Why is the RP getting so much flack?

Maybe I have been watching to many YouTube videos about the RP.... but I think this camera is getting a lot of undeserved flack. Everyone keeps dumping on its video capabilities which I don't really care about.

I have been thinking about making the jump to full frame for a while now, and to me this seems like a great option. The marketing material keeps saying how this is an "entry level" or "family camera", I tend to disagree with this. To me this is a mirrorless 6D mark II with an improved sensor. To me its seems closer to the pro-sumer end of the market than the beginner. Am I off base on my assessment of this camera. I shoot primarily portraits, and nature would this be a good move from my 70D?


Thanks
Roshan

The answers to your questions are going to vary wildly from person to person. My wife bought me the RP for my birthday. It's my first full frame camera (coming from 80D, 60D, 40D).

Using a mirrorless camera is different, no doubt about it. So far, I've been very impressed with it in terms of image quality and focus ability. No more worrying about back/front focus from various lenses.

I don't think it tracks moving subjects as well as my 80D. The real test (for me) will be in a couple of weeks when my kids start soccer for the season. I have no doubt it'll be "good enough".

I also wish the max shutter was 1/8000 rather than 1/4000 ... that's a bummer for me. I was routinely over 1/4000 with my 80D.

I love mine, but if you've owned a camera that's "better" than an 80D, maybe you won't love it.

I think you are right, about answers varying wildly from person to person depending on how they use it. I can even see what you are saying about speed in shooting sports. I am sure that camera will do great work but maybe not as good as some for that category. I am really curious to see peoples opinion of it as a portrait/landscape camera. I feel like it would excel at that, but I have seen few people comment one way or the other on that genre.

Regarding the 1/4000 shutter speed. I should add that the camera can be set to ISO 50 (which I forgot and haven't tried yet) ... which will "counteract" the lack of 1/8000

ISO 100 and 1/8000 is the same as ISO 50 and 1/4000 ... in theory anyway

ISO 50 is ISO 100 -1 stop done in software. You can do the same shooting 100 and changing the raw on your computer. It provides no real benefit unless you want SOOC images.

As for YouTube, you gotta understand that 99 percent of these people make money through bombast. The platform has become a place for viewers to suckle their own confirmation bias, but other folks get sucked into that vortex and end up doubting their own good sense.

Read the specs, if you don't already understand them gain an understanding and then make your own decision. Go to YouTube if you want entertainment, but don't expect much honesty.

Subfightersandman wrote in post #18846472
To me this is a mirrorless 6D mark II with an improved sensor.

Improved in what way? As far as noise concerned, they seem to be identical twins, as far as I can tell from comparison images. The 6D2 does have a magenta cast in DPR's latitude/DR comparisons shooting ISO 6400 with the ISO 100 setting, but that is a converter error; not the sensor. All shadows from all CFA cameras go green or magenta if the wrong blackpoint is used in conversion.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18846493
ISO 50 is ISO 100 -1 stop done in software. You can do the same shooting 100 and changing the raw on your computer. It provides no real benefit unless you want SOOC images.

That's been historically true for a recent history, but don't count on that always being true with future cameras. They may actually have more saturation capacity at ISO 50. Some of the Canons from about 14 years ago or so (5D and 1D2, IIRC) actually had higher absolute headroom at ISO 50, by about 1/2 stop. The current round of Canon sensors, with the 80D, 6D2, 5D4, and 1DxII sensors have about 1/3 stop more RAW headroom than the previous generation. That's why their ISO 100 settings score lower "measured ISO" vales (based on saturation) a la DxOMark.

One dark reality is that when you shoot at f/1.4, light is lost compared to that expected by the exposure triangle, because of issues with photosites and their microlenses, and cameras, rather than compensating with metering, compensate by pushing RAW values, lowering the highlight clipping point. So, unfortunately, if ISO 100 can handle a charge of 40K electrons at f/8, it may only handle up to 25 to 35K at f/1.4, depending on microlens/photosite optical interplay. Supposedly, this effect is different in the mirrorless "R" Canons (Canon has claimed a microlens change, IIRC), but I don't know by how much.

John Sheehy wrote in post #18846498
Improved in what way? As far as noise concerned, they seem to be identical twins, as far as I can tell from comparison images. The 6D2 does have a magenta cast in DPR's latitude/DR comparisons shooting ISO 6400 with the ISO 100 setting, but that is a converter error; not the sensor. All shadows from all CFA cameras go green or magenta if the wrong blackpoint is used in conversion.

I misspoke I meant improved processor not sensor, Digic 7 vs 8 in the RP. and that might not mean much in the real world.

The 6D line is Canon's entry level full frame camera and it looks as if Canon is positioning the RP in the same niche.

Canon has also said that the R and RP are complimentary cameras to their current line. I read it more like they just want you to buy another camera. But the flack that Canon has received is well deserved in my opinion if you compare outside of Canons ecosystem. If you want to only compare what canon is offering then its a perfectly fine camera. I will say this though, that it is very difficult to find any company that is putting out bad cameras. They can all produce great pictures. Like others have mentioned if the specs and price match what you want then get it. People make way too much about camera brands.

When I moved from Canon (5DIII) to mirrorless (Fuji XT-1) it was primarily for convenience and size for events.
About a year later I got a Sony A7RII to have high pixel count for commercial work.
When Fuji introduced the GFX I got that for commercial work and went back to Xt-3 for events and real estate work.

After about about a year of that I decided I wanted to be able to use my TSE lenses at their native focal length so I got an EOS R to test. It turned out to be a great camera for real estate and I expect for general photography as well. When it was introduced I got an RP as a backup. Its a nice, small, full frame camera.

I think it will suit most photographers well for general shooting. Sports and other specialized shooting maybe not as well.

kmilo wrote in post #18846475
I don't think it tracks moving subjects as well as my 80D. The real test (for me) will be in a couple of weeks when my kids start soccer for the season. I have no doubt it'll be "good enough".

Don't take this as offensive, but the R couldn't handle tracking swim practice laps in any way, shape, form or fashion. I don't think you're going to find it very good for soccer but I could be wrong.

Everything gets shunned on release these days. It's like a fad. There's the release fans. Then there's the instant "it's horrible" anti-fans who've never even used one but will quote the white paper to you.

It's an affordable mirrorless full frame camera. It's that simple.

It's not for everyone.

It's not going to replace a 5D series. It's not going to replace the 1D series.

It may contend for some uses with the newer (latest, new price) Rebels, older (before the 80D) XXD prosumer bodies and 6D series for people who do not need the supreme AF capabilities of their other body options. It may. You have to put things into perspective, if using the RP for portrait, you're set. You literally don't even need AF for that. For landscape? Set. Again, you don't even need AF for that. But when it comes to tracking your 7 year old at their track meet or trying to take shots at F1.4 in your dark house of your kid taking their first steps, or recording your kids or family or whatever you want to use as context in motion in poor light, you may find out that... ok... maybe the RP isn't a replacement for these camera bodies that have way, way, way more robust AF features.

Granted, I've not used one. I won't use one. I have no interest in Canon's full frame stuff at this time. But, for people with the camera in their hands, it's got a great system for things that are not moving fast. So it should likely be a good all around general camera for general stuff. But, I haven't seen someone saying it tracks birds in flight and kids at their sports in poor light very well yet. Something that truly taxes the body and makes or breaks shots because the system literally cannot AF aggressively and accurately and is too slow with FPS to capture moments.

I use mirrorless for almost everything I do. My mirrorless is almost all manual too, no AF, and I image at F1.2 and F1.4 the most. But none of that is on a moving subject. It's general shots, portrait, photojournalism of my family, etc. When I want to shoot action, I get my 1D out.

So I think a lot of times its people assuming the camera is meant to do "everything" when its not. No one recommends the 6D for action. Why would one expect the RP to do that too?

As for websites and youtube, etc, even bad publicity is good, because it attracts views which is ad revenue.

My suggestion: rent it from a rental agency and try it for yourself. Can't beat first hand experience.

Very best,

Same was, is applied towards to Rebels. While they are in 99% as capable as bigger, expensive cameras.

I never had problem to track BIF with my 500D. Take pictures for publishing and so on. My 500D has way over 100K clicks, went on different contents with me and only time it was needed service is after I stupidly decided to clean VF.

I'm looking at RP and it is feels close to Rebel.

I think the Main reason for the flocking is everybody expected Canon to wipe the floor with the competition on their first mirrorless release. Instead they released some cameras that in many ways are a generation behind while solid picturetakers the are still bested by Sony on specs and features. Looking at how the try to protest their DSLR line it seems like Canon are trying to eat the cake and have it too sitting down between two chairs