Opinion: Let's redo the APS-C lineup in 2025. Please.

[CatholicStreamer]

I used to use a M50 as a nice street camera and to teach kids. It was the perfect fit and in white with silver lens looked cool too. I used an R7 as my everyday camera. This summer I bought a Fujifilm X-T5 and it replaced both the Canons….40megapixel APC, lightweight and in black and silver it looks better than anything Canon is selling today.

 

[John Wilde]

I think Canon's most pressing APS-C need is to make a vlogging-first camera like the Sony ZV-E10 II and Nikon Z30.

​

 

[Uneternal]

I agree with most of the article but 2 things:

R50 II - Would I prefer it to be a little smaller? Sure. But I don't think dropping the viewfinder is a good idea. The M200 never sold as well as the M50 did, although it was basically the same camera - cheaper and sans the viewfinder. Make the R50 II as flat as the M50 (59mm instead of 69mm). It should also have a fully mechanical shutter. The R50 not having fully mechanic shutter was a huge Canon-Cripple-Hammer moment. It would be nice if Canon also introduced new and flatter kit lenses like a 15-45mm with the same size as the one on EOS-M (which also had 8mm less length). Take notes from Nikon, their Nikon Z 16-50mm kit lens is only 32mm long. Also please stop crippling kit lenses with narrower zoom ranges!

R200 - This is the lowest end beginner camera, so there's no need to drive a truck over it. And since it's not that old, there's no need to update it before 2027. I agree the R200 could be without a viewfinder. It should be for people who come from the smartphone, trying to get a better camera. I think the internals can stay pretty much as they are. Maybe it could be an R50 in a smaller housing, with an optional viewfinder. It could have a retro-design option, similar like the M6 Mark II with its silver housing.

Additionally:
Powershot G1X Mark IV
Put the R10 or even R7 sensor in it. Either an integrated 22mm f/2 prime lens or a 15-65mm zoom with f/2.8-f/4 (24-105mm equivalent).
Internal cropping feature with A.I. upscaling, allowing up to 4x digital zoom without losing image quality.
New film simulation modes including CCD era simulations (Kodak Gold, Kodak Portra, Canon G12, Canon Powershot Pro1)
Give it a retro design, Canon AE-1 style. I guarantee at a price point between $999-$1499 this would snatch the majority of sales from Fujifilm X100 cameras.

 

[bf]

Listen you MF Canon! Bring back the M line!

 

[SvO2]

Would love if canon released a smaller rangefinder style aps-c body and added IBIS. Would make for a nice travel camera and be pretty competitive with the Fuji and Sony options

 

[CJaurelius]

I think Canon's most pressing APS-C need is to make a vlogging-first camera like the Sony ZV-E10 II and Nikon Z30.

​

I agree with most of the article but 2 things:

R50 II - Would I prefer it to be a little smaller? Sure. But I don't think dropping the viewfinder is a good idea.

I think the first quote addresses the second. The market for these cameras is for video shooters who don't need an EVF.

I think they should drop the EVF and focus on more wide angle affordable options for glass.

 

[CJaurelius]

Listen you MF Canon! Bring back the M line!

Getting rid of the M line was vital to Canon being successful with the R line. They couldn't continue to drop R&D on another mount. The faster they migrate M line users to R the better.

 

[Steve Balcombe]

I personally think keeping it under $2000 is reasonable. but you are right because the point of comparison could easily be the X-H2 - and that's a $2500 camera.

But I think if it goes over the $2000 then it's got to have the performance in stills and video to match. the problem with a $2500 camera body is that there's no damned APS-C lenses to go on it. I'd suggest that Canon would then need a 15-45mm F2.8-4 (or something similar) kit lens for the camera (variable aperture to keep the size / weight down)

But at least make it worthy of the 7

Very good point re the X-H2. I have the R7 and the OM-1 so I'm better qualified to compare those, but the X-H2 is an even better comparison.

"worthy of the 7" - Exactly this!!

 

[bf]

Getting rid of the M line was vital to Canon being successful with the R line. They couldn't continue to drop R&D on another mount. The faster they migrate M line users to R the better.

I disagree because what they really released was production capacity rather than R&D. Also, you think M line users migrate to R but they can easily move to Sony, Fuji, Nikon, or even Leica. The lenses are what create commitment, which is already f% up in different ways for M owners.

 

[Loswr]

Also, you think M line users migrate to R but they can easily move to Sony, Fuji, Nikon, or even Leica.

Leica? Lol. You could buy several M bodies for the cost of the cheapest ILC.

But more broadly, you have a point. I suspect the slow pruning and eventual termination of the M series in 2023 is part of the reason that Canon's ILC market share dipped very slightly (from 51% to 48%). They're forecasting 49% for 2024, so it does seem that APS-C R sales are picking up where M sales left off.

 

[Robert Stone]

I agree with most of this, I think the R100 (or R200 as it might be) should have a hot shoe.

I love everything about the M200 except that it doesn’t have a hot shoe. It’s the perfect pair for me as a professional who travels, I use it for professional streaming and video tutorials, but it lacks a hot shoe which I could use for a flash sure, but also a portable mic, a radio trigger, or other attachments. Maybe limit it to the smallest flash? (I realize there is a support structure that might not handle heavier flashes) but it’s a fantastic little on-the go camera (and I own an R3 and lots of L glass so it’s not like I couldn’t use something bigger but it’s great to stash. Of course that might change the articulating screen choice for blogging, or maybe not, is a mic in the center of my face while I’m checking gonna really be an issue, nah, it’s just for glancing.

I also whole heartedly agree about the R7. Although with the resolution of the R5 do we need a cropped frame for birders now? (I Don’t know I’m not one). As I keep saying an R1s high MP flagship would solve all that. The current flagship cropped to 1.6 is 9mp… not for birders I would think. R7 II with pro-level features that have the same AF as the R5 II (and R1) might eat up their flagship line because of the reach.

I think the R7 may have been relegated to the VR/AR recording world. Why else would they limit those lenses to only the R7 while also making other cameras that have better features for fast action? More than likely the high MP small sensor for 3D since they are basically shooting micro-level images with split recording.

 

[Traveler]

APSC is not necessary any more, since the sensors can be fast and cheap. Canon could make an “apsc-like” lenses that are small but slower (which would be perfectly compensated by the FF sensor).
However – vast majority of people still don’t understand the maths (24mm f/6.4 on a FF would be equivalent to a 15mm f/4 on APSC in terms of DOF, FOV and noise performance and would be ~ the same size. But that f/6.4 looks too scary to people, right?).
I also understand that it makes Canon way more money – those people switching systems spend their money almost twice.

 

[TexPhoto]

Having always used a 7D or 7D2 as my 2nd body the R7 was a real disappoint for me. Name it something else, because it is not a successor. The 7D and 7D2 were semi-pro cameras and great for their era. I'm not sure what the R7 is, but I know it feels terrible in hand. I would really like an R72 that returned to the semi-pro nature of the 7 series.

 

[koenkooi]

Having always used a 7D or 7D2 as my 2nd body the R7 was a real disappoint for me. Name it something else, because it is not a successor. The 7D and 7D2 were semi-pro cameras and great for their era. I'm not sure what the R7 is, but I know it feels terrible in hand. I would really like an R72 that returned to the semi-pro nature of the 7 series.

I have always considered it an R90! I 3d printed a grip similar to the EG-E1, that significantly improved the handling of my R7. I don’t understand why Canon designed one for the R8/RP, but not the R7.

 

[DhlcadR6]

I was using 80D in DSLR days and R6 before "downgrade" to R7. Ergonomics wise R7 is ok, the scroll-joystick combination works well for me.

My complains with the R7 is no battery grip and small buffer when using full RAW. Everything else is a joy to use, especially after the Sigma RF-S availability.

Depends on where you live, grey imports R7 nowadays can be sub-800 USD. IMHO at sub-900 USD price point it's invincible.

R7ii should be stacked CMOS and fulfil our complaints on R7. I can see it'll be a strong in its class just like R5ii R6ii.

 

[Juppeck]

I assume that Canon will uses the new developed sensor in all of their systems. Just wait a little bit time. The sensor is for a still image photographer not the major things he needs to keep sense. The entire package of Lenses and Body are more important. We are not in the time of a EOS 5Ds(R). They are noisy if you reached ISO800. Modern sensors like them from the "R" or the "R5" are quite better. In the knowledge of the greater "workframe", canon produces lenses with a start f/8 or f/11.