There are two more APS-C RF mount cameras coming [CR2]

Bob Howland

CR Pro
Mar 25, 2012
917
588
We need a few lens rumors to go with these camera rumors.
For example, 2 or 3 of the M-series lenses ought to be redesigned to fit the R mount.
The 32/1.4, 22/2, and one of the 15-xx zooms. 15 on the cropper gives a field of view of a 24 mm on FF, and makes a great all-around zoom range.
I vote for the 11-22. That together with the 18-150, 100-400 and R7 makes a nice lightweight kit. I'm getting old and want to lighten my load.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
CR Pro
Nov 7, 2013
5,691
8,593
Germany
The entry segment isn't dead at all. Canon actually makes the most profit there. There's still lots of people who want to upgrade from phone quality and look for something in the sub $1000 range. ...
I hope and suppose you are right.
But when looking around my friends, I see the majority being absolutely satisfied with their cell, and the others are more in the > €2.000 range.
But as I said, I am sure Canon knows their markets well...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
R50 is confusing to me, R100 or R1000 would make more sense to me and beginners who are learning the naming scheme. A common question would be, is the R50 better then the R10? Traditionally new generations of that line would be R10, R20, R30 etc. Maybe the R10 successor would be R10 mkII, R10 mkIII etc, that would be easier to learn for everyone in my opinion. Keep in mind I'm thinking about beginners who are new to Canon, not advanced users who post on forums who already know the naming scheme. Maybe they are naming it R50 to intend to replace the M50? Like an M50 with an RF mount.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

Pierre Lagarde

Canon, Nikon and So on ...
Aug 4, 2020
123
147
France
www.deviantart.com
We need a few lens rumors to go with these camera rumors.
For example, 2 or 3 of the M-series lenses ought to be redesigned to fit the R mount.
The 32/1.4, 22/2, and one of the 15-xx zooms. 15 on the cropper gives a field of view of a 24 mm on FF, and makes a great all-around zoom range.
Add the 11-22 to the list. If they just revamp the M 15-45, I'll pass as it was not the best lens in the M line-up. (that's personal).
Even if indeed, having 24mm equivalent is great, it needs to be improved to be interesting. Though, the larger mount could be a help for that purpose, and they even could make it a bit faster at the long end, as they can do it slightly bigger and match the likely increased size of cameras.
In fact, to my sense, the 11-22 is mandatory to have something really interesting as a whole system, as this lens is very unique considering size, weight and quality for the price and is clearly one of the main interest of the M line-up.
I think it has no competitor in that regard.
What would be cool is to have a 56mm F/1.4 too. The Sigma is great and one of the rare third party lenses I have ever kept.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

jam05

R5, C70
Mar 12, 2019
922
588
I'm expecting the R100 to be a 'R10 meets M6II form factor' and the R1000 to be 'R10 meets M50 form factor'. But I don't see why that would make the R1000 be a 4 digit model, so I must be wrong in my expectations :)
Form factor alone won't replace the M6mk2. 32.5mp is a major factor also. Meanwhile Canon recently increased the price of it refurbished units and the new unit prices havent budged in the US
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

jam05

R5, C70
Mar 12, 2019
922
588
When those prices come down on the M50 mk 2 and the M6mk2 you will know. On Canon's website those prices are far from coming down. If anything, the M6 mk 2 prices have actually increased in the last week. For example a refurbished M6mk2 increased from $549 to $679. Canon is making as much money from those cameras as it can. The prices of new items havent budged.
 
Upvote 0
Talk of a rangefinder style body always goes with talk of another APS-C body.

I wish Canon would recognize the value of a full-frame 'rangefinder' like the Sony a7C. WITH a viewfinder and a flip out screen so it can be used like an old Hasselblad or TLR at waist level. And resolution like an R5.

I've gotta have a full frame backup body for my work and it has to be full frame for the TS lenses I use—so I can't justify buying an APS-C anything. A rangefinder style would be perfect. I could actually use it instead of just bagging it, waiting on the unlikely failure of my primary camera.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
it could be a bit later: start of the cp+ is not Februar 2. 2023, it\'s Februar 23. 2023:
 
Upvote 0

ReflexVE

Fujifilm X-H2S (M50 Veteran)
CR Pro
May 5, 2020
161
163
Renton, WA
What about a high end APS-C camera? APS-C sadly is treated by Canon as a format for amateurs, although many professionals might want the longer reach that the crop gives them. Of course Canon did their market research, but I still see a lot of complaints in many R7 reviews. Mainly about the bad rolling shutter (The R7 needs more than 30ms to read out the sensor) and the lack of high quality glass for APS-C. Why can't there be something like a flagship APS-C camera for maybe $3,000 or so? Is there no demand for something like that? Don't wildlife photographers always crop anyway? Of course they could use buy the upcoming R1 and just use crop mode, but that would be overkill.
I mean it's working for Fuji. The X-H2S is a fantastic camera that has sold very well for Fuji. That said Canon does not have the lens lineup to sell such a camera for that price at the moment. If they chose to take the market seriously, there are customers for it and they need probably three primes and a good zoom built for APS-C to make it a worthwhile investment for a photographer.

I'd love to see it happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
The R7 e.g. outperforms the 7D series in almost every regard, but is priced as a novice camera and lacks several features (third control dial, integral vertical grip, high build quality etc) that are expected by most pros.
This is a complaint I see thrown around constantly, and frankly, I think it's comical. Most everyone seems to forget that there is a third control dial conveniently placed on pretty much every single RF lens on offer, and on an adapter if you want to use it on EF-mount lenses. To me, the control ring is one of the most impressive things about the RF mount design. It's an absolute coup, and yet it's the most neglected. Consider this: with the control ring plus two body control dials, you can take complete control over the entire exposure triangle pretty much simultaneously because you have both hands involved. Try that with separate thumb wheels. Having the control ring really made it easier for me to make quick adjustments on the fly, once I got used to using it. After a while, the gripe starts to sound less like "Canon won't give me the proper controls" and more like "I'm resistant to learning anything new."

Similarly, all I hear about the R7 is how sturdily it's built. The complaints against the R7 seem to be that it's either built too light, or has a plastic body. (Did the 7D have an all-metal body? I'm pretty sure it didn't, but I can't remember.) Either way, it's surprising, and makes me wonder if people are equating heavy with well-built and lighter with poorly built. It seems to me that Canon has done a pretty good job of charting a course between weight, size, and build. But it's important that I say directly that I spent a lot of time with the 7D or a lot of other cameras, so my vision is perhaps skewed a bit. I'm not filthy rich, and am lucky to afford the camera tools I have gotten my hands on. That has, by necessity, forced me to make the most of Canon's less expensive cameras, and accept some of their shortcomings and figure my way around them. That absolutely could give me a more forgiving perspective than others might have.

As with the M series, I think it very unlikely that they'll make more than half a dozen RF-S lenses, as *most* of the target buyers of the "R50" etc will probably only want/need a kit zoom and a pancake wide-angle.
I totally agree. The EF-S line wasn't all that robust either. At least having everything under one mount will make manufacturing and marketing a bit smoother, and reduce consumer confusion about what lens can be used on what camera. I have a feeling Canon will be moving pretty quickly to modify the cream of that crop for RF-S use. And I think that, once that's been done, and cameras in the M6 and maybe M5 form factors have been released, many of the new customers who may have purchased an M series camera in the past will transition seamlessly into the smaller Rs without ever really recognizing the difference. In fact, I would bet that Canon is eager to get those sales numbers rolled into the R series as quickly as they can so they can put the M series the rest of the way out to pasture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
I hope canon read all coments here.
Ok canon I am gonna tell you what we needs
1 .Small body size -apsc ( r7,10 are too big )
2. Build flash in body
3. Viewfinder ( look for Sony nex6 , a6400 etc.... They are small with viewfinder and flash build in )
4. Good quality full hd
- canon wide DR for video option , 4 k 25,24
5. Canon Dual AF
6. Canon color science


I can leave without 5axi stabilization
Canon c log , 4k 60p etc....

Canon I need small , pocket camera for everyday use , travel, family holiday.
I do not want to take big block 5dmk3 or R6 body everytime when I go outside or go for holidays . Just do it and I will back to you straight away.
 
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,998
2,438
UK
This is a complaint I see thrown around constantly, and frankly, I think it's comical. Most everyone seems to forget that there is a third control dial conveniently placed on pretty much every single RF lens on offer, and on an adapter if you want to use it on EF-mount lenses. To me, the control ring is one of the most impressive things about the RF mount design. It's an absolute coup, and yet it's the most neglected. Consider this: with the control ring plus two body control dials, you can take complete control over the entire exposure triangle pretty much simultaneously because you have both hands involved. Try that with separate thumb wheels. Having the control ring really made it easier for me to make quick adjustments on the fly, once I got used to using it. After a while, the gripe starts to sound less like "Canon won't give me the proper controls" and more like "I'm resistant to learning anything new."

