Playing dirty (how the RP will be crippled)

Back2M · Feb 6, 2019

Since those rumored specs went out the window as 24mp is false, one has to wonder what Canon is going to cripple on the EOS RP to justify the $800 savings.

A few things come to mind that Canon could have up their sleeve to play dirty... I look to the EOS M50 as a good guide as to what Canon will do...

4K available cropped but, with no DPAF ala M50

Limited RAW buffer

Silent Shooting in only certain modes

Reduced movie codec options

Reduced AF methods (no horizontal or vertical zone AF, no cross or cross expanded modes)

No weather sealing

Reduced dials / buttons

Reduced customization options

DLO support limited to EF 5 lens (unlimited RF) profiles

UHS-I only

No top display; PASM dial in lieu of "smart dial". 1 C mode.

This is in addition to giving us the dreaded 6DII sensor (that I think is decent), an LP-E17 that will result in much reduced battery life, and a reduced grip as that optional grip implies and removal of the M-FN bar. To say nothing of if we'll get a EVF or not.

Granted Canon could get nastier, I'm just trying to cover the basis of what I think they'll do compared to the existing EOS R so people have a feel as to what to expect, like myself

pyla · Feb 6, 2019

Back2M said:
Since those rumored specs went out the window as 24mp is false, one has to wonder what Canon is going to cripple on the EOS RP to justify the $800 savings.

A few things come to mind that Canon could have up their sleeve to play dirty... I look to the EOS M50 as a good guide as to what Canon will do...

4K available cropped but, with no DPAF ala M50

Limited RAW buffer

Silent Shooting in only certain modes

Reduced movie codec options

Reduced AF methods (no horizontal or vertical zone AF, no cross or cross expanded modes)

No weather sealing

Reduced dials / buttons

Reduced customization options

DLO support limited to EF 5 lens (unlimited RF) profiles

UHS-I only

This is in addition to giving us the dreaded 6DII sensor (that I think is decent), an LP-E17 that will result in much reduced battery life, and a reduced grip as that optional grip implies and removal of the M-FN bar. To say nothing of if we'll get a EVF or not.

Granted Canon could get nastier, I'm just trying to cover the basis of what I think they'll do compared to the existing EOS R so people have a feel as to what to expect, like myself

Less buttons/dials, lower quality EVF, smaller LCD screen with less resolution, smaller number of AF points, lower bit rate for video, no top panel display, less build quality.

Wildabobalore · Feb 6, 2019

Well there’s no more conjecture on what costs they cut with buttons/dials.

Back2M · Feb 6, 2019

Wildabobalore said:
Well there’s no more conjecture on what costs they cut with buttons/dials.

As I said on my post about 3 hours ago, by the time most folks read this, it's a done deal.

We still are lacking many key specs, video out, buffer size, shutter max. Those however probably won't come clean for a few more days. Maybe even release I'll have to make up my marbles with what information I have at this point. Kinda leaning on keeping my R.

I am suprised no more data has emerged on the G7X III. Maybe they aren't launching it with the RP?

Rawpaul · Feb 6, 2019

Back2M said:
Since those rumored specs went out the window as 24mp is false, one has to wonder what Canon is going to cripple on the EOS RP to justify the $800 savings.

A few things come to mind that Canon could have up their sleeve to play dirty... I look to the EOS M50 as a good guide as to what Canon will do...

4K available cropped but, with no DPAF ala M50

Limited RAW buffer

Silent Shooting in only certain modes

Reduced movie codec options

Reduced AF methods (no horizontal or vertical zone AF, no cross or cross expanded modes)

No weather sealing

Reduced dials / buttons

Reduced customization options

DLO support limited to EF 5 lens (unlimited RF) profiles

UHS-I only

No top display; PASM dial in lieu of "smart dial". 1 C mode.

This is in addition to giving us the dreaded 6DII sensor (that I think is decent), an LP-E17 that will result in much reduced battery life, and a reduced grip as that optional grip implies and removal of the M-FN bar. To say nothing of if we'll get a EVF or not.

Granted Canon could get nastier, I'm just trying to cover the basis of what I think they'll do compared to the existing EOS R so people have a feel as to what to expect, like myself

I don't think it's nasty, you get where you pay for .

It seems like people want everthing in a cheap camera but that's not fair .

rrccad · Feb 6, 2019

Back2M said:
Since those rumored specs went out the window as 24mp is false, one has to wonder what Canon is going to cripple on the EOS RP to justify the $800 savings.

A few things come to mind that Canon could have up their sleeve to play dirty.

why is it playing dirty?

you want a more featured camera, #$(*&#$ pay for it.

Dareshooter · Feb 6, 2019

Crippled ? In another thread which you started over on the M forum you claim this crippled camera is going to kill off aps-c .

Rawpaul · Feb 6, 2019

Dareshooter said:
Crippled ? In another thread which you started over on the M forum you claim this crippled camera is going to kill off aps-c .

MMM….try to explain that , sounds fishy to me

--
light is the source of all life.....

badtweed · Feb 6, 2019

Back2M said:
Since those rumored specs went out the window as 24mp is false, one has to wonder what Canon is going to cripple on the EOS RP to justify the $800 savings.

A few things come to mind that Canon could have up their sleeve to play dirty... I look to the EOS M50 as a good guide as to what Canon will do...

4K available cropped but, with no DPAF ala M50

Limited RAW buffer

Silent Shooting in only certain modes

Reduced movie codec options

Reduced AF methods (no horizontal or vertical zone AF, no cross or cross expanded modes)

No weather sealing

Reduced dials / buttons

Reduced customization options

DLO support limited to EF 5 lens (unlimited RF) profiles

UHS-I only

No top display; PASM dial in lieu of "smart dial". 1 C mode.

This is in addition to giving us the dreaded 6DII sensor (that I think is decent), an LP-E17 that will result in much reduced battery life, and a reduced grip as that optional grip implies and removal of the M-FN bar. To say nothing of if we'll get a EVF or not.

Granted Canon could get nastier, I'm just trying to cover the basis of what I think they'll do compared to the existing EOS R so people have a feel as to what to expect, like myself

Silly title. hyperbolic musings. Welcome to DPR...

David Hull · Feb 6, 2019

Back2M said:
Since those rumored specs went out the window as 24mp is false, one has to wonder what Canon is going to cripple on the EOS RP to justify the $800 savings.

A few things come to mind that Canon could have up their sleeve to play dirty... I look to the EOS M50 as a good guide as to what Canon will do...

4K available cropped but, with no DPAF ala M50

Limited RAW buffer

Silent Shooting in only certain modes

Reduced movie codec options

Reduced AF methods (no horizontal or vertical zone AF, no cross or cross expanded modes)

No weather sealing

Reduced dials / buttons

Reduced customization options

DLO support limited to EF 5 lens (unlimited RF) profiles

UHS-I only

No top display; PASM dial in lieu of "smart dial". 1 C mode.

This is in addition to giving us the dreaded 6DII sensor (that I think is decent), an LP-E17 that will result in much reduced battery life, and a reduced grip as that optional grip implies and removal of the M-FN bar. To say nothing of if we'll get a EVF or not.

Granted Canon could get nastier, I'm just trying to cover the basis of what I think they'll do compared to the existing EOS R so people have a feel as to what to expect, like myself

Lower price generally implies a more limited feature set. I cant quite figure where the term "crippled" is justified (or even makes sense).

Rock and Rollei · Feb 6, 2019

badtweed said:
Back2M said:

Since those rumored specs went out the window as 24mp is false, one has to wonder what Canon is going to cripple on the EOS RP to justify the $800 savings.

A few things come to mind that Canon could have up their sleeve to play dirty... I look to the EOS M50 as a good guide as to what Canon will do...

4K available cropped but, with no DPAF ala M50

Limited RAW buffer

Silent Shooting in only certain modes

Reduced movie codec options

Reduced AF methods (no horizontal or vertical zone AF, no cross or cross expanded modes)

No weather sealing

Reduced dials / buttons

Reduced customization options

DLO support limited to EF 5 lens (unlimited RF) profiles

UHS-I only

No top display; PASM dial in lieu of "smart dial". 1 C mode.

This is in addition to giving us the dreaded 6DII sensor (that I think is decent), an LP-E17 that will result in much reduced battery life, and a reduced grip as that optional grip implies and removal of the M-FN bar. To say nothing of if we'll get a EVF or not.

Granted Canon could get nastier, I'm just trying to cover the basis of what I think they'll do compared to the existing EOS R so people have a feel as to what to expect, like myself

Click to expand...

Silly title. hyperbolic musings. Welcome to DPR...

Yup. It has one of those typical DPR trigger words - "crippled". You just know that sillyness awaits. When will people learn that using this hyperbole makes them look daft, not the target of their words?

liopleurodon · Feb 6, 2019

David Hull said:
Lower price generally implies a more limited feature set. I cant quite figure where the term "crippled" is justified (or even makes sense).

Crippled is used when a manufacturer limits the functionality of a devices firmware to not include features they have already developed and the hardware is capable of supporting. It doesn't cost any more to load software features so why not offer them? Its holding back instead of pushing the envelope. Its choosing to not offer features that the camera is well capable of and involve little effort to provide. It's limiting features to force artificial segmentation.

An example would be not offering AFMA on the T6s or 77D, cameras targeted at enthusiasts, not amateurs who would get confused by it. They have plenty of horsepower to run that software feature and it's already developed for the autofocus systems they both have. It would have cost Canon virtually nothing to provide it.

Mako2011 · Feb 6, 2019

liopleurodon said:
David Hull said:

Lower price generally implies a more limited feature set. I cant quite figure where the term "crippled" is justified (or even makes sense).

Click to expand...

Crippled is used when a manufacturer limits the functionality of a devices firmware to not include features they have already developed and the hardware is capable of supporting. It doesn't cost any more to load software features so why not offer them? Its holding back instead of pushing the envelope. Its choosing to not offer features that the camera is well capable of and involve little effort to provide. It's limiting features to force artificial segmentation.

And that strategy can often/sometimes boost total revenues which in tern helps with more funds available for future innovation (better for all in the long run...sometimes). Balancing act

Thoughts R Us · Feb 6, 2019

With most products you get what you pay for. It's very common for every manufacturer to differentiate between price points based on features.

It's such a silly narrative to think of this as something nefarious or wrong.

To the OP, I would ask if the company for which he works delivers the same features in all products and services regardless of price?

Gwand · Feb 6, 2019

Back2M said:
Since those rumored specs went out the window as 24mp is false, one has to wonder what Canon is going to cripple on the EOS RP to justify the $800 savings.

A few things come to mind that Canon could have up their sleeve to play dirty... I look to the EOS M50 as a good guide as to what Canon will do...

4K available cropped but, with no DPAF ala M50

Limited RAW buffer

Silent Shooting in only certain modes

Reduced movie codec options

Reduced AF methods (no horizontal or vertical zone AF, no cross or cross expanded modes)

No weather sealing

Reduced dials / buttons

Reduced customization options

DLO support limited to EF 5 lens (unlimited RF) profiles

UHS-I only

No top display; PASM dial in lieu of "smart dial". 1 C mode.

This is in addition to giving us the dreaded 6DII sensor (that I think is decent), an LP-E17 that will result in much reduced battery life, and a reduced grip as that optional grip implies and removal of the M-FN bar. To say nothing of if we'll get a EVF or not.

Granted Canon could get nastier, I'm just trying to cover the basis of what I think they'll do compared to the existing EOS R so people have a feel as to what to expect, like myself

Yeah, when I bought a new f150 I wanted a Platinum model but I settled for a “crippled” XLT. Still gets me to work and I saved thousands.

I’ll take this crippled camera and a nice lens and take great photos all day, thank you.

David Hull · Feb 6, 2019

liopleurodon said:
David Hull said:

Lower price generally implies a more limited feature set. I cant quite figure where the term "crippled" is justified (or even makes sense).

Click to expand...

Crippled is used when a manufacturer limits the functionality of a devices firmware to not include features they have already developed and the hardware is capable of supporting. It doesn't cost any more to load software features so why not offer them? Its holding back instead of pushing the envelope. Its choosing to not offer features that the camera is well capable of and involve little effort to provide. It's limiting features to force artificial segmentation.

An example would be not offering AFMA on the T6s or 77D, cameras targeted at enthusiasts, not amateurs who would get confused by it. They have plenty of horsepower to run that software feature and it's already developed for the autofocus systems they both have. It would have cost Canon virtually nothing to provide it.

In other words, features that took time and effort to develop, market and test have no value and should be offered for free. This is garbage. It obviously has value and a manufacturer has every right to mane money off of that value.

David Hull · Feb 6, 2019

Thoughts R Us said:
With most products you get what you pay for. It's very common for every manufacturer to differentiate between price points based on features.

It's such a silly narrative to think of this as something nefarious or wrong.

To the OP, I would ask if the company for which he works delivers the same features in all products and services regardless of price?

There are always some who expect to get something for nothing, I guess. Good luck with that.

jalywol · Feb 6, 2019

Not everyone buying a FF camera wants a behemoth with everything but the kitchen sink!

I've been hoping someone would come out with a lightweight body with a smaller form factor, and good, basic controls and feature set, so I can use it as a relatively inconspicuous street camera. This may well fit that bill, so using it with the 35mm f1.8 would give me a genuinely portable FF option that would go with me frequently, rather than sit in the bag at home due to size. AND it might even be in the budget....

More is not always necessary...or better.

-J

David Hull · Feb 6, 2019

jalywol said:
Not everyone buying a FF camera wants a behemoth with everything but the kitchen sink!

I've been hoping someone would come out with a lightweight body with a smaller form factor, and good, basic controls and feature set, so I can use it as a relatively inconspicuous street camera. This may well fit that bill, so using it with the 35mm f1.8 would give me a genuinely portable FF option that would go with me frequently, rather than sit in the bag at home due to size. AND it might even be in the budget....

More is not always necessary...or better.

-J

This one may have some value as a replacement for my EOS M. It has not been clear (to me anyway) for some time what the future of that line is.

LMOE · Feb 6, 2019

jalywol said:
Not everyone buying a FF camera wants a behemoth with everything but the kitchen sink!

I've been hoping someone would come out with a lightweight body with a smaller form factor, and good, basic controls and feature set, so I can use it as a relatively inconspicuous street camera. This may well fit that bill, so using it with the 35mm f1.8 would give me a genuinely portable FF option that would go with me frequently, rather than sit in the bag at home due to size. AND it might even be in the budget....

More is not always necessary...or better.

-J

Agreed. I just find it odd that Canon is releasing all of this higher level glass without a truly high level body to go along. I sure hope there are some smaller, lighter lenses announced with this camera next week.

Playing dirty (how the RP will be crippled)

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

rrccad

Guest

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Community Leader

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts