Here are the Canon EOS R7 and Canon EOS R10

[JustUs7]

Yeah he's has proven tool status long ago. Also those multiple replies, it's ricockulous. Moving on.

This can’t be in common use. Infectious Grooves fan?

 

[Czardoom]

The R10 has always appeared to me to be the RF version of the Rebel series. Nothing about this news changes that.

Hmmm, 15 fps mechanical/23 fps electronic...all the subject tracking of the R3...yup, that sure spells Rebel. Not!

 

[Blue Zurich]

This can’t be in common use. Infectious Grooves fan?

idk, I've been using it for 30 odd years

 

[takesome1]

Quite commonly misused in the U.S. that way.

Kind of like "I could care less" when they're trying to say they couldn't care l

I couldn’t care less about metaphors involving pudding.

I would say that usage is incorrect, as you could have cared even less and not have commented at all.

 

[JustUs7]

idk, I've been using it for 30 odd years

That’s about right. The Plague That Makes Your Booty Move was released in 1991. Band was led by Mike Muir, from Suicidal Tendencies as a side project. The album had character dialogue between songs. “This is ricockulous! What’chyu mean!?!” was a phrase used. Only place I’ve ever heard it other than fans repeating it. Or people repeating them? Or maybe it was more common than I thought.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Hmmm, 15 fps mechanical/23 fps electronic...all the subject tracking of the R3...yup, that sure spells Rebel. Not!

The $1000 price tag doesn’t spell Rebel.

A lot of shared components with the R7. I wonder how much of the R10’s higher end feature set was driven by Canon trying to build in flexibility in response to supply shortages, minimizing the number of components.

 

[unfocused]

Quite commonly misused in the U.S. that way.

Kind of like "I could care less" when they're trying to say they couldn't care less.

Sorry, but no. A quick search reveals a number of reliable sources that affirm that "the proof is in the pudding" is a perfectly acceptable phrase that grew out of the older phrase, "The proof of the pudding is in the eating." Both phrases are accepted and both mean essentially the same thing.

On the other hand, "I could care less" is obviously nonsensical. If one "could" care less it literally means one cares.

 

[Bishop80]

For me this thread ends with Micheal Clark laughing at me yet perhaps it's me laughing at Canon for putting a physical AF/MF switch on those bodies thinking if the thousands of folks wondering why their camera won't focus, lol. Fat fingering has GOT to be a consideration in ergonomics and button layout.

Human Factors engineering has got to be a thankless job for products like cameras, unless you just knock the design out of the park. Personally, I'm not fond of buttons on top of a camera (like the flush ones that control a mode/function, not the recessed rotary dial), but nevertheless they tend to put some important ones up there. Of course, many cameras let you customize other buttons and accommodate. I find buttons or switches on the front or back of the body a bit easier to manage during hand-held scenarios. Shooting on a monopod or tripod, however, it isn't as big a hassle. However, those flush buttons on top are less prone to accidental pressing.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

On the other hand, "I could care less" is obviously nonsensical. If one "could" care less it literally means one cares.

I have always taken it as sarcasm.
People seem to have no problem when people sarcastically say the opposite of what they mean in other cases.

 

[koenkooi]

Sorry, but no. A quick search reveals a number of reliable sources that affirm that "the proof is in the pudding" is a perfectly acceptable phrase that grew out of the older phrase, "The proof of the pudding is in the eating." Both phrases are accepted and both mean essentially the same thing.

On the other hand, "I could care less" is obviously nonsensical. If one "could" care less it literally means one cares.

Bonus points for using ‘literally’ in this discussion

 

[shire_guy]

Thanks neuro, that's very encouraging. I wish they had similar on the R5.

I know it's been covered before but having variable fps for electronic shutter on the R5 is probably the one thing I would like most. I guess there is no chance of a firmware upgrade - but they did give the R5 the vehicle AF upgrade from the R3.

 

[Pierre Lagarde]

This can’t be in common use. Infectious Grooves fan?

... agreed ! That reminds me I need to call my hair stylist.

 

[Aussie shooter]

I have to admit. When I saw the first image of the R7 joystick/wheel configuration, my first reaction was somewhat skeptical, but the more I look at it, the wiser it looks. It really does look like a decent canera

 

[Aussie shooter]

Canon states that the sensor in the R7 is brand new

From the sounds of it , it is the same base sensor with improved micro lenses and circuitry (that is if I am understanding what I have heard correctly. Combined with the digic X that should see a definite improvement in performance.

 

[john1970]

After digesting the R7 release it appears to be a decent APS-C camera at its price point. Personally I would have rather seen a higher end APS-C camera with a stacked BSI sensor, one CFExpress lot, and a much improved buffer at 30 fps of ~100 RAW files. I would have gladly spent $2500 for such a camera, but as is I shall pass and wait patiently for a R1, which I assuming is going to be a combination of R3 and R5 with all the bells and whistles.

 

[speg]

I can’t decide if I should go for R7 or save a bit more for R6. Can the hive mind tell me what to do?

Reach & action are a priority. But so are sunrises with flowers.

 

[JustUs7]

I can’t decide if I should go for R7 or save a bit more for R6. Can the hive mind tell me what to do?

Reach & action are a priority. But so are sunrises with flowers.

I would guess APS-C can do sunrises and flowers easier than full frame can do reach. But they both look like you won’t miss any action. Unless it’s distant action, then you’re back to reach.

If you said low light, portraits, and action, I would have said R6.

 

[mdcmdcmdc]

I can’t decide if I should go for R7 or save a bit more for R6. Can the hive mind tell me what to do?

Reach & action are a priority. But so are sunrises with flowers.

If you primarily need reach, APS-C might be better, If you primarily need wide fields and shallow DOF, FF is the better option.

I don't know how the R6 is as an action camera, but using a longer lens or extender could help partially improve the reach. Still, 32.5 MP APS-C versus 20 MP FF is a big difference in pixel density.

Ultimately they're both great cameras which will enable you to make great images. It's just a question of what properties are most important to you.

 

[mdcmdcmdc]

Interesting. The MSRP at the Canon USA web site is $479.99.

View attachment 203866

I wouldn't attribute this to any nefarious intent. Oftentimes, dealers have little more notice than the rest of us mere mortals when new products are announced. They might have put it into their system with incorrect or miscommunicated information.

From what I understand, official Canon dealers (at least in the USA) aren't allowed to deviate from the "official" prices. So they'll likely correct it at some point, and anybody who preorders one at $499 should only be charged $479 when it actually ships.

 

[Kit.]

Kind of like "I could care less" when they're trying to say they couldn't care less.

Technically, they could, by not replying at all.