Canon EOS R Series Cameras

Sadly no IBIS as the rumor sites earlier suggested: It was all I would have needed to sway me

I still find it highly irritating that the biggest moans about any new camera are video based. Stills photographers don't give a damn about that side. I have good 4K, I've used it about 5 times just messing about because it was there. Unless you're a serious videographer and already have a powerhouse of a PC and intend to shoot serious cinematic video a lot, then it shouldn't matter. 4k is crippling on even a decent spec PC to grade, and even then the average viewer can't really tell between decent 1080p and average 4k. What is disappointing re video though, is that 1080p is locked out when you adapt EF lenses, that's an odd decision.

For me IBIS would be much more desirable, but then again, not everyone cares about that feature.

I think it's a nice looking camera, I see some label it ugly, matter of taste I guess, but that is definitely the least important aspect. A cross between an M50 and 6DII pretty much
 
Last edited:
Sadly no IBIS as the rumor sites earlier suggested: It was all I would have needed to sway me

I still find it highly irritating that the biggest moan about any new camera are video based. Stills photographers don't give a damn about that side. I have 4K, I've used it about 5 times just messing about because it was there. Unless you're a serious videographer and already have a powerhouse of a PC and intend to shoot serious video a lot, then it shouldn't matter. 4k is crippling on even a decent spec PC to grade, and even then the average viewer can't really tell between decent 1080p and average 4k. What is dissapointing re video though, is that 1080p is locked out when you adapt EF lenses, that's an odd decision.

For me IBIS would be much more desirable, but then again, not everyone cares about that feature.

I think it's a nice looking camera, I see some label it ugly, matter of taste I guess, but that is definitely the least important aspect

I don't care for video much either and it's hard to find reviews that aren't heavily focused on the video capabilities.
I never expected it to have ibis as this sits below the R so I imagine that'll come in their "Pro" version. The most exciting thing for me is the glass.
 
Commercially I'm sure this thing will be huge. I know Canon get hit pretty hard on the review sites these days, but their position in the market kinda makes that irrelevant as so many are already invested in the ecosystem. At this price point I've no doubt this will be by some margin the most popular full frame mirrorless camera on the market.

It's also Canon's first real step into cannabilising their own DSLR ecosystem, which I didn't see coming so early on given their reluctance to ever even remotely step on their own toes when positioning new cameras in the market. Very aggressive move from Canon.
 
Sadly no IBIS as the rumor sites earlier suggested: It was all I would have needed to sway me

I still find it highly irritating that the biggest moans about any new camera are video based. Stills photographers don't give a damn about that side. I have good 4K, I've used it about 5 times just messing about because it was there. Unless you're a serious videographer and already have a powerhouse of a PC and intend to shoot serious cinematic video a lot, then it shouldn't matter. 4k is crippling on even a decent spec PC to grade, and even then the average viewer can't really tell between decent 1080p and average 4k. What is disappointing re video though, is that 1080p is locked out when you adapt EF lenses, that's an odd decision.

For me IBIS would be much more desirable, but then again, not everyone cares about that feature.

I think it's a nice looking camera, I see some label it ugly, matter of taste I guess, but that is definitely the least important aspect. A cross between an M50 and 6DII pretty much

What's the 'dual sensing IS' that's mentioned in the descriptions of the camera on various websites that claims to offer up to 5 stops of image stabilization? Different to IBIS?

Simon

PS - haven't watched any of the early videos in case it's explained in there!
 
Sadly no IBIS as the rumor sites earlier suggested: It was all I would have needed to sway me

I still find it highly irritating that the biggest moans about any new camera are video based. Stills photographers don't give a damn about that side. I have good 4K, I've used it about 5 times just messing about because it was there. Unless you're a serious videographer and already have a powerhouse of a PC and intend to shoot serious cinematic video a lot, then it shouldn't matter. 4k is crippling on even a decent spec PC to grade, and even then the average viewer can't really tell between decent 1080p and average 4k. What is disappointing re video though, is that 1080p is locked out when you adapt EF lenses, that's an odd decision.

For me IBIS would be much more desirable, but then again, not everyone cares about that feature.

I think it's a nice looking camera, I see some label it ugly, matter of taste I guess, but that is definitely the least important aspect. A cross between an M50 and 6DII pretty much
I disagree on some points. People can tell the difference between 4k and 1080p especially when you down sample the 4k footage.

Let's face it. There's more money in YouTube video then photography these days so I can see why video features are important for many.

Even doing wedding and events. Some clients like to have some video of it too
 
I don't care for video much either and it's hard to find reviews that aren't heavily focused on the video capabilities.
I never expected it to have ibis as this sits below the R so I imagine that'll come in their "Pro" version. The most exciting thing for me is the glass.
Yes the glass are important. I'm worried for nikon as I think Canon and Sony will be the top dogs for mirrorless ff.

Where's the nikon glaass?
 
Yes the glass are important. I'm worried for nikon as I think Canon and Sony will be the top dogs for mirrorless ff.

Where's the nikon glaass?

Canon seem to have the jump on lenses - plus offer some nice compact ones too. That 35mm 1.8 especially.

Also...

Zooms:

  • RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM
  • RF 15-35mm F2.8 L IS USM
  • RF 24-70mm F2.8 L IS USM
  • RF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM
  • RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM
 
Last edited:
Beginning of the end for DSLR with a release like that.
Yup I did mention and said ages ago that canon will kill dslr. Makes no financial sense to support both.

Now canon bring a body with same or more features then the Sony bodies and you are on to something
 
I disagree on some points. People can tell the difference between 4k and 1080p especially when you down sample the 4k footage.

Let's face it. There's more money in YouTube video then photography these days so I can see why video features are important for many.

Even doing wedding and events. Some clients like to have some video of it too

Decent 1080p Vs average 4K jonney, the average viewer can't tell without being told, and that's not condescending - if 1080p is graded nicely and the lighting is good, vs out of the box 4K ... you'd be hard pressed, even with a good eye.

I don't care about youtube, I care that photographers are getting stiffed these days because of vloggers whiney needs. There's video-specific gear out there, always has been! Wedding videography has always been thing and professionally cut 1080p is more than good enough. I just hate the fact that these days the stills only photographer has to foot the bill for all these snazzy features they don't need or want. Look at any review for this camera from here on, I guarantee the lack of extra features for 4K will take up a good chunk of the moans about it
 
Last edited:
What's the 'dual sensing IS' that's mentioned in the descriptions of the camera on various websites that claims to offer up to 5 stops of image stabilization? Different to IBIS?

Simon

PS - haven't watched any of the early videos in case it's explained in there!

I think it's specific to RF lenses only, but it's not true IBIS that will work with non native lenses. True IBIS will stabilize even old MF lenses, as you'll know from your M43 days - it's one of the features that is attractive about the system, got me interested at least. It's a lot tougher for them to implement it anywhere near as effectively for FF no doubt, but I would be sold on this if it even had IBIS comparable to say Sony's APSC line. It doesn't need to be outstanding for stills, just a couple of stops even
 
Last edited:
I think it's specific to RF lenses only, but it's not true IBIS that will work with non native lenses. True IBIS will stabilize even old MF lenses, as you'll know from your M43 days - it's one of the features that is attractive about the system, got me interested at least. It's a lot tougher for them to implement it anywhere near as effectively for FF no doubt, but I would be sold on this if it even had IBIS comparable to say Sony's APSC line. It doesn't need to be outstanding for stills, just a couple of stops even

Thanks for the clarification Keith. As I say, I've not looked at the camera in any sort of detail so missed the nuance around the stabilization they're offering on it.

Simon.
 
Decent 1080p Vs average 4K jonney, the average viewer can't tell without being told, and that's not condescending - if 1080p is graded nicely and the lighting is good, vs out of the box 4K ... you'd be hard pressed, even with a good eye.

I don't care about youtube, I care that photographers are getting stiffed these days because of vloggers whiney needs. There's video-specific gear out there, always has been! Wedding videography has always been thing and professionally cut 1080p is more than good enough. I just hate the fact that these days the stills only photographer has to foot the bill for all these snazzy features they don't need or want. Look at any review for this camera from here on, I guarantee the lack of extra features for 4K will take up a good chunk of the moans about it

4K is definitely better than 1080p, even if just downsampling to 1080p you'll have a better image, it also gives you the flexibility of cropping and not losing detail, so you're buying fewer lenses. If you have a large viewing device you can also get closer. 4K is fast becoming the norm and it should, technology moves on.

If manufacturers leave out 'every day' functions like video then the sales would be even weaker in a slowing market.
 
Last edited:
4K is definitely better than 1080p, even if just downsampling to 1080p you'll have a better image, it also gives you the flexibility of cropping and not losing detail, so you're buying fewer lenses. If you have a large viewing device you can also get closer. 4K is fast becoming the norm and it should, technology moves on.

If manufacturers leave out 'every day' functions like video then the sales would be even weaker in a slowing market.

I wish 4k was fast becoming the norm. I bought a 4k TV 4 years ago and there is still a real lack of genuine 4k content out there. I won't be an early adopter of 8k that's for sure.
 
4K is definitely better than 1080p, even if just downsampling to 1080p you'll have a better image, it also gives you the flexibility of cropping and not losing detail, so you're buying fewer lenses. If you have a large viewing device you can also get closer. 4K is fast becoming the norm and it should, technology moves on.

If manufacturers leave out 'every day' functions like video then the sales would be even weaker in a slowing market.

I know it is, when processed correctly, otherwise it can look more like over sharpened for the sake of it 1080. Have you ever processed 4K files? If you don't have at least an i7 with 16GB RAM and a decent video card you're not having fun that day - because it'll take the best part of the day to get through a few minutes footage. And for what? If it's just for a talking head vlog it's completely wasted, 1080p looks just as good for this purpose. The people ranting about 4k aren't making movies, they're recording themselves airing views on veganism or the latest watch they bought at Walmart. I know 4k can be clearer, I have a 4K camera that shoots better 4K than any of these new FF ML cameras can - would I be sad if it was 1080p 24 max? nope, because I'm not a film maker.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if the large mount does have something to do with this?
I mentioned long back that I wondered if the large mount was to reduce size of telephoto lenses....
 
I wonder if the large mount does have something to do with this?
I mentioned long back that I wondered if the large mount was to reduce size of telephoto lenses....

Possibly, could also be Sony has been relying on older lens design (except for a couple lenses) so the size has remained relatively the same as DSLR, this saves on R&D and time to market.

Im also impressed by the Canon 70-200, looks really cool.
 
So the RP is being marketed as a "Budget" camera?

I know the price will drop in a few months, but I don't see how anything with a list price of £1300 can be considered "Budget."
 
So the RP is being marketed as a "Budget" camera?

I know the price will drop in a few months, but I don't see how anything with a list price of £1300 can be considered "Budget."

Are there any other newly released full frame cameras on the market with this spec that are cheaper? Its a budget price for the spec it offers.
 
So the RP is being marketed as a "Budget" camera?

I know the price will drop in a few months, but I don't see how anything with a list price of £1300 can be considered "Budget."

What I don't understand is how it's $1299 US, but £1399 UK .. which is more like $1700!
 
807 (US region only) matches on this site alone... thats a lot of watching. Pretty much everything released these days has a 4K bluray version.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/sear...t=&slipcoverback=&submit=Search&action=search
I've just bought a new 4k wide gamut monitor
Very very interesting. This has caught my attention.
Indeed it has but I've heard the lens may extend when zoomed?
Are there any other newly released full frame cameras on the market with this spec that are cheaper? Its a budget price for the spec it offers.
Sony A7?
 

Though certainly not new, the A7II is definitely one to consider over the RP, as it's got ibis. For those like me who don't care for video or flappy screens. There's always a compromise for us budget shooters though, you lose the excellent touch screen and the RP comes with an adapter that will no doubt work better with cheap EF lenses than the Sony would
 
Though certainly not new, the A7II is definitely one to consider over the RP, as it's got ibis. For those like me who don't care for video or flappy screens. There's always a compromise for us budget shooters though, you lose the excellent touch screen and the RP comes with an adapter that will no doubt work better with cheap EF lenses than the Sony would
That's true. A7 2 more appealing
The A7 has been around a few years. Its not a new release and isn't as good as the RP. The A7iii was £2000 at launch and is still more expensive.
Yea true that.

Anyways personally I'm done with buying stuff or switching systems. I'll switch when the next ground breaking tech gets released like global shutter etc.

Rip dslr...
 
Rip dslr...

Not quite. I've tried using mirrorless cameras to shoot motorsport a couple of times now and each time using an EVF for fast moving subjects has proved awful, absolutely no comparison to a proper optical viewfinder. I appreciate mirrorless cameras are now much better for everyday photography but I think DSLRs will retain their niche for fast moving sports for a little while yet. Once using an electronic viewfinder is indistinguishable from an optical one then I think DSLRs will be dead.

That said this looks like a great camera, and once the price comes down a bit it will be a bargain way to get an FF sensor. I'd be tempted by one as a second body for more general photography.
 
Not quite. I've tried using mirrorless cameras to shoot motorsport a couple of times now and each time using an EVF for fast moving subjects has proved awful, absolutely no comparison to a proper optical viewfinder. I appreciate mirrorless cameras are now much better for everyday photography but I think DSLRs will retain their niche for fast moving sports for a little while yet. Once using an electronic viewfinder is indistinguishable from an optical one then I think DSLRs will be dead.

That said this looks like a great camera, and once the price comes down a bit it will be a bargain way to get an FF sensor. I'd be tempted by one as a second body for more general photography.

Surely for many fast moving targets that's one advantage that is now clearly with the latest mirrorless cameras (Sony) and their clever focusing systems?
 
Surely for many fast moving targets that's one advantage that is now clearly with the latest mirrorless cameras (Sony) and their clever focusing systems?

Focusing may be better but actually trying to follow fast action using an electronic viewfinder I just can't get on with at all. It's a couple of years since I've tried so maybe things are better now but both times I've tried it I found it vastly inferior. I was very aware I was looking at a tiny screen rather than seeing everything through a prism.
 
Focusing may be better but actually trying to follow fast action using an electronic viewfinder I just can't get on with at all. It's a couple of years since I've tried so maybe things are better now but both times I've tried it I found it vastly inferior. I was very aware I was looking at a tiny screen rather than seeing everything through a prism.

You need to try an A9.
 
This has me excited, I've been wanting a second camera for a while now to replace my 7D without blowing the bank. The video stuff doesn't worry me, I'm a stills photographer so I don't really need it, nice to have maybe but I don't mind either way. I can see me selling my Fuji gear to fund the RP in a while, once the dust settles. The only 2 concerns I have are, the same sensor as the 6Dmkii, with it's (suppossed) dynamic range issues and 'only' 4000/sec.

Is it suprising that Fuji announce the X-T30 today?
 
What I don't understand is how it's $1299 US, but £1399 UK .. which is more like $1700!

£1165 before VAT in the UK, which is $1492 as a direct exchange, so a bit closer than it looks, and that's assuming most Americans avoid sales tax by ordering online out of state.

Impossible to do like for like comparison though, on average we (UK) earn slightly less but also have a significantly lower cost of living. Most of us also get a shed load of annual leave compared to our friends across the pond, I'd take that and the chance to use my camera more every time.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top