What’s next from Canon?

Sort by date Sort by votes
#181
riker said:
Sidenote, I wish there was a lightweight 100-300/4 for travel. The 70-200/4 is really great and super cute, but the reach is just not enough and I really don't care about the 70-100-120mm part. Now I use the 100-500 but it is still too heavy on a backpacker trip. 120-300/4? 120-300/4-5.6? 150-320/5.6? Something that is max 850-900g.
Click to expand...
Have you considered the RF 100-400? It gets panned because of the slow aperture, but really it's only 1/3-2/3 stop slower than the 100-500L through the overlapping range. If you need weather sealing, it's a non-starter but from an IQ standpoint the RF 100-400 punches well above its weight (helps that the price drops to $500 periodically). I was glad I had a lens longer than my 24-105/4 when hiking up Mt. Etna in Sicily, but also glad that I wasn't carrying my 100-500L. This was taken from near the summit of Mt. Etna, the island of Salina is ~90 km away as the crow flies.

Salina.jpg
EOS R8, RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM @ 400mm, 1/400 s, f/8, ISO 1000
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#182
My "wishlist" is two-fold and I'm not sure I'll ever see this from Canon. 1: Go back to your roots and produce the best high resolution/high dynamic range camera dedicated for still shooters, that is at least 60 mp (important for deep crops) and uses an updated modern sensor. When Canon produced the 5Ds DSLR it was a breakthrough for stills. I still wish I had the one I sold for the R5 as its images are superior to the R5. 2: Produce the "one lens for all" sharp super zoom. Canon has a patent for an RF 30 to 200 or 300 mm L lens. Please make it. The RF 24-240 is subpar and for landscapes and as a walkaround lens, this would be fantastic.
 
Upvote 0
#187
Baywoof said:
My "wishlist" is two-fold and I'm not sure I'll ever see this from Canon. 1: Go back to your roots and produce the best high resolution/high dynamic range camera dedicated for still shooters, that is at least 60 mp (important for deep crops) and uses an updated modern sensor. When Canon produced the 5Ds DSLR it was a breakthrough for stills. I still wish I had the one I sold for the R5 as its images are superior to the R5.
Click to expand...
I’ve been a 5DsR shooter for 5 years and the R5 since august 2020 and I do not agree with your statement that 5Ds has ‘superior images to the R5’.

There is a thread on the 5Ds and R5: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/does-a-5ds-do-anything-better-than-an-r5.41891/
Most people in the thread do not agree with your statement.

The R5:
  • Has much better dynamic range (see below).
  • Outresolves the 5DS since it has a much better AA filter: see DPreview
  • Has less noise (see previous link to DPreview).
The difference in MP 50 vs 45 is negligible.

Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
#189
Perhaps Canon will release 4 more cameras:

R6iii & R8ii with the 24MP stacked sensor from the R3 (hoping the R6iii has at least 1 CF express card slot and I would definitely upgrade from my R6ii if it has both stacked sensor & CF express card(s) )

R7ii with a new APS-C stacked sensor (currently only the Fujifilm X-H2S comes with an APS-C stacked sensor)

R9 with the 24MP CMOS sensor from the R6ii and very low price to replace the RP

Canon could choose to make very competitive bodies like these to dominate the market, but perhaps this is just wishful thinking on my part?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#190
Chig said:
Canon could choose to make very competitive bodies like these to dominate the market
Click to expand...
Right. Because their market share is suffering since they cannot seem to make competitive bodies now. I mean, clearly it's something other than dominating the market when you have led the market for 20 years, lead the market today and sell more cameras than your next three competitors combined. What, I'm not sure.

1718131590750.png

The main point I’m making is that while Canon may choose to release additional bodies, it won’t be to achieve something they already have.

Regarding the R6III / R8 with a stacked sensor, it’s been suggested the production cost would be prohibitive. No idea if that’s true, but to date they’ve only been used in high-end bodies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#192
koenkooi said:
Rudy Winston mentioned that the record mode will the '4k fine' for the whole sensor, I was hoping they'd add an un-downsampled full sensor width mode. The R5 can record compressed 8k to SD, so the R7 should be more than able to record 7k to SD. It can read 7k video and downsample it to 4k already, so cutting out the downsampling shouldn't be a big ask :)

Hmmm, maybe people can fake it by just using the 30fps burst mode, provided they only need 2-3 second clips :)
Click to expand...
Does the R7 support raw light video modes?
 
Upvote 0
#193
Baywoof said:
My "wishlist" is two-fold and I'm not sure I'll ever see this from Canon. 1: Go back to your roots and produce the best high resolution/high dynamic range camera dedicated for still shooters, that is at least 60 mp (important for deep crops) and uses an updated modern sensor. When Canon produced the 5Ds DSLR it was a breakthrough for stills. I still wish I had the one I sold for the R5 as its images are superior to the R5.
Click to expand...
No, I'm not sure this is true. Unless your R5 has some issues (and that is a possibility).
Last week I was lucky enough to attend a Canon sponsored night event and play with RF cameras and lenses (all released products). I took along my 5DsR and EF24-70Lf/2.8mII so I could do some comparisons before I jump to RF.
So, I did a methodical comparison as follows:
5DsR with my EF24-70, R5 with my adapted EF24-70; R5 with RF24-70: all on a tripod and using the same manual settings.
I then compared the images in Lightroom. I can clearly see a lot less noise and better image quality in the R5 images compared to the 5DsR. Between the lenses, less so. If I did this experiment during the day with good lighting, this may not be as obvious, but it is also why I wanted to do this at night.
As I shoot landscapes, I'm really looking forward to the R5m2, and I may even get the RF85Lf/1.2 - that lens was stellar at the event. The rest of my lenses I will adapt, at least in the short term
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#194
neuroanatomist said:
Right. Because their market share is suffering since they cannot seem to make competitive bodies now. I mean, clearly it's something other than dominating the market when you have led the market for 20 years, lead the market today and sell more cameras than your next three competitors combined. What, I'm not sure.
Click to expand...
To be fair, and to provide some context, this is revenue in billions of JPY over the last 12 months in the digital photo and video segment (and I've generously allocated half of all "Network Camera & Others" revenue in Canon's financials to this -- any more and the segment would be called "Video Cameras & Others", along with all of "Cameras" revenue).

1718149595965.png

Canon is selling the most camera bodies by far from your data, but I think everyone else has a higher ASP and the race is a lot tighter when viewed by revenue between Sony and Canon.

The ASP difference is borne out by just looking at B&H's new ILC category and sorting by price -- there are virtually no other new cameras competing with R50 and R100. All other players have effectively ceded that to Canon, resulting in a higher market share by unit count but not nearly as much by revenue. Conversely, I would not be surprised if at the full frame end of the market, Canon's units shipped is neck and neck with Sony.

For what it's worth, I think it is great that Canon is selling lots of R50s and R100s, but I am not in the market for those.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#195
neuroanatomist said:
...

Regarding the R6III / R8 with a stacked sensor, it’s been suggested the production cost would be prohibitive. No idea if that’s true, but to date they’ve only been used in high-end bodies.
Click to expand...
I think the cost would certainly go up, so would Canon put a stacked sensor in the R8 II and then try and sell it for 1799 or more? Or a R6 III for $2799? Not only would that make no sense, but Canon usually knows the target market for its cameras. Who wants or needs a stacked sensor? Sports, action, Bird and Wildlife shooters. Are either the R6 or R8 series cameras geared towards the Sports. action, birds and wildlife shooters? Nope. So why raise the price of a camera with a feature that will not geared towards the customer base? That's not what Canon does, I don't believe. They aren't putting in specs just to impress the spec lovers and gear-heads, in my opinion. And as a photographer and not a gear-head, I appreciate that.

