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

[tron]

If we see Quad Pixel (or any other new AF tech) it will come in the R1 long before it shows up in a prosumer body. If there is an R7, it will likely be the same as in the R5/R6, which really isn't a bad thing. I'd rather have that than what any DSLR could offer as it outperforms any DSLR I've ever used (including 1DX II). My friend went from a D500 to a Z6 II and as bad as the AF is in the Z6 II, he still says it outperforms his D500. I know he gets better results.

Outperforms how? In reach ? No! In IQ? Only when not being FL limited. In BIF? I would certainly laugh!

In my opinion, my D500 and D850 with 500mm PF cannot be outperformed easily - in birding photography - since they produce excellent results! I just don't make much use of a TC.

Regarding Quad pixel there is a chance that Canon might test it in a non-top model first.

 

[roby17269]

I remain unconvinced we'll see an APS-C EOS R model at all. But if we do, in the current market I doubt Canon will try to replicate the broad lineup of APS-C DSLRs. Thinking of the RF 18-45/4-5.6 on the roadmap, I can see Canon coming out with a single APC-S R model, an R7 that is the entry-level APS-C gateway to the RF system.

Either way (no APS-C R or an entry-level one), most of those on this forum hoping for an APS-C EOS R are not going to get the camera they want. The reality is that people know what they want, while Canon knows what the market wants.

View attachment 203243

For once I agree with you
I do not think that there will be a crop R camera. I think that, essentially, there is no big incentive for Canon to invest in one since Nikon and Sony are not showing a lot of interest in the same market as well. Canon can continue to milk the M system with 0 investment into it.
Given the current economic outlook, all 3 major vendors seem focused on FF cameras and FF lenses to generate max profit from a limited number of sales.
I also agree that, should Canon decide to indeed release a crop R, it will be a part bin model to reduce R&R investment to the bare minimum.

I do hope we'll be proven wrong. But this is my humble opinion

 

[unfocused]

I remain unconvinced we'll see an APS-C EOS R model at all. But if we do, in the current market I doubt Canon will try to replicate the broad lineup of APS-C DSLRs. Thinking of the RF 18-45/4-5.6 on the roadmap, I can see Canon coming out with a single APC-S R model, an R7 that is the entry-level APS-C gateway to the RF system.

Either way (no APS-C R or an entry-level one), most of those on this forum hoping for an APS-C EOS R are not going to get the camera they want. The reality is that people know what they want, while Canon knows what the market wants.

Only time will tell. But...

1) I think it's generally a bad idea to bet against @Canon Rumors Guy when it comes to his sources on camera and lens releases. There have been many times in the past when I thought he was dead wrong and was in fact spot on.

2) I don't think any rational person believes Canon will replicate the broad lineup of APS-C DSLRs. That ship has sailed and the market has changed.

3) If you are suggesting that Canon might come out with an R7 that is "the entry-level APS-C gateway to the RF system" I disagree. Canon is pretty consistent in their naming conventions, so an R7 is unlikely to be an entry-level anything. But, more importantly I don't see the viability of any "gateway" APS-C camera. It's debatable whether or not such a gateway ever existed, but if it did, that was another era. In today's market I see budget cameras (budget being a very loose term for cameras under $1,000) for consumers who buy one camera every 10-20 years and use it until it breaks or becomes so old they decide to replace it with a newer model. They aren't likely to "move up" to full frame and most don't know or care that there is a difference in the sensor size.

4) Then there is the enthusiast market, which is the only viable high margin market that exists anymore. That's the market that an R7 would target. Specifically, bird and wildlife hobbyists who want reach and quality and are willing to pay for it. You don't believe such a market is large enough to justify an R7. Others believe it is. No one but Canon knows, but if I had to bet, I would bet that such a market does exist and that Canon can pretty easily satisfy that demand with a R7 based on the R6 body coupled with updated sensor and dropping the mechanical shutter. I think that market can absorb a $2,300 to $2,700 price tag. For many it will be a second body that serves as a lower cost alternative to an unaffordable and unwieldy $12,000-plus big white. (Although, of course, Canon's strategy would be to sell people an R5, and an R7 and then wait for the buyer to decide that their never-ending quest for reach can only be satisfied by adding a big white as well. An R7 is more of a gateway to a big white than a gateway to a full frame body).

 

[Stig Nygaard]

If we see Quad Pixel (or any other new AF tech) it will come in the R1 long before it shows up in a prosumer body.

Not saying QPAF is to be introduced in an R7, but Canon does not always introduce new technology in flagship bodies. In fact historically 1D bodies has been somehow conservative releases, mostly using technologies already "tested" in lower ranged camera models.

Regarding Quad pixel there is a chance that Canon might test it in a non-top model first.

DualPixel AF was introduced in the EOS 70D.

 

[bernie_king]

Outperforms how? In reach ? No! In IQ? Only when not being FL limited. In BIF? I would certainly laugh!

In my opinion, my D500 and D850 with 500mm PF cannot be outperformed easily - in birding photography - since they produce excellent results! I just don't make much use of a TC.

Regarding Quad pixel there is a chance that Canon might test it in a non-top model first.

Outperforms in tracking, and yes with BIF. I can't speak to the Z6 II personally, but the R5/R6/R3 I can and it's nothing short of amazing. I'm not FL limited (and neither is my friend) as I shoot with a 600 f4. I've never seen a DSLR lock in on the eye of a bird and track it across a frame, even when using a 2X converter. There's a reason why mirrorless cameras are taking over the industry.

 

[bernie_king]

Not saying QPAF is to be introduced in an R7, but Canon does not always introduce new technology in flagship bodies. In fact historically 1D bodies has been somehow conservative releases, mostly using technologies already "tested" in lower ranged camera models.



DualPixel AF was introduced in the EOS 70D.

True, but that wasn't the main method of AF at the time. When it came to that, they kept the best AF in their 1 series cameras.

 

[AlanF]

Outperforms how? In reach ? No! In IQ? Only when not being FL limited. In BIF? I would certainly laugh!

In my opinion, my D500 and D850 with 500mm PF cannot be outperformed easily - in birding photography - since they produce excellent results! I just don't make much use of a TC.

Regarding Quad pixel there is a chance that Canon might test it in a non-top model first.

What you say is the consensus in the Nikon forums. The birders generally say the D500 and D850 are much better than the Z6 and Z7 IIs for BIF. That is why they are loving the Z9 because it has caught up with the R5.

 

[Czardoom]

Only time will tell. But...

1) I think it's generally a bad idea to bet against @Canon Rumors Guy when it comes to his sources on camera and lens releases. There have been many times in the past when I thought he was dead wrong and was in fact spot on.

2) I don't think any rational person believes Canon will replicate the broad lineup of APS-C DSLRs. That ship has sailed and the market has changed.

3) If you are suggesting that Canon might come out with an R7 that is "the entry-level APS-C gateway to the RF system" I disagree. Canon is pretty consistent in their naming conventions, so an R7 is unlikely to be an entry-level anything. But, more importantly I don't see the viability of any "gateway" APS-C camera. It's debatable whether or not such a gateway ever existed, but if it did, that was another era. In today's market I see budget cameras (budget being a very loose term for cameras under $1,000) for consumers who buy one camera every 10-20 years and use it until it breaks or becomes so old they decide to replace it with a newer model. They aren't likely to "move up" to full frame and most don't know or care that there is a difference in the sensor size.

4) Then there is the enthusiast market, which is the only viable high margin market that exists anymore. That's the market that an R7 would target. Specifically, bird and wildlife hobbyists who want reach and quality and are willing to pay for it. You don't believe such a market is large enough to justify an R7. Others believe it is. No one but Canon knows, but if I had to bet, I would bet that such a market does exist and that Canon can pretty easily satisfy that demand with a R7 based on the R6 body coupled with updated sensor and dropping the mechanical shutter. I think that market can absorb a $2,300 to $2,700 price tag. For many it will be a second body that serves as a lower cost alternative to an unaffordable and unwieldy $12,000-plus big white. (Although, of course, Canon's strategy would be to sell people an R5, and an R7 and then wait for the buyer to decide that their never-ending quest for reach can only be satisfied by adding a big white as well. An R7 is more of a gateway to a big white than a gateway to a full frame body).

I agree that if this rumored camera is APS-C, then the supposedly confirmed name - and with the target market consisting of wildlife and bird photogs - it will be a high-end camera, spec'ed above the R6 and priced between the R6 and R5. That intended market may not be large, but may be willing to pay premium prices if this is a premium camera.

For those wanting a mirrorless replacement for their DSLR rebels, welcome to the M50, and the M system in general. That keeps it fairly simple, R system for advanced enthusiasts and pros, M system for those wanting small, simple and inexpensive, but more than a smartphone will provide.

 

[Blue Zurich]

I agree that if this rumored camera is APS-C, then the supposedly confirmed name - and with the target market consisting of wildlife and bird photogs - it will be a high-end camera, spec'ed above the R6 and priced between the R6 and R5. That intended market may not be large, but may be willing to pay premium prices if this is a premium camera.

For those wanting a mirrorless replacement for their DSLR rebels, welcome to the M50, and the M system in general. That keeps it fairly simple, R system for advanced enthusiasts and pros, M system for those wanting small, simple and inexpensive, but more than a smartphone will provide.

Above the R6. Well if your logic starts with how Canon uses the single numeric scheme for it's top line models and 1 designates the highest model.....you see where I'm going with this. I think 7 is just what dreamers want it to be to replace the 7D series. Your description would make it an R5.5

 

[unfocused]

Above the R6. Well if your logic starts with how Canon uses the single numeric scheme for it's top line models and 1 designates the highest model.....you see where I'm going with this. I think 7 is just what dreamers want it to be to replace the 7D series. Your description would make it an R5.5

I'm not sure the numbering scheme is that simple/logical. The 7D had a higher number than either the 6D or the 5D, but its specs (aside from sensor size) were always superior to both models of the same generation. When the original 7D came out, it had a much better autofocus system than the then-current 5DII. When the 7DII came out, it was superior to both the 5DIII and 6D in many specs and often described as a mini 1Dx.

