The R6 really puzzles me.
This is a really good question.
Right now I can't see the right place for the R6 in the EOS R lineup.
If it was an RP successor, same size or smaller, I'd get the lower MP count (20 MP < 26 MP) if they were really better, say this is a real 1DX Mk??? sensor (with DPAF).
If it's not a (recognizably) better sensor than the ones of the RP or R that would really make me scratch my head.
Especially if the body is bigger than the RP.
Interesting, times... .
Yes. I think it's a mistake to try to equate this with either the R or the RP. My guess is that the RP stays in the lineup as the bargain full frame mirrorless. The R6 is somewhat comparable to the 6D and the R5 to the 5D. Canon may keep the R in production for awhile as an option that is slightly below the R6 in pricepoint.I guess (hence the naming) its the same constellation like the 5D and 6D. The 6 is just a little bit lower, a bit smaller, notable cheaper, a bit less rugged for daily professional use. Overall probably a very affordable, nice Fullframe Camera, especialy for portraits, landscapes and advanced amateurs
Given that the R6 and R5 seem to be designed to slot into clear positions defined in the DSLR lineup, i wonder where the EOS R and RP now fit. do the R5 and R6 replace these or will they continue on in the future?
Just my thought: If the silicon is good the larger area will do the rest.It's a Sony A7iii/iv & Nikon Z6 competitor. I may get one if the pixel level sharpness (due to large photosite), DR & High ISO is great.
Of the specs we know about, the only thing that doesn't sound better than the R is the sensor pixel density (3.51 MP/cm² for the R vs 2.3 MP/cm² for the R6). I'm also puzzled with this choice from Canon... 24 MP (2.8 MP/cm²) seems to be the norm for many entry level and prosumer camera bodies... Unless, as some some people have mentioned here, that they use the same sensor as the 1Dx III. But I guess the lower MP count is necessary for getting 20 fps with a processor that will be likely not as powerful than that on R5 or 1Dx III?doesn't sound better than the R, which to me is a very functional and fun camera for still photographers. I don't it does much for someone who has a EOS R.
"I want the R6 to have the AF from R5"
"I want the R6 to have the high megapixel from R5"
"I want the R6 to have the 4k120 from R5"
"I want the R6 to have much lower price then R5"
These kind of comments has no sense at all.
R5 = Pro camera with Pro features with a Pro price
R6 = Prosumer camera with great features with good price
I am sooo right there with you, but if the new specs are true, no top screen, lesser build quality and lower res evf, it sounds more like an RP, which probably means no battery / vertical grip, 1/4000 max shutter and slower flash sync. But maybe the next camera announced will be the EOS R mark II? It would just be so nice to have a pro stills focused camera with a manageable pixel count, for me that is 20-30. Or maybe the new info is crap and it'll be awesome!I really hope it's just an improved version of EOS R, you know with the specs R should have -4K 60fps and IBIS. That's the main reason I am looking at other manufacturers instead of EOS R at the moment. So if R6 is R with a bit better specs I will be more than happy!
It doesn’t have to fall into an existing class. Canon can define a new class at any time in a position where it feels there is a market.Is this seen as an RP replacement? If so it's a hard sell trying to push a lower megapixel sensor than the one the RP already has.
Either it's a A7S class camera or it's lower than the RP. But then dual card slots?