Canon’s Retro Camera is Coming as the EOS R8 Mark II

[roby17269]

Physical cooling is the main difference similar to what is being rumoured with the V version but takes out IBIS which offsets the passive cooling. We don’t know what the relative cost difference is.
The R5c has not only longer run times but also 8k60 vs 8k39 on the R5.
Adding the cinema menus but only via restart makes it a video SW version but looks to be shoe horned in vs a redeveloped integrated SW release.

my point was: the R5 and R5C are different beasts and extrapolating from them that a no video version would cost less would be incorrect in my opinion

I can’t comment on colour vs monochrome as canon hasn’t done that before and Leica charge what the market will bare.
Canon has released 2 Astro sensor bodies with the IR filter removed and charged more but that was a long time ago

Apart from Leica, Ricoh and PhaseOne have done monochrome versions of existing models as well. In all cases the monochrome version costs more than the color one and in all case the only difference is lack of color filtering. The color versions are all niche products admittedly, but the monochrome ones are niche in a niche

 

[dwkdnvr]

Apart from Leica, Ricoh and PhaseOne have done monochrome versions of existing models as well. In all cases the monochrome version costs more than the color one and in all case the only difference is lack of color filtering. The color versions are all niche products admittedly, but the monochrome ones are niche in a niche

The Astro-Cam market is also illustrative. Astro-Cams (from ZWO and QHY among others) are pretty close to 'sensor in a box' designs where most of the complexity is offloaded to a universal driver. They have many designs where they offer a color and mono version of the same camera differing only in which version of the sensor they use. Even here, the mono versions are always more expensive.

 

[Old Man FL/FD]

To me, a "retro" camera is one you put on the shelf, and stays there except when you want to show it off to a relative.

 

[Del Paso]

View attachment 229029

I see a Focotar and a Colorplan...very good choices!
The funny bayonet was the only reason why I chose the Minolta SRT 101 over Canon's FTb Ql.
While dreaming, still a poor student, of a Leicaflex SL and a Nikon F2. Which I both bought a few years later.

 

[Old Man FL/FD]

I see a Focotar and a Colorplan...very good choices!
The funny bayonet was the only reason why I chose the Minolta SRT 101 over Canon's FTb Ql.
While dreaming, still a poor student, of a Leicaflex SL and a Nikon F2. Which I both bought a few years later.

Wow!

I'm impressed on your lens ID's - my Leitz enlarger and slide projector lenses.

 

[Del Paso]

Wow!

I'm impressed on your lens ID's - my Leitz enlarger and slide projector lenses.

Had (have) exactly the same...

 

[sanj]

To me, a "retro" camera is one you put on the shelf, and stays there except when you want to show it off to a relative.

There have been many many fantastic photos made from retro cameras. Your comment does not make much sense, sir.

 

[SereneSpeed]

@Canon Rumors whats the current prediction for the R7ii release? There’s so many predictions in so many threads… I can’t keep up. Knowing what you *now* know about the certification of the LP-E6P camera(s), is the R7ii still likely before June 16th? Thanks.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

It would be funny if Canon has a very different idea of retro to us. It might only be as far back as a T70, those FD lenses didn't look too different, polycarb shells, different rubber ware and of course an aperture ring.
They could go VERY retro into their film range finder territory, like the old Canon P or 7 series, but mounting a modern RF lens on these camera styles would look very odd and those old Lecia thread mount lenses are very different in size and shape to modern optics. However, having an offset EVF might be fun to use. It would be fun to have a EVF only UI...so no back LCD screen would look VERY old skool.
Canon might consider the EOS 300 / Rebel 2000 as retro small film and those were EF mount lenses, not too dissimilar to the current RF shells, easy to re-imagine a few RF lenses in that style. Something like the EOS 33 / Elan 7 were the a lot bigger and were in some respects the forerunners of the 5D range (ie not the 1 series, or the 3 series, but the next 5 series model).
I guess it depends on what Canon means by "retro". I can't imagine a EOS 650 sized camera, even a AE-1 will be bigger than the current R8 foot print.

 

[blackcoffee17]

And yet, here we are, with the article already adjusted to the (at this moment) suggested/perceived split of the current R8 into an R8V and R8 Mark II. Go figure.
Probably a split by Canon due to wildly different reasons than mine, but we'll see what we end up with eventually.

BTW: 'Photographing' at 30 FPS is just making very short films and hoping that one particular frame has the approximate image you'd want.
Not my kind of picture taking and I'd gladly take a much lower max FPS if that means slower/cheaper onboard buffer RAM, less cooling (as someone else mentioned), etc. etc.

That's not the same at all. That's not a split, Canon just adding another video-first camera in the lineup. The R8V/R6V is very video specific and doesn't have an EVF. The R8 Mark II will have the same video features as the current R8, it won't be a stills-only camera.