There may be a higher-end APS-C mirrorless announced in late 2020, early 2021 [CR2]

[Keith_Reeder]

btw I second Bert63s question about seeing some of the maximum-pixels-per-duck images

I don't have many - it's not a common occurrence to need to be out at that FL, and atmospheric conditions usually become a limiting feature - but, I've certainly needed to go there enough times to see a benefit, so I'll see if I can dig some out.

 

[Keith_Reeder]

I won't disagree (that's why the winky face thingy at the end). I shoot a ton of macro with the 90D and an constantly at f/16 with zero issues

Oh, I know - but I always also think about people who might read friendly banter, and piggy-back their BS onto it...

 

[JBSF]

The R, RP and reportadly R5 and R6 all have 1.6X crop modes built in. The 5Ds has both 1.6X and 1.3X crop modes. When cropped, the 20MP R6 sensor has about 7.8MP, which arguably isn't "enough" while the 45MP R5 has about 17.6MP which is about what the 7D had and less than the 7D2. There is also the question of whether having everything in one body is a good idea or having two more specialized bodies for about the same amount of money or maybe slightly more is preferable.

Agreed. I use 7D2 for birds, but for several years have used it more for insects, especially with the close-focusing 100-400 mark II. I always crop. I have held off on the buying a 90D, because I want to be rid of AFMA. If Canon makes an R-series version of the 7D with appropriate build quality and weatherproofing, even with the 32 mpix sensor of the 90D, I would probably buy it. I would like to see features of the R series added to it, especially IBIS and focus stacking. The sales potential for Canon is huge. I see far more people in the field using a 7D2 with the 100-400 than any other body/lens combination.

 

[Tangent]

Put all this together and... the M50 mkII is coming for the M series small camera use case. The "R7 " will be aps-c but will of course accept RF lenses without an adapter. The 18-45 IS STM makes most sense as an "RF-S" lens. The "RF-S" lenses will also mount on the FF RF camera bodies -- likely such lenses will be interpreted as ef-s lenses by the camera body and use the existing crop mode software. No more adapters.

... Then the digital mirrorless rebels will start coming. The 18-45 "RF-S" kit lens will be accompanied by a few more -- maybe a pancake like the 24 2.8 ef-s, a WA crop zoom, and a compact tele such as the 55-250. Of course the digital mirrorless Rebels will also take RF lenses without an adapter. No more adapters.

But the ef-m will be on its own island going forward. The M series will live on if sales are good; I hope so, 'cos it's so darn handy to have the option to shoot small.

 

[Bob Howland]

Detailed R5 and R6 specifications are up at Canon USA. Apparently the R5 has a 1.6X crop but the R6 does not. Look under "Recording System" for both cameras.

Canon Support | User Manual Library | Canon U.S.A., Inc.

Need help with your Canon product? Find support & more information regarding User Manual Library only at Canon U.S.A., Inc.

www.usa.canon.com

 

[yeahright]

Detailed R5 and R6 specifications are up at Canon USA. Apparently the R5 has a 1.6X crop but the R6 does not. Look under "Recording System" for both cameras.

Canon Support | User Manual Library | Canon U.S.A., Inc.

Need help with your Canon product? Find support & more information regarding User Manual Library only at Canon U.S.A., Inc.

www.usa.canon.com

maybe they feel that in 2020 an 8 MP image from a $2500 camera does not shine a good light on it

 

[bbasiaga]

Please forgive what is likely a stupid question....

But rather than a dedicated crop sensor camera, could Canon not have a "crop mode" setting for say, the R5 and have it do the same thing a dedicated crop sensor camera does?

Seems that would be the route to go....give you everything you'd want in one body?

C

The way this actually works is - a lens of a given focal length and design makes an image circle of a certain size. So when you put a FF lens on an APSc camera, only the portion of that image circle is used - the rest falls outside the smaller sensor. This 'crop factor' means you only get the field of view of a lens that is equivalently longer. 1.6x is the factor IIRC. So your 100mm lens on APSc shows only the same field of view a 160mm lens would if it were on FF. If you put that 160mm lens on APSc, it would show the same FOV on the sensor as a 250mm lens on FF. Note though that the magnification of the image at the image plane is not any larger! Its only field of view that is condensed.

If your APSc sensor has the same number of pixels as your FF sensor, then you have more pixels in a given area of the sensor (the pixels are smaller than FF pixels in this case, because the same number fit in a smaller area). Therefore you have 'more pixels per duck'. in your 100mm APSc image than you would in your 100mm FF image. Since targets like ducks are small and far away, many bird shooters like this feature of APSc cameras.

