svg+xml;base64,PHN2ZyB2aWV3Qm94PScwIDAgNzI4IDQzOCcgeG1sbnM9J2h0dHA6Ly93d3cudzMub3JnLzIwMDAvc3ZnJz48L3N2Zz4= - The Canon EOS R50 will be announced in Q1 2023 [CR3]

    The Canon EOS R50 will be announced in Q1 2023 [CR3]

    By Updated:181 Comments1 Min Read Canon EOS Rumors

    There have been a lot of rumblings over the last month or two about the Canon EOS R100, a camera rumored to take on a similar form-factor as the EOS M lineup.

    We are now told that Canon will announce a camera called the EOS R50 in the first quarter of 2023. This could perhaps be the rumored “EOS R100”. Canon's nomenclature isn't really difficult to guess or assume, which may be what has happened here.

    We can say with a good degree of certainty, that the Canon EOS R50 will be the name of what is likely the next camera from Canon.

    We think that there is a good chance that the EOS R50 and a lot more will be announced in February, ahead of the CP+ show in Japan that begins on February 2. 2023. Prior to the pandemic, this show was a big one for the Japanese manufacturers and we usually saw major announcements.

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    181 comments

    1. ... 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.
      ...
      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 ;) ).
    2. 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 :)
    3. ... 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, ...
      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 ;) )
    4. 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 ;) )
      I hadn't even considered that Canon will repackage the M50 again, but it would be a very Canon thing to do :)
    5. 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.
    6. 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 ;) )
      The m200 does not have great ergonomics
    10. 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.
      Right!
      It would be this kind of overkill: $$$$$$$$$$
      The 7 D II was affordable, the R1 will be super expensive to use it as an APS/C most of the time. Anyway, Canon must have done some serious market-analysis to check whether there could be a demand for a higher-end APS/C, like an EOS R 7 II.
      Our wishes won't necessarily correspond to sales figures...
    11. Right!
      It would be this kind of overkill: $$$$$$$$$$
      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...
      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>
    12. 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.
    13. 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 ;) ).
      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.
    16. 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...
      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.
    17. 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 ;) ).
      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.
    18. 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.
    19. If Canon does not really put much effort into RF-S lenses, they should allow third party manufacturers to produce those.
      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.

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment