Is a Canon EOS R100 coming next year? A budget EOS R APS-C camera [CR1]

[John Wilde]

“I never think of the future, it comes soon enough.” Albert Einstein

"Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." - Niels Bohr

 

[David - Sydney]

M is dead and EF/EF-S is dead.
When I say "dead" it doesn't mean that M and EF/EF-S products won't be produced and sold anymore. Or to say in Canon words: They will be sold "as long as there is demand".

When I say "dead" I mean there won't be any new(!) products anymore.

Having a personal definition of "death" doesn't help general communication.
By multiple sources, Death is the irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism. Death is final and absolute.

"End of sale" and "end of support" are good definitions of the final life stage of a product's life. Although some product item pruning has occurred, it is clear that no announcement about even end-of-sale has been made. Clearly a long way from being "dead" and I would contend that M / EF/EF-S are in the maturity/cashcow life stage (and have been for some time).

I suggest that we move to using more definitions used by industry wrt product lifecycle stages.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_life-cycle_management_(marketing)
Is a good primer but there is a lot of other good and free educational material out there.

 

[Botts]

Here I am still waiting for an EOS R Mk II, but I might just have to suck it up and buy an EOS R6.

 

[lote82]

Having a personal definition of "death" doesn't help general communication.
By multiple sources, Death is the irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism. Death is final and absolute.

"End of sale" and "end of support" are good definitions of the final life stage of a product's life. Although some product item pruning has occurred, it is clear that no announcement about even end-of-sale has been made. Clearly a long way from being "dead" and I would contend that M / EF/EF-S are in the maturity/cashcow life stage (and have been for some time).

I suggest that we move to using more definitions used by industry wrt product lifecycle stages.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_life-cycle_management_(marketing)
Is a good primer but there is a lot of other good and free educational material out there.

Thank you for correcting my bad English!

Of course things can't be dead. But if things can't be dead, they can't be "alive" neither! Regarding to "end of support" the term dead is at least closer to correct than alive!

 

[mdcmdcmdc]

Thank you for correcting my bad English!

Of course things can't be dead. But if things can't be dead, they can't be "alive" neither! Regarding to "end of support" the term dead is at least closer to correct than alive!

There’s nothing wrong with your English. “Dead” is a perfectly acceptable description of inanimate objects. Both Merriam-Webster (American English) and Cambridge (British English) dictionaries give the example of “a dead battery” as an acceptable use.

@David - Sydney is just being pedantic because he didn’t like you using the word in reference to EF-M and EF/EF-S.

 

[neuroanatomist]

There’s nothing wrong with your English. “Dead” is a perfectly acceptable description of inanimate objects. Both Merriam-Webster (American English) and Cambridge (British English) dictionaries give the example of “a dead battery” as an acceptable use.

@David - Sydney is just being pedantic because he didn’t like you using the word in reference to EF-M and EF/EF-S.

That's the thing, though. Using the word 'dead' to describe something, whether animate or inanimate, when that being or thing is 'alive' is not an appropriate use of the word.

@David - Sydney's suggested use of 'end of sale' and 'end of support' are good definitions of the final life stage of a product's life is reasonable and logical. M-series cameras are clearly still being sold (and sold well, the M50 II was the best-selling ILC in Japan last week, as it has been almost every week for the past couple of years). I do think 'end of sale' is probably the most reasonable definition for a 'dead' camera line. 'End of support' is somewhat later, because Canon like most manufacturers will continue to support products for several years after they are sold.

 

[Czardoom]

Here I am still waiting for an EOS R Mk II, but I might just have to suck it up and buy an EOS R6.

Any particular reason that you are in a hurry? Based on the rumors, anyway, some sort of announcement or newer information should be coming this year regarding newer models/replacements for the R and RP.

 

[David - Sydney]

There’s nothing wrong with your English. “Dead” is a perfectly acceptable description of inanimate objects. Both Merriam-Webster (American English) and Cambridge (British English) dictionaries give the example of “a dead battery” as an acceptable use.

@David - Sydney is just being pedantic because he didn’t like you using the word in reference to EF-M and EF/EF-S.

Being pedantic and having definitions for terms is reasonable so that we have common understanding when it comes to debates.
Misunderstandings have lead to wars (flame or physical) in the past.
Frankly, I have no incentive for arguing that we need to sustain the M or EF-S lines (see my gear list). Direct replacement of my EF lenses if needed would be preferred but could be an existing RF equivalent (at a higher cost) except that there is no equivalent for the EF8-15mm/4

 

[David - Sydney]

Thank you for correcting my bad English!

Of course things can't be dead. But if things can't be dead, they can't be "alive" neither! Regarding to "end of support" the term dead is at least closer to correct than alive!

"End of support" is the final death for a product. Just look at Microsoft's efforts to have end-of-support dates for Windows XP for instance which was released in 2001 but...

"Mainstream support for Windows XP ended on April 14, 2009, and extended support ended on April 8, 2014. After that, the operating system ceased receiving further support. Windows Embedded POSReady 2009, based on Windows XP Professional, received security updates until April 2019. After that, unofficial methods were made available to apply the updates to other editions of Windows XP. Still, Microsoft discouraged this practice, citing incompatibility issues.[10] As of May 2022, 0.44% of Windows PCs[9] run Windows XP (on all continents, the share is below 1%), and 0.1% of all devices across all platforms run Windows XP. Windows XP is still in widespread use in certain countries, such as Armenia, where over 50–60% of computers use it. "

 

[lote82]

You contradict yourself! First you claim "Death is the irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism".

By multiple sources, Death is the irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism. Death is final and absolute.

Now you are talking about "the final death for a product". Is "product" an "organism" with "biological functions"?

"End of support" is the final death for a product. Just look at Microsoft's efforts to have end-of-support dates for Windows XP for instance which was released in 2001 but...

"Mainstream support for Windows XP ended on April 14, 2009, and extended support ended on April 8, 2014. After that, the operating system ceased receiving further support. Windows Embedded POSReady 2009, based on Windows XP Professional, received security updates until April 2019. After that, unofficial methods were made available to apply the updates to other editions of Windows XP. Still, Microsoft discouraged this practice, citing incompatibility issues.[10] As of May 2022, 0.44% of Windows PCs[9] run Windows XP (on all continents, the share is below 1%), and 0.1% of all devices across all platforms run Windows XP. Windows XP is still in widespread use in certain countries, such as Armenia, where over 50–60% of computers use it. "

You also stated "Death is final and absolute". When "Mainstream support for Windows XP ended on April 14, 2009" why it "received security updates until April 2019"? So "End of support" doesn't sound "final and absolute" to me!

 

[mdcmdcmdc]

That's the thing, though. Using the word 'dead' to describe something, whether animate or inanimate, when that being or thing is 'alive' is not an appropriate use of the word.

@David - Sydney's suggested use of 'end of sale' and 'end of support' are good definitions of the final life stage of a product's life is reasonable and logical. M-series cameras are clearly still being sold (and sold well, the M50 II was the best-selling ILC in Japan last week, as it has been almost every week for the past couple of years). I do think 'end of sale' is probably the most reasonable definition for a 'dead' camera line. 'End of support' is somewhat later, because Canon like most manufacturers will continue to support products for several years after they are sold.

Language is inherently imprecise. This isn't a specialized scientific field where we can expect everybody who contributes to use an agreed upon vernacular. Even if you don't agree with what @lote82 was saying (and I'm pretty sure you and I have similar views on that), his choice of words was more than adequate to make his opinion clear.

It was only a week ago that I read post #2 in this very thread:

EOS M is dead. Long live EOS M.

I assumed you were being sarcastic, which is why I gave the post a "like". But you didn't seem to mind applying the words "dead" and "live" to an inanimate object then.

That's it for me. I'm not going to be drawn into a throw-down over semantics. I generally respect your opinions and what you post here, but this discussion is pointless IMO.

 

[David - Sydney]

You contradict yourself! First you claim "Death is the irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism".

Now you are talking about "the final death for a product". Is "product" an "organism" with "biological functions"?

You also stated "Death is final and absolute". When "Mainstream support for Windows XP ended on April 14, 2009" why it "received security updates until April 2019"? So "End of support" doesn't sound "final and absolute" to me!

The definition of "Death" assumes life for an organism which clearly a product doesn't have. Death is meaningless for a product in that context but in practical terms, death would be the end-of-support date for a product from a manufacturer's perspective.

Perhaps I shouldn't have muddied the water with XP which was a dog's breakfast for MS to discontinue support. A perpetual SW license never "dies" and continues to work indefinitely as it is just lines of code.

Windows XP is a classic example of the problems that a manufacturer (of SW in this case) to try to "kill" off a product. MS tried multiple times to have a end-of-support date for XP as it costs MS money to support for security etc patches but they had no revenue to offset it.
XP was embedded in many, many ways with applications on top where not updated to support newer operating systems. These ancient SW applications were discovered to be essential for medical and manufacturing critical equipment made at the time. The end user's desperate calls to MS were sufficient to keep it going for 17 years and outlived its successor.
It would be reasonably safe to continue to use it in an "air-gapped" application ie no connection to the internet. It would be relatively simple to crack it if you had direct access though.

The opposite issue is when a customer mandates that a supplier support a product for 20 years. This happened when telecommunications switching equipment was being selected in the '90s. Given the pace of change of telco/internet equipment space, it should have been an unreasonable request as even getting semiconductors orderable over that time is unreasonable. The R&D work to keep circuit boards current when processor and memory chips are updated multiple times a year is crazy. The only option is to make a big manufacturing run and keep the boards on the shelf to support future failures and hope that all the equipment is deinstalled/replaced quickly before they run out.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Language is inherently imprecise. This isn't a specialized scientific field where we can expect everybody who contributes to use an agreed upon vernacular. Even if you don't agree with what @lote82 was saying (and I'm pretty sure you and I have similar views on that), his choice of words was more than adequate to make his opinion clear.

It was only a week ago that I read post #2 in this very thread:

I assumed you were being sarcastic, which is why I gave the post a "like". But you didn't seem to mind applying the words "dead" and "live" to an inanimate object then.

That's it for me. I'm not going to be drawn into a throw-down over semantics. I generally respect your opinions and what you post here, but this discussion is pointless IMO.

My quibble is not about the use of 'dead' to refer to an inanimate object. That's why I stated, "...whether animate or inanimate..." If someone says that Cleopatra is dead or the 5.25" floppy disk is dead, both are fine. But if someone says the Taylor Swift or the iPhone is dead, that's not correct.

Yes, his opinion was clear. An analogy would be that whether someone states that the Earth is flat or that the earth is a disc, both are clear expressions of an opinion that is contradicted by the facts.

 

[mdcmdcmdc]

My quibble is not about the use of 'dead' to refer to an inanimate object. That's why I stated, "...whether animate or inanimate..." If someone says that Cleopatra is dead or the 5.25" floppy disk is dead, both are fine. But if someone says the Taylor Swift or the iPhone is dead, that's not correct.

Yes, his opinion was clear. An analogy would be that whether someone states that the Earth is flat or that the earth is a disc, both are clear expressions of an opinion that is contradicted by the facts.

I feel like we're in violent agreement. I don't agree with his statement about EF-M and EF/EF-S, but I do believe the way he expressed it was entirely appropriate. Those are two different things in my view.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I feel like we're in violent agreement. I don't agree with his statement about EF-M and EF/EF-S, but I do believe the way he expressed it was entirely appropriate. Those are two different things in my view.

Lol. I violently agree. In current US politics, there are lots of people expressing things in entirely appropriate ways, while being completely wrong at the same time. Appropriate expression of a concept and being correct about that concept are independent of one another.

 

[SaP34US]

My hopes the R100 or whatever it’s called are as follows: 1. 20mp to 24mp; 2. A lower class ibis 3 axis to test the new system or none; 3. Both the black & white video/ photo and grainy black & white for both video & photo; 4. 480i, 720p, 1080p & 4k oversampled form 5k; 5. Filmic filters; and 6. jpeg & heif as well as RAW.

 

[Rocky]

The discussion of "DEAD" is boarder line hair splitting. English is already more precise than some other languages. Try the Cantonese from Hong Kong in recent years. People can get totally lost (do not understand or misunderstand) if you have not lived there for a while, even you can speak fluent old Cantonese.

 

[cayenne]

"End of support" is the final death for a product. Just look at Microsoft's efforts to have end-of-support dates for Windows XP for instance which was released in 2001 but...

"Mainstream support for Windows XP ended on April 14, 2009, and extended support ended on April 8, 2014. After that, the operating system ceased receiving further support. Windows Embedded POSReady 2009, based on Windows XP Professional, received security updates until April 2019. After that, unofficial methods were made available to apply the updates to other editions of Windows XP. Still, Microsoft discouraged this practice, citing incompatibility issues.[10] As of May 2022, 0.44% of Windows PCs[9] run Windows XP (on all continents, the share is below 1%), and 0.1% of all devices across all platforms run Windows XP. Windows XP is still in widespread use in certain countries, such as Armenia, where over 50–60% of computers use it. "

Hmm...how about "no longer in production"...?

That's kinda dead too.

 

[Memirsbrunnr]

Lets hope they finally retire the silly Rebel and Kiss names for the budget line of cameras-- They are just too cringe.. Just use them standardised under a R100 series name.

 

[DogpackChris]

Then there is this: https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/...ine-does-have-a-place-in-our-range-says-canon