSLRs (SL2, Rebel 7, Rebel 7 Ti, 77D, 80D, 6D, 7D, 5D, 1dX). Why people think they are suddenly going to cut out the middle half of their market as they move to mirrorless, I don't understand.
The position of the 7D has long been a puzzle to me. The original 7D came along just when I was itching for something better than my 40D, and it was a perfect fit with my needs. But then we had a very long wait for the 7D2, which I think it's fair to say was slightly disappointing in some respects and has looked like second best ever since the D500 hit the market (but boy did Nikon owners wait a long time for that!). The 7D2 is well overdue for an update but there are no firm rumours of it happening. It's as if Canon isn't really all that bothered about the high end of the APS-C market. But whether or not this is true, it would surely be very unlikely that they would replace the 7D2 with a mirrorless, given how far their mirrorless technology in 2018/19 appears to lag behind the 2014 7D Mark II in the performance stakes. An RF mount replacement for the 7D2 would make sense in so many ways, but there are no indications that Canon has the technology available to do it. The only way I can see a high end APS-C launch coming from Canon before 2020 is if there is one more generation of DSLR.

It's a different situation at the 80D level though - that could easily be replaced by an RF mount body with a crop sensor.
 
Reactions: tiggy@mac.com

Antono Refa

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 26, 2014
770
80
i dont think an eos r apsc body is likely.

there are no aps-c lenses for the eos r, only full frame lenses. i dont beleve canon will force us to use full frame lenses (which are more expensiv). what are the thoughts of the community on this?
Where do you think the future of 7D lies-

1. With EOS-M

2. With EOS-R

3. With EOS (= with mirror)

4. Something else
 

Antono Refa

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 26, 2014
770
80
Why is everybody so into APS-C R body?!?! It makes no sense and I very much hope Canon is not going to do that.
It should be
FF - R
APS-C - M
That's it. Just like Sony does it.
IMHO, Canon wouldn't do it as...

1. It doesn't provide an easy upgrade path from crop to FF - M lenses aren't mountable on R bodies.

2. Pro crop body, like the 7D, which give an extra reach with superteles. That is, unless you think the 1D X, 7D, and superteles will be EOS forever.
 

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
3,882
226
I don't expect a 1D-X class mirrorless anytime too soon, but a rather slow
50 MP 5Ds/R model shouldn't be too much work for Canon.

Yes, I do see APS-C on the horizon much sooner as well.
The initial lens line-up set the landmark, telling all noobs
how very professional they can get with RF, and now
cheaper cameras will bring in the harvest.

I am personally not so much interested in RF lenses, as the
filter mount adapter gives me one ring to polarize them all......
... with EF lenses.

What I desperately want is pretty much all in the R, except
for the 5D MkIV ergonomics. That is the point where the R
really sucks.
There is already a rather slow 50Mpixel Canon camera. It's time for a fast one too (see Nikon's D850).
 

tiggy@mac.com

Pentax K-1000
Jan 20, 2014
474
143
Thetford, VT
www.ForestMetrix.com
Excellent one Canon (if rumors are true) of releasing an APS EOS R mount camera probably sitting between 80D - 7D MK 2 area and some good EF / EOS R glass to use on it - abeit 1.6x crop

At least Canon's got a good APS ML and FF ML system that will get better and better. As a Nikon user hope Nikon wakes up and do the same APS ML system & range of cameras - possibly a silly decision to do the Nikon 1 instead of starting a Nikon APS ML line
Hmm. That gets me thinking.... [Warning: remainder is complete speculation and likely wrong...] If you have a problem where you can't release the 1DR that you want to due to silly old electronics, a decent interim strategy might be to push a crop body so that you can solve half your issue by needing to push fewer bits to the card. To tempt people into that, you might even consider a couple crop lenses, such as a 600 f/5.6 R-S. Would be roughly the size of the Nikon 500 f/5.6. This would be a brilliant way of getting some smaller "big whites" on the market without shooting their leg-sized big white market. Would be pretty much no cannibalization with the crop factor. I could get behind that sort of delaying strategy. Make it 18-20 mp, which nowadays could give the low light performance of the 2012 full frame 18mp sensors. Could probably get 7-8 fps out of that with R-level throughput. Hard to get that 600 f/5.6 crop lens out of my head now that it's inserted itself in there. A $1599 crop body and a $2499 600 f/5.6 wouldn't be a terrible sports/wildlife backup kit, thus engaging the other half of the FF pro market.
 
Reactions: Pape

jd7

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 3, 2013
706
82
Why is everybody so into APS-C R body?!?! It makes no sense and I very much hope Canon is not going to do that.
It should be
FF - R
APS-C - M
That's it. Just like Sony does it.
APS-C was a good thing 15 years ago when technology was kinda new and making FF sensors was complicated and expensive. We should really start leaving it behind or at least leave it to the compact size cameras.

1Dx R? I think that was a joke. Nobody wishes for that and nobody has ever expected it.
Most of us I guess is wishing for a 5Ds R with a better 50MP sensor (DR and sensitivity), 6 FPS with a switch to 25MP/10FPS and the video capabilities of the 5d4 but FF 4K. This should be no sci-fi, no magic, no unrealistic expectations.
...OK and maybe some innovation like perfectly working builtin panorama or RAW HDR.
Even 4K/60 and 1080/120 should not be that much of a rocketscience 3 years after 1Dx has it but I know at this point I'm close to just a wet dream.
IMHO, Canon wouldn't do it as...

1. It doesn't provide an easy upgrade path from crop to FF - M lenses aren't mountable on R bodies.

2. Pro crop body, like the 7D, which give an extra reach with superteles. That is, unless you think the 1D X, 7D, and superteles will be EOS forever.
I like the simplicity of Riker's approach but my guess is much depends on the cost of producing a FF sensor (at scale) these days. Rebels and the like sell in relatively high volumes despite being more limited cameras than "higher end" models, which suggests there is a significant market at the price point of the Rebels, et al. Canon will want to supply that market. It will do that to some degree through the M system, but if there is a significant market at that price point which still wants "more" than small size/weight, Canon will want to supply that market. If that market is significant (and I don't know one way or the other), the question becomes can Canon supply full-frame cameras at that price point and be at least as profitable as if it supplied APS-C cameras to that market (taking into account all factors, such as extent to which confusion about RF v RF-s is likely to help or harm sales, anticipated sales volume (which will partly depend on the competition, eg if anyone else releases FF models at that price point), whether it means a more efficient production and supply chain overall, whether it materially changes R&D costs (including for related lens), etc, etc. Perhaps the time is about to come for the lower end of the market (if I can call it that) to be supplied with FF RF cameras, and APS-C will be left for those who are specifically looking for small and light? I wouldn't bet on it (apart from anything else, Canon could decide that market is still best supplied by APS-C DSLRs), but maybe? (If I recall correctly, Canon changed the market for DSLRs when it released the 300D (Rebel) at a price point which had previously been supplied only by digital compact cameras, didn't it?)

The other potential market for an RF-s camera seems to be the reach-limited crowd who are desperate for "pixels on target" (and who therefore may get a benefit from APS-C rather than simply cropping a FF shot). The first question there is whether that market is large enough to motivate Canon to go after it (as against leave it to users to pay up for the large and expensive FF gear and otherwise miss out). However, even assuming that market is large enough for Canon to go after it (and it may well but I have no idea really), the camera would need not only be RF-s but have the speed and tracking ability to satisfy users in that market. It is not obvious the technology is quite there yet for that sort of camera, and if (when?) it comes it may use an APS-C sensor but it won't be "low end".

Anyway, perhaps the key point of the original post in this thread is to emphasise that if you want to predict what Canon is going to do, you are probably better off trying to think like a business-person than like a photographer/photography enthusiast.

(And for those who might question if Canon was thinking from a business perspective in releasing a couple of high end lenses with the EOS R, my guess is they were. I don't know what Canon's reasons were, but a couple of high end lenses (halo products) generates hype, gives a sense of commitment to the system, etc. And the high end lenses seem to be far from useless on the EOS R (eg the accuracy of the EOS R's AF system plays well with the RF 50/1.2, albeit also wide aperture EF lenses) ... and the EOS R itself seems to be far from useless even if it isn't all that everyone wanted ... so it's not like what they have released is totally impractical.)
 
