Canon EOS RP

A

Archlich

Well-known
Local time
11:47 AM
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
1,706
Surprisingly there's no subforum for Canon mirrorless cameras...

https://www.nokish!ta-camera.com/2019/02/eos-rp.html

- 26.2 Megapixel full frame sensor
- Dual Pixel AF
- DIGIC 8 Processor
- 5fps
- ISO:100-40000 (50-102400 expanded)
- Organic EL EVF
- 132.5 x 85.0 x 70.0 mm
- 440 grams body only, 485 grams with battery
- Rumored MSRP is $1300-$1600

1R6zkb.jpg


1R6Xtl.jpg


1R6V43.jpg


1R6rY8.jpg


This is one small ugly camera that doesn't have in body stabilization. But oh my it is small...and light. Lighter than anything else in the class. And it has an actual grip. Fully articulated screen is good for us who don't want to bother with the monitor.

Would be nice for adapted lenses.
 
Adapted EF mount lenses I have :)
If it will be the price, I'll upgrade from 5D MKII for higher iso and less weight, size.
 
Now if they can make small lenses, don't need to be fast, but performing well...
A tiny 40 and a tiny 28 a la Cl would be nice.
 
retinax said:
Now if they can make small lenses, don't need to be fast, but performing well...
A tiny 40 and a tiny 28 a la Cl would be nice.
Click to expand...

The 35/1.8 IS STM is not big. Other than that I doubt we'd see any truly small native lenses soon. Manufacturers are concentrating on rushing out big pro lenses for the Tokyo Olympics next year.

That's why it seems to be good for adapted small lenses for the moment...
 
They at least need a regular style 50mm (F1.8 to F2) at a decent price for these cameras. A $1600 body with a $3000 50mm is not going to work too well for the budget conscious crowd. I'm not an adapter fan at all.
 
Canon's AF point selection on these first R cameras leaves a lot to be desired. Moving the hand away from the dials to 'thumb' the rear screen seems so unnecessary when a thumb stick could have easily been implemented. I have a feeling they're saving the thumb-stick for the professional models.
 
retinax said:
Now if they can make small lenses, don't need to be fast, but performing well...
A tiny 40 and a tiny 28 a la Cl would be nice.
Click to expand...

40 2.8 is the pancake, adapter adds to it, but it is still compact.
My EF 22-55 is compact zoom and it works fine on EOS.
Writes the lens ID and aperture size to exif.
 
I don't quite understand what the appeal of these cameras are as opposed to DSLRs when the lenses are so large and the bodies are marginally smaller and less bulky.

Is getting rid of the pentaprism/mirror that much of an advantage to DSLR folks?

If I already had invested in a full frame Canon or Nikon DSLR and lenses, why would I want one of these?

Genuinely curious. I don't quite get it coming from the Leica film and digital world.
 
Range-rover said:
No way, like always they're milking it, expensive lenses to boot not impressed!
Click to expand...

Bob, they are supposedly going to make the cheapest new FF digital camera ever (at launch)... while the specs are not groundbreaking, I can't agree that they are milking it.
 
ptpdprinter said:
I doubt we will see small lenses anytime soon. Manufacturers seem to have lost the desire or capability to make them. ...
Click to expand...

Methinks manufactures will soon rediscover them, once current "make it as big as you like, as long as its fast" trend has been exhausted.
 
jarski said:
Methinks manufactures will soon rediscover them, once current "make it as big as you like, as long as its fast" trend has been exhausted.
Click to expand...
Not if you look at the lens roadmaps for Canon, Nikon, and Leica SL. I don't think Panasonic has posted a roadmap, but given the size of the full frame bodies and the three announced lenses, I am not expecting any small lenses from them anytime soon.
 
nightfly said:
I don't quite understand what the appeal of these cameras are as opposed to DSLRs when the lenses are so large and the bodies are marginally smaller and less bulky.

Is getting rid of the pentaprism/mirror that much of an advantage to DSLR folks?

If I already had invested in a full frame Canon or Nikon DSLR and lenses, why would I want one of these?

Genuinely curious. I don't quite get it coming from the Leica film and digital world.
Click to expand...

The big advantage I find is having set the EVF to the same brightness as my monitor that is set to print density from my printer I get a great view of exposure. However, I don't use any of the FF bodies any more, as the lenses seem bigger than DSLR alternatives. The Hassleblad X1d seemed more compact than the Sony I sold and the M240 with f2 lenses is again smaller. I shoot m43 where I can get small size and it does the job. From what I have read a lot of this oversized lenses is down to people wanting lenses that are perfectly sharp from edge to edge from f1.x to f22, and so they end up being very over corrected. Yet there are great photographs taken with lenses designed with pen and paper that had great character and some magical qualities.
 
nightfly said:
I don't quite understand what the appeal of these cameras are as opposed to DSLRs when the lenses are so large and the bodies are marginally smaller and less bulky.

Is getting rid of the pentaprism/mirror that much of an advantage to DSLR folks?

If I already had invested in a full frame Canon or Nikon DSLR and lenses, why would I want one of these?

Genuinely curious. I don't quite get it coming from the Leica film and digital world.
Click to expand...

New Leica lenses are often bulky as well. Sumilux 21,24 1.4 are half a kilo bricks.

Mirrorless FF EOS allows to use all of the Canon lenses, in principal,
from LTM, to FD to EF. I have Canon LTM and EF. And best (optically) 28mm I owned was FD mount 70$ lens.

It is no difference from Leica, which I also own. All lenses are compatible via adapter.

Basically, RP is same size and weight as my EOS300 film Canon.
And I have no problem to use my L zooms on it. In fact, it is my most preferable SLR film body, because of small size and weight. And it has AF, great metering, flash and all modes. I didn't bond with Canon EOS 3 and even Elan 7e is little bit large for my taste.
I don't take out 5DMKII because of bulk and weight, but I like to go out with small EOS 300 and same Canon L lenses.

Now, if Canon ever puts FF into SL body... I could use just EF lenses and this will be it :).


43703024951_29f92b7724_o.jpg


39738026062_00007ef2c9.jpg


If here is no problem to haul three Leica lenses each is 3K$, I don't see a problem with 16-35 f2.8 L lens to be just single lens for 1.5K$ via 129$ adapter. It is f2.8 on 16 and 18mm. And it takes pictures at 21, 24, 28 and 35 mm as well. So, it is 5+1 Leica lens in one.
DSLR, small FF doesn't matter, advantage is the same.
 
jsrockit said:
Bob, they are supposedly going to make the cheapest new FF digital camera ever (at launch)... while the specs are not groundbreaking, I can't agree that they are milking it.
Click to expand...

I think so, all the new cameras like this are about $2000 and up, maybe
one day someone will come up with a camera with less crap in it, does everybody here
use everything that they put into these modern marvels I don't, I'd go crazy if I did. I think
Nikon and Canon have a problem with Sony and Fuji with their mirrorless and they have to
play catch-up and add things the S&F don't have. We will have to see in the meantime I'll
use my Fuji.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top