# Interview: Canon execs talk EOS RP with Imaging Resource



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 14, 2019)

> The Canon EOS RP was officially announced yesterday (or today for some folks) and has received a pretty positive reception. Canonites are a passionate bunch and I’ve been very impressed with the reception that EOS RP has received.
> Imaging Resource had a chance to sit down with Canon execs to talk all things Canon EOS RP.
> Some questions we think a lot of you want answers to?
> The 26.2mp sensor is the exact same sensors that appeared in the EOS 6D Mark II. Some adjustments to the microlenses were needed for light angles and things like that, but everything else is identical. The DIGIC 8 processor in the EOS RP is the exact same as any other DIGIC 8 processor as well.
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Feb 14, 2019)

It's interesting how they mention the time and development that goes into releasing a camera that's truly on a professional level. Sounds like they're not quite there yet, and they know and admit that. It's comforting to know based on this that they never truly intended the EOS R to be taken as a professional level camera, because I don't feel that it is. It's good, but there's way too much left to be desired to consider it a professional camera, IMO.


----------



## jeremypark (Feb 14, 2019)

Would be nice to see a professional level camera incorporating some of these features. Unfortunately this new system is not up to pro use. Trialing the R system recently the body felt cheap and the EV very contrasty and harsh to look through. I couldn't use it for commissioned shoots. I am really wanting more focus ones that this system offers in a pro level body.


----------



## elephant_man (Feb 14, 2019)

They may not be ready with a Pro version of the R, but does that mean you stop the release of "pro" version upgrades of your other cameras (i.e. the 5Ds and 5DsR) in this quest for the Holy Grail R?


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 14, 2019)

I have long been convinced that Canon hasn’t been able to make the pro body that so many ask for, and I for one am glad they take their time to do it right.

My biggest problem with the R is the EVF. In many situations the EVF is very nice, such as in low light and “normal” light, but I don’t like it in strong and contrasting light - and I don’t think any EVF made to date would satisfy me in such conditions. I used the R in snow and sunlight last weekend, and the viewfinder was too dark and unable to show the scene in a compelling way. I hated using it, and I will stick to my DSLRs for use in daylight for the foreseeable future. Personally I have hard to see when an EVF will become so good that it would be preferred over an OVF for shooting an event such as alpine skiing, and ultimately if a camera is bad to use in such conditions I believe many pros would steer away from it.


----------



## RedPixels (Feb 14, 2019)

So [email protected] was chosen due to heat concerns and would possibly require a larger body which went against the design philosophy. Can anyone confirm that higher FPS would generate that much more heat?


----------



## jjesp (Feb 14, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> I have long been convinced that Canon hasn’t been able to make the pro body that so many ask for, and I for one am glad they take their time to do it right.
> 
> My biggest problem with the R is the EVF. In many situations the EVF is very nice, such as in low light and “normal” light, but I don’t like it in strong and contrasting light - and I don’t think any EVF made to date would satisfy me in such conditions. I used the R in snow and sunlight last weekend, and the viewfinder was too dark and unable to show the scene in a compelling way. I hated using it, and I will stick to my DSLRs for use in daylight for the foreseeable future. Personally I have hard to see when an EVF will become so good that it would be preferred over an OVF for shooting an event such as alpine skiing, and ultimately if a camera is bad to use in such conditions I believe many pros would steer away from it.



I have the same problem with the Fujis... But actually I believe that the problem is the eyecup and not the viewfinder itself. But maybe an EVF with more power would help in the future.. The worst thing about EVF is, when you get used to it - you really miss it when going back to dslr's. At least I do.


----------



## lenspacker (Feb 14, 2019)

seems to be a nice cam for beginners and newcomer of the fullformat - - but it`s not my cam - so I`m still waiting for a pro level one - - until this I have my DSLR`s - and at the moment there a no situation in which I will miss an low-level EOS R....


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 15, 2019)

elephant_man said:


> They may not be ready with a Pro version of the R, but does that mean you stop the release of "pro" version upgrades of your other cameras (i.e. the 5Ds and 5DsR) in this quest for the Holy Grail R?



The thing is, we aren't really in store for a 5D4 refresh or a 1DX2 refresh. It's not been enough time. So it's hard to interpret Canon sitting around not giving us a new pro DSLR, as that's sort of expected anyhow.

I think that the thing to watch is the high-resolution camera. You *could* come out with a 5DSr refresh in RF or in EF. That'll be the telling move. They could come out in RF because it doesn't need to be high frame rate, and that's really where they're most unprepared for the general pro versions. If it were 2 fps at 60mp, added all the new tech whizbangs that have accrued since and improve sensor performance with on-chip ADC, it would be an OK refresh for Canon. Then again, they could do that as a DSLR no sweat. This is the test as to their intent. If they go RF with it, I don't see them worrying much about the other DSLRs in the future. If they use EF, I suspect we'll see a 5 and 1 series refresh in a couple years as mirror slappers.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 15, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> I have long been convinced that Canon hasn’t been able to make the pro body that so many ask for, and I for one am glad they take their time to do it right.
> 
> My biggest problem with the R is the EVF. In many situations the EVF is very nice, such as in low light and “normal” light, but I don’t like it in strong and contrasting light - and I don’t think any EVF made to date would satisfy me in such conditions. I used the R in snow and sunlight last weekend, and the viewfinder was too dark and unable to show the scene in a compelling way. I hated using it, and I will stick to my DSLRs for use in daylight for the foreseeable future. Personally I have hard to see when an EVF will become so good that it would be preferred over an OVF for shooting an event such as alpine skiing, and ultimately if a camera is bad to use in such conditions I believe many pros would steer away from it.



Panasonic S1 has industry highest EVF 5.8 million dot EVF. 

I am fine with Canon EOS R EVF 3.69 but it is missing too many pro features


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 15, 2019)

I will say that under certain lighting conditions, the EVF has horrible contrasty rendering. Usually, its fine, but Its also neem really ugly. I hope a firmare upgrade can improve it.


----------



## Sharlin (Feb 15, 2019)

RedPixels said:


> So [email protected] was chosen due to heat concerns and would possibly require a larger body which went against the design philosophy. Can anyone confirm that higher FPS would generate that much more heat?



Well, only Canon engineers could _confirm_ that. But 30fps means 25% higher throughput than 24fps, which is a very nontrivial increase. If other design decisions constrain your thermal budget, well, there you have it. Canon certainly does not want random shutdowns caused by overheating à la Sony.


----------



## Ira Parker (Feb 15, 2019)

The problem for Canon is that other companies have figured out the pro mirrorless world _well enough_ to cause new photographers, considering their first system investment, to forgo Canon as an option. And what makes this launch of the R series particularly confusing, is that while Canon now says that it has not quite figured out the pro body, it is selling, and announced the sale, of a lot of pro lenses. Who is buying the R or RP and putting $2000 glass on these cameras?


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Feb 15, 2019)

Ira Parker said:


> The problem for Canon is that other companies have figured out the pro mirrorless world _well enough_ to cause new photographers, considering their first system investment, to forgo Canon as an option. And what makes this launch of the R series particularly confusing, is that while Canon now says that it has not quite figured out the pro body, it is selling, and announced the sale, of a lot of pro lenses. Who is buying the R or RP and putting $2000 glass on these cameras?



Lenses make the system, not the camera. Canon wants a good library of glass ready for professionals to jump in when they have a good pro body. If I needed to buy a new body today, I would probably buy an R. I loaned one from CPS and while it’s not perfect, it’s a pretty good camera. I’ll probably pick up an RP as a backup/walk around camera (and sell my M50) and use my 1DX2 for the heavy lifting.


----------



## Ira Parker (Feb 15, 2019)

I just do not see the appeal of the R. I had one on loan for a month and really tried to like it as a light weight companion to my 5D Mark IV. I returned the R, bought a Sony A7RIII as my mirrorless lightweight, along with a Sigma MC11 adapter, to use my Canon glass when I want the mirrorless body.

I truly found nothing redeeming in the R. It lacks every feature I want in a good mirrorless camera, from IBIS to useful 4K video features and a joystick for my focus points. How about the simple ability to turn off the back screen when I don't need it. I could perhaps forgive the lack of 2 card slots, if, like Nikon, they put a next generation card in the camera. They did none of this. It's low light performance was terrible compared not only to the great low light performance of the Sony 7 RIII, but even my 5D Mark IV.

I scratch my head that as a 1DX2 user, you would truly choose the R if you needed to buy a replacement body today.


----------



## home_slice (Feb 15, 2019)

Ira Parker said:


> The problem for Canon is that other companies have figured out the pro mirrorless world _well enough_ to cause new photographers, considering their first system investment, to forgo Canon as an option. And what makes this launch of the R series particularly confusing, is that while Canon now says that it has not quite figured out the pro body, it is selling, and announced the sale, of a lot of pro lenses. Who is buying the R or RP and putting $2000 glass on these cameras?



That's what bothers me so much. Why would they make these pro lenses if there's no decent body to put them on? I've been waiting for an updated 50mm 1.2 (one that autofocuses faster, with less chromatic aberrations and a smoother focus ring...) and now they finally make one but it's for a prosumer body?!?


----------



## Ira Parker (Feb 15, 2019)

home_slice said:


> That's what bothers me so much. Why would they make these pro lenses if there's no decent body to put them on? I've been waiting for an updated 50mm 1.2 (one that autofocuses faster, with less chromatic aberrations and a smoother focus ring...) and now they finally make one but it's for a prosumer body?!?


Exactly. My only disagreement is that it is really loose to call the R "prosumer." I don't see any aspect of the pro in it. Like you, I use the heck out of my 50mm 1.2 and have been waiting for an upgrade. And now I'm told put it on an R "consumer" body or wait a couple of years until we figure out how to build a pro mirrorless. I don't get it.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 15, 2019)

"R or RP are not decent bodies for the RF "L" lenses." SMH


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 15, 2019)

home_slice said:


> [,,,] I've been waiting for an updated 50mm 1.2 (one that autofocuses faster, with less chromatic aberrations and a smoother focus ring...) and now they finally *make one but it's for a prosumer body?!?*



RF 1.2 50 is not made for prosumer bodies but for the RF bayonet.

I praise Canon for their comittment just to use my old non-USM non-IS 2.8 24 which will work flawlessly (while noisy) on an EOS R(P). While they cripple some camera features for thermal and or marketing reasons, you can stay mostly in the system with ~ 25 year old equipment.


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 15, 2019)

Ira Parker said:


> The problem for Canon is that other companies have figured out the pro mirrorless world _well enough_ to cause new photographers, considering their first system investment, to forgo Canon as an option. And what makes this launch of the R series particularly confusing, is that while Canon now says that it has not quite figured out the pro body, it is selling, and announced the sale, of a lot of pro lenses. Who is buying the R or RP and putting $2000 glass on these cameras?



I am buying $2000 dollar glass on the EOS R!! Especially the RF50L and R is an absolutely fantastic combo, especially for shooting portraits, and for shooting moving subjects in low light! My hit rate of pictures of my daughter running around inside, using large aperture lenses, is so much better with the EOS R than my former 1DXII, that I had a hard time getting over it. 

The R does a lot of things very, very well, but it isn’t the perfect camera for every situation.


----------



## degos (Feb 15, 2019)

Larsskv said:


> My hit rate of pictures of my daughter running around inside, using large aperture lenses, is so much better with the EOS R than my former 1DXII, that I had a hard time getting over it.



Part of that is probably the technology, and part is probably because you're pointing a camera that weighs 600 grams versus 1530...


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 15, 2019)

degos said:


> Part of that is probably the technology, and part is probably because you're pointing a camera that weighs 600 grams versus 1530...



It is 100 percent the camera. The weight of the 1DXII helps with stability. 

The bottom line here is that mirrorless is better in many situations, DSLRs are better in others. EVFs are better in some situations, OVFs are better in others. 

A competent photographer will get amazing results from either, but will often need to use different approaches to get there. I am happy to have both DSLRs and mirrorless.


----------



## zonoskar (Feb 15, 2019)

Sadly they didn't ask why no DPAF in 4k. I would be nice to know it is a sensor limitation, or Canon deemed it too costly for a $1299 camera to have.


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 15, 2019)

It's always hard with these interviews as to whether they really say what's going on or a plausible well rehearsed story for the public. I'm surprised Canon are so far away from a professional camera. I thought they would be targeting early 2020 for the Olympics with it. It maybe that they didn't change course early enough and felt DSLR's would remain king for longer than they think now. This year they've made a big push to mirrorless but made the two easiest full frame cameras they could make. The next easiest would be a high MP equivalent of the 5DSR.
I'd have thought Canon would have been working on full frame cameras even before Sony hit the market with one but may be they waited to see how that was going and judge whether that was a threat.
I'm not sure which part of a Pro camera causes them to have difficulties. You would think a mirrorless equivalent of a 1DX II would have been possible around now. Mirrorless would allow them to have a faster FPS but they could have kept everything else similar. World class focusing on a mirrorless must be more difficult than expected for them. I guess they stake their reputation on their flagship camera and are conservative about rushing it.
They've made a smart near term move with the RP. 
It will be interesting if they can built on it with a new flagship camera in the next 12 months.


----------



## Stuart (Feb 15, 2019)

If apodization is easy to apply, then could they also do it on glass in the EF to RF adapter as they did with the polarisation filter?
Could they also do it on an teleconvertor - make a nifty 50 into an 80mm with apodization !


----------



## Kit. (Feb 15, 2019)

Stuart said:


> If apodization is easy to apply, then could they also do it on glass in the EF to RF adapter as they did with the polarisation filter?
> Could they also do it on an teleconvertor - make a nifty 50 into an 80mm with apodization !


It needs to be applied to the surfaces nearest to the diaphragm, otherwise it's not apodization but vignetting.


----------



## BeenThere (Feb 15, 2019)

Kit. said:


> It needs to be applied to the surfaces nearest to the diaphragm, otherwise it's not apodization but vignetting.


I wonder if it smooths the entire image, or just the OOF background?


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 15, 2019)

Ira Parker said:


> The problem for Canon is that other companies have figured out the pro mirrorless world _well enough_ to cause new photographers, considering their first system investment, to forgo Canon as an option. And what makes this launch of the R series particularly confusing, is that while Canon now says that it has not quite figured out the pro body, it is selling, and announced the sale, of a lot of pro lenses. Who is buying the R or RP and putting $2000 glass on these cameras?



Yeah, it's confusing unless you conjecture that Canon couldn't produce the camera it wanted due to tech constraints, but is planning on doing so in the future. 

As a result, I find myself in a funny situation. Recognizing that there is now extreme price pressure in the market, especially for old mount glass and bodies, I've started to sell off a very significant swath of my lenses and bodies to capture back the capital before the prices sink too much (if you watch eBay, they're starting to go down rapidly, also encouraged by retailers and lens manufactures pushing deals to blow out inventory too. Trust me, it's hard to sell a Sigma 85 Art used for the normal used price when Sigma starts selling it for $50 less new). I pre-ordered the R; bought the 50 1.2. So, a week from today I'll have 7 fewer lenses, 3 fewer bodies (a couple were old beaters), and a $2k lens that I can't fit onto a camera that I actually own yet. Funny times. But necessary to preserve the resale value of the collection.

I expect it to be likely that I will have to go for some time with just the RP using some of my new glass, with just one EF body using the few EF lenses I kept, until the pro body comes - which I don't necessarily expect in 2019. It also preserves my ability to throw that capital into a new system if that looks to be necessary. Because of the likelihood of that pro body being a 2020 affair, I'm open minded to things like Panasonic and the new Sigma L mount. Panasonic's SL1 would look pretty good, if Sigma had already come out with its L mount glass. When that happens, probably about the same time Sony is on the Mark IV cycle of its A7R series, things will be interesting.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 15, 2019)

BeenThere said:


> I wonder if it smooths the entire image, or just the OOF background?


If it is an apodization filter, It does not smooth image, it makes the aperture variably transparent, _darkening_ the the borders of out-of-focus circles.

It is also possible to make a lens that does the same without losing light, but it won't be symmetrical. If you use such a design to make pleasant bokeh for far field OOF, you will get donut-shaped near field OOF, and vice versa.


----------



## Mort (Feb 15, 2019)

One thing that I feel like no one has talked about is this helping fund the R&D/engineering costs for the Pro level camera. Everyone is assuming that Canon will sell a boatload of these things, and despite all the criticism, the R seems to have sold a bunch too. All of those sales will help with the R&D costs. 

As an example of what I'm talking about, look at Porsche. Their 911 is their flagship, but the money makers for the company are their relatively cheaper SUV's. The Macan was by far their best selling car. All of those sales have given Porsche the freedom to make a lot of really special models that they otherwise weren't able before. 

Hopefully that will be the same with Canon. Sell a bunch of R's and RP's to help fund the R&D to make the really good and competitive PRO or Halo cameras. Crossing my fingers.


----------



## Bundu (Feb 15, 2019)

Ira Parker said:


> The problem for Canon is that other companies have figured out the pro mirrorless world _well enough_ to cause new photographers, considering their first system investment, to forgo Canon as an option. And what makes this launch of the R series particularly confusing, is that while Canon now says that it has not quite figured out the pro body, it is selling, and announced the sale, of a lot of pro lenses. Who is buying the R or RP and putting $2000 glass on these cameras?


I have used $12 000 glass on an EOS 1000d just last weekend. Just for the heck of it. And to my suprise the photos were stunning! Really stunning. Ok, the light was good and it is no pro full frame with ultra fast focusing and tracking but the point is the photos were really great! A $11 750 difference between body and lens. I bought the R and use my $1 500 to $12 000 lenses it. It works fine. And sometimes even great. The R cannot replace my 7dii but I am happy. But then again I am not the sharpest of the human race!!!!!


----------



## Trey T (Feb 15, 2019)

RP=EOS-M + Rebel + FF

I predict that the sales will be extremely low for pro use, simply it’s best at nothing. you tubers will love this camera


----------



## padam (Feb 15, 2019)

zonoskar said:


> Sadly they didn't ask why no DPAF in 4k. I would be nice to know it is a sensor limitation, or Canon deemed it too costly for a $1299 camera to have.


It has been asked for the M50 in the past already, and it is likely that they would have given pretty much the same answer as to 1080p 24p (or silent mode, only automatic or manual 4k video modes, etc.): "That's the best we can do at this price point."


----------



## padam (Feb 15, 2019)

Trey T said:


> RP=EOS-M + Rebel + FF
> 
> I predict that the sales will be extremely low for pro use, simply it’s best at nothing. you tubers will love this camera


Good for them, better chance of selling more "Pro" models which are more expensive 
But it is still their only choice if they want the smallest possible FF camera (for street for instance) that happens to work perfectly with cheap and small EF glass and it is also not expensive, so it even has appeal for them (but they are also encouraged to go for the more advanced R instead)


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 15, 2019)

zonoskar said:


> Sadly they didn't ask why no DPAF in 4k. I would be nice to know it is a sensor limitation, or Canon deemed it too costly for a $1299 camera to have.



I assume heat was the issue. Canon's sensor and processor tech is pretty old compared to Fuji and Panasonic who can debayer 6k to 4k in a small package with no issue. Canon admitted before that the crop on the other cameras was to reduce heat(and probably rolling shutter). Some have said that Canon told them in interviews that the RP was limited to 24p in 4k due to heat. 

I can understand those hardware limitations, but the real head scratcher is why remove 1080 24fps, limit EF-S lenses to 4K and 720(no 1080) and removal of most exposure modes from the video modes?


----------



## padam (Feb 15, 2019)

crazyrunner33 said:


> I can understand those hardware limitations, but the real head scratcher is why remove 1080 24fps, limit EF-S lenses to 4K and 720(no 1080) and removal of most exposure modes from the video modes?


If the 4k DPAF is a hardware limitation (which I don't think based on their M50 interview) in that case, no EF-S 1080p can also be explained with hardware, it would be downsampled from the cropped 4k image (just like the EOS R), and that coupled with an IPB codec, is more processing intensive than just writing it in 4k and compressing that straight away. They don't have a separate line-skipped 1080p crop mode (why would they, get an M50, it would be much better than the RP for that, but 720p is also a waste of programming time)

Actually, apart from the A7S series in up to 1080p 30p, I think all Sony cameras have line-skipped 1080p video (which is also much weaker) they only downscale to 4k and not 1080p.


The EOS RP does still have a fast UHS-II SD interface, so it could certainly be hacked to provide more high-end video stuff, but a fairly new processor with the new CR3 Raw format, I really don't think it will go anywhere, while this is still relevant.
Compressed Raw option is actually very good here, but no M50 hack in sight to have anything from the past as a solid base.
There are some promises for the EOS R...we'll see I guess...


----------



## chik0240 (Feb 15, 2019)

Ira Parker said:


> I just do not see the appeal of the R. I had one on loan for a month and really tried to like it as a light weight companion to my 5D Mark IV. I returned the R, bought a Sony A7RIII as my mirrorless lightweight, along with a Sigma MC11 adapter, to use my Canon glass when I want the mirrorless body.
> 
> I truly found nothing redeeming in the R. It lacks every feature I want in a good mirrorless camera, from IBIS to useful 4K video features and a joystick for my focus points. How about the simple ability to turn off the back screen when I don't need it. I could perhaps forgive the lack of 2 card slots, if, like Nikon, they put a next generation card in the camera. They did none of this. It's low light performance was terrible compared not only to the great low light performance of the Sony 7 RIII, but even my 5D Mark IV.
> 
> I scratch my head that as a 1DX2 user, you would truly choose the R if you needed to buy a replacement body today.


 
Tried the R at some local camera store, the evf still feels disconnected to the reality maybe due to the artificial lighting that I see flickering with evf.

And for low light performance I always believe with same sensor tech a dslr will always be better, as you don’t get the heat noise build up when always in live view high gain for the EVF use, I rarely shoot astrophotograph but when I occasionally do, the amount of long exposure noise is significant compared to normal night shots


----------



## padam (Feb 15, 2019)

chik0240 said:


> Tried the R at some local camera store, the evf still feels disconnected to the reality maybe due to the artificial lighting that I see flickering with evf.
> 
> And for low light performance I always believe with same sensor tech a dslr will always be better, as you don’t get the heat noise build up when always in live view high gain for the EVF use, I rarely shoot astrophotograph but when I occasionally do, the amount of long exposure noise is significant compared to normal night shots


I do somewhat agree on the EVF, but really don't see any difference in noise if I use the 6DII in Live-View of full-DSLR mode, so I guess the latter is not significant maybe because for view mode, not all of the pixels are utilized unlike with a long exposure which collects information from the whole sensor so there is a definite increase of noise there.


----------



## BeenThere (Feb 15, 2019)

Trey T said:


> RP=EOS-M + Rebel + FF
> 
> I predict that the sales will be extremely low for pro use, simply it’s best at nothing. you tubers will love this camera


Perhaps best at sales because of low cost.


----------



## Trey T (Feb 15, 2019)

BeenThere said:


> Perhaps best at sales because of low cost.


It’s likely and that was my prediction -see photo


----------



## windsorc (Feb 15, 2019)

I'm pretty sure we'd all like to know why they can't make a cutting edge sensor to match Sony/Nikon. That question doesn't get asked though. Or maybe asking how many more years do Canon users have to put up with a sensor that can't match the main competitors. The problem remains that many parents now, instead of buying a DSLR, just use their phone. So the Canon RP will help with mirrorless market share and profit, but possibly at the behest of rebel/E-M cameras that users would have otherwise bought. It will still sell well, but it might not sell as well as everyone thinks.


----------



## chik0240 (Feb 18, 2019)

padam said:


> I do somewhat agree on the EVF, but really don't see any difference in noise if I use the 6DII in Live-View of full-DSLR mode, so I guess the latter is not significant maybe because for view mode, not all of the pixels are utilized unlike with a long exposure which collects information from the whole sensor so there is a definite increase of noise there.


I am just thinking about heat noise/ hotpixels, as using mirrorless always makes the camera hot or at least warm at extended use, I am thinking though no my significant it will result in more noise.

But frankly speaking the new RF lens potential is attractive, it becomes a hard choice between better RF lens which cost an arm and a leg for a complete new set of lens plus the new camera or just upgrade to the next dslr model. I still prefer ovf so if use adapter with the R seems counter intuitive to me


----------

