Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...

Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread
Distinctly Average Senior Member • Posts: 1,178
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...
1

IR1234 wrote:

Distinctly Average wrote:

IR1234 wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

palombian wrote:

It is strange indeed there isn't a 7DII successor after almost 7 years.

Maybe this can be explained by Canon's efforts on getting a leading place in mirrorless again.

It seems inconceivable to me a company with 45% market share would abandon APS-C altogether. The M-system has it's place.

But they are trying hard with half-decent camera's as the 90D and M6II to push wildlife and sport shooters to RF full-frame. I am afraid the R7/M7 will be of the same kind.

OTH the low pixel density indicates the R6 is NOT the 7DII successor, and the R5 is too expensive for the average 7D(II) customer.

I'll wait until August/September.

I don't think it's strange. Look at the market. ILC sales peaked in 2012, and the majority if not all the losses have been in crop/APS-C. What made sense to do back when the first 2 7Ds were released doesn't make sense today. It's a completely different environment, which is why Canon has changed its priorities. Canon didn't push customers to FF RF; customers pushed them.

It does sound like there is demand for a 7D3 successor but if it comes it will 100% be on RF mount, IMO as it should be.

7D3 is already here, it's called the R6.

Everyone is getting totally hung up on the numbers 6 and 7. They think 6 means the 6D/6D2 and 7 means the 7D/7D2.

But what part of the R6 is the 6D2? The R6 has less MP, is much much faster, has dual slot, and has a processor in a different league (resizing second image on the fly for second card) . In fact, the R6 looks exactly what a 7D3 would be - except for the full frame sensor. That is all we are arguing about, whether a mirrorless 7D3 should have a full frame sensor.

The R6 just doesn’t have enough pixels. It is a great camera, sure. However, to get the same number of pixels on subject you need either a bigger lens, be a lot closer or a combo of both. That is what people are arguing about, pixels on subject. An R6 with a 32mp crop sensor would be all it really takes for most of us wildlife togs to be happy. If Canon added a few small tweaks then we would be very happy and throwing our hard earned at them. Currently, if my 7D2 dies, and it is getting close, I would have to go R5 and then would have only 17mp on subject at the same distance.

As I've said earlier, the point of the 600 and 800s was to bring crop reach to a full frame body. So pixel density becomes irrelevant. Full frame gives you a lot more light to play with and the f11 becomes less of a problem.

They really are not in the same class as even the 100-400 etc. The AF speed is slower, they are not exactly versatile. While they are good lenses, they are not the sort of thing most serious wildlife shooters want.

-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow