An APS-C RF mount prototype is currently in the wild [CR2]

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
366
321
Do you consider the 7D to be a FF-sized body?
It weighs more than a 5D mark II, so yes, it is a FF sized body in just about every respect. The R5 is considerably smaller and I think some would consider it to be a FF camera.
 

Bob Howland

EOS RP
CR Pro
Mar 25, 2012
606
200
A real R7 is a R5 body with an aps-c sensor. The 7DII has been an aps-c equivalent of the 5D-series (form and weather resistance) with 1DX series features (mostly speed). This has always been a popular wildlife and sports camera.

Most birders I know have the 7D2 with 100-400 II. This setup is so popular. I can imagine an R version of this (R7 and RF 100-500) will be very popular.
To be a real R7 it should be something like this:
-32mp aps-c sensor
-Autofocus comparable to the R5
-12fps mechanical and 20fps electronic.
-Dual card: 1 CFExpress and 1 SD (like R5)
-R5 body with top lcd and weather sealing.
-IBIS
-€2000-€2300 price tag

However I expect R6 specs with the 32mp sensor to maintain a €1300-€1800 price tag.
I have a couple minor quibbles with your analysis. First, the 7D series was never quite as fast as the 1D or 1Dx, although it is both speedy and rugged. Second, the R5 and R6 have the same focusing system, which is pretty normal. The 5D3 had basically the same focusing system as the 1Dx and the EOS-3 film body had the same focusing system as the EOS-1N sports film camera. What is unusual is that there isn't also an R1 with that same focusing system.

You seem (repeat, seem) to be expecting two APS-C R bodies, one based on the R5 and one on the R6. I expect only one, based on the R6. Or maybe that's just what I want.
 

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
366
321
It's quite clear that a lot of people without any experience of nature photography, still don't understand the demand for crop sensor higher level cameras like the 7D mkII, and are still stuck in the false argument that it is about price i.e. why get a crop sensor camera if you can get a FF camera for just a bit more. Indeed I see a lot of nature photographers with FF cameras like 5D series cameras, who crop nearly every photo they take to less than APS-C size. It really is very simple. In many places, no matter how long your lens is, you will still have to crop. It's not just with telephoto stuff either, but with in the field macro photos. I'm still surprised at how many photographers don't understand that if you crop a photo to APS-C size or smaller, then a FF camera has no advantage whatsoever. You just have big file sizes and have to do a big crop on nearly every photo you take.
I disagree that there is "no advantage whatsoever" If you have the same pixel density (which the R5s will likely have), then the FF gives you the same number of pixels on the bird, but the wider field of view makes the bird much easier to find and much easier to keep in the frame. So, in the end, it is about price and maybe a little higher frame rate and a much bigger opportunity to get shots of half a bird. If you haven't used an R5 with its wide field AF, you may not understand the ease of tracking.
 

Madbox

I'm New Here
CR Pro
Sep 5, 2020
9
15
Portland, OR
I think if Canon doesn't include everything the EOS M5 Mark II should have, and figure out a way to adapt M mount lenses to this RF mount APS-C Frankenstein horror, I'll be presented an opportunity to re-evaluate which camera brand I'll continue taking on the road with me. Just release the EOS M5 Mark II already, and we can have a nice day with equipment that already works and is widely supported.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Michael Clark

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
366
321
There are two distinct markets discussed here. The M series nicely satisfies the small and light application and the line really needs a contemporary replacement for the M5 as well as couple more primes and a small telephoto that reaches to at least 300mm (even if slow). The 7D mark II replacement NEEDs to be a BIG camera to swing big glass if it is to fit in the same niche. The real question is whether Canon can get away with releasing such a camera with no APS-c lens support other than the historic EF-s lenses. The 7D II crowd would want any APS-c lenses to be high end, which would make them too costly for any kind of R series Rebel and thus condemned to low volume. Cheap lenses would require an R series Rebel which would, at a minimum, make many people belive the M series was dead, even if that was not the intent. A self-fulfilling prophecy, so to speak. Given the dramatic drop in the overall market and particularly the casual market, my sense is that if they release an R7, it will come with no APS-c only lenses and will be there simply to satisfy the very loud whine coming from the 7D II crowd (which, by the way, hasn't figured out that a high pixel density FF produces a much higher hit rate for BIF and similar applications just because of the wider field of view). Canon always says they listen to the customer, so it will be interesting to see where this goes.
 

melgross

EOS RP
Nov 2, 2016
702
461
Well, do you expect everybody who wants to get the most out of their high end tele lens to also buy an R5s (probably more expensive than the R5), and be content with 10-ish FPS, when even the lowly 90D and M6 II can deliver much more than that at the same pixel density (reach) and far, far lower prices?

