This is the possible Canon RF mount camera roadmap [CR2]

[Karel]

is it possible to have ProRes internal recording to CFExpress in the future Canon EOS R1?

 

[slclick]

is it possible to have ProRes internal recording to CFExpress in the future Canon EOS R1?

Anything is possible on a product that doesn't exist

 

[highdesertmesa]

...The pixels are getting so small that I'm not sure how much better the 90MP images will be compared to the 45MP images, but if you have their best L quality R lenses then I can only hope it will be worth getting the R5s instead of a 2nd R5.

I hope they do something special with the microlens design of the high-res R sensor to improve corner performance. Even high-end lenses like the RF 50 f/1.2L shot at f/5.6 and f/8 show some corner weakness at 2:1 magnification on the R5.

 

[pj1974]

This CR2 rumour is particularly enticing for me. I have not yet bought into the RF mount system, but I definitely plan to.

The most attractive camera to me would be the high resolution "R5s" model.
In fact, the R5 is pretty much my ideal camera in almost every aspect: image quality, autofocus, IBIS, build quality, size & weight, ergonomics, etc. The only aspect I really wish it would have a built in pixel shift / high resolution mode.
(As evidenced by Canon in so many ways in digital photography, they test and implement technology when it is thoroughly functional... e.g. DPAF, IBIS, DPAF II, articulating screen, etc).

I use my Canon DSLRs and M5 for photography >95% of the time... that is, I take video only for specific reasons. Decent 4K at 30fps is plenty for me. But 1080 120fps or even 1080 240fps is something I would use in certain applications.

The great thing is that my EF lenses, including some L glass (and even a few of my EF-S lenses) work very well on EOS RF mount cameras. (I have borrowed some friends' EOS R and EOS R6 cameras and my lenses perform wonderfully well!)

So a higher resolution R5s would fit the bill oh so VERY well for me.
I mainly focus (pun intended) on landscape photography, (including panoramas) and other nature photography, e.g. wildlife (animals including birds), macros (plants, insects, etc).

It's a great time to be a photographer. Enjoy the light!

Peace

PJ

 

[yeahright]

I hope they do something special with the microlens design of the high-res R sensor to improve corner performance. Even high-end lenses like the RF 50 f/1.2L shot at f/5.6 and f/8 show some corner weakness at 2:1 magnification on the R5.

how could microlens design help with corner sharpness of the lens?

 

[Jasonmc89]

I would probably buy the APS-C model if it's a 7D3 equivalent but I don't think the market is all that large. What I wonder is whether could use the same basic architecture to develop something similar for the M-mount and how well such a camera would sell.

RF is where the lenses are (or will be) at though. Think big whites.

 

[Jasonmc89]

Good point but will 1 or more APS RF cameras mean an end to the existing EOS M system ?

Quite possibly yes. Although maybe not. For me it would make sense to have just one APS-C R mount, as in a fast crop sports/wildlife body, but keep the rest of the range full frame... and the M line just be about crop sensors only. I dunno, it’s a confusing one.

 

[usern4cr]

I hope they do something special with the microlens design of the high-res R sensor to improve corner performance. Even high-end lenses like the RF 50 f/1.2L shot at f/5.6 and f/8 show some corner weakness at 2:1 magnification on the R5.

Do you think the microlens design at the corner of the sensor has anything appreciable to do with "corner weakness", relative to the weakness caused by the lens itself? I wonder if they take the average angle of incidence into each pixel into account when they lay out the pixel microlens center/shape in the sensor? It's always easier to have the same microlens center & shape for all pixels for ease of microlens design & fabrication, but with advanced computers nowdays you'd think they might have considered this.

 

[usern4cr]

Good point but will 1 or more APS RF cameras mean an end to the existing EOS M system ?

If the M system is selling well, then I'd continue it as long as it is profitable if I was Canon. It doesn't have an EVF, so it'd be a different body from the R APS version, in case there are folks who want a really small camera without an EVF (which there probably are).

 

[gmon750]

As an underwater photographer, I’m holding off upgrading my 5DM3 until I see where the R bodies go. It’s frustrating for folks like us. We invest thousands of dollars in underwater gear and the housings we use are made for a very specific camera dimensions and button locations. Those housings usually cost more than the camera itself. One thing I like about my 5D camera is Canon not changing the external dimensions for three cameras (5DM3, 5DM4, 5DSR) so my $4K housing can use all three cameras.

I wonder if Canon will continue this tradition with the R5, or begin changing them as new cameras are introduced, and at a faster schedule than the 4-year cycle that Canon original did with the 5D models.

First-world problem for sure, but it does make me wonder.

 

[navastronia]

I love my R and it fits my finances. Of course, I would not say no to a R5 if it was given to me. But I wouldn't spent the money on a R5 out of my pocket. And the R is a great offer for the money, at least in my opinion.

Honestly, the RP is a great value for the money if you're upgrading from older gear. There's nothing else like it in the Canon ecosystem, and there never has been, AFAIK.

 

[ctk]

That EOS R replacement is interesting. I wonder if it will get dual card slots. I kind of doubt it. I think they'll keep that a differentiator for the R6. But it will probably have a higher MP sensor with lower frame rates. Ugh that'd be a tough decision as far as what to upgrade to coming from a 5D3.

-Brian

I'd be happy with the same sensor in the R6 body (IBIS, joystick etc). Maybe better AF implementation. Otherwise I'm very happy with the R.

 

[David - Sydney]

As an underwater photographer, I’m holding off upgrading my 5DM3 until I see where the R bodies go. It’s frustrating for folks like us. We invest thousands of dollars in underwater gear and the housings we use are made for a very specific camera dimensions and button locations. Those housings usually cost more than the camera itself. One thing I like about my 5D camera is Canon not changing the external dimensions for three cameras (5DM3, 5DM4, 5DSR) so my $4K housing can use all three cameras.

I wonder if Canon will continue this tradition with the R5, or begin changing them as new cameras are introduced, and at a faster schedule than the 4-year cycle that Canon original did with the 5D models.

First-world problem for sure, but it does make me wonder.

I had the same issues with my Ikelite housing. Moving from the 5Diii to the 5Div was a bigger improvement overall. More pixels, faster AF/fps etc was very useful underwater. Buying the 5Div second hand was not too expensive and I ended up selling it for more than I paid when I went to the R5
I did find that the knob for changing from still to video and back wasn't ideal on the 5Diii but did work fine on the 5Div so there were minor changes to the body shape.
I jumped to the R5 housing as there isn't much else I would want in a body. Speed, AF, pixels, high ISO, video etc are good enough to keep me going for a long time to come even if a replacement body is somehow better in the future.
Selling second hand housings is not simple during this travel-restricted time but the flexibility to handle 5Diii/iv/SR is an advantage over other options. I am not sure what the lifespan of a housing should be... 5-8 years at least I guess. Hard to imagine that a R5ii will have a revolutionary jump in specs even in 4 years time so I will be happy to keep mine for a long time to come.

 

[unfocused]

If it is going to be a 7D counterpart, which lenses its users are interested in?

Offer a 15-85 f4 and maybe a 10-20 f4 and that's everything Canon would need to make. Most buyers are interested in using R telephotos anyway.

 

[unfocused]

Anybody know if there’s gonna be Black Friday or cyber Monday deals on the C70?

 

[CanonGrunt]

How does the naming work with the C-series. Would a C50 be a step down from C70, or up?

Down. C90 would be up. Though technically the naming for canon cinema cameras goes by body size, but they put more stuff in the bigger ones. But big number, big camera, big specs. Distinct line from the c100, 200, 300, 500, 700, but they should follow the same pattern...

 

[unfocused]

I hope Canon makes some announcements early in 2021. It seems like they run the risk that Fear Of Missing Out might freeze buyers until all the various configurations are announced.

 

[Sorosuub]

" It won’t be an “EOS R Mark II”.

 

[Besisika]

If I have to dream like others, I wish they made a full frame with native video ISO at 1600, or at least 800. 400 seems to be low sometimes.

 

[highdesertmesa]

how could microlens design help with corner sharpness of the lens?

Do you think the microlens design at the corner of the sensor has anything appreciable to do with "corner weakness", relative to the weakness caused by the lens itself? I wonder if they take the average angle of incidence into each pixel into account when they lay out the pixel microlens center/shape in the sensor? It's always easier to have the same microlens center & shape for all pixels for ease of microlens design & fabrication, but with advanced computers nowdays you'd think they might have considered this.

They could go to a BSI sensor to improve wide angle corners, but it’s my understanding that the sensor micro lens array can be designed to help even on non-BSI. This is optical science over my head, but all I can say is based on the R5 results I’m getting on the best RF lenses, Canon will need to do something with the sensor to improve the corners on a 90mp full frame setup.

High concentration factor diffractive microlenses integrated with CMOS single-photon avalanche diode detector arrays for fill-factor improvement

Large-format single-photon avalanche diode (SPAD) arrays often suffer from low fill-factors—the ratio of the active area to the overall pixel area. The detection efficiency of these detector arrays can be vastly increased with the integration ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov