The next full-frame RF mount camera will be a replacement for the Canon EOS R

[Curahee]

IBIS is overrated.
Compare camera shake with a non-stabilised tele or macro, on a 5DMkiv, and on a R5, and you won't notice much difference.
Yes, I have both bodies and have made multiple comparison tests using stabilised and non-stabilised Canon glass.
You'll see an improvement in stabilisation if you use short focal length lenses, but with teles nearly all of the stabilisation is done with the lens, not the body.

There are many non IS lenses that it would be great to have IBIS. Think FD, FL and R lenses and hundreds of other Non-IS lenses. If the lens has IS that is not required but for all other lenses this would be huge and make using them far more enjoyable, especially older telephoto lenses including many EF lenses and even some RF lenses without IS like the 28-70, the 50mm f1.2 and 85mm f1.2.

 

[entoman]

I had the unfortunate situation of being in Iceland for 2 weeks with lost luggage for 11 days.... so no filters or tripod :-(
IBIS was critical to handle longer exposure times hand held in this case.
You are correct about OIS vs IBIS for long vs short focal lengths but they still work together. OIS can't handle yaw etc but with longer focal lengths IBIS can't move that far.
That said, IBIS also reduces body shake for high mp sensors in general.
I definitely don't see it as overrated but it depends on your shooting genres.

Yes, "overrated" depends on shooting genres, and much more importantly - on whether you are using wideangles, medium teles, or long focal lengths.
IBIS and OIS working in conjunction yields the best results, but with teles and macros almost all of the work is done by the OIS.
With wideangles IBIS certainly has benefits.
With *unstabilised* teles and macros, IBIS alone makes very little difference in my experience - maybe 1 stop at best (depending on the user's "shakiness").
I think some have misinterpreted my use of the word "overrated" - I wasn't implying that it is valueless, just that it isn't as effective (with unstabilised teles) as some folk are led to believe.

 

[bergstrom]

Only thing for sure is that half the people here will love it, and half the people here will hate it

already some reviews are complaining about the R10 video AF. For a new camera , thats piss poor, and a middle finger from canon to customers.

 

[entoman]

already some reviews are complaining about the R10 video AF. For a new camera , thats piss poor, and a middle finger from canon to customers.

I'm not a video guy, so it's not really something I can comment on.

As a stills shooter specialising in macro and wildlife, I think the R3, R5 and R6 are all stunning cameras - and very much in their favour is the fact that the controls are almost identical on each, which makes it much easier (for me) to switch back and forth between models without "muscle-memory" issues.

The different ergonomics of the R7, R10 and RP make them undesirable to me, but I'm looking forward (admittedly with some trepidation) to seeing the "R replacement", and how it compares to the R6, as a potential backup to my R5.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

OK, we have the R3-semi flagship, the R5 megapixel, the R6 which is working horse, and R7 the R3 in APS sensor, and the R10 which is the R-rebel. So where will we slide the new R/RP version? it can be R8 or R9 cause we "go down the line", but it needs to be lower htan the R6 but higher than the R10. So, if it is R8 it will be closer to the R6/R7 and if R9 then closer to the R10 with FF sensor. The space and differences are getting narrower as we speak. Personally I would go to the R9 more than the R8 cause the R8 (with the advance in technology since the R5/R6 came out) is too close to the R6 to really make the margin needed to be a "different" camera.

I am not convinced it would make much sense but Canon could easily make a cheaper R6 with a smaller buffer, one card slot, and no IBIS.
Call it an R6 P or something like that

 

[EOS 4 Life]

already some reviews are complaining about the R10 video AF. For a new camera , thats piss poor, and a middle finger from canon to customers.

People complain about every camera Canon makes.
I do not remember the last one that people did not complain about.
The R10 video is better than pretty much anything else in its price category.

 

[bergstrom]

People complain about every camera Canon makes.
I do not remember the last one that people did not complain about.
The R10 video is better than pretty much anything else in its price category.

If they're sacrificing focus to meet a price point, then they shouldn't make a product.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

If they're sacrificing focus to meet a price point, then they shouldn't make a product.

Then most of Canon's competition should not exist at all.
Only Sony matches Canon's autofocus.

 

[bergstrom]

Then most of Canon's competition should not exist at all.
Only Sony matches Canon's autofocus.

you shouldn't have great AF on one canon model and crap on another. It should be consistent.

 

[Del Paso]

you shouldn't have great AF on one canon model and crap on another. It should be consistent.

Crap?
Did you test it or do you rely on the internet?
Are these sources reliable, like for instance TDP?

 

[entoman]

People complain about every camera Canon makes.
I do not remember the last one that people did not complain about.

Yep, and people complain about every camera made by Nikon, Sony, Panasonic and OM Systems too.

I guess we all just want more, more, more, for less, less, less.

 

[entoman]

you shouldn't have great AF on one canon model and crap on another. It should be consistent.

It's inevitable that newer models will have better AF than older ones, that's just progress.
It's also a fact of life that you won't get hi-end performance from a budget camera, because the best AF systems require very expensive processors.

Also, manufacturers have to stop their budget models from cannibalising more expensive ones in their range.

So it would be unrealistic e.g. to expect R3 performance from an R7 or R10.

Canon do a pretty good job though, even with their budget models (I'm talking stills here, not qualified to comment on video)

 

[bergstrom]

Crap?
Did you test it or do you rely on the internet?
Are these sources reliable, like for instance TDP?

Oh, rely on internet. Listen very carefully about R10 AF.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Oh, rely on internet. Listen very carefully about R10 AF.

DPR? Lol. Maybe they’ve learned something since their last review I viewed, when they didn’t understand how Canon’s automatic AF point selection works so they bashed it even though it was functioning as designed (which is different from the Sony/Nikon cameras they’re used to), and when they configured the Servo AF in a way Canon recommend against (because they couldn’t be bothered to RTFM) and bashed the tracking performance.

But sure, rely on the internet.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

Surely the discussion of mirrorless cameras with no video has been debunked already.
The EVF is a video screen so there is already a video stream to be captured.
Electronic shutter is used for EVF and there is no mechanical cost for this in any case.
The incremental SW cost to write this to a card is small and given that that code has already been written for R3/5/6/7 etc on Digic X processor then it is a no-brainer to include it with whatever features (or not) to offer. The market will demand it anyway.

If you are saying that you want a R3 but DLSR then the 1DXiii is available for you but even that has better AF via live view.

The costs of a feature are not really an argument when it comes to Canon. Canon is famous for its "cripple hammer". They leave away some functions that could be cheap and easy to add - sometimes even via firmware - to offer a cheaper option. That makes a lot of sense for a manufacturer. People have different budgets and different needs. The way to maximize profit is selling everybody the most expensive camera they can afford. Some people will always buy the best option with all the features and others might be willing to pay half the price for a camera with less options.

For Canon it would be very cheap to include some professional video specs like time code and a few more codes into cameras like the R3, but that would cannibalize some of the really professional video camera that cost much more. That could also work in the other direction: Taking an R3 and stripping it off a lot of features to make sure that many people would still buy the real R3 for those features, but the lower spec camera could be offered much cheaper that the higher spec one without cannibalizing it. So it is not about what a feature like video costs Canon, but what it is worth to the customer.

The main reason why I would like a mirrorless camera is IBIS. I wish there would be Canon DSLRs with IBIS. That would be the best of two worlds. I would also love to have the sensor of the R3, which still is the best performing low light sensor on the whole full frame market. I understand the physical limitations of a DSLR though. In order for a 7 or 8 stop IBIS to work, the image circle has to be much larger and therefore the mirror would also have to grow, but than it would no longer fit within the flange distance of the DSLR. So basically a new mount would have to be invented. One with a larger flange distance than the EF mount has. That would result in even worse optical formulas than the EF mount has. Exactly the opposite direction of the RF mount, which has a shorter flange distance and allows better optical formulas. So in a DLSR with EF mount a strong IBIS could only work in Live View, but than you would practically use the DSLR as a mirrorless camera, just without an EVF.

Sadly photography is all about compromises. Even cameras manufacturers admit that after using the sensor for a while, it warms up and the images noise increases. That really is one of the worst compromises. A degrading image quality just because a camera warms up while I compose my shot. I think DSLRs should still have their place for situations where they can play their advantages, Just last month I bought a new EF lens, because I still believe in that system. That lens even is made of metal. Sooner or later I will probaly carry both a DSLR and a mirrorless camera on all of my trips.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

DPR? Lol. Maybe they’ve learned something since their last review I viewed, when they didn’t understand how Canon’s automatic AF point selection works so they bashed it even though it was functioning as designed (which is different from the Sony/Nikon cameras they’re used to), and when they configured the Servo AF in a way Canon recommend against (because they couldn’t be bothered to RTFM) and bashed the tracking performance.

But sure, rely on the internet.

DP Review seems pretty clueless to me in general.
Also, Chris usually does not film himself.
Usually, Jordan records him so this does not tell us anything about how the R10 compares with the autofocus in other cameras.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

For Canon it would be very cheap

We have no idea what anything costs.

 

[dolina]

This is the timeline of full frame EOS bodies

1-Series

• 2001 1D 2002 Winter Olympics
• 2004 1D Mark II for 2004 Summer Olympics
• 2005 1D Mark IIn for 2006 Winter Olympics
• 2007 1D Mark III for 2008 Summer Olympics
• 2009 1D Mark IV for 2010 Winter Olympics
• 2012 1D X for 2012 Summer Olympics
• 2016 1D X Mark II for 2016 Summer Olympics
• 2020 1D X Mark III for 2020 Summer Olympics
• 2024 R1 (?) for 2024 Summer Olympics

5-Series

• 2005 5D
• 2008 5D Mark II
• 2012 5D Mark III
• 2016 5D Mark IV
• 2020 R5
• 2024 R5 Mark II (?)

6-Series

• 2012 6D
• 2017 6D Mark II
• 2020 R6
• 2024 R6 Mark II (?)

R-Series

• 2018 EOS R
• 2022 EOS R Mark II (?) or 2023

RP-Series

• 2019 EOS RP
• 2023 EOS RP Mark II (?) or 2024

I suspect that Canon & Nikon may discontinue production of dSLR bodies, lenses and accessories by 2024.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

This is the timeline of full frame EF bodies

1D X

• 2012 1D X
• 2016 1D X Mark III
• 2020 1D X Mark III

5-Series

• 2005 5D
• 2008 5D Mark II
• 2012 5D Mark III
• 2016 5D Mark IV
• 2020 R5

6-Series

• 2012 6D
• 2017 6D Mark II
• 2020 R6

EOS R that was released in 2018 may be released in Christmas 2022 or 2023.

Nice to see dolina again.
It is interesting that there is no discernible pattern to the release schedule of the 6 series.
We could potentially see an R6 II at any time.
I am not sure that it would make much sense for one to come out before an R5 II though.

 

[dolina]

Nice to see dolina again.
It is interesting that there is no discernible pattern to the release schedule of the 6 series.
We could potentially see an R6 II at any time.
I am not sure that it would make much sense for one to come out before an R5 II though.

Thanks for missing me. I edited my post to give it more order. (?) signifies a future body.

If I were to hazard a guess 2024 will be the year R1, R5 Mark 2 & R6 Mark 2 will be out.

My preference though is that each year will have Canon pushing out a full frame body.

Example

• 2022 R Mark II
• 2023 RP Mark II
• 2024 R1
• 2025 R5 Mark II
• 2026 R6

In light of weakening of sales of ILCs, personally I'd prefer less full frame SKUs

For EF mount we have

• 1D X
• 5D
• 6D

With RF mount we have

• R1 (?)
• R3
• R5
• R6
• R
• RP