Canon EOS R6 Mark III & RF 45 F1.2 STM November 6

[Michael Clark]

I have. It’s a sad day when that happens. Probably though just a numbers game, and the character of s/he who holds the gear. And the environment is also a factor: wet campsites, animals enclosures, soggy moss, damp gear bags, etc.

How do you know a 5-Series body would have survived in the same environment?

Putting cameras in damp gear bags will kill them all if left in there very long. That's what desiccant packets are for, to keep the interior of your bags (kept closed except when putting gear in or out) dry when in damp environments. Putting damp cameras in gear bags without drying the cameras and lenses first will obviously make the bags damp, and no amount of desiccant bags will dry the bag out with wet cameras in it.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

What I hope for and expect with any lens, especially L lenses, is for the actual images they produce, using whatever corrections they are designed for (optical, digital, or both) to be really good. Since the images from the VCM lenses are not just really good, but actually outstanding, I also think they are a remarkable accomplishment. I own and use four of them (24, 35, 50, 85), so I actually know what I'm talking about (unlike people who tiresomely scream "but digital corrections, but digital corrections" over and over and over, without actually owning and using the lenses). When I bought my 50 F1.4, I thought I might hang onto my RF 50 F1.2, which is a truly wonderful lens. However, I just didn't find myself using it. The results from the VCM version are just as good, no-one notices the 1/3 stop difference between F1.2 and F1.4, and the VCM version is so much smaller and lighter. So I've just sold my F1.2. The latest, which is the 85 F1.4, is my favorite 85 ever. It's just superb. You can, of course, stick your head in the mud, ignore the fact that designing lenses for digital corrections (which the VCM lenses employ to a greater or lesser extent, depending on which lens we're talking about--the 85 probably the least) makes possible not just particular body designs but also the kinds of optical performance that would be hard, if not impossible, to achieve with optical corrections only, and thereby miss out on some fabulous lenses. Your choice.

Well spoken or written I absolutely agree with you. Not just for the VCM lenses, but for most gear I would just wish people would only complain or criticize after they´ve actually used a lens and not after seeing a bunch of YT videos...

 

[davidespinosa]

ICYMI, here's the updated photo of the 45mm f/1.2:

https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-eos-r6-mark-iii-rf-45mm-f-1-2-stm-latest-specifications/

 

[Walrus]

Well, I guess if you consider those shots to be sharp... (maybe it's the resizing?)

They are (pics where screen grabs, not even exports, to show lens used), it's just I don't have any medium/long distance shots, because I only used the combination indoor for closeup art nudes details, so the DoF is always razor thin, and it's not easy to show you examples because I have to censor the parts that are actually in focus.
I guess the following belly button, that I can post full size (hope it opens that way when you click and then zoom) and with no censor, show how sharp it felt (it's f11 in this instance), on the very thin focus plane you can see single body hairs, and the texture of the skin




This instead is the EF 70-200 f2.8 L classic (non-IS) with the same EF2.0 II extender, again at f11

 

[m4ndr4ke]

the 40 Art which is probably the sharpest lens on the market, period

That, to me is the one that got away.
Well, actually, I sent it away, because I absolutely had no use for it, but no other prime lens has ever impressed me as much as the Sigma 40mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art.
I would have loved keeping the lens. It cost me less than 600€ (a returned item, again) and it's just so, so good...I wanted to keep it as guilty pleasure.

They had several choices -- the 6D / RP sensor, the R sensor

Those sensors (from the 6D Mark II and 5D Mark IV, respectively) were older and had already been used on mirrorless cameras.
The EOS R was released in 2018, the EOS RP was released in 2019, and the EOS R6 and R5 were released in 2020.

I'd never dare to say that a line of shamelessly optically uncorrected lenses with extreme vignetting is 'a great accomplishment'. I don't even think the VCM line is worth of the red ring. At that price tag the least I expect is the lenses to be optically corrected.

The 50 and the 85 are somewhat similar to their predecessors in that regard. It's just the shorter lenses that have a lot of distortion correction via software but, even with such correction, they're delivering higher image quality than their predecessors.
Actually, in terms of vignetting, there are many EF lenses with tons of it as well. Some are even worse than the VCMs.

Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM Lens Vignetting

Review vignetting (peripheral shading) test results with f-stop contours for the Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM Lens. Compare the results from this lens with other lenses.

www.the-digital-picture.com

Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Lens Vignetting

Review vignetting (peripheral shading) test results with f-stop contours for the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Lens. Compare the results from this lens with other lenses.

www.the-digital-picture.com

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Lens Vignetting

Review vignetting (peripheral shading) test results with f-stop contours for the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Lens. Compare the results from this lens with other lenses.

www.the-digital-picture.com

Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM Lens Vignetting

Review vignetting (peripheral shading) test results with f-stop contours for the Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM Lens. Compare the results from this lens with other lenses.

www.the-digital-picture.com

As you can see, the 85 VCM is the only one that seems slightly worse.

Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM Lens Image Quality

View the image quality delivered by the Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM Lens using ISO 12233 Resolution Chart lab test results. Compare the image quality of this lens with other lenses.

www.the-digital-picture.com

Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Lens Image Quality

View the image quality delivered by the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Lens using ISO 12233 Resolution Chart lab test results. Compare the image quality of this lens with other lenses.

www.the-digital-picture.com

And resolution improvement is there, for the ones with significant distortion.

Then the EF 50mm f/1.2 L is not a lens for you. But just because it does not meet your needs doesn't mean it is not an excellent lens for other use cases.

I know, I went with the Sigma
I no longer own it though, I sold all my remaining EF lenses last year.
Actually the Sigma 50mm Art was the last to go.
I went with the intermediate solution, the 28-70mm f/2. It replaced my 28mm f/1.4 Art, the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 II, and the 50mm f/1.4 Art.
I still like to own a few prime lenses but now I don’t really use them for work, and this 45 will probably suit me in that scenario.

Having said that, way back at the beginning of this discussion I said that the R6 Mark III "matching" the R5 in a way that was reminiscent of the 6D Mark II matching the 5D Mark III was, in both cases, on the spec sheet, but not in terms of build quality.

They R6s don't match the R5s in terms of weather sealing, but they mostly match in terms of overall build quality.

The 6D Mark II is made out of polycarbonate resin with a few parts of magnesium alloy, with its weather sealing relying on tightly assembled plastics - it's mostly a plastic camera (I had it, I upgraded to the R6). Plastic on top, plastic at the bottom, plastic on the sides, plastic doors.

The R6s have pretty much an entirely magnesium alloy structure and feature weather sealing gaskets. The R5s feature more weather sealing gaskets.
Heck, the originals R6 and R5 are so similar they share the same cage models.

In terms of shutter expectancy:
The 6D Mark II was rated I think at 150k;
The RP is rated at 100k (it had a lower release price);
The R6s are rated at 300k;
The R5s are rated at 500k.

The R6 is nothing like what the 6D cameras were, it went upmarket. The mirrorless transition brought the 6-series much closer to what the 5D were - minus the resolution, that is.
From basic sensors to high performing sensors.
From basic autofocus to the same features at the high end cameras.
Higher framerates, improved durability, improved build quality, 1/4000s shutter speed limit removed, second memory card slot.
And I'm going to ignore video, as I don't care for that.

I don't buy the "love letter" story though, sorry. The R6 was released at almost 1000€ more than the 6D Mark II, here. The camera went upmarket and we paid for it.

To be honest, I've been imagining the R6s in the future will take the place the 5D DSLRs had in the market, with the R5s going to an upper level, above €5000, closer to the concept of the Sony A1. Clearly that's not happening now, but I'd say it may happen within a generation or two.

 

[Walrus]

That, to me is the one that got away.
Well, actually, I sent it away, because I absolutely had no use for it, but no other prime lens has ever impressed me as much as the Sigma 40mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art.
I would have loved keeping the lens. It cost me less than 600€ (a returned item, again) and it's just so, so good...I wanted to keep it as guilty pleasure.

I had the Sigma 50 Art for like 10yrs (before I used the 50 1.8 classic, the one with distance window and metal mount), and then I got the RF 35 STM (in an usual happy eBay occasion); wasn't really using the 35mm much, as I've always been a 50mm guy, so I planned to sell it.
In those days I discovered that 40 Art was existing (from years, but I don't know how, I had missed it), I saw reviews and got blown away, found one brand new for the same resell price of 35 + 50, so I decided to sell both, to get one that could cover both focals, as from time to time I felt the need of something a little more wider then 50mm but with same brightness, superior to the f2.8 zooms I had.

Years after I'm still happy with the choice, lens is astonishing, and even if size and weight are huge, that's not the real problem (I also got the 105 Art, so I'm used to heavy stuff), but I understood that the 40mm is "too 35mm" for my taste, I've to confirm I'm a 50mm guy, I shot it for more then 20yrs and I can tell the small difference with 40mm, and I don't feel fully connected with it.

That's why I look with great hope for the 45 f1.2 as it's much closer to my 50mm feel while still retaining a small wide kick (if it's not real 48mm as they say, of course ), it's brighter, I can sell the 40 Art without any extra expense (hopefully I can even have some extra in return for the swap), and also solves the side problems of size&weight, plus ditching the adapter; but of course, while it won't be tack sharp corner to corner wide open as the 40 Art, it needs to be at least better then the 50 Art at f1.4
If it's (clearly) better then the 50 Art, with the bonus of the extra aperture kick, then I think I can deal with losing the incredible sharpness of the 40 Art, balanced by all the other advantages that the 45 STM will bring.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

My experience with an EF 135mm f/2 L + EF1.4X III was rather disappointing. The images were well below the quality of the bare lens or even my EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II at 135mm.

I did AFMA with the Camera + 1.4X + 135/2 before the shoot for which I used it while my EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II was off to CPS for a new IS unit (at age 9 years and a LOT of heavy use with plenty of hard bumps and bangs along the way).

I've never noticed any offensive colors of specular highlights with the EF 135mm f/2 L. But then I usually shoot with it in darker environments where there aren't a lot of bright points in the out of focus areas.

Yes, you've reminded me that I really should send my EF 70-200mm f2.8 II L off to Canon for a service. Mine is a bit battered too and I've recenently noticed that the center moves when I zoom. It's not the IS, it looks like some of the internals are de-centered slightly. It still gives amazing and sharp images...but zoom bursts look a bit off center to to the optical alignment.

 

[rombe3jr]

This R6 Mark III forum is by far the most popular on Canon Rumors. Well over 500 comments and climbing each day. This is going to be an important camera in the Canon lineup for the next few years. So far, the rumors seem to be ringing true to the market and it should be a best seller. Cannot say the same for Sony and the A7V. The few rumors that are being leaked are not looking good. My guess is that Sony is freaking out how much Canon is advancing the technology at the same price point. They will either have to take an "L" (loss) on this model and try to do better in a couple years or just reduce the price on a minor update to the A7IV. To their credit, Sony did finally reduce the price of the A7IV from $2,700 to $2,000 (USD) and that helped move it to number one on Amazon. But it looks like the R6 III is going to have so many more features than the A7V at nearly the same price, that even Sony fanboys won't be able to ignore Canon anymore. Of course they will just continue to gloat about all of their 3rd party lenses on the FE mount still missing from RF mount. Looks like that's the only hand Sony fans will have left after the R6 III is announced on Thursday.

 

[Walrus]

This R6 Mark III forum is by far the most popular on Canon Rumors. Well over 500 comments and climbing each day. This is going to be an important camera in the Canon lineup for the next few years. So far, the rumors seem to be ringing true to the market and it should be a best seller. Cannot say the same for Sony and the A7V. The few rumors that are being leaked are not looking good. My guess is that Sony is freaking out how much Canon is advancing the technology at the same price point. They will either have to take an "L" (loss) on this model and try to do better in a couple years or just reduce the price on a minor update to the A7IV. To their credit, Sony did finally reduce the price of the A7IV from $2,700 to $2,000 (USD) and that helped move it to number one on Amazon. But it looks like the R6 III is going to have so many more features than the A7V at nearly the same price, that even Sony fanboys won't be able to ignore Canon anymore. Of course they will just continue to gloat about all of their 3rd party lenses on the FE mount still missing from RF mount. Looks like that's the only hand Sony fans will have left after the R6 III is announced on Thursday.

