Canon EOS-R8, EOS-R50 And New Lenses Announced

[gt3rs]

6 hours ago, herein2020 said:

I am sure they will sell loads of these but to me its hard to tell who will buy this. The absolute only feature that I think is surprising at its price point is the uncropped downsampled 4K60FPS, everything else is a major compromise IMO:

 

• No IBIS - That rules out most vloggers
• Tiny Battery - Anyone who already owns a Canon body will think twice about getting a new body that requires a different battery.
• Single card slot - understandable at this price point but IMO this single missing feature eliminates this camera from even being used as a B or C camera for paid work. 
• No Hybrid Hotshoe - Once again, understandable at this price point, but I would have thought Canon would standardize on that feature for all new bodies not to mention it might drive sales of Canon accessories.
• Price - This camera is definitely priced out of Canon Rebel territory, but it has the ergonomics of a Canon Rebel. Definitely better specs, but the same ergonomics. Combine that with expensive RF lenses or having to buy EF lenses and an adapter vs crop sensor lenses like the Canon Rebel and you have a rather expensive setup with tons of compromises.

Of course I am biased since I own (and love) my R7, but IMO if you are going with a Canon body at this price point the R7 is a way better value. The R8 makes you accept too many compromises just to say you have a FF sensor and to get non line skipped 4K60FPS.

Also, I agree with @Andrew Reid the ergonomics look pretty awful; the only thing that makes the R7 tolerable without the back wheel is the wheel around the joystick, even then I still wish the R7 had included the back wheel as well just to keep some consistency when paired with the R5.

BTW Canon is confusing me these days, it seems like no two bodies are even the same button layout. I think the wheel around the joystick is great and should have made an appearance with the R6II but it didn't. It would have also made the button layout of the R8 a bit more tolerable.

Needless to say, this is a big nope for me, but Canon being Canon, they will sell tons of these and convert tons more new buyers to their RF lenses. A body like this reminds me of printers; they get you with the rock bottom prices and loads of features....the sticker price comes later when you need to buy the ink. With this body they get you with the low price then you are stuck with either more compromises (buying "new" EF mount lenses), or they get you with the RF lens prices since I get the feeling that most buyers of this body won't already be in Canon's FF ecosystem.

R8 has the hybrid hotshoe.

Expensive RF lens like the RF 100-400, 600 11, 800 11, 24-105 7.1, 24-240, 16, 24, 35, 50, 85 STM, 24-50, 15-30….

I don’t think people buying an entry level R body will buy 28-70 2.0 or 50 1.2

Yes canon should have included IBIS, a bigger battery, a bigger body and call it R6 II….. boy it cost 1000$ (40%) less it cannot be the same.

The Sony a7c cost 300$ more has no dual card neither, max 10fps vs 40, 4k 30 max and with a 1.2 crop at 30, 8bit only, half the res touch screen…. people should get real…

[newfoundmass]

3 hours ago, gt3rs said:

R8 has the hybrid hotshoe.

Expensive RF lens like the RF 100-400, 600 11, 800 11, 24-105 7.1, 24-240, 16, 24, 35, 50, 85 STM, 24-50, 15-30….

I don’t think people buying an entry level R body will buy 28-70 2.0 or 50 1.2

Yes canon should have included IBIS, a bigger battery, a bigger body and call it R6 II….. boy it cost 1000$ (40%) less it cannot be the same.

The Sony a7c cost 300$ more has no dual card neither, max 10fps vs 40, 4k 30 max and with a 1.2 crop at 30, 8bit only, half the res touch screen…. people should get real…

The A7c is like 3 years old. We're setting the bar awful low if "it's a better value than a 3 year old camera" is all it takes to praise Canon. It seems like any time they don't release a complete lemon people feel the need to praise them like you'd praise a dog for going to the bathroom outside while potty training them. (sorry, I'm currently potty training a pup!) 

[newfoundmass]

Ultimately Canon accomplished what they wanted by including uncropped 4K60 because that simple fact has blinded some people into thinking this is some great release/super value camera. To be clear, it's not an awful release, but let's stop praising Canon because they're doing more than the bare minimum finally. 

 

[Kisaha]

I am buying this. It has all I need, except the stupid battery, but is also a lot smaller and lighter than the R7, which will be my main workhorse of the near future (or now). 

I always had multiple bodies anyway, I still have 5 NX bodies (I only use the NX500 and 1 NX1 out of those) and a Pocket4K (amd the R7), what I am missing is a full frame body which doesn't have to be a premium model.

Canon RP is 9th in amazon.com after a bunch of A7x, ZV and a6xxx versions. R5 is sixth and G7 4th I believe..

In BCN Fuji and Pana didn't have a single model at the top 10..

"Canon EOS M50 Mark II(sold as EOS Kiss M2 in Japan) is at the top of the list in 2022 followed by the popular vlogger focused Sony ZV-E10 camera. 2021's best seller Sony Alpha a6400 dropped to 5th position this year. Olympus PEN E-PL10 is the only MFT camera in the list just like last year and Nikon managed to slide in only one camera, the Nikon Z50. Canon EOS RP  and the Sony Alpha A7 IV are the only two Full-frame cameras in the list."

RP is sixth in total sales, the Sony 7th..

[gt3rs]

3 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

The A7c is like 3 years old. We're setting the bar awful low if "it's a better value than a 3 year old camera" is all it takes to praise Canon. It seems like any time they don't release a complete lemon people feel the need to praise them like you'd praise a dog for going to the bathroom outside while potty training them. (sorry, I'm currently potty training a pup!) 

Happy to see your comparison with other FF in the same price range.... Nikon Z5 😁 ? 

 

[herein2020]

10 hours ago, gt3rs said:

R8 has the hybrid hotshoe.

Expensive RF lens like the RF 100-400, 600 11, 800 11, 24-105 7.1, 24-240, 16, 24, 35, 50, 85 STM, 24-50, 15-30….

I don’t think people buying an entry level R body will buy 28-70 2.0 or 50 1.2

Yes canon should have included IBIS, a bigger battery, a bigger body and call it R6 II….. boy it cost 1000$ (40%) less it cannot be the same.

The Sony a7c cost 300$ more has no dual card neither, max 10fps vs 40, 4k 30 max and with a 1.2 crop at 30, 8bit only, half the res touch screen…. people should get real…

I didn't say it should have a single thing it doesn't have, all I did was compare the missing features to the type of people those missing features will drive away and concluded with the fact that IMO the R7 at the same price point is a better value while I tried to imagine what type of consumer would find the R8 appealing; I never said it should have xyz feature at its price point.

Also, I didn't find in Canon's documentation for the R8 that it has the hybrid hotshoe, maybe they say it in one of the YT videos or comprehensive reviews, but I didn't see it listed in Canon's marketing materials.

Yes, the RF lenses you listed are "cheap" for RF lenses but I was comparing the ergonomics of the R8 to the Canon Rebel and regardless of how cheap RF lenses are when compared to other RF lenses, they are still more expensive than APS-C lenses meaning you are still  paying quite a bit for a camera that has a lot of compromises at its price point considering the R7 at the same price point has none of them.

[Django]

6 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

The A7c is like 3 years old. We're setting the bar awful low if "it's a better value than a 3 year old camera" is all it takes to praise Canon. It seems like any time they don't release a complete lemon people feel the need to praise them like you'd praise a dog for going to the bathroom outside while potty training them. (sorry, I'm currently potty training a pup!) 

It's the most entry-level FF model, that's why it should be compared to the similarly priced A7C. Not a Z9, A1 etc.

And yeah Canon should be praised for not gimping the video specs and giving it FF4K60p & 10-bit.

Like I said this is beneficial for consumers no matter if you're on a rival system. Like for example hopefully it pushes Sony to replace the A7C with an updated A7IV sensor and also give it 10-bit & 4K60p. Alongside IBIS it would have an advantage and be competitive.  

9 minutes ago, herein2020 said:

I didn't say it should have a single thing it doesn't have, all I did was compare the missing features to the type of people those missing features will drive away and concluded with the fact that IMO the R7 at the same price point is a better value while I tried to imagine what type of consumer would find the R8 appealing; I never said it should have xyz feature at its price point.

Also, I didn't find in Canon's documentation for the R8 that it has the hybrid hotshoe, maybe they say it in one of the YT videos or comprehensive reviews, but I didn't see it listed in Canon's marketing materials.

Yes, the RF lenses you listed are "cheap" for RF lenses but I was comparing the ergonomics of the R8 to the Canon Rebel and regardless of how cheap RF lenses are when compared to other RF lenses, they are still more expensive than APS-C lenses meaning you are still  paying quite a bit for a camera that has a lot of compromises at its price point considering the R7 at the same price point has none of them.

Well for starters R7 is an APS-C cam so that's a pretty big compromise if you have FF EF/RF glass. There really isn't much in terms of APS-C RF options. IQ wise, R7 4K60p is line-skipped. You do get a slightly better body & IBIS. But for those that need/want FF on a budget, that is R8s target. Just look at it as the new and enhanced RP. I could see myself grabbing one for a B-Cam + travel cam.

 

[herein2020]

18 minutes ago, Django said:

It's the most entry-level FF model, that's why it should be compared to the similarly priced A7C. Not a Z9, A1 etc.

And yeah Canon should be praised for not gimping the video specs and giving it FF4K60p & 10-bit.

Like I said this is beneficial for consumers no matter if you're on a rival system. Like for example hopefully it pushes Sony to replace the A7C with an updated A7IV sensor and also give it 10-bit & 4K60p. Alongside IBIS it would have an advantage and be competitive.  

Well for starters R7 is an APS-C cam so that's a pretty big compromise if you have FF EF/RF glass. There really isn't much in terms of APS-C RF options. IQ wise, R7 4K60p is line-skipped. You do get a slightly better body & IBIS. But for those that need/want FF on a budget, that is R8s target. Just look at it as the new and enhanced RP. I could see myself grabbing one for a B-Cam + travel cam.

 

 

I guess I just look at it the other way, I don't consider the crop sensor to be a compromise at all and I use it with FF glass every day; in fact, I did not buy a single new lens for the R7, even my EF-S glass works with it.  I actually consider it a strength since it produces identical IQ as the R5 up to 3200ISO, but with better battery life, better IBIS, and better heat handling.

What I do consider a much bigger compromise is the single card slot, worse ergonomics, no IBIS, etc of the R8 just because it is a FF sensor.

I do agree, no matter who this camera appeals to; consumers win in the end with more choice.

[Django]

2 minutes ago, herein2020 said:

 

I guess I just look at it the other way, I don't consider the crop sensor to be a compromise at all and I use it with FF glass every day; in fact, I did not buy a single new lens for the R7, even my EF-S glass works with it.  I actually consider it a strength since it produces identical IQ as the R5 up to 3200ISO, but with better battery life, better IBIS, and better heat handling.

What I do consider a much bigger compromise is the single card slot, worse ergonomics, no IBIS, etc of the R8 just because it is a FF sensor.

I do agree, no matter who this camera appeals to; consumers win in the end with more choice.

Yeah the R7 as a B-cam to your R5 may work better for you and all the others that chose to buy an R7 for whatever reasons suit them. Other folks just might not want a crop sensor on their EF/RF lenses. 

And yes there are compromises with the R8. But as gt3rs pointed out, the R6ii takes care of all of them. you just have to pay extra. The R8 is a cut-down R6ii, wether or not it appeals to you is a different matter but rest assured there is a target market at that price point. As someone else pointed the RP is still a big seller on Amazon and such, despite super outdated specs.

[Django]

I do think what's interesting is that video is finally starting to become equally if not more important than stills for the general public. surely the influence of YouTube, social networks etc. Everybody wants to get into it, do slomo, grade their footage. This has the beneficiary effect of camera manufacturers putting higher video specs than previous generations inside low-mid tier bodies. Its a real change in policy for companies like Canon & Sony that used to really cripple hard on video specs to protect cine lines. I still think FF4K60p in 10-bit with Clog3 is quite a nice surprise in an entry-level FF mirrorless. Yeah its no big deal for all those of us with R5's, A7SIII's, S1Hs etc but think of the little guys 😉 

[gt3rs]

1 hour ago, herein2020 said:

I didn't say it should have a single thing it doesn't have, all I did was compare the missing features to the type of people those missing features will drive away and concluded with the fact that IMO the R7 at the same price point is a better value while I tried to imagine what type of consumer would find the R8 appealing; I never said it should have xyz feature at its price point.

Also, I didn't find in Canon's documentation for the R8 that it has the hybrid hotshoe, maybe they say it in one of the YT videos or comprehensive reviews, but I didn't see it listed in Canon's marketing materials.

Yes, the RF lenses you listed are "cheap" for RF lenses but I was comparing the ergonomics of the R8 to the Canon Rebel and regardless of how cheap RF lenses are when compared to other RF lenses, they are still more expensive than APS-C lenses meaning you are still  paying quite a bit for a camera that has a lot of compromises at its price point considering the R7 at the same price point has none of them.

Here is listed the hybrid hotshoe and even a pic with a mic.

https://www.newsshooter.com/2023/02/07/canon-eos-r8-r50-announced/

on dpreview you can see the hotshoe that has all the small pins on the back.

For the same shallow dof lenses you will spend less on the R8 than R7 lenses so I really don’t get this APS-C arguments that lens are cheaper they are not.

[newfoundmass]

5 hours ago, gt3rs said:

Happy to see your comparison with other FF in the same price range.... Nikon Z5 😁 ? 

 

One camera was released in 2023, the other was released in 2020. A 2023 camera shouldn't be comparable to a camera released nearly 3 years earlier, regardless of the price.

Canon doesn't deserve a ticker-tape parade for releasing an average camera with one great feature (and several handicaps) just because they priced it lower than a bunch of cameras that are 2-3 years older than it. It's a pretty damning indictment of Canon that people think they do simply for not releasing a lemon.

2 hours ago, Django said:

It's the most entry-level FF model, that's why it should be compared to the similarly priced A7C. Not a Z9, A1 etc.

An entry model camera that was released three years ago! Within 6 to 12 months there will be a FF camera that exceeds what the Canon R8 can do, and probably significantly, while priced competitively. 

 

2 hours ago, Django said:

And yeah Canon should be praised for not gimping the video specs and giving it FF4K60p & 10-bit.

You are laser focused on that one spec and just ignoring everything else that was cut from this camera. Outside that one spec, and the better autofocus, it's not even a more capable camera than the 2 1/2 year-old S5 that now goes for $1000 used and the same price brand new as the R8.

1 hour ago, herein2020 said:

I guess I just look at it the other way, I don't consider the crop sensor to be a compromise at all and I use it with FF glass every day; in fact, I did not buy a single new lens for the R7, even my EF-S glass works with it.  I actually consider it a strength since it produces identical IQ as the R5 up to 3200ISO, but with better battery life, better IBIS, and better heat handling.

The obsession with full frame has become so entrenched that functional cameras are completely dismissed by some folks because they have crop sensors. It's just crazy.

1 hour ago, Django said:

I still think FF4K60p in 10-bit with Clog3 is quite a nice surprise in an entry-level FF mirrorless. Yeah its no big deal for all those of us with R5's, A7SIII's, S1Hs etc but think of the little guys 😉 

It's not so much that it's not a big deal because of those cameras, it's just not that big of a deal because it's the natural progression camera companies have been moving toward, except most of those companies are moving towards that without removing camera features like Canon does.

[DampB]

7 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

You are laser focused on that one spec and just ignoring everything else that was cut from this camera.

Hello! 

What do you mean "cut from this camera"?. The R8 is the RP Mk II, but renamed to fit in with the rest of the lineup. Canon have upgraded the sensor and image processor to give it the latest AF and features, switched to the new MF hotshoe, and slightly rejigged the exterior and switches.

Seems like a decent upgrade to me.

[DampB]

On 2/8/2023 at 6:57 PM, Django said:

Agreed, EF L glass has never been cheaper and is still great. I also have some RF STM primes and they're cheap and compact, have IS and macro. It is a bummer no more third party lenses from Sigma and such though..

Yeah I don't get people complaining about the prices of the non-L RF lenses. Most seem to have added some extra features over the closest EF predecessors while keeping the prices reasonable, especially when compared to the original launch prices of those EF lenses.

[DampB]

On 2/8/2023 at 6:59 PM, Andrew Reid said:

Can you really say the back of the R8 looks anything like a near $2000 tool in 2023?

Isn't it a $1500 tool? That's "near $2000" to the same degree that it's also "near $1000". It's decently equipped for a camera that's "near $1000"!

On 2/8/2023 at 6:59 PM, Andrew Reid said:

4K/60p 15ms rolling shutter with good AF does not a great film make.

It will not make you into Spielberg.

Taken as an all-round package it just isn't very exciting as, say the X-H2 is.

The X-H2 is a proper pro and enthusiast camera with cutting edge specs.

Will X-H2 cutting edge specs make me into Spielberg? 😄

[ntblowz]

10 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

Ultimately Canon accomplished what they wanted by including uncropped 4K60 because that simple fact has blinded some people into thinking this is some great release/super value camera. To be clear, it's not an awful release, but let's stop praising Canon because they're doing more than the bare minimum finally. 

 

The simple fact is video quality on R8 should be better than any other similar price camera because of supersampled 4k60p from 6K sensor, not just uncropped FF4K60P with line skipping or pixel bining or S35 crop.

Some Cinema cameras don't have IS, AF, and need to be rigged with external battery, but I don't hear ppl bashing hard out on those short coming.

[Django]

1 hour ago, newfoundmass said:

An entry model camera that was released three years ago! Within 6 to 12 months there will be a FF camera that exceeds what the Canon R8 can do, and probably significantly, while priced competitively. 

 

We can only speak about what's out now. We can sure hope Sony will refresh the outdated A7C specs but they will have a big challenge with heat management in such a tiny body. 

Also keep in mind the original R6 that also came out three years ago already had things like FF 4K60p 10-bit, thanks to its sensor coming from the then flagship 1DX3. Its an interesting move from Canon putting flagship tech inside a low/mid tier camera and it sure has paid off (R6 is their biggest seller).

1 hour ago, newfoundmass said:

You are laser focused on that one spec and just ignoring everything else that was cut from this camera. Outside that one spec, and the better autofocus, it's not even a more capable camera than the 2 1/2 year-old S5 that now goes for $1000 used and the same price brand new as the R8.

I am focused on that feature because I find it so impressive that a $1500 camera can do it. Again you have to step up to a $4K A7SIII to do it in Sony land and its not even an oversampled image! I think not even the S1H can do it in Panny land. So its no small feat.

But sure we can talk about other things like the low rolling shutter and DPAF2 that crushes the S5's DFD.

But in the end the S5 and R8 target vastly different customers, it's pointless to even compare them.

1 hour ago, newfoundmass said:

It's not so much that it's not a big deal because of those cameras, it's just not that big of a deal because it's the natural progression camera companies have been moving toward, except most of those companies are moving towards that without removing camera features like Canon does.

You seem to fail to understand camera segments. Again the R8 is a cut down R6ii or an upgraded RP, however you wanna see it. They made some hardware choices to reach that $1500 entry-level price point. But aside from IBIS on the video side there are no compromises as far as specs. You get everything from the R6ii. You even get some things that aren't in the R5. This is a good philosophy and one can only hope Sony will follow. AFAIK Panasonic don't play in that $1500 FF segment so again pointless to even compare.

 

[herein2020]

1 hour ago, newfoundmass said:

The obsession with full frame has become so entrenched that functional cameras are completely dismissed by some folks because they have crop sensors. It's just crazy.

It is kind of funny to me considering the C70, C100, C200, C300, most of the BMP cameras, the GH5, GH6, etc. etc. all have 2 things in common; they are not full frame and they are lower resolution than the R7 yet when those sensors are wrapped in a cinema body people are willing to pay up to $16K for them. 

I used to think FF was the holy grail as well, until I shot with the GH5 for many years, now I care more about the rest of the ecosystem and body's features vs the sensor size.  If anything, the smaller sensors are really proving their worth since they are easier to cool, better on battery life, and easier to stabilize with IBIS.

Now with all of that said, I do think its impressive what you get for $1500.00, all I am saying is that I don't think its the best value today right now at that price point thanks to the R7. Even one year ago I'd probably have a different opinion.

 

1 hour ago, DampB said:

Isn't it a $1500 tool? That's "near $2000" to the same degree that it's also "near $1000". It's decently equipped for a camera that's "near $1000"!

Will X-H2 cutting edge specs make me into Spielberg? 😄

 

Andrew is in the UK, so it is actually over $2000USD for his country with the current exchange rates. I am not sure if the listed prices in the UK include VAT, if they do not then its actually $2400USD with 20% VAT added. So yes, it actually is "near $2000" if not over $2000USD in some parts of the world.

[DampB]

3 hours ago, herein2020 said:

Andrew is in the UK, so it is actually over $2000USD for his country with the current exchange rates. I am not sure if the listed prices in the UK include VAT, if they do not then its actually $2400USD with 20% VAT added. So yes, it actually is "near $2000" if not over $2000USD in some parts of the world.

The '£' symbol does exist for when referring to UK prices, which do by the way already have the VAT factored in.

[PannySVHS]

1799 in Europe. Rolling shutter 15ms in FF you say?:) Like the BMMCC I think, which I love for its motion cadence. If codec is fine, seems indeed interesting for people who don´t need HDMI full type or Ibis. No Raw out is fine, since Raw out and Micro Hdmi is not appealing. Still 1799, I would buy a used S5 instead, for half the price, which is crazy.