EB-1 wrote:
One of the main reasons to get an RF-s body with tiny pixels is to gain reach with big teles.
From what I can see Fuji X has no big teles (100mm or larger front aperture), only a few slow, long lenses (100-600/8 and 500/5.6). Fuji X is more about retroactive-looking compact body styles and small lenses only for APS-C, since they have no FF.
EBH
Really not comparable for telephoto.
R7 II could be popular like 7D2 and D500 used to be. Similar use.
EB-1 wrote:
From what I can see Fuji X has no big teles (100mm or larger front aperture), only a few slow, long lenses (100-600/8 and 500/5.6). EBH
Fuji makes a 200mm f/2.0 (a 305mm f/2.8 equivalent) with a dedicated 1.4x teleconverter. They also separately offer the 1.4x TC and a 2.0x TC for use with this or other lenses. So, you can convert this lens up to a 400mm f/4.0 (a 610mm f/5.6 equivalent).
The 500mm f/5.6 is a 762mm f/8.0 equivalent. Admittedly it is not fast, but it is only 3 lbs and quite compact relative to any full frame offering with the same reach.
(I quoted Fuji's own focal length conversions from their website rather than basic 1.5x numbers.)
Of course, I would not argue that Fuji is a top choice for wildlife (they probably need something fast in the 400mm range), but they have the bases covered. There are also regular or focal length-reducing "speed booster" adapters for EF lenses.
AmbientMike wrote:
Really not comparable for telephoto.
R7 II could be popular like 7D2 and D500 used to be. Similar use.
Yes, but no shutter shock if the read speed is fast enough. I'd be happy enough if it reaches 1/90th, but not baiting my breath. The R7 is just too slow when the species is mobile.
EBH
Mar 17, 2026 at 07:45 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
EB-1 wrote:
Yes, but no shutter shock if the read speed is fast enough. I'd be happy enough if it reaches 1/90th, but not baiting my breath. The R7 is just too slow when the species is mobile.
EBH
The Fuji X-H2s has a read speed of 1/161 according to what snapsy measured and reported here:
If the R7 II is indeed a fully stacked sensor it should be able to do better than 1/90 for read speed. I would expect at least the speed of the OM-1 that is 1/125. If it is a partially stacked sensor perhaps it will be about 1/90, but a fully stacked sensor should do better in my view.
That's a nearly $3K camera. I'm confident that as usual Canon will segment the R7 II with limited features somehow rather than make it much more expensive and useful.
EB-1 wrote:
That's a nearly $3K camera. I'm confident that as usual Canon will segment the R7 II with limited features somehow rather than make it much more expensive and useful.
EBH
I think this would be inconsistent with the rumored sensor specifications. And, most would say the R6 III did away with the "cripple hammer" for its price class, especially with respect to video.
Maybe Canon has turned a new leaf.
Mar 18, 2026 at 05:16 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
EB-1 wrote:
That's a nearly $3K camera. I'm confident that as usual Canon will segment the R7 II with limited features somehow rather than make it much more expensive and useful.
EBH
Well, if Canon is going to make a stacked sensor APS-C sensor camera and especially a 39 MP one, then I expect it to be $2,500 at least and more likely close to the $2,900 price tag of the Fuji X-H2s. If the R7 is going to be a top level APS-C camera then I think the price is appropriate, and Canon still has the R10 and other models for lower priced APS-C cameras.
If you are hoping for a 39 MP stacked sensor BSI sensor in a camera with a price like the current R7, then I think that is a pipe dream. If they are going for a high megapixel stacked sensor APS-C the price is going to increase substantially.
garyvot wrote:
I think this would be inconsistent with the rumored sensor specifications. And, most would say the R6 III did away with the "cripple hammer" for its price class, especially with respect to video.
Maybe Canon has turned a new leaf.
But it would be consistent with the Canon history.
A few years ago it seemed that Canon eliminated the best leakers/moles and the rumors are less accurate.
I'd be stoked if Canon introduced a more expensive cropper body, but am still skeptical.
arbitrage wrote:
To be fair to Fuji they already have a 40.2MP APS-C sensor (2022). Although because they use a 1.5x crop and Canon uses 1.6x a 39MP R7II would take the record for pixel density.
But Fuji went backward in terms of readout speed, and this worsened their already class-trailing autofocus. Granted I'm not going to rag on Fuji for using the sensor, given the primary market segments that patronize Fuji's X-mount camera system.
But having resolution and speed is what makes this upcoming Canon sensor interesting.
EB-1 wrote:
I'd be stoked if Canon introduced a more expensive cropper body, but am still skeptical.
EBH
I think you're right based on Canon's history - skepticism is warranted. I won't believe it till I see it.
However, there's a motivation here for Canon, and that's video - the R7 II could do for video on APS-C what the R6 III is doing for video on full-frame, for Canon's lineup, with a sensor with that resolution and speed.
Really I think that's what's going to get them to the demand to justify production volume of what otherwise would be a niche stills camera.
-----------------------
I know there are people here who hate video, but it's important to recognize that technical advancements that improve video capability also improve stills capability. Faster sensors reduce rolling shutter, but they also allow for faster and more accurate autofocus, etc. Faster processors allow for better tracking algorithms. Improvements to the storage pipeline enhance burst shooting. The list goes on.