Camera bodies are overrated, lenses are 10 times more important. I don't like to think about fanboys of any manufacturer, I like to think on each one of us wanting to spend their money on what we consider the best tech for our needs.
I use Canon since 1999, in the film days, and never had any other 24x36 system for this 26 years, so I can be considered somewhat a Canon fanboy, but no matter what the R6 III is bringing us, I can tell you I have never been so close so switch side, to Sony, and not by the reason of "lenses", plural, but I'm ready to switch just to get ahold of a single specific lens, the Tamron 35-150, that for me is enough to bear with Sony ergonomics and menus, which I deem way inferior to Canon's.

Cameras are full of marketing gimmicks, sometimes REALLY helpful, especially in the AF department, but in the end they're just black boxes recording light via the exposure triangle, and what really makes the difference is lighting, first, and the lens, second. Camera comes in as a distant third.
I don't know if Sony fans won't be able to ignore Canon after the release of the R6 III, but I can tell you that I still won't be able to ignore Sony even if the 45 f1.2 (which is why I'm here, the R6III doesn't interest me one bit) is great and even if I'll buy it on pre-order, I'll still be thinking about that Tamron lens, and possibly ending up switching side.

Who cares about being a fan of a company? Really?

 

[jamtra]

Camera bodies are overrated, lenses are 10 times more important. I don't like to think about fanboys of any manufacturer, I like to think on each one of us wanting to spend their money on what we consider the best tech for our needs.
I use Canon since 1999, in the film days, and never had any other 24x36 system for this 26 years, so I can be considered somewhat a Canon fanboy, but no matter what the R6 III is bringing us, I can tell you I have never been so close so switch side, to Sony, and not by the reason of "lenses", plural, but I'm ready to switch just to get ahold of a single specific lens, the Tamron 35-150, that for me is enough to bear with Sony ergonomics and menus, which I deem way inferior to Canon's.

Cameras are full of marketing gimmicks, sometimes REALLY helpful, especially in the AF department, but in the end they're just black boxes recording light via the exposure triangle, and what really makes the difference is lighting, first, and the lens, second. Camera comes in as a distant third.
I don't know if Sony fans won't be able to ignore Canon after the release of the R6 III, but I can tell you that I still won't be able to ignore Sony even if the 45 f1.2 (which is why I'm here, the R6III doesn't interest me one bit) is great and even if I'll buy it on pre-order, I'll still be thinking about that Tamron lens, and possibly ending up switching side.

Who cares about being a fan of a company? Really?

You are absolutely correct. I think people use what they are the most comfortable with and produces the best shot for them and at a cost that suits their pocketbook.

 

[roby17269]

I agree. It comes down to that in terms of the sensor. In the history of the 6D vs 5D it was also body, shutter, lifetime of flaps, sealing, etc.


I disagree. Moving from the 6D -> 6D II was meh, but from the 6D II to (spiritually, at least) the R6 it was wow. There are far fewer differences between the R6 and R5 when you take a photo or dunk the body in animal snot than what were with the 6D series vs 5D series. Similarly, the RP vs R or 5D.4 was meh. Canon could have kept with meh, but it ran strong. More my point about the 5D.4 comparison and use of the 1D III -ish chip. Canon didn't just hand the masses a road apple. They handed them a quality product by which only resolution and mode selection were the big differentiators.

Put this way:
For CAD $2k in moving from the R6 to R5 you get double the pixels and an LCD display. I guess more EVF pixels.
For CAD $2k in moving from the 6D II to 5D.4 you got double the pixels, better snot resistance, better daylight tolerance, better low end detail preservation, more flaps before failure, etc.

