Canon EOS R8 specifications

[mikhail]

Sounds really promising. I can even live with the small battery, as this body is primarily for hiking for me. No IBIS - no problem. 1 card slot - no problem either.
But I do need a viewfinder!
I really hope that 'the new body design' refers to rangefinder style (something like XE on Fuji). If this would be the case - no brainer purchase for me.

 

[Del Paso]

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

It's hard to imagine Canon, having been the first company to drastically change the shape of DSLRs (EOS!), to turn back to retro design.
I can rather see them applying a "form follows function" concept than the opposite. I only hope it won't be about full touch screen controls using a plethora of sub-sub-sub menus.

 

[Del Paso]

The Pentax DSLR that Noah used to photograph the animals in his Ark had IBIS

Noah bitterly needed IBIS, since he was often drunk!

 

[Skux]

Sounds like the R6II-lite and a pretty exciting proposition.

Thoughts:
- no will be no rear dial, like the RP
- there will be an EVF
- no IBIS is fine at this price point considering the other features. Either buy a gimbal or get the R6II if you want stabilisation, or just hold the camera steady lol
- LP-E17 battery is a given, however this does not necessarily mean awful RP-esque battery life, Digic X and a sensor made for mirrorless could be more efficient

 

[hobbodanno]

I really like what Sony has done with the a7C, and I’ve been wishing Canon offer something similar. Had the a7C been released 6 months earlier when I bought my R, I probably would’ve gone the Sony route.

If the rumors of no IBIS are true, then that’s a bummer. I don’t care about the video stuff, and dual card slots aren’t a huge deal for me either. If the R8 ends up the size of a a7C with FF, IBIS, and a viewfinder, I’m sold!

 

[Sporgon]

Ahh, I thought it was just rough seas

 

[Exploreshootshare]

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.

Sony only puts IBIS in all cameras because they lack IS in their lenses. There are so many stabilized lenses (EF and RF) that you basically don't need IBIS as well. And if makes the camera smaller, there is even a benefit to not having IBIS.

 

[mikhail]

Sony only puts IBIS in all cameras because they lack IS in their lenses. There are so many stabilized lenses (EF and RF) that you basically don't need IBIS as well. And if makes the camera smaller, there is even a benefit to not having IBIS.

Lack of IBIS can benefit to the price and to the battery life. Rumoured MSRP for R8 is 300$ less compared to current Sony A7C. I can easily accept this tradeoff: 50g less and 300$ cheaper.

 

[knight427]

Sorry man, I would see quite the opposite, if I shoot 6/8 hours and then I'm up to 4am posting pics, I had to be paid, and to be paid a lot Lot LOt LOT of money

I get it. But for me, photography is a hobby and I shoot only what I want, when I want. Nobody made me spray 7k frames in one evening. My kids were involved in this event so I was excited to give other parents some great photos along the way. This event is the primary fundraiser to help support this school activity (which both my kids are a part of). I knew I made a huge mistake taking so many and my choices were to just forget it and go to bed not delivering the photos I promised or to suck it up and finish my self-elected task.

A friend asked me to do something similar for an event she helps organize for her kid. I had to hold back the laughter when I found a polite way to say no thanks.

 

[smooviescontent]

That would be great but I'm afraid Canon for many years is keeping the same scheme about naming their cameras. For example 6D, 5D -> R6, R5 then 7D -> R7, R10 -> 10D (and it followed until 90D) etc. So I feel that R50 will follow M50 style of camera with newer tech ofc. R8 from the other hand is a new addition in the line up. It should be better than R10 but not better than R7 which is apsc size sensor. It would be strange for R8 to be ff body when R7 is Apsc. I hope I'm wrong ofc!

I was thinking that originally, but I'm starting to think that this is canon's shot at the A7c and soon to be a7cii from Sony. Essentially put the main 2500 main camera into a smaller form factor. I would've thought maybe just call it the rp2 or R_ with another letter though.

 

[smooviescontent]

Lack of IBIS can benefit to the price and to the battery life. Rumoured MSRP for R8 is 300$ less compared to current Sony A7C. I can easily accept this tradeoff: 50g less and 300$ cheaper.

I was thinking the same thing, this is their shot at the A7c

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Lack of IBIS can benefit to the price and to the battery life. Rumoured MSRP for R8 is 300$ less compared to current Sony A7C. I can easily accept this tradeoff: 50g less and 300$ cheaper.

I use the Canon EOS R and I actually don't miss IBIS at all. Most lenses have IS and that is efficient enough. I'd take the trade-off "less-weight-lower-price-no-IBIS" in a heartbeat.
I just wanted to say with my post: with Sony, missing IBIS usually means missing IS/IBIS altogether, therefore Sony needs to put IBIS in cameras. Canon does not have to that.

 

[mb66energy]

Maybe a good imager for "old" image stabilized EF 16-35 4.0 for landscape/architecture photo plus video in tiny spaces! Good for macro work and general video from a tripod if you need thin DOF. Maybe a good companion to the R7 for my scenario of a tele system (R7 + 100-400) and good UW system (R8 + 16-35) and unbeatable compactness/lightweightness with RF 1.8 35. Yeah, will think about it!

 

[Czardoom]

I'm curious, how many folks complaining about the possibility of no IBIS actually have lenses with no IS?

If your lenses have IS, you do understand that IBIS is not necessary...or don't you?

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Also, broken IBIS units are one of the more common reasons camera need be sent in to get repaired. Furthermore, when your IBIS is broken, you can't take any pics. If the IS unit in the lens is broken, you can just turn IS off and it usually works. If not, just change the lens and enjoy your shoot with a different focal length.
Broken IBIS happened to a friend of mine on vacation...really sucks... T
The info provided came from a service member of a photo store. It is probably one of the reasons why Canon took forever to put IBIS in cameras.

 

[yankiefrankie]

Sony only puts IBIS in all cameras because they lack IS in their lenses. There are so many stabilized lenses (EF and RF) that you basically don't need IBIS as well. And if makes the camera smaller, there is even a benefit to not having IBIS.

With all due respect, this is a flawed argument. You can make the same case that Canon only puts IS in its short focal length lenses, because many of its cameras lack IBIS. IMHO IBIS is always better than no IBIS. I have lenses I use on my R3 that would be far less useful without IBIS. Sony put IBIS in the A7C, and it is smaller than the RP. Granted the A7C IBIS is not that great for video, but it is extremely useful for stills.

 

[yankiefrankie]

WOW, I am amazed at all the comments that argue that lack of IBIS is somehow a FEATURE!

 

[Exploreshootshare]

With all due respect, this is a flawed argument. You can make the same case that Canon only puts IS in its short focal length lenses, because many of its cameras lack IBIS. IMHO IBIS is always better than no IBIS. I have lenses I use on my R3 that would be far less useful without IBIS.

The RF 100-500mm has IS, as do the 600mm and 800mm lenses. So it's definitely not only in short focal length lenses...

Sony put IBIS in the A7C, and it is smaller than the RP. Granted the A7C IBIS is not that great for video, but it is extremely useful for stills.

True, I didn't know the A7C is even smaller. This part of my argument is flawed. But the main statement still stands: Canon does not to put IBIS in every camera because a lot of lenses have IS.

 

[mikhail]

I was thinking that originally, but I'm starting to think that this is canon's shot at the A7c and soon to be a7cii from Sony. Essentially put the main 2500 main camera into a smaller form factor. I would've thought maybe just call it the rp2 or R_ with another letter though.

I think the mess with the naming is because different teams were involved in this process at different stages. First they wanted some letter abbreviations (R, RP). Then they decided to revive 'classic' SLR names: R3, R5, R6 and then R7. And now they realize that they are somewhat stuck with the naming shceme and they need space to maneuver introducing more specialized bodies. So now they would seamingly have R6ff, R7apsc and R8 again ff. Like what makes R7 more advanced camera comparing to R8? Dual card slots and IBIS? I would personaly make Rx - all FF cameras and Rx0 - crop sensor. So, R7 should be better named as R50 (apsc version of R5), R10 -> R60 (apsc version of R6) etc.
But what is done cannot be undone. So better be prepared for even more bizzare namings from Canon to come

 

[bbasiaga]

I think the mess with the naming is because different teams were involved in this process at different stages. First they wanted some letter abbreviations (R, RP). Then they decided to revive 'classic' SLR names: R3, R5, R6 and then R7. And now they realize that they are somewhat stuck with the naming shceme and they need space to maneuver introducing more specialized bodies. So now they would seamingly have R6ff, R7apsc and R8 again ff. Like what makes R7 more advanced camera comparing to R8? Dual card slots and IBIS? I would personaly make Rx - all FF cameras and Rx0 - crop sensor. So, R7 should be better named as R50 (apsc version of R5), R10 -> R60 (apsc version of R6) etc.
But what is done cannot be undone. So better be prepared for even more bizzare namings from Canon to come

Canon's naming convention is so crippled, I'm switching to Sony.



-Brian