This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X9

[Etienne]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

Holy balls -- they got a tilty-flippy on a tiny SL# body?!

Was that expected? Presume that means DPAF is onboard as well.

- A

That is a surprise. Vari-angle touch screen, smaller, lighter, and probably cheaper than the T7i.

it won't be cheaper. the SL1 was originally a pretty pricy camera at 799 body + 18-55

Ok, in which case I'd opt for the T7i, which is already quite light weight, unless there's some other advantage of the SL2

Just size really.

Please if you can guide me on the advantages of T7i over SL2 pls. I am thinking of getting a crop camera and wondering which one.

Ergonomics. The T7i has a lot more buttons, which reduces the number of times you have to dive into the menu system to make a change.

 

[Woody]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

It looks like the same old 9 point AF system, if what's viewable in the mirror from that front view is anything to go by

Seriously? What can you see from that particular front view? That mirror is all white out.

 

[rs]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

It looks like the same old 9 point AF system, if what's viewable in the mirror from that front view is anything to go by

Seriously? What can you see from that particular front view? That mirror is all white out.

It sounds like you need to get your screen calibrated

Here's a screen grab with the black levels and mid-tones adjusted to make the AF points stand out more

 

[LonelyBoy]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

Are you speaking from experience or just keyboard warrioring it at this point? Because once you throw in the 18-135 you have basically nullified the existence of this camera as a Rebel is hardly any bigger and is small compared to that large zoom lens. A few years ago I captured a nice long weekend in NYC with a T4i and an 18-135. It was a great kit. But I can assure you at no point did I ever feel that "only if" the camera was smaller "I'd be good".

A bit of a rhetorical question, but I have to ask how often some of you shoot what you preach. If the point of the SL1/SL2 is ultimate small form factor then attaching a large zoom lens has completely defeated that purpose. You pair the "ultimate smallest DSLR" with equally fitting/balancing lenses... aka primes.

Given the aggression of your post, calling me the keyboard warrior is funny.

I used my SL1 a ton with my 18-135 STM. The package is still smaller and lighter than that lens with an 80D or 7D2. Maybe you don't have a use for the combo, but I can almost guarantee that most SL1s were, and most SL2s will be, shot with slow zooms. I did use the pancakes, but not nearly exclusively.

Haha, I apologize, that was a little snarky, aggressive.

Honestly what triggered me was in your original post said something about fast glass is NOT for EF-S and fast glass was for your 5D3. There are a lot of folks that want, expect fast glass on APS-C cameras. Some of us have been frustrated by Canon's lack of love in this area and frankly that is what pushed me to look at other systems to fill that compact/travel kit.

Hey, no worries. My comment was poorly phrased too; it's not that think it's wrong to want to use fast primes on crop, it's that I think Canon intends that glass to be used, at the lowest-end, on XXD and 7D classes (especially the 7Ds now that the 80D lacks AFMA, I think). Similarly, their intent for compact DSLRs is for people to start with slow zooms, then (if they move up the ladder) move to the 7D or FF for fast prime usage, maybe after playing a bit with the 35/2IS or 50 STM on their crop. That seems to be their roadmap, so if you want fast APS-C glass, I will say you probably should look elsewhere. Canon's actions certainly imply that they see the market breaking down like I do, with small bodies using mostly slow zooms. I wouldn't hold my breath for them suddenly making high-end fast primes for APS-C; they seem fine ceding that market to other players.

And, for the mass market, I think they're right. For as many people as there are around here who want a high-end compact body with high-end, fast, compact primes, there are literal piles of boxes of Rebels at Costco and Target and Best Buy and Walmart with bundled slow zooms. That's the first and last camera purchase for a whole lot of people.

 

[LonelyBoy]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

It looks like the same old 9 point AF system, if what's viewable in the mirror from that front view is anything to go by

Seriously? What can you see from that particular front view? That mirror is all white out.

It sounds like you need to get your screen calibrated

Here's a screen grab with the black levels and mid-tones adjusted to make the AF points stand out more

*vomit*

T7i, here I come.

 

[NorbR]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

Here's a screen grab with the black levels and mid-tones adjusted to make the AF points stand out more

Wow, good catch !

If that is indeed the case, that's very disappointing. Even for the Rebels, that's two generations old ... I really thought that 9-pt AF system was a thing of the past by now

 

[Don Haines]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

Here's a screen grab with the black levels and mid-tones adjusted to make the AF points stand out more

Wow, good catch !

If that is indeed the case, that's very disappointing. Even for the Rebels, that's two generations old ... I really thought that 9-pt AF system was a thing of the past by now

A 9 point AF system has one big advantage..... you save time adjusting your camera settings because you just leave it on the center point.....

 

[BillB]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

Holy balls -- they got a tilty-flippy on a tiny SL# body?!

Was that expected? Presume that means DPAF is onboard as well.

- A

That is a surprise. Vari-angle touch screen, smaller, lighter, and probably cheaper than the T7i.

it won't be cheaper. the SL1 was originally a pretty pricy camera at 799 body + 18-55

Ok, in which case I'd opt for the T7i, which is already quite light weight, unless there's some other advantage of the SL2

Just size really.

Please if you can guide me on the advantages of T7i over SL2 pls. I am thinking of getting a crop camera and wondering which one.

Ergonomics. The T7i has a lot more buttons, which reduces the number of times you have to dive into the menu system to make a change.

Using the menus may get easier with the touchscreen interface.

 

[Etienne]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

Holy balls -- they got a tilty-flippy on a tiny SL# body?!

Was that expected? Presume that means DPAF is onboard as well.

- A

That is a surprise. Vari-angle touch screen, smaller, lighter, and probably cheaper than the T7i.

it won't be cheaper. the SL1 was originally a pretty pricy camera at 799 body + 18-55

Ok, in which case I'd opt for the T7i, which is already quite light weight, unless there's some other advantage of the SL2

Just size really.

Please if you can guide me on the advantages of T7i over SL2 pls. I am thinking of getting a crop camera and wondering which one.

Ergonomics. The T7i has a lot more buttons, which reduces the number of times you have to dive into the menu system to make a change.

Using the menus may get easier with the touchscreen interface.

It's still a multi step process vs direct connection to important settings, and you have to look at the LCD screen to do anything.

 

[BillB]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

Are you speaking from experience or just keyboard warrioring it at this point? Because once you throw in the 18-135 you have basically nullified the existence of this camera as a Rebel is hardly any bigger and is small compared to that large zoom lens. A few years ago I captured a nice long weekend in NYC with a T4i and an 18-135. It was a great kit. But I can assure you at no point did I ever feel that "only if" the camera was smaller "I'd be good".

A bit of a rhetorical question, but I have to ask how often some of you shoot what you preach. If the point of the SL1/SL2 is ultimate small form factor then attaching a large zoom lens has completely defeated that purpose. You pair the "ultimate smallest DSLR" with equally fitting/balancing lenses... aka primes.

Given the aggression of your post, calling me the keyboard warrior is funny.

I used my SL1 a ton with my 18-135 STM. The package is still smaller and lighter than that lens with an 80D or 7D2. Maybe you don't have a use for the combo, but I can almost guarantee that most SL1s were, and most SL2s will be, shot with slow zooms. I did use the pancakes, but not nearly exclusively.

Haha, I apologize, that was a little snarky, aggressive.

Honestly what triggered me was in your original post said something about fast glass is NOT for EF-S and fast glass was for your 5D3. There are a lot of folks that want, expect fast glass on APS-C cameras. Some of us have been frustrated by Canon's lack of love in this area and frankly that is what pushed me to look at other systems to fill that compact/travel kit.

Hey, no worries. My comment was poorly phrased too; it's not that think it's wrong to want to use fast primes on crop, it's that I think Canon intends that glass to be used, at the lowest-end, on XXD and 7D classes (especially the 7Ds now that the 80D lacks AFMA, I think). Similarly, their intent for compact DSLRs is for people to start with slow zooms, then (if they move up the ladder) move to the 7D or FF for fast prime usage, maybe after playing a bit with the 35/2IS or 50 STM on their crop. That seems to be their roadmap, so if you want fast APS-C glass, I will say you probably should look elsewhere. Canon's actions certainly imply that they see the market breaking down like I do, with small bodies using mostly slow zooms. I wouldn't hold my breath for them suddenly making high-end fast primes for APS-C; they seem fine ceding that market to other players.

And, for the mass market, I think they're right. For as many people as there are around here who want a high-end compact body with high-end, fast, compact primes, there are literal piles of boxes of Rebels at Costco and Target and Best Buy and Walmart with bundled slow zooms. That's the first and last camera purchase for a whole lot of people.

I think it must be generally true that zooms trump primes when it comes to sales volume. This may be more true for crop than it is for full frame, but I am not even sure about that. Using full frame, mostly I use the 16-35 and the 70-200 when I am serious, while the 24-105 comes in handy for walking around and exploring new possibilities. I do have primes and I do use them, but more in niche roles, like if I want less weight or I want to avoid drawing attention. Certainly over the last while, the Canon lens strategy seems to have been zooms first, and they have a lot of impressive zooms, both EF and EF-S, as well as EF-M.

 

[ahsanford]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

Here's a screen grab with the black levels and mid-tones adjusted to make the AF points stand out more

Wow, good catch !

If that is indeed the case, that's very disappointing. Even for the Rebels, that's two generations old ... I really thought that 9-pt AF system was a thing of the past by now

Great catch if true. Any chance there are more lower contrast AF points clustered around the 9 that we can't see? (The original photo's not exactly straight OOC as far as detail is concerned.)

Of all the things to leave out of the camera, I thought the AF module / secondary mirror was a relatively constant size -- why on earth would Canon stick with 9 points on what we presume will be a Rebel-level $799 camera? Giving it the nice 80D/T7i AF setup would make it a much more attractive sell.

I'm flummoxed on why they'd go with 9 points. Is there an AF related space constraint I'm not aware of? Does it require more processing power, battery consumption, etc?

- A

 

[Don Haines]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

Here's a screen grab with the black levels and mid-tones adjusted to make the AF points stand out more

Wow, good catch !

If that is indeed the case, that's very disappointing. Even for the Rebels, that's two generations old ... I really thought that 9-pt AF system was a thing of the past by now

Great catch if true. Any chance there are more lower contrast AF points clustered around the 9 that we can't see? (The original photo's not exactly straight OOC as far as detail is concerned.)

Of all the things to leave out of the camera, I thought the AF module / secondary mirror was a relatively constant size -- why on earth would Canon stick with 9 points on what we presume will be a Rebel-level $799 camera? Giving it the nice 80D/T7i AF setup would make it a much more attractive sell.

I'm flummoxed on why they'd go with 9 points. Is there an AF related space constraint I'm not aware of? Does it require more processing power, battery consumption, etc?

- A

I shot for years with a 60D and 9point AF. Yes it worked very reliably, but the AF point coverage was so poor that I rarely moved it out of the center point.... focus and recompose! 9 points is unacceptable on a modern camera, could these just represent the most precise points and the other AF points just did not show up in the picture?

 

[Etienne]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

Are you speaking from experience or just keyboard warrioring it at this point? Because once you throw in the 18-135 you have basically nullified the existence of this camera as a Rebel is hardly any bigger and is small compared to that large zoom lens. A few years ago I captured a nice long weekend in NYC with a T4i and an 18-135. It was a great kit. But I can assure you at no point did I ever feel that "only if" the camera was smaller "I'd be good".

A bit of a rhetorical question, but I have to ask how often some of you shoot what you preach. If the point of the SL1/SL2 is ultimate small form factor then attaching a large zoom lens has completely defeated that purpose. You pair the "ultimate smallest DSLR" with equally fitting/balancing lenses... aka primes.

Given the aggression of your post, calling me the keyboard warrior is funny.

I used my SL1 a ton with my 18-135 STM. The package is still smaller and lighter than that lens with an 80D or 7D2. Maybe you don't have a use for the combo, but I can almost guarantee that most SL1s were, and most SL2s will be, shot with slow zooms. I did use the pancakes, but not nearly exclusively.

Haha, I apologize, that was a little snarky, aggressive.

Honestly what triggered me was in your original post said something about fast glass is NOT for EF-S and fast glass was for your 5D3. There are a lot of folks that want, expect fast glass on APS-C cameras. Some of us have been frustrated by Canon's lack of love in this area and frankly that is what pushed me to look at other systems to fill that compact/travel kit.

Hey, no worries. My comment was poorly phrased too; it's not that think it's wrong to want to use fast primes on crop, it's that I think Canon intends that glass to be used, at the lowest-end, on XXD and 7D classes (especially the 7Ds now that the 80D lacks AFMA, I think). Similarly, their intent for compact DSLRs is for people to start with slow zooms, then (if they move up the ladder) move to the 7D or FF for fast prime usage, maybe after playing a bit with the 35/2IS or 50 STM on their crop. That seems to be their roadmap, so if you want fast APS-C glass, I will say you probably should look elsewhere. Canon's actions certainly imply that they see the market breaking down like I do, with small bodies using mostly slow zooms. I wouldn't hold my breath for them suddenly making high-end fast primes for APS-C; they seem fine ceding that market to other players.

And, for the mass market, I think they're right. For as many people as there are around here who want a high-end compact body with high-end, fast, compact primes, there are literal piles of boxes of Rebels at Costco and Target and Best Buy and Walmart with bundled slow zooms. That's the first and last camera purchase for a whole lot of people.

I think it must be generally true that zooms trump primes when it comes to sales volume. This may be more true for crop than it is for full frame, but I am not even sure about that. Using full frame, mostly I use the 16-35 and the 70-200 when I am serious, while the 24-105 comes in handy for walking around and exploring new possibilities. I do have primes and I do use them, but more in niche roles, like if I want less weight or I want to avoid drawing attention. Certainly over the last while, the Canon lens strategy seems to have been zooms first, and they have a lot of impressive zooms, both EF and EF-S, as well as EF-M.

I also primarily use 16-35 and 70-200 on FF, but I don't use the 24-105 much. I usually carry the 35mm f/2 IS for low light and light weight walk around. Those three lenses covers most of what I want to do.

 

[rrcphoto]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

It looks like the same old 9 point AF system, if what's viewable in the mirror from that front view is anything to go by

Seriously? What can you see from that particular front view? That mirror is all white out.

It sounds like you need to get your screen calibrated

Here's a screen grab with the black levels and mid-tones adjusted to make the AF points stand out more

that was a good catch. once you said you could see it in the mirror, it was pretty obvious.

it makes sense really... the 45 point module would be considerably larger than the 9 point module.

 

[rrcphoto]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

Here's a screen grab with the black levels and mid-tones adjusted to make the AF points stand out more

Wow, good catch !

If that is indeed the case, that's very disappointing. Even for the Rebels, that's two generations old ... I really thought that 9-pt AF system was a thing of the past by now

Great catch if true. Any chance there are more lower contrast AF points clustered around the 9 that we can't see? (The original photo's not exactly straight OOC as far as detail is concerned.)

Of all the things to leave out of the camera, I thought the AF module / secondary mirror was a relatively constant size -- why on earth would Canon stick with 9 points on what we presume will be a Rebel-level $799 camera? Giving it the nice 80D/T7i AF setup would make it a much more attractive sell.

I'm flummoxed on why they'd go with 9 points. Is there an AF related space constraint I'm not aware of? Does it require more processing power, battery consumption, etc?

- A

I shot for years with a 60D and 9point AF. Yes it worked very reliably, but the AF point coverage was so poor that I rarely moved it out of the center point.... focus and recompose! 9 points is unacceptable on a modern camera, could these just represent the most precise points and the other AF points just did not show up in the picture?

the AF coverage is even poorer if you leave it at the center. I never had a problem for general shooting an the 9 point AF, and that was even using it in the studio with well over 200k+ shots. if you used the point closest to where you wanted, the focus recompose distance was trival.

 

[rrcphoto]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

I'm flummoxed on why they'd go with 9 points. Is there an AF related space constraint I'm not aware of? Does it require more processing power, battery consumption, etc?

- A

i'm not really. if you take a look at the SL2 and the T7i,etc there's more room used underneath the the T7i. that's where the AF module lives and dies. for a camera that size matters, every mm is important.

and ofc it would also require more processing power.

 

[Maximilian]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

Here's a screen grab with the black levels and mid-tones adjusted to make the AF points stand out more

Wow, good catch !

If that is indeed the case, that's very disappointing. Even for the Rebels, that's two generations old ... I really thought that 9-pt AF system was a thing of the past by now

Great catch if true. Any chance there are more lower contrast AF points clustered around the 9 that we can't see? (The original photo's not exactly straight OOC as far as detail is concerned.)

Of all the things to leave out of the camera, I thought the AF module / secondary mirror was a relatively constant size -- why on earth would Canon stick with 9 points on what we presume will be a Rebel-level $799 camera? Giving it the nice 80D/T7i AF setup would make it a much more attractive sell.

I'm flummoxed on why they'd go with 9 points. Is there an AF related space constraint I'm not aware of? Does it require more processing power, battery consumption, etc?

- A

I shot for years with a 60D and 9point AF. Yes it worked very reliably, but the AF point coverage was so poor that I rarely moved it out of the center point.... focus and recompose! 9 points is unacceptable on a modern camera, could these just represent the most precise points and the other AF points just did not show up in the picture?

If those 9 points AF are true that'll be a real bummer and would put me out of the game for this at once.
Even if it was the more modern all cross type one. : : :

Let's hope that we're misinterpreting something in this picture or that'll be just a mockup model for marketing shots with an old focussing screen of the SL1. :-\

 

[blackcoffee17]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

Clearly visible on my monitor too. Haha. The same old 9 point AF system.

Why they couldn't put the same flip screen on the M5 and make the build quality a bit better?

 

[LonelyBoy]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

It looks like the same old 9 point AF system, if what's viewable in the mirror from that front view is anything to go by

Seriously? What can you see from that particular front view? That mirror is all white out.

It sounds like you need to get your screen calibrated

Here's a screen grab with the black levels and mid-tones adjusted to make the AF points stand out more

that was a good catch. once you said you could see it in the mirror, it was pretty obvious.

it makes sense really... the 45 point module would be considerably larger than the 9 point module.

But at least give us the 19-point system! I had assumed 19-point would be the worst-case, and up to the 45-point would be the lucky highest-end system they'd use. It's surprising they even still MAKE the 9-point system!

 

[rrcphoto]

Re: This is the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D/X8

It looks like the same old 9 point AF system, if what's viewable in the mirror from that front view is anything to go by

Seriously? What can you see from that particular front view? That mirror is all white out.

It sounds like you need to get your screen calibrated

Here's a screen grab with the black levels and mid-tones adjusted to make the AF points stand out more

that was a good catch. once you said you could see it in the mirror, it was pretty obvious.

it makes sense really... the 45 point module would be considerably larger than the 9 point module.

But at least give us the 19-point system! I had assumed 19-point would be the worst-case, and up to the 45-point would be the lucky highest-end system they'd use. It's surprising they even still MAKE the 9-point system!

canon's AF modules are made in house, pretty easy for them just to create the AF module.

IMO, it has to do with size and weight I would imagine the 9 point module is probably simply "easy" to fit in there.

here's a good example of the 6D 9 point versus the 5D Mark III AF module. the size difference is considerable.

this is the only picture of the 80D assembly I can find. you can tell though that it extends quite a bit under the mount, but i wish there was better pictures.

if you look again at the SL2, there just isn't much room under the mount.

combine that with the fact that the camera is much smaller, you have less room inside and you still need a solid foundation at the underside of the camera for your tripod mount.

This is all my theory, but even when CW suggested 45 point AF, I thought to myself and even commented. it seemed doubtful because of the size of the camera.