Last edited:
I don't see why there's an issue with this? Canon can clearly support 2 systems, and I don't think an APS-C R camera would totally cannibalize the EOS-M line. I think both could coexist just fine.

EOS M is a small form factor, and Canon clearly has size restrictions for EF-M lenses that make it difficult for certain types of lenses. EOS-M is there for the people who think mirrorless should be about size. There are a lot of people for whom this is important. They'll buy into the M system. Canon wants to make money off these people, so they will keep selling EOS M.

The ergonomics of the EOS R aren't perfect, but I still think they're MUCH closer to what I want. I don't care about size/form factor/lens size. The things I want from mirrorless are ONLY exposure preview and better AF spread. Otherwise I'm happy with DSLR. There are a lot of other people like me (despite what many people say!), including a certain group of entry-level/enthusiast buyers. It's part of why Rebels still sell when people could be buying PowerShots or even whatever m43 camera you might want to consider. If nothing else, certain people see the DSLR-type form factor as "Pro" and they want to be a "Pro." Some people will want larger cameras than EOS M, for whatever reason.

Even though most people who buy Rebels will never upgrade to FF, there's the sense that you *could* do that if you wanted. It encouraged people to buy into a system, and in some cases to buy more expensive lenses than they ever need. You buy a Rebel and a EF 70-200 because some day you REALLY WILL buy that 6D mark II to get full use of the lens (even if you really won't). Canon just made WAY more money off you than if the EF-S 55-250 had been your only choice.

Canon wants to sell RF lenses. They will be more expensive than EF-M lenses. Canon can't sell RF lenses to people who buy the M50. There are people who will never pay $2300 for a camera. They might pay $1500. They probably would pay $999, just to show off their Pro Camera (TM) to their friends. Canon wants to make money off of *these* people. That's why I believe APS-C R is inevitable. Why does Canon sell a 77D and an 80D when the 6D mark II is clearly "better"?

The other reason is the 7D line. Canon still clearly has some issues with FF sensor readout. I'm sure they will one day be solved, but I don't think that's imminent. I think there's likely to be at least one more APS-C high-fps camera. There are also wildlife folks that enjoy the extra 1.6x reach that they get. I think there's demand for a high-end APS-C R camera, at least in the short term.

Why does Prego make 50 kinds of pasta sauce? Shouldn't they just make the 2 or 3 best ones? Because nobody can agree on which the best ones are, and they can get more customers by selling all things to all people. Canon has had pretty much the same approach to DSLRs (SL2, Rebel 7, Rebel 7 Ti, 77D, 80D, 6D, 7D, 5D, 1dX). Why people think they are suddenly going to cut out the middle half of their market as they move to mirrorless, I don't understand.
Let me fix one thing for you. EOS-M really feels like an afterthought nowadays. Your argument about ppl not eventually attaching expensive RF lens to EOS-M is just an excuse for an inability to do so, and is not valid imo. Canon still allows you to attach your expensive L EF lens, no matter how weird the combo might look. And yes, the reason why we've bought into 70-200/2.8 II IS was, that we could use it for our FF one day, which we did with our 5DIV.

But - nowadays and with an advent of RF lens, EF feels a little bit like a dead end - would you buy it, for the money given, if you knew, that there is an RF equivalent? Would you buy it for its advantage of possible attachability to an EOS-M body? As for me - no. That makes EOS-M less attractive in my eyes and pushes it into just PS level of camera - small, nice, still useful pocket camera with an interchangable lenses and excellent APS-C image quality as an advantage.

But - if Canon releases APS-C based R body with an RF mount, it will push EOS-M into the corner even more, imo, because there's basically no upgrade path left. If you accept those aspects, then you are of course good to go, and EOS-M is still your good travel/street combo.
 
