rkodama1

that if all lenses worked equally well with all bodies then Canon would probably have a different body offering at a different price point.

RF 16-35 f/2.8 IS RF 24-70 f/2.8 IS RF 70-200 f/2.8 IS Assuming all will outperform their EF counterpart and hopefully will be smaller and lighter.  Also assumes no IBIS in the next couple of bodies.

I'm guessing the sports oriented R by the next Olympics - early 2020.

Great first impressions.  I was interested in the AF performance and am excited by your experience with the 24-105 in a relatively dark setting.  I've been leaning towards purchasing the kit for ...

The whole premise of this thread assumes that Canon can build a camera with greater functionality/performance than the released EOS R at a cost that would give them their targeted profitability at ...

Lenses are a compromise of size/weight, IQ, cost and R&D investment that is targeted for a specific market segment to achieve a certain sales projections and profitability.  Only Canon knows what ...

I absolutely agree with that.  I believe they have a business model that targets a certain short and long term profit margin for products and that's one of the key contributors for their success.  ...

In the last few years whenever Canon releases a new body, all of the pundits come out and talk about how antiquated the specifications and features are but in the same breath state that it will ...

Hah! I am learning more about the EOS R features on this and the Z forum than I am on the R forum.

If the initial R body release comes in at $2,000 then I can understand why IBIS is not included.  They recently have not released a feature rich FF body at that price point and that leaves an ...

I am not seriously considering ML today but one consideration is that the Sony E-mount will limit their lenses in the long term as compared to R and Z mounts. As one poster put it, Sony is shoving ...

When I first saw the specification of the EOS R, my immediate thought was this was going to be 5 series level body and priced accordingly. However, after additional time to digest the information, ...

It's premature to draw any conclusions or make any decisions until complete specs and pricing are published.  One thing to think about is that Canon has deeper pockets and greater resources than ...

Looks like 5D4 territory for pricing especially if it has IBIS and a relatively high FPS.

Amazing how Canon and Nikon came up with a similar base design for the body and mount  However the R may have more compelling functionality, performance and lenses than the Z.  Glad to see Canon ...

All good thoughts and conclusions.  One of the rumors is that the RF mount will be natively compatible with EF lenses so the "R" could stand for retrofit although the nomenclature is the least ...

It's very simple: Cost/Space vs Market Need All product designs are a compromise and based on Nikon's understanding of the target market, this decision was made.  As they say, you can't please ...

Frist you are comparing JPEGs with in-camera sharpening which could differ between bodies.  Shooting RAW and then post processing will help reduce the differences.  You are also comparing photos ...

Everyone is talking like it's an easy change to add a second card slot.  I am sure there were space and cost considerations to adding the second slot and I am also sure that Nikon had focus groups ...

This is one of the reasons why Canon is able to generate higher operating profits than Nikon on a % of sales basis.  Many consumers look at this as a downside but it's actually a strategic ...