Canon’s next RF mount camera is in the field

[jam05]

It really does seem like canon is transitioning the M line to RF Mount.

A vlogger style camera makes a lot sense considering Sony and Nikon are selling quite a few.

I am really interested in how the new flip screen will work. Flipping it out to the side is kind of nice, but for me (just for me) I’d wish they’d release a camera where the screen just flips out underneath. That way the screen and lens would in one straight line. It would especially be helpful for wildlife (flying birds or such) when using live view etc or when the camera is pointing towards the sky.

And hit the tripod or the gimbal? That's a non starter for many

 

[Michael Clark]

The safest thing to say right now is, if the m system ticks your boxes, there's no reason not to buy in. If you really need a more advanced autofocus system, or want to adapt eos R full frame lenses, then wait for that eos R camera. As for native lenses, crop sensor R is still in infancy.

There's no more need to "adapt" full frame EOS RF lenses to an APS-C EOS R camera than there is to "adapt" EF lenses to an APS-C EF-S body. You just mount the full frame RF lens on the APS-C EOS R body.

 

[Michael Clark]

I see Canon learned nothing from the failures of the EOS-M line. We’re going to have 3 APS-C camera bodies and only 2 RF-S lenses that cover the same focal lengths. Give us an 11-22, 22mm and 32mm as soon as possible. Port over the same designs again because the EF-M lenses were excellent. Then get us a 56mm and a 15-45 f/4 or f/2.8. PLEASE start weather sealing these things like Fuji does with all its lenses.

The other camera manufacturers would love to have a "failure" like the EOS M system, which is the highest selling MILC system in history.

 

[SteveC]

There's no more need to "adapt" full frame EOS RF lenses to an APS-C EOS R camera than there is to "adapt" EF lenses to an APS-C EF-S body. You just mount the full frame RF lens on the APS-C EOS R body.

True there's no need to adapt. But I didn't see anything in what you quoted to indicate he thought he needed an adapter.

He might want an RF-S version of a lens that already exists in RF, simply because it would likely be smaller/more compact, and cheaper.

 

[Michael Clark]

True there's no need to adapt. But I didn't see anything in what you quoted to indicate he thought he needed an adapter.

He might want an RF-S version of a lens that already exists in RF, simply because it would likely be smaller/more compact, and cheaper.

"If you really need a more advanced autofocus system, or want to adapt eos R full frame lenses, then wait for that eos R camera. As for native lenses, crop sensor R is still in infancy."

 

[neuroanatomist]

"If you really need a more advanced autofocus system, or want to adapt eos R full frame lenses, then wait for that eos R camera. As for native lenses, crop sensor R is still in infancy."

Context is always important, and you’ve missed it here. The text you are quoting was in reference to a question on whether or not to buy into the M system. The sentence you left off that preceded what you quoted above was, “The safest thing to say right now is, if the m system ticks your boxes, there's no reason not to buy in.”

The reply you’re quoting is based on the fact that it’s not possible to adapt RF lenses to M bodies, and is suggesting that if the person who asked about buying an M6II wanted to adapt FF R lenses that person should instead wait for that R camera [the one that is the subject of this rumor topic]. The implication you missed is that no (practically impossible) adapter would be required in that case.

In other words, the entire digression on this topic of an adapter was based on your misunderstanding of the context, combined with your insatiable appetite for pedantry.

 

[Michael Clark]

Context is always important, and you’ve missed it here. The text you are quoting was in reference to a question on whether or not to buy into the M system. The sentence you left off that preceded what you quoted above was, “The safest thing to say right now is, if the m system ticks your boxes, there's no reason not to buy in.”

The reply you’re quoting is based on the fact that it’s not possible to adapt RF lenses to M bodies, and is suggesting that if the person who asked about buying an M6II wanted to adapt FF R lenses that person should instead wait for that R camera [the one that is the subject of this rumor topic]. The implication you missed is that no (practically impossible) adapter would be required in that case.

In other words, the entire digression on this topic of an adapter was based on your misunderstanding of the context, combined with your insatiable appetite for pedantry.

Perhaps, but if the second sentence of that comment is made in the context of the impossibility of adapting EOS R lenses to EOS-M cameras, doesn't it seem rather odd that a distinction would be made between full frame RF lenses and possible future RF-S lenses? At that point they seem to think that more RF-S lenses will solve the potential buyer's quandary.

 

[Michael Clark]

In other words, the entire digression on this topic of an adapter was based on your misunderstanding of the context, combined with your insatiable appetite for pedantry.

I guess it takes a dog to know a dog.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Perhaps, but if the second sentence of that comment is made in the context of the impossibility of adapting EOS R lenses to EOS-M cameras, doesn't it seem rather odd that a distinction would be made between full frame RF lenses and possible future RF-S lenses? At that point they seem to think that more RF-S lenses will solve the potential buyer's quandary.

Nothing odd. I suspect the point was that the only two available RF-S lenses are either inferior to or optically identical to (18-45mm and 18-150mm, respectively) current EF-M lenses, so there’s no incentive to consider adapting current RF-S lenses to an M body. Thus the qualifier about adapting full frame RF lenses.

 

[Profit007]

Nice rumor timing. So, who thinks Canon will go all out to compete with the just released $2100 Sony???
Of course, if going all out they'd need to:
1) give us a sensor with similar DR & low light noise to the ZVE1/FX3/FX6 sensor, which would be Canon's C300III/C70 sensor. (The other current Canon sensors unfortunately don't come close.)
2) give us the full AF capabilities of the R3, and then wildly improve them so human bodies are recognized (not just faces), like the A7RV & ZVE1.

After adding in some auto AI framing & improved built in audio, Canon would be there, apart from the s35 cropped sensor. However, at least apart from sensor size, they'd have a apples vs apples offering. Throw in a fan as well, and Canon would be ahead.

Astonishingly (to a long term Canon user), Sony has put ALL of their best tech in a $2100 camera.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Astonishingly (to a long term Canon user), Sony has put ALL of their best tech in a $2100 camera.

The R50 has a lot of Canon's best tech for a lot less money and makes far more sense to me for the vlog market te ZV-E1 is targeted toward.
Frankly, the R8 seems like a superior camera.
That being said, I would like to see Canon make a pocketable camera with no EVF.

 

[koenkooi]

The R50 has a lot of Canon's best tech for a lot less money and makes far more sense to me for the vlog market te ZV-E1 is targeted toward.
Frankly, the R8 seems like a superior camera.

That depends on if you require IBIS or not and need the in-camera processing like the built-in pan&scan. The R8 more than a third cheaper than the ZV-E1, so the question becomes "is that difference worth $700?"

That being said, I would like to see Canon make a pocketable camera with no EVF.

With an EF-M or RF mount?

 

[neuroanatomist]

Frankly, the R8 seems like a superior camera.

It is for me, if for no other reason than it works with my lenses. I’m not someone who needs a high MP count, but I’d definitely pick 24 MP over 12 MP. The lenses I’ll use with the R8 have IS (except TS-E lenses that will be on a tripod), so I can live without IBIS.

RRS discontinued the L-bracket for the EOS RP, but I found one this week at KEH so I'm all set for when my R8 arrives, which may be in ~3 weeks. Hopefully Canon doesn't push back the shipping date as they did for the EL-5 (which should be in my hands already), and hopefully I am high enough in the B&H queue to get one from the first allotment.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

That depends on if you require IBIS or not and need the in-camera processing like the built-in pan&scan. The R8 more than a third cheaper than the ZV-E1, so the question becomes "is that difference worth $700?"

With an EF-M or RF mount?

Either or.
I do not consider the M6 II or M200 pocketable because I can't flip the screen over for protection.
An M6 II with a screen that flips to the side instead of up would be my perfect camera.

 

[Czardoom]

Nice rumor timing. So, who thinks Canon will go all out to compete with the just released $2100 Sony???
Of course, if going all out they'd need to:
1) give us a sensor with similar DR & low light noise to the ZVE1/FX3/FX6 sensor, which would be Canon's C300III/C70 sensor. (The other current Canon sensors unfortunately don't come close.)
2) give us the full AF capabilities of the R3, and then wildly improve them so human bodies are recognized (not just faces), like the A7RV & ZVE1.

After adding in some auto AI framing & improved built in audio, Canon would be there, apart from the s35 cropped sensor. However, at least apart from sensor size, they'd have a apples vs apples offering. Throw in a fan as well, and Canon would be ahead.

Astonishingly (to a long term Canon user), Sony has put ALL of their best tech in a $2100 camera.

Those who love Sony will be drooling over the tech. A vlogger with any sense at all realizes that you can vlog without all that tech and use pretty much the simplest camera. That's my opinion anyway. Apologies to all those vloggers who think they are the next Spielberg.