Yes, the DR obsession reminds me of the HiFi days when some people would obsess over frequency response, when one company's product could reproduce sound at let's say 30 KHz, and another only up to 28 KHz, never taking into account the fact that the best human ears can only hear sound up to about 20 KHz. Meanwhile the best brands worried more about the nuances of the sound in the range of frequencies that people could actually hear, but their advantages many times could not be shown on a spec sheet.

Many people love to go by specs, because it seems easy and objective. It's even easier to glom onto one spec. But in every arena, whether camera, car, stereo, computer, etc...wise consumers know that specs do not begin to tell the whole story.

@Thougts R US
I bought a pair of speakers with “super tweeters.” But it was because the dealer was trying to get rid of the pair after one of the domes on the super tweeter was dented. Just for fun I measured the frequency response and saw a sharp bump around 22kHz, but octaves are huge Up in that range so it seemed rather narrow (in addition to being inaudible). There actually was a white paper around that time claiming listers could pericive the presence of harmonics above 20 kHz, but I’ve been quite happy with my broken speakers.

for photographers there is no big different... Canon did great steps for collect customers from other systems, I think, and they are on right way, not this new RP will be most popular camera on market.

For most things probably not a huge difference.
But IBIS and getting 10 fps with continuous autofocus and eye autofocus is enough difference.

Some top photographers working just with Leica, which one have not most of the features of any other cameras on market. I think, RP has 99% of features for photographers, except some sport and birds photographers. And Canon knows it very good...

@koba: "Some top photographers working just with Leica". Yes, just some. But the vast majority (like 99,5%) doesn't. For good reasons :).

"RP has 99% of features for photographers" depends on what you mean with "photographers". Do you mean professional ones that earn their living with it? Then no, it does not have 99% of the needed features. Not even close.
If you mean hobby / occassional photographers, then maybe.

@kobakhok But why settle for less? Sometimes it makes sense to pay more for more/better features. After all, I could stave off hunger by eating at McDonald’s every day, but I want and enjoy more than that...

The present gallery shows that even the oldest of dogs, limping on aching paws and unsteady legs down the final dark mile to the relief awaiting at death's door is capable of new tricks—I don't understand why you would want to discourage that.
As for photography skills, I pride myself on being distinctly adequate.

Sony userer which got all the hate from the hillbilly canikon users with thereold dslrs are just laughing about canon attempts.
Even with canons sub par sensors they could throw out decent bodies... but they don’t... canon cripple the hell out of there bodies.
Even for me the canon rp looked promising... but buying a camera from a company that has no shame and crippling there bodies for no reason... hell no

The famous canon colors... LMAO

Canon's official forecast is that they will sell 4.7 million interchangeable-lens cameras this year. Other camera companies wish that they were "that dead". :-)

Sure, I've seen the D600 for $500.
But most "joe consumer" types want a "new" camera, one that was released recently.
And don't ever expect consumers to make sense. :)

If that's the case then they'd just get an A7II and call it a day.

They could get an A7ii with all its "warts" and no 4K video, but then they would have to buy a $300 EF adapter like many Sony owners do, so what is the point? LOL!!!

@Cam - Consumers make the most sense, they act as a group filter and filter out those products that are the best in terms of usability and price. That is why Canon is still #1.

We see this all the time, beautiful pictures shot with Canon, incredible content.
Then some gear head ignoring the content wants to zoom into 100% and wonders if he can lift shadows 5 stops.
Like you said 99% of the intended market is not gear heads, just people who want to take nice photos with nice Canon colors.

well.... i don't care for "99% of the intended market". Only care for myself when I take pictures in very contrast environments and have no control of the lights. This is where more DR is super valuable.

What? Literally nobody would complain if this came with a free gold bar.

Yeah they would. They would say it was a super deal and no other brand can get close. Shame about the old sensor though

Depends. Is the bar made of the actual gold metal, or just a hunk of lead painted a gold color? Gold is a color as well as a metal. Just sayin...

I would complain if it was a gold M.Fn bar.

The gold bar would be of no use if it does not have two card slots.

Well it depends on whether you think the E-M10 III has better DR at ISO 800 than the Fujifilm GFX 50R does at ISO 100.

If that sounds plausible, then yes, DPReview, DxO and Photons to Photos might have all got it wrong. (And you might also want to check if down is now up).

@tom, who said that weight or size is THE advantage of mirrorless? There are many others... for me the most important thing would be to never have to send in lenses with body for AF adjustments again. This is a waist of time and money.

As you say, if someone priorizes weight, he/she goes for m43

You can also go to the gym which btw is healthier too

@basleigh

"for me SONY A7 with 90mm macro (sold) out of proportion especially as A7II strengthened the lens mount. The XT-2 with 16mm f1,4 nicely balanced;"

How does that even make sense? Two completely different lenses and focal lengths. Here's the proper comparison:

https://camerasize.com/compact/#487.512,679.677,ha,t

Looks more like Fuji is out of proportion, as their sensor is smaller, yet they still make large lenses.

"What IQ detail lost with MFT unknown to me?"

DR and high ISO. I have an MFT camera and it collects dust because of poor AF and limiting IQ.

M43 isnt just a sensor format....its a religion. The fanatical kind

@Tom, at least I had to send it in more often than that, unfortunately. And of course, there are more benefits of mirrorless. For me, it is an easier use of Canons TS lenses thanks to focus assist. But it all comes down to if you can profit from those things or not. There is no right or wrong.
And regarding front or back focus... no, you will not have this problem with mirrorless. You can still suffer from lenses that are not centered right, but that is something different.

Its going to sell tons. Anyone can say what they want, but creating a pathway to fullframe with such low initial investment will certainly win many customers as well as secure customers for the future as mirrorless tech evolves.

I'd rather get a Sony A7II if I were in market for a cheap FF mirrorless.

If you are a canon shooter, why would you want a Sony? The A7 might be going cheap to shift the inventory, but that does not make it better or more desirable.
Also why even talk about Sony? It seems Sony fans can’t bare to see thread without the word Sony in it.

What are these way better video features? It doesn't even do 4K and the video AF is jittery. Canon has the best video AF hands down.
And where can you get an A7 II with lens for $1000? Maybe from China but certainly not on B&H or Adorama.

In this case canon has better features since it has good video af and last but not least IT HAS 4K, yes it's with crop but at least it does 4k meanwhile a7II doesn't. How ironic. :D

@George1958

"If you are a canon shooter, why would you want a Sony?"

To use your lenses on? Even though EOS R/P is Canon, you still need to use adapters for EF lenses. So why not go for something with better IQ, AF, and features?

"The A7 might be going cheap to shift the inventory, but that does not make it better or more desirable. "

It's been sub $1K for a while now. Maybe 2 Xmases ago?

"Also why even talk about Sony?"

Typical Canon fan comment. Not allowed to talk about any of the camera's competitors, in fear that it will expose Canon's laundry list of weaknesses. Always a sore point. Fortunately, the market has show customers have caught onto this, as Canon's dropping sales and forecasts have proven.

@Alannn123

"IT HAS 4K, yes it's with crop but at least it does 4k meanwhile a7II doesn't. How ironic. :D"

Phones shoot 4K, too, but nobody brags about it. Just like there's no reason to brag about Canon's 4K:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r/10

Turn on digital IS (which Canon needs because it STILL has no IBIS), and you won't see a difference between Canon 4K and Sony 1080p. 4K to 4K, Sony still easily wins. Not to mention, Sony has Log, even on the A7 II, for extended DR and low noise shadows. Plus the usual video centric Picture Profiles for a wide range of scenes, or for delivering footage with proper video levels straight from the camera.

Strolic Furlan: He can't cause Sony doesn't even have an equivalent of a f1.2 lens. The Sony fanboys need to strap on a Canon lens with adapter if they want a 1.2 lens with AF.

You wanna compare bokeh? Then actually do a 1 to 1 comparison. Look at the FE 24-105 f4. They are pretty much on par with each other in terms of sharpness and bokeh etc.

As others said, you can attach something else to the camera like the 50 f1.2 and pit that against the RX10IV. How about DOF of that camera?

What is this with "Canon Fans" and "Sony Fans"??

Have I stumbled into kindergarten?

Who is a "fan" of a camera brand anyway? Why would you do that?

Are the same people "Fans" of their toaster maker, or their washing machine?

Some really, really weird people here.

This is a camera. It is not a club. Or a gang. Or a tribe. Get a life, losers..

@TheTomx

So? As I posted if one is going to compare a 24-105 f4 lens to something and use sony as a brand to compare it to, then use the sony equivalent to compare it to. And if one were to do so we see they are comparable when it comes to the quality of the rendering. One can go a step further and compare other lenses in that similar range and would conclude that it seems to be the nature of that type of lens.

When people bring in whatever other lens seems to tickle their fancy then we can start pulling in leica and zeiss glass too, or some sigma lenses and start nit picking... which is silly over all. Not to mention to bring in a 1" sensor to argue with is completely silly considering that lack of DOF and the amount of noice one would introduce to ones image. So... Ryanide was basically trolling.

What is wrong with the 24 GM? Sorry just curious.

@ Daft Punk - Thank you! Yes, fanboyism is alive and well on the Internet, unfortunately, whether it's phones (Apple vs Android) or cameras or any number of other products.

People like to feel good about the choice they made. So if they bought a Sony - well then it MUST be the best right? C'mon - I am a Nikon Z6 owner. I like it, it's a nice camera. So is the a7iii and this new EOS RP. All great gear and any one of them can create great photos if they person using them has a clue.

A kit lens not delivering perfect bokeh? Oh my god!

"Regardless of the quality of the pictures, I find myself unable to get over the poor dynamic range of the sensor."

I think I have never read a statement that so clearly defines the disaffection for Photography that goes around here, at DPR.

Image quality, as it can be immediately perceived, is secondary.

What seems to count is "0.5 whatever" in some graphic that basically shows sensors to be pretty close to each other in most practical applications.

I feel the "P" in DPR should be replaced by a "G", for gadgetry...

Unbelievable! I've read the post many times, still cannot understand how some could be so prejudiced and obsessive. Just unbelievable!

To be fair, if you check DPREVIEW's dynamic range testing of the 6Dii (same sensor), you will find it performs even worse than M43 sensors when you try to recover shadows. In fact it is horrendous. Many people, including me, like to work on RAW files and recover the shadows and highlights to give them a nice wide dynamic range look that can't be achieved with a smartphone. This can also help you recover some photos that were taken in less than ideal situations, like in a dark museum. So this would be important to me if I was looking for a new camera.

Arun H you need to see a psychiatrist. He will make you feel better about yourself and solve those issues you have.

Dear @Boss of Sony; To be fair, saying " that (higher dinamic range) would be important to me" is one thing and "I'd feel a lot better about these photos if they didn't tell me they were shot with a Canon camera" is whole another thing. First one is reasonable demand about your needs, I respect that. Second one is one of the most stupid thing I've ever heard.

So I thought the sarcasm was evident in my comment. Apparently not. I am a long time Canon user. I love my 5D Mark IV and recently purchased a 7D Mark II for astrophotography use. I find it gives excellent results. These photographs are excellent. With the exception of the new autofocus implementation by Sony, there is little difference between cameras when it comes to stills. In particular, the ones taken with the new 85mm are impressive.

Arun H, your sarcasm writing needs work then. :P

Arun,
I caught the sarcasm. You were quite clear. Not exactly dripping, but sarcasm definitely apparent.

Why people are so defensive is beyond me.