What’s next from Canon?

[Bert63]

I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.

100-500 is L glass. 100-400 is not. Price.

 

[Bert63]

and the R5 is probably going to be fairly inadequate for motorsports photography (especially karting).

Why would you say this?

 

[Quarkcharmed]

Yes!! Really wanted to use with the cinema line, also the Canon 17-85 should get a refresh.

I think EF-S line was dead even before the EF line. The last EF-S lens was in 2017, last EF - 2018. The production and sales will obviously last for quite a while, but not the development.

 

[Bert63]

The R5 is already discounted if you know where to get it.

I got mine for $3700 @ B&H and couldn't be happier.

 

[blackcoffee17]

R6 is not enough?

Not if you care about long lens shooting and "reach". The R6 is too low resolution and the R5 too expensive.

 

[blackcoffee17]

What is up with all these STM lenses? You spend 4500 Euros on camera, thousands of Euros on cards, 15 000 on a PC, and then you go and buy yourself 300 Euro cheap lens? LOL IDK.

What's wrong with STM lenses? There are other people, not just the ones who can afford R5 + 100-500 for $7000. And nothing wrong with the image quality of STM lenses.

 

[blackcoffee17]

Another 100-400 type of lens and no 200-600 or a bit longer than 400mm.

 

[JohanCruyff]

I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.

The RF 100-500 L becomes F/6.3 @ 363mm.
https://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?t=3652591&l=it

The non L could be a 100-400 F/4.5-F/7.1, lighter and cheaper: a Tamron / Sigma competitor.

 

[Pape]

Is anyone concerned that mirrorless camera wont be as rugged as their DSLR counterparts? I know 1DX3 is a tank but even 5DIV level.

R5 and R6 havent enough expensive ?

 

[neurorx]

I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.

There was a breakdown by Gordon Laing. The 100-400 had a lower comparable f stop than the 100-500 at higher end focal lengths. I would love an affordable 200-600 f6.3.

 

[Nelu]

Will overheat after shooting 12K raw for 5 minutes.

Seriously, though, no one has such sensor tech yet.

I believe you missed this: " finally oriented on photographers "
He was specifically writing that so such camera would be fine even without any video at all.

 

[neurorx]

R5 and R6 havent enough expensive ?

It isnt about the cost, its a camera that I know can take any environment.

 

[Richard Anthony]

There were some rumors about a new Speedlite, if I remember correctly.

Also, PowerShot G9 X iii.

Canon UK told me they do not have any new speedlites in the pipe line

 

[AlanF]

I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.

It was claimed that the 100-500 was f/5.6 at 400mm but Gordon Laing's cameralabs video has this:

 

[Pape]

It isnt about the cost, its a camera that I know can take any environment.

Maybe they make R6 b version with 7d level weather seal and 2k more price or maybe not ,their goal seems to be decrease camera lines

 

[davidhfe]

I feel this is where Canon is missing the point. The R5 is definitely great on paper but after seeing all the limitation with the video I don't even know why canon tried to pull off the 8k video in this body. They could have stopped at unlimited (yeah I know the stupid EU tax, few other manufacturers have ignored this and moved on. So why not you Canon?) 4k60p with some innovation (like a heat sink grip) instead Canon tried to create a marketing buzz with 8K and missed out yet again on the 4k too. They also have AA filter on the R5 (obviously we are yet to see how strong it is).

This is what Canon could have done instead, made the R5 more of a photography product even with just 4k30p limited to 29:59 mins of recording and AA filter cancellation effect like the 5DsR and made the R6 with AA filter and great video specs (FHD @ 240fps and 4k @ 120fps with AF). IMO the R5 is a product neither an exceptional photo centric product because of AA filter nor a good hybrid camera because of video limitations. Had Canon done that they do not need to come up with another low cost body with the same 45MP sensor. Obviously it is just my opinion and I know that will not count at all at this point I was very excited to hear the specs of R5 mostly I wanted to try my 600 f/4L V1 on this body. But after seeing there is a AA filter and priced at $3900 I did not pre-order. I guess the reports of overwhelming reports are BS like Sony and Fuji does. The R5 is already discounted if you know where to get it.

I would much, much rather have a situational-use 8K and 4K HFR modes in addition to the "standard" 4K/30 pixel binned mode than to not have them. And I get the AA filter thing but I think we're just going to have to wait and see how the sharpness is compared to the Z7/A7R4/etc. I don't think it's going to be a deal breaker; Canon keeps talking about how they're improving their AA and seems to be super aware of the need. They made a huge deal about this with the 1DX3.

 

[PhotonShark]

I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm.

This looks like the non L version. It would be a game changer if it would do f5.6 to 300mm (or more). A huge temptation for APS-C users to switch to full frame if the pricing is right.

I'm currently using a 70D and the 70-300mm. This would be the perfect combo upgrade (equivalent) for me with an R6 without breaking the bank.

 

[Twinix]

I think EF-S line was dead even before the EF line. The last EF-S lens was in 2017, last EF - 2018. The production and sales will obviously last for quite a while, but not the development.

Yea, my point was just that I wan’t good aps-c glass (24-105 is too thight etc) for the cinema line with IS.

 

[miketcool]

Weather sealed macro flash. Olympus made one, and I really don't want to tape up pins and not get all the sync features.

I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm.

Canon discussed it during their launch presentation. f/5.6 at 400mm when they were talking about engineering and design.

 

[Ozarker]

I think EF-S line was dead even before the EF line. The last EF-S lens was in 2017, last EF - 2018. The production and sales will obviously last for quite a while, but not the development.

You are most probably correct. The low sellers will be closed out. I noticed now that Adorama has the EF 400mm f/5.6L on closeout. That surprised me as I would have thought it to be a strong seller because I loved the one I had. I ordered the 135mm f/2L just in case. I won't be able to afford an RF version for quite some time.