Canon R7 / R10 Rumored to be Announced this Month

[txstone]

Here is what Canon is announcing next, including the EOS R7, EOS R10 and RF-S lenses [CR3]

It looks like we have a few surprises on our hands from Canon, as they gear up to announce new products this month, which is another pleasant surprise. Canon

www.canonrumors.com

Canon Rumors says Canon to announce an R-series, perhaps two, cameras with a couple of lenses this month.

I'm not in the market for these cameras, but I hope there are folks in this forum who are interested in Canon news, even Canon APS-C news. At 32.5mp with Dual Pixel AF and 15-30fps (mechanical/electronic) according to the leaked specs, what's not to like? This is a forum for all manufacturers, right? We talk a lot about flagship capabilities showing up in enthusiast cameras, lighter weight gear, ...??

 

[Chris K]

To steal the purported R7 specs from the link:

• 32.5mp APS-C Dual Pixel CMOS AF
• 15-30fps (mechanical/electronic)
• 2x UHS-II supported
• 4K @ 60/50fps (NTSC/PAL)
• 1080p @ 120/100fps (NTSC/PAL)
• C-Log 3/HDR PQ
• In-Body IS
• Announcement in June/July 2022

Looks like a solid wildlife body, with the high pixel density and frame rate. So long as Canon doesn't "market segment" it to have lower AF capabilities than the R5/R6, it should be a hit. Likely a solid competitor to the A1 and Z9 for wildlife.

 

[FB101]

I think you hit the nail on the head, this can be the true D500 successor if they don’t artificially handicap it. It’s funny though that they made the D850 successor with the R5 and now potentially the D500 successor. They just forgot the part where you also need affordable lenses that punch way above their price point to make this work

 

[bleirer]

I think a lot of Canon 7d users are going to go for this. The 7D is as beloved to Canon shooters as the D500 is to Nikon, with good reason. There are plenty of lenses, not only native but every EF lens works flawlessly as well.

 

[Chris K]

Loved my Canon 7D. Solid, great AF tracking, good viewfinder, and nice in the hand. Made my 5D2 feel clunky by comparison.

 

[txstone]

I think a lot of Canon 7d users are going to go for this. The 7D is as beloved to Canon shooters as the D500 is to Nikon, with good reason. There are plenty of lenses, not only native but every EF lens works flawlessly as well.

The 7d was my first brush with almost converting to Canon. Rented the 7d and the 100-400 while waiting for the D500 - loved the pair and almost made the jump. The second time was when I rented the R5 and the 100-500. Wasn’t crazy about the 100-500. If Canon had had a 200-600, I would probably have gone Canon. Considered the Canon R3, but decided I couldn’t go with 24MP as I’ll still need to crop.

 

[Venkatesh VT]

If Sony had any sense it would not have made A7 Iv a lame duck wild life camera
May be Sony also would be coming out with an announcement for an A1 mini which would be a trend setter like A1

 

[FB101]

If Sony had any sense it would not have made A7 Iv a lame duck wild life camera
May be Sony also would be coming out with an announcement for an A1 mini which would be a trend setter like A1

Sony is heavily impacted by supply chain issues. If you look at their latest financial report the sales of playstations are down over 30% due tu supply limitations - and that’s a money printing machine for them so I am sure they did all they could to supply. Camera sales are down too.
‘I am sure there were ideas in the pipeline that got either delayed or scratched because of that.
That said, the A7iv did look underwhelming on paper. I have not tried one so you have better info than I do but it seems it was created to be an all-rounder that does a bit of everything, not as a camera that excels at anything. If you look at it in the light of targeting the D750 and z6 it’s actually competitive, not if you look at it as a baby A1.

 

[StefanSC]

I strongly believe there is room in the market for a 30ish megapixel APS-C high speed (ideally black-out free EVF) mirrorless.

And the incoming Canon (and Fuji) releases might just fit the bill.

It's just that both Canon (and Fuji) kind of lack the lenses for it.

A 100-500mm native, a 100-400 adapted and some old primes (400 f5.6/300 f4) an attractive system make not.

Meanwhile Sony and Nikon have the lenses but they are lacking in the body department...

 

[bleirer]

I don't understand the talk about lack of lenses. The roadmap is for 50 new RF lenses in 5 years, but the existing stable of native and adapted is solid in my opinion.

Canon Zoom Lens Reviews

The-Digital-Picture.com is your source for clear, concise and complete Canon Zoom Lens Reviews

www.the-digital-picture.com

Canon Zoom Lens Reviews

The-Digital-Picture.com is your source for clear, concise and complete Canon Zoom Lens Reviews

www.the-digital-picture.com

Canon Lens Reviews

The-Digital-Picture.com is your source for clear, concise and complete Canon Lens Reviews

www.the-digital-picture.com

 

[Chris K]

Their EF mount catalog is excellent, of course, and works fine. The RF system has the best low-end telephoto lineup on the market. The top of the line is also covered (although there’s a lot of angst over the “bolted-on TC” primes). The middle of the range is the issue in the consumer’s eyes, it seems. The 100-500 is the only native choice.

Why a 100-500/7.1 is considered a poor option but a 200-600/6.3 is considered a good option? Beats me. It’s 100mm and 1/3rd of a stop. And in exchange you get a much smaller lens that’s almost half the weight. It seems like a great lens to me. I think an argument that the last little bit of performance from a 200-600 would make or break an image should be met with an eye roll and a recommendation to use a 600/4 if performance is so critical!

An interesting turn appears to be coming… Whereas in the Sony and Nikon systems you’re buying VERY expensive bodies to get their best BEAF tech, Canon could be about to bring this technology FAR down-market. At that point, a Canon kit is considerably cheaper than a Sony or Nikon kit, and the A1 and Z9 look like a comparatively poor value for people getting into wildlife.

That window ends as soon as Sony and Nikon bring lower-end bodies to the market with high-end BEAF, and brand loyalists will not be convinced, but if you tell me I can save 2lbs and $5000 from my current kit for 1/3rd of a stop, you have my ear.

 

[abc123brian]

I don't understand the talk about lack of lenses. The roadmap is for 50 new RF lenses in 5 years, but the existing stable of native and adapted is solid in my opinion.

Canon Zoom Lens Reviews

The-Digital-Picture.com is your source for clear, concise and complete Canon Zoom Lens Reviews

www.the-digital-picture.com

Canon Zoom Lens Reviews

The-Digital-Picture.com is your source for clear, concise and complete Canon Zoom Lens Reviews

www.the-digital-picture.com

Canon Lens Reviews

The-Digital-Picture.com is your source for clear, concise and complete Canon Lens Reviews

www.the-digital-picture.com

For me, and I think others is you don’t currently have a lot of options in the midrange for RF mount. The EF lenses seem to work perfectly, but it’s difficult to justify buying lenses for a legacy mount when buying into a new system. Canon has some interesting lenses and I’m sure a lot are on the way, but other than a 100-500mm, I have a choice of F/11 primes or very expensive and large 400mm F/2.8, 600mm F/4 and their 800,1200mm that are really expensive and I’m not sure I like the idea of what they did with them. It’s not that Sony or Nikon have a lot of options here either, but I guess people have a better sense of the direction they are going. With Canon, the feeling is how much will it cost and what will be the aperture of the lens. This probably comes from them getting more creative with the F/2 zooms and then going with small Aperture consumer telephotos. The F/7.1 Aperture of the 100- 500mm was a turnoff for me because I’m too often in low light scenarios. If you look at all the manufacturers, they are all missing some key lenses so you could say the same about any of them.

 

[FB101]

I don't understand the talk about lack of lenses. The roadmap is for 50 new RF lenses in 5 years, but the existing stable of native and adapted is solid in my opinion.

Canon Zoom Lens Reviews

The-Digital-Picture.com is your source for clear, concise and complete Canon Zoom Lens Reviews

www.the-digital-picture.com

Canon Zoom Lens Reviews

The-Digital-Picture.com is your source for clear, concise and complete Canon Zoom Lens Reviews

www.the-digital-picture.com

Canon Lens Reviews

The-Digital-Picture.com is your source for clear, concise and complete Canon Lens Reviews

www.the-digital-picture.com

They don't lack lenses, they lack high value lenses (price to performance ratio). Even the 100-500 (which has it quirks) keeps being increased in price and is not a great value anymore (in my mind at least, at current price).
Then folks will point at the 600 f:11 and 800 f:11... which are definitely cheap and nice for their price but not stellar in absolute.

You take Nikon's 500pf, 800pf, EF200-500 and even the 400 f:2.8 TC in some ways deliver a ton of performance for the price.
take the Sony 200-600 - it's also setting a new benchmark for price/performance.

Canon has outstanding lenses to cover almost every possible need. None of them are priced to be a great value.

 

[FB101]

Why a 100-500/7.1 is considered a poor option but a 200-600/6.3 is considered a good option? Beats me. It’s 100mm and 1/3rd of a stop. And in exchange you get a much smaller lens that’s almost half the weight. It seems like a great lens to me. I think an argument that the last little bit of performance from a 200-600 would make or break an image should be met with an eye roll and a recommendation to use a 600/4 if performance is so critical!

Range and aperture are not the only factors.
First is price - the sony is $2000 and the Canon is $2900 (latest b&h price) - that's not a small difference for 2 lenses that as you pointed out are technically fairly close.

But to me I'd be willing to ignore the price if the 100-500 was a nice lens to handle. I do not like the long throw to zoom, the much tougher zooming ring and I think the design that prevents putting a 1.4TC unless the zoom is extended beyond 300mm is simply unmanageable (can't fit in a bag with the 1.4TC mounted for example).

I tried the 100-500 for a week, image quality was excellent, reach was fine but my objections were actually with handling - then price becomes an issue if you have to pay 50% more to get a lens you don't enjoy using.

 

[Chris K]

I don't think "number of options" is a great argument against a system if those (few) options are good. Sony has a pitiful wildlife lineup by lens count. I count four lenses? But it just so happens that one of them is the 200-600, which is excellent, and covers the vast majority of needs for a reasonable price. Sony might as well throw a 200-600 in as a kit lens with every A1 body, because it's essentially standard equipment.

As boring as that is for Sony shooters who don't get to choose from a dozen different options.... isn't that sufficient?

I see the Canon 100-500 the same way, personally. I regularly shoot my 100-400 and 500PF with a 1.4x, and they perform just fine on overcast winter days, so f/7.1 doesn't scare me off. And the 100-500 sure is nice and compact!

I guess what I'm saying is, I want to shoot every system. This is apparently my cry for help.

 

[arbitrage]

I assume this won't be a stacked sensor so will limit its ultimate success as a high speed silent camera. That said, the R5/6 still do very well without a stacked sensor.

If we ignore the EF glass then Canon's RF wildlife lenses are sort of split into the high end and the low end. The 100-500 sort of in the middle but still relatively expensive compared to Sony 200-600. However, if we consider EF glass then we have steller options like 400DOII, 300II, 500II, 200-400TC and even older ones like 400/5.6.

Sony's lineup is limited to 4 lenses but they are a well rounded set of 4 lenses.

Nikon's Z lineup is probably the most interesting and once the 200-600 and 600/4 come along, not to mention the "400PF" it will be IMO the best full MILC lineup...matching all of Sony's offerings and offering more options in the 400PF, 800PF and having the built-in TC in the 400 (and maybe 600). And of course we still have options to adapt 300PF, 500PF and other F lenses.

 

[Chris K]

I only hope that Nikon gets such strong sales from their PF lineup that Canon and Sony also decide it's worth the R&D dollars to save our shoulders.

The 500PF has proven that the derision of the 70-300DO and 400DO were not a reflection on Fresnel lenses so much as they were just early attempts that didn't work out as well as we had all hoped. Fresnel lenses are clearly a market success, and I think it's high time Canon release more DO lenses!

 

[Kenny88]

If this holds true, this is opening the door for those who might be waiting for Nikon to release a D500 mirrorless equivalent to stop waiting and bail to Canon - assuming that the R7 will have the same AF as the R5 and R6 - this should the nail in the coffin if Nikon doesn't start to think about the wildlife photography audience.

 

[FB101]

Jan Wegener indicated the sensor is rumored to be the sensor of the 90D... I imagine that would be disappointing for Canon shooters if true as it's not a great sensor at higher iso (even taking into account the fact that's it's a 33mp APSC, so very high density sensor).

 

[arbitrage]

Jan Wegener indicated the sensor is rumored to be the sensor of the 90D... I imagine that would be disappointing for Canon shooters if true as it's not a great sensor at higher iso (even taking into account the fact that's it's a 33mp APSC, so very high density sensor).

I don't think any 32MP APS-C (82MP FF using Canon's 1.6x) is going to have good high ISO at the pixel level.