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

SteveC

R5
Sep 3, 2019
1,180
943
This reminds me of all the angst over the 100-500mm lens that is 7.1 at max focal length. Did anyone ever finally establish whether it really was 5.6 at 400mm (which would make the 400-500mm range just an add on not impairing the remainder)?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ruiloba

Rivermist

Mirrorless or bust.
Apr 27, 2019
49
80
Houston
The problem with this setup is that it is an RP.
Really? Admittedly it will not deliver 1D or 5Dmk4-R quality, but unless you have taken the time to actually use it for real photography, you may want to qualify your statement. Some people find the trade-off of relative quality (it is actually really quite good and holds up its own at higher ISO) for compactness and a highly versatile user experience is just what we need, and at a price point at which you can own 2 or 3 bodies to reduce lens changes. Try the built-in JPEG (which I had never done since my Digital Rebel in 2004), it does some very competent upgrading of the image (or correction of the lens and sensor if you prefer), which makes one re-think all the pre-conceived ideas one had about workflow and hardware after 15 years of DSLR. New system = new thinking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape

Rivermist

Mirrorless or bust.
Apr 27, 2019
49
80
Houston
What is the suitability of this combo for video production in a low-cost entry level scenario?
I would say "excellent". I use an RP with the 24-240 (even more versatile but more pricey too, image quality quite sufficient for video), AF face recognition is excellent, it has microphone and headset sockets and HDMI to a monitor if you need, I use a nifty $250 2.4 Mhz dual Lavalier microphone system and some LED lights, plus some expandable backdrops. The auto-level for sound is quite OK, no need for a mixer for simple applications.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wtlloyd

Rivermist

Mirrorless or bust.
Apr 27, 2019
49
80
Houston
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.
What are you talking about? Remember that in an EVF your are in constant LiveView, and with Expo Simulation, the image is always bright and easy to compose, not like a DSLR viewfinder. With live histograms you nail exposure pretty much every time, no need for review.
 

sanj

EOS R5
Jan 22, 2012
3,591
441
I bought RP with 24-240 for 1299 through Canon Price watch! Now I wait like a kid. It has been years since I had a decent camera after all my stuff was stolen! The Canadian Geese where I live have young ones and I can't wait. :)
 

Traveler

EOS R
Oct 6, 2019
30
54
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.
I repeat myself but this set seems to be an APSC "competitor". The 24-105mm f/4-7.1 would be equal to an APSC 15-65mm f/2.5-4.4 which doesn't look that bad for a kit lens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aaron D

lawny13

EOS M6 Mark II
Mar 6, 2019
76
57
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.
Eh. You can complain about it all you want but it is $1000 for an MILC FF camera. What else can beat it at that price point?

Let me guess the A7II. Well it does have better DR than the RP below ISO 500, I’ll give it that. However, I have owned it, and I would take the RP over it any day. Why? Cause the A7II is the most annoying little piece of gear I have ever owned. Slow, locks up if you take a few shots, ergonomics are bad, and you end up fighting camera way more than you should.

In short. Yes, the 6DII is out classes. But as far as I am concerned the RP is in a class it’s own cause there is no other competition for it in that price bracket. Except the A7II... if you want to call that completion
 

reefroamer

EOS M6 Mark II
Jun 21, 2014
82
106
Many posters whined when the inexpensive RP was released that there were nothing but but wildly expensive native RF lenses to go on it . Canon has begun responding to that criticism. Now, the critics whine that the inexpensive lenses and kits are not as good enough. Eye roll here. This RF kit is not for all of us, but it looks to me like a great value for its modestly-bankrolled target customers.
 

FamilyGuy

EOS 90D
Feb 5, 2020
115
167
Many posters whined when the inexpensive RP was released that there were nothing but but wildly expensive native RF lenses to go on it . Canon has begun responding to that criticism. Now, the critics whine that the inexpensive lenses and kits are not as good enough. Eye roll here. This RF kit is not for all of us, but it looks to me like a great value for its modestly-bankrolled target customers.
It’s not even about being modestly bankrolled. Many have plenty of means, just different priorities. I enjoy photography. I prefer more say in the outcomes than my phone offers. But over a grand or two each for lenses when I’m not making money with them can’t be justified over food, shelter, clothing, education, and transportation for five kids.
 
  • Like
Reactions: reefroamer

CanonFanBoy

Really O.K. Boomer
Jan 28, 2015
5,045
3,104
Irving, Texas
Many posters whined when the inexpensive RP was released that there were nothing but but wildly expensive native RF lenses to go on it . Canon has begun responding to that criticism. Now, the critics whine that the inexpensive lenses and kits are not as good enough. Eye roll here. This RF kit is not for all of us, but it looks to me like a great value for its modestly-bankrolled target customers.
Exacto mundo!
 

SteveC

R5
Sep 3, 2019
1,180
943
Perhaps what was hoped for was a sort of mid-grade lens. The EF L lenses weren't often such "God" lenses, like the R lenses were (should perhaps be called L+). The price point (and commensurate quality of course!) I expect people were hoping for was USD 1-2K instead of well over $2K.
 

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,599
459
S Florida
Perhaps what was hoped for was a sort of mid-grade lens. The EF L lenses weren't often such "God" lenses, like the R lenses were (should perhaps be called L+). The price point (and commensurate quality of course!) I expect people were hoping for was USD 1-2K instead of well over $2K.
Actually, only the two primes are priced noticeably higher than their previous EF versions. The 28-70 is a unique lens with nothing to compare to. The RF 24-70 f/2.8 had the same release price as the EF 24-70 II and it has IS. The RF70-200 is also the same. The RF 15-35 is higher, but it is also 1 mm wider and has IS and is optically superior to its EF counterpart (vignetting notwithstanding). I picked up the 24-105 f/4L and the RF35 f/1.8 for what I consider to be very fair prices. I am currently waiting for the RF f/4L versions of the 15-35 and the 70-200.
 

privatebydesign

I don't preorder, I'm not a paid beta tester!
Jan 29, 2011
8,849
2,785
120
Actually, only the two primes are priced noticeably higher than their previous EF versions. The 28-70 is a unique lens with nothing to compare to. The RF 24-70 f/2.8 had the same release price as the EF 24-70 II and it has IS. The RF70-200 is also the same. The RF 15-35 is higher, but it is also 1 mm wider and has IS and is optically superior to its EF counterpart (vignetting notwithstanding). I picked up the 24-105 f/4L and the RF35 f/1.8 for what I consider to be very fair prices. I am currently waiting for the RF f/4L versions of the 15-35 and the 70-200.
EF 70-200 f2.8L IS III, $1,799, but often street priced lower.
RF 70-200 f2.8L IS, $2,699.

Release price be damned, how much do I need to spend to get the focal lengths I need, if I look at RF it is simply too much money, $7,300 for three f2.8 zooms is a lot of money considering my options.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SecureGSM

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,599
459
S Florida
EF 70-200 f2.8L IS III, $1,799, but often street priced lower.
RF 70-200 f2.8L IS, $2,699.

Release price be damned, how much do I need to spend to get the focal lengths I need, if I look at RF it is simply too much money, $7,300 for three f2.8 zooms is a lot of money considering my options.
Release price be damned. That's just good comedy. Well, the 70-200 f/2.8L II was released in late 2010 I believe. So just wait and see how reasonable the price of an RF 70-200 f/2.8 will be in 2029. I know mine has a lot more life left in it and will last that long barring any calamitous events...
 

privatebydesign

I don't preorder, I'm not a paid beta tester!
Jan 29, 2011
8,849
2,785
120
I wasn’t talking about the MkII I was talking about the MkIII, it was released in June 2018 for $2,100 But now retails for $1,799 but can be had for $1,550 on deals and even less refurb from Canon Direct with warranty.

I am looking at the price I have to pay to get what I need now, not what I might have to pay in ten years, THAT is just good comedy.

Is the RF system really 50% ‘better’? If so I haven’t seen any evidence of that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SecureGSM

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
2,263
1,108
Now that I had a chance to play with the RF 28-70/2, Me and my wallet is much more relaxed about the idea of adapting the excellent EF 24-70/2.8 II instead. My EF 70-200/2.8 II is not too shabby either. However the EF 16-35/2.8 III looks outright amazing especially in the corners :)
100-400 Ii - I will keep that lens
100/2.8L Macro - I will keep that lens

So.... A couple of R5 bodies that’s all I really need at this stage. Plus accessories (l-brackets)
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • Love
Reactions: CanonFanBoy