Three new segments of EOS R cameras coming in 2025

[Del Paso]

Modern RF film camera plz

It could look modern or retro but take RF lenses. A low res sensor that matches the res of the EVF that gets out of the way when taking a shot. That way the film can get exposed. And it could have modern AF etc.

That would be a dream film camera come true.

I see absolutely no chance for a modern film camera from Canon.
Those needing/wanting one can already:
- Buy for little money a Canon F1, Nikon F2, Leicaflex SL , Pentax LX, Contax RTS, Leica M, Minolta XM etc...
Even these prestigious cameras, except Leica M, can be had for a few hundred Euros. With a lens (again, not Leica $$$$$$$$$$).
- Buy a brand new Leica M if money is pretty abundant...

 

[Bob Howland]

Will Canon release a RF-FD adapter as well?

Current lenses don't look great on a retro camera

All of the interaction in the FD mount is mechanical, using levers and posts. (I owned MF Canon bodies and lenses between 1975 and1997.) I don't see how an RF mount anything would interact with a lens like that.

 

[Baywoof]

High megapixel cameras are a niche market, surely, and there are already cameras in that market - FujiFilm, Hasselblad, PhaseOne, in a different camera format, and somewhat larger sensors. If Canon can make inroads in such market with a 35mm camera . depends on what the camera will be capable of. Canon knows how well the 5DS sold.

So many things some thought to be "niche" eventually becomes mainstream. That's part of progress and some call it disruptive technology. I wouldn't call a 45 mp mirrorless camera "niche", although 5+ years ago, Canon's 50 mp offering was considered "niche". And Sony offers a 61 mp full frame camera, introduced 2 years ago and has sold well.

 

[Del Paso]

Will Canon release a RF-FD adapter as well?

Current lenses don't look great on a retro camera

119 Euros from Novoflex. ( EOSR-CAN for Canon FD lenses). Entirely manual, but excellent quality, not like the cheap ones from Amazon.

 

[EricN]

I see absolutely no chance for a modern film camera from Canon.
Those needing/wanting one can already:
- Buy for little money a Canon F1, Nikon F2, Leicaflex SL , Pentax LX, Contax RTS, Leica M, Minolta XM etc...
Even these prestigious cameras, except Leica M, can be had for a few hundred Euros. With a lens (again, not Leica $$$$$$$$$$).
- Buy a brand new Leica M if money is pretty abundant...

I agree, but it's fun to think about... like a 35 f1.2

 

[roby17269]

I would think anyone developing a 100 mp camera would take you concerns into consideration. That said, I've see Fuji and Hasselblad medium format users shoot handheld without any issue, so it can be done.

I do use my MF rig both on tripod or hand-held, as the circumstances require / allow.
It is certainly doable, especially with the assistance of flashes. The real issue with old-ish MF rigs is that their AF is laughable and this is compounded by the fact that DOF is razor-thin unless you have enough light to stop down. On the plus side, focal lengths tend to be shorter and pixels tend to be bigger compared to high-res FF systems.

With the R5 I usually shoot with shutter speed = 1/(4*fl) - I prefer to raise ISO rather than slow down the shutter

 

[roby17269]

I agree, but it's fun to think about... like a 35 f1.2

you guys need to get a life

 

[David_B]

Just think about the detail what a 100 megapixel camera shooting in crop mode would deliver.

A 100MP sensor provides the same level of detail in both full-frame mode and crop mode.

 

[LDS]

All of the interaction in the FD mount is mechanical, using levers and posts. (I owned MF Canon bodies and lenses between 1975 and1997.) I don't see how an RF mount anything would interact with a lens like that.

Actually, an RF-FD adapter would just need to allow to close the diaphragm blades (just like old reverse-mount macro adapter). Of course one would still need to turn the aperture ring and focus manually, it wouldn't work in A mode.

119 Euros from Novoflex. ( EOSR-CAN for Canon FD lenses).

I know some are available already, but I wish a Canon branded one! (just to spend more, of course) A plus if it has a spring you need to penis to actuate the diaphragm, giving the user the old feeling of having to advance the film before each shot.

So many things some thought to be "niche" eventually becomes mainstream.

Yes, but not everything. Sometimes too big is just too big. 100mpx + images are useless on small displays like phones. Any screen resolution beyond eye resolution is useless. That's why high-end cameras like the Canon 1 series has always relatively less mpx than others - their main users don't really need tons of mpx. Then there are fields when tons of mpx are useful. Even phones with 100mpx use it to downsample, not to produce very large images.

 

[MkSprintz]

You must take wildlife photos in a zoo! Reach is by far the most important reason most wildlife photographers desire APSC. Not all of us can afford an RF 600 F4 lens.

