# Eos Rp or R for $400 more



## KKCFamilyman (Dec 29, 2019)

Hello All,

I am getting the eos RP with 24-105L for $1799 but am enticed to consider the R for $400 more @ $2,199. Even though the R is a better deal I was hoping someone on this forum could shed some light if they have one and are wishing they had the other or if they do not think the R is worth the extra $$ just because it is on sale.

I will be recording indoor band concerts, general family photography, some landscapes. Nothing professional. I Like the RP size but the R does not seem much bigger. Any help is appreciated.


----------



## Ozarker (Dec 29, 2019)

I went with the R because it has the same sensor as the 5D Mark IV and it just felt better in my hand. I also knew I'd be using heavy glass. The RP has the sensor from the 6D Mark II. I'm sure it is also a good choice for the money. Both are very well priced right now. Especially the R. I paid $2,899 for the R and RF 24-105L you are looking at just 4-5 months ago.


----------



## koenkooi (Dec 29, 2019)

I was planning to buy the R, but I decided the RP was 'good enough' for me after renting an RP for a week. The price difference back then worked out to be the 100mm L macro that I've wanted since it was announced. I also bought the EG-E1, I really needed it for heavy lenses like the RF24-105 and 100mm macro + twin flash.

But $400 is a relatively tiny difference, I would be very tempted to get an R. But personally, I'd want the battery grip as well, so it would be $400 + $300 in my case. So I'd use my wife as tie breaker


----------



## Joules (Dec 29, 2019)

What camera are you using currently? Would you like to lift shadows a lot?

I think I would tend to the R at this price difference, but I also would try and compare the viewfinders somewhere if I could.


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Dec 29, 2019)

Canon m6 mkii and m50. I do lift shadows sometimes. I have owned the 5d4 when it was released and did give the RP a test drive. I liked the idea of the size of the new mirrorless bodies for FF but ended with the good enough M series. After the Holidays of shooting and the good deals I am thinking of going to the RP as the 24-105 is a lens that will cover most of what I shoot. The images have way more detail no matter how much I tell myself it is minor. It is a lot more. I have not had a chance to look thru the R’s viewfinder but that is a good point.


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Dec 29, 2019)

koenkooi said:


> I was planning to buy the R, but I decided the RP was 'good enough' for me after renting an RP for a week. The price difference back then worked out to be the 100mm L macro that I've wanted since it was announced. I also bought the EG-E1, I really needed it for heavy lenses like the RF24-105 and 100mm macro + twin flash.
> 
> But $400 is a relatively tiny difference, I would be very tempted to get an R. But personally, I'd want the battery grip as well, so it would be $400 + $300 in my case. So I'd use my wife as tie breaker


I would not need the grips but the extra money saved on the RP would get me the rf 35mm


----------



## JPAZ (Dec 29, 2019)

As a long-time 5D* shooter, I tried the R in a store and found it to be really nice but not nice enough to give up my 5Div. When the RP came out, I sold all of my M bodies and EM lenses to get the RP and the RF 24-105 for my secondary body. While the RP has some limitations (FPS, single card, battery life), I quickly grew to like the histogram in the EVF, the significant increase in focus points, the smaller size and weight and the very reasonable IQ from this mirrorless FF camera. This camera with 4 batteries and the RF lens were all I took on a recent 1 week trip. The compactness of the rig was very welcomed. In fact, the RP is now my "go-to" most of the time. 

Do I regret not getting the R? Not really. I could probably program the control bar for some useful functions and could get used to the mode button rather than dials but I am not making a move yet. May be when there is a dual slot faster R body, I'll sell the 5Div and go 100% mirrorless........

My opinion is that the RP is a very nice body. The choice was easier when the prices were further apart. I agree with others. Get an RP and use the savings to get something to go with it.


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Dec 29, 2019)

JPAZ said:


> As a long-time 5D* shooter, I tried the R in a store and found it to be really nice but not nice enough to give up my 5Div. When the RP came out, I sold all of my M bodies and EM lenses to get the RP and the RF 24-105 for my secondary body. While the RP has some limitations (FPS, single card, battery life), I quickly grew to like the histogram in the EVF, the significant increase in focus points, the smaller size and weight and the very reasonable IQ from this mirrorless FF camera. This camera with 4 batteries and the RF lens were all I took on a recent 1 week trip. The compactness of the rig was very welcomed. In fact, the RP is now my "go-to" most of the time.
> 
> Do I regret not getting the R? Not really. I could probably program the control bar for some useful functions and could get used to the mode button rather than dials but I am not making a move yet. May be when there is a dual slot faster R body, I'll sell the 5Div and go 100% mirrorless........
> 
> My opinion is that the RP is a very nice body. The choice was easier when the prices were further apart. I agree with others. Get an RP and use the savings to get something to go with it.


Thanks. That sounds like solid advice as it will almost cover the rf 35mm 1.8


----------



## LesC (Dec 30, 2019)

I have both & they're both really nice cameras in my opinion. The RP is really nice and so compact (but still balances well with the RF24-105) and has a dial instead of a top LCD so in some ways is actually easier to use than the R but has poorer battery life. However, the R has a better rear LCD & a larger nicer EVF and of course a larger sensor. 

IQ wise I don't think there's that much in it and the RF24-105 is a really nice lens; I can't tell the difference in IQ between the R + RF24-105 and pictures from my EOS 6D MKII + EF24-70L F2.8 MKII. 

At the end of the day, you'll be happy with either but If i had to have just one, I go for the EOS R.


----------



## Optics Patent (Jan 1, 2020)

171 grams light weight advantage for the RP. Comparing the weight and price premium on the 400mm f2.8 IS II vs III it’s $4/gram. That’s an added $684 value for the RP.

I really don’t buy into the notion that heavy lenses need heavy bodies. One hand on the body grip and the other supporting the lens.


----------



## Dantana (Jan 2, 2020)

After trying out both in the store, I went with the R. I just liked the feel in my hands better. I was coming from a 6D, so I was also hoping the image quality bump would be a bit more than the RP, but really it was mostly feel which is totally subjective. Whichever feels good to you, I'm not sure you could really go wrong. Although I will say that the longer battery life is nice too.


----------



## JPAZ (Jan 2, 2020)

Dantana said:


> After trying out both in the store, I went with the R. I just liked the feel in my hands better.........



About 100 centuries ago, I was moving from the film to the DSLR world. I went to a camera store (there were many more of them back then) and tried a few bodies. It all came down to Nikon vs Canon. I decided the Canon felt better in my hands. The rest is history. Who knows, I could be a Nikon shooter today.

Even though IQ, FPS, hi-ISO performance, battery life and countless other parameters are important to each of us, we do use these cameras so something as subjective as how it feel does become important.


----------



## Dantana (Jan 2, 2020)

JPAZ said:


> About 100 centuries ago, I was moving from the film to the DSLR world. I went to a camera store (there were many more of them back then) and tried a few bodies. It all came down to Nikon vs Canon. I decided the Canon felt better in my hands. The rest is history. Who knows, I could be a Nikon shooter today.
> 
> Even though IQ, FPS, hi-ISO performance, battery life and countless other parameters are important to each of us, we do use these cameras so something as subjective as how it feel does become important.


Absolutely. I feel lucky to live less than a mile from a Samys. And now that California is enforcing sales tax collection from out of state, it doesn't really pay to order online for a lot of things, unless it's an exclusive deal or product.

I was intrigued by the RP. I think it's a very cool product, especially for the price. So far I really like the R, though I haven't had time to shoot a whole lot with it and I'm still trying to decide how I like the options setup the best.


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2020)

One consideration that applies to a very small number of people (me among them) is that the RP takes the LP-17, a battery I already have several of. So for me, no need to buy a spare battery right off the bat. I don't know what the R takes but I'm sure it's a more expensive battery.


----------



## Act444 (Jan 4, 2020)

The R uses the LP-E6(N) so those of us with xxD and xD DSLRs also would have spares lying around should this route be taken. 

In my case I already had a spare LP-E17 for my M6 so it was not a concern going to the RP.


----------



## mistaspeedy (Jan 6, 2020)

Shadow pushing seems to be the major difference between them, as far as still photo sensor performance is concerned.
The RP (6D mark II sensor) seems to be worse than the 80D/M50/M6 mark II as far as low ISO dynamic range is concerned.
As the ISO climbs, the RP starts to perform better than the APSC cameras.... take a look at the graph:






So it is up to you how important this aspect of the camera is.


----------



## KKCFamilyman (Jan 7, 2020)

mistaspeedy said:


> Shadow pushing seems to be the major difference between them, as far as still photo sensor performance is concerned.
> The RP (6D mark II sensor) seems to be worse than the 80D/M50/M6 mark II as far as low ISO dynamic range is concerned.
> As the ISO climbs, the RP starts to perform better than the APSC cameras.... take a look at the graph:
> 
> ...


It is important but the R is no longer at that deal so not sure the added DR is worth $800 more. I can get an RF 35mm and still save $$.


----------



## mangobutter (Jan 7, 2020)

I had the R, then now the RP. I prefer the RP due to lack of that weird touch pad--it's frustrating to have that entire space there that's taken up by a crummy useless poorly implemented feature. Also the R is kind of big.

I love how compact the RP is esp with the RF 35. My friend w/ a Nikon Z6 held it and said he was jealous of how compact my RP is. 

As far as dynamic range... that's a camera measurebator's complaint. Real photographers will shrug that off. I've been pumping the hottest and heaviest photos with my 6D for years since launch day in 2012 and never skipped a beat. Sure more DR is better than less, but anything worth shooting has way more than enough DR in it. If you are shooting high contrast sunsets and need to pull out more shadows, you're shooting at the wrong time. Simply wait a while. Light is crummy when it's too bright anyway. Same w/ my original Canon EOS M. Been pumping great pics out of that little thing for years. And it has the worst DR out of anything on the market. Way overblown.


----------



## LesC (Jan 8, 2020)

mangobutter said:


> I had the R, then now the RP. I prefer the RP due to lack of that weird touch pad--it's frustrating to have that entire space there that's taken up by a crummy useless poorly implemented feature. Also the R is kind of big.
> 
> I love how compact the RP is esp with the RF 35. My friend w/ a Nikon Z6 held it and said he was jealous of how compact my RP is.
> 
> As far as dynamic range... that's a camera measurebator's complaint. Real photographers will shrug that off. I've been pumping the hottest and heaviest photos with my 6D for years since launch day in 2012 and never skipped a beat. Sure more DR is better than less, but anything worth shooting has way more than enough DR in it. If you are shooting high contrast sunsets and need to pull out more shadows, you're shooting at the wrong time. Simply wait a while. Light is crummy when it's too bright anyway. Same w/ my original Canon EOS M. Been pumping great pics out of that little thing for years. And it has the worst DR out of anything on the market. Way overblown.



Agreed, I've had the 80D, 6D & now have the 6DMKII as well as EOS R & RP. I got rid of the 80D due to amount of noise. Never had a problem with it on either of the other cameras.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Jan 10, 2020)

mistaspeedy said:


> Shadow pushing seems to be the major difference between them, as far as still photo sensor performance is concerned.
> The RP (6D mark II sensor) seems to be worse than the 80D/M50/M6 mark II as far as low ISO dynamic range is concerned.
> As the ISO climbs, the RP starts to perform better than the APSC cameras.... take a look at the graph:
> 
> ...


The difference in low ISO Dynamic Range is well known, but there are other differences that can be more important to specific users:
- better Battery Life
- (slightly) faster burst & higher resolution
- (subjectively) better grip
- much better Electronic viewfinder 
- better LCD
- 1/8000 vs 1/4000 shutter speed
- C-Log (whatever this means)

On the other hand, the RP has the focus-stacking feature.


----------



## stevenrun34 (Feb 11, 2020)

OP probably made his camera decision a while back-- just offering my own humble experience.

I don't have any out-of-store experience on the R but I have and 80D and an RP.

The RP is a great little camera for the money. Lots of value there. I got mine open-box for $850. How could I pass on that?

The RP sensor "only" has 12 stops of D-range at ISO100 where the 80D and R do a stop to a stop and a third better. The RP evens out with the R past ISO800, which is also where the RP starts kicking crap out of the 80D. On the 80D, you're probably starting to get pretty noisy at ISO1600, but noisy is better than blurry, so you grit your teeth and suffer though it. On my RP, I'll gladly shoot ISO3200 and get great results. Those fatter pixels are just better at catching photons.

My 80D may still be my main for landscape... I just don't know yet. The more I use my RP the more I like it. Ijust have to work a little differently. When I shoot outdoors with my 80D, I'll shoot -2/3 to -1 EV because the metering feels way off and I get pretty good results recovering shadows so I feel fine with that. I'll bracket if I'm THAT worried about it.

Anyway-- you can't be so cavalier exposing left with the RP. If you try to recover 2+ stops of shadows, you'll wish you didn't. This doesn't make the RP a bad camera... you just have to work around your limitations. Use your tripod and bracket, or do a better job getting the exposure right. You can even see the histogram in the evf, so that's pretty sweet if you're hand-shooting.


----------



## thelebaron (Feb 14, 2020)

personally I would think the battery life is the biggest factor for these two cameras. I love my R, battery doesnt last quite like a dslr but I personally dont feel constained by it. Given the rp's lower capacity, id weigh this into your use case.


----------



## tron (Feb 18, 2020)

I got the R kit back during a Black Friday offer (2400 euros). The RP was cheaper but I didn't care.
I wanted a sensor similar to my 5DIV, the closing of the shutter when turning the camera off, the top LCD and the same battery with my other cameras. 

The reason is I wanted to add RF15-35 and RF24-70 to my kit although I do not know when I will really need them (I wish I had them back in September when I had visited Rome).


----------

