The Canon EOS R7 Mark II May Be a Big Departure From the Original

[MkSprintz]

A "big departure" can be interpreted in many ways. For example, a full-sized body not requiring an extension grip (with a pro battery). A lower-resolution sensor around 22Mp which has better low-light capability, something potentially attractive as a professional small-sensor sports body. Beginning a large-scale changeover to CF-Express across the lineup. Introducing a new flash system with the camera. Focusing the 7-series not as the top APS-C camera, but as a top hybrid vlogger camera (with extra attachment ports). Integrating the R7ii with some third-party hardware (eg: a specialized Atomos?). And so on.

Instead of specific camera features, I suggest considering what might fill a market opportunity. Having a closer-to-pro APS-C body would align with that, but so would pushing it the other direction toward amateur interests: higher resolution, lighter weight, maybe retro-styling. And don't worry about abandonment of a market segment, as Canon can always introduce a new model number to fill any empty shoes (anyone up for an R4 or R14?).

While these vaguely-reported half-rumors about the R7ii suggest it might lean toward a more premium market, I think there's too little specificity and reliability to give these rumors any weight. We're in nothing-burger territory here.

Pushing the R7ii the other direction and downmarket with the ideas you presented would dramatically reduce potential sales of the unit, especially when it's not what the target market for said camera wants. It would push more wildlife and sports photographers towards the R6ii, R6iii, R5ii, and R1 thus reducing any chance of recovery or growth for the APS-C segment as a whole.

The C50 fills the niche as a hybrid vlogging camera with its photo capabilities, along with the R6 lineup including the upcoming R6iii as vlogging is video-centric. Unsure if Canon will make a video-centric unit similar to the R7 or R7ii when it's released for vloggers, it's possible if they see value in such a unit.

 

[Planterz]

Likely a truly improved R7II will cost more than the original... perhaps in the $1800 to $2100 US range. But keep in mind that the original 7D sold initially for $1700 and the 7DII for $1800... in 2009 and 2014 respectively! Both of those sold like hot cakes! It's baffling why Canon felt the need to cheapen the R7 and give it an introductory price of $1500 in 2022. Between 2014 and 2022 inflation was almost 24%... so theoretically the market shiould have welcomed a modernized, mirrorless 7DII that cost over $2000. Instead Canon went the other direction.

It wasn't just Canon, Nikon also abandoned the idea of a pro-level APS-C camera, and Sony abandoned the SLR style APS-C body altogether, going either with rangefinder style compact bodies, or going even smaller and eliminating the viewfinder altogether. If you think the R7 is cheapened compared to the 7D, look at the Nikon Z50 compared to the D500. Probably not a far comparison, but that's my point - there is no fair comparison because Nikon's "best" APS-C mirrorless is a budget one that's not in the same class as the R7, Fuji X-HS2, or Sony a6700.

With 3 other APS-C cameras - R10, R50, R100 - plus the R50V (but that's for vlogging), I'm not surprised that Canon is going back the other way with a more "pro" oriented R7 II. The issues people have had with the R7 are well-documented and prominent, and to me it seems they've not only been paying attention to the criticisms, but also from whom they were coming (birders, youtubers, birding youtubers, etc). I think they realized that a lot of R7 owners and prospective R7 purchasers are ones that already own fullframe Canon bodies but want the 1.6x crop and high MP count for more pixels per duck in some situations, and are willing to pay a bit more than the $1500 price for it. Simultaniously they realized that people on a budget weren't looking at the "expensive" R7, but rather the R10, R50, or R100. At least, that's how everything appears to me. I see a lot of R7 owners here and DPR that also own R5s and R6s, and guys like Duade Paton on youtube who doesn't always lug around his 600mm (500mm?) f4.

 

[MkSprintz]

It wasn't just Canon, Nikon also abandoned the idea of a pro-level APS-C camera, and Sony abandoned the SLR style APS-C body altogether, going either with rangefinder style compact bodies, or going even smaller and eliminating the viewfinder altogether. If you think the R7 is cheapened compared to the 7D, look at the Nikon Z50 compared to the D500. Probably not a far comparison, but that's my point - there is no fair comparison because Nikon's "best" APS-C mirrorless is a budget one that's not in the same class as the R7, Fuji X-HS2, or Sony a6700.

With 3 other APS-C cameras - R10, R50, R100 - plus the R50V (but that's for vlogging), I'm not surprised that Canon is going back the other way with a more "pro" oriented R7 II. The issues people have had with the R7 are well-documented and prominent, and to me it seems they've not only been paying attention to the criticisms, but also from whom they were coming (birders, youtubers, birding youtubers, etc). I think they realized that a lot of R7 owners and prospective R7 purchasers are ones that already own fullframe Canon bodies but want the 1.6x crop and high MP count for more pixels per duck in some situations, and are willing to pay a bit more than the $1500 price for it. Simultaniously they realized that people on a budget weren't looking at the "expensive" R7, but rather the R10, R50, or R100. At least, that's how everything appears to me. I see a lot of R7 owners here and DPR that also own R5s and R6s, and guys like Duade Paton on youtube who doesn't always lug around his 600mm (500mm?) f4.

very true statement. Nikon essentially abandoned APS-C which initially pushed me towards the R7 as I was coming from a Nikon D3200 at the time of purchase. Might have possibly stuck with Nikon if the Z8 were out at the time.

Have the R6ii as my current main body with the R7 as a backup. Have been tempted to add an R5ii to my lineup by one or two people. Though looking more at the upcoming 300-600 and R7ii in 2026 as better purchases.

 

[Z-06]

Buffer and FPS matching or exceeding R5, body, dimensions, ergonomics, operations and materials of R5; I would not mind paying R6 or higher money for it. I would even sacrifice the pixel count down to 25MP or so to make it faster and less noisy. Let it be a spiritual successor of 7D MKII, which the R7 isn't.

Canon, please learn from your fellow Japanese company, ICOM when it just released the IC-7300 MKII - listen to your customers.

 

[DhlcadR6]

I've said it on CR many times. I want R7ii to have stacked CMOS so I don't need to get R5ii. And the current RF lenses&EF+speedbooster I have suits APS-C.

 

[ctk]

I think an integrated vertical grip would be a bad idea. They should put it in an R5/R6 shell w/the compatible add on battery grip. An R3 style body would limit its appeal.

 

[blackcoffee17]

No need to reinvent the wheel or redesign the body at every single iteration, just put the best possible APS-C sensor in the R5 body and that's all.

 

[Michael Clark]

The R7 has the same sensor as the EOS 90D and the EOS M6 Mk II. Re-using that sensor reduced development time and costs. The sensor performance may be the reason why the R7 went “downmarket” compared to the 7D Mk II.

There's more to a camera than the sensor. At least there is for someone who actually uses cameras to take pictures with them.

 

[Michael Clark]

While these vaguely-reported half-rumors about the R7ii suggest it might lean toward a more premium market, I think there's too little specificity and reliability to give these rumors any weight. We're in nothing-burger territory here.

Everything Canon has done since 2018 points towards a more premium market. They even state it in their annual reports.

Example: The best AF used to be reserved for the top models. Even when two bodies shared the same PDAF part number (1D X Mark II, 5D Mark IV), the higher body had AF setting options the lower body did not. More importantly, even when both were set to identical settings the 1D X Mark II was slightly more consistent from shot to shot than the 5D Mark IV.

 

[Michael Clark]

Pushing the R7ii the other direction and downmarket with the ideas you presented would dramatically reduce potential sales of the unit, especially when it's not what the target market for said camera wants. It would push more wildlife and sports photographers towards the R6ii, R6iii, R5ii, and R1 thus reducing any chance of recovery or growth for the APS-C segment as a whole.

Canon makes more profit per unit on the R6, R5, and R1 series than on APS-C models. Why would Canon not want that?

But that's a fantasy world in which competition from Sony, Nikon, Fuji, and others does not exist. A More R10 type of R7 Mark II would push most potential buyers to another manufacturer that offers more what those buyers want.

 

[Mikehit]

It's baffling why Canon felt the need to cheapen the R7 and give it an introductory price of $1500 in 2022. Between 2014 and 2022 inflation was almost 24%... so theoretically the market shiould have welcomed a modernized, mirrorless 7DII that cost over $2000. Instead Canon went the other direction.
While there was a lot to like about the original R7... however there also were a lot of disappointments. Let's hope Canon has been paying attention customer comments about the R7 and R7II!

The general consensus at the time was that Sony (and to some extent Nikon) were proving very attractive to the wildlife market while Canon had nothing to compete, particularly with Sony having the excellent 200-600 at a ridiculously low price. Having the R7 body at that price, with the option of putting your existing EF wildlife lens on it was a masterstroke in the market IMO - switching to Sony would have meant buying a new camera as well as a new lens in a market sector where people by definition were on a tight budget. Now, there is not the same market pressure to keep the R7 price as low but they cant afford to be too extravagant with the price but $2200 sounds about right allowing for inflation - this would put it in the ballpark of the R6ii: even at 24MP the AF in the R6ii means it is still quite an attractive wildlife lens so the R6ii could slot in there. .

 

[Tom R5R7]

The general consensus at the time was that Sony (and to some extent Nikon) were proving very attractive to the wildlife market while Canon had nothing to compete, particularly with Sony having the excellent 200-600 at a ridiculously low price. Having the R7 body at that price, with the option of putting your existing EF wildlife lens on it was a masterstroke in the market IMO - switching to Sony would have meant buying a new camera as well as a new lens in a market sector where people by definition were on a tight budget. Now, there is not the same market pressure to keep the R7 price as low but they cant afford to be too extravagant with the price but $2200 sounds about right allowing for inflation - this would put it in the ballpark of the R6ii: even at 24MP the AF in the R6ii means it is still quite an attractive wildlife lens so the R6ii could slot in there. .

I think the R7 is somewhat of a placeholder while Canon gets their camera tech up to date on the APS-C sensors. I mean, it's a pretty clean sensor, considering the pixel density. But it's a little slow on the readout, and the AF, while very good, is not quite up to par with the R5/R6. Not terrible, mind you, but could be better.

If they're going to do a 7D level of APS-C, it will be with the latest tech, I would think. Of course, I've been wrong as recently as a few minutes ago so there's that.

 

[Tom R5R7]

I think the R7 is somewhat of a placeholder while Canon gets their camera tech up to date on the APS-C sensors. I mean, it's a pretty clean sensor, considering the pixel density. But it's a little slow on the readout, and the AF, while very good, is not quite up to par with the R5/R6. Not terrible, mind you, but could be better.

If they're going to do a 7D level of APS-C, it will be with the latest tech, I would think. Of course, I've been wrong as recently as a few minutes ago so there's that.

Oh, I wanted to add, my friend that was disappointed with the R7 after years of shooting with a Nikon D7200 and D500 - well, she got a gently used 18-135 EF-S USM lens and an adapter and now she is very happy. I think it just took a lens that felt substantial, or was comparable to her Nikon 18-140 lens that she had been using on her 7200. She has the Sigma 150-600 married to her D500. She's on a short trip right now, but is really finding that she likes the R7 now.

I think part of it is that we get set in our ways and our expectations and too big of a change, especially if it doesn't seem like a necessary change or an improvement, can discourage us.

