Canon EOS RP Specifications & Images

bokehmon22

EOS RP
Oct 31, 2016
356
186
I feel like canon is going to stop selling cameras at some point. They aren't trying. Many of us hoped that the new competition from sony would prompt them to step their game up...well, and we can see where that is going.

You shouldn't have to pay 3k for a camera just to have a damn joystick, or a sensor that's a dilapidated version of a sensor they sold 7 years ago. Meanwhile sony users can get sublime AF for eyes and portraits and motion.

So this is what loyalty to a brand means...laugh at your own customers. Nice lenses....i guess.....but if im not buying the body, then none of the lenses either. Just put a new sensor in there canon...cmon, u can do it.
They will always continue to be selling camera. They will always use their brand recognition to sell camera and lens world wide. It's not a camera for serious enthusiasts and professionals, but we represent a very small market. They concentrate where the money is. Perhaps someday they will throw us a EOS R Pro with IBIS, and better eyeAF. You just have to be patience and temper your expectation with Canon.
 

m1mm1m

I'm New Here
Feb 6, 2019
9
23
I feel like canon is going to stop selling cameras at some point. They aren't trying. Many of us hoped that the new competition from sony would prompt them to step their game up...well, and we can see where that is going.

You shouldn't have to pay 3k for a camera just to have a damn joystick, or a sensor that's a dilapidated version of a sensor they sold 7 years ago. Meanwhile sony users can get sublime AF for eyes and portraits and motion.

So this is what loyalty to a brand means...laugh at your own customers. Nice lenses....i guess.....but if im not buying the body, then none of the lenses either. Just put a new sensor in there canon...cmon, u can do it.

Canon isn't going to stop selling cameras.... LMFAO.... You may not like how they go about it, but they dominate every camera market in most of the world... That means that as a business, they're clearly doing something right....

If you like Sony so much and it works for your business, then go buy one and hang your Canon lenses off it... I hear it works very well. Or buy Sony lenses... or Zeiss, or whatever.... The only brand loyalty you should have is to your own brand. Cameras are tools... get whichever one lets you do the job the best way you can so you succeed as much as you can. For me, that's been Canon since Nikon scoffed at auto focus in the late 1980s. For others... who knows?
 

nchoh

EOS RP
Apr 3, 2018
208
113
Calgary
Fair enough, you can't really make a pattern from a single release, but here's my very speculative reasoning:
1. RF and EF-M mounts aren't compatible, make a few leaps of reasoning ( this is a rumors site ) and RF ends up being full frame only , if you want crop use EF-M. the days of EF bodies are numbered.
2. there hasn't been any sign of higher end EF-M bodies that can compete with an 80D. just because you want something small doesn't mean you don't want high end, just ask (the small number of ) olympus users. but for whatever reason canon always equates better with bigger, so there may never be an 80D like EF-M crop body.
3. in the full frame space canon has in the past done cheap ( 6d ) , all around ( 5d iv) , high resolution ( 5d sr ) ,and high speed ( 1d ) .
4. now in RF mount we have cheap ( RP ) , all around ( R ), maybe we'll see a high resolution next and eventually high speed. canon may go into different segmentations with RF vs. EF, who knows, but its not a horrible guess that they keep the segmentation roughly the same.
5. The R is a much less capable camera than the 5Div in terms of usability, and the RP seems much less capable than the 6dii., if you want at least 2 control dials you have to go even more upmarket.

So where does something like the 80D fit in? Maybe they have to do something to take the place of the 7D line . Personally I'd like to see a crop mode on a full frame high resolution weather sealed body that would be great for all nature photography ( I would be willing to pay $2000 for that ). But given their history I think they will release a completely different body for people looking to replace their 7d. But the 80D just seems like it is in no mans land. Maybe it hasn't sold well enough to make it worthwhile, if so then I understand if they drop it, but as a happy 80D user obviously I'm not happy about that.

Its all speculation, you can easily speculate the other way and pick apart these arguments, and canon may change course at any time, but this is just a rumors discussion site and I'm pessimistic. What kind of 80D replacement do you see fitting into their lineup and how will it be priced?
I see your point. And quite frankly too I can't see how the 80D replacement fits in with the current scheme of things... RF is FF and EF-M being APS-C, with APSC being small and light. I would be surprised if Canon themselves know what they are going to do with their DSLRs. My guess is that Canon will start producing APS-C M cameras 3 to 5 years from now once they have filled out the whole FF lineup for the R. Until that happens and as long as there is demand,, a 80D successor would be released.
 

Macoose

EOS T7i
Jun 4, 2015
76
8
The "R" lets you do this so I don't see why the RP would not.. ..... For this, I used my 100-400 F4-5.6L II with a 2XIII.. F 6.3 on lens, so the effective f-stop was F13. As you can see, it works great. AF from all over the sensor and fast enough to shoot a little BIF.... Images like this were impossible with any dSLR without pre-focusing and praying...


Thanks

I was thinking about looking into the 90D to replace my 40D. The RP may just be the one for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: m1mm1m

Macoose

EOS T7i
Jun 4, 2015
76
8
I believe the EOS R can auto focus at f/11, or an f/5.6 lens on a 2x extender (but maybe only Canon's newest extender). That should work for you!

Quote from the Canon Canada website: "With the EOS R camera, autofocus will operate over nearly the entire image area even when used with compatible f/8 and f/11 lenses. This means the EOS R can easily achieve sharp AF using lenses with smaller apertures, and is even compatible with select EF extenders for uncompromised shooting at an expanded range of focal lengths." http://www.canon.ca/en/Features/EOS-R/EOS-R-Camera

Thanks amorse.
 

jonebize

EOS M50
Dec 15, 2018
31
21
Alright everybody, here's the conclusion: this $1,300 or $1,400 camera is 80% of the camera that any of the superior cameras are. Let's be real: in most situations, for most people, it takes incredible photos. Once you go beyond here, there are diminishing returns. This is the perfect sweet spot from a marketing perspective. Canon is going to sell a lot of these, and their other products will benefit from the success of this model.
 

efmshark

EOS M50
Jan 19, 2018
38
20
Literally the 2nd post after hard, visual evidence from a respected review site that the 6D2 has good high ISO by today's standards. Unbelievable. Do people really cling to narratives no matter what physical reality throws at them?

It's almost a certainty that Canon is optimizing microlenses and color arrays for the R's new flange distance.
Instead of your subjective evaluation of looking at a few images which have no detail and somewhat uniform noise, if you look at the quantitative DXOMARK comparison of the EOS 6D Mark ii sensor vs the Sony A7 iii sensor, you can see that Sony has almost 3 Evs better dynamic range and significantly better low light performance:

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Com...7-III-versus-Canon-EOS-6D-Mark-II___1236_1170

Canon is hopefully optimizing Bayer arrays and LPF filters for mirrorless sensors, but I don't see how they can optimize micro lenses unless they give up on DPAF.
 

efmshark

EOS M50
Jan 19, 2018
38
20
I guess you haven't looked at any sample images yet, because vignetting is kept at normal levels and there are absolutely no problems with color shift. Of course it is not optimized for Leica M lenses.
The only test of a wide angle lens on RF I am aware of is Optical Limits' test of RF 24-105 which has a maximum aperture of only F/4. Measured light fall-off (vignetting) at f/4 was 2.6EV at 24mm and 2.1EV at 105mm, which would be considered pretty awful for a F4 DSLR lens. For comparison, light fall-off for EF 24-105L ii was measured at 1.9EV at 24mm and 1.45EV at 105mm. I would be very interested to see vignetting measurements on R bodies for faster wide angle lenses. I guess RF 16-35mm f/2.8L and RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS will be available shortly, but there are no fast wide angle RF lenses on the Canon roadmap. DSLR lenses mounted with an EF to RF adapter would not have the angle of incidence issue, so Zeiss/Leica M mount lenses with the RF adapter are probably the only fast/wide options until Sigma decides to enter the native RF mount market.
 

Larsskv

EOS 6D MK II
Jun 12, 2015
827
268
It’s nowhere near 5.4 stops if you’re using distortion correction too, as the darkest extreme corner areas are no longer in frame. Somebody has been reading too much on Optical Limits. ;)

Not sure what you’re referring to with AF - maybe you read a review with the lens mounted to an older model. Optical Limits again? Clearly you haven’t used one.

Size? It’s basically identical to the Canon!

Yes I’m aware of the EF/RF models. As I said, the problems with bokeh remain.
Have you had enough back paddling yet? Because your claim that the Sony lenses are equal to or better than Canon RF isn’t true at all. No Sony lens comes even close. And it will continue to be so, mainly because Sony didn’t do their due diligence when choosing their lens mount.
 

Jaysheldon

EOS T7i
Dec 23, 2015
88
28
I haven't read all the messages in this stream, so someone else may have mentioned this, but for me there are two crucial missing specs: The number of focus points and the refresh rate/number of pixels of the EVF. If to save money the EVF is low res and causes eye fatigue the camera isn't worth it no matter how low the price. Similarly, fewer focus points than the 6D2 for me would be a non-starter
 

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,493
1,725
Alberta, Canada
m1mm1m

My only comment is, that's not the most challenging BIF, but it is a positive. There are some evaluations out there that consider the AF with longer lenses, possibly in slightly lower light, to be rather unacceptable, so more clarification/examples would be most welcome since I'm on the fence regarding buying the R.

Jack
 
Last edited:

wanako

I'm New Here
Aug 1, 2018
18
25
What an interesting camera. The people that this is targeted to will buy the hell out of this thing and will surely make Canon loads of money. The 6DII is an excellent photographic tool for shooters of nearly all levels and this RP will likely do the same. At this price point, it seems like excellent value.

It seems they've also added something to this camera reserved for higher-end models, three Custom Modes.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,492
981
Instead of your subjective evaluation of looking at a few images which have no detail and somewhat uniform noise, if you look at the quantitative DXOMARK comparison of the EOS 6D Mark ii sensor vs the Sony A7 iii sensor, you can see that Sony has almost 3 Evs better dynamic range and significantly better low light performance:
I see someone doesn't understand DxO's low light score. From the DxO web site:
We have therefore defined low-light ISO as the highest ISO setting for a camera that allows it to achieve a SNR of 30dB while keeping a good dynamic range of 9 EVs and a color depth of 18bits. A difference in low-light ISO of 25% equals 1/3 EV and is only slightly noticeable.

There is a 30.3% difference between the Sony A73's low light score and the Canon 6D2's low light score. That's less than the half stop I guessed from my "subjective evaluation." DxO is more favorable to the 6D mark II than I was!

Both DxO and I would agree that the difference is"...only slightly noticeable." I would add that in print, after post processing, you're simply not going to see any difference.

DxO ranks the base ISO DR difference higher than I would, but still close. I would put it at 2-2.5ev scrolling around the DPReview studio scene. DxO claims 2.8ev. NR in post will reduce that difference somewhat, which is why I ranked the 6D2 a "solid 2 stops behind." With shadow NR in post I would be comfortable pushing most 6D2 files to 3.5 or 4ev and most A73 files to 6ev. This will vary somewhat based on subject/exposure/view size, but for most cases that would probably hold.

I will note that at the edge for either camera you would be better off IQ wise to blend two shots if you're going to print big.

Never the less, +4 is not +6 and the Sony wins this. But I stand by my observation that most people who cling to this difference while bashing Canon in forums cannot post images illustrating that they actually take advantage of that much shadow latitude. I've had my fill of the DR debate...raging for a decade now...because all I see are words and not pictures. It's no different to me than a Porsche owner arguing with a Ferrari owner over track specs when neither one of them have ever been to a track or had their cars over 90mph.

For years I shot landscapes and even real estate interiors on a 7D mark I (2.5-3ev shadow latitude with post NR). I know how often a single frame worked. I know how often a single frame did not work. And out of the times a single frame was not enough, I know how many scenes would have blown out even an A73 or D850. How many scenes had to have 2-3 blended exposures regardless of sensor. The Sony DR advantage is not the issue it is made out to be.

Finally: this entire conversation is based on the assumption that the RP will have the 6D2's sensor. If Canon moved ADCs on chip then it will likely match the 5D IV and R in DR. The measured 1ev difference between the 5D IV and Sony's best is inconsequential in a world of post processing and NR.
 

degos

EOS RP
Mar 20, 2015
233
154
Personally I'd like to see a crop mode on a full frame high resolution weather sealed body that would be great for all nature photography ( I would be willing to pay $2000 for that ).
A crop mode on a FF is just... a crop of the centre of the frame. The pixel density doesn't change, so you don't get exta 'reach'. So its basically just a way of using less storage when you can't fill the frame.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

PerKr

EOS T7i
Jul 11, 2018
75
69
Sverige
The only test of a wide angle lens on RF I am aware of is Optical Limits' test of RF 24-105 which has a maximum aperture of only F/4. Measured light fall-off (vignetting) at f/4 was 2.6EV at 24mm and 2.1EV at 105mm, which would be considered pretty awful for a F4 DSLR lens. For comparison, light fall-off for EF 24-105L ii was measured at 1.9EV at 24mm and 1.45EV at 105mm. I would be very interested to see vignetting measurements on R bodies for faster wide angle lenses. I guess RF 16-35mm f/2.8L and RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS will be available shortly, but there are no fast wide angle RF lenses on the Canon roadmap. DSLR lenses mounted with an EF to RF adapter would not have the angle of incidence issue, so Zeiss/Leica M mount lenses with the RF adapter are probably the only fast/wide options until Sigma decides to enter the native RF mount market.
As I recall it fast M-mount lenses have serious vignetting issues as well as corner sharpness issues until stopped down quite a bit
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kharan

sanj

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 22, 2012
3,478
286
If you are thinking IBIS when you say stabilisation, it seems it doesn’t have that. It has the “dual sensing IS” which has been in a few cameras already, eg EOS R, M50.
Oh. :-(