There may be as many as three RF mount APS-C cameras on the horizon [CR1]

Tronhard

Tronhard
Jan 7, 2021
26
23
68
Auckland, New Zealand
If Canon seeks to replicate the bases of their DSLR market spaces, it would suggest a range of Pro and prosumer FF bodies, along with a range of Pro-sumer to consumer APS-C bodies for the crop market. I am not making any comment as to whether this is a good thing or not, simply observing that this is what there was and could be as part of the new MILC landscape. Certainly there is a question as to whether large format, large file-size sensors will work for many who simply want to post on line or display on digital media, as opposed to those who want the benefits of the larger images. I see them as distinct markets as many of the former may not choose to invest the time and funds in post processing images to any significant degree. That is something Canon's market research dept will assumedly have considered...

It is always tempting for those of us who enjoy photography as a business or serious pastime to forget the silent majority of those who buy ILCs for less ambitious purposes. Certainly, the cell phone has been powerful in engaging with that market and one can assume it will continue to do so, but there are still many who buy a dedicated camera with modest intentions. People engage in photography for a myriad of reasons and create a wide range of market spaces.

Given the ground has shifted significantly since those original market spaces were created, it begs the question as to the viability of having the same range structure, and the relationship of the R to M mounts. It seems there is a constituency of vloggers who like the smaller, cheaper M bodies and lenses, and that may mean it continues the line for the time being at least - whether that continues to be developed is another question. As has been observed, the erosion of the overall camera market and the impacts of the pandemic, along with resultant disruptions in supply chains, have created even more uncertainty.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,015
2,941
They are the cheapest of the line. I absolutely agree that the numbering of the EOS M series, for example, appeared totally random. It would be helpful if they had a global numbering system that was not limited to specific digital ranges but used numbers for units with variations of MkI etc.
The high-end models use one nomenclature. There’s only one 5D Mark IV, only one 90D. Lower end models are marketed to a mass audience, I don’t see Kiss selling well as a moniker in the US, or Rebel selling well in Japan.

As for where you go after the 90D, well how about 95D then 100D? But wait, you say, there’s already a 100D. That’s what I said when I wondered what new model would replace my S95.
0EAAF951-0541-4AB5-B207-86DD0D07C072.jpeg
BF9CA13B-C6D4-41F9-956D-E47276E8F1C3.jpeg
 

Tronhard

Tronhard
Jan 7, 2021
26
23
68
Auckland, New Zealand
I think we both agree as regards the XDMk? models and hope fervently that they keep one model number with Mark suffixes. As regards the re-use of model numbers, some time ago I had a chat with the local Canon rep and he agreed that the re-use of model numbers was confusing, although he argued (rather ineffectually, I thought) that technically they were in different model ranges. I don't have a lot of sympathy with that one given that many people remember the number and the subtleties of model prefixes are often forgotten. I have been requently corrected by people who say that my oldest DSLRs: the D30 and D60, are actually 30D and 60D, not realizing the history of the numbering system.

Canon have marketed the lower end models with a number of region-specific names, which I (and many others who are not specific to one region) find unnecessarily confusing. In the US there is the Rebel (number T (confusing suffix), which is given a Kiss designation in Japan and some other Asian countries, while for the rest of the world it is ether a XXXXD or XXXD name. I accept the Rebel name has a historical association of marketing with Agassi, but since we have moved on from that it, in a global market it would make sense to have one naming convention for the R range. Using a XRMk?? seems to be the most logical to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: neuroanatomist

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,321
2,177
Canon have marketed the lower end models with a number of region-specific names, which I (and many others who are not specific to one region) find unnecessarily confusing. In the US there is the Rebel (number T (confusing suffix), which is given a Kiss designation in Japan and some other Asian countries, while for the rest of the world it is ether a XXXXD or XXXD name. I accept the Rebel name has a historical association of marketing with Agassi, but since we have moved on from that it, in a global market it would make sense to have one naming convention for the R range. Using a XRMk?? seems to be the most logical to me.
Emphatically agree, for your reasons as well as the fact that sometimes we here in the States (where it's Rebel Tn+possible suffix) sometimes see documentation that proudly proclaims the three digit model number and have no idea that's for our camera. Or that it's NOT for our camera, since they sometimes put pages that say things like "EOS-760D only" in our manuals. It turns out the 760D is the Rebel T6s (higher end rebel with a top LCD of all things), and 750D is the Rebel T6i (midgrade but vastly superior to (and higher resolution than) the T6), but you have to go to the internet to find that out. At least the 1200 (T6--I think that's the right number) didn't end up in that manual as well.

The 4000 you mention appears to be distinct from the low end Rebels' equivalent numbering scheme, which is four digits but two significant figures.

Recalling the international audience here I try to remember to put 750D in parentheses when I mention my T6i.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,015
2,941
Emphatically agree, for your reasons as well as the fact that sometimes we here in the States (where it's Rebel Tn+possible suffix) sometimes see documentation that proudly proclaims the three digit model number and have no idea that's for our camera. Or that it's NOT for our camera, since they sometimes put pages that say things like "EOS-760D only" in our manuals. It turns out the 760D is the Rebel T6s (higher end rebel with a top LCD of all things), and 750D is the Rebel T6i (midgrade but vastly superior to (and higher resolution than) the T6), but you have to go to the internet to find that out. At least the 1200 (T6--I think that's the right number) didn't end up in that manual as well.

The 4000 you mention appears to be distinct from the low end Rebels' equivalent numbering scheme, which is four digits but two significant figures.

Recalling the international audience here I try to remember to put 750D in parentheses when I mention my T6i.
Me, too. For example, my first DSLR was a T1i/500D (and the latter is the name of a close-up lens). I recall that the Rebel XS / 1000D was a contemporary of the XSi / 450D, and those came after the XT / 350D. XT before the XS? Illogical, IMO.

At the time, I suspect most people were buying at a camera shop (where they’d likely find the XSi) or Costco/Target (where they’d likely find the XS), so the confusion is probably less than it appears through the lens of history.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tronhard

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,321
2,177
I must say that even without the complications of the EF-M mount list, it looks incredibly over-complicated...
Well the M series is totally and completely separate (and also confusing just on its own terms). The M numbering might as well be a different brand for all the relationship it has to the EF (not M) series.
 

SwissFrank

from EOS 1N to R
Dec 9, 2018
578
315
> What about EF-M lenses you ask? They may not natively work on the RF mount, but there are always solutions to these sorts of problems. We have seen patents in the past that show Canon moving the image sensor inside the camera body.

I agree that M users will take it very hard if they can't use their EF-Ms going forward. What I heard in 1987 from the few pros using Canon: "as long as I have to switch outfits, I might as well switch to Nikon." (That was before USM brought a tsunami of Nikon users to Canon: the pro market share went from like 25/75 to 90/10 in the following decade.)

And I never thought of simply moving the sensor. Especially if there is no shutter it should be quite easy. You might not even need a motor. Instead you could have an EF-M mount adaptor that pushes a cam that pulls the sensor forward a bit. Let the user's twisting action mounting the adaptor move the sensor...