Here is what Canon is announcing next, including the EOS R7, EOS R10 and RF-S lenses [CR3]

SnowMiku

EOS 90D
Oct 4, 2020
135
93
I don't see the point to go back in sensor tech with a new camera first and I imagine that tech would be more similar with latest dslr 90D Canon introduced back then and propably better in many sections.
That's a good point about going backwards with the MP with the R10 compared to the 90D. The 90D did get a few 7D like features with the Joystick, I think they done that because they already decided they were not going to release a 7D mk III. I think the R10 may go back to around 80D level again to differentiate itself enough from the R7.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

jordanisaak

I'm New Here
Jan 29, 2022
14
23
If memory serves, the 80D was the first APS-C sensor where the ADC was on chip, giving it much better DR over the 70D and 7DII.

All that being said, if you look at the color response to it compared to other 24MP APS-C sensors from Canon, the 80D WB multipliers have RGB 1.75, 1, 1.75, the M6 has 1.45, 1, 1.35, the M100 has 1.49, 1, 1.37, the 2000D has 2.08, 1, 1.75, etc. Despite that they're all APS-C and roughly 24MP, the different measured white balance multipliers seems to indicate that they're not all exactly the same sensor.
Hang on. Those white balance multipliers are massively different. Are you sure you took those multipliers from files that were taken in the same lighting condition with the same white balance setting on each camera? Even completely different sensors would not have white balance multipliers vary so widely in the same lighting conditions. But different lighting would explain the variance.

Take two shots with your 80D. One with tungsten light balance setting and one with shade white balance. Then compare the white balance multipliers with each other.
 

ashmadux

Art Director, Visual Artist, Freelance Photography
Jul 28, 2011
489
73
New Yawk
photography.ashworld.com
Why is it? I’ve never had a Camera with IBIS before and my pictures are fine. It’d be a nice addition but is in no way a crucial feature.

"No way crucial.." to you.

No need to debate IS. The tech available and mature. Its should be in all mirrorless bodies. I'm sure I'm more demanding about my files considering I have successfully used M bodies for professional gigs because I know what I'm doing and have a decade of experience using them locally and across the world.

Shutter shock/slap is a real thing that really impacts pictures, especially on small, light bodies like the later M series and denser, small pixel pitch ASPC sensors. It's been the same problem on the M3, M50, and the M62. I negated the issue on my original M1 with a korean made Phottix large metal grip. No such item is available for the m50 at all. I have the m62 in a smallrig cage for the same effect.

Lack of IS is a real problem. And unfortunately canon's segmentation shenanigans has decided that this is a pro-body feature only.

If there's anyone out there that knows the challenges of small mirrorless without IS, trust that it's me. The last few M bodies I have had have been the most unreliable (and broken) cameras ever for me. I have used them on zero shoots because I just can't trust them.**


** I was able to successfully use the m62 with a EF 24-105 attached for a assignment. Worked great for a few hours, however it's never been able to repeat that success. AF fails + shutter slap all over the place. Trust me, it stinks :(
 

ashmadux

Art Director, Visual Artist, Freelance Photography
Jul 28, 2011
489
73
New Yawk
photography.ashworld.com
Hang on. Those white balance multipliers are massively different. Are you sure you took those multipliers from files that were taken in the same lighting condition with the same white balance setting on each camera? Even completely different sensors would not have white balance multipliers vary so widely in the same lighting conditions. But different lighting would explain the variance.

Take two shots with your 80D. One with tungsten light balance setting and one with shade white balance. Then compare the white balance multipliers with each other.

The difference in color from the old T2i is closer to the M1 (original), and MUCH better than the flat colors of the m50 and m62. I own all of them all of them, and I'm extremely bothered by the desaturated color profiles of the m62 especially.
 

ashmadux

Art Director, Visual Artist, Freelance Photography
Jul 28, 2011
489
73
New Yawk
photography.ashworld.com
But, your current M bodies don't have IBIS either, so why would that stop you replacing them with a successor without it? If they are intending to keep the form factor (and $s) comparable to the M series, then IBIS is unlikely. Some of the competitors do (of course) have IBIS, but it's always a compromise on image quality / $s / features, no matter what body we're talking about.
Simple. Those are very old cameras, and I'm looking to upgrade - in the same small aspc form factor.

New bodies should have it as a standard feature. The sensor quality is debatable, however the lack of IBIS is killer when shutter slap is also a factor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

sanj

EOS R5
Jan 22, 2012
4,082
957
"No way crucial.." to you.

No need to debate IS. The tech available and mature. Its should be in all mirrorless bodies. I'm sure I'm more demanding about my files considering I have successfully used M bodies for professional gigs because I know what I'm doing and have a decade of experience using them locally and across the world.

Shutter shock/slap is a real thing that really impacts pictures, especially on small, light bodies like the later M series and denser, small pixel pitch ASPC sensors. It's been the same problem on the M3, M50, and the M62. I negated the issue on my original M1 with a korean made Phottix large metal grip. No such item is available for the m50 at all. I have the m62 in a smallrig cage for the same effect.

Lack of IS is a real problem. And unfortunately canon's segmentation shenanigans has decided that this is a pro-body feature only.

If there's anyone out there that knows the challenges of small mirrorless without IS, trust that it's me. The last few M bodies I have had have been the most unreliable (and broken) cameras ever for me. I have used them on zero shoots because I just can't trust them.**


** I was able to successfully use the m62 with a EF 24-105 attached for a assignment. Worked great for a few hours, however it's never been able to repeat that success. AF fails + shutter slap all over the place. Trust me, it stinks :(
It is nice to have IS. Agree. But it is not a 'real problem'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Otara

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2012
472
279
"No way crucial.." to you.

No need to debate IS. The tech available and mature. Its should be in all mirrorless bodies. I'm sure I'm more demanding about my files considering I have successfully used M bodies for professional gigs because I know what I'm doing and have a decade of experience using them locally and across the world.

I can respect that as an achievement, but by definition you've made yourself an outlier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
499
767
Orewa , New Zealand
Much rather have BSI stacked sensor than IBIS as this would make a significant difference for low light performance and faster read outs reducing rolling shutter and improving buffering, etc.
The IS in my EF100-400 ii and the RF100-500 is perfectly adequate without IBIS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
499
767
Orewa , New Zealand
One option with the R7 that interests me is the use of a speed booster EF-RF adapter allowing for an almost full frame performance with EF glass when low light performance is needed more than reach.
Canon's own Canon Mount Adapter EF-EOS R 0.71x which would mean my EF400 f/2.8 would be equivalent FOV to 460mm lens with a crop factor of only 1.15:1 instead of 1.62:1
Potentially Metabones or Viltrox (or even Canon) may make an EF-RF 0.62x giving a full frame 1:1 equivalence .
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

sanj

EOS R5
Jan 22, 2012
4,082
957
Yeah just hold the camera steady lol
True. But in case you are being sarcastic, here are the obvious other choices: Use a higher shutter, use a tripod, use higher Iso, and use a wider aperture. You will get by!
 

adrian_bacon

EOS 90D
Aug 12, 2020
135
129
Hang on. Those white balance multipliers are massively different. Are you sure you took those multipliers from files that were taken in the same lighting condition with the same white balance setting on each camera? Even completely different sensors would not have white balance multipliers vary so widely in the same lighting conditions. But different lighting would explain the variance.

Take two shots with your 80D. One with tungsten light balance setting and one with shade white balance. Then compare the white balance multipliers with each other.
Those white balance multipliers are what DXOMark measured for a standard CIE 5000K light source. They use the same standard light source when measuring all cameras, and the numbers they publish are what you have to have to get a neutral white with that light source. My own experience with the cameras I have on hand mirrors that. The different 24MP class APS-C sensors from Canon do indeed have different white balance multipliers per camera line.
 

mdcmdcmdc

7Dii, M5, 100 (film), α6400
CR Pro
Sep 4, 2020
166
238
True. But in case you are being sarcastic, here are the obvious other choices: Use a higher shutter, use a tripod, use higher Iso, and use a wider aperture. You will get by!
While you're at it, who needs autofocus, autoexposure, TTL flash metering, digital post-processing, or high ISOs, to name a few?

At one time, these were all called "crutches" by some people who learned without them and felt they were unnecessary if you knew what you were doing.

Some people are perfectly happy setting up a tripod or adjusting their shutter, aperture, and ISO. Others are willing to let the technology help them get the shot. Neither way is wrong, neither way makes you a "better" photographer, and neither way guarantees better pictures.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

jordanisaak

I'm New Here
Jan 29, 2022
14
23
Those white balance multipliers are what DXOMark measured for a standard CIE 5000K light source. They use the same standard light source when measuring all cameras, and the numbers they publish are what you have to have to get a neutral white with that light source. My own experience with the cameras I have on hand mirrors that. The different 24MP class APS-C sensors from Canon do indeed have different white balance multipliers per camera line.
OK, thanks for the explanation.
 

Jasonmc89

EOS RP
Feb 7, 2019
360
412
UK
"No way crucial.." to you.

No need to debate IS. The tech available and mature. Its should be in all mirrorless bodies. I'm sure I'm more demanding about my files considering I have successfully used M bodies for professional gigs because I know what I'm doing and have a decade of experience using them locally and across the world.

Shutter shock/slap is a real thing that really impacts pictures, especially on small, light bodies like the later M series and denser, small pixel pitch ASPC sensors. It's been the same problem on the M3, M50, and the M62. I negated the issue on my original M1 with a korean made Phottix large metal grip. No such item is available for the m50 at all. I have the m62 in a smallrig cage for the same effect.

Lack of IS is a real problem. And unfortunately canon's segmentation shenanigans has decided that this is a pro-body feature only.

If there's anyone out there that knows the challenges of small mirrorless without IS, trust that it's me. The last few M bodies I have had have been the most unreliable (and broken) cameras ever for me. I have used them on zero shoots because I just can't trust them.**


** I was able to successfully use the m62 with a EF 24-105 attached for a assignment. Worked great for a few hours, however it's never been able to repeat that success. AF fails + shutter slap all over the place. Trust me, it stinks :(
Nope, IBIS only offers you the ability to lower your shutter speed, you can still take the image at higher ISOs without IBIS. If that shot it THAT important to you then buy a body with IBIS.
 

LogicExtremist

Lux pictor
Sep 26, 2021
299
204
While you're at it, who needs autofocus, autoexposure, TTL flash metering, digital post-processing, or high ISOs, to name a few?

At one time, these were all called "crutches" by some people who learned without them and felt they were unnecessary if you knew what you were doing.

Some people are perfectly happy setting up a tripod or adjusting their shutter, aperture, and ISO. Others are willing to let the technology help them get the shot. Neither way is wrong, neither way makes you a "better" photographer, and neither way guarantees better pictures.
That's not a sound argument, because many, if not most Canon lenses already have IS, which usually does the bulk of the work for stabilisation on IBIS bodies, the IBIS typically adds something like one or two stops on top of that, and IBIS is less effective at stabilising longer focal length lenses. It's not like lens stabilisation has been absent for the last decade or two or more and IBIS makes that big a difference!

IBIS is not necessary to everyone, it makes stuff all difference if you're shooting off a tripod, or shoot at very high shutter speeds.

Just because a new features is available on camera bodies, doesn't mean it is useful in every scenario, is desirable, or should be used. It depends on what you use your camera for. IBIS will make certain situations worse.

From https://www.fenchel-janisch.com/camera-stabilization-ibis-when-to-use-it-when-not-to/

Turn IBIS off:
  • Wide-angle (under 28mm full-frame): Wobble effect visible in the corners and delayed reaction when panning or tilting with IBIS on.
  • Car mounts: If the car is visible it will lead to a weird effect that shows unwanted motion of the IBIS.
  • Tripod: Every touch/motion of the fluid head can lead to a wobble effect. Panning with tele-photo lenses won’t be smooth with IBIS on.
  • Long exposure photography (on tripod): Just like OIS can lead to blurry results it’s the same with IBIS. Turn off when timelapsing.
If you were to say that IBIS is important to you, for whatever your reasoning is, then you'd have a very sound argument! :)