Another announcement cycle is out of the way, so what’s next from Canon for the EOS R system?

[Avenger 2.0]

So what happened to rumors of an EOS R replacement? A new fullframe camera that will "sit below the Canon EOS R6" and maybe to be named R8?
Just curious. I'm not potential buyer.

I do not believe in a R successor, just makes no sense. Unless it's called that because of the missing IBIS, joystick, single card slot and to make fun of us they include a new touch bar

 

[Del Paso]

With the R6 II and its sensor being not that exiting (compared to the price) it seems I'll lean back and hope for an EOS RP successor - even though that is not mentioned yet (or might never come with the APS-C bodies - as some say).

If I were you, I'd wait for the first reliable R 6II sensor reviews. There might be a surprise.

 

[bf]

We will laugh hard if a an M6 mK3 shows up!

 

[scyrene]

I missed this. Hope canon develops this sooner rather than later.

Given there are already two RF telephoto zooms, I would be very surprised.

 

[koenkooi]

We will laugh hard if a an M6 mK3 shows up!

I hope it will not be like the M50→M50II changes. I would very much like to see a Digic X or newer in future bodies.

 

[bf]

I also like to see a range finder style full frame R similar to Sony 7C. That would help me justifying to take such camera instead of what I use M setup for.

IMO, only high-res RFS bodies make sense for using for sport/wildlife. If I want to carry that big ring, It's better be for a full-frame sensor.

 

[USMarineCorpsVet]

How about some telephoto primes that rival Nikons PF lenses?

 

[kcimer]

We will laugh hard if a an M6 mK3 shows up!

That would be great! Let it be 24mpix and stabilized!

 

[john1970]

I would be interested in hearing more about the R1, 300 mm f2.8, 500 mm f4 and 35 mm f1.2 when things get closer. Honestly, I do not expect any reliable rumors until late Q1 early Q2 2023.

From the latest announcement cycle I ordered the RF 135 mm f1.8 and the EL-5 flash.

 

[entoman]

A "R5s" with a 90MP+ sensor would be nice, but only if there was an option to also shoot *uncropped* 45MP and 22MP RAWs.

Personally I'd much rather just have a R5 Mkii with a state-of-art 45MP-ish sensor, a new more powerful processor, a higher-res EVF with zero lag, and with the lockups and freezes of the original R5 fixed. Oh, and *don't* change any of the dials or buttons PLEASE!

 

[bergstrom]

Man, where is that RP2

 

[Ozarker]

Still dreaming of an RF 70-135mm f/2 zoom to complement the RF 28-70mm f/2. Those two together would be awesome. What a killer combo!

 

[chrysoberyl]

I don't see how that would be significantly different from the existing, already small RF 16mm f/2.8.

The RF 16mm has heavy vignette and distortion. I would like to see a 15, 16 or 17mm f/2 or faster without the heavy vignette and distortion. Yes, it would be heavier and more expensive, but much more interesting to me.

 

[Deleted member 381342]

Agreed a RF 300 2.8 is due. Personally would rather see if without a 1.4x. Without a TC, the RF 300 2.8 should be light enough to hand hold for a reasonable duration. Plus if I have enough light for f4 I'd use the 200-400. It's a little shorter than a 300x1.4 but gives me more composition options. Sadly an RF 200-400 f4 hasn't been talked about anywhere I've looked. The decade old 200-400 design is due for an upgrade. And why not dream big, how about a 120-300 f2.8 (to match Sigma and Nikon's offerings) with the possibility of a TC.

The built in TC just fills in what would otherwise we a long empty stem. Since all the lenses with built in TCs are significantly lighter than the predecessors to date, what weight the TC is adding, isn’t the make or break on if you can hand hold it. The Nikon 400 f/2.8 TC is very hand holdable, but we are more likely to see a 120-300 f/2.8 and something like a 200-500 f/4.0 instead of the primes so you have no choice but to buy a £10,000+ lens that doesn’t eat sales from the 400 and 600.

 

[Ozarker]

I do not believe in a R successor, just makes no sense. Unless it's called that because of the missing IBIS, joystick, single card slot and to make fun of us they include a new touch bar

I read somewhere that the touch bar will be replaced with 6 dip switches.

 

[bbasiaga]

Agreed a RF 300 2.8 is due. Personally would rather see if without a 1.4x. Without a TC, the RF 300 2.8 should be light enough to hand hold for a reasonable duration. Plus if I have enough light for f4 I'd use the 200-400. It's a little shorter than a 300x1.4 but gives me more composition options. Sadly an RF 200-400 f4 hasn't been talked about anywhere I've looked. The decade old 200-400 design is due for an upgrade. And why not dream big, how about a 120-300 f2.8 (to match Sigma and Nikon's offerings) with the possibility of a TC.

The built in TC just fills in what would otherwise we a long empty stem. Since all the lenses with built in TCs are significantly lighter than the predecessors to date, what weight the TC is adding, isn’t the make or break on if you can hand hold it. The Nikon 400 f/2.8 TC is very hand holdable, but we are more likely to see a 120-300 f/2.8 and something like a 200-500 f/4.0 instead of the primes so you have no choice but to buy a £10,000+ lens that doesn’t eat sales from the 400 and 600.

Would love a 120-300 2.8 from canon. That one might even be less than $10k USD. I assume they'll push the 300 3.8 price point up to $8-9k, a TC version would be $12k (similar to the 400 2.8, or maybe just a bit less). Either way, it'll remain a dream only lens for me. I think the Sigma 120-300 2.8 last retialed for about $3500USD, so add a decade of inflation, plus some Canon improvements, and maybe $5-7k for that one from Canon? Also not really an option for me.

-Brian

 

[PhotoGenerous]

Nice. That's even better than expected. I thought they were going to try for an RP successor with the R100, but if they want it to be the M successor, I'm all for that. I want to see how small they can go.

 

[justawriter]

Honestly what I could use is more selection at the lower end of the price range, or at least Canon taking their foot off the throat of third party developers. I can budget about a grand a year for new glass, and that doesn't buy much in the RF lineup.

 

[Bob Howland]

The RF 16mm has heavy vignette and distortion. I would like to see a 15, 16 or 17mm f/2 or faster without the heavy vignette and distortion. Yes, it would be heavier and more expensive, but much more interesting to me.

Also, the RF 16 f/2.8 is for a FF sensor and Sigma makes a 16 f/1.4 for 1.5X APS-C that is optically very good but a little large.

 

[Del Paso]

I read somewhere that the touch bar will be replaced with 6 dip switches.

Don't you ever touch the touch-bar, even if I'm its only user! (also ).