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.

[LeeP]

When I was looking to add my second RF body, I considered the R7 because of its features, but the APS-C sensor was the deal breaker. It simply cost too much for me--even with its features--to put up with it not being full-frame. 

If I were Canon, I'd do an R8 II with more features and a slight price increase to keep the "value" orientation and then do a R7 II with the same or fewer features and drop the price down significantly.

[Hrant]

if Canon R7 had these updates, would you reconsider?

[LeeP]

Probably not. 

I love my R8 and I never really got the "trade up" gene. 

I find it odd that Canon did the R7 and R8 the way they did.

When I was looking to do my first step into Canon mirrorless my plan was to add on to my DSLR Canons with a "back-up" body. I considered the R10 and the R100 and chose the R100 because I just couldn't see the wisdom of the R10 because it wasn't enough better--to me--than the R100 to justify the price difference. When I got the R100, I was smitten with mirrorless, so I dedicated myself to replacing my DSLRs. I liked the R7's features but couldn't understand why Canon hobbled it with an APS-C sensor. That made getting the R8 obvious, again to me.

Camera decisions are very individual and I know that the camera-as-jewelry crowd turns their nose up at the R100, but I look at it via a car analogy. In 1971 you could have an "OMG it's a" Mustang V8, but for a LOT less you could have the same engine in the Maverick that people turned their noses up at. I'm the guy that would have taken the Maverick.

If the "RE-1" (supposed AE-1 homage) is real, I will be first in line and it will be 100% an impulse buy.

[zakslm]

I don't own an R7 but it was "kinda/sorta" on my wishlist before I upgraded to a 90D late last year.  The benefit for me was that I have a few EF-S lenses that would work nicely with the R7's crop sensor ( with an adapter) and I could use them until got RF or RF-S replacements.  I don't regret getting the 90D and really enjoy the camera but it's undeniable that mirrorless is the present and future.  I did handle a R7, R8 and R6II at Best Buy last weekend and the R7 seemed most at familar in my hands with the R8 feeling kind of "small" and R6II seemed really appealing. But that's an off topic discussion for another day. 

Having said that, it seems to me that Hrant put a lot of thought, effort and research into what he or she would like to see in an R7II.  Some of it was Greek to me and other items had me nodding my head.  However given that hints of an R7II or similar upgrade/replacement are already swirling around at Canon Rumors and other places, I think the die has been cast and whatever that update or replacement is and/or what features and upgrades it contains was decided months or years ago.  It's probably way to late to influence Canon or their designers and engineers to modify what already might be in production or planned for production.  Maybe if thoughtful ideas and suggestions like Hrant's could be accomplished via firmware or firmware updates if it's not too late.  Otherwise, we can hope that someone at Canon in Japan is reading this forum and suggestions from Hrant and others and is taking notes for future updates and upgrades .

LZ

[March411]

The Maverick was a great little car, i owned one and thought the body style was cool. Less weight, same engine as the Mustang but quicker off the line, that was important back in the day.

The R7II hopefully will resolve the rolling shutter that was the most predominant in this body. I would swap my R50 for an improved R7 II because there are some advantages to owning APS-C.

[LeeP]

"...there are some advantages to owning APS-C..."

Such as?

Given the hullabaloo in another thread, I'm not asking that with a wiseacre tone, but an honest, genuine tone of inquiry.

For me, the biggest issue is the 1.6 multiplying factor when using a full-frame lens.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the advantages.

It may give me a reason to love my R100 go-everywhere camera more.

[March411]

Hey Lee, I read your posts and know that your intentions are always in the right place and enjoy a good conversation.

• First and foremost is budget, the larger share of APS-C cameras and lenses are affordable, smaller and lighter. Due to recent events (Sigma) there are some additional lenses on the market that where Canon has a gap and most of them are fairly fast.
• The overall footprint (size & weight) make them perfect for travel and hiking. 
• You can use APS-C or full frame lenses.
•  Increased focal length reach (1.5/1.6x) which would be great for let's say the RF 100-400mm.
• On the down side, the smaller sensors does not perform as well at high ISO. I am interested in what Canon uses in the R7 II.  Generally more noise but applications like DXO can smooth those rough edges.

I enjoy all my full frame bodies but sometimes I grab the R50 simply to travel light and get some extended range out of my current lenses. I may just be partial to APS-C, I loved my 60D and 90D.

[zakslm]

Marc,

"The Maverick was a great little car, i owned one..."  

Back in the day when I lived in Michigan the Ford Maverick was dis-affectionately referred to a "Rustang".  They were popular for all of the reasons you mentioned but let's just say that winter snow and ice and the road salt used to melt that snow and ice "wasn't kind" to the Maverick's thin body panels!    

[zakslm]

Full disclosure - I have not owned or used a camera with a full frame sensor.  I own 90D and Rebel T7 and both are crop sensor bodies.

I thought the 24mp sensor in the T7 was underrated.  It produces really nice images with lots of detail and contrast that I didn't think were particularly noisy and with all of the advantages that Marc mentioned that come with a crop sensor body.  High ISO performance of the T7 is not so great, but below 3200 and maybe pressing it a bit - below 6400 can produce usable images.  The colors produced by that sensor (processed from RAW files) are really nice! I don't know if the sensors in 24mp mirrorless crop sensor bodies have similar attributes but with improved high ISO performance but if they do, I understand why those people love those cameras.  

The 90D and it's 32.5mp sensor is a beast and I think the R7 has the same or a very similar sensor.  I didn't think there would be much of a difference from a 24mp image vs. a 32.5mp image but there is.  The increase in sharpness and detail vs. the 24mp sensor is quite noticeable.  Plus the ability to crop in tightly without losing detail (if needed) is an added plus.  Raw files sometimes take a bit more tweaking to bring out the colors for 90D files than it takes for T7 files but they are still very nice.  The only thing that I would love to change is the noise level in the shadow areas that is often mentioned as a characteristic of crop sensor, high megapixel sensors.

If the R7II or whatever the update will be called can improve on image noise and some of the other deficiencies mentioned and do it with a 32.5mp sensor, I think it will be a very popular camera particularly for wildlife photographers and others that want to take advantage of 1.6X focal length reach.

LZ