There is still discussion internally at Canon about an APS-C EOS R camera

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
491
454
Have I understood you correctly that you want Canon to sell a body that is the same as the R6 (USD2500) for at least USD700 less (to match the Fuji X-Pro3 pricing) with a new high density APS-C sensor. The R6 already has ~10fps (@12fps) and >200k clicks (@300k clicks).

You would additionally be willing to give up a card slot for an additional USD400 price reduction.

And you want Canon to do this so that it has a competitive APS-C offering for those Canon shooters where the existing options listed previously are not sufficient but there is a pent up demand for this body to sell successfully.

I am not trying to say that the R6 is cheap but it is clearly selling well. Would this new body cannibalise R6 sales meaning less profit for Canon?
Your irony will be lost on that one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David - Sydney

Bahrd

Red herrings...
Jun 30, 2013
179
126
I do. Moderate wide angle to portrait. Perfect for me. Paired with a 16-35 on a 6D2, or a 55-200 on an M series, as and when needed, that gives me pretty good choices for all kinds of general photography. We each have our own likes.
Still have (and sporadically use) the 1D Mk III. With an L-variety of lenses (from 8mm to 17, 85, 100, to 200mm). Never had an issue with weird focal lengths either...
But - as much as I like the idea of the APS-H sensor cameras - I don't believe Canon will reincarnate them. I suppose the nominal customers of the M series won't appreciate larger sensor if it comes at the expense of larger lenses...
 

dilbert

EOS 90D
Aug 12, 2010
113
92
If it's true that there's no reason for APS-C cameras to be significantly less expensive than equivalent FF, then clearly Canon is fleecing its FF customers.

Judging by some of the "white-box" prices that used to be seen, the answer to that is "Yes, Canon is fleecing its FF customers."

Premium product, premium price.

If APS-C gets killed by Canon then what justification is there for FF having a premium price?

Back to original topic ...
... if Canon goes RF-M for APS-C then Canon needs to develop more lenses because it won't be able to make an adapter for RF-M to RF (or users just forgo using RF lenses) but just how many is a good question. that is unless Canon wanted to allow EF-M or RF on RF-M with an adapter, the thickness of the RF-M body would need to be thinner than that of the already thin EF-M/RF bodies (at least where the lens mount is)
... if Canon goes RF on APS-C then customers will need to deal with larger/heavier lenses which will negate one of the primary reasons for using APS-C on mirrorless to deliver smaller camera/lens combinations and possibly drive those customers to other brands
 
  • Like
Reactions: mdcmdcmdc
Jul 23, 2021
5
1
Hope the M line will always stay, the bodies and lenses are so compact! I think it would be difficult to have an APSC R body as small as an M body, and even harder to have those nice and small EF-M optics at the same size and weigh ! See the difference between an EF-S 10-22 and an EF-M 11-22! The latter is so good, small and light !

But there's a clue about a possible APSC R camera : the existence of a RF 18-45 ! This lens would be very unusual for 24x36 sensors only ! What do you think ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

David_D

EOS M6 Mark II
Apr 19, 2021
52
52
The same justification as the price difference between the RP and R5?
I have read/watched various reviews of the R5 from professional photographers who say it enables them to get shots they would never of been able to capture with any other camera. For that Canon charge a premium which it appears people are willing to pay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: John Wilde

reefroamer

EOS 90D
CR Pro
Jun 21, 2014
105
130
Hope the M line will always stay, the bodies and lenses are so compact! I think it would be difficult to have an APSC R body as small as an M body, and even harder to have those nice and small EF-M optics at the same size and weigh ! See the difference between an EF-S 10-22 and an EF-M 11-22! The latter is so good, small and light !

But there's a clue about a possible APSC R camera : the existence of a RF 18-45 ! This lens would be very unusual for 24x36 sensors only ! What do you think ?
An RF 18-45 lens does not actually exist at this point, nor has one been announced by Canon. There are rumors that Canon will announce this lens, and they may well be correct. Such a lens might also be kitted with a rumored $799 full frame R body to offer a sub-$1,000 entry-level package. All speculation for now
 
Jul 23, 2021
5
1
An RF 18-45 lens does not actually exist at this point, nor has one been announced by Canon. There are rumors that Canon will announce this lens, and they may well be correct. Such a lens might also be kitted with a rumored $799 full frame R body to offer a sub-$1,000 entry-level package. All speculation for now
The screen capture (supposed from Canon), showing this RF 18-45 to be postponed to end of 2021. It seems that it's not really a rumor.
 

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
412
494
Orewa , New Zealand
While market research team discussing, 7D2 upset owners make their google research and start and find REAL alternative very attractive.
I much prefer my old 7Dii to Sony's dinky little toy camera thanks , I'm still hoping Canon brings out an R7 but eventually I'll probably buy an R5 which is an improvement over my 7Dii but not as much as an aps-c version of the R6 would be and a bit overpriced especially here in New Zealand where it sells for NZD$6,500 whereas I'd expect the R7 to be about NZD$4,000 which is much more reasonable
 

mdcmdcmdc

7Dii, M5, 100 (film), α6400
CR Pro
Sep 4, 2020
112
137
Premium product, premium price.
In the eyes of some, certainly. I do regret my choice of the word "fleecing" because it's judgmental and that wasn't my intent. The R6 is a premium product. Is it worth the premium? That's a choice each of us has to make for ourselves.

Six months ago, I would have gladly paid well north of US$2000 for an R7. But once I came to believe that there won't be an R7 any time soon, I looked around and found other ways to meet the needs I was looking for in a hypothetical R7. Could an R6 or R5 have filled those needs, as others have suggested? Probably in a lot of ways. But I made my choice and I'm happy with it.

