R100 rumor - mirrorless similar to M50II ...

Alastair Norcross wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

MAC wrote:

... seems like a logical extension of their current direction

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bU3U42ws4yo

R7 replaces M6II, 90D, 7DII

R10 replaces 80D, T8i

R100 replaces M50II

but where is the glass?

Sony and Fuji get Tamy 17-70 f2.8; siggy 18-50 f2.8, 16 f1.4, 30 f1.4, 56 f1.4

these apsc R's are hard to swallow imo without the glass

I got my wife a 6D for 400 euro only. It performs very well at ISO 1250, and I have a lot of nice glass for it.

Lots of pictures don't need fast AF. Slow down. Focus with center AF point. Lock exposure. Recompose. Push the shutter button. Check exposure. Dial in compensation if the exposure wasn't good enough. Start again. Exposure right? Done.

It takes a while, yes. But when the light gets low the good old 6D crushes these crop RF bodies with their shiny RF primes which don't focus fast anyway. Battery life is almost eternal, you only have bring a spare if you want to leave the charger at home. Build in GPS is better than my R5. The 0.7 macroish feature of the 24-70mm f/4.0 IS USM was used to make a nice and sharp candid portrait of our hamster, and it worked! The 35mm f/2.0 IS USM focuses fast, has a nice rendering, and is sharper on a 6D than all those RF primes on a crop body, even wide open.

Where have you seen pictures taken with "all those RF primes" on a crop body? There are a few in the DPR sample gallery of the RF 50 F1.2 on the R7, but that's about it. I'd hold off on predictions until a lot of people have the R crop bodies in their hands, and have taken a bunch of pictures with "all those RF primes". I've ordered the R7, mostly for sports, so I'll be using it with my 70-200 F2.8L IS II. But if/when I get it (who knows how long that will be?), I'll be sure to try my various RF primes on it, just to see.

the 70-200 makes sense on the R7.

I'll be interested in your results of primes on R7

It doesn't feel heavy at all and the ergonomics are great, and the looks of the combo is nice as well.

If we're not allowed to use an affordable yet very well performing 50mm field of view lens anymore

What are you talking about? Not allowed? The RF 35 on the R7/10 will have the field of view of a 56mm on FF. I don't think anyone is not allowing us to use that combination. The RF 35 is certainly an affordable and very well performing lens. I had the EF 35 F2 IS (more expensive than the RF 35 F1.8) for many years, and loved it.

I kept my EF 35 IS for the better AF for motion - though the RF 35 is a good lens

The RF 35 is a better lens.

my EF 35 is pretty darn good

I know you, and some others, endlessly complain about the speed of the AF on that lens, but it's never missed a shot for me because of that. You'd have to be shooting very fast moving subjects (like race cars) for the difference in AF speed to be apparent.

I've done dancers with the EF

And that's not what I would use a lens like that for anyway.

their is no point in going with this sick mixture of aps-c and RF.

Sick? In what way?

vs using the FF bodies we already have

That 24Mp R10 is boring, and if we're going to see a whole lot of micro segmentation like Canons crop DSLRs below it might be time to think about a lens mount for phones.