There is an APS-C RF mount camera coming [CR3]

Nigel95

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 2, 2020
66
87
Yep , basically an R6 with a high quality crop sensor and No AA filter and no ibis please !
I would love to have IBIS with the option to turn it off in the menu. While keeping lens stabilisation active so you have the choice if it works against you. For example with UWA video wobbles. Although maybe it's less of a problem with Aps-C than FF. You don't want IBIS because you don't need it for BIF?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chig

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
428
519
Orewa , New Zealand
Question, what an APS-C sensor will do betten than than the FF R5? unless it is a 35-40MP and extra fast shooting speed (over 20FPS). I can crop 32.5MP from the FF R5 and get simialr results to the 90D. while the R5 gives 20 FPS? They need this model to be far more advnaced than the R5 to make people shift to it.
Much cheaper than the R5 just for starters and 1.6x crop of the R5 gives only 17MP , if they use 90D or similar sensor in an R6 body and same processor/specs but with ibis and AA filter left out Canon can price the R7 a bit cheaper than the R6
Potentially faster performance than the R5 or R6 with the smaller file sizes too
 

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
428
519
Orewa , New Zealand
I would love to have IBIS with the option to turn it off in the menu. While keeping lens stabilisation active so you have the choice if it works against you. For example with UWA video wobbles. Although maybe it's less of a problem with Aps-C than FF. You don't want IBIS because you don't need it for BIF?
Yes exactly , I don't need ibis or an AA filter (and don't care about video )for BIF which is what many people would I think buy this camera for
 

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
428
519
Orewa , New Zealand
I like the idea and it was really only a matter of time.

But as it stands this only makes sense for wildlife and sports shooters. There are no APS-C lenses in the RF lineup, and nothing on the wider end (10mm) that would suit vloggers. You'll just be paying for bigger, heavier, more expensive glass that you aren't getting value from, and at that point you're better off going Sony or Fuji.
Yep , it's just for us Birds in Flight nutters, cheap cameras are ******* !
 

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
695
889
Cinema cameras aside, why?

Who want's this over full-frame? With today's processors, FF has proven to be just as performant as something like the 7D line. If you give me the "reach" argument, then I would give you the FF crop argument. If you give me the cost argument, then I point to the RP. Cheaper than that then you're going to have an up-hill battle against Fujifilm and Sony, or you know, Canon's M lineup.

I don't think it makes any sense, but maybe that's just me. I just hope they don't split their attention developing 'RF-S' lenses that are inferior in every way.

The only way it would be remotely interesting to me is if they made a really good, significantly more compact camera body with some really good, compact, L-glass (IE, competitive with Fuji's lenses), while also obviously maintaining the ability to use FF lenses. Then, maybe I'd justify one as a travel camera/backup body.

But seeing as how they never made L-glass for EF-S...

In other words, give me an RF line of APS-C lenses that can go toe-to-toe with Fuji X or GTFO.

I think it's just you. Give me a full frame with 10fps, 45-50MP, with the latest weather sealing and AF for $2000. Until that happens, nothing can properly replace a 7D, not a $4000 R5, nor a slow RP.
 

Stig Nygaard

EOS 7D II, Powershot G5 X II & Olympus TG-5
CR Pro
Jul 10, 2013
132
234
Copenhagen
www.flickr.com
Why would that be? Even if it were less, in the smaller Form factor mentioned in the OP, even the same amount of heat as current offerings would become more challenging to deal with.

Granted, I'm not an expert here. I've been told there's several advantages of a small physical sensor when it comes to video. But I don't remember the details. So okay, maybe that claim is a bit questionable.
 

Nigel95

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 2, 2020
66
87
If you give me the cost argument, then I point to the RP. Cheaper than that then you're going to have an up-hill battle against Fujifilm and Sony, or you know, Canon's M lineup.

I don't think it makes any sense, but maybe that's just me. I just hope they don't split their attention developing 'RF-S' lenses that are inferior in every way.

The only way it would be remotely interesting to me is if they made a really good, significantly more compact camera body with some really good, compact, L-glass (IE, competitive with Fuji's lenses), while also obviously maintaining the ability to use FF lenses. Then, maybe I'd justify one as a travel camera/backup body.
Luckily we have Sigma with decent IMO APS-C glass. There is nothing wrong with my current EF-S glass, I love it. I just want a capable high end APS-C body (like Fuji XT4 but with Canon AF). Right now I have to jump to FF for the specs I want, while I don't need the FF benefits for my style. I would love to have the R6 at that price but then I am forced to swap all my EF-S glass for FF glass. This is where the problem begins. As a hobby enthousiast I really love cameras. But a R6 or R5 with 3 FF lenses is just out of my league. I love the idea about an APS-C R body much more than a M line body. M line feels too small as a main camera ergonomics wise for me. Just a R6 with 1 decent lens doesn't cover my focal length needs.
 

GMCPhotographics

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Aug 22, 2010
1,701
423
50
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
But a crop sensor simply throws away light that would otherwise have fallen onto a sensor--basically throwing away pixels but earlier in the process. Of course if you use an APS-C lens that doesn't happen--the pixels are thrown away even earlier than that.

What is "reach" anyway if not the ability to PRETEND to have a longer lens by cropping the picture?
All camera formats are a crop of some sorts relative to other formats. Look at Mediaum format...or even Large Format. In large format...a 135mm lens on a 5x7" plate camera gives an effective field of view as a 26mm lens on a 35mm sensor. So the effective "reach" on a smaller sensor is very relative. If you compare the larger 8x10" frame sizes of the largest field cameras...then a 135mm focal length compares to an 18mm on a 35mm frame. A standard lens on an 8x10 is a whopping 210mm. So in theory, if we had massive resolution plate cameras (silly expensive sensors) we could have one lens (a 70-200mm f2.8 zoom) that could cover silly ultra wide (1mm) to 300mm telephoto depending on our crop down size from the massive 8x10" plate to 1.6c crop sensor. The caveate here is that the 70-200 mm f2.8 would be massive due to the image circel requirement of the 8x10" plate camera...but the maths example stands as a theoretical possibility.

Back in the day when I used to run 1.62x crop to supplement my full frame camera bodies, I would use the same lenses on both cameras. An example of the crop maths, my 70-200 f2.8 LIS would become and effective 110-320mm f4 LIS. Or my ef 400mm f2.8 LIS became an effective 640mm f4 LIS. Then I realised that a simple 1.4x TC offered roughly the same effect at the long end, slightly shorter, but close enough. The difference being that the cropped body had a faster frame rate than my full frame camera, the AF was slightly superior natively than the full frame with a 1.4x TC and the files sizes were smaller and faster to edit en-mass. However, the 1.4 TC option was smaller, lighter and a lot cheaper.
 
Last edited:

Skux

EOS 90D
Feb 21, 2020
129
165
Nothing stops you from buying EF-S lenses (if you don't have it already).
That being said, Fujifilm has build a really nice APS-C mirrorless system, and seems to be serious about APS-C. Nice cameras and a wide selection of native lenses. If they had an advanced AF-technology, I would be tempted.

If you're gonna buy an RF camera just to put EF-S lenses in it, you might as well get an EF-M camera.

An RF APS-C camera would need to have features like dual card slots or IBIS to make it different and better than what they already offer.
 

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,898
1,046
UK
www.flickr.com
Definitely would be interested. It's always funny to read the comments from the "you may as well get FF" crowd. I would expect that there will be 32 MP in this APS-C camera - the R5 in crop mode has 17 (and that is considerably more than the other R FF bodies). So, advantage APS-C. Although we don't know the price, I would expect it to be about 1/2 that of the R5. So, BIG advantage APS-C. I mean, the R5 sounds like a great camera, but for many of us, the price tag means we will never get it, nor ever consider it. Love it when people write, "just get an R5 if you want to replace your 7D II." Sure, if you will pay for it - and put a higher MP sensor in it!

The biggest advantage APS-C had over FF was always price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nigel95

Nigel95

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 2, 2020
66
87
If you're gonna buy an RF camera just to put EF-S lenses in it, you might as well get an EF-M camera.
EF-M isn't doing it for my ergonomics wise. An APS-C R body will suit my needs much better as a main camera.

What if your happy with your current EF-S glass and it will still work on your nice new APS-C R body with decent specs? In the future you can upgrade to other RF glass if you have more budget? The EF-M lens developments over the last years (beside Sigma) isn't looking promising for me. If I buy a high end APS-C body I would like it to be a bit more future proof. And I have more trust in RF glass and system. Hopefully third party will also jump in to make APS-C RF glass. In the mean time my EF-S glass will work fine. EF-M is all about small and compact. Not something I am looking for as a main camera.
 
Last edited:

koenkooi

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
1,919
1,860
EF-M isn't doing it for my ergonomics wise. An APS-C R body will suit my needs much better as a main camera.
[..] EF-M is all about small and compact. Not something I am looking for as a main camera.

It's very hard to beat an M+32mm f/1.4 for quality/size/weight with the R system, which is why that combination sits on the living room table to take candids of the kids or put into a bag to come along with an outing. But even with Smallrig L-bracket that also beefs up the grip, the M6II isn't fun to use with 'big' lenses like the 100-400L or 180L. The R5 gives me about the same pixel density as my 7D, so I don't have a lot of use for that body anymore. An APS-C R would make my macro work easier for far away creatures like dragonflies or high magnification subjects like ants and aphids.

But at this moment I don't think an APS-C R would improve those things enough for me to spend money on it. I'm waiting for an Mx00 with eye-AF in servo mode (IBIS would be neat as well). That would make a great around-the-house camera, the R5 does the rest.
 

Antono Refa

EOS R
Mar 26, 2014
1,337
444
The biggest advantage APS-C had over FF was always price.

Price of the camera, the lenses, or both? My impression is MILC has taken most of the inherent difference in the camera itself.

With no mirror, part of the price difference due to smaller mirror and weaker motor is gone. So is the saving on pentamirror vs pentaprism, etc.

Smaller sensor will always be cheaper, as manufacturers get more sensors per wafer and lower % of defects, but AFAIK I've read the difference isn't what it used to be in the early DSLR era.

The rest of the difference is where the manufacturer wants it to be, e.g. one memory slot rather than two, and less RAM for buffer.
 

Stig Nygaard

EOS 7D II, Powershot G5 X II & Olympus TG-5
CR Pro
Jul 10, 2013
132
234
Copenhagen
www.flickr.com
If you're gonna buy an RF camera just to put EF-S lenses in it, you might as well get an EF-M camera.

I will use EF-S when there are no better choice. But I expect to add one or more long RF lenses to my collection.

An RF APS-C camera would need to have features like dual card slots or IBIS to make it different and better than what they already offer.

I would definitely expect that from the rumored camera.

I also want to invest in a camerasystem I see a future in. I have never seen that in EOS-M.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LRPP

Marximusprime

EOS M6 Mark II
Sep 18, 2018
60
61
DO WANT. I would GLADLY pay $2k for a crop-sensor version of the R5/6. 12+ FPS mechanical, IBIS, good weather sealing, DPAF II, 30ish MP (not so high that it's difficult for some lenses to resolve); that's all I need/want. The rumored size is a little concerning, but if it came with, say, the little grip extension like the RP, I'd have no problem. I found that combo to be the most comfortable camera I've ever held.
Also: to use that 800 f/11 on crop...whoo.
 
Last edited:

bbasiaga

Canon Shooter
Nov 15, 2011
468
541
USA
I don't really think Canon sees the M line as part of the same continuum as the rebel/dslr/RF mount line. They have rebel cameras that compete on price points with the M series, and always have. So this new APSc RF body won't be constrained by that. I don't know what the future of the M series is, but I think Canon sees it as a line for a younger audience of travelers and vloggers, parallel to their other camera lines.

I guess I could see some APSc RF cameras coming in to replace the Rebel line at price points below the RP. Its probably necessary to go to APSc to achieve that costco kit that's $999 with a pair of kit lenses. And that is an important seller for Canon. I wonder if this first APSc will be the 7D style performance body so many are hoping for, or the first in this consumer line of MILC?

-Brian
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maru