Big Canon EOS R price drop, save up to $500 and still get the EF-RF adapter for free

[neuroanatomist]

I think you are looking at smoke and thinking fire when in reality it was a burnout and you didn't hear the engine roaring and the tires screaming.

The short supply of the a7III is known. The reason for it isn’t, but could be:

• Sony poorly predicted demand
• Sony was unable to produce sufficient supply
• Sony chose to underproduce or held back inventory

Honestly, I doubt the third is true but none of those look particularly good for Sony.

Nevertheless, for the a7III supply << demand for several months, and I’d argue the ‘discount clock’ doesn’t really start until the camera is widely available. Even that’s irrelevant – no reason Sony and Canon need to have the same sales strategy, and Canon’s has been most successful for >16 years.

 

[neuroanatomist]

All that being said, how well does the ND filter-adapter perform with stills compared to dedicated ND's? All the reviews I've seen are video focused... I would use it for video, but want it for the same reasons you mentioned... long exposures using wide lenses with incompatible front elements. But I only want it for stills if it performs well...

It’s good, at most densities equivalent to the B+W NDs I typically use. At max density there’s a cool color cast (Blue) similar to the Lee Big Stopper I used to use. If shooting RAW, it can be corrected in post with little difficulty. The B+W 10-stop has a warm cast, but in many cases I like that and don’t correct it, whereas the cool cast of the Canon ND adapter is something I generally don’t like and will usually correct.

I haven’t tried the CPL drop in (I checked a while back, and it was cheaper to buy the CPL adapter than just the drop in filter itself). I expect that will perform well, the drop in CPL for the superteles does so in my 600/4 II.

 

[dtaylor]

The turning point was the latest firmware with real time tracking. For Tennis it is crazy good - go with tracking af-c flexible spot small (actually use that for almost all sports), set AF sensitivity 4 or 5 (maybe 3). It's not 100% keeper rate, but I can't see how it could get any better. My closest comparison point is the D500, which is also fantastic (far better than the 7Dii), but the A9 is better.

EDIT: For the record, I hate the ergonomics of Sony, I don't like their support either. I am not a Sony fan by any means. I'd much rather shoot Canon (or Nikon) but Sony is just so far ahead.

It's a friend's A9, but I can shoot it whenever I want. I'll get the latest firmware on there and try those settings.

 

[dtaylor]

I've considered grey market and used. But I've yet to pull the trigger. I like the risk reduction that comes with a new camera with a warrenty. That said, I'll buy used lenses.

Reputable eBay stores include their own 1yr warranty on grey market items. I know it's not a Canon warranty, but in all likelihood if something goes wrong they will swap it for you. They can't afford a complaint to eBay or PayPal.

That said, I'm not even sure if Canon would refuse warranty work. Nikon has that reputation, but the reports I've heard were that Canon would still honor their warranty. That MAY have changed or MAY NOT be true in all cases, so it is absolutely a risk. It's not a risk I've been willing to take for a few hundred dollars. But $1,600? It was worth it.

 

[M. D. Vaden of Oregon]

I'll bet they are accelerating the next few RF mount releases with the new sensor designs. They are knocking it out of the park with lenses, but need the bodies to at least stay within a generation or two of Sony's improvements. So much of the official talk lately has been pushing the message of

1. Mirrorless RF is the primary focus in the future.
2. Short term profits were going to be down.

After using my friend's Sony A7Riii and then owning the EOS R, I find the new Canon in some ways to be beyond Sony.

 

[Mbell75]

Did Canon do that with their DSLRs? According to the viewpoint of many on this forum, no. Did Canon maintain their nearly 50% ILC market in spite of that? According to established fact, yes.

This isn't DSLR land anymore. Canon doesn't have the dirt cheap and insanely popular Rebel series to bail them out in mirrorless. Thats the ONLY reason they had that huge marketshare, they dominated the cheap camera space where every soccer mom and grandparents taking pics of their kids could afford and bought a Rebel. Those people are now using their iPhones to take photos.They are as hell aren't dropping $2400 on EOS R bodies and $1500 RF lenses....The EOS R needs to drop to about $1500, which it should have retailed at, to get me even remotely interested. Even then, it would just be a backup to my a7iii.

 

[neuroanatomist]

This isn't DSLR land anymore. Canon doesn't have the dirt cheap and insanely popular Rebel series to bail them out in mirrorless. Thats the ONLY reason they had that huge marketshare, they dominated the cheap camera space where every soccer mom and grandparents taking pics of their kids could afford and bought a Rebel. Those people are now using their iPhones to take photos.They are as hell aren't dropping $2400 on EOS R bodies and $1500 RF lenses....The EOS R needs to drop to about $1500, which it should have retailed at, to get me even remotely interested. Even then, it would just be a backup to my a7iii.

I don’t know what land you live in (although I’m fairly certain it’s located under a large bridge), but out here in reality-land the EOS M series is the best-selling MILC line (the Kiss M/M50 has remained the #1 MILC in Japan for months), and DSLRs continue to outsell MILCs globally. Thanks for playing, and better luck next round.

 

[jebrady03]

I'm sorry, what? You know of pros that have switched from their 1dx2's to Alphas? Do tell. Pretty sure you'll say you do, because this is the internet and anyone can say anything. In reality, we all know deep inside you don't, because pros aren't so stupid to believe all the internet propaganda spewed from Sony forums and DPR.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter all this talk about discounts, specs, 1-month sales figures (really?), etc. What matters is Canon and Nikon have bitten the bullet and started with fresh mounts, R and Z, respectively. In contrast, Sony made the fatal, catastrophic mistake of going with the apsc E mount for their FF alpha cameras - 6 years in, they are still trying to match EF lenses, and the ones they come out with, are just as large as EF lenses and more expensive. Pity the fool who got the "value" a73, only to find out what a mess it becomes attaching any lens worth a spit, both with ergonomics and cost ($2600 for a Sony 70-200 f/2.8, really?). Nothing short of an optical quantum breakthrough can change that. All because Sony took the shortcut and went E mount.

Now look at the Canon R and R mount. In its first year alone, it has introduced useful new technology, including the control ring, drop-in filter adapters, shutter closing to prevent sensor dust, and virtually unlimited focus points. Add to that best-in-class fully articulating touchscreen, best-in-class EVF, best-in-class touchpad (who needs the joystick?), best-in-class low light focusing, best-in-class focus speed and accuracy, best-in-class video bitrate and grading, and yes, the best color science and ergonomics (of course), the 1st-gen hits the ground running (I'm not the only one who feels that way: https://alikgriffin.com/canon-eos-r-just-about-everyone-got-it-wrong ). Now add the fresh R mount, allowing groundbreaking lenses like the 28-70 f/2. Yes it's heavy and expensive, but only consumers complain about that - pros can see the value of not needing 2 or 3 dedicated primes. The upcoming RF f/2.8 zooms will rock too, offering again groundbreaking designs.

Yes eye-tracking could improve, and dual-card slots and IBIS will need to come and it will, but the foundation laid down by Canon is rock solid. Watch, just watch, Sony's market share, not on a 1 month basis, but watch it in 6 months, then 1 year, then a few. If it grows, it will not be at Canon's expense.

Admit it... You had to change your underwear after writing that post

 

[woodman411]

Admit it... You had to change your underwear after writing that post

Twice.

 

[KristinnKr]

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter all this talk about discounts, specs, 1-month sales figures (really?), etc. What matters is Canon and Nikon have bitten the bullet and started with fresh mounts, R and Z, respectively. In contrast, Sony made the fatal, catastrophic mistake of going with the apsc E mount for their FF alpha cameras - 6 years in, they are still trying to match EF lenses, and the ones they come out with, are just as large as EF lenses and more expensive. Pity the fool who got the "value" a73, only to find out what a mess it becomes attaching any lens worth a spit, both with ergonomics and cost ($2600 for a Sony 70-200 f/2.8, really?). Nothing short of an optical quantum breakthrough can change that. All because Sony took the shortcut and went E mount.

Now look at the Canon R and R mount. In its first year alone, it has introduced useful new technology, including the control ring, drop-in filter adapters, shutter closing to prevent sensor dust, and virtually unlimited focus points. Add to that best-in-class fully articulating touchscreen, best-in-class EVF, best-in-class touchpad (who needs the joystick?), best-in-class low light focusing, best-in-class focus speed and accuracy, best-in-class video bitrate and grading, and yes, the best color science and ergonomics (of course), the 1st-gen hits the ground running (I'm not the only one who feels that way: https://alikgriffin.com/canon-eos-r-just-about-everyone-got-it-wrong ). Now add the fresh R mount, allowing groundbreaking lenses like the 28-70 f/2. Yes it's heavy and expensive, but only consumers complain about that - pros can see the value of not needing 2 or 3 dedicated primes. The upcoming RF f/2.8 zooms will rock too, offering again groundbreaking designs.