If there is a place for APS-C in the RF lineup, I think it is in the high end, for folks that really can't have enough reach and speed. A smaller physical shutter simply makes it less difficult to offer 1 series speeds at less than 5 series prices.
When you say: “get the most out of”, then you’re saying the body with the highest IQ. Do you think that will be an APS-C body?

traditionally, APS-C has NEVER been at the high end, once FF came out. It’s a compromise product category, which as I said earlier, is why you don’t find high end lenses specifically made for it by the major camera manufacturers.
 

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
366
321
Cost saving from the sensor is probably the only way to reduce the overall cost of the APS-C/R7 cf the R6
A new IBIS unit will need to be designed for the smaller sensor
Main benefit of a crop sensor will be pixels on target. The current M series 32mp crop sensor is much higher than the cropped R5 sensor @ ~17mp. Remember that the 7Dii is still only 20mp so not a huge difference from the cropped R5.
Whether the 32mp sensor will be reused (cheaper) or a resized version of the upcoming R5s sensor is a good question. For cost, the 32mp is fast enough already and amortised the R&D
Reusing the R6 body makes sense but the 7Dii has a joystick and the R6 doesn't. Touch/drag on the rear LCD for moving focus point may be faster and sufficient
Makes sense to use the same focusing system and shutter speed as the R5/6 for consistency/cost but the R7 can't be too good compared to the R6
No RF-S lenses. If you want to go wide then use adapted EF-S lenses. If there is to be a RF-S, expect just a cheap wide angle zoom and stellar wide angle zoom equivalent to their EF-S lens options. For long focal lengths then RF100-500mm or EF100-400mm (or EF/RF primes) together with the expected long RF primes to come.
Weather sealing equivalent to the R6
4k/30 and HD/60 with no overheating cf R6's 4k/60 and HD/120 for video differentiation. The current 32mp sensor can do 10 bit to HDMI so assume that internal 10 bit will be possible. Autofocus with HD/60
Would make sense to release a M7 at the same time as R7 with basically the same specs but different form factor to manage both target segments. Managing heat in the M7 will be interesting. M7 should have a built in EVF
Same battery for M and R6 variants
The unicorn of the 7D's price, focusing system from 1D, fps more than double the 5D, weather sealing from the 5D can't be supported with the current R body marketing.
I agree with your conclusion on all but one point. You really don't want the M7 to grow enough to fit an LP-E6 battery and you really do want that battery in the R7. The M7 will likely use the LP-E17 and be power reduced enough for that to be adequate. The M7 also wouldn't typically have to run the AF and IS in big heavy lenses that chew up a lot of power, whereas that is the express purpose of the R7 if you read all the comments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

melgross

EOS RP
Nov 2, 2016
702
461
Is that what the point is? Funny, all these years I've been using a 7Dii to get a higher pixel density under a small central subject with a long tele. Silly me.
Not silly you, just a small segment of the market you.

i’m not objecting to this. I’m just surprised that if this “rumor” is true, that the first APS-C model Canon comes out with would be big, and likely as heavy as any mirrorless in that size.

you guys have to remember that talk of a Canon mirrorless RF mount camera here, was about a small body, not a large one. All that talk was about how M series users couldn’t directly move to an RF model without dumping their “small and light” lenses. And what is Canon expected to be doing next year? Releasing a number of lower cost lenses. Slower and lighter too. If an APS-C does come out, likely APS-C lenses TIG.

remember that the M series has been very popular—the first or second in every market it’s been in. Small and light. If Canon wants them to come to RF, it won’t be with a FF body and lenses.
 

ronaldzimmerman.nl

I'm New Here
May 25, 2020
16
11
www.ronaldzimmerman.nl
I have a couple minor quibbles with your analysis. First, the 7D series was never quite as fast as the 1D or 1Dx, although it is both speedy and rugged. Second, the R5 and R6 have the same focusing system, which is pretty normal. The 5D3 had basically the same focusing system as the 1Dx and the EOS-3 film body had the same focusing system as the EOS-1N sports film camera. What is unusual is that there isn't also an R1 with that same focusing system.

You seem (repeat, seem) to be expecting two APS-C R bodies, one based on the R5 and one on the R6. I expect only one, based on the R6. Or maybe that's just what I want.
I should have said “1DX like features” indeed. The 10fps with AF was much faster than all other non-1D bodies. The AF-system was based/the same as the 1DX and so was that of the 5D3.
You are right about the AF of the R5 and R6 being similar. I thought only the R5 had dual pixel af II. Seems very likely the R7 will have similar tech.

Not really expecting two bodies in this range.
I expect them to have a similar strategy as with the 90D and merge the x0d with the 7D series. The 90D is somewhere between those series.
A R6 body, with 32mp, IBIS, 12fps mechanical shutter, dual SD, hopefully R5 viewfinder and some extra weather seals would be a worthy R7 in this era (a little less rugged/“pro” than the 7D2). It can’t be too far from the €1500. This is probably the camera you are looking for.

Another aps-c could be placed at the bottom of the current market. In the Sony A5xxx range (€500-€700). So young/starting/student photographers have their first body to buy into the RF ecosystem.The success of Canon was that you could start in the same ecosystem as the professionals. There will be a time that new buyers don’t have an EF collection.
 
Last edited:

Mr Majestyk

EOS RP
Feb 20, 2016
342
195
Australia
Hopefully less expensive than the R6 but still with IBIS

Hopefully one of them is a an R7 that is the spiritual successor to the 7DIII, but with far more relaibale AF, and of course much better DR. Given it's APS-C I'd expect 14fps mechanical, and hopefully it allows us to choose the e-shutter shooting speed rather than be locked to a stupid 20fps like the R5/R6. if it's the exact same AF as the R5/R6 as well as digic X or newer, 26-32MP, 5.69MP EVF, dual CFE Type A, 4K60p from 6K as well as from pixel binning, and similar to R6 in everyother way, I'd gladly pay $2200.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joaquim

Skux

EOS M6 Mark II
Feb 21, 2020
81
106
I can see this being great for birders and sports shooters who want the high pixel density of an APS-C sensor.

But Canon really needs to step up their game if they want to get the vlogger/content creator crowd away from Sony and Fuji, and that means releasing high performance APS-C RF mount lenses (or at the very least, an EOS M body with IBIS and oversampled 4k).
 

reef58

EOS RP
CR Pro
Apr 16, 2016
346
282
North Carolina
youtu.be
And people act like every single photographer wants to attach a 500mm lens to the front of a camera and there's no reason to use one otherwise. I for one do NOT want that. I wish I had a tiny 300mm on my M6 but I really really don't want a big camera. 99% of the photos I'll ever take in my life is within reach of a 150mm lens. An R6 with an APS-C sensor makes zero sense to me.

Yep to you, but to most wildlife photographers in the Canon eco-system it makes plenty of sense.
 

reef58

EOS RP
CR Pro
Apr 16, 2016
346
282
North Carolina
youtu.be
Yes, except the only camera with the same pixel density and speed would be the R5 and that's not affordable for many. Until we have a 50MP high speed FF camera under 2000, the R7 has a market

I will say this in yet another thread I guess. A good deal of the market for the r7 is not buying to save money over an r5 or r6. They have $10,000 lenses and they are looking for maximum pixel density, and world class auto focusing. Canon could well exceed the price of the r6 and it would have a market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: digigal and Joaquim
Jul 12, 2013
312
360
No snark intended with my question here.

It seems to me that the primary reason folks posting here 'wouldn't put a 600mm lens on an M6 II' is ergonomics.

I get that. Fully. Probably at least as much as anyone--I am fully aware that the M-series of bodies are not appropriate, ergonomically, for big white lenses.

Riddle me this. Who will choose to use an R7, with the big whites...over an R5 (with the same big whites)...and why, exactly?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bert63
<-- start Taboola -->