Yes, that's a very good point. I can see that folk using just one body could quickly adjust to using the control ring instead of a third dial. I just prefer to use the traditional third dial on my R5, and wouldn't want to confuse my muscle memory, if I was switching back and forth between 2 bodies, by having to use the control ring on the R7.

It would just have been so easy (and IMO considerably better) to have put the R7 sensor and electronics in a R6 body shell. I suspect that the primary reason why Canon didn't do so, is because that would mean the R7 would then have to be priced a lot closer to the R6.

I would have been happy to pay more to get an R6-based R7, but Canon clearly believe that the affordable R7 will sell more units than a higher-priced version in a R6 shell, and they're probably correct. Anyway they've made the decision, so there's no point in me moaning about it.

Similarly, all I hear about the R7 is how sturdily it's built. The complaints against the R7 seem to be that it's either built too light, or has a plastic body. (Did the 7D have an all-metal body? I'm pretty sure it didn't, but I can't remember.) Either way, it's surprising, and makes me wonder if people are equating heavy with well-built and lighter with poorly built. It seems to me that Canon has done a pretty good job of charting a course between weight, size, and build. But it's important that I say directly that I spent a lot of time with the 7D or a lot of other cameras, so my vision is perhaps skewed a bit. I'm not filthy rich, and am lucky to afford the camera tools I have gotten my hands on. That has, by necessity, forced me to make the most of Canon's less expensive cameras, and accept some of their shortcomings and figure my way around them. That absolutely could give me a more forgiving perspective than others might have.
I'm pretty sure that my 7D and 7DMkii had all metal bodies, just like my 5DMkiii, 5DS and 5DMkiv. And yes, I do think a metal body is more durable than a polycarbonate shell, although it's just a gut feeling. My 5DS got dropped, knocked and banged, subjected to vibration and a whole lot more, yet it never dented, just scuffed the paintwork, and after a quarter of a million shutter actuations it was still functioning as good as new when I eventually sold it. My R5 feels well built, but I just don't think it would survive as well, and the R7 is built down to a price, and is less weather-proof than the R5 or R6.

I was excited initially when the R7 was announced, but have decided it isn't for me. I'm very tempted t get an R6 Mkii as a second body to my R5 though, but will be hanging in for a few more months hoping (probably in vain) for a R5 Mkii to be announced.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
What about a high end APS-C camera? APS-C sadly is treated by Canon as a format for amateurs, although many professionals might want the longer reach that the crop gives them. Of course Canon did their market research, but I still see a lot of complaints in many R7 reviews. Mainly about the bad rolling shutter (The R7 needs more than 30ms to read out the sensor) and the lack of high quality glass for APS-C. Why can't there be something like a flagship APS-C camera for maybe $3,000 or so? Is there no demand for something like that? Don't wildlife photographers always crop anyway? Of course they could use buy the upcoming R1 and just use crop mode, but that would be overkill.
Can you clarify about the lack of high quality glass for APS-C? All EF, EF-S and RF glass can be used on the R7/R10 and some it is pretty high quality.
Most APS-C high end users are using it for pixels-on-duck or working distance for macro.

The missing piece is the wide angle RF-S glass. Adapted EF-S glass can be used but otherwise there is no solution. Repackaging the decent wide angle glass (prime and zoom) would make sense to me. The only use case that would then be missing is a compact macro setup ie APS-C body + 60mm macro.

You can crop with R5 of course and get 17mp shots which is about the same as the 7D had.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
To me, the control ring is one of the most impressive things about the RF mount design. It's an absolute coup, and yet it's the most neglected. Consider this: with the control ring plus two body control dials, you can take complete control over the entire exposure triangle pretty much simultaneously because you have both hands involved.
I totally agree! The control ring was one of the "wow" features I loved instantly when I first picked up an R camera at the photokina in 2018.


At that time, I had destroyed my everlasting 1000d and was getting "serious/ more enthusiastic about photography. So, I was actually testing all kinds of cameras in order to find which system I would stick to next. Although some competitors did have better offerings (at least spec-wise) I just loved the ergonomics having control over the complete triangle. From there on out, all other cameras (e.g. Sony A7riii) felt weird to me. In the end, I admittedly loved the R although it was flawed (fps, eye control AF) but I picked it up anyway. Probably would have happened if it wasn't for that control ring. It was such a major factor to me!
 
Upvote 0