An APS-C RF mount prototype is currently in the wild [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
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.
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
Not quite. But dslrs have that pentaprism to deal with. It’s not just the size, it’s the weight too.
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
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:
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
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).
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).
Upvote
0
Yep to you, but to most wildlife photographers in the Canon eco-system it makes plenty of sense.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
josephandrews222
I Shot the Sheriff, but I Did Not Shoot the Deputy
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?
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?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
