Tamron Still Believes in APS-C

Started 11 months ago | Discussions
OP dpeete Contributing Member • Posts: 746
Re: Tamron is leaving $ MONEY $ on the table not making EF-M, Fuji-X lens

nnowak wrote:

ihgold2 wrote:

nnowak wrote:

ihgold2 wrote:

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

That's a really tempting offer. Do you think f/7.1 is limiting though, in that kit lens? IQ notwithstanding, seems like f/7.1 being the largest possible aperture would be frustrating. What does everyone think?

f/7.1 on full frame is equivalent to f/4.5 on Canon APS-C crop. Yes, f/7.1 sounds slow, but when you consider that an equivalent EF-M lens would need to be 15-66mm f/2.5-4.5, f/7.1 suddenly looks pretty good. Going the other way, the EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 is equivalent to a full frame 24-72mm f/5.6-10. After converting for equivalence, the EF-M 15-45mm ends up a full stop slower than the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1.

No, f/7.1 is not ideal for low light use, but it is still better than any of the existing EF-M zooms.

Thanks, yeah, I guess that does put it in perspective.

Naive question then: hypothetical exposure, f/7.1, ISO 400 ... will those result in different shutter speeds one FF vs crop bodies?

No, the shutter speeds will be the same.

Interesting question. I would say that when I am shooting I tend to let the aperture and necessary shutter speed determine what my ISO should be, and then use Auto ISO. If I am purposely trying to get a specific exposure, I'll adjust the ISO manually, or if I am shooting a dual-gain sensor (Sony sensors in my case, but the R5 & R6 also are) I might jam it onto one of the two base ISO's. But that is the exception.

I mostly shoot indoor sports, so my calculus is that I can deal with some noise in post... but I can't deal with motion blur in post. So shutter speed and aperture are my fixed variables and ISO is what I let go. Shooting full frame means that i can run faster shutter speeds due to the better low-light sensitivity.

 dpeete's gear list:dpeete's gear list
Canon EOS M Sony a7R III Canon EOS M6 Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM +17 more
m100 Contributing Member • Posts: 812
Re: Tamron is leaving $ MONEY $ on the table not making EF-M, Fuji-X lens

ihgold2 wrote:

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

That's a really tempting offer. Do you think f/7.1 is limiting though, in that kit lens? IQ notwithstanding, seems like f/7.1 being the largest possible aperture would be frustrating. What does everyone think?

I would sell that lens

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1504

on ebay right away.

They are going for $230 or so.

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2334524.m570.l1313&_nkw=canon+rf+24-105mm+f%2F4-7.1+&_sacat=0&LH_TitleDesc=0&_osacat=0&_odkw=canon+rf+24-105mm+f%2F4-7.1+is+stm+lens&LH_Complete=1&rt=nc&LH_Sold=1

Get the RP for less than $800 that way.

I would rather have a RP with a 50MM STM than that kit zoom.

Microprism Contributing Member • Posts: 865
Re: Tamron is leaving $ MONEY $ on the table not making EF-M, Fuji-X lens
2

nnowak wrote:

Microprism wrote:

nnowak wrote:

ihgold2 wrote:

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

That's a really tempting offer. Do you think f/7.1 is limiting though, in that kit lens? IQ notwithstanding, seems like f/7.1 being the largest possible aperture would be frustrating. What does everyone think?

f/7.1 on full frame is equivalent to f/4.5 on Canon APS-C crop. Yes, f/7.1 sounds slow, but when you consider that an equivalent EF-M lens would need to be 15-66mm f/2.5-4.5, f/7.1 suddenly looks pretty good. Going the other way, the EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 is equivalent to a full frame 24-72mm f/5.6-10. After converting for equivalence, the EF-M 15-45mm ends up a full stop slower than the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1.

No, f/7.1 is not ideal for low light use, but it is still better than any of the existing EF-M zooms.

It is really slow in low light when your subject is moving and you need a faster shutter speed.

For the same noise levels, you will still get a faster shutter speed with the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 than any EF-M zoom.

I don't think noise and exposure level are interchangeable for most photographers, but suit yourself.

 Microprism's gear list:Microprism's gear list
Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS M6 II Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +22 more
007peter
007peter Forum Pro • Posts: 12,877
even @$999 Canon RP isn't as impressive as Fuji X-S10, Sony A6400, or Canon M6ii
4

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

While $999 is indeed a great price for a mediocre FF camera. Price is truely excellent, no argument from me there. (BUT) this also highlight a rather fraud reasoning:

  1. there is more to a camera than a fullframe!
  2. What IF you need Build-in Flash? RP doesn't have one!
  3. What IF you need to shoot Kids? Canon RP 4 FPS with AF, and 5 FPS without AF is rather PATHETIC, even by point/shoot standard
  4. What IF you need to shoot 4K? RP suffer from nasty 1.7x crop in 4K! That is almost a 2x loss in vertical & horizontal video resolution
  5. Here is DPR review on RP horrible video:

Cropped video causes a number of problems: (1) it means your field-of-view gets cropped, which can make it difficult to shoot with a wide-angle view (something that's really useful in video), (2) it means you're using a smaller light-sensitive region, which means noisier video, for any given exposure, than using the full sensor. (3) As if that weren't not enough, in 4K mode the EOS RP loses access to one of its most compelling video features: Dual Pixel AF. Without it, the camera reverts to using a rather slow and unreliable contrast-detection system

The only good thing about RP is the $999 price.  But once you consider AF performance, Continuous AF for moving kids, soft 1080p and non-usable 4K video, this a very compromised camera for $999.

I much rather have Canon M6II, Fuji X-S10, or Sony A6400 or a $599 Sony A6100.  While these are APS-C, they FOCUS FAST, have build-in flash, yet retain AF ability in 4K.

Like I said, take way the $999 price tag, RP simply suffer from too much compromised.  While its is a FF, its also a rather weak FF sensor comparing against competition.  I much rather have Canon 32mp ASP-C in M6ii over 26mp in RP.  Dynamic range is also disappointing for a FF sensor.

The best part about RP is the access to future Canon (R) lens, but as a Camera, it is rather disappointing.

 007peter's gear list:007peter's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF6 Panasonic 20mm F1.7 II
nnowak Veteran Member • Posts: 7,770
Re: Tamron is leaving $ MONEY $ on the table not making EF-M, Fuji-X lens

Microprism wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Microprism wrote:

nnowak wrote:

ihgold2 wrote:

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

That's a really tempting offer. Do you think f/7.1 is limiting though, in that kit lens? IQ notwithstanding, seems like f/7.1 being the largest possible aperture would be frustrating. What does everyone think?

f/7.1 on full frame is equivalent to f/4.5 on Canon APS-C crop. Yes, f/7.1 sounds slow, but when you consider that an equivalent EF-M lens would need to be 15-66mm f/2.5-4.5, f/7.1 suddenly looks pretty good. Going the other way, the EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 is equivalent to a full frame 24-72mm f/5.6-10. After converting for equivalence, the EF-M 15-45mm ends up a full stop slower than the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1.

No, f/7.1 is not ideal for low light use, but it is still better than any of the existing EF-M zooms.

It is really slow in low light when your subject is moving and you need a faster shutter speed.

For the same noise levels, you will still get a faster shutter speed with the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 than any EF-M zoom.

I don't think noise and exposure level are interchangeable for most photographers, but suit yourself.

Really?  You have never pulled down your shutter speed or swapped to a brighter lens in an attempt to keep your M3 from exceeding ISO 6400?  Noise levels have been a consideration for a large percentage of photographers going back to the days of film.

thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 7,578
Re: even @$999 Canon RP isn't as impressive as Fuji X-S10, Sony A6400, or Canon M6ii

007peter wrote:

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

While $999 is indeed a great price for a mediocre FF camera. Price is truely excellent, no argument from me there. (BUT) this also highlight a rather fraud reasoning:

  1. there is more to a camera than a fullframe!
  2. What IF you need Build-in Flash? RP doesn't have one!

Build in flash only rarely gives acceptable results, and only as fill in flash.

  1. What IF you need to shoot Kids? Canon RP 4 FPS with AF, and 5 FPS without AF is rather PATHETIC, even by point/shoot standard

don't need it. In my opinion shooting kids is not the same as spray and pray and pick the moment afterwards. It's like i don't consider making captures of 8K footage as photography. Nothing factual, just my opinion of course.

  1. What IF you need to shoot 4K? RP suffer from nasty 1.7x crop in 4K! That is almost a 2x loss in vertical & horizontal video resolution

don't need it

  1. Here is DPR review on RP horrible video:

Cropped video causes a number of problems: (1) it means your field-of-view gets cropped, which can make it difficult to shoot with a wide-angle view (something that's really useful in video), (2) it means you're using a smaller light-sensitive region, which means noisier video, for any given exposure, than using the full sensor. (3) As if that weren't not enough, in 4K mode the EOS RP loses access to one of its most compelling video features: Dual Pixel AF. Without it, the camera reverts to using a rather slow and unreliable contrast-detection system

The only good thing about RP is the $999 price. But once you consider AF performance,

in my opinion that's a serious differentiator.

Continuous AF for moving kids, soft 1080p and non-usable 4K video, this a very compromised camera for $999.

I much rather have Canon M6II, Fuji X-S10, or Sony A6400 or a $599 Sony A6100. While these are APS-C, they FOCUS FAST, have build-in flash, yet retain AF ability in 4K.

Like I said, take way the $999 price tag, RP simply suffer from too much compromised. While its is a FF, its also a rather weak FF sensor comparing against competition. I much rather have Canon 32mp ASP-C in M6ii over 26mp in RP. Dynamic range is also disappointing for a FF sensor.

The best part about RP is the access to future Canon (R) lens, but as a Camera, it is rather disappointing.

You're forgetting one thing: in all cases with good light not needing a lot of DR the RP blows all the aps-c cameras out of the water when it comes to IQ. A bigger sensor size allows for better IQ. Yes DR, yes ISO2noise ratio, i know i know, but those metrics aren't necessarily important for a large portion of your photography.

You don't have to shop for the very expensive lenses for the better full frame IQ. RF 24-105 f/4.0 + RF 35mm f/1.8 IS stm + 85mm f/2.0 IS stm will give better result than any ef-m whatever zoom + ef-m 22mm f/2.0 + sigma 56mm f/1.4. And although other aps-c platforms have better zoom options, i doubt if these platforms give options beating these full frame lenses. You can determine this as "access to the RF mount" but let's not forget it's essentially the full frame sensor allowing for this access, and the full frame sensor playing the biggest role in the better IQ here.

There might be the exception of the 32mm giving better results than the RF 50mm f/1.8, however, more stopped down and towards the center the 32mm won't even match that new nifty fifty.

So basically the RP gives you the option to trade AF speed to get better IQ, AND compatibility of you current lenses with your best future camera option.  While AF speed is important, i don't find it attractive to prioritize AF speed over IQ and invest in a lot of aps-c lenses you will have to sell when upgrading.

-- hide signature --

victory

 thunder storm's gear list:thunder storm's gear list
Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art +18 more
thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 7,578
Re: Tamron is leaving $ MONEY $ on the table not making EF-M, Fuji-X lens

Microprism wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Microprism wrote:

nnowak wrote:

ihgold2 wrote:

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

That's a really tempting offer. Do you think f/7.1 is limiting though, in that kit lens? IQ notwithstanding, seems like f/7.1 being the largest possible aperture would be frustrating. What does everyone think?

f/7.1 on full frame is equivalent to f/4.5 on Canon APS-C crop. Yes, f/7.1 sounds slow, but when you consider that an equivalent EF-M lens would need to be 15-66mm f/2.5-4.5, f/7.1 suddenly looks pretty good. Going the other way, the EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 is equivalent to a full frame 24-72mm f/5.6-10. After converting for equivalence, the EF-M 15-45mm ends up a full stop slower than the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1.

No, f/7.1 is not ideal for low light use, but it is still better than any of the existing EF-M zooms.

It is really slow in low light when your subject is moving and you need a faster shutter speed.

For the same noise levels, you will still get a faster shutter speed with the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 than any EF-M zoom.

I don't think noise and exposure level are interchangeable for most photographers, but suit yourself.

Fake response.

-- hide signature --

victory

 thunder storm's gear list:thunder storm's gear list
Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art +18 more
m100 Contributing Member • Posts: 812
Re: even @$999 Canon RP isn't as impressive as Fuji X-S10, Sony A6400, or Canon M6ii
1

thunder storm wrote:

007peter wrote:

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

While $999 is indeed a great price for a mediocre FF camera. Price is truely excellent, no argument from me there. (BUT) this also highlight a rather fraud reasoning:

  1. there is more to a camera than a fullframe!
  2. What IF you need Build-in Flash? RP doesn't have one!

Build in flash only rarely gives acceptable results, and only as fill in flash.

  1. What IF you need to shoot Kids? Canon RP 4 FPS with AF, and 5 FPS without AF is rather PATHETIC, even by point/shoot standard

don't need it. In my opinion shooting kids is not the same as spray and pray and pick the moment afterwards. It's like i don't consider making captures of 8K footage as photography. Nothing factual, just my opinion of course.

  1. What IF you need to shoot 4K? RP suffer from nasty 1.7x crop in 4K! That is almost a 2x loss in vertical & horizontal video resolution

don't need it

  1. Here is DPR review on RP horrible video:

Cropped video causes a number of problems: (1) it means your field-of-view gets cropped, which can make it difficult to shoot with a wide-angle view (something that's really useful in video), (2) it means you're using a smaller light-sensitive region, which means noisier video, for any given exposure, than using the full sensor. (3) As if that weren't not enough, in 4K mode the EOS RP loses access to one of its most compelling video features: Dual Pixel AF. Without it, the camera reverts to using a rather slow and unreliable contrast-detection system

The only good thing about RP is the $999 price. But once you consider AF performance,

in my opinion that's a serious differentiator.

Continuous AF for moving kids, soft 1080p and non-usable 4K video, this a very compromised camera for $999.

I much rather have Canon M6II, Fuji X-S10, or Sony A6400 or a $599 Sony A6100. While these are APS-C, they FOCUS FAST, have build-in flash, yet retain AF ability in 4K.

Like I said, take way the $999 price tag, RP simply suffer from too much compromised. While its is a FF, its also a rather weak FF sensor comparing against competition. I much rather have Canon 32mp ASP-C in M6ii over 26mp in RP. Dynamic range is also disappointing for a FF sensor.

The best part about RP is the access to future Canon (R) lens, but as a Camera, it is rather disappointing.

You're forgetting one thing: in all cases with good light not needing a lot of DR the RP blows all the aps-c cameras out of the water when it comes to IQ. A bigger sensor size allows for better IQ. Yes DR, yes ISO2noise ratio, i know i know, but those metrics aren't necessarily important for a large portion of your photography.

You don't have to shop for the very expensive lenses for the better full frame IQ. RF 24-105 f/4.0 + RF 35mm f/1.8 IS stm + 85mm f/2.0 IS stm will give better result than any ef-m whatever zoom + ef-m 22mm f/2.0 + sigma 56mm f/1.4. And although other aps-c platforms have better zoom options, i doubt if these platforms give options beating these full frame lenses. You can determine this as "access to the RF mount" but let's not forget it's essentially the full frame sensor allowing for this access, and the full frame sensor playing the biggest role in the better IQ here.

There might be the exception of the 32mm giving better results than the RF 50mm f/1.8, however, more stopped down and towards the center the 32mm won't even match that new nifty fifty.

So basically the RP gives you the option to trade AF speed to get better IQ, AND compatibility of you current lenses with your best future camera option. While AF speed is important, i don't find it attractive to prioritize AF speed over IQ and invest in a lot of aps-c lenses you will have to sell when upgrading.

I might upgrade my 6D to a RP but no way would I trade the M6II for a RP.

thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 7,578
Re: even @$999 Canon RP isn't as impressive as Fuji X-S10, Sony A6400, or Canon M6ii

m100 wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

007peter wrote:

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

While $999 is indeed a great price for a mediocre FF camera. Price is truely excellent, no argument from me there. (BUT) this also highlight a rather fraud reasoning:

  1. there is more to a camera than a fullframe!
  2. What IF you need Build-in Flash? RP doesn't have one!

Build in flash only rarely gives acceptable results, and only as fill in flash.

  1. What IF you need to shoot Kids? Canon RP 4 FPS with AF, and 5 FPS without AF is rather PATHETIC, even by point/shoot standard

don't need it. In my opinion shooting kids is not the same as spray and pray and pick the moment afterwards. It's like i don't consider making captures of 8K footage as photography. Nothing factual, just my opinion of course.

  1. What IF you need to shoot 4K? RP suffer from nasty 1.7x crop in 4K! That is almost a 2x loss in vertical & horizontal video resolution

don't need it

  1. Here is DPR review on RP horrible video:

Cropped video causes a number of problems: (1) it means your field-of-view gets cropped, which can make it difficult to shoot with a wide-angle view (something that's really useful in video), (2) it means you're using a smaller light-sensitive region, which means noisier video, for any given exposure, than using the full sensor. (3) As if that weren't not enough, in 4K mode the EOS RP loses access to one of its most compelling video features: Dual Pixel AF. Without it, the camera reverts to using a rather slow and unreliable contrast-detection system

The only good thing about RP is the $999 price. But once you consider AF performance,

in my opinion that's a serious differentiator.

Continuous AF for moving kids, soft 1080p and non-usable 4K video, this a very compromised camera for $999.

I much rather have Canon M6II, Fuji X-S10, or Sony A6400 or a $599 Sony A6100. While these are APS-C, they FOCUS FAST, have build-in flash, yet retain AF ability in 4K.

Like I said, take way the $999 price tag, RP simply suffer from too much compromised. While its is a FF, its also a rather weak FF sensor comparing against competition. I much rather have Canon 32mp ASP-C in M6ii over 26mp in RP. Dynamic range is also disappointing for a FF sensor.

The best part about RP is the access to future Canon (R) lens, but as a Camera, it is rather disappointing.

You're forgetting one thing: in all cases with good light not needing a lot of DR the RP blows all the aps-c cameras out of the water when it comes to IQ. A bigger sensor size allows for better IQ. Yes DR, yes ISO2noise ratio, i know i know, but those metrics aren't necessarily important for a large portion of your photography.

You don't have to shop for the very expensive lenses for the better full frame IQ. RF 24-105 f/4.0 + RF 35mm f/1.8 IS stm + 85mm f/2.0 IS stm will give better result than any ef-m whatever zoom + ef-m 22mm f/2.0 + sigma 56mm f/1.4. And although other aps-c platforms have better zoom options, i doubt if these platforms give options beating these full frame lenses. You can determine this as "access to the RF mount" but let's not forget it's essentially the full frame sensor allowing for this access, and the full frame sensor playing the biggest role in the better IQ here.

There might be the exception of the 32mm giving better results than the RF 50mm f/1.8, however, more stopped down and towards the center the 32mm won't even match that new nifty fifty.

So basically the RP gives you the option to trade AF speed to get better IQ, AND compatibility of you current lenses with your best future camera option. While AF speed is important, i don't find it attractive to prioritize AF speed over IQ and invest in a lot of aps-c lenses you will have to sell when upgrading.

I might upgrade my 6D to a RP but no way would I trade the M6II for a RP.

The M6mkII and RP are totally different cameras. Both are nice. Just pick the right tool for the job.

-- hide signature --

victory

 thunder storm's gear list:thunder storm's gear list
Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art +18 more
superpig000 Regular Member • Posts: 143
Re: Tamron Still Believes in APS-C

The zoom range and speed would be perfect for EOS-M! The lack of I.S. would be personally hard to deal with - the 11-22 and 18-150's I.S. is great and going back to unstabilised longer focal lengths would be hard given how easy the I.S. makes the lens to use.

 superpig000's gear list:superpig000's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PM2 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Pro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4-5.6 R +1 more
m100 Contributing Member • Posts: 812
Re: even @$999 Canon RP isn't as impressive as Fuji X-S10, Sony A6400, or Canon M6ii
2

thunder storm wrote:

m100 wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

007peter wrote:

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

While $999 is indeed a great price for a mediocre FF camera. Price is truely excellent, no argument from me there. (BUT) this also highlight a rather fraud reasoning:

  1. there is more to a camera than a fullframe!
  2. What IF you need Build-in Flash? RP doesn't have one!

Build in flash only rarely gives acceptable results, and only as fill in flash.

  1. What IF you need to shoot Kids? Canon RP 4 FPS with AF, and 5 FPS without AF is rather PATHETIC, even by point/shoot standard

don't need it. In my opinion shooting kids is not the same as spray and pray and pick the moment afterwards. It's like i don't consider making captures of 8K footage as photography. Nothing factual, just my opinion of course.

  1. What IF you need to shoot 4K? RP suffer from nasty 1.7x crop in 4K! That is almost a 2x loss in vertical & horizontal video resolution

don't need it

  1. Here is DPR review on RP horrible video:

Cropped video causes a number of problems: (1) it means your field-of-view gets cropped, which can make it difficult to shoot with a wide-angle view (something that's really useful in video), (2) it means you're using a smaller light-sensitive region, which means noisier video, for any given exposure, than using the full sensor. (3) As if that weren't not enough, in 4K mode the EOS RP loses access to one of its most compelling video features: Dual Pixel AF. Without it, the camera reverts to using a rather slow and unreliable contrast-detection system

The only good thing about RP is the $999 price. But once you consider AF performance,

in my opinion that's a serious differentiator.

Continuous AF for moving kids, soft 1080p and non-usable 4K video, this a very compromised camera for $999.

I much rather have Canon M6II, Fuji X-S10, or Sony A6400 or a $599 Sony A6100. While these are APS-C, they FOCUS FAST, have build-in flash, yet retain AF ability in 4K.

Like I said, take way the $999 price tag, RP simply suffer from too much compromised. While its is a FF, its also a rather weak FF sensor comparing against competition. I much rather have Canon 32mp ASP-C in M6ii over 26mp in RP. Dynamic range is also disappointing for a FF sensor.

The best part about RP is the access to future Canon (R) lens, but as a Camera, it is rather disappointing.

You're forgetting one thing: in all cases with good light not needing a lot of DR the RP blows all the aps-c cameras out of the water when it comes to IQ. A bigger sensor size allows for better IQ. Yes DR, yes ISO2noise ratio, i know i know, but those metrics aren't necessarily important for a large portion of your photography.

You don't have to shop for the very expensive lenses for the better full frame IQ. RF 24-105 f/4.0 + RF 35mm f/1.8 IS stm + 85mm f/2.0 IS stm will give better result than any ef-m whatever zoom + ef-m 22mm f/2.0 + sigma 56mm f/1.4. And although other aps-c platforms have better zoom options, i doubt if these platforms give options beating these full frame lenses. You can determine this as "access to the RF mount" but let's not forget it's essentially the full frame sensor allowing for this access, and the full frame sensor playing the biggest role in the better IQ here.

There might be the exception of the 32mm giving better results than the RF 50mm f/1.8, however, more stopped down and towards the center the 32mm won't even match that new nifty fifty.

So basically the RP gives you the option to trade AF speed to get better IQ, AND compatibility of you current lenses with your best future camera option. While AF speed is important, i don't find it attractive to prioritize AF speed over IQ and invest in a lot of aps-c lenses you will have to sell when upgrading.

I might upgrade my 6D to a RP but no way would I trade the M6II for a RP.

The M6mkII and RP are totally different cameras. Both are nice. Just pick the right tool for the job.

I was saying when the vaccine gets here I will be so happy I will buy a R5 but for real the RP deal looks good.

Besides why would I need a R5 when I have a M6II ? 

thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 7,578
Re: even @$999 Canon RP isn't as impressive as Fuji X-S10, Sony A6400, or Canon M6ii

m100 wrote:

Besides why would I need a R5 when I have a M6II ?

IQ

-- hide signature --

victory

 thunder storm's gear list:thunder storm's gear list
Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art +18 more
R2D2 Forum Pro • Posts: 23,531
Re: even @$999 Canon RP isn't as impressive as Fuji X-S10, Sony A6400, or Canon M6ii
2

m100 wrote:

I was saying when the vaccine gets here I will be so happy I will buy a R5 but for real the RP deal looks good.

Besides why would I need a R5 when I have a M6II ?

When it comes right down to it I actually enjoy shooting with the M6ii much more than with the R5. The whole system is so much smaller, lighter, and more portable. Plus I just love using the (very quick) tilting LCD instead of having to deploy the R5's articulating screen (I much prefer to use the back LCD instead of the viewfinder for general shooting).

Conversely the R5 is better at other things of course. Like mounting the incredible RF 100-500 (with and without RF 1.4x TC).    Or controlling DOF with the mighty RF "L" lenses. Or using Eye AF, etc. But this all comes at a price to be sure, both literally and figuratively. As 'Storm says, pick the right tool for the job at hand.

I'll add that you should always let your output requirements determine how much IQ you need. Everything in photography is on a moving scale!  Don't waste money that might be better applied elsewhere.

R2

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries

 R2D2's gear list:R2D2's gear list
Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS M6
dwfrommonterey Regular Member • Posts: 359
Re: even @$999 Canon RP isn't as impressive as Fuji X-S10, Sony A6400, or Canon M6ii

I might upgrade my 6D to a RP but no way would I trade the M6II for a RP.

Agreed!

Some would be far more likely to upgrade their M5.

The M6/2, with no integrated EVF, but with more pixels, is just not in any obvious upgrade path to the RP.  If you like the M6/2, you probably won't see the RP as an important improvement.

 dwfrommonterey's gear list:dwfrommonterey's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P900 Nikon D7200 Canon EOS M5 Canon EOS RP
dwfrommonterey Regular Member • Posts: 359
Re: even @$999 Canon RP isn't as impressive as Fuji X-S10, Sony A6400, or Canon M6ii
2

When it comes right down to it I actually enjoy shooting with the M6ii much more than with the R5. The whole system is so much smaller, lighter, and more portable.

What many pine for is an APS-C R5.  Small, light,  portable, thus, enjoyable.  And $1000 rather than $4000.  Known colloquially as the M5II.  Or maybe even $2000.

 dwfrommonterey's gear list:dwfrommonterey's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P900 Nikon D7200 Canon EOS M5 Canon EOS RP
OP dpeete Contributing Member • Posts: 746
Re: Tamron Still Believes in APS-C
4

superpig000 wrote:

The zoom range and speed would be perfect for EOS-M! The lack of I.S. would be personally hard to deal with - the 11-22 and 18-150's I.S. is great and going back to unstabilised longer focal lengths would be hard given how easy the I.S. makes the lens to use.

Please stop propagating that... the lens has IS. You can see "VC" right on the pics... that is Tamron's IS nomenclature.

 dpeete's gear list:dpeete's gear list
Canon EOS M Sony a7R III Canon EOS M6 Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM +17 more
Microprism Contributing Member • Posts: 865
Re: Tamron is leaving $ MONEY $ on the table not making EF-M, Fuji-X lens

Athunder storm wrote:

Microprism wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Microprism wrote:

nnowak wrote:

ihgold2 wrote:

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

That's a really tempting offer. Do you think f/7.1 is limiting though, in that kit lens? IQ notwithstanding, seems like f/7.1 being the largest possible aperture would be frustrating. What does everyone think?

f/7.1 on full frame is equivalent to f/4.5 on Canon APS-C crop. Yes, f/7.1 sounds slow, but when you consider that an equivalent EF-M lens would need to be 15-66mm f/2.5-4.5, f/7.1 suddenly looks pretty good. Going the other way, the EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 is equivalent to a full frame 24-72mm f/5.6-10. After converting for equivalence, the EF-M 15-45mm ends up a full stop slower than the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1.

No, f/7.1 is not ideal for low light use, but it is still better than any of the existing EF-M zooms.

It is really slow in low light when your subject is moving and you need a faster shutter speed.

For the same noise levels, you will still get a faster shutter speed with the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 than any EF-M zoom.

I don't think noise and exposure level are interchangeable for most photographers, but suit yourself.

Fake response.

How about a real response then? I don't remember anyone ever posting, "Hey, that's great shot. Look at that low noise. Is that a bird, or a plane, in it by the way?" If your subject is in motion you need a faster shutter speed to stop the motion unless you like blur. A faster lens allows that. You either get the shot, or you don't.

 Microprism's gear list:Microprism's gear list
Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS M6 II Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +22 more
thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 7,578
Re: Tamron is leaving $ MONEY $ on the table not making EF-M, Fuji-X lens

Microprism wrote:

Athunder storm wrote:

Microprism wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Microprism wrote:

nnowak wrote:

ihgold2 wrote:

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

That's a really tempting offer. Do you think f/7.1 is limiting though, in that kit lens? IQ notwithstanding, seems like f/7.1 being the largest possible aperture would be frustrating. What does everyone think?

f/7.1 on full frame is equivalent to f/4.5 on Canon APS-C crop. Yes, f/7.1 sounds slow, but when you consider that an equivalent EF-M lens would need to be 15-66mm f/2.5-4.5, f/7.1 suddenly looks pretty good. Going the other way, the EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 is equivalent to a full frame 24-72mm f/5.6-10. After converting for equivalence, the EF-M 15-45mm ends up a full stop slower than the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1.

No, f/7.1 is not ideal for low light use, but it is still better than any of the existing EF-M zooms.

It is really slow in low light when your subject is moving and you need a faster shutter speed.

For the same noise levels, you will still get a faster shutter speed with the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 than any EF-M zoom.

I don't think noise and exposure level are interchangeable for most photographers, but suit yourself.

Fake response.

How about a real response then? I don't remember

You should remember someone posting this:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4535021/64597977

anyone ever posting, "Hey, that's great shot. Look at that low noise. Too bad the bird is a blur." If your subject is in motion you need a faster shutter speed to stop the motion unless you like blur. A faster lens allows that.

It's simply nonsense to state a faster lens is the only factor allowing for that. It can also be a higher ISO with a sensor with a better signal to noise ratio.

You either get the shot, or you don't.

You either understand how to adjust your ISO or you don't. You either understand the sensor signal to noise ratio performance is a factor just as important or you don't.

I don't think noise and exposure level are interchangeable for most photographers, but suit yourself.

Suit yourself.

-- hide signature --

victory

 thunder storm's gear list:thunder storm's gear list
Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art +18 more
Microprism Contributing Member • Posts: 865
Re: Tamron is leaving $ MONEY $ on the table not making EF-M, Fuji-X lens
1

thunder storm wrote:

Microprism wrote:

Athunder storm wrote:

Microprism wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Microprism wrote:

nnowak wrote:

ihgold2 wrote:

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

That's a really tempting offer. Do you think f/7.1 is limiting though, in that kit lens? IQ notwithstanding, seems like f/7.1 being the largest possible aperture would be frustrating. What does everyone think?

f/7.1 on full frame is equivalent to f/4.5 on Canon APS-C crop. Yes, f/7.1 sounds slow, but when you consider that an equivalent EF-M lens would need to be 15-66mm f/2.5-4.5, f/7.1 suddenly looks pretty good. Going the other way, the EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 is equivalent to a full frame 24-72mm f/5.6-10. After converting for equivalence, the EF-M 15-45mm ends up a full stop slower than the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1.

No, f/7.1 is not ideal for low light use, but it is still better than any of the existing EF-M zooms.

It is really slow in low light when your subject is moving and you need a faster shutter speed.

For the same noise levels, you will still get a faster shutter speed with the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 than any EF-M zoom.

I don't think noise and exposure level are interchangeable for most photographers, but suit yourself.

Fake response.

How about a real response then? I don't remember

You should remember someone posting this:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4535021/64597977

anyone ever posting, "Hey, that's great shot. Look at that low noise. Too bad the bird is a blur." If your subject is in motion you need a faster shutter speed to stop the motion unless you like blur. A faster lens allows that.

It's simply nonsense to state a faster lens is the only factor allowing for that. It can also be a higher ISO with a sensor with a better signal to noise ratio.

You either get the shot, or you don't.

You either understand how to adjust your ISO or you don't. You either understand the sensor signal to noise ratio performance is a factor just as important or you don't.

I don't think noise and exposure level are interchangeable for most photographers, but suit yourself.

Suit yourself.

I know quite well that no matter how good a sensor is there is some light level at which either you use a faster lens or you get distractingly visible noise. The better the sensor the lower the light level in which it performs acceptably, but that threshold always exists. For myself, I know exactly what ISO level on my own cameras is acceptable to me. That suits me fine.

 Microprism's gear list:Microprism's gear list
Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS M6 II Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +22 more
nnowak Veteran Member • Posts: 7,770
Re: Tamron is leaving $ MONEY $ on the table not making EF-M, Fuji-X lens
2

Microprism wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

Microprism wrote:

Athunder storm wrote:

Microprism wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Microprism wrote:

nnowak wrote:

ihgold2 wrote:

dwfrommonterey wrote:

Not everyone care to upgrade to Fullframe, majority of "consumer" don't want to spend $2000 when an $500~$1000 APS-C DSLR or Mirrorless will do.

Canon RP with decent kit lens $999. Right now.

That's a really tempting offer. Do you think f/7.1 is limiting though, in that kit lens? IQ notwithstanding, seems like f/7.1 being the largest possible aperture would be frustrating. What does everyone think?

f/7.1 on full frame is equivalent to f/4.5 on Canon APS-C crop. Yes, f/7.1 sounds slow, but when you consider that an equivalent EF-M lens would need to be 15-66mm f/2.5-4.5, f/7.1 suddenly looks pretty good. Going the other way, the EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 is equivalent to a full frame 24-72mm f/5.6-10. After converting for equivalence, the EF-M 15-45mm ends up a full stop slower than the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1.

No, f/7.1 is not ideal for low light use, but it is still better than any of the existing EF-M zooms.

It is really slow in low light when your subject is moving and you need a faster shutter speed.

For the same noise levels, you will still get a faster shutter speed with the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 than any EF-M zoom.

I don't think noise and exposure level are interchangeable for most photographers, but suit yourself.

Fake response.

How about a real response then? I don't remember

You should remember someone posting this:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4535021/64597977

anyone ever posting, "Hey, that's great shot. Look at that low noise. Too bad the bird is a blur." If your subject is in motion you need a faster shutter speed to stop the motion unless you like blur. A faster lens allows that.

It's simply nonsense to state a faster lens is the only factor allowing for that. It can also be a higher ISO with a sensor with a better signal to noise ratio.

You either get the shot, or you don't.

You either understand how to adjust your ISO or you don't. You either understand the sensor signal to noise ratio performance is a factor just as important or you don't.

I don't think noise and exposure level are interchangeable for most photographers, but suit yourself.

Suit yourself.

I know quite well that no matter how good a sensor is there is some light level at which either you use a faster lens or you get distractingly visible noise. The better the sensor the lower the light level in which it performs acceptably, but that threshold always exists. For myself, I know exactly what ISO level on my own cameras is acceptable to me. That suits me fine.

That is exactly the point.  The 24-105mm f/4-7.1 on full frame will give you a higher threshold than any EF-M zoom on crop.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads