It’s not the dimensions of the sensor that set the readout speed, it’s the number of lines and the time per line.
Case in point: the R5 reads out its sensor twice as fast as the R7, with more lines to read.
Upvote
0
Opinion: Let's redo the APS-C lineup in 2025. Please.
- Thread starter Richard CR
- Start date
Case in point: the R5 reads out its sensor twice as fast as the R7, with more lines to read.
I wanted to get R7 initially, but pulled back due to concern of the shutter shock issue, and AF, speed of processor too..
Hope they have a M6 II similar design out soon and I think if that is pocketable, it may be hot cakes... and pls... more compact pancake lens too??
Hope they have a M6 II similar design out soon and I think if that is pocketable, it may be hot cakes... and pls... more compact pancake lens too??
Upvote
0
Thank you, Richard, again for sharing your thoughts with us. I really appreciate your work.This year from Canon seems to be the year in which almost the entire full-frame lineup is refreshed. We have seen the R5 Mark II, R1, and later this year if rumors hold, the R6 Mark III. Outside of the R8, which was only released in early 2023, Canon mostly completed an entire system refresh of their full-frame cameras. Notably missing is the APS-C lineup, which is most likely the least competitive of Canon’s RF cameras.
Opinion: Let’s redo the APS-C lineup in 2025. Please.
This year from Canon seems to be the year in which almost the entire full-frame lineup is refreshed. We have seen the R5 Mark II, R1, and later this year if rumwww.canonrumors.com
As an R7 user I fully agree with your list for an improved R7 Mk II. I think, too, like others here, that Canon should return with that camera to a bit bigger body with the same control layout than the R5 – like in the old days when you could switch between FF and APS-C prosumer bodies and your fingers fell just on the right places. Plus, the current small thumb wheel-controller combo is really a pain in the
(censored) in winter, when you wear thick gloves. A beafier body would also provide a better balanced tele shooting, an R7 attached on a big white works but looks a bit like this end of the combo was washed too hot . The first thing after I got my R7 was to put it in a rubber case, what I never did before with any camera. With that the R7 feels a bit bigger in my hands, but in particular with the sturdy RF 200-800 the space between the rubber-wrapped grip and the back end of the lens is quite tight now.Another item in the wish list of many users I guess would be a battery grip!
Upvote
0
I learn from that discussion that Canon really should develop their future APS-C camera lines in two directions: an R7 II on top level with a bigger rugged body and the same wheel & button layout like an R5 since that camera addresses mainly wildlife tele shooters, and much smaller and lighter other APS-C cameras. Only when they set their APS-C camera segment that way apart of the compact, light and affordable FF cameras, APS-C makes sense anymore, I guess. But as Richard stated in his article, the quite big diameter of the RF mount - perfect for FF - limits the shrinking of RF-S cameras compared with Sony's Alpha 6X00 line in particular.
Upvote
0
Interesting idea, maybe Richard could comment it.
I personally had always the impression that Canon didn't feel time is ripe to jump into an new R1 line a few years ago because some pros might be conservative and still prefer a 100% lag-free OVF (besides the speed of light lag
). So the original R3 was a test to find out how the market reacts. That's why they used a bigger body with an integrated vertical grip, other than the original EOS 3 that inspired Canon's new eye control AF. Plus, a bigger body provides more space and better cooling of the R3's fast electronics.
Upvote
0
Unit sales justify a camera's model's existence. It's only one "tea leaf", but it does well on the Japan-only BCN list.
The product differentiation that DPR mentions:
"Over the R50, the R10 adds a second command dial, joystick, additional on-body buttons, an AF/MF switch, a faster burst rate and buffer, a faster mechanical shutter and support for faster memory cards, all in a larger body."
Different strokes for different folks.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Seems very unlikely. Canon has been reducing emphasis on high end APS-C bodies and lenses, and they've never made the Baby 1D X that some people have been wishing for. No need to keep pushing these ridiculous conspiracy theories about the R3.
- "It was supposed to be the R1 but Canon panicked because of SoNikon and renamed it."
- "It was supposed to have an APS-C sensor but Canon suddenly realized they could actually make it FF."
- "Elvis was dropped off at Canon HQ by aliens and he sang a new song directly to Fujio Mitarai about how he couldn't help falling in love with the EOS 3 and Canon shouldn't be cruel to it's memory and had to name their new camera the R3."
So why have both the R3 and the R1 in the catalog? A year before the development announcement for the R1, they started dropping the price of the R3. It's now down below the price of the R5II, and thus the R3 clearly differentiates from the R1 on price.
People want to read all sorts of nonsense into what is really a set of straightforward product development decisions.
Upvote
0
Really good article. Agree strongly that Canon need to sort out their APS-C lineup. Too many similar "variation on a theme" bodies and no real innovation. I have used various 5D series DSLRs since they came out, then bought an M6 Mark II. I love its compactness and high image quality with the 32mm/1.4 and the brilliant Sigma lenses. What I love most about it is being able to capture high quality images while attracting zero attention from people around as it is so small. A big SLR with the large expensive white lenses simply can't do this. Neither can the bulky, conspicuous current APS-C range with their SLR-like humps. Canon need an M-type form factor in today's lineup.
Much of the M6 II spec is competitive today and I will continue using mine for years to come. I believe Canon's biggest mistakes with the M6 II were:
- Not including a pop-up or built-in fixed viewfinder like various Sony models such as the A7.
- Not including IBIS. I don't actually need this myself but many novice photographers think they do, hence lost sales for cameras without it.
Much of the M6 II spec is competitive today and I will continue using mine for years to come. I believe Canon's biggest mistakes with the M6 II were:
- Not including a pop-up or built-in fixed viewfinder like various Sony models such as the A7.
- Not including IBIS. I don't actually need this myself but many novice photographers think they do, hence lost sales for cameras without it.
Upvote
0
Well, with the pixel pitch of the current R7 a FF camera would come with whopping 80 MP. So, for certain applications like tele or macro photography, the R7 can really provide a leap in resolution - if there is enough light available. That's why I decided to go for the R7, and I did not regret it. It can deliver quite impressively detailed images of motifs you only get with a longer supertele or a macro lens. For other purposes I personally prefer cameras with less and bigger pixels, but for that particular niche the R7 is really a good choice, despite the well-known limitations of that camera.
Upvote
0
The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 wasn't a jewel in Canon's line. Mine was a dust pump (I learned that Canon fixed that later), optically it suffered from very visible CA and its bokeh could be quite busy. So I soon got rid of it. CA today is less a problem due to in-camera or post-processing digital correction, of course.
Upvote
0
That would turn it into a €3000+ camera, which is Fuji kind of pricing for a crop camera. Putting it in an R6II body would make more sense for pricing, Canon could make it match that price as well, €2500-ish. Still a lot for a crop camera.
Upvote
0
Size is no argument for a higher pricing. The original 7D's were in the 1.3-1.5 k€ range here in Europe but had a body not much smaller than a 5D series body and shared nearly exactly the same button & wheel layout.
Upvote
0
The argument wasn't size. It was an APS-C version of the R5 vs. an APS-C version of the R6. The former is obviously going to cost more.
I liked that the 7D and 5DII paired so well. But I loved that the 1D X combined the best of both in one body.
Upvote
0
Interesting article and well thought out....except one factor, which is very common on Canon Rumors. The typical Canon Rumors poster, member or lurker is not the typical APS-C camera buyer. I'm not saying that Canon's current strategy is smart or will work, but it seems clearly based on the assumption that the typical APC-S buyer is A) most concerned with price, B) not likely to buy any lenses that are not consumer level kit type lenses. It's likely they have the market data that backs up that assumption.
