There may be as many as three RF mount APS-C cameras on the horizon [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Hopefully you're right and we see an R body that small. The M bodies plus the 22mm pancake...or even the kit zooms...are really perfect for those times when you want great photos but don't want to carry a full kit.
None of this makes any sense without an "RF-S" lens roadmap. No one is buying a hypothetical R7 just to pay through the nose for a big heavy 24-70mm and only use the middle of the glass. Unless they're birders who are putting on a 100-500mm.
If it's going to succeed EF-M, where is the light compact kit zoom? The 16mm vlogging lens? The 24mm street pancake?
If it's going to succeed EF-M, where is the light compact kit zoom? The 16mm vlogging lens? The 24mm street pancake?
Thank you, seriously...thank you. I know it's open mic right now but I think Craig can book you a regular slot.
I see all of this CR1 as just "ok", as in Pete Davidson "Okay". Acceptance. I think Canon knows which way the wind blows and the finest optical M formulas (22mm I'm looking at you especially) will be ported over. Salvaging and repurposing assemblage saves hundreds of millions in a hundred part body. I bet there will be a couple unique bodies and a couple that look familiar (M5?). Look at Canon now...making FF mainstream.
That's good news! I hope that the IQ and pricing compared to the RF 15-35 F2.8L are similar to that between 70-200 F4 and 70-200 F2.8L. If so, it will be on my 'to purchase' list.
Unless you also want to hang a wider lens on your FF body at the same time you're using a telephoto in crop mode.
There was a rumor posted the other day that Canon will introduce another FF model to fill the gap between the sub-$1000 RP replacement (R9?) and the $2600 R6. That will effectively be the EOS R replacement, but it won't be named EOS R Mark II.
There will never be an R4. The number "4" is considered more unlucky in Japanese culture than the number "13" is in Western European culture.
I doubt any Canon model number will ever contain the number "4". It's considered unlucky in Japanese culture. It's kind of like how many buildings in Anglicized cultures do not have a 13th floor because "13" is an unlucky number in Anglo culture.
I think the longer it takes to release, the less likely it is that the R7 will be a true 7D Mark II "replacement".
At this point I'm expecting an R6 type body and an R6 (introductory) type price if we see an R7 by the end of this year.
If it takes another year, then I expect it to be more of a 90D type body with even less build quality/durability/AF capability than the R6, but will also be priced lower than the R6, though perhaps not by much.
I don't think anyone is expecting to get an APS-C R3 for a 7D Mark II price. I'm not even expecting to get a 90D type R7 for a 7D Mark II price.
You folks are the ones who keep projecting on those of us who found the 7D Mark II useful and would find a similar R7 useful that we also expect it to be just as cheap. I think most of us know better than that. A 7D Mark II level camera will be in the high $2K range if it ever sees the light of day at all.
The 1D X was 18 MP, up from the APS-H 16 MP 1D Mark IV, but down from the 21 MP FF 1Ds Mark III.
The 5D Mark III was 22 MP and released at the same time as the 18 MP 1D X. That's a 22% difference in resolution, or roughly the same as the 1D Mark IV vs. the 1Ds Mark III. The same percentage comparison today would be a 37 MP integrally gripped body (R3?) compared to the 45 MP R5.
In 2012 when the 1D X and 5D Mark III were both rolled out, a lot of shooters who had been using the 1Ds Mark III for weddings, studio, and fashion moved to the the 5-Series when they replaced their 1Ds-Series bodies.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the R1 is the spiritual successor to the 1Ds, putting a higher MP FF sensor in a 1-Series body for professional studio, wedding, and fashion work. The R3 is certainly looking more and more like the spiritual successor to the 1D-Series (not 1Ds-Series nor 1D X-Series, but the original 1D-Series with lower resolution and faster handling built for sports/reportage).
Last edited:
The 2014 7D Mark II (20 MP) sensor was a scaled down version of the 2015 5Ds/5Ds R (50 MP) sensor, not a scaled down version of the 2012 5D Mark III (22MP), or even 2016 5D Mark IV (30 MP) sensors. Or to be more precise, based on their introductory dates, the 5Ds/5Ds R sensor was a scaled up version of the 7D Mark II sensor. Both sensors had identical pixel dimensions.
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 in 2014, when the 5D Mark III was only 22 MP (which would scale down to an 8.6 MP APS-C sensor). 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, I fixed that for you.
So just because you personally have no use for APS-C for anything you shoot, that means Canon should not produce a camera that others might find useful?
I suppose you could buy all of the stock in Canon Corporation and then tell them to do what you want. You could gain unfettered control by purchasing 51% of their total equity, which would only cost you around $15,000,000,000 ($15 Billion) USD.
One of the reasons the 7D Mark II was as cheap as it was (it should have probably been priced in the low $2K range) was to entice the niche users who bought it to buy $$$ FF EF telephoto lenses.
Just like Remington practically gave away the handle to get you to buy their (uniquely sized) $$ razor blades. Just like everyone practically gave away cheap printers to get you to buy expensive ink.
Canon's design and engineering departments could have delivered such a camera six months ago, but Canon's supply chain could not even deliver the R5, R6, RF 100-500mm, etc. in the numbers the market demands throughout all of 2020.
No one (okay, maybe one or two total outliers somewhere) ever hung a 24-70 on the 7D Mark II. They used their FF bodies for that. They used the 7D Mark II for telephoto lenses.
Similar threads