Crop mode on a FF sensor doesn't achieve the objective of more pixels per duck, as stated above. It would just mean less pixels from the image sensor are used. In the example above that means a lower megapixel image when cropped to the same FOV as APSc. The two ways to solve that are 1) increase the pixel density of the FF sensor to match that of the APSc sensor you are comparing it to. Now you can crop the same FOV and have the same number of pixels. or 2) Buy a longer lens so the duck fills more of the image, such that there are an equivalent number of pixels per duck as the APSc example above.

1) is up to Canon to produce something with equivalent density (I think the R5 is getting close). Once they match pixel density of the 7DII, the APSc advantage goes away, (except maybe on cost!) 2) is costly and heavy!

Dedicated crop cameras were not really about this pixel advantage, though it was a niche realized as the technology developed. It was more about technology and cost at first. The bodies were not necessarily smaller, as the EF mount and flange to sensor distance was the same for crop and FF sensors. Though the mirror was smaller so there was some advantage there, and the lenses needed to produce a smaller image circle so they could be smaller as well.

-Brian

 

[slclick]

The R5 already has a crop mode. 17 mpx I think.

Interested in seeing noise samples etc etc from that mode, esp comparing it to the 18MP sensor from Canon so many of us are familiar with. Pixel density is different, Digic X etc . Might be something.

 

[Tangent]

Not in the rumor mill, pure speculation: I wouldn't surprised at all to see a digital mirorless Rebel kitted with the 18-45 IS STM "RF-S" lens announced alongside the "R7." Because, after all, what use is a 18-45 kit lens to the 7D mkII crowd?

 

[BeenThere]

Not in the rumor mill, pure speculation: I wouldn't surprised at all to see a digital mirorless Rebel kitted with the 18-45 IS STM "RF-S" lens announced alongside the "R7." Because, after all, what use is a 18-45 kit lens to the 7D mkII crowd?

I guess it’s in the rumor/speculation mill now.

 

[Stig Nygaard]

So, again, if this is the case, why not just enable a "crop mode" on the R5 and then have the best of all worlds...FF and crop?

Price? If I can get an R5 for $1300-1500, then I might be okay using it in crop-mode despite the slight drop in resolution compared to my 7DII.

 

[jolyonralph]

Put all this together and... the M50 mkII is coming for the M series small camera use case. The "R7 " will be aps-c but will of course accept RF lenses without an adapter. The 18-45 IS STM makes most sense as an "RF-S" lens. The "RF-S" lenses will also mount on the FF RF camera bodies -- likely such lenses will be interpreted as ef-s lenses by the camera body and use the existing crop mode software. No more adapters.

Why would Canon do this? They already have a successful line of mirrorless APS-C cameras, and a new successful line of full-frame mirrorless. I can see the benefits in having a high-end APS-C camera, but I can't see them replacing the Rebels with anything other than the EOS M line - which is already happening.

 

[jolyonralph]

So. Another thing about an APS-C EOS R model. How much do you think it's going to cost?

If what you want is essentially a 32mpx APS-C sensor in the same body as the R5 - same weather sealing, same IBIS, same dual slots (maybe you'll accept dual SD), maybe only 4K video but possibly 6K RAW.

Essentially, it's more or less the same as an R5 but with a smaller sensor. How much is the cost of the sensor vs the overall camera cost? It's no doubt the most expensive component but it's certainly not half of the cost.

With the R5 at $3899 how much do you think they'd have to charge for an APS-C R right now? It probably wouldn't be any much less than $2800

Now, the 7D was based significantly on the 5D II body, but it took a whole year for that to come out after the 5D II - after which they were able to write off a lot of the R&D costs with 5D II sales. 7D II was 2 years after the 5D III (although the 7DII was obviously at least partially developed in parallel with the 5DS/SR with which it shares similar sensor tech albeit at a different size)

They aren't there yet on the R5, so I would guess if you're waiting for an R7 it's going to be a year out. Also, with the R5 and R6 selling so well, they really don't want to disrupt production by adding a third product right now.

Now, if you take the R6 body and throw in an APS-C sensor I think something could come out a lot sooner and a lot cheaper than with an R5 based one. But that won't be exactly a 7D class camera.

 

[konsolas_captures]

I have a Canon Eos M5 and I am really happy with this camera. I really hope and believe that this new camera is an M camera. Supposed that this camera is a 7D replacement for bird photography and stuff like that, how many of the 7D users have moved to Full Frame? Probably none because they want APS-C sensor. So there is no need to be a path from a APS-C to FF, at least for those users. The second reason I think this would be a M camera is the price. If this is going to be the best M mount camera then a price of 1.500 € is quite reasonable but if it’s an RF mount camera then I don’t think it’s logical to be more expensive than a camera in the same mount category which has better sensor (RP). It makes more sense to compare cameras with the same sensor size or in the same mount than to compare different mounts. Third and last reason is Canon’s reliability. If this is an RF mount camera it sends a message that the M mount is dead and although it is not one of the best mount it is one of the most popular and most profitable Mount. If you can’t trust Canon to keep developing a system that popular you can’t trust the RF mount either. Camera market is in danger and although RF mount is great and professional is not by itself a sustainable for the company mount.
Just my opinion

 

[dwarven]

Nice, I hope it's an RF body. I love APS-C cameras in general for their value and performance.

So. Another thing about an APS-C EOS R model. How much do you think it's going to cost?

Probably $1200 or less.

 

[Whowe]

Nah.. Love her too much. Been together since we were 15 or so - almost 41 years.

Does she read these forums....

Seriously, that's awesome!

 

[Twinix]

Are there minimum write speed requirements for the cards, or does the camera throttle back write speed to match the card inserted?

If you have a card that writes at the same speed as the images are beeing captured (12 fps, lets say each is 20MB, 12x20=240MB/S, so if you have a card like the Sandisk Extreme Pro that writes 260MB/S) you should be able to take photos for quite a while. But no one takes photos continuously for minutes, so with small breaks the cheaper Sandisk Extreme (70MB/S write) should be enough. So when the buffer gets full, the fps slows down, but I don’t think you will ever get to that point..
With video, the R5 shoots 4K 50p ALL-I at 1000mpbs, 1000/8=125MB/S, and thats how fast card you need for video. With the R6 that only shoots IPB the Sandisk Extreme would be fast enough. Its also fast enough for ALL-I 4K 25p.

 

[Skux]

I just can't see them doing an APS-C EOS R camera. The mount is huge and they would have to make dedicated crop lenses, when they already exist for the M mount.

I own the M6ii and it's great. If they made the viewfinder built-in, gave it IBIS, maybe a bigger battery, and gave it true native or downsampled 4k it'd be incredible.

What they need is some quality M zooms. Like an 18-55 f2.8, or an 18-105 f4, and then a 400+.

 

[Cat_Interceptor]

As soon as Canon unveiled the R5/R6 names it was fairly obvious a R7 was on the cards.

And it's been obvious for a while that yes the M6 II is a great camera, that sensor really deserved to be used in a better body with better tracking and case controls.

R7 witht he 32MP sensor, dual SD card slots, DIGIC X, IBIS, far better weather sealed body...... yeah that'll will get my money.

 

[Tangent]

Why would Canon do this? They already have a successful line of mirrorless APS-C cameras, and a new successful line of full-frame mirrorless. I can see the benefits in having a high-end APS-C camera, but I can't see them replacing the Rebels with anything other than the EOS M line - which is already happening.

Could be -- you raise good points. Western customers have a track record of preferring larger cameras; some current Rebel users might see the M series as too small in the hand for their needs -- they would want to moving forward with a camera having the form factor they are used to. And they would be interested in a camera having a future in the R world.

So I think Canon would want to offer a budget entry-level camera for the R ecosystem. From Canon's POV, the M series offers some opportunities for additional add-on purchases, but the larger profit potential is in introducing aspirational photographers to the world of FF RF midsumer and RF L lenses. M shooters are shut out from these RF lenses. I believe Canon would definitely see the need for an entry-level inexpensive, hence APS-C, RF compatible mirrorless digital camera that would open the door to more profitable downstream sales -- that approach has been their game plan since film days , after all.

If the "R7" is indeed APSc then that would open the door to more such cameras. And an inexpensive R APS-c entry level would make a lot of sense from a marketing standpoint.

So, just my guess, I think that we will see a mirrorless RF/"RF-S" APS-C digital Rebel... I would guess before year-end 2021. Otoh, the FF RP with its kit was selling for $1k recently, but still, that's not entry-level for a lot of folks. You need something cheaper to get 'em hooked.