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

Deleted

7D2
Sep 30, 2021
111
337
For me, APS-C means more pixels on subject for a given focal length. I hike around a lot so if I can get the same amount of pixels on wildlife with a 100-400 on an APS-C as Ican with a 600F4 on a FF then I will always favour the smaller setup.

Macro is similar. I favour my 60mm/APS-C combo over my 100mm/FF camera. I shoot macro exclusively handheld in the wild and the heavier kit really makes my arms ache and as a result less steady. That is also one reason I don’t use my MPE-65 handheld for too long, it is a heavy beast especially extended.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users

chrisrmueller

EOS M50
CR Pro
Oct 23, 2018
44
32
I would love to see an R7 that is an R5 body with a new APS-C sensor in it. I say R5 and not R6 because I really like that Mode button for convenience and the CFexpress/SD combo for high speed. Something like this in the high $1,000's would be an absolute winner.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 5 users

reefroamer

EOS 90D
CR Pro
Jun 21, 2014
133
186
From my understanding, all existing Canon EF-S (APSC) lenses should work perfectly with the EF-R adapter on any R-mount crop sensor Canon bodies. That would include ultra wide angle lenses like the EF-S 10-18. I believe these EF-S lenses would fill the entire smaller APSC sensor without cropping (as happens on the full-frame R bodies). Thus, buyers of crop sensor R bodies would have plenty of crop lens choices from the get-go. Canon might develop native R mount crop lenses if they saw the demand, but users could adapt all the existing EF-S lenses to meet immediate needs. And that might be all there is to it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

chrisrmueller

EOS M50
CR Pro
Oct 23, 2018
44
32
From my understanding, all existing Canon EF-S (APSC) lenses should work perfectly with the EF-R adapter on any R-mount crop sensor Canon bodies. That would include ultra wide angle lenses like the EF-S 10-18. I believe these EF-S lenses would fill the entire smaller APSC sensor without cropping (as happens on the full-frame R bodies). Thus, buyers of crop sensor R bodies would have plenty of crop lens choices from the get-go. Canon might develop native R mount crop lenses if they saw the demand, but users could adapt all the existing EF-S lenses to meet immediate needs. And that might be all there is to it.
This is true. I used my Canon EF-S 10-18 and Sigma 18-35 on my R and R5 all the time; the camera intelligently auto-switches to the 1.6 crop mode in photo and video mode so the entire sensor was covered. And those focal lengths were really helpful shooting wide with the R's 4K crop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

lote82

EOS 90D
Jan 4, 2022
158
137
Here we go again... "RF should be ff only" followed by "M has everything we need" in 3, 2, 1...
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,567
2,472
I can see Canon having photographers mount EF-S lenses with an adapter, and if any of those that doesn't have a FF equivalent becomes popular, repackage it / make a new version for RF.

This time we don't need a pseudo-different mount to prevent a -S lens from being put onto a regular RF mount, as the camera will crop down automatically. So I see no need to create a distinct RF-S mount, even if they do decide to create a crop RF lens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
986
1,164
UK
If its an ultra compact camera like the Sigma FP, I may be interested. Maybe fullframe or APS-C. As long as its offering good quality images, I would be very interested in this for travel/hiking :) EVF may be added on an acessory port, like on the Sigma FP. Which would be an interesting camera for travel, if there where some tiny pancake lenses for that fullframe sensor. Like a 50mm 1,8 pancake or a 35mm 1,8 or a 16mm f2,8 like canon offers.

If we see how tiny they can build lenses for the FF RF cameras (50mm 1,8 or the tiny 16mm f2,8) it would be very interesting to see, how small they can build lenses for an APS-C camera with the RF mount =)
I don't think having an add-on EVF is a very elegant solution. For one thing, it's pretty small and quite likely to get lost. For another, it will be expensive - the EVF-DC2 for the M series cameras costs a crazy £250. It's a lot cheaper to build it into the camera in the first place, and infinitely more convenient. Perhaps if Canon are aiming for a low price *and* a tiny compact camera, they might consider a pop-up EVF - but these are generally very low magnification and not of much use (low magnification makes it hard to see details).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

bbasiaga

Canon Shooter
Nov 15, 2011
551
687
USA
This time we don't need a pseudo-different mount to prevent a -S lens from being put onto a regular RF mount, as the camera will crop down automatically. So I see no need to create a distinct RF-S mount, even if they do decide to create a crop RF lens.
The cheaper wide lenses already available are the first APS-c lenses. Listen to me here - they don't quite cover a FF image sensor properly, and rely heavily on in-camera correction profiles at their wide angles (think 24-240, 16mm 2.8). But pop that on an APSC and you are using the center of those image circles only. They are small, lightweight and less expensive. But, unlike EF-s, they also work great on FF thanks to the computational power of the bodies now offered and provided lens corrections. We've seen patents for more that appear to use the same concept, One mount, one lens type, covering both APS-c and and FF sensors and ensuring you can upgrade to FF and use your current glass.

-Brian
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 users

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
502
1,107
I don't think having an add-on EVF is a very elegant solution. For one thing, it's pretty small and quite likely to get lost. For another, it will be expensive - the EVF-DC2 for the M series cameras costs a crazy £250. It's a lot cheaper to build it into the camera in the first place, and infinitely more convenient. Perhaps if Canon are aiming for a low price *and* a tiny compact camera, they might consider a pop-up EVF - but these are generally very low magnification and not of much use (low magnification makes it hard to see details).
An add on EVF may not be elegant, but it will allow the camera without an EVF to be sold at that lower price point that Canon may be aiming for, while also giving those who want an EVF the chance to buy the lowest cost R camera. I briefly owned the M6 II and bought the add-on EVF and it worked great for me. I bought the add-on EVF used, so it cost me less than $250. If they offer the low cost R camera without an EVF at all - than that would be a camera I would never buy - even for 50 bucks. There's no way I can hold the camera at arm's length and take the shot along with the fact that you can't see the screen in many lighting conditions. So no EVF means no buy. Add-on EVF means potential buy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

bergstrom

Photographer
Feb 23, 2015
413
278
I want an RP2 or RX, new budget entry, WITH FAN,
proper HDMI,
full ULTRA 4k will do, can live without 8k,
NO recording time limit, or if there IS one, 2 hours max would be fine
24-30MP
lp-e6 battery (not the horrendous lp-e17)

I don't want it at $999 and stuff missing, I wouldn't mind paying $1500 and everyone happy with it.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
502
1,107
The cheaper wide lenses already available are the first APS-c lenses. Listen to me here - they don't quite cover a FF image sensor properly, and rely heavily on in-camera correction profiles at their wide angles (think 24-240, 16mm 2.8). But pop that on an APSC and you are using the center of those image circles only. They are small, lightweight and less expensive. But, unlike EF-s, they also work great on FF thanks to the computational power of the bodies now offered and provided lens corrections. We've seen patents for more that appear to use the same concept, One mount, one lens type, covering both APS-c and and FF sensors and ensuring you can upgrade to FF and use your current glass.

-Brian
I agree that the R system does not need specific RF-S lenses (with the possible exception of a wide angle entry), but the 24-240 is not designed for the focal lengths that a crop user will want, nor is it at the price point for entry level crop buyers. The 16mm will translate to a usable crop lens, but so far they don't have any other lenses that really fit both FF and crop focal lengths. But if Canon puts out a entry level crop camera, then all they really need is an R lens that is something like 18-55mm. That zoom range can be used by both FF and crop users, and there you have the R crop kit lens. Then, if they put out an inexpensive 70-200mm (similar build and price to the RF 24-105 non-L) they will have another lens that can easily be used for both FF and crop. Crop users who are into wildlife will be looking at the telephotos anyway, so no need to put out any lenses meant primarily for crop cameras.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Nov 29, 2015
34
31
I don't think having an add-on EVF is a very elegant solution. For one thing, it's pretty small and quite likely to get lost. For another, it will be expensive - the EVF-DC2 for the M series cameras costs a crazy £250. It's a lot cheaper to build it into the camera in the first place, and infinitely more convenient. Perhaps if Canon are aiming for a low price *and* a tiny compact camera, they might consider a pop-up EVF - but these are generally very low magnification and not of much use (low magnification makes it hard to see details).
I have had an M6 with EVF-DC2 since 2017, and the M6II since 2019. I've never even come close to losing the EVF, which I rarely use, but always have with me, just in case. I agree that $250 (or pounds) is a lot to pay for it. I got mine bundled in a deal when I bought my M6, and it cost me $49. If Canon offered the EVF discounted in bundles with a tiny R camera, that would be a great idea. What I really love about the detachable EVF for the M6 and M6II is that it allows me to use the camera without an EVF most of the time. I only use it with longer lenses. The M6 and M6II are so wonderfully light and compact that I carry them with me far more than my R. A friend recently moved from his Nikon D800 to a Sony A7C just because of the size.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

bergstrom

Photographer
Feb 23, 2015
413
278
and hopefully canon figure out whats causing these lock ups and prevent them happening again with new models.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

SaP34US

EOS 90D
Aug 21, 2018
137
14
I hope that the entry level apsc camera should have retro design like the Nikon Z fc so that design would that of the Canon AE 1.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 3 users

CanonGrunt

C70
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2012
287
210
How small could they get a crop sensor RF mount body? Say in comparison to the M5 or M6 MK II…
 

bbasiaga

Canon Shooter
Nov 15, 2011
551
687
USA
How small could they get a crop sensor RF mount body? Say in comparison to the M5 or M6 MK II…
for round numbers, say a half inch taller and wider to account for the increased diameter of the RF mount vs. EF-m mount. That's assuming the screen, EVF, battery, etc stay the same as the comparison body.

Brian
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

bbasiaga

Canon Shooter
Nov 15, 2011
551
687
USA
I agree that the R system does not need specific RF-S lenses (with the possible exception of a wide angle entry), but the 24-240 is not designed for the focal lengths that a crop user will want, nor is it at the price point for entry level crop buyers. The 16mm will translate to a usable crop lens, but so far they don't have any other lenses that really fit both FF and crop focal lengths. But if Canon puts out a entry level crop camera, then all they really need is an R lens that is something like 18-55mm. That zoom range can be used by both FF and crop users, and there you have the R crop kit lens. Then, if they put out an inexpensive 70-200mm (similar build and price to the RF 24-105 non-L) they will have another lens that can easily be used for both FF and crop. Crop users who are into wildlife will be looking at the telephotos anyway, so no need to put out any lenses meant primarily for crop cameras.
agreed, the 24-240 is not a typical analog range when used on a crop body, but it is an example of how the lenses will be designed to be compatible with both. THere were a bunch of patents for 18-xx or xxx zooms over the past few years. We'll see one or more of them.

Brian
 

mxwphoto

R6 and be there
Jun 20, 2013
53
85
My guess, R7 at 36mpx newly developed crop sensor with Digic 11 and IBIS, mechanical shutter, essentially a R5 or R6 but cropped, maybe 8k, 14fps mechanical. Priced $2200-2500. This would not be an entry or mid level crop camera, it would be a companion to R3 for wildlife/other long reach uses.

R successor R8 or R9 probably 20-24mpx so as to not blow out R6 on the hierarchy and R6ii will have a 34mpx sensor for 8k. Have EVF, Digic X, IBIS, no mechanical shutter, limited to 10-12fps priced around $1699.

RPii or R100 or RKiss $999 using R6 sensor with Digic X, no IBIS, no EVF, no mechanical shutter, small battery and no raw on video (lack hdmi perhaps), limited 4k, limited to 5-8fps
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,239
1,032
www.flickr.com
I'd love a small camera for underwater photography work. If that means ditching the viewfinder and APS-C, so be it. Of course, with APS-C you also need the right lenses (60ish macro for me).
You can always adapt the EF-s lenses which include the 60mm macro. It may not be a tiny package but it would be cheap(ish).
There is no doubt that my Ikelite R5 setup can't get in very close to the action especially when using an 8" dome!
 

cgc

I'm New Here
Feb 9, 2016
24
37
And where you where did you come up with the idea that there might not be other R APS-C cameras in the future...and no APS-C glass?? Oh, you just made that up and then made deductions from a made up conclusion. I see you are new here. Off to a good start!
Now it there will be many full frame bodies:

Previously: 1DX, 5D4, 5DS, 6D (total of 4)
Now: R-entry, R-better, R6, R5, R3, R1 (total of 6)

I'd assume that more market segmentation in full frame implies less room for crop sensors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users