R8 / RF28 initial thoughts

[RLight]

Disclaimer: longtime Canon shooter, I’ve got an R3, been stuck on the M platform for portable needs and I’ve been doing this photo thing for a minute so I’d like to think I know my stuff.

.

The R8 I knew was a winner the moment I saw it on paper. In practice though, it resolves my technical gripes with the RP, namely better AF, FPS and sensor (ADC).

The R8 like the R50 has near bullet proof AF, so far. It really begs the question, do I need eye-controlled AF if the camera is just smart enough to assume what you want, be easy to override if not via touch and drag, and holds locks, solid.

The SOOC metering, contrast rendering are on par with the R50, to say exactly as I predicted, and represents next generation SOOC from Canon. Really impressive, means post processing needs are virtually banished, from spot checks thus far.

Size and weight…

With the stock 24-50 it’s fairly M-ish, but, with the RF28? I forget it’s there, like the M. To my surprise, it pockets! In my cargo shorts, but that’s usually where I care. In fact it allowed me to sneak it out of the house today undetected. I’m gonna have to fess up to the wife about this guy soon, though. I have a feeling this combo is a keeper. Glovebox though? It BARELY, doesn’t fit. Can’t win em all. The M6 II + 22mm BARELY, fits. Figures.

Regarding the RF28 itself, “sharp” wide open. Good contrast rendering for what it is and color. But, I’d say just like my PMo glasses, losses a touch of contrast and color when I put on my glasses, in exchange for increased sharpness. This lens is like that; not as interesting rendering as a much more expensive L, but very good for what it is, and especially, the footprint. The bokeh is a bit noisy but not obnoxious, again, we’ll controlled for what this is, and again, that footprint.

That 24-50, not bad, but, not gonna lie, I’ll spend some time with it, but I think it may collect dust in favor of the 28, and I don’t have, but used to have the 24-240. I can see that working well. Shame I missed that last refurb sale. I’ll wait out the next.

Where I can see the R8 displacing my M is with the 22, this May dislodge it. Where it doesn’t? Reach, or say the 32, 11-22. That 32 has STRONG rendering for its footprint. The 11-22? Ditto. The RF16 May challenge it, but nothing touches the 32, or say the 18-150 or 55-200. Sure the RF-S has the former, but it doesn’t have anything wide, or fast.

I dunno folks, gonna have to sleep on this, shoot it, and think on it. It’s not a slam dunk death to the M, unless, you’re talking the 22, this may do that function better. Detailed comparisons and samples to follow…

 

[MAC]

Disclaimer: longtime Canon shooter, I’ve got an R3, been stuck on the M platform for portable needs and I’ve been doing this photo thing for a minute so I’d like to think I know my stuff.

.

The R8 I knew was a winner the moment I saw it on paper. In practice though, it resolves my technical gripes with the RP, namely better AF, FPS and sensor (ADC).

The R8 like the R50 has near bullet proof AF, so far. It really begs the question, do I need eye-controlled AF if the camera is just smart enough to assume what you want, be easy to override if not via touch and drag, and holds locks, solid.

The SOOC metering, contrast rendering are on par with the R50, to say exactly as I predicted, and represents next generation SOOC from Canon. Really impressive, means post processing needs are virtually banished, from spot checks thus far.

Size and weight…

With the stock 24-50 it’s fairly M-ish, but, with the RF28? I forget it’s there, like the M. To my surprise, it pockets! In my cargo shorts, but that’s usually where I care. In fact it allowed me to sneak it out of the house today undetected. I’m gonna have to fess up to the wife about this guy soon, though. I have a feeling this combo is a keeper. Glovebox though? It BARELY, doesn’t fit. Can’t win em all. The M6 II + 22mm BARELY, fits. Figures.

Regarding the RF28 itself, “sharp” wide open. Good contrast rendering for what it is and color. But, I’d say just like my PMo glasses, losses a touch of contrast and color when I put on my glasses, in exchange for increased sharpness. This lens is like that; not as interesting rendering as a much more expensive L, but very good for what it is, and especially, the footprint. The bokeh is a bit noisy but not obnoxious, again, we’ll controlled for what this is, and again, that footprint.

That 24-50, not bad, but, not gonna lie, I’ll spend some time with it, but I think it may collect dust in favor of the 28, and I don’t have, but used to have the 24-240. I can see that working well. Shame I missed that last refurb sale. I’ll wait out the next.

Where I can see the R8 displacing my M is with the 22, this May dislodge it. Where it doesn’t? Reach, or say the 32, 11-22. That 32 has STRONG rendering for its footprint. The 11-22? Ditto. The RF16 May challenge it, but nothing touches the 32, or say the 18-150 or 55-200. Sure the RF-S has the former, but it doesn’t have anything wide, or fast.

I dunno folks, gonna have to sleep on this, shoot it, and think on it. It’s not a slam dunk death to the M, unless, you’re talking the 22, this may do that function better. Detailed comparisons and samples to follow…

so first of all, congrats, you've finally got the small size and power in a small FF setup.

I agree with most of your assessment.

As I've said to you before, it is about multiples

I just did an amusement park with high speed swings and the R8 in e-shutter locked on instantaneously and got shots at high fps that I've never been able to get before - though I could have used the reach of that 24-240 - do buy it again - the m6II can't do these and bif - the RF 100-400 and 800 are in my future

 

[gimp_dad]

Disclaimer: longtime Canon shooter, I’ve got an R3, been stuck on the M platform for portable needs and I’ve been doing this photo thing for a minute so I’d like to think I know my stuff.

.

The R8 I knew was a winner the moment I saw it on paper. In practice though, it resolves my technical gripes with the RP, namely better AF, FPS and sensor (ADC).

The R8 like the R50 has near bullet proof AF, so far. It really begs the question, do I need eye-controlled AF if the camera is just smart enough to assume what you want, be easy to override if not via touch and drag, and holds locks, solid.

The SOOC metering, contrast rendering are on par with the R50, to say exactly as I predicted, and represents next generation SOOC from Canon. Really impressive, means post processing needs are virtually banished, from spot checks thus far.

Size and weight…

With the stock 24-50 it’s fairly M-ish, but, with the RF28? I forget it’s there, like the M. To my surprise, it pockets! In my cargo shorts, but that’s usually where I care. In fact it allowed me to sneak it out of the house today undetected. I’m gonna have to fess up to the wife about this guy soon, though. I have a feeling this combo is a keeper. Glovebox though? It BARELY, doesn’t fit. Can’t win em all. The M6 II + 22mm BARELY, fits. Figures.

Regarding the RF28 itself, “sharp” wide open. Good contrast rendering for what it is and color. But, I’d say just like my PMo glasses, losses a touch of contrast and color when I put on my glasses, in exchange for increased sharpness. This lens is like that; not as interesting rendering as a much more expensive L, but very good for what it is, and especially, the footprint. The bokeh is a bit noisy but not obnoxious, again, we’ll controlled for what this is, and again, that footprint.

That 24-50, not bad, but, not gonna lie, I’ll spend some time with it, but I think it may collect dust in favor of the 28, and I don’t have, but used to have the 24-240. I can see that working well. Shame I missed that last refurb sale. I’ll wait out the next.

I agree with the sentiment of the 24-240 working well. I have that lens attached to my R8 sitting in my work backpack. It's surprising how much lighter and smaller that combo seems than the R5 + RF24-240. And the lens balances quite well on the small body. Those who've used the RF24-240 know that it is one of the best non-L lenses you can get on the RF mount (sharpness, contrast, AF speed, aberration resistance). The R8 + RF24-50 is still a very viable extra-light/small FF solution but has more compromises. Sharpness is better that one might expect, IS is very good, tiny size, very small weight but it does have fringing and can suffer a bit from flare. And the zoom range is just pretty limited.

So many good choices these days...

Where I can see the R8 displacing my M is with the 22, this May dislodge it. Where it doesn’t? Reach, or say the 32, 11-22. That 32 has STRONG rendering for its footprint. The 11-22? Ditto. The RF16 May challenge it, but nothing touches the 32, or say the 18-150 or 55-200. Sure the RF-S has the former, but it doesn’t have anything wide, or fast.

I dunno folks, gonna have to sleep on this, shoot it, and think on it. It’s not a slam dunk death to the M, unless, you’re talking the 22, this may do that function better. Detailed comparisons and samples to follow…

 

[lomondra]

I'm glad that the R8 managed to break the paradigm that the smaller the camera, the less equipped it is. Yes, it has various concessions, but they are really only about "additional hardware" and apparently in favor of reducing weight and size. IBIS, two card slots and a huge viewfinder is not what I need for mountain hikes with my family. Excellent work by Canon.

 

[m100]

Put it on full auto, point it at some trees, take a picture and post the full size SOOC JPEG.

Lets see what that kit can do !

Not interested in your PP skills.

 

[RLight]

I'm glad that the R8 managed to break the paradigm that the smaller the camera, the less equipped it is. Yes, it has various concessions, but they are really only about "additional hardware" and apparently in favor of reducing weight and size. IBIS, two card slots and a huge viewfinder is not what I need for mountain hikes with my family. Excellent work by Canon.

Shooting the R8 has really got me thinking M6 II-like analogies; it'd be nice if Canon did an R4... That's a bad word though for them (4 is a bad omen in Japanese); something higher-end than an R6, but smaller or equal to an R8 in footprint. It's obvious to me shooting the R8 after the R50, the shutter for example, can do more than 6FPS, probably can match the R50 if I had to bet, but is throttled to 6FPS to give the R6 II more competitive leeway.

Likewise, I'm torn wishing I had the AF and SOOC of the R8, with IBIS and that shutter cover. That's called an R6 II, but the R6 II is quite a bit larger where the R8 and RF 28 approach M-like footprint, an R6 II soils that. Also that control dial the M6 II has is wonderful.

Dual card slot isn't such a big deal; nor is small battery. For the intended purpose (advanced amateur shooting), it's fine on the R8. Dual slots is where you're gonna want a larger body to accompany professional lenses, and a larger battery. R8 allows you to marry smaller lenses to make a much smaller footprint. It's a second body (to a pro), or a first, if you're non-professional. I really can't say Canon made an oops on the R8, they didn't. Now again, an R4 option, say a higher price, more advanced compact body? That'd be nice. Not required, just be nice.

 

[RLight]

Put it on full auto, point it at some trees, take a picture and post the full size SOOC JPEG.

Lets see what that kit can do !

Not interested in your PP skills.

I'm not either. I don't have spectacular shots to share at the moment... I just capture life, it's short, as you start to appreciate as you get older all the more...

[ATTACH alt="F/2.8 indoors. Sharpest in the burst. 6FPS "works" well for candid capture. Less than 6FPS? I'm just glad we have 6FPS. Eye AF has no problems, and the eval metering is a step above previous models, especially my R3. I brought out my R3 next to it, 28-70 in tow to compare..."]3337287[/ATTACH]
F/2.8 indoors. Sharpest in the burst. 6FPS "works" well for candid capture. Less than 6FPS? I'm just glad we have 6FPS. Eye AF has no problems, and the eval metering is a step above previous models, especially my R3. I brought out my R3 next to it, 28-70 in tow to compare...

[ATTACH alt="Didn't realize this was "shaken" apologies it's all I took yesterday to do a quick rough swag comparison. I may need to play with the RF 28-70 on the R8 a bit. They may look similar, but the contrast is not, I can assure you."]3337288[/ATTACH]
Didn't realize this was "shaken" apologies it's all I took yesterday to do a quick rough swag comparison. I may need to play with the RF 28-70 on the R8 a bit. They may look similar, but the contrast is not, I can assure you.


Background bokeh is a bit noisy, but contrast is good for this little guy, for being PMo. Sharp even in the corners (boy's face in focus, obviously)


Candid test


Stop down test. Again, bokeh a touch noisy, but colors and contrast, sharpness are good. Again, especially for the footprint involved.


AF is very snappy; sky is well balanced in metering in comparison to subject. Canon has a knack for blowing that out historically.


Holds eye-AF with ease. Even my R3, although superior in AF selection, can't hold a lock so easily... Again, Canon can, but won't hand down this new firmware, instead opting to wait for the next model as an up-sell. Pity.


General purpose aperture test


General purpose Av test. Note, the bokeh is a touch busy.

[ATTACH alt="WIth the a stronger foreground, suddenly the background becomes less "grumpy". Capturing water movement still escapes smartphones as their "magic" involves multi-shot combination. ...Move over small sensor-smartphones for larger dedicated photographic ones... F/2.8 test"]3337313[/ATTACH]
WIth the a stronger foreground, suddenly the background becomes less "grumpy". Capturing water movement still escapes smartphones as their "magic" involves multi-shot combination. ...Move over small sensor-smartphones for larger dedicated photographic ones... F/2.8 test


F/2.8 test, Candid


F/2.8, candid


F/2.8, candid

[ATTACH alt="Intentional tree test, stopped down. AF didn't get confused here; Canon cameras can get "buggy" on contrast-lack scenes (edit: in fact the comparison shots between the two in the next reply, I had to resort to Manual focus on my R3, perfect example, you can see it in the metadata), lack this where same/similar contrast envelops a subject/area. Nope. It got it. Touch and drag obeyed when refocusing on different parts of the tree nicely. Stopped down a touch for sharpness testing."]3337322[/ATTACH]
Intentional tree test, stopped down. AF didn't get confused here; Canon cameras can get "buggy" on contrast-lack scenes (edit: in fact the comparison shots between the two in the next reply, I had to resort to Manual focus on my R3, perfect example, you can see it in the metadata), lack this where same/similar contrast envelops a subject/area. Nope. It got it. Touch and drag obeyed when refocusing on different parts of the tree nicely. Stopped down a touch for sharpness testing.


Macro focus is do-able, but not a strength of this lens


Macro


Candid test, f/2.8

 

[RLight]

Some quick size comparisons and front/rear element comparisons...

[ATTACH alt="Note how the front element is similar, in fact I think the 22 is a touch larger, which presumably it has more "input" This makes sense the vignetting amounts when looking at OpticalLimits data on these two"]3337338[/ATTACH]
Note how the front element is similar, in fact I think the 22 is a touch larger, which presumably it has more "input" This makes sense the vignetting amounts when looking at OpticalLimits data on these two


VERY close in size, the M6 II is a touch shorter the R8 a touch longer... Matters with glovebox duty.


Again, closer


Rear element on the RF28 is bigger; spreads that light it does capture over a larger sensor circle.


Larger front element on the RF24-50, though.


And rear element, too. Notable as the RF-S 18-45 (not pictured) has a TINY, rear element. Canon CHOOSE to do that... On the RF 24-50? They gave it everything they had.


Obviously the RF24-50 combination is bigger than the 15-45 combination.

I'll say unfortunately the R8 combos drew attention where my M6 II combos, don't. The sheer size of the lens usually is what grabs attention; there's no way around this, larger mount, larger diameter, more attention. That's a downer. That RF 28mm? 55mm lens cap. That's where the RF "starts", *sigh* that's a loss (being low profile is out shooting the smallest R combination; it's low-er profile, but still draws attention; my M always snuck under the radar where folks didn't notice my shooting or carry, even the R8/RF28 got noticed even though I was being very, nonchalant)

 

[RLight]

Its looks "bigger" on me, and looks larger when pointed at folks, too, than an M.

 

[Marximus]

If Canon ports its 22 f/2 to RF-S this year, then I’ll probably pick it up. If not, I’ll probably buy the 28. Either lens would make for a killer walk around kit with my R10.

 

[MAC]

nice shooting

you're going to send it back aren't you, because a tad bigger - that is nuts

 

[Ray Chen]

Don't know why, but the M looks more aesthetically pleasing to me. If I have to nitpick, the tacked on viewfinder would be the only fault.

 

[m100]

Nice shots !

Thanks for full size shots. Makes it easier to compare the shots to the shots from a M6II.

So far I do not think a R8 with a RF 28mm can beat a M6II with an EF-M 11-22mm at the car show on a clear day though.

No R camera can i guess.

--
Dr. says listen to this every morning.

 

[gimp_dad]

Thanks for the great review RLight! The R8 + RF28/2.8 shots look very compelling while the M6II still stands the test of time. Personally, I still fall on the side of downsized FF but the APSC solution makes a ton of sense and the size difference is quite material. And with the EFM22/2, 32/1.4, 11-22, etc. there is very good glass for the size. I'm sure, similar/better lenses will eventually make their way to RF-S.

As you were mentioning the differences about whether people notice or not, I realized I don't think about that much when using the R5 or R8. Maybe because of my birding hobby where carrying big whites causes me to build up a barrier to other people while I'm shooting. I have people literally grab my arm as I'm shooting with the R3 + EF600/4LIII + 2xIII and ask me questions. So the mild difference between how others perceive the R8 + RF28/2.8 vs M6II + EFM22/2 would be something I'd ignore. Maybe this is just because I'm a boomer...

Disclaimer: longtime Canon shooter, I’ve got an R3, been stuck on the M platform for portable needs and I’ve been doing this photo thing for a minute so I’d like to think I know my stuff.

.

The R8 I knew was a winner the moment I saw it on paper. In practice though, it resolves my technical gripes with the RP, namely better AF, FPS and sensor (ADC).

The R8 like the R50 has near bullet proof AF, so far. It really begs the question, do I need eye-controlled AF if the camera is just smart enough to assume what you want, be easy to override if not via touch and drag, and holds locks, solid.

The SOOC metering, contrast rendering are on par with the R50, to say exactly as I predicted, and represents next generation SOOC from Canon. Really impressive, means post processing needs are virtually banished, from spot checks thus far.

Size and weight…

With the stock 24-50 it’s fairly M-ish, but, with the RF28? I forget it’s there, like the M. To my surprise, it pockets! In my cargo shorts, but that’s usually where I care. In fact it allowed me to sneak it out of the house today undetected. I’m gonna have to fess up to the wife about this guy soon, though. I have a feeling this combo is a keeper. Glovebox though? It BARELY, doesn’t fit. Can’t win em all. The M6 II + 22mm BARELY, fits. Figures.

Regarding the RF28 itself, “sharp” wide open. Good contrast rendering for what it is and color. But, I’d say just like my PMo glasses, losses a touch of contrast and color when I put on my glasses, in exchange for increased sharpness. This lens is like that; not as interesting rendering as a much more expensive L, but very good for what it is, and especially, the footprint. The bokeh is a bit noisy but not obnoxious, again, we’ll controlled for what this is, and again, that footprint.

That 24-50, not bad, but, not gonna lie, I’ll spend some time with it, but I think it may collect dust in favor of the 28, and I don’t have, but used to have the 24-240. I can see that working well. Shame I missed that last refurb sale. I’ll wait out the next.

Where I can see the R8 displacing my M is with the 22, this May dislodge it. Where it doesn’t? Reach, or say the 32, 11-22. That 32 has STRONG rendering for its footprint. The 11-22? Ditto. The RF16 May challenge it, but nothing touches the 32, or say the 18-150 or 55-200. Sure the RF-S has the former, but it doesn’t have anything wide, or fast.

I dunno folks, gonna have to sleep on this, shoot it, and think on it. It’s not a slam dunk death to the M, unless, you’re talking the 22, this may do that function better. Detailed comparisons and samples to follow…

 

[LennyLevino]

Now again, an R4 option, say a higher price, more advanced compact body? That'd be nice. Not required, just be nice.

For sure. I'd like an R8-style body with at least 45mps. Would be perfect for hiking and landscape photography. Give it a full mechanical shutter as well, so the sensor can be protected when switching lenses.

 

[LennyLevino]

AF is very snappy; sky is well balanced in metering in comparison to subject. Canon has a knack for blowing that out historically.

Does this new metering and "SooC processor" also improve the RAW files? Or just jpegs?

 

[RLight]

If Canon ports its 22 f/2 to RF-S this year, then I’ll probably pick it up. If not, I’ll probably buy the 28. Either lens would make for a killer walk around kit with my R10.

Actually, I think this is the “port”… 8 in 6 groups vs 7 in 6. Similar opening, no IS, “street” lens? I think this was an engineer giving it some love.

 

[RLight]

nice shooting

you're going to send it back aren't you, because a tad bigger - that is nuts

Undecided. Too early to tell. There’s definitely pros and cons… Its not a slam dunk either way truthfully. I’ll write up my thoughts shortly.

 

[RLight]

Does this new metering and "SooC processor" also improve the RAW files? Or just jpegs?

RAWs; different mapping of data to color, and, smarter exposure.

 

[RLight]

Nice shots !

Thanks for full size shots. Makes it easier to compare the shots to the shots from a M6II.

So far I do not think a R8 with a RF 28mm can beat a M6II with an EF-M 11-22mm at the car show on a clear day though.

No R camera can i guess.