mcfingon
Western Australia
The results look good to me. On the back of the camera, the nice low viewfinder eyepiece height reminds me of an OM-1, particularly when the rear screen is folded away.
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2123961252/canon-eos-rp-shooting-experience
John Mc
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2123961252/canon-eos-rp-shooting-experience
John Mc
Dogman
Mentor
While I have no interest in these new cameras, I can see the specialized utility in the Olympus. I have an original model EM-1 mainly so I can use an adapted Olympus 50-200 2.8-3.5 tele-zoom, sometimes with a 1.4X extender. The combination is pretty sharp, lightweight with a fast aperture and decent enough for my purposes AF. I seldom shoot with long lenses but when combined with Olympus IBIS, the outfit is pretty agile and hand-holdable.
willie_901
Mentor
If I was starting from scratch looking for a digital mirrorless platform in this price range, the EOS RP could be my choice. The EOS RP's size and weight works for me. The EF adapter is compact and provides access to a sea of lenses. I much prefer the EOS RP to the Nikon Z6 and 7 (due to weight and my opinion of newer Nikon lenses, not cost).
After using FUJIFILM's EVF/OVF, an OVF is a non-negotiable, must have feature. If I was moving from a DSLR to digital mirrorless, I wonder if I would understand how the OVF means I can use the camera as I once used my Zeiss Ikon ZM? That said, the EOS RP's articulated LCD screen would be very convenient when the camera is on a tripod. Which reminds me, neither camera has internal image stabilization.
The EOS R is not ISO-invariant (ISO gain is required to optimize shadow-region IQ). This is not an inherent disadvantage, but sometimes it's simpler to ignore ISO and just concentrate on the optimum shutter time and aperture. And for in-camera JPEGs ISO-invariance is irrelevant. The EOS RP's sensor is assumed to be similar to the EOS 6D II. This sensor's sensitivity is similar to the X-Pro 2's.
After using cameras with 24 X 36 mm and APS-C sensors, I don't consider either to be inherently superior. I think the most important factor is what lenses does one already own. Another involves the type of work one intends to do. That said, nothing beats sensor area in terms of maximizing total signal level. This can make a difference. Increasing lens surface area is a separate way to maximize the total signal level. But then the lenses become larger, heavier and more expensive.
For my needs a F 2 prime gets the job done. At shorter focal lengths I'm OK with F 2.8.
If sensor area was important for my work I would skip 24 X 36 mm sensors and jump to the medium-format mirrorless sensor area.
Range-rover
Mentor
Results do look good, looks like another winner from Canon.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
If those are results which looks good, then I really miss something. Here is no even single shot on high iso and portraits are mushy where focus is.
ptpdprinter
Mentor
You can't tell anything from internet photos. Those shots could have been made by any camera.
giganova
Well-known
Today I had a chance to hold a number of mirrorless cameras side-by-side and play with them for an hour or so: Canon EOS-RP, Canon EOS-R, Nikon Z7, Nikon Z6, Fuji X-Pro2, X100F, and a number of Fuji X-T models (plus many Sony/Olympus/Panasonic/etc I don't care much about). Here are my observations:
The Canon EOS bodies had by far the best build quality and they felt very solid and ergonomic in my hand. The top-panel LCD on the EOS-R is a nice feature and looks beautiful. The Canon EOS-RP body is a bit short, though, and I see the need for the available extension grip. The EVF was the best in terms of size, response (refresh rate and flicker), contrast & brightness, and the eye relieve was much larger than any of the other cameras. However, even though customers only had a few hours to play with these cameras, the plastic lens barrel was already broken and had a wide crack with sharp plastic peeling off! How come my Leica and Nikon AI-S lenses are decades old and work like new, and this lens didn't survive a few hours inside a store?!? The lens had trouble locking focus, but maybe this was because the lens barrel had a crack. Plus, the lens looked HUGE for the small bodies. What I hated is that the ON/OFF wheel is on the left of the bodies, so you need both hands to turn the camera on! What was Canon thinking?!
The Nikon Zs felt very solid, too, but the design and arrangements of the buttons didn't seem very natural and the bodies didn't feel as ergonomic in my hands as the Canon bodies.
The Fujis were surprisingly small, especially the X-T models. In fact, too small for my hands to feel comfortable. To my surprise, the optical viewfinder of the X-Pro2, X100F did nothing for me because they lacked frame lines, so I had no clue what I was framing and what would end up on the photos, and there was no other info in the optical viewfinder such as exposure time, f/stop, etc. Plus, I had no clue what the lens focused on until I looked at the photos on the display at the back. I thought to myself "Why am I even looking through this OVF if its adding zero information?" I thought maybe it was operator error and I need to add some electronic info somewhere in the menus? I gave up going through the menu after 10 minutes because I didn't find anything. Very odd. When I switched to the EVF, I found it rather small, the resolution was not very high, the contrast low and not bright enough. Plus, when flipping from OVF to EVF, they didn't match and the images jumped. Very disappointing. The zoom lenses that were mounted on the X-T had a huge lag when I zoomed in & out which felt very unnatural, and the zoom speed was not linear, it accelerated while zooming. Very weird! But I loved the small sizes of the lenses, which matched the body sizes nicely.
To me, the Canon EOS-R was the clear winner, followed by the EOS-RP. But the poor build quality of the (huge!) lenses worries me a lot because the lens that was mounted was already broken. I never had a Canon camera in my life but I think I'm ready to switch because Canon did an outstanding job with these mirrorless cameras!
The Canon EOS bodies had by far the best build quality and they felt very solid and ergonomic in my hand. The top-panel LCD on the EOS-R is a nice feature and looks beautiful. The Canon EOS-RP body is a bit short, though, and I see the need for the available extension grip. The EVF was the best in terms of size, response (refresh rate and flicker), contrast & brightness, and the eye relieve was much larger than any of the other cameras. However, even though customers only had a few hours to play with these cameras, the plastic lens barrel was already broken and had a wide crack with sharp plastic peeling off! How come my Leica and Nikon AI-S lenses are decades old and work like new, and this lens didn't survive a few hours inside a store?!? The lens had trouble locking focus, but maybe this was because the lens barrel had a crack. Plus, the lens looked HUGE for the small bodies. What I hated is that the ON/OFF wheel is on the left of the bodies, so you need both hands to turn the camera on! What was Canon thinking?!
The Nikon Zs felt very solid, too, but the design and arrangements of the buttons didn't seem very natural and the bodies didn't feel as ergonomic in my hands as the Canon bodies.
The Fujis were surprisingly small, especially the X-T models. In fact, too small for my hands to feel comfortable. To my surprise, the optical viewfinder of the X-Pro2, X100F did nothing for me because they lacked frame lines, so I had no clue what I was framing and what would end up on the photos, and there was no other info in the optical viewfinder such as exposure time, f/stop, etc. Plus, I had no clue what the lens focused on until I looked at the photos on the display at the back. I thought to myself "Why am I even looking through this OVF if its adding zero information?" I thought maybe it was operator error and I need to add some electronic info somewhere in the menus? I gave up going through the menu after 10 minutes because I didn't find anything. Very odd. When I switched to the EVF, I found it rather small, the resolution was not very high, the contrast low and not bright enough. Plus, when flipping from OVF to EVF, they didn't match and the images jumped. Very disappointing. The zoom lenses that were mounted on the X-T had a huge lag when I zoomed in & out which felt very unnatural, and the zoom speed was not linear, it accelerated while zooming. Very weird! But I loved the small sizes of the lenses, which matched the body sizes nicely.
To me, the Canon EOS-R was the clear winner, followed by the EOS-RP. But the poor build quality of the (huge!) lenses worries me a lot because the lens that was mounted was already broken. I never had a Canon camera in my life but I think I'm ready to switch because Canon did an outstanding job with these mirrorless cameras!
giganova
Well-known
Let me qualify my verdict a little bit:
Mirrorless technologies have led to miniaturization of camera bodies that I find too small to be ergonomic. Plus, any EVF is a poor representation of what the lens actually sees. Even with today's highest resolution EVFs, you still see pixels, some flicker, some lag time, and the image does not look natural because, after all, you look at a tiny electronic display.
To be honest, optical viewfinders of DSLRs are a thing of beauty!
Mirrorless technologies have led to miniaturization of camera bodies that I find too small to be ergonomic. Plus, any EVF is a poor representation of what the lens actually sees. Even with today's highest resolution EVFs, you still see pixels, some flicker, some lag time, and the image does not look natural because, after all, you look at a tiny electronic display.
To be honest, optical viewfinders of DSLRs are a thing of beauty!
bayernfan
Well-known
Agreed. Optical trumps anything electronic. Part of the reason the D850 is such an appealing digital body to me is the VF.
Dogman
Mentor
Canon has always been able to build extremely ergonomic cameras and even their plastic Rebel bodies have had good build quality. Canon's AF has always been reliable, at least in my observation. I expect that lens was broken inside as well as out. I respect Nikon but I haven't used one in many years but I would think their cameras are the equal of Canons as far as build and function are concerned.
Your observation about the Fuji X-Pro2 and X100F has me a bit baffled. The part about the OVFs not having frame lines. Both cameras have frame lines that are pretty darn accurate in framing, at least as accurate as any separate viewfinder camera can be. While it's possible that both cameras were defective, it's unlikely both would have defects in the same feature. They also have a green indicator lights to show the AF sensor when in focus. It's likely someone moved settings on both cameras to something that turned these features off. I use both X-Pro1 and X-Pro2 cameras as well as the older X100S mainly with the OVFs and the experience you had with them is not at all the way these cameras work.
It depends on what you like. EVFs show me my exposure in a way that I love. I work with a lot of harsh shadows and I know what I’m getting with an evf.
And to the guy who said Fuji’s OVFs have no information, they most likely set it up that way in the shop and you just have to add everything back in the menus. But there so much information you can have in the ovf if you want it.
willie_901
Mentor
The added information is the same as with any RF. You can see what's outside the frame. Choosing OVF finder information content is straight forward. The frame lines are easy to see and you can invoke parallax correction. One can also select camera parameter information as well. The OVF can look as crowded or as clean as you need.
Not so odd at all. You have to read the manual or do a Google search for tutorials to understand how to set the camera up for your needs. This is the case for most brands. Otherwise fiddling with the Menu is a waste of time. Personally, I find this to be absurd when the camera could be set up using a phone/tablet App connected via WiFi. But this is the case for many brands. Try to set up a new Nikon DSLR for action photography AF and, or use their AF Fine-Tune function without spending some quality time with the manual.
Again, this is easy to change and optimize. But you have to read the manual.
How could they match? This is not possible. They must be different in every way. However, it is true the X-Pro 2's OVF is not great with zoom lenses. For that matter it isn't great with telephoto lenses either. But this the case for many RF finders. Separately, maximum speed and responsiveness requires that all energy saving Menu options are disabled.
giganova
Well-known
I would expect to see frame lines and exposure info in an optical viewfinder by default without having to read manuals and having to setup the camera -- especially for a demo model that is supposed to show what a camera can do. Every other digital camera with an optical viewfinder I have ever looked through showed theses essential informations. The user experience that Fuji is giving me left a very bad taste in my mouth.
ptpdprinter
Mentor
So you spent ten minutes trying to figure it out and didn't ask the salesman demoing the camera?
When you buy it, everything in the OVF is turned on. I know this because I’ve used all 6 of the Fuji’s with an ovf and I always have to turn that garbage off except framelines, frames remaining, and battery life. Someone played with it in the store and turned it all off is my guess.
Dogman
Mentor
As we have tried to point out, someone has set the cameras up this way. That is one of the good things about digital cameras--you can set them up to suit the way you want to use them. It's also one of the infuriating things about digital cameras--determining how to set them up. You have to take the time to read instructions and fiddle around with the options until you're satisfied.
ptpdprinter
Mentor
Or just ask the salesman demoing the camera. Beats futzing around with the menus for ten minutes and giving up.
bayernfan
Well-known
when I pick up a camera in a store to test it, I always go to settings tab and reset everything. makes things a lot simpler.
michaelwj
----------------
Hi Stefan,
Just add a little about the Fuji OVF. By default, tramlines and exposure information is displayed, along with everything else you'd expect in a digital camera. You can turn off what you want. This brings me to the question of how do I know what is in focus? If you push the VF toggle switch the other way, it brings up a little box in the bottom right corner that shows a magnifies EVF view of the area where the focus point is at. It makes it trivially easy to check focus.
I don't read the manual, I just play with it. If there's something I'm curious about then I google it.
The good thing about modern digital cameras is you can set them up how you want.
The bad thing about modern digital cameras is you can set them up how you want.
In the end if they're too small for you then it makes no difference. But apart from a DSLR, they're the only OVF available.
Just add a little about the Fuji OVF. By default, tramlines and exposure information is displayed, along with everything else you'd expect in a digital camera. You can turn off what you want. This brings me to the question of how do I know what is in focus? If you push the VF toggle switch the other way, it brings up a little box in the bottom right corner that shows a magnifies EVF view of the area where the focus point is at. It makes it trivially easy to check focus.
I don't read the manual, I just play with it. If there's something I'm curious about then I google it.
The good thing about modern digital cameras is you can set them up how you want.
The bad thing about modern digital cameras is you can set them up how you want.
In the end if they're too small for you then it makes no difference. But apart from a DSLR, they're the only OVF available.
Oren Grad
Well-known
Canon has stated explicitly that it is the same sensor except for modified microlenses.