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

dwarven

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 12, 2019
292
447
California, US
Coming this Summer *guitar solo starts* Canon and Mountain Dew are teaming up for a completely out of this world camera. The Flaming Hot Doritos Code Red EOS R420. With 5 radical colors, a shutter that sounds like a laser blaster, and an EVF that gives you a view like the Terminator, you'll really stand out. Tired of looking like a creep with telephoto lens? Now you can get the universal lens foregrip and tactical memory card/battery bandolier as optional accessories. You're fired. Tired of your subject always moving? Get the optional net launcher that mounts to Canon's brand new tactical rail system. Stick around. Tired of your wife or husband always complaining about your camera purchases? Get the brand new Canon/Mountain Dew gym membership led by Calum Von Moger, an optional addon with every purchase. No one will ever $#@! with you again. *Lifts 1200mm 5.6 with one hand* Because I'm going to say please.

But yeah, doesn't really matter to me what they call it. Gimme more cameras.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,742
1,305
If they can make an RF mount body the size of some of the M camera’s, and RF-S(?) lenses that small as well, I could see it working longer term. But the appeal of the M, for us, is just how compact the system is. Totally unobtrusive, hardly noticeable when out hiking or whatever.

If they make an RF-S 18-150 the size of the EF-M 18-150, a trade might merit exploration just to share glass. I’d be interested to see my RF-85 f/2 0.5 macro do some focus stacking on the M6 MK II’s 32 megapixel sensor.
I don't think they can get that small because of the difference in mount size. It's a bummer that the ILC market has collapsed because otherwise Canon might make R APS-C bodies but still keep a couple EF-M bodies and compact primes/zooms for the market segment which prefers a smaller size.

OTOH, the M6 mark II exists, and I don't think one could ask for much more in what is effectively a P&S replacement (based on size) but with some of the best IQ and camera capabilities in the history of photography.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pzyber and JustUs7

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
941
789
www.flickr.com
Having 3 ASP-C models certainly makes more sense than just 1 model eg a 7D replacement (equivalent body) and an entry level.... but
"If this is true, this should be the death knell for the EOS M system."
is not so clear.

Clearly, Canon has left the M system in stasis but it achieves small and cheap. Canon's R mount eco system is neither of these.
Canon would need to release both small and cheap RF lenses before such a claim could be made. A quality wide RF lens for APS-C would also be needed.
Adapting existing EF-s lenses is an option but they would still be much larger than the equivalent M lens.
 
Last edited:

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,487
5,705
Having 3 ASP-C models certainly makes more sense than just 1 model.... but
"If this is true, this should be the death knell for the EOS M system."
is not so clear.

Clearly, Canon has left the M system in stasis but it achieves small and cheap. Canon's R mount eco system is neither of these.
Canon would need to release both small and cheap RF lenses before such a claim could be made. A quality wide RF lens for APS-C would also be needed.
Adapting existing EF-s lenses is an option but they would still be much larger than the equivalent M lens.
Why EOS-M and EF-s did double duty sharing sensors with little practical crossover? The sensor is a small part of the system and the EOS-M is a very popular solution for those that have no interest in bigger more expensive cameras but do want better image quality than their phone.
 

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,882
1,029
UK
www.flickr.com
Today full frame sensors can be mass produced much cheaper. So the reason for Canon still produces APS-C cameras might be some artificial crippling of the expensive full frame cameras. Those cheap cameras could easily be full frame, but then they might cannibalize the expensive cameras.

It's still cheaper to produce a smaller sensor, even if overall costs have fallen. Your supposition is ill conceived.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sanj

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
941
789
www.flickr.com
Just thinking of lenses, how many RF-s lenses might Canon release? I am thinking ~4. A kit general purpose zoom (18-55 f/3.5-5.6), a higher end general purpose zoom (~17-55 f/2.8), a nice UWA lens (10-22 f/4-5.6), and then an extreme range zoom (18-135 or 18-200 f/3.5-5.6). After that, it will depend on sales, but I can see Canon encouraging standard RF lenses.
I agree with a kit RF-s lens, a general purpose zoom and a good quality UWA lens but not convinced about the tele zoom lens. For reach, the existing EF or RF lenses will provide that focal length and still be relatively small eg the RF70-200/4 or RF24-240mm rather than a RF-s 55-250
One additional useful lens would be a pancake street lens eg RFs24/2.8
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jethro

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
941
789
www.flickr.com
I don't think they can get that small because of the difference in mount size. It's a bummer that the ILC market has collapsed because otherwise Canon might make R APS-C bodies but still keep a couple EF-M bodies and compact primes/zooms for the market segment which prefers a smaller size.

OTOH, the M6 mark II exists, and I don't think one could ask for much more in what is effectively a P&S replacement (based on size) but with some of the best IQ and camera capabilities in the history of photography.
If you look at the Sigma fp or even the M200, you can see how small the body can be relative to the mount if you lose the multiple controllers.

People used to phone touch screens for controls could step up to a ILC system using a similar control system without the confusing multiple dials that a beginner would intimidated by. Given the camera phone "quality" snaps - especially with computational HDR, the images from the RFs system would need to have as good SOOC jpgs otherwise they will stick to their phones.
Phone cameras have 2 limitations: bokeh and reach. The former is simulated by "portrait" mode but the latter is harder to achieve without a bigger lens.
 

juststeve

EOS M6 Mark II
Nov 29, 2018
69
104
To point to the viability of porting over current EF-M lenses to RF, the outside diameter of EF-M mount is 61 mm. The outside diameter of the RF mount, as measured by my digital caliper of my R5's mount, is 67 mm. Six millimeters, or roughly a quarter of an inch greater in diameter is not going to make for huge lenses if the design goal is compactness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: reisi007

vignes

EOS M50
Oct 19, 2017
30
28
Australia
Looks like RIP M-mount system. Canon might release another M model just to kept the Japanese market happy. This is a rumour now but anyone seeing this would be thinking should they buy into this system?
Not sure the R mount APSC bodies would be as compact as the M ones. Canon should continue with the M mount as a compact line, maybe release one or two more lens or work with Sigma and release more lens. Otherwise Fuji would benefit from this. Can't see R mount based system being smaller as the M mount ones.
Canon used to run 3 lines EF, EFS, EFM... why not run RF, EFM since the EF mount would eventually be phased out.
Come out with some exotic designs i.e. small silver retro design M bodies....like Olympus
 
  • Like
Reactions: josephandrews222

Mr Majestyk

EOS RP
Feb 20, 2016
419
276
Australia
I thought the last APS-C rumour was a 7DII successor or performance model at CR2. Can't beleive CAnon is taking so long, EF-M is not an alternative I would ever consider with it's tragic lens line up.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,305
3,838
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
I have to admit I have zero idea where Canon is going. I used to think Canon was fairly predictable. One flagship APS-C, one serious hobbyist APS-C, one tiny DSLR and lots and lots of Rebels at every conceivable price point; One flagship Full Frame, one wedding photographer and serious photographer full frame and one entry-level full frame. Throw in a specialty camera like the 5Ds duo to capture a niche and call it good.

Now, it seems impossible to predict where Canon is heading. Have they decided to go all in on R mount mirrorless or are they just building out their mirrorless line before effing with us by introducing some new DSLRs in two or three years to scoop up the remaining buyers who don't want mirrorless? (better not sell all those EF lenses) https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/stories/future-of-dslrs/

Have they decided to port everything over to the R mount? I imagine most M buyers, like most Rebel buyers only ever buy a kit lens and maybe one other lens in a bundle. They may have research that shows these buyers get an M before a big vacation, hold on to the cameras for 3-5 years and then ditch them for whatever new model is out before the next big trip. In which case, those M buyers can be converted to the low cost R mount version next time around.

Will the R7 be a true 7DII replacement, or will it be more of a 90D-type model? It seems unlikely to me that they will release an R7 that is basically an R3 with an APS-C sensor at less than half the cost of the R3.

What exactly can they put into an R1 other than two CF Express slots that would warrant an additional $1,000 or so? Would they play it conservative with an R1 leaving out some of the gee-whiz technology like eye-control focus in favor of a solid but conservative workhorse in the tradition of the 1D series?

About those other APS-C bodies, could one be an SL-type super small mirrorless? Seems very possible to me.

And, don't forget that any APS-C lens would also work on a full frame R body, just like EF-S lenses do, so you could well see a full frame high resolution R body that seamlessly crops to 1:6 with the same resolution as an R-7. And, as I mentioned earlier, it's quite possible that the R-7 would include an 4/3 killer crop mode at 1:2.

All I know is that whatever happens, it will be fun to watch and even more fun to read the outrage here when people don't get the unicorns they think they will.
 
Aug 7, 2018
353
305
What exactly can they put into an R1 other than two CF Express slots that would warrant an additional $1,000 or so? Would they play it conservative with an R1 leaving out some of the gee-whiz technology like eye-control focus in favor of a solid but conservative workhorse in the tradition of the 1D series?
For me just making the R3 body much bigger and heavier to match the 1D X Mark III size would already we worth $500 to $1000. It could also have an upgrade to a sensor with larger pixels. It should have a secondary back display.

I remember when the 1D X and the 5D Mark III came out with roughly the same sensor and the same autofocus capabilities. One was about twice as expensive than the other for a larger body, more fps and a higher shutter lifetime rating.

At the top end you always pay a lot more for tiny improvements. For example a lot of money for some more memory in an iPhone.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,305
3,838
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
...I remember when the 1D X and the 5D Mark III came out with roughly the same sensor and the same autofocus capabilities. One was about twice as expensive than the other for a larger body, more fps and a higher shutter lifetime rating...
I think a lot of people would disagree with equating the 5D and 1D series in that way.
 

SnowMiku

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 4, 2020
95
64
I'm surprised to hear that there could be 3 APS-C crop bodies, I thought there would only be 1 or 2. I'm thinking the R9 would be at the M50 level, but I'm concerned about the R8 which is designed for vloggers, it sounds like the 90D level may be a thing of the past unless if they have all 90D features plus all of the vlogging features, and of course there is the R7 which is the 7DII replacement.

I wouldn't get my hopes up for EF-M lenses and RF APS-C compatibility.

I am also wondering what they will name future models, I think this would make sence and ease confusion: R9 mkII, R8 mkII, R7 mkII, RP mkII, R6 mkII, R5 mkII, R3 mkII, R1 mkII.
 

Diltiazem

Curiosity didn't kill me, yet.
Aug 23, 2014
199
73
With Stacked sensor tech... not going to happen if they want to kept the price down.
If a stacked sensor is too expensive R5/6 tech would be fine too for a 7D replacement. They can use the 90D sensor. But if they can keep the price around 2500 USD with a stacked sensor, most people will be generally fine with it.
 

Jethro

EOS R
CR Pro
Jul 14, 2018
555
451
If a stacked sensor is too expensive R5/6 tech would be fine too for a 7D replacement. They can use the 90D sensor. But if they can keep the price around 2500 USD with a stacked sensor, most people will be generally fine with it.
I'd expect that new bodies will feature new sensors (not recycled DSLR sensors) and that would include any new APS-C bodies. More likely, they would be based on 'scaled-down' versions of the new FF RF mount sensors, which is why it will be fascinating to see what the sensor in the R3 looks like (and whether there are enough MP to utilise in this way). Otherwise, potentially based on the R5 sensor?