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

riker

5D4
Jan 19, 2015
111
52
riker.hu
Oh no, I hate APS-C, RF should be FF and M should be APS-C, end of story.
RP proved already that FF can be small+cheap (if many years of even smaller Sony wasn't enough). And R5 already proved that FF+high resolution can provide high FPS.
All that's needed is to better these technologies and make them cheaper.
7Dmk2 is 20MP@10FPS and everybody was happy with it. EOS R is 30MP@8FPS. A new Rmk2 could easily be 30MP@15FPS and still be small/cheap especially given the R5 which is 45MP@20FPS.
I really don't this APS-C is that much needed anymore for technological and economical reasons, gone are the 2000s. It's just marketing/sales strategy :(
 

schaudi

I'm New Here
Feb 4, 2021
13
25
Wenn APS-C was introduced many years ago, the given reason was that it was very hard to produce digital full frame sensors. So it was born out of necessity and not as a feature to have a tighter crop for bird photpgraphy and stuff like that. So I thought that it would die sooner or later. 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.

I do not think Canon will create any "RF-S" lenses.

I wonder which of the APS-C cameras will have IBIS. I think only the R7.
Oi....that could fit on r/ConfidentlyIncorrect....
"Advanced Photo System (APS) is a discontinued film format for still photography first produced in 1996." *Wikipedia
It was the last new film format before digital became a common thing. Reason were in fact the ability to build smaller and cheaper cameras with smaller lenses.

If they'll do produce APS-C R cameras, APS-C Lenses would make a lot of sense for both advanced and budget users.
Budget users can get affordable and compact lenses at all, while birders (or who whatever) can get cheaper, lighter or longer telephoto lenses (choose 2),
just imagine super tele RF-S L lenses. maybe a RF-S 600mm f/4 L which is way lighter and not as expensive as its RF counterpart. or one with an bigger aperture while maintaining the same weight and price.....just imagine...
I mean - I am not into that super telephoto range, but if I were and I buy an professional APS-C camera to get more reach, I would too be very happy about lenses, especially for that. I mean with FF lenses on APS-C - you waste a lot of money and you carry a lot of weight for an image circle, you are actually not using at all.

And I don't see any typical rebel user jumping from rebel and efs to r9 or r8 with those very expensive RF lenses. They also need totally different focal lengths for standards - now there is only 2 24-105s (not enough wide angle) or the very very expensive 15-35L (not enough tele). For the start you can continue to use the EFs lenses, but they won't be available new for long.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Michael Clark
Aug 7, 2018
347
294
But how much cheaper will those lenses be? Will people risk that they can't use those lenses anymore, once they upgrade to fullframe. And of course a full frame lens on an APS-C camera has the advantage that it uses the sharpest areas of the lens. When I had the 17-40 f/4 on an APS-H camera, I was glad that the corners were cropped out, because they were not really sharp. Of course newer lenses might be sharper though.
 

JustUs7

EOS RP
Feb 5, 2020
235
426
People lament the limited number of EF-M lenses, but seem to forget that after nearly 20 years, there are only 17 EF-S lenses. Of which 7 are either v2 or at least nearly duplicate coverage of other EF-S lenses. There are no ‘L’ EF-S lenses. Focal length also tops out at 250mm. I wouldn’t expect a ton of affordable RF-S lenses either if Canon went that route.

The lenses M is missing vs EF-S are a fast short zoom, like the 17-55 f2.8, a zoom to 250mm, and a 60mm macro.

The only meaningful plus over M mount would be to use RF full frame glass without an adapter. Other positives, like IBIS, could be added to v2 versions of M bodies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pzyber

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,882
1,029
UK
www.flickr.com
Phone cameras have 2 limitations: bokeh and reach.

Off topic but to that I'd add: anything approaching macro capability, and ability to focus on small subjects which aren't people when there's a fair separation from the background (e.g. flowers - it's nigh on impossible to get a phone to focus on that, rather than what's behind it; tapping to select a focus 'point' is very hit and miss even on the best modern phones, and manual focus is essentially absent).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,882
1,029
UK
www.flickr.com
just imagine super tele RF-S L lenses. maybe a RF-S 600mm f/4 L which is way lighter and not as expensive as its RF counterpart. or one with an bigger aperture while maintaining the same weight and price.....just imagine...
I mean - I am not into that super telephoto range, but if I were and I buy an professional APS-C camera to get more reach, I would too be very happy about lenses, especially for that. I mean with FF lenses on APS-C - you waste a lot of money and you carry a lot of weight for an image circle, you are actually not using at all.

What are you on about? There have never been Canon super telephoto lenses for APS-C. As has been stated here and elsewhere for many years, long lenses don't really benefit from being able to be designed for a smaller format. Probably also, the market was deemed too small to be worthwhile. A 600mm f/4 is going to be the size of a 600mm f/4 regardless of what sensor it's mounted in front of. Weight savings have been made over the past few generations of lenses by using lighter materials, removing/rearranging some of the glass, and you can get shorter lenses by using diffractive optics, but none of this has anything to do with APS-C versus full frame.

Canon have released their cheap and light superteles for RF - the 600mm f/11 and the 800mm f/11. If they release APS-C RF bodies (and I still don't really believe it), those would be the birders' immediate budget choices.
 

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
677
842
Oh no, I hate APS-C, RF should be FF and M should be APS-C, end of story.
RP proved already that FF can be small+cheap (if many years of even smaller Sony wasn't enough). And R5 already proved that FF+high resolution can provide high FPS.
All that's needed is to better these technologies and make them cheaper.
7Dmk2 is 20MP@10FPS and everybody was happy with it. EOS R is 30MP@8FPS. A new Rmk2 could easily be 30MP@15FPS and still be small/cheap especially given the R5 which is 45MP@20FPS.
I really don't this APS-C is that much needed anymore for technological and economical reasons, gone are the 2000s. It's just marketing/sales strategy :(

"EOS R is 30MP@8FPS" - You mean 3 fps with tracking priority. Yeah, that's super fast.

"R5 already proved that FF+high resolution can provide high FPS." - Yes, for $4K.
 

SwissFrank

from EOS 1N to R
Dec 9, 2018
608
343
In both the USA and Japan the M50 is Canon's best selling mirrorless camera, so that line isn't going anywhere any time soon
World-wide, Canon's best-selling interchangeable-lens camera wasn't an RF-mount, before the RF-mount was created.

I'd have to check but before EF existed, their best-selling camera was FD-mount.

FD-mount cameras, even the best-seller, was discontinued.

EF-mount cameras, even the best-seller, was discontinued.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bahrd

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
677
842
People lament the limited number of EF-M lenses, but seem to forget that after nearly 20 years, there are only 17 EF-S lenses. Of which 7 are either v2 or at least nearly duplicate coverage of other EF-S lenses. There are no ‘L’ EF-S lenses. Focal length also tops out at 250mm. I wouldn’t expect a ton of affordable RF-S lenses either if Canon went that route.

The lenses M is missing vs EF-S are a fast short zoom, like the 17-55 f2.8, a zoom to 250mm, and a 60mm macro.

The only meaningful plus over M mount would be to use RF full frame glass without an adapter. Other positives, like IBIS, could be added to v2 versions of M bodies.

But at least you could mount the EF 100-400 on a 7D like many people did.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,570
3,893
EF-mount cameras, even the best-seller, was discontinued.
Of all ILCs sold in the first 4 months of 2021, 56% were MILCs, and 44% were DSLRs. For all of 2020, those were 55% and 45%, respectively

I must’ve missed Canon‘s announcement they discontinued their camera lines that comprise nearly half of the current ILC market.

I know that you believe Canon makes stupid decisions, and that you seem to think you’re really good with the facts and the numbers and such, so forgive me for being just a teensy weensy bit skeptical.

But I’m sure you’ll have no trouble providing a link to a Canon press release or a news article from a reputable source to substantiate your claim. Or if not, I’m sure you’ll admit that you’re wrong again because you’re just making up facts as usual. Lol, no, I’m pretty sure neither of those will happen. :rolleyes:
 

David_D

EOS M6 Mark II
Apr 19, 2021
52
52
Oh no, I hate APS-C, RF should be FF and M should be APS-C, end of story.
RP proved already that FF can be small+cheap (if many years of even smaller Sony wasn't enough). And R5 already proved that FF+high resolution can provide high FPS.
All that's needed is to better these technologies and make them cheaper.
7Dmk2 is 20MP@10FPS and everybody was happy with it. EOS R is 30MP@8FPS. A new Rmk2 could easily be 30MP@15FPS and still be small/cheap especially given the R5 which is 45MP@20FPS.
I really don't this APS-C is that much needed anymore for technological and economical reasons, gone are the 2000s. It's just marketing/sales strategy :(
I think you are ignoring reach and pixel density. When reach limited the advantage of a 7Dmk2 with only 20MP is that you would need a FF camera with at least 50MP to have 20MP on the subject. That is why many people are happy with the 45MP of the R5 (taking into account the 1.6 crop that equates to @17.5MP, so just a bit smaller than the 7Dmk2).
A 600mm f/4 is going to be the size of a 600mm f/4 regardless of what sensor it's mounted in front of.
Agree 99%! To clarify, the maximum aperture, which is approximately the diameter of the front element, is given by f/4, where f=focal length. For a 600mm lens that means a 150mm diameter front element. (The max diameter of a EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM lens is 168mm.) With standard optics (i.e. not DO) the length is fairly fixed as well. The 1% disagreement is that the difference an APS-C mount/sensor might make is the rear elements could be a little smaller (because of the smaller image circle) but in comparison with the fixed very large front elements it is negligible.
 

sanj

EOS R5
Jan 22, 2012
3,889
794
Oh no, I hate APS-C, RF should be FF and M should be APS-C, end of story.
RP proved already that FF can be small+cheap (if many years of even smaller Sony wasn't enough). And R5 already proved that FF+high resolution can provide high FPS.
All that's needed is to better these technologies and make them cheaper.
7Dmk2 is 20MP@10FPS and everybody was happy with it. EOS R is 30MP@8FPS. A new Rmk2 could easily be 30MP@15FPS and still be small/cheap especially given the R5 which is 45MP@20FPS.
I really don't this APS-C is that much needed anymore for technological and economical reasons, gone are the 2000s. It's just marketing/sales strategy :(
There are many who want APSC. Canon knows that.
 

mdcmdcmdc

7Dii, M5, 100 (film), α6400
CR Pro
Sep 4, 2020
114
145
These rumors are very encouraging, IF they're true. I'm still skeptical.

- These are just rumors, and they are are CR1. It's been a long time since Canon has shown any real interest in moving any of their APS-C product lines forward in a meaningful way.

- I've said it before, either in these forums or in POTN, that if Canon truly has a bright RF APS-C future planned, I don't see any harm in issuing a development announcement. You can't seriously tell me they're worried about cannibalizing 7D Mark II or 90D sales, and APS-C shooters are generally looking for different things than the R5 and R6 offer. Such an announcement could also help Canon tactically by denying a few sales to Sony or Fuji from faithful Canon users who want a high performing APS-C mirrorless body.

- If the R7 does come true in Q4 2021 or Q1 2022, I hope it has some amazing new features and is not just a 90D sensor with the R6 AF system in an R6 body. Don't get me wrong, such a camera would be fantastic. But Canon could have released that six months ago. Don't make me wait until 2022 for repackaged 2019/2020 technology!
 
  • Like
Reactions: reisi007 and Chig