Sure, there are many folks that would want a higher level R7. But would it sell more than a cheaper R7? How large is that market for a "pro" level R7? Based on the many threads here and elsewhere, many 7D owners looking for a "successor" for birds and wildlife have gone FF with the R5. This would indicate to me, the the market for a true 7D II successor is now considerably smaller than the number of 7D and 7D II owners. And how large was that market? The 7D had a very long product cycle. NIkon never updated their high level, very well received D500 pro level APS-C camera, and has yet to have a mirrorless replacement for it. It appears that neither Canon or Nikon think that a pro level APS-C camera is a good idea.
The continuing success of the cheapest Canon DSLRs seems to indicate that a cheap camera is what the vast majority of consumers want and can afford. Checking the "Top sellers in Mirrorless" on Amazon USA yesterday, I found the R100 with kit lens at #1. Without kit lens at #11. Price matters. Perhaps more than anything else for regular, non-gear-head folks.
Sure, there are many folks that would want a higher level R7. But would it sell more than a cheaper R7? How large is that market for a "pro" level R7? Based on the many threads here and elsewhere, many 7D owners looking for a "successor" for birds and wildlife have gone FF with the R5. This would indicate to me, the the market for a true 7D II successor is now considerably smaller than the number of 7D and 7D II owners. And how large was that market? The 7D had a very long product cycle. NIkon never updated their high level, very well received D500 pro level APS-C camera, and has yet to have a mirrorless replacement for it. It appears that neither Canon or Nikon think that a pro level APS-C camera is a good idea.
The continuing success of the cheapest Canon DSLRs seems to indicate that a cheap camera is what the vast majority of consumers want and can afford. Checking the "Top sellers in Mirrorless" on Amazon USA yesterday, I found the R100 with kit lens at #1. Without kit lens at #11. Price matters. Perhaps more than anything else for regular, non-gear-head folks.
Upvote
0
At least port the buttons and dials from R100 to R200.
We do not need the worst part of the M200.......
We do not need the worst part of the M200.......
Upvote
0
As another 7DII user for some time, I agree. Was considering an R7, but the details did not appeal. I'd just started using some setups with the PC contact for remote flash (as well as the optical link), and the R7 did not have one. I also think if Canon had been serious about a 7DIII replacement the R7 should have had the same layout as the R5 - as the 7DII did for the 5D. And the PC contact.
And I tend to use the 24-105 f4L or the EFS17-55 almost on a 50:50 basis for the majority of general photos. I would have liked to have seen a 10-22 RF and 17-55RF at least.
Maybe I'll have saved enough to buy one when Canon get round to it.
Upvote
0
*La alineación del 2025
No me malinterpreten, me gusta el posicionamiento aproximado de la línea APS-C, con la R7 como cuerpo de cámara para profesionales y la R10 como variante más para el consumidor, y la línea tiene sentido.
R7 – Prosumidor / Profesional
R10 – Prosumidor
R50 – Consumidor
R100 – Novato*
Gracias de nuevo Ricardo. CR.
Este detalle es donde nos tenemos que posicionar tanto los que nos encantan las APS C de Canon para algún propósito concreto de Fotografia, como los que solo les gusta criticar las APS C.
Es Imprescindible saber donde se esta cada uno.
No me malinterpreten, me gusta el posicionamiento aproximado de la línea APS-C, con la R7 como cuerpo de cámara para profesionales y la R10 como variante más para el consumidor, y la línea tiene sentido.
R7 – Prosumidor / Profesional
R10 – Prosumidor
R50 – Consumidor
R100 – Novato*
Gracias de nuevo Ricardo. CR.
Este detalle es donde nos tenemos que posicionar tanto los que nos encantan las APS C de Canon para algún propósito concreto de Fotografia, como los que solo les gusta criticar las APS C.
Es Imprescindible saber donde se esta cada uno.
Upvote
0
Esta claro que si se quiere una R7 II, ( R7 -Prosumidor/ Profesional) tendra un precio como tal.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
