If you want to abandon legacy film formats, why go to the medium format film standard of 3:4? Why not do 16:9, which is what most monitors do today (1080P, 4K, 8K). The world has gone digital, after all!Not gonna happen, but with the high-res body I'd love to see Canon abandon the 2:3 ratio and go 3:4 like MF cameras. Or 4:5 even. That 'full-frame' albatross has nothing to do with anything but maximizing image area on 35mm movie film stock. No film! Be free!
I would really love to have a Camera that mixes the EOS R and R6: give it the new sensor tech, IBIS and dual slots, autofocus. Reduce the number of FPS to 8-10 max. FF4k and 1080p 120.
Megapixel count can be in between 20 and 30, just to have a little more room for cropping than 20mp and to enjoy the glorious sharpness of RF lenses a bit more.
Basically what people expected the original R to be, an evolved A7III like camera.
Maybe it’s just me though
Video is now an essential feature so this is the opposite to the ratios you mention with 16:9 etc being needed.Not gonna happen, but with the high-res body I'd love to see Canon abandon the 2:3 ratio and go 3:4 like MF cameras. Or 4:5 even. That 'full-frame' albatross has nothing to do with anything but maximizing image area on 35mm movie film stock. No film! Be free!
Anyone like to setup a table of features/differentiators for each camera (price, mp, fps, max video rate, dual/single card, etc)? By descending price...
R1
R5s
R5
R6
R7? (APS-C?)
R8? full frame
R9? full Frame
I get that an APS-C sensor will be great for birders IF it has a greater pixel density than the R5 ie >17mp. It could be a cut down version of the R5s given the rumour is for >2x R5 ie ~100mp. How that fits into enhanced videography is a good question. It won't be an A7Siii competitor in that case.
The smaller sensor should give a cost benefit but that would fit into a lower end version to replace the M system. Ideally, the M5ii's 32mp sensor put into a RF mount would be a good match but that doesn't fit the full frame rumour.
I said "high-res body". A 100MP sensor doesn't make any sense for video does it? I also said "I'd love to see..." I'm not even TRYING to satisfy the blog-o-masses.Video is now an essential feature so this is the opposite to the ratios you mention with 16:9 etc being needed.
I get that an APS-C sensor will be great for birders IF it has a greater pixel density than the R5 ie >17mp.
With RF mount, it will not necessarily be lighter as the mount is dictating that. The 7D is heavier than the 6D. Yes, the rebels are lighter but that is due to the body construction rather than the sensor size.It's not just that. People also shoot APS-C because it's a lighter kit, and it's cheaper. That's also why some use micro 4/3, for an even more dramatic benefit than APS-C.
Of course it doesI said "high-res body". A 100MP sensor doesn't make any sense for video does it? I also said "I'd love to see..." I'm not even TRYING to satisfy the blog-o-masses.
*ahem...great for birders. I think that part wasn't aimed at the smaller lighter crowd....sure, a few are out there but most come from the 7D world, correct me if I'm wrong about that, I'm ok with being wrong.It's not just that. People also shoot APS-C because it's a lighter kit, and it's cheaper. That's also why some use micro 4/3, for an even more dramatic benefit than APS-C.
*ahem...great for birders. I think that part wasn't aimed at the smaller lighter crowd....sure, a few are out there but most come from the 7D world, correct me if I'm wrong about that, I'm ok with being wrong.
Ok, but then you added 'fun' which like my Lensbaby use, it kind of throws out the entire point which is great photography and not snapshots or images which require a ton of post. Large glass balances well with a bigger bodies. From my personal experience, when I think of higher end crop Canon use for other than travel, I think of the 7D. Same size as all/most FF bodies. (talking about this sure beats the disgust/anger/anxiety of everything else happening in my country today) Cheers!Yeah, although you can make a 400mm work for birds on an APS-C body. Not so much if you're using full frame. I guess what I meant was cheaper and lighter than a 600mm f/4 strapped to an R5. And, consider m4/3. I have an Oly M5 Mark III that I can use to shoot birds with one hand, albeit with not nearly as good IQ. But it's still a ton of fun. And that's really what wildlife photography is all about. At least for me.
Ok, but then you added 'fun' which like my Lensbaby use, it kind of throws out the entire point which is great photography and not snapshots or images which require a ton of post.
It won't be lighter. I doubt that there will be RF-S lenses, but could be wrong about that. My 7D and lenses were not much lighter than FF.It's not just that. People also shoot APS-C because it's a lighter kit, and it's cheaper. That's also why some use micro 4/3, for an even more dramatic benefit than APS-C.