Travel size full frame Canon?

[carrrrrlos]

Greetings, new here, but have been a Canon fan for decades.
Currently own and still use:
Canon F-1n, EOS A2e, and the 5DMIV
I also have some non Canons that will not be mentioned here ;P

Looking to delve into FF mirrorless - I dusted off my a6000, which I picked up when it was released to delve into the mirrorless world. It’s a fine cropped sensor camera, but never really considered Sony any further - as the interface just felt clunky to me.

Fast forward to 2025. I’m now looking at diving fully into FF mirrorless with the R5 to replace my 5D - but also looking for a fun, light, casual camera body. I’ve narrowed it down to a (dare i say) Sony 7CR. I would really love for Canon to have something similar but I just don’t see anything.

I figured I’d post this here in the event that there may be some knowledge regarding Canon exploring a FF system like this. I looked at the RP, but it was still a little too large for pocketing, and am hesitant to use as a travel camera from reviews on poor battery life.

Photography would be the main use for me, video is bonus.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I use the R8 for travel, I’m very happy with it.

My local shooting is with the R1 and mainly L-series lenses. I sometimes take those lenses on trips, usually when traveling for business where I have time to shoot. On family trips, lenses like the RF 24-240 and RF 28/2.8 are great, delivering good IQ in a small package. The RF 100-400 is another lightweight lens that punches above its weight on IQ. I do often travel with the RF 10-20mm f/4L, it gives a unique look and AFAIK no one else has an UWA zoom that wide.

There are some good examples in the RF Lens Gallery.
RF 24-240
RF 28/2.8
RF 100-400

If I need to go really small, I have an M6II and the full set of EF-M lenses. But I generally prefer full frame as I'm not always shooting in bright light.

 

[carrrrrlos]

I use the R8 for travel, I’m very happy with it.

I was considering the R8, but was hesitant because of the size - almost picked it up actually. Then Canon released the R5Mii. Once the price dropped on the R5, I decided to just go for that camera as a replacement for my 5D. I’m still considering the R5 w/ a pancake lens as my travel camera, but limiting myself to that 28mm lens (to keep the size down) is not optimal.
Appreciate your feedback.

 

[Jethro]

The RF 28-70mm f2.8 is tiny for what it is, and ideal for travel. The RF 16mm f2.8 is similarly small, and together they make an excellent travel pack. Together maybe with the 28mm pancake as a 'walk-around' lens.

 

[Kit.]

I’m still considering the R5 w/ a pancake lens as my travel camera, but limiting myself to that 28mm lens (to keep the size down) is not optimal.

R5 + RF 14-35 is my travel combo, but I'm not into small cameras.

 

[carrrrrlos]

The RF 28-70mm f2.8 is tiny for what it is, and ideal for travel. The RF 16mm f2.8 is similarly small, and together they make an excellent travel pack. Together maybe with the 28mm pancake as a 'walk-around' lens.

Great combos here, thanks!

 

[carrrrrlos]

R5 + RF 14-35 is my travel combo, but I'm not into small cameras.

Great combo here too. Getting big and heavy. Keeping it light is the key for me for travel and hitting the forest. I’ve seen videos of photographers lugging their kit around, which is what i’m hoping to avoid. It’s looking like the R5 w/ pancake for starters at the very least.

 

[kten]

at the risk of some controversy here I'd say if you are after significantly smaller the Canon isn't really going to provide there and better looking elsewhere. I use an R5ii and 15-35 2.8 for what I consider a travel setup. Although it is light and small for the IQ, light gathering and other features it isn't what most mean by light and small much like my travel backpack I usually have it stuffed in I consider light and small isn't actually light nor small in the bag marketplace, just for that manufacturer. It is the lightest and smallest for the load bearing and features that fit my frame (kifaru ark and ku4300 as my light setup) but admittedly would be considered heavy and big by most people asking for light and small, however I'm 193cm and have long torso and would rather a bit more weight for a lot more comfort carrying over time/distance.

Canon I see similar, more weight and size vs competition on the light and small end of things so the smallest lightest travel option "for Canon" is still pretty big and heavy vs other options, but you get ergonomics and other features in return for the difference. Depending on how small you can handle reasonably without it becoming fiddly there are other manufacturers that do small a lot better for some, I am between 10 and 11 in mens glove size and find Canons modern bodies the smallest I would practically want. If you have significantly smaller hands though then you could trade some of that size without much loss of practical usability imho and go with of of the really small 3rd party options.

I do use the R5ii and sometimes the R with a 28mm pancake on when really need to drop the weight and it is a great lens for the weight and price in fair weather. You mention you don't want to just be tied to that though and even their smallest lightest other lenses are much bigger and heavier considering you mention pocketable. Considering that without knowing your exact needs and comfort threshold/size etc I would consider getting the R5 as a general robust 35mm ff system and pick up a 28mm pancake due to weight/price being almost insignificant for the times that will do. Then get a smaller travel option from another party such as Fuji, Sony, maybe Nikon etc etc that offers the features you need and available lenses for when you need much much smaller/lighter at the cost of features or comfort.

 

[carrrrrlos]

at the risk of some controversy here I'd say if you are after significantly smaller the Canon isn't really going to provide there and better looking elsewhere. I use an R5ii and 15-35 2.8 for what I consider a travel setup. Although it is light and small for the IQ, light gathering and other features it isn't what most mean by light and small much like my travel backpack I usually have it stuffed in I consider light and small isn't actually light nor small in the bag marketplace, just for that manufacturer. It is the lightest and smallest for the load bearing and features that fit my frame (kifaru ark and ku4300 as my light setup) but admittedly would be considered heavy and big by most people asking for light and small, however I'm 193cm and have long torso and would rather a bit more weight for a lot more comfort carrying over time/distance.

Canon I see similar, more weight and size vs competition on the light and small end of things so the smallest lightest travel option "for Canon" is still pretty big and heavy vs other options, but you get ergonomics and other features in return for the difference. Depending on how small you can handle reasonably without it becoming fiddly there are other manufacturers that do small a lot better for some, I am between 10 and 11 in mens glove size and find Canons modern bodies the smallest I would practically want. If you have significantly smaller hands though then you could trade some of that size without much loss of practical usability imho and go with of of the really small 3rd party options.

I do use the R5ii and sometimes the R with a 28mm pancake on when really need to drop the weight and it is a great lens for the weight and price in fair weather. You mention you don't want to just be tied to that though and even their smallest lightest other lenses are much bigger and heavier considering you mention pocketable. Considering that without knowing your exact needs and comfort threshold/size etc I would consider getting the R5 as a general robust 35mm ff system and pick up a 28mm pancake due to weight/price being almost insignificant for the times that will do. Then get a smaller travel option from another party such as Fuji, Sony, maybe Nikon etc etc that offers the features you need and available lenses for when you need much much smaller/lighter at the cost of features or comfort.

Agree here. The small form factor + interchangeable lens just may not be part of Canon’s line-up vision at the moment. Actually going to keep my 5DMIV as it’s just such a great camera, and add the R5 to the collection. I have plenty of EF lenses and have been looking for an excuse to break out my FD glass, and the R5 w/ FD to RF adapter would be fun. I’m a Creative Director and at times I’ll work directly with clients on smaller projects when not working with a dedicated photographer - this when I break out the pelicans and a camera bag. So in regards to exact needs - we’re traveling a bit more to see family and friends this year and I just want to take one camera - wouldn’t that be nice. I live in the PNW, so I go on hikes quite often, and there are times I wish I have more than my iPhone - but less than my 5D. After watching countless videos on youtube, I think I landed on the Sony a7CR - it seems to check off all the boxes.

I was reading on here there may be a retro A-1 style coming - with a FF sensor, I’d pick that up in a heartbeat.

 

[kten]

One thing worth mentioning with the 28mm which may be obvious but easily forgotten is depending on subject you can take/stitch several shots. I use it as a glorified phone camera basically, and even though my phone camera is supposed to be decent that cheap 28mm canon does better and in low light and is even workable into the sun or deep shadows. Attached examples of a few quick photos grabbed as walking and stitched including into the sun and with deep shadow and it still didn't flare too much and held up better than a phone for not much more size and weight. It couldn't go toe to toe with well setup heavier bigger lenses, especially lugging along a tripod and my ND kit and so on but for fast on the move snaps certainly better than a phone imho and worth the weight and crazy value for when good enough vs best will suffice (ie. personal snaps).

 

[docsmith]

I usually travel with the R5. If I need smaller the options I own are the M6 II and then the G7X II. Canon is coming out with this "V" series, and while it seems weighted toward video, I am intrigued that they may be very capable smaller still cameras as well.

That said, there is a camera comparison tool.

I think Neuro's suggestion of the R8 is most comparable to the Sony.

 

[Aldherrian]

One thing worth mentioning with the 28mm which may be obvious but easily forgotten is depending on subject you can take/stitch several shots. I use it as a glorified phone camera basically, and even though my phone camera is supposed to be decent that cheap 28mm canon does better and in low light and is even workable into the sun or deep shadows. Attached examples of a few quick photos grabbed as walking and stitched including into the sun and with deep shadow and it still didn't flare too much and held up better than a phone for not much more size and weight. It couldn't go toe to toe with well setup heavier bigger lenses, especially lugging along a tripod and my ND kit and so on but for fast on the move snaps certainly better than a phone imho and worth the weight and crazy value for when good enough vs best will suffice (ie. personal snaps).

Great pictures ! The sea of clouds is really something else
A bit of off-topic question but did you use some panorama mode in-camera or is it the result of post-process stitching ?

 

[kten]

Great pictures ! The sea of clouds is really something else
A bit of off-topic question but did you use some panorama mode in-camera or is it the result of post-process stitching ?

Post process with photoshop. I used to use hugin or ptgui but never upgraded latter in a long time since around CS6 or early CC adobe was good enough in nearly every scene so paying for new license wasn't worth it like in the past. The ability to plug in things like enblend and other pt and pfstools and the auto-stitching accuracy used to set it apart (they are both based on same foss libraries basically). Especially in scenes with foreground and thus parallax error (I don't use pano head on tripod) but these days a lot of other software I have tried is good enough.

I mention it for those in adobe free workflow it is possibly worth it, and hugin is free still iirc. PTGUI pro just gets a few easier workflow options and easier faster results with options in the GUI that used to take multiple steps and CLI tools which was a pain when I used to do a lot of landscape stuff so may not be worth it and like I say these days may not be worth it at all.

Side note : the sea of clouds was perfect 360 degree around inversion that lasted few days. The day before heading up was literally 15metre visibility from base of the hills (250m ish) all the way to about 800m where it suddenly ended when hit the warm layer up top and the 1000m peaks like islands in a sea of milk due to low wind and was gentle flowing and ebbing at the ridges down into the cwms like liquid. Camping up there above the mist due to condensation and it lasted into the evening and still partial next morning with only some breaks in the cloud at distance. Sadly hadn't taken more landscape kit and couldn't get more time away to stay another day to get better images but it's always the way isn't it? As they say the best camera is the camera you have on you and my knees are getting too old to ruck masses of weight on the off chance un-forecast good weather hits.

edit: I mean to try the pano mode in camera but haven't yet. I imagine for scenes without much parallax error that are horizontal pans it would be fine especially if you tried to rotate the camera around the nodal point and not at your hips. For vertical scenes I find selecting transverse projections looks more correct because you need the vanishing point on the outer vertical boundary or you get perfect straight none converging lines that look off and compress the size. Kinda like tilt on a tilt shift but over a panoramic style scene it takes away the towering look which is usually the opposite of what you need so not sure how auto mode in camera could handle that when manually you can do it in a few clicks.

 

[carrrrrlos]

One thing worth mentioning with the 28mm which may be obvious but easily forgotten is depending on subject you can take/stitch several shots. I use it as a glorified phone camera basically, and even though my phone camera is supposed to be decent that cheap 28mm canon does better and in low light and is even workable into the sun or deep shadows. Attached examples of a few quick photos grabbed as walking and stitched including into the sun and with deep shadow and it still didn't flare too much and held up better than a phone for not much more size and weight. It couldn't go toe to toe with well setup heavier bigger lenses, especially lugging along a tripod and my ND kit and so on but for fast on the move snaps certainly better than a phone imho and worth the weight and crazy value for when good enough vs best will suffice (ie. personal snaps).

These are great - thanks for pointing out the stitching, I didn’t think about this. The 28mm is capable for sure.

 

[carrrrrlos]

I usually travel with the R5. If I need smaller the options I own are the M6 II and then the G7X II. Canon is coming out with this "V" series, and while it seems weighted toward video, I am intrigued that they may be very capable smaller still cameras as well.

That said, there is a camera comparison tool.

I think Neuro's suggestion of the R8 is most comparable to the Sony.

View attachment 222862

This is a great tool, thanks. I was looking at the V as well. The M6 II is a great option - and actually what I was almost going to pick up at mpb. I was simply hesitant buying an older mirrorless that is somewhat less future proof. The form factor of the M6II w/ a full frame lens and RF mount would be amazing. I hopped on here to see if there was such a beast in the works. In regards to the R8, it is another good option, but I just don’t see me getting both an R5 and an R8. I’m still eying that M6 - it’s such a nice camera, they are holding their value nicely too.

 

[Aldherrian]

Post process with photoshop. I used to use hugin or ptgui but never upgraded latter in a long time since around CS6 or early CC adobe was good enough in nearly every scene so paying for new license wasn't worth it like in the past. The ability to plug in things like enblend and other pt and pfstools and the auto-stitching accuracy used to set it apart (they are both based on same foss libraries basically). Especially in scenes with foreground and thus parallax error (I don't use pano head on tripod) but these days a lot of other software I have tried is good enough.

I mention it for those in adobe free workflow it is possibly worth it, and hugin is free still iirc. PTGUI pro just gets a few easier workflow options and easier faster results with options in the GUI that used to take multiple steps and CLI tools which was a pain when I used to do a lot of landscape stuff so may not be worth it and like I say these days may not be worth it at all.

Side note : the sea of clouds was perfect 360 degree around inversion that lasted few days. The day before heading up was literally 15metre visibility from base of the hills (250m ish) all the way to about 800m where it suddenly ended when hit the warm layer up top and the 1000m peaks like islands in a sea of milk due to low wind and was gentle flowing and ebbing at the ridges down into the cwms like liquid. Camping up there above the mist due to condensation and it lasted into the evening and still partial next morning with only some breaks in the cloud at distance. Sadly hadn't taken more landscape kit and couldn't get more time away to stay another day to get better images but it's always the way isn't it? As they say the best camera is the camera you have on you and my knees are getting too old to ruck masses of weight on the off chance un-forecast good weather hits.

edit: I mean to try the pano mode in camera but haven't yet. I imagine for scenes without much parallax error that are horizontal pans it would be fine especially if you tried to rotate the camera around the nodal point and not at your hips. For vertical scenes I find selecting transverse projections looks more correct because you need the vanishing point on the outer vertical boundary or you get perfect straight none converging lines that look off and compress the size. Kinda like tilt on a tilt shift but over a panoramic style scene it takes away the towering look which is usually the opposite of what you need so not sure how auto mode in camera could handle that when manually you can do it in a few clicks.

I wouldn't have suspected there would be so many different tools for stitching !
I've tried a bit the in-camera mode but wasn't really impressed. I want to try a bit more panoramas but so far, I worked with the tool inside Lightroom and it's a bit heavy in processing to work with. Maybe I should try one of these you mentionned just to compare

 

[arkon_]

If you can get over the ergonomics, then you're probably better off with a Sony, or an L mount camera. In either case you'd also get access to Sigma's compact C lenses, while on Canon you're limited to (good, but enormous) L glass and a few plasticky tubes. Nikon with a chipped E to Z adapter would also get you there.
It's a shame really. I'm in the same position as you (5Dmk4 workhorse that hardly gets used anymore) and would have bought an R6mkII in a heartbeat if the lens situation wasn't so terrible for those who aren't necessarily prioritizing IQ at the cost of size.
The current top contenders for me at the moment are (in no order of preference):

• any used Leica SL (also great for adapting rangefinder lenses, where the adapter size keeps the package a lot smaller compared to SLR mounts), although it suffers from size and weight concerns, being very close to the 5D on both counts;
• a Nikon Z7II or whatever its successor will be;
• a Fuji GFX (same weight+size issue as the SL but at least the larger sensor might justify it);
• waiting to see what the digital retro Canon will end up being.

The Nikon Zf totally fails to capture me due to its overly convoluted control scheme. I don't know why they didn't just copy Fuji with the addition of the 1/3 Step setting as a command dial override. I might have actually bought it then. Baffling decision by Nikon.

At the moment I've been carrying a Ricoh GR as my daily camera and straight up just shooting film on travels, but this can't go on forever xD

 

[carrrrrlos]

If you can get over the ergonomics, then you're probably better off with a Sony, or an L mount camera. In either case you'd also get access to Sigma's compact C lenses, while on Canon you're limited to (good, but enormous) L glass and a few plasticky tubes. Nikon with a chipped E to Z adapter would also get you there.
It's a shame really. I'm in the same position as you (5Dmk4 workhorse that hardly gets used anymore) and would have bought an R6mkII in a heartbeat if the lens situation wasn't so terrible for those who aren't necessarily prioritizing IQ at the cost of size.
The current top contenders for me at the moment are (in no order of preference):

• any used Leica SL (also great for adapting rangefinder lenses, where the adapter size keeps the package a lot smaller compared to SLR mounts), although it suffers from size and weight concerns, being very close to the 5D on both counts;
• a Nikon Z7II or whatever its successor will be;
• a Fuji GFX (same weight+size issue as the SL but at least the larger sensor might justify it);
• waiting to see what the digital retro Canon will end up being.

The Nikon Zf totally fails to capture me due to its overly convoluted control scheme. I don't know why they didn't just copy Fuji with the addition of the 1/3 Step setting as a command dial override. I might have actually bought it then. Baffling decision by Nikon.

At the moment I've been carrying a Ricoh GR as my daily camera and straight up just shooting film on travels, but this can't go on forever xD

Funny, what prompted me to even start this journey was an EOY assessment of film dev and scanning costs - hence the search for a smaller FF interchangeable. While looking through a LCD viewfinder or screen to see your subject is not as satisfying as a SLR/DSLR - it’s is the standard for cameras now - so I am embracing it. All the cameras you listed are pretty great options - and yes a retro Canon would be amazing - we just had an intense snow storm over the weekend so I took out my F-1 for fun and hopefully caught some falling fat flakes. Actually we’re pretty fortunate to have so many great cameras to choose from these days - it all boils down to what works for the individual, and having forums like this is a great sounding board and appreciate everyone’s comments.

 

[Mekos]

Greetings, new here, but have been a Canon fan for decades.
Currently own and still use:
Canon F-1n, EOS A2e, and the 5DMIV
I also have some non Canons that will not be mentioned here ;P

Looking to delve into FF mirrorless - I dusted off my a6000, which I picked up when it was released to delve into the mirrorless world. It’s a fine cropped sensor camera, but never really considered Sony any further - as the interface just felt clunky to me.

Fast forward to 2025. I’m now looking at diving fully into FF mirrorless with the R5 to replace my 5D - but also looking for a fun, light, casual camera body. I’ve narrowed it down to a (dare i say) Sony 7CR. I would really love for Canon to have something similar but I just don’t see anything.

I figured I’d post this here in the event that there may be some knowledge regarding Canon exploring a FF system like this. I looked at the RP, but it was still a little too large for pocketing, and am hesitant to use as a travel camera from reviews on poor battery life.

Photography would be the main use for me, video is bonus.

Hi, carrrrrlos and everyone!
Just like you I went through two Canon F-1, one F-1n, A1, T90, RT, 7D and so on till today with Canon R6 II and Canon R7. Multiple lenses, FD and RF. But nowadays weight starts being a problem to my back . So, I also am looking for a everyday pocket size camera with FF priority or at least APS-C sensor. I only consider two brands: Canon or Fuji. From the latter, the only under consideration for the purpose is Fujifilm X-M5.

Till the end of the year (expecting something "new" from Canon), I'll have to decide between that Fuji or... which Canon would someone advise? Any of the present cameras suits (R50V? as for Carrrrrlos "Photography would be the main use for me, video is bonus". The features of the X-M5 and its weight are fine. But I wonder if Canon will make a FF similar to that (even with a few milimetres extra) or, if your thoughts are that the answer is NO, if R50V will match Fuji's.

Thanks Carrrrrlos for your thread and to all those that have already been participating and helping. I only added a small extra point with the Fuji X-M5 in challenge.