Camera Size updated with R and adapters/lenses

keeponkeepingon · Sep 7, 2018

The R is now on camerasize.com with the adapter and lenses.

It's a bit eye opening to see how the R compares to other bodies.

For example here's the smallest 6DII camera/lens combo you can make with canon lenses and the smallest R with canon Lens (native 35mm is bigger than the 40 with adapter).

Source: https://camerasize.com

keeponkeepingon · Sep 8, 2018

Smallest possible M50 camera/lens sandwiched between the smallest R with Adapted and Native lenses. This made me think of Bill Herman's recent post "whatever happened to the size factor".

Source: https://www.camerasize.com

Alexsfo · Sep 8, 2018

Canon did mention that RF was not about the size. 6dii is already at the edge of ergonomics. Hopefully we’ll see some pancake RF lenses. I was really hoping for 6dii size EF mount mirrorless with the mirror space used for IBIS. I had no idea that short flange distance helps to design better optics.

keeponkeepingon · Sep 8, 2018

Alexsfo said:
Canon did mention that RF was not about the size. 6dii is already at the edge of ergonomics. Hopefully we’ll see some pancake RF lenses. I was really hoping for 6dii size EF mount mirrorless with the mirror space used for IBIS. I had no idea that short flange distance helps to design better optics.

Source?

Canon USA on the R:

"When Canon set forth to develop a new interchangeable lens camera system, they focused on three core optical principles: high-image quality, high-specification performance, and compact design."

byDMP · Sep 8, 2018

keeponkeepingon said:
Alexsfo said:

Canon did mention that RF was not about the size. 6dii is already at the edge of ergonomics. Hopefully we’ll see some pancake RF lenses. I was really hoping for 6dii size EF mount mirrorless with the mirror space used for IBIS. I had no idea that short flange distance helps to design better optics.

Click to expand...

Source?

Canon USA on the R:

"When Canon set forth to develop a new interchangeable lens camera system, they focused on three core optical principles: high-image quality, high-specification performance, and compact design."

'Compact' isn't absolute - it's a relative term. A camera doesn't have to be the smallest to be compact. The R is undoubtedly smaller than the 6DII, yet still maintains 'Canon' handling for the most part. Not everyone wants or needs a tiny camera.

Rick Knepper · Sep 8, 2018

keeponkeepingon said:
Alexsfo said:

Canon did mention that RF was not about the size. 6dii is already at the edge of ergonomics. Hopefully we’ll see some pancake RF lenses. I was really hoping for 6dii size EF mount mirrorless with the mirror space used for IBIS. I had no idea that short flange distance helps to design better optics.

Click to expand...

Source?

Canon USA on the R:

"When Canon set forth to develop a new interchangeable lens camera system, they focused on three core optical principles: high-image quality, high-specification performance, and compact design."

Let me bold some additional wording.

Your comparison shows an EOS R with an EF lens and adapter. I think it is clear that the reference above is to native RF lenses.

The following image shows a tale of two approaches:

On the left, the 6D2 + 35/2 vs. EOS R + RF 35/1.8. On the right, 6D2 + 50/1.2 vs. EOS R + RF 50/1.2

To me, the left side represents the size reductions of the EOS R camera and the potential size reductions of the RF lens line up.

The right side represents the IQ improvements possible. The EF 50/1.2 is NOT very sharp wide open and suffers terribly from focus shift. If you look at the sample images of the RF 50/1.2, you'll see that the lens steps all over the EF 50/1.2 in that regard.

Zeiss said the same thing about lens design for mirrorless systems but they added a disclaimer. Zeiss said it cannot override the laws of physics. Neither can Canon. This is what is happening with the EF & RF 50/1.2 versions. In order to get a sharp image wide open, the RF version had to be necessarily larger.

--
Once you've done fifty, anything less is iffy.

Mike CH · Sep 8, 2018

Ineteresting that the eye piece projects that far out on the EOS R, also given the relatively position of the sensors in the bodies...

Can’t say that I mind, though. As a left eye-shooter, an eye-piece that is more offset to the body means a less scrunched up nose

Regards, Mike

Mike CH · Sep 8, 2018

keeponkeepingon said:
This made me think of Bill Herman's recent post "whatever happened to the size factor".

Probably got at least a bit lost in the comparison of oblong apples and rotund bananas.

You are, after all, comparing APS-C with FF, f/2.8 with f/1.8 and so on...

On size alone, though, the EOS M wins hands down.

Regards, Mike

byDMP · Sep 8, 2018

Mike CH said:
Ineteresting that the eye piece projects that far out on the EOS R, also given the relatively position of the sensors in the bodies...

Can’t say that I mind, though. As a left eye-shooter, an eye-piece that is more offset to the body means a less scrunched up nose

Regards, Mike

Probably to allow some extra clearance for a thumb to operate touch AF. I like that it projects further.

Mike CH · Sep 8, 2018

byDMP said:
Mike CH said:

Ineteresting that the eye piece projects that far out on the EOS R, also given the relatively position of the sensors in the bodies...

Can’t say that I mind, though. As a left eye-shooter, an eye-piece that is more offset to the body means a less scrunched up nose

Regards, Mike

Click to expand...

Probably to allow some extra clearance for a thumb to operate touch AF.

Good point. Wasn’t thinking - ahem - past my own nose at first...

Member said:
I like that it projects further.

Me too.

Regards, Mike

Steve Balcombe · Sep 8, 2018

keeponkeepingon said:
The R is now on camerasize.com with the adapter and lenses.
It's a bit eye opening to see how the R compares to other bodies.

For example here's the smallest 6DII camera/lens combo you can make with canon lenses and the smallest R with canon Lens (native 35mm is bigger than the 40 with adapter).

Source: https://camerasize.com

Sure, but the R system doesn't yet have a pancake lens, so this is not representative of "how the R compares to other bodies". It's easy to find things the R system doesn't have on day one.

Comparing adapted lenses, the EOS R will always lose. There is more space behind the sensor in the R, and since the distance from front of lens to sensor is always fixed, the EOS R adapted combination will always be longer.

Maybe there will be a future EOS RF body which is much slimmer front to back, for those who desire compactness above all else.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/stevebalcombe/

Astrophotographer 10 · Sep 8, 2018

I look forward to seeing one in the flesh but I think Canon has gotten the size right.

Sony has gone for the absolute smallest and its a marvel in miniaturisation really.

But some complain about large hands etc. Canon also has mainly a DSLR user base and Sony does not. So to wean DSLR users off their DSLRs and to balance these relatively large and heavy initial offerings a larger size makes sense.

I bet it feels good to hold, to operate, to select controls etc. These are Canon strengths.

The lenses though whilst making good headlines may not be that practical.

My Sony 24-70 2.8 GM is smaller than the Canon equivalent but it still feels a bit like a monster lens when on the Sony.

Zeiss are releasing some exciting F1.8 pancake lenses for emount using some new tech aluminium lens element.

Now they look compact. Tiny but with Zeiss IQ.

If Sony put out a body the size of the EOS R it would be heavily criticised. But for Canon its the sensible decision.

Greg.

Rail2trail · Sep 8, 2018

The lenses are enormous. A small body really wouldn’t balance well with them anyway. Compact design doesn’t seem to be part of the gameplan for either Canon nor Nikon in the ff arena.

keeponkeepingon · Sep 9, 2018

Rick Knepper said:
keeponkeepingon said:

Alexsfo said:

Canon did mention that RF was not about the size. 6dii is already at the edge of ergonomics. Hopefully we’ll see some pancake RF lenses. I was really hoping for 6dii size EF mount mirrorless with the mirror space used for IBIS. I had no idea that short flange distance helps to design better optics.

Click to expand...

Source?

Canon USA on the R:

"When Canon set forth to develop a new interchangeable lens camera system, they focused on three core optical principles: high-image quality, high-specification performance, and compact design."

Click to expand...

Let me bold some additional wording.

Your comparison shows an EOS R with an EF lens and adapter. I think it is clear that the reference above is to native RF lenses.

The following image shows a tale of two approaches:

On the left, the 6D2 + 35/2 vs. EOS R + RF 35/1.8. On the right, 6D2 + 50/1.2 vs. EOS R + RF 50/1.2

To me, the left side represents the size reductions of the EOS R camera and the potential size reductions of the RF lens line up.

The size savings is in the body not the 35mm lens. There is no "size reduction" in the RF lens lineup. I'll wager if they ever came out with a pancake it'd be bigger than the EF counterpart but I'm sure that's wayyyyy down the R road given the initial release of the not very small 35mm.....

And wow, simply wow that 50mm is big........ Other than the 35 everything made for the R system is absolutely huge compared to their EF counterparts. Very odd for a "second camera" with a "compact design".

keeponkeepingon · Sep 9, 2018

Steve Balcombe said:
keeponkeepingon said:

The R is now on camerasize.com with the adapter and lenses.
It's a bit eye opening to see how the R compares to other bodies.

For example here's the smallest 6DII camera/lens combo you can make with canon lenses and the smallest R with canon Lens (native 35mm is bigger than the 40 with adapter).

Source: https://camerasize.com

Click to expand...

Sure, but the R system doesn't yet have a pancake lens, so this is not representative of "how the R compares to other bodies". It's easy to find things the R system doesn't have on day one.

Comparing adapted lenses, the EOS R will always lose. There is more space behind the sensor in the R, and since the distance from front of lens to sensor is always fixed, the EOS R adapted combination will always be longer.

The point was that the R lenses are so huge that your smallest initial R setup will be an adapted EF lens. Undoubtebly the EF-R 35mm is a better lens (IS, a little faster/wider) but this is the smallest R system you can carry around.

> "It's easy to find things the R system doesn't have on day one."

Including compactness. I can understand that a bigger body may be more ergonomically desirable, I can live with that, but I think this the first mirrorless launch without a (relatively) compact lens option.

byDMP · Sep 9, 2018

keeponkeepingon said:
Steve Balcombe said:

keeponkeepingon said:

The R is now on camerasize.com with the adapter and lenses.
It's a bit eye opening to see how the R compares to other bodies.

For example here's the smallest 6DII camera/lens combo you can make with canon lenses and the smallest R with canon Lens (native 35mm is bigger than the 40 with adapter).

Click to expand...

Sure, but the R system doesn't yet have a pancake lens, so this is not representative of "how the R compares to other bodies". It's easy to find things the R system doesn't have on day one.

Comparing adapted lenses, the EOS R will always lose. There is more space behind the sensor in the R, and since the distance from front of lens to sensor is always fixed, the EOS R adapted combination will always be longer.

Click to expand...

The point was that the R lenses are so huge that your smallest initial R setup will be an adapted EF lens. Undoubtebly the EF-R 35mm is a better lens (IS, a little faster/wider) but this is the smallest R system you can carry around.

> "It's easy to find things the R system doesn't have on day one."
Including compactness. I can understand that a bigger body may be more ergonomically desirable, I can live with that, but I think this the first mirrorless launch without a (relatively) compact lens option.

I usually choose a lens due to it's focal length or speed as opposed to achieving the absolute shortest front-to-rear length possible. If a smaller size is critical, there are other cameras, from Canon or other manufacturers, that are more svelte.

I think they're clever with the lenses they've announced - two affordable options that I'm sure most R buyers would at least consider, and two flagship lenses to show the performance and IQ the system is capable of. I'd rather see that from the beginning than a range of pancake lenses to prove you can achieve a lens/camera combination 10mm narrower than a 6D.

stratobill · Sep 9, 2018

Mike CH said:
byDMP said:

Mike CH said:

Ineteresting that the eye piece projects that far out on the EOS R, also given the relatively position of the sensors in the bodies...

