R50 - no hotshoe pins??

2ndact scene1 wrote:

Lisa Horton wrote:

ChrisPCrunch wrote:

drsnoopy wrote:

ChrisPCrunch wrote:

Every other camera with the new Multi-function accessory shoe still comes with the traditional hotshoe contacts. This is the first camera to drop this feature. I cannot imagine that they are saving that much money by removing the contacts. Maybe they shaved a couple of dollars off the price? Having to buy the adapter costs the customer more in the long run. Plus using the adapter just adds height/bulk to the camera which is designed to be a small/light entry level camera.

People argue that most buyers of an entry level camera like this are unlikely to buy an external flash unit anyway. Well, I agree they are unlikely to buy an external CANON Speedlite as they are generally expensive. BUT, they are more likely to buy a cheaper third party flash like a Godox tt350c. However, at least here in Canada where I live the Canon flash adapter is half the cost of the Godox tt350!

To me, this is simply a dig at third party flash manufacturers by Canon. Entry level camera buyers are more likely to be looking at cheaper 3rd party flash units. I know I am. It was the same thing Canon tried to do when they dropped the center pin from the hotshoe on other entry level Canon Cameras like the SL3. This meant that 3rd party flashes wouldn't work on these cameras. However, eventually, Godox provided a firmware update that allowed their flashes to work on these cameras too.

I imagine that moving forward, Canon will start making their new flash units without the regular hotshoe pins so that everything (cameras and flashes) will only work with the new Multi-function accessory shoe. But that will take time. In the meantime, why not allow for backward compatibilty?

Chris

Of course, you don’t have to buy an R50, buy an R10 instead, which is more versatile in several ways. Then you can buy an inexpensive used flash such as a 430EX which will work just fine and keep costs down. But people who’ve already bought an R50, without understanding this issue, may feel cheated.

Yeah, I agree. The R10 is a much better camera. In some ways, I don't see the point of the R50 unless they dropped the price a ton. Right now it is too close to the R10 in price to make it worth while.

Size alone can be an attraction. Looking for a smaller lighter second camera, the R50 fits that role better than the R10. That AF system is is the other big draw for me.

The R10 reminded of the SL1 I used to have. It is pretty compact. The R50 must really be tiny. Potential buyers probably should try out the ergonomics on each of them before buying.

Interesting.  I will admit that my first thought was "oh but the R10 is bigger than the SLn (I have a SL2). So I checked, and wow, the R10 actually is about the same size as a SL1/2/3!
So yes, that R50 is going to be tiny!