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

Tremotino

EOS 90D
Jan 23, 2018
120
77
Munich
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.
That's exactly what happened to me...

After more than 10 years apsc I bought my first fullframe camera and guess what? I sold all my FULLFRAME lenses except 50mm F1.4 and 14mm F2.8 Samyang. Both not the greatest lenses but I get nothing for them on the refurbished market so I kept them. I don't like them anymore...

As an apsc shooter my only apsc lense was the 18-55mm kit lense.
And I thought at that time as a teenager I will only buy fullframe lenses because later I want to upgrade. The only problem was, that as a apsc shooter you won't invest good money for extraordinary lenses. You just buy cheap and old stuff for a few hundred bucks which in my opinion is already a lot for an apsc shooter. I think most of them stick with their kit lense.
So now I have really good lenses because I understood that my cheap old fullframe lenses won't make me happy anymore.
Would I have bought this lenses for my apsc cameras?
No way!

Anyone had a similar experience?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: -pekr-

amfoto1

I'm New Here
Aug 29, 2014
17
16
Why couldn't Canon introduce two R-series APS-C cameras at the same time, with one being an affordable model and the other a higher-end, more "pro" oriented camera?
That's EXACTLY what Canon with the R6 and R5. The RP and R also were introduced less than 6 months apart, so must have been in the development and manufacturing pipeline on similar schedules. In fact, it's possible Canon "held back" the release of the RP in order to maximize R sales. Maybe we'll see an "R7" and an "R10" or "R100" intro'd together or very close to each other (and alongside a couple crop specific RF lenses... a compact "kit" standard zoom and an ultrawide, both of which already appear on the lens roadmap and are slate for this year or early 2022).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Chig and Fletchahh

Tremotino

EOS 90D
Jan 23, 2018
120
77
Munich
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.
That's simply marketing for the investors: the board always has to impress the shareholders with the newest, greatest, most advanced product ;)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

Tremotino

EOS 90D
Jan 23, 2018
120
77
Munich
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.
I think the Sigma FP L is quite small for a fullframe mounted camera?
Same could happen to RF
 

jeanluc

EOS RP
Oct 29, 2012
214
127
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.
I strongly suspect the next “wave” of RF glass to include a F4L wide angle, and maybe an F4L 24-70. Those will be cheaper and lighter than the F2.8 versions out now.
 

amfoto1

I'm New Here
Aug 29, 2014
17
16
Not everyone wants or needs a full frame camera. Personally I use both full frame and APS-C Canon DSLRs and mirrorless. Different tools for different purposes. Each formats has its strengths and weaknesses, pros and cons.
Someone who is rather specialized in what they shoot may only need one format or the other. But some if us shoot quite different types of subjects and can see benefits in having a choice of formats.
Shooting a lot of sports (commercially) and wildlife (personally), I use crop sensor cameras about 10X more than I do full frame (architecture, landscapes, portraits, etc.) A number of my 24 lenses are L-series, too, and see their most frequent use on crop cameras. I long ago learned that tip quality glass was the most important aspect of photography and never felt any shame hanging a 500mm f/4L, 300mm f/2.8L, 24-70mm f/2.8L or 70-200mm f/2.8L off a Canon 10D, 30D, 59D or 7D-series camera.
For some of my shooting, I would find it very useful for an RF 100-500mm lens to "act like" a 160-800mm, simply by using it on an APS-C R-series camera. Yes, I could use a full frame camera and just add a 1.4X teleconverter... But that costs one stop of light and only gets me to 700mm. Also, yes I could just crop a full frame image to the equivalent of APS-C... But that costs resolution. To equal 24MP APS-C, the full frame image would need to be done with a 63MP camera. To equal a 32.5MP APS-C image, the crop would need to be done from an 80+MP camera. Since those don't exist (and will be quite expensive when they do), Canon please give me a good APS-C R-series!
The Canon M-series do not suffice as Canon's APS-C mirrorless contribution. Yes, I have one (M5) and really like it for certain purposes (street photography, casual portraiture, travel). But the M-series... and especially the very limited selection and type of lenses Canon has so grudgingly produced for them... just do not have the performance necessary for some types of photography.
Canon has sort of treated the M-series as interchangeable lens Powershots on steroids... They've acted as if M-series fall somewhere in between a point n shoot and a "real" camera like a DSLR. It's not that M-series aren't quite capable and didn't have a lot of potential. It's just that Canon appeared to be afraid of eroding their own DSLR sales and chose not to go "too far" with the M-series. And now, because it must be a pain to produce four distinct series of lenses with limited interchangeability, you can bet Canon will eventually sunset the M-series and replace them with APS-C R-series.
 
Last edited:
Jul 12, 2013
352
597
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.

My answer for an out-to-300 lens for the M format is an adapted 70-300 IS II--not too large...not too heavy...and (including the EF/EF-M adapter) very well-balanced on both the M6 and M6 Mark II.

Image quality pretty good...and it focuses thisfast!
 

jeanluc

EOS RP
Oct 29, 2012
214
127
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.
I thought I preferred an OVF until I got an R5. That body will make you forget OVF (and DSLR’s in general) very, very quickly…
 

dick ranez

I'm New Here
Apr 26, 2013
19
9
I'm not sure what percentage of the volume or the profit that the Rebel line of cameras produce, but I don't see a R based replacement that's obvious. Unless Canon has a secret "arrangement" to leave the APS market to Fuji, there doesn't seem to be a strategy.
 

scottw

I'm New Here
Aug 30, 2018
15
7
photographybanzai.com
The never ending rumors of APS-C RF, lol.

Canon, if you read this stuff...

EF-M has been a nice system since dual pixel AF sensors were added. I'd actually like to see them take it in a direction more like Sony has with their A7c and ZV-1 by offering compact video focused bodies in addition to their straight consumer focused bodies. Group together the markets that don't need ultra pro long telephoto and specialty lenses.

I personally think they should stick to their sensor mount split by coming up with an ultra high pixel density full-frame RF body that has a super fast crop mode for people that want it.

Has the Nikon Z50 done well? What percentage of those users are experimenting with FF glass and bodies? I've used the camera and generally like it, but right now it's $150 cheaper than the Z5 (new body only), which doesn't feel like enough of a difference for someone with an interest in eventually going full-frame. That said, I think for good or bad it's likely Canon will release APS-C RF due to fear of missing out compared to Nikon, haha.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bahrd

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
465
438
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 ;) ).
Don't lose hope yet. CR1 means this is Craig's best wild a** guess. The description of the APS-c body better fits the definition of an M5 II than anything that makes sense in the R system. Why would you make an APS-c R body that was more expensive than the entry full frame and not address the 7D market? That makes far less sense than a top-of-the-line M camera.
 

Flamingtree

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2015
50
54
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!
The simplicity of having a single mount may simplify design and product development, I hadn’t really thought about that.

But the case of using a crop on say 70-200 I don’t get. If you own a 70-200 2.8 and FF you’ll like buy a lens with a longer reach if you need it rather than a smaller sensor. At least that’s I would think about it.
 

jvillain

EOS RP
Sep 29, 2018
264
209
I like being able to take one set of crop lenses to a shoot that I can use for both stills and my video work. Before some clown starts in with the "go full frame, go full frame, my favorite Youtiuber says full frame is best and he's dreamy". The cost of upgrading all my bodies and lenses to FF would be ~$40,000. The benefit to doing so would be 0.
 

Flamingtree

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2015
50
54
That's exactly what happened to me...

After more than 10 years apsc I bought my first fullframe camera and guess what? I sold all my FULLFRAME lenses except 50mm F1.4 and 14mm F2.8 Samyang. Both not the greatest lenses but I get nothing for them on the refurbished market so I kept them. I don't like them anymore...

As an apsc shooter my only apsc lense was the 18-55mm kit lense.
And I thought at that time as a teenager I will only buy fullframe lenses because later I want to upgrade. The only problem was, that as a apsc shooter you won't invest good money for extraordinary lenses. You just buy cheap and old stuff for a few hundred bucks which in my opinion is already a lot for an apsc shooter. I think most of them stick with their kit lense.
So now I have really good lenses because I understood that my cheap old fullframe lenses won't make me happy anymore.
Would I have bought this lenses for my apsc cameras?
No way!

Anyone had a similar experience?
You describe my journey almost exactly. I think my only aps-c lens was the 15-85. The only lens I kept was the 70-300 L, all my other EF lenses got sold when I got a FF.
 

jvillain

EOS RP
Sep 29, 2018
264
209
The simplicity of having a single mount may simplify design and product development, I hadn’t really thought about that.

But the case of using a crop on say 70-200 I don’t get. If you own a 70-200 2.8 and FF you’ll like buy a lens with a longer reach if you need it rather than a smaller sensor. At least that’s I would think about it.

Lenses over 200MM get exponentially more expense quickly not to mention heavy and bulky.
 

Flamingtree

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 13, 2015
50
54
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.
I assume the strategy you describe is what canon is banking on, but I wonder if that’s how it commonly plays out. If I was a GM in canon I would question throwing out the investment made in developing EOS M, in the hope of developing upgraders path. That definitely worked for EF-S to EF but will it still play in today’s market?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hachu21

dwilz

I'm New Here
Nov 16, 2018
15
29
I see this scenario quite a bit over on the sports photography forum on facebook. Newbie gets a cheap aps-c camera with kit lens to shoot their children's sports. Newbie posts blurry photos of their kid playing the sport and asks why aren't their photos sharp. They get told they need a faster lens so that their shutter speed can be higher. They are told to get a 70-200 f/2.8. So they buy that. A little later in the season it starts getting dark earlier and their children are now playing in low light. They post photos asking why are their photos so grainy/ not sharp. The response is they need to buy a full frame body. And there is your typical upgrade path (for parents shooting sports).
 

Adelino

EOS RP
Jan 21, 2015
378
248
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.
Improve a little of everything, maybe the R sensor, I'd be happy with that, a little more frame rate not much, better eye focus animal focus that should be easy, I would LOVE IBIS but I know that's expensive. Less blackout and higher rez viewfinder/screen
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sporgon