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

melgross

EOS RP
Nov 2, 2016
704
461
All I'm saying is this: the chance that Canon will offer 90 MP 20 FPS mechanical in the high resolution R (R5s) at a equal or lower price than the R5 is 0 %.

There is however a decent chance that this rumored APS-C RF body is meant to appeal to the 7D market segment by providing the highest available pixel density (90 MP FF, 32 MP APS-C) and mechanical speed (20 FPS, found in the 1DX III). And as APS-C has traditionally been priced below the 5 series, there is also a good chance this would cost less than the R5.

Mind you, we are talking a specialized camera here. No lenses made only for APS-C, no focus on cheap or small and light. Simply make it as optimized for focal length restrained wildlife as possible.
I get that. As I just replied elsewhere, I have no problem with Canon pursuing that market.

it seems as though a bunch of people are misconstruing my intentions here. my point, which I suppose wasn’t made clearly enough, was that I don’t see why Canon would come out with this FF size APS-C camera now, that is, first. I understand perfectly that there a some who want that. But it’s a small percentage of APS-C buyers. Canon has a fair number of those small, light and inexpensive APS-C DSLR models, and obviously, they want to convert them to the RF mount. But they won’t do it with a large, fairly expensive (to them) body.

so why this first? It would seem to make sense to try to capture that larger customer base first, and then the smaller one for a larger body.

maybe I’m wrong, but I can’t see why.
 

melgross

EOS RP
Nov 2, 2016
704
461
I think you are vastly underestimating the percentage of people who want higher end APS-C cameras and currently use them with expensive lenses. The Nikon D500 is very popular and often paired with the AF-S NIKKOR 80-400mm VR ($2300) or the 500mm PF ($3500). The 7D series is very popular and most of my friends who have it pair it with the 100-400 IS II. It's not just SOME people like you continue to state....there is a significant demand for this type of camera and Canon doesn't make money by developing cameras that only a small percentage of people would want. I currently have the R5 and RF100-500, RF70-200 2.8 and RF15-35 2.8, and will be a day 1 purchaser of the R7.
Both Canon and Nikon have failed to come out with pro level lenses for APS-C, so those who need them but FF lenses. When you say something is very popular, well, compared to what?
 

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
141
115
Orewa , New Zealand
They are not going to ditch the AA filter, unless it is specifically made for resolution, like an R5s
It would introduce more problems for video which they can't just ignore, if it stays at 32.5MP then it will remain line-skipped but maybe up to 4k60p.
Most people wanting a 7D ii replacement aren't into video and would rather not have an AA filter at all
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

1D4

EOS M6 Mark II
Jun 5, 2020
75
137
Both Canon and Nikon have failed to come out with pro level lenses for APS-C, so those who need them but FF lenses. When you say something is very popular, well, compared to what?
Why do they need pro-level APS-C lenses when you can use FF lenses perfectly fine with APS-C? It's not like the two systems are completely incompatible. The sales figures of 7Ds and D500s say they are very popular, as does the fact that a high percentage of my photographer friends use them (I too, also owned the 7D (v1) and D500 at one point). When you repeatedly state that only a small percentage of APS-C buyers would want a body in FF size and "most people buying that format are often not much more than snap shooters who want a few cheaper lenses", what are you basing those assertions on? Again, Canon knows their exact sales figures for the 7D line. Do you honestly think they'd spend the money and resources developing a mirrorless equivalent if 7D sales weren't that great?
 
Last edited:

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
141
115
Orewa , New Zealand
I cant exactly spend all my money on a 400mm, because I like other types of photography too. also I meant 100, not 500
Hi Lucas
You were talking about spending $USD900 on an RF800 lens which is less versatile and more expensive than a good used EF400 f/5.6 , so not sure what you want , also some very affordable zooms available and a nifty/fifty 50mm f/1.8 is very cheap and great for all sorts of photography
Some amazing used gear for sale at very reasonable prices around which would be closer to what you can afford than some future gear like the R7 which will be pretty expensive.
Try buying an old film camera from a charity shop , you'll have lots of fun and learn a lot
 

masterpix

EOS RP
Jun 29, 2016
249
176
Who says the RF APS-C body doesn’t have to get smaller?
The size and weight of the body relay on how compact you can make the electronics, the battery and the ruggness of the frame of the camera, The sensor is not an issue for the lens mount and the distnace from the rear of the lens dictate the size of the "optical chamber". So FF or APS can't differ in the "optical chamber", the rest is up to the design.
 

masterpix

EOS RP
Jun 29, 2016
249
176
I have an EF400 f/5.6 which is cheap (especially 2nd hand) and light and a fantastic lens which would work great with an R camera
I prefer my new EF100-400 ii though even though it's a bit heavier as it's so versatile and I can use for macro as well
Same here, my 100-400II is the lens mounted on my 7D as first choice.
 

Attachments

  • 7D_031781M.jpg
    7D_031781M.jpg
    342.8 KB · Views: 40
  • Like
Reactions: 1D4

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,153
763
Most people wanting a 7D ii replacement aren't into video and would rather not have an AA filter at all
Well, then there is the R5s model in crop mode. They are not going to do an 's' model with an APS-C sensor and video is important for every new camera in 2021.
 

LRPP

I'm New Here
Feb 18, 2020
9
10
There are a lot of people talking about market. Can someone please provide me a source of how many camera Canon has produced by model?
 
Last edited:

SteB1

EOS M50
Feb 22, 2019
48
72
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.
It's not about tracking. It's about taking hundreds of 45mp images and cropping every one to 10-12mp or less. In the UK it is very rare that any bird photograph not taken from a hide/blind is not going to be seriously cropped.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

SteB1

EOS M50
Feb 22, 2019
48
72
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?
Basically anyone that uses a 7D mkII on a big white lens. Lots of photographer who use 7D mkII's on big white lenses, also have a 1Dx mk whatever, and a 5D series camera. But if you're a bird photographer in many parts of the world, you're going to be cropping every single image, even on a 7D mkII. It means if you use a FF camera, most of your frame is entirely wasted. Even a 7D mkII has a bit more pixel density than an R5, which I believe is only 18mp when cropped to APS-C. Whereas if a new R7 has the 32mp sensor in it, photographers will get far higher resolution images than they would with an R5. The new high resolution R camera may give similar pixel density. But if you fire lots of bursts, even if it has the same frame rates, you are going to be dealing with huge files to cull the images down to keepers. Even modern computers are going to get slowed down by 90mp images.
 

Psamathe

I'm New Here
Sep 2, 2020
16
11
I think one broader aspect is to get/keep people in "the ecosystem". Once "in" it becomes a lot harder to switch to another brand. I have a low end Canon DLSR but expensive lenses ("big white") and were it not for those lenses I'd have switched to Sony mirrorless a years ago. Canon got me "in their ecosystem" and it's hard to get out. So whilst manufacturing new models of big sellers is important, long term they need a full range to get and keep people.

And people need long term confidence when buying into a system. All the talk of "M-series is dead" don't inspire confidence and not knowing what direction Canon are going does not inspire confidence.

Focusing on a big seller is short term important but to overlook a broad range could cause longer term difficulties.

Ian
 
  • Like
Reactions: LeBlobe

rwvaughn

Live in the moment.
Mar 22, 2016
46
23
Southern Indiana, USA
Lack of APS-C lenses (slower, cheaper, lighter, less IQ) in the RF mount probably. And the fact that splitting the low to mid end APS-C market between the EF-M and RF mount sounds like a poor choice, given how well the EF-M system does what it does (be small and sell well) and how Canon have positioned RF as all about quality rather than compactness or affordability so far.

I don't think I'd count on the M line being developed much further. Yes, I know it's a good selling system for Canon, but looking at the RF lens roadmap one lens pops out at me as a screamer for crop sensor bodies.....
  • Canon RF 18-45mm f/4-5.6 IS STM
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

Otara

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2012
406
198
If I was just birding the R7 would be pretty attractive. But being able to get 18MP in crop with the R5 is pretty awesome, and if you get close enough, you get more, not to mention my amazing ability to cut off a tail with crop sensors.

Im sure some people will get the R7 as well as an R5, but the difference is probably less compelling that it used to be other than price, and its more a matter of preference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zim and unfocused

swkitt

EOS M50
Dec 8, 2015
29
16
I don't think you are getting any 'reach' though. In fact, I'm nearly sure. The lens projects the same image circle, regardless of what mode you are shooting in. Crop mode just takes an APSc sized section out of the middle of it. So you are just getting the same image, at the same apparent magnification, just with the outer 28mp already cropped off for you.

I don't believe it is resampling the FF image down to a smaller file. Though I could be wrong. The result would be the same as if you had taken the same image in FF mode, and just cropped it yourself. You could test this by setting up on a tripod, and taking the same image twice - once in crop and once in FF mode. Then display those images both at 300ppi. Your subject should be the same size in both images, just with less around it in the crop mode photo.

Of course it's just a crop, but what you see in the viewfinder is the crop, and thats a great advantage compare to cropping on the computer. Easier to get a good focus too and in the right spot than with a wider image. Imagine shooting a bird on a tree between branches for example.
I used to carry a 5D and a 7D for having the possibility of different reach (or call it "crop" if you prefer), but now it's not necessary anymore as this function does exactly the same thing as having an APS-C sensor.
 

Nigel95

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 2, 2020
59
83
Most people wanting a 7D ii replacement aren't into video and would rather not have an AA filter at all
Well I really hope this R7 will be my dream hybrid camera. Been waiting a long time for something like that.. Currently there is nothing that ticks the boxes for me personally for a hybrid camera with an APS-C sensor. If it has the speed for photography (R7) it could have the 4k with higher framerates hopefully as well.

I wonder, would the 7d II crowd skip this body if it has an AA filter? Otherwise Canon could reach a larger segment for both the current 7d and hybrid shooters. To have something similar as Fuji XT4
 
Dec 18, 2020
1
0
I really don't see the point for putting an APS-C Sensor in a RF-Mount Body. I Can't imagine, that the price benefit is that huge and on the other side why not add a «crop-mode» which allows existing APS-C user to continue using their glass (reach) while still having the option to move to full frame? I think with an EVF it should also be not much of an effort to display the correct FOV directly in the viewfinder.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,854
2,996
67
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
I cant exactly spend all my money on a 400mm, because I like other types of photography too. also I meant 100, not 500

Hi Lucas
...Try buying an old film camera from a charity shop , you'll have lots of fun and learn a lot

I think this is well-meaning but not very sound advice. Film cameras come with some very expensive requirements no matter how cheap the original purchase may be. Film is not cheap and you can spend thousands of dollars on film for what you can get for $20 or so on a card. Plus there is the expense of the darkroom or, alternatively, film processing. But sending film off to be processed doesn't help you learn anything and the results you get back are likely to be disappointing. Not to mention the difficulty of even obtaining supplies unless you live in a large city.

Compare that to the $10-$20 a month that a Lightroom or Photoshop subscription costs, not to mention the many advantages of learning to process you own images and the versatility that these programs provide.

Photography has always been a rich person's hobby. Today you spend a lot of money at the front end, but the ongoing costs are low. In the film days, we were able to get into the hobby at a reasonable cost, but the supplies quickly bled you dry.

@Lucas Tingley, if you are serious about photography and your parents can't or won't subsidize you, then the best advice is to look for an after-school job as soon as you are old enough.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,854
2,996
67
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
I really don't see the point for putting an APS-C Sensor in a RF-Mount Body. I Can't imagine, that the price benefit is that huge and on the other side why not add a «crop-mode» which allows existing APS-C user to continue using their glass (reach) while still having the option to move to full frame? I think with an EVF it should also be not much of an effort to display the correct FOV directly in the viewfinder.
All the R series cameras already do that. The advantage of the crop sensor body is the higher resolution, since the current resolution of the R5 crops down to under 20mp. Not bad, but not necessarily enough when trying to shoot small songbirds, which will likely fill only a small portion of the frame even in crop mode.

I would agree that if the rumored R5s has the same crop resolution as the rumored R7, then the advantages of the R7 will really come down to whether or not it has better features (faster frame rate, more accurate autofocus, etc,) than the R5s. The beauty of the 7DII was that it offered features above the 5DIII and closer to the 1Dx. As for price, I'm not expecting there to be a huge savings for the crop sensor.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,854
2,996
67
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
...I don’t see why Canon would come out with this FF size APS-C camera now, that is, first. I understand perfectly that there a some who want that. But it’s a small percentage of APS-C buyers. Canon has a fair number of those small, light and inexpensive APS-C DSLR models, and obviously, they want to convert them to the RF mount. But they won’t do it with a large, fairly expensive (to them) body.

so why this first? It would seem to make sense to try to capture that larger customer base first, and then the smaller one for a larger body.

maybe I’m wrong, but I can’t see why.

Because it is not their first APS-C mirrorless body. I think a lot of people see the M series as the successor to the Rebel line...small, light and inexpensive. And, Canon has already captured that customer base, as the M series is, I believe, already the top selling mirrorless brand in the world.

The R7 is a specialist camera that offers more perceived reach (pre-cropping might be a better term) for those who consistently can't get close enough to their subjects to fill the frame. Which would be a lot of bird and wildlife and some sports photographers.

I think where you are wrong is in assuming Canon intends to ever offer low cost APS-C bodies in the R mount. Granted, Canon is taking a bit of a risk because there is no longer the seamless upgrade path from entry-level Rebel to full frame DSLR. But, they have the market research and it is quite possible that those following the upgrade path were never that great and that with low cost full frame cameras like the RP, there is less of a need for low cost crop sensor bodies in the R mount.
 
<-- start Taboola -->