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

[DBounce]

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

To counter-argue, I will need to write at least 50 pages, so if you didn't understand my previous 2 posts, then sorry, but I have very limited e-time.

I wasn't attacking anyone, I genuinely believe you have no clue about how the "industry" and audio and visual markets work.

Well maybe Canon will hire you as a consultant. You clearly understand the way industry works far better than they do?

[heart0less]

8 hours ago, Snowbro said:

Jon may be gone, but his spirit lives on in some of us

He began his own crusade on dpreview

(( :

[mkabi]

Yeah... 4K @ 30p cropped to 1.5...

Isn’t exciting enough...

If they pushed it to be equivalent in capabilities as the XT3... then I can say, “now we’re talking.”

And, to justify $1699 for it... I don’t know...

Too bad, Canon has had so many opportunities to turn it around.

[DBounce]

Rumored Canon EOS RP specifications:

Camera weight is 400g, the lightest full-frame mirrorless camera ever

A side-articulated monitor and a comfortable grip

A new 24MP CMOS sensor. Expect the performance similar to EOS R

No Touch Bar and top monitor but an extra dial

5FPS

Standard ISO 100-40000

Eye AF now supports Servo AF and Video AF

Dual Pixel AF speed is 0.05 sec.

USB-C and headphone jack are available. Battery charging while shooting is supported

Canon Log, HDMI clean output, and 1.56x 4K crop

Price is about $1300USD for body

[Video Hummus]

The real question is, but when is Peter McKinnon switch to the EOS RP?

[DBounce]

7 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

The real question is, but when is Peter McKinnon switch to the EOS RP?

Have you shot with the EOS R?

[Video Hummus]

13 minutes ago, DBounce said:

Have you shot with the EOS R?

A friend has one and so I’ve had some hands on time with it. He had only EF lenses because the RF ones cost a kidney. So that is my limit with it. The auto focus was worst than the 5DmIV and as a 1080p camera it was decent. But I’m not gonna pay 2500 for that shite in 2019. Yes it has canon colors. But imo, there are other great baked in colors form Panasonic and to an extent newer Sony bodies. The touch pad is a mistake in my opinion.

I was poking fun after Peter sold it as his next camera because the limitations would make him a better professional ?‍♂️. Yet he doesn’t use it for anything but stills. That’s telling. Tony says it’s a great “family cam”. OKAY.

The R is not as good as Canon could do. That’s the sad part and I think this RP is the same story.

[Michael Steiner]

40 minutes ago, DBounce said:

Rumored Canon EOS RP specifications:

Camera weight is 400g, the lightest full-frame mirrorless camera ever

A side-articulated monitor and a comfortable grip

A new 24MP CMOS sensor. Expect the performance similar to EOS R

No Touch Bar and top monitor but an extra dial

5FPS

Standard ISO 100-40000

Eye AF now supports Servo AF and Video AF

Dual Pixel AF speed is 0.05 sec.

USB-C and headphone jack are available. Battery charging while shooting is supported

Canon Log, HDMI clean output, and 1.56x 4K crop

Price is about $1300USD for body

I think this is to decent for a low end Canon release. 

If there actually is a new 24mp sensor in this Camera (with better DR than the one from the 6D II), Canon Log and 4K in a S35 crop (with DPAF working in 4K video) this would be an almost perfect B-camera for my needs and my new go to stills camera. But I don't think these are the real specs of that camera, at least not at that price point. I expect a mirrorless 6D II with 4k video but without DPAF in 4K.  

Come on Canon, just bring out an M5 II with full-sensor 4K, DPAF in 4K and Canon Log.

[DBounce]

1 minute ago, Video Hummus said:

A friend has one and so I’ve had some hands on time with it. He had only EF lenses because the RF ones cost a kidney. So that is my limit with it. The auto focus was worst than the 5DmIV and as a 1080p camera it was decent. But I’m not gonna pay 2500 for that shite in 2019. Yes it has canon colors. But imo, there are other great baked in colors form Panasonic and to an extent newer Sony bodies. The touch pad is a mistake in my opinion.

I was poking fun after Peter sold it as his next camera because the limitations would make him a better professional ?‍♂️. Yet he doesn’t use it for anything but stills. That’s telling. Tony says it’s a great “family cam”. OKAY.

The R is not as good as Canon could do. That’s the sad part and I think this RP is the same story.

Within the limitations is where you need to work... not just with the R... with all cameras. I use 4K all the time on the R. Yes there’s a crop... that’s been covered to death. But the image it produces is quite good. IMO, more filmic/cinematic than both Sony and Nikon. 

Side-by-side, comparing to the Z6, I can tell you that the Nikon’s is the more detailed image. The Sony produces a similarly detailed image. The problem is, for me at least, neither of these images feels very cinematic. They feel like video. Don’t get me wrong, they are certainly technically superior; and in low-light both handily outperform the Canon. But here in lies the problem. Regardless of technical superiority, the Canon just looks better. It looks organic. It moves better. And while the Canon cannot hope to compete at nose bleed ISOs, it works well up to 6400 or so, with noise looking more like film grain than the horrible confetti we are all too use to seeing.

Now here is the problem... while you can certainly sharpen the Canon image, there is no method I am aware of that can recreate the organic qualities that the Canon produces. I spent about two months comparing footage from these cameras. Trying to match to my C200 which is of course pretty flexible in post. During the course of this testing I tried numerous techniques, in an attempt to replicate the organic look that the EOS R could produce. I added filters to the lenses. Tried vintage glass. Used post processing... nothing... and I mean nothing could convincingly reproduce the filmic/organic feel of the Canon. Finally, frustrated and frankly, disappointed I opted to switch to the EOS R and part with the other “superior” cameras.

My conclusion: Cinema is art... and art is not a technical exercise. While the others are without doubt better spec wise, that means little if they fail to produce an image that you love.

I’m positive that if you search around you can find some awful EOS R footage. But I can tell you right now... that’s operator error... not the camera. In the right hands this camera can produce impressive imagery.

[ade towell]

27 minutes ago, Michi said:

I think this is to decent for a low end Canon release. 

If there actually is a new 24mp sensor in this Camera (with better DR than the one from the 6D II), Canon Log and 4K in a S35 crop (with DPAF working in 4K video) this would be an almost perfect B-camera for my needs and my new go to stills camera. But I don't think these are the real specs of that camera, at least not at that price point. I expect a mirrorless 6D II with 4k video but without DPAF in 4K.  

Come on Canon, just bring out an M5 II with full-sensor 4K, DPAF in 4K and Canon Log.

Yes unfortunately I can't see Canon giving us clog and a better 4k crop than the EOS-r for £1000 less, that's not the way they work.

[thebrothersthre3]

Looks like it'll be a better video cam than the EOS r, good job Canon.

[currensheldon]

Bunch of new lenses coming with this announcement as well:

Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM

Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM

Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

Canon RF 85mm f/1.2L USM

from: https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-to-announce-at-least-5-rf-lenses-next-week/

—

To me, that looks like a professional lineup. Not an entry level system. Perhaps Canon has a $3500 pro body hidden somewhere to go along with this announcement?

More likely, they’ll start using the RF Mount for cinema cameras, most likely the mythical C100 MarkIII or XC-15 style camera with interchangeable lenses. If they announce those at NAB 2018, you’ll have plenty of lenses for them. And both the 15-35mm and 24-70mm f2.8s have stabilization - huge for video.

There is a huge gap for a small form factor 4K 10-bit 422 workhorse camera in the $4000 - $6000 range. Canon could really make a big splash with that. 

[Nikkor]

I think this looks like a very nice beginner cam for girls who want to upload Portraits to instagram. The only Problem I see is the lens lineup right now (expensive lens, cheap body), strange timing 

[DBounce]

50 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Looks like it'll be a better video cam than the EOS r, good job Canon.

I didn’t see 10 bit on that list. Will DPAF work in 4K? I wouldn’t jump the gun just yet to assume it’s going to be better than the R for video.

7 minutes ago, Nikkor said:

I think this looks like a very nice beginner cam for girls who want to upload Portraits to instagram. The only Problem I see is the lens lineup right now (expensive lens, cheap body), strange timing 

Because $2300 body only is soooo cheap? They should give them away as prizes in children’s cereal boxes.

[thebrothersthre3]

Just now, DBounce said:

I didn’t see 10 bit on that list. Will DPAF work in 4K? I wouldn’t jump the gun just yet to assume it’s going to be better than the R for video.

I can see it happening though. The EOS R will target photographers who need the high MP. The higher crop 4k also makes sense for a more photo oriented camera. It makes sense for them to have a lower MP video featured camera.

That's the hope at least. This would actually make me consider Canon.

[hijodeibn]

55 minutes ago, DBounce said:

Within the limitations is where you need to work... not just with the R... with all cameras. I use 4K all the time on the R. Yes there’s a crop... that’s been covered to death. But the image it produces is quite good. IMO, more filmic/cinematic than both Sony and Nikon. 

Side-by-side, comparing to the Z6, I can tell you that the Nikon’s is the more detailed image. The Sony produces a similarly detailed image. The problem is, for me at least, neither of these images feels very cinematic. They feel like video. Don’t get me wrong, they are certainly technically superior; and in low-light both handily outperform the Canon. But here in lies the problem. Regardless of technical superiority, the Canon just looks better. It looks organic. It moves better. And while the Canon cannot hope to compete at nose bleed ISOs, it works well up to 6400 or so, with noise looking more like film grain than the horrible confetti we are all too use to seeing.

Now here is the problem... while you can certainly sharpen the Canon image, there is no method I am aware of that can recreate the organic qualities that the Canon produces. I spent about two months comparing footage from these cameras. Trying to match to my C200 which is of course pretty flexible in post. During the course of this testing I tried numerous techniques, in an attempt to replicate the organic look that the EOS R could produce. I added filters to the lenses. Tried vintage glass. Used post processing... nothing... and I mean nothing could convincingly reproduce the filmic/organic feel of the Canon. Finally, frustrated and frankly, disappointed I opted to switch to the EOS R and part with the other “superior” cameras.

My conclusion: Cinema is art... and art is not a technical exercise. While the others are without doubt better spec wise, that means little if they fail to produce an image that you love.

I’m positive that if you search around you can find some awful EOS R footage. But I can tell you right now... that’s operator error... not the camera. In the right hands this camera can produce impressive imagery.

DBounce, very interesting your conclusions, this kind of profesional work is what I am always looking here, if the R is more cinematic than the C200 that´s only good news for me, what about comparing the R with the C100/C300, how much cinematic is it?, I am using a C100 and very happy with the cinematic image for now...

[DBounce]

14 minutes ago, hijodeibn said:

DBounce, very interesting your conclusions, this kind of profesional work is what I am always looking here, if the R is more cinematic than the C200 that´s only good news for me, what about comparing the R with the C100/C300, how much cinematic is it?, I am using a C100 and very happy with the cinematic image for now...

To clarify, the EOS R is not more “cinematic” than the C200. And I never had that expectation. I wanted it to match... which it does very nicely. The other cameras I compared looked good, but not organic. They looked videoish... I’ll go one better. I believe the Nikon might have been more accurate in color... but that accuracy never equated to a more complementary image than the Canon. Which ultimately, just added up to more work in post... bending the image of the Sony and Nikon; and that extra time in post never equaled what the Canon could produce without trying.

The spec junkie in me REALLY hated parting with the other cameras. I knew by almost every measure they were better. But in the end the images spoke for themselves. 

The Canons strengths are intangible... ease/speed of use, pleasing imagery vs technical accuracy. It’s hard to understand until you shoot them all side by side. In the end you have to decide what matters most to you as a creator... technical specs or the end result? 

[currensheldon]

49 minutes ago, DBounce said:

To clarify, the EOS R is not more “cinematic” than the C200. And I never had that expectation. I wanted it to match... which it does very nicely. The other cameras I compared looked good, but not organic. They looked videoish... I’ll go one better. I believe the Nikon might have been more accurate in color... but that accuracy never equated to a more complementary image than the Canon. Which ultimately, just added up to more work in post... bending the image of the Sony and Nikon; and that extra time in post never equaled what the Canon could produce without trying.

The spec junkie in me REALLY hated parting with the other cameras. I knew by almost every measure they were better. But in the end the images spoke for themselves. 

The Canons strengths are intangible... ease/speed of use, pleasing imagery vs technical accuracy. It’s hard to understand until you shoot them all side by side. In the end you have to decide what matters most to you as a creator... technical specs or the end result? 

I love this because it’s so true. I went with Sony for a couple of years (FS7/5, A7s, A7rII) because they seemed to be crushing in specs. But despite all the technical prowess, the 8-bit HD image out of the 5 year old C100 was still way nicer looking. 

Now I have a mixture of Canon and the GH5, but will probably stick with Canon now that they have a full frame mirrorless line.

hoping for a $5000-ish cinema line camera with RF Mount soon as well. Then could be happy for a few years. 

[Nikkor]

2 hours ago, DBounce said:

I didn’t see 10 bit on that list. Will DPAF work in 4K? I wouldn’t jump the gun just yet to assume it’s going to be better than the R for video.

Because $2300 body only is soooo cheap? They should give them away as prizes in children’s cereal boxes.

Huh? The rumor is saying something about 1300$. I paid that for a crappy nikon d7000 back in 2010.

I think this Camera is going to sell very good.

[thebrothersthre3]

TBH the lenses are kind of holding me back from going Canon. One of the big advantages of switching to Canon for me would be lens selection. But if older lenses cripple the auto focus that kind of kills it.