Real world review: Canon EOS R by Fro

mirage

EOS RP
Jul 31, 2018
297
111
But back on topic: If Canon had launched the RF system with lenses like a 24-70mm f/3.5-5.6, 50mm f/2.8 STM, the message would have been received by me as "We did a FF mirrorless like you asked, with some mediocre lenses, now go away".
yes, possibly. but only to a few people primarily concerned with "perception, brand image, bragging rights, bling factor" etc.

but vast majority of potential customers are much more interested in "bang for the buck".

given the fact that Canon was not able yet to release a "pro-grade"'EOS R body (equivalent in performance to 5DSR II or 1DX III) but only a "mirrorfree 6D III" it would have been smarter to offer it at an "attractive 6D-class price", lower than A7 III and Z6, eg 1699,- along with an RF 24-105/3.5-5.6 IS STM (equivalent to EF non-L) in kit for 1999.

plus a few RF lenses not more expensive than equivalent EF glass -eg
RF 16-35/4.0 IS STM
RF 24-70/4.0 IS STM
RF 24/2.8 IS STM
RF 35/1.8 NOT macro (useless anyways)
RF 50/1.8 IS STM
RF 100/2.0 IS STM
...
then Canon would be scrambling to meet demand and fill an avalanche of orders. Entry barrier to move into R system much lower and more enticing to more enthusiasts as well as pros willing to "try out the new platform with limited commitment first, rather than having to go all-in".

Canon could then still have launched some of their "pink unicorn lens fancies" in 2019 along with an EOS R1 ("flagship") and R5 (hi rez) bodies once those are ready to go. Second massive wave of "buzz". More orders and more excitement for R eco-system.

would have made a lot more (business) sense to me.

but ofc "Canon is #1, Canon knows better, Canon knows best, Canon is infallible". :)
 

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
3,874
429
I disagree, the EOS R is by far the body that has been underestimated the worst ever... I can live very happily with it and the crazy glass released made it even more attractive.

The thing is I get more and better than my 1dx2 for 60% less money, which makes it possible to have that awesome glass and still have a superb body, for a lot less money...

A stroke of genius from Canons part again imo...
 
Last edited:
Reactions: YuengLinger

Mbell75

I'm New Here
Oct 21, 2018
22
7
I think the point is that Canon is committed to making more cost effective lenses for the R as well as the high end ones.. The initial line-up was more to demonstrate what is possible with the new standard.
More waiting for reasonably priced RF lenses, more waiting for a real FF camera,,,its about to be 2019. How long are canon users supposed to wait? No wonder so many have switched to other systems. Its going to be at least another 2 years before Canon has a decent RF lineup and a quality body. But hey, maybe when Canon does their usual 3 year incremental update, they will throw their peasants a bone and let them finally have full 4k video with the EOS Rii in 2022...
 

snappy604

EOS RP
Jan 25, 2017
238
101
More waiting for reasonably priced RF lenses, more waiting for a real FF camera,,,its about to be 2019. How long are canon users supposed to wait? No wonder so many have switched to other systems. Its going to be at least another 2 years before Canon has a decent RF lineup and a quality body. But hey, maybe when Canon does their usual 3 year incremental update, they will throw their peasants a bone and let them finally have full 4k video with the EOS Rii in 2022...

I have to admit I feel frustrated by Canon's offerrings for the last decade.. the 5d followed by the 5d MkII was revolutionary when it happened... then they went on a decade of slow, small incremental polishing/evolution. Holding on and milking their SLR share. I get it, I felt frustrated by it and have expressed it previously.

But I have to disagree with this as a slow 'throw the peasants a bone' release. The body was decent.. weirdly backwards in some ways, but they made a significant long term commitment to a new format.. a huge number of people have an investment in the EOS system and you have to be damn careful as a rapid transition can sink loyalty quickly.

Putting out 3 high end lenses + 1 more entry level is hardly slow and shows a long term commitment to a very significant change they made. I don't recall Sony mirrorless on their first iteration having good lens support. In a sense this is revolutionary and shows a lot of potential.. shame the body feels...rushed. Its almost like they underspecified the CPU and data buses to handle the new deluge of data produced by the new standard. They will catch up, I have no doubt.. but they were late to the game, so a bit of patience is warranted.

I'm already tempted by their release... but waiting to see what comes next (seems like they have a fair bit in dev already).
 

Mbell75

I'm New Here
Oct 21, 2018
22
7
I have to admit I feel frustrated by Canon's offerrings for the last decade.. the 5d followed by the 5d MkII was revolutionary when it happened... then they went on a decade of slow, small incremental polishing/evolution. Holding on and milking their SLR share. I get it, I felt frustrated by it and have expressed it previously.

But I have to disagree with this as a slow 'throw the peasants a bone' release. The body was decent.. weirdly backwards in some ways, but they made a significant long term commitment to a new format.. a huge number of people have an investment in the EOS system and you have to be damn careful as a rapid transition can sink loyalty quickly.

Putting out 3 high end lenses + 1 more entry level is hardly slow and shows a long term commitment to a very significant change they made. I don't recall Sony mirrorless on their first iteration having good lens support. In a sense this is revolutionary and shows a lot of potential.. shame the body feels...rushed. Its almost like they underspecified the CPU and data buses to handle the new deluge of data produced by the new standard. They will catch up, I have no doubt.. but they were late to the game, so a bit of patience is warranted.

I'm already tempted by their release... but waiting to see what comes next (seems like they have a fair bit in dev already).
Good points and I agree the EOS R feels rushed, I think they were caught off guard by the Nikon release and weren't planning on releasing theirs until next year. However. still no excuse for it to be lacking so many features the competition has for hundreds of dollars less. I dont think Canon has the ability to catch up when it comes to bodies. Sony is far superior when it comes to sensors, Canon has several issues that really hinder things like fps and DR. They just dont have the tech to compete with Sony there and lets face it, its their awesome lenses that have always been their bread and butter.
 

koenkooi

EOS RP
Feb 25, 2015
232
87
Good points and I agree the EOS R feels rushed, I think they were caught off guard by the Nikon release and weren't planning on releasing theirs until next year.[..]
I have the impression they moved up the launch of the R by a few months (for whatever reasons), which is why not all RF lenses are available yet and Canon was so adamant about both new firmware coming out soon(TM) and which changes it would have.

I don't have a good guess for when the original launch was planned, late November would enable it to profit from the western holiday buying craze, but the firmware being scheduled for early next year would move it closer to your guess.
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
527
178
I disagree, the EOS R is by far the body that has been underestimated the worst ever... I can live very happily with it and the crazy glass released made it even more attractive.

The thing is I get more and better than my 1dx2 for 60% less money, which makes it possible to have that awesome glass and still have a superb body, for a lot less money...

A stroke of genius from Canons part again imo...
It is what it is, it shouldn't be declared as the greatest (it will be far from that even if they do some firmware fixes), and it shouldn't be loathed either.
1DX II is a very different camera to so it shouldn't be compared like that. Even Canon admits that for predictive AF it lags way behind their DSLR cameras. Video is also severely lacking in comparison (even if it is a much newer camera) despite some of the new goodies like external 10-bit with C-Log.
 
Mar 14, 2012
2,241
135
I have the impression they moved up the launch of the R by a few months (for whatever reasons), which is why not all RF lenses are available yet and Canon was so adamant about both new firmware coming out soon(TM) and which changes it would have.

I don't have a good guess for when the original launch was planned, late November would enable it to profit from the western holiday buying craze, but the firmware being scheduled for early next year would move it closer to your guess.
I think it was launched close to when they intended to launch it. You don't just manufacture thousands of units to sit in warehouses and incur costs without getting revenue in return, and Canon tends to have less inventory availability issues than Nikon because it is able to manufacture more.

Sure, there can be delays as they bring the launch lenses to market, so 4 were announced but only three are currently available. And acknowledging a firmware fix to address eyeAF is smart because it gives them time to get it right and to test it properly without delaying the launch. The fact that the R system is available staunches losing switches to Sony. People can see what the RF system can bring (50, 28-70, etc), and that is a good start to build a system around. I'm ok with them having the fastest glass without IS, but if Canon is able to get the f/2.8 zooms (16-35, 24-70, 70-200) with IS, then IBIS is less important. And if Canon delivers a body with IBIS, then IBIS + IS > Sony IBIS because Sony's G master 16-35 and 24-70 do not have OSS.
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
527
178
I think it was launched close to when they intended to launch it. You don't just manufacture thousands of units to sit in warehouses and incur costs without getting revenue in return, and Canon tends to have less inventory availability issues than Nikon because it is able to manufacture more.
Agreed, companies are adjusting to each other far less than most people think.

Sure, there can be delays as they bring the launch lenses to market, so 4 were announced but only three are currently available. And acknowledging a firmware fix to address eyeAF is smart because it gives them time to get it right and to test it properly without delaying the launch. The fact that the R system is available staunches losing switches to Sony. People can see what the RF system can bring (50, 28-70, etc), and that is a good start to build a system around. I'm ok with them having the fastest glass without IS, but if Canon is able to get the f/2.8 zooms (16-35, 24-70, 70-200) with IS, then IBIS is less important. And if Canon delivers a body with IBIS, then IBIS + IS > Sony IBIS because Sony's G master 16-35 and 24-70 do not have OSS.
That's far too conclusive, by the time Canon comes out with the next generation and IBIS, a 24-70 2.8 OSS can also be added to Sony's lineup. Just because they have more lenses does not mean that development will stop or that it will only focus on telephoto lenses.
From the patents, I don't think the RF 16-35 2.8 will have IS like the 24-70 2.8, but we'll see.
 

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
3,874
429
It is what it is, it shouldn't be declared as the greatest (it will be far from that even if they do some firmware fixes), and it shouldn't be loathed either.
1DX II is a very different camera to so it shouldn't be compared like that. Even Canon admits that for predictive AF it lags way behind their DSLR cameras. Video is also severely lacking in comparison (even if it is a much newer camera) despite some of the new goodies like external 10-bit with C-Log.
How much have you used it?
 
Mar 14, 2012
2,241
135
Agreed, companies are adjusting to each other far less than most people think.



That's far too conclusive, by the time Canon comes out with the next generation and IBIS, a 24-70 2.8 OSS can also be added to Sony's lineup. Just because they have more lenses does not mean that development will stop or that it will only focus on telephoto lenses.
From the patents, I don't think the RF 16-35 2.8 will have IS like the 24-70 2.8, but we'll see.
Except that although Sony's GM lineup is larger than RF, it is still much smaller than EF. there are other gaps that are higher priorities than a 24-70 OSS. The fact that EF can work as well on RF as it does on EF bodies gives Canon time to transition. Look at all the Sony GMs -- they're fighting the last war. 16-35/24-70/100-400/400mm prime. Those are all targeted at Nikon/Canon F/EF counterparts. Canon just moved the bar with 28-70 f/2 and 50 f/1.2. Those are designs that might not be practical/producible on the FE mount.
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
527
178
Except that although Sony's GM lineup is larger than RF, it is still much smaller than EF. there are other gaps that are higher priorities than a 24-70 OSS. The fact that EF can work as well on RF as it does on EF bodies gives Canon time to transition. Look at all the Sony GMs -- they're fighting the last war. 16-35/24-70/100-400/400mm prime. Those are all targeted at Nikon/Canon F/EF counterparts. Canon just moved the bar with 28-70 f/2 and 50 f/1.2. Those are designs that might not be practical/producible on the FE mount.
A patent for the 28-70 f/2 does exist. But if they decide to do it, they can just wait until they come up with even bigger (more expensive) camera bodies to handle the weight a bit better.
Again, these are things that we don't really know, so it is too early to judge.
Using bigger EF lenses have the same problem as Sony did when adopting early (but to a lesser degree). The camera body is too small and light for them and the weight is pushed more forward.
 

zim

EOR R
Oct 18, 2011
1,863
53
Hi, I think you may want to re-watch the video, please spell my name right Jared. The guy sitting in the chair had nothing to do with AF and everything to do with attempting to fill up the buffer. Second, "word is canon marketing has been throwing..." cool, show some examples or proof of this, i'd love to see that information. You imagine they are putting the screws to us? Where do you get this information, so uninformed and flat out WRONG. You have no idea what goes into doing what we do, so stop trying to saying everything is a "puff" piece or we must be getting paid.

You know what it costs me to create this real world review in man hours? You have no clue what it takes to run this FREE service, so please get informed before spreading false information.
Welcome to the mad house! :eek:
Keep calm and carry on shooting RAW :D
 
Reactions: stevelee