Interview: Canon execs talk EOS RP with Imaging Resource

degos

EOS RP
Mar 20, 2015
201
123
My hit rate of pictures of my daughter running around inside, using large aperture lenses, is so much better with the EOS R than my former 1DXII, that I had a hard time getting over it.
Part of that is probably the technology, and part is probably because you're pointing a camera that weighs 600 grams versus 1530...
 

Larsskv

EOS 7D MK II
Jun 12, 2015
770
192
Part of that is probably the technology, and part is probably because you're pointing a camera that weighs 600 grams versus 1530...
It is 100 percent the camera. The weight of the 1DXII helps with stability.

The bottom line here is that mirrorless is better in many situations, DSLRs are better in others. EVFs are better in some situations, OVFs are better in others.

A competent photographer will get amazing results from either, but will often need to use different approaches to get there. I am happy to have both DSLRs and mirrorless.
 

zonoskar

EOS M50
Aug 29, 2018
39
46
Sadly they didn't ask why no DPAF in 4k. I would be nice to know it is a sensor limitation, or Canon deemed it too costly for a $1299 camera to have.
 

Hector1970

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 22, 2012
1,094
272
It's always hard with these interviews as to whether they really say what's going on or a plausible well rehearsed story for the public. I'm surprised Canon are so far away from a professional camera. I thought they would be targeting early 2020 for the Olympics with it. It maybe that they didn't change course early enough and felt DSLR's would remain king for longer than they think now. This year they've made a big push to mirrorless but made the two easiest full frame cameras they could make. The next easiest would be a high MP equivalent of the 5DSR.
I'd have thought Canon would have been working on full frame cameras even before Sony hit the market with one but may be they waited to see how that was going and judge whether that was a threat.
I'm not sure which part of a Pro camera causes them to have difficulties. You would think a mirrorless equivalent of a 1DX II would have been possible around now. Mirrorless would allow them to have a faster FPS but they could have kept everything else similar. World class focusing on a mirrorless must be more difficult than expected for them. I guess they stake their reputation on their flagship camera and are conservative about rushing it.
They've made a smart near term move with the RP.
It will be interesting if they can built on it with a new flagship camera in the next 12 months.
 
  • Like
Reactions: max_sr

Stuart

Hi, Welcome from an ePhotozine fan, & 6D user.
Jul 22, 2010
286
48
London & Woking
www.ephotozine.com
If apodization is easy to apply, then could they also do it on glass in the EF to RF adapter as they did with the polarisation filter?
Could they also do it on an teleconvertor - make a nifty 50 into an 80mm with apodization !
 

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,357
746
If apodization is easy to apply, then could they also do it on glass in the EF to RF adapter as they did with the polarisation filter?
Could they also do it on an teleconvertor - make a nifty 50 into an 80mm with apodization !
It needs to be applied to the surfaces nearest to the diaphragm, otherwise it's not apodization but vignetting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stuart

tiggy@mac.com

Pentax K-1000
Jan 20, 2014
498
185
Thetford, VT
www.ForestMetrix.com
The problem for Canon is that other companies have figured out the pro mirrorless world well enough to cause new photographers, considering their first system investment, to forgo Canon as an option. And what makes this launch of the R series particularly confusing, is that while Canon now says that it has not quite figured out the pro body, it is selling, and announced the sale, of a lot of pro lenses. Who is buying the R or RP and putting $2000 glass on these cameras?
Yeah, it's confusing unless you conjecture that Canon couldn't produce the camera it wanted due to tech constraints, but is planning on doing so in the future.

As a result, I find myself in a funny situation. Recognizing that there is now extreme price pressure in the market, especially for old mount glass and bodies, I've started to sell off a very significant swath of my lenses and bodies to capture back the capital before the prices sink too much (if you watch eBay, they're starting to go down rapidly, also encouraged by retailers and lens manufactures pushing deals to blow out inventory too. Trust me, it's hard to sell a Sigma 85 Art used for the normal used price when Sigma starts selling it for $50 less new). I pre-ordered the R; bought the 50 1.2. So, a week from today I'll have 7 fewer lenses, 3 fewer bodies (a couple were old beaters), and a $2k lens that I can't fit onto a camera that I actually own yet. Funny times. But necessary to preserve the resale value of the collection.

I expect it to be likely that I will have to go for some time with just the RP using some of my new glass, with just one EF body using the few EF lenses I kept, until the pro body comes - which I don't necessarily expect in 2019. It also preserves my ability to throw that capital into a new system if that looks to be necessary. Because of the likelihood of that pro body being a 2020 affair, I'm open minded to things like Panasonic and the new Sigma L mount. Panasonic's SL1 would look pretty good, if Sigma had already come out with its L mount glass. When that happens, probably about the same time Sony is on the Mark IV cycle of its A7R series, things will be interesting.
 

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,357
746
I wonder if it smooths the entire image, or just the OOF background?
If it is an apodization filter, It does not smooth image, it makes the aperture variably transparent, darkening the the borders of out-of-focus circles.

It is also possible to make a lens that does the same without losing light, but it won't be symmetrical. If you use such a design to make pleasant bokeh for far field OOF, you will get donut-shaped near field OOF, and vice versa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stuart

Mort

EOS M50
Jun 28, 2013
25
7
www.facebook.com
One thing that I feel like no one has talked about is this helping fund the R&D/engineering costs for the Pro level camera. Everyone is assuming that Canon will sell a boatload of these things, and despite all the criticism, the R seems to have sold a bunch too. All of those sales will help with the R&D costs.

As an example of what I'm talking about, look at Porsche. Their 911 is their flagship, but the money makers for the company are their relatively cheaper SUV's. The Macan was by far their best selling car. All of those sales have given Porsche the freedom to make a lot of really special models that they otherwise weren't able before.

Hopefully that will be the same with Canon. Sell a bunch of R's and RP's to help fund the R&D to make the really good and competitive PRO or Halo cameras. Crossing my fingers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeenThere

Bundu

EOS T7i
Nov 24, 2014
72
28
South Africa
The problem for Canon is that other companies have figured out the pro mirrorless world well enough to cause new photographers, considering their first system investment, to forgo Canon as an option. And what makes this launch of the R series particularly confusing, is that while Canon now says that it has not quite figured out the pro body, it is selling, and announced the sale, of a lot of pro lenses. Who is buying the R or RP and putting $2000 glass on these cameras?
I have used $12 000 glass on an EOS 1000d just last weekend. Just for the heck of it. And to my suprise the photos were stunning! Really stunning. Ok, the light was good and it is no pro full frame with ultra fast focusing and tracking but the point is the photos were really great! A $11 750 difference between body and lens. I bought the R and use my $1 500 to $12 000 lenses it. It works fine. And sometimes even great. The R cannot replace my 7dii but I am happy. But then again I am not the sharpest of the human race!!!!!
 

Trey T

EOS 80D
Feb 6, 2019
109
55
RP=EOS-M + Rebel + FF

I predict that the sales will be extremely low for pro use, simply it’s best at nothing. you tubers will love this camera
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
599
217
Sadly they didn't ask why no DPAF in 4k. I would be nice to know it is a sensor limitation, or Canon deemed it too costly for a $1299 camera to have.
It has been asked for the M50 in the past already, and it is likely that they would have given pretty much the same answer as to 1080p 24p (or silent mode, only automatic or manual 4k video modes, etc.): "That's the best we can do at this price point."
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
599
217
RP=EOS-M + Rebel + FF

I predict that the sales will be extremely low for pro use, simply it’s best at nothing. you tubers will love this camera
Good for them, better chance of selling more "Pro" models which are more expensive ;)
But it is still their only choice if they want the smallest possible FF camera (for street for instance) that happens to work perfectly with cheap and small EF glass and it is also not expensive, so it even has appeal for them (but they are also encouraged to go for the more advanced R instead)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Trey T

crazyrunner33

EOS RP
Nov 4, 2011
265
80
Sadly they didn't ask why no DPAF in 4k. I would be nice to know it is a sensor limitation, or Canon deemed it too costly for a $1299 camera to have.
I assume heat was the issue. Canon's sensor and processor tech is pretty old compared to Fuji and Panasonic who can debayer 6k to 4k in a small package with no issue. Canon admitted before that the crop on the other cameras was to reduce heat(and probably rolling shutter). Some have said that Canon told them in interviews that the RP was limited to 24p in 4k due to heat.

I can understand those hardware limitations, but the real head scratcher is why remove 1080 24fps, limit EF-S lenses to 4K and 720(no 1080) and removal of most exposure modes from the video modes?
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
599
217
I can understand those hardware limitations, but the real head scratcher is why remove 1080 24fps, limit EF-S lenses to 4K and 720(no 1080) and removal of most exposure modes from the video modes?
If the 4k DPAF is a hardware limitation (which I don't think based on their M50 interview) in that case, no EF-S 1080p can also be explained with hardware, it would be downsampled from the cropped 4k image (just like the EOS R), and that coupled with an IPB codec, is more processing intensive than just writing it in 4k and compressing that straight away. They don't have a separate line-skipped 1080p crop mode (why would they, get an M50, it would be much better than the RP for that, but 720p is also a waste of programming time)

Actually, apart from the A7S series in up to 1080p 30p, I think all Sony cameras have line-skipped 1080p video (which is also much weaker) they only downscale to 4k and not 1080p.


The EOS RP does still have a fast UHS-II SD interface, so it could certainly be hacked to provide more high-end video stuff, but a fairly new processor with the new CR3 Raw format, I really don't think it will go anywhere, while this is still relevant.
Compressed Raw option is actually very good here, but no M50 hack in sight to have anything from the past as a solid base.
There are some promises for the EOS R...we'll see I guess...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: crazyrunner33

chik0240

I'm New Here
Dec 31, 2016
24
4
I just do not see the appeal of the R. I had one on loan for a month and really tried to like it as a light weight companion to my 5D Mark IV. I returned the R, bought a Sony A7RIII as my mirrorless lightweight, along with a Sigma MC11 adapter, to use my Canon glass when I want the mirrorless body.

I truly found nothing redeeming in the R. It lacks every feature I want in a good mirrorless camera, from IBIS to useful 4K video features and a joystick for my focus points. How about the simple ability to turn off the back screen when I don't need it. I could perhaps forgive the lack of 2 card slots, if, like Nikon, they put a next generation card in the camera. They did none of this. It's low light performance was terrible compared not only to the great low light performance of the Sony 7 RIII, but even my 5D Mark IV.

I scratch my head that as a 1DX2 user, you would truly choose the R if you needed to buy a replacement body today.
Tried the R at some local camera store, the evf still feels disconnected to the reality maybe due to the artificial lighting that I see flickering with evf.

And for low light performance I always believe with same sensor tech a dslr will always be better, as you don’t get the heat noise build up when always in live view high gain for the EVF use, I rarely shoot astrophotograph but when I occasionally do, the amount of long exposure noise is significant compared to normal night shots
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
599
217
Tried the R at some local camera store, the evf still feels disconnected to the reality maybe due to the artificial lighting that I see flickering with evf.

And for low light performance I always believe with same sensor tech a dslr will always be better, as you don’t get the heat noise build up when always in live view high gain for the EVF use, I rarely shoot astrophotograph but when I occasionally do, the amount of long exposure noise is significant compared to normal night shots
I do somewhat agree on the EVF, but really don't see any difference in noise if I use the 6DII in Live-View of full-DSLR mode, so I guess the latter is not significant maybe because for view mode, not all of the pixels are utilized unlike with a long exposure which collects information from the whole sensor so there is a definite increase of noise there.