 

[mikev]

I agree with most of the technical "wish list" items.
A simple feature that seems lacking in most of the lineup of Cannon is geolocation. Why can a camera of this level not have this basic modern feature?
Given the general consensus that the R7 is used for wildlife and if Canon want to make it a truly wildlife / outdoor camera they must include geolocation / *** into the body.
So wildlife / outdoor features should include:
FAST APS C sensor to avoid rolling shutter. Electronic only is good if it is not subject to rolling shutter effect
APS C is great for giving that extra reach on lenses
Geo location is a must
A good low light performance would be great since artificial light with wildlife is not always possible. Again a good new sensor.
High burst rate 40 raw. high res video at high frame rate for slow-motion
Pre-capture
No blackout / blackout free EVF
Fast and smart advanced AF
at least 33MP - higher would be great to allow cropping
Good stabilization (IBS) because most shots are out of the hand
focus bracketing

 

[MkSprintz]

I agree with most of the technical "wish list" items.
A simple feature that seems lacking in most of the lineup of Cannon is geolocation. Why can a camera of this level not have this basic modern feature?
Given the general consensus that the R7 is used for wildlife and if Canon want to make it a truly wildlife / outdoor camera they must include geolocation / *** into the body.
So wildlife / outdoor features should include:
FAST APS C sensor to avoid rolling shutter. Electronic only is good if it is not subject to rolling shutter effect
APS C is great for giving that extra reach on lenses
Geo location is a must
A good low light performance would be great since artificial light with wildlife is not always possible. Again a good new sensor.
High burst rate 40 raw. high res video at high frame rate for slow-motion
Pre-capture
No blackout / blackout free EVF
Fast and smart advanced AF
at least 33MP - higher would be great to allow cropping
Good stabilization (IBS) because most shots are out of the hand
focus bracketing

With the exception of Geolocation/*** which is unnecessary and pointless the rest of that list is realistic for what's needed in the R7ii.

 

[mikev]

With the exception of Geolocation/*** which is unnecessary and pointless the rest of that list is realistic for what's needed in the R7ii.

Why would you say its pointless? Am I missing something that I always took for granted in taking outdoor pics in unknown areas and want to tag and id later? Not arguing - just want to understand why other people would not find it a necessity?

 

[P-visie]

Why would you say its pointless? Am I missing something that I always took for granted in taking outdoor pics in unknown areas and want to tag and id later? Not arguing - just want to understand why other people would not find it a necessity?

You are not missing a thing, some people think their wants/ needs represent the entire user-base.

@CRguy explained in another thread why *** is an issue for smaller camera bodies. See: Post in thread 'Canon Officially Announces the Canon EOS R6 Mark III'
https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...-the-canon-eos-r6-mark-iii.44848/post-1035009

 

[mikev]

You are not missing a thing, some people think their wants/ needs represent the entire user-base.

@CRguy explained in another thread why *** is an issue for smaller camera bodies. See: Post in thread 'Canon Officially Announces the Canon EOS R6 Mark III'
https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...-the-canon-eos-r6-mark-iii.44848/post-1035009

Thanks. Yes I get the point and reasoning about battery, space shielding etc.... But old cameras and specifically referring to bridge (which has EVF) Canon PowerShot and Nikon P900 etc has geo tagging. they have small batteries, small boddies, EVF etc and still a *** in there. I know Rx cameras are a bit more advanced and shielding would be good but come on a *** is no longer some big battery hunger device - they are always on in your phone.

 

[Tom R5R7]

Regarding ***, with the "intelligent" flash connection setup, they ought to be able to make a self-powered *** module that is both small and unobtrusive, and fits on the flash shoe mount of all newer Canon bodies.

 

[P-visie]

Regarding ***, with the "intelligent" flash connection setup, they ought to be able to make a self-powered *** module that is both small and unobtrusive, and fits on the flash shoe mount of all newer Canon bodies.

I agree, I posted in another thread: “Canon could make an external *** similar to the Speedlite transmitter ST-E10. The size would accommodate a *** chip + antenna, it can be powered via the hotshoe and controlled via the camera menu’s. The size would not be very cumbersome in the field.”

See: Post in thread 'Canon Officially Announces the Canon EOS R6 Mark III'
https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...-the-canon-eos-r6-mark-iii.44848/post-1035256