We could selectively choose which specs count and which don't, but I strongly suspect that when Canon named it's flagship APS-C camera a 7D, they weren't that caught up in ranking it numerically, but rather it was most likely a marketing decision.

 

[Blue Zurich]

I'm not sure the numbering scheme is that simple/logical. The 7D had a higher number than either the 6D or the 5D, but its specs (aside from sensor size) were always superior to both models of the same generation. When the original 7D came out, it had a much better autofocus system than the then-current 5DII. When the 7DII came out, it was superior to both the 5DIII and 6D in many specs and often described as a mini 1Dx.

We could selectively choose which specs count and which don't, but I strongly suspect that when Canon named it's flagship APS-C camera a 7D, they weren't that caught up in ranking it numerically, but rather it was most likely a marketing decision.

It was kind of an outlier, wasn't it? Alright...(I still think we have the crop Canon wants us to have in 'crop mode')

 

[Czardoom]

Above the R6. Well if your logic starts with how Canon uses the single numeric scheme for it's top line models and 1 designates the highest model.....you see where I'm going with this. I think 7 is just what dreamers want it to be to replace the 7D series. Your description would make it an R5.5

My logic has nothing to do with price. The R5 is the mirrorless 5D series camera, the R6 is the mirrorless 6D series camera. Thus the R7 apparently will be the mirrorless 7D series camera. That's the logic.

 

[tapanit]

That admin is vaporware

Yes. So is the R7 at the moment. Reality in each case remains to be seen.

 

[tron]

Outperforms in tracking, and yes with BIF. I can't speak to the Z6 II personally, but the R5/R6/R3 I can and it's nothing short of amazing. I'm not FL limited (and neither is my friend) as I shoot with a 600 f4. I've never seen a DSLR lock in on the eye of a bird and track it across a frame, even when using a 2X converter. There's a reason why mirrorless cameras are taking over the industry.

1. My doubts were for Z6 II
2. I have both R5 and D500/D850 do you? I agree about focus accuracy for mirrorless (I use R5 with 500mm 4L IS Ii and EF2XIII and eos-rf converter) but not about focus speed/response etc for mirrorless (R3 excluded since I do not have it)

 

[tron]

What you say is the consensus in the Nikon forums. The birders generally say the D500 and D850 are much better than the Z6 and Z7 IIs for BIF. That is why they are loving the Z9 because it has caught up with the R5.

I believe that Z9 must be a fantastic camera. I especially like the D850 layout and the preshoot buffering. But it must be heavy and it requires an adapter since my only lens is 500mm f/5.6 PF as you well know.

P.S My bag now has both D850/500PF and R5/100-500 with 2X. It is heavy unless I hold a combo and cut the weight to almost half. Both combos are useful to me.

 

[Blue Zurich]

My logic has nothing to do with price. The R5 is the mirrorless 5D series camera, the R6 is the mirrorless 6D series camera. Thus the R7 apparently will be the mirrorless 7D series camera. That's the logic.

We were coming at it from different points of view. It's just when the nomenclature was used in forming deductions, I assumed it's common attached hierarchy.

Canon has a system. The 7D was an outlier in that naming scheme. Calling it an R7 is just what CR is doing for a placeholder/ familiarity. Not to mention clicks.

What the issue here really is is simple....an APS-C RF lens using body might be on the way. Where it lies in the lineup is anyone's guess. I sort of think it might not be a numbered, 7, 6, 5, 3, 1 etc camera at all and be an R (pick a letter or name) Not to mention, one name for Japan and another for other areas.

I guess all in all this means nothing to me since I won't be purchasing one no matter the specs as the R6 is all the camera I could wish for.


Oh one more thing....CR1

 

[lote82]

My logic has nothing to do with price. The R5 is the mirrorless 5D series camera, the R6 is the mirrorless 6D series camera. Thus the R7 apparently will be the mirrorless 7D series camera. That's the logic.

I feel you ... but apparently too much logic for notorious "ff-only" and "m-lovers"!

 

[Kit Chan]

I just want an M7 that let's me use my M lenses and addresses the lack of EFCS on the M6II.
DigicX and 10 minute 4k 60 recording would be a nice have too.

I don't want bulky RF lenses.

I'm looking to upgrade from my M200 in the latter half of this year for something with more physical controls and less menu tapping and it's so far looking like I might switch to Fuji as going into menus to make sure I'm on electronic or mechanical shutter with the M6II means I'm missing my candid shot.

 

[GoldWing]

What about the M5ll? (which would sell far more copies)

The R1 will sell more copies.

 

[Blue Zurich]

The R1 will sell more copies.

Can of worms, meet Goldwing