# Canon EOS RP Specifications & Images



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 6, 2019)

> It looks like these are the confirmed specifications for the upcoming Canon EOS RP, which is pretty close to the previous specification list that we posted. See the end of the article for some insight into that.
> *Canon EOS RP Additional Features:* (Updated February 13, 2019)
> 
> 35mm full frame CMOS sensor with about 26.2 million effective pixels
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

Looks weird on these pictures (the EOS R looks more balanced) but maybe it is still nicer to hold than the Sonys. But the price is the biggest question (and if it gained any video features over the 6D Mark II, it will be definitely targeted as a vlogging camera)


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 6, 2019)

it's a walking, breathing EOS 6D Mark II smushed down into an EOS RP size.


----------



## qudek77 (Feb 6, 2019)

Ahhhh cmon Canon, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...


----------



## Foxeslink (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...



Pls do! and be happy with sony! You're never happy with anything about Canon


----------



## fentiger (Feb 6, 2019)

Rather than slagging off this camera, why not wait for the real use reviews
you could put up and shut up, and just buy a Sony


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, jesus, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...



drama much?


----------



## JonSnow (Feb 6, 2019)

Mhm...... so the 18mp sensor story repeats itself


----------



## zonoskar (Feb 6, 2019)

Would be interesting to do a size comparison with the EOS-R and EOS-M5 based on the mount size (cannot do this at work). This one looks like a slightly bigger EOS-M5. And the EVF doesn't protrude up as much. Might be my next camera to replace my 5D (the original).


----------



## Josh Leavitt (Feb 6, 2019)

Whether the RP retails for $1299 or $1599, I think Canon might try to position this camera on the shelves of popular department stores like Best Buy, Walmart, Target, and so on; all of this in attempt capture the market of casual consumers who aren't photography professionals. It has the potential to become the most affordable, visible, and accessible full-frame system out there in that case. If they're clever, they'll use in-store promo material to demonstrate the sensor size comparisons to APS-C and M4/3, and show the differences in DoF along with all the other full-frame benefits that manufacturers like to tout.


----------



## 1Zach1 (Feb 6, 2019)

This might be the upgrade from my 40D I’ve been looking for, since it seems the 7DIII will never come out. I look forward to the release and reviews.


----------



## LesC (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, jesus, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...



Like the 6dMKII? That'd do me just fine. The 6D MKII is a superb camera; I get great results with mine with virtually no noise on A3 prints at up to iso 25600. Would I switch to Sony - no, I'm sure they make fine cameras but not for me. Specs aren't everything ... 

What are you currently using?


----------



## Memirsbrunnr (Feb 6, 2019)

looks like the sales of the 26.2 mp sensors is lagging behind their own expectations, due to less 6D mark 2's sold than expected. so the sensible business thing is to do is tp put the old wine in new bags
.


----------



## HaroldC3 (Feb 6, 2019)

Should come out with a budget friendly kit lens too.


----------



## JonSnow (Feb 6, 2019)

That the 6d mk2 can capture great photos is not the question. The original 5d can.

Well this was discussed to death already.....


----------



## bitm2007 (Feb 6, 2019)

padam said:


> Looks weird on these pictures (the EOS R looks more balanced) but maybe it is still nicer to hold than the Sonys. But the price is the biggest question (and if it gained any video features over the 6D Mark II, it will be definitely targeted as a vlogging camera)



Agreed, if the image resembles the final product it looks like it needs to be stretched upwards. It's obviously not got a built in flash, and it's doubtful if it has enough height to include a built in EVF and a 3.2 inch rear LCD like the original EOS R.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

bitm2007 said:


> Agreed, if the image resembles the final product it looks like it needs to be stretched upwards. It's obviously not got a built in flash, and it's doubtful if it has enough height to include a built in EVF and a 3.2 inch rear LCD like the original EOS R.


It _is_ the final product, probably the same EVF and LCD as the M50. The grip is not as tall as the R, so I guess the vertical grip may be needed to fit bigger hands properly.
It also seems that all their cameras will have EOS R written on the front and a small text elsewhere for different models.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Feb 6, 2019)

LesC said:


> Like the 6dMKII? That'd do me just fine. The 6D MKII is a superb camera; I get great results with mine with virtually no noise on A3 prints at up to iso 25600. Would I switch to Sony - no, I'm sure they make fine cameras but not for me. Specs aren't everything ...
> 
> What are you currently using?


You realize it was a lackluster camera back in 2017. It's 2019 now so it is even worse now by today's standards. It could the worst brand new full frame camera this year and beyond.


----------



## bitm2007 (Feb 6, 2019)

padam said:


> It _is_ the final product, probably the same EVF and LCD as the M50. The grip is not as tall as the R, so I guess the vertical grip may be needed to fit bigger hands properly.
> It also seems that all their cameras will have EOS R written on the front and a small text elsewhere for different models.



The Canon Rumors post only states it looks like these are the confirmed specifications for the upcoming Canon EOS RP, so I assume the posted image isn't 100% guaranteed to be the final product either. If everything stated is correct however it does back up my suspicion regarding the lack of space on it's rear for a EVF and 3.2 inch LCD (3.0 inch is stated)


----------



## Chaitanya (Feb 6, 2019)

Should be good for macro work, for RF shooter that is a nice sized body for use with 35mm f1.8 lens.


----------



## wockawocka (Feb 6, 2019)

Lol you guys, wait until we see what the files are like. I'm envious of that mode dial.

The real comedy is going to be when SAR goes to spin it in a negative way. They do it so subtly.


----------



## degos (Feb 6, 2019)

JonSnow said:


> That the 6d mk2 can capture great photos is not the question. The original 5d can.



I don't really understand all the hatred. I'd consider this as an upgrade when my 1Ds3 finally dies. Certainly the ISO performance would be a massive improvement. No point talking about switching to Sony or Panasonic when all my lenses are EF.

I think people on this site are in the upper quartile of income and forget that most amateur photographers struggle to spend $1000 on a camera. Even the ancient second-hand 5D2 is a popular seller on eBay UK. Anything that gets a decent FF sensor into amateur hands is good.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

bitm2007 said:


> The Canon Rumors post only states it looks like these are the confirmed specifications for the upcoming Canon EOS RP, so I assume the posted image isn't 100% guaranteed to be the final product either. If everything stated is correct however it does back up my suspicion regarding the lack of space on it's rear for a EVF and 3.2 inch LCD (3.0 inch is stated)


Yes, the _stated_ specs are the _actual_ specs (with _actual _product images), they are just not complete yet...


----------



## slclick (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, jesus, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...


 Canon has never made a bad FF body, but a poor driver can make a Porsche a horrible car with your logic I guess.


----------



## amorse (Feb 6, 2019)

bitm2007 said:


> The Canon Rumors post only states it looks like these are the confirmed specifications for the upcoming Canon EOS RP, so I assume the posted image isn't 100% guaranteed to be the final product either. If everything stated is correct however it does back up my suspicion regarding the lack of space on it's rear for a EVF and 3.2 inch LCD (3.0 inch is stated)


There's a picture of the EVF in the post on the attached images (it's clearly visible from the back). It definitely has an EVF. Also, Canon Rumors got the information and images from Nokishita, and I'm struggling to think of the last time they were wrong on something like this. I think you can bet that the post is correct at this point.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

wockawocka said:


> Lol you guys, wait until we see what the files are like. I'm envious of that mode dial.


It is pretty easy to get 6D II raw files from the internet, apart from using the new CR3 raw format, maybe they've changed the colors a little bit, but overall it is going to be very similar (it may have more banding when the shadows are really pushed to the extremes which the EOS R does in comparison to the 5D IV, but overall they are very similar as well).


----------



## dak723 (Feb 6, 2019)

JonSnow said:


> Mhm...... so the 18mp sensor story repeats itself



So, your constant endless whining repeats itself???


----------



## Act444 (Feb 6, 2019)

Mixed thoughts. No top LCD screen - but there *IS* a mode dial!


----------



## LesC (Feb 6, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> You realize it was a lackluster camera back in 2017. It's 2019 now so it is even worse now by today's standards. It could the worst brand new full frame camera this year and beyond.



Depends on your needs I guess; I wanted the smallest FF Canon dslr so it met my needs perfectly. I didn't consider it lacklustre in 2017 & now in 2019 it's still the same - hasn't got any worse  To me the glass you put on the camera is more important.

Having said that, out of the original R and the new RP, I'll probably get the original R. Hopefull once the RP is out, the prices for the R may start dropping a little.


----------



## sanj (Feb 6, 2019)

I am thrilled big time with this camera. Full frame. Light. Stabilization. Choice of great RF lenses. Am buying. And believe this will be a hot seller. 
This will pair superbly with the high end camera when it comes out. Super.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 6, 2019)

I'm working to get a confirmed price asap. I've heard $1299, $1499, $1599.......


----------



## wockawocka (Feb 6, 2019)

padam said:


> It is pretty easy to get 6D II raw files from the internet, apart from using the new CR3 raw format, maybe they've changed the colors a little bit, but overall it is going to be very similar (it may have more banding when the shadows are really pushed to the extremes which the EOS R does in comparison to the 5D IV, but overall they are very similar as well).



That's assuming it is exactly the same sensor. This hasn't been confirmed. No matter how likely.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> I'm working to get a confirmed price asap. I've heard $1299, $1499, $1599.......


Considering the 6D Mark II started at 1999$, the latter two seems more logical with the last one having the EF adapter included.


----------



## SimonW (Feb 6, 2019)

I don't fully understand the ugly comments - this looks fine to me, albeit clearly aimed at the consumer. Slightly baffled by the lack of top LCD screen though. I'd have thought that would be a bare minimum feature??


----------



## 1Zach1 (Feb 6, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> I'm working to get a confirmed price asap. I've heard $1299, $1499, $1599.......


I vote for $1299. That’s how this works, right?


----------



## TommyLee (Feb 6, 2019)

did we determine the battery here?...
I would like to have std batteries...
from 5 series..
but I believe it is too (physically) small ... to be that ...

a standard battery 
would add this to a lot of bags..
especially if it IS $1300.....

///
update:
AND a free or... nearly-free EOS converter
(I assume my late-model tamron and sigma will work fully via an EOS converter)

I guess the weight confirms it is a small battery..
well maybe it is an efficient camera system,.. and that's enough...sigh


----------



## -pekr- (Feb 6, 2019)

Are all those pictures legit? From the top view, we can see an Rp moniker, whereas from the front, you can only see an R one. I am somehow used to know what the model of camera is, looking from the front, when I can see some colleagues in the field


----------



## Danglin52 (Feb 6, 2019)

Dual Sensing IS? I assume this means in body image stabilization. Surprised no one is cheering if this is the meaning of the line.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

wockawocka said:


> That's assuming it is exactly the same sensor. This hasn't been confirmed. No matter how likely.


The EOS R has a similar sensor to the older 5D IV but the more basic model gets a completely new sensor which is as good as the higher-end model. Makes total sense, knowing how Canon clearly does not like to differentiate all of its models - and spending as much on R&D as they can to reduce profits...


----------



## TommyLee (Feb 6, 2019)

SimonW said:


> I don't fully understand the ugly comments - this looks fine to me, albeit clearly aimed at the consumer. Slightly baffled by the lack of top LCD screen though. I'd have thought that would be a bare minimum feature??


yes... when it hangs on a strap.. you NEED to see that info..

just too little space .. is why...IMO


----------



## Josh Leavitt (Feb 6, 2019)

SimonW said:


> Slightly baffled by the lack of top LCD screen though. I'd have thought that would be a bare minimum feature??


Maybe not. None of the Sony full-frames feature a top-plate LCD. All critical exposure data can be displayed in the EVF anyway. But it would have been nice to include an OLED top-plate screen like the one on the EOS R.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

Danglin52 said:


> Dual Sensing IS? I assume this means in body image stabilization. Surprised no one is cheering if this is the meaning of the line.


No, it is a combination of lens-based IS and electronic stabilization.


----------



## criscokkat (Feb 6, 2019)

I'm sure the sensor has the same treatments done on the 5dIV sensor for the R. Microlenses, more dpaf points, etc.

I'm curious to see how the firmware upgrades are. If this sensor can do 5 frames per second while autofocusing, I imagine the R can do at least the 8 that it can currently do without continuous focus? The underlying hardware should be the same, so they might have made some improvements with 1.x of the firmware. If they do that and are able to achieve eye focus comparable to the sony a7III (pre their new update) they will actually be on the road to catching up with Sony on the few specs that *actually* matter. (the ISO expansion range difference being negligible in most real world scenarios).


----------



## Uneternal (Feb 6, 2019)

A repackaged 6D2 with the same sh*tty sensor. 
Don't get your pants wet with the price, I bet my last shirt it's gonna cost $1599 - body only. Cause 6D2 goes for $1499 already.


----------



## TommyLee (Feb 6, 2019)

Danglin52 said:


> Dual Sensing IS? I assume this means in body image stabilization. Surprised no one is cheering if this is the meaning of the line.


///
yes I was also surprised... there was ..no rush of the crowd toward the stage ..on that..ha!

does that mean my sig 135 f1.8 will now have stabilization


----------



## Bob Howland (Feb 6, 2019)

I wanted a lighter FF camera and wide range zoom to make a travel camera and Canon seems to delivering. The camera looks like the Jolly Green Giant sat on it, but I can see myself buying it and the 24-240 in 6 months.


----------



## qudek77 (Feb 6, 2019)

LesC said:


> Like the 6dMKII? That'd do me just fine. The 6D MKII is a superb camera; I get great results with mine with virtually no noise on A3 prints at up to iso 25600. Would I switch to Sony - no, I'm sure they make fine cameras but not for me. Specs aren't everything ...
> 
> What are you currently using?


I have a 60D (really old and worn out), 70D and a 5DIII.

The video quality of the 6D mark II is kinda soft, it is slightly worse compared to the 70D in my opinion. I need a FF 4K body with good autofocus during video, and the MarkIII is lacking that feature, so I was waiting for a long time for Canons no crop no bullshit 4K camera but unfortunately it didn't came.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> I'm curious to see how the firmware upgrades are. If this sensor can do 5 frames per second while autofocusing, I imagine the R can do at least the 8 that it can currently do without continuous focus? The underlying hardware should be the same, so they might have made some improvements with 1.x of the firmware. If they do that and are able to achieve eye focus comparable to the sony a7III (pre their new update) they will actually be on the road to catching up with Sony on the few specs that *actually* matter. (the ISO expansion range difference being negligible in most real world scenarios).


They will not change the framerates with firmware, but eye-AF and silent mode will be improved.
But it not the same as the Sony, which is also receiving a firmware update for a better AF system, so not really worth comparing to. Each camera has its strengths and it will not depend on firmware updates, which is "better".


----------



## jd7 (Feb 6, 2019)

sanj said:


> I am thrilled big time with this camera. Full frame. Light. Stabilization. Choice of great RF lenses. Am buying. And believe this will be a hot seller.
> This will pair superbly with the high end camera when it comes out. Super.


If you are thinking IBIS when you say stabilisation, it seems it doesn’t have that. It has the “dual sensing IS” which has been in a few cameras already, eg EOS R, M50.


----------



## TommyLee (Feb 6, 2019)

Bob Howland said:


> I wanted a lighter FF camera and wide range zoom to make a travel camera and Canon seems to delivering. The camera looks like the Jolly Green Giant sat on it, but I can see myself buying it and the 24-240 in 6 months.


///
you know ..that seems like the real use to me too..

24-240 sounds good
(if it can photograph a star as a point) 
and then carry my 14mm f2.8L II as a super-wide...since it is small (but now it needs a converter)

eventually there will be wider than 14mm (maybe 11-22)
..with quality... in this mount ...IMO


----------



## masterpix (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, jesus, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...


I really don't "get it" what is so bad in the 6DII? the fact it is not 5DMK4? not 1DxMK2? the fact that it is an entry level FF camera, it does not try to be more or less, than what so "wrong" with it? If the price is right for the camera (below 1500$) than why not? Let me say that it is the photographer who does make the difference, not the number of "gimmicks" one can find in one body or the other.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> I have a 60D (really old and worn out), 70D and a 5DIII.
> 
> The video quality of the 6D mark II is kinda soft, it is slightly worse compared to the 70D in my opinion. I need a FF 4K body with good autofocus during video, and the MarkIII is lacking that feature, so I was waiting for a long time for Canons no crop no bullshit 4K camera but unfortunately it didn't came.


I wonder if this camera is actually going to have 4k and improved 1080p or just leave that behind for now and keep it exactly as it was with the 6D Mark II (maxing out at 1080p60p)
If there is any manufacturer that can get away with that, it's Canon (in that case they could just simply price it a bit lower)

Sony and Nikon both have cameras with FF 4k and hybrid AF but of course they don't have anywhere near the same range of full compatibility with lenses besides other quirks and a different look, etc.


----------



## qudek77 (Feb 6, 2019)

Foxeslink said:


> Pls do! and be happy with sony! You're never happy with anything about Canon


That's not true at all, I have Canons all my life and I still think that Canons EF lenses are great, especially the RF ones, simply amazing. The bodies feel kinda dated.


----------



## csibra (Feb 6, 2019)

Thank's God, I don't need to buy a new camera. No BSI no buy


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 6, 2019)

TommyLee said:


> ///
> yes I was also surprised... there was ..no rush of the crowd toward the stage ..on that..ha!
> 
> does that mean my sig 135 f1.8 will now have stabilization



As previously mentioned, it's probably digital stabilization like the M50.


----------



## qudek77 (Feb 6, 2019)

slclick said:


> Canon has never made a bad FF body, but a poor driver can make a Porsche a horrible car with your logic I guess.


Well a 2000 euro (on launch) camera that has only IPB video, only 1080p, no headphone jack, UFS-I slot (only one), just ok video quality (little soft) is NOT a Porsche to me. It was and it still is quite expensive for what you get, the camera in many ways was inferior to the 3 year old D750, so I don't really get the metaphore. D850 is a Porsche, and it handles exceptionally.


----------



## qudek77 (Feb 6, 2019)

masterpix said:


> I really don't "get it" what is so bad in the 6DII? the fact it is not 5DMK4? not 1DxMK2? the fact that it is an entry level FF camera, it does not try to be more or less, than what so "wrong" with it? If the price is right for the camera (below 1500$) than why not? Let me say that it is the photographer who does make the difference, not the number of "gimmicks" one can find in one body or the other.


In my opinion it costs too much, 2000 euros on launch, around 1600 euros right now.


----------



## docsmith (Feb 6, 2019)

All the hatred cracks me up....I took one look at the size and weight and started to wonder if it could replace the M as my "small kit" camera.


----------



## Rysz (Feb 6, 2019)

1Zach1 said:


> This might be the upgrade from my 40D I’ve been looking for, since it seems the 7DIII will never come out. I look forward to the release and reviews.


You are not the only one in this situation 
It may be my next camera... if Canon announces more affordable lenses.


----------



## neo302 (Feb 6, 2019)

If no 4K and 6D dynamic range, forget it. Doesn't make sense to me as I'm mostly video. 
Love Canon, but just doesn't make sense in these times. Might as well get an M50, which I'm not. 
Sticking with my a6400 preorder if this is the case.


----------



## amorse (Feb 6, 2019)

It looks to me like this could fit very well as a secondary backup camera. If you need to carry a second camera in case the first one is damaged/fails then size/weight can become important - I was ok with them removing the EVF to save space and weight, but looks like they managed to reduce the size and weight without losing the EVF: that's a win/win. If the price comes in low enough, that will be a real winner. Potentially the lightest/cheapest FF new mirrorless you can buy.

However, I'm sure using an LP-E17 saved some weight, but even the 6D II uses an LP-E6N. As a backup it means doubling the number of extra batteries and having two chargers. That's not the best, but I guess it's the price of focusing on size/weight. Also, I still don't understand why Canon devotes so much space to the on/off dial (both here and on the R). I feel like that area could have been better utilized considering the size limitations of smaller camera bodies.


----------



## brianboru (Feb 6, 2019)

zonoskar said:


> Would be interesting to do a size comparison with the EOS-R and EOS-M5 based on the mount size (cannot do this at work). This one looks like a slightly bigger EOS-M5. And the EVF doesn't protrude up as much. Might be my next camera to replace my 5D (the original).















m50 RP superimposed.png



__ brianboru
__ Feb 6, 2019
__ 3





Superimposed with an M50 aligning the flashmount. Obviously rough, but height is very similar to an M50.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 6, 2019)

I have a 7D Mark II and 7 lens kit covering 180° horizontal to 960mm equivalent. The R system doesn't seem to have any redeeming features that would make me want to go through the expense and time to switch, even if they actually have usable EVFs.


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 6, 2019)

I expect it will be priced higher than a 6DII. It’s a basic and ordinary full frame mirrorless equal to Canons lowest full frame offering from two years ago.
The price will matter greatly as to how it’s received. It will be a solid performer. No bells and whistles. A solid second camera that can shoot silently.
I had no intention of buying an EOS R as I felt it was overpriced for what it offered. This is a poorer version that will produce similar results in reasonable conditions if you are only concerned with photography. 
That makes it a little more tempting as the outlay will be less. 
It’s strange if I get this it would be the first time I downgraded from what I have.
Probably a wait and see for me. Save for what’s next on the mirrorless agenda.
As a Canon customer I can’t help feeling disappointed this is the next mirrorless which is less than the first one that disappointed me.
It will probably be hammered by reviews but sell well which is all Canon will be worried about in the short term.


----------



## jeanluc (Feb 6, 2019)

Hopefully it sells a ton so Canon can fund development of what we (ie. the small group of us who want a 5DSR 2 or Canon D850 ) are actually waiting for....or at least the recently patented BSI sensors....and use up all the old sensors lying around the plant lol.

I recently had the chance to use a D850 and yes, there is a very big difference between it and my beloved 5D4 for landscapes. Not just the DR( which really is not a big deal anymore IMHO) and resolution, but things like focus stacking in camera, tilting screen etc.

I bet this will be the last Canon to use the off-chip ADC, and I bet the next R will be the "camera we are looking for".

Maybe.

Until then, lets hope this one is a great success.


----------



## amorse (Feb 6, 2019)

Also, with the loss of the touch bar it leaves some questions on customization and quick adjustments. For quick changes to ISO I guess you'd be looking at either the d-pad or the control ring on the lens. There doesn't appear to be a dedicated ISO button, so I guess the best option is customizing the control ring to manage either ISO or exposure compensation - the issue is you may have to choose between them. Not sure how I feel about that tradeoff if I'm honest, especially with a giant on/off dial taking up so much room.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

amorse said:


> However, I'm sure using an LP-E17 saved some weight, but even the 6D II uses an LP-E6N. As a backup it means doubling the number of extra batteries and having two chargers. That's not the best, but I guess it's the price of focusing on size/weight. Also, I still don't understand why Canon devotes so much space to the on/off dial (both here and on the R). I feel like that area could have been better utilized considering the size limitations of smaller camera bodies.


Yes, it is the usual Canon segmentation, clever product positioning but maybe taken a step too far (as usual).
Even the 6D Mark II battery life isn't that great if it is been used in LiveView mode non-stop, so this could be worse than the M5 (maybe close to equal if the newer Digic 8 has become more economical), in which case we are back to the 'good old' level of mirrorless battery life.


----------



## Deleted member 378664 (Feb 6, 2019)

I did a comparison of the Topside views of M5 an RP. The overlay is based on the size of the flashmount.
It Looks like the LP-E6N battery will fit into the grip.


----------



## amorse (Feb 6, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> It will probably be hammered by reviews but sell well which is all Canon will be worried about in the short term.


Agreed, though it seems like Canon expected that. I'm speaking from memory here, but I thought an executive said that they're recognizing the interest in high resolution/high-end models, but they'd likely be releasing a lower end model next. It seemed to me at the time as bracing for negative reactions, but at the end of the day if the price is right it will sell very well.


----------



## Del Paso (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, jesus, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...



Is whining about Canon your fulltime occupation?


----------



## knight427 (Feb 6, 2019)

This will very likely be my 6D replacement, but my target date is Black Friday. The street price difference between the R and RP will be most critical to me.


----------



## Rysz (Feb 6, 2019)

Photorex said:


> I did a comparison of the Topside views of M5 an RP. The overlay is based on the size of the flashmount.
> It Looks like the LP-E6N battery will fit into the grip.



Unfortunately weight of the LP-E6N is approximately 80g, and rumored weight of the body is ~440g and ~485g including batteries


----------



## docsmith (Feb 6, 2019)

Photorex said:


> I did a comparison of the Topside views of M5 an RP. The overlay is based on the size of the flashmount.
> It Looks like the LP-E6N battery will fit into the grip.



Thanks. Of course, most of that is lens. While not comparing zoom to zoom, a "small" kit with the RP would be with a couple of pancake lenses or other small primes with an adaptor (for now).


----------



## Maximilian (Feb 6, 2019)

Really Interesting!
I am using a 200D/SL2 as travel camera today.
I'd be really interested, how much bigger this one is.
Now let's go for some native small primes 

_Edit:_
EOS RP
Size: 132.5 x 85.0 x 70.0 mm
EOS 200D
Size: 122.4 x 92.6 x 69.8 mm

Just one cm in with. Therefore FF. Really interesting...


----------



## slclick (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Well a 2000 euro (on launch) camera that has only IPB video, only 1080p, no headphone jack, UFS-I slot (only one), just ok video quality (little soft) is NOT a Porsche to me. It was and it still is quite expensive for what you get, the camera in many ways was inferior to the 3 year old D750, so I don't really get the metaphore. D850 is a Porsche, and it handles exceptionally.



You would have had a coronary shooting 20+ years ago. Try a pinhole camera, it will humble your need for 'more'.


----------



## CaMeRa QuEsT (Feb 6, 2019)

I've been looking forward for a tiny FF ILC to show up, so I'm loving almost everything about this camera so far, except for:

1. Power switch: they got it wrong on the R and are perpetuating this dumb decision on the RP. That lock switch is in the perfect spot for a power switch, just like in my Rebel XS bodies. I understand that they wanted a power switch that wouldn't easily be nudged on by accident when the camera is not being used, but a mirrorless ILC, especially one using a tiny battery, needs to have it handy on the shutter hand. Perpetuating a wrong engineering decision just makes Canon engineers look dumb.

2. Why no command wheel around the D-pad AGAIN? I'll gladly pay the $5 Canon is saving from not installing one.

3. If they are re-using the 6DII sensor, then this camera is dead on arrival. That old big fab process analog sensor (no in-chip A/D converters) and its ancilliaries run hot and are power hungry, how hot will this tiny body get in the hands, and how many shots will CIPA rate it at, 100 or less? Also, DR and 4K, or lack thereof. Hope Canon doesn't reuse that sensor, and they should really sell that old fab off already.

4. Forget about kitting it with the 24-105/4 (unless it's heavily discounted), I want it kitted with the 35/1.8 Macro! And make a nice, compact 20/2.8 and 85/1.8 to go along with, I've already got a perfect tiny mirrorless bag to hold this kit in!


----------



## BigShooter (Feb 6, 2019)

Jesus, still people moaning about 'bad' this or 'better Sony' that. When do you imbeciles understand it's a tool, any shortcoming in the end result is YOUR fault, not your equipment.


----------



## Absolutic (Feb 6, 2019)

Josh Leavitt said:


> Whether the RP retails for $1299 or $1599, I think Canon might try to position this camera on the shelves of popular department stores like Best Buy, Walmart, Target, and so on; all of this in attempt capture the market of casual consumers who aren't photography professionals. It has the potential to become the most affordable, visible, and accessible full-frame system out there in that case. If they're clever, they'll use in-store promo material to demonstrate the sensor size comparisons to APS-C and M4/3, and show the differences in DoF along with all the other full-frame benefits that manufacturers like to tout.


 

You see for these box stores for the kit to be successful canon would need a budget kit lens to put into the package. Here 24-105 is far from being budget and will push this into $2500 territory. If canon released something like 24-105 variable aperture lens for cheaper to keep the kit price under $2k it might make more sense


----------



## dcm (Feb 6, 2019)

Full frame, mirrorless SL2 is my first impression. Might be interesting if I didn't have the M5. Still might be interesting.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 6, 2019)

Absolutic said:


> You see for these box stores for the kit to be successful canon would need a budget kit lens to put into the package. Here 24-105 is far from being budget and will push this into $2500 territory. If canon released something like 24-105 variable aperture lens for cheaper to keep the kit price under $2k it might make more sense



THIS.

the fact that this is bundled with the 24-105 is the biggest WTF from me really. They really needed to bundle this with a small 28-80 3.5-5.6 or even the 24-240mm. the L? this isn't going to be a cheap kit that attracts the masses.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 6, 2019)

CaMeRa QuEsT said:


> If they are re-using the 6DII sensor, then this camera is dead on arrival. That old big fab process analog sensor (no in-chip A/D converters) and its ancilliaries run hot and are power hungry, how hot will this tiny body get in the hands, and how many shots will CIPA rate it at, 100 or less? Also, DR and 4K, or lack thereof. Hope Canon doesn't reuse that sensor, and they should really sell that old fab off already.



got any real tangible proof to back that up? I'd love to see it.
going by the 6D Mark II pinout, it's not using the old fab. PDR doesn't tell you what fab it uses.

btw, 500nm wiring will run cooler than 180nm wiring structures, simply because there's less resistance.


----------



## qudek77 (Feb 6, 2019)

slclick said:


> You would have had a coronary shooting 20+ years ago. Try a pinhole camera, it will humble your need for 'more'.



Now I'm painted as a bad guy in this thread, I was just disappointed that after a really long wait to upgrade (to make my shooting easier), Canons mirrorless announcement didn't make a big step forward in terms of features that some other systems have.

No hate, just sadness...


----------



## Aaron D (Feb 6, 2019)

Good looking camera! This looks like it'd be a fun one to carry around everywhere you go. It would be nice to have something like a 24-70 f/4 to make it even more compact. Or I'd love to see a small 28mm f/1.8 with a lens hood that isn't goofy…...


----------



## Aaron D (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> No hate, just sadness...



So why be sad? Buy a Sony or a Nikon or WHATEVER will make you happy. And be happy!


----------



## delta0 (Feb 6, 2019)

This has my attention. However is this the same sensor as the 6D mkii or a new sensor?


----------



## deleteme (Feb 6, 2019)

“Dual Sensing IS”

Haven’t read all the comments but I would have thought this would be the marquee feature.


----------



## Quackator (Feb 6, 2019)

This again isn't for me. I still lag behind with shrinking my hands.....


----------



## raptor3x (Feb 6, 2019)

delta0 said:


> This has my attention. However is this the same sensor as the 6D mkii or a new sensor?



Almost certainly the same sensor.


----------



## Bambel (Feb 6, 2019)

quick'n'dirty size comparison:


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, jesus, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...



If you go for Sony, you know you need to put up with the Sony lenses instead of the amazing new Canon lenses? Glass are lasting, not the bodies.


----------



## max_sr (Feb 6, 2019)

Normalnorm said:


> “Dual Sensing IS”
> 
> Haven’t read all the comments but I would have thought this would be the marquee feature.



It's not so special to be the "marquee feature". It just slightly improves the lens IS with additional information from the image sensor. Nothing more.


----------



## riker (Feb 6, 2019)

Josh Leavitt said:


> Whether the RP retails for $1299 or $1599, I think Canon might try to position this camera on the shelves of popular department stores like Best Buy, Walmart, Target, and so on; all of this in attempt capture the market of casual consumers who aren't photography professionals. It has the potential to become the most affordable, visible, and accessible full-frame system out there in that case. If they're clever, they'll use in-store promo material to demonstrate the sensor size comparisons to APS-C and M4/3, and show the differences in DoF along with all the other full-frame benefits that manufacturers like to tout.


Although I see how huge of a potential it would be for Canon to make it widely spread and sell sh*tloads of them, in the meantime I'm also confused. Casual consumers buying camera in Walmart have no idea at all what full frame is, never shoot RAW, etc...M should be their camera. Or an even cheaper and weaker RP below $1000 which has the "serious" look, competes with Sony in that regard, but half the price.
Or maybe I just tend to forget how much more money Japanese and Americans have and it's totally common to buy body only for $1500 for casual consumers.


----------



## tmc784 (Feb 6, 2019)

This should be casual consumer camera, you get what you pay for.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

riker said:


> Although I see how huge of a potential it would be for Canon to make it widely spread and sell sh*tloads of them, in the meantime I'm also confused. Casual consumers buying camera in Walmart have no idea at all what full frame is, never shoot RAW, etc...M should be their camera. Or an even cheaper and weaker RP below $1000 which has the "serious" look, competes with Sony in that regard, but half the price.
> Or maybe I just tend to forget how much more money Japanese and Americans have and it's totally common to buy body only for $1500 for casual consumers.


If they don't have any idea the sellers at the store can try and convince them. Ever since this category was "invented" with the D600 and 6D it has become one of the most important segment in the camera marketplace and there are dozens of the older models on ebay with very low shutter count (and after this, there could be more still, since this camera with the smaller size, easier to use AF system and articulating screen is more useful to them as well).

The EOS M system has definitely been put to the sideline a little bit, simply because there are way more EF lenses available to this system than EF-S or EF-M and there will be more affordable options in RF-mount as well.
That is also why I don't think it will be less than 1500$ (without the EF adapter) to still keep some distance from the EOS M system.


----------



## Ladislav (Feb 6, 2019)

This is the ugliest Canon camera I have ever seen


----------



## Trey T (Feb 6, 2019)

I'm on the fence of jumping on the bandwagon, FF and MILC. I prefer APS-C platform over FF, particularly the frame rate for live events (a hobbyist), but tired of waiting for a revised 7D (assuming it to be 7D Mark III). The EOS R has the crop feature but the MP is too low

I've been handicapped w/ a EOS-M camera for two years now. W/ EOS R and RP news, it appears that there's no hope for high-end APS-C in DSLR or MILC.

I don't like to drastically change, so I'll stick w/ Canon. I need a better camera for sure!!!!


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Feb 6, 2019)

depending on price and video features, I may consider this camera. It would make a great vlogging camera pending video specs. I would assume there will be a 4k crop but should be less since the sensor has less mp


----------



## Trey T (Feb 6, 2019)

Ladislav said:


> This is the ugliest Canon camera I have ever seen


It appears to be a low-end FF camera, like a Rebel mirrorless w/ FF. It probably serve as a dedicated camera (e.g. macro camera), a secondary camera.


----------



## max_sr (Feb 6, 2019)

kaptainkatsu said:


> depending on price and video features, I may consider this camera. It would make a great vlogging camera pending video specs. I would assume there will be a 4k crop but should be less since the sensor has less mp


I wouldn't be surprised, if there wasn't any 4k. Or without DPAF like in the M50.


----------



## Ladislav (Feb 6, 2019)

One observation for everyone moaning about IBIS or jumping every time IS is mentioned with relation to Canon's camera body. This is unicorn.

Even if Canon adds IBIS to their next body, it will be just marketing gimmick. They already stated how much they trust their possible first version of IBIS by their roadmap of RF lenses with build in IS. If they had good working IBIS ready for PRO body, they would not need to do something like 15-35 IS or 35 IS maybe even 24-70 IS. 

If Canon launches IBIS it will be in my opinion far behind competition in its first version and people will be moaning again.


----------



## Trey T (Feb 6, 2019)

kaptainkatsu said:


> depending on price and video features, I may consider this camera. It would make a great vlogging camera pending video specs. I would assume there will be a 4k crop but should be less since the sensor has less mp


Perhaps that's the target consumer. Thousands of Youtubers these days can film/narrate just as good or better than the multi-million dollar Hollywood budget.


----------



## YnR (Feb 6, 2019)

BigShooter said:


> Jesus, still people moaning about 'bad' this or 'better Sony' that. When do you imbeciles understand it's a tool, any shortcoming in the end result is YOUR fault, not your equipment.



If you’re not pushing the limits of the camera that makes complete sense but in low light, long exposure scenarios, you couldn’t be more wrong. And fixing it in post isn’t the answer I’m looking for.


----------



## Trey T (Feb 6, 2019)

Ladislav said:


> One observation for everyone moaning about IBIS or jumping every time IS is mentioned with relation to Canon's camera body. This is unicorn.
> 
> Even if Canon adds IBIS to their next body, it will be just marketing gimmick. They already stated how much they trust their possible first version of IBIS by their roadmap of RF lenses with build in IS. If they had good working IBIS ready for PRO body, they would not need to do something like 15-35 IS or 35 IS maybe even 24-70 IS.
> 
> If Canon launches IBIS it will be in my opinion far behind competition in its first version and people will be moaning again.


People that mention about IBIS are likely not serious (or lack of standard) about the product they output (e.g. photo or vid work). There are tons of youtubers that review products and perhaps they need those features to talk about or bait people into their less sensible narratives.


----------



## qudek77 (Feb 6, 2019)

Aaron D said:


> So why be sad? Buy a Sony or a Nikon or WHATEVER will make you happy. And be happy!


Well the switch is making me sad, I'm sort off forced to buy something with 4K because some clients ask if I shoot in 4K, and I always have to say no...


----------



## NicoN (Feb 6, 2019)

Did a small size comparison R vs. RP


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Feb 6, 2019)

At this price point...I think these cameras will fly off the shelves. I think a lot of curious pros / semi pros will buy one just to try and then use them as a 2nd or 3rd camera body.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> At this price point...I think these cameras will fly off the shelves. I think a lot of curious pros / semi pros will buy one just to try and then use them as a 2nd or 3rd camera body.


Yes, that's why making it with a lesser battery is an annoyance for them (just like the single SD slot was for the 6D II or EOS R in comparison to a 5D III or 5D IV)


----------



## mpb001 (Feb 6, 2019)

I use a 5DIV, which I think will be my last DSLR. I think that Canon is moving in the right direction with the RP. I do like the smaller body, even if it is plastic, it is still a FF camera and if they have tweeked the sensor a little to get better dynamic range, that will have my attention. It will probably make a great travel camera. Since it is small, I do hope that they will make a battery grip for it, but I have not seen any indication of that. With this camera, the original R and a forthcoming pro mirrorless R-body and all the new R-Lenses, I think that Canon will have all the bases covered for a couple of years.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

mpb001 said:


> I use a 5DIV, which I think will be my last DSLR. I think that Canon is moving in the right direction with the RP. I do like the smaller body, even if it is plastic, it is still a FF camera and if they have tweeked the sensor a little to get better dynamic range, that will have my attention. It will probably make a great travel camera. Since it is small, I do hope that they will make a battery grip for it, but I have not seen any indication of that. With this camera, the original R and a forthcoming pro mirrorless R-body and all the new R-Lenses, I think that Canon will have all the bases covered for a couple of years.


Yes it is going to be a simple grip extension, for a battery grip one probably needs to step up to an EOS R (and I guess the top-end model will have the vertical grip built-in, just like an OM-D E-M1X)


----------



## nbaresejr (Feb 6, 2019)

I am still not sure what Canon is doing with the R series. Are they in a position now where they are going to have 5 full frame mirrorless cameras? Does everyone see it this way at the current time?

1. RP- entry level FF
2. R- Mid range
3. ??- 5d mk4 replacement in Mirrorless form
4. ??- 5dsr replacement in mirrorless form
5. ?? 1dx2 replacement in mirrorless. This seems to be way down the road if the rumor of the 1dx2 replacement being a DSLR holds true.

It does not make sense to me to have the 5dmk4 and 5dsr lines become 1 camera. I am wanting to jump in on this system but will not do so until a get a camera better then my 5d4.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 6, 2019)

nbaresejr said:


> I am still not sure what Canon is doing with the R series. Are they in a position now where they are going to have 5 full frame mirrorless cameras? Does everyone see it this way at the current time?
> 
> 1. RP- entry level FF
> 2. R- Mid range
> ...



IMO, 4 lines.
Rp
R
Rs (high mp version of the R)
Rx (sports 1DX)

I doubt they'll come out with an exact 5D Mark IV replacement, but over time, make the R Mark II,etc more like the 5D series.


----------



## Josh Leavitt (Feb 6, 2019)

riker said:


> Although I see how huge of a potential it would be for Canon to make it widely spread and sell sh*tloads of them, in the meantime I'm also confused. Casual consumers buying camera in Walmart have no idea at all what full frame is, never shoot RAW, etc...M should be their camera. Or an even cheaper and weaker RP below $1000 which has the "serious" look, competes with Sony in that regard, but half the price.
> Or maybe I just tend to forget how much more money Japanese and Americans have and it's totally common to buy body only for $1500 for casual consumers.



There's no doubt that the EOS M cameras would be a much more practical choice (and in all reality far wiser choice) for an average consumer. It really all comes down to the in-store marketing promotions and how effectively Canon would communicate the advantages of their full-frame system over the APS-C system. A casual consumer would need to see visual representations of full-frame versus APS-C in terms of: sensor size, field of view, depth of field, low-light performance, and other key performance areas. It would be just like shopping for a large screen 4k HDR television and comparing it a 1080p television; obviously more expensive, but the differences are easily visible when you compare them side-by-side in the store.

Selling the $1299-$1599 body-only model would be critical, however. Consumerism always favors the route of up-selling; in this case, buying a $1299-$1599 body that can be rationalized as having major advantages over the latest EOS M body for only $400-$500 more (depending on sales events), and then supplementing that purchase with a x10 optical zoom (RF 24-240mm IS USM) that will meet all your photographic needs for just $800-$900 more (although I'm not sure how much that one will actually cost). That sales combo would likely outsell the RP+24-105mm F/4L kit, even though they would be fairly close to the same price.


----------



## nbaresejr (Feb 6, 2019)

rrcphoto said:


> IMO, 4 lines.
> Rp
> R
> Rs (high mp version of the R)
> ...



Your prob right and if you are im looking at another 3 years prob until they upgrade that camera for me to buy. I like the camera but I have trouble spending 2K+ on a camera that will not have improved image quality over what I currently have.


----------



## shawn (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, jesus, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...


The reality is the 6D II is a great camera with a great sensor.


----------



## edoorn (Feb 6, 2019)

They could make the 5Ds replacement a bit like the D850, like a do-it-all camera with the option to shoot raw in lower resolution (and possibly faster fps)


----------



## dpc (Feb 6, 2019)

Trey T said:


> People that mention about IBIS are likely not serious (or lack of standard) about the product they output (e.g. photo or vid work). There are tons of youtubers that review products and perhaps they need those features to talk about or bait people into their less sensible narratives.




I must object to this. I’m possibly interested in IBIS and I’m very serious about my photographic output. My interest is unrelated to “gimmicky” tech but very much related to the practicalities of my personal situation. I’m older. I’m in good health but am thinking forward to a time when I may not be able to hold my camera as steadily as I can now. IBIS in combination with lens stabilization may be quite beneficial, not to mention with lenses having no built-in stabilization. Up to this point I’ve not given IBIS a second thought. In any event, I’m interested in a new camera and whether it has IBIS or not won’t be the deciding factor but will be something I mull over. If I do decide to go with IBIS, it’ll be in the Fujifilm X-H1 since I have have four good Fuji lenses, two of which are unstabilized. I love my Canon gear and will continue to use it. I guess my point is that different photographers may have very different needs.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

edoorn said:


> They could make the 5Ds replacement a bit like the D850, like a do-it-all camera with the option to shoot raw in lower resolution (and possibly faster fps)


In Canon's book, the name suggests it is a derivative of the 5D line with a specialized high-megapixel sensor (and of course it can produce lower res files).

So that would mean that the EOS Rs would have more or less similar body as the EOS R (itself a mirrorless derivative of the 5D) with a different sensor.

Or another possibility that it is derived from their, bigger higher-end body that is still coming, so one "Pro" body with dual card slots but with two different sensors (one for sports and video and another for high-resolution, which is a formula that three other FF MILC competitors are already using)

Or maybe we will see four R bodies and they all look different to each other - except saying EOS R at the front and the exact model written elsewhere


----------



## stochasticmotions (Feb 6, 2019)

This seems like a great entry into full frame cameras, very close to the 6D2 gives you a good choice if you want to go into mirrorless or stay with DSLR you can get pretty comparable cameras at a reasonable price. If they have an inexpensive but reasonable lens for this, I could see it being a big seller and a good launch point towards canon's future full frame R series cameras and lenses. Seems like this will really undercut the Nikon Z6 for people looking at their first full frame, the Sony A7III is still a better choice and worth more than its price but that won't matter as people (including me) will tend to tell people who want to get in to photography that you can't go wrong with Canon.


----------



## jeanluc (Feb 6, 2019)

nbaresejr said:


> I am still not sure what Canon is doing with the R series. Are they in a position now where they are going to have 5 full frame mirrorless cameras? Does everyone see it this way at the current time?
> 
> 1. RP- entry level FF
> 2. R- Mid range
> ...




I think a lot of people are with you.


----------



## BeenThere (Feb 6, 2019)

nbaresejr said:


> I am still not sure what Canon is doing with the R series. Are they in a position now where they are going to have 5 full frame mirrorless cameras? Does everyone see it this way at the current time?
> 
> 1. RP- entry level FF
> 2. R- Mid range
> ...


Because Canon does not give us their roadmap, we are all guessing along with you.


----------



## BeenThere (Feb 6, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> I'm working to get a confirmed price asap. I've heard $1299, $1499, $1599.......


This means that most likely is $1399.


----------



## nchoh (Feb 6, 2019)

CaMeRa QuEsT said:


> I've been looking forward for a tiny FF ILC to show up, so I'm loving almost everything about this camera so far, except for:
> 
> 1. Power switch: they got it wrong on the R and are perpetuating this dumb decision on the RP. That lock switch is in the perfect spot for a power switch, just like in my Rebel XS bodies. I understand that they wanted a power switch that wouldn't easily be nudged on by accident when the camera is not being used, but a mirrorless ILC, especially one using a tiny battery, needs to have it handy on the shutter hand. Perpetuating a wrong engineering decision just makes Canon engineers look dumb.



Right hand for holding onto the camera grip. Right thumb and forefinger to handle the controls. Left hand to hold onto the lens. Left thumb/forefinger to control the 2 or 3 rings. Left thumb to switch on/off camera. 

Following the design philosophy is one handed control using the right hand. Furthermore, many people complained that the settings would be changed when the on/off switch is located below a dial. Happened to me many times and I hated that I had to visually check every time I switched the camera on. I like that the on/off switch is on the left.

Your own single preference does not make it a wrong engineering decision.


----------



## hkenneth (Feb 6, 2019)

NicoN said:


> View attachment 183003
> 
> 
> Did a small size comparison R vs. RP


 
The waste of space of the on/off switch is making me crazy. Why not put an ISO dial over there...


----------



## Aaron D (Feb 6, 2019)

mpb001 said:


> I use a 5DIV, which I think will be my last DSLR.



Same here. I've got the 5Div and now the R and I can't wait to ditch EFs altogether. Biggest hole I'm going to have for a while is TS-E lenses—and I'm not sure how absolutely essential those are anymore, with an excellent 15-24 coming up. 

And a very real concern I have though is _psychology_: I showed off my new R to a client who told me, "Nobody's going to take you seriously with that little thing." No kidding.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 6, 2019)

Aaron D said:


> Same here. I've got the 5Div and now the R and I can't wait to ditch EFs altogether. Biggest hole I'm going to have for a while is TS-E lenses—and I'm not sure how absolutely essential those are anymore, with an excellent 15-24 coming up.
> 
> And a very real concern I have though is _psychology_: I showed off my new R to a client who told me, "Nobody's going to take you seriously with that little thing." No kidding.



add the grip and it should be a "serious camera"


----------



## Aaron D (Feb 6, 2019)

Bambel said:


> quick'n'dirty size comparison:



Ought to add the 5Div with the EF 24-105 next to those. That's a giant leap…..


----------



## CaMeRa QuEsT (Feb 6, 2019)

rrcphoto said:


> got any real tangible proof to back that up? I'd love to see it.
> going by the 6D Mark II pinout, it's not using the old fab. PDR doesn't tell you what fab it uses.
> 
> btw, 500nm wiring will run cooler than 180nm wiring structures, simply because there's less resistance.



I wish I could give you tangible proof that the 6DII sensor is made in the same fab as the 6D's but I don't. Now why would Canon use its new fab to churn out old tech sensors when they have an underused old fab that already does those strikes me as wasteful of available resources and contrary to what their bean counters wanted to achieve, which clearly was to provide a cost effective update/upgrade from the 6D. 

BTW, pinout won't tell you whether it was made on one fab or another, either, and it's not the thick wiring that's hogging power and generating heat, it's the large size logics and transistors etched on the silicon which need those thick wires to feed them with the additional power to run properly.


----------



## AA (Feb 6, 2019)

If it has the 6D II sensor, we already have the winner for "the worst new camera release of 2019" 

That sensor is 10 years behind the curve at this point.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 6, 2019)

Aaron D said:


> Same here. I've got the 5Div and now the R and I can't wait to ditch EFs altogether. Biggest hole I'm going to have for a while is TS-E lenses—and I'm not sure how absolutely essential those are anymore, with an excellent 15-24 coming up.
> 
> And a very real concern I have though is _psychology_: I showed off my new R to a client who told me, "Nobody's going to take you seriously with that little thing." No kidding.



I wouldn't worry much about what they think by the looks of the small camera. I faced something similar when I ditched the large cameras for video and went DSLR. Some clients would ask about that, but I would just say wait for the final product and let the work speak for itself. After the first commercial with them, they trusted my judgement. 

At the end of the day, we may end up using consumer products in 10 years. Give the client the same camera as you, and you'll outperform them. A great camera won't fix an amateur photographer.


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

Aaron D said:


> And a very real concern I have though is _psychology_: I showed off my new R to a client who told me, "Nobody's going to take you seriously with that little thing." No kidding.


You can also get the RF 28-70mm "kit" lens, I didn't know where to put that, but based on this, maybe it should be called the _psycho _lens


----------



## Metalex (Feb 6, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> If you go for Sony, you know you need to put up with the Sony lenses instead of the amazing new Canon lenses? Glass are lasting, not the bodies.


A lot of those Sony lenses are every bit as good as Canon equivalents. Some are are worse, some are better...

ALL of them are stabilised.


----------



## m1mm1m (Feb 6, 2019)

This body makes no sense to me..... It has a sensor with marginally less resolution than the EOS R and all else looks eerily similar...

You'd think Canon would next come out with a much higher-end pro-oriented or a consumer-level much cheaper body and not this almost-an-R thing....

All that said... I just finished a CPS eval of the "R" and I like what I see -- a lot... Still there are issues... namely:

1. I don't like the way the EVF behaves after a shot... There should be an option to always go back to live view and not simply mimic what the LCD does... which is generally a preview.

2. Speaking of the LCD.. there should be a way to have it simply do a few-second preview and then off... The way I have all my dSLRs set to do. This "always on" displaying something or always off binary choice is annoying and a waste of battery.

3. We need more than 5FPS.. even if only in a crop mode.

4. That slider thingy is useless. I want my joystick back...

My favorite "feature" this has over any dSLR -- the ability to AF anywhere on the sensor with any lens/TC combination of any effective maximum aperture -- and do it WELL as well as FAST..

The first two issues could be fixed in software right now. I like way more than I disliked, but not enough to buy it. I'll stick to my 5DSR and 1D4 until Canon addresses my four concerns... which I'm sure they will within a year or two.... LOL...

Either way... I am quite sure this camera along with Nikon's "Z" series represents the end of the dSLR.... I know when I finally buy into this, I'm never looking back...


----------



## peterzuehlke (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, jesus, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...


Canon has a history of upgrading camera bodies on one cycle and then upgrading sensors on the next, so you used to get a whole new camera every 3 years or so. So not unexpected. Problem is they are behind Sony on IBIS and autofocus and sensors for low noise and DR. I have both and I would really like to get back to all Canon, adapting lenses for me has been mixed.


----------



## Aaron D (Feb 6, 2019)

crazyrunner33 said:


> I wouldn't worry much about what they think by the looks of the small camera. I faced something similar when I ditched the large cameras for video and went DSLR. Some clients would ask about that, but I would just say wait for the final product and let the work speak for itself. After the first commercial with them, they trusted my judgement.
> 
> At the end of the day, we may end up using consumer products in 10 years. Give the client the same camera as you, and you'll outperform them. A great camera won't fix an amateur photographer.



Very true all that—though I've heard some talk from clients about a competitor who uses an Arca-Swiss/digital back and apparently uses a cart now to drag his _lights_ around on a shoot. Who uses lights now with digital? And even though nobody can _see_ the difference in images out of that camera compared to FF—they still get the notion they're getting their money's worth from that guy. They get dinner AND a show!


----------



## Lalumière (Feb 6, 2019)

I think this camera will be very popular, by its shape and performance. Seems to be a finished product and not a pre-production. Canon will sell a lot of them.
More R lenses are coming and it proves Canon's seriousness.
The only problem with this device will be the complainers with their ridiculous comparison with Sony or other brands.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Feb 6, 2019)

Canon seems to be one of the few manufactures that understands that the main benefit of mirrorless is that you can make inexpensive uncomplicated cameras. I'd expect this to be a $900 camera within a year or two. Hopefully that will slow the demise of interchangable lens camera a bit. Some smaller, inexpensive glass to match would be nice.


----------



## peterzuehlke (Feb 6, 2019)

Metalex said:


> A lot of those Sony lenses are every bit as good as Canon equivalents. Some are are worse, some are better...
> 
> ALL of them are stabilised.


and there is Sigma and Tamron which work well with the Sonys. If you don't use the big white super teles, there is a lot of competition for glass these days.


----------



## Aaron D (Feb 6, 2019)

padam said:


> You can also get the RF 28-70mm "kit" lens, I didn't know where to put that, but based on this, maybe it should be called the _psycho _lens


Yeah and that's a very real argument for getting one, even though all that speed is wasted in architectural when I'd stop it down to f/8 anyway…..


----------



## CaMeRa QuEsT (Feb 6, 2019)

nchoh said:


> Right hand for holding onto the camera grip. Right thumb and forefinger to handle the controls. Left hand to hold onto the lens. Left thumb/forefinger to control the 2 or 3 rings. Left thumb to switch on/off camera.
> 
> Following the design philosophy is one handed control using the right hand. Furthermore, many people complained that the settings would be changed when the on/off switch is located below a dial. Happened to me many times and I hated that I had to visually check every time I switched the camera on. I like that the on/off switch is on the left.
> 
> Your own single preference does not make it a wrong engineering decision.



This camera's lock switch is clear and far away from the mode dial. I am an amateur shooter, the very type of shooter this camera is aimed at, and I (like most of my ilk) when idle either carry the camera hanging from its strap over my neck or grabbing it with my right hand hanging down below my hip. I want to be able to turn the camera on before my left hand reaches the camera, by which time I want my camera to be ready to fire right away, and mirrorless bodies tend to take much longer to be fully armed and ready after flicking the power switch on than DSLRs and I don't want to keep the camera on when idle, wasting what precious little battery charge the LB-E17 carries.


----------



## Rezen73 (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Well the switch is making me sad, I'm sort off forced to buy something with 4K because some clients ask if I shoot in 4K, and I always have to say no...



Is it a requirement for you to use the same device to shoot stills and video? For ~$350 you can get a DJI Osmo Pocket and shoot far better video footage than you can with ANY hand-held DSLR or Mirrorless ILC system, just from the standpoint of having gimbal stabilized footage (unless you carry around a DSLR/Mirrorless gimbal in your kit for shoots) With a gimbal (or tripod), the need for in-body stabilization is negated tremendously, and you can use a wider angle lens (e.g. the 15-35, or adapted 11-24) if the crop is too much for your composition requirements. Of course, if you have a use-case where you need professional 4k video footage wider than 24mm (the market for this is extremely thin), you'd probably be shooting with EOS-C line with PL mount lenses (or non-Canon equivalent) anyway... and for everything else, for the purposes of ticking the "*shoots with 4k*" box... DJI Osmo, iPhone, Android, etc... all tick that box.

Personally I *very rarely* shoot video with my stills cameras these days, unless I have a specific composition that is only achievable through my EF glass, and even then, I really hate it, because I don't carry around a DSLR gimbal with me on vacation. At best I have a tripod or platypod. For vast majority of my personal video requirements, the DJI Osmo Mobile (using my iPhone) or Pocket are good enough.

I am seriously considering buying the RP to replace my M5 as my second body (my primary body is 5D4), along with the RF 24-70 f/2.8L IS to replace my damaged EF 24-70 f/2.8L I. Half-tempted to get the RF 15-35 f/2.8L IS as well for my astrophotography interests, despite just buying the EF 16-35 f/2.8L III a few months ago. Will wait for reviews on that one. Regardless, once the prosumer (e.g. 5D equivalent) R body is available, I plan on making the full switch to RF, much to my wife's chagrin.


----------



## espressino (Feb 6, 2019)

BeenThere said:


> Because Canon does not give us their roadmap, we are all guessing along with you.



Yes but in one of the many interviews with Canon executives which were posted on CR in these last few months they did say that there weren't going to be exact matches between DSLR and mirrorless lines, and that's also what has happened with the APS-C and M series: there is no exact equivalent for one model in the respective other line; the M5 lacks some features of the 77D, 80D and vice versa. (They also said that the EOS R was positioned somewhere between the 6D and 5D IV. Maybe that's just marketing speak. Maybe it's what they actually think).
All that being said: the RP looks like the M50 full frame equivalent. I enjoyed the whine-fest when that camera came out, I'm enjoying the whine-fest now: It's still going to be a very capable camera. And so many --supposedly pro-- users on this site keep mentioning how much they love the M50 as their n-th body: so it appears that even pros can work with entry-level models.
One more thing: as of next week there are going to be two R models available, and at least 8 lenses, for a system launched just half a year ago. EF-S hasn't seen a new lens for over two years (yes yes I know it's dead, silly me for still enjoying my camera), and EOS M users needed *a lot* of patience before getting their lens count up to 8. So claiming that Canon isn't committed to the R system is just plain wrong. And if you're not happy with the EOS RP then wait for the pro body, which I'm sure won't be too long. But as of now this is a little bit like moaning that the EOS 2000D doesn't have all of the features and ergonomics of the 7D II. Different tool. Different target audience. And part of the strategy: cheaper entry point into FF so as to increase sales.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 6, 2019)

slclick said:


> Canon has never made a bad FF body, but a poor driver can make a Porsche a horrible car with your logic I guess.



Defending Canon move to keep on polishing a turd with a lower tier EOS R model because of sales is like Sony users defending Sony


Josh Leavitt said:


> Whether the RP retails for $1299 or $1599, I think Canon might try to position this camera on the shelves of popular department stores like Best Buy, Walmart, Target, and so on; all of this in attempt capture the market of casual consumers who aren't photography professionals. It has the potential to become the most affordable, visible, and accessible full-frame system out there in that case. If they're clever, they'll use in-store promo material to demonstrate the sensor size comparisons to APS-C and M4/3, and show the differences in DoF along with all the other full-frame benefits that manufacturers like to tout.



$1600 might be too pricey for that market especially without a lens. 

Something like M50 II with RF mount would be more ideal for those price sensitive market.


----------



## navastronia (Feb 6, 2019)

Aaron D said:


> Very true all that—though I've heard some talk from clients about a competitor who uses an Arca-Swiss/digital back and apparently uses a cart now to drag his _lights_ around on a shoot. Who uses lights now with digital? And even though nobody can _see_ the difference in images out of that camera compared to FF—they still get the notion they're getting their money's worth from that guy. They get dinner AND a show!



Wait a minute, which lights is he dragging around that people apparently don't use anymore? Surely you don't mean strobes, which people use all the time?


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 6, 2019)

Metalex said:


> A lot of those Sony lenses are every bit as good as Canon equivalents. Some are are worse, some are better...
> 
> ALL of them are stabilised.



So... which Sony lenses are equivalent to the RF 50L f1.2 or the 28-70 f2? And which are better than the RF 24-105 and RF 35 f1.8?


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

Aaron D said:


> Yeah and that's a very real argument for getting one, even though all that speed is wasted in architectural when I'd stop it down to f/8 anyway…..


Well, there are plenty of other ones, like the 11-24mm which I got for a lot less than it was new (and still like new), because people seem to loose interest in big, bulky lenses that look more impressive  But I think it will be looked at again a bit more, if the EF-EOS R filter adapter works as well as promised.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 6, 2019)

I started into the thread but have baled after one page because it's the same old whining of those who should forget about Canon and shoot with the best that is on the other side of the fence. Get a life, go out and do some photography or join the Sony forum and have a love-in.

Jack


----------



## padam (Feb 6, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> I started into the thread but have baled after one page because it's the same old whining of those who should forget about Canon and shoot with the best that is on the other side of the fence. Get a life, go out and do some photography or join the Sony forum and have a love-in.
> 
> Jack


Yep, they have put it up and it's hilarious already, I think YT reaction videos are coming up before the full specs and price


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 6, 2019)

slclick said:


> Canon has never made a bad FF body, but a poor driver can make a Porsche a horrible car with your logic I guess.



No FF camera in the last 5 years is a bad camera for photographer just a poorly value camera. We are all spoil with choices. 

A poor photographer doesn't make 5DIV/1DXII a bad camera just like a poor driver can make a porsche a horrible car anymore since we all know what that camera and car is capable off.

Canon 6D II had a poorer sensor performance compared to my 6D and a poorly value one too compared to the competitions. It came out with MSRP of $2000 and quickly drop to $1300. 

Those 5 amazing lens that was leaked will be expensive especially the trinity lens, and 85 1.2. With an entry EOS R, I don't know if people would go buy it immediately. 
Those lenses are specifically aimed at a higher market. We just Canon would release a better camera body who aim at a higher end market to buy those pro lens.


----------



## Aaron D (Feb 6, 2019)

navastronia said:


> Wait a minute, which lights is he dragging around that people apparently don't use anymore? Surely you don't mean strobes, which people use all the time?



Yeah I know they do—but in architectural and interiors photography it's my own belief that when you introduce lighting to a space, you're 'destroying' (too strong a word…over-writing?) the designer's work. Lights are required for a lot of uses, but for capturing an interior accurately, in digital it's possible to add another exposure in PS and preserve the original ambience…...


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 6, 2019)

What I do not like is
* very different from M50 layout
* Menu button on the left side (see above)

What I like is
* price if it is 1300 $ / EUR
* size
* weight
* three C-settings
* mode dial

What I would like: A body only version or a body + controlring adapter version!

Seeing forward to this body to mate it e.g. with 100mm Macro or 100mm F2 lens and ... EF 400 5.6 with 2x converter AND FULL WORKING AF !!!

The no buy case would be the same sensor like 6D mark ii - maybe it is 26.2 MPix for full sensor and 24 MPix for images - so a different sensor. In this case I am shure they will not do it because they have to set a big foot into the open door of the mirrorless market and IQ has to be very close to EOS R.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...



Sony A7III, A7RIII, A9 EVF is poor compared to EOS R. Their ergonomic is a mess too. They cut corner like EVF and LCD screen to get to affordable price. It may or may not matter to you. 

I wouldn't switch to Sony and wait until the next generation and hopefully they fix some of the issues. By then you can consider Canon EOS R Pro, Sony and Panasonic S1.


----------



## preppyak (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> I have a 60D (really old and worn out), 70D and a 5DIII.
> 
> The video quality of the 6D mark II is kinda soft, it is slightly worse compared to the 70D in my opinion. I need a FF 4K body with good autofocus during video, and the MarkIII is lacking that feature, so I was waiting for a long time for Canons no crop no bullshit 4K camera but unfortunately it didn't came.


This. Im working my 80D and a GH4, and was hoping that either a 90D w/ 4k or something like this RP would help me shrink down my kit some. If I could stick all to LP-E6 batteries (and charge them in camera), suddenly that shrinks down my multiple battery types and chargers. Also allows me to carry 1/2 the lenses since I can adapt EF to RF cheaply (compared to Metabones at $400). Having used the first gen Sony a7R, I know all the limitations it had and switched back to Canon.

The 6DII was supposed to be the answer to my problems...with 4k (even cropped), the same battery, and improved DR, etc. Instead, it somehow stepped back. The 90D seems like its an afterthought currently. This sounds like a 6dII with worse battery life. Sony caught up to Canon in autofocus and battery life...and the list of drawbacks is getting shorter by the day.

Cant imagine Canon having what I need by summer.


----------



## Aaron D (Feb 6, 2019)

Danglin52 said:


> Surprised no one is cheering if this is the meaning of the line.



Yeah no kidding! The answer to so many prayers…...


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Well the switch is making me sad, I'm sort off forced to buy something with 4K because some clients ask if I shoot in 4K, and I always have to say no...



Buy whatever tool require to do your job. No point is being emotional about it. That's what I am doing if EOS R Pro is another good enough camera. Eventually Sony may not provide you with what you need and you switch to another company when it's viable.


----------



## windsorc (Feb 6, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> You realize it was a lackluster camera back in 2017. It's 2019 now so it is even worse now by today's standards. It could the worst brand new full frame camera this year and beyond.


It has the Canon colors and ergonomics, so that's enough to keep the Canon faithful happy. They lived with the 7d ii sensor being poor, with the fact that Sony's sensors always seem to be a step above Canon's, but hey, when you are the market leader(overall) and have great colors you can afford to be average and get by, apparently. Of course people will say they take great shots with the 6d. Canon will discount as usual, throw in a printer nobody wants, make it look like a great deal. They'll still sell a load of these.


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Feb 6, 2019)

m1mm1m said:


> This body makes no sense to me..... It has a sensor with marginally less resolution than the EOS R and all else looks eerily similar...
> 
> You'd think Canon would next come out with a much higher-end pro-oriented or a consumer-level much cheaper body and not this almost-an-R thing....
> 
> ...



I just returned my CPS Loan yesterday.
1: Yes totally agree
2: In agreement
3: 100%
4: Completely useless.


----------



## Etienne (Feb 6, 2019)

After the 6DII sensor was universally ridiculed in reviews, I honestly thought that Canon would be too embarrassed ever to reuse that sensor.
But, here we go again.


----------



## Trey T (Feb 6, 2019)

espressino said:


> Yes but in one of the many interviews with Canon executives which were posted on CR in these last few months they did say that there weren't going to be exact matches between DSLR and mirrorless lines, and that's also what has happened with the APS-C and M series: there is no exact equivalent for one model in the respective other line; the M5 lacks some features of the 77D, 80D and vice versa. (They also said that the EOS R was positioned somewhere between the 6D and 5D IV. Maybe that's just marketing speak. Maybe it's what they actually think).
> All that being said: the RP looks like the M50 full frame equivalent. I enjoyed the whine-fest when that camera came out, I'm enjoying the whine-fest now: It's still going to be a very capable camera. And so many --supposedly pro-- users on this site keep mentioning how much they love the M50 as their n-th body: so it appears that even pros can work with entry-level models.
> One more thing: as of next week there are going to be two R models available, and at least 8 lenses, for a system launched just half a year ago. EF-S hasn't seen a new lens for over two years (yes yes I know it's dead, silly me for still enjoying my camera), and EOS M users needed *a lot* of patience before getting their lens count up to 8. So claiming that Canon isn't committed to the R system is just plain wrong. And if you're not happy with the EOS RP then wait for the pro body, which I'm sure won't be too long. But as of now this is a little bit like moaning that the EOS 2000D doesn't have all of the features and ergonomics of the 7D II. Different tool. Different target audience. And part of the strategy: cheaper entry point into FF so as to increase sales.


Do you know what the "RP" stands for? 

If the R sits between 6D and 5D, then this RP will sits below the 6D (probably price about $1300). I hope they will make a MLIC that sits between 7D and 1D (fast fps consideration).


----------



## knight427 (Feb 6, 2019)

Aaron D said:


> Same here. I've got the 5Div and now the R and I can't wait to ditch EFs altogether. Biggest hole I'm going to have for a while is TS-E lenses—and I'm not sure how absolutely essential those are anymore, with an excellent 15-24 coming up.
> 
> And a very real concern I have though is _psychology_: I showed off my new R to a client who told me, "Nobody's going to take you seriously with that little thing." No kidding.



Should'a bought an Oly EM1DX


----------



## gbc (Feb 6, 2019)

Got rid of the Touch Bar? Great! Replaced it with... Nothing?! Just move the freaking AF-ON button back there for god's sakes!


----------



## JohanCruyff (Feb 6, 2019)

Canon used to produce a 24 Mpixel APS-C "low DR sensor" (M3 and DSLRs).
Then they switched to a 24 Mpixel APS-C "high DR sensor" (M5, M6, 80D etc.).
["high DR" according to Canon's standards]


So, we still can hope that the 26 Mpixel sensor in the RP will feature _on-chip ADC_ and therefore improved Dynamic Range.


----------



## jdavidse (Feb 6, 2019)

I’m seeing a lot of gnashing of teeth about the lowest-tier R system camera. But with the leaked 2.8 trinity lenses and 85 1.2 we have a promise of a great pro camera coming in the near future. Which means none of the RP stuff matters, insofar as you don’t need to buy it. What matters is that canon sells a crap ton of these so that they can remain the market leader, and so future buyers of lots of RF L glass can get hooked. I’d say this camera looks perfect to do just that.


----------



## Metalex (Feb 6, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> So... which Sony lenses are equivalent to the RF 50L f1.2 or the 28-70 f2? And which are better than the RF 24-105 and RF 35 f1.8?


Only one of those has an equivalent. The Sony 24-105, which is pretty comparable.

I guess you could compare the Sony Zeiss 50/1.4 to the Canon 50/1.2 but they’re really quite different. Unfortunately Canon didn’t fix the bokeh from the DSLR version.


----------



## Shakey (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...


Tired of hearing this thought repeated...the 6D MKII is not a bad camera. Not by any stretch of the imagination. I do not own one, I own the other "really bad" Canon 5dsr...at least according to the uninformed...


----------



## drob (Feb 6, 2019)

What is dual sensing IS?


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Feb 6, 2019)

drob said:


> What is dual sensing IS?


Uses Lens IS and a gyro inside the camera for better is performance


----------



## edoorn (Feb 6, 2019)

padam said:


> In Canon's book, the name suggests it is a derivative of the 5D line with a specialized high-megapixel sensor (and of course it can produce lower res files).
> 
> So that would mean that the EOS Rs would have more or less similar body as the EOS R (itself a mirrorless derivative of the 5D) with a different sensor.
> 
> ...



I hope it would be derived from a higher end body; the R definitely needs some improvements if you ask me (I hate where that af-on button is)


----------



## AlanF (Feb 6, 2019)

Trey T said:


> Do you know what the "RP" stands for?
> 
> If the R sits between 6D and 5D, then this RP will sits below the 6D (probably price about $1300). I hope they will make a MLIC that sits between 7D and 1D (fast fps consideration).


 *R*equiescat in *P*ace?


----------



## brad-man (Feb 6, 2019)

AlanF said:


> *R*equiescat in *P*ace?



_Et tu_, _Brute_?


----------



## nchoh (Feb 6, 2019)

Etienne said:


> After the 6DII sensor was universally ridiculed in reviews, I honestly thought that Canon would be too embarrassed ever to reuse that sensor.
> But, here we go again.



The 6DII camera was ridiculed for it's antiquated AF system. The sensor was decent but did not show improvements over the 6DI sensor except in mp count. Criticism was on the camera due to the AF system, not the sensor!

You do know the difference between sensor and AF system right?


----------



## unfocused (Feb 6, 2019)

kaptainkatsu said:


> Uses Lens IS and a gyro inside the camera for better is performance


Not so sure about that. A source please.


----------



## jonebize (Feb 6, 2019)

Canon is clearly run by better businesspeople than Nikon.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 6, 2019)

Shakey said:


> Tired of hearing this thought repeated...the 6D MKII is not a bad camera. Not by any stretch of the imagination. I do not own one, I own the other "really bad" Canon 5dsr...at least according to the uninformed...
> View attachment 183014



The 5DSR is a fantastic camera for birds, my go to. Here is another hummer from last month, 7m away, 100-400mm II. Try and get that detail on any other Canon, or indeed an equivalent lens on a Sony or Nikon.


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Feb 6, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Not so sure about that. A source please.


https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...-strategy-development-focus-dual-sensing-tech


----------



## amorse (Feb 6, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Not so sure about that. A source please.


This video from Canon Korea on the EOS R references internal gyro and lens microprocessor (not lens IS) as being Dual Sensing IS, so I'd suggest they're not too far off:


----------



## jonebize (Feb 6, 2019)

Does anyone know if Canon will release some budget RF primes at some point? Like some fairly compact f/2.0 or f/2.8 glass?


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Feb 6, 2019)

kaptainkatsu said:


> https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...-strategy-development-focus-dual-sensing-tech


From my reading of that article it sounds like a combination of gyro data from the lens and image tracking data from the sensor rather than an in-body gyro. Thanks for the link though. I was curious what they meant by that.


----------



## jonebize (Feb 6, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Canon seems to be one of the few manufactures that understands that the main benefit of mirrorless is that you can make inexpensive uncomplicated cameras. I'd expect this to be a $900 camera within a year or two. Hopefully that will slow the demise of interchangable lens camera a bit. Some smaller, inexpensive glass to match would be nice.



Totally agree. Some of us just want -a camera- (a full-frame one!) that is compact, and that we can shoot photos with. For a lot of people, the form factor and price matters a lot more than the sensor. I wouldn't mind if they put a 5D MKII sensor in the thing, to be honest. I just want a small, affordable full frame camera.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Feb 6, 2019)

windsorc said:


> It has the Canon colors and ergonomics, so that's enough to keep the Canon faithful happy. They lived with the 7d ii sensor being poor, with the fact that Sony's sensors always seem to be a step above Canon's, but hey, when you are the market leader(overall) and have great colors you can afford to be average and get by, apparently. Of course people will say they take great shots with the 6d. Canon will discount as usual, throw in a printer nobody wants, make it look like a great deal. They'll still sell a load of these.


zzWhy would they buy this over a 6d mark II that much. Was the 6dII even a big seller. I never met a person with one.


----------



## ThomsA (Feb 6, 2019)

Just out of curiosity and suppressed GAS - are there any hints/rumours about availability of the RP?


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 6, 2019)

brad-man said:


> _Et tu_, _Brute_?


Did Canon verify in the end what R stood for?
Hopefully P doesn't stand for Penny Pinching.
RX or RZ would sound better but X and Z are used up already by other brands
Maybe it will be RP , R and then RC for a 100mp sensor


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 6, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> Did Canon verify in the end what R stood for?
> Hopefully P doesn't stand for Penny Pinching.
> RX or RZ would sound better but X and Z are used up already by other brands
> Maybe it will be RP , R and then RC for a 100mp sensor


R is for the mount, possibility R for right 

P could stand for Pink..... perhaps Canon is going after new markets and this will be the “Hello Kitty” camera


----------



## The Fat Fish (Feb 6, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Oh god, please not the 6DII sensor again. Please.


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 6, 2019)

AlanF said:


> The 5DSR is a fantastic camera for birds, my go to. Here is another hummer from last month, 7m away, 100-400mm II. Try and get that detail on any other Canon, or indeed an equivalent lens on a Sony or Nikon.
> View attachment 183015


A beautiful bird.
What ISO is that shot at?
I was curious about the artefacts above the eye when zoomed in. Is that just a result of bokeh?
It's not apparent elsewhere around the other edges.


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 6, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> R is for the mount, possibility R for right
> 
> P could stand for Pink..... perhaps Canon is going after new markets and this will be the “Hello Kitty” camera


Maybe its for Peppa as its now year of the Pig.


----------



## dak723 (Feb 6, 2019)

AA said:


> If it has the 6D II sensor, we already have the winner for "the worst new camera release of 2019"
> 
> That sensor is 10 years behind the curve at this point.



Another laughably idiotic post from a newcomer! Thanks for joining!


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 6, 2019)

The Fat Fish said:


> Oh god, please not the 6DII sensor again. Please.


First, go pick up a 6D2 and shoot with it. It works great!

Second, this is a BUDGET FF camera. This camera is probably the death of the 80D, and what is required is a low cost sensor that is better than the one in the 70D. This meets the bill. Go develop a new one, and the price goes up, and you just have another R. Why would they do that?


----------



## digitalride (Feb 6, 2019)

jonebize said:


> Totally agree. Some of us just want -a camera- (a full-frame one!) that is compact, and that we can shoot photos with. For a lot of people, the form factor and price matters a lot more than the sensor. I wouldn't mind if they put a 5D MKII sensor in the thing, to be honest. I just want a small, affordable full frame camera.



I think this hits the nail on the head - that is who the RP is marketed for. There is a huge segment of the market that will jump at this because it ticks off the "mirrorless" and "full frame" checkboxes even if an 80D would be a much better camera for them. 

I don't think any of the people saying the 6dii sensor is pathetic are in the market to buy a rebel, yet they make it sound like they'd buy this if the sensor was better. This is definitely a rebel-level camera in terms of controls and I'm sure they will find some other ways to cripple it, do you think they will go even slower than 1/180 flash sync speed?  

Of course this can be the perfect camera for some specific situations ( small back up body, low light, static subjects. ) but odds are if you're on this forum its not the camera you are looking for.


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 6, 2019)

dak723 said:


> Another laughably idiotic post from a newcomer! Thanks for joining!



It's just an opinion. It's hardly going to change your mind.
We were all newcomers once.
We might not always have free speech.
I might not agree with them but I'd recognise their right to give their opinion.


----------



## digitalride (Feb 6, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> This camera is probably the death of the 80D



You might be right and that's what scares me the most about Canon's potential roadmap. How long will it be until they release another camera with the 80D's mix of decent physical buttons/dials, decent autofocus, decent speed, comfortable size even with bigger lenses, excellent battery life, and will it ever cost less than $1000 again? Yeah, I'd really like a stop less of noise but I'm not willing to give up everything else and I'm not willing to pay 3x as much for it. The transition to mirrorless seems to be an opportunity to take features away and then introduce them later as advantages in higher end even more expensive bodies.


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 6, 2019)

Metalex said:


> Only one of those has an equivalent. The Sony 24-105, which is pretty comparable.
> 
> I guess you could compare the Sony Zeiss 50/1.4 to the Canon 50/1.2 but they’re really quite different. Unfortunately Canon didn’t fix the bokeh from the DSLR version.



If you ignore the heavy distortion, the 5,4 stops vignetting, the larger size, slow AF, and the poor image stabilizer, I guess the Sony 24-105 is pretty comparable to the RF24-105. I don’t ignore it however, and therefore it is no question that the Canon lens is significantly better.

Every Sony owner would have tears in their eyes because of joy if they could have a lens like the RF 50L f1.2, and you know it. If you don’t like it’s bokeh, you haven’t used it.

Good luck comparing your Sony lenses with the upcoming Canon RF L lenses.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 6, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> No FF camera in the last 5 years is a bad camera for photographerCanon 6D II had a poorer sensor performance compared to my 6D and a poorly value one too compared to the competitions. It came out with MSRP of $2000 and quickly drop to $1300.



except this is not the truth.

The MSRP of the 6D Mark II is not 1300, and it's not selling for 1300 now.

you'd look alot more credible if you googled over to B&H and checked the price before launching on your diatribe.

It dropped to 1300 over thanksgiving sales this year, approximately 17 months after it was released. that's not "quickly". It also went back up and Canon is hanving on a current sale with a bunch of other cameras right now, including the 6D II dropping the price from an MSRP of 1799 to 1499. for instance, the 5D Mark IV, 80D, 5Dsr, 5Ds,7d markii are all on a similar sale right now.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 6, 2019)

digitalride said:


> You might be right and that's what scares me the most about Canon's potential roadmap. How long will it be until they release another camera with the 80D's mix of decent physical buttons/dials, decent autofocus, decent speed, comfortable size even with bigger lenses, excellent battery life, and will it ever cost less than $1000 again? Yeah, I'd really like a stop less of noise but I'm not willing to give up everything else and I'm not willing to pay 3x as much for it. The transition to mirrorless seems to be an opportunity to take features away and then introduce them later as advantages in higher end even more expensive bodies.


I like the 80D. It is a fine camera, and except for the robustness I would pick it over a 7D2 any day of the week. (For me, the sealing of the 7D2 won out) I think that in many ways the RP will be a step down, but it most definitely a better sensor.

I think that as the market is shrinking, Canonwill try to shift users to more expensive cameras and the lenses that go with them. The RP, coupled with that 24-240 lens, would be an easy gateway into FF.....


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 6, 2019)

jonebize said:


> Does anyone know if Canon will release some budget RF primes at some point? Like some fairly compact f/2.0 or f/2.8 glass?



They have released the RF 35 f1.8 IS Macro, if you weren’t aware of it...


----------



## slclick (Feb 6, 2019)

Etienne said:


> After the 6DII sensor was universally ridiculed in reviews, I honestly thought that Canon would be too embarrassed ever to reuse that sensor.
> But, here we go again.


Ridiculed in reviews and LOVED by actual users (watching Fro Knows Podcasts is not a good way to determine what products to buy)... a common thing what with forums, keyboard warriors and spec sheets.


----------



## nchoh (Feb 6, 2019)

digitalride said:


> You might be right and that's what scares me the most about Canon's potential roadmap. How long will it be until they release another camera with the 80D's mix of decent physical buttons/dials, decent autofocus, decent speed, comfortable size even with bigger lenses, excellent battery life, and will it ever cost less than $1000 again? Yeah, I'd really like a stop less of noise but I'm not willing to give up everything else and I'm not willing to pay 3x as much for it. The transition to mirrorless seems to be an opportunity to take features away and then introduce them later as advantages in higher end even more expensive bodies.



Not sure what you are worried about. Canon's strategy to date has been to offer a camera for every segment possible at a competitive price. If there is a market, Canon wants to fill it. I don't see a pattern from the single R series released so far and I don't see a pattern with the soon to be release RP added either. If you see evidence of a change of strategy, please share.


----------



## Metalex (Feb 6, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> If you ignore the heavy distortion, the 5,4 stops vignetting, the larger size, slow AF, and the poor image stabilizer, I guess the Sony 24-105 is pretty comparable to the RF24-105. I don’t ignore it however, and therefore it is no question that the Canon lens is significantly better.
> 
> Every Sony owner would have tears in their eyes because of joy if they could have a lens like the RF 50L f1.2, and you know it. If you don’t like it’s bokeh, you haven’t used it.
> 
> Good luck comparing your Sony lenses with the upcoming Canon RF L lenses.


None of those are issues in real world shooting with software correction. Vignetting correction especially on Sony cameras is less of an issue with their superior sensors.

In terms of stabilisation, well you’re getting 5-axis on Sony, compared to lens-only with the Canon.

I’ve used the old Canon 50/1.2 a fair bit actually. The only tears are when the swirly bokeh destroys the image. You may like that - lots of people don’t.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 6, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> A beautiful bird.
> What ISO is that shot at?
> I was curious about the artefacts above the eye when zoomed in. Is that just a result of bokeh?
> It's not apparent elsewhere around the other edges.



It was shot at iso 1250. You are right, there is an artefact above the eye. It results from the lens sharpening tool of DxO PL. The tool works very well with the 5DIV, which doesn't give such sharp images because of its AA-filter. With the 5DSR, it oversharpens and I don't like the effect and usually turn it off and use a smidgeon of USM. Here is the same image with the lens sharpening turned off and zero sharpening applied, and the artefact has gone. It's a very heavy crop, the bird occupying only the middle 1100px x 550px at the centre of the 50mpx image, and is pushing the limits of getting a sharp image.


----------



## BrightTiger (Feb 6, 2019)

"The MSRP of the 6D Mark II is not 1300, and it's not selling for 1300 now."
Who buys MSRP? Seriously. Let's talk street prices.
Second, um yes, the Canon 6D II new, not grey, has been hitting sub $1200 lately. We should know: we almost pulled the trigger on one we put in the shopping cart a couple of nights ago. Why not? A great deal on a used one came up so we are rolling the dice on that. But yes, if you watch the prices and shop around, it's a $1200 new camera. Don't buy it above that unless you really need to.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 6, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> The video quality of the 6D mark II is kinda soft, it is slightly worse compared to the 70D in my opinion. I need a FF 4K body with good autofocus during video, and the MarkIII is lacking that feature, so I was waiting for a long time for Canons no crop no bullshit 4K camera but unfortunately it didn't came.



I can understand why someone interested in 4k video would look elsewhere. Sony has good FF 4k, and if you're going to accept Canon's crop factors then there are a number of APS-C and m43 bodies with excellent video features and output. Of course system consistency and EF lens support, plus DPAF, could certainly lead someone to stick with Canon on video. It's here that I wish Canon would improve, either their DIGIC processors or their sensor readout speeds, whichever is the bottleneck. I would really like to see a FF 4k R body.

I cannot, however, understand the whining by stills photographers. Canon is not behind in resolution, color (they're ahead here), or high ISO. They are _slightly_ behind in DR. Playing with the DPReview Exposure Latitude tool the 5D IV is within 1ev of the D850 and A7 III (+5ev vs. +6ev). Heck, depending on the part of the image you're looking at the 5Dsr is within 2ev (+4ev vs +6ev) or very close at 1ev (+5ev vs +6ev). The 6D II seems to be off by a solid 2ev (+4ev vs. +6ev). 

Still, that's 4ev of shadow latitude. I would like to see the HDR galleries of those complaining that the 6D II sensor is "old" or "bad". Can you actually exploit 4ev of shadow latitude? Or are you just upset that DPReview is going to lecture you again about the importance of "ISO invariance" when no one ever shoots that way since it screws up meter readings, exposure calculations (AE or manual), and EVF brightness?

The 6D II was not a bad camera in 2017 and it's not a bad camera today. Given the limited video features it is understandably a lower priced camera. 

I hope that the RP has a 4k video option, though I suspect it would never be FF given the prices being discussed and the R crop. A 4k 30p 1.5x crop mode and a lower price tag would make this tempting. If Canon "protects" the R by making the RP 1080p only it will be a mistake IMHO. But it still will not make the RP a _bad_ camera.


----------



## justawriter (Feb 6, 2019)

Picked up a 6DII on great Black Friday special to go with my 7DII, so that puts me out of considering another body until at least 2022. I expect by that time most of the R teething pains will be history and Sony will no longer bother to sell cameras but simply send sensors directly to DXO for glorification.


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 6, 2019)

Metalex said:


> None of those are issues in real world shooting with software correction. Vignetting correction especially on Sony cameras is less of an issue with their superior sensors.
> 
> In terms of stabilisation, well you’re getting 5-axis on Sony, compared to lens-only with the Canon.
> 
> I’ve used the old Canon 50/1.2 a fair bit actually. The only tears are when the swirly bokeh destroys the image. You may like that - lots of people don’t.



So... I guess the software correction of 5,4 stops vignetting is a breeze at ISO 1600? And I guess software correction also makes up for the shot you missed while you were waiting for the lens to focus? And software correction makes the lens smaller as well? I better get myself a Sony camera!  (Sarcasm allert )

You are aware that the EF 50L and RF 50L are different lenses?


----------



## BrightTiger (Feb 6, 2019)

slclick said:


> Ridiculed in reviews and LOVED by actual users (watching Fro Knows Podcasts is not a good way to determine what products to buy)... a common thing what with forums, keyboard warriors and spec sheets.


Agreed about Fro. Even Tony N had to retract his findings on the 6DII for vlogging (look for: "I made a mistake: Canon 6D mk II is the BEST vlogging camera. Seriously."). I tend to favor the long term reviews and use the short term review just for *possible* points to watch for. And the feedback from fellow users, particularly those with the camera in question. YT and many a review site is about entertainment first... just keep that in mind. Wish DPReview would put a 6 month and 1 yr review for each new product it reviews.


----------



## Wy Li (Feb 6, 2019)

One thing's for sure. No one gonna be complaining about the touchbar


----------



## Etienne (Feb 6, 2019)

nchoh said:


> The 6DII camera was ridiculed for it's antiquated AF system. The sensor was decent but did not show improvements over the 6DI sensor except in mp count. Criticism was on the camera due to the AF system, not the sensor!
> 
> You do know the difference between sensor and AF system right?



Ridiculed for its sensor too, especially it's poor low light performance. In fact many 6D users declined to "upgrade" as a result. You do know the difference between photographer and fanboy, right?


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 6, 2019)

Lee Jay said:


> I have a 7D Mark II and 7 lens kit covering 180° horizontal to 960mm equivalent. The R system doesn't seem to have any redeeming features that would make me want to go through the expense and time to switch, even if they actually have usable EVFs.



_Mirrorless is the future abandon your mirror slappers!_ is a meme being pushed by certain review sites and brands. DSLRs still dominate sales, still have some key advantages, and are still the more mature technology.

Yes, mirrorless has its own advantages. Yes, eventually mirrorless will mature and will match SLRs on every point. And yes, eventually most or all ILCs sold will be mirrorless. 

That doesn't mean your DSLR has stopped working today, or will stop working in the future. A 7D mk II has IQ as good as 645 film in a body that has superior performance to >= 95% of all "sports cameras" ever shipped. It can cover the vast majority of photographic assignments and subject/print size requirements. Nothing that comes out later will change that.

No reason to upgrade until there's an upgrade that's worth it _to you._


----------



## nchoh (Feb 6, 2019)

Etienne said:


> Ridiculed for its sensor too, especially it's poor low light performance. In fact many 6D users declined to "upgrade" as a result.


Now you are making a false statements here.


----------



## jonebize (Feb 6, 2019)

digitalride said:


> I think this hits the nail on the head - that is who the RP is marketed for. There is a huge segment of the market that will jump at this because it ticks off the "mirrorless" and "full frame" checkboxes even if an 80D would be a much better camera for them.
> 
> I don't think any of the people saying the 6dii sensor is pathetic are in the market to buy a rebel, yet they make it sound like they'd buy this if the sensor was better. This is definitely a rebel-level camera in terms of controls and I'm sure they will find some other ways to cripple it, do you think they will go even slower than 1/180 flash sync speed?
> 
> Of course this can be the perfect camera for some specific situations ( small back up body, low light, static subjects. ) but odds are if you're on this forum its not the camera you are looking for.



Ironically, this is the "Digital FM2" that Nikon owners have been clamoring for. It is smaller and lighter than the FM2. I have been wanting a digital version of an FM2 for years. I am actually a pro but this type of concepts appeals to me. I used to carry the FM2 with a short prime 24/7 and shot photos with it casually. I would get a long strap and sling it over my shoulder, and it would hang on the opposite hip. But film development has gotten more expensive and less common; APS-C cameras really don't have the same look; and full-frame DSLR's have been so big -- that I haven't really carried a camera in years. I am looking forward to doing it again.


----------



## Stuart (Feb 6, 2019)

So the same sensor as the 6Dmk2 - I*SO Sensitivity*
Stills: Auto (100 - 40000), 100 - 40000 (in 1/3-stop or whole stop increments), Manual ISO can be expanded to L: 50, H1: 51200, H2: 102400
So low light performance & Focusing not great?


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 6, 2019)

AlanF said:


> It was shot at iso 1250. You are right, there is an artefact above the eye. It results from the lens sharpening tool of DxO PL. The tool works very well with the 5DIV, which doesn't give such sharp images because of its AA-filter. With the 5DSR, it oversharpens and I don't like the effect and usually turn it off and use a smidgeon of USM. Here is the same image with the lens sharpening turned off and zero sharpening applied, and the artefact has gone. It's a very heavy crop, the bird occupying only the middle 1100px x 550px at the centre of the 50mpx image, and is pushing the limits of getting a sharp image.
> 
> View attachment 183016


That’s very interesting. Easily fixable. I’ve only seen a hummingbird in Africa. Amazing type of bird and I expect hard to capture. We don’t have them locally


----------



## unfocused (Feb 6, 2019)

Prior to this announcement I had zero interest in mirrorless. (Well maybe slightly more than zero, but not much). I'm actually going to watch this very closely. A mirrorless body that that has a silent or near silent shutter (Not a joke like the 1DxII), would be a very useful auxiliary body for me when shooting events and meetings where I want to be unobtrusive. In those situations, 5fps is plenty and I will be using mostly single point for focusing. I don't shoot at base ISO, so the benefits of on-chip ADC don't really come into play. I'd love to have something quiet that I can pair with the 5DIV (which is not too bad in its "silent" settings) and then leave the 1Dx in the bag. 

Point is, this may have some appeal beyond Rebel users looking to convert to full frame. Watch any national press conference and listen to the annoying whirr of the 1DX's and you'll understand why working photographers might find an affordable mirrorless appealing to try out. No, I'm not going to shoot sports with it, but having a low cost tool that is right for certain jobs would be appealing.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 6, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> So... I guess the software correction of 5,4 stops vignetting is a breeze at ISO 1600? And I guess software correction also makes up for the shot you missed while you were waiting for the lens to focus? And software correction makes the lens smaller as well? I better get myself a Sony camera!  (Sarcasm allert )



I would add: is there software correction for rain water getting in your Sony cam and ruining your day?


----------



## dak723 (Feb 6, 2019)

Etienne said:


> After the 6DII sensor was universally ridiculed in reviews, I honestly thought that Canon would be too embarrassed ever to reuse that sensor.
> But, here we go again.



Because Canon does not care if reviewers ridicule the sensor, and any potential embarrassment is easily offset by the large sales numbers and happy customers. As you no doubt have noticed if your read the posts here on CR, almost every 6D II owner is very happy with the IQ and those who have both the 6d and 6d II have said how much better the IQ is.

If all you do is look at the test results you will be unhappy no matter what you get.


----------



## digitalride (Feb 6, 2019)

nchoh said:


> I don't see a pattern from the single R series released so far and I don't see a pattern with the soon to be release RP added either. If you see evidence of a change of strategy, please share.



Fair enough, you can't really make a pattern from a single release, but here's my very speculative reasoning:
1. RF and EF-M mounts aren't compatible, make a few leaps of reasoning ( this is a rumors site ) and RF ends up being full frame only , if you want crop use EF-M. the days of EF bodies are numbered.
2. there hasn't been any sign of higher end EF-M bodies that can compete with an 80D. just because you want something small doesn't mean you don't want high end, just ask (the small number of ) olympus users. but for whatever reason canon always equates better with bigger, so there may never be an 80D like EF-M crop body.
3. in the full frame space canon has in the past done cheap ( 6d ) , all around ( 5d iv) , high resolution ( 5d sr ) ,and high speed ( 1d ) . 
4. now in RF mount we have cheap ( RP ) , all around ( R ), maybe we'll see a high resolution next and eventually high speed. canon may go into different segmentations with RF vs. EF, who knows, but its not a horrible guess that they keep the segmentation roughly the same.
5. The R is a much less capable camera than the 5Div in terms of usability, and the RP seems much less capable than the 6dii., if you want at least 2 control dials you have to go even more upmarket.

So where does something like the 80D fit in? Maybe they have to do something to take the place of the 7D line . Personally I'd like to see a crop mode on a full frame high resolution weather sealed body that would be great for all nature photography ( I would be willing to pay $2000 for that ). But given their history I think they will release a completely different body for people looking to replace their 7d. But the 80D just seems like it is in no mans land. Maybe it hasn't sold well enough to make it worthwhile, if so then I understand if they drop it, but as a happy 80D user obviously I'm not happy about that.

Its all speculation, you can easily speculate the other way and pick apart these arguments, and canon may change course at any time, but this is just a rumors discussion site and I'm pessimistic. What kind of 80D replacement do you see fitting into their lineup and how will it be priced?


----------



## dak723 (Feb 6, 2019)

The Fat Fish said:


> Oh god, please not the 6DII sensor again. Please.



No one is forcing you to buy this camera. For many of us, the 6D II sensor will be worth it for the price of the camera.


----------



## Metalex (Feb 6, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> So... I guess the software correction of 5,4 stops vignetting is a breeze at ISO 1600? And I guess software correction also makes up for the shot you missed while you were waiting for the lens to focus? And software correction makes the lens smaller as well? I better get myself a Sony camera!  (Sarcasm allert )
> 
> You are aware that the EF 50L and RF 50L are different lenses?


It’s nowhere near 5.4 stops if you’re using distortion correction too, as the darkest extreme corner areas are no longer in frame. Somebody has been reading too much on Optical Limits. 

Not sure what you’re referring to with AF - maybe you read a review with the lens mounted to an older model. Optical Limits again? Clearly you haven’t used one.

Size? It’s basically identical to the Canon!

Yes I’m aware of the EF/RF models. As I said, the problems with bokeh remain.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 6, 2019)

kaptainkatsu said:


> https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...-strategy-development-focus-dual-sensing-tech





amorse said:


> This video from Canon Korea on the EOS R references internal gyro and lens microprocessor (not lens IS) as being Dual Sensing IS, so I'd suggest they're not too far off:



Thanks. Learn something new everyday. I have no understanding of how this works, but I appreciate the clarification.


----------



## dak723 (Feb 6, 2019)

Etienne said:


> Ridiculed for its sensor too, especially it's poor low light performance. In fact many 6D users declined to "upgrade" as a result. You do know the difference between photographer and fanboy, right?



No, the low light performance is almost equal to the 5D IV. It was at base ISO that the 6D II was no better than the 6D and a couple stops lower than the 5D IV. And that was the main reason folks decided not to upgrade.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 6, 2019)

Etienne said:


> Ridiculed for its sensor too, especially it's poor low light performance.



What poor low light performance? Look at high ISO RAWs in DPReview's comparison tool. Download the RAWs yourself and examine them. It's within 0.5ev of a Sony A7 III at high ISO.



> You do know the difference between photographer and fanboy, right?



Do you know the difference between FakeNews and actual results?

Here's the 6D II at 25600 and 12800 against the Sony, both samples at 25600. This way you can clearly see that while the Sony is slightly better at the same ISO, it's worse when the 6D II is 1ev lower. There's no denying the high ISO difference is therefore <1 ev. Less than 1ev is inconsequential in post because it's a tick on a NR slider.

The same thing is true ooc for the 6D.


----------



## dak723 (Feb 6, 2019)

nchoh said:


> The 6DII camera was ridiculed for it's antiquated AF system. The sensor was decent but did not show improvements over the 6DI sensor except in mp count. Criticism was on the camera due to the AF system, not the sensor!
> 
> You do know the difference between sensor and AF system right?



No, the sensor got most of the criticisms. The AF system was a major upgrade. The original 6D had a very basic 9 point AF system. The 6D II had a much improved AF system.

From Digital Camera World:

The 6D Mark II’s regular autofocus system gets an update too, with a 45-point array (all cross-type) that’s light years ahead of the old model’s archaic nine-point system.


----------



## efmshark (Feb 6, 2019)

It is kind of disappointing that this camera will come with the recycled 6D mk ii sensor. That was not such a great sensor to begin with (not just worse high ISO performance that its competitors but also worse dynamic range), but using DSLR sensors in mirrorless bodies leads to problems like excessive vignetting with wide angle lenses and even color shift. Maybe it is possible to alleviate these problems to some degree by using a thinner LPF filter (or no LPF) or thinner Bayer array in the short term, but eventually Canon will have to make new sensors optimized for much lower angle of incidence that is inevitable because of the short flange distance of the mirrorless design. Interestingly enough, the DPAF architecture makes it more difficult to solve this issue by simply changing the micro-lens topology.


----------



## CanoKnight (Feb 6, 2019)

Looks like Canon's new niche is low tech still cameras in uglo mirrorless packages.


----------



## dlee13 (Feb 6, 2019)

fentiger said:


> Rather than slagging off this camera, why not wait for the real use reviews
> you could put up and shut up, and just buy a Sony



To be honest this camera will probably get negative reviews regardless of how well it performs. There are so many negative reviews of the EOS R purely based on specs. 

ANY weakpoint to a Canon body is what people will focus on. The Slanted lens did a real world test of the EOS R vs A7RIII and Z7 and the EOS R matched the Sony in all the IQ tests and beat the Nikon in them. These real world tests are what matters and not what is listed in specs.


----------



## The Fat Fish (Feb 6, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> First, go pick up a 6D2 and shoot with it. It works great!
> 
> Second, this is a BUDGET FF camera. This camera is probably the death of the 80D, and what is required is a low cost sensor that is better than the one in the 70D. This meets the bill. Go develop a new one, and the price goes up, and you just have another R. Why would they do that?


I did pickup a 6DII and shoot with it. For three weeks and really didn't like it. Why can't we get a new BSI sensor, full frame 4K, IBIS and 11+ FPS? You say the price will go up but Sony, Nikon and Panasonic can manage it. Don't use the overpriced EOS R as the market standard. It clearly isn't. $2000ish can get you a lot of camera nowadays and if you continually accept mediocrity, Canon will keep charging you more for it.


----------



## jdavidse (Feb 6, 2019)

nchoh said:


> Now you are making a false statements here.



https://m.dpreview.com/articles/3416153698/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-dynamic-range


----------



## Talys (Feb 6, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> I cannot, however, understand the whining by stills photographers. Canon is not behind in resolution, color (they're ahead here), or high ISO. They are _slightly_ behind in DR. Playing with the DPReview Exposure Latitude tool the 5D IV is within 1ev of the D850 and A7 III (+5ev vs. +6ev). Heck, depending on the part of the image you're looking at the 5Dsr is within 2ev (+4ev vs +6ev) or very close at 1ev (+5ev vs +6ev). The 6D II seems to be off by a solid 2ev (+4ev vs. +6ev).



I don't really have a problem with people who want more dynamic range for a specific purpose like experienced landscape photographers. But when I see the photography from most people who want more dynamic range, really, what they want to do is push the exposure slider in lightroom further to the right. Often, it's just to get out of using a flash because they don't know how to get good results with a flash.

If it were possible to get amazing photos this way, I'd say, hey, sure. It is, after all, amazing how you can recover a test scene at minus-whatever-ev created with ND filters. But the reality is that this isn't how photography works. Most photos I see pushed for exposure and shadow recovery also don't have light coming from the right places, so there is a distinct lack of interesting highlights and shadows. No matter how much you can push the exposure, to get something to appear, the photo will still be a poor photo. 

From a practical perspective, for must subjects, if I have enough light to create a good photo, whether it's natural, artificial, or augmented, I will also usually not have a need to go crazy in post with sliders.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 6, 2019)

efmshark said:


> It is kind of disappointing that this camera will come with the recycled 6D mk ii sensor. That was not such a great sensor to begin with (not just worse high ISO performance that its competitors...



Literally the 2nd post after hard, visual evidence from a respected review site that the 6D2 has good high ISO by today's standards. Unbelievable. Do people really cling to narratives no matter what physical reality throws at them?



> but using DSLR sensors in mirrorless bodies leads to problems like excessive vignetting with wide angle lenses and even color shift.



It's almost a certainty that Canon is optimizing microlenses and color arrays for the R's new flange distance.


----------



## mpb001 (Feb 6, 2019)

I think that some people just assume that the sensor that is in the RP is the exact sensor that is in the 6DII. How about we wait and see? It may indeed be the same sensor or an update to that sensor that will surprise some people.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 7, 2019)

jdavidse said:


> https://m.dpreview.com/articles/3416153698/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-dynamic-range



His reply to you was in response to your statement about poor low light performance, *not* about base ISO DR.


----------



## Talys (Feb 7, 2019)

The Fat Fish said:


> I did pickup a 6DII and shoot with it. For three weeks and really didn't like it. Why can't we get a new BSI sensor, full frame 4K, IBIS and 11+ FPS? You say the price will go up but Sony, Nikon and Panasonic can manage it. Don't use the overpriced EOS R as the market standard. It clearly isn't. $2000ish can get you a lot of camera nowadays and if you continually accept mediocrity, Canon will keep charging you more for it.


It's just the wrong camera for you. $2,000 can't et you a good (new) full frame camera at all. It can get you an decent camera body, but you can't take pictures with a camera body. If you want to take photos, , you need to spend thousands more dollars on lenses and accessories.

Personally, I don't take videos, IBIS does very little for me for stills, and I don't care to have 11+FPS. Even when I was using the A7R3, when I was taking action shots, I never went above 9 fps. Canon wins me over with things like articulating screen with touch that actually works and the 470EXAI flash that is stupidly easy to get great results from. I guess that's why I really like my 6DII  

If I had to choose to take 1 camera body with me for a trip between 6D2, 5D4, A7R3, and EOS R, it would be, hands down, 6D2 (as 5D4 does not have an articulating screen).


----------



## Shakey (Feb 7, 2019)

AlanF said:


> The 5DSR is a fantastic camera for birds, my go to. Here is another hummer from last month, 7m away, 100-400mm II. Try and get that detail on any other Canon, or indeed an equivalent lens on a Sony or Nikon.
> View attachment 183015


agreed I use a Tamron 150-600, not quite as sharp as a Canon 100-400...and all are hand held...BTW beautiful pic...


----------



## padam (Feb 7, 2019)

efmshark said:


> It is kind of disappointing that this camera will come with the recycled 6D mk ii sensor. That was not such a great sensor to begin with (not just worse high ISO performance that its competitors but also worse dynamic range), but using DSLR sensors in mirrorless bodies leads to problems like excessive vignetting with wide angle lenses and even color shift. Maybe it is possible to alleviate these problems to some degree by using a thinner LPF filter (or no LPF) or thinner Bayer array in the short term, but eventually Canon will have to make new sensors optimized for much lower angle of incidence that is inevitable because of the short flange distance of the mirrorless design. Interestingly enough, the DPAF architecture makes it more difficult to solve this issue by simply changing the micro-lens topology.


I guess you haven't looked at any sample images yet, because vignetting is kept at normal levels and there are absolutely no problems with color shift. Of course it is not optimized for Leica M lenses.


----------



## Refurb7 (Feb 7, 2019)

Hooray for the size & weight!!! So good to have a lighter full frame option.


----------



## dak723 (Feb 7, 2019)

CanoKnight said:


> Looks like Canon's new niche is low tech still cameras in uglo mirrorless packages.



Thank you for your usual troll observations. Why are you here on a Canon site if you hate Canon so much?


----------



## Macoose (Feb 7, 2019)

Primarily, I'd be interested in the RP if it has the ability to auto focus using my 1.4 extender at f8. I checked the system map on the R Supplemental Info pdf and it does not show extenders. I've seen only one R in the field and didn't have the chance to ask the user. I'm sure I could use one and manually focus.

Secondly, I'm assuming that there will be a 1.6 crop mode like the R. I'd like to have this feature.

Macoose


----------



## tmroper (Feb 7, 2019)

Looks like a chop top EOS R. But anything with that touch bar thing gone is a good start.


----------



## Grimbald (Feb 7, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> I cannot, however, understand the whining by stills photographers. Canon is not behind in resolution, color (they're ahead here), or high ISO. They are _slightly_ behind in DR. Playing with the DPReview Exposure Latitude tool the 5D IV is within 1ev of the D850 and A7 III (+5ev vs. +6ev). Heck, depending on the part of the image you're looking at the 5Dsr is within 2ev (+4ev vs +6ev) or very close at 1ev (+5ev vs +6ev). The 6D II seems to be off by a solid 2ev (+4ev vs. +6ev).




I own both a 6d and 5d Mark IV and the dynamic range benefit of 1.5 EV is something that I highly appreciate/need for "hard to bracket" landscapes or for timelapses. There is not too much to complain about with the 5d Mark IV sensor, as I find it's DR fairly capable to do almost everything I've ever done, although there have been situations where I would definitly welcome another stop of DR.

Seeing that Canon made a massive improvment from the 5d Mark III to the 5d Mark IV as well as from the 70d to the 80d, I'm confident that they will come up with something similar with their top model in the EOS R line. I just hope they don't end up with a resolution that is just so high that the DR/low light aspect will suffer too much. 50MP just as in the 5DSR but with an additional 1.5 EV and better low light capabilities would be fantastic.


----------



## ashmadux (Feb 7, 2019)

I feel like canon is going to stop selling cameras at some point. They aren't trying. Many of us hoped that the new competition from sony would prompt them to step their game up...well, and we can see where that is going.

You shouldn't have to pay 3k for a camera just to have a damn joystick, or a sensor that's a dilapidated version of a sensor they sold 7 years ago. Meanwhile sony users can get sublime AF for eyes and portraits and motion.

So this is what loyalty to a brand means...laugh at your own customers. Nice lenses....i guess.....but if im not buying the body, then none of the lenses either. Just put a new sensor in there canon...cmon, u can do it.


----------



## amorse (Feb 7, 2019)

jdavidse said:


> https://m.dpreview.com/articles/3416153698/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-dynamic-range


This article speaks specifically to dynamic range and editing flexibility when an image is under-exposed at low ISO, but it does not look at low light photography where high ISO would be used. Dynamic range is not the same as low light performance, and dynamic range changes with ISO. If you are discussing performance in very low light (i.e. night shooting at high ISO) then the 6D II has the same dynamic range as the Z7 or D850 from around ISO 3200 and onward according to photons to photos (http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 6D Mark II,Nikon D850,Sony ILCE-7R). In the DP review article referenced in your post you can switch some of the sample images to show the Z7 at ISO 3200 pushed 1 stop vs the 6D II at 3200 pushed 1 stop and you'll see that the images are very similar. The DR advantages of Nikon and Sony are certainly observable at low ISO, but there doesn't appear to be any perceptible advantage at high ISO.


----------



## amorse (Feb 7, 2019)

Macoose said:


> Primarily, I'd be interested in the RP if it has the ability to auto focus using my 1.4 extender at f8. I checked the system map on the R Supplemental Info pdf and it does not show extenders. I've seen only one R in the field and didn't have the chance to ask the user. I'm sure I could use one and manually focus.
> 
> Secondly, I'm assuming that there will be a 1.6 crop mode like the R. I'd like to have this feature.
> 
> Macoose


I believe the EOS R can auto focus at f/11, or an f/5.6 lens on a 2x extender (but maybe only Canon's newest extender). That should work for you!

Quote from the Canon Canada website: "_With the *EOS R camera*, autofocus will operate over nearly the entire image area even when used with compatible f/8 and f/11 lenses. This means the *EOS R* can easily achieve sharp AF using lenses with smaller apertures, and is even compatible with select EF extenders for uncompromised shooting at an expanded range of focal lengths._" http://www.canon.ca/en/Features/EOS-R/EOS-R-Camera


----------



## TommyLee (Feb 7, 2019)

crazyrunner33 said:


> As previously mentioned, it's probably digital stabilization like the M50.


thanks ..I see that now...
is the electronic I.S. worth a stop or two?...

that's ok.. a little help..
and the lenses I use are usually fast..

good news it works for both.
...I wonder if it ..'plays well' with third party I.S.?..

I have no complaints ..just curiosity


----------



## m1mm1m (Feb 7, 2019)

Macoose said:


> Primarily, I'd be interested in the RP if it has the ability to auto focus using my 1.4 extender at f8. I checked the system map on the R Supplemental Info pdf and it does not show extenders. I've seen only one R in the field and didn't have the chance to ask the user. I'm sure I could use one and manually focus.
> 
> Secondly, I'm assuming that there will be a 1.6 crop mode like the R. I'd like to have this feature.
> 
> Macoose



The "R" lets you do this so I don't see why the RP would not.. ..... For this, I used my 100-400 F4-5.6L II with a 2XIII.. F 6.3 on lens, so the effective f-stop was F13. As you can see, it works great. AF from all over the sensor and fast enough to shoot a little BIF.... Images like this were impossible with any dSLR without pre-focusing and praying...


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 7, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> I feel like canon is going to stop selling cameras at some point. They aren't trying. Many of us hoped that the new competition from sony would prompt them to step their game up...well, and we can see where that is going.
> 
> You shouldn't have to pay 3k for a camera just to have a damn joystick, or a sensor that's a dilapidated version of a sensor they sold 7 years ago. Meanwhile sony users can get sublime AF for eyes and portraits and motion.
> 
> So this is what loyalty to a brand means...laugh at your own customers. Nice lenses....i guess.....but if im not buying the body, then none of the lenses either. Just put a new sensor in there canon...cmon, u can do it.



They will always continue to be selling camera. They will always use their brand recognition to sell camera and lens world wide. It's not a camera for serious enthusiasts and professionals, but we represent a very small market. They concentrate where the money is. Perhaps someday they will throw us a EOS R Pro with IBIS, and better eyeAF. You just have to be patience and temper your expectation with Canon.


----------



## mpmark (Feb 7, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...



Don't let the door hit you on the way out!


----------



## m1mm1m (Feb 7, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> I feel like canon is going to stop selling cameras at some point. They aren't trying. Many of us hoped that the new competition from sony would prompt them to step their game up...well, and we can see where that is going.
> 
> You shouldn't have to pay 3k for a camera just to have a damn joystick, or a sensor that's a dilapidated version of a sensor they sold 7 years ago. Meanwhile sony users can get sublime AF for eyes and portraits and motion.
> 
> So this is what loyalty to a brand means...laugh at your own customers. Nice lenses....i guess.....but if im not buying the body, then none of the lenses either. Just put a new sensor in there canon...cmon, u can do it.




Canon isn't going to stop selling cameras.... LMFAO.... You may not like how they go about it, but they dominate every camera market in most of the world... That means that as a business, they're clearly doing something right....

If you like Sony so much and it works for your business, then go buy one and hang your Canon lenses off it... I hear it works very well. Or buy Sony lenses... or Zeiss, or whatever.... The only brand loyalty you should have is to your own brand. Cameras are tools... get whichever one lets you do the job the best way you can so you succeed as much as you can. For me, that's been Canon since Nikon scoffed at auto focus in the late 1980s. For others... who knows?


----------



## nchoh (Feb 7, 2019)

digitalride said:


> Fair enough, you can't really make a pattern from a single release, but here's my very speculative reasoning:
> 1. RF and EF-M mounts aren't compatible, make a few leaps of reasoning ( this is a rumors site ) and RF ends up being full frame only , if you want crop use EF-M. the days of EF bodies are numbered.
> 2. there hasn't been any sign of higher end EF-M bodies that can compete with an 80D. just because you want something small doesn't mean you don't want high end, just ask (the small number of ) olympus users. but for whatever reason canon always equates better with bigger, so there may never be an 80D like EF-M crop body.
> 3. in the full frame space canon has in the past done cheap ( 6d ) , all around ( 5d iv) , high resolution ( 5d sr ) ,and high speed ( 1d ) .
> ...



I see your point. And quite frankly too I can't see how the 80D replacement fits in with the current scheme of things... RF is FF and EF-M being APS-C, with APSC being small and light. I would be surprised if Canon themselves know what they are going to do with their DSLRs. My guess is that Canon will start producing APS-C M cameras 3 to 5 years from now once they have filled out the whole FF lineup for the R. Until that happens and as long as there is demand,, a 80D successor would be released.


----------



## Macoose (Feb 7, 2019)

m1mm1m said:


> The "R" lets you do this so I don't see why the RP would not.. ..... For this, I used my 100-400 F4-5.6L II with a 2XIII.. F 6.3 on lens, so the effective f-stop was F13. As you can see, it works great. AF from all over the sensor and fast enough to shoot a little BIF.... Images like this were impossible with any dSLR without pre-focusing and praying...
> 
> 
> Thanks
> ...


----------



## Macoose (Feb 7, 2019)

amorse said:


> I believe the EOS R can auto focus at f/11, or an f/5.6 lens on a 2x extender (but maybe only Canon's newest extender). That should work for you!
> 
> Quote from the Canon Canada website: "_With the *EOS R camera*, autofocus will operate over nearly the entire image area even when used with compatible f/8 and f/11 lenses. This means the *EOS R* can easily achieve sharp AF using lenses with smaller apertures, and is even compatible with select EF extenders for uncompromised shooting at an expanded range of focal lengths._" http://www.canon.ca/en/Features/EOS-R/EOS-R-Camera




Thanks amorse.


----------



## jonebize (Feb 7, 2019)

Alright everybody, here's the conclusion: this $1,300 or $1,400 camera is 80% of the camera that any of the superior cameras are. Let's be real: in most situations, for most people, it takes incredible photos. Once you go beyond here, there are diminishing returns. This is the perfect sweet spot from a marketing perspective. Canon is going to sell a lot of these, and their other products will benefit from the success of this model.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Feb 7, 2019)

Cheap, small, light. AVTVMFULLSTOPMIRAGE’s dream?

Somehow I suspect it’s not “really right.”


----------



## unfocused (Feb 7, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> I feel like canon is going to stop selling cameras at some point...



Of course they will...at some point. But then again, human beings will go extinct...at some point. So long as neither one is going to happen in the next 20-30 years, I'm not all that concerned.


----------



## efmshark (Feb 7, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Literally the 2nd post after hard, visual evidence from a respected review site that the 6D2 has good high ISO by today's standards. Unbelievable. Do people really cling to narratives no matter what physical reality throws at them?
> 
> It's almost a certainty that Canon is optimizing microlenses and color arrays for the R's new flange distance.



Instead of your subjective evaluation of looking at a few images which have no detail and somewhat uniform noise, if you look at the quantitative DXOMARK comparison of the EOS 6D Mark ii sensor vs the Sony A7 iii sensor, you can see that Sony has almost 3 Evs better dynamic range and significantly better low light performance:

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Com...7-III-versus-Canon-EOS-6D-Mark-II___1236_1170

Canon is hopefully optimizing Bayer arrays and LPF filters for mirrorless sensors, but I don't see how they can optimize micro lenses unless they give up on DPAF.


----------



## efmshark (Feb 7, 2019)

padam said:


> I guess you haven't looked at any sample images yet, because vignetting is kept at normal levels and there are absolutely no problems with color shift. Of course it is not optimized for Leica M lenses.



The only test of a wide angle lens on RF I am aware of is Optical Limits' test of RF 24-105 which has a maximum aperture of only F/4. Measured light fall-off (vignetting) at f/4 was 2.6EV at 24mm and 2.1EV at 105mm, which would be considered pretty awful for a F4 DSLR lens. For comparison, light fall-off for EF 24-105L ii was measured at 1.9EV at 24mm and 1.45EV at 105mm. I would be very interested to see vignetting measurements on R bodies for faster wide angle lenses. I guess RF 16-35mm f/2.8L and RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS will be available shortly, but there are no fast wide angle RF lenses on the Canon roadmap. DSLR lenses mounted with an EF to RF adapter would not have the angle of incidence issue, so Zeiss/Leica M mount lenses with the RF adapter are probably the only fast/wide options until Sigma decides to enter the native RF mount market.


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 7, 2019)

Metalex said:


> It’s nowhere near 5.4 stops if you’re using distortion correction too, as the darkest extreme corner areas are no longer in frame. Somebody has been reading too much on Optical Limits.
> 
> Not sure what you’re referring to with AF - maybe you read a review with the lens mounted to an older model. Optical Limits again? Clearly you haven’t used one.
> 
> ...



Have you had enough back paddling yet? Because your claim that the Sony lenses are equal to or better than Canon RF isn’t true at all. No Sony lens comes even close. And it will continue to be so, mainly because Sony didn’t do their due diligence when choosing their lens mount.


----------



## Jaysheldon (Feb 7, 2019)

I haven't read all the messages in this stream, so someone else may have mentioned this, but for me there are two crucial missing specs: The number of focus points and the refresh rate/number of pixels of the EVF. If to save money the EVF is low res and causes eye fatigue the camera isn't worth it no matter how low the price. Similarly, fewer focus points than the 6D2 for me would be a non-starter


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 7, 2019)

*m1mm1m*

My only comment is, that's not the most challenging BIF, but it is a positive. There are some evaluations out there that consider the AF with longer lenses, possibly in slightly lower light, to be rather unacceptable, so more clarification/examples would be most welcome since I'm on the fence regarding buying the R.

Jack


----------



## wanako (Feb 7, 2019)

What an interesting camera. The people that this is targeted to will buy the hell out of this thing and will surely make Canon loads of money. The 6DII is an excellent photographic tool for shooters of nearly all levels and this RP will likely do the same. At this price point, it seems like excellent value.

It seems they've also added something to this camera reserved for higher-end models, three Custom Modes.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 7, 2019)

efmshark said:


> Instead of your subjective evaluation of looking at a few images which have no detail and somewhat uniform noise, if you look at the quantitative DXOMARK comparison of the EOS 6D Mark ii sensor vs the Sony A7 iii sensor, you can see that Sony has almost 3 Evs better dynamic range and significantly better low light performance:



I see someone doesn't understand DxO's low light score. From the DxO web site:
_We have therefore defined low-light ISO as the highest ISO setting for a camera that allows it to achieve a SNR of 30dB while keeping a good dynamic range of 9 EVs and a color depth of 18bits. A difference in low-light ISO of 25% equals 1/3 EV and is only slightly noticeable._

There is a 30.3% difference between the Sony A73's low light score and the Canon 6D2's low light score. That's *less than* the half stop I guessed from my "subjective evaluation." DxO is more favorable to the 6D mark II than I was!

Both DxO and I would agree that the difference is_"...only slightly noticeable."_ I would add that in print, after post processing, you're simply not going to see any difference.

DxO ranks the base ISO DR difference higher than I would, but still close. I would put it at 2-2.5ev scrolling around the DPReview studio scene. DxO claims 2.8ev. NR in post will reduce that difference somewhat, which is why I ranked the 6D2 a _"solid 2 stops behind." _With shadow NR in post I would be comfortable pushing most 6D2 files to 3.5 or 4ev and most A73 files to 6ev. This will vary somewhat based on subject/exposure/view size, but for most cases that would probably hold.

I will note that at the edge for either camera you would be better off IQ wise to blend two shots if you're going to print big.

Never the less, +4 is not +6 and the Sony wins this. But I stand by my observation that _most_ people who cling to this difference while bashing Canon in forums cannot post images illustrating that they actually take advantage of that much shadow latitude. I've had my fill of the DR debate...raging for a decade now...because all I see are words and not pictures. It's no different to me than a Porsche owner arguing with a Ferrari owner over track specs when neither one of them have ever been to a track or had their cars over 90mph.

For years I shot landscapes and even real estate interiors on a 7D _mark I_ (2.5-3ev shadow latitude with post NR). I know how often a single frame worked. I know how often a single frame did not work. And out of the times a single frame was not enough, I know how many scenes would have blown out even an A73 or D850. How many scenes had to have 2-3 blended exposures regardless of sensor. The Sony DR advantage is not the issue it is made out to be.

Finally: this entire conversation is based on the assumption that the RP will have the 6D2's sensor. If Canon moved ADCs on chip then it will likely match the 5D IV and R in DR. The measured 1ev difference between the 5D IV and Sony's best is inconsequential in a world of post processing and NR.


----------



## degos (Feb 7, 2019)

digitalride said:


> Personally I'd like to see a crop mode on a full frame high resolution weather sealed body that would be great for all nature photography ( I would be willing to pay $2000 for that ).



A crop mode on a FF is just... a crop of the centre of the frame. The pixel density doesn't change, so you don't get exta 'reach'. So its basically just a way of using less storage when you can't fill the frame.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

JonSnow said:


> That the 6d mk2 can capture great photos is not the question. The original 5d can.
> 
> Well this was discussed to death already.....


If it can't capture good photos the fault isn't in the camera. Hard for many to understand.


----------



## PerKr (Feb 7, 2019)

efmshark said:


> The only test of a wide angle lens on RF I am aware of is Optical Limits' test of RF 24-105 which has a maximum aperture of only F/4. Measured light fall-off (vignetting) at f/4 was 2.6EV at 24mm and 2.1EV at 105mm, which would be considered pretty awful for a F4 DSLR lens. For comparison, light fall-off for EF 24-105L ii was measured at 1.9EV at 24mm and 1.45EV at 105mm. I would be very interested to see vignetting measurements on R bodies for faster wide angle lenses. I guess RF 16-35mm f/2.8L and RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS will be available shortly, but there are no fast wide angle RF lenses on the Canon roadmap. DSLR lenses mounted with an EF to RF adapter would not have the angle of incidence issue, so Zeiss/Leica M mount lenses with the RF adapter are probably the only fast/wide options until Sigma decides to enter the native RF mount market.



As I recall it fast M-mount lenses have serious vignetting issues as well as corner sharpness issues until stopped down quite a bit


----------



## sanj (Feb 7, 2019)

jd7 said:


> If you are thinking IBIS when you say stabilisation, it seems it doesn’t have that. It has the “dual sensing IS” which has been in a few cameras already, eg EOS R, M50.



Oh. :-(


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

Kit. said:


> That's nothing. Wonder how desperate they are if Sony is _not_ paying them.


 True!


----------



## telliscope (Feb 7, 2019)

Would be interested to find out if it allows selection of focus points on the LCD screen with your finger while looking through the view finder like the r


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

docsmith said:


> All the hatred cracks me up....I took one look at the size and weight and started to wonder if it could replace the M as my "small kit" camera.


And I am very seriously thinking of dumping my Olympus... Micro 4/3 and weighs 465gr with the battery. Goodbye Oly! Homerun Canon! Another nail in the coffin of M43.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

Trey T said:


> I'm on the fence of jumping on the bandwagon, FF and MILC. I prefer APS-C platform over FF, particularly the frame rate for live events (a hobbyist), but tired of waiting for a revised 7D (assuming it to be 7D Mark III). The EOS R has the crop feature but the MP is too low
> 
> I've been handicapped w/ a EOS-M camera for two years now. W/ EOS R and RP news, it appears that there's no hope for high-end APS-C in DSLR or MILC.
> 
> I don't like to drastically change, so I'll stick w/ Canon. I need a better camera for sure!!!!


I could be wrong, but EOS R doesn't have a crop feature for stills unless one mounts an EFs lens. It has cropped 4K video.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

Ladislav said:


> One observation for everyone moaning about IBIS or jumping every time IS is mentioned with relation to Canon's camera body. This is unicorn.
> 
> Even if Canon adds IBIS to their next body, it will be just marketing gimmick. They already stated how much they trust their possible first version of IBIS by their roadmap of RF lenses with build in IS. If they had good working IBIS ready for PRO body, they would not need to do something like 15-35 IS or 35 IS maybe even 24-70 IS.
> 
> If Canon launches IBIS it will be in my opinion far behind competition in its first version and people will be moaning again.


Then why do Sony's G Master lenses have IS (OSS)? Even the Zeiss for Sony have it. Yes, even short focal lengths. Lens IS and IBIS work together.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Feb 7, 2019)

Is it just me or does it seem like there are a lot of new members saying the exact same thing? Surely this is a troll or trolls/bots? Humans would at least have the ability to read through the thread and come up with something even a little bit original. I think the mods should be looking at this.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> I started into the thread but have baled after one page because it's the same old whining of those who should forget about Canon and shoot with the best that is on the other side of the fence. Get a life, go out and do some photography or join the Sony forum and have a love-in.
> 
> Jack


They are like 90 year olds with a 21 year old trophy wife. Looks good by their side, but they aren't "up" to the job. The "gear" knows it, but the 90 year old blames the gear. Pathetic.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

AlanF said:


> *R*equiescat in *P*ace?


Don't know what the R stands for, but the "P" stands for "Profit Center".


----------



## justaCanonuser (Feb 7, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...


The alternative would be (according to Frank Zappa): shut up and take yer images. Don't forget: the coolest gear of today is already the obsolete scrap of tomorrow. That's the Karma of the digital age.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Feb 7, 2019)

mpb001 said:


> I use a 5DIV, which I think will be my last DSLR. I think that Canon is moving in the right direction with the RP. I do like the smaller body, even if it is plastic, it is still a FF camera and if they have tweeked the sensor a little to get better dynamic range, that will have my attention. It will probably make a great travel camera. Since it is small, I do hope that they will make a battery grip for it, but I have not seen any indication of that. With this camera, the original R and a forthcoming pro mirrorless R-body and all the new R-Lenses, I think that Canon will have all the bases covered for a couple of years.



I think you've hit a very interesting point, The Rp a foundation for a great travel kit. But there aren't any travel lenses available fro it yet...only large and fast pro lenses. The Rf format lends itself to a a range of super small and light pancake primes or some super small wide zooms. But Canon seem to be blowing their R lens budget on the big ticket pro orientated L lenses. I wonder if Canon have thought about a super small and light 15-35mm f4, a 35-80mm and a 80-300. All designed to be small and light. Then a range of pancake lenses in the f2 arena, 15mm, 21mm (very range finder), 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and a 70mm. Maybe even a 135mm f2.8


----------



## justaCanonuser (Feb 7, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Don't know what the R stands for, but the "P" stands for "Profit Center".


Nah, "Profit Center" would be "PC", what also mean "Politically Correct", and that again would apply more to Sony alike art filters that only allow Eye AF on smiling faces  Seriously, I think Canon tries to refer to their history of rangefinders, more exactly, to the Canon P (= Populaire) from the 1950s. Btw one of the most beautiful cameras ever made, an icon of clean Bauhaus like industrial design. Leica then still decorated there M3 with baroque frames around its rangefinder windows.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> Nah, "Profit Center" would be "PC", what also mean "Politically Correct", and that again would apply more to Sony alike art filters that only allow Eye AF on smiling faces  Seriously, I think Canon tries to refer to their history of rangefinders, more exactly, to the Canon P (= Populaire) from the 1950s. Btw one of the most beautiful cameras ever made, an icon of clean Bauhaus like industrial design. Leica then still decorated there M3 with baroque frames around its rangefinder windows.


I think you are exactly right! Thanks for the education.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Feb 7, 2019)

telliscope said:


> Would be interested to find out if it allows selection of focus points on the LCD screen with your finger while looking through the view finder like the r


I'm sure Canon have designed a number of deliberate and irritating limitations that the budget model has are resolved by buying the better and more expensive model. Marketing 101...it's a product range. I'm also suspecting that the EVF in the Rp probably isn't the same fantastic unit found in the Eos R. In fact I'm surprised Canon have included an EVF in this base model. I would have thought that a small and light no EVF model was the obvious choice with an optional after market EVF unit popped on the hot shoe. Then we are getting into true digital range finder territory. Maybe a range of optical range finder modules to keep the art / trads really happy.


----------



## Del Paso (Feb 7, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> Nah, "Profit Center" would be "PC", what also mean "Politically Correct", and that again would apply more to Sony alike art filters that only allow Eye AF on smiling faces  Seriously, I think Canon tries to refer to their history of rangefinders, more exactly, to the Canon P (= Populaire) from the 1950s. Btw one of the most beautiful cameras ever made, an icon of clean Bauhaus like industrial design. Leica then still decorated there M3 with baroque frames around its rangefinder windows.



It's a sin which cannot be pardonned to criticize the Leica M 3, best Leica ever!


----------



## Ladislav (Feb 7, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Then why do Sony's G Master lenses have IS (OSS)? Even the Zeiss for Sony have it. Yes, even short focal lengths. Lens IS and IBIS work together.



G Master? Are you talking about 100-400 or 400? Those are very different focal lengths to those I mentioned. Yes. IBIS and IS is used together in long focal lengths. I found one Zeiss 24-70 with OSS so I would call it exception.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 7, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> They are like 90 year olds with a 21 year old trophy wife. Looks good by their side, but they aren't "up" to the job. The "gear" knows it, but the 90 year old blames the gear. Pathetic.


You may live to eat your words.


----------



## padam (Feb 7, 2019)

The more I think about it, 4k might not be featured at all in this camera (if it was, it would have a bit 'better' crop factor to the EOS R and Canon is known to segment its models) and I also think the soft 1080p quality will not improve either. I hope I am wrong.

I guess it is mainly a stills camera and it is still decent enough for people who considered a 6D Mark II for video, but now can get it in a much smaller and lighter package, but the EOS R definitely has its advantages like the better battery life and better 1080p with C-Log (as well as 4k, albeit heavily cropped).


----------



## scyrene (Feb 7, 2019)

padam said:


> Or maybe we will see four R bodies and they all look different to each other - except saying EOS R at the front and the exact model written elsewhere



I would think that the 1-series replacement at least will have to be bigger, for ergonomics and battery capacity.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 7, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> Canon 6D II had a poorer sensor performance compared to my 6D and a poorly value one too compared to the competitions. It came out with MSRP of $2000 and quickly drop to $1300.



There's a bit of rewriting history going on here. The 6D2 improved most aspects of the 6D and was released at a _lower_ price than the earlier model. The sensor is 'worse' in marginal ways that won't impact most images. And incidentally I've just done a quick check of three major retailers (2 US, 1UK) and it's selling for $1499/£1499 - quite a bit above what you stated.


----------



## wockawocka (Feb 7, 2019)

scyrene said:


> I would think that the 1-series replacement at least will have to be bigger, for ergonomics and battery capacity.



I'm in agreement. I think the 1 series equivalent will be the last out of the gate but def with a different battery. The question is, what will the 5 series type one be like. I wouldn't turn away a larger battery in exchange for speed and responsiveness.


----------



## padam (Feb 7, 2019)

scyrene said:


> I would think that the 1-series replacement at least will have to be bigger, for ergonomics and battery capacity.


Yes, it will have a second CFast 2.0 slot and things like dual Digic 8 processors and heatsinks for 4k60p and 1080p120p
Although it will be an additional model, not a replacement, the 1-series will continue.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 7, 2019)

windsorc said:


> Of course people will say they take great shots with the 6d.



Well they can...


----------



## scyrene (Feb 7, 2019)

padam said:


> Yes, it will have a second CFast 2.0 slot and things like dual Digic 8 processors and heatsinks for 4k60p and 1080p120p
> Although it will be an additional model, not a replacement, the 1-series will continue.



Oh I agree, I'd expect a 1DxIII before or alongside a 'pro' RF body.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 7, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> zzWhy would they buy this over a 6d mark II that much. Was the 6dII even a big seller. I never met a person with one.



LOL. Well it mustn't have done then


----------



## scyrene (Feb 7, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> It's just an opinion. It's hardly going to change your mind.
> We were all newcomers once.
> We might not always have free speech.
> I might not agree with them but I'd recognise their right to give their opinion.



=eyeroll=

We didn't all come into this forum and immediately start spouting nonsense. It's a pity so many use their 'right' to do that.


----------



## analoggrotto (Feb 7, 2019)

padam said:


> Yes, it will have a second CFast 2.0 slot and things like dual Digic 8 processors and heatsinks for 4k60p and 1080p120p
> Although it will be an additional model, not a replacement, the 1-series will continue.


 May be the last of the EF series to go indeed. Many wonder if there will be a 5DV or 5DX. I was really hoping for a 5D4 beating R body to begin selling off some EF lenses and get the new 50/1.2. Eh, this camera has been so good to me that its not nice to talk about selling it.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 7, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> That’s very interesting. Easily fixable. I’ve only seen a hummingbird in Africa. Amazing type of bird and I expect hard to capture. We don’t have them locally



Was it in a zoo? Wild hummingbirds only occur outside the Americas as vagrants crossing from Alaska to the far east of Siberia.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 7, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Do people really cling to narratives no matter what physical reality throws at them?



Look at the world: yes they do.


----------



## Metalex (Feb 7, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> Have you had enough back paddling yet? Because your claim that the Sony lenses are equal to or better than Canon RF isn’t true at all. No Sony lens comes even close. And it will continue to be so, mainly because Sony didn’t do their due diligence when choosing their lens mount.


Nobody is back peddling.

I'm sure you really believe what you say. That red ring is an omnipotent and infallible God to you. In reality, you are as indoctrinated as any religious follower.


----------



## padam (Feb 7, 2019)

analoggrotto said:


> May be the last of the EF series to go indeed. Many wonder if there will be a 5DV or 5DX. I was really hoping for a 5D4 beating R body to begin selling off some EF lenses and get the new 50/1.2. Eh, this camera has been so good to me that its not nice to talk about selling it.


They are doing a careful and slow transition, as expected (with mirrorless, they don't seem have the techology to top DSLR speed yet anyway).


----------



## Metalex (Feb 7, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Then why do Sony's G Master lenses have IS (OSS)? Even the Zeiss for Sony have it. Yes, even short focal lengths. Lens IS and IBIS work together.


It now tends to be only the newer telephoto (100mm+) G Master lenses that have IBIS. There are a few older Sony Zeiss lenses with OSS, but they pre-date the introduction of IBIS.


----------



## Metalex (Feb 7, 2019)

Ladislav said:


> G Master? Are you talking about 100-400 or 400? Those are very different focal lengths to those I mentioned. Yes. IBIS and IS is used together in long focal lengths. I found one Zeiss 24-70 with OSS so I would call it exception.


Yep, that lens was probably in the works either before Sony considered adding IBIS or it had been perfected. It was launched with the original non-IBIS A7(R).


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 7, 2019)

Metalex said:


> Nobody is back peddling.
> 
> I'm sure you really believe what you say. That red ring is an omnipotent and infallible God to you. In reality, you are as indoctrinated as any religious follower.



Look who’s talking.

No statement would suit you better.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 7, 2019)

telliscope said:


> Would be interested to find out if it allows selection of focus points on the LCD screen with your finger while looking through the view finder like the r



I think it would have to. That's in quite a few canon mirrorless cameras, not just the R. it came out with the M5 originally.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 7, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I think you've hit a very interesting point, The Rp a foundation for a great travel kit. But there aren't any travel lenses available fro it yet...only large and fast pro lenses. The Rf format lends itself to a a range of super small and light pancake primes or some super small wide zooms. But Canon seem to be blowing their R lens budget on the big ticket pro orientated L lenses. I wonder if Canon have thought about a super small and light 15-35mm f4, a 35-80mm and a 80-300. All designed to be small and light. Then a range of pancake lenses in the f2 arena, 15mm, 21mm (very range finder), 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and a 70mm. Maybe even a 135mm f2.8



Usually, I'll travel with a couple of good small zooms. For instance, my current travel kit is an M5 with an 11-22, 18-150, 15-45 and 32mm.

constant aperture lenses aren't super small, nor super light. I see the 24-240 as being the 18-150 replacement, however we still need a 16-35 3.5-5.6 small and light lens.

I'm sure canon is making, like they did for the M mount, and the EF-S mount, small, cheap and light lenses and not just L's .. the 24-240 is a sign of that.

I was disappointed that this camera did not come with a 28-80 or 24-70 3.5-5.6 small and light travel kit lens, instead comes with the much bigger 24-105L.


----------



## m1mm1m (Feb 7, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> *m1mm1m*
> 
> My only comment is, that's not the most challenging BIF, but it is a positive. There are some evaluations out there that consider the AF with longer lenses, possibly in slightly lower light, to be rather unacceptable, so more clarification/examples would be most welcome since I'm on the fence regarding buying the R.
> 
> Jack



Absolutely without a doubt landing pelican images are very far from the most challenging BIF photography.... LOL... Also without a doubt, the "R" is not the optimal BIF camera even with a "proper" BIF lens and no TC. While AF is quick and excellent (as good as XYZ) with a fast lens, no TC, in decent light, and you do get AF all over the sensor, you are still hobbled by the 5fps frame rate. For very fast subjects, the 7D2 eats it alive and even more so, the 1DX2. I have both and would not give up either for an "R" a this point.

My only point was to illustrate that on the "R", AF works sensor-wide with any lens/TC combination at any aperture and it works acceptably enough to even use for some BIF. On most high-end dSLRs, you get center spot from 5.6 to 8 and nothing past 8..... This is way better. For static subjects, AF even at tiny apertures is as accurate as the R's AF ever is... IOW, very.

If having acceptable AF capability at small apertures matters to you at some level..... I would certainly consider it for that as well as it's other attributes. Personally I have 4 issues with the "R" Canon would need to solve before I spend money on this. See my previous posts for what they are. Yes, my current dSLRs are heavier and bigger, but they do what I need done better than the "R" at this point in time and I can live without AF at small apertures.


----------



## Metalex (Feb 7, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> Look who’s talking.
> 
> No statement would suit you better.


Except that I have said nothing of the sort that would invite that description. But otherwise... 

Seriously though, how old are are you?


----------



## knight427 (Feb 7, 2019)

Macoose said:


> Primarily, I'd be interested in the RP if it has the *ability to auto focus using my 1.4 extender at f8*. I checked the system map on the R Supplemental Info pdf and it does not show extenders. I've seen only one R in the field and didn't have the chance to ask the user. I'm sure I could use one and manually focus.
> 
> Secondly, I'm assuming that there will be a 1.6 crop mode like the R. I'd like to have this feature.
> 
> Macoose



I have just assumed this will be the case since the 6D2 can do it. That would be a deal breaker for me. I'd either step up to the R or save some money and go with the 6D2.


----------



## m1mm1m (Feb 7, 2019)

knight427 said:


> I have just assumed this will be the case since the 6D2 can do it. That would be a deal breaker for me. I'd either step up to the R or save some money and go with the 6D2.



Yes on both counts.


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 7, 2019)

Metalex said:


> Except that I have said nothing of the sort that would invite that description. But otherwise...
> 
> Seriously though, how old are are you?



You made false statements, which I have proven to be wrong with reference to facts. You have back paddled all the way, and your last defence is “how old are you”...seriously??

Edit: by the way, how much is Sony paying you to troll?


----------



## knight427 (Feb 7, 2019)

degos said:


> A crop mode on a FF is just... a crop of the centre of the frame. The pixel density doesn't change, so you don't get exta 'reach'. So its basically just a way of using less storage when you can't fill the frame.



Those of us asking for autocrop understand what it means. Benefits include:
-better view of subject in EVF
-smaller files
-if programmed to a button, would be an easy way to re-target your subject when they move erratically out of frame
-much faster first review in post when I reduce 1,000 frames to 100, then 100 to 10-20. 

and could include:
-if implemented well, would in theory allow higher fps (I haven't seen this implemented by any camera yet, but I also haven't looked hard for it)
-if implemented well, improve AF performance by reducing load on processor and potential distractions from AF points outside crop area


----------



## digitalride (Feb 7, 2019)

degos said:


> A crop mode on a FF is just... a crop of the centre of the frame. The pixel density doesn't change, so you don't get exta 'reach'. So its basically just a way of using less storage when you can't fill the frame.



I am aware it doesn't give extra "reach" or magically increase your focal lengths . If I am photographing birds that are too far away to fill the frame I want a crop mode, the storage and extra post processing to frame the shot later are a small reason, but also for the speed. If some cameras FPS are limited by the number of pixels it is processing then it should be able to process a crop faster. So if the 5d iv can do 7 fps, it should be able to do up to 14 FPS in ~1.5x crop mode with ~2.25x fewer pixels to process. The FPS could be limited by the focusing system or other factors, but I think a lot of FPS limits are made for business reasons.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 7, 2019)

digitalride said:


> I am aware it doesn't give extra "reach" or magically increase your focal lengths . If I am photographing birds that are too far away to fill the frame I want a crop mode, the storage and extra post processing to frame the shot later are a small reason, but also for the speed. If some cameras FPS are limited by the number of pixels it is processing then it should be able to process a crop faster. So if the 5d iv can do 7 fps, it should be able to do up to 14 FPS in ~1.5x crop mode with ~2.25x fewer pixels to process. The FPS could be limited by the focusing system or other factors, but I think a lot of FPS limits are made for business reasons.



the shutter and mirrorbox assembly plays a huge part in the 5D shooting faster than 7fps.


----------



## m1mm1m (Feb 7, 2019)

digitalride said:


> I am aware it doesn't give extra "reach" or magically increase your focal lengths . If I am photographing birds that are too far away to fill the frame I want a crop mode, the storage and extra post processing to frame the shot later are a small reason, but also for the speed. If some cameras FPS are limited by the number of pixels it is processing then it should be able to process a crop faster. So if the 5d iv can do 7 fps, it should be able to do up to 14 FPS in ~1.5x crop mode with ~2.25x fewer pixels to process. The FPS could be limited by the focusing system or other factors, but I think a lot of FPS limits are made for business reasons.




A large part of the reason that Canon's crop mode in FF cameras that have it don't yield higher FPS has to do with the way the the data bus inside the camera works. If you could simply "turn off" part of the sensor in crop mode and never capture -- and have to later deal with -- those extra pixels then a higher frame rate could easily be achieved. Canon's crop mode, OTOH, still captures the whole frame, off-loads it from the sensor into the buffer and only then throws the extra data away. The only step that is truly "saved" is writing it to the card.... which is minimal. Arguably, that saving is eaten up by the extra processing needed to decide which data to keep and which to delete and the associated delete operations.

I am a software engineer and from that perspective what they do makes no sense at all....Never ingesting data in the first place that you fully intend to throw away is a decades old tenet of software design. I can only speculate that there's a hardware limitation to explain why they simply cant "turn off" or otherwise disable part of the sensor so the software never has to deal with moving that extra data around.

Anyone with sensor hardware knowledge, feel free to expand upon this....


----------



## mpb001 (Feb 7, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I think you've hit a very interesting point, The Rp a foundation for a great travel kit. But there aren't any travel lenses available fro it yet...only large and fast pro lenses. The Rf format lends itself to a a range of super small and light pancake primes or some super small wide zooms. But Canon seem to be blowing their R lens budget on the big ticket pro orientated L lenses. I wonder if Canon have thought about a super small and light 15-35mm f4, a 35-80mm and a 80-300. All designed to be small and light. Then a range of pancake lenses in the f2 arena, 15mm, 21mm (very range finder), 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and a 70mm. Maybe even a 135mm f2.8


Agreed, Canon will need to address adding to their lower "L" range lenses for the R mount. I use the f4 L lenses, because I do not need fast glass for my style of photography (travel and landscapes), for which I rely of mainly f8-f16 apertures.


----------



## transpo1 (Feb 7, 2019)

I’ll wait for a weather and freeze resistant model with higher frame rates in both 4K and stills before taking the plunge into the Canon EOS-R system. But I’m glad Canon is beginning to catch up. One day I’ll ditch my Fuji X-T3 and come back. 

By the way, anyone know why Canon is getting rid of the scroll wheel on their FF mirrorless models? This is my favorite part of the hardware UI and the one hardware element that I miss from Canon cameras.


----------



## Metalex (Feb 7, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> You made false statements, which I have proven to be wrong with reference to facts. You have back paddled all the way, and your last defence is “how old are you”...seriously??
> 
> Edit: by the way, how much is Sony paying you to troll?


Christ. So I'd guess you're about 14 years old.

What did you prove wrong? Where did I back peddle? Quotes please.


----------



## YnR (Feb 7, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> They are like 90 year olds with a 21 year old trophy wife. Looks good by their side, but they aren't "up" to the job. The "gear" knows it, but the 90 year old blames the gear. Pathetic.



Look, I’ve got a 60D and have been patiently waiting the last few years for the right entry level FF body. The 6DII didn’t it cut it for me due to the many hashed over points. Would I rather have my 60 over the 6? Of course not but for the price, I decided to wait. Along comes Canon’s mirrorless FF which brings some attention with the possibility of a new sensor, higher FPS, along with the lighter weight and smaller package. So Canon may release a camera that isn’t noticeably improved over the 6D2 as far as output and performance. I’ve been waiting for several years, hoping for a better option, but it hasn’t come. Understand why so many of us “bots” are frustrated and saying the same thing?


----------



## prodorshak (Feb 7, 2019)

I am in baby years regarding experience in photography (happily shooting with my 77D), maybe that's why I thought "RAW development in camera" is a good addition in a consumer model. But, no one is talking about it here. What am I missing? Is that a very common feature?


----------



## AlanF (Feb 7, 2019)

m1mm1m said:


> The "R" lets you do this so I don't see why the RP would not.. ..... For this, I used my 100-400 F4-5.6L II with a 2XIII.. F 6.3 on lens, so the effective f-stop was F13. As you can see, it works great. AF from all over the sensor and fast enough to shoot a little BIF.... Images like this were impossible with any dSLR without pre-focusing and praying...
> 
> View attachment 183024


I am not deprecating the quality of your photo or the camera - both very fine indeed. But, I do query your statements. First, a huge great pelican slowing down as it lands on water is not "a little BIF" - pelicans are about the easiest birds to shoot in full flight, let alone slowly landing. Secondly, "Images like this were impossible with any dSLR without pre-focusing and praying..." I take dozens of shots like that with a dslr with similar focal length, and I am a rank amateur. Here are two of pelicans from last month on a 5DSR with a 100-400mm II at 560mm (yours is at 624mm).


----------



## sanj (Feb 7, 2019)

digitalride said:


> I think this hits the nail on the head - that is who the RP is marketed for. There is a huge segment of the market that will jump at this because it ticks off the "mirrorless" and "full frame" checkboxes even if an 80D would be a much better camera for them.
> 
> I don't think any of the people saying the 6dii sensor is pathetic are in the market to buy a rebel, yet they make it sound like they'd buy this if the sensor was better. This is definitely a rebel-level camera in terms of controls and I'm sure they will find some other ways to cripple it, do you think they will go even slower than 1/180 flash sync speed?
> 
> Of course this can be the perfect camera for some specific situations ( small back up body, low light, static subjects. ) but odds are if you're on this forum its not the camera you are looking for.



I am on this forum and looking for this camera.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 7, 2019)

scyrene said:


> There's a bit of rewriting history going on here. The 6D2 improved most aspects of the 6D and was released at a _lower_ price than the earlier model. The sensor is 'worse' in marginal ways that won't impact most images. And incidentally I've just done a quick check of three major retailers (2 US, 1UK) and it's selling for $1499/£1499 - quite a bit above what you stated.



You must have miss BlackFriday sales. It was $1300.
Here is the deal website https://slickdeals.net/f/12281707-c...amera-w-24-105mm-f-4l-ii-lens-2199-00-more-fs on Nov 11, 2018.

It was $1300 from [bhphotovideo.com] bandhphoto.com

MSRP is $1500. Adorama used price is $1149

There isn't any rewriting history. You just do a very poor job at Google search.

Canon 6D II may be better than 6D but that isn't saying much.

Here is an Fstoppers Article.
*Canon 6D Mark II: The Worst Camera of 2017*
https://fstoppers.com/critiques/canon-6d-mark-ii-worst-camera-2017-209420

Compared to Canon own line, it's a fine camera, but it's overvalue at its debut price of $2000.

As the original owner of Canon 6D, I was hoping 6D II will be the low light king vs my Canon 5D IV. Canon didn't want to make the same mistake with 6D vs 5D III so it won't cannibalize 5D IV sales. Canon segmented the 6D II line even more by putting a slightly worst sensor, and added more AF points that's mostly center. Compare to 6D, it's a better camera, but compare to competitions, it's a poorly value one.

It couldn't beat out an 3 year old Nikon D750 in term of values that has dual card slot and better dynamic range and $200 cheaper.

At $1500, I don't know if I would recommend it over Sony A7III for $1800 that has a better sensor, dual card slot, IBIS, better eyeAF, and 4k. I can deal with the ergonomics issue with L bracket.

Canon has a history of providing poorly value camera because they know we are tied down to glasses - 5D IV, 6D II, and EOS R. They aren't bad camera. I don't think any FF camera in the last 5 year take bad pictures. It just a poorly value one.


----------



## prodorshak (Feb 7, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I am not deprecating the quality of your photo or the camera - both very fine indeed. But, I do query your statements. First, a huge great pelican slowing down as it lands on water is not "a little BIF" - pelicans are about the easiest birds to shoot in full flight, let alone slowly landing. Secondly, "Images like this were impossible with any dSLR without pre-focusing and praying..." I take dozens of shots like that with a dslr with similar focal length, and I am a rank amateur. Here are two of pelicans from last month on a 5DSR with a 100-400mm II at 560mm (yours is at 624mm).
> View attachment 183028
> View attachment 183029


Beautiful pelican! Sharing one of mine! (77D, 55-250 IS STM, f5.0, ISO-100, 1/160, 200mm)


----------



## jvillain (Feb 7, 2019)

CW has a bunch of photos comparing the RP to the Z6 and the R if any one is interested,. As well they are claiming the EVF will be 2360k dots.


----------



## m1mm1m (Feb 7, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I am not deprecating the quality of your photo or the camera - both very fine indeed. But, I do query your statements. First, a huge great pelican slowing down as it lands on water is not "a little BIF" - pelicans are about the easiest birds to shoot in full flight, let alone slowly landing. Secondly, "Images like this were impossible with any dSLR without pre-focusing and praying..." I take dozens of shots like that with a dslr with similar focal length, and I am a rank amateur. Here are two of pelicans from last month on a 5DSR with a 100-400mm II at 560mm (yours is at 624mm).
> View attachment 183028
> View attachment 183029



You completely missed the point. Go back and read everything I wrote and you will clearly see that I never claimed these photos were spectacular from a BIF standpoint in any way...

What I did claim is 100% true.... No Canon (or anyone's, AFAIK) sDLR will auto-focus any lens/TC combination with an aperture of anything approaching f13. That is what I used and therefore what I did and how I did it was indeed impossible with any dSLR..

Your example uses a 1.4 TC on a 5DSR (I own both) which will indeed AF with the center few spots down to F8. I used a 2X TC on the 100-400 with which the "R" was still able to capably AF even using the very corner of the sensor even. Apples and oranges to you, my friend...


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 7, 2019)

TommyLee said:


> thanks ..I see that now...
> is the electronic I.S. worth a stop or two?...
> 
> that's ok.. a little help..
> ...



I see it mostly as a video feature(might only work in video), it works similar to warp stabilizer in Adobe After Effects. If it does work, it's probably cropping the sensor. I've used the OIS and IBIS, and tried one and not the other on the GH5 and GX85, the physical sensor stabilizer works very well when combined with OIS. I haven't had personal experience with EIS in the Canon M50, but below is a link with some reviews of it.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4330895


----------



## max_sr (Feb 7, 2019)

m1mm1m said:


> A large part of the reason that Canon's crop mode in FF cameras that have it don't yield higher FPS has to do with the way the the data bus inside the camera works. If you could simply "turn off" part of the sensor in crop mode and never capture -- and have to later deal with -- those extra pixels then a higher frame rate could easily be achieved. Canon's crop mode, OTOH, still captures the whole frame, off-loads it from the sensor into the buffer and only then throws the extra data away. The only step that is truly "saved" is writing it to the card.... which is minimal. Arguably, that saving is eaten up by the extra processing needed to decide which data to keep and which to delete and the associated delete operations.
> 
> I am a software engineer and from that perspective what they do makes no sense at all....Never ingesting data in the first place that you fully intend to throw away is a decades old tenet of software design. I can only speculate that there's a hardware limitation to explain why they simply cant "turn off" or otherwise disable part of the sensor so the software never has to deal with moving that extra data around.
> 
> Anyone with sensor hardware knowledge, feel free to expand upon this....



There is another reason. Why sell one camera, that can do both: high res full frame images and high fps crop images, when you can sell two cameras, that can only do one of these things.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 7, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I think you've hit a very interesting point, The Rp a foundation for a great travel kit. But there aren't any travel lenses available fro it yet...only large and fast pro lenses. The Rf format lends itself to a a range of super small and light pancake primes or some super small wide zooms. But Canon seem to be blowing their R lens budget on the big ticket pro orientated L lenses. I wonder if Canon have thought about a super small and light 15-35mm f4, a 35-80mm and a 80-300. All designed to be small and light. Then a range of pancake lenses in the f2 arena, 15mm, 21mm (very range finder), 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and a 70mm. Maybe even a 135mm f2.8


what about the 24-240 lens, which is F6.3 at the long end? This would seem to me to be a great travel lens.....


----------



## max_sr (Feb 7, 2019)

prodorshak said:


> I am in baby years regarding experience in photography (happily shooting with my 77D), maybe that's why I thought "RAW development in camera" is a good addition in a consumer model. But, no one is talking about it here. What am I missing? Is that a very common feature?



Yes, there are many cameras out there, that can already do that.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 7, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> As the original owner of Canon 6D, I was hoping 6D II will be the low light king vs my Canon 5D IV.



I hate to tell you this, but there are no "low light kings." All currently shipping FF sensors occupy roughly a 1ev band. If anything you're best off going high resolution (D850, A7r3, 5Ds/sr) because while there's more noise in flat areas, there's also considerably higher detail/sharpness and in post you have much more room to NR. The end result is a cleaner image that's still sharper/more detailed. But even then we're not talking about leaps and bounds.

BSI did virtually nothing for FF sensor sensitivity (probably due to microlens tech at that scale) and everyone is dealing with the same laws of physics.



> At $1500, I don't know if I would recommend it over Sony A7III for $1800 that has a better sensor, dual card slot, IBIS, better eyeAF, and 4k. I can deal with the ergonomics issue with L bracket.



How about we wait and see if it's even the 6D2's sensor?


----------



## prodorshak (Feb 7, 2019)

max_sr said:


> Yes, there are many cameras out there, that can already do that.


Any canon DSLR/MILC below $1500?


----------



## m1mm1m (Feb 7, 2019)

max_sr said:


> There is another reason. Why sell one camera, that can do both: high res full frame images and high fps crop images, when you can sell two cameras, that can only do one of these things.



A highly placed Canon US exec who shall remain nameless told me the exact same thing when I asked the exact same question about the 5DSR. He said to add a 7D2 to my kit (rhetorical because I already had one) which has a similar pixel pitch to the 5DSR and have the benefit of two bodies.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 7, 2019)

m1mm1m said:


> You completely missed the point. Go back and read everything I wrote and you will clearly see that I never claimed these photos were spectacular from a BIF standpoint in any way...
> 
> What I did claim is 100% true.... No Canon (or anyone's, AFAIK) sDLR will auto-focus any lens/TC combination with an aperture of anything approaching f13. That is what I used and therefore what I did and how I did it was indeed impossible with any dSLR..
> 
> Your example uses a 1.4 TC on a 5DSR (I own both) which will indeed AF with the center few spots down to F8. I used a 2X TC on the 100-400 with which the "R" was still able to capably AF even using the very corner of the sensor even. Apples and oranges to you, my friend...


I quoted exactly what was in your post with the picture, in which there were no caveats. I do not believe your claim that a pelican landing is "a little `BIF" is 100% true.


----------



## max_sr (Feb 7, 2019)

prodorshak said:


> Any canon DSLR/MILC below $1500?



The 7DII can do it, the 80d can do it, the original 6D can do it and I guess there are others, that also have in camera raw processing. They are not "new", but they are below $1500 right now.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 7, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> I hate to tell you this, but there are no "low light kings." All currently shipping FF sensors occupy roughly a 1ev band. If anything you're best off going high resolution (D850, A7r3, 5Ds/sr) because while there's more noise in flat areas, there's also considerably higher detail/sharpness and in post you have much more room to NR. The end result is a cleaner image that's still sharper/more detailed. But even then we're not talking about leaps and bounds.
> 
> BSI did virtually nothing for FF sensor sensitivity (probably due to microlens tech at that scale) and everyone is dealing with the same laws of physics.
> 
> ...



I did mentioned low light king vs my 5D IV just like Canon 6D perform over 5D III. I wasn't expect leap and bound increase but at least an increase in performance just like 5D IV over 5D III not worst like the 6D II over 6D.

We can but it is still not a camera I would want to buy. I'm looking for EOS R Pro not a downgrade to EOS R.

If history is any indication of Canon practices, it's likely a recycle Canon 6D II sensor just like 5D IV sensor for EOS R. From a business stand point, why waste R&D money to come up with a newer sensor and that's going to better than EOS R/5D IV sensor. That would be another reason to sway people to buy EOS RP over EOS R.


----------



## prodorshak (Feb 7, 2019)

max_sr said:


> The 7DII can do it, the 80d can do it, the original 6D can do it and I guess there are others, that also have in camera raw processing. They are not "new", but they are below $1500 right now.


Thanks. Planning to upgrade mine.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 7, 2019)

m1mm1m said:


> !
> 
> A pelican is a bird.
> That one was clearly flying.
> ...


For little birds in flight, is there any camera/lens out there that is fast enough to track a Chickadee in flight when you are close enough that it fills more than a quarter of a frame? Is there any photographer who is fast enough?

(I am talking in flight here, not the instant that they take off or land)


----------



## scyrene (Feb 7, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> You must have miss BlackFriday sales. It was $1300.
> Here is the deal website https://slickdeals.net/f/12281707-c...amera-w-24-105mm-f-4l-ii-lens-2199-00-more-fs on Nov 11, 2018.
> 
> It was $1300 from [bhphotovideo.com] bandhphoto.com
> ...



This is a bit tl;dr, but okay...

Well I simply searched for what the camera is selling for *now*. You didn't say '$1300 during the intense pre-Christmas sales', you implied that's what it was selling for now.

And while there is some merit in what you are saying, my points stand. The 6D2 improved most features of the 6D - especially the number of autofocus points, which was considered a weakness of the original model. Despite inflation, its price was lower than the 6D's. Not by much, but it could have been more. That you consider rival brands' offerings better value is a separate issue imho. The 6D2 was never gonna debut at $1500. If you check the discussions here before it was released, I'm not sure many were even predicting the price to be as low as it was.

And the point is - Canon doesn't arguably include as many features (although many it does include are overlooked by the naysayers here and elsewhere) because they sell well without going the extra mile, so why bother? It might piss you off, but that's not their focus. This is just my hunch, but at the entry level in particular I don't think the minutiae of DR and even dual slots make much difference to sales.


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 7, 2019)

Metalex said:


> Christ. So I'd guess you're about 14 years old.
> 
> What did you prove wrong? Where did I back peddle? Quotes please.





Metalex said:


> Christ. So I'd guess you're about 14 years old.
> 
> What did you prove wrong? Where did I back peddle? Quotes please.



Why don’t you start with mentioning a Sony lens that is as good as the equivalent RF lens?


----------



## Metalex (Feb 7, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> Why don’t you start with mentioning a Sony lens that is as good as the equivalent RF lens?


You have already asked that and I answered.

Please answer my questions. What did you prove wrong? Where did I back peddle? Quotes please.


----------



## m1mm1m (Feb 7, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> For little birds in flight, is there any camera/lens out there that is fast enough to track a Chickadee in flight when you are close enough that it fills more than a quarter of a frame? Is there any photographer who is fast enough?
> 
> (I am talking in flight here, not the instant that they take off or land)





My ONLY point was to illustrate that the "R" can AF with a lens/TC combination with an f-stop smaller than F8 and do it anywhere on the sensor.... This is something no current dSLR can do. That pelican shot was illustrative of this and that the camera does it well enough even to keep up with some motion.

I never said a pelican is a "little" bird...as in "small" (LMFAO) -- I said the picture shows that the equipment in question is capable of a "little BIF" --- as opposed to "a lot" or "full-blown" BIF like you'd be able to do with say a 1DXII and a 500 F4L or similar......


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 7, 2019)

scyrene said:


> This is a bit tl;dr, but okay...
> 
> Well I simply searched for what the camera is selling for *now*. You didn't say '$1300 during the intense pre-Christmas sales', you implied that's what it was selling for now.
> 
> ...



I never said Canon 6D II as an overall system doesn't improve over 6D. It is a good camera if you have to stick to Canon because of your existing lens. Canon know that. 

I'm evaluating that camera compared to the competitions and why Canon 6D user like me wouldn't consider upgrading to 6D II because it doesn't provide enough value - more AF but center, articulating LCD, 2 more FPS. We waited 5 years for incremental increased over 6D. Canon is a king when it come to segmentation and charging more for less feature compare to competitions. 

If camelcamelcamel is back, you can check the price history. It didn't stay $2000 price for long. It didn't sell that well. 

As a consumer (not stockholder), you should be mad that Canon just provide the status quo without going to extra mile to get your hard earn money.

I'm lucky to have alot of disposable money, but even then, I want to be smart with my money and not spend it on incremental increase camera and poorly value one. 

If I own Canon stock, I would applaud them for their business practices. They are able to minimize R&D money spent, providing incremental upgrade, yet people continue to buy their system even though it's a poorly value to their competitions.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 7, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> I did mentioned low light king vs my 5D IV just like Canon 6D perform over 5D III. I wasn't expect leap and bound increase but at least an increase in performance just like 5D IV over 5D III not worst like the 6D II over 6D.



It's not worse. Slightly more noise but slightly more detail. Probably less than 0.5ev difference even if you're just looking at noise in a gray patch. If you NR to the same level of detail/sharpness it might be a tiny bit better.

FF differences at high ISO are practically a myth at this point, reinforced by pixel peeping files which vary in size.



> We can but it is still not a camera I would want to buy. I'm looking for EOS R Pro not a downgrade to EOS R.



That comes after the RP. But it will be priced accordingly.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 7, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> As a consumer (not stockholder), you should be mad that Canon just provide the status quo without going to extra mile to get your hard earn money.



That sounds like a description of Sony's three generations of non-existent and poor weather sealing. (To say nothing of a history of compressed RAWs, star eating algorithms, off sensor reflections, broken UIs, etc, etc.)



> If I own Canon stock, I would applaud them for their business practices. They are able to minimize R&D money spent, providing incremental upgrade, yet people continue to buy their system even though it's a poorly value to their competitions.



Is that how they got the 28-70 f/2 and the sharpest 50 f/1.2 to date? By minimizing R&D money spent?


----------



## qudek77 (Feb 7, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Amazing how the Sony trolls all sign up for an account when a new Canon is released. Since the first R was released, there have been many more of you. Gotta wonder how desperate Sony is getting, if Sony is paying trolls.


Sony troll that uses canon all his life?


----------



## qudek77 (Feb 7, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> Buy whatever tool require to do your job. No point is being emotional about it. That's what I am doing if EOS R Pro is another good enough camera. Eventually Sony may not provide you with what you need and you switch to another company when it's viable.


I'm quite used to use canon bodies, lenses, batteries, menus, options, dpaf and everything else, the transition will be really hard (and emotional)


----------



## qudek77 (Feb 7, 2019)

Rezen73 said:


> Is it a requirement for you to use the same device to shoot stills and video? For ~$350 you can get a DJI Osmo Pocket and shoot far better video footage than you can with ANY hand-held DSLR or Mirrorless ILC system, just from the standpoint of having gimbal stabilized footage (unless you carry around a DSLR/Mirrorless gimbal in your kit for shoots) With a gimbal (or tripod), the need for in-body stabilization is negated tremendously, and you can use a wider angle lens (e.g. the 15-35, or adapted 11-24) if the crop is too much for your composition requirements. Of course, if you have a use-case where you need professional 4k video footage wider than 24mm (the market for this is extremely thin), you'd probably be shooting with EOS-C line with PL mount lenses (or non-Canon equivalent) anyway... and for everything else, for the purposes of ticking the "*shoots with 4k*" box... DJI Osmo, iPhone, Android, etc... all tick that box.
> 
> Personally I *very rarely* shoot video with my stills cameras these days, unless I have a specific composition that is only achievable through my EF glass, and even then, I really hate it, because I don't carry around a DSLR gimbal with me on vacation. At best I have a tripod or platypod. For vast majority of my personal video requirements, the DJI Osmo Mobile (using my iPhone) or Pocket are good enough.
> 
> I am seriously considering buying the RP to replace my M5 as my second body (my primary body is 5D4), along with the RF 24-70 f/2.8L IS to replace my damaged EF 24-70 f/2.8L I. Half-tempted to get the RF 15-35 f/2.8L IS as well for my astrophotography interests, despite just buying the EF 16-35 f/2.8L III a few months ago. Will wait for reviews on that one. Regardless, once the prosumer (e.g. 5D equivalent) R body is available, I plan on making the full switch to RF, much to my wife's chagrin.



I'm not crazy about ibis either, most of the time I use a Ronin S for gimbal work, 11-24 is 3300 euros, that is not a reasonable option for me. As far as professional 4K video, I don't need "professional", but when I'm shooting a conference/wedding/small promo or something like that some people ask about 4K, and I feel that I might be losing certain jobs because of it.

It doesn't have to be the same device, but let me ask you a question, for the footage to have a quality look in most lightning conditions, a full frame sensor is a must. And is there a full frame device cheaper then a DSLR / mirrorless with interchangable lenses?


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 7, 2019)

Metalex said:


> You have already asked that and I answered.
> 
> Please answer my questions. What did you prove wrong? Where did I back peddle? Quotes please.



That proves my point. There aren’t any Sony lenses that matches any of the RF lenses, and that is where you were wrong.


----------



## knight427 (Feb 7, 2019)

prodorshak said:


> Beautiful pelican! Sharing one of mine! (77D, 55-250 IS STM, f5.0, ISO-100, 1/160, 200mm)



Oh, we're doing pelican photos here?

Apologies in advance to AlanF for using his photo w/o permission


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 7, 2019)

m1mm1m said:


> Absolutely without a doubt landing pelican images are very far from the most challenging BIF photography.... LOL... Also without a doubt, the "R" is not the optimal BIF camera even with a "proper" BIF lens and no TC. While AF is quick and excellent (as good as XYZ) with a fast lens, no TC, in decent light, and you do get AF all over the sensor, you are still hobbled by the 5fps frame rate. For very fast subjects, the 7D2 eats it alive and even more so, the 1DX2. I have both and would not give up either for an "R" a this point.
> 
> My only point was to illustrate that on the "R", AF works sensor-wide with any lens/TC combination at any aperture and it works acceptably enough to even use for some BIF. On most high-end dSLRs, you get center spot from 5.6 to 8 and nothing past 8..... This is way better. For static subjects, AF even at tiny apertures is as accurate as the R's AF ever is... IOW, very.
> 
> If having acceptable AF capability at small apertures matters to you at some level..... I would certainly consider it for that as well as it's other attributes. Personally I have 4 issues with the "R" Canon would need to solve before I spend money on this. See my previous posts for what they are. Yes, my current dSLRs are heavier and bigger, but they do what I need done better than the "R" at this point in time and I can live without AF at small apertures.



Thanks for this. I'll search for your other comments. Too bad these threads are so full of time wasting insults. My thought is that this camera would be a good backup to the 1DX2 for sure and if I took it on a trip and not the 1DX2 it would be to conserve space and weight and in that case there would be no big white anyway, probably the biggest would be the 70-200 2.8, which I assume would work fine.

Jack


----------



## LesC (Feb 7, 2019)

With regard to the 'Is the 6D MKII a good/bad camera", a few things to consider:

As this is a Canon forum, I'd expect the majority of users have Canon gear? If so you may well have amassed a good collection of decent glass. Therefore you're more likely to stay with Canon even if the latest whatever isn't as good as the competition's comparable model. Would you say, rather than go for a 5D MKIV go for a Nikon D850 and change all your lenses? What if the next Canon is better - would you change systems again?

Specs on paper & lab tests have their place but I'd rather listen to real-world experiences from people who've actually bought the camera. Despite what the specs might suggest, in practice you may not notice so much difference, if any. So what if you can recover more detail from a shot underexposed by 5 stops; I doubt I've had many shots I've miscalculated the exposure so badly on!

OK, if you're a pro and/or shoot in really challenging conditions you may require a more robust model but that's about it. At our camera club we regularly project images up to 6ft wide or look at A3 prints but you can't tell which camera was used whether 6D, D850 or whatever.

Some cameras may have more of the features you need personally but to suggest the 6D MKII (or indeed the 6D) is a bad camera is just silly.


----------



## Talys (Feb 7, 2019)

Canon cameras remind me of movies that the film critics hate, but I go watch anyways, and then think to myself, "Hey, that was a great!"

But anyways, seriously, the issue with Sony cameras is that they're really awesome at a lot of things, but at the end of the day, they are features that I either don't use (like 4k video) or that I seriously can't tell the difference on for the sorts of photography I do (like a step or two more base DR). I'm confident that I can get the same results out of whatever;p system is in my hands -- it's just a question of which system I'm happier to use, and I would rank that Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Sony.

Canon also wins out for me from a practical perspective simply because of some great lower priced EF lenses, and a much broader set of first and third party accessories. For example, if I owned a Sony, I probably would never have purchased a 16-35 or a 100 macro, and these are now lenses I can't imagine being without -- never mind other lenses with no equivalent like Sigma 150-600.


----------



## Talys (Feb 7, 2019)

LesC said:


> With regard to the 'Is the 6D MKII a good/bad camera", a few things to consider:
> 
> As this is a Canon forum, I'd expect the majority of users have Canon gear? If so you may well have amassed a good collection of decent glass. Therefore you're more likely to stay with Canon even if the latest whatever isn't as good as the competition's comparable model.


Canon deserves points for making an excellent EF to RF adapter. Putting aside nifty bonuses like control ring or rear filters, _it works the way you would want it to._ Yes, there may be differences in raw autofocus speed and coverage and at f/whatever, but for most people in most use cases, autofocus feels natural, performs as promised. This is in sharp contrast to Nikon's FTZ adapter (or Sony's A mount adapter, though I don't think there were enough A mount lens owners for this to be an issue), where a Z7 with an F-mount lens doesn't autofocus anything like an 850 with the same F-mount lens.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Sony troll that uses canon all his life?


Sure! Besides, claiming to be a lifetime Canon user doesn't change the attitude of the posts.


----------



## Talys (Feb 7, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> As a consumer (not stockholder), you should be mad that Canon just provide the status quo without going to extra mile to get your hard earn money.



As a consumer (not a shareholder), I am happy that Canon provides a camera with the features that I want, and not just a high end model that forces me to pay for a bunch of features that I don't need and won't use.



bokehmon22 said:


> I'm lucky to have alot of disposable money



Yes, aren't you lucky.


----------



## dak723 (Feb 7, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> .....
> 
> Canon has a history of providing poorly value camera because they know we are tied down to glasses - 5D IV, 6D II, and EOS R. They aren't bad camera. I don't think any FF camera in the last 5 year take bad pictures. It just a poorly value one.



You mean, FOR THE *SPECS YOU VALUE.*

How many times to rational people have to point this out to those who make proclamations about value? Different consumers have different priorities in what they value. When you proclaim something as a fact for all, you are almost certainly wrong.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

YnR said:


> Look, I’ve got a 60D and have been patiently waiting the last few years for the right entry level FF body. The 6DII didn’t it cut it for me due to the many hashed over points. Would I rather have my 60 over the 6? Of course not but for the price, I decided to wait. Along comes Canon’s mirrorless FF which brings some attention with the possibility of a new sensor, higher FPS, along with the lighter weight and smaller package. So Canon may release a camera that isn’t noticeably improved over the 6D2 as far as output and performance. I’ve been waiting for several years, hoping for a better option, but it hasn’t come. Understand why so many of us “bots” are frustrated and saying the same thing?


No. I don't understand why people constantly come here to talk of another brand offering everything they want or need, but never switching if that is the case. The camera is a tool. Buy the tool you say you want or need. If people seriously think they'll get a clone of brand X in a Canon... well, I just think that's silly. Ain't gonna happen. Ever. Your present 60D is far outclassed by any of Canon's FF offerings. If that isn't apparent and the Sony checks all the boxes for you, then why not the Sony? Hoping Canon releases your individual dream camera is a pipe dream.


----------



## Talys (Feb 7, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Sure! Besides, claiming to be a lifetime Canon user doesn't change the attitude of the posts.


I cannot grasp this. I was a "lifetime Nikon user" until I decided I really liked Canon. I was happy with the switch (okay, well, I tried MFT for the dream of shrinking everything first, but anyways). I can't imagine (a) still being on Nikon and bitching that live view on my DSLR can't autofocus if my life depended on it or (b) going onto Nikon forums to bitch about what I like better on Canon.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

Metalex said:


> It now tends to be only the newer telephoto (100mm+) G Master lenses that have IBIS. There are a few older Sony Zeiss lenses with OSS, but they pre-date the introduction of IBIS.


Lenses don't have IBIS, my friend. No lens in the world has IBIS.


----------



## Mark D5 TEAM II (Feb 7, 2019)

Not the 6D2 arguments all over again . Canon should just lower the MSRP to ~$1100 and all the complaints would disappear. All the rest of the criticism are just Photography Level 0 spec-sheet comparos & equipment measurebating.

For this RP, price it at $1200-1300 and the target market won't care if it has the exact same 6D2 sensor. All the rest of the complaints are people wishing 1DX2 bodies priced at 6D2 levels.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 7, 2019)

m1mm1m said:


> My ONLY point was to illustrate that the "R" can AF with a lens/TC combination with an f-stop smaller than F8 and do it anywhere on the sensor.... This is something no current dSLR can do. That pelican shot was illustrative of this and that the camera does it well enough even to keep up with some motion.
> 
> I never said a pelican is a "little" bird...as in "small" (LMFAO) -- I said the picture shows that the equipment in question is capable of a "little BIF" --- as opposed to "a lot" or "full-blown" BIF like you'd be able to do with say a 1DXII and a 500 F4L or similar......



We (those on these threads) do not always take the time to be completely clear in our comments and even sometimes they are incorrect. I don't see that as an excuse for borderline insults going back and forth, which contributes nothing to an otherwise useful exchange. The best approach, well proven , is to not engage in this and just be nice. 

Jack


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 7, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> I'm quite used to use canon bodies, lenses, batteries, menus, options, dpaf and everything else, the transition will be really hard (and emotional)



It's time to relearn it


dtaylor said:


> That sounds like a description of Sony's three generations of non-existent and poor weather sealing. (To say nothing of a history of compressed RAWs, star eating algorithms, off sensor reflections, broken UIs, etc, etc.)
> 
> 
> Is that how they got the 28-70 f/2 and the sharpest 50 f/1.2 to date? By minimizing R&D money spent?



I was talking about camera body. Canon is the best manufacture when it comes to lens manufacture. At $2300 and $3000 they aren't cheap. They probably have a higher profit margin. I am talking about their 6D II offering, EOS R recycle sensor and most likely EOS RP 6D II sensor. 

Sony do have a lot of faults. Not arguing with you there. That's why I'm still with Canon to see if EOS R Pro would be a good alternative.



dtaylor said:


> It's not worse. Slightly more noise but slightly more detail. Probably less than 0.5ev difference even if you're just looking at noise in a gray patch. If you NR to the same level of detail/sharpness it might be a tiny bit better.
> 
> FF differences at high ISO are practically a myth at this point, reinforced by pixel peeping files which vary in size.
> 
> ...



I was willing to spend the cash for a long time now.



qudek77 said:


> I'm quite used to use canon bodies, lenses, batteries, menus, options, dpaf and everything else, the transition will be really hard (and emotional)



I can relate. It will be emotional for me since Canon is all I ever own and how I started with photography and build my portfolio, but you need to separate the tool from the photographer. Photography is all about continuing learning the craft and the tools. My workflow is alot differences 5 years ago then how it is today - off camera lighting, photoshop techniques, raw processing, different lenses, etc.

Third party are cheap and some camera come with USB PD. Menu can learn and customized with custom function button. It depends on your niche, but third party lens is really good. 

Canon 135 F2 is one of Canon best lens but I can find Sigma 105 1.4/135 1.8. Gone are the days Canon is a few manufacturers that can make decent lens. 

The new RF lens look incredible but you can bet they will be expensive as well. 

Good luck with your decision but I will keep an open mind on the best system that work for me.


----------



## Mark D5 TEAM II (Feb 7, 2019)

As for body design my only observation is that Canon, again, wasted the entire top left side of the body by using that huge single-function ON/OFF dial. They should have added functionality to that dial and 1 or 2 more customizable buttons on that side.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Feb 7, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Lenses don't have IBIS, my friend. No lens in the world has IBIS.


sure they do, in the lens body! 
Haha


----------



## Talys (Feb 7, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> sure they do, in the lens body!
> Haha


LOL


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

Mark D5 TEAM II said:


> Not the 6D2 arguments all over again . Canon should just lower the MSRP to ~$1100 and all the complaints would disappear. All the rest of the criticism are just Photography Level 0 spec-sheet comparos & equipment measurebating.
> 
> For this RP, price it at $1200-1300 and the target market won't care if it has the exact same 6D2 sensor. All the rest of the complaints are people wishing 1DX2 bodies priced at 6D2 levels.


I know the sensor being from the 6D II (if it really is) doesn't bother me. If it works it works. People act as though the thing can't capture a great image. FF sensor, on a mirrorless camera, in my preferred brand and at this price... which I can use on my MF lenses and allowing me to ditch my Olympus MFT? Hallelujah! So far, either the R or the RP would do it for me. This camera, I think, is going to sell very well.


----------



## CanoKnight (Feb 7, 2019)

dak723 said:


> Thank you for your usual troll observations. Why are you here on a Canon site if you hate Canon so much?



If you look below at the Canon gear I own I am still very much a Canon user and a one time Canon enthusiast. As a Canon owner/user am I not allowed to criticize Canon.. or are we only allowed to sing the glory of Canon ? 

I don't "hate" Canon. I have been disappointed with their strategy and after giving them several chances to get video right, I have moved on. Yes, moved on as in I pre ordered the new king of mirrorless, the Panasonic S1 and eagerly await its arrival.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

Talys said:


> LOL


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

CanoKnight said:


> If you look below at the Canon gear I own I am still very much a Canon user and a one time Canon enthusiast. As a Canon owner/user am I not allowed to criticize Canon.. or are we only allowed to sing the glory of Canon ?
> 
> I don't "hate" Canon. I have been disappointed with their strategy and after giving them several chances to get video right, I have moved on. Yes, moved on as in I pre ordered the new king of mirrorless, the Panasonic S1 and eagerly await its arrival.


Yay for you! Enjoy! It won't be king in a year. That's just how all this works.  Glad you found what meets your needs.


----------



## knight427 (Feb 7, 2019)

Mark D5 TEAM II said:


> As for body design my only observation is that Canon, again, wasted the entire top left side of the body by using that huge single-function ON/OFF dial. They should have added functionality to that dial and 1 or 2 more customizable buttons on that side.



No way, that space is perfectly suited for custom modification. I invented a tactical shadow lifter. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you, the Shadow Sniper(TM):



In version 2, I'm going add a mechanical arm that switches the light on only when the shutter is depressed. This should eliminate all of the hand wringing over shadow lifting.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Feb 7, 2019)

The biggest problem many people dont understand or at least acknowlodge here, since this is a forum dedicated to one brand is the time=progression when it comes to technology. If something is new we expect it to be better than what came before it. I see a lot of excuses and sales "figures" and other stuff . Simply put if a consumer buys something that is brand new many expect it should be better ( and possibly smaller) than a past model. If not the price should just be much lower than what it derived from. With Canon we dont really get that. There are more side grades than upgrades until a significant amount of time goes by in technology standards. Here is the idea simplified anything released 2020>2019>2018>2017>2016 etc. I dont see how peopel get so defensive about that criticism. Do you not want to get more for your money if possible unless you collect profit from the money being saved....


----------



## knight427 (Feb 7, 2019)

knight427 said:


> No way, that space is perfectly suited for custom modification. I invented a tactical shadow lifter. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you, the Shadow Sniper(TM):
> View attachment 183033
> 
> 
> In version 2, I'm going add a mechanical arm that switches the light on only when the shutter is depressed. This should eliminate all of the hand wringing over shadow lifting.



Wow, Canon already has a competitive product to market. That was quick. But not to worry, I've got it all over them in the spec sheets.


----------



## Colorado (Feb 7, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> I dont see how peopel get so defensive about that criticism. Do you not want to get more for your money if possible unless you collect profit from the money being saved....


I've avoided this thread but it isn't people getting defensive. It is nothing new is being said. Canon has a history of being very conservative with upgrades and along with that reusing tweaked existing sensors. But reading a comment thread in a Canon rumors site with 1000's of comments that basically say "Canon sucks, Sony rocks" is tiresome.

It took me about 30 seconds of reading the leaked specs to know that the RP is not the camera to lure me to mirrorless away from my 1DX. That's fine. Not all products will be for me. I could either post repeatedly how I wish Canon would make the camera I want or I could get on with my life. Posting repeatedly would probably annoy those that are genuinely excited by what the RP will offer for the price point. They are here to talk about the rumors for this camera. Telling them that some yet-to-be-leaked camera that will cost 2-3x times as much will be better is just rude. Telling them that Canon sucks, will never make a good camera, and they should just sell everything for Sony is doubly rude.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Feb 7, 2019)

prodorshak said:


> I am in baby years regarding experience in photography (happily shooting with my 77D), maybe that's why I thought "RAW development in camera" is a good addition in a consumer model. But, no one is talking about it here. What am I missing? Is that a very common feature?



Only very basic raw editing can be done in camera and it’s been around for a while. Nothing at all compared to DPP or Lightroom!


----------



## unfocused (Feb 7, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> The biggest problem many people dont understand or at least acknowlodge here, since this is a forum dedicated to one brand is the time=progression when it comes to technology. If something is new we expect it to be better than what came before it. I see a lot of excuses and sales "figures" and other stuff . Simply put if a consumer buys something that is brand new many expect it should be better ( and possibly smaller) than a past model. If not the price should just be much lower than what it derived from. With Canon we dont really get that...



Do you base this on actual experience? 

Here is my experience (I am only referencing cameras I actually own or owned):

From 7D to 7D II: 7D II is a significant upgrade in virtually every way.
From 70D to 80D (Wife's cameras); 80D is a significant improvement in image quality and in a number of other features.
From 5D III to 5D IV: Better image quality in terms of dynamic range, high ISO performance and resolution, autofocus is much improved.
100-400 I to 100-400 II: Noticeable improvement in sharpness, plus I was never that fond of push pull zooming (although my wife uses her 100-400 II as a push-pull which you can do if you want)
24-105 I to 24-105 II: Okay, in this case there really isn't much improvement I admit. Main advantage is the zoom creep is much better. I bought the II mostly because my old lens was getting long in the tooth.

Now, please, give me your experience with new models that *you have actually purchased* that you found not to be better than the old one you owned.


----------



## mdmphoto (Feb 7, 2019)

Dual Sensing IS?


----------



## MartinF. (Feb 7, 2019)

To me the main question is, what Canon will do with their existing fullframe DSLR line. Being the happy owner of the 6D "Classic", and more than a handfull of good glasses, I am split of what to do. Finally buy a 24-70 L f/2.8 , and then - later - a 5D mk IV og a V (when ever it comes) - of simply stay put with what I got and in a couple of years or so by a 5D equivalent EOS R, a RF 24-70 f/2.8 and then "adapt" the rest of my EF lenses.....
I fully understand that Canon is focusing on the R-series - but damn I would like to see a roadmap for the DSLR line and the "R-line"......


----------



## genriquez (Feb 7, 2019)

Haven't seen this mentioned yet but as a 6D mark one user I'm excited for the possibility of hundreds (thousands?) of selectable AF points than my single usable AF point.

If this is indeed comparable to the Canon 6D line then bring it on!

More AF points across the frame > need for new sensor and 1 stop DR

At least for me.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 7, 2019)

m1mm1m said:


> My ONLY point was to illustrate that the "R" can AF with a lens/TC combination with an f-stop smaller than F8 and do it anywhere on the sensor.... This is something no current dSLR can do. That pelican shot was illustrative of this and that the camera does it well enough even to keep up with some motion.
> 
> I never said a pelican is a "little" bird...as in "small" (LMFAO) -- I said the picture shows that the equipment in question is capable of a "little BIF" --- as opposed to "a lot" or "full-blown" BIF like you'd be able to do with say a 1DXII and a 500 F4L or similar......


If have no problems with your statement(s), but I really want to know if any camera out there is good enough to track erratic tiny birds. This would be a severe test of any AF system.... I know that none of my cameras are up to it.....


----------



## transpo1 (Feb 7, 2019)

I’ll wait for a weather and freeze resistant model before taking the plunge into the Canon EOS-R system. 

By the way, anyone know why Canon is getting rid of the scroll wheel on their FF mirrorless models? This is my favorite part of the hardware UI.


----------



## digitalride (Feb 7, 2019)

max_sr said:


> There is another reason. Why sell one camera, that can do both: high res full frame images and high fps crop images, when you can sell two cameras, that can only do one of these things.



That way of thinking only works until a competitor eats your lunch. I'm sure someone will release a ~45mp full frame camera with a speedy ~20mp crop mode in the next few years, hopefully canon but I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## tarjei99 (Feb 7, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> Edit: by the way, how much is Sony paying you to troll?



I've heard from a reliable source that there is talk in the camera industry that Sony is in fact paying people to troll on Canon forums. I don't think this has been proven.

I tend to think that these people are desperate to get someone else to confirm that they have made the right choice. Or will make the right choice when they can afford to buy a new camera.

They are in two modes ; either Canon is too expensive or the specifications are not good enough. And yet people keep buying them.

So I have grave doubts about most peoples analytical skills. After all, Canon proves them wrong time after time.


----------



## padam (Feb 7, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> By the way, anyone know why Canon is getting rid of the scroll wheel on their FF mirrorless models? This is my favorite part of the hardware UI.


Probably because of the size, it takes up a lot of real estate.


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 7, 2019)

tarjei99 said:


> I've heard from a reliable source that there is talk in the camera industry that Sony is in fact paying people to troll on Canon forums. I don't think this has been proven.
> 
> I tend to think that these people are desperate to get someone else to confirm that they have made the right choice. Or will make the right choice when they can afford to buy a new camera.
> 
> ...



I would not be surprised if they did. There are so many trolls in here bashing Canon, who ends up being trashed with Sony’s indisputable shortcomings, that I have a hard time believing a true Sony fanboy would stick around to volunteeringly get the painful reality check. I find it likely that some of the trolls in here are being paid by Sony. 

Sony were also the first company that I know of, who started paying trips to Hawaii and similar, to YouTube reviewers, with the obvious intent of influencing their reviews. Sadly, other companies, including Canon, have followed Sony’s lead and seems to do the same now.


----------



## nchoh (Feb 7, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> I would not be surprised if they did. There are so many trolls in here bashing Canon, who ends up being trashed with Sony’s indisputable shortcomings, that I have a hard time believing a true Sony fanboy would stick around to volunteeringly get the painful reality check. I find it likely that some of the trolls in here are being paid by Sony.



True that. And they don't defend their positions all that much. And then a lot of new accounts pop up on rumors of new product launches.


----------



## knight427 (Feb 7, 2019)

Here’s an idea. If you are seriously considering the RP based on the current leaked specs, tell us why with a little context about your use case.

*Very brief intro:*
I’m interested in the RP as a replacement for my 6D, which is my only camera. I’m a hobbyist with no aspirations to make money through photography. My most demanding use cases are birds in flight, daughters on stage (dance) and scenic astrophotography (aka milky way landscape).

*Rumored specs most interesting to me:*
AF at small apertures so I can use my extenders on the 100-400ii for more than landscape and moon photos (f/8 lets me use the 1.4x, f/11 like the R would allow me to use my 2x)

Better AF with more points

Price

*Non-critical extras:*
I’d be interested in trying video for family events, I tried it once on my 6D and decided it was better to just be I the moment that have crappy out of focus video with loud lens sounds. (user incompetence MIGHT have had a bit to do with this)

I might as well get going on building my RF lens collection before my EF lenses are officially obsoleted

A smaller body might be nice, but might not given how much I like shooting with my 100-400. I will eventually get the 70-200 f/2.8, and the thought of that being short (due to telescoping) plus this small body sounds appealing for travel and general use.

*Biggest disappointment:*
Despite 6.5 years between launch of 6D and RP, the sensor will gain me little if any benefit versus what I already have. But a camera is more than its sensor, so at the right price, this is not a deal breaker for me.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Feb 7, 2019)

m1mm1m said:


> My ONLY point was to illustrate that the "R" can AF with a lens/TC combination with an f-stop smaller than F8 and do it anywhere on the sensor.... This is something no current dSLR can do. That pelican shot was illustrative of this and that the camera does it well enough even to keep up with some motion.
> 
> I never said a pelican is a "little" bird...as in "small" (LMFAO) -- I said the picture shows that the equipment in question is capable of a "little BIF" --- as opposed to "a lot" or "full-blown" BIF like you'd be able to do with say a 1DXII and a 500 F4L or similar......


I'm happy you like the EOS R but I'm not sure why you keep saying that DSLR's can't DPAF focus beyond F8. That's not correct. My IDX2 and 5D4 can both focus at f-stops smaller than f/8 in live view using DPAF. The only difference is that I don't have the benefit of the EVF and have to work off the rear display or an external monitor. I've worked at f/11 maximum apertures for both stills and video and the focus works perfectly fine. You really shouldn't make such broad assertions without fully considering what you are saying. My DSLR's wouldn't have the slightest problem photographing that pelican BTW.


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 7, 2019)

nchoh said:


> True that. And they don't defend their positions all that much. And then a lot of new accounts pop up on rumors of new product launches.



Absolutely! It is the defending of the impossible, never admitting that they are even slightly wrong, that makes me suspicious - together with the new accounts popping up.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 7, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> Absolutely! It is the defending of the impossible, never admitting that they are even slightly wrong, that makes me suspicious - together with the new accounts popping up.


I am afraid it is a human failing that (some) people will not back down or admit they are wrong despite proof to the contrary, and not necessarily because they are paid to troll.


----------



## Thatguyy (Feb 7, 2019)

A 6D II Sensor with the high Res RF Lenses will be a nice pair


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 7, 2019)

knight427 said:


> *Biggest disappointment:*
> Despite 6.5 years between launch of 6D and RP, the sensor will gain me little if any benefit versus what I already have. But a camera is more than its sensor, so at the right price, this is not a deal breaker for me.



Honestly the situation wasn't much different 6.5 years ago. The top DR hasn't changed, defined by the D8x0 series. It's just that the A7r3 and A73 caught up to the D8x0. Canon hasn't quite caught up, but the 5D4 was a significant step forward. We talk about high ISO improvements but they are fractional stop improvements. Top resolution (in FF) is still set by the 5Ds/sr, though Nikon and Sony inched closer.

I hope Canon did put ADCs on chip in the RP sensor, though that still wouldn't silence the naysayers.


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 7, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I am afraid it is a human failing that (some) people will not back down or admit they are wrong despite proof to the contrary, and not necessarily because they are paid to troll.


Yep! But it is also how trolls operate, paid or not. 

I guess it says a lot when members in here are not seeking knowledge or treating facts as facts. I have no issues with differences in opinion or preferences, but I cannot deal with thos ignoring facts.


----------



## prodorshak (Feb 7, 2019)

'Full blown BIF'  .
Great Blue Heron.
pardon the quality, poor man's camera-lens combo!
1) (77D, 55-250 IS STM, f5.6, ISO-100, 1/320, 233mm)
2)(77D, 55-250 IS STM, f5.6, ISO-100, 1/640, 233mm)


----------



## AlanF (Feb 7, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> Yep! But it is also how trolls operate, paid or not.
> 
> I guess it says a lot when members in here are not seeking knowledge or treating facts as facts. I have no issues with differences in opinion or preferences, but I cannot deal with thos ignoring facts.


Again, I am afraid it is all too common to ignore facts and to twist meaning. At the end of the day, it doesn't mean that much when it's for photography but it mirrors the wider society for real issues that are really important.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 7, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> ...By the way, anyone know why Canon is getting rid of the scroll wheel on their FF mirrorless models? This is my favorite part of the hardware UI.





padam said:


> Probably because of the size, it takes up a lot of real estate.



It may also be that with touch screens, there is less need for scrolling with a wheel. Although I always forget that I can scroll with a finger swipe.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 7, 2019)

prodorshak said:


> 'Full blown BIF'  .
> Great Blue Heron.
> pardon the quality, poor man's camera-lens combo!
> 1) (77D, 55-250 IS STM, f5.6, ISO-100, 1/320, 233mm)
> ...


Nice shots. The 55-250mm STM is a hidden gem of a lens.


----------



## navastronia (Feb 7, 2019)

prodorshak said:


> 'Full blown BIF'  .
> Great Blue Heron.
> pardon the quality, poor man's camera-lens combo!
> 1) (77D, 55-250 IS STM, f5.6, ISO-100, 1/320, 233mm)
> 2)(77D, 55-250 IS STM, f5.6, ISO-100, 1/640, 233mm)



Still great shots, though the second didn't quite hit focus.

My 55-250 IS II, on a Rebel t4i, was good for outdoor event photography (below), cheapness be damned


----------



## Jethro (Feb 7, 2019)

MartinF. said:


> To me the main question is, what Canon will do with their existing fullframe DSLR line. Being the happy owner of the 6D "Classic", and more than a handfull of good glasses, I am split of what to do. Finally buy a 24-70 L f/2.8 , and then - later - a 5D mk IV og a V (when ever it comes) - of simply stay put with what I got and in a couple of years or so by a 5D equivalent EOS R, a RF 24-70 f/2.8 and then "adapt" the rest of my EF lenses.....
> I fully understand that Canon is focusing on the R-series - but damn I would like to see a roadmap for the DSLR line and the "R-line"......


I was in a virtually identical position to you before Xmas, and succumbed to the EOS R on Black Friday. The reality is that they won't provide a roadmap, because it would effect people's buying patterns. The EOS R would not have sold as well as it has if people knew there was a cheaper, more consumer based version being announced in Feb. Similarly the sale of APS-C and EOS M cameras pre-Xmas. So, they cash in on 'early adopters' with EOS R. 

There is almost certainly a higher MP EOS R coming later this year, but to announce a formal timeline would (i) cannibalise EOS R sales, and (ii) cannibalise 5Ds sales. Plus, they almost certainly want the flexibility to stagger the releases depending upon how sales go on the early models. Probably a genuine pro-model pre the Olympics next year. They have been much more open on RF lenses - 2019 is RF year. And the certifcations are coming thick and fast. I think there is a very clear strategy to move existing Canon users into mirrorless over the next coup[le of years.


----------



## prodorshak (Feb 7, 2019)

navastronia said:


> Still great shots, though the second didn't quite hit focus.
> 
> My 55-250 IS II, on a Rebel t4i, was good for outdoor event photography (below), cheapness be damned
> 
> View attachment 183037


Good view.
Cheap and dope!


----------



## prodorshak (Feb 7, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Nice shots. The 55-250mm STM is a hidden gem of a lens.


I love my 55-250 STM.


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 7, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Again, I am afraid it is all too common to ignore facts and to twist meaning. At the end of the day, it doesn't mean that much when it's for photography but it mirrors the wider society for real issues that are really important.


Very true indeed, and to some degree most, if not all, of us suffer to some degree of this phenomenon..


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 7, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> The biggest problem many people dont understand or at least acknowlodge here, since this is a forum dedicated to one brand is the time=progression when it comes to technology. If something is new we expect it to be better than what came before it. I see a lot of excuses and sales "figures" and other stuff . Simply put if a consumer buys something that is brand new many expect it should be better ( and possibly smaller) than a past model. If not the price should just be much lower than what it derived from. With Canon we dont really get that. There are more side grades than upgrades until a significant amount of time goes by in technology standards. Here is the idea simplified anything released 2020>2019>2018>2017>2016 etc. I dont see how peopel get so defensive about that criticism. Do you not want to get more for your money if possible unless you collect profit from the money being saved....



I tried to bring up this point but people got so defensive as if it's a personal attack against them.

If there are no significant upgrade, I wouldn't consider upgrading my current camera to FF mirrorless. There got to be a substantial improvements in multiple area for me to consider otherwise I would rather skip a generation like I did with Canon 6D II. I don't shoot video so Canon weakness in that area doesn't matter to me. I understand this camera and EOS R wasn't target to me, but I was just discussing how Canon 6D II is an incremental upgrade over 6D after 5 years while being much more expensive.

The same thing is occurring with smart phones nowaday. If there isn't a significant upgrade for me, I wouldn't upgrade and pay the premium to buy a new phone.

My account was created since 2016 and yet people called me a troll and pointed about sales figures. I hope Canon share some of those profits with you guys.

If you look at my post history, I have blame Sony for poor ergonomic, poor EVF, fully touch screen LCD but also give praise where it needed to be which is competitive price, better eyeAF, IBIS, dual card slot in all their camera. Even at $1600 A7III, the poor EVF and ergonomic wasn't enough to sway me to buy it. 

If they just add 5.6 million EVF in their A7III with fully touch screen like a6400 and implement the new eyeAF, I would seriously consider that camera.

Canon doesn't need to do a lot to get my money - dual card slot, add joystick, add IBIS, better sensor than 5D IV, and better eyeAF. I don't care about 4K. If they charge $3500, I'll buy it.


----------



## Treyarnon (Feb 7, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> The biggest problem many people dont understand or at least acknowlodge here, since this is a forum dedicated to one brand is the time=progression when it comes to technology. If something is new we expect it to be better than what came before it. I see a lot of excuses and sales "figures" and other stuff . Simply put if a consumer buys something that is brand new many expect it should be better ( and possibly smaller) than a past model. If not the price should just be much lower than what it derived from. With Canon we dont really get that. There are more side grades than upgrades until a significant amount of time goes by in technology standards. Here is the idea simplified anything released 2020>2019>2018>2017>2016 etc. I dont see how peopel get so defensive about that criticism. Do you not want to get more for your money if possible unless you collect profit from the money being saved....


The problem I have with your point is that you are not being honest about what you are criticizing. 
You offer the point then new cameras should be (and I quote) " better than what came before it" OR " the price should just be much lower than what it derived from" - and you leave it there, but can you name a single Canon camera which fails this test of being "Better then what came before or lower cost than what came before"??
I have no problem with debating bad points of Canon's cameras - but you should be clear with the accusation and you should understande if people hold different opinions. Also, Cameras should be judged as a whole - every camera out there has good point and bad points (even the ones with Sony on the front) . To focus exclusively on the bad points and ignore the good is not very balanced is it?


----------



## unfocused (Feb 7, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> I tried to bring up this point but people got so defensive as if it's a personal attack against them.
> 
> If there are no significant upgrade, I wouldn't consider upgrading my current camera to FF mirrorless. There got to be a substantial improvements in multiple area for me to consider otherwise I would rather skip a generation like I did with Canon 6D II. I don't shoot video so Canon weakness in that area doesn't matter to me. I understand this camera and EOS R wasn't target to me, but I was just discussing how Canon 6D II is an incremental upgrade over 6D after 5 years while being much more expensive...



I'm having a hard time believing that anyone on this forum would disagree – provided you add a caveat or two. Everyone must make their own decision about what is important to them, and I don't know of anyone on this forum who criticizes others for saying that a particular camera of any brand doesn't offer the features that they personally want or doesn't offer what they personally consider to be a sufficient upgrade. 

What is always going to get people stirred up are blanket pronouncements, such as what RayValdez360 said, "...if a consumer buys something that is brand new many expect it should be better...With Canon we dont really get that."

This was stated as fact and as a blanket statement, with absolutely nothing to back it up. And frankly, it's just not true. Every generation of Canon cameras is objectively better than the previous. Everyone is entitled to their opinion as to whether or not the improvements are sufficient to justify purchasing a new model, but no one is entitled to just make up things.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 7, 2019)

unfocused said:


> I'm having a hard time believing that anyone on this forum would disagree – provided you add a caveat or two. Everyone must make their own decision about what is important to them, and I don't know of anyone on this forum who criticizes others for saying that a particular camera of any brand doesn't offer the features that they personally want or doesn't offer what they personally consider to be a sufficient upgrade.
> 
> What is always going to get people stirred up are blanket pronouncements, such as what RayValdez360 said, "...if a consumer buys something that is brand new many expect it should be better...With Canon we dont really get that."
> 
> This was stated as fact and as a blanket statement, with absolutely nothing to back it up. And frankly, it's just not true. Every generation of Canon cameras is objectively better than the previous. Everyone is entitled to their opinion as to whether or not the improvements are sufficient to justify purchasing a new model, but no one is entitled to just make up things.



I mentioned previously that there are no bad camera for the past 5 years and just a poorl value one. I did talk about how 6D II was a disappointing release especially at its release price of $2000. The sensor is more or less the same with more AF, articulating LCD, fully touch screen. None of those features really convince me to upgrade one of my 2 Canon 6D camera to 6D II. Canon 6D can be had for $700 used on craiglist. Thus I got a 5D IV instead. 

Canon 6D II took 5 years to release. It has a more AF points that's mostly center, articulating LCD and fully touch screen. Is it worth paying $2000 for? People argue the sensor is not worst that's it's -0.5 EV of each other. Even it's tie, I wouldn't want to shell $1300 extra money for articulating LCD and more AF points.

I get comment such as these.



> Amazing how the Sony trolls all sign up for an account when a new Canon is released. Since the first R was released, there have been many more of you. Gotta wonder how desperate Sony is getting, if Sony is paying trolls.





> Sony troll that uses canon all his life?



It amazing that a life long Canon user can't be critical of Canon for churning products after product for incremental increase yet commanding expensive price. The same goes for their 70-200 2.8 II and 70-200 2.8 III.


----------



## efmshark (Feb 7, 2019)

PerKr said:


> As I recall it fast M-mount lenses have serious vignetting issues as well as corner sharpness issues until stopped down quite a bit



I haven't been able to find any M-mount fast wide prime reviews on EOS RF, but I found some data on RF 35mm f1.8. At f/1.8, vignetting is more than 3.5EV near corners (https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?Lens=1224). Compare this to Tamron SP 35mm f/1.8 Di which has about 1.8 EV vignetting wide open at f/1.8 on an EOS 5DS R (https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?Lens=1003)


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 7, 2019)

knight427 said:


> Here’s an idea. If you are seriously considering the RP based on the current leaked specs, tell us why with a little context about your use case.
> 
> *Very brief intro:*
> I’m interested in the RP as a replacement for my 6D, which is my only camera. I’m a hobbyist with no aspirations to make money through photography. My most demanding use cases are birds in flight, daughters on stage (dance) and scenic astrophotography (aka milky way landscape).
> ...


I'd be interested in the RP to replace my mistake in buying an M43 Olympus for my wife. I can appreciate the FF sensor and the approximately 20gr difference in weight. The menu system will be more familiar. It will also give me a second FF camera with more focus points and spread than a 6D or 6D II would give. I would imagine the sensor is better than that of my 5D Mark III, which I have zero complaints about. I shoot 99% fashion and portrait stills. The video features don't mean anything to me. The camera will be still small enough and light enough for my wife to handle. So far, it looks like a relatively inexpensive FF camera that will provide great images. People comparing it to an a7r III are not being honest with themselves.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 8, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> I mentioned previously that there are no bad camera for the past 5 years and just a poorl value one. I did talk about how 6D II was a disappointing release especially at its release price of $2000. The sensor is more or less the same with more AF, articulating LCD, fully touch screen. None of those features really convince me to upgrade one of my 2 Canon 6D camera to 6D II. Canon 6D can be had for $700 used on craiglist. Thus I got a 5D IV instead.
> 
> Canon 6D II took 5 years to release. It has a more AF points that's mostly center, articulating LCD and fully touch screen. Is it worth paying $2000 for? People argue the sensor is not worst that's it's -0.5 EV of each other. Even it's tie, I wouldn't want to shell $1300 extra money for articulating LCD and more AF points.
> 
> ...


It is hard to make any statement without someone taking offense. I think that most of us realize that we are data points crowded on one end of the spectrum, but there are a few of us who think that we represent the masses.

Concerning the 6D and 6D2 controversy...... we have both. The mark 2 is a significantly better camera than the mark 1, particularly with the AF system and the articulating touchscreen. That said, yes, it has flaws. The sensor should have been better.... but you also have to consider that it is a higher res sensor, and that if you down sampled it from 26M to 20M, that you would recover most of the difference at low ISO and would actually be better at high ISO. It has no headphone jack, and despite supporting Bluetooth, you can not use Bluetooth headphones. WHY?

If I were starting from scratch, I would have no problems getting a 6D2, but I can also say that (at least for me) if I had a mark 1, the upgrade to the 2 is not enough to be worth it. I tend to skip models.....


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 8, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> It is hard to make any statement without someone taking offense. I think that most of us realize that we are data points crowded on one end of the spectrum, but there are a few of us who think that we represent the masses.
> 
> Concerning the 6D and 6D2 controversy...... we have both. The mark 2 is a significantly better camera than the mark 1, particularly with the AF system and the articulating touchscreen. That said, yes, it has flaws. The sensor should have been better.... but you also have to consider that it is a higher res sensor, and that if you down sampled it from 26M to 20M, that you would recover most of the difference at low ISO and would actually be better at high ISO. It has no headphone jack, and despite supporting Bluetooth, you can not use Bluetooth headphones. WHY?
> 
> If I were starting from scratch, I would have no problems getting a 6D2, but I can also say that (at least for me) if I had a mark 1, the upgrade to the 2 is not enough to be worth it. I tend to skip models.....



If someone critical about a camera, lens, or camera equipments I own, I wouldn't take offense to it. I understand I went for the best value options and they tend to have compromises. It is just a tool for me. There are no perfect camera just what you are willing to compromises on.

With the EOS RP soon out of way, I'm looking forward to hearing EOS R Pro rumors.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 8, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> We (those on these threads) do not always take the time to be completely clear in our comments and even sometimes they are incorrect. I don't see that as an excuse for borderline insults going back and forth, which contributes nothing to an otherwise useful exchange. The best approach, well proven , is to not engage in this and just be nice.
> 
> Jack



I have edited out Alan's name as it was being construed as me implying that he had made an insulting remark, whereas I was just teasing that he may have contributed to the insult that came his way. My apologies - I will try to stay away from commenting on interpersonal issues that are not my business, in the future. 

Jack


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 8, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> If someone critical about a camera, lens, or camera equipments I own, I wouldn't take offense to it. I understand I went for the best value options and they tend to have compromises. It is just a tool for me. There are no perfect camera just what you are willing to compromises on.
> 
> With the EOS RP soon out of way, I'm looking forward to hearing EOS R Pro rumors.


Same with me, I am very curious to see what is coming on the higher end R cameras.

I don’t take offense to differing opinions on gear, but I’m in an interesting position on the 6Ds, I use them, but didn’t have to pay for them. I like them, but recognize that they have shortcomings. I think that the mark 2 is an improvement over the 1, but not enough of an improvement to upgrade from one to the other.


----------



## PerKr (Feb 8, 2019)

Re the 6d vs 6d2. The mk2 isn't so much for those looking to upgrade from the mk1 as it is for those looking to replace their aging mk1. As such, the improvements are enough and keep the model up to date. If you need to upgrade beyond that you move to the 5D series or 1D series.what happened with the 6D2 was that for some reason people expected a 5D4 at a lower price point and got carried away with speculation. This doesn't happen with the rebel series. When the 400D came about there weren't a lot of people talking about it as an upgrade option for those using the 350D. The upgrade then was the 30D. Somehow it seems the quality of gear discussions has been significantly reduced since those days.


----------



## transpo1 (Feb 8, 2019)

unfocused said:


> It may also be that with touch screens, there is less need for scrolling with a wheel. Although I always forget that I can scroll with a finger swipe.



Too bad. It’s always been my favorite hardware element on the 5D series. Fuji lacks the same thing on their flagship models, and it’s a shame Canon is removing it, too. It was always a very reliable interface dial. Perhaps we’ll see it in the pro model R, when it’s released.


----------



## Jethro (Feb 8, 2019)

Hopefully we can have serious discussions about these things - because it's one of the most interesting aspects of the last little while for me: the jostling within the different classes of Canon cameras. 

For eg: with the EOS R, serious query whether there will be a 6D3. With the EOS RP, will there be a 90D? If there is a high MP EOS R later in the year, will there be a 5Ds2? The really interesting element is how this will play with the other pro DSLRs - assuming that at least one pro EOS R will turn up next year. Wlll that be pitched between the 5D4 and the 1D series? This is not just a timing issue about those DSLR series, but how many of them will ever be upgraded. If its seen as profitable, obviously they will - and there seems no issue about re-using old (and presumably new) sensors between DSLR and mirrorless versions. I don't see the older ones dropping off the shelves any time soon, but will they bother to incrementally upgrade them in a DSLR setting, or provide incentives for users to shift into mirrorless, where the value-ad of upgrading is not just a marginally better sensor, and/or (eg) video capabilities, versus buying into an all new system with state-of-the-art native RF lenses? 

To me a lot of what we are seeing is a deep long-term strategy on upgrades. Not just from older FF DSLRs to mirrorless, but from higher-grade APS-C DSLRs to FFM, and from lower level APS-C DSLRs to EOS-M. Of course they want non-Canon users to buy in as well, but I think a big part of it is to get existing users to turn over their existing bodies to newer (and mirrorless) versions.


----------



## bf (Feb 8, 2019)

I wish it was a rangefinder style body similar to M6. I'd wait till I hold it and learn more about the performance.


----------



## padam (Feb 8, 2019)

Jethro said:


> To me a lot of what we are seeing is a deep long-term strategy on upgrades. Not just from older FF DSLRs to mirrorless, but from higher-grade APS-C DSLRs to FFM, and from lower level APS-C DSLRs to EOS-M. Of course they want non-Canon users to buy in as well, but I think a big part of it is to get existing users to turn over their existing bodies to newer (and mirrorless) versions.


I think a high-end APS-C camera is a very important model in their lineup (and at this very moment they can do it better with a DSLR than a mirrorless), they won't skip that because it is a model that one might want to have in addition to a FF camera because of the extra performance it offers without going to a 1D-level camera.
From the features they offer (e.g. single SD slot in the EOS R) it is very obvious that first and foremost they want to sell as many cameras as they can to a single user.

And all the critiqe is actually emerging from the exact same thing which frustates people. For instance, the form factor of this camera seems really great, but
both photo and video will be severely crippled in comparison to the higher-end model (no 4k and very soft 1080p, if it stays as it was with the 6D Mark II).
Want the best video they currently offer in a stills camera? Well that's a much bigger and more expensive sports camera that most people don't really need (and with no C-Log), the 1DX Mark II.


----------



## Talys (Feb 8, 2019)

Jethro said:


> For eg: with the EOS R, serious query whether there will be a 6D3. With the EOS RP, will there be a 90D? If there is a high MP EOS R later in the year, will there be a 5Ds2? The really interesting element is how this will play with the other pro DSLRs - assuming that at least one pro EOS R will turn up next year. Wlll that be pitched between the 5D4 and the 1D series? This is not just a timing issue about those DSLR series, but how many of them will ever be upgraded. If its seen as profitable, obviously they will - and there seems no issue about re-using old (and presumably new) sensors between DSLR and mirrorless versions.



I can't imagine that Canon would discontinue the most popular enthusiast/professional DSLRs until at least 1 generation failed to generate good sales. Surely, 80D, 5D4, and 1D2 will all see successors, as these are some of Canon's most popular high-end models. I don't think low end DSLRs (xxxD Rebels) will disappear until an APSC mirrorless or EOS M accounts for the lion's share of mirrorless, and at the moment, we're far, far away from that, even though EOS M is pretty decent. Will 6D get the axe? Maybe? I think that there are reasonable odds that Canon produces at least 1 more lower-end full frame DSLR, but it might be a few years coming.


----------



## padam (Feb 8, 2019)

Talys said:


> I can't imagine that Canon would discontinue the most popular enthusiast/professional DSLRs until at least 1 generation failed to generate good sales. Surely, 80D, 5D4, and 1D2 will all see successors, as these are some of Canon's most popular high-end models. I don't think low end DSLRs (xxxD Rebels) will disappear until an APSC mirrorless or EOS M accounts for the lion's share of mirrorless, and at the moment, we're far, far away from that, even though EOS M is pretty decent. Will 6D get the axe? Maybe? I think that there are reasonable odds that Canon produces at least 1 more lower-end full frame DSLR, but it might be a few years coming.


The way that their product cycles are currently working will enable them to keep their 5D/6D line of DSLRs attractive for a bit if they want to, since they can jump a generation a few years ahead of the R, it is unclear at this point if the top-end mirrorless will get a sensor derived from the upcoming 1DX III or the (still rather good) 1DX II.


----------



## marc ln (Feb 8, 2019)

2 remarks:
- 6D mark2 sensor is not explicitly quoted... (_"...full frame mirrorless camera that appears to have the same resolution as the EOS 6D Mark II"_ : same resolution does not mean same sensor ...)
- No more battery reference quoted (but LP-E17 quoted in the initial rumor only)

And, .... I am waiting for a 80D/7D2 replacement ....  (actual gear is 500D/T1i) ...


----------



## padam (Feb 8, 2019)

marc ln said:


> 2 remarks:
> - 6D mark2 sensor is not explicitly quoted... (_"...full frame mirrorless camera that appears to have the same resolution as the EOS 6D Mark II"_ : same resolution does not mean same sensor ...)
> - No more battery reference quoted (but LP-E17 quoted in the initial rumor only)


Based on all the years past and from what the EOS R is, it is pretty obvious what is happening.

Also, kind of interesting that the weight of the LP-E17 does fit to the difference between the two quoted weights, one with the battery and card and one without.
Just another coincidence, surely


----------



## Metalex (Feb 8, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Lenses don't have IBIS, my friend. No lens in the world has IBIS.


True, but I'm sure you know what I meant.


----------



## marc ln (Feb 8, 2019)

padam said:


> Based on all the years past and from what the EOS R is, it is pretty obvious what is happening.
> 
> Also, kind of interesting that the weight of the LP-E17 does fit to the difference between the two quoted weights, one with the battery and card and one without.
> Just another coincidence, surely



So it could be LP-E10 45g, 860 mAh !!


----------



## AlanF (Feb 8, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Lenses don't have IBIS, my friend. No lens in the world has IBIS.


The latest Canon patent from Nokishita. The new RF telephoto has an an ibis to take the strain on hikes.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 8, 2019)

AlanF said:


> The latest Canon patent from Nokishita. The new RF telephoto has an an ibis to take the strain on hikes.
> 
> View attachment 183040


----------



## marc ln (Feb 8, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


>


nooooo .... IBIS should be inside the body ... beak toward the target and .... ass in front of the sensor


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 8, 2019)

scyrene said:


> Was it in a zoo? Wild hummingbirds only occur outside the Americas as vagrants crossing from Alaska to the far east of Siberia.


Actually it was a Sunbird which is like an hummingbird in behaviour but not actually of that genus


----------



## marc ln (Feb 8, 2019)

Canon EOS RP .... is it more like a cheap R or a FF M50 ? Depending on the point of view we can be happy for the money or happy for the features ....


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 8, 2019)

scyrene said:


> =eyeroll=
> 
> We didn't all come into this forum and immediately start spouting nonsense. It's a pity so many use their 'right' to do that.


Everyone spouts nonsense from time to time on this forum but only seem to dislike other peoples nonsense. We all need to learn to have a bit of tolerance to people who disagree with our own opinions. Whether you like the potential RP or not is a matter of opinion and its formed by where we are coming from and what we want. It's an open forum where all members can freely express an opinion. You never learn anything or change if you don't consider other opinions.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 8, 2019)

marc ln said:


> nooooo .... IBIS should be inside the body ... beak toward the target and .... ass in front of the sensor


You are correct for the IBIS-ibis. Here is another CR[0] from Nokishita for the 5R. IBIS-ibis is primarily for shorter focal length lenses. IS-ibis is being developed for supertelephotos.


----------



## marc ln (Feb 8, 2019)

AlanF said:


> You are correct for the IBIS-ibis. Here is another CR[0] from Nokishita. IBIS-ibis is primarily for shorter focal length lenses. IS-ibis is being developed for supertelephotos.
> View attachment 183045


Perfect!


----------



## dba101 (Feb 8, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> Everyone spouts nonsense from time to time on this forum but only seem to dislike other peoples nonsense. We all need to learn to have a bit of tolerance to people who disagree with our own opinions. Whether you like the potential RP or not is a matter of opinion and its formed by where we are coming from and what we want. It's an open forum where all members can freely express an opinion. You never learn anything or change if you don't consider other opinions.



Except if they are trolling the forum (even being paid to) and waste all our time. 
Get real.


----------



## analoggrotto (Feb 8, 2019)

AlanF said:


> The latest Canon patent from Nokishita. The new RF telephoto has an an ibis to take the strain on hikes.
> 
> View attachment 183040



The internet has been won this hour


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 8, 2019)

AlanF said:


> The latest Canon patent from Nokishita. The new RF telephoto has an an ibis to take the strain on hikes.


I want to know if Canon is working on flourite elements for pancake lenses.......


----------



## ThomsA (Feb 8, 2019)

AlanF said:


> You are correct for the IBIS-ibis. Here is another CR[0] from Nokishita for the 5R. IBIS-ibis is primarily for shorter focal length lenses. IS-ibis is being developed for supertelephotos.
> View attachment 183045



... which is of course not to be mistaken as an BSI-IBIS, as that one would hide behind the sensor ...


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 8, 2019)

dba101 said:


> Except if they are trolling the forum (even being paid to) and waste all our time.
> Get real.


Maybe you are a troll too as you are new here.
A sort of deep undercover one with a few initial positive comments about the RP before ripping into some other aspect of Canon.
Maybe they would but I'd doubt if Sony would be paying for trolls. Its not very effective as it drives conversations about Canon products as opposed to stopping them or else there wouldn't be so many pages of comments.
Anyway they are pretty predictable as to their content. 
However there are very genuine Canon customers here who do get disappointed from time to time but not everyone seems to want to listen to their comments because they hold a different opinion.


----------



## mpb001 (Feb 8, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> Too bad. It’s always been my favorite hardware element on the 5D series. Fuji lacks the same thing on their flagship models, and it’s a shame Canon is removing it, too. It was always a very reliable interface dial. Perhaps we’ll see it in the pro model R, when it’s released.


I agree and one huge reason I switched from Nikon to Canon in 1997 was because of the flat dial on the camera back making it so easy to adjust exposure compensation. It looks like the R series will not have the rear scroll dial due to the physical size restrictions, but I hope that they put some sort of dial on the back on new R cameras. I guess until then, I will stick with mt 5DIV.


----------



## max_sr (Feb 8, 2019)

mpb001 said:


> I agree and one huge reason I switched from Nikon to Canon in 1997 was because of the flat dial on the camera back making it so easy to adjust exposure compensation. It looks like the R series will not have the rear scroll dial due to the physical size restrictions, but I hope that they put some sort of dial on the back on new R cameras. I guess until then, I will stick with mt 5DIV.



If Sony can put a dial on the rear of the A7xxx bodies, why should Canon not be able to do so on the larger Rx bodies? It's just another feature (or lack thereof) to differentiate between the EOS R and the 5DIV, like frames per second, dual card slots, the position of the AF-on button, the lack of a joystick and so on. In my opinion the whole EOS camera body ecosystem just got more differentiated and more confusing with the positioning of the R and Rp.


----------



## koenkooi (Feb 8, 2019)

mpb001 said:


> I agree and one huge reason I switched from Nikon to Canon in 1997 was because of the flat dial on the camera back making it so easy to adjust exposure compensation. It looks like the R series will not have the rear scroll dial due to the physical size restrictions, but I hope that they put some sort of dial on the back on new R cameras. I guess until then, I will stick with mt 5DIV.



The RP does have an extra dial, it's next to the mode dial on top of the camera. I hope it can be programmed to function the same as the flat dial you mention.


----------



## Architect1776 (Feb 8, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> I want to know if Canon is working on flourite elements for pancake lenses.......



Why?
They are primarily for use in correcting telephoto lenses.
Aspherical is more for short lenses.


----------



## Bentley Boy (Feb 8, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> I’ll wait for a weather and freeze resistant model before taking the plunge into the Canon EOS-R system.
> 
> By the way, anyone know why Canon is getting rid of the scroll wheel on their FF mirrorless models? This is my favorite part of the hardware UI.


I have the R and can confirm it's weather-resistant as far as I can tell. I had it out in a heavy snow storm with the 24-105 for 2.5 hours and it worked perfectly the entire time. It was literally covered in wet snow and kept on truckin', and keeps on today.

The scroll wheel is a question I wish I could answer. If the R had that and dual card slots it would best the 5D4 in every way. It already is better in most relevant ways, which is why I chose it when replacing my 5D3. The lower cost was just icing on the cake.


----------



## marc ln (Feb 8, 2019)

Any information related to the EVF quality (3mpx, 5mpx?)?


----------



## Kit. (Feb 8, 2019)

ThomsA said:


> ... which is of course not to be mistaken as an BSI-IBIS, as that one would hide behind the sensor ...


Isn't it a tautology ("Behind-Sensor-Ibis-IBIS")?


----------



## dba101 (Feb 8, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> Maybe you are a troll too as you are new here.
> A sort of deep undercover one with a few initial positive comments about the RP before ripping into some other aspect of Canon.
> Maybe they would but I'd doubt if Sony would be paying for trolls. Its not very effective as it drives conversations about Canon products as opposed to stopping them or else there wouldn't be so many pages of comments.
> Anyway they are pretty predictable as to their content.
> However there are very genuine Canon customers here who do get disappointed from time to time but not everyone seems to want to listen to their comments because they hold a different opinion.



I refer you to the last line of my comment which is even more relevant now.
You need to get real..


----------



## unfocused (Feb 8, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> ...It amazing that a life long Canon user can't be critical of Canon for churning products after product for incremental increase yet commanding expensive price. The same goes for their 70-200 2.8 II and 70-200 2.8 III.



See, this is the problem. The 70-200 III is priced significantly lower than the 70-200 II was at introduction. So, you can be disappointed that the new lens is only an incremental increase, but you are absolutely incorrect in claiming that the pricing is somehow out of line. That's exactly the kind of statement that invites criticism. Plus, if you want to debate the 70-200 III, you need to ask if it was even possible for Canon to come up with any significant optical improvements at a reasonable price. Looking at what competitors offer and at the quality of the II version, the obvious answer would be "no." 

The point is, if you want to be disappointed in Canon, that is your right. But, if you want to convince others that your disappointment is justified, you need to have a little logic behind it and not just complain without considering what is feasible or reasonable. And, you certainly shouldn't make statements that are simply wrong.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 8, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> Why?
> They are primarily for use in correcting telephoto lenses.
> Aspherical is more for short lenses.


You missed a bad pun 

Alan posted a picture of an IBIS (the bird) carrying a lens, flourite is a miss-spelling (fairly common) of fluorite.... flour is used to make pancakes


----------



## AlanF (Feb 8, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> You missed a bad pun
> 
> Alan posted a picture of an IBIS (the bird) carrying a lens, flourite is a miss-spelling (fairly common) of fluorite.... flour is used to make pancakes


Flourite is used for shortcake IBIS for wide angle lenses and for baguette IS for telephotos.
Well, Jack logs on for the humour!


----------



## unfocused (Feb 8, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> You missed a bad pun



Is there any other kind?


----------



## Pape (Feb 8, 2019)

this ibis found something


----------



## stochasticmotions (Feb 8, 2019)

edoorn said:


> They could make the 5Ds replacement a bit like the D850, like a do-it-all camera with the option to shoot raw in lower resolution (and possibly faster fps)


^^^^This....please do this  or a Canon version of the A7RIII


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 8, 2019)

unfocused said:


> See, this is the problem. The 70-200 III is priced significantly lower than the 70-200 II was at introduction. So, you can be disappointed that the new lens is only an incremental increase, but you are absolutely incorrect in claiming that the pricing is somehow out of line. That's exactly the kind of statement that invites criticism. Plus, if you want to debate the 70-200 III, you need to ask if it was even possible for Canon to come up with any significant optical improvements at a reasonable price. Looking at what competitors offer and at the quality of the II version, the obvious answer would be "no."
> 
> The point is, if you want to be disappointed in Canon, that is your right. But, if you want to convince others that your disappointment is justified, you need to have a little logic behind it and not just complain without considering what is feasible or reasonable. And, you certainly shouldn't make statements that are simply wrong.



It is my opinion only. If you think $2100 70-200 III is worth it over the affordable 70-200 II 2.8 kudo to you. I can deduct 70-200 2.8 III as a business expense but it just not worth my time selling and buying gears, and pay extra for it.

Here is lensrental review.



> they’re nearly identical lenses. Yes, you heard right, Canon has essentially slapped a new paint job on the lens and re-released the 8-year-old 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II....But optically, they’re identical. The image stabilization system? Identical.



We have an awesome 70-200 2.8 II. We are very lucky in that sense.

Yes, lets look what what the competitor are charging to justify Canon's price for the new one without any significant improvement. If you have the money, go for it.

As for me, if there are no significant in performance, I'll skip it and buy the older generation for the exact performance. If you want the latest and have the mean for it, just buy whatever you want. I don't care.


----------



## YnR (Feb 8, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> No. I don't understand why people constantly come here to talk of another brand offering everything they want or need, but never switching if that is the case. The camera is a tool. Buy the tool you say you want or need. If people seriously think they'll get a clone of brand X in a Canon... well, I just think that's silly. Ain't gonna happen. Ever. Your present 60D is far outclassed by any of Canon's FF offerings. If that isn't apparent and the Sony checks all the boxes for you, then why not the Sony? Hoping Canon releases your individual dream camera is a pipe dream.



I’m not jumping ship. This is a hobby for me. I love tech toys, in general, but I don’t see the value in going from one brand to another given my position in the photo world. Overall, I like Canon a lot as a brand. I like how aggressive they are with their lens development, and I wish they would share that same energy with their bodies. The last year has really shown some great lens releases but the bodies have been mostly meh. For the RP, I’m not asking for weather sealing, higher FPS, insane autofocus speeds or even eye AF. In fact, I prefer to not see them on the RP to keep the costs and weight down. I’ve only mentioned Sony’s A73 as a marker for what you can get at a price point. Granted I don’t ever expect Canon to offer all of the A73’s features at that price, but it can’t be ignored. 

Also, I’m very aware all of the current Canon offerings outclass my current body but again the cost:value isn’t there for me. I’ve really resisted getting a FF camera the last few years, so I can get wider angles and also to start making larger prints. However, just b.c I want a better body and a better body is available doesn’t mean I should feel compelled to buy it. 

Wanting a better sensor instead of one that’s 2 years old really isn’t that much to ask for or expect in a brand new product. Maybe you shouldn’t expect everyone to be such a diehard fan of everything Canon releases and that unpopular products (a sensor in this case) that get re-released are going to remain unpopular. The RP looks almost perfect on paper (I don’t like the AF-on button position but could live with it) except for the possibility of the 6D2 sensor being employed and would pre-order it, if the sensor were improved. That is all. I’m not going to re-emphasize this point any further but hope you can at least understand that perspective or more importantly hope Canon can.


----------



## YnR (Feb 8, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> The biggest problem many people dont understand or at least acknowlodge here, since this is a forum dedicated to one brand is the time=progression when it comes to technology. If something is new we expect it to be better than what came before it. I see a lot of excuses and sales "figures" and other stuff . Simply put if a consumer buys something that is brand new many expect it should be better ( and possibly smaller) than a past model. If not the price should just be much lower than what it derived from. With Canon we dont really get that. There are more side grades than upgrades until a significant amount of time goes by in technology standards. Here is the idea simplified anything released 2020>2019>2018>2017>2016 etc. I dont see how peopel get so defensive about that criticism. Do you not want to get more for your money if possible unless you collect profit from the money being saved....



Damn, this a million times over. I’ve been trying to get this point across but someone on this forum in particular refuses to accept this as a reasonable expectation. I’d “like” your comment 5x if I could.


----------



## transpo1 (Feb 8, 2019)

Bentley Boy said:


> I have the R and can confirm it's weather-resistant as far as I can tell. I had it out in a heavy snow storm with the 24-105 for 2.5 hours and it worked perfectly the entire time. It was literally covered in wet snow and kept on truckin', and keeps on today.
> 
> The scroll wheel is a question I wish I could answer. If the R had that and dual card slots it would best the 5D4 in every way. It already is better in most relevant ways, which is why I chose it when replacing my 5D3. The lower cost was just icing on the cake.



Good to know! I wonder if the RP will have the same weather resistance...


----------



## transpo1 (Feb 8, 2019)

max_sr said:


> If Sony can put a dial on the rear of the A7xxx bodies, why should Canon not be able to do so on the larger Rx bodies? It's just another feature (or lack thereof) to differentiate between the EOS R and the 5DIV, like frames per second, dual card slots, the position of the AF-on button, the lack of a joystick and so on. In my opinion the whole EOS camera body ecosystem just got more differentiated and more confusing with the positioning of the R and Rp.



Good point! I do agree that this is Canon differentiating the lower-end prosumer R models from their prosumer DSLR line.

I suspect they will save the scroll wheel for their first $4000 plus, pro-level R model.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 8, 2019)

YnR said:


> Wanting a better sensor instead of one that’s 2 years old really isn’t that much to ask for or expect in a brand new product. Maybe you shouldn’t expect everyone to be such a diehard fan of everything Canon releases and that unpopular products (a sensor in this case) that get re-released are going to remain unpopular.



Well, I don't consider a two year old product to be "old", nor does one expect people to be diehard fans of everything Canon releases. lol. I also don't understand where one would get the idea that the 6D II is "unpopular".

The problem is the spec sheet measurbating and pixel peeping people do, and the criticisms they make without having taken the time to even run down to the camera shop and even hold a product they have offhandedly judged to be old, recycled, and unpopular. This is also just a hobby for me. However, I am not wound so tight that I consider something two years old, to be old. Nor, without any hard data or actual evidence, do I declare something unpopular just because I don't like it. Why? Because I am not so arrogant to think that because I like a "Ford" that "Chevy" should produce the same thing because that is what I want... except with a "Ford" badge.

A camera is a tool. How one uses it is going to determine whether or not the photo is any good.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 8, 2019)

YnR said:


> Damn, this a million times over. I’ve been trying to get this point across but someone on this forum in particular refuses to accept this as a reasonable expectation. I’d “like” your comment 5x if I could.


Part of the problem is that sometimes you have an update where a bunch of things gets better, a few things get worse, and people fixate on what got worse. This has occurred when pixel count goes up and individual pixel performance goes down, and when a crop video mode disappears from an update (or is added).

You can't make everyone happy.


----------



## Bentley Boy (Feb 8, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> Good to know! I wonder if the RP will have the same weather resistance...


I doubt it, as it's likely the "Rebel" equivalent with a full frame. However, we won't know until we know!

And even though my R is battle-tested, it's not something I would have done if planned. We got caught off guard by a freak snow storm while shooting Christmas lights a local preserve. I wasn't about to pack up and quit, so we stayed the course and took our chances. Shockingly, the weather reports were wrong!


----------



## YnR (Feb 8, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Well, I don't consider a two year old product to be "old", nor does one expect people to be diehard fans of everything Canon releases. lol. I also don't understand where one would get the idea that the 6D II is "unpopular".
> 
> The problem is the spec sheet measurbating and pixel peeping people do and the criticisms they make without having taken the time to even run down to the camera shop even hold a product they have offhandedly judged to be old, recycled, and unpopular. This is also just a hobby for me. However, I am not wound so tight that I consider something two years old, to be old. Nor, without any hard data or actual evidence, do I declare something unpopular just because I don't like it. Why? Because I am not so arrogant to think that because I like a "Ford" that "Chevy" should produce the same thing because that is what I want... except with a "Ford" badge.
> 
> A camera is a tool. How one uses it is going to determine whether or not the photo is any good.



I’m not sure, but are you calling me arrogant? That’s a bit offensive. Your last statement is laughable considering you have the R and I’m with my 60D. Want to trade since you don’t need it?


----------



## Ira Parker (Feb 8, 2019)

Foxeslink said:


> Pls do! and be happy with sony! You're never happy with anything about Canon


I'm an avid Canon user. I currently have a 5D Mark IV and well over $10k of glass. But truly, it feels like Canon - in the increasingly mirrorless age of cameras - is saying if you are serious about a mirrorless camera, look at Sony and now, increasingly, Nikon. The R is on so many levels a faulty camera. The reported new RP seems to be a downgrade from the R. I have been a loyal Canon user in the digital SLR age. It is becoming very difficult to remain so.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 8, 2019)

YnR said:


> I’m not sure, but are you calling me arrogant? That’s a bit offensive. Your last statement is laughable considering you have the R and I’m with my 60D. Want to trade since you don’t need it?


You are still shooting with a 60D? That’s ancient! I have not used one of those since last fall 

I still have mine, and I use it as my primary camera when kayaking. It is reasonably well sealed. I have been considering getting the Tamron 18-400 to go with it, as this gives me a one lens solution that should outperform any of the tiny sensored bridge or super zoom cameras, plus that lens is dock compatible so I am better protected from future changes.


----------



## ThomsA (Feb 8, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Isn't it a tautology ("Behind-Sensor-Ibis-IBIS")?



Only if the IBIS is not illuminated.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 8, 2019)

YnR said:


> I’m not sure, but are you calling me arrogant? That’s a bit offensive. Your last statement is laughable considering you have the R and I’m with my 60D. Want to trade since you don’t need it?


I do not have an R. What I have is listed below in my sig. I've not called you arrogant.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 8, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> You are still shooting with a 60D? That’s ancient! I have not used one of those since last fall
> 
> I still have mine, and I use it as my primary camera when kayaking. It is reasonably well sealed. I have been considering getting the Tamron 18-400 to go with it, as this gives me a one lens solution that should outperform any of the tiny sensored bridge or super zoom cameras, plus that lens is dock compatible so I am better protected from future changes.


I tried the 18-400, Don, three times. The first copy wasn't too bad at 400mm, but I passed. The next 2 were disasters. Should have bought the first. So, test before keeping.


----------



## dak723 (Feb 8, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> It is my opinion only. If you think $2100 70-200 III is worth it over the affordable 70-200 II 2.8 kudo to you. I can deduct 70-200 2.8 III as a business expense but it just not worth my time selling and buying gears, and pay extra for it.
> 
> Here is lensrental review.
> 
> ...



This is my opinion, but I beleive people on forums totally misinterpret why Canon or any company comes out with a new version of a lens - especially a lens that is not that old. An "L" quality lens such as the Canon 70-200L will never see much if any optical improvement, so it is not marketed as an upgrade replacement for its predecessor. Nor was the 24-105 L II meant to be an upgrade for current 24-105 L users. These lenses are meant for NEW buyers. They are merely replacing an older model so that the lens can possibly be made cheaper, or perhaps lighter in weight, or perhaps with newer advances in coatings. Optics is not a new electronic technology - so you won't see much - if any advances. The fact that an owner of an "L" lens made in the past 15 years will actually buy a newer version of the same lens will be a bonus for Canon, but the number of upgraders must be small.

In fact, as has been pointed out so many times it is hard to understand why folks don't comprehend it, but sensors and digital cameras have gotten to the point where they are a mature technology with little room for improvement from one generation to the next. My guess is that many - if not most - camera users skip at least one and maybe two generations between camera purchases. Forum users are likely not the typical buyer and are not the target consumer. So every time someone complains that the newer model is only a small incremental upgrade, the obvious answer is - yes, that is the way it has been for the past 15 years and will become even more so since the technology has become more and more mature.

Again, these are my opinions.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 8, 2019)

Ira Parker said:


> I'm an avid Canon user. I currently have a 5D Mark IV and well over $10k of glass. But truly, it feels like Canon - in the increasingly mirrorless age of cameras - is saying if you are serious about a mirrorless camera, look at Sony and now, increasingly, Nikon. The R is on so many levels a faulty camera. The reported new RP seems to be a downgrade from the R. I have been a loyal Canon user in the digital SLR age. It is becoming very difficult to remain so.


Why? Do your camera and lenses not work for you?

Then why did you buy them?

Personally, I would prefer Canon (or Sony, or Nikon, or whoever) to test all that novel stuff on a camera I would _not_ buy.


----------



## amorse (Feb 8, 2019)

dak723 said:


> This is my opinion, but I beleive people on forums totally misinterpret why Canon or any company comes out with a new version of a lens - especially a lens that is not that old. An "L" quality lens such as the Canon 70-200L will never see much if any optical improvement, so it is not marketed as an upgrade replacement for its predecessor. Nor was the 24-105 L II meant to be an upgrade for current 24-105 L users. These lenses are meant for NEW buyers. They are merely replacing an older model so that the lens can possibly be made cheaper, or perhaps lighter in weight, or perhaps with newer advances in coatings. Optics is not a new electronic technology - so you won't see much - if any advances. The fact that an owner of an "L" lens made in the past 15 years will actually buy a newer version of the same lens will be a bonus for Canon, but the number of upgraders must be small.
> 
> In fact, as has been pointed out so many times it is hard to understand why folks don't comprehend it, but sensors and digital cameras have gotten to the point where they are a mature technology with little room for improvement from one generation to the next. My guess is that many - if not most - camera users skip at least one and maybe two generations between camera purchases. Forum users are likely not the typical buyer and are not the target consumer. So every time someone complains that the newer model is only a small incremental upgrade, the obvious answer is - yes, that is the way it has been for the past 15 years and will become even more so since the technology has become more and more mature.
> 
> Again, these are my opinions.


Back in June when the 70-200 f/2.8 III was announced and loads of people felt frustrated that it was an incremental upgrade, I made the suggestion in this forum that maybe Canon was just performing a minor upgrade on this lens because they could have a significant R&D burden behind the scenes if they were creating a new mount with several "bread and butter" lenses to go with it. At the time, the rumours said that a mirrorless camera was coming, and there would be an "eloquent" solution to the EF mount conundrum - so it seemed possible that if a new mount was coming then Canon's team could be taxed with building a lot of lenses at the time. My thinking was why would Canon invest substantially in a lens which is already a much beloved product when they can make small upgrades to it to keep it on the same refresh cycle while investing in the big splash coming? Who knows if that was Canon's motivation here, but it is seems to still be a possibility. 

Bottom line, the 70-200 II was great already, and instead of pumping R&D into a product which is plenty good enough, Canon may have pumped resources into the RF lenses available now, AND the 5 more lenses rumoured to be coming next week. If that was Canon's thinking, it seems like the right choice, because as someone looking at the RF mount I'd gladly take a stable of ~9 lenses within 4 months of release rather than a bigger update to an already great lens!

This came off much more "I told you so" than I intended (sorry) - I just wanted to note that if Canon prioritized RF lens design over 70-200 III design, I'm a big fan of that choice.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 8, 2019)

Ira Parker said:


> I'm an avid Canon user. I currently have a 5D Mark IV and well over $10k of glass. But truly, it feels like Canon - in the increasingly mirrorless age of cameras - is saying if you are serious about a mirrorless camera, look at Sony and now, increasingly, Nikon. The R is on so many levels a faulty camera. The reported new RP seems to be a downgrade from the R. I have been a loyal Canon user in the digital SLR age. It is becoming very difficult to remain so.



The EOS RP is not meant for me or you. If you are looking for high res EVF, dual card slot, IBIS, fast eyeAF, you might have to wait for EOS Pro that's coming late 2019.

At the same time, if you value some of the intangibles like ergonomic, fully touch screen, articulate LCD, close shutter, control ring adapter that work flawless with you EF lens, you won't find it on a Sony. I tried all Sony A7III, A9, A7RIII and I didn't enjoy using it. Maybe the next model will have 5.6 million EVF and better ergonomic.

I would wait until EOS R Pro come out late 2019 and fully evaluate all the models from Panasonic, Sony, Canon and Nikon to see which one fit your needs. If it deliver what you need, get it. It's good that both Sony and Panasonic will take EF lens.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 8, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> You realize it was a lackluster camera back in 2017. It's 2019 now so it is even worse now by today's standards. It could the worst brand new full frame camera this year and beyond.



It was lackluster in one spec: DR at ISO 100. By ISO 400 there is no significant difference to most other FF cameras out there.

Those who love to constantly slam the 6D Mark II have obviously never used it in real world scenarios, but are just jumping on the bandwagon of YouTube clickbaiters.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Feb 8, 2019)

Colorado said:


> I've avoided this thread but it isn't people getting defensive. It is nothing new is being said. Canon has a history of being very conservative with upgrades and along with that reusing tweaked existing sensors. But reading a comment thread in a Canon rumors site with 1000's of comments that basically say "Canon sucks, Sony rocks" is tiresome.
> 
> It took me about 30 seconds of reading the leaked specs to know that the RP is not the camera to lure me to mirrorless away from my 1DX. That's fine. Not all products will be for me. I could either post repeatedly how I wish Canon would make the camera I want or I could get on with my life. Posting repeatedly would probably annoy those that are genuinely excited by what the RP will offer for the price point. They are here to talk about the rumors for this camera. Telling them that some yet-to-be-leaked camera that will cost 2-3x times as much will be better is just rude. Telling them that Canon sucks, will never make a good camera, and they should just sell everything for Sony is doubly rude.


I dont really see a lot of people saying canon sucks in this forum. I do see people acknowledging that Sony excels in some areas and people losing patience with Canon especially video shooters but a lot of people here have no empathy for video users. So those peopel come off very closed minded.
A lot of people say they dont need video but video is very important to a lot of us and it pays our bills as well.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Feb 8, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Do you base this on actual experience?
> 
> Here is my experience (I am only referencing cameras I actually own or owned):
> 
> ...


 you realize i already mentioned that. those are like the mega upgrades that are like 4 years in between and in between those there are a lot of little cameras that come out within that 4 year period that are kinda wack. the ony one that might have been a fast upgrade was the 70d and 80d but that was after years of kinda the same stuff in the x0d line.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 8, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> In my opinion it costs too much, 2000 euros on launch, around 1600 euros right now.



It's $1,499 USD (1,325 € at today's exchange rate) right now from authorized sellers in the U.S., but was at $1,399 (€ 1,235) with free battery grip for most of the last half of 2018.

Gray market sellers in the U.S, are currently selling the 6D Mark II for about $1,200 (€ 1,060).


----------



## amorse (Feb 8, 2019)

knight427 said:


> Here’s an idea. If you are seriously considering the RP based on the current leaked specs, tell us why with a little context about your use case.
> 
> *Very brief intro:*
> I’m interested in the RP as a replacement for my 6D, which is my only camera. I’m a hobbyist with no aspirations to make money through photography. My most demanding use cases are birds in flight, daughters on stage (dance) and scenic astrophotography (aka milky way landscape).
> ...



I'll play this game - 

I'm seriously considering the camera based on the leak for a few reasons.

*My use case* - I shoot almost exclusively landscapes using a 5D IV as a hobby, and I usually plan 1-3 photography focused trips per year (maybe a week long each). That can involve carrying too much glass and a tripod for maybe 3 to 6 days straight with camping gear and food. My issue is I only carry the one body with me, and at least a few times I have come a bit too close for comfort in losing my camera due to a misstep (or two). My issue is if I lose my 5D IV, there's no running to replace it for a few days and the trip is lost and over. I like the idea of having a light-weight and small secondary camera which can put out comparable image quality to the 5D IV for that "just in case" scenario. I could also see myself running both cameras at once when I'm humming and hawing over a composition or subject choice (i.e. something that needs a long lens and something that needs a wide lens).

*What I like about the rumour* - I love that it is half the weight of my 5D IV and much smaller. It looks as though I could add that to a bag with an EF converter for very little weight and size penalty which would amazing. For context, I've considered an M6 with a converter as well - I don't care too much about ergonomics/button layout or even the EVF if it is a secondary camera. The RP looks to be a much better fit than the M6 considering that I wouldn't need to be thinking about crop factor. I just need to be able to carry it with everything else! Also, and don't hate me for this, but I actually like how it looks! Oh, and the price. Definitely the price.

*What I don't like about the rumour* - LP-E17. This would be a pain for my use case - I don't want to double the batteries I'm carrying and have to leave a second charger in the car. If this used an LP-E6N I could just share batteries with the 5D IV since most of the time I'd be using one or the other and not both at once. 

*What I'm not sure about *- is it the 6D II sensor? I had a 6D and replaced it with the 5D IV. I know DR comes up here quite a lot, but I've looked at my images from both cameras many times, and I do prefer the 5D IV outputs for editing. I'll need to see the output from the camera, because frankly the R could be a better fit if it's that big a deal to me. Though, if it's a small difference in IQ I'll need to ask myself whether it's worth the extra cash/weight/size to me.

But yes, I'm in the maybe camp. Part of me is also tempted to wait and see what the pro model looks like - maybe the 5D IV should become the backup to the upcoming camera. Well, that sounds like my GAS flaring up, so I'll leave it there!


----------



## padam (Feb 8, 2019)

amorse said:


> I'll play this game -
> 
> I'm seriously considering the camera based on the leak for a few reasons.


I think the EOS R is just a better fit for this exact case, it's not going to be any heavier in the bag in practice, since there is no need to carry more batteries and another charger and this camera won't be discounted any time soon either. And of course in the future it may turn out to work as a replacement for the Mark IV and an EOS RP as the backup camera to that (althogh the different battery is still somewhat annoying).


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 8, 2019)

nbaresejr said:


> I am still not sure what Canon is doing with the R series. Are they in a position now where they are going to have 5 full frame mirrorless cameras? Does everyone see it this way at the current time?
> 
> 1. RP- entry level FF
> 2. R- Mid range
> ...



Perhaps the 5D Mark IV replacement (EOS 5R ?) and the 1D X Mark III (still a DSLR in 2020) replacement in 2024 will converge in an EOS R X or EOS 5R X in much the same way that the "fast" APS-H 1D Mark IV and "high IQ" FF 1Ds Mark III converged in the EOS 1D X? The death of the staff photojournalist position, which used to be by far the highest number of users of 1-series bodies, is seriously reducing the demand for a "flagship" type body such as the 1D X and its successors.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 8, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I tried the 18-400, Don, three times. The first copy wasn't too bad at 400mm, but I passed. The next 2 were disasters. Should have bought the first. So, test before keeping.


Thanks for the advice!


----------



## amorse (Feb 8, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Perhaps the 5D Mark IV replacement (EOS 5R ?) and the 1D X Mark III (still a DSLR in 2020) replacement in 2024 will converge in an EOS R X or EOS 5R X in much the same way that the "fast" APS-H 1D Mark IV and "high IQ" FF 1Ds Mark III converged in the EOS 1D X?



Based on the "R" and "RP" naming convention, I'm wondering maybe even "RS" for the next body if it's resolution focused (a la 5DS). I was wondering if maybe the 5DS and 5DIV would converge as well - if the resolution gets high enough, could they just count blocks of 4 pixels as one pixel to reduce the resolution and increase output capacity. For instance, if you had a 100MP camera, could you change modes to treat blocks of 4 pixels as one in a "low resolution" or "speed" mode and jump down to 25MP and increase shooting speed/low light noise? I'm no engineer so I have no idea if that's feasible, but it sounds interesting to me.


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 8, 2019)

amorse said:


> I'll play this game -
> 
> I'm seriously considering the camera based on the leak for a few reasons.
> 
> ...


A fair summation of the pros and cons. The small battery will mean probably carrying 3 spares.


----------



## hmatthes (Feb 8, 2019)

windsorc said:


> Of course people will say they take great shots with the 6d


Yep -- and selling them too! The camera is merely the instrument we play. Not everyone can afford a Martin OM-45 Brazilian, but they can make beautiful music with the lowest end of another brand. Same with cameras.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 8, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> you realize i already mentioned that. those are like the mega upgrades that are like 4 years in between and in between those there are a lot of little cameras that come out within that 4 year period that are kinda wack. the ony one that might have been a fast upgrade was the 70d and 80d but that was after years of kinda the same stuff in the x0d line.


So now I am even more confused by what your point is. You seemed to be complaining that Canon's upgrades were not significant. But when I listed several upgrades that I have personal experience with you are saying those don't count because they *were *major upgrades. That just seems like goalpost moving to me.


----------



## Zen (Feb 8, 2019)

Foxeslink said:


> Pls do! and be happy with sony! You're never happy with anything about Canon



Plus 1!!!!!

Canon Rumors seems to be more about Canon Complainers! If you don't like Canon, move on!


----------



## navastronia (Feb 8, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Perhaps the 5D Mark IV replacement (EOS 5R ?) and the 1D X Mark III (still a DSLR in 2020) replacement in 2024 will converge in an EOS R X or EOS 5R X in much the same way that the "fast" APS-H 1D Mark IV and "high IQ" FF 1Ds Mark III converged in the EOS 1D X? The death of the staff photojournalist position, which used to be by far the highest number of users of 1-series bodies, is seriously reducing the demand for a "flagship" type body such as the 1D X and its successors.



That would be completely fine with me (someone who would be happy with either a mirrorless 5D or 1DX successor), provided Canon makes one sooner rather than later. 2024 would be an insanely long wait. I just don't see it taking that long with them still remaining in the game - the a9, which despite what some forumers say, competes well with the 1DX mII, would be 7 years old by then . Can Canon afford to cede the high-end mirrorless space to its competitors for that long?


----------



## dak723 (Feb 8, 2019)

Ira Parker said:


> I'm an avid Canon user. I currently have a 5D Mark IV and well over $10k of glass. But truly, it feels like Canon - in the increasingly mirrorless age of cameras - is saying if you are serious about a mirrorless camera, look at Sony and now, increasingly, Nikon. The R is on so many levels a faulty camera. The reported new RP seems to be a downgrade from the R. I have been a loyal Canon user in the digital SLR age. It is becoming very difficult to remain so.



If you have a 5D IV, then what is it that you are looking for that you don't have?
If you have followed the camera news, then you do realize that the R is basically a lower level camera -than you own - a mirroless 6D.
If you have followed the camera news, then you certainly understand the RP is the lowest priced FF mirrorless - the most entry level. So your use of the word downgrade makes no sense.
If you have followed the camera news, then you certainly know that Canon is still developing their high end mirrorless FF cameras. 

What is it that Sony and Nikon offer that you feel you need above and beyond your 5D IV?


----------



## Kit. (Feb 8, 2019)

navastronia said:


> Can Canon afford to cede the high-end mirrorless space to its competitors for that long?


Why not? "High-end mirrorless space" is not a meaningful definition of any particular market.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 8, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> you realize i already mentioned that. those are like the mega upgrades that are like 4 years in between and in between those there are a lot of little cameras that come out within that 4 year period that are kinda wack. the ony one that might have been a fast upgrade was the 70d and 80d but that was after years of kinda the same stuff in the x0d line.


so upgrading the 1DX to the 1DX2 does not count?
so upgrading the 5D to the 5D2 does not count?
so upgrading the 5D2 to the 5D3 does not count?
so upgrading the 5D3 to the 5D4 does not count?
so upgrading the 6D to the 6D2 does not count?
so upgrading the 7D to the 7D2 does not count?
so upgrading the 50D to the 60D does not count?
so upgrading the 60D to the 70D does not count?
so upgrading the 70D to the 80D does not count?

Just what exactly does count? ? ? ?


----------



## The Fat Fish (Feb 8, 2019)

Danglin52 said:


> Dual Sensing IS? I assume this means in body image stabilization. Surprised no one is cheering if this is the meaning of the line.


It'll be that non-feature video IS Canon uses on marketing to trick users into thinking it's IBIS.


----------



## The Fat Fish (Feb 8, 2019)

neo302 said:


> If no 4K and 6D dynamic range, forget it. Doesn't make sense to me as I'm mostly video.
> Love Canon, but just doesn't make sense in these times. Might as well get an M50, which I'm not.
> Sticking with my a6400 preorder if this is the case.


Sadly for you, me and many others, we are in for a continued rough ride with Canon for the time being. They will break through it eventually but we will have some more crippling, recycling and overpricing to get through first.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Feb 8, 2019)

The Fat Fish said:


> It'll be that non-feature video IS Canon uses on marketing to trick users into thinking it's IBIS.


It's buried way back in this monster thread somewhere but essentially dual sensing IS is a combination of IS info from the in-lens gyro and image motion data from the sensor which, when combined, allow for more precise motion compensation. Thanks to the OP who posted a link to an interview with Canon where they describe in some detail how it works. Not to be confused with electronic IS.


----------



## navastronia (Feb 9, 2019)

The Fat Fish said:


> Sadly for you, me and many others, we are in for a continued rough ride with Canon for the time being. They will break through it eventually but we will have some more crippling, recycling and overpricing to get through first.



I want to just agree with you, but the element of Canon's gear being overpriced strikes me as interesting because how do we put a price on ergonomics and usability, where Canon continues to lead? Isn't that worth as much as some of the features Canon's cameras lack as compared to other manufacturers?



Kit. said:


> Why not? "High-end mirrorless space" is not a meaningful definition of any particular market.



Isn't it, though? Canon themselves admit that the R is not a pro model, and neither is the RP. No pro models have been announced at this time.


----------



## analoggrotto (Feb 9, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> I want to know if Canon is working on flourite elements for pancake lenses.......


A premium L class pancake. That would be a super sweet travel camera. But would the compromises of a pancake ever allow one to L?


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 9, 2019)

YnR said:


> Wanting a better sensor instead of one that’s 2 years old really isn’t that much to ask for or expect in a brand new product.



It just dawned on me that I've never compared 6D2 and A72 high ISO files. (The A72 was the competition when the 6D2 was released.) Guess which is better? Not the Sony.

Going even further back the original A7 had _awful_ high ISO. A crop 80D is about as good. The competition at the time, the 6D, buried the A7 on high ISO.

So why is it Canon's sensors were and are ragged on, yet Sony's were and are praised? Canon bumped MP yet held the line pretty well on high ISO. Sony did manage to improve high ISO in the A72 but it wasn't until the A73 that they could actually compete with the 6D2 sensor.

Is the 6D2 sensor two years old? Or was Sony four years behind?

I know, I know...DR at base ISO. _Nothing in the entire world of photography matters except_ base ISO DR and "ISO invariance." Just ask DPReview where they think everyone superglues their ISO dial, shoots on full manual, and mentally recalculates their ISO 100 meter readings for ISO 6400.

Interesting thing...Sony *went backwards* in base ISO DR between the A7 (14.2) and A7 II (13.6). Did anyone meme about this? Complain about Sony 'reusing a two year old' 24mp sensor and _making it even worse?_

What am I thinking? Only Canon reuses sensor tech. Every other sensor ever made is a completely new design...new architecture, new CAD files, new tape out...with nothing at all borrowed from the previous generation. And they're all just perfect. Except for Canon and their poor, old, reused sensors. Clearly the 6D II's sensor is really a reused D30 sensor. And honestly the D30's sensor was just reused Kodacolor film..._expired_ film at that.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Feb 9, 2019)

unfocused said:


> So now I am even more confused by what your point is. You seemed to be complaining that Canon's upgrades were not significant. But when I listed several upgrades that I have personal experience with you are saying those don't count because they *were *major upgrades. That just seems like goalpost moving to me.


I am saying it takes forever for significant upgrades and by the time they do the competition made more steps ahead in various areas. Time stops for no one.


----------



## bhf3737 (Feb 9, 2019)

max_sr said:


> If Sony can put a dial on the rear of the A7xxx bodies, why should Canon not be able to do so on the larger Rx bodies? It's just another feature (or lack thereof) to differentiate between the EOS R and the 5DIV, like frames per second, dual card slots, the position of the AF-on button, the lack of a joystick and so on. In my opinion the whole EOS camera body ecosystem just got more differentiated and more confusing with the positioning of the R and Rp.


You can also argue the other way: If Canon can put a tilty-flippy-touchy screen on EOS-R body, why should Sony not be able to do so with its FF cameras? Now perhaps you see the point. Every manufacturer sees the market in a unique way and develops its product for the intended market segment. We should learn to know that if we don't belong to the segment that the product is intended for, we should simply look elsewhere. I have R and 5DRS and I know that RP is not for users like me, so why bother with wasting my time arguing features it should or should not have. It is like asking why my neighbor's old SUV has more features than my brand new sedan!!


----------



## TAF (Feb 9, 2019)

analoggrotto said:


> A premium L class pancake. That would be a super sweet travel camera. But would the compromises of a pancake ever allow one to L?



The EF 40/2.8 pancake is very nearly an L quality lens (optical performance wise), so yes, an L pancake is certainly doable.

Does the RF mount make it smaller still?

And as aside - if the follow-on pro model is the Rx, who writes the prescription to order it?


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 9, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> You can also argue the other way: If Canon can put a tilty-flippy-touchy screen on EOS-R body, why should Sony not be able to do so with its FF cameras? Now perhaps you see the point. Every manufacturer sees the market in a unique way and develops its product for the intended market segment. We should learn to know that if we don't belong to the segment that the product is intended for, we should simply look elsewhere. I have R and 5DRS and I know that RP is not for users like me, so why bother with wasting my time arguing features it should or should not have. It is like asking why my neighbor's old SUV has more features than my brand new sedan!!


A wise man is bhf3737.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 9, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> I am saying it takes forever for significant upgrades and by the time they do the competition made more steps ahead in various areas. Time stops for no one.


Still waiting for DPAF from Sony. *sigh* And good ergonomics. *sigh* And a tilty flippy screen *sigh* And decent menu system *sigh* etc, *sigh* Decent tracking during bursts *sigh* Weather sealing *sigh* Decent product support *sigh* Better color science ( poor sensor tech?) *sigh* Lenses as good as Canon *sigh* Less expensive lenses than Canon *sigh* STM lenses for video *sigh* A 28-70 f/2 *sigh* A 11-24mm with no distortion *sigh* A 600mm lens *sigh* An 800mm lens *sigh*


----------



## bhf3737 (Feb 9, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Still waiting for DPAF from Sony. *sigh* And good ergonomics. *sigh* And a tilty flippy screen *sigh* And decent menu system *sigh* etc, *sigh* Decent tracking during bursts *sigh* Weather sealing *sigh* Decent product support *sigh* Better color science ( poor sensor tech?) *sigh* Lenses as good as Canon *sigh* Less expensive lenses than Canon *sigh* STM lenses for video *sigh* A 28-70 f/2 *sigh* A 11-24mm with no distortion *sigh* A 600mm lens *sigh* An 800mm lens *sigh*


Perhaps some more sighs: a working flash system *sigh*, thousands of AF points *sigh*, usable touch screen *sigh*, intuitive working menu system *sigh*, no additional charge for apps *sigh*, SDXC/CFast drive *sigh*, ....


----------



## yungfat (Feb 9, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...



I do not think 6DII is a bad and I believe many people felt the same. 

There isn’t a bad camera, but an incapable photographer who do not how to shoot better photo. 

Cheers....


----------



## yungfat (Feb 9, 2019)

It seems there are a lots of paid poster (from others brand) in the forum. 

Personally do not think it is healthy for someone who really wanted to seek for advise to choose a right camera for them. 

Sigh...


----------



## knight427 (Feb 9, 2019)

yungfat said:


> It seems there are a lots of paid poster (from others brand) in the forum.
> 
> Personally do not think it is healthy for someone who really wanted to seek for advise to choose a right camera for them.
> 
> Sigh...



While a small subset of the complainers might be trolls, they aren't being paid. Some people just enjoy causing drama. Welcome to the internet. and just FYI, the Nigerian prince does not need your bank account number and Bill Gates is not going to give you money for forwarding that email.


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 9, 2019)

knight427 said:


> While a small subset of the complainers might be trolls, they aren't being paid. Some people just enjoy causing drama. Welcome to the internet. and just FYI, the Nigerian prince does not need your bank account number and Bill Gates is not going to give you money for forwarding that email.


How do you know if a troll is paid or not?

Sony started paying YouTube reviewers years ago at press events with all included trips to Hawaii, essentially corrupting them. Are you really so sure they don’t pay people to troll as well?

I am not saying it is so, but it could be.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 9, 2019)

navastronia said:


> Isn't it, though? Canon themselves admit that the R is not a pro model, and neither is the RP. No pro models have been announced at this time.


EOS-1D X Mark II was announced only 3 years ago.

It's not "mirrorless"? So what?


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

amorse said:


> Based on the "R" and "RP" naming convention, I'm wondering maybe even "RS" for the next body if it's resolution focused (a la 5DS). I was wondering if maybe the 5DS and 5DIV would converge as well - if the resolution gets high enough, could they just count blocks of 4 pixels as one pixel to reduce the resolution and increase output capacity. For instance, if you had a 100MP camera, could you change modes to treat blocks of 4 pixels as one in a "low resolution" or "speed" mode and jump down to 25MP and increase shooting speed/low light noise? I'm no engineer so I have no idea if that's feasible, but it sounds interesting to me.



The "s" for higher level sub-models in Canon's naming convention is always lower case:

1Ds Mark III
5Ds / 5Ds R

So it would be "Rs."

I think it is quite possible that the successor to the 5D Mark IV will be an R body, but I also think there is a small chance Canon could release a 5D Mark V (which would, by convention, be an EF mount camera).

I do think there will be both a "normal" resolution "5D" type of body (currently in the 30-35 MP range) and another model with basically the same body and features but a "high" resolution sensor (currently 50-?? MP).

In addition to the added expense of producing a 100MP sensor for users who would only output 25MP files, there would also be the added disadvantages of four times the data to be read out (with the accompanying longer time needed to read it, the additional power requirement, and additional heat), and processing load to bin 100MP to 25MP (and the accompanying extra power consumption and heat generated).

Pixel binning does not simplify color conversion they way most people think it does. Color filters in Bayer masks are not discreet. (Neither are the three types of cones in the human retina.) There's a lot of sensitivity overlap in response between the "Blue" (actually a violet shade of blue at about 460nm), "Green" (actually a slightly blue tinted green at about 540nm) and "Red" (actually a yellow-orange color with the highest transmissivity at around 600nm, not really what we call"red" at 640nm - all drawings on the internet that show "red", "green", and "blue" squares notwithstanding) filtered sensels. *This "overlap" is actually how our eye-brain system creates "color."* Some "red" (quite a bit, actually) and "blue" light make it past the "green" filters. Some "green" (quite a bit, actually) makes it past the "red" filters, and even some "red" and more "green" make it past the "blue" filters. The energy from all of those photons is measured the same by each sensel (a/k/a pixel well).




The way we demosaic the monochromatic luminance values collected by sensels behind the three different colored filters mimic the way our brains process the information gathered by our retinas. Even if we had two "green", a "blue", and a "red" filtered sensel for each pixel in our output image, we'd still have to demosaic and weight the color multipliers properly to get accurate color. It takes values from both the "green" sensels most sensitive at 540nm and the "red" sensels most sensitive at 600nm to interpolote the strength of "orange" light centered at 590-600nm. If there were no "overlap" in the response of sensels behind the three different filters, we would not be able to perceive what we call "color" at all! For more on this, google the "Luther-Ives condition" or "Maxwell-Ives criterion."

The overlap between our retinas' "green" and "red" cones is even closer - our "red" cones are most sensitive to light at 565nm, or a slightly green tint of yellow!





There's nothing intrinsically different in the portion of the electromagnetic spectrum we call visible light other than the fact our retina's respond chemically to those particular wavelengths and do not respond chemically to other wavelengths in the EM spectrum. Similarly, there's no "color" intrinsic in any particular wavelength of light. Non-human vision systems can perceive the same wavelengths differently, or even not perceive at all some wavelengths humans can see. Color is a construct of our eye-brain system. While it is true that some wavelengths of light will be perceived by humans as a certain color, it's also possible to created the same perception of that "color" by blending the proper amounts of other wavelengths of light. That's how our trichromatic color reproduction systems work. It is also the case that there are some "colors" that can not be created with a single wavelength of light. Magenta, for example, is how our brains perceive a combination of very "blue" and very "red" wavelengths that are near opposite ends of the visible spectrum. There is no single wavelength of light that can produce a perception of magenta in the human brain.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

navastronia said:


> Can Canon afford to cede the high-end mirrorless space to its competitors for that long?




"Flagships" are no longer "the high end" in many respects.

The disappearance of the staff photojournalist has pretty much eliminated the #1 user category of bodies like the 1D-series and Nikon D3/4/5 series. In many ways, the high end cameras for Nikon and Canon are now the 850D and 5D Mark IV and/or 5Ds R, respectively. Freelance sports shooters are also feeling the pinch of current market conditions, where images that paid $250-500 only 10-15 years ago and let the photog keep control of copyright/distribution rights are now paying $2.50-5.00 and letting Getty sell them as many times as they want for whatever lowball price they want. Without those working pros to buy over half of the "flagship" bodies and "great white" lenses, the unit cost of each is going to skyrocket as the sales volumes plummet.


----------



## max_sr (Feb 9, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> You can also argue the other way: If Canon can put a tilty-flippy-touchy screen on EOS-R body, why should Sony not be able to do so with its FF cameras? Now perhaps you see the point. Every manufacturer sees the market in a unique way and develops its product for the intended market segment. We should learn to know that if we don't belong to the segment that the product is intended for, we should simply look elsewhere. I have R and 5DRS and I know that RP is not for users like me, so why bother with wasting my time arguing features it should or should not have. It is like asking why my neighbor's old SUV has more features than my brand new sedan!!



I already bought the A7III, because I needed better lowlight video, so I agree with you, that everybody should buy what they want. But I don't really like to use two systems at a time and the time will come, when I decide to either ditch Canon or Sony. And it depends on two things: Canons fullframe mirrorless cameras and the 7DIII or whatever Canon will bring to replace it. And of course on Sony's A7000.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

Aaron D said:


> Who uses lights now with digital? !



Pros who prefer to control the light instead of letting the light control them?


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

AlanF said:


> The 5DSR is a fantastic camera for birds, my go to. Here is another hummer from last month, 7m away, 100-400mm II. Try and get that detail on any other Canon, or indeed an equivalent lens on a Sony or Nikon.
> View attachment 183015




Who cares about the bird? All we care about is that you couldn't raise the shadows without increasing the noise and banding! Right? Stay on topic, for goodness sakes!


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

Etienne said:


> Ridiculed for its sensor too, especially it's poor low light performance. In fact many 6D users declined to "upgrade" as a result. You do know the difference between photographer and fanboy, right?



The only knock on the 6D Mark II's sensor was DR at base ISO. It's pretty good at higher ISO in low light. Better than its Sony counterpart, in fact.


----------



## Bahrd (Feb 9, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Is there any other kind?



The worst ones - those with a seemingly mandatory "pun intended" phrase.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

efmshark said:


> Instead of your subjective evaluation of looking at a few images which have no detail and somewhat uniform noise, if you look at the quantitative DXOMARK comparison of the EOS 6D Mark ii sensor vs the Sony A7 iii sensor, you can see that Sony has almost 3 Evs better dynamic range and significantly better low light performance:
> 
> https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Com...7-III-versus-Canon-EOS-6D-Mark-II___1236_1170
> 
> Canon is hopefully optimizing Bayer arrays and LPF filters for mirrorless sensors, but I don't see how they can optimize micro lenses unless they give up on DPAF.



Yeah that really looks like three stops at typical low light ISO settings. By ISO 800 the difference is barely one and one-third stops. You do realize 1 Ev = 1 stop?




Oh, but let's talk about noise, shall we?


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

degos said:


> A crop mode on a FF is just... a crop of the centre of the frame. The pixel density doesn't change, so you don't get exta 'reach'. So its basically just a way of using less storage when you can't fill the frame.



With an EVF, you would get extra "reach" when composing as well.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 9, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Who cares about the bird? All we care about is that you couldn't raise the shadows without increasing the noise and banding! Right? Stay on topic, for goodness sakes!



A little good humour and less carping criticism make for a much more pleasant forum.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

m1mm1m said:


> Absolutely without a doubt landing pelican images are very far from the most challenging BIF photography.... LOL... Also without a doubt, the "R" is not the optimal BIF camera even with a "proper" BIF lens and no TC. While AF is quick and excellent (as good as XYZ) with a fast lens, no TC, in decent light, and you do get AF all over the sensor, you are still hobbled by the 5fps frame rate. For very fast subjects, the 7D2 eats it alive and even more so, the 1DX2. I have both and would not give up either for an "R" a this point.
> 
> My only point was to illustrate that on the "R", AF works sensor-wide with any lens/TC combination at any aperture and it works acceptably enough to even use for some BIF. On most high-end dSLRs, you get center spot from 5.6 to 8 and nothing past 8..... This is way better. For static subjects, AF even at tiny apertures is as accurate as the R's AF ever is... IOW, very.
> 
> If having acceptable AF capability at small apertures matters to you at some level..... I would certainly consider it for that as well as it's other attributes. Personally I have 4 issues with the "R" Canon would need to solve before I spend money on this. See my previous posts for what they are. Yes, my current dSLRs are heavier and bigger, but they do what I need done better than the "R" at this point in time and I can live without AF at small apertures.



*Current Canon DSLR bodies that can officially focus at f/8 when using PDAF via the viewfinder: 1D X Mark II, 5D Mark IV, - up to all 63 AF points with ver. III extenders and certain lenses; 1D X, 1D C, 5Ds, 5Ds R, 5D Mark III, 7D Mark II - center AF point with surrounding 8 points as 'assist' points; All other 1-series bodies - center AF point only; 6D Mark II, 80D - center AF point only except 27 AF points with 100-400 II and 200-400. No other Canon DSLR bodies officially support viewfinder based AF at f/8 or narrower. Many models older than about 2011 will *try* to AF with such combinations. When using Live View with DSLRs or mirrorless bodies a different AF system is used and performance using lenses with apertures narrower than f/5.6 will vary based in the camera's capability, the lighting conditions, and contrast of the target subject.*


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

AlanF said:


> A little good humour and less carping criticism make for a much more pleasant forum.



My apologies if you failed to see the humorous absurdity of my comment.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

YnR said:


> Look, I’ve got a 60D and have been patiently waiting the last few years for the right entry level FF body. The 6DII didn’t it cut it for me due to the many hashed over points. Would I rather have my 60 over the 6? Of course not but for the price, I decided to wait. Along comes Canon’s mirrorless FF which brings some attention with the possibility of a new sensor, higher FPS, along with the lighter weight and smaller package. So Canon may release a camera that isn’t noticeably improved over the 6D2 as far as output and performance. I’ve been waiting for several years, hoping for a better option, but it hasn’t come. Understand why so many of us “bots” are frustrated and saying the same thing?



Camera bodies Canon has introduced that are significantly better than the 60D in almost every single aspect:

EOS 80D
EOS 7D Mark II
EOS 6D Mark II (it takes great photos - really, it does - all of the clickbaiters on YouTube trying to make a living by making their viewers worry about DR at base ISO notwithstanding.)

There will never be an "entry level" Canon camera introduced that the YouTubers don't complain about not getting 1D X Mark II for a Rebel price. It's what they do.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

prodorshak said:


> I am in baby years regarding experience in photography (happily shooting with my 77D), maybe that's why I thought "RAW development in camera" is a good addition in a consumer model. But, no one is talking about it here. What am I missing? Is that a very common feature?



Pretty much everything other than the "Rebel" series has had it since the original 7D firmware update in 2012. It's old news, and not really that useful to most of us. If you need to move images so fast you don't have time to edit on at least a tablet or notebook with a larger, color calibrated screen, you might as well just shoot straight to jpeg.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> You must have miss BlackFriday sales. It was $1300.
> Here is the deal website https://slickdeals.net/f/12281707-c...amera-w-24-105mm-f-4l-ii-lens-2199-00-more-fs on Nov 11, 2018.
> 
> It was $1300 from [bhphotovideo.com] bandhphoto.com
> ...



B&H and other authorized Canon retailers had it for $1399 for most of the second half of 2018, not $1,300. A one-day (or one weekend) sale on Black Friday says nothing about the real price of anything. The current MSRP is $1,799. Authorized Canon dealers in the U.S. are currently selling it for $1,499 with a $300 factory provided "instant rebate."

Used cameras do not have an MSRP provided by Canon or anyone else.

Of course F-stoppers will use a headline like that. It gets more clicks than a headline that says "Entry level FF camera has fewer features than higher priced models"


----------



## Aussie shooter (Feb 9, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Camera bodies Canon has introduced that are significantly better than the 60D in almost every single aspect:
> 
> EOS 80D
> EOS 7D Mark II
> ...



I would add the 760d, 77d and 800d to that list as well.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 9, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> [...] In addition to the added expense of producing a 100MP sensor for users who would only output 25MP files, there would also be the added disadvantages of four times the data to be read out (with the accompanying longer time needed to read it, the additional power requirement, and additional heat), and processing load to bin 100MP to 25MP (and the accompanying extra power consumption and heat generated).
> 
> *Pixel binning does not simplify color conversion* they way most people think it does. Color filters in Bayer masks are not discreet. (Neither are the three types of cones in the human retina.) [...]



IMO it simplifies the image reconstruction dramatically. The "color science" is nearly the same - in that point the agree.
But Bayer conversion expands the color of one subpixel to its neighbourhood while deriving the brightness of the colored subpixels from its own value and its neigbourhood. I do not know the Debayering Algorithm explicitly but just from those two conditions I see a lot of calculations and potential for mistakes.
In the case of pixel binning you can derive the R, G and B values directly from the subpixels and calculate the basic R, G and B values while dividing G1 + G2 by two (for the typically two green subpixels).

After that there comes the same translating process from the debayered subpixel RGB values or the non-bayer R, G and B ADC values of the Sensor readout chain into numbers.

If you only use 25 MPixels a good debayering might be good enough but for me it would be interesting to have ONE camera where I can switch between (1) very good color reproduction at the cost of resolution and (2) very good resolution at the cost of color reproduction. At least during postprocessing. 

And lots of thanks for the "pink" is not in the visible spectrum statement - while trying to teach my studends (13 ... 18 yr.) the beauty of spectra and the simplicity of our basically simple RGB universe I never thought to bring them into the state of cognitive dissonance: There "exists" a color which is not in the rainbow spectrum.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 9, 2019)

knight427 said:


> No way, that space is perfectly suited for custom modification. I invented a tactical shadow lifter. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you, the Shadow Sniper(TM):
> View attachment 183033
> 
> 
> In version 2, I'm going add a mechanical arm that switches the light on only when the shutter is depressed. This should eliminate all of the hand wringing over shadow lifting.


I'd prefer a different shade of black on the light. No red ring? C'mon!


----------



## Bilal (Feb 9, 2019)

We as a user should be realistic with our needs. As a human being its normal that we want the best or something that others have but as a job we should be realistic enough to understand that what are the things we need to accomplish the jobs that we do.

As a youtube creator, and few of my hobbies like astrophotography, timelapse & Hyperlapses, my realistic needs are

Articulated Screen (Check)

C-Log (Check)

Full Frame Canon Mirrorless (Check)

Variable ND filter adopter ( Made my life easier with existing lenses )

1080p 120fps is pending for verification.

They have inbuilt intervalometer in previous models so this should have it too.

These are my basic needs for accomplishing my jobs. I dont even need or use 4K because the audiance and clients of mine are mostly mobile users or dont really know when they see the videos.

Things like maximum dynamic range and higher fps and IBIS are optional to me. I need the above things and canon seems to be providing those cheaply at the moment.

Moving to sony is not an option.

Great move canon


----------



## padam (Feb 9, 2019)

Bilal said:


> We as a user should be realistic with our needs. As a human being its normal that we want the best or something that others have but as a job we should be realistic enough to understand that what are the things we need to accomplish the jobs that we do.
> 
> As a youtube creator, and few of my hobbies like astrophotography, timelapse & Hyperlapses, my realistic needs are


The RP won't have C-Log or any form of 120 fps recording.


----------



## Bilal (Feb 9, 2019)

padam said:


> The RP won't have C-Log or any form of 120 fps recording.


you sure? as per rumor it has. 
60fps is still great though but there is no alternate to C-Log for me.


----------



## padam (Feb 9, 2019)

Bilal said:


> you sure? as per rumor it has.
> 60fps is still great though but there is no alternate to C-Log for me.


No real video specs yet, but the most likely scenario is that it will be the same as the 6D Mark II.
Maybe some form of basic 4k added, but I highly doubt it, the sensor may not be capable (it would be quite weird to have a camera with a better crop factor than the higher-end variant), the 1080p is definitely a step down from the EOS R or 5D IV, much softer.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 9, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> You must have miss BlackFriday sales. It was $1300.
> Here is the deal website https://slickdeals.net/f/12281707-c...amera-w-24-105mm-f-4l-ii-lens-2199-00-more-fs on Nov 11, 2018.
> 
> It was $1300 from [bhphotovideo.com] bandhphoto.com
> ...



why do you criticize others, and then spout bull crap?

the MSRP of the 6D Mark II is 1799.

it's currently on sale, but so is just about every other Canon DSLR at the moment. they are having a promotion right now.




and black friday is just that, a massive sale period. it went on sale, as did most other Canon cameras sans R because it was so new. Like it happens, Every. Other. Year. the 6D Mark II went on sale, it was 17 months old, Canon usually puts their cameras on sale after a year or so. Big Whoop.

heck the Sony A9 was $1000 off during black friday.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 9, 2019)

rrcphoto said:


> why do you criticize others, and then spout bull crap?
> 
> the MSRP of the 6D Mark II is 1799.
> 
> ...




You do realize that's the MSRP now right?

The LAUNCH price is $2000. 

Source 
https://www.cnet.com/reviews/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-preview/

https://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/canon/6d-mark-ii/deals-and-prices

I can't believe you even want to argue with something so basic and verifiable

Easy it's jut a camera. No need get emotional about it. No need to justify it to me. I'm not bothering respond it to this post any more.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 9, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> You do realize that's the MSRP now right?
> 
> The LAUNCH price is $2000.
> 
> ...



I took the MSRP right off Canon USA's website.

it's on sale. being on sale does not change the MSRP. it may change the MAP.

it's MSRP is 1799, down from 2000, and it's released around 19 months ago. going on 2 years old. Big #(*&#$ whoop.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Feb 9, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> *When using Live View with DSLRs or mirrorless bodies a different AF system is used and performance using lenses with apertures narrower than f/5.6 will vary based in the camera's capability, the lighting conditions, and contrast of the target subject.*


As I'm sure you are aware, when using live view with Canon's current DSLR's the focusing system is the same (DPAF) as that used by the EF R's and should yield similar results. My 1DX2 and 5D4 both focus just fine in reasonable light and subject contrast for both stills and video using lens rigs with a max apperture of f11 or smaller. In fact, it works pretty well in totally unreasonable conditions as well. I'd expect the other DPAF DSLR's to do the same but I don't own those. The advantage of using the EF R's is the EVF ( if you consider that an advantage). Slap a magnifying hood on the rear display and you are good to go. It seems to be a widely held misconception that DPAF focusing on Canon's DSLR's is bound by the max aperture limitations of the PDAF sensor.

edit: I use an f4 lens with stacked 2x and 1.4x tele's which results in f11. Obviously not ideal for every scenario but a nice trick to have in your bag when it's called for. 

Warning! Do not try and mate a 1.4x and a 2x tele directly together. If you go that route you have to put an extension tube between them (EF-12) or you are going to scratch some glass!


----------



## Bentley Boy (Feb 9, 2019)

The Fat Fish said:


> It'll be that non-feature video IS Canon uses on marketing to trick users into thinking it's IBIS.


If you actually look at real video comparisons on line, of which there are many, you’ll see that the digital IS is quite effective. The only downside is that it crops in closer and perhaps creates some softness. Perhaps. However, as far as stabilizing the image, it works well.

It is certainly not a marketing ploy as you suggest. Luckily, even a simple Google search can help people realize you’re spreading nothing but lies. You, a claimed Canon user that does nothing but bash instead of just switching brands to dry your fake tears.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Feb 9, 2019)

Bentley Boy said:


> If you actually look at real video comparisons on line, of which there are many, you’ll see that the digital IS is quite effective. The only downside is that it crops in closer and perhaps creates some softness. Perhaps. However, as far as stabilizing the image, it works well.
> 
> It is certainly not a marketing ploy as you suggest. Luckily, even a simple Google search can help people realize you’re spreading nothing but lies. You, a claimed Canon user that does nothing but bash instead of just switching brands to dry your fake tears.


This thread is just getting silly. Google "Canon Dual sensing IS" and you will see it has nothing to do with digital IS. Canon uses gyro data from the lens and motion tracking data from the sensor (dual) to improve control of the physical IS unit in the lens (ie. dual sensing). Google is your friend.


----------



## analoggrotto (Feb 9, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> This thread is just getting silly. Google "Canon Dual sensing IS" and you will see it has nothing to do with digital IS. Canon uses gyro data from the lens and motion tracking data from the sensor (dual) to improve control of the physical IS unit in the lens (ie. dual sensing). Google is your friend.


When the leak was fresh, I desperately googled it hoping for some indication of IBIS. What a realization!


----------



## mpb001 (Feb 9, 2019)

max_sr said:


> If Sony can put a dial on the rear of the A7xxx bodies, why should Canon not be able to do so on the larger Rx bodies? It's just another feature (or lack thereof) to differentiate between the EOS R and the 5DIV, like frames per second, dual card slots, the position of the AF-on button, the lack of a joystick and so on. In my opinion the whole EOS camera body ecosystem just got more differentiated and more confusing with the positioning of the R and Rp.


I think that we are likely to see these dials in the higher end R series. This RP camera is entry level, ir that equates to a mirrorless Rebel, the control set on the RP makes sense. Nearly all camera companies approach the design of entry level DSLRs or even mirrorless similarly. It is not just Canon.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> I would add the 760d, 77d and 800d to that list as well.



None of those models offer AFMA. To me that is a critical "improvement." Of the three you cite, the 800D does not offer two control wheels so that both Av and Tv have a direct control when shooting in manual exposure mode. A "camera" is about more than just the performance of its sensor.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> IMO it simplifies the image reconstruction dramatically. The "color science" is nearly the same - in that point the agree.
> But Bayer conversion expands the color of one subpixel to its neighbourhood while deriving the brightness of the colored subpixels from its own value and its neigbourhood. I do not know the Debayering Algorithm explicitly but just from those two conditions I see a lot of calculations and potential for mistakes.
> In the case of pixel binning you can derive the R, G and B values directly from the subpixels and calculate the basic R, G and B values while dividing G1 + G2 by two (for the typically two green subpixels).
> 
> ...



Your understanding is based on the false assumption that _only "green" light _(or light between, say, 480-580 nanometers) gets past the "green" filter, _only "red" light_ (or light between 580nm and infrared) gets past the "red" filter, and _only "blue" light _ (or light between UV and 480nm) gets past the "blue" filter. If our cameras operated that way, they could not reproduce color. If the cones in our retinas operated that way, we could not perceive color the way we do. "Color" is a construct of our eye-brain system based on the differences in the overlapping sensitivities of the the three types of cones in our retinas. Trichromatic color reproduction is also based on the differences in the overlapping sensitivities of the color components of our imaging devices (and the cones in our retinas).

It's also based on the false assumption that our color reproduction systems use the same three colors as the colors of a Bayer filter array as primaries. They do not. Not sRGB. Not Adobe RGB. Not CYMK. Not web offset printing. Not any other color reproduction system that uses anywhere from three to dozens of colors. The values collected by a Bayer masked camera must be translated into a standard color space before they are meaningful.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> As I'm sure you are aware, when using live view with Canon's current DSLR's the focusing system is the same (DPAF) as that used by the EF R's and should yield similar results. My 1DX2 and 5D4 both focus just fine in reasonable light and subject contrast for both stills and video using lens rigs with a max apperture of f11 or smaller. In fact, it works pretty well in totally unreasonable conditions as well. I'd expect the other DPAF DSLR's to do the same but I don't own those. The advantage of using the EF R's is the EVF ( if you consider that an advantage). Slap a magnifying hood on the rear display and you are good to go. It seems to be a widely held misconception that DPAF focusing on Canon's DSLR's is bound by the max aperture limitations of the PDAF sensor.
> 
> edit: I use an f4 lens with stacked 2x and 1.4x tele's which results in f11. Obviously not ideal for every scenario but a nice trick to have in your bag when it's called for.
> 
> Warning! Do not try and mate a 1.4x and a 2x tele directly together. If you go that route you have to put an extension tube between them (EF-12) or you are going to scratch some glass!



Well, except that the processing of the information off the sensor when doing DPAF seems to be a LOT faster with the R than with cameras such as the 5D Mark IV when used in LV. It probably has something to do with the additional processing provided because it is the primary means of using the camera for shooting still images, rather than a secondary one. It's all about the allocation of limited resources in size limited devices concerned with limited available energy and limited ability to get rid of heat. Or it may have more to do with the increased data throughput between the camera and lenses with the R system than the EF system.

However, more than a few folks have reported that when adapted to an R body, their most recent EF glass AFs faster than when attached to an EF body (recently introduced EF lenses probably have some firmware elements included to make them more compatible with R bodies than older EF lens designs - Canon has long included "hidden" capabilities in one piece of a system several years before the other piece is introduced: _i.e._ IS lenses first introduced in 1995 and the bodies beginning in 1993 that "secretly" included the firmware needed to run IS, or bodies introduced since late 2014 that have the ability to control the whiz-bang auto-aiming bounce feature of the 470EX-AI introduced in early 2018). This flies in the face of the assumption that more battery power is available to move focus elements when used with cameras with higher capacity batteries (such as a 5D Mark IV or 1D X Mark II) than when used with cameras with lower capacity batteries (such as an EOS R), as was almost always the case when comparing different EF and EF-S bodies.

I don't think my previous comment implied anything of the sort. Viewfinder based PDAF systems are fundamentally different than sensor based DPAF in several ways. That's what I stated. Imaging sensor based AF is not the same as dedicated PDAF sensor based AF. The context of my previous comment was with regard to a comment that states, "On most high-end dSLRs, you get center spot from 5.6 to 8 and nothing past 8." I was merely pointing out that several "high end" Canon DSLRs do, indeed, give more than just center point AF with f/8 lenses or lens/extender/TC combinations using viewfinder based PDAF. I then pointed out that imaging sensor based AF in LV is not restricted by the same maximum aperture limitations that viewfinder based PDAF is, and the limiting aperture for the same camera will be different when using LV than when using the dedicated PDAF sensor.

But beyond that, two different implementations of DPAF won't necessarily give the same performance in terms of speed and accuracy, even though the concepts by which they both operate are the same.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Feb 9, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> It's a sin which cannot be pardonned to criticize the Leica M 3, best Leica ever!


I am German, in fact I live in Hesse, the German state where Leitz/ Leica is located, so I am allowed to write such a comment about the Leica M3 . I didn't say that the M3 was no good camera, in fact it offered the best rangefinder technology of its time when it hit the market. Such a bright and precise rangefinder was a revolution for 35mm cameras. But Leica needed a few more years to move to such a clean design like the Canon P already had in the late 50s - in fact, the M6 has it and for me it is the most beautiful and ageless Leica ever made. But that's a matter of personal preferences. A well working M3 is of course a gem, no question. 

That said, I have and use two Canon 7 rangefinders when I shoot film. They are not such beauties, but the Seven was the most capable rangefinder ever made for the old Leica M39 thread.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 9, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> If you only use 25 MPixels a good debayering might be good enough but for me it would be interesting to have ONE camera where I can switch between (1) very good color reproduction at the cost of resolution and (2) very good resolution at the cost of color reproduction. At least during postprocessing.



Foveon sensors sample RGB at every pixel site. Their color detail reproduction is only slightly better than a Bayer sensor of the same physical resolution. When I say "slightly" it's something you can pick up in some areas while pixel peeping, but which is meaningless in print. A 100mp Bayer image will absolutely look better in print than a 25mp Foveon image, assuming a print size large enough to tell the difference (since 25mp can saturate many common print sizes).

The other problem with this idea is that the CFA is fixed so you can't go into a 25mp mode where every pixel samples RGB. A pixel covered by a green filter still only sees green. (Though that is a gross simplification, per Michael Clark's posts. He is correct that there is bandwidth overlap of the three filters.)


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> It is my opinion only. If you think $2100 70-200 III is worth it over the affordable 70-200 II 2.8 kudo to you.
> 
> Yes, lets look what what the competitor are charging to justify Canon's price for the new one without any significant improvement. If you have the money, go for it.
> 
> As for me, if there are no significant in performance, I'll skip it and buy the older generation for the exact performance. If you want the latest and have the mean for it, just buy whatever you want. I don't care.



You miss the entire point that the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II debuted at $2,600 in 2010, and for most if its life was sold by authorized dealers for MORE than the introductory price of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS III of $2,100. 

The authorized price of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II only dropped below $2,100 six weeks before the release of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS III. It is now being heavily discounted to clear existing inventories. It's a great deal if you don't need to modest improvements of the lens coatings in the "III".

But it is being totally disingenuous to imply that the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS III is more expensive than the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II was for all but the last six weeks of the eight-plus years that it was the "current" Canon 70-200/2.8! It's actually cheaper than the "II" was over much of that eight year period!


----------



## Yasko (Feb 9, 2019)

Maximilian said:


> Really Interesting!
> I am using a 200D/SL2 as travel camera today.
> I'd be really interested, how much bigger this one is.
> Now let's go for some native small primes
> ...



The lenses will be larger. Or the smaller lens will negate the FF improvement regarding depth of focus and ISO  („pi times thumb“ as we say in Germany)


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

nchoh said:


> I see your point. And quite frankly too I can't see how the 80D replacement fits in with the current scheme of things... RF is FF and EF-M being APS-C, with APSC being small and light. I would be surprised if Canon themselves know what they are going to do with their DSLRs. My guess is that Canon will start producing APS-C M cameras 3 to 5 years from now once they have filled out the whole FF lineup for the R. Until that happens and as long as there is demand,, a 80D successor would be released.



All EOS M bodies are already APS-C cameras.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Feb 9, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> None of those models offer AFMA. To me that is a critical "improvement." Of the three you cite, the 800D does not offer two control wheels so that both Av and Tv have a direct control when shooting in manual exposure mode. A "camera" is about more than just the performance of its sensor.


Fair enough re the controls. Tbh i didn't realize the 60d offered AFMA either.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Fair enough re the controls. Tbh i didn't realize the 60d offered AFMA either.



It doesn't, although the 50D did. That's one reason those other bodies I listed are a "significant improvement." The 70D also includes AFMA, but I did not list it because, in that case, the sensor performance was not really improved at all over the 60D. The 80D sensor was a significant improvement over the 60D and 70D. Perhaps I should have included the 70D. It also included the 7D's 19 pt. AF system over the 60D's 9 pt. AF, as well as AFMA.


----------



## Etienne (Feb 9, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> The only knock on the 6D Mark II's sensor was DR at base ISO. It's pretty good at higher ISO in low light. Better than its Sony counterpart, in fact.



That's a nice Canon Fan dream, but tests prove otherwise: the 6D2 was a step backwards in low light / high ISO performance.


----------



## Etienne (Feb 9, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> You miss the entire point that the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II debuted at $2,600 in 2010, and for most if its life was sold by authorized dealers for MORE than the introductory price of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS III of $2,100.
> 
> The authorized price of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II only dropped below $2,100 six weeks before the release of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS III. It is now being heavily discounted to clear existing inventories. It's a great deal if you don't need to modest improvements of the lens coatings in the "III".
> 
> But it is being totally disingenuous to imply that the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS III is more expensive than the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II was for all but the last six weeks of the eight-plus years that it was the "current" Canon 70-200/2.8! It's actually cheaper than the "II" was over much of that eight year period!



NOT true. I bought my 70-200 f/2.8L IS Mark II for US $1850 from B&H less than 6 months after its release. And B&H had this lens on special at least twice a year since release for less than $2100.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

Etienne said:


> That's a nice Canon Fan dream, but tests prove otherwise: the 6D2 was a step backwards in low light / high ISO performance.



Yeah, that really looks like a step back to me. SNR of 26.2 dB for the 6D mark II compared to 26.2 dB for the 6D at ISO 3200. SNR of 29.1 dB for the 6D Mark II compared to 29.2 dB for the 6D at ISO 1600. I guess you got me there!



And although I don't put much stock in DxO's composite scores (because they do not disclose the weighting that goes into them so that I can judge if they are concerned with the same things I am), there's also this:



That really looks like a step back to me, huh?


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

Etienne said:


> NOT true. I bought my 70-200 f/2.8L IS Mark II for US $1850 from B&H less than 6 months after its release. And B&H had this lens on special at least twice a year since release for less than $2100.



That was back when B&H was still selling gray market lenses imported from Hong Kong taking advantage of the highly fluctuating exchange rate between the USD and yen, wasn't it? In your case, though, it was probably used, wasn't it?

You're comparing apple to oranges. The same thing with "instant rebates" during Canon promotions. Instant rebates for limited periods do not change the official MSRP to which the price returns when the promotion is over.


----------



## padam (Feb 9, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Yeah, that really looks like a step back to me. SNR of 26.2 dB for the 6D mark II compared to 26.2 dB for the 6D at ISO 3200. SNR of 29.1 dB for the 6D Mark II compared to 29.2 dB for the 6D at ISO 1600. I guess you got me there!
> And although I don't put much stock in DxO's composite scores (because they do not disclose the weighting that goes into them so that I can judge if they are concerned with the same things I am), there's also this:
> 
> That really looks like a step back to me, huh?


Honestly, these are next to useless. In real-life examples the 6D is indeed better, there is another article on fstoppers as well. Ultimately, the difference is pretty small and the tradeoff is worth it.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 9, 2019)

padam said:


> Honestly, these are next to useless. In real-life examples the 6D is indeed better,



You are wrong. And if you bothered to skim the thread or just look at a review site you would find test images proving it and verifying Michael Clark's post.



> ...there is another article on fstoppers as well...



fstoppers is click bait, and words do not trump observable images.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 9, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> As I'm sure you are aware, when using live view with Canon's current DSLR's the focusing system is the same (DPAF) as that used by the EF R's and should yield similar results. My 1DX2 and 5D4 both focus just fine in reasonable light and subject contrast for both stills and video using lens rigs with a max apperture of f11 or smaller. In fact, it works pretty well in totally unreasonable conditions as well. I'd expect the other DPAF DSLR's to do the same but I don't own those. The advantage of using the EF R's is the EVF ( if you consider that an advantage). Slap a magnifying hood on the rear display and you are good to go. It seems to be a widely held misconception that DPAF focusing on Canon's DSLR's is bound by the max aperture limitations of the PDAF sensor.
> 
> edit: I use an f4 lens with stacked 2x and 1.4x tele's which results in f11. Obviously not ideal for every scenario but a nice trick to have in your bag when it's called for.
> 
> Warning! Do not try and mate a 1.4x and a 2x tele directly together. If you go that route you have to put an extension tube between them (EF-12) or you are going to scratch some glass!


I have an old Kenko 3xTC (much better than their 2xTC) that is not meant to AF with a DSLR, and was sold only for manual focussing. But it now AFs fine on the 5DIV with LV plus a 100-400mm II at f/17 and 1200mm. It will be a useful piece of kit with an R!


----------



## padam (Feb 9, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> You are wrong. And if you bothered to skim the thread or just look at a review site you would find test images proving it and verifying Michael Clark's post.
> fstoppers is click bait, and words do not trump observable images.


Yes. And that video included that.
I guess some just see it differently and it is regretful to add anything to a debate like this, because some people get triggered and will just jump on it straight away saying "you are wrong", that's just too easy  Again as a user of the camera, I don't think it is that big of a deal, but I can't see it having better DR or ISO than its predecessor.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Feb 9, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Well, except that the processing of the information off the sensor when doing DPAF seems to be a LOT faster with the R than with cameras such as the 5D Mark IV when used in LV. It probably has something to do with the additional processing provided because it is the primary means of using the camera for shooting still images, rather than a secondary one. It's all about the allocation of limited resources in size limited devices concerned with limited available energy and limited ability to get rid of heat. Or it may have more to do with the increased data throughput between the camera and lenses with the R system than the EF system.
> 
> However, more than a few folks have reported that when adapted to an R body, their most recent EF glass AFs faster than when attached to an EF body (recently introduced EF lenses probably have some firmware elements included to make them more compatible with R bodies than older EF lens designs - Canon has long included "hidden" capabilities in one piece of a system several years before the other piece is introduced: _i.e._ IS lenses first introduced in 1995 and the bodies beginning in 1993 that "secretly" included the firmware needed to run IS, or bodies introduced since late 2014 that have the ability to control the whiz-bang auto-aiming bounce feature of the 470EX-AI introduced in early 2018). This flies in the face of the assumption that more battery power is available to move focus elements when used with cameras with higher capacity batteries (such as a 5D Mark IV or 1D X Mark II) than when used with cameras with lower capacity batteries (such as an EOS R), as was almost always the case when comparing different EF and EF-S bodies.
> 
> ...


My concern was that the post you quoted asserted that no DSLR can focus at a max apperture of f11and your response seemed to accept that assertion. I had already knocked that down previously and you brought it back up again. I tried to address it tactfully but may have fallen short of the mark in that regard. 

You are paying for a DPAF sensor in all of Canon's current DSLR's and one of the benefits is that you can, in fact, focus at max apertures well beyond f5.6 on all of them using DPAF. The fact that those bodies also have PDAF isn't the point. I thought it was a valuable tip to those readers who use DPAF DSLR's who often assume that they can't use f8 or f11 lens rigs when in fact they can. 

In addition, based on my experience with DPAF and my brief demo's of the EOS R I haven't seen anything to convince me that the DPAF in the R is meaningfully different from my 5D4. It is certainly slower than the 1DX2 but as you say that is probably a voltage issue. Given that the r/5D4 probably share a sensor I suspect the difference may be significantly smaller than many people assume although I have no hard data to back that up. DPAF/LiveView is a powerful and often underutilized tool DSLR's users should take advantage of. After all, they paid for it.

FYI, for those of use in Dark Mode the colors, especially the black, make your posts a little difficult to read.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 9, 2019)

padam said:


> Yes. And that video included that.



Because evaluating DSLR still image characteristics is best done by shooting random house and street shots under uncontrolled conditions, then viewing the results cropped and compressed/encoded for video on YouTube.

You will find comparable or even slightly better 6D2 noise characteristics, versus the 6D, in *controlled, repeatable, studio* tests performed by IR, DPR, TDP, and DxO.

I have no issue being critical of DxO when studio tests from DPReview, Imaging Resource, or The Digital Picture contradict them because DxO does have a 'black box' testing methodology and they are often observably off. But when *all four are in agreement* it's going to take a little more than an fstoppers clickbait video with casual amateur tests to prove them wrong.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 9, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Yeah that really looks like three stops at typical low light ISO settings. By ISO 800 the difference is barely one and one-third stops. You do realize 1 Ev = 1 stop?
> 
> View attachment 183055
> 
> ...



1.3 stops is a lot. 3 stops difference at base ISO is huge. 3 stops = 8 times more light. Absolutely crucial for landscapes and many other sutuations.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> My concern was that the post you quoted asserted that no DSLR can focus at a max apperture of f11and your response seemed to accept that assertion. I had already knocked that down previously and you brought it back up again. I tried to address it tactfully but may have fallen short of the mark in that regard.
> 
> You are paying for a DPAF sensor in all of Canon's current DSLR's and one of the benefits is that you can, in fact, focus at max apertures well beyond f5.6 on all of them using DPAF. The fact that those bodies also have PDAF isn't the point. I thought it was a valuable tip to those readers who use DPAF DSLR's who often assume that they can't use f8 or f11 lens rigs when in fact they can.
> 
> ...



I said no such thing.

I made no such assertion, implied or explicit.

I merely pointed out that there were several top models that went beyond the stated limits in the comment to which I was directly responding. I then also pointed out that when using imaging sensor based AF, the limiting factors were not the same.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 9, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> 1.3 stops is a lot. 3 stops difference at base ISO is huge. 3 stops = 8 times more light. Absolutely crucial for landscapes and many other sutuations.



ISO 100 also has absolutely nothing to do with "low light/high ISO" performance, which is what the comment was addressing. ISO 800 hasn't really been considered "high ISO" for at least a decade or more. Most of us shooting moving subjects in low light start at ISO3200 and go up from there. No one was talking about landscapes.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 9, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> ISO 100 also has absolutely nothing to do with "low light/high ISO" performance, which is what the comment was addressing. ISO 800 hasn't really been considered "high ISO" for at least a decade or more. Most of us shooting moving subjects in low light start at ISO3200 and go up from there. No one was talking about landscapes.


1.3 stop difference in low light means you can go from say 1/100s to 1/250s which is also crucial for indoor sports, concerts etc.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 9, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> 1.3 stops is a lot. 3 stops difference at base ISO is huge. 3 stops = 8 times more light. Absolutely crucial for landscapes and many other sutuations.



Funny how many of the world's great landscape shots were made on E6 slide films which had 6-8ev of total DR and virtually no ability to push or lift shadow detail.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 10, 2019)

padam said:


> Honestly, these are next to useless. In real-life examples the 6D is indeed better, there is another article on fstoppers as well. Ultimately, the difference is pretty small and the tradeoff is worth it.



Who processes raw files from different cameras with different sensors and different low pass filters with the exact same raw conversion settings?

One could optimize the settings, particularly color processing settings, for the 6D at the expense of the 6D II and 80D, or one could optimize the settings for the 6D II at the expense of the 6D and 80D. Every camera has slight color differences, different noise characteristics, low pass filters, etc. A true comparison would allow the images from each camera to be edited in a way that optimizes the results for each camera.

The entire premise of the "lamp test" is to see which camera can compensate best for a photographer who has absolutely no idea how to control light before taking a shot. I guess he thinks all of those dark scenes in the Alien film series were actually filmed in light that dark by Ridley Scott, James Cameron, et. al. Or compare the earliest prints of "Moonrise, Hernandez, NM" made in the 1940s with Adams' definitive prints produced in the 1960s. Just because a masterpiece looks like it was shot in a very dark environment does not mean it was actually underexposed by 5-6 stops when captured. The true professional would know to replace the bulb with a much dimmer one that _looks to the camera_ to be the same difference in brightness as the actual scene does to human eyes so the rest of the scene could be more properly exposed.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 10, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Funny how many of the world's great landscape shots were made on E6 slide films which had 6-8ev of total DR and virtually no ability to push or lift shadow detail.


yeah it's also funny how people where using horse carriages, a lot of great people, even kings and queens used carriages quite successfully. Why use modern cars at all?

The film btw behaves quite differently from digital, 4ex negative film is very tolerant to overexposure. Digital just captures 255,255,255 and there's no recovery.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 10, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> 1.3 stop difference in low light means you can go from say 1/100s to 1/250s which is also crucial for indoor sports, concerts etc.



You don't have a clue if you think ISO 800 at 1/100 to 1/250 with an f/2.8 lens is either fast enough or bright enough for indoor sports or theater. It is neither (unless you're shooting so wide from so far that subject motion is not visible in your images).


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 10, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> yeah it's also funny how people where using horse carriages, a lot of great people, even kings and queens used carriages quite successfully. Why use modern cars at all?



Because the difference between an E6 slide shot and a DSLR shot is clearly as great as the difference between a literal horse and a Ford Mustang 



> The film btw behaves quite differently from digital, 4ex negative film is very tolerant to overexposure.



E6 slide films are not tolerant of overexposure. Even neg films which are generally have less total DR than a 6D2.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 10, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> You don't have a clue if you think ISO 800 at 1/100 to 1/250 with an f/2.8 lens is either fast enough or bright enough for indoor sports or theater. It is neither (unless you're shooting so wide from so far that subject motion is not visible in your images).


I have no clue because the light may differ drastically. I have a lot of successful dancing shots of jumps at 1/250 and 30-70mm. 1/100 will almost certainly be blurry. 1/320 and faster will be even better, of course. ISO will depend on light.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 10, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> E6 slide films are not tolerant of overexposure. Even neg films which are generally have less total DR than a 6D2.


Can/could you capture great landscapes using old film cameras? - yes.
Could you capture sceneries in the same conditions as we capture landscapes with modern digital cameras? - no. If old cameras had better DR, we would have seen more great photos from good old days. We just don't see all failed blown out our underexposed shots.
Limited DR means limited number of situations you can shoot in. 3-stop difference is a huge limiting factor.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Feb 10, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Can/could you capture great landscapes using old film cameras? - yes.
> Could you capture sceneries in the same conditions as we capture landscapes with modern digital cameras? - no. If old cameras had better DR, we would have seen more great photos from good old days. We just don't see all failed blown out our underexposed shots.
> Limited DR means limited number of situations you can shoot in. 3-stop difference is a huge limiting factor.



That's true. In the god ol days photographers had to rely on skill, patience and persistence to overcome any shortcomings. Now photographers jist rely on DR and photoshop to create an image that never existed in the first place.


----------



## Pape (Feb 10, 2019)

With very good DR you got danger overdo photograph too . Its not photograph if more DR what eyes got .More like photographic art .
Just my opinion  i know i am probably wrong


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 10, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> That's true. In the god ol days photographers had to rely on skill, patience and persistence to overcome any shortcomings.



In the good old days they were just limited technically, compared to digital era. However they used very heavy postprocessing, dodging and burning, chemicals to increase contrast etc. Some of most famous landscapes were made with heavy processing.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 10, 2019)

Pape said:


> With very good DR you got danger overdo photograph too . Its not photograph if more DR what eyes got .More like photographic art .
> Just my opinion  i know i am probably wrong



Yeah, as in my analogy above, ride a horse carriage, or you can get over the speed limit in a car.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Feb 10, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> In the good old days they were just limited technically, compared to digital era. However they used very heavy postprocessing, dodging and burning, chemicals to increase contrast etc. Some of most famous landscapes were made with heavy processing.


Massive processing. Ansell was a master inthe darkroom. But he also had skill. And patience. And determination. Ansell would wait hours or even days for that perfect moment of light and then enhance what he got in the darkroom. Now we have photographers who want 234.2stops of DR so they can drive to a location in any conditions, take one image and then spend an hour in photoshop to put in all the bits that weren't there. Light included. Don't get me wrong. I love DR. I shoot wildlife so for me more would be better but i do get the feeling that those who harp on about it the most tend to want it to make up for shortcomings in the things that Ansell had in spades.


----------



## Etienne (Feb 10, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> That was back when B&H was still selling gray market lenses imported from Hong Kong taking advantage of the highly fluctuating exchange rate between the USD and yen, wasn't it? In your case, though, it was probably used, wasn't it?
> 
> You're comparing apple to oranges. The same thing with "instant rebates" during Canon promotions. Instant rebates for limited periods do not change the official MSRP to which the price returns when the promotion is over.



No, my lens was full US warranty, not grey market. You're just wrong, plain and simple.


----------



## Maximilian (Feb 10, 2019)

Yasko said:


> The lenses will be larger. Or the smaller lens will negate the FF improvement regarding depth of focus and ISO  („pi times thumb“ as we say in Germany)


Hi Yasko!

Sorry, but your arguments have already been disproved:

When you take a look at the recent Canon RF patents you can see that even tele zooms can be made a little bit smaller, although this was not expected.
When you think about standard FL, WA, and UWA here we had a lot of discussions in this forum that those lenses could be built smaller than their EF equivalent because of the smaller backfocus distance possible.
Of course, if Canon decides to make a more complex optical formula ir if they add macro functionality like at the RF 35 this could make a bigger again.

And if you compare this Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS Macro STM with the EF 35mm f/2 IS USM you can find this:
size (diameter x length):
74,4 x 62,8 mm vs. 77,9 x 62,6

So the RF lens has the same length and slightly smaller diameter ALTHOUGH macro feature was included AND the aperture got slightly wider.
So shallower DOF and less ISO in the same package.

Ans as icing on top the IQ / sharpnes and CA have been improved over the already very good EF lens:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com...4&Sample=0&CameraComp=453&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

So that would be my German rule-of-thumb.


----------



## -pekr- (Feb 10, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> It doesn't, although the 50D did. That's one reason those other bodies I listed are a "significant improvement." The 70D also includes AFMA, but I did not list it because, in that case, the sensor performance was not really improved at all over the 60D. The 80D sensor was a significant improvement over the 60D and 70D. Perhaps I should have included the 70D. It also included the 7D's 19 pt. AF system over the 60D's 9 pt. AF, as well as AFMA.



60D was a hybrid I hate to this date. Canon misstepped with this one. To that date, I considered xxD being a (semi)professinal line. 70D was a big improvement, a nice and consistent camera and imo it is not true, that it did not provide a sensor performance update. I remember something like 1/3 of stop at least, as well as 70D was the first camera ever, providing DPAF, so by all means, it as a new sensor.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 10, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Yeah, as in my analogy above, ride a horse carriage, or you can get over the speed limit in a car.


Except that these days you don't need high DR for that. You need a well-trained neural network.

Taking a photo is optional too. Sometimes just a sketch may work.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 10, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Foveon sensors sample RGB at every pixel site. Their color detail reproduction is only slightly better than a Bayer sensor of the same physical resolution. When I say "slightly" it's something you can pick up in some areas while pixel peeping, but which is meaningless in print. A 100mp Bayer image will absolutely look better in print than a 25mp Foveon image, assuming a print size large enough to tell the difference (since 25mp can saturate many common print sizes).
> 
> The other problem with this idea is that the CFA is fixed so you can't go into a 25mp mode where every pixel samples RGB. A pixel covered by a green filter still only sees green. (Though that is a gross simplification, per Michael Clark's posts. He is correct that there is bandwidth overlap of the three filters.)



Foveon: Foveon suffers from the fact that different wavelengths travel up to different depths into a silicon block. The deepest layer gets strongly attenuated light in that wavelength region. Hence you have different QEs for different colors which counteracts the great principle of evaluating three different wavelength (or color) channels.

CFA issues: CFA must NOT be changed to go from 100MP bayer image reconstrugtion to pixel binning of four R-G-G-B pixel quadruplets. NOT CHANGING THE CFA is the solution to sample ALL COLOR CHANNELS for ONE FINAL IMAGE PIXEL. Trying to do that in ASCII graphics (fixed font not worked, so used dots as spacers):

CAMERA in HIGH RESOLUTION MODE
100 MPixel bayer sensor read out to 100 MPixel Image = a lot of deriving non-existing per pixel data from RAW)
*R . . . G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RGB . . . RGB*
* . . . . . . . . . = debayering => *
*G . . . B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  RGB . . . **RGB*

CAMERA in HIGH COLOR QUALITY MODE + low light
100 MPixel bayer sensor read out to 25 MPixel IMAGE = getting measurement values from RAW
*R . . . G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *
* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  = binning => RGB*
*G . . . B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *

Switching the mode on site helps to reduce file size under certain circumstances while retaining qualities needed in these cases.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 10, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Can/could you capture great landscapes using old film cameras? - yes.
> Could you capture sceneries in the same conditions as we capture landscapes with modern digital cameras? - no.



Galen Rowell would like a word with you.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 10, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Your understanding is based on the false assumption that _only "green" light _(or light between, say, 480-580 nanometers) gets p [...]
> 
> It's also based on the false assumption that our color reproduction systems use the same three colors as the colors of a Bayer filter array as primaries. [...]



(1) I really know that I can see sodium light (yellow) and that it is essential that both green and red cones need their gaussian-like shaped spectra with overlap to trigger BOTH cone types to say "Hey this is not green or red, it is in between" and that orange light means that there is a higher potential in the "red cone" compared to the "green cone".
So your assumption is false that I assumed that 

(2) I never assumed that the R G and B sensitivity spectra are the same for eyes (just not beween different people) and all our technical stuff. I know that they have to chose from existing dyes which not must have the right spectral response but also have to show long term stability and can be managed in the CFA production process. The same for monitors where maybe the spectra of the used LEDs are only adjustable in narrow limits. ... And that is the reason why SAMSUNG introduced quantum dots as light convertes from blue to R and G because they are tunable.

Please see my post above where I try to picture how I see the advantage of having a 25MPix mode on a 100MPix camera where pixel binning allows for full color pixels - that you have to apply some functions from sensor ADC raw values to the RGB values in the final image ... for sure, that has always to be done.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 10, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Massive processing. Ansell was a master inthe darkroom. But he also had skill. And patience. And determination. Ansell would wait hours or even days for that perfect moment of light and then enhance what he got in the darkroom. Now we have photographers who want 234.2stops of DR so they can drive to a location in any conditions, take one image and then spend an hour in photoshop to put in all the bits that weren't there. Light included. Don't get me wrong. I love DR. I shoot wildlife so for me more would be better but i do get the feeling that those who harp on about it the most tend to want it to make up for shortcomings in the things that Ansell had in spades.



It may leave an impression that a low DR improves patience and compositional skills.
I'm not sure which shortcomings exactly you can overcome with the higher DR, apart from inability to capture high contrast sceneries. I'm confident you can't overcome the lack of compositional skills or lack of patience and effort. If you're willing to make fake skies or fake light, high or low DR won't stop you from doing that. And on the other hand, having a high DR won't make you less skillful, as well as low DR won't give you any additional skills.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 10, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> In the good old days they were just limited technically, compared to digital era. However they used very heavy postprocessing, dodging and burning, chemicals to increase contrast etc. Some of most famous landscapes were made with heavy processing.


Actually, postprocessing has nothing to do with the topic. _It does not increase the DR of the sensor_. It plays a different role: to compress the dynamic range of the captured image into a very shallow range of densities of the output medium (paper) without losing "natural" local contrast.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Feb 10, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> It may leave an impression that a low DR improves patience and compositional skills.
> I'm not sure which shortcomings exactly you can overcome with the higher DR, apart from inability to capture high contrast sceneries. I'm confident you can't overcome the lack of compositional skills or lack of patience and effort. If you're willing to make fake skies or fake light, high or low DR won't stop you from doing that. And on the other hand, having a high DR won't make you less skillful, as well as low DR won't give you any additional skills.



Having high DR will allow ypu to shoot in ppor light and even the exposure out in post while retaining acceptable quality.Far far more than in days gone by. Then adding all the BS can be achieved more effectively. You no longer have to wait for the light. Now like I said. DR is great. The more the better for certain applications. But it has allowed less skilled and dedicated photographers to get results. Again. That is fine but like I said those who are obsessed with it are likely the ones to abuse it. I guess it would be my opinion that rhe more the technology advances the less photographers seem to understand what they are doing. Because they don't need to. Knowing and understanding light is not as important as it used to be. Composition of course is not being affected but that is about all.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 10, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Actually, postprocessing has nothing to do with the topic. _It does not increase the DR of the sensor_. It plays a different role: to compress the dynamic range of the captured image into a very shallow range of densities of the output medium (paper) without losing "natural" local contrast.



All true, however I don't think anybody claimed that postprocessing increases DR.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 10, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> All true, however I don't think anybody claimed that postprocessing increases DR.


Then why did you bring it in?


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 10, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Then why did you bring it in?



Postprocessing? I didn't. I was responding to this post https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...ecifications-images.36678/page-28#post-763821 and the statement that good old photographers relied on skill, and nowadays they do photoshopping. Even then nobody claimed that postprocessing increases DR.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 10, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Postprocessing? I didn't. I was responding to this post https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...ecifications-images.36678/page-28#post-763821 and the statement that good old photographers relied on skill, and nowadays they do photoshopping. Even then nobody claimed that postprocessing increases DR.


The claim in that post was, as I understand it, that higher DR makes it easier to produce an image _of what_ never existed in the first place. Not a reproduction of what an eye can see in the natural settings, but a kind of photocollage, with collage techniques trying to mask deficiencies in photographic ("drawing with light") skills.

Burning and dodging were actually "prepress" (lab technician) skills, not photographic skills. You did not need to do burning and dodging for a slide projector.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 10, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Having high DR will allow ypu to shoot in ppor light and even the exposure out in post while retaining acceptable quality.Far far more than in days gone by. Then adding all the BS can be achieved more effectively. You no longer have to wait for the light. Now like I said. DR is great. The more the better for certain applications. But it has allowed less skilled and dedicated photographers to get results. Again. That is fine but like I said those who are obsessed with it are likely the ones to abuse it. I guess it would be my opinion that rhe more the technology advances the less photographers seem to understand what they are doing. Because they don't need to. Knowing and understanding light is not as important as it used to be. Composition of course is not being affected but that is about all.



You don't generally compensate bad light with postprocessing. It's either impossible or hugely time-consuming. Playing with shadows and highlights and/or tone curve doesn't help. If there is faint but good light in the shadows, you'll be able to pull it out, if there's no light, you get nothing.
Maybe if your photoshop-fu is beyond imagination and you can dodge and burn, basically, per pixel - but then it's the same as digital painting and it requires high artistic skills.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 10, 2019)

Kit. said:


> The claim in that post was, as I understand it, that higher DR makes it easier to produce an image _of what_ never existed in the first place. Not a reproduction of what an eye can see in the natural settings, but a kind of photocollage, with collage techniques trying to mask deficiencies in photographic ("drawing with light") skills.
> 
> Burning and dodging were actually "prepress" (lab technician) skills, not photographic skills. You did not need to do burning and dodging for a slide projector.



But again, even then it wasn't a claim that postprocessing increases DR. Vice versa, it's the higher DR that increases the room for post. I'd agree with that. But it doesn't compensate the need of good composition and light.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 10, 2019)

About the DR and postprocessing posts:

The human eye has a DR of about 20 stops including sensor mods (in the retina according to light level), iris and "sensor cell" DR.

If you look at a scenery the iris might regulate 3 stops (6 ... 2 mm diameter) for an adult - younger people have more DR by iris diameter adaption.

Changes between night- and day-vision might add another 3 stops but this is a slow process where the cells in the retina change their positions.

Finally there is a DR of roughly 17 stops what we can see in a single scene. BW film has that DR but all the usual media to display images do not have it at the moment. This is ~128 000 levels of brightness! (2 ^17 = 2 ^10 * 2^7 = 1024 * 128). To put that vast DR into e.g. 7-8 bits (128 ... 256 levels) on very good paper or 10 bits on a good monitor it is essential to postprocess the original image:
compress the DR of e.g. 14 bit of a good sensor into 7-10 bits globally or locally (dodging / burning) for presentation media - that's the idea of applying a tone curve locally or globally.

The same as 30 years ago in a (BW) darkroom where we had gradations of paper (1...5) from low contrast to high contrast and some other variables like exposure + duration of the sheets in the developper bath. For local "corrections" you needed a mask made from paper or formed with your hands. And very important: different paper types lead to very different results - I liked the ORWO baryt paper most which had great blacks (lots of silver) and fine transitions between different grays.

With Vantablack (the blackest black we would like in lens interiors and lens hoods EDIT: only 99.965% absorption leading to ~12 bits DR on very white paper) as printer black (just kidding) or OLED / micro LED screens a DR of 15 ... 20 bits seems possible because it is just managing the electric current (not the voltage) through the LEDs which is mostly proportional to its light output.


----------



## Yasko (Feb 10, 2019)

Maximilian said:


> Hi Yasko!
> 
> Sorry, but your arguments have already been disproved:
> 
> ...


Yes, they can make the lenses more compact, but not an order of magnitude as I read it through your lines (just quick interpretation, don‘t take this too serious).
Look at the 28-70 f/2, it‘s a huge lens and it makes compromises at the lower focal length as compared to a 24-70 f/2.8 EF counterpart.

Where mirrorless FF shines is with compact primes. Anything else will more or less lead you to the compromise I described. (I am only talking about those people that want to be as compact as with smaller sensor cameras. For me FF is also about giving the sensor the best lens in front of it possible for the purpose. For compactness that‘s just a prime.)
And if you compare it to the M system, this becomes more evident. Comparing an APS-C with EF DSLRs to a mirrorless fullframe is of course valid, but e.g. an M5 with a 22 f/2 prime states my point, too.
APS-C EF-M lenses will in general be smaller than their EF-R counterparts as they do not need to cover the larger FF sensor.

Physics is not off its hinges due to the introduction of a new approach to photography in terms of ripping out a mirror and bring the rear of the lens in closer proximity to the plane of focus.

I am btw not in anyway saying, that I don‘t like the R system. If I had the money to spend (and didn‘t already have a 6D mk II) I would love to try it out and buy myself a EOS R .


----------



## Kit. (Feb 10, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> But again, even then it wasn't a claim that postprocessing increases DR. Vice versa, it's the higher DR that increases the room for post. I'd agree with that. But it doesn't compensate the need of good composition and light.


I wonder... if I create a Photoshop plugin that automatically makes masks for daylight shadow areas, will it sell well?



mb66energy said:


> About the DR and postprocessing posts:
> The human eye has a DR of about 20 stops including sensor mods (in the retina according to light level), iris and sensor cell DR.
> If you look at a scenery the iris might regulate 3 stops (6 ... 2 mm diameter) for an adult - younger people have more DR by iris diameter adaption.
> Changes between night- and day-vision might add another 3 stops but this is a slow process where the cells in the retina change their positions.
> So there is a DR of roughly 17 stops what we can see in a single scene.


Have you actually tried it in practice?

My attempts tell me that I stop considering what I look at _as a single scene_ long before my 5D2 loses the ability to capture it in one frame due to its DR limitations.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 10, 2019)

Kit. said:


> I wonder... if I create a Photoshop plugin that automatically makes masks for daylight shadow areas, will it sell well?



there are plugins already for creating luminosity masks, you can make masks for highlights or shadows or even mid-range. Luminosity masking is a powerful tool but by no means it creates non-existent light.


----------



## Viggo (Feb 10, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> I am German, in fact I live in Hesse, the German state where Leitz/ Leica is located, so I am allowed to write such a comment about the Leica M3 . I didn't say that the M3 was no good camera, in fact it offered the best rangefinder technology of its time when it hit the market. Such a bright and precise rangefinder was a revolution for 35mm cameras. But Leica needed a few more years to move to such a clean design like the Canon P already had in the late 50s - in fact, the M6 has it and for me it is the most beautiful and ageless Leica ever made. But that's a matter of personal preferences. A well working M3 is of course a gem, no question.
> 
> That said, I have and use two Canon 7 rangefinders when I shoot film. They are not such beauties, but the Seven was the most capable rangefinder ever made for the old Leica M39 thread.


To me there is not a prettier camera ever made than the M7 with the 50 Lux on, now that is gorgeous. Second favorite is the M4 black.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 10, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> there are plugins already for creating luminosity masks, you can make masks for highlights or shadows or even mid-range. Luminosity masking is a powerful tool but by no means it creates non-existent light.


Luminosity masks are totally not what I am talking about. I am talking about recognizing the shadows (and creating the masks for them) as the objects in the picture, like my team at work does with cars and pedestrians.


----------



## Maximilian (Feb 10, 2019)

Yasko said:


> Yes, they can make the lenses more compact, but not an order of magnitude as I read it through your lines (just quick interpretation, don‘t take this too serious).
> Look at the 28-70 f/2, it‘s a huge lens and it makes compromises at the lower focal length as compared to a 24-70 f/2.8 EF counterpart.


I was not refering to such lenses. I know optical physics and I know that it can not be bended. 



> *Where mirrorless FF shines is with compact primes. *


THIS!!! Especially if those are WA or UWA primes. And exactly this was what I was refering to in my original post, that you've quoted.
AS you could read here:


Maximilian said:


> Now let's go for some native small primes



And then your reply got me confused.
Now I see that we are almost in line in opinion and wishes.
But that sounded different in your first reply.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 10, 2019)

Maximilian said:


> I was not refering to such lenses. I know optical physics and I know that it can not be bended.


It can be bent. All you need is a small black hole in close proximity, which would not only bend the light, lens, photographer......, but would suck the earth inside it, ending all life on the planet, and possibly even ending this thread!


----------



## Pape (Feb 10, 2019)

i am sure canon invents force field elements to tube wht hold black hole on contorl. maybe thats why two stabilizer place on lens patents ,other is for black hole


----------



## AlanF (Feb 10, 2019)

A 400mm DO II is 233mm. A 2xTC is 52mm long. Add it to the DO and it becomes a 285mm long 800mm focal length lens. But, a Canon 800mm lens is 463mm long, so you have got an 800mm focal length lens that is 178mm shorter in physical length!
Add the 2xTC to the 800mm lens, and you get a 1600mm lens for only a 52mm increase in length!
So, that proves Canon is bending the laws of optics!


----------



## Pape (Feb 10, 2019)

salesmans talks bend optic laws ,equivalent focal lenghts and X zillion objective when starting point is 1mm focal lenght


----------



## dak723 (Feb 10, 2019)

Pape said:


> With very good DR you got danger overdo photograph too . Its not photograph if more DR what eyes got .More like photographic art .
> Just my opinion  i know i am probably wrong



I find it funny in a way that folks equate DR with IQ. In my opinion, there are far more crappy photos taken today by people who believe that DR is more important than contrast when it comes to what would be considered good IQ or a GOOD photo. Not saying that more DR is a bad thing under some shooting conditions, but too much DR leads to so many washed-out, flat-looking photos, that to say today we have more good photos is really just a matter of opinion.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 10, 2019)

dak723 said:


> I find it funny in a way that folks equate DR with IQ. In my opinion, there are far more crappy photos taken today by people who believe that DR is more important than contrast when it comes to what would be considered good IQ or a GOOD photo. Not saying that more DR is a bad thing under some shooting conditions, but too much DR leads to so many washed-out, flat-looking photos, that to say today we have more good photos is really just a matter of opinion.



More dynamic range IS one aspect of TECHNICAL IQ because more DR means better raw data. But it is the same in physics (science generally): A good scientist derives better results from bad raw data than a incompetent scientist from the best raw data. On the other hand a good scientist can produce excellent results from the best raw data.

But dynamic range is ONLY ONE aspect of PHOTOGRAPHIC image quality so I agree fully that these flat "look what I can capture" images aren't always the best images from the artistic point of view.

I myself was am happy with the 200D & M50 which have a great sensor and I added the Technicolor style to the cameras. It's a very flat style which is great to capture or better shows a lot of different levels. It is great to see all the stuff in the shadows and the highlights. BUT: the images weren't any longer photographs but just images with a lot of visible content. If one wants to convert the "data" into a photograph it is ESSENTIAL to apply appropriate tone curves and I learned that the Neutral or Faithful styles are much better as starting point for the "end product".
But I like the Technicolor style for a quick check during photographing because it gives a good feedback if you are correct with exposure, light and composition - my theory: Flat view finder (M50)/display contast makes me search for better composition, contrast, light modelling to shell out the subject from the environment ...


----------



## Maximilian (Feb 10, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > I was not refering to such lenses. I know optical physics and I know that it can not be bended.
> ...


Oh Don, this I cannot leave unanswered 

I was not referring to light rays, that can't be bended or the space they travel within.
This can be done easier than with black holes, it happens in all cameras and is called diffraction. - and - you know that 
And if you think you can use black holes to bend the laws of optical physics then my answer is that the laws are not bended but they are also just subject to the theory of relativity (either general and special) as well as when it comes to quantum theory.
The physics of optics is not bended - it is just part of these higher level theories  (sorry, there is no Einstein emojy here)

But thank you for a nice Sunday joke.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 10, 2019)

Maximilian said:


> Oh Don, this I cannot leave unanswered
> 
> I was not referring to light rays, that can't be bended or the space they travel within.
> This can be done easier than with black holes, it happens in all cameras and is called diffraction. - and - you know that
> ...


Thanks. We were getting a bit to serious so I thought I would inject a bit of humor.


----------



## navastronia (Feb 10, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> It can be bent. All you need is a small black hole in close proximity, which would not only bend the light, lens, photographer......, but would suck the earth inside it, ending all life on the planet, and possibly even ending this thread!



One can only hope!


----------



## Jethro (Feb 10, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> It can be bent. All you need is a small black hole in close proximity, which would not only bend the light, lens, photographer......, but would suck the earth inside it, ending all life on the planet, *and possibly even ending this thread*!


Man, ain't nothing going to end this thread - 'announcement date' is coming on Thursday!


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 10, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> Foveon: Foveon suffers from the fact that different wavelengths travel up to different depths into a silicon block. The deepest layer gets strongly attenuated light in that wavelength region. Hence you have different QEs for different colors which counteracts the great principle of evaluating three different wavelength (or color) channels.



I would ask for a source but it doesn't matter because this would affect low light/high ISO images, not bright light/low ISO images.



> CFA issues: CFA must NOT be changed to go from 100MP bayer image reconstrugtion to pixel binning of four R-G-G-B pixel quadruplets.



Your algorithm would result in worse fine detail than simply demosaicing the 100mp image and then using a high quality algorithm to scale to 25mp. Also: modern demosaicing algorithms typically look at all 8 neighboring pixels, not just the other 3 in a quad.

You're looking for an improvement in color accuracy/detail that simply isn't there to be gained.


----------



## briansquibb (Feb 10, 2019)

This might be the 7D2 replacement - complete with ED-S and EF lens ...


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 10, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> It can be bent. All you need is a small black hole in close proximity, which would not only bend the light, lens, photographer......, but would suck the earth inside it, ending all life on the planet, and possibly even ending this thread!



Nothing can end this thread. Theoretical physicists at the Large Hadron Collider are frantically searching for the meaning to this thread, and the impact it will have on the universe itself, as we speak.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 10, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> Everyone spouts nonsense from time to time on this forum but only seem to dislike other peoples nonsense. We all need to learn to have a bit of tolerance to people who disagree with our own opinions. Whether you like the potential RP or not is a matter of opinion and its formed by where we are coming from and what we want. It's an open forum where all members can freely express an opinion. You never learn anything or change if you don't consider other opinions.



You're preaching to the choir. I wonder how many newbie accounts popping up and saying 'this camera is DOA' will heed you?


----------



## masterpix (Feb 10, 2019)

26MP is very close to the Nikon Z6, the only question is the pricing of this camera and it's video capabilities. And as to "back to 26MP sensor"..


qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...


It is rather funny that someone comes to this group, complains over a camera spec, and I wonder if he had any of those cameras he complain so much about. It sound more like a BOT trying to create fake-drama to live up this group rather than a serious person. When a man is more concerted about "the size" it means he has a size problem, and the more complaints the serious the issue is... Sorry, but that is what comes to mind when hearing someone complains about a minor thing so loud.


----------



## JBSF (Feb 10, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> It can be bent. All you need is a small black hole in close proximity, which would not only bend the light, lens, photographer......, but would suck the earth inside it, ending all life on the planet, and possibly even ending this thread!



Yes, but would it end politics as we know them?


----------



## scyrene (Feb 11, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Warning! Do not try and mate a 1.4x and a 2x tele directly together. If you go that route you have to put an extension tube between them (EF-12) or you are going to scratch some glass!



That was one downside to the mark III extenders - the older ones could be stacked just fine.


----------



## prodorshak (Feb 11, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Pretty much everything other than the "Rebel" series has had it since the original 7D firmware update in 2012. It's old news, and not really that useful to most of us. If you need to move images so fast you don't have time to edit on at least a tablet or notebook with a larger, color calibrated screen, you might as well just shoot straight to jpeg.


Further proof about 'baby years'!


----------



## SaP34US (Feb 11, 2019)

What percentage larger then M50 is it the EOS R is about 22% larger the the M50 in all diminisions?


----------



## RayH (Feb 11, 2019)

More DR IS more realistic
More colors in between


----------



## Mbell75 (Feb 11, 2019)

qudek77 said:


> Ahhhh cmon Canon, really?? 6D mark II, do we really need another bad full frame camera. Well there's nothing left here to do then switch to Sony...



I did just that over last summer after 15 years shooting Canon and thinking the R was a complete joke. Bought an a7iii and haven't looked back, you should do the same. Canon has proven to be inept when it comes to sensor tech, AF and FF mirrorless cameras in general.


----------



## Pape (Feb 11, 2019)

uhh how R is joke?


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 11, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> I would ask for a source but it doesn't matter because this would affect low light/high ISO images, not bright light/low ISO images..



About Foveon: I read roughly 10 years ago that a lot of green and especially red light is absorbed while it tries to penetrate the sensor layers. The stacking is blue -> green -> red. An ISO 1600 test shows, that this sensor in APS-C size is roughtly 2 stops worse just compared to a G1X: http://thenewcamera.com/sigma-dp2-quattro-high-iso-test/
And look at the green color which is confined in other cameras - Foveon lets it swap around its position ...
These deficits will affect the bas ISO quality - just think about native ISOs of 100 for blue, 200 for green and 400 for red (the deepest layer).

I really like the concept of Foveon but it seems that this sensor shows its specific qualities at low ISO, good lighting and explicitly no underexposure - maybe the Kodachrome 25 equivalent of today 
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61885615



dtaylor said:


> Your algorithm would result in worse fine detail than simply demosaicing the 100mp image and then using a high quality algorithm to scale to 25mp. Also: modern demosaicing algorithms typically look at all 8 neighboring pixels, not just the other 3 in a quad.
> 
> You're looking for an improvement in color accuracy/detail that simply isn't there to be gained.



Maybe I wasn't clear enough! I NEVER spoke about improvement of BOTH parameters but having the option of large files with lots of detail and good color plus lots of calculations for debayering OR smaller files with less detail and superb color with much less need for calculation. I am aware of the fact that downscaling from 100 MPix to 25 MPix will result in very similar results like directly recording from 100 MPix sensors in 25 MPix full color format!
About 8 neighboring pixels: They just aren't drawn because I had to fiddle a lot to make just that graphical representation because fixed fonts seem not to be fixed enough (at least the spaces 

At least one point about debayering: It doesn't work well with monochromatic light sources like e.g. LED tail lights of cars or traffic signals - these show strong artifacts which look like a chess pattern of R_R_R and the next line _R_R_ which is - just my idea - of the missing brightness data in the G and B subpixels: Pure red means that G and B subpixels see close to nothing. Downsampling in camera with quad pixel binning avoids this effekt.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Feb 11, 2019)

Mbell75 said:


> I did just that over last summer after 15 years shooting Canon and thinking the R was a complete joke. Bought an a7iii and haven't looked back, you should do the same. Canon has proven to be inept when it comes to sensor tech, AF and FF mirrorless cameras in general.


Oh look. Another 'I'm new here' account pops up and says they switched to sony. Surprise surprise.


----------



## navastronia (Feb 11, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Oh look. Another 'I'm new here' account pops up and says they switched to sony. Surprise surprise.



Strange. Do admins ever limit new account creation? I've been on boards where it's become necessary, due to spam.


----------



## Viggo (Feb 11, 2019)

Mbell75 said:


> I did just that over last summer after 15 years shooting Canon and thinking the R was a complete joke. Bought an a7iii and haven't looked back, you should do the same. Canon has proven to be inept when it comes to sensor tech, AF and FF mirrorless cameras in general.


So, more trolls with new accounts.


----------



## Del Paso (Feb 11, 2019)

Mbell75 said:


> I did just that over last summer after 15 years shooting Canon and thinking the R was a complete joke. Bought an a7iii and haven't looked back, you should do the same. Canon has proven to be inept when it comes to sensor tech, AF and FF mirrorless cameras in general.


Good riddance!


----------



## Del Paso (Feb 11, 2019)

After having read all the "I dumped my Canon because they are so inept and now, live a life of perfect harmony in Wonderful Sony World", I can imagine Canon engineers committing mass_seppuku or begging Wonderful Sony to hire them.
Despite their notorious incompetence...
By the way: the more and more aggressive anti-Canon posts simply prove that Canon is on the right way!


----------



## edoorn (Feb 11, 2019)

well it's a bit of a hype and yes, Sony is doing great things, but in my scene (wedding photography) I also hear about a lot of ppl that have switched to the A73 and say it's the greatest thing ever. Thing is; I'm sure it's good but it's not a perfect body; I find the EVF seriously inferior to the higher 3.6mpix resolution EVF's, and I don't like the grip and buttons very much. The lack of touch screen implementation is also a thing I don't quite understand. 

If I'm going to dive into a system, I'd like a futureproof body that will keep me happy for at least a year or 4. So I'll wait a bit; in about one year my 5D4's have taken quite a good beating (I use them professionally) and my impression is that Canon by then will have some good pro options on the market too. I'll make up my mind by then (and who knows, maybe Sony has a new generation too by then).


----------



## marc ln (Feb 11, 2019)

I am a "I am a new here" and i would like a 80D  or good APS-C for wildlife photo (coming from 500D ... )


----------



## delta0 (Feb 11, 2019)

marc ln said:


> I am a "I am a new here" and i would like a 80D  or good APS-C for wildlife photo (coming from 500D ... )


I am in a similar boat. I am strongly considering the full frame RP. The price point is around what a new xxD would be. I don’t think we will see a crop R series camera for a while or possibly ever. The M series is currently covering crop.


----------



## Nelu (Feb 11, 2019)

Mbell75 said:


> I did just that over last summer after 15 years shooting Canon and thinking the R was a complete joke. Bought an a7iii and haven't looked back, you should do the same. Canon has proven to be inept when it comes to sensor tech, AF and FF mirrorless cameras in general.


Well, you kind of keep looking back, hence your post on Canon Rumors...
Are we missing something on the Sony side, maybe?


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 11, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> Maybe I wasn't clear enough! I NEVER spoke about improvement of BOTH parameters but having the option of large files with lots of detail and good color plus lots of calculations for debayering OR smaller files with less detail and superb color with much less need for calculation.



You were clear. And I'll repeat: there's not much left to be gained, beyond Bayer, in terms of color accuracy or fine color detail. Go compare images in the Imaging Resource Comparometer. Sigma claims 29 'effective' MP for the SD Quattro. The 5D IV is roughly equal in the color fabric area of the IR studio scene. (The 5D IV image needs some sharpening, but the data is there.) Switch to the 7D mk II which is closer to the physical or spatial resolution of the Quattro. The Foveon sensor is better in the color fabrics (except red which is a mess). Now switch to the 5Ds or 5Dsr and watch the Quattro get crushed in all respects.

IR's tool has the drawback of being based off JPEGs. I know ACR would improve the color detail rendition of all the Bayer sensors, I've seen it in resolution testing using a color map as the target. I have little doubt that the 5D IV RAW file would out perform the Foveon file, and the 6D2 would be darn close if not equal in all respects.

You can choose RAW in DPReview's tool but unfortunately they don't have a section which clearly stresses color detail the way the fabrics do in the IR studio scene. Which reminds us that we're talking about improvements at the very edge of details primarily defined by color (rather than luminance) variations. Coarser details aren't going to show the difference.

So we're looking at 33-50% more pixels in a Bayer sensor to match or exceed a Foveon sensor in terms of color detail rendition at the very edge of the sensor's capabilities...stuff you'll only notice while pixel peeping or inspecting very large prints. If you take a 100mp Bayer sensor and spit out 25mp images you've _lost_ color detail.



> About 8 neighboring pixels: They just aren't drawn because I had to fiddle a lot to make just that graphical representation because fixed fonts seem not to be fixed enough



You're missing the point that modern demosaicing algorithms are already recovering more color information than most people assume. There's a persistent myth that we're losing something special or important by using Bayer. That would only be true if Bayer had the same spatial resolution and ISO characteristics as a stacked sensor. Bayer has raced passed stacked sensors. A 50mp 5Ds does not lack for fine color detail at any print size you or I are likely to ever make. What will a 100mp sensor lack?



> At least one point about debayering: It doesn't work well with monochromatic light sources like e.g. LED tail lights of cars or traffic signals - these show strong artifacts which look like a chess pattern of R_R_R and the next line _R_R_ which is - just my idea - of the missing brightness data in the G and B subpixels: Pure red means that G and B subpixels see close to nothing. Downsampling in camera with quad pixel binning avoids this effekt.



I've actually tried to isolate and exploit this in the past. Everything I tried suggests that artifacts on strong neon or LED light sources are much more about channel blowout. The only way I could create the situation you describe (only 1/3 or 1/2 of the pixels responding to the scene) is through narrow filters on the lens.

And if you have that situation with a 100mp sensor then downsizing in post is little different from downsizing in camera.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 11, 2019)

Mbell75 said:


> I did just that over last summer after 15 years shooting Canon and thinking the R was a complete joke. Bought an a7iii and haven't looked back, you should do the same. Canon has proven to be inept when it comes to sensor tech, AF and FF mirrorless cameras in general.



Nice to meet you! There's a rain storm coming to my area. If you live near me maybe we can go shoot some scenic landscapes in the rough weather.

What do you shoot? A Sony? Oh...uh...maybe when the sun comes out then.


----------



## masterpix (Feb 11, 2019)

I have a question, DSLR's have a shutter that protect the sensor while changing lenses, the sensor is also far in the back, preventing any accidental touch etc. How does mirrorless cameras deal with those two issues, while the sensor is exposed all the time and it is not far from the mounting ring?

Thanks!


----------



## fentiger (Feb 11, 2019)

masterpix said:


> I have a question, DSLR's have a shutter that protect the sensor while changing lenses, the sensor is also far in the back, preventing any accidental touch etc. How does mirrorless cameras deal with those two issues, while the sensor is exposed all the time and it is not far from the mounting ring?
> 
> Thanks!


go and read the specs for the canon R, there you will see how canon solve that problem!


----------



## Randywayne (Feb 11, 2019)

edoorn said:


> well it's a bit of a hype and yes, Sony is doing great things, but in my scene (wedding photography) I also hear about a lot of ppl that have switched to the A73 and say it's the greatest thing ever. Thing is; I'm sure it's good but it's not a perfect body; I find the EVF seriously inferior to the higher 3.6mpix resolution EVF's, and I don't like the grip and buttons very much. The lack of touch screen implementation is also a thing I don't quite understand.
> 
> If I'm going to dive into a system, I'd like a futureproof body that will keep me happy for at least a year or 4. So I'll wait a bit; in about one year my 5D4's have taken quite a good beating (I use them professionally) and my impression is that Canon by then will have some good pro options on the market too. I'll make up my mind by then (and who knows, maybe Sony has a new generation too by then).



I shot a wedding this past weekend (although I don't consider myself a wedding photographer -I just get asked to do them a lot). I used the a7III for 80% of the photos and my 5D IV for the rest. It really is a great camera (the Sony) for indoor events where the face and eye tracking can't be beat. However if asked the question "You leaving for such-and-such a place for three or more weeks and you can only take one camera" I will chose my Canon every single time. So not an "anti-Canon/pro-Sony" post so much as saying I ADDED Sony to my kit.


----------



## Viggo (Feb 11, 2019)

masterpix said:


> I have a question, DSLR's have a shutter that protect the sensor while changing lenses, the sensor is also far in the back, preventing any accidental touch etc. How does mirrorless cameras deal with those two issues, while the sensor is exposed all the time and it is not far from the mounting ring?
> 
> Thanks!


The EOS R is pretty much the only one that does anything and it closes the shutter curtains so that the sensor is well protected from dust.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 11, 2019)

I'd really love to finally see a serious video shooter from Canon. Been using my 1DX2 to shoot 4k from time to time and it does really well. But it's bulky for that purpose (especially when trying to put on a Ronin M). I'd hoped for 4k/60 in the EOS R but best we got was 4k/30. But with 10 bit 422 CLog output over HDMI ... which I cant even do 4K output on my DX2. If the EOS RP hits with the same 4k specs as the EOS R, for $1500... I may well be all in purely as a video machine. being able to sling out 4k Canon video (which Sony doesn't compare... sorry) at that level into an Atomos Ninja for things like interviews and regular 24fps shooting... I'm in heaven.


----------



## padam (Feb 11, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> I'd really love to finally see a serious video shooter from Canon. Been using my 1DX2 to shoot 4k from time to time and it does really well. But it's bulky for that purpose (especially when trying to put on a Ronin M). I'd hoped for 4k/60 in the EOS R but best we got was 4k/30. But with 10 bit 422 CLog output over HDMI ... which I cant even do 4K output on my DX2. If the EOS RP hits with the same 4k specs as the EOS R, for $1500... I may well be all in purely as a video machine. being able to sling out 4k Canon video (which Sony doesn't compare... sorry) at that level into an Atomos Ninja for things like interviews and regular 24fps shooting... I'm in heaven.


That is really not how it works with Canon.
The smaller (lighter), lower-end camera is a step down equally in terms of photo and video (with the same sensor size) with some different features like the flip-sceen on the 6DII over the 5DIV or optional C-Log on the latter vs 1DXII

So it is highly doubtful that we get any kind of 4k with the EOS RP (or clean HDMI, C-Log, headphone jack, etc.)
The most I was hopeful was an IPB only 4k like the M50 (slower UHS-I slot can still allow that), but even that would put it in a weird position with a better crop factor than the EOS R, so I doubt it is going to happen. Will turn out soon enough anyway.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 11, 2019)

padam said:


> That is really not how it works with Canon.
> The smaller (lighter), lower-end camera is a step down equally in terms of photo and video (with the same sensor size) with some different features like the flip-sceen on the 6DII over the 5DIV or optional C-Log on the latter vs 1DXII
> 
> So it is highly doubtful that we get any kind of 4k with the EOS RP (or clean HDMI, C-Log, headphone jack, etc.)
> The most I was hopeful was an IPB only 4k like the M50 (slower UHS-I slot can still allow that), but even that would put it in a weird position with a better crop factor than the EOS R, so I doubt it is going to happen. Will turn out soon enough anyway.




I realize that. But video specs are more often overlooked with Canon. What the EOS R has is basic 4k with a bit stepped up output over HDMI. I dont see see 4k being eliminated altogether in 2019. So 4k at 30 should hold. Now whether it will also have 10bit c log etc is another story. That said, the inital rumored specs CR had included 4K and Clog. Nokishita simply had no video info. Bottom line, we still don't know anything for certain. I suspect CR will have more info within in the next 24 to 36 hours as the rumored release date is imminent


----------



## FramerMCB (Feb 11, 2019)

masterpix said:


> I have a question, DSLR's have a shutter that protect the sensor while changing lenses, the sensor is also far in the back, preventing any accidental touch etc. How does mirrorless cameras deal with those two issues, while the sensor is exposed all the time and it is not far from the mounting ring?
> 
> Thanks!


Canon's new EOS R closes the shutter when changing lenses (from what I understand).


----------



## padam (Feb 11, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> I realize that. But video specs are more often overlooked with Canon. What the EOS R has is basic 4k with a bit stepped up output over HDMI. I dont see see 4k being eliminated altogether in 2019. So 4k at 30 should hold. Now whether it will also have 10bit c log etc is another story. That said, the inital rumored specs CR had included 4K and Clog. Nokishita simply had no video info. Bottom line, we still don't know anything for certain. I suspect CR will have more info within in the next 24 to 36 hours as the rumored release date is imminent


The sensor is probably not capable (otherwise the 6D Mark II could have got it already)

It was obviously mistaken for a different model (either the higher-end 'Pro' model or maybe an M5 Mark II, which would have a 24MP APS-C sensor with further cropped 4k and maybe it could get C-Log as an M-series flagship camera). This is first and foremost an entry-level FF stills camera.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 11, 2019)

padam said:


> The sensor is probably not capable (otherwise the 6D Mark II could have got it already)
> 
> It was obviously mistaken for a different model (either the higher-end 'Pro' model or maybe an M5 Mark II, which would have a 24MP APS-C sensor with further cropped 4k and maybe it could get C-Log as an M-series flagship camera). This is first and foremost an entry-level FF stills camera.



The 6DII sensor is totally capable of it. Canon merely excluded that capability when building the firmware. 4k is 8.8MP. This Sensor is 26MP. Only reason you cant do it is if you deliberately design other components not to, like buffer, recording media, CPU, etc...

The 2012 1DX could shoot 4K. They just only built the firmware for the 1DC a year later. Same Sensor. Same CPUs. Same everything. Just different firmware that allowed for 4K recording


----------



## padam (Feb 11, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> The 6DII sensor is totally capable of it. Canon merely excluded that capability when building the firmware. 4k is 8.8MP. This Sensor is 26MP. Only reason you cant do it is if you deliberately design other components not to, like buffer, recording media, CPU, etc...
> 
> The 2012 1DX could shoot 4K. They just only built the firmware for the 1DC a year later. Same Sensor. Same CPUs. Same everything. Just different firmware that allowed for 4K recording


Difficult to tell, even with Magic Lantern the original 6D can't record in 4k resolution for any given time, if the readout on the 6D Mark II sensor is not any faster, then it may not be capable either. The M50 had to have a new 24MP APS-C sensor to be able to record in 4k, which suggests that the old 24MP sensor in the M5 80D etc. really wasn't 4k capable.

Or we can also look at the 1080p quality between the 5D Mark IV / EOS R versus the 6D Mark II.
The latter is much softer, which suggests that the slower sensor is reading out less pixels for 1080p recording.
So I wonder, if we are going to see some improvement on this front at least, or we are back to this level of 1080p quality, because this is a feature that its potential users would definitely use.



And anyway, will they simply add a feature if the product is positioned at the same place (only being mirrorless) as opposed to the 1DC with its hefty premium? It also needs more care for heat management (more development costs, higher pricetag, smaller gap between models)
It actually makes much more sense for them to have as many reasons as possible to go for the EOS R, if one needs those extra features, it is a formula that has been working for them, they are still going strong with the migration to mirrorless, so there is no need to change it.

For me, the only unexpected positive surprise from them is that the order, which they come out with new R lenses is really making a lot of sense.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 11, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> *The 6DII sensor is totally capable of it. *Canon merely excluded that capability when building the firmware. *4k is 8.8MP. This Sensor is 26MP.* Only reason you cant do it is if you deliberately design other components not to, like buffer, recording media, CPU, etc...
> 
> The 2012 1DX could shoot 4K. They just only built the firmware for the 1DC a year later. Same Sensor. Same CPUs. Same everything. Just different firmware that allowed for 4K recording



Sensor readout speed. The 1DC/1DX only uses an 18 megapixel sensor, the readout didn't need to be as fast. Even with that, it still needed to crop for 4K. The 6D II sensor will be capable of 4K the same way the 5D Mark III is capable of shooting 3.5k, through sensor cropping.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 11, 2019)

crazyrunner33 said:


> Sensor readout speed. The 1DC/1DX only uses an 18 megapixel sensor, the readout didn't need to be as fast. Even with that, it still needed to crop for 4K. The 6D II sensor will be capable of 4K the same way the 5D Mark III is capable of shooting 3.5k, through sensor cropping.



Yeah but Canon isn't pixel binning on 4k. It's only using the center 8.8MP, hence the crop factor. It IS doing a full readout and binning with 1080p though as far as I recall. So the full sensor frame at 18 or 26 or 30 (in the case of the R) is being read in HD and then squashed back down to 2.2MP for HiDef. 

And the 6DII was released, what, 2 years ago? Not having 4k back then was still mostly passable. I dont think that happens again. Also, we are assuming the sensor is exactly the same as the 6DII. The pixel count and pitch may be fabricated the same, but the onboard ADC it's mounted to could be different/newer (i think the 6D2 also had onboard ADC) which would also affect the readout speeds of the sensor plate itself.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 11, 2019)

The issue is the recording speeds. If all we get is a single SDXC slot (like the EOS R) which I'd suspect we will with this lower end model, then it probably would find itself limited to 4K 30 like the R. The DX2 uses a CFAST2 slot that is mandatory to record 4k60. The only other way to get around this would be to allow 4K60 recorded only externally (kinda like the Sony and Panasonics did a couple years back... not sure if they still do)


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 11, 2019)

Furthermore, if we expect the next iteration of the EOS R to be a "high end" model, (a la, high resolution), then the likelihood of more attractive 4k goes down. Why? Because so far Canon hasn't seemed interested in binning 4K readouts. So What would a 50MP sensor with a dot for dot readout look like? Crop factor of 2 - 2.5x ??? YIKES! So the high end model will either have to have an all new readout readout design with pixel binning across a much larger frame area (if not all) or a 4K feature would be rendered too painful (so far as crop) to put up with and may not even be offered. I would suspect that Canon would more likely have pixel binning in that model, but then that ups the load even more when talking about 4K60... so we are in a holding pattern for now. That said... it's fun to explore the possibilities and debate them. That's why this site exists ;-)


----------



## prodorshak (Feb 11, 2019)

*Crummy Acronym session I*​
Wow, 600+ comments for an upcoming camera. Exciting. Reading the comments, I felt that comments, and thus the people commenting, can be classified into following groups (mix & match is of course there):


a. The new camera should *C*apture *A*esthetic *M*oments *E*rgonomically *R*eliably *A*ffordably (Balanced needs)
b. The new camera should Capture Anything with Modernized Electric-speed & Resolution Anytime (nerdy needs)
c. Every new camera is Ceaselessly Abject Megapixel-less Electrophotograph Radiator Algorithm (Pseudo-nerds)
d. Many cameras *C*apture *A*esthetic *M*oments *E*xigenting *R*etinal *A*wareness; the new camera should be *F*orwarding this *F*rontier (‘arty’ needs).
(extra choice f. Fail to purchase any new products at the moment)

What’s your vote? I vote d and f.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 11, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> The 6DII sensor is totally capable of it. Canon merely excluded that capability when building the firmware. 4k is 8.8MP. This Sensor is 26MP. Only reason you cant do it is if you deliberately design other components not to, like buffer, recording media, CPU, etc...
> 
> The 2012 1DX could shoot 4K. They just only built the firmware for the 1DC a year later. Same Sensor. Same CPUs. Same everything. Just different firmware that allowed for 4K recording


Or it could be overheating......


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 11, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> Or it could be overheating......



Certainly a possibility. We know Sony had trouble with that (or maybe it was Panasonic?). Even with the older fabrication process of the off-sensor ADC, Canon managed to do it with the DX just fine. Yes it was DUAL Digic 5 but the 6D2 had a Digic 7 which was much the same power as the dual 5. So I'm not sure heat was the problem. I think 2 years ago Canon made a choice to keep 4k out of it to offer greater distinction to upper models. I just dont think that same logic can fly in 2019 on 4K. And these is no question a Digic 8 can handle it. Again, the sensor may be derived from the 6D2, but Canon seemed adamant 2 years ago that going forward everything would be fabbed with onboard ADC. So same pixel count, new ADC design? That's what I'm guessing.


----------



## padam (Feb 11, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> $899 for 4k will full readout on a lil’ ol’ crop body compact. EOS RP has no excuse for leaving out 4k


Different companies with different marketing strategies, different sensor sizes, different features. This is utterly pointless.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 11, 2019)

masterpix said:


> 26MP is very close to the Nikon Z6, the only question is the pricing of this camera and it's video capabilities. And as to "back to 26MP sensor"..



THAT right there. The Z6 is about $1999. Basic 4K30 with a good 10bit output (Like the EOS R) but it also can accommodate a RAW out format in tandem with Atomos Ninja which can take that and record in ProRes Raw. Pretty cool. That's the sort of thing I think should be reasonable from Canon too. Maybe we dont see something quite so fancy on the $1400 Canon RP but who knows. Maybe something Canon could firmware into the R, but would they? Obviously it's all speculation, but again, we're all having fun here.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 11, 2019)

padam said:


> Different companies with different marketing strategies, different sensor sizes, different features. This is utterly pointless.



No doubt. But the Vloggers and small film guys out there are a good market. It's a new Sony camera that just popped up and I was simply offering an alternative thought on the "well it's $1500 and Canon wont..." Look, it's 4K. It's very commonplace now. I think Canon will almost certainly have it on the RP regardless of the 6D2 from 2 years past.

I'm a Canon guy. Always gonna be. Just looking at overall market trends vs just what Canon has done in the past. Even Canon's own brass made public comments that they felt they have moved a little too slow in the past and plan to change that. (That was said about 1-2 years ago now). So I'm speculating with some degree of blind faith here that we will see a very healthy offering overall in the EOS RP.


----------



## padam (Feb 11, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> No doubt. But the Vloggers and small film guys out there are a good market. It's a new Sony camera that just popped up and I was simply offering an alternative thought on the "well it's $1500 and Canon wont..." Look, it's 4K. It's very commonplace now. I think Canon will almost certainly have it on the RP regardless of the 6D2 from 2 years past.
> 
> I'm a Canon guy. Always gonna be. Just looking at overall market trends vs just what Canon has done in the past. Even Canon's own brass made public comments that they felt they have moved a little too slow in the past and plan to change that. (That was said about 1-2 years ago now). So I'm speculating with some degree of blind faith here that we will see a very healthy offering overall in the EOS RP.


Again, by the same token one could say to that the A6400 "it is unacceptable not to have a fully articulating screen that is not in the way of a microphone on a vlogging cam" or "all their other recent models have IBIS" or "the rolling shutter is still horrible" ("lack of APS-C lenses" "colors" "menus", etc. etc.)

I already got attacked ever since the first reliable information came into light about the same pixel count as the 6D II several months ago, and I said it will definitely be the basis (some people still don't believe it, maybe even after it comes out...) and then I thought it might have some form of basic 4k at least.
However, thinking more about it with the model strategy, and now coupled with the pricing, it seems more and more of a surprise if it came out with that included.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 11, 2019)

padam said:


> Again, by the same token one could say to that the A6400 "it is unacceptable not to have a fully articulating screen that is not in the way of a microphone on a vlogging cam" or "all their other recent models have IBIS" or "the rolling shutter is still horrible" ("lack of APS-C lenses" "colors" "menus", etc. etc.)
> 
> I already got attacked ever since the first reliable information came into light about the same pixel count as the 6D II and I said it will definitely be the basis (some people still don't believe it, maybe even after it comes out...) and then I thought it might have some form of basic 4k at least.
> However, thinking more about it with the model strategy, and now coupled with the pricing, it seems more and more of a surprise if it came out with that included.



And that may well be. Only 72 hours before we know for certain. But as I said before, if Canon is true to it's statement a couple years ago about going forward that everything will have on board ADC, that would at least suggest the same pixel count could still be a new sensor design from that standpoint and thus would throw out "it's just the same sensor, different body" debate. So we'll know soon enough.


----------



## padam (Feb 11, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> And that may well be. Only 72 hours before we know for certain. But as I said before, if Canon is true to it's statement a couple years ago about going forward that everything will have on board ADC, that would at least suggest the same pixel count could still be a new sensor design from that standpoint and thus would throw out "it's just the same sensor, different body" debate. So we'll know soon enough.


From their standpoint, it makes the EOS R less attractive as well as killing 6D II sales and value (yes, they are still very much wanting to sell this camera)
Apart from making new buyers happier, it doesn't look like a good marketing choice to me in either direction. Oh, and it costs more to produce as well as develop.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 11, 2019)

padam said:


> From their standpoint, it makes the EOS R less attractive as well as killing 6D II sales and value (yes, they are still very much wanting to sell this camera)
> Apart from making new buyers happier, it doesn't look like a good marketing choice to me in either direction. Oh, and it costs more to produce as well as develop.



I think no matter what, it cuts into at least some (if not significantly) 6D2 sales. Both cameras will sport a 26MP FF sensor (let's assume for now exactly the same one) for about the same price. If Canon simply releases a more compact 6D2 whose only real difference is that its mirrorless and accommodate some newer glass... eh. I don't see that doing much for Canon either. That's why I think it makes more sense to make something that does actually have something measurably more attractive for a broader audience. A total rehash of a 6D2 at the same price sitting along side of it just doesn't seem to make any sense to me.

So far as the EOS R, it's still higher res, more FPS, perhaps will have a better output for 4K at 10bit 422, etc... there's room there. I mean, the 6D2 at 26 MP is only 4 less than the 5D4 and both have sold well.


----------



## padam (Feb 11, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> So far as the EOS R, it's still higher res, more FPS, perhaps will have a better output for 4K at 10bit 422, etc... there's room there. I mean, the 6D2 at 26 MP is only 4 less than the 5D4 and both have sold well.


Gave it away at the end lol
As a very compact FF stills camera with some basic video features, this will sell well, too, even in 2019


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 11, 2019)

padam said:


> Gave it away at the end lol
> As a very compact FF stills camera with some basic video features, this will sell well, too, even in 2019



Absolutely, but just wondering with two cameras being almost identical (in our assumptions here) and at almost identical price points, they would certainly eat into each other. Not into EOS R or 5D4


----------



## digitalride (Feb 11, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> View attachment 183080
> $899 for 4k will full readout on a lil’ ol’ crop body compact. EOS RP has no excuse for leaving out 4k



What is this pixel binDing that adorama speaks of? I'm not sure what it is but it sounds bad, I want my pixels to be free to artistically express themselves!


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 11, 2019)

If I understand the forum logic correctly, we are expecting a lower cost camera than the R, but with higher specs.

“I don’t think so Tim”


----------



## Chavim (Feb 11, 2019)

Is the RP going to have any sort of weather sealing?


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 11, 2019)

Chavim said:


> Is the RP going to have any sort of weather sealing?



Yes. Provided you wrap it in a ziploc bag before going out in the rain


----------



## dak723 (Feb 11, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> And that may well be. Only 72 hours before we know for certain. But as I said before, if Canon is true to it's statement a couple years ago about going forward that everything will have on board ADC, that would at least suggest the same pixel count could still be a new sensor design from that standpoint and thus would throw out "it's just the same sensor, different body" debate. So we'll know soon enough.



Don't forget that Canon made the statement that going forward everything will have on board ADC before the 6D II was announced. Now, maybe it was already too far along in the production pipeline, but if Canon is going for a really low price, I wouldn't be surprised if it is not on board ADC.

But I will probably buy one anyway, as the 6D I used to own had plenty enough DR for all my daytime shooting needs.


----------



## Chavim (Feb 11, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> Yes. Provided you wrap it in a ziploc bag before going out in the rain


Ha..... Ha..... Ha..... So funny


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 12, 2019)

dak723 said:


> Don't forget that Canon made the statement that going forward everything will have on board ADC before the 6D II was announced. Now, maybe it was already too far along in the production pipeline, but if Canon is going for a really low price, I wouldn't be surprised if it is not on board ADC.
> 
> But I will probably buy one anyway, as the 6D I used to own had plenty enough DR for all my daytime shooting needs.



Correct. But now that the fabrication system is firmly IN place (whereas it really wasn't as the 6D2 was being developed) it seems more likely now. But as I said I don't know the logistics of taking that same 6D2 wafer with 26MP and put it through the new process with onboard ADC. Someone with more technical knowledge will have to chime in.


----------



## Pape (Feb 12, 2019)

i bet sony would crop their 4k too if they would have as good lenses as R 
When downscaled less quality lenses do good 4k too.
Canon is working speedboosters so can give wider view for R 4k too


----------



## padam (Feb 13, 2019)

More pictures of the EOS RP have been added here:
https://www.nokishita-camera.com/2019/02/eos-rp.html







Looks like the headphone jack hasn't been left out.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 13, 2019)

Why does it display only R except for the top - seems odd?

Jack


----------



## fox40phil (Feb 13, 2019)

"Dual Sensing IS" for video only again right? because of the crop as anti shaking feature^^? + the IS from lenses. :/ :/
Look at the small battery grip?!


----------



## AlP (Feb 13, 2019)

Nokishita provides some additional info (at this stage likely correct)

- 100% x 88% AF coverage (same as EOS R)
- 4779 selectable AF points
- AF sensitivity down to -5 EV (-6 EV for the EOS R)
- "pupil detect and AF" with servo AF
- 2.36 M Dots EVF
- 4K 24p/25p
- Built-in focus bracketing


----------



## Viggo (Feb 13, 2019)

Seems confirmed that eye af is in Servo, I say that confirms it will be added to the R as well


----------



## genriquez (Feb 13, 2019)

fox40phil said:


> Look at the small battery grip?!



It's a well engineered extension grip (sarcasm). The real question is, why is there a picture of a SD card or battery on it?


----------



## 1Zach1 (Feb 13, 2019)

Ugh, I hope I’m wrong but that EVF is disappointing. Really that might be the only thing that stops me from buying it right off the bat.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 13, 2019)

genriquez said:


> It's a well engineered extension grip (sarcasm). The real question is, why is there a picture of a SD card or battery on it?



because it replaces the battery door from the camera. so that's the inside of the door you are looking at.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 13, 2019)

1Zach1 said:


> Ugh, I hope I’m wrong but that EVF is disappointing. Really that might be the only thing that stops me from buying it right off the bat.



not sure why you'd think that a entry level camera would have as good of an EVF as the big boys, but what's so dissappointing about 2.36mdot? that's the same specs as the sony's.


----------



## 1Zach1 (Feb 13, 2019)

rrcphoto said:


> not sure why you'd think that a entry level camera would have as good of an EVF as the big boys, but what's so dissappointing about 2.36mdot? that's the same specs as the sony's.



I really have little first hand expirence with EVFs, just working with the M50 and R side by side. If it’s the same EVF as the M50 than it’s a disappointment to me, “entry level” or not, on a $1300-1600 camera.

Edit: And I am happy to be wrong here, if this is just an issue in my head and works out fine, then even better.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 13, 2019)

Well we got 4k24 which is fine I suppose. Now just wAiting to hear what sort of output over hdmi it will have.


----------



## amorse (Feb 13, 2019)

Focus bracketing? That I can certainly get behind! I wonder if it will try to stitch in camera or provide multiple images for stitching with third party software? I wonder if it can show you the areas of the image it thinks are in/out of focus? I wonder how much of this will be added to the R in the upcoming firmware update?

Now I'm a bit more excited - I really didn't expect to see focus bracketing included.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 13, 2019)

1Zach1 said:


> I really have little first hand expirence with EVFs, just working with the M50 and R side by side. If it’s the same EVF as the M50 than it’s a disappointment to me, “entry level” or not, on a $1300-1600 camera.
> 
> Edit: And I am happy to be wrong here, if this is just an issue in my head and works out fine, then even better.



you are confusing magnification (which the M50 has little of). The EVF spec has little bearing on this. just because it's the same dots doesn't mean it's any less good than the Sony's as an example. up to this year the best EVF's only had 2.36Mdots.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 13, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> Well we got 4k24 which is fine I suppose. Now just wAiting to hear what sort of output over hdmi it will have.



I'd suggest thinking consumer specs - which you I guess weren't. what did you expect? a high end video machine handling broadcast capable bitrates and bit depth?


----------



## 1Zach1 (Feb 13, 2019)

rrcphoto said:


> you are confusing magnification (which the M50 has little of). The EVF spec has little bearing on this. just because it's the same dots doesn't mean it's any less good than the Sony's as an example. up to this year the best EVF's only had 2.36Mdots.


Cool, thanks for the education.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 13, 2019)

1Zach1 said:


> Cool, thanks for the education.



to be fair, i'm waiting to see what magnification this will have. hopefully it uses the same OPTICS as the R, just a cheaper EVF panel.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 13, 2019)

Need to see some info on this sensor too... is a 6D2 sensor? Or is it a new version? Hmmmm....


----------



## Viggo (Feb 13, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> Need to see some info on this sensor too... is a 6D2 sensor? Or is it a new version? Hmmmm....


CanonWatch wrote it’s definitely not the same sensor, only the same res. But I don’t know how much I believe that..


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 13, 2019)

rrcphoto said:


> I'd suggest thinking consumer specs - which you I guess weren't. what did you expect? a high end video machine handling broadcast capable bitrates and bit depth?



As per several of my earlier posts on the topic, something relatively similar to the EOS R as the EOS R specs were very basic at 4k30. I’d previously stated that while 10 bit 422 clog out over hdmi (on the EOS R) would be nice, i had lesser faith it would make it to the RP. (Maybe just Clog). I’d prefer the RP if only for the lesser crop factor but the EOS R will do as well.

Many times, I’d like something smaller than my 1DX2 to shoot video as Ive been doing more
Of that lately. Beautiful video from it, but it is bulkly to balanace on a gimbal (Ronin M) and cant send 4k out. 

I usually shoot in 4k24 anyway (interviews and standard b roll stuff) so that works great for me as long as i get it out the HDMi port


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 13, 2019)

Viggo said:


> CanonWatch wrote it’s definitely not the same sensor, only the same res. But I don’t know how much I believe that..



Thats what I thought as well. If memory serves the 6D2 was built on the older fab process where the ADC is off chip. My theory was this was the same size sensor but built on the new process with the ADC onboard. Which would effectively be a whole new sensor with a totally different pedformance


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 13, 2019)

Viggo said:


> CanonWatch wrote it’s definitely not the same sensor, only the same res. But I don’t know how much I believe that..



they are guessing.

https://www.canonnews.com/canon-eos-rp-to-have-4k-video


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 13, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> Thats what I thought as well. If memory serves the 6D2 was built on the older fab process



it's actually not.


this is 100% the new fabrication process - you can tell by the connectors surrounding the image chip.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 13, 2019)

The sensor is the last important variable for me: Because I need some DR I need a sensor which is comparable to 200D or M50. But I am confident that Canon has listened to the DR fights on different rumors and the sensor will have some robust 13.5+ stops of DR. Maybe they have reused all the 6D ii photosite / filter / microlens equipment and designs but improved the signal processing backend of the sensor meaning on chip ADC. So ...

Maybe one of the most interesting camera releases in the last 10 years: A FF camera fully compatible with my ~8 mid level EF-S lenses. If the crop factor for 4k is really 1.6 ... great: I have developed some feeling for APS-C-focal lengths which can be reused.
Head phone out isn't that important because I intend to record in NOS stereo technique with phantom powered microphones so I bought an external recorder. With LinearPCM which it hopefully has I can feed the audio signal from the recorder directly into the camera and use it without any synchronization: makes my future steps into video much easier.

The extension plate is a funny thing - reminds me on concrete (or steel) plates they built into lighter SUVs to bring its mass above 2.8 tonnes - to save taxes


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 13, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> The sensor is the last important variable for me: Because I need some DR I need a sensor which is comparable to 200D or M50. But I am confident that Canon has listened to the DR fights on different rumors and the sensor will have some robust 13.5+ stops of DR.



yeah don't be counting on it.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 13, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> As per several of my earlier posts on the topic, something relatively similar to the EOS R as the EOS R specs were very basic at 4k30. I’d previously stated that while 10 bit 422 clog out over hdmi (on the EOS R) would be nice, i had lesser faith it would make it to the RP. (Maybe just Clog). I’d prefer the RP if only for the lesser crop factor but the EOS R will do as well.
> 
> Many times, I’d like something smaller than my 1DX2 to shoot video as Ive been doing more
> Of that lately. Beautiful video from it, but it is bulkly to balanace on a gimbal (Ronin M) and cant send 4k out.
> ...



I'd be fine if the HDMI output wasn't 10 bit, but would actually be surprised if it's limited to 8bit. The HDMI hardware being used is now becoming pretty standard. 

The crop will be around halfway in between the crop of the EOS R and your 1DX Mark II.


----------



## -pekr- (Feb 13, 2019)

Does it have sensor protection too, like EOS R, when the lens is not connected to the body?


----------



## padam (Feb 13, 2019)

Well the Japanese starting price (body only) is actually 173,000 yen according to Nokishita Camera (but it will go down once it is in stock)

That's really not far off the EOS R, which started at 237,000 yen (but now it is around 190,000 yen)

This would suggest a price drop is definitely coming on the EOS R to bring them closer, the RP is priced more aggressively in international markets from the get-go.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 13, 2019)

crazyrunner33 said:


> I'd be fine if the HDMI output wasn't 10 bit, but would actually be surprised if it's limited to 8bit. The HDMI hardware being used is now becoming pretty standard.
> 
> The crop will be around halfway in between the crop of the EOS R and your 1DX Mark II.



That’s what Id expect. 8bit output instead
Of 10. Maybe Clog. Maybe not. Log Gamma seems so commonplace now in these $1500-$2000 milcs, so id love to see it here too. And yes the crop should be a bit closer to 1.5 vs 1.75 while my DX2 is a very easy 1.3. 

I keep waiting to see Canon design a video focused MILC (a better Sony A7s). 12MP full frame 4k readout. Clog. 10bit 422 out (like Eos R). Id gladly cough up $3k for that


----------



## Kit. (Feb 13, 2019)

-pekr- said:


> Does it have sensor protection too, like EOS R, when the lens is not connected to the body?


I don't see why not.


----------



## Stuart (Feb 13, 2019)

Nice one Canon.


----------



## efmshark (Feb 13, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Yeah, that really looks like a step back to me. SNR of 26.2 dB for the 6D mark II compared to 26.2 dB for the 6D at ISO 3200. SNR of 29.1 dB for the 6D Mark II compared to 29.2 dB for the 6D at ISO 1600. I guess you got me there!
> View attachment 183060



Introducing a camera that has worse SNR at high ISO compared to a model that was released five years prior is indeed a step back. And this while competitors were making significant improvements in this area year after year. And questionable dynamic range at base ISO while competitors are breaking DR records with each new full frame sensor they release.

Now if Canon chooses to use the exact same 6D mk ii sensor on RP, that would be a "jump" back. 

Of course, Canon can still put their marketing muscle behind this product and make it successful with attractive pricing, promotions and product placement throughout the retail channel. Once they have significant market share in the full frame mirrorless market and a respectable arsenal of RF lenses, they can bring out RF mount cameras with better sensors and features and drive the upgrade cycle.


----------



## Tanguy (Feb 13, 2019)

Anxious to see the specification for EOS M2


----------



## jkirch76 (Feb 13, 2019)

If the EOR RP is really comming with these updated specs, then Canon has to add a lot in their next Firmware update to the EOS R.
Otherwise it will just rest in peace on the shelves. So many features missing with the same Processor and just a larger sensor.
Disappointing.


----------



## Jdbuzz (Feb 13, 2019)

genriquez said:


> It's a well engineered extension grip (sarcasm). The real question is, why is there a picture of a SD card or battery on it?


Sd card will be inside the battery door like on the SL2 and other compact camera bodies. The grip extension is just for your pinky and to help with the larger rf lenses when mounted. I'm guessing


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 14, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> Foveon: Foveon suffers from the fact that different wavelengths travel up to different depths into a silicon block. The deepest layer gets strongly attenuated light in that wavelength region. Hence you have different QEs for different colors which counteracts the great principle of evaluating three different wavelength (or color) channels.
> 
> CFA issues: CFA must NOT be changed to go from 100MP bayer image reconstrugtion to pixel binning of four R-G-G-B pixel quadruplets. NOT CHANGING THE CFA is the solution to sample ALL COLOR CHANNELS for ONE FINAL IMAGE PIXEL. Trying to do that in ASCII graphics (fixed font not worked, so used dots as spacers):
> 
> ...



Except the actual filter on the Bayer arrays of most cameras are nowhere close to the actual "red" at 640nm, the actual "green" at 530nm, and the actual "blue" at 480nm that our RGB color reproduction systems use. So all of the information from four "RGGB" pixels still has to be translated to actual "RGB" by interpolating the differences in response between the three filters that are actually centered on a slightly violet shade of "blue" at about 455nm, a slightly yellow shade of "green" at about 540nm, and, most significantly, a slightly orange shade of yellow at about 590-600nm that we call "red".




The response of our retinas is similar:




Our "S" cones ("s" is for short wavelength, not 'small') have peak sensitivity at about 445nm and not 460nm "blue", our "M" cones ('medium wavelength') have peak sensitivity at about 540nm, not 530nm "green", and our "L" cones ('long wavelength', not 'Large') are most sensitive at about 565nm which is a slightly green shade of "yellow" and nowhere close to 640nm "red."


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 14, 2019)

-pekr- said:


> 60D was a hybrid I hate to this date. Canon misstepped with this one. To that date, I considered xxD being a (semi)professinal line. 70D was a big improvement, a nice and consistent camera and imo it is not true, that it did not provide a sensor performance update. I remember something like 1/3 of stop at least, as well as 70D was the first camera ever, providing DPAF, so by all means, it as a new sensor.



Yeah, the 7D was the true successor to the 50d in many ways. Then Canon got caught in a product refresh cycle in which the 70D, released in 2013, outperformed 2009's 7D in a few ways, then the 7D Mark II leapfrogged the 70D in 2014 before the 80D did the same thing in some respects in 2016.

Of course, those just who have to have the absolute best of everything within the Canon APS-C ecosystem wound up buying a 7D in 2009, then a 70D in early 2013, then a 7D Mark II in late 2014, and an 80D in early 2016. Maybe that was Canon's strategy for maximizing sales all along?

I went 50D → 7D → 7D Mark II in terms of APS-C bodies. I wasn't really planning to ever buy another APS-C body when the 7D Mark II introduced the "flicker reduction" feature that revolutionized shooting sports under flickering lights. I was also extremely frustrated with the shot-to-shot inconsistency of the 7D's AF system and had started using the 70-200/2.8 on a 5D Mark III and just cropping more when needed. With the better AF consistency and flicker reduction, the upgrade from the 7D to the 7D Mark II was worth the cost for me. The much higher "keeper" rate and much easier workflow associated with having almost all frames consistently the same color and brightness not only from one side of the frame to the other, but from shot-to-shot as well, has paid for itself several times by now. Plus the shutter firing at the peak of stadium lights' cycle gives about a half stop faster Tv or lower ISO than when shooting manually without it. I went from ISO 3200, f/2.8, 1/640 to ISO 3200, f/2.8, 1/800-1/1000 in most of the high school football stadiums where I shoot.

As to the 60D → 70D → 80D sensor evolution, there's a LOT more improvement between the 70D and 80D than the 60D to 70D as far as the IQ of still images is concerned. DPAF was revolutionary for video work by those who couldn't (or did not want to) use manual focus when shooting video with a DSLR, but it did nothing to improve still image quality. The difference in the microlenses may have actually hurt a bit, which might have been overcome by advances elsewhere in the design and implementation. It was definitely a newer, slightly higher resolution sensor with DPAF, but the performance for full resolution stills was not noticeably improved over the 60D.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 14, 2019)

RayH said:


> More DR IS more realistic
> More colors in between



No, that is more bit depth. More DR is more brightness levels at the edges.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 14, 2019)

efmshark said:


> Introducing a camera that has worse SNR at high ISO compared to a model that was released five years prior is indeed a step back. And this while competitors were making significant improvements in this area year after year. And questionable dynamic range at base ISO while competitors are breaking DR records with each new full frame sensor they release.
> 
> Now if Canon chooses to use the exact same 6D mk ii sensor on RP, that would be a "jump" back.
> 
> Of course, Canon can still put their marketing muscle behind this product and make it successful with attractive pricing, promotions and product placement throughout the retail channel. Once they have significant market share in the full frame mirrorless market and a respectable arsenal of RF lenses, they can bring out RF mount cameras with better sensors and features and drive the upgrade cycle.



How is 26.2 dB *worse* than 26.2db?


----------



## ykn123 (Feb 14, 2019)

-pekr- said:


> Does it have sensor protection too, like EOS R, when the lens is not connected to the body?


no - and i really dont understand this. Are beginners and enthusiasts not hit by sensor dust ? Would they not identify large spots on their printed familiy images ? I think it is one of the innovations of the R that it solve's the dust issue much better than any other mirrorless - and they removed it immediately from the second camera of the R family. Just don't get it. (but included focus bracketing which i would like to have in my R)


----------



## Viggo (Feb 14, 2019)

ykn123 said:


> no - and i really dont understand this. Are beginners and enthusiasts not hit by sensor dust ? Would they not identify large spots on their printed familiy images ? I think it is one of the innovations of the R that it solve's the dust issue much better than any other mirrorless - and they removed it immediately from the second camera of the R family. Just don't get it. (but included focus bracketing which i would like to have in my R)


Jared seem to think it was because noobs tend to touch the sensor and it’s better to not have the shutter to tempt people poking in there ...


----------



## padam (Feb 14, 2019)

ykn123 said:


> no - and i really dont understand this. Are beginners and enthusiasts not hit by sensor dust ? Would they not identify large spots on their printed familiy images ? I think it is one of the innovations of the R that it solve's the dust issue much better than any other mirrorless - and they removed it immediately from the second camera of the R family. Just don't get it. (but included focus bracketing which i would like to have in my R)


Well I do, it is literally the price to pay for the lower price, simple differentiation that has always been a tool that they've used for many years. People will complain, but I really don't think they will change anything about the product other than potentially refining features that it came with, like eye-AF and stuff.

Focus stacking is another feature they could add with a much later firmware to the EOS R (but I am not sure it can't be done more efficiently manually, it is just more convenient).


----------



## -pekr- (Feb 14, 2019)

padam said:


> Well I do, it is literally the price to pay for the lower price, simple differentiation that has always been a tool that they've used for many years. People will complain, but I really don't think they will change anything about the product other than potentially refining features that it came with, like eye-AF and stuff.
> 
> Focus stacking is another feature they could add with a much later firmware to the EOS R (but I am not sure it can't be done more efficiently manually, it is just more convenient).



There are certain features imo, which help to define a brand. In the case of Canon, it is DPAF and tilty-flippy. It could be this nice little feature, which could become another one. Some marketing honcho just apparently decided to think otherwise.


----------



## padam (Feb 14, 2019)

-pekr- said:


> There are certain features imo, which help to define a brand. In the case of Canon, it is DPAF and tilty-flippy. It could be this nice little feature, which could become another one. Some marketing honcho just apparently decided to think otherwise.


If the M50 is selling well with these same features, then I don't see why they wouldn't do the same thing here in exchange for a lower pricetag. To be honest, the 4k rolling shutter is an even bigger problem, so not many people will buy it for the 4k video anyway.


----------



## Mark D5 TEAM II (Feb 14, 2019)

Lovely gold body limited ed. 5000 units only...


----------



## -pekr- (Feb 14, 2019)

M6 in a disguise


----------



## RedPixels (Feb 14, 2019)

Viggo said:


> Jared seem to think it was because noobs tend to touch the sensor and it’s better to not have the shutter to tempt people poking in there ...


They could’ve easily made it a feature that was disabled by default.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 14, 2019)

Today, like in some socialist countries, everyone receives the bare necessities for free. I wonder if folk receiving one of these for free would still complain about the "value"?

Jack


----------



## ykn123 (Feb 14, 2019)

padam said:


> Well I do, it is literally the price to pay for the lower price, simple differentiation that has always been a tool that they've used for many years. People will complain, but I really don't think they will change anything about the product other than potentially refining features that it came with, like eye-AF and stuff.
> 
> Focus stacking is another feature they could add with a much later firmware to the EOS R (but I am not sure it can't be done more efficiently manually, it is just more convenient).


well i'm trying to say that the increased amount of dust on mirrorless camera's sensors is a problem and Canon had a nice idea how to solve that to some extend. It really is something special compared to the competition. The camera lacks a lot of things not only because it's entry level but because Canon does not have it (yet) - removing this clever mechanism to protect the sensor is in my eyes a bad decision. I'm not wondering that the RP does not have a lot of new things compared to the R and it's ok to reduce the shutter speed and the x - sync and dont provide a real battery grip and and ... but removing the sensor protection is simply a bad idea in my eyes. By the way, (side note) i've installed firmware 1.1 on my R and love the silent shutter in contiues shooting mode.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 15, 2019)

Just noticed this: "Single Point Spot AF is a newly included feature that the manufacturer believes is a first – not just in terms of its own mirrorless series, but anyone’s." That's a very nice feature for bird photography when you need to pinpoint a small one in a difficult background.


----------



## bluediablo (Feb 15, 2019)

ykn123 said:


> well i'm trying to say that the increased amount of dust on mirrorless camera's sensors is a problem and Canon had a nice idea how to solve that to some extend. It really is something special compared to the competition. The camera lacks a lot of things not only because it's entry level but because Canon does not have it (yet) - removing this clever mechanism to protect the sensor is in my eyes a bad decision. I'm not wondering that the RP does not have a lot of new things compared to the R and it's ok to reduce the shutter speed and the x - sync and dont provide a real battery grip and and ... but removing the sensor protection is simply a bad idea in my eyes. By the way, (side note) i've installed firmware 1.1 on my R and love the silent shutter in contiues shooting mode.



I've mixed feelings on the design of the shutter dropping to protect the sensor it exchanges one vulnerability for another. I really do like the concept but when I see that shutter exposed it just makes me feel a little uneasy it seems so delicate.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Feb 18, 2019)

efmshark said:


> Introducing a camera that has worse SNR at high ISO compared to a model that was released five years prior is indeed a step back. And this while competitors were making significant improvements in this area year after year. And questionable dynamic range at base ISO while competitors are breaking DR records with each new full frame sensor they release.
> 
> Now if Canon chooses to use the exact same 6D mk ii sensor on RP, that would be a "jump" back.
> 
> Of course, Canon can still put their marketing muscle behind this product and make it successful with attractive pricing, promotions and product placement throughout the retail channel. Once they have significant market share in the full frame mirror-less market and a respectable arsenal of RF lenses, they can bring out RF mount cameras with better sensors and features and drive the upgrade cycle.



I'm sure that for 99.9% of this camera's intended audience / purchasing market....the slightly inferior SNR isn't an issue. The only people who seem to worry about things like this are Sony / Nikon trolls who seem to think it's the only measurement that matters. 

For most users this camera will outperform 99% of it's users.


----------



## Mikehit (Feb 19, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I'm sure that for 99.9% of this camera's intended audience / purchasing market....the slightly inferior SNR isn't an issue. The only people who seem to worry about things like this are Sony / Nikon trolls who seem to think it's the only measurement that matters.
> 
> For most users this camera will outperform 99% of it's users.



Yep. I am looking on the RP as someone who has a FF rig wanting a small second camera giving access to native Canon lenses without having to buy into the M series. They don;t necessarily want the best possible camera, simply a smaller FF body to carry around in a smaller bag.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 25, 2019)

bluediablo said:


> I've mixed feelings on the design of the shutter dropping to protect the sensor it exchanges one vulnerability for another. I really do like the concept but when I see that shutter exposed it just makes me feel a little uneasy it seems so delicate.


My 24-70 would live on it, so not a problem for me. I've not experienced dust problems on my Olympus, yet. Sensors are easy enough to clean though.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 25, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I'm sure that for 99.9% of this camera's intended audience / purchasing market....the slightly inferior SNR isn't an issue. The only people who seem to worry about things like this are Sony / Nikon trolls who seem to think it's the only measurement that matters.
> 
> For most users this camera will outperform 99% of it's users.


Exactly. Fine camera for the money in my opinion. If a camera had everything everyone wants... nobody could afford it. The skill of the person using a tool matters more than miniscule spec sheet differences like this.


----------



## RayH (Feb 26, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> No, that is more bit depth. More DR is more brightness levels at the edges.


Yes, and that extend the gradient colors.


----------



## awair (Mar 10, 2019)

My 2c, given only 48 hours with the camera.

It's a great purchase for the money: full frame, native EF lenses and smaller than my SL1, which is now "officially" retired!

The good: as above; Accurate AF; EVF is not noticeably 'E', until... see below

The bad: EVF - not bright enough outdoors (no option to change); not the blackout, but the 'freeze frame' & preview, while trying to compose next shot; EVF too slow to activate, when bringing camera to eye.
AF - no idea what 'auto' is trying to lock on; 'spot' is fiddly to change (miss the joystick)

Things to get used to: buttons a little close together, for recalling customised settings (AF on, set to AF OFF; *, set to centre the focus point); don't leave in 'M' mode - no image visible until the exposure settings are close!


----------

