Sounds good to me. Even if this one is a regular-sized R body, it somehow gives me hope that we will eventually get an RP or even M-sized APS-C body.
A BSI APS-C EOS R camera is coming in the second half of 2022 [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Whither the Rebel? Is there a market for, or for Canon to economically produce a competent EVF version of those boxed kits that stack up at Costco each holiday?
Hopefully they won't dumb it down with a crappy EVF, like the small and (so I've heard) non-pentaprisms in the current Rebel lineup.
Hopefully they won't dumb it down with a crappy EVF, like the small and (so I've heard) non-pentaprisms in the current Rebel lineup.
Last edited:
Assuming that the rumour is correct(!), where in the product line would a R7 fit in?
The birding etc community currently using 7Dii want: eye-AF, build quality, >8fps (14fps M6ii), dual card which will put it at least at the R6 level so around USD2500. The cost of the R6 full frame sensor vs a BSI APS-C sensor could potentially be approximately the same cost (newer technology vs larger wafer size). Would it compete against the R6 ie more megapixels?
$6500 1DXiii
$6000 R3
$3900 R5
$2500 R6
$1500 R
$1200 90D
$1000 RP
<$1000 rumoured low end FF body. Likely without EVF a la Sigma fp style
12 months out is a long time for a CR2 rumour especially as there was the same rumour last year for end 2021 delivery.
The birding etc community currently using 7Dii want: eye-AF, build quality, >8fps (14fps M6ii), dual card which will put it at least at the R6 level so around USD2500. The cost of the R6 full frame sensor vs a BSI APS-C sensor could potentially be approximately the same cost (newer technology vs larger wafer size). Would it compete against the R6 ie more megapixels?
$6500 1DXiii
$6000 R3
$3900 R5
$2500 R6
$1500 R
$1200 90D
$1000 RP
<$1000 rumoured low end FF body. Likely without EVF a la Sigma fp style
12 months out is a long time for a CR2 rumour especially as there was the same rumour last year for end 2021 delivery.
The FOV would be different, but the 'reach' is a function of pixel density. So you could still see a benefit as long as the bump the density up.
An APSc sensor from Canon is always a 1.6 crop factor - cutting a smaller image out of the center of a 'normal' full frame image. But the number of additional pixels per duck vs the full frame - which determines the apparent image size when viewed at the same (say 300dpi) image scale - will be different based on the pixel density of the sensors you are comparing.
Good illustrations here:
Mark David | Pixel density in camera sensors
An explanation about how the density of a camera sensor's pixels affect the differences between APS-C and full-frame cameras
www.mdavid.com.au
Not my website, just a link I found.
Just because Canon prices the R6 at USD$2500, I don't buy the argument that an APS-C body with similar features must naturally be priced there as well.
There is no precedent in the current market for a $2500 USD APS-C body. The most expensive APS-C body I am aware of is the Fujifilm X-Pro3 ($1800, without the dura finish), but I think the $1700 X-T4 is a better option for 7Dii sports/action/wildlife shooters looking to move to mirrorless, that or the $1400 Sony a6600 (prices in USD at B&H as of this date).
All three of these bodies check the boxes for the standard high-end features: Magnesium alloy construction, weather/dust resistance, fast AF, face/eye AF, animal eye AF (Sony, not sure about Fuji), IBIS, 200K (Sony) or 300K (Fuji) shutter rating, 4K video (no time limit on Sony, not sure about Fuji), and a large image buffer. The two Fuji's also have dual SD card slots.
If Canon does make an "R7" with similar specs, they very likely will price it well north of $2K. That's their prerogative, and I'm sure there will be many compelling reasons why people will be willing to pay that much. I'm not judging, in fact I might even be one of them. But that price and that feature set do not inherently have to go hand in hand with one another.
I dont see Canon releasing lots of F7.1, F8 lenses and the like as all that compatible with APS-C bodies coming too.
Not impossible, but definitely lots of reason to have a few buckets of salt. Id buy one if it came, but not going to lose sleep over it.
Not impossible, but definitely lots of reason to have a few buckets of salt. Id buy one if it came, but not going to lose sleep over it.
unfocused
EOS-1D X Mark III
I can't express how much I'm looking forward to endless discussions of crop sensor reach over the next year. Plus, I'm hoping there will be a few hundred forum posts dedicated to equivalence.
unfocused
EOS-1D X Mark III
I get the feeling that those who really, really want a crop-sensor body for birding and wildlife would be willing to spend as much or even a little more than an R6. That's actually where the 7D was slotted, a little above the 6D.
that's what I'm thinking. I don't see value. users can now crop to get APSC format. Maybe smaller lens would be interesting but Canon has to focus on getting more RF FF lens out. Sony+Sigma+Tamron are producing good E mount lenses at a very fast pace.