So in moderns times resolution. In the before times pretty much well the whole pie. Steering this back to my original moaning, I'm just hoping the R6.3, despite apparent advancement, isn't inching us back to the whole pie scenario.

I guess I am confused by the parallels you are making?
And I guess Canon's numbering patterns do not help...

But to me the 6 lineage would be: 6D -> 6D II -> RP -> R8...
While the 5 lineage has remained more or less linear (the R is a bit of an outlier), the 6 lineage seems to have split into 8 and new 6 (R6 -> R6 II -> R6 III) that slots between the 8 and the 5.

By the way, I sympathize with your some of your considerations, being myself a non-pro prosumer who likes pro features

 

[jamtra]

You can get notified when preorder starts

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1928858-REG/canon_elevate_your_image.html

 

[archie]

Does anybody know what the S&F stands for on the mode dial. Would it be something like "shutter and framerate" or am I off-base?

And if it is related to framerate setting, why does it need such easy access for quick changes?
At the risk of building false hope, would it enable trade-offs between frame rates and sensor readout speeds? You know, to maybe enable better readout speeds. Or would it be something like enabling a longer stream of shots at a slower framerate?

 

[jamtra]

Does anybody know what the S&F stands for on the mode dial. Would it be something like "shutter and framerate" or am I off-base?

And if it is related to framerate setting, why does it need such easy access for quick changes?
At the risk of building false hope, would it enable trade-offs between frame rates and sensor readout speeds? You know, to maybe enable better readout speeds. Or would it be something like enabling a longer stream of shots at a slower framerate?

• Mode Dial Now Includes “S&F”
  • Update: This feature let's you select framerates based on a multiplication factor more efficiently. If you're shooting at 24fps, you can easily switch to 12fps by selecting 0.5x or double the frame rate by selecting 2x. I don't know if there are other multiplication settings.

 

[rombe3jr]

Camera bodies are overrated, lenses are 10 times more important. I don't like to think about fanboys of any manufacturer, I like to think on each one of us wanting to spend their money on what we consider the best tech for our needs.
I use Canon since 1999, in the film days, and never had any other 24x36 system for this 26 years, so I can be considered somewhat a Canon fanboy, but no matter what the R6 III is bringing us, I can tell you I have never been so close so switch side, to Sony, and not by the reason of "lenses", plural, but I'm ready to switch just to get ahold of a single specific lens, the Tamron 35-150, that for me is enough to bear with Sony ergonomics and menus, which I deem way inferior to Canon's.

Cameras are full of marketing gimmicks, sometimes REALLY helpful, especially in the AF department, but in the end they're just black boxes recording light via the exposure triangle, and what really makes the difference is lighting, first, and the lens, second. Camera comes in as a distant third.
I don't know if Sony fans won't be able to ignore Canon after the release of the R6 III, but I can tell you that I still won't be able to ignore Sony even if the 45 f1.2 (which is why I'm here, the R6III doesn't interest me one bit) is great and even if I'll buy it on pre-order, I'll still be thinking about that Tamron lens, and possibly ending up switching side.

Who cares about being a fan of a company? Really?

That Tamron 35-150 ($1,700 USD) has quite an impressive focal range and fast aperture. Also available on Z mount but obviously Sony appeals to more of the market than Nikon. Samyang has a similar lens, new for only $1,075 USD right now. And that lens is also available on L mount. But obviously Leica, Panasonic & Sigma are less appealing than Sony. Definitely a fantastic range for a single lens. I personally prefer to be a bit more discreet and so the smaller zooms a better fit. That's why I'm really hoping that Canon matches the RF 16-28 f/2.8 STM, RF 28-70 f/2.8 STM with a crucial third lens to complete the holy trinity: RF 70-180 f/2.8 STM. That set on the R8? Chef's kiss for me. I also understand that over time, lenses become more important than camera bodies. All of these "features" seem to be getting a bit outrageous for photography (video, obviously has quite a bit more complexity and added features really help). Out of curiosity, if you bought a Sony in order to accommodate the Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8, which model would you buy?

 

[rombe3jr]

Does anybody know what the S&F stands for on the mode dial. Would it be something like "shutter and framerate" or am I off-base?

And if it is related to framerate setting, why does it need such easy access for quick changes?
At the risk of building false hope, would it enable trade-offs between frame rates and sensor readout speeds? You know, to maybe enable better readout speeds. Or would it be something like enabling a longer stream of shots at a slower framerate?

I have heard "Slow and Fast" before.

 

[Walrus]

That Tamron 35-150 ($1,700 USD) has quite an impressive focal range and fast aperture. Also available on Z mount but obviously Sony appeals to more of the market than Nikon. Samyang has a similar lens, new for only $1,075 USD right now. And that lens is also available on L mount. But obviously Leica, Panasonic & Sigma are less appealing than Sony. Definitely a fantastic range for a single lens. I personally prefer to be a bit more discreet and so the smaller zooms a better fit. That's why I'm really hoping that Canon matches the RF 16-28 f/2.8 STM, RF 28-70 f/2.8 STM with a crucial third lens to complete the holy trinity: RF 70-180 f/2.8 STM. That set on the R8? Chef's kiss for me. I also understand that over time, lenses become more important than camera bodies. All of these "features" seem to be getting a bit outrageous for photography (video, obviously has some quite a bit more complexity). Out of curiosity, if you bought a Sony in order to accommodate the Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8, which model would you buy?

I have the 28-70 STM, great lens, I had the EF 24-70 2.8 L II and swapped it immediately for less then 200€ difference, nice upgrade, as I don't really use wide focals much, so 24mm isn't missed; a matching 70-180 STM or whatever would certainly be interesting to swap my ancient (but still hot and sharp) EF 70-200 2.8 L classic (non-IS).

But, doing weddings, and 70mm being not enough, I crave the Tamron 35-150 because I can have a single lens that covers both for 24/28-70 and 70-180/200, and instead of having two bodies always on me, I can just have one (35mm on the widest end is enough for 95% of my shots), and the second body would be ready in the bag, only when needed, arguably with a Tamron 20-40 2.8 or something similar (small, cheap, bright, as the use would be much reduced). Today if wideangle is really needed I have the 16 STM, small and inexpensive, but it's too wide, even a fixed 18/20mm prime would be enough for me, in Canon there's nothing cheap (20 VCM is overkill and overprice, it's a lens that would shoot no more then 50/100 pics per year, so 300/350€ is the max I would invest in it), and the old EF 20 f2.8 that would be perfect isn't any good wide open.
So today I have to remove 70-200 from the second body to accommodate the 16 STM in emergency, while in a possible Sony future (...or if Canon finally allows FF third party lenses on RF...) I would just pick up the second body, took those 5/10pics needed, and store it back for good in the bag.

I would buy an used A7IV, and that's why I'm on the verge of moving to Sony since almost two years, but I haven't done yet, because I'm waiting for the A7V to be released, so the A7IV price drops and the used market is flooded by cameras form people wanting to upgrade.

A7III or A7C feels not enough advanced in the AF system for being my primary camera (could certainly be the second, today I work with primary R6 and secondary RP), the A7S's have too low mpx, and the A7R's have too high mpx, I'm happy to move on from 20mpx (which is my resolution since 5D II in 2010 and passing thru the 6D...yes, time to have some more after 15yrs) but 42/60mpx from A7R's are not needed, the 33mpx of the A7IV feels like a perfect sweet spot. And yes, I know that R6 III would have the exact same sweet spot, but my primary concern is having one lens that does it all, and the R6 III doesn't solve the issue, like it doesn't solve it the RF 24-105 2.8 L which is too expensive, and also too short on the long end to be the do-it-all lens that I'd like to have.

Now, Canon semi-new course with lenses like 28-70 STM, 16-28 STM and the possibile 2.8 tele zoom companion, and the coming 45 f1.2 are certainly helping me to stay for the moment, probably without the 28-70 STM I would already have gone in the last year, so something better is happening, but I still don't feel it's enough for me.

