What’s Coming Next from Canon?

[Michael Clark]

Lower prices

With the price of semiconductor chips currently going through the roof? Good luck with that!

 

[MkSprintz]

What about the connection with the unveiling of FCC-registration (DS126933)? Doesn’t that not hint anymore towards R7ii?

That registration is the R8 ii Retro style camera.

 

[Makmut]

Makmut - my understanding of the physics of optics is that a faster 100-500 would have to also be
larger (diameter). That means it will be both heavier and a lot more expensive. When I got the R5m2
I didn't understand how much importance the extra dynamic range of the sensor would be. As in -
the R5m2 made my RF 100-500 better. Perhaps "better glass" might mean "better tech in the body"?

Of course bokeh comes with a price but two options would be great ...

 

[MkSprintz]

How many birders would opt for a R6 I/II over the R7? How many will opt for a R6 III or wait for the R7 II? I am in the wait crowd, as my current travel combo now is the R1 & R5 II.

Have been using the R6 ii over the R7 ever since i purchased an R6ii in mid December of 2023.

It easily outperforms the R7 in every way. In addition to its stellar low light performance. Still mulling over replacing the R7, likely selling to a friend for a straight grand, but could also use it towards store credit towards an R6iii which I'll likely pick up more than the R7 or even an R5 ii with those tempting 45 megapixels.

 

[john1970]

Am I the only one who doesn't understand the "hype" about the Sony 4,5/100-400?
The EF 4,5-5,6 100-400 cost half, was lighter and at longer focals about 1/2 aperture slower...
The Sony is certainly a brillant lens, but I still don't get it.

The advantages (IMO) are: 1) internal zoom, 2) ⅔ stop faster at 400 mm, 3) with TC you can get out to 560 mm @ f6.3, 4) reasonably lightweight at ~ 4.4 lbs (with the hood). In contrast, my Canon RF 100-300 mm f2.8 with 2x TC (600 mm f5.6) weighs in at almost 7 lbs. Ideally, for me I would love to have a RF 100-400 mm f4.5 DO with 1.4x TC built in with a weight of less than 5 lbs. One can always dream.

 

[Kanivete]

The only camera I'd be interested to see is the R7MKII, so I'd snatch a MKI at lower price. I guess my old 200D will have to keep on going!

 

[Skyfall]

Any rumors to complete the f2.8 stm trinity? A light 50-150 or even a 70-150 would be a perfect complement to a wide angle(i use the 14-35mm and 20mm but i miss something between that and my 100-500mm)
I agree that sonys 100-400 seem like a good compromise between a 100-400/500 and a more exotic 100-300

 

[Del Paso]

The advantages (IMO) are: 1) internal zoom, 2) ⅔ stop faster at 400 mm, 3) with TC you can get out to 560 mm @ f6.3, 4) reasonably lightweight at ~ 4.4 lbs (with the hood). In contrast, my Canon RF 100-300 mm f2.8 with 2x TC (600 mm f5.6) weighs in at almost 7 lbs. Ideally, for me I would love to have a RF 100-400 mm f4.5 DO with 1.4x TC built in with a weight of less than 5 lbs. One can always dream.

Disadvantages, compared to the "old" EF:
-Weight (+300g)
-Price (X 2,5...)
-Size (longer, wider)
-It's a Sony
Advantages: internal zoom, 2/3 opener
Sorry, but I still don't get the excitement.

 

[Marc73]

I think Canon is not going to release the R7ii until at least next year simply because if they do they would kill a part of the sell of an 300-600 because people would have enough with the rf 100-500.

Jeff89 you're likely not going to get an R3ii anytime soon as canon said there's nothing they can currently do with that camera without intruding on R1 territory.

As far as the R7 goes you're looking at Fall 2027 the earliest, though I'm thinking Fall 2028 is more likely. It won't be a competition killer as there's no competition in that market, in fact it's highly likely that Canon will re-use the sensor from the R7 in the R7ii which would effectively kill APS-C at least as far as Canon goes. Maybe that's the line of thinking they have, I dunno.

 

[bloblom]

I was thinking something similar this morning, but a full stop improvement so the Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1 L IS USM Lens ($2799 currently) becomes the:

Canon RF 100-500 mm f3.2-5 L IS USM (? $4499-4999)

which would compete with the newly released Sony FE 100-400 F4.5 GM OSS ($4298)

While the Sony is a constant aperture versus a variable for the Canon, with auto ISO, to me a variable aperture isn't a big deal, if the Canon is a full stop faster at the short end and probably about the same at 400

The entrance pupil is 100mm, less than the 107mm on the 100-300 f2.8 and the proposed 300-600 f5.6, so smaller and lighter than the 100-300 f2.8

If it is built so it can use the extenders:

1.4x converter gives you a RF 140-700 mm f4.5-7.1 L IS USM
2x converter gives you a RF 200-1000 mm f6.3-9 L IS USM

which gives you an extra 200mm at the far end over the non-L
Canon RF 200-800 f6.3-9 IS USM

That's a pretty big jump, you're effectively doubling the surface area of the front element. The entire lens would have to be redesigned, from each optical element to the body itself. It would be vastly different from the original 100-500: at least 1 kg heavier and bulkier. If it ever came out, it would certainly not cost "only" $4500-5000 and move much closer to the 100-300.
Canon's never done such a lens refresh. If they want to fill the gap, it'll be with a new lens.

 

[homebodyMacro2]

Canon really needs to get with the program on the sub 5-figure "not quite the fastest" supertelephoto market.

Nikon (current prices on Adorama):
400mm f/4.5 - $3050
600mm f/6.3 - $4000
800mm f/6.3 - $6000

Sony:
100-400 f/4.5 - $4300
300mm f/2.8 - $6600

Sigma E-Mount:
500mm f/5.6 - $3300
300-600mm f/4.0 $6600

Canon:
Best we have is doubled 70-200Z, 100-500L, or 200-800 non-L (none really competing in this space).

Maybe we can take a break from 9 wide/ultrawide lenses in the last 18 months or so lol