Given their lack of interest in keeping those folks happy with a 7DIII, I'm skeptical that we'll see what some on this forum seem to want, an APS-C version of the R3 in an R5 body. Ever.
This one gets my vote.
Except that is has a really slow readout speed compared to all R cameras, excepting the RP. E-shutter would have severe rolling shutter, the 18fps 10-bit burst mode on the M6II needs to crop in to be barely usable.
I do not understand what you mean. In DSLRs I haven't seen any reference in bit depth dropping anywhere. In R cameras it exists only in R5 and R6. I do not know anything about M cameras so I cannot comment on them.Does it really? Canon has dropped bit depth on higher FPS for a long time now, which is hard to spot for most people who aren't called @bclaff
I don't disagree with any of that. At the end of the day it's all speculation, and like I said before, what they ultimately end up doing will be determined by how many they think they can sell. Yes, other manufacturers have released products that have sailed past the 7DII on paper, and there are those that have no problem with switching brands at will, but there are also a large number of photographers who view their cameras as tools, and don't just switch whole platforms over specsmanship. Only Canon knows their plans.
What's the readout compared to the 7DII sensor? Comparing the 90D sensor readout speed to other RF bodies and then trying to equate that to a 7DII doesn't make any sense. Look at it from the perspective of a current 7DII shooter.
We have no idea on the specs, so pricing theories are just that. This could be crop RF and nothing resembling the 7D series or what 7D shooters have been hoping for. Then you might just get your entry level crop RF after all. For far less than 1799 imo. what with RP pricing as a yardstick.
Since we know nothing, is that directed at the 7D3 spec'd wishlist R7? Or just any new RF crop body in general.
2999?? Is that USD? Man! I've been saying that I can't see how Canon can justify going much beyond $2K for a high-end APS-C body. $2999 is in a different league altogether.
I based that number upon Canon listening to all the CR members and they're extensive list of demands. Believe me, I'm with you. But now that I see the way you worded your response, it's as if you're devaluing crop in general in my view. Why couldn't/wouldn't it be amazing and of course expensive? You won't get amazing for cheap no matter how often we say it should be.
7D III specs. That assumes that an R7 would be spec'd similar to the R6 but with a crop sensor. I think U.S. $3,000 is too heavy of a lift. Canon has to be realistic about what the market will bear. But, I'm not one of those who see it coming in anywhere near the old 7DII price. When I've asked the most vocal of the R7 advocates on this forum if they would spring for an R7 spec'd and similarly priced to the R6, they've said yes.
7DII. Cheap and Amazing.
I don't know what I said or how I worded it that makes you think I'm devaluing crop. Look no further than the list of bodies under my user name. Three of those are crop bodies. The fourth is indeed a "full frame" body, but one that pre-dates APS-anything and uses wet chemical sensor technology.
It was also the least expensive of all of them.Make that the lingering death of the M system. I can't remember the last time Canon mentioned its existence. It's never mentioned in their financial documents. Canon even excluded it from their "Canon EOS System celebrates 35th anniversary" press release. I want Canon to continue to develop M, but things are looking pretty grim.
So the M system is a monumental cash cow for Canon, all revenue and no engineering costs. That's what Neuro seems intent of reminding us of. For all we know, profits from the M-system provide all of the R&D funding for the R system. That doesn't mean that anybody on this website should care about the M system at all.