The only real outlier for Canon is the M6ii with speed and pixel density in a M body. I suspect that a cheaper but similar body with that sensor would sell well.
Canon will price within their product portfolio and they haven't really tried to match Sony or Nikon with equivalent models let alone Fuji.
A new sensor is a different story.
A R7 with similar features to R6 but faster rolling shutter, and a higher pixel BSI density would cannibalise their R6 if it was priced lower than the R6.
For the record, the 7D launched at $1699 (2009), and the 6D launched at $2099 (2012). The 7DII launched at $1799 (2014), and the 6DII launched at $1999 (2017).
So the 6D was slotted $400 above the 7D, and the 6DII was slotted $200 above the 7DII.
But a 6Dii is USD1400 vs $2500 for R6. There may be a re-jigging of the product line with EOS R and RP replacements but a R7 with similar specs to R6 will be a problem for them in product differentiation.
In a cheaper body than R6, 12fps, single card might be an option or it will need to be >USD2500 to justify the higher megapixel count. I know that mp is not everything but as the R5 and R3 have shown that the key feature to Canon is the megapixel count!
It might depend on the overall build quality - I recall that the 7D was in the bullet-proof semi-pro category, and the 7DII somewhat less than that. But I agree it will probably come back to the sensor - if that is a new design then it is going to represent a premium component, knocking up the price. And, like others, I wonder how many they will actually sell - I can't see there being a mass-market (even in R6 terms), so more likely it will aim at specialist niches, meaning that the necessary revenue (and profit) would have to be recouped over a lesser volume of sales. And of course there is the expected low-price (<$1000) R series FF that is rumoured for early 2022 - that would presumably entice a certain number more of potential APSC buyers into entry level FF?
I wonder what this means for EF-M. It seems pretty clear to me that the M system was never a priority for Canon. I (and I'm sure most others) would prefer Canon dive fully into RF for both full-frame and mirrorless, but I could see them keeping EF-M around as a lower-end ILC system with smaller bodies (partially thanks to the smaller lens mount) and bottoming out the RF APS-C bodies at about a 90D-equivalent level, perhaps offering both a 90D-esque (or even 77D-esque) general APS-C body and a sports-/wildlife-oriented "mirrorless 7D3".
Looking at it from Canon's perspective, keeping both systems would allow them to sell more gear overall (making you upgrade body and lenses together to get to the next "level"), but they'd run the risk of EF-M customers who are looking to upgrade to a nicer kit simply moving to a different brand while they're at it.
Looking at it from Canon's perspective, keeping both systems would allow them to sell more gear overall (making you upgrade body and lenses together to get to the next "level"), but they'd run the risk of EF-M customers who are looking to upgrade to a nicer kit simply moving to a different brand while they're at it.
Best to speak for just yourself. About 90% of ILC sales are APS-C, and about 43% of ILC sales are DSLRs. So clearly ‘most others’ don’t share your preference, at least based on what is actually being bought.
I don't agree. Canon may not be spending R&D money/resources into the EF-M mount now but they certainly did invest a lot in it between 2012-2019. It has been 2 years since a new release but the EF-m is a cashcow for Canon.
There is no upgrade path to RF. Those wanting to upgrade to full frame have many choices. They may stick to Canon if there are bridge type cameras eg a sub USD1000 RF body
A full frame sub USDk RF body means easy upgrade to expensive RF lenses or current adapted EF lenses and eventually higher end bodies. I suspect that it won't have an EVF and will operate more like a phone UI (M200/Sigma fp style). It would be the pathway for phone photographers to better photography including optical bokeh (not computational).
If the sub USD1k body is APS-C then it won't be a replacement for 7D or 90D. Being 20% cheaper than the 90D would normally means less features.
As a bird enthusiast, I'd class someone acknowledging a mistake publicly and backtracking as a "Rara Avis". Kudos to you!
Not so rare though is the absurd number of people that won't read the whole thread to see if someone already provided a correct answer and keep on saying the same thing over and over again.
I guess the temptation of being right in a forum is too big for some. . .
No , it works on area to get equivalent pixel density and Canon's aps-c crop is 1.6x
1.6x1.6=2.56
30mp x 2.56=76.8
Unfocused was correct
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)