Reactions: Isaacheus

Bennymiata

EOS 7D MK II
I think the M series will continue for a long time.
In fact, I'm waiting for Canon to release an updated M5 with full sensor 4k video to replace my M5.
I also use a 5d3 for events etc. and a 70d on a gimbal for video, and each camera has its own personality.
Someone who wants a good small camera might buy an M series camera, but they wouldn't consider something the size of an R or even a crop DSLR. Tha camera market is a big and fragmented one.

DSLRs aren't going anywhere anytime soon.
They're too popular and too cheap to make compared to mirrorless cameras.
 
Reactions: jd7 and unfocused

Antono Refa

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 26, 2014
770
80
I like the simplicity of Riker's approach
Canon cares about profits, not simplicity.

but my guess is much depends on the cost of producing a FF sensor (at scale) these days.
AFAIK, smaller chips will always be cheaper to make than bigger chips. Same for lenses with smaller power of coverage (up to a certain focal length, which is why there aren't EF-S & EF-M superteles).

Rebels and the like sell in relatively high volumes despite being more limited cameras than "higher end" models, which suggests there is a significant market at the price point of the Rebels, et al.
Production costs play a large part here.

Canon will want to supply that market. It will do that to some degree through the M system, but if there is a significant market at that price point which still wants "more" than small size/weight, Canon will want to supply that market. If that market is significant (and I don't know one way or the other)
This is where the 7D (and probably the xxD series, to some degree) come in. If Canon can make a high performance EOS-R camera (not trivial, but I guess would be easier with a crop sensor than FF sensor), a 7D like EOS-R would be a low hanging fruit.

such as extent to which confusion about RF v RF-s is likely to help or harm sales
IMHO, it would help. With no mirror to interfere, Canon could pull the same trick Nikon did - allow photographers to mount RF-S lenses on RF bodies, and shoot in crop mode (same as it does for video), giving an easy upgrade path.

The other potential market for an RF-s camera seems to be the reach-limited crowd who are desperate for "pixels on target" (and who therefore may get a benefit from APS-C rather than simply cropping a FF shot).
Not only. Crop + 300mm f/4 (possibly even f/2.8) would have more sales than FF + 500mm f/4, esp as some would be unable to afford the later.

The first question there is whether that market is large enough to motivate Canon to go after it (as against leave it to users to pay up for the large and expensive FF gear and otherwise miss out).
I think the 7D, esp the mkII, shows there is.

Anyway, perhaps the key point of the original post in this thread is to emphasise that if you want to predict what Canon is going to do, you are probably better off trying to think like a business-person than like a photographer/photography enthusiast.
Agreed.
 

cellomaster27

Capture the moment!
Jun 3, 2013
333
20
San Jose - CA
I think I've decided that I am going to wait for the 5D mark V. I know that's going to be a fantastic camera. It'll be better than the mark 4 obviously and there's a standard with the line that won't change. i.e. dual card slots, at least 7 fps, at least 30MP, 4K 1.6x crop, touch screen, etc..
I just think that it'll take wayyy too long to wait for canon to come out with a 5D line equivalent mirrorless and even then, they may disappoint. Besides, who here will miss the sound of the shutter?? :cool: kind of kidding but it's so satisfying at times for me photographing.
I just have to have to talk about IBIS.. why is this such an important thing? Sure, you'll get more stabilization with sensor and lens stabilization. Or it'll be fantastic for lenses without IS.. but is it really truly that important? I can shoot plenty steady, and that came from being conscious of my body and it supporting the camera. If I shot video seriously, then I'd get a rig to really actually smooth things out. I see too many wannabe filmmakers buying cheap rigs and expecting cinema quality stuff from 4K+, IBIS. :unsure: (granted, some people get really great quality content with these cameras, but it's skills, not the rig AT ALL) It's funny to see people buy these cameras with great specs and coming out with content that could be shot with anything cheaper and simpler. Went to Best Buy and some guys were bashing canon based on specs(I agree) very vocally but they didn't know anything about the camera and what it can do for them and what lenses to get. Funny and sad.
If canon actually comes out with something smashing with their mirrorless, then I'm in. but I really really don't see that happening for several years. My mark 3 is adding up on the milage.. I think it's slated for 2020? :cry: