Is a Canon EOS R100 coming next year? A budget EOS R APS-C camera [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Or for even less. Who wouldn't!
I'd bet that the vast majority of M purchasers, as mdcmdcmdc points out, are smartphone users or novices who don't own a DSLR or RF camera, and have no interest or intention of ever getting one. They are simply attracted by the styling, the Canon name, and the possibility of adding an extra lens to supplement the kit lens. They might be disappointed to find that the new super-duper RF10 and the imaginary RF100 are less pocketable than the M models.
Upvote
0
Aren't there many more things in life to be disgruntled about than the status of the M system?
So much heat and shade being thrown around for a system regularly dismissed by the majority of the forum over the years.
If Canon brings anything new out, there's unhappiness, if Canon sits on its hands and releases nothing, there's unhappiness.
So much heat and shade being thrown around for a system regularly dismissed by the majority of the forum over the years.
If Canon brings anything new out, there's unhappiness, if Canon sits on its hands and releases nothing, there's unhappiness.
Upvote
0
If Canon doesn't bring out the camera I specifically want, with each and every bell I want and not a single whistle I don't want, there's unhappiness.
Upvote
0
Every year I go on a multi-day backcountry hiking trip. Early on I carried a 5D Mark II, then a 5DsR with a telephoto, macro, and a wide angle lens. As I got older I wanted my weight down, but I didn't want to compromise quality. I eventually went with a SL1 which created some saleable images for me, but I hated the noise at higher ISOs.
I resisted going in on the M series for quite some time because I felt that Canon just didn't offer the lens lineup I needed. Finally, I went in on an M5 just because every ounce counts when hiking. I picked up the 11-22, 18-150, 55-200. The 11-22 is pretty good, I'm not really a fan of the others. My biggest use case for my cameras is landscape so the wider the better. I got pretty good at stitching M5 images while the camera was balanced on a trekking pole. Here is an example of that.
I then found the Laowa 9mm and fell in love with wide angle all over again. I picked up the M6 II which I think is a very capable camera and so easy to pull out and capture images. In fact, I frequently have my 5DsR on a tripod with my 11-24 f/4l and I grab the M6 with the Laowa and capture better images because I'm unburdened by the weight.
While I like the R line, for me it's going backwards on the weight a tad. I know it's lighter and very capable (I own an R5 and have preordered an R7), but the M series had brought back a little of the fun for me. Plus it has the quality I need to create saleable images. If the M line dies, so be it, my M6 II and Laowa will continue to function regardless. With that being said, I personally would love to see the M series continue in some form.
In the end, if I have to choose water over a camera, I'll choose water every time. The M series just enabled me to have a camera and still go quite a distance on my hikes while capturing some memorable images.
I resisted going in on the M series for quite some time because I felt that Canon just didn't offer the lens lineup I needed. Finally, I went in on an M5 just because every ounce counts when hiking. I picked up the 11-22, 18-150, 55-200. The 11-22 is pretty good, I'm not really a fan of the others. My biggest use case for my cameras is landscape so the wider the better. I got pretty good at stitching M5 images while the camera was balanced on a trekking pole. Here is an example of that.
Mirror Lake Reflections - Scenic Landscape, Nature and Wildlife Photography
I wanted to choose a backcountry site that was more out of the way than during my previous trips to Rocky Mountain National Park. Mirror Lake is generally accessible from the far northwestern corner of the park which is a couple hour drive from Trail Ridge. From there it was about a 5-6 mile...
www.journeyoflight.com
I then found the Laowa 9mm and fell in love with wide angle all over again. I picked up the M6 II which I think is a very capable camera and so easy to pull out and capture images. In fact, I frequently have my 5DsR on a tripod with my 11-24 f/4l and I grab the M6 with the Laowa and capture better images because I'm unburdened by the weight.
While I like the R line, for me it's going backwards on the weight a tad. I know it's lighter and very capable (I own an R5 and have preordered an R7), but the M series had brought back a little of the fun for me. Plus it has the quality I need to create saleable images. If the M line dies, so be it, my M6 II and Laowa will continue to function regardless. With that being said, I personally would love to see the M series continue in some form.
In the end, if I have to choose water over a camera, I'll choose water every time. The M series just enabled me to have a camera and still go quite a distance on my hikes while capturing some memorable images.
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Like @Czardoom I get a little tired of these closed-loop rumors that simply repost unsubstantiated rumors from other sites. I guess it is too much to expect that anyone is going to practice actual journalism and do some research to sort out the facts from fiction. Much easier and more profitable to just post clickbait.
As for the substance of the rumor I am in the skeptical category. I doubt that consolidating everything into a single mount will really save Canon much if anything. Those who buy the M system because of its size are unlikely to ever be pleased with the size of a R body. And, I wonder why Canon even needs to have cheap R crop sensor bodies, when they've shown with the RP that full frame can be affordable as well. It seems to me that releasing full frame R bodies in a range of lower costs would make more sense. It was possible during the film days with SLRs, why would it not be possible today with all the improvements in manufacturing efficiencies that have occurred since the 60s and 70s?
As for the substance of the rumor I am in the skeptical category. I doubt that consolidating everything into a single mount will really save Canon much if anything. Those who buy the M system because of its size are unlikely to ever be pleased with the size of a R body. And, I wonder why Canon even needs to have cheap R crop sensor bodies, when they've shown with the RP that full frame can be affordable as well. It seems to me that releasing full frame R bodies in a range of lower costs would make more sense. It was possible during the film days with SLRs, why would it not be possible today with all the improvements in manufacturing efficiencies that have occurred since the 60s and 70s?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Canon is making a lot of low resolution cameras. They must have a ton of low resolution sensors in inventory or orders they were committed to. The Z9 revolution really caught Canon off guard.
Upvote
0
The "Z9 revolution"? Lol! I think you mean, Nikon's response to the R5's revolution. Canon was the one who shook up the industry by releasing a $3900 camera that shot 45 megapixels at 20 fps. Nikon was the one caught off guard, which is why the Z9 ended up at $5500, instead of $6500, to try to bridge the gap that was left by Canon's $3900 option.
The reality is that the *vast* majority of daily consumers do not need more than 24 megapixels. No one posting photos to Instagram or Facebook is worried about missing out on a 45mp sensor. Instagram's feed only even posts 1350x900p images. We're talking about what will probably be a $500 camera here. I really don't see a reason for the cheap end of cameras to get much more higher resolution anytime soon. The users, if anything, will be more annoyed by the large file sizes being sent to their phones more than they'd even know that they could crop them, and they probably aren't printing any larger than 8x10, if they're printing at all.
Upvote
0
In my opinion a core remark: "unburdened".
I use two M50 ii for video (and photo) and I am impressed what they can do. I only need Full HD at the moment and like to have 15-85, 70-200, 60 macro, a self-made compact M/S mic and the bodies in a small photo back pack. (I am more the tele guy)
Technicolor style is a good substitute for some Log styles.
I wanted the C70 but this isn't for photo. The R5 C was the next "wanted" system including the XLR recording accessory but it's too expensive for a two body solution. So I preordered the R7 which might be compatible and is a good step into 4k I maybe need for further projects. Add some variable neutral density adapter and I am close to a C70 in achievable image quality + hopefully the TASCAM XLR accessory works for the R7. (and not only with some upcoming R7 C
By the way: Great "unburdened" photographs!
Upvote
0
A basic understanding of how large corporations handle competitive intelligence suggests that Canon was not caught off guard.
I'm sure you weren't caught off guard, either, with your vast knowledge and understanding of the ILC market. Lol.
Upvote
0
Additionally, of course, we're talking here of cameras with 24 Mpx and 32 Mpx APS-C sensors, which are equivalent to taking a crop from the middle of 61 Mpx and 82 Mpx resolution Full Frame cameras respectively, so hardly "low resolution" at all! (And both higher than the Z9!)
Upvote
0
You might want to try something from Olympus/OM. The sensor is smaller but some of the cameras border on the miniscule. As for water vs camera decision, been there, done that. The battle against weight is relentless.Every year I go on a multi-day backcountry hiking trip. Early on I carried a 5D Mark II, then a 5DsR with a telephoto, macro, and a wide angle lens. As I got older I wanted my weight down, but I didn't want to compromise quality. I eventually went with a SL1 which created some saleable images for me, but I hated the noise at higher ISOs.
I resisted going in on the M series for quite some time because I felt that Canon just didn't offer the lens lineup I needed. Finally, I went in on an M5 just because every ounce counts when hiking. I picked up the 11-22, 18-150, 55-200. The 11-22 is pretty good, I'm not really a fan of the others. My biggest use case for my cameras is landscape so the wider the better. I got pretty good at stitching M5 images while the camera was balanced on a trekking pole. Here is an example of that.
Mirror Lake Reflections - Scenic Landscape, Nature and Wildlife Photography
I wanted to choose a backcountry site that was more out of the way than during my previous trips to Rocky Mountain National Park. Mirror Lake is generally accessible from the far northwestern corner of the park which is a couple hour drive from Trail Ridge. From there it was about a 5-6 mile...www.journeyoflight.com
I then found the Laowa 9mm and fell in love with wide angle all over again. I picked up the M6 II which I think is a very capable camera and so easy to pull out and capture images. In fact, I frequently have my 5DsR on a tripod with my 11-24 f/4l and I grab the M6 with the Laowa and capture better images because I'm unburdened by the weight.
While I like the R line, for me it's going backwards on the weight a tad. I know it's lighter and very capable (I own an R5 and have preordered an R7), but the M series had brought back a little of the fun for me. Plus it has the quality I need to create saleable images. If the M line dies, so be it, my M6 II and Laowa will continue to function regardless. With that being said, I personally would love to see the M series continue in some form.
In the end, if I have to choose water over a camera, I'll choose water every time. The M series just enabled me to have a camera and still go quite a distance on my hikes while capturing some memorable images.
Upvote
0
It was only expected that after the R7 and R10 which are replacements of the 7D and 90D, a 850D replacement will come out. This will be a complete replacement of the EF line. Canon will only need to generate more RFs lenses.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