Yes eye-tracking could improve, and dual-card slots and IBIS will need to come and it will, but the foundation laid down by Canon is rock solid. Watch, just watch, Sony's market share, not on a 1 month basis, but watch it in 6 months, then 1 year, then a few. If it grows, it will not be at Canon's expense.

Undoubtably the larger mount diameter gives RF and Z an advantage compared to Sony FE. But this does not mean that it is the superior product for every consumer. Right now I think the by far all-around best standard zoom, for any camera system, not just FF mirrorless, is the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 for Sony FE cameras. It's as sharp as the Canon 24-70mm f2.8, costs half as much, and is 250g lighter. Sony FE cameras also have IBIS so it's effectively stabilized. Sure, a Canon equivalent will maybe be just as light, but it probably will not be cheaper. It's a hypothetical future product, while the Tamron is here right now. A lot of people use a standard zoom 90% of the time, so small-ish differences in other lenses aren't as important as having a great standard zoom.

The issue of third party lenses is also more general. First of all all lenses made for FF mirrorless will be made so that the Sony FE mount diameter is sufficient, since they have the largest user base, and this will not change in the immediate future. So the extra mount diameter of Nikon and Canon is superfluous for the purpose of third party lenses. Second of all Sony licences their AF algorithms to third party lens manufacturers, allowing Sony users to have first-party AF experience with their third-party lenses. This is not the case with Nikon and Canon, and famously always made third party AF unreliable.

 

[jayphotoworks]

Why would anyone make a point about trends with less than one months worth of data? That just reeks of mindless propaganda, why regurgitate it here?

Have you even read the links yet? You can clearly see via BCN Canon's 3 month declining trend in the MILC category. You can further review Canon's 1Q 2019 performance which shows their Imaging BU at -17% sales and -82% profit compared to 1Q 2018. I would have expected the A7III market share to drop sharply with the introduction of the EOS R given the pent up demand from Canon owners (especially with the included adapter that freely adapts EF lenses). But that was simply my own opinion. The point is, you are free to combine multiple data points and make your own decisions. I apologize that you don't like the numbers and you also feel in your rant that the EOS R is perfection quoting 1 critical article. But the rest of the review world and the numbers so far doesn't necessarily agree with you.

 

[sdz]

Reputable eBay stores include their own 1yr warranty on grey market items. I know it's not a Canon warranty, but in all likelihood if something goes wrong they will swap it for you. They can't afford a complaint to eBay or PayPal.

That said, I'm not even sure if Canon would refuse warranty work. Nikon has that reputation, but the reports I've heard were that Canon would still honor their warranty. That MAY have changed or MAY NOT be true in all cases, so it is absolutely a risk. It's not a risk I've been willing to take for a few hundred dollars. But $1,600? It was worth it.

I believe Canon will service grey market cameras in their country of origin. So, a grey market camera that came from, say, South Africa, would need to go to South Africa for warranty repairs. When considering a grey market item, an image of a mangled box that traveled across the Atlantic comes to mind.

On the other hand, I've never had an issue with a camera. Computers, on the other hand.....

 

[jebrady03]

For anyone who finds it interesting...
The A7III is selling better than all the competitors combined.

 

[privatebydesign]

I believe Canon will service grey market cameras in their country of origin. So, a grey market camera that came from, say, South Africa, would need to go to South Africa for warranty repairs. When considering a grey market item, an image of a mangled box that traveled across the Atlantic comes to mind.

On the other hand, I've never had an issue with a camera. Computers, on the other hand.....

I have personally had grey market equipment warranty serviced by Canon USA with no charge, so your belief is not consistent with my experience.

I got my 1DX MkII's via CPW from Canada and got a 12 month North American Canon warranty and a three year stand alone international 3rd party warranty.

 

[sdz]

I have personally had grey market equipment warranty serviced by Canon USA with no charge, so your belief is not consistent with my experience.

I got my 1DX MkII's via CPW from Canada and got a 12 month North American Canon warranty and a three year stand alone international 3rd party warranty.

Thanks

 

[ColinJR]

Reviews aren’t facts (although some do contain facts). Reviews are the opinions of reviewers...individual opinions. What’s the point of reviews? Today, for the vast majority of the reviewers, the point is to monetize clicks and click-through purchases. Reviewers (many of them) have been ‘making it clear that Canon is behind’ for several years now. The only objective way to gauge the effects of those reviews is to look at sales. If people most highly valued those features the reviewers have been highlighting that Canon lacks and other systems offer, people – in aggregate – would be buying systems other than Canon. So, what effect have the reviews had on Canon’s market share? None.


So anecdotally, you’ve read the many reviews that ‘objectively make it clear that Canon is behind in several areas’, yet you bought an EOS R and you’re sticking with it. That pretty much sum up the impact of those reviews on buying behavior, doesn’t it?


It demonstrates the obvious fallacy of statements to the effect that Canon must do X, add feature Y, or improve spec Z or they will ‘not be competitive’, ‘lose sales’, etc. Consider the very first feature you mentioned: “Canon is behind in several areas that folks care about right now: sensor dynamic range...” On average across the lineup, Canon fell behind other brands on low ISO DR starting in 2009, a full decade ago. In 2009, Canon had ~44% ILC market share. Today, they have just under 50% market share. The sales data make it manifestly clear that the majority of ILC buyers do not strongly value low ISO DR. Sorry that you feel stating relevant facts comprises ‘shoving sales figures down people's throats’. Apparently repeated statements that Canon ‘is behind’ and ‘needs to catch up’, in spite of objective evidence to the contrary, are perfectly fine.

Again, sales do not necessarily equate to good products, they only reflect popularity, brand loyalty, etc... I'm sticking with my R... because of the reasons stated above, but that doesn't mean I don't constantly wish it were better and more competitive with other brands. If Fujifilm had a stable of tilt-shift lenses, for example, I would be very tempted to jump over to that system. Besides the lack of specialty lenses, I'm a big fan of the way those cameras operate and the way they render images. If the GFX cameras were better at day-to-day stuff, I would be tempted to start saving for one and adapt my Canon tilt-shifts. As it is, I'm stuck between two incompatible systems. If the R was able to satisfy me the ways my Fuji does, I'd ditch the fuji and the frustrations owning incompatible systems bring.

 

[woodman411]

Undoubtably the larger mount diameter gives RF and Z an advantage compared to Sony FE. But this does not mean that it is the superior product for every consumer. Right now I think the by far all-around best standard zoom, for any camera system, not just FF mirrorless, is the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 for Sony FE cameras. It's as sharp as the Canon 24-70mm f2.8, costs half as much, and is 250g lighter. Sony FE cameras also have IBIS so it's effectively stabilized. Sure, a Canon equivalent will maybe be just as light, but it probably will not be cheaper. It's a hypothetical future product, while the Tamron is here right now. A lot of people use a standard zoom 90% of the time, so small-ish differences in other lenses aren't as important as having a great standard zoom.

The issue of third party lenses is also more general. First of all all lenses made for FF mirrorless will be made so that the Sony FE mount diameter is sufficient, since they have the largest user base, and this will not change in the immediate future. So the extra mount diameter of Nikon and Canon is superfluous for the purpose of third party lenses. Second of all Sony licences their AF algorithms to third party lens manufacturers, allowing Sony users to have first-party AF experience with their third-party lenses. This is not the case with Nikon and Canon, and famously always made third party AF unreliable.

I like Tamron, I use their 24-70 f/2.8 VC G2 on my R, and would rather have 24 than 75 for general walk-around range, but to each their own. Autofocus, although slower and noisier than RF lenses, works accurately on the R, much better than the 5d4. Tamron just announced the 35-150 f/2.8-4 for Canonikon, arguably a better portraiture range than 28-75, since it includes the important 85mm and 100mm, but it is variable aperture (personally I'm happy with the 24-70 70-200 combo).

 

[lenspacker]

I think Canon doesn`t sell so many bodies as they hoped they would do - - the EOS R has a lot of little issues and many users waiting for the better and more professional version. Canon has misjudged the market - many people buy futhermore an APS-C body and a kit lens - and many ambitious photographer are waiting for... So the EOS R was only a signal to the ambitious people not to change to nikon or sony, because Canon has also such a thing.....
The RP was the attempt to sell in lower price segments and the EOS R is still a failure - as I wrote: to many issues, to expensive and build for the false target group - - - if canon did not
subsequently supply competitive products, they will get problems in the market....

 

[Ladislav]

Btw. unless it is permanent, it is not a price drop. It is just a campaign.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Again, sales do not necessarily equate to good products, they only reflect popularity, brand loyalty, etc...

I haven’t said anything to the contrary, only that sales can be quantified but ‘good’ cannot.