Canon EOS RP specs leaked, features 26MP sensor and 4K video

[Nikkor]

You can take those pictures with a Canon 5d mk ii, Nobody will notice poor shadows on those tiny Instagram pictures.

[thebrothersthre3]

8 hours ago, Nikkor said:

You can take those pictures with a Canon 5d mk ii, Nobody will notice poor shadows on those tiny Instagram pictures.

true

[iamoui]

Has anyone seen Ken Rockwell's RP review? https://kenrockwell.com/canon/eos-r/rp.htm

Interesting to note:

• 4k has ALL-I (480 Mbps) or IPB (120 Mbps). IPB only for 1080p.
• Canon Log internal??
• Uncompressed 4K UHD 4:2:2 10- or 8-bit HDMI output with Canon Log. Neutral (Rec. 709 or Rec. 2020) and Cinema EOS Original (Rec. 709) color matrices.

Am I reading this correctly? His reviews are extremely in-depth I can't imagine these are oversights.

[DBounce]

1 hour ago, iamoui said:

Has anyone seen Ken Rockwell's RP review? https://kenrockwell.com/canon/eos-r/rp.htm

Interesting to note:

• 4k has ALL-I (480 Mbps) or IPB (120 Mbps). IPB only for 1080p.
• Canon Log internal??
• Uncompressed 4K UHD 4:2:2 10- or 8-bit HDMI output with Canon Log. Neutral (Rec. 709 or Rec. 2020) and Cinema EOS Original (Rec. 709) color matrices.

Am I reading this correctly? His reviews are extremely in-depth I can't imagine these are oversights.

He did this one in a hurry. Those look more like EOS R specs.

[iamoui]

2 minutes ago, DBounce said:

He did this one in a hurry. Those look more like EOS R specs.

Yeah he must have copy/pasted from his R review?

[liork]

He is funny.

[DBounce]

On 2/3/2019 at 10:21 AM, DBounce said:

Well that’s interesting, the vast majority are using Sony FS cameras yet in this video about which cameras were used to shoot the academy award nominated films this year... no mention of Sony? I hear Panavision... Red... ARRI... oh and Canon... but no Sony? Hmmm?

 

https://***URL not allowed***/oscars-2019-all-nominated-documentaries-shot-on-canon-cameras/

[Jordan Garcia]

Curious, do you think this might be a good companion to the GH5? I've been considering selling my GH5 lately, because I've been wanting to go a full-frame route, but I'm thinking, since I already own quite a few GH5 accessories, maybe this would be a nice segue into a Canon system? 

[Mokara]

18 hours ago, DBounce said:

https://***URL not allowed***/oscars-2019-all-nominated-documentaries-shot-on-canon-cameras/

That would be because arts types are also equipment snobs in general. Most of them probably would not be caught dead with anything other than an Apple product (where applicable) for example. The type of person who shoots documentaries with awards in mind (in other words, as "art" rather than as content) is probably going to use the "right" sort of equipment. It is a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts. For them, if they don't use a Canon they are not a real artist, so they use a Canon. If they used something else, their fellow artists would consider whatever they made as "not looking right" and hence not "art", so they would not win any awards (or at least, not stand much chance of winning). That is why all of those docs were shot on Canon equipment.

On the other hand people who shoot documentaries primarily as content are going to be more concerned with equipment specs, so their choices will be different.

[Mattias Burling]

8 minutes ago, Mokara said:

That would be because arts types are also equipment snobs in general. Most of them probably would not be caught dead with anything other than an Apple product (where applicable) for example. The type of person who shoots documentaries with awards in mind (in other words, as "art" rather than as content) is probably going to use the "right" sort of equipment. It is a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts. For them, if they don't use a Canon they are not a real artist, so they use a Canon. If they used something else, their fellow artists would consider whatever they made as "not looking right" and hence not "art", so they would not win any awards (or at least, not stand much chance of winning). That is why all of those docs were shot on Canon equipment.

On the other hand people who shoot documentaries primarily as content are going to be more concerned with equipment specs, so their choices will be different.

For a minute I thought you where serious.

[webrunner5]

2 hours ago, Jordan Garcia said:

Curious, do you think this might be a good companion to the GH5? I've been considering selling my GH5 lately, because I've been wanting to go a full-frame route, but I'm thinking, since I already own quite a few GH5 accessories, maybe this would be a nice segue into a Canon system? 

I really don't think it is going to be very easy to mix the two together. Most Panasonic stuff is pretty sharp, and most Canon stuff other than a C100, C300 is pretty soft. Not counting the Color Science difference. Best companion to the GH5 is another Panasonic camera like the G85 or G9. Even the GH4 has different looking CS. You have to be pretty damn talented with Grading to mix cameras. Why go to the hassle. Heck this new Canon cheaper FF camera might be a good option to start with on Canon. Personally I think FF is a total waste of time for Video. Almost everything you have ever seen in the last 10 years, or see now is shot in s35 unless it was shot on film.

[Mokara]

34 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

For a minute I thought you where serious.

I am serious.

[DBounce]

2 hours ago, Mokara said:

That would be because arts types are also equipment snobs in general. Most of them probably would not be caught dead with anything other than an Apple product (where applicable) for example. The type of person who shoots documentaries with awards in mind (in other words, as "art" rather than as content) is probably going to use the "right" sort of equipment. It is a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts. For them, if they don't use a Canon they are not a real artist, so they use a Canon. If they used something else, their fellow artists would consider whatever they made as "not looking right" and hence not "art", so they would not win any awards (or at least, not stand much chance of winning). That is why all of those docs were shot on Canon equipment.

On the other hand people who shoot documentaries primarily as content are going to be more concerned with equipment specs, so their choices will be different.

This is a nonsensical argument. Too much low hanging fruit to pick off here. If this is honestly your view, what can I say... good luck with that!

[hijodeibn]

3 hours ago, Mokara said:

I am serious.

Wow, so the the guys who are nominated to the Oscars are just snobs who doesn`t know anything about the right equipment to make their productions to shine over the crow?, then, where are the EXPERTS who are using sony, panasonic, etc....? , why their productions are not nominated to the Oscars?, is it a Canon conspiration?, I have hear non senses before, but this one really SHINE OVER THE CROW!!!!

[Django]

4 out of 5 of those docus were shot on C300 II (Minding the Gap was filmed over a 12 year period starting on a 5D and ending on the C300).

While the 5D4/6D2 & EOS R/RP may have disappointed many in the video specs field, it is worth noting the C line is still going strong inside the industry.

And it's not a "snob" thing.. That would be more ARRI/RED territory..

For under $10K the C300 II is the perfect run'n'gun camera: Built like a tank, Long battery life, Dual Pixel AF (game changer for single operators), WideDR profile..

.. and it can shoot 12-bit 444 2K & 10-bit DCI 4K internally. Meaning its broadcast & cine friendly. Those are all facts, not subjective fanboyism.

Meaning that's before even considering Canon's colour science, lens selection, ergonomics, UI..etc.

Another important factor is reliability.. and Canon has some of the best pro customer service, especially right there near Hollywood with their Burbank repair facility.

So while internet trolls & spec sheet observers are quick to attack Canon on their lower-end offerings and "behind technology", many others are just busy making money & winning academy awards using their "outdated" professional gear.. Go figure!

 

 

 

[ade towell]

I wouldn't say the c300 II is perfect for run n gun - like all the cXXX cameras (I have the c100) they only work well handheld if you use it completely barebones, just lens and either use the viewfinder or cradle it. They are horrible cameras ergonomically to set up for shoulder use, they are too high and unwieldly, the c300 II being the worst of the bunch especially with where the audio ports are. The c200 is a little better but still. I wish they would (and this goes for all the other manufacturers too) create a camera with a lower centre of gravity like some of the old 16mm film cameras that would work better for on the shoulder work. It would also eradicate such a reliance on lenses with IS. Actually the c700 is better in that regard but is obviously aimed at a different market

[Django]

23 minutes ago, ade towell said:

They are horrible cameras ergonomically to set up for shoulder use, they are too high and unwieldly, the c300 II being the worst of the bunch especially with where the audio ports are.

1

This guy begs to disagree..

 

[ade towell]

He's getting the shot but I bet it wasn't enjoyable, looks very unwieldly - was thinking more like the old Aaton ethos

[DBounce]

3 hours ago, Django said:

So while internet trolls & spec sheet observers are quick to attack Canon on their lower-end offerings and "behind technology", many others are just busy making money & winning academy awards using their "outdated" professional gear.. Go figure!

I don't think you could ask for a better endorsement than the fact that every nominated doc was shot on Canons. Any arguments that suggest otherwise are plainly disingenuous. 

[Kisaha]

2 hours ago, DBounce said:

I don't think you could ask for a better endorsement than the fact that every nominated doc was shot on Canons. Any arguments that suggest otherwise are plainly disingenuous. 

What about all the rest of the productions that shot with different cameras?

What about all the rest Oscar winners that didn't use a Canon?

What about the vast majority of tv and studio tv work beeing created but other manufactures?

Aren't those self explantory arguments?

I understand why a hobbyist like you would prefer Canon, or an - internet only content creator like Django, but defending the wrong choices of a manufacturer doesn't bring better cameras for all of us.

If it wasn't for bold moves by Samsung, Panasonic and BlackMagic, C100 and 80D would be still the only choice for sub 5.000$€£ video. Luckily for us, it is not.