We’ve returned to the 26.2mp sensor in the EOS RP

[dak723]

I’m not misrepresenting anything. If you want to make that argument, I’ll make the claim, you’re not seeing the relevant scenario. Two years is plenty of time to either improve the current sensor, design a new sensor, or even purchase a 3rd party sensor. Canon says it’s mirrorless sales are only going to cannibalize their own DSLR sales. You know why? Because no one in their right mind starting from scratch would buy the RP if it has the 6DII sensor. Same reason why no one in the same boat would take 6DII over the A7R. You want new customers? Make a product worth investing in. It’s not the pre-digital age anymore where you can limp in with a lame body. It’s not just about lenses anymore. The market isn’t growing so every company has to fight over the same pie to get a bigger slice. If the company wants to garner new customers, they need a new product. Rehashing two year old sensors isn’t the way. So yes, two years is old.

There have been virtually no noticeable improvements in sensors for the past two generations of anyone's cameras. Why you think that companies can suddenly change the laws of physics is unknown. Sensors are pretty much at their best limit, and have been for far more than two years - and wont change much unless totally different technology is developed.

Plus, we are discussing a budget level FF camera - and yet you somehow think that Canon can afford to put a newly designed top-of-the-line sensor in it. If you are among those that wants Canon's best sensor in a mirrorless camera, then the R is already available.

Your proclamation that "no one in their right mind would buy the RP if it has the 6DII sensor," is not only moronic, but also insulting to those of us will indeed consider buying this camera. Experienced photographers have indeed chosen the 6dII over the Sony A7RIII - not because they are somehow stupid, but because they are not so stupid as to think specs actually tell you what makes a good camera. Some folks value ergonomics, color, the articulating screen, the better touch screen and the overall better AF. Not everyone is stuck on the idea that you have to have the maximum DR, and DR is the be-all and end-all when it comes to IQ. Each person should buy the camera that suits their needs, if the camera doesn''t suit yours, then just say so without all the rediculous and insulting proclamations.

 

[Antono Refa]

Is outselling the competition in any relation with technology, its capabilities, and advancements. Long time ago I was an Amiga user. It was outsold by Windows, which dragged entire world 10-15 years back.

That's capitalism for you. Corporations are in it for profit, not progress.

While corporations like DEC & Apple charged a premium for their superior technology (I know, I worked on OpenVMS and MS Windows 95 at the same time), MS competed on price, even making it easy for users to use the products without paying. Fast forward 20 years, Microsoft rules the market, the Macintosh is a niche market, and DEC was bankrupted.

 

[Don Haines]

There have been virtually no noticeable improvements in sensors for the past two generations of anyone's cameras. Why you think that companies can suddenly change the laws of physics is unknown. Sensors are pretty much at their best limit, and have been for far more than two years - and wont change much unless totally different technology is developed.

Plus, we are discussing a budget level FF camera - and yet you somehow think that Canon can afford to put a newly designed top-of-the-line sensor in it. If you are among those that wants Canon's best sensor in a mirrorless camera, then the R is already available.

Your proclamation that "no one in their right mind would buy the RP if it has the 6DII sensor," is not only moronic, but also insulting to those of us will indeed consider buying this camera. Experienced photographers have indeed chosen the 6dII over the Sony A7RIII - not because they are somehow stupid, but because they are not so stupid as to think specs actually tell you what makes a good camera. Some folks value ergonomics, color, the articulating screen, the better touch screen and the overall better AF. Not everyone is stuck on the idea that you have to have the maximum DR, and DR is the be-all and end-all when it comes to IQ. Each person should buy the camera that suits their needs, if the camera doesn''t suit yours, then just say so without all the rediculous and insulting proclamations.

The quantum efficiency of sensors is typically in the mid 80% range for everyone. This means that as far as signal gathering goes, we are within a third of a stop from perfection...... not a lot of room to grow! The only place to make real gains is either to reduce read noise with massively parallel a/d converters on chip, or to come up with a new technology that counts photons individually.

However you slice it, there is only so much light, and to get better sensor performance you need more of it.

For the immediate future, advances in computing power will mean more to the world of cameras than any tweaking of sensors. Look at the latest from Olympus and Panasonic! My bet for an upcoming high end R model will be at least quad digic processors

 

[koenkooi]

[..]My bet for an upcoming high end R model will be at least quad digic processors

In the past Canon has also used faster clocked versions of existing digics, so the high end R could also have 2 digic 9+ processors instead. Thinking about it some more, the dual models had one digic for AF and another "the rest". With no seperate AF sensor and what seems to be a bottleneck on sensor readout, I wonder if adding more processors actually helps.

 

[3kramd5]

Apple charged a premium for their superior technology (I know, I worked on OpenVMS and MS Windows 95 at the same time), MS competed on price, even making it easy for users to use the products without paying. Fast forward 20 years, Microsoft rules the market, the Macintosh is a niche market,

Their business models were a lot more different than premium versus budget. Apple sold (and still does) hardware, Microsoft sold software that would work on almost any computer system.

 

[Antono Refa]

Their business models were a lot more different than premium versus budget.

Apple's business models turned the Macintosh into a niche product, that nowadays runs on the same hardware as MS-Windows.

What's you point?

 

[stevelee]

Apple's business models turned the Macintosh into a niche product, that nowadays runs on the same hardware as MS-Windows.

What's you point?

And Apple became, at least for a while, the most valuable company in the world. Macs seem to be everywhere you turn, so it is a pretty good-sized niche.