Can’t say that I mind, though. As a left eye-shooter, an eye-piece that is more offset to the body means a less scrunched up nose

Regards, Mike

Click to expand...

Probably to allow some extra clearance for a thumb to operate touch AF.

Click to expand...

Good point. Wasn’t thinking - ahem - past my own nose at first...

Mike CH said:

I like that it projects further.

Click to expand...

Me too.

Regards, Mike

Also it makes the camera look bigger in the comparison tool. If you line up the backs of the camera, you can see how much thinner the body of the R is.

BlueRay2 · Sep 9, 2018

keeponkeepingon said:
The R is now on camerasize.com with the adapter and lenses.
It's a bit eye opening to see how the R compares to other bodies.

For example here's the smallest 6DII camera/lens combo you can make with canon lenses and the smallest R with canon Lens (native 35mm is bigger than the 40 with adapter).

Source: https://camerasize.com

i am really impressed with the grip of canon R camera, looks like it'll be comfortable even if one has big hands and fingers! i am eager to hold one in my hand to see how it feels!

--
Who are you gonna believe, me, or your lying eyes? Groucho Marx.

Rick Knepper · Sep 9, 2018

keeponkeepingon said:
Rick Knepper said:

keeponkeepingon said:

Alexsfo said:

Canon did mention that RF was not about the size. 6dii is already at the edge of ergonomics. Hopefully we’ll see some pancake RF lenses. I was really hoping for 6dii size EF mount mirrorless with the mirror space used for IBIS. I had no idea that short flange distance helps to design better optics.

Click to expand...

Source?

Canon USA on the R:

"When Canon set forth to develop a new interchangeable lens camera system, they focused on three core optical principles: high-image quality, high-specification performance, and compact design."

Click to expand...

Let me bold some additional wording.

Your comparison shows an EOS R with an EF lens and adapter. I think it is clear that the reference above is to native RF lenses.

The following image shows a tale of two approaches:

On the left, the 6D2 + 35/2 vs. EOS R + RF 35/1.8. On the right, 6D2 + 50/1.2 vs. EOS R + RF 50/1.2

To me, the left side represents the size reductions of the EOS R camera and the potential size reductions of the RF lens line up.

Click to expand...

The size savings is in the body not the 35mm lens. There is no "size reduction" in the RF lens lineup.

Look at the comparison on the left. This refutes what you are saying.

Not every lens will meet all three goals or meet them at varying levels.

keeponkeepingon said:
I'll wager if they ever came out with a pancake it'd be bigger than the EF counterpart but I'm sure that's wayyyyy down the R road given the initial release of the not very small 35mm.....

And wow, simply wow that 50mm is big........ Other than the 35 everything made for the R system is absolutely huge compared to their EF counterparts. Very odd for a "second camera" with a "compact design".

--
Once you've done fifty, anything less is iffy.

Heritage Cameras · Sep 9, 2018

1Dx4me said:
keeponkeepingon said:

The R is now on camerasize.com with the adapter and lenses.
It's a bit eye opening to see how the R compares to other bodies.

For example here's the smallest 6DII camera/lens combo you can make with canon lenses and the smallest R with canon Lens (native 35mm is bigger than the 40 with adapter).

Source: https://camerasize.com

Click to expand...

i am really impressed with the grip of canon R camera, looks like it'll be comfortable even if one has big hands and fingers! i am eager to hold one in my hand to see how it feels!

...and here's what the EOS R might look line with a future pancake lens:

https://camerasize.com/compact/#716.345,799.345.5,799.345,ha,t

--
Dave, HCL

Camera Size updated with R and adapters/lenses

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

byDMP

Guest

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

byDMP

Guest

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

byDMP

Guest

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts