After the EOS R3, Canon will introduce new “affordable” RF mount cameras [CR1]

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
9,007
1,735
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
The Canon EOS R3 is getting all of the talk right now, and for good reason. The new camera will become Canon’s flagship RF mount camera until we see an EOS R1 late next year at the earliest.
I have been told that after the Canon EOS R3 begins and whenever supply chain issues are corrected, Canon will focus on the lower end of the RF mount lineup.
A replacement for the Canon EOS RP is coming, this will obviously be the new entry-level camera for the RF lineup. Pricing for this camera will be aggressive.
The RF mount APS-C sensor equipped unicorn is also “in the pipeline”. It will sit above the EOS RP replacement in price and will be the smallest camera in the RF mount lineup.
Reading between the lines, it doesn’t appear that an APS-C RF mount camera will be the EOS 7D series replacement a lot...

Continue reading...


 

Flamingtree

EOS M50
Dec 13, 2015
38
48
I know nothing about product development or product strategy but I don’t get an rf aps-c strategy.

They have a perfectly good aps-c system, just make more lenses for that, because you are hardly going to sell 85mm f1.2 lenses to an aps-c buyer….

If down the track said buyer upgrades to full frame they are going to buy new lenses anyway so changing mount won’t really hurt them.
 
Jul 12, 2013
331
508
Sigh...I guess I'll be buying another M6 Mk II as a 'backup'.

I don't understand Canon's thinking here regarding small cameras and small lenses (EF-M ecosystem)--they're ceding that market to others.

I don't understand it at all.

That's OK...there's lots of things I don't understand (ask my wife of 37 years ;) ).
 
Last edited:

SUNDOG04

EOS 90D
CR Pro
Mar 1, 2015
109
50
More affordable than an R6? Hoping so. I primarily do landscape and see no compelling reason to pay the extra $500 or so that an R6 costs over a Z6II. As great as the the RF lenses are, the fast ones not affordable for me, nor do much good for landscape work. I prefer the Nikkor S 24-70 f4 and their great S50 f1.8 to what I see from Canon. My mind is open, not wishing to buy right now, and anxiously waiting to see what Canon delivers.
 

mb66energy

EOS 5D Mark IV
Dec 18, 2011
1,504
373
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
I know nothing about product development or product strategy but I don’t get an rf aps-c strategy.

They have a perfectly good aps-c system, just make more lenses for that, because you are hardly going to sell 85mm f1.2 lenses to an aps-c buyer….

If down the track said buyer upgrades to full frame they are going to buy new lenses anyway so changing mount won’t really hurt them.

You have an RF 70-200 2.8 and you need more reach - one solution is a tele converter, the over one is to use a camera with a smaller sensor. I think this is one reason to do that.
Think of video (super 35 like format) with all existing EF and EF-S + RF lenses for hybrid shooters.
If its smaller and lighter it could be a good alternative to APS-C SLRs in the future.

I think Canon has two other reasons to do that: focusing the resources to ONE mount in the near future for the higher end systems and sell more new RF lenses in an otherwise saturated market (the rare occurence of these simple EF to EOS RF adapters supports this idea IMO).
IMO EF mount will die soon, EF-M has its own niche and will stay longer, maybe much longer. M50 is a great little guy!
 

Rumourhasit

Eos R5, Eos 7Dii
CR Pro
Sep 28, 2018
12
4
It’s going to be a very interesting few years as Canon Revamp there lineup. Will they truly leave the popular M series behind or morph is into an small bodied APS-C with RF mount. Will they release a successor to the 7D, A crop frame in a reasonably pro body worthy of a single digit. What about the 90D, they are running out of numbers for the two digit line. The RPii as an entry level FF has a place but the eosR was only every a stop gap till the R5 came out so I doubt it will see a replacement
 
  • Like
Reactions: EOS 4 Life

amorse

EOS RP
Jan 26, 2017
785
1,048
www.instagram.com
I know nothing about product development or product strategy but I don’t get an rf aps-c strategy.

They have a perfectly good aps-c system, just make more lenses for that, because you are hardly going to sell 85mm f1.2 lenses to an aps-c buyer….

If down the track said buyer upgrades to full frame they are going to buy new lenses anyway so changing mount won’t really hurt them.
I don't know, I can see value in having the RF APS-C system as creating a pathway to full frame and keeping people within the ecosystem as they transition. There are a number of lower cost full frame lenses which could realistically be purchased by a cost-conscious RF APS-C camera user who would want to continue use of the lenses on a new full frame camera when they upgrade. As a few examples, I could see an APS-C RF mount buyer also picking up an RF 35mm macro, or the 85mm macro, or even the RF 24-105 f/4-7.1.

Speaking from my own experience, when I owned a Canon 450D I had only 3 lenses - the kit lens (I think it was an 18-55), a Sigma 10-20, and a Canon EF 85mm f/1.8. That Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 was the only lens I owned that would work with a full frame EF camera, but it was enough to tip the scales and get me to invest a 6D, despite the lens being my least-used lens at the time. People can be weird about their perception of sunk investment, so if people do buy any full frame RF lenses for an RF APS-C camera, I think they may become quite a bit more likely to buy a full frame RF body to prevent the perception of lost investment. With that said, I've been wrong before and I'll be wrong again.
 

FamilyGuy

EOS 90D
Feb 5, 2020
179
297
Sigh...I guess I'll be buying another M6 Mk II as a 'backup'.

I don't understand Canon's thinking here regarding small cameras and small lens (EF-M ecosystem)--they're ceding that market to others.

I don't understand it at all.

That's OK...there's lots of things I don't understand (ask my wife of 37 years ;) ).

The fact that the M6II with the 18-150 that my wife has provides essentially the same field of view as my RP and 24-240 is pretty impressive as a small kit with a lot of range and image quality.

That said, I think based on the target market (as I perceive it), the M’s really don’t need a ton of lenses. I’d like something that extends to at least 300 that breaks the supposed barrel diameter rule, and maybe a 60mm macro. But beyond that, I’m not sure how many more lenses that group needs. I’m guessing most M owners are two or three lens people anyway. Most M owners don’t post on forums like these.
 

John Wilde

EOS M6 Mark II
Jan 2, 2021
55
111
In both the USA and Japan the M50 is Canon's best selling mirrorless camera, but in their financial documents, they don't even acknowledge its existence. I can't remember that last time Canon mentioned APS-C anything.
 

Chaitanya

EOS R
Jun 27, 2013
1,401
593
35
Pune
You have an RF 70-200 2.8 and you need more reach - one solution is a tele converter, the over one is to use a camera with a smaller sensor. I think this is one reason to do that.
Think of video (super 35 like format) with all existing EF and EF-S + RF lenses for hybrid shooters.
If its smaller and lighter it could be a good alternative to APS-C SLRs in the future.

I think Canon has two other reasons to do that: focusing the resources to ONE mount in the near future for the higher end systems and sell more new RF lenses in an otherwise saturated market (the rare occurence of these simple EF to EOS RF adapters supports this idea IMO).
IMO EF mount will die soon, EF-M has its own niche and will stay longer, maybe much longer. M50 is a great little guy!
Another group is macro photographers especially ones who herp, very few move to FF cameras.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mb66energy

EOS 4 Life

EOS RP
Sep 20, 2020
600
425
I see M6 Mark II as kind of a 90D in an M body so I can see putting a 90D in an RP body.
I can also see putting a 7D in an R body.
None of these would replace the portability of the M line.
People who keep calling for its death do not seem to get its appeal.
 
Nov 3, 2020
8
12
What I don´t understand is, that Canon leaves the entire segment of enthusiasts and pros on a budget to Sony and Nikon.

Sony has the A7III for 1800 €/$ and Nikon has the Z5, Z6 and Z6II all of them very capable cameras between 1300-1800 €/$. Canon only has the EOS R (slow, without IBIS, without 2nd cardslot, ...), that in my opinion is clearly overpriced compared to Sony and Nikon and aswell to the EOS RP.

I have the EOS RP and I´m happy with the performance for the price of around 1000 €/$. But I would like to upgrade soon to a more capable camera. Shooting mainly portrait and architecture, I´m shurely not willing to pay 2600 €/$ for a 20MP EOS R6.

If they just brought the price of the RP back down to 999,- incl. EF-RF-adapter, there would be no need to replace the RP at the moment because it´s a great entry to the mirrorless FF segment.

What is really missing in canons lineup is a capable camera between 1500-2500 €/$ with 30+ MP, IBIS and good DR that is able to beat the A7III/IV, and the Z5/Z6/Z6II.-

Guess I´ll have to wait till 2024+ to replace my RP...
 

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
CR Pro
I love my RP but I want more, looking forward to an RP upgrade! :)
I wonder how you’d meaningfully upgrade the RP ? I guess the obvious thing is fit an up to date sensor. The one in the RP is fine but you have to shoot in the traditional Canon way - don’t unnecessarily underexpose. I guess other upgrades would be frame rate, maybe add more specific eye detect focus.
I bought an RP at a good price and I have to say ergonomically it’s superb for an entry level camera. Still much prefer an OVF though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Adelino

Ruined

EOS R
Aug 22, 2013
915
53
I know nothing about product development or product strategy but I don’t get an rf aps-c strategy.

They have a perfectly good aps-c system, just make more lenses for that, because you are hardly going to sell 85mm f1.2 lenses to an aps-c buyer….

If down the track said buyer upgrades to full frame they are going to buy new lenses anyway so changing mount won’t really hurt them.
APS-C RF mount is 100% upsell marketing strategy and makes zero practical sense. It's the hope they they will sell someone a cheap RF mount aps-c and that person will invest in expensive RF lenses - then eventually an expensive full frame RF body. Trying to recreate their EF-S marketing upsell strategy in other words

The main difference and problem is EF-M and options from other brands are a much smarter small sensor choice than RF APS-C if you know what you are doing
 
<-- start Taboola -->