The next full-frame RF mount camera will be a replacement for the Canon EOS R

[Del Paso]

Oh, rely on internet. Listen very carefully about R10 AF.

DPR?
That's what you call reliable?

 

[Bob Howland]

This is the timeline of full frame EOS bodies

1-Series

• 2001 1D 2002 Winter Olympics
• 2004 1D Mark II for 2004 Summer Olympics
• 2007 1D Mark III for 2008 Summer Olympics
• 2009 1D Mark IV for 2010 Winter Olympics
• 2012 1D X for 2012 Summer Olympics
• 2016 1D X Mark II for 2016 Summer Olympics
• 2020 1D X Mark III for 2020 Summer Olympics
• 2024 R1 (?) for 2024 Summer Olympics

5-Series

• 2005 5D
• 2008 5D Mark II
• 2012 5D Mark III
• 2016 5D Mark IV
• 2020 R5
• 2024 R5 Mark II (?)

6-Series

• 2012 6D
• 2017 6D Mark II
• 2020 R6
• 2024 R6 Mark II (?)

R-Series

• 2018 EOS R
• 2022 EOS R Mark II (?) or 2023

RP-Series

• 2019 EOS RP
• 2023 EOS RP Mark II (?) or 2024

I suspect that Canon & Nikon may discontinue production of dSLR bodies, lenses and accessories by 2024.

What about the R3?

 

[AlanF]

DPR?
That's what you call reliable?

He’s very reliable - he complains about every Canon.

 

[dolina]

What about the R3?

Not enough data points.

EOS 3D was never a dSLR line.

 

[David - Sydney]

The 10D was announced in 2003
Canon ran out of names in 2019 with the 90D

Not really.. There is no reason why the xxD had to x0D eg The 77D comes to mind. They could have had another 9 models (91D/92D etc) let alone mark 2/3/4 etc

 

[dolina]

Not really.. There is no reason why the xxD had to x0D eg The 77D comes to mind. They could have had another 9 models (91D/92D etc) let alone mark 2/3/4 etc

$899.99 77D & $1199 90D have different price points.

The 2016 80D shared the same price point as the 2019 90D.

 

[David - Sydney]

The way that some lenses are crippled is that they're a regression from their EF or EF-S counterparts, they're either darker, more distorted or stripped back in functionality. There are some great new RF lenses that aren't L-series lenses, but some of them only offer benefits to specific photography niche uses, such as personal travel photography, where portability (size/weight) trumps image quality.

There are many new RF lenses and most (excluding the 600/800L primes) offer something unique ie over their EF counterparts. For me, the RF70-200mm/2.8 is so much better than my previous EF equivalent due to size/weight. No issues with weather sealing with the extending front element. No need for a tripod ring IMHO as the weight balance can be handled easily by the body tripod mount. I haven't seen any image quality issues and focusing is fast due to RF connectivity. Lots of other examples as well. The RF14-35mm/4 and RF100mm macro have additional features (focal length/magnification) but I don't need the extra features so I haven't updated from EF.

The RF 16mm f/2.8 and 24mm f/1.8 macro are really poor excuses for lenses in that they can't be used for the majority of genres those UW focal lengths are used for. The reality is that these are just lenses for vlogging/Youtube and casual travel/hiking photos to share on social media. and they're great for that purpose.

Canon haven't released a decent UAW astrolandscape lens... arguably ever. the RF16/RF24mm are perfect for their intended purpose which you have described. What genre can't they do?

Once Canon was no longer constrained by the minimum DSLR aperture necessary for AF to function, or the real-world view of an OVF, some of their consumer lenses got darker or more distorted, simply because mirrorless camera bodies can work with less! It's not like the consumer EF and EF-S lenses were so outstanding that they could be crippled a bit more without losing something. Using a crippled lens that can do less does eat into whatever gains are delivered by the new camera body technology, meaning that the potential of the camera tech isn't fully realised , because it's a classic case three steps forward, two steps back.

It did enable unique lenses like the 600/800 f11 primes though. Given the sensor improvements over time for ISO performance, darker lenses aren't the same problem as they used to be. I would rather than a grainy shot that is sharp than miss it completely

Like you said, there's nothing stopping people from continuing to use adapted EF/EF-S glass, and waiting until Canon releases a more comprehensive range of lenses that offer more choices. That's kind of an amusing idea when third-party RF mount AF lenses are progressively decreasing in number for some strange reason, but as the brand-loyal strongly assure us, there's nothing to see here! If there's no compelling reason to pay very premium prices for good L-series RF glass, or put up with the compromises of consumer RF lenses, then people are better off saving their money for now. Having an almost total monopoly in the RF lens market means buyers are backed into a situation of either buying consumer lenses with whatever compromises Canon's cripple hammer chooses to inflict, or paying for brilliant but mostly overpriced RF L lenses.

The RF lenses are expensive but mostly offer additional features over their EF counterparts. Canon is maximising their ROI for new products. Migration to R mount is exactly that... a migration over time. Options of RF lenses or adapted EF lenses or second hand gives 3 different price points for users. Getting them to buy a body is the first step to an eventual replacement of their lenses which is the greater dollar cost. Otherwise Canon would have had a greater problem of switchers to other systems

I've done what any reasonable person would do, bought the RF lenses that suit my needs, got an adapter for my EF lenses, and ignored the RF lenses in my wants category that may be nice to have, but are either overpriced, aren't good value for money, lack the image quality I require, or that don't give me much over my EF lenses for all the additional cost.

I completely agree with you on this... but I have no complaints about the new RF lenses except that they are expensive. They are still selling well so Canon's strategy is working even as lower end bodies etc are being decimated by smart phones.

Right now I'm patiently waiting to see if the promised Canon 150-600mm lens ever arrives and if it's is going to be any good...

Was it ever promised? Can you point this out for me? I can't see it ever being released personally. The RF100-500mm is wonderful. Put a 1.4TC on it and the only downside is that it is from 300mm so you are missing 150-300mm range but get an extra 100mm on the long end.
But (I hear you say) that it isn't bright enough or as heavy as the Sigma.... well that is true but you can always adapt that lens perfectly. The eye AF will work perfectly

 

[David - Sydney]

$899.99 77D & $1199 90D have different price points.

The 2016 80D shared the same price point as the 2019 90D.

that is true but my point was about the numbering scheme as a previous poster had said that there was no other numbers after 90D

 

[David - Sydney]

Thanks for missing me. I edited my post to give it more order. (?) signifies a future body.

If I were to hazard a guess 2024 will be the year R1, R5 Mark 2 & R6 Mark 2 will be out.

I am still thinking about what extra features a R5ii would have over the R5.... They have basically removed the overheating debate now and added more video features especially compression etc. R5C for dedicated video. R3 gives faster frame rates if you need them.

There are niggling issues like eshutter noise/lower frame speeds/rate button remap etc but I'm not sure about serious feature upgrades. Adding an AF-on controller could be interesting but not a deal breaker. Stacked/BSI sensor would be a big step up but may cannibalise the R1.

 

[dolina]

that is true but my point was about the numbering scheme as a previous poster had said that there was no other numbers after 90D

Given that EF system will be phased out by mid 20s then the 2019 90D will be the last of its product line.

Canon was attempting to have a EF body at an increment of ~$100 apart of each product line. It is probable that this not saleable anymore given smartphones and the EOS RP selling for $999.

Odds are with RF system there will be fewer APS-C bodies & more full frame bodies.

 

[dolina]

I am still thinking about what extra features a R5ii would have over the R5.... They have basically removed the overheating debate now and added more video features especially compression etc. R5C for dedicated video. R3 gives faster frame rates if you need them.

There are niggling issues like eshutter noise/lower frame speeds/rate button remap etc but I'm not sure about serious feature upgrades. Adding an AF-on controller could be interesting but not a deal breaker. Stacked/BSI sensor would be a big step up but may cannibalise the R1.

I wouldn't even bother thinking about it as that's 2 years from now.

Better to imagine what projects you can do today with the products that ca be bought today.

If I skipped the 2014 7D2 & 2015 5DsR and was as prolific in shooting from 2008-2013 as today I'd be enticed to upgrade from

- 2009 1D4 to 2021 R3
- 2008 5D2 to 2020 R5
- 2009 7D to 2022 R7

A 1 decade upgrade cycle makes sense to me with hobby photography

 

[David - Sydney]

The costs of a feature are not really an argument when it comes to Canon. Canon is famous for its "cripple hammer". They leave away some functions that could be cheap and easy to add - sometimes even via firmware - to offer a cheaper option. That makes a lot of sense for a manufacturer. People have different budgets and different needs. The way to maximize profit is selling everybody the most expensive camera they can afford. Some people will always buy the best option with all the features and others might be willing to pay half the price for a camera with less options.

Canon used to be famous for deliberately choosing which features to add/remove. The whole point of Magic Lantern was to unlock what the 5Diii could do. That changed with the R5/Digic X with the engineers pushing all the boundaries. Free firmware upgrades have added features as well over time so Canon is adding value to existing customers... that is excellent customer service in my opinion. Canon will always have a market segmentation strategy - as every product line has. Do you similarly complain about car product lines?

Note that Canon (and Sony/Nikon etc) are pushing sales into the higher priced/featured products as their lower end market is being decimated. That is the only way to still in the camera business. My phone is used more and more except when I cannot use it for certain genres. I am amazed at the advances of computational photography! The main selling point for new phones is their cameras. Horses for courses.

For Canon it would be very cheap to include some professional video specs like time code and a few more codes into cameras like the R3, but that would cannibalize some of the really professional video camera that cost much more. That could also work in the other direction: Taking an R3 and stripping it off a lot of features to make sure that many people would still buy the real R3 for those features, but the lower spec camera could be offered much cheaper that the higher spec one without cannibalizing it. So it is not about what a feature like video costs Canon, but what it is worth to the customer.

Sure but I am not sure what you mean by "the real R3". It is a sum of its parts and is general enough to appeal to a narrow-ish range of users

The main reason why I would like a mirrorless camera is IBIS. I wish there would be Canon DSLRs with IBIS. That would be the best of two worlds. I would also love to have the sensor of the R3, which still is the best performing low light sensor on the whole full frame market. I understand the physical limitations of a DSLR though. In order for a 7 or 8 stop IBIS to work, the image circle has to be much larger and therefore the mirror would also have to grow, but than it would no longer fit within the flange distance of the DSLR. So basically a new mount would have to be invented. One with a larger flange distance than the EF mount has. That would result in even worse optical formulas than the EF mount has. Exactly the opposite direction of the RF mount, which has a shorter flange distance and allows better optical formulas. So in a DLSR with EF mount a strong IBIS could only work in Live View, but than you would practically use the DSLR as a mirrorless camera, just without an EVF.

That is why the 1Dxiii's best AF is via liveview. Ergonomically unsatisfactory but Canon decided to put the best bits that they could into one final 1 series body. I can't see a new DLSR being released again - at least at the high end. Those users will expect the latest technology/features/reliability and mirrorless is the way of the future

Sadly photography is all about compromises. Even cameras manufacturers admit that after using the sensor for a while, it warms up and the images noise increases. That really is one of the worst compromises. A degrading image quality just because a camera warms up while I compose my shot.

I would suggest that the incremental thermal noise difference during sensor warmup would be minor. Astro cameras have built in coolers for the sensors to reduce thermal noise but that is a highly specialised and expensive genre!

I think DSLRs should still have their place for situations where they can play their advantages, Just last month I bought a new EF lens, because I still believe in that system. That lens even is made of metal. Sooner or later I will probaly carry both a DSLR and a mirrorless camera on all of my trips.

EF lenses are still wonderful and work perfectly with mirrorless bodies.
Metal vs industrial plastics is a different argument. You may feel that it is more solid/heavy etc but there has been no evidence that RF lenses are less sturdy. The weight/size etc difference is a major factor to encourage EF lens owners to upgrade where it makes sense to RF.
After upgrading to the R5, I would never go back to a DLSR. YMMV of course but I think that most R5 would agree with me.

 

[David - Sydney]

Given that EF system will be phased out by mid 20s then the 2019 90D will be the last of its product line.

Canon was attempting to have a EF body at an increment of ~$100 apart of each product line. It is probable that this not saleable anymore given smartphones and the EOS RP selling for $999.

Odds are with RF system there will be fewer APS-C bodies & more full frame bodies.

I agree. Given that smart phones can easily be >USD1000 then $100 either way doesn't make a sense to compete in general in high income countries
Still, in low income markets, that differentiation can be very important so we will see what happens.
I was always surprised by the cruise line photographers using very cheap bodies/lenses. They "focus" on lighting to maximise the quality up to the print size and make a very healthy profit in that area.

 

[David - Sydney]

I wouldn't even bother thinking about it as that's 2 years from now.

Better to imagine what projects you can do today with the products that ca be bought today.

If I skipped the 2014 7D2 & 2015 5DsR and was as prolific in shooting from 2008-2013 as today I'd be enticed to upgrade from

- 2009 1D4 to 2021 R3
- 2008 5D2 to 2020 R5
- 2009 7D to 2022 R7

A 1 decade upgrade cycle makes sense to me with hobby photography

Sure, that makes sense but Canon will have a release cycle with R bodies as they did with DLSRs. I buy Lexus cars and upgrade every 7-10 years as they just don't have issues in my experience. I could buy something cheaper and replace every 3-4 years but that wouldn't mean that it is overall cheaper with depreciation.

I am planning to keep my R5 for a long time and it certainly has few limitations for my needs/wants. I still have 3 years of warranty left anyway.

Canon will want to entice users to upgrade... The 5Div was seen as incremental over 5Diii though without must-have features.

 

[dolina]

I agree. Given that smart phones can easily be >USD1000 then $100 either way doesn't make a sense to compete in general in high income countries
Still, in low income markets, that differentiation can be very important so we will see what happens.
I was always surprised by the cruise line photographers using very cheap bodies/lenses. They "focus" on lighting to maximise the quality up to the print size and make a very healthy profit in that area.

Too many factors are stacked against dedicated still cameras.

• utility
• convenience
• always with you
• able to shoot, process and share all from 1 device without need for PC, Photoshop & fiber internet
• upgrades are "pushed" rather than "pull"
• upgrades can be paid amortized over 3 years or longer through a telco plan

It's a luxury item for hobbyists and more of a commercial/industrial tool for working photogs.

If I could do a redo I'd replace per dozen years rather than everytime the next model comes out.

 

[dolina]

Sure, that makes sense but Canon will have a release cycle with R bodies as they did with DLSRs. I buy Lexus cars and upgrade every 7-10 years as they just don't have issues in my experience. I could buy something cheaper and replace every 3-4 years but that wouldn't mean that it is overall cheaper with depreciation.

I am planning to keep my R5 for a long time and it certainly has few limitations for my needs/wants. I still have 3 years of warranty left anyway.

Canon will want to entice users to upgrade... The 5Div was seen as incremental over 5Diii though without must-have features.

I'd shorted my upgrade cycle if I used it daily. Last time I picked up any camera was 4 years ago.

If I drove my Lexus 4 years ago I would not bother upgrading until it hit 100,000km.

 

[David - Sydney]

Too many factors are stacked against dedicated still cameras.

• utility
• convenience
• always with you
• able to shoot, process and share all from 1 device without need for PC, Photoshop & fiber internet
• upgrades are "pushed" rather than "pull"
• upgrades can be paid amortized over 3 years or longer through a telco plan

It's a luxury item for hobbyists and more of a commercial/industrial tool for working photogs.

If I could do a redo I'd replace per dozen years rather than everytime the next model comes out.

Note that the phone hardware is amortised over the contract period with the carrier. The carrier pays the OEM for the full amount. Paying a monthly hardware cost seems cheaper compared to up front payment. I won't be upgrading my iphone this year and will save AUD1000 by waiting another year.

SW upgrades on phones are pushed out over time but look virtually seamless from one phone to a new one so the OEM needs to show more HW improvements (eg facial recognition etc).

And not just still cameras.... I recorded 90 minute 4k video of my daughter's wedding with a iphone on a tripod.. barely got warm and no recording time limits. It was just... simple.

 

[David - Sydney]

I'd shorted my upgrade cycle if I used it daily. Last time I picked up any camera was 4 years ago.

If I drove my Lexus 4 years ago I would not bother upgrading until it hit 100,000km.

Lexus replaced free (labour and parts) a dashboard on a 9 year old IS250 because the plastic was tacky and deemed to be poor quality. Completely unexpected and got my loyalty.
My RC350 is currently 6 years old and have 95,000km on it and no issues. Will last at least 2-3 more years for me before I get a EV. How much I spend then will be a great question.... but we are off topic!

 

[dolina]

Note that the phone hardware is amortised over the contract period with the carrier. The carrier pays the OEM for the full amount. Paying a monthly hardware cost seems cheaper compared to up front payment. I won't be upgrading my iphone this year and will save AUD1000 by waiting another year.

SW upgrades on phones are pushed out over time but look virtually seamless from one phone to a new one so the OEM needs to show more HW improvements (eg facial recognition etc).

And not just still cameras.... I recorded 90 minute 4k video of my daughter's wedding with a iphone on a tripod.. barely got warm and no recording time limits. It was just... simple.

Back end is not that important than what is direct to user.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

excluding the 600/800L primes

Those never had EF equivalents