Canon EOS R8 specifications

[photophil]

I don't know how or why Sony can use a 2280 mAh battery in the same physical size as the RP's.

It just doesn't make any damn sense.
Compels me though

I used to carry two extra batteries and only needed both if the battery that was in the RP was close to being dead already, so my complaints are only half-hearted.

For a future LP-E17 camera I would get two of these, charge them with a power bank as needed, and just leave the original battery at home.

 

[knight427]

At that weight, it does seem likely that it will use the LP-E17, not the LP-E6

I was hoping the R8 would be as originally rumored, an APS-C camera between the R10 and R7, and that it would have an M6II-like form factor. Had that been the case, it would have replaced the M6II my walkaround/backup camera for travel (on family trips, I typically carry an M with a few lenses during the day with family, then go out solo in the early morning/late evening with a FF camera).

The current R8 specs have me considering the R8 as the 'main' camera. My travel shooting with FF is typically on a tripod, so I don't need the speed of the R3. For me, if the R8 uses the LP-E17 that would be an advantage for travel because it would share batteries with the M6II.

There is a lot of consensus in this thread. For those interested in this camera independent of anything else, the smaller battery is either non-issue or part of the benefit to make the camera smaller. For the multi-camera customers, the battery sharing issue is more important. Interesting that you might be able to share batteries between the R8 and M6II but not share lenses (OK, not totally true with adapters, but then you lose some of the small form factor benefits).

 

[mpb001]

No IBIS?
And such a slow kit lens? And, referring to the B&H price list, as expensive as the R7?
Yet, I still expect some good surprises to justify these "negatives" , form factor, video features etc...

i don’t like that it has no IBIS. I have a 5DIV. have shot with Canon for over 20 years. I wanted to go mirrorless with an affordable mirrorless with IBIS. Nikon did it with the Z5. Canon could have put IBIS in the R8 but crippled it.
Unfortunately, I will now end my mirrorless search with Canon.

I will probably rent a Sony who puts IBIS in all FF cameras. i can use my EF lenses with Sony.
Nikon is a third choice but then I would need Nikon glass.

 

[HikeBike]

These rumored specs are very close to what I expect. However, if true, I'm quite surprised by the over-sampled 4K 60 and the 40 FPS. I was thinking it would be straight-up 4K 60 and 20 FPS.

 

[knight427]

i don’t like that it has no IBIS. I have a 5DIV. have shot with Canon for over 20 years. I wanted to go mirrorless with an affordable mirrorless with IBIS. Nikon did it with the Z5. Canon could have put IBIS in the R8 but crippled it.
Unfortunately, I will now end my mirrorless search with Canon.

I will probably rent a Sony who puts IBIS in all FF cameras. i can use my EF lenses with Sony.
Nikon is a third choice but then I would need Nikon glass.

Canon put arguably the world's best AF system in a FF camera that shoots 40 fps for $1500. I can understand that those things maybe aren't your top priorities, but calling back to the dark days of the real Canon cripple hammer over these specs is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[Del Paso]

i don’t like that it has no IBIS. I have a 5DIV. have shot with Canon for over 20 years. I wanted to go mirrorless with an affordable mirrorless with IBIS. Nikon did it with the Z5. Canon could have put IBIS in the R8 but crippled it.
Unfortunately, I will now end my mirrorless search with Canon.

I will probably rent a Sony who puts IBIS in all FF cameras. i can use my EF lenses with Sony.
Nikon is a third choice but then I would need Nikon glass.

I understand your wanting a camera with IBIS. Instead of a Sony, lacking perfect EF compatibility, why not get an R6, R6II, R7?
I'd never sacrifice ergonomics and compatibility, EF lenses are sometimes problematic when used on Sony (AF...).
Buying a Sony to use EF lenses is kind of strange, when EOS R alternatives are available...

 

[Derek13]

Viewfinder !!!
I can not to buy any camera without it
I it must have !!!
I am videographer who pass c70 , because lack of viewfinder .
For still is even more important to have it .

 

[neuroanatomist]

There is a lot of consensus in this thread. For those interested in this camera independent of anything else, the smaller battery is either non-issue or part of the benefit to make the camera smaller. For the multi-camera customers, the battery sharing issue is more important. Interesting that you might be able to share batteries between the R8 and M6II but not share lenses (OK, not totally true with adapters, but then you lose some of the small form factor benefits).

Indeed, and that's why I was hoping the R8 would be an M6II replacement since that would serve as a true backup camera. Most of my lenses are RF (the exceptions for travel would be the EF 11-24/4 and the TS-E 17). Still, for my travel needs an APS-C backup to a FF body is not a great option anyway. Most of my travel is urban and I'm on the wide end of the focal length range. Mounting lenses like the 14-35 or TS-E 17 on a crop body reduces their utility for me.

Instead, I think of them as separate, parallel systems. For the M6II, I use the M11-22 and M18-150 (and I bring the M22/2 for occasional indoor use) and that whole kit fits in a small bag or more commonly in separate small cases in a larger backpack with other stuff for the family (water, snacks, sunscreen, etc.) when I'm walking around cities with family during the day. When going out solo at golden/blue hours, I bring the FF kit in a dedicated backpack with a tripod. In that case, sharing batteries would be about the best overlap anyway.

 

[sryan]

My hope is that the R50 will be an M50 or M6II RF camera, and that the R8 will be a direct competitor with the Sony A7c and maybe have a smallish integrated viewfinder. We'll see.

 

[HikeBike]

New form factor does not mean no viewfinder. I really, really, really...REALLY do not think Canon will omit a viewfinder on any of their "single digit" R cameras.

 

[Blue Zurich]

Again and again, folx want specs in a new release from a higher tier body at a lower price point simply because time marches on. If I had a nickel for every post on CR where the cripple hammer whine was combined with the personal price point plea, I could buy an R3.

 

[Del Paso]

I did an event recently with my R6 (LP-E6NH) where I shot just over 7,000 frames in about 6 hours and had 50% of my battery left. I'm not sure CIPA is relevant to anything. Perhaps it's proportionally correct, but it's so far off from reality even that seems unlikely.

Fully agree!
Leica M 240 Cipa rating:
- about 750 (if I remember well)
Real life: -
- hiking , sporadically shooting 280 max, continuous shooting 1800 max.
To me, Cipa seems as relevant and realistic as the official gas consumption of hybrid cars (Porsche 700 HP Panamera sports: 2,8l/100 km...)

 

[neuroanatomist]

My hope is that the R50 will be an M50 or M6II RF camera

I suspect the R50 will be the M50 III with an RF mount, which is exactly what the name suggests.

Personally, such a camera is not useful to me absent an RF-S UWA zoom.

 

[photophil]

@neuroanatomist what would be your go-to lenses for a compact R8? Would you be getting any of the STM primes?

 

[blackcoffee17]

You can't put a large battery into a small camera. The fact that you don't understand this means that you have learned nothing. The fact that over the years you continue to criticize the battery means that you have absolutely no idea what is important in a camera. Everybody else seems to undersrtand that the battery is of almost no consequence because you can carry extras if you are planning on a long day of shooting.

How can the A7C have a big battery then? Twice the capacity of the RPs in a similar or even smaller body? Sony even managed to fit IBIS.

 

[John Wilde]

It's highly unlikely, but it would be fun if the new form factor was a pretty retro camera.

 

[neuroanatomist]

@neuroanatomist what would be your go-to lenses for a compact R8? Would you be getting any of the STM primes?

I'd just swap the R8 for the R3 for my travel kit. Lenses would be the same – RF 14-35/4, RF 24-105/4, RF 100-400, and the adapted EF 11-24/4 and TS-E 17.

 

[entoman]

No IBIS?

In *some* situations IBIS can be useful, e.g. if you are using an unstabilised lens, but IMO it's overrated. At focal lengths of 85mm or longer, the vast majority of stabilisation is done by the lens. Canon have always maintained that this is the case, and their OIS is extremely good. IBIS probably only increases efficiency by about 1 stop in my experience, although clearly it will vary from person to person depending on their personal steadiness. IBIS is most effective with wideangles, but ironically camera-shake is always minimal with such lenses - most people should be able to hand-hold with an unstabilised 24mm at 1/15 quite easily. So unless you habitually shoot in low light situations without a tripod, don't worry about the absence of IBIS.

 

[entoman]

They sound too good to be true.

While I can easily imagine this camera without IBIS, EVF, weather sealing and LP-E6 battery, I highly doubt they’d put the same sensor as the R6 Mark II in it, while allowing it to achieve the same 40fps, having C-log3, and having the same autofocus.

I’d expect a lower tier sensor.

I agree that the low price and alleged weight probably rule out IBIS, EVF, weather sealing and LP-E6, and I'll be very surprised if there is any truth to the 40fps claim. The autofocus will probably be as good as R6ii and R7, as it's largely firmware dependent, and Canon would be unwise to launch a camera with AF that couldn't match competition from Sony.

Regarding the sensor, I think it's logical and commonsense from Canon's manufacturing perspective to use any particular sensor in several camera bodies, as it saves development, tooling and production costs. So I'd expect either the 24MP from the R6ii or the older but still excellent 30MP from the R and 5DMkiv. I think Canon's logic would be to use the 24MP, as it's more up to date and in practice produces images as good or better than the 30MP one.

 

[amorse]

At that weight, it does seem likely that it will use the LP-E17, not the LP-E6

I was hoping the R8 would be as originally rumored, an APS-C camera between the R10 and R7, and that it would have an M6II-like form factor. Had that been the case, it would have replaced the M6II my walkaround/backup camera for travel (on family trips, I typically carry an M with a few lenses during the day with family, then go out solo in the early morning/late evening with a FF camera).

The current R8 specs have me considering the R8 as the 'main' camera. My travel shooting with FF is typically on a tripod, so I don't need the speed of the R3. For me, if the R8 uses the LP-E17 that would be an advantage for travel because it would share batteries with the M6II.

I can see that - for me, I've been waiting to replace my 5DIV for ages and will likely replace with an R5 or higher resolution option (if and when obviously). Most of my shooting is while camping, and it's 95% on a tripod. I've wanted a secondary body for a while, as long as it could be as light and cross compatible with the main camera as possible.