For me my r8 is matched (with my r7) for (travel/) backpacking.
I would prefer keeping the low weight/size and increasing the mpx. It would be great if they dropped the AA filter too. Maybe changing the battery to same as R7/R5ii, to reduce the camera bag weight.
IBIS is not a priority for me. I have the heavy IBIS R5ii, r7 already. The R6iii already has IBIS for others. IBIS would add weight and size. Most my travel lens have IS.
howard wrote:
How can people be so gullible? That site has no credibility.
Can you substantiate that claim? Seems to me they're not dramatically more or less reliable than other rumor sites.
Early rumors often inaccurate, but fairly accurate 1-3 months ahead of release. With the occasional miss (e.g. expecting higher R1 megapixel count), but then these are rumors not news..
IBIS plus the new R6 III sensor would be ideal upgrades for me. Hoping the rumors are correct here.
I am most concerned about the reported "retro styling" messing up the ergonomics. But maybe it's just a chrome top plate, which would probably be fine.
I think it's entirely possible we get the worst of all worlds on the "retro styling" front -- just enough to screw up the ergos while not actually looking like a 70's era SLR. I'm bracing for it to be just ugly, while still hoping to be pleasantly surprised.
Jul 12, 2026 at 02:25 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
EB-1 wrote:
Why not just get the R6 III if it has the same sensor? Is the retroactive styling that important to those kind of users?
EBH
The simply answer is that it will be cheaper and smaller. Both of those things might be important to some users. If it has the same sensor and IBIS, however, expect the price to go up. The R6 III typical US retail price is $2,800. The R8 II if it has the same sensor and IBIS, won't have all the features of the R6 III (likely no full mechanical shutter only EFCS, lots less video specs, smaller buffer, smaller EVF, and likely a few other things), but it will still be expensive. I would guess the price will be at least $2,100, which is a pretty big increase from the current $1,300 of the R8. Still there is little doubt the R8 II would be cheaper and smaller than the R6 III. The retro styling might be important to some, but I am guessing that the size and price will be what really drives sales of this camera if it is as rumored.
I am not sure that going with the higher spec'd sensor is a great idea for Canon. They could keep the same sensor and add IBIS to this version of the camera and still have a great offering and better differentiation of their cameras and more differentiation between their cameras and keep the price lower. I would rather they included a better EVF than the newer sensor, but Canon isn't going to build the camera based on what I would prefer. They used the same sensor in the R6 II and R8, so I do suspect they will use the same sensor in the R8 II as in the R6 III. It will be a compelling camera even if it isn't what I would prefer. At some point, I will likely get it for my wife.
R6 III is currently $2700 and the R8 is $1650 on sale for $1300. If they update the "R8 II" to be more like the R6 III, it seems the price would be higher, perhaps $1800-2000. I'm unable to gauge if the kind of folks that prefer the archaic/retroactive style are willing to pay extra for that as compared to performance features.
I would consider it if it was a T90 Mark II, but that might not be retro enough compared to the competition, given that the T90 is the design inspiration for the EOS line and would still look modern.
If it's an AE-1 knockoff, they should release a nostalgic trio of budget 'kit' primes in FD-esque housings: 28/2.8, 50/1.8, 135/2.8.
Otherwise they could go modern compact and make it a Leica Q series knockoff with interchangeable lens mount. Or any kind of compact box with the EVF in the top left corner for a Canon alternative to the a7C cameras. That would probably interest me most as a compact ILC.
Although I’d really love to see the new R8 model - and if it turns out to be a sensible upgrade, I might even buy it. I’m not convinced by the suggested retro design, unless they unveil two separate cameras with identical internal technology but different external appearances.
Based on my brief experience with the Nikon Zf and Zfc models, I know that cameras with a design dominated by an overly complicated user interface—neither completely classic nor fully modern, but rather a mix of both approaches—aren’t for me.
I still think that a major roadblock for the Big three when introducing so-called “retro” cameras is that they don’t have a supporting ecosystem for lenses. That’s a big part of what makes Fujifilm’s retro cameras succeed — a robust assortment of prime lenses with aperture rings.
Jul 13, 2026 at 10:50 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
gdanmitchell wrote:
I still think that a major roadblock for the Big three when introducing so-called “retro” cameras is that they don’t have a supporting ecosystem for lenses. That’s a big part of what makes Fujifilm’s retro cameras succeed — a robust assortment of prime lenses with aperture rings.
I think you are right, but Canon doesn't have to make the lenses themselves. They could get a wide assortment of MF lenses if they just allowed manufacturer such as Laowa, Thypoch, TT Artisans, 7 Artisans, and Samyang to offer lenses with electronic contacts. They let Cosina do that for their Voigtlander lenses and they could open up the party to a lot of other lenses. Canon being Canon I don't expect them to do that, but I don't think they would be hurt at all if they restricted the electronic contacts to manual focus lenses. A retro R8 that had a wide array of MF lenses (including FD lenses, Canon should make an adapter with electronic contacts) could be a great platform for manual focus shooters and especially so with Canon's excellent MF aids. The Nikon ZF has a bit of traction in that space and the R8 could become that for Canon. I don't think Canon will do that but I think they could and should do it.
I don't think it will be as retro as some may think.
They could style it like film EF bodies. For instance, an EOS 30 (from 2000) doesn't look worlds apart from current ones, similar R8-like grip, just a bit different controls.
With dual SD it will be limited to what an R8 / R6 II were doing, no RAW / 7K (no biggie), also no 4k120, a bit of a shame, no pre-capture, might be an artificial limitation. Existing EFCS-only shutter limited to 6 fps (ES still does 40 with slower buffer). Maybe they replace the LP-E17, since it's over 10 years old, IBIS may need more.
it might still be an R8 / R6 II alternative / replacement, so they might price it close to where an R6II currently sits.
