APS-C or smaller is still 90% of the mirrorless ILC market.Also, APS/C is sooo last decade, lets move on!
APS-C or smaller is still 90% of the mirrorless ILC market.Also, APS/C is sooo last decade, lets move on!
Fair point, but this is a new system, with new lenses. What problem are they solving by releasing an APS-C body? As I posted later, just cost reduce the RP instead. If the target is a rebel class R camera, cost reduce the RP even more. The dev costs are sunk already, and you will sell more glass, and pull users in if they can get a FF body for $500 (or even a kit).APS-C or smaller is still 90% of the mirrorless ILC market.
I was actually asking NetMage , who implied that he or she prefers the original 7D over the 90D, and didn't upgrade to the Mark II because it's too targeted to action/birding, but thanks for the detailed info.Oops! I initially thought that comment was directed at me. IMHO, the 80D/90D are better all around generalist cameras than the 7D Mark II if one doesn't need the extra durability and better AF for sports/action. They have far better IQ at ISO 100 - ISO 400 than the 7D Mark II. At ISO 800 and above there's not much practical difference, though the 7D Mark II does test a bit better in terms of S/N ratio and DR past ISO 1600 than the 80D.
While every other third party lens manufacturer watching for Canon’s reaction to a potential IP violation by Samy. See what happens. Right?Yes, indeed. However, Samyang has released one AF lens for RF mount, the 14mm F2.8 RF, so I would expect them to release more AF lenses since they have about 8 AF lenses for the Sony E mount.
Even the 80D kicks the original 7D's can all over the field. Easy.I was actually asking NetMage , who implied that he or she prefers the original 7D over the 90D, and didn't upgrade to the Mark II because it's too targeted to action/birding, but thanks for the detailed info.
There's a significant difference between "less than the RP" at an introductory price of $1,299 (body only) and "$500 (or even a kit)."Fair point, but this is a new system, with new lenses. What problem are they solving by releasing an APS-C body? As I posted later, just cost reduce the RP instead. If the target is a rebel class R camera, cost reduce the RP even more. The dev costs are sunk already, and you will sell more glass, and pull users in if they can get a FF body for $500 (or even a kit).
I'd guess more like $749-$899 after debuting at $999-$1099. In the sub $1000 price range Canon has tended to have models spaced about every $150-200. And the RP debuted at $1,299, not $999.the RP is $999, this thing would be what? $699? Who’s going to buy that when almost every RF lens is over $2200? Canon needs affordable RF lenses, like yesterday
I read that some people are adapting EF lenses for there RF cameras.the RP is $999, this thing would be what? $699? Who’s going to buy that when almost every RF lens is over $2200? Canon needs affordable RF lenses, like yesterday
So the M Series fills that gap, no? It is apparent that they are placing all their bets on R systems, so maybe this is a reason to do an APS-C R. Short of that, if they are truly leaving EF/EF-S behind, they can have the M series be the lower end/bridge mirrorless system to the R.There's a significant difference between "less than the RP" at an introductory price of $1,299 (body only) and "$500 (or even a kit)."
Just look at recent past history:
EOS 77D introductory price: $899 (2017-02)
EOS Rebel T7i/800D introductory price: $749 (2017-02)
Only $150 between the top Rebel and the lowest x0D.
The new "budget" EOS R will not be $500, it will be $800-900.
Yep, and I just sold my RP because I was tired of using a 27 year old lens designed for a film camera on my brand new mirrorless camera. AbsurdI read that some people are adapting EF lenses for there RF cameras.
Wait, so you're saying on an EF-M mount camera I can't use all 79 EF zoom lenses, all 61 EF primes lenses, all 8 TS-E lenses, the MP-E 65mm, and all 12 EF-S lenses that Canon has sold since 1987?Canon can let the M series compete at the APS-C level with the addition of several decent lenses. It has the frame rate capability to replace the 7Dii and a higher end M level body, at a higher price point, should suffice. Otherwise, abandon the APS market to Fuji and concentrate on "affordable" lenses for the R mount. A "nifty fifty" would be nice, a moderately priced mid-range zoom (18-135 like) and one longer telephoto similar to the 70-300 IS f4.0-5.6 would round out a kit. Canon has a window while Nikon is struggling with lens options to forge ahead and catch Sony.
What camera did you buy instead?Yep, and I just sold my RP because I was tired of using a 27 year old lens designed for a film camera on my brand new mirrorless camera. Absurd
Havent decided yet. Either the XT3 or maybe wait for the XT4.What camera did you buy instead?
RP at $650 would kill the 6DMkII, 90D, M6MkII, and upcoming 850D. Therefore... its not happening. I don't see the EOS RP ever going below $899 in its lifetime (unless on sale of course).Why not just cost-reduce the RP and then lower the price on the R, when the R2 comes out?
RP @ $650
R1 @ $1,200
R2 @ $2,500
RS and/or R5 @ $3,500
Thoughts?
I don't see it killing the M6mkII or the 90D simply because the sensor has significantly less resolution. I personally wouldn't trade my M6-II straight across for an RP. Sometimes lower resolution can be advantageous, but it's not always so, so the RP is not unambiguously better than the other camera..RP at $650 would kill the 6DMkII, 90D, M6MkII, and upcoming 850D. Therefore... its not happening. I don't see the EOS RP ever going below $899 in its lifetime (unless on sale of course).
The RP and the 90D/M6 Mark II are entirely different tools intended for entirely different purposes.RP at $650 would kill the 6DMkII, 90D, M6MkII, and upcoming 850D. Therefore... its not happening. I don't see the EOS RP ever going below $899 in its lifetime (unless on sale of course).