If APS-C gets killed by Canon then what justification is there for FF having a premium price?
(y);)
 

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
412
494
Orewa , New Zealand
The are asking to Pro photographers.
So it is "expensive" aps-c body, same price range as the original R.

Looking at this forum we know people want aps-c RF but will never buy it for the same price as a FF camera.

This is not a cheap Rebel RF for people stuck in the delusional upgrade path.
I'm not expecting to pay less than full frame for an R7 , if it's based closely on an R6 I would be happy to pay similar or higher price than the R6 as it would be better for my bird photography than the R6 or even the R5.

If Canon decide to make an all out pro aps-c R body similar to the R3 I'd be prepared to pay the same as the R3 price too as this would be the best camera in the world by far for what I do.

I think it's unlikely Canon will make this pro body though.

I don't want to buy a full frame camera if I can get an aps-c version instead but only because the full frame wouldn't be as good for what I do.
I don't expect a bargain but will only consider a full frame if no R7 is produced as it's the reach advantage I want.

The reason I'd prefer aps-c is that with this I can use lenses like my EF100-400ii rather than a EF600 f/4 which is ridiculously expensive at $18,000 NZD and far too heavy to handhold and isn't nearly as versatile as my zoom.

The R5 is the best camera Canon make for wildlife but I don't really want to pay so much if I can get an R7 for an R6 level price which would perform much better than the R5 for my bird photography
 

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
491
454
Hope the M line will always stay, the bodies and lenses are so compact! I think it would be difficult to have an APSC R body as small as an M body, and even harder to have those nice and small EF-M optics at the same size and weigh ! See the difference between an EF-S 10-22 and an EF-M 11-22! The latter is so good, small and light !

But there's a clue about a possible APSC R camera : the existence of a RF 18-45 ! This lens would be very unusual for 24x36 sensors only ! What do you think ?
The 18-45 makes perfect sense as a compact low-cost replacement for the 17-40. Holding the short end to 18 rather than 16 or 17 would keep the size, weight, and cost down. Every millimeter at the short end add size, weight, and $. Look at the current WA R lenses for reference. Neither are even close to being "kit lenses".

Actually, 18-45 is a pretty interesting range for a walk-around FF lens. I can see a lot of folks liking it a lot.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,555
11,245
The R5 is the best camera Canon make for wildlife but I don't really want to pay so much if I can get an R7 for an R6 level price which would perform much better than the R5 for my bird photography
It would be nice if you posted some of your bird photos, especially birds in flight, in our two birds threads as images there are much appreciated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chig

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,959
1,315
Not practical. To have a crop UWA combo for example all we have to do is get a Rebel with a 10-18 or a M with 11-22.

These are cheap combos. How Canon will replace these if they make a crop RF-S camera with no crop lenses? How much an equivalent combo will cost?
 

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
293
653
The Un corrected vignette on the RF24-240 looks suspiciously like a lens that would work better on aps -c
On crop it is a 38-380mm field of view. So, no. Not wide enough for a one lens solution. And still distorted if you don't understand that it has auto in-camera or in-software correction.
 

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
293
653
The 18-45 makes perfect sense as a compact low-cost replacement for the 17-40. Holding the short end to 18 rather than 16 or 17 would keep the size, weight, and cost down. Every millimeter at the short end add size, weight, and $. Look at the current WA R lenses for reference. Neither are even close to being "kit lenses".

Actually, 18-45 is a pretty interesting range for a walk-around FF lens. I can see a lot of folks liking it a lot.
Which is why- if Canon does make crop R series cameras - they don't need RF-S crop lenses. The 18-45 will work as a wide angle on FF and a standard zoom kit lens for crop. They could also go ultra-wide for FF and wide for crop with the same lens. All other focal lengths can work for both as well and telephotos that will obviously work for both FF and crop will be the major lenses that many crop users will be looking at.
 

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
491
454
Which is why- if Canon does make crop R series cameras - they don't need RF-S crop lenses. The 18-45 will work as a wide angle on FF and a standard zoom kit lens for crop. They could also go ultra-wide for FF and wide for crop with the same lens. All other focal lengths can work for both as well and telephotos that will obviously work for both FF and crop will be the major lenses that many crop users will be looking at.
And if they do make the cropped R, there will be thousands of folks in forums denigrating them for not making dedicated small crop lenses. Frankly, I think they will be better off building an R5s for those looking for more reach and enhancing the M line for the vast majority of APS-c users. I find it hard to believe that there are a lot of people who own an EF 500mm f/4L who can't afford to choke up for a high res FF.
 

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
491
454
I'm not expecting to pay less than full frame for an R7 , if it's based closely on an R6 I would be happy to pay similar or higher price than the R6 as it would be better for my bird photography than the R6 or even the R5.

If Canon decide to make an all out pro aps-c R body similar to the R3 I'd be prepared to pay the same as the R3 price too as this would be the best camera in the world by far for what I do.

I think it's unlikely Canon will make this pro body though.

I don't want to buy a full frame camera if I can get an aps-c version instead but only because the full frame wouldn't be as good for what I do.
I don't expect a bargain but will only consider a full frame if no R7 is produced as it's the reach advantage I want.

The reason I'd prefer aps-c is that with this I can use lenses like my EF100-400ii rather than a EF600 f/4 which is ridiculously expensive at $18,000 NZD and far too heavy to handhold and isn't nearly as versatile as my zoom.

The R5 is the best camera Canon make for wildlife but I don't really want to pay so much if I can get an R7 for an R6 level price which would perform much better than the R5 for my bird photography
Wait for the R5s and dig a little deeper into your pocket. The added FOV combined with high res gives you the best of both worlds, wide FOV so you can keep the bird in the frame and high res so you can ruthlessly crop the image. Then again, the R3 just could be that high res camera .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chig