No price leaks yet?
My guess is that the R10 will cost about the same as the Nikon Z50, $1,000 with lens.
whats the point of an R5s. Seems like canon is using 1-9 for the mirrorless. If the R5C is just an R5 with a fan basically, i cant see them naming a whole new sensor and camera an R5 still. I think we are more likley to see an R2 before an R5. The number 4 is bad luck in Japan so I dont know if we will see an R4.I posted this line-up as a suggestion in September 2021 (and even earlier) in another thread:
R5s is surely coming at one point, so will the R1. After the upcoming announcement we are almost there!For four years in the making and two of those years being hit with the pandemic, it already looks like a great line-up.
Just missing the R9/ R8... the latter one would attract me![]()
R5s would be the long-rumored high-resolution sensor in the body of an R5. It's just like how the 5DS (and 5DSR) were high-resolution sensors in the body of the 5D mk3 (among other changes). With R3 and R6 already taken, and "4" being bad luck (as stated above), I don't see any other integers available that would make sense. R5 followed by a letter to denote a specialized R5 version, like "C" for video and "S" for resolution, makes plenty of sense to me.whats the point of an R5s. Seems like canon is using 1-9 for the mirrorless. If the R5C is just an R5 with a fan basically, i cant see them naming a whole new sensor and camera an R5 still. I think we are more likley to see an R2 before an R5. The number 4 is bad luck in Japan so I dont know if we will see an R4.
45Mp is already a high resolution. Very few people would need more. I just feel like the R5S sounds like BS.R5s would be the long-rumored high-resolution sensor in the body of an R5. It's just like how the 5DS (and 5DSR) were high-resolution sensors in the body of the 5D mk3 (among other changes). With R3 and R6 already taken, and "4" being bad luck (as stated above), I don't see any other integers available that would make sense. R5 followed by a letter to denote a specialized R5 version, like "C" for video and "S" for resolution, makes plenty of sense to me.
In a 2015 press release, Canon made a development announcement for a 120MP DSLR, Still waiting.45Mp is already a high resolution. Very few people would need more. I just feel like the R5S sounds like BS.
Are we heading into Modality of Mind and Fodor & Chomsky territory? It might be better than these crop circles posts, lol.
Well, apparently you can buy a 120 mp APS-H sensor.In a 2015 press release, Canon made a development announcement for a 120MP DSLR, Still waiting.![]()
Well, there's the tourist market, which is already served pretty good by EF-M, then the pro APS-C market, which is better served with an APS-C holy trinity, something like 10-18, 16-45, and 45-135 in at least constant aperture f/4 if not 2.8.15- 45 is a better range for APS-C than 16-50 or 18-55, especially as a tourist.
It does not work that way. You cannot boost APS-C lenses. There is noting where to get the extra light. Also it would be a tele converter.So looks like they pushed the R7 announcement up again? Was March, then August, now May? Guess we'll have to wait and see.
I do hope someone makes an EF-M to RF adapter. It'll need optics, so it can be a speed booster as well. But just a plain optical adapter would be nice as well. Don't want to re-buy my EF-m stuff in RF once/if my M50 stops working. Knew this day was coming. Loved the M. Will miss it.
Brian
Not exactly a holy trinity, but if people are willing to look at adapting EF-S lenses, there are still good fast zoom options such as the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 and 50-100 f/1.8, especially with the R7 since neither of them have IS.Well, there's the tourist market, which is already served pretty good by EF-M, then the pro APS-C market, which is better served with an APS-C holy trinity, something like 10-18, 16-45, and 45-135 in at least constant aperture f/4 if not 2.8.
Before I went full frame, I had 10-18, 18-55, and 55-250 in ef-s. I wished it was all at least constant f/4. The full frame 24-105L (or 24-70L) and 100-400 or 100-500 would be fine for the longer end, and all they really need to do is make a solid f/2.8 (or f/4) 10-24 for APS-C. 16-35 can be made to work, but really, at least 10-18 or 10-24 would be better.
18-45mm is a bit limiting. should be better if they made it 16-50mm or 18-55mm.
My guess is... because the R10 has same form factor as the M10, and the 18-45mm is a perfect size to match the R10 small size.... ???
Unless it is a very cheap FF lens as reported for the last year. Then it makes perfect sense. The R line needs a cheap FF UW zoom.The 18-45 has to be really tiny or cheap with that focal length/aperture combination. It's 29-70mm, pretty boring.
Even Nikon's cheap 16-50 is better and that lens is very sharp and small at only 135g.
True. Sigma does make good glass, but there are other things to take into consideration if you're a working professional, like getting your stuff serviced through CPS, because ...life and accidents do happen, and if you're depending on your gear to make a living, you can either have multiple copies as an insurance policy, or stick with same brand and have coverage through their support network.Not exactly a holy trinity, but if people are willing to look at adapting EF-S lenses, there are still good fast zoom options such as the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 and 50-100 f/1.8, especially with the R7 since neither of them have IS.
I know about it but the need and demand isn't that great for such a camera. When it does come out or something similar, the youtubian machine will spin, having people fighting and bitching about how every camera now needs 120MP. Sure I would get one. I want a GFX100 but no way in hell am I spending my money on it at that price plus buying their lenses.In a 2015 press release, Canon made a development announcement for a 120MP DSLR, Still waiting.![]()