The 10 Most Important Canon EOS Digital Cameras of All-Time

[Canon Rumors]

Over the last little while I have been going down some historical digital camera development rabbit holes. I have been around for most of the evolution of digital ILC cameras when I started out with the 300D in 2003. This website has also contributed to perhaps knowing more than one should about Canon camera models […]

See full article...

 

[AlanF]

I've owned 5 of your top 10: 300D; R5; 70D; 7Dii; EOS M; and the Dishonourable Mentioned 5DSr. And, I still have the 300D alongside my R5ii, R5 and R7. If I had to keep one MILC and one DSLR it would be the R5ii and the 5DSr. Once I got the 5DSr, I sold my 7Dii and 5Div. The 5DSr gave by far the best IQ, outresolved the 7Dii and had better AF than it, albeit not its burst rate. I've had some of my best bird shots, including BIF with it as well as landscapes. It took the R5 for me to sell it. Here's my favourite from the 5DSr with the EF 100-400mm ii.

 

[DhlcadR6]

I would swap 40D and R1 out for R6 and M50. M50 is showing Canon can make a well spec&relatively cheap mirrorless.

And R6 deserves more respect than it has now, as it is crucial along with R5 to stop most of the mid range Canon shooters jump to Sony(or other brands). Nikon did a huge mistake of making Z6ii Z7ii as a lame update. Z9 Z8 somewhat came out too late and not for the enthusiasts. Z5ii Z6iii are ridiculously late to the party.

Imho 6D R8 5Ds/5Dsr are honourable mentions.

 

[Canon Rumors]

I've owned 5 of your top 10: 300D; R5; 70D; 7Dii; EOS M; and the Dishonourable Mentioned 5DSr. And, I still have the 300D alongside my R5ii, R5 and R7. If I had to keep one MILC and one DSLR it would be the R5ii and the 5DSr. Once I got the 5DSr, I sold my 7Dii and 5Div. The 5DSr gave by far the best IQ, outresolved the 7Dii and had better AF than it, albeit not its burst rate. I've had some of my best bird shots, including BIF with it as well as landscapes. It took the R5 for me to sell it. Here's my favourite from the 5DSr with the EF 100-400mm ii.

View attachment 227521

I hated the cameras because of the sensor. It felt 10 years behind what Nikon was doing with the D8xx and those were also better cameras in almost every other way too.

Noticeable with the eyes how crappy the dynamic range was, especially in the shadows.,, and I'm not a DR evangelist. Anything with any level of dark to it looked terrible and printed terrible. There were no real software options that could clean them up at the time.

Resolving power was way too restricted to the lens that was on it. There was a lot of lenses in the EF lineup that were never going to do much with the added resolution, especially Canon's wide angle offerings.

These were half-assed cameras to get more margin out of the 5D4. I really haven't met anyone that liked them, including landscape shooters. Why anyone would have bought one of these over the 5D4 is beyond me.

 

[AlanF]

I hated the cameras because of the sensor. It felt 10 years behind what Nikon was doing with the D8xxx and those were also better cameras in almost every other way too.

Noticeable with the eyes how crappy the dynamic range was, especially in the shadows.,, and I'm not a DR evangelist. Anything with any level of dark to it looked terrible and printed terrible. There were no real software options that could clean them up at the time.

These were half-assed cameras to get more margin out of the 5D4. I really haven't met anyone that liked them, including landscape shooters. Why anyone would have bought one of these over the 5D4 is beyond me.

I shot a Nikon D850, with the 500/5.6 PF, alongside the 5DSr with 100-400mm ii for a year. The D850 knocked the spots off all Canon DSLRs, for both IQ and AF, but I was still happy to take out the 5DSr when I needed a zoom as Nikon couldn't match the 100-400mm ii.

 

[GirlsAreBeautiful]

I sold the 5d2 when I bought the 3, such a great camera, I look back at it with fond memories but I am happy it found a new home...

 

[amorse]

These were half-assed cameras to get more margin out of the 5D4. I really haven't met anyone that liked them, including landscape shooters. Why anyone would have bought one of these over the 5D4 is beyond me.

I don't know, I think the 5Ds and sR need a bit more credit than they're getting here. They were based on the 5D III, and released a year before the 5D IV, so I think lots of people owned a 5Ds/sR before the 5D IV came out. I know this because I looked at getting an sR and then they announced the 5D IV, so I promptly waited a year to see if they'd update the sR based on the 5D IV, and when they didn't, I bought a 5D IV. When this released in 2015, the next highest resolution option from Canon was the 5D III at 22.3mp. So while they may yet be detested, they literally doubled the next highest resolution option in the lineup, which was their value proposition and enough people certainly seemed to buy into that. With that said, I still know photographers using them today with great success. Despite their limitations, they do have a bit of a following. I know that if they released a sR version of the R5 ii I'd buy it immediately, even if it suffered a burst rate and video reduction.

 

[roby17269]

My path has been so far:
350D -> 20D -> 5D -> 5D mkII -> 1D X -> R5

While I agree with most of the list, I do struggle with the inclusion of the 40D and of the 7D mkII and of the R1 as I do not think they were important nor revolutionary in any sense. Not that they are bad cameras, on the contrary. Just not real milestones.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I would swap 40D and R1 out for R6 and M50. M50 is showing Canon can make a well spec&relatively cheap mirrorless.

And R6 deserves more respect than it has now, as it is crucial along with R5 to stop most of the mid range Canon shooters jump to Sony(or other brands). Nikon did a huge mistake of making Z6ii Z7ii as a lame update. Z9 Z8 somewhat came out too late and not for the enthusiasts. Z5ii Z6iii are ridiculously late to the party.

Imho 6D R8 5Ds/5Dsr are honourable mentions.

The 40D was the first to have live view. That one achievement paved the way for all mirrorless cameras that came much later. It was the initial technology that was the foundation that would allow other development to sit upon and render the optical view finder redundant and offer software based AF.
It was a great camera, but I remember thinking when I first used live view, that SLR cameras were coming full circle and probably going back to range inder style of cameras. Add an evf and software based focussing and there you have the mirrorless format technology bed.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

In terms of impact,
The Eos 300D was my first DSLR and a used a Sigma 12-24 as my UWA. The only Canon offering at the time was a 17-40L which wasn't very wide on a 1.6x crop.
The 20D was a legend, but a stop gap for me before the mighty 5D, my first full frame DSLR. Sure, pedestrian fps, awful rear lcd and very basic AF.
The 40D introduced me to live view and it was great when this was ported over to the 5DII.
The 7D was an amazing camera except for the very dissapointingly noisy sensor.
The 5DIII didn't offer anything revolutionary other than making the 5 series what it is today, pro build, just below the 1 Series. it had pro resolution, build, features and AF. Dual card slots too. The 5DIII paved the way for the R5.
These day's I use a pair of cams, a R6ii and a R5. I might upgrade my R5 later in the year fro a R5ii.

 

[mimbu]

My first DSLR was the D60 which I purchased in 2002 pretty soon after release. I really loved that camera. Later I had a 20D and a 5D, before moving to Nikon with the D700. Good memories.

 

[PinholeR5]

Are these typos:

That all changed in 2018 when Canon launched the RF mount and more so in 2019 with the arrival of the EOS R5 and EOS R6.

Weren't the R5/R6 launched in 2020?

In the 5D II section:

In June 2019. Canon released their first firmware update to make the camera an even better tool for video production.

Did you mean June 2009?

 

[Dragon]

I've owned 5 of your top 10: 300D; R5; 70D; 7Dii; EOS M; and the Dishonourable Mentioned 5DSr. And, I still have the 300D alongside my R5ii, R5 and R7. If I had to keep one MILC and one DSLR it would be the R5ii and the 5DSr. Once I got the 5DSr, I sold my 7Dii and 5Div. The 5DSr gave by far the best IQ, outresolved the 7Dii and had better AF than it, albeit not its burst rate. I've had some of my best bird shots, including BIF with it as well as landscapes. It took the R5 for me to sell it. Here's my favourite from the 5DSr with the EF 100-400mm ii.

View attachment 227521

I still have my 5DSr and still like it. When I bought it, I paired it with the Sigma 14-105 f.4 Art and the combo did and still does work very well. And as you say, the 5DSr works very well with the EF 100-400 L II, particularly the AF.

 

[Dragon]

I hated the cameras because of the sensor. It felt 10 years behind what Nikon was doing with the D8xx and those were also better cameras in almost every other way too.

Noticeable with the eyes how crappy the dynamic range was, especially in the shadows.,, and I'm not a DR evangelist. Anything with any level of dark to it looked terrible and printed terrible. There were no real software options that could clean them up at the time.

Resolving power was way too restricted to the lens that was on it. There was a lot of lenses in the EF lineup that were never going to do much with the added resolution, especially Canon's wide angle offerings.

These were half-assed cameras to get more margin out of the 5D4. I really haven't met anyone that liked them, including landscape shooters. Why anyone would have bought one of these over the 5D4 is beyond me.

The 5DS/r was an upgrade to the 5D3 and released a year and a half before the 5D4, so your 5D4 comparison doesn't make much sense. The 5Ds/r had substantially better DR than the 5D3 as well as better AF and the shutter and mirror mechanisms in the DS cameras are still the best around for minimal vibration. Shadow noise is clearly worse than the next gen cameras and at the time from a DR perspective, Canon was clearly behind the Sony sensors that Nikon was using, but the sensor was the best they had and the rest of the camera was and still is very solid. I would at least give the DS cameras an honorable mention as opposed to a dishonorable one. Your gripe about lenses has nothing to do with the camera. I paired mine with the Sigma 24-105 f/4 Art and it still is a very sharp combination.

 

[PinholeR5]

This is a fun one!

Taking a look at cameras that have had a big impact in the industry and contrasting with our own paths is always fun. It's great to take a look at our trajectory and how cameras influenced us. I guess which cameras we had depended heavily on where we were in our lives at the time they were launched.

I mostly skipped film. I had a few cameras and took pictures in the 80s and 90s, but was in school and limited budget. It was only after grad school in the early 2000s that I started looking into photography. I started with the Canon PowerShot A20. I picked a Canon camera simply because my father shot canon and the vast majority of my childhood photos were shot on a Canon FTb.

My first DSLR was the

1000D/SX quickly sold and got the 450D/SXi

I took an intro to photography class at a community college with the SXi.

Then 550D/T2i when it came out in 2010. Followed by the 7D later that year, together with a used EF 70-200mm F4, my first L lens. I was into triathlons at the time and that was one of my main motivations.

The next camera was the 5D III in the first half of 2014. At that point I was motivated by taking kid's pictures. Gave the 7D to my brother and was shooting almost exclosively the 5D III. I really loved that camera (really regret selling it)! Started a collection of better glass 24-70 F2.8 II, EF 70-200mm III, Sigma ART 24, 50, 85, etc.

Stuck with the 5D III and spent less time on photography, mostly family pictures, until the R5.

The R5 was really a game changer! AF was unreal and the (i) animal AF; (ii) COVID providing more time at home; (iii) people with masks making for an uninteresting subject, got me into wildlife photography. A bit later, with my son growing, lots of youth soccer.

I must say, the R5 really had a phenomenal impact on me and got me back into photography in an aggressive way (with unbelievable amount of GAS).

I currently own:
R1, R5II, R7, R8, R10, R50 and R100

Have owned:
R3, R5, R6II, R, RP, M50 II

I own more lenses than makes sinse to own and far more than I care to admit. In my journey, the most impactfull were:

R5 - Mirrorless AF consistency (no MFA, 3rd party lens focus accuracy, etc) and AI AF were really game changers. Oh, and Electronic shutter (100% for me).
T2i - The one I spent most of my early learning time with and really got me into photography. Continued shooting with it even after the 7D.
5D III - My first Full-Frame. Game changer in IQ for me.
R3 - My first integrated grip camera and a game changer in terms of reliability and consistency for sports and events.

 

[P-visie]

Are these typos:


Weren't the R5/R6 launched in 2020?

In the 5D II section:

Did you mean June 2009?

And the EOS 10D was released in March 2003, not 2004.
See: https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/dslr783.html

 

[P-visie]

The 40D was the first to have live view. That one achievement paved the way for all mirrorless cameras that came much later. It was the initial technology that was the foundation that would allow other development to sit upon and render the optical view finder redundant and offer software based AF.
It was a great camera, but I remember thinking when I first used live view, that SLR cameras were coming full circle and probably going back to range inder style of cameras. Add an evf and software based focussing and there you have the mirrorless format technology bed.

The 40D was the first Canon DSLR to have live view (in 2007). The Olympus E-330 and Panasonic L-1/Leica Digilux 3 were some of the first DSLRs to offer live view (in 2003).

See: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/0...mpus E-330 and,introduce just two years later.

 

[ThomasTH]

Here's my favourite from the 5DSr with the EF 100-400mm ii.

View attachment 227521

That is an amazing photo by the way.