 

[rombe3jr]

I have the 28-70 STM, great lens, I had the EF 24-70 2.8 L II and swapped it immediately for less then 200€ difference, nice upgrade, as I don't really use wide focals much, so 24mm isn't missed; a matching 70-180 STM or whatever would certainly be interesting to swap my ancient (but still hot and sharp) EF 70-200 2.8 L classic (non-IS).

But, doing weddings, and 70mm being not enough, I crave the Tamron 35-150 because I can have a single lens that covers both for 24/28-70 and 70-180/200, and instead of having two bodies always on me, I can just have one (35mm on the widest end is enough for 95% of my shots), and the second body would be ready in the bag, only when needed, arguably with a Tamron 20-40 2.8 or something similar (small, cheap, bright, as the use would be much reduced). Today if wideangle is really needed I have the 16 STM, small and inexpensive, but it's too wide, even a fixed 18/20mm prime would be enough for me, in Canon there's nothing cheap (20 VCM is overkill and overprice, it's a lens that would shoot no more then 50/100 pics per year, so 300/350€ is the max I would invest in it), and the old EF 20 f2.8 that would be perfect isn't any good wide open.
So today I have to remove 70-200 from the second body to accommodate the 16 STM in emergency, while in a possible Sony future (...or if Canon finally allows FF third party lenses on RF...) I would just pick up the second body, took those 5/10pics needed, and store it back for good in the bag.

I would buy an used A7IV, and that's why I'm on the verge of moving to Sony since almost two years, but I haven't done yet, because I'm waiting for the A7V to be released, so the A7IV price drops and the used market is flooded by cameras form people wanting to upgrade.

A7III or A7C feels not enough advanced in the AF system for being my primary camera (could certainly be the second, today I work with primary R6 and secondary RP), the A7S's have too low mpx, and the A7R's have too high mpx, I'm happy to move on from 20mpx (which is my resolution since 5D II in 2010 and passing thru the 6D...yes, time to have some more after 15yrs) but 42/60mpx from A7R's are not needed, the 33mpx of the A7IV feels like a perfect sweet spot. And yes, I know that R6 III would have the exact same sweet spot, but my primary concern is having one lens that does it all, and the R6 III doesn't solve the issue, like it doesn't solve it the RF 24-105 2.8 L which is too expensive, and also too short on the long end to be the do-it-all lens that I'd like to have.

Now, Canon semi-new course with lenses like 28-70 STM, 16-28 STM and the possibile 2.8 tele zoom companion, and the coming 45 f1.2 are certainly helping me to stay for the moment, probably without the 28-70 STM I would already have gone in the last year, so something better is happening, but I still don't feel it's enough for me.

The 35-150 is well suited for weddings. Larger lenses only help look more professional! I have seen the Sony A7IV used for as little as $1,400 (USD) this fall on MPB, although a fairly high shutter count. I can see the appeal. Canon does have better ergonomics, color science build quality and service. Lens selection (compared with Sony) maybe the only weakness. Glad to hear you like the 28-70 STM! That will probably be my next lens for church photos & videos.

 

[David - Sydney]

Welcome back Michael

What cheaper model has been released since the RP with the RP's spec sheet?

I didn't state that. "The RP is a mirrorless 6Dii and still being sold."
I was pointing out that Canon is happy to leave the RP in their marketing lineup long after the R/R6 etc have disappeared even though it is considered older tech with essentially the same sensor from the 6Dii. I am happy for Canon to leave the RP in their lineup and I bought one as my backup body. Kudos to Canon for selling the cheapest full frame body.

The EOS R was cheaper than the R6 and R5 by the time the R6 & R5 came out, not more expensive.

Again, I didn't state that the R was cheaper or more expensive
"The EOS R was selling for a long time after the R6/R5 were released."
How was I incorrect in my actual comment?
My point was that Canon was happy to leave the R (and the 5Div) in their lineup for a long time after the R5/R6 was released as a data point supporting my original suggestion that Canon should leave the R5 in their lineup for some time to come.

But if the R6 comes with a 30+ MP sensor for around the same price as the R5 is currently commanding on the NEW market, the R5 will disappear from authorized Canon dealers' shelves.

Maybe, maybe not.
The R5 still has features that the R6iii can't or won't have. We won't know for sure until the R6iii is released. I appreciate the extra pixels in the R5 over my previous 5Div's 30mp. Perhaps others will too. Canon has amortised their R5 R&D costs so there will be higher unit profit on it vs a newer body. Should users complain if we have more choice??
Canon is still selling the R5 in parallel with the R5ii even though it is more than a year after the latter's release.

If an older, higher end model is selling new for less than the newer mid-tier product with the same basic capabilities, then dealers will continue to stock the older model as long as Canon will let them because it's easier to sell an older model with the same capabilities if it's cheaper than the newer model.
If an older, higher end model is selling new for more than the newer mid-tier product with the same basic capabilities, then dealers will not continue to stock the older model because it's very hard to sell an older model when there's a newer model on their shelves that can do the same thing and is priced lower. They'll return those units to Canon for credit. Canon will then use them for parts sources for the next seven years or so until they drop that model from official support.

I agree that the price will either be higher or lower... why is that a problem for users? Dealers won't care as long as they sell stuff.
It is up to Canon to decide what is in their lineup and at what price they sell to dealers (and marketing rebates)
If users want one and one dealer doesn't have it then they will buy from another.

 

[DocInfoSci]

I guess I am confused by the parallels you are making?
And I guess Canon's numbering patterns do not help...

But to me the 6 lineage would be: 6D -> 6D II -> RP -> R8...
While the 5 lineage has remained more or less linear (the R is a bit of an outlier), the 6 lineage seems to have split into 8 and new 6 (R6 -> R6 II -> R6 III) that slots between the 8 and the 5.

By the way, I sympathize with your some of your considerations, being myself a non-pro prosumer who likes pro features

Hello! My thinking is this:

At the advent of the R6 / R5 there was no other R camera beyond the R and RP. RP clearly is a 6D2 successor, but I felt that the mantle moved to the R6 when it arrived and the RP simply... remained. So, in my mind, when July 9, 2020 came around the R6 was the natural successor because it had the number 6 and was priced below the R5. It cost more, yes, but so did everything Canon released around that time.

Fast forward to 2025 and I'd agree with your thinking -- or, at least, I wouldn't disagree in many conversation spaces. There's probably an argument that the R8 also exists to placate those who used to buy the x0D series as well. Maybe it does double duty?

Having owned the 80D (well, it was my wife's and now my son's), I felt it was a fun, geeky, and relatively affordable alternative to the much more expensive full frames: it gave the "feel" of an "upscale camera" as seen in the hands of the well-heeled out on holiday, like that stranger who steps onto a float plane in Alaska with their 5Dx amidst the sea of people clutching their Best Buy bodies. Canon kind of lost that feel with the R transition, I think, although cameras like the R8 are probably their attempt to at least slot in a price equivalent. I don't think the R8 spiritually captures what was happening, but it sits at a good price point in the catalog. They'd do well, I feel, to make a mini R5 body in crop form and re-introduce the X0D series as an X0R line -- and that's where the new video functionality they've been pushing for the new gen would fit very, very comfortably for people like my kiddo and his friends. But I agree, it also fills that 6D character as well -- competent, trade-offs, but serves. Someone mentioned earlier here that the R6 is kind of the 5D of yesteryear and the R5 is something new (or maybe the new 5DS/R?), in which case the R8 is now definitely the 6D equivalent.

I'll say this, though, because it's probably not obvious from my limited chatter here: I've had the privilege since 2005 to use a multitude of Canon's digital bodies -- either through ownership or via family and friends. I think they're all great for their time and serve a need or scratch an itch in one way or the other. They all take great photos when used well. I wouldn't turn down the chance to play with any! 600mm of big glass on a Rebel is so much fun, especially if you bring it along with a pal and pretend it's your serious body for the day. (And the memories it captures today are just as good as when it first hit my bag.)

And yes, the R6 captured a special place in my heart. Like the Rebel and my Mac 512ke, I'll probably never part with it even though I eventually will move forward with the times.