p.1 #2 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
"The EOS R8 Mark II will come after the R6 V and will have the retro styling. I promise that one isn't a retro R6 series camera. I have no idea what “retro” means aesthetically."
Well damn. That's not the R8 Mark II camera I would have hoped for, personally, though on its own merits it could actually be quite successful.
I feel like the retro thing will appeal to a younger audience, and being full frame gives it street credibility. This is probably the demographic that the RP / R8 was intended for in the first place, so maybe Canon is on the right track here.
Maybe I'm in a minority of "serious" photographers (cough, or maybe I'm just old, haha) that have come to prefer smaller, lighter gear. I *like* the current R8 simplicity and ergonomics, and mostly just wanted IBIS. If this "retro inspired" camera is real, my guess is that it won't get that and will probably be less comfortable to shoot.
But, I guess we'll find out soon.
Not a video shooter, so don't have much to say about the R6 V.
p.1 #3 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
EOS R6 V, EOS R8 V, EOS R8 II are all a bunch of cheap gear I don't want.
Where is the high-res pro camera? Nikon has the Z9 nearly 4.5 years already and SONY the a1 over 5 years. Where is the R5s? Canon keeps regurgitating the cheap consumer video stuff. And the retro stuff that we ditched in the 80s.
p.1 #4 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
I'll never stop saying that IBIS needs to be in everything.
It doesn't even have to be 'good', just two or three stops is enough. Just enough for shaky hands or quick shooting where human stabilization isn't the best.
------------
fringe idea alert
Even better would be IBIS that can work with external devices - think gimbals and drones. The idea being that IBIS can supplement external mechanical stabilization and can avoid 'fighting it'.
This comes from using our EOS M6 II with a DJI gimbal - the camera is tethered to the gimbal via USB-C, and the gimbal's controls then control the camera to a degree. This means that there's communication there; and further, it could go both ways. With all the accelerometer stuff in RF cameras and lenses, this data could be used to steady both unplanned wobbles/bumps and planned pans.
p.1 #5 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
Perhaps Canon marketing doesn't think the publics will pay extra in the cheaper cameras.
What does it cost for the end user, $100 or $200?
EBH
Apr 20, 2026 at 09:03 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
EB-1 wrote:
EOS R6 V, EOS R8 V, EOS R8 II are all a bunch of cheap gear I don't want.
Where is the high-res pro camera? Nikon has the Z9 nearly 4.5 years already and SONY the a1 over 5 years. Where is the R5s? Canon keeps regurgitating the cheap consumer video stuff. And the retro stuff that we ditched in the 80s.
EBH
Neither Canon nor Nikon has made a high res camera with more than 45 MP, and Sony has still only made the 60 MP A7r V. All three major companies have pretty much stalled high res cameras and instead focussed on cameras with stacked BSI sensors with faster sensor scan speed. Canon has not made an R5s, Nikon has not made a Z7 III (despite the Z7 II coming out in 2020), and Sony has not made an A7r VI (despite the A7r V coming out in 2022 and the 7r series being released on a two to three year cycle before now). Canon could make such a camera, they would just have to make a full frame sensor with the pixel density of the R7 and it would be an 82 MP camera. Sony could certainly make such a sensor (and sell it to Nikon too) all they would have to do is make a full frame sensor with the pixel density of the sensor they make for Fuji's 40 MP APS-C cameras and it would be a 90 MP sensor. It seems, however, that nobody is in a hurry to make such a camera.
p.1 #7 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
Steve Spencer wrote:
Neither Canon nor Nikon has made a high res camera with more than 45 MP, and Sony has still only made the 60 MP A7r V. All three major companies have pretty much stalled high res cameras and instead focussed on cameras with stacked BSI sensors with faster sensor scan speed. Canon has not made an R5s, Nikon has not made a Z7 III (despite the Z7 II coming out in 2020), and Sony has not made an A7r VI (despite the A7r V coming out in 2022 and the 7r series being released on a two to three year cycle before now). Canon could make such a camera, they would just have to make a full frame sensor with the pixel density of the R7 and it would be an 82 MP camera. Sony could certainly make such a sensor (and sell it to Nikon too) all they would have to do is make a full frame sensor with the pixel density of the sensor they make for Fuji's 40 MP APS-C cameras and it would be a 90 MP sensor. It seems, however, that nobody is in a hurry to make such a camera. ...Show more →
There are at least four challenges here that I foresee:
First, higher pixel density absolutely mauls lenses in lens comparisons. If any manufacturer wants to go down that road, they'd want to have a broad lineup for the types of photography that such higher resolutions would likely to be employed for. And as good as many modern lenses are, I don't necessarily see them being good enough across the frame for that level of resolution. You'd almost want to make lenses with larger image circle projection to widen the 'sweet spot' and combat vignetting, like using medium-format lenses on full-frame cameras. Would be the opposite of Canon's VCM lineup thesis.
Second, even if there are lenses that can resolve the sensor at some aperture, the range of apertures that the sensor would be 'sharp' would be quite limited. A lot of computational photography (assuming very high Q/C lenses) would be needed to bring back acuity lost to diffraction.
Readout speed will also be critical. We see this when comparing Fuji X cameras with Fuji's 26MP sensor against the newer 40MP sensor - autofocus performance is set back and rolling shutter is increased. Addressing this at the same time would be extremely costly, especially if the idea is to keep read speeds acceptable while also maintaining dynamic range.
And then there's power. The higher resolution will require more juice, IBIS will require more juice, the camera's processors will require more juice as will the additional RAM, and the storage interface and storage devices will require more juice. This all adds up to needing a bigger battery and more cooling.
I'd expect such a camera to come as a hypothetical R3s, with integrated active cooling, to provide space and power for the monster sensor to run at the speed expected of modern cameras (i.e., no Fuji XF snail cameras).
-------------------
That all said, it's far from impossible and we're far from pushing the theoretical limits of current optical science and semiconductor fabrication in the consumer camera space. It's just going to cost time and money, and companies with highly coordinated objectives to get there.
p.1 #8 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
Yes we need a camera difraction limited at f1.4!
The emphasis is on video!
I'd like to see a gps function in R5 as we had an 5D. What would that cost? $10?
p.1 #9 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
Flowernut wrote:
Yes we need a camera difraction limited at f1.4!
We'll get there. Even stopping into diffraction, you still have tools available to increase detail, and the noise performance is not affected.
Flowernut wrote:
The emphasis is on video!
Can't build a fast stills camera that isn't also a good video camera - and vice versa.
Flowernut wrote:
I'd like to see a gps function in R5 as we had an 5D. What would that cost? $10?
Quite a bit more.
Good actual GPS needs decent antennas and is power intensive. GPS like phones use requires cellular modems to ping cellphone towers. Doing both well would indeed be expensive and come with tradeoffs from lower battery life to increased camera size to account for the antennas.
Instead, I'd like to see a Bluetooth Low-Energy function that relies on a phone for geolocation, and then provides orientation via accelerometers to show direction of camera at time of capture, elevation of camera (looking up / down), and rotation of camera. Meaning that with the metadata combined, we could reasonably construct what the camera was looking at when the capture was taken.
Could even do it per frame or maybe per second for video.
p.1 #10 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
johnctharp wrote:
Good actual GPS needs decent antennas and is power intensive. GPS like phones use requires cellular modems to ping cellphone towers. Doing both well would indeed be expensive and come with tradeoffs from lower battery life to increased camera size to account for the antennas.
GPS doesn't need anything but the satellites. WAAS is available in some areas for enhanced accuracy, but hardly needed for camera activities. Plenty of receivers are in the sub 100mW range with timed measurements for slow movers like humans. The GP-E2 runs about 40 hours on a single AA for example, and that is over 10 years old tech.
I think the reason they don't include GPS is that the users are supposed to have a cellphone in the field.
p.1 #11 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
I'd be happy with what is in the 5D. It worked fine for me. I don't need the location to the inch. I don't like the way the phone works (battery draw for example) particularly with more than one camera body.
p.1 #12 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
EB-1 wrote:
GPS doesn't need anything but the satellites. WAAS is available in some areas for enhanced accuracy, but hardly needed for camera activities. Plenty of receivers are in the sub 100mW range with timed measurements for slow movers like humans. The GP-E2 runs about 40 hours on a single AA for example, and that is over 10 years old tech.
I think the reason they don't include GPS is that the users are supposed to have a cellphone in the field.
p.1 #14 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
Flowernut wrote:
I'd be happy with what is in the 5D. It worked fine for me. I don't need the location to the inch. I don't like the way the phone works (battery draw for example) particularly with more than one camera body.
Which 5D has GPS? I owned a 5D and 5DIII. Neither had GPS. My 7D2 had it, but leaving it on killed the standby time.
p.1 #17 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
I didn't find the GPS to be that big of a draw on the 5D4. Not sure of my settings. Battery always lasted at least a day. Do not do video but did photograph in sub zero weather.
p.1 #18 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
Flowernut wrote:
I didn't find the GPS to be that big of a draw on the 5D4. Not sure of my settings. Battery always lasted at least a day. Do not do video but did photograph in sub zero weather.
The issue on my 7D2 was with standby time. I'm not a pro and don't shoot daily. With the 5D3 which lacked GPS, the camera could sit for a week or more and still be ready to go. With the 7D2, the battery would be much more depleted when GPS was enabled. I don't remember exactly how long it lasted, just that it was much less than the 5D3.
p.1 #19 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
Mike_5D wrote:
The issue on my 7D2 was with standby time. I'm not a pro and don't shoot daily. With the 5D3 which lacked GPS, the camera could sit for a week or more and still be ready to go. With the 7D2, the battery would be much more depleted when GPS was enabled. I don't remember exactly how long it lasted, just that it was much less than the 5D3.
This was a major issue on my 6D. I was used to leaving cameras on and letting them sleep - then pulling them out months later and being able to start firing off immediately.
The GPS doesn't really 'sleep' on the 6D. The battery will be stone cold dead.
Further, when you're used to filling up a handful of memory cards, GPS drain definitely limits shooting time - and the worst part is that the actual geolocations provided weren't that good. Like maybe in the right city, but not the precision we're used to with cellphones.
p.1 #20 · We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V
Have they solved the problem of the Standalone GPS (Standalone being non networked, not standalone as not a Canon product attached to the camera) losing ephemeris and taking forever to re lock?
I had an S100 point and shoot (and a 7D2) and my biggest complaint was that it took ages to re lock to the sky. When you're travelling you're often shoving the camera into a bag or taking a bus/train/plane to another location and it takes forever. I thought more recent models may have got an assist from a phone, but if you need that, then you might as well just use the phone for GPS location source.
