EOS R7 Mark II "ideas discussion"

[Hrant]

I've heard there is an expectation that an R7 II might be in development now, though it's not confirmed. Anyway would like to hear opinions regarding my set of ideas for the R7 II which hopefully could bring improvement there. Some say there is no development in stills cameras anymore, the only direction is video. Instead, I believe, lots of things can be done and believe Canon could lead change especially given increasing experimental approach seen lately with R50v, powershot, etc. I would also like to hear from others how do they think these might improve their workflow.

1. The biggest change I believe can be the size of the sensor. Which is now 22.3*14.8mm (vs 23.5*15.6 on some other aps-c) and gives crop factor of 1.614. At the same time, Canon S35 sensor is 24.6*13.8. What if the new R7 sensor would fit completely the super 35 sensor inside and still have 3:2 ratio. Then it would be 24.6*16.4 with crop factor of 1.46. The area size of sensor would be 22% larger than R7, so will improve the dynamic range and also Canon crop series would get back the wide angle, which is, frankly speaking, one of the big troubles. I've been dealing with lots of lenses on the speedboosters and have seen that all of canon aps-c and 3rd party lenses cover in reality significantly larger image circle than 1.6x crop, usually 1.5, 1.4 or bigger. When losing some of it, sharpness is getting lost too. So I think increasing size of sensor will bring back wide angle, increase sharpness and increase dynamic range. This small change in size will lead to big change in result, I believe.

2. Regarding the density of the sensor, I think of retaining the pixel pitch of R10, which would give 29.6 megapixels or 39.7 with density of R7 (first case preferable to limit the diffraction).

3. Another boosting thing would be the adoption of the Astro regime. It could either use sensor shift, or software-based stack pics to make astro photos when on the tripod (with some shift on the image). At least that would work with Milky way astrophotography, but further development might bring it to life even with the Deep space.

4. Another regime that I would love to see - is pixel shift on the R7 II. It could involve 2 regimes - when on tripod and when handheld. Tripod could quadruple resolution, handheld - double.

The following are less important updates though still valuable to bring camera from good to perfect:

5.1. A more quiet shutter, elimination of the shutter shock

5.2. Closing shutter for protection when imaging in ES mode too

5.3. Improve HDR exposure measurement (currently it makes picture overexposed by ~1 stop)

5.4. Optional battery grip

5.5. Except to fast series make full picture quality readout on ES mode

5.6. Screen bigger (3.5'')

5.7. Make IBIS working with the EF lenses, improve with manual lenses.

5.8. Introduce luts, which can not only contain slight coorrection on curve, but also deeper working with shadows and highlights for fast or immediate editing after picturing.

5.9. Introduce 3:2 open gate for video

5.10. Readout speed not higher than 10 ms.

5.11. Pair with a standard bright zoom lens like 16-65 or re-introduce EF-M lenses like 22mm F2, 32mm F1.4, 15-45mm, 11-22mm and the system is perfect for the coming decade.

[Hrant]

There are in reality many advantages to aps-c.

1. As everyone already said, you get multiplied your focal length and it can be useful in many cases (though in others might be a trouble)

2. For macro or subject photography increased depth of field is advantage.

3. With proper lenses you get significant size advantage. If you compare 18-150 to 24-240 it's much lighter and not worse in picture quality and also twice cheaper. It lacks some wide angle but in reality 24-240 cuts of significant portion of it due to distortion correction. 

4. Usually zoom lenses are easier to design.

5. Price 

6. Technically lots of stuff can be done easier including IBIS, sensor overheating, battery spending.

In most cases aps-c is good enough though with canon lineup it lacks lenses and advanced technics of ibis usage like those I mentioned in main post. For instance, DR on the R7 is higher than Canon R and RP. Still good enough. Also has advanced features that r8 does not have. So there are some advantages though r5 is of course superior to the r7 in almost every direction

[LeeP]

I have an R100 precisely for its wonderful portability. I enjoy doing street photography and it plus the 28mm "pancake" lens makes a compact setup with a "50mm" lens...or at least "close enough for government work" to use an old cliche.

When I was looking at the R7 and R8 I felt the megapixels of the R7 should be on the R8 and vice versa and that their price points should be switched, but ultimately I went full-frame and am very happy. Not saying that I would not have been thrilled with an R7, but full frame is wonderful.

I'd love for Canon to pull a "Pentax ME" moment i.e. put a full frame sensor in a tiny body. I still shoot a lot of film in addition to a lot of digital and when I saw the R100 I instantly thought "Pentax ME" and for me that is a very high compliment because I still use that Pentax regularly and love its astoundingly good metering accuracy...kinda like the R100.

I don't hate APS-C, but as soon as the features stack up I want full frame. It will be interesting to see what the "RE-1" does for a sensor.

Thank you for the conversation.

[LeeP]

I grew up in and around Bakersfield California where we get some rain though a laughable amount compared to any place that really gets rain. Snow? Maaaaybe once every 25 years; we're at 26 years and counting at the moment.

Thus, there should have been no rust buckets back in the day where I live, but I can assure you that rust happened on old Detroit cars here too. Obviously not to the degree you experienced, but back then you were supposed to trade up every year to a new car or heaven forbid every other year. Thus, cars didn't "need" rust proofing then, but with people now financing for 72, 84, and even 96 month loans... I wish I could say that my grandparents (who raised me) splurged on a new car that often; they didn't. As for Mavericks, they were a budget muscle car and probably quite fun.

[zakslm]

LeeP,

All good points and no doubt the Maverick was a fun car in it's day.  I did not own one because we were a "GM Family" and back in the day, things were quite territorial with regard to automobiles and the Big 3 (maybe the same now with camera brands like Canon vs. Nikon vs. Sony, etc.?)  The reference to a "Rustang" came from a particular young lady I knew who owned one at the time and whenever the Ford Maverick or it's Mercury clone is mentioned, it brings back that memory.

A standard practice up in the Rust Belt was to Ziebart or undercoat cars so they didn't rust as fast and lasted long enough to "pay off the note".  When automakers started using galvanized steel and other types of corosion inhibitors the practice of undercoating cars faded away.  

Sorry for meandering off topic, but I did try to throw in a camera reference!

All the best, 

LZ

[March411]

When I was looking at an APS-C the R7 was my focus but the rolling shutter and price point (with the known challenges) gave me pause. I picked up the R50 at almost half the price. It was a compromise because the R7 had more features but my thought was to wait and see what Canon did with APS-C moving forward. If the rolling shutter is resolved and they improve the sensor I would most likely add one to my stable of bodies. 

Personally I guess I look at the bodies as tools, rigght tool for the right job. The R7 II, if the sensor is improved and the rolling shutter was resolved (or significantly reduced as all the R bodies have some challenges) it would be a nice replacement for the R50. The considerable addition to the features and the ability to customize my setup and save them would be outstanding...... which the the balance of the APS-C lack. 

All that being said, I love my full frame bodies but I have carried Canon for over 40 years so I may be bias.

[kvbarkley]

This is a good list, but I would not want the new R7 II to sacrifice the rotating sensor for automagic leveling.