The likelihood of a Canon EOS R6 Mark III this year is near zero

Camera technology isn’t advancing rapidly, aside from AI features, so there’s little incentive for most people to upgrade. In fact, a quarter to half of the Canon shooters I know in the wedding industry are still using the original R6 model. For many, there’s just no urgency to upgrade.
That's reality. Outside of your circle of friends who 'buy the latest gear without hesitation' and similar folks who are over-represented in the membership of forums like this one, relatively few people upgrade their gear frequently. Not that I am at all representative of the typical buyer, but I'm fortunate to be able to buy what I want, and I kept the original 1D X as my primary camera for 9 years, until the R3 came out. I bought the EOS R in 2019 to play with and use for travel, but the 1D X continued to meet my needs and I didn't feel the MkII or MkIII offered sufficient improvement to warrant buying them.

Cameras have useful lives of ≥5 years, easily. MILCs didn't start outselling DSLRs until 4 years ago. There are a lot pf people shooting with 5- and 6-series DSLRs who are only now considering switching to mirrorless, and despite full (adapted) compatibility with their EF lenses, there will be even more inertia to switch because of a perceived need to update lenses as well. But IMO, those are the people who are the primary target market for the R5II. So if you're basing your opinion on your experience with a cohort of people already using MILCs, it's no surprise you're not seeing much enthusiasm for the R5II.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
I'm okay being the villain here. I'm comfortable thinking different. I just see it for what it is. Few people want the R5 MK II from what I can see both in person and online.
That's fine, I'm just saying that your viewpoint is narrow compared to the global market. It does seem disingenuous for Canon to artificially limit sales such they're not even fulfilling orders, which seems to be what you're suggesting.
 
Upvote 0
@bergstrom . Sort of off topic but for everyone's benefit could you share more about the shooting situation, and the lens you were using? I think there's more users out there enjoying the R6II than not liking it.

As far as Canon announcing an R6III this year, I was a bit skeptical.

rf 24-105 f4 , which itself is damn soft at the edges, making group shots a problem.
 
Upvote 0
I would think a mark II rarely gets as much interest. And some of the headline stats (eg resolution) didn't change. But I have no idea how to judge hype. And to what extent "buzz" generates sales is something that's been pondered on these forums for years.
Depends on the mark ii. 5d mark II was pretty hyped when that came out. But the camera market was very different at the time and the 5dii was a pretty drastic update as far as mark ii updates go. Canon also played the marketing game well with that camera (all sorts of articles about how the season finale for House was shot on a 5DII and that sorta thing).

I think the headline stats looking the same played a big role like you note. And I think sharing the spotlight with the R1 didn’t help the R5II’s perception, especially since the lukewarm reception to the R1 dominated the news cycle.

How much any of that is relevant to actual sales, who knows. Even if the reception was stellar, inflation / economic issues would probably hamper things regardless (unlike say 2020 when a bunch of people all of a sudden had some stimulus money and a whole lot of free time)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
If my perspective, shaped by living in one of the busiest cities in the world—home to some of the greatest photographers—and from reading thousands of YouTube comments from across the globe, is considered narrow, I’ll accept that. But in my opinion, the simple reality is that this camera is one of the biggest flops of the past decade for stills photographers. There’s little incentive for most stills shooters to pay for an upgrade, as it offers almost no advantage over the R5 for 99% of them.
If your perspective is that most stills shooters are already using an R5, that makes sense. But your perspective is probably not well aligned with reality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
If my perspective, shaped by living in one of the busiest cities in the world—home to some of the greatest photographers—and from reading thousands of YouTube comments from across the globe, is considered narrow, I’ll accept that. But in my opinion, the simple reality is that this camera is one of the biggest flops of the past decade for stills photographers. There’s little incentive for most stills shooters to pay for an upgrade, as it offers almost no advantage over the R5 for 99% of them.

Is the pre-capture feature cool? Sure. Are the additional autofocus capabilities impressive? Definitely. But are they essential? Not at all. There’s no sense of urgency for most stills photographers to buy this camera. For video, maybe, but Sony is incredibly competitive in that arena, and Nikon is bringing its A-game in both stills and video. Canon no longer holds the dominant position it once did—Sony and Nikon are fiercely competing for that top spot now.

To be fair outside of a few medium format or high megapixel cameras most of the features are going to be video focused. Most cameras today are essentially sacrificing a little bit of image quality (dynamic range) to offer a camera that is better for video. Video is clearly the future. Most of the issues with still photography can be mitigated or addressed post processing a lot easier than video.

Would it be a bad idea to slow down releases and build some FOMO around your product at launch? Personally, I don’t think so. I see it as smart business. If you disagree, that’s fair. I’d rather create hype around a product than have it sit on a shelf collecting dust, eventually hitting discount sites because retailers can’t sell it at MAP, leading to brand devaluation.
You just highlighted Sony and Nikon are fiercely competing so I don't think slowing down is a good option. The issue isn't that the R5mii came out too soon, its that when it did come out its basically on par with the current competition that has been out for YEARS!

I think the R5mii is a great camera for the money currently. It it slightly better than the Z8 at a slightly higher price and slightly below the A1 at a significant price reduction. But again these cameras are years old already. So we'll probably see updated models in 2025 from competitors and Canon will once again be behind the pack. The R5mii would've dominated if it came out 2 years ago.

The same thing will probably happen with the R6miii. They'll release it next year and it will basically be on par with the current Z6III but with better autofocus than the Nikon.

So Canon is essentially trying to catch up with the competition in the mid and upper range. Not sure how slowing down is going to make things better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Not sure where you interpreted that, but this is becoming tit for tat forum stuff. Have a good day my friend.
Read what you wrote: "But in my opinion, the simple reality is that this camera is one of the biggest flops of the past decade for stills photographers. There’s little incentive for most stills shooters to pay for an upgrade, as it offers almost no advantage over the R5 for 99% of them." How else would you interpret it? If you're not referring to R5 owners, and the R5II offers no advantage over the R5, then you are saying that the R5 offers no advantage for people upgrading fro earlier bodies. Neither makes much sense. Best case scenario, you're suggesting people should buy the R5 instead of the R5II. The R5 will probably be discontinued as soon as the R5II is readily available, so that doesn't really work, either.

Regardless, good day, indeed.
 
Upvote 0
I had an event yesterday and it was in a low light restaurant and sweet Lord, did my R6ii have trouble focusing. Its an absolute piece of shit to be honest and I bought it based on all the reviews I saw, and these are the big regular ones.
I wouldn't go so far as to rate the R62's AF as a piece of shit, but it's certainly worse than the R5 and R6 in my experience. In video mode, the AF on the R62 is even worse than in photo mode - unpredictable, extremely prone to jumping to the background... When using it on a gimbal, when it is difficult or almost impossible to constantly assist and correct the AF system via the touchscreen, I could even agree with your original assessment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Were you using flash? If so did you try IR assist?
yes and no, I stuck it on today to check it, didn't even come on and thats after checking the 3 settings including LED . This bullsh1t of canon disabling the speedlite AF assist lights, making them redundant is just stupid. I bought the R6ii to replace my broken 6dii, I wish I'd nearly bought a new 6dii now.
 
Upvote 0
Correct, instead they use either the onboard AF assist LED, or with an external flash they strobe the main tube for AF assist (or with newer flashes combined with newer cameras, the LED modeling lamp on the flash is used).
On the EL-5 you can assign a double half-press of the shutter to enable the modeling light as well. Very handy when you want to control if and when it’s used.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
rf 24-105 f4 , which itself is damn soft at the edges, making group shots a problem.
The RF 24-105 f/4L is a great lens for me (and I have 2 of them and both are identical) in almost all parameters (excellent sharpness and contrast, virtually complete absence of focus breathing...), except that I would like the zoom ring to be a little less sticky and a little more smooth.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0
I can use AF assist on my profotos if need be. Set it to on and I get focus if I need it
All mirrorless camera systems have a "flaw", with the IR system as a focus assistant, i.e. they cannot use it. There is no way it can be used, as far as I know. This is because they use the image sensor to focus, so like almost all digital cameras, they have to use an IR filter on the image sensor (unless the camera is modified or originally built for astro photography) and therefore do not see the IR spectrum of light. SLR cameras do not have this drawback. I don't know how it is possible that you managed to use the IR AF assistant system, but here, again, I will be open to the fact that I may be wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
yes and no, I stuck it on today to check it, didn't even come on and thats after checking the 3 settings including LED . This bullsh1t of canon disabling the speedlite AF assist lights, making them redundant is just stupid. I bought the R6ii to replace my broken 6dii, I wish I'd nearly bought a new 6dii now.
Canon did not disable anything, but mirrorless cameras (the vast majority of them) simply do not see the IR spectrum of light, and this system cannot be used on them. Even DSLRs couldn't use IR AF assist in servo focus mode...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
All mirrorless camera systems have a "flaw", with the IR system as a focus assistant, i.e. they cannot use it. There is no way it can be used, as far as I know. This is because they use the image sensor to focus, so like almost all digital cameras, they have to use an IR filter on the image sensor (unless the camera is modified or originally built for astro photography) and therefore do not see the IR spectrum of light. SLR cameras do not have this drawback. I don't know how it is possible that you managed to use the IR AF assistant system, but here, again, I will be open to the fact that I may be wrong.

can't speedlite companies just make speedlites for canon with a different colour AF assist beam ?
 
Upvote 0
All mirrorless camera systems have a "flaw", with the IR system as a focus assistant, i.e. they cannot use it. There is no way it can be used, as far as I know. This is because they use the image sensor to focus, so like almost all digital cameras, they have to use an IR filter on the image sensor (unless the camera is modified or originally built for astro photography) and therefore do not see the IR spectrum of light. SLR cameras do not have this drawback. I don't know how it is possible that you managed to use the IR AF assistant system, but here, again, I will be open to the fact that I may be wrong.
Human eyes don't see the IR portion of the spectrum, yet we can see the AF assist lamp because it includes both visible red and IR wavelengths. Even though Canon disables the 'IR Assist' on OEM flashes mounted on MILCs, I suppose a 3rd party assist lamp that is red/IR like the Canon flashes but not disabled might be enough to assist the AF.

AF Assist.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
If my perspective, shaped by living in one of the busiest cities in the world—home to some of the greatest photographers—and from reading thousands of YouTube comments from across the globe, is considered narrow, I’ll accept that. But in my opinion, the simple reality is that this camera is one of the biggest flops of the past decade for stills photographers. There’s little incentive for most stills shooters to pay for an upgrade, as it offers almost no advantage over the R5 for 99% of them.
All Canon 5 series models have received negative reviews throughout their history, compared to the generation before, it seems to me mostly from laymen and those people who have no real practice of using these cameras, but still, I guess by some miracle, the 5 models remained one of the their most successful models.

It always amazes me how people interpret the advances as completely insignificant and so for every new model, and let's look at where we are now with the R52 compared to the 5D - really insignificant progress.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0