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

vangelismm

EOS 90D
Jul 28, 2015
137
88
The sigma 18-35mm 1.8 and Canon 60mm macro are perfectly fine EF-S lenses to pair with a capable high end aps c body. The Canon 10-18mm isn't too bad either.

What if someone already has a lot of EF-S glass? Wants a more updated hybrid body with better video specs like R5 and R6, but doesn't have the money to swap the body + several lenses to FF. The transition to FF if you have 3+ lenses to switch is very expensive. If someone wants to cover UWA, medium and short telephoto range for example and doesn't want to live with only 1 lens on new FF body.

I love my ef-s 24mm and the 55-250 STM.
But i still do not think it justify.
 

Andy Westwood

EOS R6
CR Pro
Dec 10, 2016
170
273
UK
Interesting what is said about the lenses to accommodate the new RF APS-C mount, this could be good news also for existing RP owners who seek cheaper glass over the great but widely expense red stripe and big whites lenses.

On the subject of AF, it looks like the future is DPAF II for all new R bodies, last week I gave my R6 its first real test shooting 2500 images over a two day fashion shoot under tricky lighting conditions. The eye AF worked very well nearly all the time, having said that I didn’t see a massive leap in performance over the firmware improved AF of the original R.

I’m not having a go at the R6 but merely suggesting the eye AF on the original R isn’t that bad for the current selling price.
 
Last edited:
Feb 7, 2013
117
34
Anticipated that Canon will do this to branch their (70d, 7d) equivalent APS ML into the RF mount, hopefully with some APS RF lenses as well giving Sony and Nikon a run for their money.

Only question is what's going to happen to their existing APS ML system ? - will Canon keep investing in the EOS M mount or gradually kill it off before moving everything APS & FF under the RF mount.
 

Sibir Lupus

EOS M6 Mark II + EOS M200
Feb 4, 2015
163
122
38
Judging by this rumor, I don't know if this really rules out an M5 successor. Especially seeing as the rumor mentions that no RF-S lenses will be made for this APS-C RF mount camera. I'm still hopeful for an M5 Mark II announced sometime before the 2nd quarter next year.
 

Nigel95

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 2, 2020
66
87
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.
Sure if I had a R5 and wanted something with decent IQ and travel light the M series is great. But I don't have a R5.

If there would never be an APS-C R body and a high end M7. I would had to go for that option. But if I could choose I definitely lean towards R style body with better ergonomics instead of a M7 with extra attachments to make it more comfortable to hold. As it will be my main camera don't have a R6 or R5.

What concerns me about M line is that it doesn't seem to get much attention for new (high end) lenses. RF system will cover me much more future wise (I think) .

It would be nice if Canon could make a high end body and introduce it both in the M and R line with same specs. So people can choose what they prefer.

If I ever wanted to jump FF I could first get some RF lenses and upgrade the body later.

Canon bring on this APS-C R body I want it!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fletchahh

slclick

PINHOLE
Dec 17, 2013
4,567
2,909
1/2 the responses seem to think it will be entry level and base/compare reasoning to the M line and the other 1/2 a 7D2 successor. Makes me think how those who come into the craft post mirrorless view things so differently. Maybe it's the curmudgeon in me. idk
 
  • Like
Reactions: AccipiterQ

Eimajm

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 10, 2011
51
1
RP is definitely an enthusiast camera, at least by Canon terms, and transparently marketed to compete with early A7s - released at a low spec to decelerate quickly and come down to a price that competes with Sony's entry level mirrorless. And I don't think anyone is missing using EF-S glass. It's not great. And if your argument is to lose the full frame, and lose the RF Glass... I revert to my original point - why would you buy an APS-C RF mount camera?
Because FF at the same pixel density is normally 1. much more expensive and 2. Slower frame rates due to the processor having to process many more pixels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fletchahh

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,317
3,870
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
I don't have any issues with Canon releasing a 7D replacement in RF. I just don't believe that it will be cheap for what people want from it. The days of the 7D series being cheap/fast/good AF and weather sealed are over.... and if I am wrong then everyone wins :)
I don't believe it will be cheap either. For it to be a true 7D replacement it has to have all the features of the R5. The days when the major cost difference between full frame and crop sensor could be ascribed to the sensor cost are long past. Making a 7D replacement significantly cheaper than the R5 would now require compromises in the feature set and that defeats the purpose of the 7 series, which was all about a full feature set in a crop sensor.
 

reef58

EOS RP
CR Pro
Apr 16, 2016
423
409
North Carolina
youtu.be
Given the hint at the feature set, this is appeasement for the 7DII whiners. The no RF-s lens comment is encouraging news for M owners. I is a tricky path to navigate, but Canon must have figured there were enough potential big whites in the mix to make this worthwhile. The 7DII crowd makes no sense to me. If you are going to spend 10 or 20 grand on glass, why not get a body (R5 or R5s) that can fully utilize it, not to mention giving you a much bigger field of view when using for what this crowd is planning?. Canon does listen to customers, so we have to assume that segment was large enough and loud enough to justify making them their very own trinket.

Pixel Density
 

Kane Clements

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 6, 2019
54
43
Yeahhh buddyyy. Watch out birds.

Some hopeful specs:
Joystick
~10fps still shooting
30mp sensor, like the one in the 90D/M6 II
At least one UHS-II slot, or one CFexpress slot
Video: don't care, but it will probably have at least 4k 30p
USB-C charging while shooting
Flippy, rather than tilty-flippy screen. It's way quicker for low shots and subjects that are in motion
Tight weather sealing. I wanna be able to shoot birds with God's natural softbox in the rain
IBIS: I don't care too much, but it will probably have it
An Olympus Pro Capture-like feature
120Hz mode for the EVF

I expect to pay ~$2k or a little less for this

With the exception of the MP there are cameras out there that fit the bill. X-T4 and X-T3 from Fuji. Why wait for Canon Vapourware, again.
 

reef58

EOS RP
CR Pro
Apr 16, 2016
423
409
North Carolina
youtu.be
I don't have any issues with Canon releasing a 7D replacement in RF. I just don't believe that it will be cheap for what people want from it. The days of the 7D series being cheap/fast/good AF and weather sealed are over.... and if I am wrong then everyone wins :)

It will probably be priced similar to the 7d2 in the same fashion the R5 was priced similar to the 5d4. The 7d2 was introduced as nearly a $2000 camera. I would guess unless it is really high end $2199 or so.
 

riker

5D4
Jan 19, 2015
111
52
riker.hu
A budget option without budget crop exclusive lenses wouldn't make sense to me.

Exactly. I'm pretty disappointed. I was hoping that with R the days of APS-C are finally over. No need for it anymore, FF is cheap, body is small.
I wish R was FF-only, and EF-M was the more portable APS-C line and that's it. It could be such a nice and clean product portfolio.
And they say EF-M will be discontinued. wtf.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: LRPP

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,436
2,304
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.

Indeed. There's this wide perception that the thing we call "full frame" is "normal." It could have been anything.

I spent years doing nothing but APS-C--to me, it was normal, and all the talk about that 35mm lens being like a 56 mm on an APS-C was meaningless. To me, that 35 mm lens would be like a 22 mm lens if someone put it on a full frame, because to me what a 35 mm lens does on an APS-C is normal--i.e., what I am used to. (This is still true for me even though I've now dipped my toes into full frame. My first time with a full frame I was saying things like "Dang, this damn lens won't zoom in like it should!")
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jasonmc89

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
503
493
Pixel Density
Yes, I know, pixel density. I have a 90D and there are damn few lenses that will effectively use that pixel density. Also, the R5s will almost certainly have equivalent pixel density and still give you that FF field of view, so I stand by what I said above.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,436
2,304
Who says that though? People who mistake the M50 II as a small improvement, when it really is an upgrade in features at a reduced introduction price? That's just folks on forums, right?

Perhaps the people who thought if the M50 II didn't have IBIS and 32 MP (thus making it a better camera than the M6-II) the whole series was *******.

Sort of like expecting the R6 II to exceed the R1. They would never do such a thing.
 

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,726
2,135
Hamburg, Germany
Perhaps the people who thought if the M50 II didn't have IBIS and 32 MP (thus making it a better camera than the M6-II) the whole series was *******.

Sort of like expecting the R6 II to exceed the R1. They would never do such a thing.
I mean, I get the thinking. The M6 II, R6 and R5 have been huge pushes forward in technology. But as you say, expecting that momentum to apply equally at the low end, is not something to be expected from Canon.

They know how to sell cameras, they know price is a key factor in that, and sold the M50 incredibly well at its current price.

Keeping that price in the successor, while also adding meaningful updates to AF and at least some improvements on video features, is not an indication of the EF-M death to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fletchahh
Oct 11, 2018
7
0
In my opinion a APS-C EOS R makes sense for all the glass that is out there.
- It could make good use of the EF-S Lenses with the adapter without compromising to much of the frame.
- Entry level Camera for possible upgrade later to other R bodies with RF and then existing Lenses out of the EF and RF lineup.

I also have an EOS M5 and though it is nice to adapt all EF lenses the key is the size of the camera. Basically it is a travel camera for me, but also due to the size of my hands I prefer the EOS R size body for handling
 

Antono Refa

EOS R
Mar 26, 2014
1,326
434
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.

I'm not sure this continuum will continue to exist.

The EOS 850D is priced $750
The EOS RP is priced $900
The EOS 90D is priced at $1,200
The EOS R is priced at $1,800

So the existence of the continuum depends on lenses, e.g. the customer saving on something like the trio of kit lenses (10-18mm, 18-55mm, 55-250mm). I doubt Canon can make a 10-~20mm lens that would be both <$500 and give sufficiently good image quality for anyone with a FF camera to want to keep it. Actually, if the 18-55mm did a reasonable job on FF, the customer could dump the 10-18mm, so maybe Canon can pull off a crop RF rebel with a couple of lenses.