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

[Kisaha]

3 hours ago, hmcindie said:

I agree but have you noticed how every other camera has it too? Professional cameras still have it and doing a scene like that on a C200 is horrible. Yeah it has half less but it's still visually easy to spot and if do a real bourne style fight scene with any of these cams you will have to change your settings to something that rolls less. So yeah, you could do that with an EOS R but you have to drop the resolution. But you have to drop it with every other cam too, especially FF ones. I shot a lot of that style of shit back in the day with a Canon 7d in 720p. Dropping the resolution is always an option and it works so these scenes are not out of the question.

Buy a used NX1 or NX500 for 400-500$. They do 7.9ms in 1080p and the quality is leaps ahead a6xx cameras 1080p. The NX1 also does usable 120f, unlike a6xx cameras wich 120f is completely unusable.

The issue is that have similar bad RS in 4K (even though is less than other cameras, but still at 30ms is terrible-also, it is alnost a 5 years old camera).

[Django]

RS on EOS R is poor in 4K.

That said if you’re shooting car chases or fight scenes RS will be an issue on most cameras (even pro cine cams unless you’re shooting an Alexa or GS camera).

I often notice RS skewing in big budget TV/Hollywood productions (just the other night watching The Sinner on a bridge shot).

RED even has an article on it:

https://support.red.com/hc/en-us/articles/236069387-8K-Sensors-and-Rolling-Shutter-Skew-Effects

They also suggest reducing the resolution to counter the issue.

I do this all the time on EOS R, mainly to get FF shots (you can easily switch from FHD to 4K with custom movie settings) but also to combat RS.

I just know when I’m in 4K to slow down camera movements.

 It’s far from ideal, it’s clearly a workaround the 4K crop & RS.

Hopefully EOS RP’s 24MP sensor will have similar or better RS performance to other 24MP cameras (A7III/Z6) as it probably won’t supersample. 

 

[newfoundmass]

2 minutes ago, Django said:

That said if you’re shooting car chases or fight scenes RS will be an issue on most cameras (even pro cine cams unless you’re shooting an Alexa or GS camera)

I shoot pro wrestling with the GH5 and while there is some RS no one really notices it. It doesn't bother me at all. 

I think I'd rip my hair out though if I was shooting with a Sony camera! 

[Nikkor]

15 minutes ago, Django said:

 

Hopefully EOS RP’s 24MP sensor will have similar or better RS performance to other 24MP cameras (A7III/Z6) as it probably won’t supersample. 

 

Neither does the EOS R, canon sensors are just too damn slow.

[Django]

Yeah but the R uses a 2.5 year old 30MP sensor.

15 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

I shoot pro wrestling with the GH5 and while there is some RS no one really notices it. It doesn't bother me at all. 

I think I'd rip my hair out though if I was shooting with a Sony camera! 

Yeah sorry I meant out of the big sensor cameras (Super35 and above).

Its worthy to note though that I’ve never heard a viewer complain about RS. It’s only to us camera nerds / content creators that it gets talked about..

[newfoundmass]

Yeah, I think a lot of people make a big deal out of rolling shutter when it should only be a problem for action and sports shooters. For most other stuff it can be minimized with steadier camera movement. Not that they shouldn't keep trying to improve it, especially on larger sensors, but I always kinda chuckle when people talk about needing global shutter cameras when no one should really need it unless they're shooting fighter jets or something. 

[JurijTurnsek]

Canon is coming out with 4 L lenses and one super zoom on the 14th, so where is the PRO body to go along with them? At least it shows that Canon is seriously committed to EOS R and where it is eventually headed.

[Tiago Rosa-Rosso]

RS makes you a steadier filmmaker.  

[DBounce]

14 hours ago, Towd said:

Have fun shooting something in this style on a camera with a lot of rolling shutter:

In my opinion it is one of the most creatively limiting artifacts in low budget cameras.  Just about everything else can be worked around from limited dynamic range, to depth of field, to iffy "color science".  But when something forces you to shoot in a certain style, it's very limiting creatively. 

It also can't really be fixed in post, and it's hell on VFX as well.  There is a reason pro cinema cameras all have extremely low rolling shutter.

You do know The Hurt Locker was shot on film right?

[thebrothersthre3]

2 hours ago, DBounce said:

You do know The Hurt Locker was shot on film right?

I don't think that takes away from his point but yeah.

[Mokara]

On 2/4/2019 at 11:31 AM, DBounce said:

Older lenses do not "cripple" the AF... where did you hear that? From my experience the AF is little different than on a native body.

The motors on older lenses are not designed for the rapid and dynamic response required for MILC focusing systems. DSLRs determine a range and send the lens to that point, whereas MILCs adjust the lens until a focus is found. The result is that most older Canon lenses which were designed for DSLR use are not ideal for MILC use. That is the main reason why the R system comes with new lenses. The old lenses can be used of course, but they are not ideal for the camera.

[thebrothersthre3]

1 minute ago, Mokara said:

The motors on older lenses are not designed for the rapid and dynamic response required for MILC focusing systems. DSLRs determine a range and send the lens to that point, whereas MILCs adjust the lens until a focus is found. The result is that most older Canon lenses which were designed for DSLR use are not ideal for MILC use. That is the main reason why the R system comes with new lenses. The old lenses can be used of course, but they are not ideal for the camera.

I completely understand why they would make new lenses. What is annoying is the new mount, unless that was necessary for the new lenses to perform better. 

[Mokara]

11 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Buy a used NX1 or NX500 for 400-500$. They do 7.9ms in 1080p and the quality is leaps ahead a6xx cameras 1080p. The NX1 also does usable 120f, unlike a6xx cameras wich 120f is completely unusable.

The issue is that have similar bad RS in 4K (even though is less than other cameras, but still at 30ms is terrible-also, it is alnost a 5 years old camera).

The NX cameras have noticeable aliasing in FHD mode though, which you rarely see in UHD mode. So you might solve one issue but add another in doing so.

[DBounce]

9 minutes ago, Mokara said:

The motors on older lenses are not designed for the rapid and dynamic response required for MILC focusing systems. DSLRs determine a range and send the lens to that point, whereas MILCs adjust the lens until a focus is found. The result is that most older Canon lenses which were designed for DSLR use are not ideal for MILC use. That is the main reason why the R system comes with new lenses. The old lenses can be used of course, but they are not ideal for the camera.

I think you are confusing focusing systems. "Contrast detect" hunts; moving past the point of focus and returning in order to establish sharp focus. DPAF does not hunt... regardless of which lens is used. I frequently use my 24-70mm F2.8, 16-35mm F4 and even my EF-S 10-18 on the EOS R... there is zero hunting. As there is also zero hunting on any other Canon bodies that I have used it on... C200 and 1DXMK2 to name a few. If the body support DPAF there is no hunting.

I'm curious... have you used this camera?

Now a case could be made regarding noise... not on the lenses I have previously mentioned. But if using in-camera mics, the 50mm F1.2 does make a noticeable sound when tracking focus. If recording audio externally, well it's a non-issue.

[thebrothersthre3]

4 minutes ago, DBounce said:

I think you are confusing focusing systems. "Contrast detect" hunts; moving past the point of focus and returning in order to establish sharp focus. DPAF does not hunt... regardless of which lens is used. I frequently use my 24-70mm F2.8, 16-35mm F4 and even my EF-S 10-18 on the EOS R... there is zero hunting. As there is also zero hunting on any other Canon bodies that I have used it on... C200 and 1DXMK2 to name a few. If the body support DPAF there is no hunting.

I'm curious... have you used this camera?

Now a case could be made regarding noise... not on the lenses I have previously mentioned. But if using in-camera mics, the 50mm F1.2 does make a noticeable sound when tracking focus. If recording audio externally, well it's a non-issue.

So in general the older mount lenses perform just as good?

[DBounce]

Just now, thebrothersthre3 said:

So in general the older mount lenses perform just as good?

In all honesty I think any difference is imperceivable. The magic happens in the body, not the lens. The adapted lenses work as well as the native glass. If I need a shallower DOF or want a wider angle, I do not hesitate to switch to an adapted lens. Their use is seamless.

[Towd]

3 hours ago, DBounce said:

You do know The Hurt Locker was shot on film right?

Of course.  It was also shot on 16mm and not full frame.  That was kind of my point.

Everything is a trade off.  Yes, there are varying levels rolling shutter on different cameras.  Yes you can get away with some things with moderate rolling shutter.  Yes, you can drop your resolution and improve rolling shutter performance.

All the mental gymnastics aside, I'm just pointing out that if you are shooting on a camera with large amounts of rolling shutter, you are going to need to modify your shooting style, limit a subject's motion, or possibly make image quality sacrifices.  You can also just stick your head in the sand and pretend rolling shutter is not a crappy artifact because you've spotted it in something you saw on Netflix. 

I'm not trying to discount the controlled camera motion crowd, the neighborhood walkabout cinematographer, the sleeping cat aficionado, or the Youtube vlogger (although they could really benefit from low rolling shutter).  There are a lot of valid styles and subjects.  I just think that ignoring it is a real issue in many scenarios and a tell tale sign of a cheap camera is a myopic viewpoint.

[Django]

 

51 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

So in general the older mount lenses perform just as good?

It isn't really that simple.

Canon uses two types of lens motors STM & USM. 

On legacy EF glass, STM will give smoother & more silent AF results for video.

With RF USM they use a new nano-USM tech that gives STM like smooth & silent video AF performance. 

Now from my legacy glass adapted on EOS R experience, USM EF glass is louder & a bit less responsive than on a Canon DSLR. (YMMV depending on lens).

STM EF is about the same.

 

[Mokara]

1 hour ago, DBounce said:

I think you are confusing focusing systems. "Contrast detect" hunts; moving past the point of focus and returning in order to establish sharp focus. DPAF does not hunt... regardless of which lens is used. I frequently use my 24-70mm F2.8, 16-35mm F4 and even my EF-S 10-18 on the EOS R... there is zero hunting. As there is also zero hunting on any other Canon bodies that I have used it on... C200 and 1DXMK2 to name a few. If the body support DPAF there is no hunting.

I'm curious... have you used this camera?

Now a case could be made regarding noise... not on the lenses I have previously mentioned. But if using in-camera mics, the 50mm F1.2 does make a noticeable sound when tracking focus. If recording audio externally, well it's a non-issue.

When I say "hunt" I am referring to the speed with which the lens can achieve focus and how it does that, not behaviour after it is there (which is probably what you are thinking about).

The phase detect systems used in DSLRs are a lot more accurate than the ones used in MILCs, even DPAF, which is why they are faster in general historically (MILCs are catching up though as a result of the sheer number of detect points they can monitor at any one time - this allows them to overcome the accuracy deficit to some extent). They allow the lens to be sent directly to the focus point, with fine tuning of exact focus by the contrast detect points. A MILC has to hunt around a bit initially, even with PD, for that reason, and that imposes a different behaviour on the lens motors. The motors on lenses made for DSLRs are designed with an expected behaviour in mind, but a different more responsive behaviour is required for a MILC.

Some of the more modern EF lenses do have suitable motors in them, but not all of the EF lenses do. And even those which are more suitable probably would perform better if they were designed specifically for a MILC system. 

[DBounce]

1 hour ago, Django said:

 

It isn't really that simple.

Canon uses two types of lens motors STM & USM. 

On legacy EF glass, STM will give smoother & more silent AF results for video.

With RF USM they use a new nano-USM tech that gives STM like smooth & silent video AF performance. 

Now from my legacy glass adapted on EOS R experience, USM EF glass is louder & a bit less responsive than on a Canon DSLR. (YMMV depending on lens).

STM EF is about the same.

 

Have you noticed anything that would deter you from using legacy glass on the R mount? Honestly of the lenses I own the difference is near enough as makes no difference.