Reading mode: Light Dark

Playing dirty (how the RP will be crippled)

Go to last post
Wildabobalore said:
Well there’s no more conjecture on what costs they cut with buttons/dials.
Click to expand...
Well, I am slightly intrigued by the FV setting on the mode dial. I don't recall seeing that on any other Canon body. I'd guess it could be something similar to Pentax SV mode (ISO priority), which would be a nice thing to have.
 
Last edited:
pyla said:
Critical Thinker said:
007peter said:
pyla said:
Back2M wrote: 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.
Click to expand...
Chinese has a saying: one part money; one part product.

Translation: You get what you Pay For

You cannot accuse Canon of "crippling" when canon is selling RP cheaper. Again, one part money; one part product.

In fact, my only regret is canon didn't cut further:
  • I would eliminate EVF entirely (useless or videoshooter)
  • more plastic to saved weight
  • I want that EVF-less (400g) FF camear for vlogging
  • making it the first sub $1000 ($999) FF camera
To each their own, but accusing Canon as crippling when the camera is $800 less seem rather GREEDY to me.
Click to expand...
Why are you so triggered? The world crippling is correct. Manufacturers intentionally cripple entry level models, thats why they are cheaper. OP is just speculating what will be crippled in this cheaper Canon body.
Click to expand...
I agree. I think people are jumping to conclusions on what the OP said. He is not complaining. He is acknowledging that in order for Canon to bring in the RP at a substantially lower price, features have to be removed. He is asking what features can be removed, while maintaining it as an attractive camera for people to buy.
Click to expand...
That's what the OP says now, but using a phrase like "playing dirty" in the thread title rather suggests a different original intent... ;)
pyla said:
pyla said:
Also no way any manufacturer is going to make a sub $1000 FF camera yet. They can do it, but they just started their first gen FF models. They need to milk it as much as they can, like Sony has been doing for years. In a few years I can see Sony finally cave in and release a basic entry level FF, not because they want to, but because the fierce competition has pushed them into doing so.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Rock and Rollei said:
pyla said:
Critical Thinker said:
007peter said:
Rock and Rollei said:
Back2M wrote: 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.
Click to expand...
Chinese has a saying: one part money; one part product.

Translation: You get what you Pay For

You cannot accuse Canon of "crippling" when canon is selling RP cheaper. Again, one part money; one part product.

In fact, my only regret is canon didn't cut further:
  • I would eliminate EVF entirely (useless or videoshooter)
  • more plastic to saved weight
  • I want that EVF-less (400g) FF camear for vlogging
  • making it the first sub $1000 ($999) FF camera
To each their own, but accusing Canon as crippling when the camera is $800 less seem rather GREEDY to me.
Click to expand...
Why are you so triggered? The world crippling is correct. Manufacturers intentionally cripple entry level models, thats why they are cheaper. OP is just speculating what will be crippled in this cheaper Canon body.
Click to expand...
I agree. I think people are jumping to conclusions on what the OP said. He is not complaining. He is acknowledging that in order for Canon to bring in the RP at a substantially lower price, features have to be removed. He is asking what features can be removed, while maintaining it as an attractive camera for people to buy.
Click to expand...
That's what the OP says now, but using a phrase like "playing dirty" in the thread title rather suggests a different original intent... ;)
Rock and Rollei said:
Rock and Rollei said:
Also no way any manufacturer is going to make a sub $1000 FF camera yet. They can do it, but they just started their first gen FF models. They need to milk it as much as they can, like Sony has been doing for years. In a few years I can see Sony finally cave in and release a basic entry level FF, not because they want to, but because the fierce competition has pushed them into doing so.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I did start a thread which I expected feedback on, however, not quite the feedback I was hoping.

I did however answer my own question: The EOS RP needs no neutering; if they haven't added ADC to the 6D II sensor, that, is the biggest con. And, enough to make me think twice, and I was hell bent on the RP last night, even though I may not have said it, I was ready to return my whole R rig and wait for the darn thing. But, that much of an IQ hit is really a stickler after I looked over 6D II output from various sources.

I think the specs we're seeing will be pretty close to reality. We may see some reduced buffer, 4K without DPAF, but really I suspect things like 88x100% AF coverage, Eye-AF, and silent shutter, will all make their way into the RP. Silent shutter may be reduced to scene mode or M. But, otherwise, I suspect the RP's biggest shortfall is already built-in. I'm sure many folks haven't forgotten the 6DII DR debacle, well, it's back if they haven't fixed it. They probably haven't (fixed it).
 
Last edited:
Back2M said:
Rock and Rollei said:
pyla said:
Critical Thinker said:
007peter said:
Back2M said:
Back2M wrote: 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.
Click to expand...
Chinese has a saying: one part money; one part product.

Translation: You get what you Pay For

You cannot accuse Canon of "crippling" when canon is selling RP cheaper. Again, one part money; one part product.

In fact, my only regret is canon didn't cut further:
  • I would eliminate EVF entirely (useless or videoshooter)
  • more plastic to saved weight
  • I want that EVF-less (400g) FF camear for vlogging
  • making it the first sub $1000 ($999) FF camera
To each their own, but accusing Canon as crippling when the camera is $800 less seem rather GREEDY to me.
Click to expand...
Why are you so triggered? The world crippling is correct. Manufacturers intentionally cripple entry level models, thats why they are cheaper. OP is just speculating what will be crippled in this cheaper Canon body.
Click to expand...
I agree. I think people are jumping to conclusions on what the OP said. He is not complaining. He is acknowledging that in order for Canon to bring in the RP at a substantially lower price, features have to be removed. He is asking what features can be removed, while maintaining it as an attractive camera for people to buy.
Click to expand...
That's what the OP says now, but using a phrase like "playing dirty" in the thread title rather suggests a different original intent... ;)
Back2M said:
Back2M said:
Also no way any manufacturer is going to make a sub $1000 FF camera yet. They can do it, but they just started their first gen FF models. They need to milk it as much as they can, like Sony has been doing for years. In a few years I can see Sony finally cave in and release a basic entry level FF, not because they want to, but because the fierce competition has pushed them into doing so.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I did start a thread which I expected feedback on, however, not quite the feedback I was hoping.

I did however answer my own question: The EOS RP needs no neutering; if they haven't added ADC to the 6D II sensor, that, is the biggest con. And, enough to make me think twice, and I was hell bent on the RP last night, even though I may not have said it, I was ready to return my whole R rig and wait for the darn thing. But, that much of an IQ hit is really a stickler after I looked over 6D II output from various sources.

I think the specs we're seeing will be pretty close to reality. We may see some reduced buffer, 4K without DPAF, but really I suspect things like 88x100% AF coverage, Eye-AF, and silent shutter, will all make their way into the RP. Silent shutter may be reduced to scene mode or M. But, otherwise, I suspect the RP's biggest shortfall is already built-in. I'm sure many folks haven't forgotten the 6DII DR debacle, well, it's back if they haven't fixed it. They probably haven't (fixed it).
Click to expand...
We have gotten to the point with digital where we were with film cameras in the 80s and that is that pretty much every camera is as good as another. The features that are being added or subtracted are mostly useless and irrelevant. For the most part, they don't fundamentally to image quality or the ability to capture images that you couldn't capture otherwise.

I am still using the 5d2 and the features that I find useful are:
  • AV
  • Manual exposure
  • Matrix and spot metering
  • Live view
  • AF
That's pretty much it. The one thing that I wish it had was long exposure longer than 30 seconds, but I can get around that with tethering or accessories.

The rest of the features are completely irrelevant to me. So, from my perspective, whether Canon cripples or doesn't cripple the feature set has no impact on my buying decision.
 
Macro guy said:
Back2M said:
Rock and Rollei said:
pyla said:
Critical Thinker said:
007peter said:
Macro guy said:
Back2M wrote: 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.
Click to expand...
Chinese has a saying: one part money; one part product.

Translation: You get what you Pay For

You cannot accuse Canon of "crippling" when canon is selling RP cheaper. Again, one part money; one part product.

In fact, my only regret is canon didn't cut further:
  • I would eliminate EVF entirely (useless or videoshooter)
  • more plastic to saved weight
  • I want that EVF-less (400g) FF camear for vlogging
  • making it the first sub $1000 ($999) FF camera
To each their own, but accusing Canon as crippling when the camera is $800 less seem rather GREEDY to me.
Click to expand...
Why are you so triggered? The world crippling is correct. Manufacturers intentionally cripple entry level models, thats why they are cheaper. OP is just speculating what will be crippled in this cheaper Canon body.
Click to expand...
I agree. I think people are jumping to conclusions on what the OP said. He is not complaining. He is acknowledging that in order for Canon to bring in the RP at a substantially lower price, features have to be removed. He is asking what features can be removed, while maintaining it as an attractive camera for people to buy.
Click to expand...
That's what the OP says now, but using a phrase like "playing dirty" in the thread title rather suggests a different original intent... ;)
Macro guy said:
Macro guy said:
Also no way any manufacturer is going to make a sub $1000 FF camera yet. They can do it, but they just started their first gen FF models. They need to milk it as much as they can, like Sony has been doing for years. In a few years I can see Sony finally cave in and release a basic entry level FF, not because they want to, but because the fierce competition has pushed them into doing so.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I did start a thread which I expected feedback on, however, not quite the feedback I was hoping.

I did however answer my own question: The EOS RP needs no neutering; if they haven't added ADC to the 6D II sensor, that, is the biggest con. And, enough to make me think twice, and I was hell bent on the RP last night, even though I may not have said it, I was ready to return my whole R rig and wait for the darn thing. But, that much of an IQ hit is really a stickler after I looked over 6D II output from various sources.

I think the specs we're seeing will be pretty close to reality. We may see some reduced buffer, 4K without DPAF, but really I suspect things like 88x100% AF coverage, Eye-AF, and silent shutter, will all make their way into the RP. Silent shutter may be reduced to scene mode or M. But, otherwise, I suspect the RP's biggest shortfall is already built-in. I'm sure many folks haven't forgotten the 6DII DR debacle, well, it's back if they haven't fixed it. They probably haven't (fixed it).
Click to expand...
We have gotten to the point with digital where we were with film cameras in the 80s and that is that pretty much every camera is as good as another. The features that are being added or subtracted are mostly useless and irrelevant. For the most part, they don't fundamentally to image quality or the ability to capture images that you couldn't capture otherwise.

I am still using the 5d2 and the features that I find useful are:
  • AV
  • Manual exposure
  • Matrix and spot metering
  • Live view
  • AF
That's pretty much it. The one thing that I wish it had was long exposure longer than 30 seconds, but I can get around that with tethering or accessories.

The rest of the features are completely irrelevant to me. So, from my perspective, whether Canon cripples or doesn't cripple the feature set has no impact on my buying decision.
Click to expand...
You're probably right.

But if your hobby is mainly acquiring equipment, or at least reading about it and comparing specifications, the 5dII (which I still happily use too - although before I came here I really thought it was the canine's genitalia) is sooo yesterday. How can you possibly manage? ;-)
 
Last edited:
All the negs don't matter. Canon will have a winner with this one if rumored specs and price are correct

Flipscreen, IS, nice body (if rumor previous are correct), nice price, nice color tech (matters to me), FF, huge brand, .. I'm buying.

--
Tell Sigma to make X-mount lenses
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/about-sigma/contact-us/
 
Last edited:
Totally agree with your satire. The only thing crippled in the camera world are the minds of people who confuse product differentiation based on price with a nefarious plot against them personally.
 
liopleurodon said:
David Hull said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
Software features are different than hardware features. Yes the manufacturer has every right to choose to withhold them. Consumers also have every right to be irritated by it. Competitors have every right to play by different rules.

There's two kinds of cost when making a physical piece of hardware, the cost to design/engineer it, and the cost per unit to physically manufacture one. Software features are very different. They have no material cost, no build cost, etc. The decision to exclude them is solely to push buyers into a higher model to get them. It doesn't add to the per unit manufacturing cost.

In the camera world Sony doesn't do what Canon does.
Click to expand...
we really don't care in here about what Sony does.
 
Critical Thinker said:
007peter said:
Critical Thinker said:
Back2M wrote: 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.
Click to expand...
Chinese has a saying: one part money; one part product.

Translation: You get what you Pay For

You cannot accuse Canon of "crippling" when canon is selling RP cheaper. Again, one part money; one part product.

In fact, my only regret is canon didn't cut further:
  • I would eliminate EVF entirely (useless or videoshooter)
  • more plastic to saved weight
  • I want that EVF-less (400g) FF camear for vlogging
  • making it the first sub $1000 ($999) FF camera
To each their own, but accusing Canon as crippling when the camera is $800 less seem rather GREEDY to me.
Click to expand...
Why are you so triggered? The world crippling is correct. Manufacturers intentionally cripple entry level models, thats why they are cheaper. OP is just speculating what will be crippled in this cheaper Canon body.

Also no way any manufacturer is going to make a sub $1000 FF camera yet. They can do it, but they just started their first gen FF models. They need to milk it as much as they can, like Sony has been doing for years. In a few years I can see Sony finally cave in and release a basic entry level FF, not because they want to, but because the fierce competition has pushed them into doing so.
Click to expand...
Sony generally doesn't play at the lower end of any market. Some products drop in price like the original 7 has and end up there but Sony usually only introduces higher end products. A Sony CEO famously admonished an employee about this way back in the Walkman era.
 
trungtran said:
Oh dear, they gonna make the RP like a M. Crippling specs is the Canon way.

People will still buy it if the prices is right. M5 and M6 replacement is looking less likely of making an appearance now.
Click to expand...
Why, they are different products/categories?
 
Paul B Jones said:
Totally agree with your satire. The only thing crippled in the camera world are the minds of people who confuse product differentiation based on price with a nefarious plot against them personally.
Click to expand...
I wonder if the internet creates this kind of paranoia. Cameras are one th but unfortunately it seems to happen in other aspects of life that are even more meaningful in the world :(
 
trungtran said:
Oh dear, they gonna make the RP like a M. Crippling specs is the Canon way.

People will still buy it if the prices is right. M5 and M6 replacement is looking less likely of making an appearance now.
Click to expand...
the EF-M lineup is operated out of a entirely different division in Canon. the M's are run out of the Powershot group, not the EOS group.

which is why all their model numbers start with PC, instead of DSC
 
rrccad said:
trungtran said:
Oh dear, they gonna make the RP like a M. Crippling specs is the Canon way.

People will still buy it if the prices is right. M5 and M6 replacement is looking less likely of making an appearance now.
Click to expand...
the EF-M lineup is operated out of a entirely different division in Canon. the M's are run out of the Powershot group, not the EOS group.

which is why all their model numbers start with PC, instead of DSC
Click to expand...
The EF-M are called EOS cameras though. I agree though different category of cameras.
 
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...
You mean they'll give me an $800 discount for these silly restrictions that I don't care about? Bring it on!
 
I assume it is not true IBIS which I want in my next EOS R.
 
Battersea said:
rrccad said:
trungtran said:
Oh dear, they gonna make the RP like a M. Crippling specs is the Canon way.

People will still buy it if the prices is right. M5 and M6 replacement is looking less likely of making an appearance now.
Click to expand...
the EF-M lineup is operated out of a entirely different division in Canon. the M's are run out of the Powershot group, not the EOS group.

which is why all their model numbers start with PC, instead of DSC
Click to expand...
The EF-M are called EOS cameras though. I agree though different category of cameras.
Click to expand...
it's not that they are a different category, they are made by an entirely separate group.

what happens with the EOS R has no bearing on what happens to the EOS EF-M
 
rrccad said:
Battersea said:
rrccad said:
trungtran said:
Oh dear, they gonna make the RP like a M. Crippling specs is the Canon way.

People will still buy it if the prices is right. M5 and M6 replacement is looking less likely of making an appearance now.
Click to expand...
the EF-M lineup is operated out of a entirely different division in Canon. the M's are run out of the Powershot group, not the EOS group.

which is why all their model numbers start with PC, instead of DSC
Click to expand...
The EF-M are called EOS cameras though. I agree though different category of cameras.
Click to expand...
it's not that they are a different category, they are made by an entirely separate group.

what happens with the EOS R has no bearing on what happens to the EOS EF-M
Click to expand...
I understand what you are alluding to but actually both are in the Imaging System Business Unit and both report to the same MD. Also there is quite a lot of cross fertilisation between the two both in terms of R&D and in manufacture, not to mention product planning and marketing.
 
rrccad said:
Battersea said:
rrccad said:
trungtran said:
Oh dear, they gonna make the RP like a M. Crippling specs is the Canon way.

People will still buy it if the prices is right. M5 and M6 replacement is looking less likely of making an appearance now.
Click to expand...
the EF-M lineup is operated out of a entirely different division in Canon. the M's are run out of the Powershot group, not the EOS group.

which is why all their model numbers start with PC, instead of DSC
Click to expand...
The EF-M are called EOS cameras though. I agree though different category of cameras.
Click to expand...
it's not that they are a different category, they are made by an entirely separate group.

what happens with the EOS R has no bearing on what happens to the EOS EF-M
Click to expand...
Yeah, that is interesting to know. What Powershot influences do the EF-M cameras have?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
  • Question Question
Upgrade from Canon EOS M3?
3 4 5
Replies
99
Views
42K
M4Mobility
M4Mobility
R
  • User review User review
Well rounded
2 3
Replies
42
Views
128K
RLight
R
R
R8 is Full Frame; R50 succeeds the M50?
6 7 8
Replies
141
Views
18K
Nunataks
Nunataks
A
Quick primer needed on Canon Eos M50 Mk 2
Replies
3
Views
438
Kjeld Olesen
Kjeld Olesen
Satyaa
ML journey with m43... part 1 the cameras
Replies
1
Views
8K
jalywol
jalywol

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top