Canon EOS RP added to studio test scene comparison, sample gallery updated

Fist of all it is 1300$ not 1200$ and that's for USA only! If you add the kit lens it's 2200$ (BH prices).
In Europe it's more expensive at 1500eu body only or 2500eu with the kit lens (Amazon DE prices). For about the same or less money you can get the Sony A7RII, which is vastly superior in any department (including battery life). By the I've got the Sony A7III on a quick February deal and it costed as much as the EOS cRaP in Europe.
For what it's worth the Canon EOS cRaP is actually very expensive especially with the kit lens and offers so little in return!

Yes, well, that’s poor technique. Anyway, if it’s was ONE shot here and there, fair enough, but this happens aaaall they time.

Also remembering that all cameras underexpose as default. I’m shooting with the R and usually I’m at 1 and 1/3 stop over, using the histogram in the VF and having the controlring on the lens, it’s a simple 1/10th of a second adjustment .

I agree that the puppy is cute enough to forgive a little under :oP

still using the 6d (mark I) and not planning to change it before DR improves. EOS R (not RP) on the other hand can be a good step up from 6D, not RP though...

See test with color circles and you will see a HUGE difference between Fuji xt3 and canon, it is so obvious ! Fuji has a very low contrast and lacks of precision compared to Canon

Where are you seeing this? Lowlight performance is better, and dynamic range is only higher in RAW files at base ISO then starts to be identical. Then if course there"s the biggest IQ difference which is getting the FF lens image circle, meaning wider angles and shallow DOF (FF aesthetic).

Fuji is mushy.

xTrans is the worst. You must be blind if can't see that.
FF rules!

Dynamic range isn't image quality. The RP has plenty of flaws, but FF beats crop no sweat. Maybe you don't need higher definition images. But that doesn't change the fact. Get a larger / higher resolution monitor and you'll see.

Thank for wishing us luck with the RP!

No really, I think the XT3 stacks up incredibly well. I didn't know it had high ISO performance near identical to 6D/D750 rather than M50. There isn't much in it just a little less detail at 12800+. Great chip on the Fuji. I still prefer the RP for the FF images. An RP + RF 50/1.2 gives an image that's entirely untakeable by a Fuji system. But these aren't cheap lenses!

To some, image quality = Underexpose by 3-4 stops at base ISO and adjust in software.
You'll be surprised but there are far more parameters. I mean, far more.

Don't get me wrong. Great dynamic range is a fantastic feature. But that's what it is, a feature. Not image quality. IBIS doesn't compensate for having a tiny m4/3 sensor instead of FF. And great DR doesn't compensate for having APS-C image quality instead of FF image quality.
However, there are high contrast situations when you just have to underexpose some parts of the image and overexpose other parts. So that you can bring everything back in post. Not every camera is capable of such DR, but you can always use exposure bracketing and then produce a nice quality image with veeery deeep dynamic range, as deep as you want, no matter what camera you have. And it works perfectly well, specially when you need to do some focus stacking too, at the same time. While a great DR camera can only let you skip this extra step when you don't really need a super deep DR to make it work. But it's not as good as bracketing. Not even close.

I don't get how people say such stupid statements that RP is 1 full stop better in high ISO performance than Fuji, here is what I see (https://i.imgur.com/siongJd.jpg) and to me it is 90% identical maybe RP has more sharpness than Fuji but that's due to bad ACR conversion as we all know it is the worst Fuji converter. Not to mention the awful colors on RP but that's another subject...

@Nas from the Valley
Stop fooling around with the comparison tool. You can't see $#!T there. Download the RAWs and then we'll talk.

Take a look https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3827214348/albums/ff-vs-crop

Last Canon colors are 6D, 5D mk III and 5Ds/R

...and 6D MK2

What's wrong with 5D4 and the R? Same colors ...
Are you talking about OOC JPEG colors? I don't care about OOC JPEGs and who does ...

always RAW. And no, 5D4 and the R have a different look

very sure

The R has amazing JPEG colours. BTW, the R samples have a white balance tint applied in the EXIF data. This was discussed in the R days back then and DPR was pointed out.

The RP however, the flesh does look greener than 5DIV/6DII. Weird.

@Ebrahim Saadawi
Green shadow tint helps hiding the purple noise. Which the 6D2/RP sensor produces a lot (because of the low DR). Therefore, it might have been done on purpose, to make it look better.

ecka84: The tint was actually a WB shift added by DPR because they thought it would make the testshot more neutral. Which of course it didn’t.

No, I just don't see the point. Much as most Nikon buyers never saw the point in the D600/610 and instead opted to stay with APS or buy into the D750.

“I don’t understand the appeal of this product, which makes me smarter than those who do.”

@DiffractionLtd

How come it's "smarter" to buy a used camera?
Some (many) are fully aware of the used market, but want a new and unused camera with full warranty.
Always risks with buying used. With that said, I've bought both used and new myself. But i would never act condescending against people for buying a new camera. The EOS RP is priced right (it's quite a bit more expensive here in Sweden though.........).

The RP is priced right, I will get one eventually to travel and leave the the 5Dmk4 at home. It's stupid to think that because someone use a RP it will use cheap lenses, I used the m50 as my second camera when I traveled and used my best canon glass on it when needed, and I found that the lenses in the Canon M system lineup are very good too.

Plus no IBIS.

@Ecka "No. Enthusiasts prefer semi-pro type of cameras. Not consumer level. In Canon marketing, enthusiasts do not exist. They only make cameras for consumers and professionals. "
- hm... I would say the 6D was kind of an "enthusiasts" camera :)

@Peter1976
Yes, it was. It replaced the 5D2 for me. But it is still a very crippled camera even compared to the cheaper APS-C options like the 70D/80D. But at least it has/had a decent sensor back then in 2012, even better than 5D3. Unlike the RP.

Hey that's exactly what I believe too! Shallow DOF in video at 30p is going to be one big nail in Cameras' deepening coffins. If you missed it, the first phone to does this, is the new unreleased 5G version of the Samsung S10, which has a rear 4th camera module dedicated for depth mapping. They say this camera setup will be shown on the next Note device (10)

If a smart phone does everything you need, use it.

Higher end control comes in larger and larger and more expensive packages.

Fake bokeh will not kill any serious video work.

The galaxy is S10 is a freaking lens bag in your pocket. A 12mm, a 28mm and a 52mm, all stabilized with very good looking 12mp stills & 4K 60p. The only thing that's still making me use a camera is the deep DOF aesthetic on these 3 lenses. If they cleverly simulate fast primes, I'll be an obnoxious phone snapper :)

Maybe the RP is made for getting the EOS M users out of the M system. To let them taste and get addicted to FF :). Without scaring them off too much with size and price.

Never underestimate ergonomics and general user experience. I'm a big guy (199cm tall), with huge hands. And I'm getting more and more annoyed using my Sony A7iii (had the MK1 and MK2 before). The grip has gotten bigger and bigger, but now it's instead too cramped. I can't fit my fingers between the grip and lenses (especially the bigger lenses ). I love the tech and speed in the A7iii, but I LONG for a better grip and user experience without having to attach a battery grip (still won't solve the tight space between the grip and lenses). I still have some EF lenses, and I'm actually considering an EOS R or RP with bottom grip.. I know they're "worse" cameras from a technical standpoint. But I have a feeling ill enjoy using them more.

Then again, I will miss the video on the A7iii (which I'm only using 10-20% of the time, but still).

Arun, why would I, as a consumer, prioritize manufacturer's interests (maximization of profit) over my own when commenting on the latter's product? I have no sense of subservience or obligation to the corporation.

PhotoDiod: You shouldn’t. Nobody is forcing you to buy this or any other camera. It is YOUR money and you should spend it as YOU wish. The issue I have is with people expecting camera companies to cater to their individual needs. No, every company will cater to a certain segment of the market that they think is large enough to generate a profit. If you are not among those they choose to serve, then either switch or temper your expectations.

"The issue I have is with people expecting camera companies to cater to their individual needs."
Isn't that the foundation of most consumer-manufacturer relationships in free market economy? Whose else needs would a person talk about but his own?

"Isn't that the foundation of most consumer-manufacturer relationships in free market economy? Whose else needs would a person talk about but his own?"

Do you expect companies to interview you specifically, and develop every product with you personally in mind? No, of course you don't. Like any other company, Canon develops products for a sufficiently large segment of consumers to make a profit. If you don't like their products, you don't have to buy them. If they are right in their market analysis, other people will. If they are wrong, the product will fail. The issue I have is with people acting as if the world has come to an end because Canon dared to release a camera they personally have no use for. Other people do or might.

Don't I know that. It isn't just with Canon though. E.g. the latest from Olympus had whingers coming out of the woodwork & yet the cameras are selling, to those that appreciate what it offers.

@Arun H,
"Do you expect companies to interview you specifically...blahblah"
no one expects that and you know it.
As PhotoDiod was saying, company generally aim to introduce some innovation and new features while making the product more affordable, trying to strike the middle of the bell curve and increase the sales. I consider myself very much average customer and something doesn't quite work for me with the Canon product lineup and it hasn't for quite a few years. I am just saying...

Arun, you resort to a lot of truisms and outright exaggerations, while missing the point completely. You are saying that consumers should not voice their opinions but rather vote with their wallets? Why do you voice YOUR opinion then? Just go and buy this product. (see, I can type in all caps too :))

Mpb002, what do you think of the skin tones in this gallery?

Ahh, the myth of the Canon 'Color Science'......

Exactly the reason I still have my 6D and added a Sony A7RIII and Metabones adapter. I'm not buying another Canon until their sensors are on par with Sony and Nikon

Their sensors are fine but they need to stop selling crippled bodies.

There's about 3 stops of exposure latitude there. Much worse than the EOS R, a somewhat worse than the 5DS R, Fuji X-T20 and X-T3. Looks like if an "enthusiast" is buying into RF the right model for now is the EOS R. Both of them look wrong to me as the EOS R has spoiled the great 5D line ergonomics with no joystick, wheel controller and that silly touchbar (which is next to useless on MacBooks as well). I'll be on the sidelines enjoying my second system (Fuji) for another two years and still shooting my Canon DSLR.

Colour are also a mess. The 5DIV and EOS R and EOS RP don't even look like Canon cameras. 5DS R, 6D Mark II have completely different and traditional Canon colours in RAW. I'm not very tempted to buy into lines of cameras which won't match my 5D, 5DS R and 5DIII. Strangely the new Canon colours are much closer to Fuji X.

@Michael G2, I'm in the same boat. I own two 6Ds. I really wanted to buy the 6D II. But when that piece of garbage came out, I got so upset I bought an A7R III. That thing is beautiful!

Kudos to Canon for helping us see the light! Even in the shadows! :)

I could never go back to a low DR camera. It's literally day and night.

Took the words out of my mouth, this sensor is garbage by today's standards. Canon just doesn't seem to care anymore though - there isn't even anything left to cripple on a body like this. Even that eye AF test floating around the web had Canon performing *by far* the worst compared to it's cheaper and much better featured peers.

I think that you guys are too harsh in judging today camera's sensors. There is difference in DR but that difference is not that huge and "must have" at all. If I need to push shadows for 3 or 5 steps that's mean that I've made some big mistakes in my shooting. And even that new Canon sensors (5d mkIV, EOS R) keep up very well. Compared with 6D and 5d mkIII sensors they are way better and that's ok.
For me is more important general color output than pushing shadows like maniac. Yes I know, okay, all files you can make to look whatever you like BUT for huge cost of time. Time is expensive today.

The only way this sells like 'hot cakes' is if all the cureent canon shooters buy it. The allure of Canon has eroded. Young people coming into the camera world don't seem to be clamoring for Canon. As a lyft/uber driver I bring my a7 everywhere and it's surprising how a few years ago only a few would recognize an a6000 but now young people hear A7 and they think it's the cat's meow (1st gen is certainly not). It's interesting how the perception has changed particularly in the younger ages. We will see if it sells like 'hot cakes'.

I think ProDude spoke about noise level and not DR. In this regards, the EOS RP performs pretty well indeed.

Regards

My vision puts the RP just under a stop worse at high ISO than the A7 III in raw.

I doubt the RP is even a half stop off of the A7iii in noise from what I see

But the Sony colours have that usual purple luminance tones that need to be corrected in post, although the a7 iii has finally improved on this. Just check the faces at ISO 100...
The RP is barely discernible from the other FF at ISO 100 and it is certainly indistinguishable in JPG which is the target market for this camera. Regarding High ISO performance it is 1 stop better that any APSC camera, so for the price it is a great FF worthy for upgrade among Rebel users.

I only look at the raw and that is a different story. But the A7 II is an older camera, but I guess it is priced closest to this model.

well, RAWs are better on the EOS RP..

I agree. The sensor development has matured and the advances are slower and in smaller steps. If you throw in a K-1you can see how this camera with a sensor from 2016 still tops all of this comparison.
Quite amazing for a camera you can buy on Amazon for EUR 1.300,- at the moment.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eosrp&attr13_1=canon_eos6dmkii&attr13_2=sony_a7ii&attr13_3=pentax_k1&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=3200&attr16_1=3200&attr16_2=3200&attr16_3=3200&attr126_3=1&normalization=compare&widget=661&x=-0.5277395184838302&y=0.2859610165309646

IMO detail does look considerably better:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eosrp&attr13_1=pentax_kp&attr13_2=fujifilm_xt3&attr13_3=nikon_d7200&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=1600&attr16_1=1600&attr16_2=1600&attr16_3=1600&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=0.9376342901217564&y=0.5104860597088575

@KrisAK: indeed, but it's from the edge, where the lens come into play (e.g. field curvature). Apart from this, I think that one can always find an area where one camera seems to do better than the other (in both directions), be it on the left side, the right side, up, down, corners or center.

"the right side of the KP seems softer than the left."

It's a lens thing. $2000 new canon against decade old $600 pentax that dpreview noted has inconsistent focusing across the frame in every copy they tested.

Another example of why these lens tests are useless across manufactures and made even more useless by using botique lenses such as the $2000 RF 50mm F1.2

Ref:
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-55-1p4-p15/5

"we've looked at three samples of this lens, and each has shown a clear tilt to the focus plane; this was most pronounced in the first sample, but relatively minor in the last (indeed in this sample it was only really detectable in our studio tests). This does more than simply mess up our studio tests - it clearly results in real-world image quality and focusing problems too. In fact we've never before seen a lens so capricious when it comes to focusing - we're used to F1.4 primes being challenging for cameras' AF systems, but the 55mm was most difficult of all."

@tinetz, Comparing noise is pointless. I'm comparing what's left after I remove the noise. The data. The image quality.
The comparison tool doesn't show you the "whole picture". Some cameras apply noise reduction even to their RAW images (like Fuji). You can't evaluate sensor performance based on DPR comparison tool. It only shows you some kind of a default output. Not the essence of it. You have to download and process the RAW files. Otherwise, you just have no idea what's the actual difference there.

colors look slightly yellowish to me

> the best lens available should be used,

That's not the dpreview methodology.

For the M50 they use an ADAPTED 50mm F1.4 designed 30 years ago.

Is that really "the best lens available"

For the DSLRS they use the $300 85mm F1.8

Is that really "the best lens available"?

For comparisons consistency is an asset. As it is we are left comparing apples to bumblebees.....

Actually, the 85mm f/1.8 has been an excellent performer when stopped down to f/5.6 as DPR have consistently done. The idea behind the test scene is that there is consistently high sharpness across the frame, with low chromatic aberration, and the 85mm f/1.8 has provided that for a long time. You need to be able to look at any part of the test scene to see how the sensor is performing (checking for shadow/highlight noise/recovery or whatever), so there's no point in using a lens that has soft corners. The 85 has performed well, but I'm not surprised DPR have decided to use a more modern lens on the new mount ML cameras.

The key is that we use native-mount primes whenever possible. With the EOS M50, there was not a native mount prime at the time that would give us a 50-90mm field of view (the new EF-M 32mm F1.4 may be our new standard prime, we'll investigate when the next EF-M camera comes out).

The details for the RF system lens use - as well as a comparison of the 50mm F1.2L and 85mm F1.8 USM on the higher-megapixel EOS R - can be found here: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r/7