RP going back, unopened

Feb 27, 2019
58
20
The R is a nice camera. The RP is.... less than even what I expected for the low price.

Mine's not due in until Monday, but the local Best Buy had one out to fondle. The viewfinder really doesn't cut it for me. Very hard to see with glasses, while I have no issue at all with the R.

Ah well.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,130
1,650
Canada
The R is a nice camera. The RP is.... less than even what I expected for the low price.

Mine's not due in until Monday, but the local Best Buy had one out to fondle. The viewfinder really doesn't cut it for me. Very hard to see with glasses, while I have no issue at all with the R.

Ah well.
Interesting......

What was it that you found so terrible? Was it the diopter adjustment? Brightness? Contrast? As someone with strong glasses, I am very curious.
 
Feb 27, 2019
58
20
The diopter adjustment was fine. Brightness/contrast maybe a little more "contrasty" than the R, but I'd have to A/B compare. Could have been the store lighting. Brightness was ok for the store at least. Had a LOT of trouble seeing the corners. With the 5DmkIII I can see the whole screen with my glasses on. This was very much not the case with the RP. With the RP, it was like my eye had to dance around under the shower to get wet (visually speaking). I'd be using the EVF better than half the time, as I tend to shoot in full daylight.

Canon once made a do-hickey for the 5DmkII that changed the viewfinder image, allowing a smaller but entire screen to be seen at once, and I've got one. Works ok, pretty well in fact. But, that won't do with the RP, as the detail on the screen is pretty small to begin with. I'm thinking I remember seeing an adjustment for on screen display sizes from reading the manual, but I could be confused on that. Either way, Canon doesn't offer that type of eyepiece correction for the RP (at least not right now).

There are other considerations too. Camera didn't "feel" all that great, but I could get used to that. Seemed too light... sort of toyish. I know the target market is those folks "moving up" to full frame, fully admit from shooting 5D series I'm used to having some heft in a camera. Like I said, that would grow to be something accustomed to.

The main reason I considered the RP was the smaller size. Even though the RF lenses seem very big, the bodies are not all that small actually. A little smaller than a 7D series, a lot bigger than an old Rebel XTi. Of course, those are crop sensor cameras too.

My hope was to be a bit more stealthy, with an 40/2.8 pancake and adapter (which is smaller, together, than the RF 35/1.8). I don't see being any significantly smaller with the RP over the R, and the R has features I really like - like the EVF is pretty nice, plus shutter over the sensor, same battery as my 5D series cameras (a plus since I travel a bit, don't need extra crap). All the rest is just vanilla vs chocolate to me, and I don't shoot all that much video - only very very occasionally some ten or fifteen second clips like old newsreel stuff.
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,478
713
Its not a $2200 camera or a $3600 one. Expecting the same features as a camera costing $1000 more is going to disappoint some. For me, a viewfinder is for composing a photo, and a evf is useless for evaluating the quality of the colors or brightness of the image.

I have the R, and don't like the quality of the image I see thru the EVF (as compared to my 5D MK IV), but for composing photos and seeing the settings, it works well.

My main question about a RP is how the quality of the images holds up, how are images compared to a 80D?

At the low end, its the image output that is the big concern.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Talys and Pape

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
381
225
i like about idea getting histogram to viewfinder :) i am not selfconfident enough to trust my exposures are right and need stop photographing to look back screen if its right :)
birds usually dont like that big movement.
but yeah view finder is more for composing ,auto focus should do focusing right ,trying see too sharp makes just eyes tired.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jethro

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,663
2,922
The R is a nice camera. The RP is.... less than even what I expected for the low price.

Mine's not due in until Monday, but the local Best Buy had one out to fondle. The viewfinder really doesn't cut it for me. Very hard to see with glasses, while I have no issue at all with the R.

Ah well.
At least you are sending it back unopened so the seller loses money only on the wasted postage. If you have a local store that stocks the camera, why not buy it from them? Support your local store.
 
Feb 27, 2019
58
20
Its not a $2200 camera or a $3600 one. Expecting the same features as a camera costing $1000 more is going to disappoint some. For me, a viewfinder is for composing a photo, and a evf is useless for evaluating the quality of the colors or brightness of the image.

My main question about a RP is how the quality of the images holds up, how are images compared to a 80D?
I think we're essentially in agreement. The EVF is ok enough, but for me with my glasses (about a 2.5 diopter), my nose maybe... heck I dunno... it just is hard to see the corners or side edges. Hard to see, hard to compose, no?

I had another question, thread someplace here, about the adjusted microlenses on either R or RP sensors, and their use with short focal length EF lenses. My concern is that the R and RP are "optimized" for RF lens backfocal distances, which would be most critical on lenses of under about 35mm or 50mm focal length. I have no doubt that is the case. But what I've yet to really dig into, is if the R or RP (and really, just the R at this point, since the RP is goin' back) are going to show some issues with my short focal length EF lenses. You really don't see much about that, but it seems a logical extension of Canon Japan saying what they did about optimizing the microlenses. I asked CUSA about it, and they beat around the bush, saying that the sensors were absolutely not the same as the 5D mkIV and 6D mkII regardless of microlens design. Maybe they didn't get the memo? Then instead of addressing possible EF lens quality issues on the R/RP sensors, the canned response of "EF lenses are fully operational on RF camera bodies with the adapter". Time will tell.... and not to waste too much more, back to the yard work, already in progress!
 
Feb 27, 2019
58
20
At least you are sending it back unopened so the seller loses money only on the wasted postage. If you have a local store that stocks the camera, why not buy it from them? Support your local store.
Because I have loyalties with both CUSA and B&H that go back to the early 1970s. Canon and B&H have both earned my business. And I would not open even the outer shipping box on for an item that I knew I wasn't going to keep.
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,663
2,922
Because I have loyalties with both CUSA and B&H that go back to the early 1970s. Canon and B&H have both earned my business. And I would not open even the outer shipping box on for an item that I knew I wasn't going to keep.
Nothing wrong with buying on line, it's often very convenient. But, handling the stock in the local store to make your decision on what to buy on line seems unfair to some of us and leads to city centres becoming devoid of shops.
 
  • Like
Reactions: briangus and Talys
Feb 27, 2019
58
20
Nothing wrong with buying on line, it's often very convenient. But, handling the stock in the local store to make your decision on what to buy on line seems unfair to some of us and leads to city centres becoming devoid of shops.
Simple logic would indicate that I obviously did not do that. If I had handled, examined, evaluated the wares locally, coming to the conclusion that "it wasn't right for me", why would I then order the item online after the handling, examination and evaluation only to return it?

Actually, I was in the store on Friday, getting some ear buds, had already pre-ordered the RP, was expecting delivery Monday, but just got curious. And, this particular Best Buy only had it with the RF 24-105L "kit" (at least on Friday afternoon).

All's well, I'm gonna pull the trigger on a second R tonite when B&H opens up online.
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,663
2,922
Simple logic would indicate that I obviously did not do that. If I had handled, examined, evaluated the wares locally, coming to the conclusion that "it wasn't right for me", why would I then order the item online after the handling, examination and evaluation only to return it?

Actually, I was in the store on Friday, getting some ear buds, had already pre-ordered the RP, was expecting delivery Monday, but just got curious. And, this particular Best Buy only had it with the RF 24-105L "kit" (at least on Friday afternoon).

All's well, I'm gonna pull the trigger on a second R tonite when B&H opens up online.
The logic is absolutely crystal clear - you made your decision not to buy based on your fondling of the camera in the Best Buy store and your disliking of the EVF. Is that not true?
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,130
1,650
Canada
I think we're essentially in agreement. The EVF is ok enough, but for me with my glasses (about a 2.5 diopter), my nose maybe... heck I dunno... it just is hard to see the corners or side edges. Hard to see, hard to compose, no?

I had another question, thread someplace here, about the adjusted microlenses on either R or RP sensors, and their use with short focal length EF lenses. My concern is that the R and RP are "optimized" for RF lens backfocal distances, which would be most critical on lenses of under about 35mm or 50mm focal length. I have no doubt that is the case. But what I've yet to really dig into, is if the R or RP (and really, just the R at this point, since the RP is goin' back) are going to show some issues with my short focal length EF lenses. You really don't see much about that, but it seems a logical extension of Canon Japan saying what they did about optimizing the microlenses. I asked CUSA about it, and they beat around the bush, saying that the sensors were absolutely not the same as the 5D mkIV and 6D mkII regardless of microlens design. Maybe they didn't get the memo? Then instead of addressing possible EF lens quality issues on the R/RP sensors, the canned response of "EF lenses are fully operational on RF camera bodies with the adapter". Time will tell.... and not to waste too much more, back to the yard work, already in progress!
My eyes are at 8 diopter, so when someone complains about how something works with glasses I listen!
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,478
713
My eyes are at 8 diopter, so when someone complains about how something works with glasses I listen!
Wow, I'd have likely given up on using a EVF, even with glasses, you are likely having a struggle. I have a shade that fits over the LCD on my 5D MK IV which makes it semi usable in sunlight and much easier to see everything than using my glasses thru the VF. Unfortunately, it does not fit on my R due to the eyepiece design, and likely the spacing of it to the LCD in any event. I do find the EVF usable, but am not in love with it, its barely functional, so if the RP is the same as Sony's, that may not be a good thing, but for the price, I'd try it. I have not been in to my local store to see the RP. They match B&H prices if they are less.
 

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
381
225
Ken Rockwell loves the viewfinder as well as the RP in general https://kenrockwell.com/canon/eos-r/rp.htm and prefers it to the R.
Yep it could work more smoothly when same digic 8 processor but only half of resolultion.
Less lag ,and faster wake up. +all other functions performed same time will be faster cause less processor use for wiefinder.
smaller fps and huge buffer gives processor better chanse work with viewfinder too.
I dont know anything about this matter,but i got feeling most of eye straining is lagging jerking viewfinder?
i never used any electric viewfinder
 
Last edited:

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,663
2,922
The evf of the RP seemed fine to me when I looked through it with the RF 24-105, which focussed very quickly. I use an evf with my Sony RX10IV and find it perfectly fine for short periods, but I have to use my binoculars for prolonged viewing of birds and animals whereas with my DSLRs I can dispense with the bins and use the camera as an approximately x8 scope. I'll take my 100-400mm II into the camera shop tomorrow to see how it performs on the RP for AF and image through the evf. I have a very good relationship with the store owner and staff and they don't mind me trying lenses and bodies as I do purchase from them and help them in other ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Talys and Pape

mangobutter

EOS 80D
Dec 11, 2014
103
17
www.e46mango.com
The diopter adjustment was fine. Brightness/contrast maybe a little more "contrasty" than the R, but I'd have to A/B compare. Could have been the store lighting. Brightness was ok for the store at least. Had a LOT of trouble seeing the corners. With the 5DmkIII I can see the whole screen with my glasses on. This was very much not the case with the RP. With the RP, it was like my eye had to dance around under the shower to get wet (visually speaking). I'd be using the EVF better than half the time, as I tend to shoot in full daylight.

Canon once made a do-hickey for the 5DmkII that changed the viewfinder image, allowing a smaller but entire screen to be seen at once, and I've got one. Works ok, pretty well in fact. But, that won't do with the RP, as the detail on the screen is pretty small to begin with. I'm thinking I remember seeing an adjustment for on screen display sizes from reading the manual, but I could be confused on that. Either way, Canon doesn't offer that type of eyepiece correction for the RP (at least not right now).

There are other considerations too. Camera didn't "feel" all that great, but I could get used to that. Seemed too light... sort of toyish. I know the target market is those folks "moving up" to full frame, fully admit from shooting 5D series I'm used to having some heft in a camera. Like I said, that would grow to be something accustomed to.

The main reason I considered the RP was the smaller size. Even though the RF lenses seem very big, the bodies are not all that small actually. A little smaller than a 7D series, a lot bigger than an old Rebel XTi. Of course, those are crop sensor cameras too.

My hope was to be a bit more stealthy, with an 40/2.8 pancake and adapter (which is smaller, together, than the RF 35/1.8). I don't see being any significantly smaller with the RP over the R, and the R has features I really like - like the EVF is pretty nice, plus shutter over the sensor, same battery as my 5D series cameras (a plus since I travel a bit, don't need extra crap). All the rest is just vanilla vs chocolate to me, and I don't shoot all that much video - only very very occasionally some ten or fifteen second clips like old newsreel stuff.
I know what you mean about stealth. The R can never be stealth. For that, I got a Fuji XT20. Very very powerful sensor in that thing... very. powerful. I actually ran some preliminary tests and found more detail with the XT20 sensor than the R sensor mounting my 16-35L w/ a focal reducer on the Fuji. Same shot, fuji had slightly more detail. Anyway going on a tangent here. My point is FF canon can't really be stealth.

I have the 40 2.8 on my R as well. with the adapter it makes the whole setup kinda big. Such a great lens though. really good 3D pop when used wide open.
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,663
2,922
I tried the RP today, wearing my glasses. The evf was quite acceptable and there were no problems whatsoever viewing the corners. I was using a 100-400mm with TCs. Not nearly as good as the ovf on my 5DSR, but perfectly useable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape