There are currently 3 EOS R system cameras coming in the second half of 2022 [CR2]

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,817
4,791
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
Re-reading and thinking about this rumor. If two of the three are simply replacements for the RP and R, which seems like a good possibility, the exciting news about three new R bodies essentially becomes much less impressive news about one APS-C body added to the lineup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
517
1,123
Your wording is "might be advantageous" to use less MP. For others it might be to have more MP. Canon does not serve the best for those, and the rest is you making word games.

1. Higher FPS? Canon offers lower resolution modes for years.

2. Better Buffer capacity? Canon offers lower resolution modes for years.

3. Better high ISO noise? Not for the same print size, and lower MP doesn't allow for higher print sizes, so this argument is rubbish.

4. Diminishing returns as more MPs means diffraction sets in at lower apertures - again, there's no loss for the same print size, and there's a gain with higher apertures.

5. Higher shutter speeds are needed or you need to use a tripod more often - same, as above.

6. High MP camera is clearly a niche product that is not a high priority for Canon - its high enough for Canon to actually make such sensors, which go into real cameras. Not the type you're talking about, but some have actually seen one, which means they think is "the best."

Next time, feed your straw men to donkeys.


I have real argument, you're just not worth the effort of making it, because you're not as clever as you think.
Here is your quote that I responded to initially:

"Canon can make sensors with a higher resolution. We could have a long discussion on why it doesn't, the bottom line is Canon is in it to make a profit, not to sell customers the very best it can."

Forgive me if your two sentences were not both talking about sensor resolution. If both sentences are talking about sensor resolution, then you are clearly saying that if Canon makes a camera that does not have the highest resolution Canon can make, then it is not the best it can be.

Now you seem to be saying that it may not be the best for everyone - which is exactly the point I made.

So, in other words, you've simply back-tracked from your initial comment and begun stating the obvious.
But you still think insulting me makes you the bigger man. OK, I concede. Congrats.
 

ozturert

EOS 90D
Jan 16, 2019
141
111
"No EVF" is quite a disturbing idea. Not only "old folks" are using EVF by the way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,771
1,393
"No EVF" is quite a disturbing idea. Not only "old folks" are using EVF by the way.
I'm fine with no EVF on my M, but that's a casual/light travel camera. I would never accept no EVF on my main camera. Heck...I haven't even accepted no OVF on my main camera...yet.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 5 users

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
CR Pro
Nov 11, 2012
4,407
1,118
Yorkshire, England
I'm fine with no EVF on my M, but that's a casual/light travel camera. I would never accept no EVF on my main camera. Heck...I haven't even accepted no OVF on my main camera...yet.
A 5DS with fine lenses and good technique takes some replacing, doesn’t it ? ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Otara

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2012
485
292
That is ridiculous. First they get rid of the mirror and say that an EVF is better than an OVF and then they get rid of the EVF.

Keep in mind that even the cheapest DSLR has a viewfinder.

And even the cheapest bicycle has wheels.
 

Antono Refa

EOS R
Mar 26, 2014
1,403
502
Here is your quote that I responded to initially:

"Canon can make sensors with a higher resolution. We could have a long discussion on why it doesn't, the bottom line is Canon is in it to make a profit, not to sell customers the very best it can."

Forgive me if your two sentences were not both talking about sensor resolution. If both sentences are talking about sensor resolution, then you are clearly saying that if Canon makes a camera that does not have the highest resolution Canon can make, then it is not the best it can be.
Canon makes a variety of cameras to cater to a variety of photographers. Some of them want higher resolution. Yet, Canon doesn't cater to them with the highest resolution sensor it can makes, which makes an example of how Canon doesn't sell the best technology it has.

Now you seem to be saying that it may not be the best for everyone - which is exactly the point I made.

So, in other words, you've simply back-tracked from your initial comment and begun stating the obvious.
No, I didn't. That was you putting words into my mouth, which is a straw man argument.
But you still think insulting me makes you the bigger man. OK, I concede. Congrats.
Me stating I think you make straw man arguments for argument's sake is exactly that. E.g. you didn't try to say how many MP is good, just argued in a non-specific way that more isn't always better. Is the EOS 350D worse than the 300D, just because it upgraded the sensor from 6.3MP to 8MP?
 

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,282
1,065
www.flickr.com
As an optional attachment, the EVF should slide into a port in the hot shoe. It could allow centered placement, and protrude off of the camera back. This allows use by either eye. Of course it should be weather resistant and have another hot shoe on it’s top.
As a bonus, that additional hot shoe could accept another EVF. This would make vertical camera holding with the 5.2/2.8 dual fish eye not cumbersome at all...
The Sigma fp L external EVF is attached on the side of the camera - rangefinder style. Reviews say that it isn't the best. If I recall correctly, it couldn't be attached on the top.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: 1 user

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,282
1,065
www.flickr.com
I think we all understand that IBIS is less effective on longer lenses, but the question of IBIS and telephoto lenses was in regard to whether the camera would have IBIS or not, the argument being that because users will be using telephoto lenses the camera does not need IBIS. Or at least that is how I interpret the initial statement, here:

"David - Sydney said:

I am not sure that the R7 will have IBIS. It will mostly be targeted at telephoto users where IBIS is less effective anyway."
Wow! I didn't expect my comment to elicit such a divergent response. I hope that there has been some education for forum members :)
 

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,282
1,065
www.flickr.com
David, Sydney is full of Ibis - so much so I recall you call them "bin chickens", "tip turkeys", "sandwich snatchers" and "picnic pirates". Here's one I took outside our hotel there pre-covid. Has anyone tried to see if Ibis gives any stabilization to the good old EF 400mm f/5.6 L? View attachment 202279
Very true... only problem is trying to fit an Ibis into a camera... Canon have had difficulties 3D printing them small enough :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,282
1,065
www.flickr.com
Birds in flight is not the only use of a telephoto lens. Most of my subjects are perched birds for example, in the forest where it’s really, really dark. A hell of a lot of shots are like 1/50 sec at 600mm focal length. The more IS the better!
Yes, more lens IS but sensor IS is LESS effective due to the massive sensor shift movements needed to counteract movement of the image at 600mm vs at 35mm for instance
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,282
1,065
www.flickr.com
I’m not saying Canon should ‘not include IS because most R7 users will be telephoto shooters’, I don’t think anyone in this forum understands who Canon will be targeting with an APS-C RF body. If they leave out IBIS, it will be because it’s a low cost body intended to pull Rebel/xxxD users into the RF ecosystem.
Yes, my original point was to reduce cost with a APS-C R7. Of course, if it includes it, the sticker price will be higher.
One of the very few argument points against the R5c was the omission of IBIS as it would impact stills shooters but cinema users would be less likely to miss it.
Did Canon do it to reduce cost or was there an engineering issue of heat transfer from the sensor that the IBIS mechanism couldn't handle (or both)?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,282
1,065
www.flickr.com
Perhaps a graphic from Canon will help. The blue line is labeled Sensor Shift Only (aka IBIS). See how it drops off along the Focal Length axis toward the Telephoto Side?
View attachment 202281
If you still cannot grasp the concept that IBIS is less effective at longer focal lengths, perhaps you should just ignore the technological aspects of photography and stick to pressing the shutter button.
The interesting part of the graphic for me was the significant advantage of IBIS at wide focal lengths over lens IS but there were complaints about jello effects from video users at wide angles. It was assumed that the combined lens IS/IBIS was not working well together and that Canon would release a firmware update to fix it or at least include the option to turn off IBIS and leave lens IS on. Neither of which seems to have happened (yet).
 

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,282
1,065
www.flickr.com
No one really knows, because the typical EOS M buyer doesn't really shoot action, and typical action shooters want cameras that aren't as delicate as an M6 Mark II with an eye level viewfinder attached to the hot shoe.
That may be true (we don't really know for sure) but the point is that the camera can do sports with pixel density for reach and good fps.
If you are referring to professional sports shooters then there would be very few in my opinion but the stereotypical "soccer mum" would think that it is a good camera for action.
I really noticed the difference going from my 7D to 5Diii for indoor sports but I wouldn't have thought about using the M6ii as a replacement. My R5 is a dream now :)
 

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,282
1,065
www.flickr.com
I'm a current 7D Mark II user who has never owned a wide angle EF-S lens (unless you count a single 18-55mm kit lens, which I do not consider wide angle on APS-C). If I want to take a wide angle shot, I use one of my FF bodies.
And this is my point that I think that the R7 will be aimed at telephoto users who want pixels-on-subject rather than having a low cost model by a smaller sensor size. Adapting EF-s lenses in your case (and knowledge/experience) would be a no-brainer if you needed it and didn't have a ff body.
 

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,282
1,065
www.flickr.com
That is ridiculous. First they get rid of the mirror and say that an EVF is better than an OVF and then they get rid of the EVF.

Keep in mind that even the cheapest DSLR has a viewfinder.
That is a good point that APS-c DLSRs will still be made for some time to come. Canon has optimised the cost of the pentaprism and mirror assembly to hit the Dxxx price points... but will the cost of the rear LCD may match it either now or in the future?
We are all talking about Canon's future models and future strategic direction.
The M series hasn't made the xxxD models obsolete so there is room for both if Canon can handle the product / inventory complexities.
 
Last edited:

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,282
1,065
www.flickr.com
Personally I hope Canon don’t take the viewfinder off the RP series. Unless you require fast frame rate there’s very little the current RP can’t do, the ergonomics and interface are as quick as my 5 series, so that makes it a bargain priced “competent” camera. Judging by the serial numbers since 2019 Canon are moving a lot of them.
There is no doubt that keeping both the EVF and rear LCD will be the best solution but we are discussing how Canon can release models that are lower cost as bridge to higher end products. Leveraging the R mount is the obvious choice and removing the EVF (a la M100/200 and Sigma fp/fpL) are choices.
There is no doubt that many togs will comment negatively about the removal of the EVF (similar to R5c commentators about the removal of IBIS) but it is unlikely that they are the target audience.
I would like a back-up R body when I am able to do a big landscape photography workshop next. I remember drowning a 7D on a trip and borrowing a 80D and thinking that the flippy screen was amazing!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users