A new camera not named the R1 is coming in the 2nd half of 2021 [CR2]

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
946
791
www.flickr.com
Dumb old me is right there with you. I'm not smart enough to know any better apparently..
It will be a long time before I really hit the limits of what my R5 can do... which is a good thing!
Love playing with 4k120 as a previous stills-only shooter - even with only a 128GB CFe card. Was shooting hot air balloons inflating last weekend and got some nice stills and footage (is that still a term??) of the burns
 

Hector1970

EOS R
CR Pro
Mar 22, 2012
1,348
600
Nooooooooo!
I was hoping in 2021 I wouldn't part with any money to Canon and now they are threatening to bring me what I want - a high MP R5.
I'm very disappointed.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,443
2,308
Nooooooooo!
I was hoping in 2021 I wouldn't part with any money to Canon and now they are threatening to bring me what I want - a high MP R5.
I'm very disappointed.

What do you and your relatives need two kidneys for, anyway?
 

-pekr-

EOS R5
CR Pro
I really don't undestand all those requests for the R II. Guys, R5 is your R II, right? R and RP were nothing more, than a test bed for Canon in a mirrrorless world. R used a 5D IV sensor, RP the one from 6D II, well, kind of.

The reason why ppl feel there is a gap between the R5 and R6, is the 20mpx of R6. That's mostly psychological, but it really does not work for those coming nor from the 5DIV, but also from the 6DII. Imo R6 should not exist and Canon would make it better with the following segmentation:

- R5 - replacement for the 5DIV.
- R5s - high megapixel camera
- R6 - lower than 20mpx. Recently, R6 is no real advantage to R5 in high ISO scenarios. R6 should have been a competition to Sony A7SIII, a bit more video oriented
- R7 - APS-C camera
- R1 - a flagship camera
 

-pekr-

EOS R5
CR Pro
Folks, don't forget how successful financially the Rebel line and EOS M are. Much bigger sales than 7D would ever hoped for. If Canon does not decide to cover APS-C with EOS M only, we may see R3xx and/or R7 someday. But I bet that in a foreseeable future Canon will concentrate on high end and enthusiast RF segments, leaving APS-C to M. IMHO, all they need is one relatively advanced M3 body to fill the gap, if they are not afraid that such body will hurt sales of low end R bodies.

This scenario is an absolute no go, as far as there is a situation, where you can't use RF lens on the M mount. Whatever Canon brings to the M line, is not going to be your 7D II replacement. The camera would have to have a decent ergonomics, which contradicts the M line's main purpose - the small size. Forget it.
 

koenkooi

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
1,868
1,794
I really don't undestand all those requests for the R II. Guys, R5 is your R II, right? R and RP were nothing more, than a test bed for Canon in a mirrrorless world. R used a 5D IV sensor, RP the one from 6D II, well, kind of.

The reason why ppl feel there is a gap between the R5 and R6, is the 20mpx of R6. That's mostly psychological, but it really does not work for those coming nor from the 5DIV, but also from the 6DII. Imo R6 should not exist and Canon would make it better with the following segmentation:

- R5 - replacement for the 5DIV.
- R5s - high megapixel camera
- R6 - lower than 20mpx. Recently, R6 is no real advantage to R5 in high ISO scenarios. R6 should have been a competition to Sony A7SIII, a bit more video oriented
- R7 - APS-C camera
- R1 - a flagship camera
I feel there's a size gap between the RP and the R/R5/R6. I'd love to have an RP sized body (with better-than-RP AF) to stick the RF50STM on and bring it when taking the kids for a walk.
 

mpphoto

EOS M6 Mark II
CR Pro
Dec 15, 2013
86
8
The reason why ppl feel there is a gap between the R5 and R6, is the 20mpx of R6. That's mostly psychological, but it really does not work for those coming nor from the 5DIV, but also from the 6DII. Imo R6 should not exist and Canon would make it better with the following segmentation:

- R5 - replacement for the 5DIV.
- R5s - high megapixel camera
- R6 - lower than 20mpx. Recently, R6 is no real advantage to R5 in high ISO scenarios. R6 should have been a competition to Sony A7SIII, a bit more video oriented
- R7 - APS-C camera
- R1 - a flagship camera
The 5D4 was my primary SLR. Since I got my RP and then the R, I have rarely used my 5D4, 7D2, or 80D. I plan on getting the R6 once it becomes available refurbished. The R5 is overkill for me. It has video capabilities beyond what I need, 45MP is more resolution than I need, and despite cheap storage, the files are bigger than I want to deal with. Plus the R5 costs more. Why pay more for specs and functions I won't take advantage of? Do I wish the R6 had 30MP instead of 20? Yes, but otherwise it offers all the performance I need. By offering the R6, Canon will be getting some of my cash. If only the R5 was available, I wouldn't be updating anytime soon. If the R6 had lower resolution but better low-light performance as you proposed, I wouldn't consider it. Resolution below 20MP is too much of a sacrifice for high ISO performance for me.

My only issues with the R are its relatively slow burst speed and the lack of IBIS. The R6 fixes those things without giving me huge resolution and pro video features I don't need, and it saves me money compared to the R5. There is definitely a place for the R6 in the market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,443
2,308
The 5D4 was my primary SLR. Since I got my RP and then the R, I have rarely used my 5D4, 7D2, or 80D. I plan on getting the R6 once it becomes available refurbished. The R5 is overkill for me. It has video capabilities beyond what I need, 45MP is more resolution than I need, and despite cheap storage, the files are bigger than I want to deal with. Plus the R5 costs more. Why pay more for specs and functions I won't take advantage of? Do I wish the R6 had 30MP instead of 20? Yes, but otherwise it offers all the performance I need. By offering the R6, Canon will be getting some of my cash. If only the R5 was available, I wouldn't be updating anytime soon. If the R6 had lower resolution but better low-light performance as you proposed, I wouldn't consider it. Resolution below 20MP is too much of a sacrifice for high ISO performance for me.

My only issues with the R are its relatively slow burst speed and the lack of IBIS. The R6 fixes those things without giving me huge resolution and pro video features I don't need, and it saves me money compared to the R5. There is definitely a place for the R6 in the market.

In a way your attitude is the mirror image of mine. I didn't want to go *below* 30 MP so I ended up with an R5 that's a bit overkill for me in other regards (including the video modes). I now have a second card slot I'm unlikely ever to use too, because they made it CFE for those video modes I don't actually care about. Had the R6 been 30MP or more, that's what I'd have today.
 

Fischer

EOS RP
Mar 17, 2020
301
216
All of that is true of course, but in my opinion the world was a little different then. If the resolution is close to what is rumored 85-90MP, then I would be extremely happy with just a resolution bump over the R5 in regards to technical specs. The AF system, DR, etc. of the R5 is in another world in comparison to the 5DIII. In fact it is on another level from the 5D4 as well. I'm just not sure how much better it could actually be in practical terms. Small improvements perhaps but not earth shattering, especially when you consider the resolution increase. If it would have a crop shooting mode at 12FPS (like the R5 does at full res) I would be pretty impressed.
We will see... just guessing like everyone else, but there are several possible improvements.
 

vladk

EOS M50
Mar 10, 2021
39
52
This scenario is an absolute no go, as far as there is a situation, where you can't use RF lens on the M mount. Whatever Canon brings to the M line, is not going to be your 7D II replacement. The camera would have to have a decent ergonomics, which contradicts the M line's main purpose - the small size. Forget it.
What I said is Canon does not need the 7D replacement in foreseeable future.
They see good sales of M line, they may want to provide more advanced M body feature wise, not a bigger, better built one.
RF will be FF only until they see the market saturation, and only then they may consider APS-C RF. The same approach they did with EF/EF-S (no pro grade APS-C body until late phase).

Add to this that there are no leaks about APS-C RF lenses. APS-C body without APS-C lenses makes no sense IMO.
 

slclick

PINHOLE
Dec 17, 2013
4,568
2,909
What I said is Canon does not need the 7D replacement in foreseeable future.
They see good sales of M line, they may want to provide more advanced M body feature wise, not a bigger, better built one.
RF will be FF only until they see the market saturation, and only then they may consider APS-C RF. The same approach they did with EF/EF-S (no pro grade APS-C body until late phase).

Add to this that there are no leaks about APS-C RF lenses. APS-C body without APS-C lenses makes no sense IMO.
YMMV. Let's take the 7D, many if not most shooters used L glass. Sot there's that
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

GoldWing

Canon EOS 1DXMKII
Oct 19, 2013
322
234
Los Angeles, CA
en.wikipedia.org
As I recall, you tested the 1DxIII for what, a few days? As someone who actually bought and uses the 1DxIII I strongly disagree that it is a "nothing buger." Or should that be a "nothing burger" or maybe a "nothing bugger?" Having used the 1DxIII through the winter sports season and now going into a spring season I have found it to be a significant improvement over the 1Dx II. Autofocus accuracy is much improved although it does take a learning curve to get the most out of the new autofocus system. The 1Dx II was pretty much limited to the center autofocus point or expanded point for sports shooting, but I've found that the 1DxIII often performs better in the larger or even full zones -- something that Peter Read Miller also commented on. In many cases, I'm getting more keepers than I know what to do with.
We shoot with center point our avg years is 20 and we don't need the handicap of focusing across. However we can see how most need the EVF or with the the 1DX 1 2 or 3 letting the camera to take over. We tell our cameras what to do, shoot in manual and use single point with about 100% keepers. The OVF is still the best with a trained professional.
 

Ramage

EOS R5
CR Pro
Aug 27, 2019
589
1,188
We shoot with center point our avg years is 20 and we don't need the handicap of focusing across. However we can see how most need the EVF or with the the 1DX 1 2 or 3 letting the camera to take over. We tell our cameras what to do, shoot in manual and use single point with about 100% keepers. The OVF is still the best with a trained professional.
Sounds like you need a Snickers.

Cheers
 

slclick

PINHOLE
Dec 17, 2013
4,568
2,909
It's about time we had some of these highly trained professionals school the rest of us on what is up. Where would we be without them?

Pass the popcorn
 
  • Like
Reactions: unfocused