The Canon EOS R8 will be announced at CP+ in February

So yet another FSI sensored camera(while competition(Fuji) has been offering BSI sensors in sub $1000 cameras for years at this point), also Canon needs to launch better crop lenses for RF mount(55-250mm, macro, and ultra wide zoom). Current RF 16mm and 50mm 1.8 are good primes for RF-S but both zooms are underwhelming at best.

Chaitanya said:

So yet another FSI sensored camera(while competition(Fuji) has been offering BSI sensors in sub $1000 cameras for years at this point), also Canon needs to launch better crop lenses for RF mount(55-250mm, macro, and ultra wide zoom). Current RF 16mm and 50mm 1.8 are good primes for RF-S but both zooms are underwhelming at best.

Click to expand...

Could you demonstrate samples that reveal a profit and a significant difference in terms of IQ from a BSI sensor compared to a FSI one?

miric said:

Could you demonstrate samples that reveal a profit and a significant difference in terms of IQ from a BSI sensor compared to a FSI one?

Click to expand...

BSI performs better on the meaningless checklist test.

EOS 4 Life said:

BSI performs better on the meaningless checklist test.

Click to expand...

I really like to see that better performance.

The R8 sounds very interesting to me! I'm still looking around for a camera to replace my M6II as a second body for my R5. I tried an R7 for a week and found it both too large when using the RF16mm and too small when using the RF100-500L. The R10 would be a good fit, but for €1000 it needs to have IBIS.

So I hope the R8 drops the token EVF, adds IBIS and gets all the nifty software features from the R6II, like native UVC webcam support and 'detect only' AF in video. And keep the R10 price point

Chaitanya said:

BSI

Click to expand...

"Bullshit integrated"?

koenkooi said:

The R8 sounds very interesting to me! I'm still looking around for a camera to replace my M6II as a second body for my R5. I tried an R7 for a week and found it both too large when using the RF16mm and too small when using the RF100-500L. The R10 would be a good fit, but for €1000 it needs to have IBIS.

So I hope the R8 drops the token EVF, adds IBIS and gets all the nifty software features from the R6II, like native UVC webcam support and 'detect only' AF in video. And keep the R10 price point

Click to expand...

I use the R7 routinely with the RF 100-500mm, and don't find the R7 too small. So, the size and ergonomics are personal. The R10 has several problems for me as a back-up for the R5: the different batteries, especially the R10's being smaller; the lack of a protective shutter when changing lenses or putting on extenders; and a very slow read-out time of 40ms for a 24 Mpx sensor, even slower than the 31ms for the 32 Mpx R7, leading to rolling shutter. As a stand-alone small body, the R10 would fine, especially with small IS lenses that don't require changing often. The same could apply even more so to an R8 of the form you suggest.

This looks like the case "BSI for BSI". Very similar to X-Trans in "Fjudzii" cameras. They say it's cool but cannot argue why. Drawbacks only. I used to think BSI was cool but then it appeared I was confused with BSI and stacked sensor technology. So I treat BSI as a BS feature until I'll see real significant advantages. @Chaitanya where are you?

Ohhhh no,

I’m still hoping for an R successor and do believe there’s room for at least one full frame body underneath the R6mkii.

Also, if the RP gets a FF successor, an R8 APS-C will totally mess up canons naming scheme.

Also, what differences would justify another APS-C model between R7 and R10???? To me, it makes no sense…

All in all, I’m not convinced at all. Let’s wait and see what February brings

Also,

How about releasing some more RF-s lenses before pushing another APS-C camera body? Two lenses is a joke, even worse when you’re considering there’s a third crop camera soon.

The fact that Canon is abandoning customers with EF-format cameras in favor of RF-format and ceasing to offer new EF lenses and bodies makes me regret trusting them and buying an EOS 5D Mark III.

I don't like the RF series LCD viewfinders which are bad for the eyes. I will not change either my equipment which cost me a fortune to adopt the range without RF mirror. I will abandon Canon, as they sadly abandoned me. And for this reason I will certainly never buy the Canon brand, which from my point of view abused the trust I had in them ;-(

miric said:

Could you demonstrate samples that reveal a profit and a significant difference in terms of IQ from a BSI sensor compared to a FSI one?

Click to expand...

It certainly helps marketing to have bsi , may well be only small improvements over fsi. I’m not sure about Fuji using it widely for years

New flippy screen would be great - like the Sony a7s got. A screen that can be flipped with (full size) HDMI and usb cables plugged in would be great Especialy for the R5 II a well.

Let's hope this camera will have the tech discussed in patent 2018-101080.

Phil995511 said:

The fact that Canon is abandoning customers with EF-format cameras in favor of RF-format and ceasing to offer new EF lenses and bodies makes me regret trusting them and buying an EOS 5D Mark III.

I don't like the RF series LCD viewfinders which are bad for the eyes. I will not change either my equipment which cost me a fortune to adopt the range without RF mirror. I will abandon Canon, as they sadly abandoned me. And for this reason I will certainly never buy the Canon brand, which from my point of view abused the trust I had in them ;-(

Click to expand...

How old is the EOS 5D Mark III? First release March 2012! I hope you don't have any apple hardware they abandoned, because you would certainly NOT buy any apple products anymore.

How is this relevant for an EOS R8 announcement?

Also EF lenses will be cheaper second hand and will work on an RF body without downsides, compared to other brands. Canon has a complete portfolio of EF lenses and I cannot imagine a specific EF lens they should develop to complete that.

EVF Canon R5:
OLED
High Res
High refresh rate
low brightness
Yes, a screen sends out light waves, but not any different from "real" light from a mirror. In an EVF you see the picture stopped down where an OVF is fully opened and thus straining the eye a little bit more. You cannot state they are LCD, or bad for the eyes without relevant links or proof. It's your argument and because of that I will not provide you with any proof of the opposite.

I'm old and would get eye strain from my 5D mark IV, because of constant focussing from close to far, which seams to be a lot less of a problem with my R5. But this is personal. And yes, I felt more of a photographer with my 5D, but that 5R is so quick and the focus so good, I feel like a tool just holding up the camera.

AlanF said:

I use the R7 routinely with the RF 100-500mm, and don't find the R7 too small. So, the size and ergonomics are personal. The R10 has several problems for me as a back-up for the R5: the different batteries, especially the R10's being smaller; the lack of a protective shutter when changing lenses or putting on extenders; and a very slow read-out time of 40ms for a 24 Mpx sensor, even slower than the 31ms for the 32 Mpx R7, leading to rolling shutter. As a stand-alone small body, the R10 would fine, especially with small IS lenses that don't require changing often. The same could apply even more so to an R8 of the form you suggest.

Click to expand...

I have a lot of spare LP-E12 (M) and LP-E17 (M6II) batteries, so that isn't a big issue for me. I hadn't realized that the R10 lacked the protective shutter, I really like that on the R5. I've only had to dry-brush off a single speck in the past 2 years. The RP needed cleaning almost weekly, till I switched to the filter adapter.

As for the size thing, I find that I like to have my pinky completely on the grip (e.g. R5) or comfortably under it (e.g. M6II). The RP and R7 were in the range where it didn't fit completely under it and it started rubbing. The RP has the most excellent EG-E1 mini-grip, that made it very easy to switch between a camera fit for the 100-500 and a much smaller body for the RF50 STM to stuff in a large-ish coat pocket. I'd probably go for the RF16 nowadays.

I searched around for EG-E1 equivalents for the R7 and found one that I could quickly and cheaply get before the rental body arrived. I 3D printed this: https://www.printables.com/model/312874-canon-eos-r7-grip-manfrotto-200pl-and-screw and it made my pinky much more comfortable:

With one or 2 more iterations and shortening a 1/4-20 screw this would be at the level of a proper EG-E1. But in the end it came down to: Do I really want to spend €1500 on a replacement for the M6II, when it won't actually replace it, but turn into a 3rd body to bring?
I did enjoy using the R7, but at the end of the macro season it tipped into GAS territory. Maybe next spring, after all the rumoured announcements, the R7 does turn out to be the 'best' replacement for the M6II and I'll see if I find it worth buying. The R5 is such a good camera that anything I'd get as a 2nd body pales in comparison

miric said:

This looks like the case "BSI for BSI". Very similar to X-Trans in "Fjudzii" cameras. They say it's cool but cannot argue why. Drawbacks only. I used to think BSI was cool but then it appeared I was confused with BSI and stacked sensor technology. So I treat BSI as a BS feature until I'll see real significant advantages. @Chaitanya where are you?

Click to expand...

I don't have any actual experience with x-trans, but I think the main letdown is 3rd party support. Both Adobe and DxO struggle to assign enough people-hours to adopt their processing magic to x-trans. So if you don't want to use the Fuji provided software, you won't be getting the (supposed) benefits from x-trans.
Which in practice results in, as you said, 'Drawbacks only'.

I'm glad that the lack of 3rd party support for the DPRAW feature in Canon bodies doesn't impact image quality like x-trans does. But it still a huge letdown that in this age of machine learning and automagic masking no one seems interested in the depth-map that DPRAW gives you for free.

miric said:

This looks like the case "BSI for BSI". Very similar to X-Trans in "Fjudzii" cameras. They say it's cool but cannot argue why. Drawbacks only. I used to think BSI was cool but then it appeared I was confused with BSI and stacked sensor technology. So I treat BSI as a BS feature until I'll see real significant advantages. @Chaitanya where are you?

Click to expand...

I had to remove a snake(Russell's viper) from a house in my neighbourhood, here is comparison between Xt30(3 year old camera) vs R7(with a "new" sensor according to Canon)(when it comes to APS-C systems Sony and Nikon both are in same boat as Canon i.e. they treat these cameras like unwanted Step child(though Sony has built up few lenses for the system over the years while they keep the best tech for their FF bodies)). Having BSI sensor certainly improves IQ compared to Front side illuminated sensor. Stacked sensors are different to BSI(and it seems they certainly are more expensive to produce currently) and they seem to be more suited for applications which require faster read speeds(sports/wildlife oriented cameras this generation around all have stacked BSI sensors).



Edit: Just for comparison added 90D into comparison with R7 and XT30.

peters said:

New flippy screen would be great - like the Sony a7s got. A screen that can be flipped with (full size) HDMI and usb cables plugged in would be great Especialy for the R5 II a well.

Click to expand...

The standard flippy screen is a pain in the ass because a) it isn't on-axis with the lens, which makes visually tracking subjects much harder b) I find it awkward wrapping my hands under and behind it when using it at waist level, c) it obstructs any attached cables when flipped out.

A tilting screen is a pain in the ass because a) it can't be reversed to protect the screen, b) it's useless for vertical compositions.

So, I really hope Canon come to their senses, and follow the fine examples set by Panasonic, Fujifilm and Sony, by fitting a hybrid tilting/flippy screen to *all* future bodies.

But Canon can be very slow and reluctant to take onboard advances made by other brands, so I'm not holding my breath...