Canon RP feb 14'th?

all your posts about the speedbooster made me get one...but i only have the first EOSM, so it's not really great for me shooting wise...but i am looking forward to strapping it on my 120-300f2.8 when i'm looking for owls in a few months

DreDaze wrote in post #18811744
all your posts about the speedbooster made me get one...but i only have the first EOSM, so it's not really great for me shooting wise...but i am looking forward to strapping it on my 120-300f2.8 when i'm looking for owls in a few months

Hmm, I wouldn't know what to expect on the EOS M. Works well on the 24Mpx sensor'd M series though. Now that the EOS RP is sporting the same basic battery life as the M50, the same tilt touch screen, and same EVF, I can truly say the M50 is the APS C version of the EOS RP.

Too bad Canon isn't sporting any kind of discounts on their refurbished M50. $520 on Ebay though, pretty close to what I paid. Perhaps its time to upgrade?

https://www.ebay.com …386&hash=item4b​40a13422:g5AAAOSwVUta0Lpm:rk:4:p​f:1&LH_BIN=1&frcectupt​=true

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18811818
Hmm, I wouldn't know what to expect on the EOS M. Works well on the 24Mpx sensor'd M series though. Now that the EOS RP is sporting the same basic battery life as the M50, the same tilt touch screen, and same EVF, I can truly say the M50 is the APS C version of the EOS RP.

Too bad Canon isn't sporting any kind of discounts on their refurbished M50. $520 on Ebay though, pretty close to what I paid. Perhaps its time to upgrade?

https://www.ebay.com …386&hash=item4b​40a13422:g5AAAOSwVUta0Lpm:rk:4:p​f:1&LH_BIN=1&frcectupt​=true

yeah, it's not really a great option...but for the owls i'm tripod mounted, and gaining a stop will be fun to experiment with...i have been setting alerts on ebay for the m50...definitely some around the $450 area...if i knew for sure canon wasn't dropping something i'd want to replace my 70D with, i'd probably just go for it...but i'm hoping something will come out that i'll be happy with this year

I just tried my 100L on the booster/M50. It gives me the equivalent of a 70mm at f2. It actually makes for a very nice portrait lens this way for an APSC.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18811846
I just tried my 100L on the booster/M50. It gives me the equivalent of a 70mm at f2. It actually makes for a very nice portrait lens this way for an APSC.

i just wish my M had a viewfinder...i use it as my basic point and shoot, travel and want a camera that i don't care about...it's definitely been fun trying it with all the different lenses

Fixed the issue of no VF for you... this is a great accessory.... (looks so funny)... I doubt they sold very many of these. Just skip to 6:00.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18811470
People have been scheming that Canon will eliminate the crop sensor for 15 years now. I have been on the boards for 15 years, and have heard it time and time again.

An APS C is definitely cheaper to manufacturer, and if you keep a set of lenses that pander to that sensor, the lenses are cheaper to manufacture as well, nothing has changed from those factors.

Interesting... I don't cruise the hardware parts much. I have been here since 2005.... and I also saw arguments that we'll never get or need more than 20 mpx. No one has had a crystal ball that has forecast this stuff. No one was predicting in a 35mm format we would be running image sensors over 40 mpx.

Here is the deal. The overall cost of building an APS based camera may be cheaper, but its not because the chip is cheaper per unit. There are a ton of other factors, plastic body versus magnesium, weather sealing versus not, mirror box rated at 300,000 actuations version ones made for 100,000, High capacity batteries versus smaller batteries, more focus points, processing power of the chip, buffer size.... there are a ton of things that drive the cost of an APS-C format camera versus what is typically in a full frame camera. Or things such as most Canon Pro or full frame cameras sport dual processors, versus the APS-c world only use one processor.

But I know your in IT, and you should also be equally aware that science and math dictates that the density of traces in a chip drive cost. A full frame 24 mpx chip has a far lower trace density than does the same number of traces on a much higher chip die. The precision of the equipment has to be higher to put the same number of transistors on a smaller wafer than it does on a larger wafer.

The one things smaller does have is per wafer, you can crame more sensors/chips on a single wafer. That offsets some of the cost. But generally speaking, the higher the density of the components on a wafer/chip/sensor, the higher the manufacturing cost.

The cheapness of all the other stuff on an APS-C camera helps dramatically reduce the cost deferential. The cost of the processors themselves (two versus one) is a huge part of that.

Canon finds itself in a far different world than it did over the last 15 years. It's loosing marketshare in a market that itself is shrinking.