I remember Seth Miranda, NYC photographer and YouTuber, talking about specs and the differing philosophies of the different camera companies. From memory, and just paraphrasing, he cautioned people against just looking at specs and comparing different brands by their spec lists. The best, most advanced specs do not make the best cameras, he said. The specs need to work together in harmony and be based on the brand philosophy, and what is best for that particular camera, and those who will use it. If the camera does that, it will be easier to use, and create a better photography experience (and thus better results) than just cramming all the latest specs into the camera. Good advice, in my opinion.
 
Upvote 0
#196
frankchn said:
To be fair, and to provide some context, this is revenue in billions of JPY over the last 12 months in the digital photo and video segment (and I've generously allocated half of all "Network Camera & Others" revenue in Canon's financials to this -- any more and the segment would be called "Video Cameras & Others", along with all of "Cameras" revenue).

View attachment 217380

Canon is selling the most camera bodies by far from your data, but I think everyone else has a higher ASP and the race is a lot tighter when viewed by revenue between Sony and Canon.

The ASP difference is borne out by just looking at B&H's new ILC category and sorting by price -- there are virtually no other new cameras competing with R50 and R100. All other players have effectively ceded that to Canon, resulting in a higher market share by unit count but not nearly as much by revenue. Conversely, I would not be surprised if at the full frame end of the market, Canon's units shipped is neck and neck with Sony.

For what it's worth, I think it is great that Canon is selling lots of R50s and R100s, but I am not in the market for those.
Click to expand...
Unit sales and revenue are important, but more important is profit. Canon includes that metric for cameras, does Sony?
 
Upvote 0
#198
neuroanatomist said:
Unit sales and revenue are important, but more important is profit. Canon includes that metric for cameras, does Sony?
Click to expand...
Good question, Sony only seems to break it down by segments and their segments are a lot bigger (since Sony's fingers are in everything from music labels to movie studios to cameras to making chips). The other question is that I don't know how much Sony semiconductor charges Sony cameras for their sensors, since some of the profit would be to their semiconductor business.

Overall, I think Canon is likely more profitable in the cameras segment.
 
Upvote 0
#199
Quack said:
Are either the R6 or R8 series cameras geared towards the Sports. action, birds and wildlife shooters? Nope. So why raise the price of a camera with a feature that will not geared towards the customer base? That's not what Canon does, I don't believe. They aren't putting in specs just to impress the spec lovers and gear-heads, in my opinion. And as a photographer and not a gear-head, I appreciate that.
Click to expand...
Any reason why the R6ii wouldn't appeal to sports / action/ birds?
I get that the R7 has greater pixel density, the R5 has more pixels for cropping and the R3 for ergonomics but I believe that the R6ii would definitely appeal to those use cases at that price level especially with its 40fps mode.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#200
neuroanatomist said:
Right. Because their market share is suffering since they cannot seem to make competitive bodies now. I mean, clearly it's something other than dominating the market when you have led the market for 20 years, lead the market today and sell more cameras than your next three competitors combined. What, I'm not sure.

View attachment 217374

The main point I’m making is that while Canon may choose to release additional bodies, it won’t be to achieve something they already have.

Regarding the R6III / R8 with a stacked sensor, it’s been suggested the production cost would be prohibitive. No idea if that’s true, but to date they’ve only been used in high-end bodies.
Click to expand...
Never suggested that Canon were uncompetitive, just that cameras such as these would I think sell well which is what companies like their products to do
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Canon Rumors
What’s Next from Canon?
Replies
64
Views
5K
Dpcj2
D
Canon Rumors
Is a New Flagship Level Camera Coming from Canon?
Replies
46
Views
3K
kaihp
K
Canon Rumors
The Canon EOS R7 Mark II May Be a Big Departure From the Original
Replies
42
Views
5K
P-visie
P-visie
Canon Rumors
The Canon EOS R6 Mark III is Canon’s Next Full-Frame Release
Replies
239
Views
28K
pulseimages
pulseimages
Canon Rumors
Canon EOS R7 Mark II is Reportedly in the Wild
Replies
17
Views
2K
Michael Clark
Michael Clark
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu