Not sure why that would "terrify" anyone. The 7DII was cheaper than the 5DIII with features that were closer to the 1Dx and no one complained. However, in this case, if an R7 comes out, I doubt it will be "half as much" as the R5. People who are counting on a big bargain in the R7 are likely to be hugely disappointed.
An APS-C RF mount prototype is currently in the wild [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
I will be honest. I think that IF and future R7 is not the unicorn then it probably wont succeed. As many have said. Why bother? Just get an R5 or the future R5s. The 7d2(and the d500 for that matter) were insane value cameras that could be paired with a third-party 150-600 and make an awesome wildlife camera for 3k(US DOLLARS). I cant see canon making much profit if it is as expensive as an R5. But maybe they wont make much profit if it is the price of an R6 either
I don't really disagree.
I think it will depend on specs and pricing. If the R5s can shoot 12fps, has 82 mp, R5 pricing and R5 autofocus, then the only thing that would make the R7 appealing would be cost. On the other hand, if the R5s shoots at 7 fps, has a buffer that fills up quickly and is priced around $4,000, while the R7 has 14 fps, an unlimited buffer, autofocus that is closer to the coming R1 and comes in at $2,500 it will be appealing to many buyers.
My main point is that I think there are some on the forum who expect the R7 to mirror the 7DII with specs superior to the R5 at a price below $2,000. I just have a feeling that Canon will try to push the upper limits on pricing to see what the market will bear. Always easier to come down in price than to go up.
Totally agree. I love my 7d2 and still cant work out how they priced it as they did. And i just dont know if they can do it again.
With a smaller APSC sensor and existing processing power, is there a better possibility of making a model with a global shutter, even in 1080p 24 mode? Just trying to figure out what a feature hook would be for an R7, other than being able to make use of existing EF-S lenses for the Rebel crowd looking to modernize.
The 7D II was close to DX 1 Mk II in many respects so I would hazard a guess at the R 7 being right up there??
The R6 is smaller than the 7D 2 anyway and personally I'd prefer it to not be too small for ergonomics, I have small hands but find my 7d2 very comfortable to use . I've tried an M mount camera and found it far too small for me.The original rumour had the body smaller than the R6 this makes more sense as the proper 7d replacement
The R6 as it is with a 32mp 90D sensor (or an updated version) would be ideal for me with my EF100-400 ii plus T.Cs for my bird and Macro photography and I would be happy to pay the same price as an R6 (but even happier if slightly lower price)
Even better for me personally would be these changes from the R6:
- no IBIS (the IS in my zoom lenses is all I need but I doubt Canon will leave it out as it's a good marketing gimmic)
- no AA filter
- pop up high speed flash
- tilting evf for macro shots
- red dot sight attached to line up with your left eye
I wouldn't use any R without a battery grip!
If this new body was smaller than the R6 as per the original rumour that would have taken it into m5 territory and that would make no sense to me. I really liked the idea of the m5 when it came out having tried it i was really disappointed, couldn't use the b****y thing. I fear I'll fall in love with the R1
As I've not moved to Canon Mirrorless yet. Do any of the full frame Canon mirrorless crop in the view finder.
What I mean is through the viewfinder can you zoom in to focus or keep the crop at APS-C or even micro 4/3.
It's something you can't do with a pentaprism.
I know you can do it through the back screen to view but I personally need to be wear glasses now to see it clearly.
It would really help with focusing or confirming something is in focus.
If not yet existing, surely it makes sense to have this in a mirrorless.
What I mean is through the viewfinder can you zoom in to focus or keep the crop at APS-C or even micro 4/3.
It's something you can't do with a pentaprism.
I know you can do it through the back screen to view but I personally need to be wear glasses now to see it clearly.
It would really help with focusing or confirming something is in focus.
If not yet existing, surely it makes sense to have this in a mirrorless.
Just checked for you on the R5. Yes, change to crop and the cropped image fills the evf. I have never bothered to use crop as the .CR3 files are not too large.
R6 is the same as the R5 Alan was referring to. You have cropping options in the viewfinder but as a 1.6x crop takes it down to a 7 or 8mp image then i would probably recommend against it.
Thanks, it might be interesting with a 90MP sensor.
With a conventional pentaprism you don't have this ability to increase the size of the image in the viewfinder. It can be difficult to be assured you have say the eye of a bird in focus as you are taking the image.
But what you don't seem to get is that many of us who use, for example, the 7D Mark II also have a wider lens mounted to our FF 5D-series camera at the same time. So if we accept using an 82MP FF camera in crop mode instead of a 32MP APS-C body, then we need to buy two FF cameras at $8,000+ total ($3,900 + $4,300?) instead of one FF camera and one APS-C camera at about $6,000 total ($3,900 + $2,100?).
Take away the higher end AF system, high fps, and durability and the R7 is no longer an attractive option for those looking to replace their worn out 7D Mark II bodies. A "low mileage" used 7DII would be far more attractive to the user and the benefit of that to Canon is near zero.
You grossly underestimate the size of the 7D Mark II user base and the market size that an R7 that is basically a mirrorless 7D Mark III would be.
The 7D Mark II AF system used the same routines as the 1D X and the 5D Mark III, which where the current 1-Series and 5-Series bodies when the 7D Mark II released. It also offers the same options in the AF settings menus. It was the same level AF system. The narrower baseline of the APS-C size mirror does affect the relative accuracy and shot-to-shot consistency when compared to the 5D Mark III and 1D X, but the difference is not that great. The 7D Mark II is much closer to the 1-Series and 5-Series AF systems than to the (crappy) 7D AF system or even the fairly good 80D/90D AF systems.
The 7D Mark II has 65 AF points, all of them "cross-type", while the 1D X and 5D Mark III only had 61 AF points, with 41 of the cross type. All three models had five dual-diagonal cross type AF points in a vertical line at the center that are f/2.8 sensitive on the diagonals.
By and large, the "7D Mark II crowd" has no use for APS-C lenses of any type. If we want to shoot wide angle, we use wide angle EF lenses on our FF cameras.
What you folks who think you know more about the "7D Mark II crowd" than those of us who actually use them fail to understand is that the vast majority of us also own FF cameras. We use the appropriate tool for the appropriate job. Often we use both FF bodies and our 7D Mark II bodies at the same time. We'll have a "short" or "wide" lens on the FF and a "long" lens on the 7D Mark II.
Blindfolded I couldn't tell the difference between my 7D Mark II and my 5D Mark IV. That's after using the 7D Mark II for almost 200,000 frames and the 5D Mark III/5D Mark IV combined for about 95,000 frames.
