There are two more APS-C RF mount cameras coming [CR2]

Canon Rumors Guy said:

... Let’s call it the “R1000” until we hear otherwise.

Will Canon keep the “Rebel” brand alive for the RF mount? We’re actually a bit out of the loop as to whether or not the name “Rebel” carries the same weight as it did a decade ago. Time will tell.
...

Click to expand...

A low price, entry market Rebel/Kiss/Rx000 seems to be a no-brainer to me.
How else should Canon gain new customers?
(except for the fact, that this market segment is absolutely dead and shifted over to cells. But this is something Canon should have researched)

Personally, I would like to see a similar naming in all regions of the world (as a European, I'd prefer the Rx000 naming ).

I'm expecting the R100 to be a 'R10 meets M6II form factor' and the R1000 to be 'R10 meets M50 form factor'. But I don't see why that would make the R1000 be a 4 digit model, so I must be wrong in my expectations

koenkooi said:

... and the R1000 to be 'R10 meets M50 form factor'. But I don't see why that would make the R1000 be a 4 digit model, ...

Click to expand...

I suppose that an R1000 doesn't need to be smaller than an R100, because ergonomics define a minimum size of a useful MILC camera.
But it would come with less functionality, e.g. reuse of old 24 MP sensor and old DIGIC sensor, only HD vid, 5to 10 fps only, etc. ...
(everything, prosumer people, like us, would love to complain about )

Maximilian said:

I suppose that an R1000 doesn't need to be smaller than an R100, because ergonomics define a minimum size of a useful MILC camera.
But it would come with less functionality, e.g. reuse of old 24 MP sensor and old DIGIC sensor, only HD vid, 5to 10 fps only, etc. ...
(everything, prosumer people, like us, would love to complain about )

Click to expand...

I hadn't even considered that Canon will repackage the M50 again, but it would be a very Canon thing to do

What about a high end APS-C camera? APS-C sadly is treated by Canon as a format for amateurs, although many professionals might want the longer reach that the crop gives them. Of course Canon did their market research, but I still see a lot of complaints in many R7 reviews. Mainly about the bad rolling shutter (The R7 needs more than 30ms to read out the sensor) and the lack of high quality glass for APS-C. Why can't there be something like a flagship APS-C camera for maybe $3,000 or so? Is there no demand for something like that? Don't wildlife photographers always crop anyway? Of course they could use buy the upcoming R1 and just use crop mode, but that would be overkill.

Maximilian said:

I suppose that an R1000 doesn't need to be smaller than an R100, because ergonomics define a minimum size of a useful MILC camera.
But it would come with less functionality, e.g. reuse of old 24 MP sensor and old DIGIC sensor, only HD vid, 5to 10 fps only, etc. ...
(everything, prosumer people, like us, would love to complain about )

Click to expand...

The m200 does not have great ergonomics

Canon definitely needs more RF-S lenses first.

Come to think of it, Canon needs more RF lenses too.

EOS 4 Life said:

The m200 does not have great ergonomics

Click to expand...

Always depends on the size of your hands = children's camera?

EOS 4 Life said:

The m200 does not have great ergonomics

Click to expand...

Agreed, but I very much like the body shape and size! On the original M I added a Franiec grip, which improved the ergonomics a lot, no more cramps after holding it for a while.

Skyscraperfan said:

What about a high end APS-C camera? APS-C sadly is treated by Canon as a format for amateurs, although many professionals might want the longer reach that the crop gives them. Of course Canon did their market research, but I still see a lot of complaints in many R7 reviews. Mainly about the bad rolling shutter (The R7 needs more than 30ms to read out the sensor) and the lack of high quality glass for APS-C. Why can't there be something like a flagship APS-C camera for maybe $3,000 or so? Is there no demand for something like that? Don't wildlife photographers always crop anyway? Of course they could use buy the upcoming R1 and just use crop mode, but that would be overkill.

Click to expand...

Right!
It would be this kind of overkill: $$$$$$$$$$
The 7 D II was affordable, the R1 will be super expensive to use it as an APS/C most of the time. Anyway, Canon must have done some serious market-analysis to check whether there could be a demand for a higher-end APS/C, like an EOS R 7 II.
Our wishes won't necessarily correspond to sales figures...

Del Paso said:

Right!
It would be this kind of overkill: $$$$$$$$$$
The 7 D II was affordable, the R1 will be super expensive to use it as an APS/C most of the time. Anyway, Canon must have done some serious market-analysis to check whether there could be a demand for a higher-end APS/C, like an EOS R 7 II.
Our wishes won't necessarily correspond to sales figures...

Click to expand...

With the R7 being a mirrorless 90D on the $1500 side and the R6(I/II) on the $2500 part of the spectrum, does Canon want to put something very popular in between those or rather push people to get a R7+100-400+wide angle zoom or R6+100-500L? I have nothing to back this up, but I can image that selling a body that isn't quite what people want and selling addons to compensate might bring in more profit. </tin foil hat>

An "R1000" makes even less sense. An R100 without an EVF is about as entry-level as it gets, would there even be anything left to cripple?

And more importantly, a cheap camera needs cheap lenses.

Maximilian said:

A low price, entry market Rebel/Kiss/Rx000 seems to be a no-brainer to me.
How else should Canon gain new customers?
(except for the fact, that this market segment is absolutely dead and shifted over to cells. But this is something Canon should have researched)

Personally, I would like to see a similar naming in all regions of the world (as a European, I'd prefer the Rx000 naming ).

Click to expand...

Of course they will have a lower-end entry-level camera! But the question of the "Rebel"/"Kiss"/Rxxxx naming is up in the air. I actually agree that they should have the same naming all around the world, as they do with their other camera lines. It would simplify things.

I would like a true M6 mark ii sucessor, ergonomic wise.

Del Paso said:

Right!
It would be this kind of overkill: $$$$$$$$$$
The 7 D II was affordable, the R1 will be super expensive to use it as an APS/C most of the time. Anyway, Canon must have done some serious market-analysis to check whether there could be a demand for a higher-end APS/C, like an EOS R 7 II.
Our wishes won't necessarily correspond to sales figures...

Click to expand...

The 7D and 7DMkii seemed to be extremely popular cameras among spots and wildlife photographers, but in terms of overall sales they may have lagged way behind Rebels and 5 series. The fact that Canon never produced a 7DMkiii hints that demand for the 7D series was actually quite low.

Canon's long-term plan seems to have been to promote FF models to pros and serious enthusiasts, and to "downgrade" all APS cameras to novice models. The R7 e.g. outperforms the 7D series in almost every regard, but is priced as a novice camera and lacks several features (third control dial, integral vertical grip, high build quality etc) that are expected by most pros.

It's probably also been Canon's long term plan to gradually phase out the popular M series and replace it with pocketable RF models. Just because a camera is popular and profitable doesn't guarantee it will be continually upgraded, it's more rational to switch everything over to a common mount.

As with the M series, I think it very unlikely that they'll make more than half a dozen RF-S lenses, as *most* of the target buyers of the "R50" etc will probably only want/need a kit zoom and a pancake wide-angle.

Maximilian said:

A low price, entry market Rebel/Kiss/Rx000 seems to be a no-brainer to me.
How else should Canon gain new customers?
(except for the fact, that this market segment is absolutely dead and shifted over to cells. But this is something Canon should have researched)

Personally, I would like to see a similar naming in all regions of the world (as a European, I'd prefer the Rx000 naming ).

Click to expand...

The entry segment isn't dead at all. Canon actually makes the most profit there. There's still lots of people who want to upgrade from phone quality and look for something in the sub $1000 range. If you watched any of Canon's video ads for R10 and R7 you'd have seen they're aiming for exactly that kind of customer (notice the age of people, general style and the music). They even did comparison pictures with phones.

If Canon does not really put much effort into RF-S lenses, they should allow third party manufacturers to produce those. That would be a nice start. The problem would be of course that those lenses also work on full frame. So they would have to have sure that Tamron and Sigma do not provide a full frame image circle on their RF-S glass.

Skyscraperfan said:

If Canon does not really put much effort into RF-S lenses, they should allow third party manufacturers to produce those.

Click to expand...

Why? Besides the fact that you want them to, I mean. What would be the business justification for doing so? Do you think Canon has not run the numbers and considered that as an option? What does the fact that they have not done so tell you about the business drivers for what you want them to do.