Canon EOS RP Specifications & Images

[prodorshak]

Yes, there are many cameras out there, that can already do that.

Any canon DSLR/MILC below $1500?

 

[m1mm1m]

There is another reason. Why sell one camera, that can do both: high res full frame images and high fps crop images, when you can sell two cameras, that can only do one of these things.

A highly placed Canon US exec who shall remain nameless told me the exact same thing when I asked the exact same question about the 5DSR. He said to add a 7D2 to my kit (rhetorical because I already had one) which has a similar pixel pitch to the 5DSR and have the benefit of two bodies.

 

[AlanF]

You completely missed the point. Go back and read everything I wrote and you will clearly see that I never claimed these photos were spectacular from a BIF standpoint in any way...

What I did claim is 100% true.... No Canon (or anyone's, AFAIK) sDLR will auto-focus any lens/TC combination with an aperture of anything approaching f13. That is what I used and therefore what I did and how I did it was indeed impossible with any dSLR..

Your example uses a 1.4 TC on a 5DSR (I own both) which will indeed AF with the center few spots down to F8. I used a 2X TC on the 100-400 with which the "R" was still able to capably AF even using the very corner of the sensor even. Apples and oranges to you, my friend...

I quoted exactly what was in your post with the picture, in which there were no caveats. I do not believe your claim that a pelican landing is "a little `BIF" is 100% true.

 

[max_sr]

Any canon DSLR/MILC below $1500?

The 7DII can do it, the 80d can do it, the original 6D can do it and I guess there are others, that also have in camera raw processing. They are not "new", but they are below $1500 right now.

 

[bokehmon22]

I hate to tell you this, but there are no "low light kings." All currently shipping FF sensors occupy roughly a 1ev band. If anything you're best off going high resolution (D850, A7r3, 5Ds/sr) because while there's more noise in flat areas, there's also considerably higher detail/sharpness and in post you have much more room to NR. The end result is a cleaner image that's still sharper/more detailed. But even then we're not talking about leaps and bounds.

BSI did virtually nothing for FF sensor sensitivity (probably due to microlens tech at that scale) and everyone is dealing with the same laws of physics.



How about we wait and see if it's even the 6D2's sensor?

I did mentioned low light king vs my 5D IV just like Canon 6D perform over 5D III. I wasn't expect leap and bound increase but at least an increase in performance just like 5D IV over 5D III not worst like the 6D II over 6D.

We can but it is still not a camera I would want to buy. I'm looking for EOS R Pro not a downgrade to EOS R.

If history is any indication of Canon practices, it's likely a recycle Canon 6D II sensor just like 5D IV sensor for EOS R. From a business stand point, why waste R&D money to come up with a newer sensor and that's going to better than EOS R/5D IV sensor. That would be another reason to sway people to buy EOS RP over EOS R.

 

[prodorshak]

The 7DII can do it, the 80d can do it, the original 6D can do it and I guess there are others, that also have in camera raw processing. They are not "new", but they are below $1500 right now.

Thanks. Planning to upgrade mine.

 

[Don Haines]

!

A pelican is a bird.
That one was clearly flying.

Any arguments thus far?

My describing it as "a little" BIF is a clear nod to the fact that this shot is not even close to the same as one of a Peregrine Falcon cruising across the frame at 180 mph. I might describe that one as "a whole lot" of BIF.... LMFAO!

For little birds in flight, is there any camera/lens out there that is fast enough to track a Chickadee in flight when you are close enough that it fills more than a quarter of a frame? Is there any photographer who is fast enough?

(I am talking in flight here, not the instant that they take off or land)

 

[scyrene]

You must have miss BlackFriday sales. It was $1300.
Here is the deal website https://slickdeals.net/f/12281707-c...amera-w-24-105mm-f-4l-ii-lens-2199-00-more-fs on Nov 11, 2018.

It was $1300 from [bhphotovideo.com] bandhphoto.com

MSRP is $1500. Adorama used price is $1149

There isn't any rewriting history. You just do a very poor job at Google search.

Canon 6D II may be better than 6D but that isn't saying much.

Here is an Fstoppers Article.
Canon 6D Mark II: The Worst Camera of 2017
https://fstoppers.com/critiques/canon-6d-mark-ii-worst-camera-2017-209420

Compared to Canon own line, it's a fine camera, but it's overvalue at its debut price of $2000.

As the original owner of Canon 6D, I was hoping 6D II will be the low light king vs my Canon 5D IV. Canon didn't want to make the same mistake with 6D vs 5D III so it won't cannibalize 5D IV sales. Canon segmented the 6D II line even more by putting a slightly worst sensor, and added more AF points that's mostly center. Compare to 6D, it's a better camera, but compare to competitions, it's a poorly value one.

It couldn't beat out an 3 year old Nikon D750 in term of values that has dual card slot and better dynamic range and $200 cheaper.

At $1500, I don't know if I would recommend it over Sony A7III for $1800 that has a better sensor, dual card slot, IBIS, better eyeAF, and 4k. I can deal with the ergonomics issue with L bracket.

Canon has a history of providing poorly value camera because they know we are tied down to glasses - 5D IV, 6D II, and EOS R. They aren't bad camera. I don't think any FF camera in the last 5 year take bad pictures. It just a poorly value one.

This is a bit tl;dr, but okay...

Well I simply searched for what the camera is selling for *now*. You didn't say '$1300 during the intense pre-Christmas sales', you implied that's what it was selling for now.

And while there is some merit in what you are saying, my points stand. The 6D2 improved most features of the 6D - especially the number of autofocus points, which was considered a weakness of the original model. Despite inflation, its price was lower than the 6D's. Not by much, but it could have been more. That you consider rival brands' offerings better value is a separate issue imho. The 6D2 was never gonna debut at $1500. If you check the discussions here before it was released, I'm not sure many were even predicting the price to be as low as it was.

And the point is - Canon doesn't arguably include as many features (although many it does include are overlooked by the naysayers here and elsewhere) because they sell well without going the extra mile, so why bother? It might piss you off, but that's not their focus. This is just my hunch, but at the entry level in particular I don't think the minutiae of DR and even dual slots make much difference to sales.

 

[Larsskv]

Christ. So I'd guess you're about 14 years old.

What did you prove wrong? Where did I back peddle? Quotes please.

Christ. So I'd guess you're about 14 years old.

What did you prove wrong? Where did I back peddle? Quotes please.

Why don’t you start with mentioning a Sony lens that is as good as the equivalent RF lens?

 

[Metalex]

Why don’t you start with mentioning a Sony lens that is as good as the equivalent RF lens?

You have already asked that and I answered.

Please answer my questions. What did you prove wrong? Where did I back peddle? Quotes please.

 

[m1mm1m]

For little birds in flight, is there any camera/lens out there that is fast enough to track a Chickadee in flight when you are close enough that it fills more than a quarter of a frame? Is there any photographer who is fast enough?

(I am talking in flight here, not the instant that they take off or land)

My ONLY point was to illustrate that the "R" can AF with a lens/TC combination with an f-stop smaller than F8 and do it anywhere on the sensor.... This is something no current dSLR can do. That pelican shot was illustrative of this and that the camera does it well enough even to keep up with some motion.

I never said a pelican is a "little" bird...as in "small" (LMFAO) -- I said the picture shows that the equipment in question is capable of a "little BIF" --- as opposed to "a lot" or "full-blown" BIF like you'd be able to do with say a 1DXII and a 500 F4L or similar......

 

[bokehmon22]

This is a bit tl;dr, but okay...

Well I simply searched for what the camera is selling for *now*. You didn't say '$1300 during the intense pre-Christmas sales', you implied that's what it was selling for now.

And while there is some merit in what you are saying, my points stand. The 6D2 improved most features of the 6D - especially the number of autofocus points, which was considered a weakness of the original model. Despite inflation, its price was lower than the 6D's. Not by much, but it could have been more. That you consider rival brands' offerings better value is a separate issue imho. The 6D2 was never gonna debut at $1500. If you check the discussions here before it was released, I'm not sure many were even predicting the price to be as low as it was.

And the point is - Canon doesn't arguably include as many features (although many it does include are overlooked by the naysayers here and elsewhere) because they sell well without going the extra mile, so why bother? It might piss you off, but that's not their focus. This is just my hunch, but at the entry level in particular I don't think the minutiae of DR and even dual slots make much difference to sales.

I never said Canon 6D II as an overall system doesn't improve over 6D. It is a good camera if you have to stick to Canon because of your existing lens. Canon know that.

I'm evaluating that camera compared to the competitions and why Canon 6D user like me wouldn't consider upgrading to 6D II because it doesn't provide enough value - more AF but center, articulating LCD, 2 more FPS. We waited 5 years for incremental increased over 6D. Canon is a king when it come to segmentation and charging more for less feature compare to competitions.

If camelcamelcamel is back, you can check the price history. It didn't stay $2000 price for long. It didn't sell that well.

As a consumer (not stockholder), you should be mad that Canon just provide the status quo without going to extra mile to get your hard earn money.

I'm lucky to have alot of disposable money, but even then, I want to be smart with my money and not spend it on incremental increase camera and poorly value one.

If I own Canon stock, I would applaud them for their business practices. They are able to minimize R&D money spent, providing incremental upgrade, yet people continue to buy their system even though it's a poorly value to their competitions.

 

[dtaylor]

I did mentioned low light king vs my 5D IV just like Canon 6D perform over 5D III. I wasn't expect leap and bound increase but at least an increase in performance just like 5D IV over 5D III not worst like the 6D II over 6D.

It's not worse. Slightly more noise but slightly more detail. Probably less than 0.5ev difference even if you're just looking at noise in a gray patch. If you NR to the same level of detail/sharpness it might be a tiny bit better.

FF differences at high ISO are practically a myth at this point, reinforced by pixel peeping files which vary in size.

We can but it is still not a camera I would want to buy. I'm looking for EOS R Pro not a downgrade to EOS R.

That comes after the RP. But it will be priced accordingly.

 

[dtaylor]

As a consumer (not stockholder), you should be mad that Canon just provide the status quo without going to extra mile to get your hard earn money.

That sounds like a description of Sony's three generations of non-existent and poor weather sealing. (To say nothing of a history of compressed RAWs, star eating algorithms, off sensor reflections, broken UIs, etc, etc.)

If I own Canon stock, I would applaud them for their business practices. They are able to minimize R&D money spent, providing incremental upgrade, yet people continue to buy their system even though it's a poorly value to their competitions.

Is that how they got the 28-70 f/2 and the sharpest 50 f/1.2 to date? By minimizing R&D money spent?

 

[qudek77]

Amazing how the Sony trolls all sign up for an account when a new Canon is released. Since the first R was released, there have been many more of you. Gotta wonder how desperate Sony is getting, if Sony is paying trolls.

Sony troll that uses canon all his life?

 

[qudek77]

Buy whatever tool require to do your job. No point is being emotional about it. That's what I am doing if EOS R Pro is another good enough camera. Eventually Sony may not provide you with what you need and you switch to another company when it's viable.

I'm quite used to use canon bodies, lenses, batteries, menus, options, dpaf and everything else, the transition will be really hard (and emotional)

 

[qudek77]

Is it a requirement for you to use the same device to shoot stills and video? For ~$350 you can get a DJI Osmo Pocket and shoot far better video footage than you can with ANY hand-held DSLR or Mirrorless ILC system, just from the standpoint of having gimbal stabilized footage (unless you carry around a DSLR/Mirrorless gimbal in your kit for shoots) With a gimbal (or tripod), the need for in-body stabilization is negated tremendously, and you can use a wider angle lens (e.g. the 15-35, or adapted 11-24) if the crop is too much for your composition requirements. Of course, if you have a use-case where you need professional 4k video footage wider than 24mm (the market for this is extremely thin), you'd probably be shooting with EOS-C line with PL mount lenses (or non-Canon equivalent) anyway... and for everything else, for the purposes of ticking the "shoots with 4k" box... DJI Osmo, iPhone, Android, etc... all tick that box.

Personally I very rarely shoot video with my stills cameras these days, unless I have a specific composition that is only achievable through my EF glass, and even then, I really hate it, because I don't carry around a DSLR gimbal with me on vacation. At best I have a tripod or platypod. For vast majority of my personal video requirements, the DJI Osmo Mobile (using my iPhone) or Pocket are good enough.

I am seriously considering buying the RP to replace my M5 as my second body (my primary body is 5D4), along with the RF 24-70 f/2.8L IS to replace my damaged EF 24-70 f/2.8L I. Half-tempted to get the RF 15-35 f/2.8L IS as well for my astrophotography interests, despite just buying the EF 16-35 f/2.8L III a few months ago. Will wait for reviews on that one. Regardless, once the prosumer (e.g. 5D equivalent) R body is available, I plan on making the full switch to RF, much to my wife's chagrin.

I'm not crazy about ibis either, most of the time I use a Ronin S for gimbal work, 11-24 is 3300 euros, that is not a reasonable option for me. As far as professional 4K video, I don't need "professional", but when I'm shooting a conference/wedding/small promo or something like that some people ask about 4K, and I feel that I might be losing certain jobs because of it.

It doesn't have to be the same device, but let me ask you a question, for the footage to have a quality look in most lightning conditions, a full frame sensor is a must. And is there a full frame device cheaper then a DSLR / mirrorless with interchangable lenses?

 

[Larsskv]

You have already asked that and I answered.

Please answer my questions. What did you prove wrong? Where did I back peddle? Quotes please.

That proves my point. There aren’t any Sony lenses that matches any of the RF lenses, and that is where you were wrong.

 

[knight427]

Beautiful pelican! Sharing one of mine! (77D, 55-250 IS STM, f5.0, ISO-100, 1/160, 200mm)

Oh, we're doing pelican photos here?

Apologies in advance to AlanF for using his photo w/o permission

 

[Jack Douglas]

Absolutely without a doubt landing pelican images are very far from the most challenging BIF photography.... LOL... Also without a doubt, the "R" is not the optimal BIF camera even with a "proper" BIF lens and no TC. While AF is quick and excellent (as good as XYZ) with a fast lens, no TC, in decent light, and you do get AF all over the sensor, you are still hobbled by the 5fps frame rate. For very fast subjects, the 7D2 eats it alive and even more so, the 1DX2. I have both and would not give up either for an "R" a this point.

My only point was to illustrate that on the "R", AF works sensor-wide with any lens/TC combination at any aperture and it works acceptably enough to even use for some BIF. On most high-end dSLRs, you get center spot from 5.6 to 8 and nothing past 8..... This is way better. For static subjects, AF even at tiny apertures is as accurate as the R's AF ever is... IOW, very.

If having acceptable AF capability at small apertures matters to you at some level..... I would certainly consider it for that as well as it's other attributes. Personally I have 4 issues with the "R" Canon would need to solve before I spend money on this. See my previous posts for what they are. Yes, my current dSLRs are heavier and bigger, but they do what I need done better than the "R" at this point in time and I can live without AF at small apertures.

Thanks for this. I'll search for your other comments. Too bad these threads are so full of time wasting insults. My thought is that this camera would be a good backup to the 1DX2 for sure and if I took it on a trip and not the 1DX2 it would be to conserve space and weight and in that case there would be no big white anyway, probably the biggest would be the 70-200 2.8, which I assume would work fine.

Jack