The Canon EOS “R7” has been pushed to Q4 of 2022

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,232
1,542
the R6 is the mirrorless 6D series camera.
I don't see how. Have you seen dual card slots in a 6D series camera? 12 fps mechanical shutter? 1/250s X-sync?

Or maybe a joystick?
 
Last edited:

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
500
1,100
I don't see how. Have you seen dual card slots in a 6D series camera? 12 fps mechanical shutter? 1/250s X-sync?

Or maybe a joystick?
Let me explain it real simple like...The 5 series DSLRs were higher end more expensive FF cameras. The 6 Series DSLRs were the lower priced, lower spec'ed (but still in the $2000 range) FF cameras. Now, in mirrorless, the R5 is the higher end, more expensive FF camera. The R6 is the lower priced, lower spec'ed (but still in the $2000 range) FF camera. See how easy! That's why they continued using the numbers 5 and 6. To make it simple to understand, even for forum dwellers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,232
1,542
Let me explain it real simple like...The 5 series DSLRs were higher end more expensive FF cameras. The 6 Series DSLRs were the lower priced, lower spec'ed (but still in the $2000 range) FF cameras.
Simple - and wrong. 5D series started with 5D and 5DII, and only then got split into (higher than 5DII) 5DIII and (lower than 5DII) 6D.

Now, in mirrorless, the R5 is the higher end, more expensive FF camera. The R6 is the lower priced, lower spec'ed (but still in the $2000 range) FF camera. See how easy!
Wrong again. We have R5, R6, R, and RP. R was positioned between 5DIV and 6DII, R6 is higher-spec'ed than R in everything but resolution, and Canon has already promised a FF camera that would be a lower tier than RP. All this makes your SLR lineup analogy irrelevant.

That's why they continued using the numbers 5 and 6. To make it simple to understand, even for forum dwellers.
They may continue to use whatever numbers they want, but it doesn't make the R6 "the mirrorless 6D series camera".
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,117
6,545
They may continue to use whatever numbers they want, but it doesn't make the R6 "the mirrorless 6D series camera".
Careful. I suggested that the R7 might not be a ‘mirrorless 7D’ and some people became rather upset.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
500
1,100
Simple - and wrong. 5D series started with 5D and 5DII, and only then got split into (higher than 5DII) 5DIII and (lower than 5DII) 6D.


Wrong again. We have R5, R6, R, and RP. R was positioned between 5DIV and 6DII, R6 is higher-spec'ed than R in everything but resolution, and Canon has already promised a FF camera that would be a lower tier than RP. All this makes your SLR lineup analogy irrelevant.


They may continue to use whatever numbers they want, but it doesn't make the R6 "the mirrorless 6D series camera".
If you believe that the specs dictate the numbering, so be it. Pretty much everyone else understands the logic of Canon's numbering scheme when it comes to "5" and "6". But if you have to be "Right" - I guess there is no arguing with you. It just seems like an UNBELIEVABLE coincidence that Canon decided to use the numbers 5 and 6 for both of their new RF FF cameras when they were released, when their DSLRs in roughly the same price bracket were also numbered 5 and 6! Wow! How silly of me to think there might be a logical, reasonable explanation!
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 2 users

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,232
1,542
If you believe that the specs dictate the numbering, so be it. Pretty much everyone else understands the logic of Canon's numbering scheme when it comes to "5" and "6". But if you have to be "Right" - I guess there is no arguing with you. It just seems like an UNBELIEVABLE coincidence that Canon decided to use the numbers 5 and 6 for both of their new RF FF cameras when they were released, when their DSLRs in roughly the same price bracket were also numbered 5 and 6! Wow! How silly of me to think there might be a logical, reasonable explanation!
What makes you so emotional about the simple observation that R6 is not an 6D series equivalent, but a higher-tier camera?
 

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
973
1,152
UK
What makes you so emotional about the simple observation that R6 is not an 6D series equivalent, but a higher-tier camera?
My opinion:

Canon naming conventions seem to be based on *several* criteria including price range, specification, build quality and target users. Cameras are constantly evolving and it's quite obvious that specifications will become more advanced with each successive model within a numerical designation, hence R5 is far more advanced than 5DS, even though they use the same numerical designation, and are/were the "high megapixel flagships" of their eras.

1D series have always been the pro battleships and the most expensive. Same will apply to "R1" which will be roughly equivalent to Nikon Z9.

5D series have always been "economy pro" and "hi-end serious amateur" FF cameras, as is the case with R5.

6D series have always been "affordable mid-range FF", as is the case with R6.

7D series have always been "economy pro" and "hi-end amateur" APS-C cameras, so logically the same will apply to the "R7". if it actually exists and uses that designation.

R3 is clearly an intermediate model between R5 and "R1", and uses the "3" designation because it uses "eye-control AF point selection", just like the EOS 3.

The bottom of range FF models will most likely be single digit "R8" and/or "R9"

As for the expected "mirrorless Rebels", my guess is that they will be called "R10" (double digits for budget APS-C)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,232
1,542
My opinion:

Canon naming conventions seem to be based on *several* criteria including price range, specification, build quality and target users. Cameras are constantly evolving and it's quite obvious that specifications will become more advanced with each successive model within a numerical designation, hence R5 is far more advanced than 5DS, even though they use the same numerical designation, and are/were the "high megapixel flagships" of their eras.
My opinion:

Canon's naming "conventions" can be given some rationalization in hindsight, but are actually unpredictable. For example, no one outside Canon would predict splitting the 5D series into two after 5DII, nor would expect Canon to come up with RP (and then not with RS, but with R5) either.

5D series have always been "economy pro" and "hi-end serious amateur" FF cameras, as is the case with R5.
Actually, the proverbial "5-series" started with EOS 10 (EOS S in the U.S.) in 1991. Then it became EOS 5, then EOS 3.

EOS 5, released in 1992, already had the eye control AF.

6D series have always been "affordable mid-range FF", as is the case with R6.
"6D" series was a lower-tier spin-off of the "5-series" after the 5DII. Only two models of the 6D series have been made.

The closest positioning of the R6 would actually be a continuation of "pre-5DIII" 5D series. Similar price to 5DII, similar ergonomics, similar build quality.

7D series have always been "economy pro" and "hi-end amateur" APS-C cameras, so logically the same will apply to the "R7". if it actually exists and uses that designation.
"7D series" has a history of having only two models and being the slowest updating Canon series ever. EOS 7D was released in 2009, EOS 7DII was released in 2014.

R3 is clearly an intermediate model between R5 and "R1", and uses the "3" designation because it uses "eye-control AF point selection", just like the EOS 3.
Actually, the closest analogy to EOS 3 in Canon's digital lineup would be EOS 5DIII. EOS R3 is a completely different beast.

The bottom of range FF models will most likely be single digit "R8" and/or "R9"

As for the expected "mirrorless Rebels", my guess is that they will be called "R10" (double digits for budget APS-C)
Canon's Rebel models traditionally have 3-digit and 4-digit model numbers.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,218
2,396
Meh. The 7D II DSLR was priced at $1799 (body only). Canon has contempt for first-time camera buyers who want something new-affordable.

It was indeed $1,799 at release in November, 2014.

However, I bought mine for $1,499 from B&H barely six months after it began shipping. I also got a free Ruggard Commando 36 bag and Watson LP-E6N battery with that $1,499+tax.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,218
2,396
The closest positioning of the R6 would actually be a continuation of "pre-5DIII" 5D series. Similar price to 5DII, similar ergonomics, similar build quality.

If you ever tried to use the 5D Mark II's AF in even moderately low light you'd never compare the R6, with its mind-blowing AF performance, to the 5D Mark II.

The 5D Mark II had near 1-series image quality but a Rebel level AF system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,218
2,396
My opinion:

Canon's naming "conventions" can be given some rationalization in hindsight, but are actually unpredictable. For example, no one outside Canon would predict splitting the 5D series into two after 5DII, nor would expect Canon to come up with RP (and then not with RS, but with R5) either.


Actually, the proverbial "5-series" started with EOS 10 (EOS S in the U.S.) in 1991. Then it became EOS 5, then EOS 3.

EOS 5, released in 1992, already had the eye control AF.


"6D" series was a lower-tier spin-off of the "5-series" after the 5DII. Only two models of the 6D series have been made.

The closest positioning of the R6 would actually be a continuation of "pre-5DIII" 5D series. Similar price to 5DII, similar ergonomics, similar build quality.


"7D series" has a history of having only two models and being the slowest updating Canon series ever. EOS 7D was released in 2009, EOS 7DII was released in 2014.


Actually, the closest analogy to EOS 3 in Canon's digital lineup would be EOS 5DIII. EOS R3 is a completely different beast.


Canon's Rebel models traditionally have 3-digit and 4-digit model numbers.

Ultimately Canon exists as a sales and marketing organization for the purpose of earning profit by taking in more revenue than the expenses they incur in the process of generating that revenue. As such, the final say in all matters is had by the financial admirals in the corporate suite, not by the engineering lieutenants. The commanders in marketing name product lines based on what senior management (that group of admirals) perceives will identify certain products with certain prospective types of buyers. They determine a price level for which they desire a product to sell, and then engineering goes to work producing a product that can profitably be sold at that price.

As technologies come and go specifications will fluctuate within a particular product line.
As competitors introduce products at similar price points specifications will fluctuate to remain competitive with those similarly priced products.
But various product lines will be identified based primarily on the potential buyers to whom they are marketed, not based on some hierarchy of technical specifications.
 

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
973
1,152
UK
I don't see how. Have you seen dual card slots in a 6D series camera? 12 fps mechanical shutter? 1/250s X-sync?

Or maybe a joystick?
Have you a desire to see technology stand still, just to comply with your imaginary model categorisation?
 

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,232
1,542
If you ever tried to use the 5D Mark II's AF in even moderately low light you'd never compare the R6, with its mind-blowing AF performance, to the 5D Mark II.

The 5D Mark II had near 1-series image quality but a Rebel level AF system.
Have you a desire to see technology stand still, just to comply with your imaginary model categorisation?
Maybe you both should start arguing with each other?
 

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
CR Pro
Nov 11, 2012
4,403
1,106
Yorkshire, England
If you believe that the specs dictate the numbering, so be it. Pretty much everyone else understands the logic of Canon's numbering scheme when it comes to "5" and "6". But if you have to be "Right" - I guess there is no arguing with you. It just seems like an UNBELIEVABLE coincidence that Canon decided to use the numbers 5 and 6 for both of their new RF FF cameras when they were released, when their DSLRs in roughly the same price bracket were also numbered 5 and 6! Wow! How silly of me to think there might be a logical, reasonable explanation!
Kit has a point: the 5D was not mid range FF at its introduction, it’s was the ‘budget’ model, and very basic. (But wonderful). The five series then grew in stature over the next two models, and the III became a genuinely ‘pro’ level body. At the same time the 6D was introduced which was kind of the spiritual successor to the original 5D as the budget model. Even if we take standards for 2012 compared with now, the R6 is still streaks ahead of what the 6D was, as a simple, slow basic FF camera. The mirrorless equivalent of the 6D is the RP. If Canon introduce a FF camera below the RP series in future it will be a more budget orientated camera than the 6D ever was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,218
2,396
Have you a desire to see technology stand still, just to comply with your imaginary model categorisation?

Have you no comprehension of the difference between technological advances (i.e. faster memory card standards) and features (i.e. how many memory card slots a camera has)?
 
  • Wow
Reactions: 1 user

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
973
1,152
UK
Have you no comprehension of the difference between technological advances (i.e. faster memory card standards) and features (i.e. how many memory card slots a camera has)?
You seem to be confused - I note that you "liked" my comment, which presumably means you agreed with it?

Rather oddly, you also "liked" Kit's reply, which disagreed with my own comments.

The comment to which I replied was directed at Kit, not you. I assume you and Kit are not the same person.

I've explained the rationale behind my views on Canon's model designation. If you disagree, that's fine, and not worth arguing about. Have a nice day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,218
2,396
You seem to be confused - I note that you "liked" my comment, which presumably means you agreed with it?

Rather oddly, you also "liked" Kit's reply, which disagreed with my own comments.

The comment to which I replied was directed at Kit, not you. I assume you and Kit are not the same person.

I've explained the rationale behind my views on Canon's model designation. If you disagree, that's fine, and not worth arguing about. Have a nice day.

I don't see where anyone has "liked" the comment to which I replied?

20220529ss3.jpg

The only comment on this page from Kit that I reacted to was a 'Laugh", not a "Like".