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

John Wilde

EOS RP
Jan 2, 2021
224
381
No price leaks yet? :( My guess is that the R10 will cost about the same as the Nikon Z50, $1,000 with lens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

RayValdez360

Soon to be the greatest.
Jun 6, 2012
776
540
40
Philadelphia
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 :)
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

C4RBON

I'm New Here
Apr 25, 2015
22
19
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.
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

RayValdez360

Soon to be the greatest.
Jun 6, 2012
776
540
40
Philadelphia
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.
45Mp is already a high resolution. Very few people would need more. I just feel like the R5S sounds like BS.
 
Mar 15, 2018
89
109
United States
If RF-S APS-C cameras can extend the life of my EF-S lenses, I'll probably buy one, especially with good IBIS. EF-S lenses were/are by far the best value around, with very good optics and amazing stabilization in the later zooms especially. It would easily take $3-4k in new lens buys to recreate my EF-S focal range, sacrificing a lot of weight and flexibility. If they cripple the RF-S bodies to not adapt EF-S lenses well, I'll use EF-M/EF-S bodies a few more years and jump to full frame at some point, but no guarantees it'll be Canon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

tataylino

EOS M50
Jul 14, 2020
33
33
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.... ???
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Rocky

EOS R
Jul 30, 2010
1,040
118
15- 45 is a better range for APS-C than 16-50 or 18-55, especially as a tourist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

Skux

EOS 90D
Feb 21, 2020
156
200
Yeah 18-45 seems pretty pointless to me unless it's a tiny pancake lens. With such a narrow range I'd rather just use something like the EF-M 22mm which will be able to shoot at much wider apertures.
 

adrian_bacon

EOS 90D
Aug 12, 2020
145
148
15- 45 is a better range for APS-C than 16-50 or 18-55, especially as a tourist.
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

okaro

EOS 90D
Oct 10, 2015
137
18
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
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.
 

Fletchahh

7D Mark II
CR Pro
Aug 31, 2020
31
65
Pasadena, CA
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.
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
771
1,007
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.... ???

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.
 
Last edited:

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
642
659
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.
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.
 

adrian_bacon

EOS 90D
Aug 12, 2020
145
148
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.
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.
 
Oct 31, 2020
278
358
If the R7 specs are actually true, the price tag must be higher than on the R6...
Even the supposed specs of the R10 sound quite a bit unrealistic or it'll too will have a high price tag for an APS-C camera.

I love my R, but since FPS specs of the R are more than outdated, I might be interested in a camera with a high-frame rate as a complement. It will depend on the price tag, FPS and auto-focus abilities. I wouldn't care for the rest.

RF 18-45mm sounds horrible imho, unless it is super compact and lightweight. If not, the loss of 10mm focal range (compared to EF 18-55mm) does seem a like a big loss.
 

RayValdez360

Soon to be the greatest.
Jun 6, 2012
776
540
40
Philadelphia
In a 2015 press release, Canon made a development announcement for a 120MP DSLR, Still waiting. :)
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.