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

Started 8 months ago | Discussions
sportyaccordy Forum Pro • Posts: 19,043
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Why are APS-C DSLR users any less likely to buy into the R system than FF DSLR users?

The same reason APS-C DSLR users are less likely to buy any camera in 2021. Many of them have moved onto smartphones. Another sizable portion are limited by budget. Some are still using their APS-C systems and genuinely happy with them. You either don't understand or aren't willing to admit a sizable # of APS-C shooters are not enthusiasts and by proxy aren't buying anything besides a basic kit. Those people might have an APS-C camera and may even still use them but are not at all interested in buying more gear, which is Canon's primary concern.

Plus you have yet to answer exactly what these users would get with this mythological APS-C RF body. Sure, the birders would benefit from an R7. But remember how there weren't enough of them to prompt Canon to make a 7D3? That's a niche piece of the APS-C pie. Canon definitely isn't going to develop a full lineup of APS-C RF glass, and they already have EF-M. What is the point of an RF Rebel?

Also, there are far more APS-C DSLR owners than FF DSLR owners. Why would APS-C die off with DSLRs? None of this makes any logical sense.

Nobody said anything about APS-C dying off. But if you actually look at available evidence, rather than speculate on hopes and dreams, there's plenty of evidence justifying Canon taking its foot off the gas on APS-C.

  • EF-S has been around for 20 years and even predated digital FF, yet even with likely 100M Canon EF-S bodies sold customers never signaled enough demand or interest for more crop development. It's the same story with Nikon, and there is actually production data for Nikon that proves it.
  • Canon themselves have said numerous times the majority of their lost ILC sales were from APS-C.
  • Industry wide, the shift in balance between FF or bigger and APS-C or smaller has changed dramatically. In 2012- the top selling year for ILCs- there were about 127 million FF lenses made vs 179 APS-C or smaller. So about a 5:7 ratio FF to non FF. In 2020 there were 118M FF or bigger lenses made vs 54M APS-C or smaller. So about a 2:1 ratio, with a pretty small drop in FF lens sales vs the 2012 ILC peak.

Obviously lenses are not 1:1 with bodies or users as FF lenses can be used on APS-C bodies. But the point remains that over the last 9 years FF (or bigger) lens production has only dropped off by about 7% while APS-C or smaller has dropped by 70%. I'm sure this is where the conspiracy of intentional hamstringing of smaller formats comes up but I'm going to ignore that. I would not be surprised if FF+ fully rebounds and APS-C continues to decline as supply chains get back to normal.

So in the context of that production data (and by proxy sales data- manufacturers don't make things they don't think they can sell) it seems pretty obvious where Canon should invest. Which format do you invest in- the one that has fallen by 7% or 70%?

And as a user, if you're willing to move to an entirely new system anyway, what's so awful about going FF, if you don't have a special need like wildlife reach?

-- hide signature --

Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
Sony a7 III Sony FE 24-70mm F4 OSS Samyang AF 35mm F1.8 FE Samyang AF 45mm F1.8 FE Sony FE 85mm F1.8
Ad12 Senior Member • Posts: 1,293
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...

I guess it's a case of the old phrase "the proof will be in the pudding".

We will have to wait!

For now i'm hanging an XT3 off the back of my EF mount Tamron lens and getting a great keeper rate for birds. Will keep an eye on Canon though, prefer the colours and ability to use LR.

 Ad12's gear list:Ad12's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Nikon Z6 Tamron 100-400mm F4.5-6.3 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XC 35mm F2 +3 more
Distinctly Average Senior Member • Posts: 1,206
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...
2

sportyaccordy wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Why are APS-C DSLR users any less likely to buy into the R system than FF DSLR users?

The same reason APS-C DSLR users are less likely to buy any camera in 2021. Many of them have moved onto smartphones. Another sizable portion are limited by budget. Some are still using their APS-C systems and genuinely happy with them.

Main reason us APS-C users are not buying in 2021 is because there is currently not a compelling model in the Canon range. I have FF and C cameras, and mainly use the crop bodies. Pixels on subject are what counts. You are making a huge assumption that APS-C users move to smart phones. It really is not the case other than in the lower end. Many crop users spend a huge amount of money on photography.

Plus you have yet to answer exactly what these users would get with this mythological APS-C RF body. Sure, the birders would benefit from an R7. But remember how there weren't enough of them to prompt Canon to make a 7D3? That's a niche piece of the APS-C pie.

Pixels on subject, that is what so many of us require. As I said, canon only current have three R cameras on sale, the original R seems to have vanished from many shops as it had become a bit irrelevant given the R5/6. The range is in its very early stages and quite rightly Canon are concentrating on models that will keep the pro togs happy, and ones that look great on a spec sheet. It is good marketing. In a few years Canon have introduced a great lens lineup for RF and it is rapidly growing.

Why was there no 7D3? Only Canon really know but I would guess timing. The 7D2 was according to my local dealer still selling well as it really is a fantastic camera. So there was little rush in updating. When it was time for an update the move to RF was already heavily under way. So given the EF mount was nearing its end a 7D3 becomes a bit of a burden.

Also, there are far more APS-C DSLR owners than FF DSLR owners. Why would APS-C die off with DSLRs? None of this makes any logical sense.

Nobody said anything about APS-C dying off. But if you actually look at available evidence, rather than speculate on hopes and dreams, there's plenty of evidence justifying Canon taking its foot off the gas on APS-C.

  • EF-S has been around for 20 years and even predated digital FF, yet even with likely 100M Canon EF-S bodies sold customers never signaled enough demand or interest for more crop development.

Well they did. Up until 3 years ago S lenses were still being released. Many crop users use EF lenses, such as the amazing 100-400II, or the 100L Macro.

  • Canon themselves have said numerous times the majority of their lost sales were from APS-C.

APS-C was used in a huge range. The sensor size was not the issue. Looking at sales figures it was the bottom end, a once high volume product line, that sales plummeted. Those is both in low end rebels, and especially compact cameras. The latter was hugely hit. Many of which used APS-C sensors.

  • Industry wide, the shift in balance between FF or bigger and APS-C or smaller has changed dramatically. In 2012- the top selling year for ILCs- there were about 127 million FF lenses made vs 179 APS-C or smaller. So about a 5:7 ratio FF to non FF. In 2020 there were 118M FF or bigger lenses made vs 54M APS-C or smaller. So about a 2:1 ratio, with a pretty small drop in FF lens sales vs the 2012 ILC peak.

That is lenses. As previously stated, many crop users buy FF lenses. I see many 7D2 users with 600mm F4 lenses out in the field. Same goes for D500 users, many have a 500PF, a 500F4 or a 600F4 attached. You can get stats for this from various image sharing sites such as Flickr and the numbers

Obviously lenses are not 1:1 with bodies or users as FF lenses can be used on APS-C bodies. But the point remains that over the last 9 years FF (or bigger) lens production has only dropped off by about 7% while APS-C or smaller has dropped by 70%. I'm sure this is where the conspiracy of intentional hamstringing of smaller formats comes up but I'm going to ignore that. I would not be surprised if FF+ fully rebounds and APS-C continues to decline as supply chains get back to normal.

So in the context of that production data (and by proxy sales data- manufacturers don't make things they don't think they can sell) it seems pretty obvious where to invest. Which format do you invest in- the one that has fallen by 7% or 70%?

Source for your statistics? Ones I have seen are very different.

You can play with statistics all you want. Buy why would Nikon, Fuji and Sony still be producing new APS-C high end models? It is because the bodies are there to sell the lenses. The lenses are where most profit comes from,  it without the bodies the lenses and accessories cannot be sold.

Really, people are clamouring for a high end RF crop camera. They will sell, I myself would almost certainly own at least two and probably go through more as I wreck them. High end crop bodies have traditionally had a long shelf life meaning less development for a long sales life. This can be seen in Nikon, Canon and Fuji ranges.

Only Canon know the future of their ranges. It is visible that with only 8 lenses available that the M system is lacking and currently not the flavour of the day. There are more RF lenses arriving this year alone than the whole life so far of M. That leaves Canon users with only the RF system, and many want pixels on subject. If you thing wildlife togs are a small market you are mistaken. There are more than enough of them for many companies around the world to be making accessories, third party lenses, YouTube videos, clothing and a lot more. It is a huge market which has grown a lot this year during the pandemic.

It is not just bird and mammal togs, macro addicts also like crop cameras for a number of reasons. Same with shooters of sports such as windsurfing, kites etc. Sports where getting close is not easy so having more pixels on subject is advantageous. I know plenty of professional photographers who have a crop camera in their quiver for that very reason. And when they can just put it on their FF lenses it is a no brainier to own one.

-- hide signature --
sportyaccordy Forum Pro • Posts: 19,043
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...

I didn't "play with the statistics", I just reported them and my analysis of them. Agree or disagree but don't accuse me of lying or manipulating without proof.

I agree that for pixel density focused disciplines a high MP crop sensor is best, and the use case for that is broader than I let on. Like I said, I think an R7 is inevitable and there is demand for it. What I question is whether there is ample demand for a whole RF-S system. All the use cases you mention can be met with existing EF/RF glass. Someone hoping for a general purpose RF kit beyond a cheap kit zoom is probably going to be extremely disappointed.

-- hide signature --

Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
Sony a7 III Sony FE 24-70mm F4 OSS Samyang AF 35mm F1.8 FE Samyang AF 45mm F1.8 FE Sony FE 85mm F1.8
Distinctly Average Senior Member • Posts: 1,206
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...

sportyaccordy wrote:

I didn't "play with the statistics", I just reported them and my analysis of them. Agree or disagree but don't accuse me of lying or manipulating without proof.

I agree that for pixel density focused disciplines a high MP crop sensor is best, and the use case for that is broader than I let on. Like I said, I think an R7 is inevitable and there is demand for it. What I question is whether there is ample demand for a whole RF-S system. All the use cases you mention can be met with existing EF/RF glass. Someone hoping for a general purpose RF kit beyond a cheap kit zoom is probably going to be extremely disappointed.

I’ve not accused you of lying. It is easy to interpret statistics in many ways and you always need context and full information to understand them. That is why I asked for the source of your statistics, so people can understand how and why.

EF-S I agree is no longer required, and we will almost certainly not see RF-S specific glass as Canon have shown they can make lower cost RF glass that fits the bill. Having said that, Venus optics under their Laowa brand have just announce an RF lens for APS-C, the 33mm F0.95 which looks like it is designed as a lens directed more towards video. Will be interesting to see how that pans out and to what use it is put.

-- hide signature --
sportyaccordy Forum Pro • Posts: 19,043
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...

I wouldn't count that Venus lens as I'm certain it''s an existing design they just slapped an RF mount on.

I think Nikon's Z DX path is indicative of what to expect from RF-S. With the only twist being an R7, since Nikon has the newer D500.

-- hide signature --

Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
Sony a7 III Sony FE 24-70mm F4 OSS Samyang AF 35mm F1.8 FE Samyang AF 45mm F1.8 FE Sony FE 85mm F1.8
BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,163
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...
1

sportyaccordy wrote:

I didn't "play with the statistics", I just reported them and my analysis of them. Agree or disagree but don't accuse me of lying or manipulating without proof.

I agree that for pixel density focused disciplines a high MP crop sensor is best, and the use case for that is broader than I let on. Like I said, I think an R7 is inevitable and there is demand for it. What I question is whether there is ample demand for a whole RF-S system. All the use cases you mention can be met with existing EF/RF glass. Someone hoping for a general purpose RF kit beyond a cheap kit zoom is probably going to be extremely disappointed.

The lack of mirror in mirrorless cameras means that there is zero need for an RF-s system.  The whole reason for the EF-s mount was that the mirror in EF mount cameras would physically hit the back of the EF-s lens.  With no mirror that isn’t a problem.  All Canon would need to do is simply design one or two RF crop sensor lenses for crop kit lenses and since the flange distance in RF is already short they can be nice and small.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

Dianthuss New Member • Posts: 1
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...
2

I’m the Rebel kit man mentioned before. Yes i use my iPhone a lot more these day’s, because it’s lightweight and can excel my old Rebel in some situations, but my efs 55-250 is glued to the rebel for lightweight 88-400mm f8 ff equivalent reach and i use it a lot! I don’t like M line. I like R 5/6 for the wildlife eye AF and great fast growing compact lens line-up. 600/800 f11 doesn’t zoom though. Two of my also aps-c using friends only use their phone nowadays, so i can relate to what is mentioned before, the pool is thinning. I tried 7Dii but it weighs 900gr or so. I really would love to see a ‘Canon rf x-t4’ (as the long expected R7 mentioned by Tony) and would buy it instantly because i love canon colours (yes i know one can tweak raw files) and i love canon grip, menu lay-out, ect. I love canon. I love Close-up and wildlife, that’s why i’m desperately waiting for aps-c R7. While it’s taking so long I rented X-T4 with ridiculous heavy Fuji 100-400, after 900 photo’s i hated the grip of the x-T4 but i really liked the photo’s it produced. But my rebel with 55-250 (400 ff eq) with nice flexible raw files can too. I rented Sony A6000 and got lost in the menu system and hated the viewfinder. I tried an a7iii with even more ridiculous heavy 200-600, can’t lift that long during hiking. I just have to wait or switch to Fuji X-S10 which seems more like a Rebel, have to try out that one. Why are you keeping me waiting that long canon? I need lightweight pixels on target in zoom format. I don’t want to work with large very expensive R5 raw files and crop them heavily down, I would need a new computer for that.

John Sheehy Forum Pro • Posts: 25,211
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...
1

EJ Fudd wrote:

in talking to someone who has worked in photo industry for 30 yrs with canon and nikon the only people who want an APS-C sensor is wildlife photographers, manufactures don’t want it
The cost of producing a full frame sensor versus an APS sensor is minimal not to mention the expense of having RandD expenses and plants manufacturing aps-c sensors.
In addition frame sensors now are 45 megapixels plus, you can easily crop in and get an image that will be just as good or better than a 30 megapixel crop sensor with less noise. Not to mention the expense of 2 different lens designs.

I was already shooting at 800mm (real mm) with the 90D, which has 2x the pixel density of the R5, so the R5 is a huge step back in pixels-on-subject, especially when you consider that despite the fact that the R5 can easily AF at high f-ratios, achieving them with multiple TCs is electrically and mechanically problematic, and the R5 does not have the rock-solid stability I had with the 90D, where the in-lens IS worked very well, but the R5 added X/Y IBIS twitches and causes small blurs that limit stability with even reasonable shutter speeds.

palombian Regular Member • Posts: 498
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...

John Sheehy wrote:

EJ Fudd wrote:

in talking to someone who has worked in photo industry for 30 yrs with canon and nikon the only people who want an APS-C sensor is wildlife photographers, manufactures don’t want it
The cost of producing a full frame sensor versus an APS sensor is minimal not to mention the expense of having RandD expenses and plants manufacturing aps-c sensors.
In addition frame sensors now are 45 megapixels plus, you can easily crop in and get an image that will be just as good or better than a 30 megapixel crop sensor with less noise. Not to mention the expense of 2 different lens designs.

I was already shooting at 800mm (real mm) with the 90D, which has 2x the pixel density of the R5, so the R5 is a huge step back in pixels-on-subject, especially when you consider that despite the fact that the R5 can easily AF at high f-ratios, achieving them with multiple TCs is electrically and mechanically problematic, and the R5 does not have the rock-solid stability I had with the 90D, where the in-lens IS worked very well, but the R5 added X/Y IBIS twitches and causes small blurs that limit stability with even reasonable shutter speeds.

I am used to a lot of "pixels per duck" too (with the M6II, same 32mp sensor as 90D) to pick far away birds for observation purposes. I am afraid the R5 would be a waste of money for this purpose.

Even with the apparently vastly superior AF of the R5 an additional extender to replace the crop factor should have some impact on the image quality and AF speed somewhere. In my experience producing more mm's with extenders to compensate pixel loss is a zero sum game.

When the birds are big and/or close enough to fill a reasonable part of the frame my 7DII still does the job in expectation of a successor. But if a high level 32mp APS-C mirrorless does not realize, compared to the 7DII the R5 should win, although at a higher cost.

 palombian's gear list:palombian's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS M100 Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 +26 more
John Sheehy Forum Pro • Posts: 25,211
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...

palombian wrote:

John Sheehy wrote:

The rumored R7 and R3 have almost no market overlap, unless the R3 is 83+ MP, but the cost would be prohibitive to many if that was the only way to get the pixel density and intelligent AF.

There is a huge gap in Canon's current offerings: no cameras with good pixel density that have intelligent tracking AF. A 30 or even 45MP R3 will not fill that gap.

Before I bought my R5, I thought that I could make up for the loss of pixels-on-subject that I had with my 90D through an extra 1.4x of tele-conversion, but it turns out the the R5 is highly incompatible with many lenses and TCs, unless you use a Canon lens and only one Canon TC, which gets me nowhere with the R5's huge pixels, and the 400/4DO II, the heaviest lens that I am willing to carry around. I need to use it at 1120/11 to get the quality I had with the 90D at 800/8, but 1120/11 crashes the lens and the IS bangs like a pneumatic power tool. If I turn off IS, it will work with AF for a few seconds before giving a communication error.

I have the M6II with the same 32mp sensor (and as I understand comparable AF) as the 90D and the quality with the 400 DO II + 2xIII is IMO at or over the edge in many situations (as it was already visible on the 20mp 7DII). No surprise stacking an additional 1.4 has the same effect on the R5.

It's two TCs, though, which adds two sets of aberrations (even if minor), but two TCs brings more potential electrical problems.  By electrical problems, I don't mean focus struggles; I mean the system crashing or malfunctioning; not working at all.

mburns
mburns Regular Member • Posts: 443
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...

Yes. Someone could say how the R6 with an EF adapter and 1.4 teleconverter does not perform like the 7D Mk II. Just use the higher available ISO for equivalence.

 mburns's gear list:mburns's gear list
Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 35-80mm f/4.0-5.6 III Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 +56 more
John Sheehy Forum Pro • Posts: 25,211
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...
2

Michael Thomas Mitchell wrote:

I believe that today's announcement of the new R3 reveals the future of the rumored 7DII successor R7: it's not going to happen.

Canon's APS-C sensor-based cameras began with the original 3MP D30 twenty years ago out of necessity; cost and development simply did not yet support a full-frame sensor body debut. Even after the release of their first full-frame body, the 1Ds, APS-C bodies continued out of necessity and predominated, even across other brands.

An APS-C "R7" simply does not fit anywhere in Canon's lineup. It is not necessary. It would be a black sheep. Fast, yes. But the sensor? No.

The announced R3 looks every bit like the speed-centric rumored R7... except in sensor size. The tech now no longer requires a smaller sensor to have blazing speed. I've said for years that the 7DII was essentially an APS-C 5DIII/IV that offered the benefit of speed made possible by the smaller resolution sensor.

Meanwhile, the M series remains fully APS-C. It is a very popular platform with vloggers, Youtubers, and travelers. The benefit is clear: small, lightweight and inexpensive. And for those who need it, there's even speed that still rivals and exceeds the 90D.

And so I'm calling it: the R platform is going to remain full-frame, while the M platform will continue to offer the advantages of APS-C. The announced R3 essentially is the successor, of sorts, to the 7DII: an "R7" in all but name. Now full-frame, it sits above the R5 in the product line rather than below.

We'll see.

If what you are saying is true, then Canon is killing focal-length-limited photography.  We need pixel density with high-end bursting and AF.  All FF pixel densities waste optical resolution, and TCs only go to 2x before they start to cause problems with reporting or communication.

John Sheehy Forum Pro • Posts: 25,211
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...
2

mburns wrote:

Yes. Someone could say how the R6 with an EF adapter and 1.4 teleconverter does not perform like the 7D Mk II. Just use the higher available ISO for equivalence.

If that is all you need, then there are almost as many pixels on subject, and AF should still be good in good light, but that is not the limit.  I am using a 2x on an R5, and feel like I could be using 3x, which does not exist in Canon quality, or better yet, have double the pixel density of the R5 with R5-like shooting abilities (AF and burst).

palombian Regular Member • Posts: 498
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...

John Sheehy wrote:

mburns wrote:

Yes. Someone could say how the R6 with an EF adapter and 1.4 teleconverter does not perform like the 7D Mk II. Just use the higher available ISO for equivalence.

If that is all you need, then there are almost as many pixels on subject, and AF should still be good in good light, but that is not the limit. I am using a 2x on an R5, and feel like I could be using 3x, which does not exist in Canon quality, or better yet, have double the pixel density of the R5 with R5-like shooting abilities (AF and burst).

The same can be done with the naked lens on a 32mp crop sensor and 2 stops more light, if Canon would make an APS-C body with the AF of the R5/R6.

Sadly enough only bigger is better nowadays...

 palombian's gear list:palombian's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS M100 Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 +26 more
nolten Contributing Member • Posts: 850
Re: Canon rumored R7. I'm calling it...

palombian wrote:

Sadly enough only bigger is better nowadays...

As long as it doesn't have a mirror. 

 nolten's gear list:nolten's gear list
Canon G1 X III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS 90D
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads