Huge Gap in Price Points-How will Canon fill it?

[docsmith]

In responding to another thread, I just noticed that there is now a huge gap in price points between the Canon R6 II at $1,999 and the R5 II at $4,299. The R5 Mk I is sitting at $2,999, but I doubt that is the long-term solution. The R6 III will likely come in around $2.5k, but that still leaves a sizable gap.

Either Canon believes that the overall market is splitting into two groups or something is coming to fill that gap.

My inital guess is an R6-s. 80-100 MP. They could use the same 12 fps mechanical shutter they are favoring: 12 fps x 80 = 960 MB/sec, 12 fps x 100 = 1,200, both lower than R5 II (45 x 30 = 1,350) and in line with the R1 (40 x 24 = 960). While I know some will want higher fps, but I am just basing the limitation on what we have seen from Canon to date. 12 fps is enough for a lot of instances, landscape for sure, and even wildlife from the 2010's (they were slower then ).

Any other thoughts on what Canon could release that would fill the gap between $2-2.5k and $4.3k?

 

[neuroanatomist]

Prices have shifted a bit, but there’s never been a camera between the 6-series and the 5-series, and I doubt Canon will insert one now given that the market is smaller than it’s ever been.

I believe if there is a high MP (s) body, it will be built on the 5-series.

You may be wrong about Canon’s long-term solution. The R8 is clearly the successor to the RP, but the RP has not been discontinued. It sits at a lower price point and Canon continues to sell it. The R5 (and R3) may follow the same path.

 

[YuengLinger]

I think within 16 months, by end of 2025, the R5II will be the $3600 option.

 

[docsmith]

Including current discounts, the FF-body only lineup on Canon USA's website is:

• R1: $6,299
• R3: $4,499
• R5II: $4,299
• R5: $2,999
• R6II: $1,999
• R8: $1,299
• RP: $899

Keeping the R3 and R5 would certainly help with the gap in price points. Looking at Canon Price Watch, the R5's price dropped a bit after 2 years and then incrementally over the next year plus. The general plan could easily be to keep the R5 around at ~$3k for 2-3 years and start dropping the price of the R5 II after about 2 yrs as the R5 phases out.

I still think there is a large expanse between the R6II and R5II with only the R5 filling it. but maybe the smaller camera market is the explanation. In terms of still image needs, a high MP body is the primary camera I see missing from the lineup.

Canon could go either way, but at this moment, I wondering if the "s" will be built on the R5II or R5 chassis/internals.

Ok, enough random speculation for the day. Thanks for humoring me, but now I need to go work and randomly speculate about something else.

 

[MSH411]

On the flip side the lack of a gap between the R3: $4,499 and the R5II: $4,299 is what gave me pause in jumping on the R5II.

The R3 @ 24MP isn't a concern as I get what I need out of the R6 II. Either one would basically force me to upgrade batteries so I would call that a wash. Because of the price points I am leaning towards the R3 but still haven't pulled the trigger. Does anyone else believe that this caused others to hold off on the R5 II?

 

[MikeGalos]

• R1: $6,299
• R5II: $4,299
• R6II: $1,999
• R8: $1,299

Removing the bodies that are old stock left in the channel but obviously not part of the lineup (RP, R5, R3) there are two big gaps.

The gap between the "$4,000 camera" and the "$6,000 flagship" makes sense because flagships typically have a halo tax. The gap between the "$2,000 camera" and the "$4,000 camera" is just weird especially since it is a price point that other vendors target. It's not like Canon to leave a major market niche with nothing filling it.

It is worth noting that it could be that the "$3,000 camera" is a real split in the industry, though. Note that when Nikon updated their "$2,000 camera" (the Z 6II to Z 6III) a couple of months ago they didn't update their "$3,000 camera" (the Z 7II) despite the 6 and 7 series bodies having been released together in the first two generations.

We haven't seen a Sony product line level update recently to see whether this is a real gap in customers and the $3,000 level just doesn't have a market or whether it's just a temporary quirk by two vendors in one niche at about the same time which could be something as simple as both having something innovative in that market and not wanting to be in the shadow of the other's announcement.