Canon officially announces the EOS R100 and RF 28mm f/2.8 STM

koenkooi

CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
3,493
4,007
The Netherlands
Don't quite understand Canon's logic with the plastic vs metal mounts. A very cheap 50mm 1.8 has metal mount, a super light and affordable 28mm pancake has metal mount, even a cheap 24-105 kit lens has metal mount. Then we have a nice 24-50 kit lens with plastic mount...
And a lot of metal mounts screws into plastic, so for relatively light lenses it's mostly window dressing. Roger at Lensrentals is very adamant about not using metal mounts as proxy for quality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

AlP

EOS R5
CR Pro
Sep 5, 2018
94
188
And a lot of metal mounts screws into plastic, so for relatively light lenses it's mostly window dressing. Roger at Lensrentals is very adamant about not using metal mounts as proxy for quality.
That's correct, but the definition of "mount" used in the Lensrentals article (I assume that you are referring to the article of December 2013) is:

the mount is the internal part of the lens where the bayonet — the metal part that twists into the camera — attaches by several screws

So in the article it's not the bayonet, which is what @blackcoffee17 referred to as mount, it's the part behind the bayonet. I am quite sure that a steel or brass bayonet is more robust than a plastic bayonet (at least when using cost-effective plastic materials) given that the geometry is given and doesn't allow to increase material thickness.

That doesn't explain why Canon is using a plastic bayonet on a 24-50 or RF-S 18-150 lens vs. metal on the 15-30, 24-105 (4-7.1) or other light prime lenses. Without knowing all the details one can only speculate, I could imagine the reasons going from expected number of mating/unmating cycles (where I would expect metal to wear off less than plastic), to marketing reasons like"users who buy the first prime lens after a kit zoom are more likely to do so if the lens looks more professional".

But maybe someone has more insight into this matter
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
30,931
12,625
Without knowing all the details one can only speculate, I could imagine the reasons going from expected number of mating/unmating cycles (where I would expect metal to wear off less than plastic), to marketing reasons like"users who buy the first prime lens after a kit zoom are more likely to do so if the lens looks more professional".
I think the former is likely the main engineering driver. Probably the bigger driver is that plastic bayonets are cheaper to produce, so they'll use them if they can 'get away with it' from a marketing standpoint.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
I had the 200D back then. When the 250D came out, I was like oh that's cool.

That was 5 years ago.. and this is just about that same camera. This is not even significantly smaller. 250D is a Rebel model, my goodness, that's just been retired. (correction: 4 years ago)

And the 250D has lenses - Canon and 3rd party - so this RF thing would be heavier with an adapter. I swear, Canon with these bare minimum stuff...
 
Upvote 0
Aug 21, 2018
144
15
No touch screen just blows my mind. It’s hard to pursued a phone photographer to not touch the screen constantly, so I don’t think this will sit very well. Perhaps their goal was to make the M50 look even better, which is what they accomplished. Haha
Maybe expect that most these people would send it directly to their phones.
 
Upvote 0
If the replacement M6ii comes, you’ll complain that it’s no smaller than the R50 and R100.

The R lens mount is way bigger than the M.

Also, IMO the most important dimension is depth.
Not width or height.
So I’m headed for R8 plus RF 28 pancake.

Of course I will complain, as Canon will surely not produce a camera for my amusement. I don't want m6 II replacement being APS-C based, but FF instead. And it should sport a viewfinder too. And if you think it can't be done, here's one from Sony:

1685077964168.png

And yes, I would pay a premium for such a camera. Simply give me an R6II in a retro form. But - would it find enough of customers for Canon to even consider it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Of course I will complain, as Canon will surely not produce a camera for my amusement. I don't want m6 II replacement being APS-C based, but FF instead. And it should sport a viewfinder too. And if you think it can't be done, here's one from Sony:

View attachment 209299

And yes, I would pay a premium for such a camera. Simply give me an R6II in a retro form. But - would it find enough of customers for Canon to even consider it?
If Sony has the camera you want why don’t you go ahead and it get?
People don’t complain about Mercedes because they don’t build a 911 type sports car. They go ahead and buy the Porsche.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
30,931
12,625
People don’t complain about Mercedes because they don’t build a 911 type sports car.
I’m sure that some people complain about that, even though they can’t afford or have no intention of buying either make of car. Sort of like people here complaining about aspects of the 100-300/2.8 or the rumored 200-500/4, when they have no intention of dropping >$10K on a camera lens.
 
Upvote 0
If Sony has the camera you want why don’t you go ahead and it get?
People don’t complain about Mercedes because they don’t build a 911 type sports car. They go ahead and buy the Porsche.
Pretty much stupid argument, if for 20+ years, we are using Canons and we even removed Sigma / Tamron.. But sure - you can go and buy a Profoto light, even if all your studio lights are Elinchrom and your trigger will not trigger it. Go figure!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
If Sony has the camera you want why don’t you go ahead and it get?
People don’t complain about Mercedes because they don’t build a 911 type sports car. They go ahead and buy the Porsche.

The Sony sounds like it would be perfect for him, but he probably has a lot of Canon lenses he would rather use instead of buying the equivalent Sony lenses. He could always get the Sony and buy maybe 1 or 2 of his most used lenses for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
It's a mirrorless camera with a viewfinder that has a price at introduction under $500. It's not a camera targeted at anyone who reads Canon Rumors. It is probably the first of a number of Rebel successors at various price points. These cameras are sold by price, not features.

The target audience currently uses smartphones for photography. The lack of a touchscreen makes the R100 is a usability downgrade.

"The M100 is aimed squarely at smartphone photographers looking to get their first 'real' camera, and its polished touch-centric control scheme reflects this."
-DPR's Review

With no touchscreen, the R100 is worse than the old M100.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Perhaps a minority perspective here, but I’m somewhat looking forward to this. I’ve always enjoyed shooting with underdog gear to see what sort of results I can get from it. For me, it’s fun to show my photography friends challenge shots and they get a bit cross eyed/slack jawed when they learn the shots were taken with inexpensive gear and not my high end stuff.

Considering the price point of this thing, which is substantially less than what I’d pay in taxes alone on my yearly gear budget, I think it’ll be great for what it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Jan 22, 2012
4,434
1,286
Of course I will complain, as Canon will surely not produce a camera for my amusement. I don't want m6 II replacement being APS-C based, but FF instead. And it should sport a viewfinder too. And if you think it can't be done, here's one from Sony:

View attachment 209299

And yes, I would pay a premium for such a camera. Simply give me an R6II in a retro form. But - would it find enough of customers for Canon to even consider it?
I would love a retro form Canon camera...
 
Upvote 0
Jan 22, 2012
4,434
1,286
Of course I will complain, as Canon will surely not produce a camera for my amusement. I don't want m6 II replacement being APS-C based, but FF instead. And it should sport a viewfinder too. And if you think it can't be done, here's one from Sony:

View attachment 209299

And yes, I would pay a premium for such a camera. Simply give me an R6II in a retro form. But - would it find enough of customers for Canon to even consider it?
Sony 7c is such a cool camera.
 
Upvote 0