 

[Talys]

Their business models were a lot more different than premium versus budget. Apple sold (and still does) hardware, Microsoft sold software that would work on almost any computer system.

They're both worth over 800 billion dollars, now, so I think that that however they got there their founders can be pretty happy about that

 

[Antono Refa]

And Apple became, at least for a while, the most valuable company in the world.

Due to the success of products other than the Mac, e.g. the iPhone, which is outside the scope of the current discussion.

Macs seem to be everywhere you turn, so it is a pretty good-sized niche.

I'm a software engineer for >20 years, and worked on a variety of platforms - Apple II, MS DOS, IBM MF & AS/400, MPX on Gould computers, OpenVMS, HPUX, AIX, and MS Windows. A previous employer (a U.S. corporation, >4,000 employees) had a product developed initially on Mac, ported to Windows, than dropped Mac support due to lack of profit. My current employer is the first company I ever saw to use Macs and develop software for it.

Point being, I'm not seeing Macs everywhere I turn.

 

[Viggo]

Is outselling the competition in any relation with technology, its capabilities, and advancements. Long time ago I was an Amiga user. It was outsold by Windows, which dragged entire world 10-15 years back.

I still have fully working A501 (you know, 1mb extra memory) and an A1200, they are beautiful machines

 

[Viggo]

I’m running Lr and Ps on a 10 year old iMac, it works ridiculously well with those two programs. I had ten pc’s in 4 years prior to that, they never worked and constant babysitting. Now, tell me again how much more expensive Apple is

 

[takesome1]

I’m running Lr and Ps on a 10 year old iMac, it works ridiculously well with those two programs. I had ten pc’s in 4 years prior to that, they never worked and constant babysitting. Now, tell me again how much more expensive Apple is

Ten year ago not expensive at all considering I still have one running to.
But the versions they have been releasing lately not so much, the last one I bought, a $2500 MacBook Pro, is just an overpriced paper weight.
It did have the advantage of being then and lighter than my ASUS ROG laptop at half the money and twice the computing machine.

 

[highdesertmesa]

I will absolutely buy the RP. Having any Canon full frame sensor from the last few years in a small, light body not designed by masochists is going to be amazing. Unlike the R, the RP makes sense to me – it's purpose is clear and converges perfectly with its rumored price point. It will be my gateway to the RF glass and will hold me off until the 5DsR replacement arrives, at which point it becomes my second body.

I wish they had released the RP first, not because it makes any kind of marketing sense, but simply for selfish reasons: I would already own it and be shooting with RF glass.

 

[3kramd5]

Apple's business models turned the Macintosh into a niche product, that nowadays runs on the same hardware as MS-Windows.

What's you point?

My point is that this was a poor comparison to demonstrate the effect of premium versus value pricing. Their strategies and products were too different. It is like comparing an iPhone to the Android OS.

 

[stevelee]

Due to the success of products other than the Mac, e.g. the iPhone, which is outside the scope of the current discussion.

Yep, mostly, but the iPhone has boosted the whole ecosystem, camel nose under the tent, and all that. I know former Apple-hating families who got MacBooks after they started using iPhones and iPads. The current discussion ranged off into business models.

I'm a software engineer for >20 years, and worked on a variety of platforms - Apple II, MS DOS, IBM MF & AS/400, MPX on Gould computers, OpenVMS, HPUX, AIX, and MS Windows. A previous employer (a U.S. corporation, >4,000 employees) had a product developed initially on Mac, ported to Windows, than dropped Mac support due to lack of profit. My current employer is the first company I ever saw to use Macs and develop software for it.

Point being, I'm not seeing Macs everywhere I turn.

We turn different places. I live near a college campus.

 

[Talys]

I will absolutely buy the RP. Having any Canon full frame sensor from the last few years in a small, light body not designed by masochists is going to be amazing.

It's funny that you say that, because I think the same thing as mirrorless bodies roll out -- why do these people torture me with small bodies? Are they masochists?

It all comes down to what lens you want to mount. The R + adapter + 70-200 2.8 or 100-400L2 does not feel rightto me. Better than a gripless Sony with a similar size lens, but that's not really saying much. I prefer something at least the size of 80D, preferably the size of 6D, so it all just depends on what you want to mount onto the body.

I like choice though -- I think it's great that there will be different size bodies for different applications in R.

 

[delta0]

I expect the RP and 6D mk2 sensor is the same situation as the R and 5D mk4 sensor.

 

[Antono Refa]

My point is that this was a poor comparison to demonstrate the effect of premium versus value pricing. Their strategies and products were too different. It is like comparing an iPhone to the Android OS.

One still has to buy hardware, regardless of OS, so I think it's a good example.

 

[Antono Refa]

Yep, mostly, but the iPhone has boosted the whole ecosystem, camel nose under the tent, and all that. I know former Apple-hating families who got MacBooks after they started using iPhones and iPads. The current discussion ranged off into business models.

So now is Apple is king of two niches. Good for them.

We turn different places. I live near a college campus.

I spent half my career within walking distance of a college campus.

 

[Memirsbrunnr]

And Apple became, at least for a while, the most valuable company in the world. Macs seem to be everywhere you turn, so it is a pretty good-sized niche.

From a north american viewpoint.. Thew more sensible Europeans here never bought into the apple hype except for the artsy people (mainly artists and art history students) who are well known for having little technical and - business sense who buy apple for looks not being hindered by any hardware knowledge.