You would be surprised what the R6 MKii can do with the 100-500 and 1.4x teleconverter attached ( 300-500 range ). It offers nearly similar range to that of the R7 and even matches and surpasses the R7 in image quality.

As an added bonus the R6 MKii offers better low light capabilities which is excellent when looking for owls.

 

[john1970]

With all of these new cameras I wonder if there are also going to be any lenses as well? I know I have mentioned it before, but so far 2024 has been relatively slow for lens announcements are there are only ~10 weeks left to go.

 

[john1970]

With regards, to these cameras a high-resolution one makes sense to me and I see the usefulness of a compact APS-C camera for video. I have never been a fan of retro camera models but that is a matter of personal preference. Would Canon announce some compact manual AF lenses for the retro camera?

 

[Del Paso]

Actually, an RF-FD adapter would just need to allow to close the diaphragm blades (just like old reverse-mount macro adapter). Of course one would still need to turn the aperture ring and focus manually, it wouldn't work in A mode.


I know some are available already, but I wish a Canon branded one! (just to spend more, of course) A plus if it has a spring you need to penis to actuate the diaphragm, giving the user the old feeling of having to advance the film before each shot.


Yes, but not everything. Sometimes too big is just too big. 100mpx + images are useless on small displays like phones. Any screen resolution beyond eye resolution is useless. That's why high-end cameras like the Canon 1 series has always relatively less mpx than others - their main users don't really need tons of mpx. Then there are fields when tons of mpx are useful. Even phones with 100mpx use it to downsample, not to produce very large images.

"A plus if it has a spring you need to penis"
Could you please elaborate???

 

[P-visie]

"A plus if it has a spring you need to penis"
Could you please elaborate???

Rather not, and I doubt if an elaboration would get past the moderators . I suspect: “A plus if it has a spring you need to press to actuate the diaphragm, giving the user the old feeling of having to advance the film before each shot.”

 

[Del Paso]

I agree, but it's fun to think about... like a 35 f1.2

Yet, I'd prefer the real thing.
A retro camera would certainly lack the mechanical excellence of a vintage one. Electronics instead of brass gears, plastics instead of machined metal etc...
A modern Nikon F2 or Canon F1 (the first one) would be more about plastic mouldings than milled and turned parts.
Traditional body design sounds good to my ears, I mean visible physical controls. But no cheap clones of former icons.
I'd certainly accept with joy a Canon rangefinder with Leica M bayonet, but for a more trivial reason: cost...plus a Canon sensor, and not a sohnni one.
But the RF 35 f/1,2 is a different story. I know at least one future customer. And know it will be as great as the 50 and 85 f/1,2: almost perfect!

 

[SvO2]

You would be surprised what the R6 MKii can do with the 100-500 and 1.4x teleconverter attached ( 300-500 range ). It offers nearly similar range to that of the R7 and even matches and surpasses the R7 in image quality.

As an added bonus the R6 MKii offers better low light capabilities which is excellent when looking for owls.

The R7 with the bare 100-500 still has effectively 30% more reach (ie pixels on the bird) than the r6 with the 1.4x tele converter.

 

[Quack]

I do not wish for more than 50 mpx. But others do, and they may get it...

I do not understand why \'as a wildlife photographer\' anyone wishes for APSC. For me, the only reason to get APSC would be size and weight.

Because my 100-500mm lens gets 800mm reach. I suppose you could quality that as size and weight compared to an 800mm lens of equal quality...and price.

 

[Quack]

On the flip side you get much, much better AF, in speed, accuracy and consistency, an actually useable electronic shutter and a high fps mode where more than half of the pictures are in focus.

While the R7 can deliver stunning results, it is fickle. When I still had an R7, I would start with the R8 and change to the R7 if I needed more pixels on the target. And even then the R7 had trouble detecting the subjects the R8 had no trouble with, despite using the same lens at the same distance.

I have owned the R7, R6 II and the R8. I have found that the AF results on all of them to be about equally good. I offer no explanation, but just giving my experience.

 

[another_mikey]

If a 100MP camera from Canon can come close to matching the dynamic range of the existing R5 (Mark I version not the new one) I would consider it if I could afford it. For that it would have to be $5k or less I think. In that scenario I would sell my existing R5 and get an R5 Mk II (for action / wildlife) and the new 100MP Canon full frame body (for scenic / landscape stuff...)

 

[LDS]

"A plus if it has a spring you need to penis"
Could you please elaborate???

I wrote c.o.c.k. - something turned it into 'penis'. I wonder what kind of spell checker...

very funny: if I edit the post I see the original word c.o.c.k, when saving it becomes 'penis' looks it's some 'AI' trying to turn a coarse word into a more acceptable one