Canon releases an EOS RP w/RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 IS STM kit

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
8,212
967
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
Last edited by a moderator:

Codebunny

EOS RP
Sep 5, 2018
478
427
Looks like a good little setup. Makes you think Canon are done with crop if you can get a full frame and lens for $1399. f/7.1 seems a bit budget, but if the light is low at 105mm then even f/4 might not be able to save you. 1/15 shutter at ISO 3200(indoors) vs 1/50: both will get you a sharp shot handheld with IS.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: flip314

FamilyGuy

EOS 90D
Feb 5, 2020
115
167
That’s the same price as buying the body and the lens separately. Hope they throw something else in the kit. A penny more, in fact. Should be $1,299 or $1,349.

Disregard. Canon USA shows $1,299. Makes sense.
 

Aaron D

Hey!
Jul 21, 2016
205
188
Kansas City
www.aarondougherty.com
I really wanted to like this lens--I thought it would be a good alternative to lugging the f/2.8 around in travels. Less weight, and less to lose if it bangs into a train door. But I can't get past that f/7.1. Maybe therapy would help. It's not at all far from 6.8, but psychologically.....

I wish it were f/4-5.6. And 24-70 or 80 would have been plenty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ajfotofilmagem

picperfect

EOS 90D
Mar 29, 2020
112
92
I ask because I have made numerous award-winning, research-grade, science-oriented nature photos with my RP,
lol. for sure with some kit lens. lol. at f/7.1 lol. and you dure its a female butterfly? just asking. cant see the details. and now, monarch wing, take flight and buzz off.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: slclick
Feb 6, 2020
3
5
The first reaction to f/7.1is a slight recoil in horror— but this is more of an outside lens. I have the 24-105 EF-S for my 80D and it’s a great little all-purpose travel lens. The electronic stabilization is good for 2-3 stops and the RP does totally fine indoors at ISO3200.

funny how it seems the people who hate the EOS RP the most are those who don’t use it. people want to treat the RP like a red-headed stepchild— but it’s a fantastic little camera. True, you can’t recover 3 stops of shadows or highlights. Perhaps a cell phone is more your speed if you’re regularly blowing your exposure by 3 stops.
 

picperfect

EOS 90D
Mar 29, 2020
112
92
all EOS RP has is a re-used 6D II sensor that was already outclassed back when it first appeared. and it is still too big for what it is. it should be only slightly bigger than a Sigma fp, to accomodate an EVF and a LP-E6NH power pack instead of the sorry joke of a LP-E17.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: slclick

SteveC

R5
Sep 3, 2019
1,183
944
If you have $1000 to spend on a body, the RP looks like a pretty good choice to me !
It's pretty much my backup plan if the R5 turns out to be too expensive. Yeah, it's not nearly the camera, but for that price...I can deal with its shortcomings relative to the R5. I honestly think I will prefer it to the R6 (even at identical prices) from what I'm hearing.
 

derpderp

Pixel Peeper
Jan 31, 2020
149
178
It's pretty much my backup plan if the R5 turns out to be too expensive. Yeah, it's not nearly the camera, but for that price...I can deal with its shortcomings relative to the R5. I honestly think I will prefer it to the R6 (even at identical prices) from what I'm hearing.
The RP is a pretty good camera for the price. I've used it extensively. Don't try to take action photos with it though - the burst speed and AF is pretty trash.
 

jolyonralph

EOS R5 Mark II
Aug 25, 2015
1,308
641
London, UK
www.everyothershot.com
I really wanted to like this lens--I thought it would be a good alternative to lugging the f/2.8 around in travels. Less weight, and less to lose if it bangs into a train door. But I can't get past that f/7.1. Maybe therapy would help. It's not at all far from 6.8, but psychologically.....

I wish it were f/4-5.6. And 24-70 or 80 would have been plenty.
What about an RF 24-62 f/4-f5.6 ? or an RF 24-80 f/4-6.3 Would you prefer those? Because that's what this lens offers.

It's only f/7.1 from 80mm to 105mm. So if you don't want to use it you don't have to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aaron D and SteveC

jolyonralph

EOS R5 Mark II
Aug 25, 2015
1,308
641
London, UK
www.everyothershot.com
by the same logic, Aaron should have been referred to a 24-70 / F4 lens instead which is in my view is a reasonably solid advice.
Of course. But that's a more expensive option. As is the 24-105 f/4 or the 24-70 f/2.8 etc etc.

You get what you pay for. Right now the cheaper 24-105 does seem like a very good value introduction lens for those on a budget, and FAR better than the 24-240 which is nothing more than a heavy lump of disappointment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveC

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
2,263
1,108
Of course. But that's a more expensive option. As is the 24-105 f/4 or the 24-70 f/2.8 etc etc.

You get what you pay for. Right now the cheaper 24-105 does seem like a very good value introduction lens for those on a budget, and FAR better than the 24-240 which is nothing more than a heavy lump of disappointment.
i thought 24-70/4 would be priced similarly to 24-100/f4-xx . no?