Canon EOS RP Specifications & Images

[YnR]

No. I don't understand why people constantly come here to talk of another brand offering everything they want or need, but never switching if that is the case. The camera is a tool. Buy the tool you say you want or need. If people seriously think they'll get a clone of brand X in a Canon... well, I just think that's silly. Ain't gonna happen. Ever. Your present 60D is far outclassed by any of Canon's FF offerings. If that isn't apparent and the Sony checks all the boxes for you, then why not the Sony? Hoping Canon releases your individual dream camera is a pipe dream.

I’m not jumping ship. This is a hobby for me. I love tech toys, in general, but I don’t see the value in going from one brand to another given my position in the photo world. Overall, I like Canon a lot as a brand. I like how aggressive they are with their lens development, and I wish they would share that same energy with their bodies. The last year has really shown some great lens releases but the bodies have been mostly meh. For the RP, I’m not asking for weather sealing, higher FPS, insane autofocus speeds or even eye AF. In fact, I prefer to not see them on the RP to keep the costs and weight down. I’ve only mentioned Sony’s A73 as a marker for what you can get at a price point. Granted I don’t ever expect Canon to offer all of the A73’s features at that price, but it can’t be ignored.

Also, I’m very aware all of the current Canon offerings outclass my current body but again the cost:value isn’t there for me. I’ve really resisted getting a FF camera the last few years, so I can get wider angles and also to start making larger prints. However, just b.c I want a better body and a better body is available doesn’t mean I should feel compelled to buy it.

Wanting a better sensor instead of one that’s 2 years old really isn’t that much to ask for or expect in a brand new product. Maybe you shouldn’t expect everyone to be such a diehard fan of everything Canon releases and that unpopular products (a sensor in this case) that get re-released are going to remain unpopular. The RP looks almost perfect on paper (I don’t like the AF-on button position but could live with it) except for the possibility of the 6D2 sensor being employed and would pre-order it, if the sensor were improved. That is all. I’m not going to re-emphasize this point any further but hope you can at least understand that perspective or more importantly hope Canon can.

 

[YnR]

The biggest problem many people dont understand or at least acknowlodge here, since this is a forum dedicated to one brand is the time=progression when it comes to technology. If something is new we expect it to be better than what came before it. I see a lot of excuses and sales "figures" and other stuff . Simply put if a consumer buys something that is brand new many expect it should be better ( and possibly smaller) than a past model. If not the price should just be much lower than what it derived from. With Canon we dont really get that. There are more side grades than upgrades until a significant amount of time goes by in technology standards. Here is the idea simplified anything released 2020>2019>2018>2017>2016 etc. I dont see how peopel get so defensive about that criticism. Do you not want to get more for your money if possible unless you collect profit from the money being saved....

Damn, this a million times over. I’ve been trying to get this point across but someone on this forum in particular refuses to accept this as a reasonable expectation. I’d “like” your comment 5x if I could.

 

[transpo1]

I have the R and can confirm it's weather-resistant as far as I can tell. I had it out in a heavy snow storm with the 24-105 for 2.5 hours and it worked perfectly the entire time. It was literally covered in wet snow and kept on truckin', and keeps on today.

The scroll wheel is a question I wish I could answer. If the R had that and dual card slots it would best the 5D4 in every way. It already is better in most relevant ways, which is why I chose it when replacing my 5D3. The lower cost was just icing on the cake.

Good to know! I wonder if the RP will have the same weather resistance...

 

[transpo1]

If Sony can put a dial on the rear of the A7xxx bodies, why should Canon not be able to do so on the larger Rx bodies? It's just another feature (or lack thereof) to differentiate between the EOS R and the 5DIV, like frames per second, dual card slots, the position of the AF-on button, the lack of a joystick and so on. In my opinion the whole EOS camera body ecosystem just got more differentiated and more confusing with the positioning of the R and Rp.

Good point! I do agree that this is Canon differentiating the lower-end prosumer R models from their prosumer DSLR line.

I suspect they will save the scroll wheel for their first $4000 plus, pro-level R model.

 

[Ozarker]

Wanting a better sensor instead of one that’s 2 years old really isn’t that much to ask for or expect in a brand new product. Maybe you shouldn’t expect everyone to be such a diehard fan of everything Canon releases and that unpopular products (a sensor in this case) that get re-released are going to remain unpopular.

Well, I don't consider a two year old product to be "old", nor does one expect people to be diehard fans of everything Canon releases. lol. I also don't understand where one would get the idea that the 6D II is "unpopular".

The problem is the spec sheet measurbating and pixel peeping people do, and the criticisms they make without having taken the time to even run down to the camera shop and even hold a product they have offhandedly judged to be old, recycled, and unpopular. This is also just a hobby for me. However, I am not wound so tight that I consider something two years old, to be old. Nor, without any hard data or actual evidence, do I declare something unpopular just because I don't like it. Why? Because I am not so arrogant to think that because I like a "Ford" that "Chevy" should produce the same thing because that is what I want... except with a "Ford" badge.

A camera is a tool. How one uses it is going to determine whether or not the photo is any good.

 

[Don Haines]

Damn, this a million times over. I’ve been trying to get this point across but someone on this forum in particular refuses to accept this as a reasonable expectation. I’d “like” your comment 5x if I could.

Part of the problem is that sometimes you have an update where a bunch of things gets better, a few things get worse, and people fixate on what got worse. This has occurred when pixel count goes up and individual pixel performance goes down, and when a crop video mode disappears from an update (or is added).

You can't make everyone happy.

 

[Bentley Boy]

Good to know! I wonder if the RP will have the same weather resistance...

I doubt it, as it's likely the "Rebel" equivalent with a full frame. However, we won't know until we know!

And even though my R is battle-tested, it's not something I would have done if planned. We got caught off guard by a freak snow storm while shooting Christmas lights a local preserve. I wasn't about to pack up and quit, so we stayed the course and took our chances. Shockingly, the weather reports were wrong!

 

[YnR]

Well, I don't consider a two year old product to be "old", nor does one expect people to be diehard fans of everything Canon releases. lol. I also don't understand where one would get the idea that the 6D II is "unpopular".

The problem is the spec sheet measurbating and pixel peeping people do and the criticisms they make without having taken the time to even run down to the camera shop even hold a product they have offhandedly judged to be old, recycled, and unpopular. This is also just a hobby for me. However, I am not wound so tight that I consider something two years old, to be old. Nor, without any hard data or actual evidence, do I declare something unpopular just because I don't like it. Why? Because I am not so arrogant to think that because I like a "Ford" that "Chevy" should produce the same thing because that is what I want... except with a "Ford" badge.

A camera is a tool. How one uses it is going to determine whether or not the photo is any good.

I’m not sure, but are you calling me arrogant? That’s a bit offensive. Your last statement is laughable considering you have the R and I’m with my 60D. Want to trade since you don’t need it?

 

[Ira Parker]

Pls do! and be happy with sony! You're never happy with anything about Canon

I'm an avid Canon user. I currently have a 5D Mark IV and well over $10k of glass. But truly, it feels like Canon - in the increasingly mirrorless age of cameras - is saying if you are serious about a mirrorless camera, look at Sony and now, increasingly, Nikon. The R is on so many levels a faulty camera. The reported new RP seems to be a downgrade from the R. I have been a loyal Canon user in the digital SLR age. It is becoming very difficult to remain so.

 

[Don Haines]

I’m not sure, but are you calling me arrogant? That’s a bit offensive. Your last statement is laughable considering you have the R and I’m with my 60D. Want to trade since you don’t need it?

You are still shooting with a 60D? That’s ancient! I have not used one of those since last fall

I still have mine, and I use it as my primary camera when kayaking. It is reasonably well sealed. I have been considering getting the Tamron 18-400 to go with it, as this gives me a one lens solution that should outperform any of the tiny sensored bridge or super zoom cameras, plus that lens is dock compatible so I am better protected from future changes.

 

[ThomsA]

Isn't it a tautology ("Behind-Sensor-Ibis-IBIS")?

Only if the IBIS is not illuminated.

 

[Ozarker]

I’m not sure, but are you calling me arrogant? That’s a bit offensive. Your last statement is laughable considering you have the R and I’m with my 60D. Want to trade since you don’t need it?

I do not have an R. What I have is listed below in my sig. I've not called you arrogant.

 

[AlanF]

You are still shooting with a 60D? That’s ancient! I have not used one of those since last fall

I still have mine, and I use it as my primary camera when kayaking. It is reasonably well sealed. I have been considering getting the Tamron 18-400 to go with it, as this gives me a one lens solution that should outperform any of the tiny sensored bridge or super zoom cameras, plus that lens is dock compatible so I am better protected from future changes.

I tried the 18-400, Don, three times. The first copy wasn't too bad at 400mm, but I passed. The next 2 were disasters. Should have bought the first. So, test before keeping.

 

[dak723]

It is my opinion only. If you think $2100 70-200 III is worth it over the affordable 70-200 II 2.8 kudo to you. I can deduct 70-200 2.8 III as a business expense but it just not worth my time selling and buying gears, and pay extra for it.

Here is lensrental review.



We have an awesome 70-200 2.8 II. We are very lucky in that sense.

Yes, lets look what what the competitor are charging to justify Canon's price for the new one without any significant improvement. If you have the money, go for it.

As for me, if there are no significant in performance, I'll skip it and buy the older generation for the exact performance. If you want the latest and have the mean for it, just buy whatever you want. I don't care.

This is my opinion, but I beleive people on forums totally misinterpret why Canon or any company comes out with a new version of a lens - especially a lens that is not that old. An "L" quality lens such as the Canon 70-200L will never see much if any optical improvement, so it is not marketed as an upgrade replacement for its predecessor. Nor was the 24-105 L II meant to be an upgrade for current 24-105 L users. These lenses are meant for NEW buyers. They are merely replacing an older model so that the lens can possibly be made cheaper, or perhaps lighter in weight, or perhaps with newer advances in coatings. Optics is not a new electronic technology - so you won't see much - if any advances. The fact that an owner of an "L" lens made in the past 15 years will actually buy a newer version of the same lens will be a bonus for Canon, but the number of upgraders must be small.

In fact, as has been pointed out so many times it is hard to understand why folks don't comprehend it, but sensors and digital cameras have gotten to the point where they are a mature technology with little room for improvement from one generation to the next. My guess is that many - if not most - camera users skip at least one and maybe two generations between camera purchases. Forum users are likely not the typical buyer and are not the target consumer. So every time someone complains that the newer model is only a small incremental upgrade, the obvious answer is - yes, that is the way it has been for the past 15 years and will become even more so since the technology has become more and more mature.

Again, these are my opinions.

 

[Kit.]

I'm an avid Canon user. I currently have a 5D Mark IV and well over $10k of glass. But truly, it feels like Canon - in the increasingly mirrorless age of cameras - is saying if you are serious about a mirrorless camera, look at Sony and now, increasingly, Nikon. The R is on so many levels a faulty camera. The reported new RP seems to be a downgrade from the R. I have been a loyal Canon user in the digital SLR age. It is becoming very difficult to remain so.

Why? Do your camera and lenses not work for you?

Then why did you buy them?

Personally, I would prefer Canon (or Sony, or Nikon, or whoever) to test all that novel stuff on a camera I would not buy.

 

[amorse]

This is my opinion, but I beleive people on forums totally misinterpret why Canon or any company comes out with a new version of a lens - especially a lens that is not that old. An "L" quality lens such as the Canon 70-200L will never see much if any optical improvement, so it is not marketed as an upgrade replacement for its predecessor. Nor was the 24-105 L II meant to be an upgrade for current 24-105 L users. These lenses are meant for NEW buyers. They are merely replacing an older model so that the lens can possibly be made cheaper, or perhaps lighter in weight, or perhaps with newer advances in coatings. Optics is not a new electronic technology - so you won't see much - if any advances. The fact that an owner of an "L" lens made in the past 15 years will actually buy a newer version of the same lens will be a bonus for Canon, but the number of upgraders must be small.

In fact, as has been pointed out so many times it is hard to understand why folks don't comprehend it, but sensors and digital cameras have gotten to the point where they are a mature technology with little room for improvement from one generation to the next. My guess is that many - if not most - camera users skip at least one and maybe two generations between camera purchases. Forum users are likely not the typical buyer and are not the target consumer. So every time someone complains that the newer model is only a small incremental upgrade, the obvious answer is - yes, that is the way it has been for the past 15 years and will become even more so since the technology has become more and more mature.

Again, these are my opinions.

Back in June when the 70-200 f/2.8 III was announced and loads of people felt frustrated that it was an incremental upgrade, I made the suggestion in this forum that maybe Canon was just performing a minor upgrade on this lens because they could have a significant R&D burden behind the scenes if they were creating a new mount with several "bread and butter" lenses to go with it. At the time, the rumours said that a mirrorless camera was coming, and there would be an "eloquent" solution to the EF mount conundrum - so it seemed possible that if a new mount was coming then Canon's team could be taxed with building a lot of lenses at the time. My thinking was why would Canon invest substantially in a lens which is already a much beloved product when they can make small upgrades to it to keep it on the same refresh cycle while investing in the big splash coming? Who knows if that was Canon's motivation here, but it is seems to still be a possibility.

Bottom line, the 70-200 II was great already, and instead of pumping R&D into a product which is plenty good enough, Canon may have pumped resources into the RF lenses available now, AND the 5 more lenses rumoured to be coming next week. If that was Canon's thinking, it seems like the right choice, because as someone looking at the RF mount I'd gladly take a stable of ~9 lenses within 4 months of release rather than a bigger update to an already great lens!

This came off much more "I told you so" than I intended (sorry) - I just wanted to note that if Canon prioritized RF lens design over 70-200 III design, I'm a big fan of that choice.

 

[bokehmon22]

I'm an avid Canon user. I currently have a 5D Mark IV and well over $10k of glass. But truly, it feels like Canon - in the increasingly mirrorless age of cameras - is saying if you are serious about a mirrorless camera, look at Sony and now, increasingly, Nikon. The R is on so many levels a faulty camera. The reported new RP seems to be a downgrade from the R. I have been a loyal Canon user in the digital SLR age. It is becoming very difficult to remain so.

The EOS RP is not meant for me or you. If you are looking for high res EVF, dual card slot, IBIS, fast eyeAF, you might have to wait for EOS Pro that's coming late 2019.

At the same time, if you value some of the intangibles like ergonomic, fully touch screen, articulate LCD, close shutter, control ring adapter that work flawless with you EF lens, you won't find it on a Sony. I tried all Sony A7III, A9, A7RIII and I didn't enjoy using it. Maybe the next model will have 5.6 million EVF and better ergonomic.

I would wait until EOS R Pro come out late 2019 and fully evaluate all the models from Panasonic, Sony, Canon and Nikon to see which one fit your needs. If it deliver what you need, get it. It's good that both Sony and Panasonic will take EF lens.

 

[Michael Clark]

You realize it was a lackluster camera back in 2017. It's 2019 now so it is even worse now by today's standards. It could the worst brand new full frame camera this year and beyond.

It was lackluster in one spec: DR at ISO 100. By ISO 400 there is no significant difference to most other FF cameras out there.

Those who love to constantly slam the 6D Mark II have obviously never used it in real world scenarios, but are just jumping on the bandwagon of YouTube clickbaiters.

 

[RayValdez360]

I've avoided this thread but it isn't people getting defensive. It is nothing new is being said. Canon has a history of being very conservative with upgrades and along with that reusing tweaked existing sensors. But reading a comment thread in a Canon rumors site with 1000's of comments that basically say "Canon sucks, Sony rocks" is tiresome.

It took me about 30 seconds of reading the leaked specs to know that the RP is not the camera to lure me to mirrorless away from my 1DX. That's fine. Not all products will be for me. I could either post repeatedly how I wish Canon would make the camera I want or I could get on with my life. Posting repeatedly would probably annoy those that are genuinely excited by what the RP will offer for the price point. They are here to talk about the rumors for this camera. Telling them that some yet-to-be-leaked camera that will cost 2-3x times as much will be better is just rude. Telling them that Canon sucks, will never make a good camera, and they should just sell everything for Sony is doubly rude.

I dont really see a lot of people saying canon sucks in this forum. I do see people acknowledging that Sony excels in some areas and people losing patience with Canon especially video shooters but a lot of people here have no empathy for video users. So those peopel come off very closed minded.
A lot of people say they dont need video but video is very important to a lot of us and it pays our bills as well.

 

[RayValdez360]

Do you base this on actual experience?

Here is my experience (I am only referencing cameras I actually own or owned):

From 7D to 7D II: 7D II is a significant upgrade in virtually every way.
From 70D to 80D (Wife's cameras); 80D is a significant improvement in image quality and in a number of other features.
From 5D III to 5D IV: Better image quality in terms of dynamic range, high ISO performance and resolution, autofocus is much improved.
100-400 I to 100-400 II: Noticeable improvement in sharpness, plus I was never that fond of push pull zooming (although my wife uses her 100-400 II as a push-pull which you can do if you want)
24-105 I to 24-105 II: Okay, in this case there really isn't much improvement I admit. Main advantage is the zoom creep is much better. I bought the II mostly because my old lens was getting long in the tooth.

Now, please, give me your experience with new models that you have actually purchased that you found not to be better than the old one you owned.

you realize i already mentioned that. those are like the mega upgrades that are like 4 years in between and in between those there are a lot of little cameras that come out within that 4 year period that are kinda wack. the ony one that might have been a fast upgrade was the 70d and 80d but that was after years of kinda the same stuff in the x0d line.