# OMG, what should I do? DPReview scores Eos R just at 79 - ;-)



## xps (Nov 19, 2018)

I just read the brand new review of the EOS R (https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r/11).
OMG! What should I do? I bought one and I arranged to work with it and it takes really fine and pleasent pictures!
Am I just to senile to recognize the 10 points lack (between my Sonys and the Eos R)?
Should I join an DPReview course in photographing to learn how to see the differences between the holys and the garbages?
Should I unsubscribe my German magazines (Color Foto and Fotomagazin) as they rated the Eos R well? They seem not knowing what they are talking about, because DPReview rates it low?


----------



## Del Paso (Nov 19, 2018)

xps said:


> I just read the brand new review of the EOS R (https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r/11).
> OMG! What should I do? I bought one and I arranged to work with it and it takes really fine and pleasent pictures!
> Am I just to senile to recognize the 10 points lack (between my Sonys and the Eos R)?
> Should I join an DPReview course in photographing to learn how to see the differences between the holys and the garbages?
> Should I unsubscribe my German magazines (Color Foto and Fotomagazin) as they rated the Eos R well? They seem not knowing what they are talking about, because DPReview rates it low?


Honestly, I would also unsubscribe those unqualified German magazines, which I consider to be as unreliable as DPReview.
Lean back, relax and enjoy your excellent camera, no matter whether these "gurus" like or dislike it. There are often subjectivity, personal preferences or, worse, money, involved in camera, car or any kind of testing!


----------



## andrei1989 (Nov 19, 2018)

i wonder sometimes if the reviewers who bash a product (of any category, not only cameras) which sells like hot cakes take a step back and rethink their assessment or they stand by their original opinion...


----------



## BillB (Nov 19, 2018)

andrei1989 said:


> i wonder sometimes if the reviewers who bash a product (of any category, not only cameras) which sells like hot cakes take a step back and rethink their assessment or they stand by their original opinion...



And I wonder how many people actually make buying decisions based on DPR. DPR generates internet buzz, but...


----------



## Viggo (Nov 19, 2018)

When DPreview rates something low that’s usually a very good sign to get one

I never had so much fun with a camera ever, AF I can completely trust is just awesome. I tried in extremely backlit situations without my lens hood where I know the 1dx2 would struggle big time and it simply works, absolutely crazy.


----------



## BillB (Nov 19, 2018)

Viggo said:


> When DPreview rates something low that’s usually a very good sign to get one
> 
> I never had so much fun with a camera ever, AF I can completely trust is just awesome. I tried in extremely backlit situations without my lens hood where I know the 1dx2 would struggle big time and it simply works, absolutely crazy.


Actually if you look at the list of things the like about the R and the list of things they don't like, it is very revealing. Basically, they like the R for single shot picture quality and AF, along with the touchscreen interface, but mark it down on video and spray and pray shooting. And of course they say the Sony sensor is a little bit better than the R sensor on low ISO shadow lifting. So once again the issue is the overall number, more than it is the specific findings.


----------



## bhf3737 (Nov 19, 2018)

The review seems that it has mentioned the advantages and disadvantages fairly. But still some points are debatable (e.g. "Evaluative metering may vary greatly from one shot to the next of the same scene") and some are based on subjective experience with the camera (e.g. "Quirky, questionable ergonomics may turn off some users") that may vary from user to user. And some features that matter a lot to the actual users are overlooked, such as ability to AF in low/back-lit light.
But for me, for every product that they review regardless of brand and make, the overall score is totally nonsense and meaningless.


----------



## BillB (Nov 19, 2018)

bhf3737 said:


> The review seems that it has mentioned the advantages and disadvantages fairly. But still some points are debatable (e.g. "Evaluative metering may vary greatly from one shot to the next of the same scene") and some are based on subjective experience with the camera (e.g. "Quirky, questionable ergonomics may turn off some users") that may vary from user to user. And some features that matter a lot to the actual users are overlooked, such as ability to AF in low/back-lit light.
> But for me, for every product that they review regardless of brand and make, the overall score is totally nonsense and meaningless.


Well, overall magic numbers are what rev up the buzz. But do they drive sales?


----------



## Viggo (Nov 19, 2018)

I’m getting used to the mix between spot linked to AF and evaluative metering. Mostly it’s for the better.


----------



## xps (Nov 19, 2018)

Viggo said:


> When DPreview rates something low that’s usually a very good sign to get one
> 
> I never had so much fun with a camera ever, *AF I can completely trust* is just awesome. I tried in extremely backlit situations without my lens hood where I know the 1dx2 would struggle big time and it simply works, absolutely crazy.



Yess, Sir!
And I saved a lot of money, when I changed almost all of my lenses (inclusive the big white ones) WITHOUT any dust on the sensor!!!! Because this hillbilly (Germanism) product has closed the shutter . (I spent a lot of money by cleaning my Sony sensors - so I do not change the lenses anymore. Just under our photoclub laminar flow-dust clean-workbench ).

There are really a lot of shortcomings (DPReview is saying right), but how much bashing they did in the last weeks, is not correct. I´d like to see this at the coming Sony alphas too...  (As I have also a lot to complain about... just think of the menue and the touch-display....)


----------



## BillB (Nov 19, 2018)

xps said:


> Yess, Sir!
> And I saved a lot of money, when I changed almost all of my lenses (inclusive the big white ones) WITHOUT any dust on the sensor!!!! Because this hillbilly (Germanism) product has closed the shutter . (I spent a lot of money by cleaning my Sony sensors - so I do not change the lenses anymore. Just under our photoclub laminar flow-dust clean-workbench ).
> 
> There are really a lot of shortcomings (DPReview is saying right), but how much bashing they did in the last weeks, is not correct. I´d like to see this at the coming Sony alphas too...  (As I have also a lot to complain about... just think of the menue and the touch-display....)


Alpha camera defects are acknowledged only after the next model comes out and does not have them.


----------



## Don Haines (Nov 19, 2018)

Before you get too worried about how the ratings score is, just remember that this is just an opinion. The magic number is based on one person's criteria and not on yours.

For example, when I looked at the 7D2, my first question was "is it well sealed?" The answer was yes, and for me, everything else really did not matter. Then again, if you are shooting in salt spray and below freezing, you are probably not the typical user. For many of us, "magic numbers" are worthless.

My favourite "magic number" comes from the good folks at DXO, who give a higher number to the 50F1.8 than they give to the 600F4. That's right, the cheapest lens in the Canon lineup scores higher than the most expensive lens!


----------



## Larsskv (Nov 19, 2018)

BillB said:


> Alpha camera defects are acknowledged only after the next model comes out and does not have them.



So true, it’s not even funny. 

I have ignored DPR for close to four years now. Their opinions and priorities are rarely relevant to my own.


----------



## 4fun (Nov 19, 2018)

well deserved low score. Competition delivers more bang for less buck. Shortcomings are obvious, real and not subjective. Anything from no IBIS to slow fps in Servo AF to nerfed 4k crop to to useless M.fn slider and other UI quirks.


----------



## Act444 (Nov 19, 2018)

I was actually leaning towards perhaps taking the leap of faith, but this review has me thinking twice...really should hold off until the R line fills out some more/the early bugs and quirks get addressed. That said, I was an early adopter of the original EOS M despite everyone panning it and liked it very much, but that was for a very specific purpose (to replace my old Elph P&S as the "take everywhere/get into stadiums" camera). Also, the financial commitment was lower (although not cheap, of course). 

The issue is not having a similar use case for the R to justify the high asking price- too slow to replace a 5D4 and too large to replace an M6. I must admit the flip-screen is awesome though, and the tech has real potential. That said, it's not realized yet...


----------



## Don Haines (Nov 20, 2018)

Act444 said:


> I was actually leaning towards perhaps taking the leap of faith, but this review has me thinking twice...really should hold off until the R line fills out some more/the early bugs and quirks get addressed. That said, I was an early adopter of the original EOS M despite everyone panning it and liked it very much, but that was for a very specific purpose (to replace my old Elph P&S as the "take everywhere/get into stadiums" camera). Also, the financial commitment was lower (although not cheap, of course).
> 
> The issue is not having a similar use case for the R to justify the high asking price- too slow to replace a 5D4 and too large to replace an M6. I must admit the flip-screen is awesome though, and the tech has real potential. That said, it's not realized yet...


See if you can borrow one or rent one. See how YOU like it. Nobody else's opinion counts here.


----------



## BillB (Nov 20, 2018)

Act444 said:


> I was actually leaning towards perhaps taking the leap of faith, but this review has me thinking twice...really should hold off until the R line fills out some more/the early bugs and quirks get addressed. That said, I was an early adopter of the original EOS M despite everyone panning it and liked it very much, but that was for a very specific purpose (to replace my old Elph P&S as the "take everywhere/get into stadiums" camera). Also, the financial commitment was lower (although not cheap, of course).
> 
> The issue is not having a similar use case for the R to justify the high asking price- too slow to replace a 5D4 and too large to replace an M6. I must admit the flip-screen is awesome though, and the tech has real potential. That said, it's not realized yet...



The DPR review made clear the role that RF lenses are starting to play in the market. The Canon R may not be the right camera, but do you really want to turn your back on RF (and EF) lenses? If you already have Canon equipment, maybe sitting tight for a while makes sense. But if you are in a position where you need to make a move now, do you really want to go with Sony or Nikon and turn your back on RF lenses? So, a lot of people may be sitting on the sidelines for a while. At least some people who have some money to play with are going to explore the RF world, especially those that already have EF lenses.


----------



## Nelu (Nov 20, 2018)

4fun said:


> well deserved low score. Competition delivers more bang for less buck. Shortcomings are obvious, real and not subjective. Anything from no IBIS to slow fps in Servo AF to nerfed 4k crop to to useless M.fn slider and other UI quirks.


So, did you return yours and got the cheaper and not-so-crippled Sony A7 III?


----------



## Otara (Nov 20, 2018)

I bought it, because of the EF-S option, particularly for video, as I already had multiple and it makes for a very light video setup. Cropped 4k is actually useful to me as my focus is wildlife rather than people. For me its the 'real' 6D2 Id been waiting for.

Currently my biggest annoyance is how much clunkier moving the AF point is compared to the M5, even with only using the top right square.


----------



## Del Paso (Nov 20, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Before you get too worried about how the ratings score is, just remember that this is just an opinion. The magic number is based on one person's criteria and not on yours.
> 
> For example, when I looked at the 7D2, my first question was "is it well sealed?" The answer was yes, and for me, everything else really did not matter. Then again, if you are shooting in salt spray and below freezing, you are probably not the typical user. For many of us, "magic numbers" are worthless.
> 
> My favourite "magic number" comes from the good folks at DXO, who give a higher number to the 50F1.8 than they give to the 600F4. That's right, the cheapest lens in the Canon lineup scores higher than the most expensive lens!


DXO is right!
For birding, nothing beats the 50mm f 1,8 1st. generation, it's mechanical quality is also sensational.
The 600 mm's reputation for low IQ is well deserved, even the Kodak Brownie lens is better.


----------



## Random Orbits (Nov 20, 2018)

Act444 said:


> I was actually leaning towards perhaps taking the leap of faith, but this review has me thinking twice...really should hold off until the R line fills out some more/the early bugs and quirks get addressed. That said, I was an early adopter of the original EOS M despite everyone panning it and liked it very much, but that was for a very specific purpose (to replace my old Elph P&S as the "take everywhere/get into stadiums" camera). Also, the financial commitment was lower (although not cheap, of course).
> 
> The issue is not having a similar use case for the R to justify the high asking price- too slow to replace a 5D4 and too large to replace an M6. I must admit the flip-screen is awesome though, and the tech has real potential. That said, it's not realized yet...



I'm waiting for a price drop, and then I'll probably bite. There are some good deals for the R body and R kit, but I'm waiting for it drop a little more. Really, the main reason to get the R is to use the RF lenses. I'm also waiting for RRS to make the L-bracket for the R (not currently in stock). 

I finally played with the R and RF 24-105, and it was better than I thought. Single shot focus accuracy is great and better than my 5D4 with off center focus points. It's like every point is a center point. And this was with f/1.4 lenses and putting the subject into the corners. I would get this to replace my 5D3, which is currently backing up the 5D4. But without a faster frame rate, GPS, etc., the 5D4 will still be the primary. I don't understand why people hem and haw about the missing joystick. With 5000+ focus points, the joystick isn't fast enough. Maybe if they had it skip 10/20 points at a time and then if you push it in it moves 1 point at a time would make it usable.


----------



## ScottO (Nov 20, 2018)

Well I for one I’m selling both of mine. Will be returning the 35 mm 1.8 that’s coming today and canceling the 28 to 70 order. Oh wait no I won’t what I am doing is unloading my Last 5d mk 4 this week. I find the EOS R to be a very competent and thoroughly enjoyable tool. While it can’t replace my 1DX bodies, for 90% of what I do it’s the perfect camera


----------



## Act444 (Nov 20, 2018)

BillB said:


> The DPR review made clear the role that RF lenses are starting to play in the market. The Canon R may not be the right camera, but do you really want to turn your back on RF (and EF) lenses? If you already have Canon equipment, maybe sitting tight for a while makes sense. But if you are in a position where you need to make a move now, do you really want to go with Sony or Nikon and turn your back on RF lenses? So, a lot of people may be sitting on the sidelines for a while. At least some people who have some money to play with are going to explore the RF world, especially those that already have EF lenses.



I’ll be honest, I want that new 50. If I could mount it on my 5D4, I’d have one right now. I was never truly happy with the EF version.


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 20, 2018)

I find myself frequently disagreeing with DPR assessments, but I think they've improved markedly in the past year or so. Here's what I think is going on: you have different people who do different types of photography, AND they have different preferences and priorities. The DPR guys will typically tote a camera around a city and take pictures of people and architecture, reveling in the ability to underexpose to preserve highlights and bring up shadows in post, valuing ISO invariance. This is a real and legitimate use case, but it's pretty far off from capturing an osprey snagging a fish, or a college football game play (more my speed). A camera review from someone valuing the former is going to be very different from one valuing the latter.

What I appreciate a great deal is that the DPR reviews have tended to be more clear about what they value and why. You get a sense from the review itself what they're concentrating on, and what they like and don't like relative to what they're trying to do. This is a missing piece that I feel was done less in years past, where the final rating was more mysterious. I may still disagree with it now, but I think it is better rationalized, and I can determine more easily if this rating is going to apply to my use case.

I think DPR could vastly improve its reader service by having the multiple people it has test its cameras divvied up into different types of genre priorities and have them come out with ratings weighted to those priorities. So the (five) street photogs might rate the R as a 72 on average, the (three) studio-oriented photogs a 76 and the (zero; maybe add one or two?) wildlife photogs a whatever.

As a wildlife guy, the R's 3 fps in AF servo may well warrant a score less than what DPR gave it.


----------



## Jethro (Nov 20, 2018)

To be fair DPR have been drip-feeding their results for months now, so it's hardly a surprise. It was pretty much obvious from the launch that they disliked some of the ergonomics, and seemed almost morally offended by the 4k video treatment. The score is very much based on spec comparisons, especially with Sony, but also apparently affected by the Z7 review. But, as others have said, they seem to be comparing the EOS R to upmarket (and spec) versions of Sony or Nikon bodies.


----------



## Larsskv (Nov 20, 2018)

[email protected] said:


> I find myself frequently disagreeing with DPR assessments, but I think they've improved markedly in the past year or so. Here's what I think is going on: you have different people who do different types of photography, AND they have different preferences and priorities. The DPR guys will typically tote a camera around a city and take pictures of people and architecture, reveling in the ability to underexpose to preserve highlights and bring up shadows in post, valuing ISO invariance. This is a real and legitimate use case, but it's pretty far off from capturing an osprey snagging a fish, or a college football game play (more my speed). A camera review from someone valuing the former is going to be very different from one valuing the latter.
> 
> What I appreciate a great deal is that the DPR reviews have tended to be more clear about what they value and why. You get a sense from the review itself what they're concentrating on, and what they like and don't like relative to what they're trying to do. This is a missing piece that I feel was done less in years past, where the final rating was more mysterious. I may still disagree with it now, but I think it is better rationalized, and I can determine more easily if this rating is going to apply to my use case.
> 
> ...



I agree with your reasoning here. 

What I find most idiotic with DPR is that final score. It is so utterly stupid to sum up the qualities of a camera in one score, because a camera can be perfect for one user, and insufficient for another, based on the actual needs the user have. I couldn’t care less about 4K crop. If anything, I would much rather have good 1080P video than perfect 4K. How does fantastic 1080P and crappy/no 4K play out in the magic final DPR/DXO score? I don’t need a deep buffer, or high frame rate. Why should such qualities matter in one final score? DPR covers a lot of pros and cons in their reviews, and are informative, but they ruin their credibility by the final score. They would be much better of if they had a conclusion based on “who is this camera for”, and who is it not for.


----------



## 4fun (Nov 20, 2018)

Larsskv said:


> They would be much better of if they had a conclusion based on “who is this camera for”, and who is it not for.



they do provide exactly that. You can safely ignore the % score. But it is a fairly good approximation of how much bang for the buck a camera delivers OVERALL vs. its competitors in same class.


----------



## Larsskv (Nov 21, 2018)

4fun said:


> they do provide exactly that. You can safely ignore the % score. But it is a fairly good approximation of how much bang for the buck a camera delivers OVERALL vs. its competitors in same class.


 The % score overshadow other conclusions, because it leads to cameras and features that may not be needed.


----------



## 4fun (Nov 21, 2018)

Larsskv said:


> The % score overshadow other conclusions, because it leads to cameras and features that may not be needed.



theoretically. if DPR (or DXO) were the sole relevant source of camera reviews. they are not. 

in practice each review is one source amongst many to help us assess different imaging product's specs, capabilities, functionality, performance, absolute and relative strengths and weaknesses.

"no IBIS" (working in tandem with in-lens stabilization when present) for example is an indisputable absolute and relative weakness of EOS R. only the amount of relevance and usefulness for individual potential customers differs, depending on their respective use cases and preferences.

current price of EOS R in absolute terms (€, $, ... ) and relative to competitive products is both an absolute (how many people interested can afford it!) and relative weakness, which may be mutigated for existing Canon customers due to "ecosystem advantages" from Canon lenses (EF, EF-S) and other accessories (eg compatible speedlites) already in their possession.

nevertheless those factors are no strengths, but weaknesses of EOS R and the more sources and voices point them out (since Canon marketing materials will not), the better for us customers. Canon may decide to eliminate or mitigate them in succeeding products and/or via firmware updates (if possible) and/or by lowering price.

i therefore welcome the critical DPR review, as well as any others, provided they are independent and not done by fan boys or shills (of Canon or other brands).


----------



## 4fun (Nov 21, 2018)

that said, i wonder, what % score my desired "stills only" camera would fetch from DPR ... no video recording whatsoever. only stills.

or what about a Leica M10D ... a digital camera with "film transport lever" and without display to compose and review captures ... priced at usd 7995. https://dpreview.com/products/leica/slrs/leica_m10_d/specification

it should not be able to get a score of more than 1% relative to any other FF MILC on the market, right?


----------



## Larsskv (Nov 21, 2018)

4fun said:


> that said, i wonder, what % score my desired "stills only" camera would fetch from DPR ... no video recording whatsoever. only stills.
> 
> or what about a Leica M10D ... a digital camera with "film transport lever" and without display to compose and review captures ... priced at usd 7995. https://dpreview.com/products/leica/slrs/leica_m10_d/specification
> 
> it should not be able to get a score of more than 1% relative to any other FF MILC on the market, right?



My point exactly. And the Leica is crazy expensive, and doesn’t have IBIS or AF either. It must be one of the worst cameras you can buy.


----------



## archiea (Nov 21, 2018)

xps said:


> I just read the brand new review of the EOS R (https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r/11).
> OMG! What should I do? I bought one and I arranged to work with it and it takes really fine and pleasent pictures!
> Am I just to senile to recognize the 10 points lack (between my Sonys and the Eos R)?
> Should I join an DPReview course in photographing to learn how to see the differences between the holys and the garbages?
> Should I unsubscribe my German magazines (Color Foto and Fotomagazin) as they rated the Eos R well? They seem not knowing what they are talking about, because DPReview rates it low?




...I just shot again with the R... the client was so in love with the shots because he saw them on an iPad, because the canon can DL to the iPad WHILE I shoot.. so to review the shot, I showed the client the pad instead of the back of the camera. Far better presentation than the back a camera....

I have the xt-3 too... can't do that. Wifi is temperamental on that system.. My old 5D3, maybe with the old mobi cards, but I cannot get the app to run on the pad anymore to do realtime transfers.....

Camera may be 79%, but that night, the photographer was 100% because the camera held deliver the winning image to the client. 

The fuji got a 88% score but can't do the above reliably

To me, that night, the R was a winner.

No second slot or uncropped 4K. point is: the client doesn't care about that. Just the image.


----------



## archiea (Nov 21, 2018)

Larsskv said:


> My point exactly. And the Leica is crazy expensive, and doesn’t have IBIS or AF either. It must be one of the worst cameras you can buy.



Leica SL is once sweet camera, and the M10MP, transfers wirelessly to the phone, very nice, 

Its easy to make fun leicas, until being in the hands of a skills photographer.

its the smallest FF platform, lens and camera. (Sony is small but not the lens)

I use a summilux on Fuji xt-3

Just got the Leica M to eos R adapter for that same lens (its fifth body,.. canon M3, canon M5, Fuji xt-2, xt-3 now the canon R). FF canon with a summilux? can't wait. picking it up tomorrow....

IF leica created an EVF like one in the SL, or even the one on the R, I'd pick one up yesterday. 

Focus peaking + leica manual glass = perfect marriage of new and old...


----------



## 4fun (Nov 21, 2018)

Larsskv said:


> My point exactly. And the Leica is crazy expensive, and doesn’t have IBIS or AF either. It must be one of the worst cameras you can buy.



yes. Leica M10-D sure is. Even when money is no object it would be a stupid purchase.


----------



## Larsskv (Nov 21, 2018)

archiea said:


> Leica SL is once sweet camera, and the M10MP, transfers wirelessly to the phone, very nice,
> 
> Its easy to make fun leicas, until being in the hands of a skills photographer.
> 
> ...



Just for the record, I was beeing sarcastic. I wish I had a Leica, and I might very well end up buying one. 

I tried to make a point related to DPRs score system. If DPR were to use the same criterias on a Leica as they do on the EOS R, every Leica ever built would get a "disaster" score, for not providing AF, video features, IBIS etc. And of course, that score would be useless for anybody looking to buy a Leica camera. My point is that the score they give a camera can be very misleading, if the camera buyer has other priorities, than those DPR use in their rating system.


----------



## 4fun (Nov 21, 2018)

only Leica manual focus lenses are compact. SL stuff with AF is huge, bigger than most other mirrorfree FF lenses with [superior to Leica] AF.

Personally I will never understand why people are willing to spend lots of money for mere "status symbol" products. Expensive items like Ferraris are at least very competent and fast cars second to none, far outperforming a Toyota Tercel. But Leica cameras are antiquated, sub-par devices, functionally outperformed and outclassed by virtually any recent "Toyota Tercel-class" run-of the mill product by Canon, Nikon, Sony. I also think it applies to those old shard Leica lenses and that they are also significantly outdone by recent Canon [L] glass - both EF and RF.

Re. size of lenses: we now have "living proof" that lenses WITH AF for short-FFD, wide-throat mirrorfree cameras can be built 
* VERY COMPACT and with 
* DECENT IQ and at
* VERY AFFORDABLE prices. 
Those recent Samyang AF lenses 14/2.8, 24/2.8, 35/2.8 [for Sony FE] but also AF 85/1.4 [for Canon EF] are much more along my idea of lenses ... and I hope they can be made even more compact for Canon RF mount (and Nikon Z) than for "less than ideal" Sony E-mount. 







And I am willing to pay 50% more if they come from Canon themselves, rather than with reverse-engineered AF and mount protocol.


----------



## BillB (Nov 21, 2018)

4fun said:


> they do provide exactly that. You can safely ignore the % score. But it is a fairly good approximation of how much bang for the buck a camera delivers OVERALL vs. its competit





Larsskv said:


> I agree with your reasoning here.
> 
> What I find most idiotic with DPR is that final score. It is so utterly stupid to sum up the qualities of a camera in one score, because a camera can be perfect for one user, and insufficient for another, based on the actual needs the user have. I couldn’t care less about 4K crop. If anything, I would much rather have good 1080P video than perfect 4K. How does fantastic 1080P and crappy/no 4K play out in the magic final DPR/DXO score? I don’t need a deep buffer, or high frame rate. Why should such qualities matter in one final score? DPR covers a lot of pros and cons in their reviews, and are informative, but they ruin their credibility by the final score. They would be much better of if they had a conclusion based on “who is this camera for”, and who is it not for.


The "magic number" final score has been important in establishing the DPR internet brand. Brilliant click bait. DPR does magic numbers and discovery of killer features very well--DR, dual card slots, and IBIS being examples. I do think that DPR has moved toward fairer presentation of the pros and cons of specific cameras.


----------



## 4fun (Nov 21, 2018)

there is no really meaningful "single number"/ranking for anything. It all depends which rating dimensions and criteria are used.

Re. EOS R: Canon made a mistake by placing it "in the middle". Nikon and Sony approach with higher end + lower end models in parallel works better. 

EOS R with sensor and specs "as is" should really have been clearly positioned by Canon as capable entry-level, "6D class" FF MILC and - even more importantly - been priced accordingly. USD/€ 1799 "including free EF adapter" at launch would have given EOS R a much better start vs. Sony A7 III and Z6. 

Plus ideally parallel launch of a high specs, hi-rez model [mirrorfree "5DSR II"], targeted directly at Nikon Z7 and Sony A7R III. 

RF lens starting lineup would also have made a lot more sense that way. 

But ... stupid Canon ... apparently was not able to deliver yet on the higher end body.


----------



## BillB (Nov 21, 2018)

4fun said:


> there is no really meaningful "single number"/ranking for anything. It all depends which rating dimensions and criteria are used.
> 
> Re. EOS R: Canon made a mistake by placing it "in the middle". Nikon and Sony approach with higher end + lower end models in parallel works better.
> 
> ...


May be a little early to pick winners and losers.


----------



## 4fun (Nov 21, 2018)

BillB said:


> May be a little early to pick winners and losers.



yes. I do expect Canon to still come out ahead of the game at the end of the day. Just saying "they could have made it easier for themselves and a lot harder for their competition".


----------



## BillB (Nov 21, 2018)

4fun said:


> yes. I do expect Canon to still come out ahead of the game at the end of the day. Just saying "they could have made it easier for themselves and a lot harder for their competition".


Be interesting to know how Canon and Nikon, especially, see the game playing out over time. How many cards do each of them have left on the table? One card that Canon might play sooner or later would to readjust the price of the R downward. I am not convinced that the R will be as big a dud as some people think, especially for people who aren't into video or spray and pray action photography. Neither Sony or Nikon can match the touchscreen interface or articulated LCD. And there are a lot of people out there with EF lenses. 

I agree that Canon will have to come up with one or more higher level cameras with the RF mount, but I don't think they needed to roll one out in the first announcement. The R and Z systems are out there now, and people may take a while making up their minds about what they want to see at the higher price levels in the mirrorless systems. It will be interesting how the Z7 sells. The Z7's main competition seems to be the Sony alphas, the D850--and the Z6.


----------



## analoggrotto (Nov 25, 2018)

If those DPR Sony guys keep bashing Canon users, we will have no choice but to buy the EOS R, which is the worst smartphone since the Nokia 3300!


----------

