I like my Canon EOS RP. No buyer’s remorse. It is an easy camera to use and I just LOVE the Canon lenses. I had missed those.
I definitely would have no qualms about recommending the Canon EOS RP to anyone. It is affordable and well-worth the money and THE LENSES. Yes, the lenses. Get the camera for the new lenses.
I do not have a problem with camera makers charging $2,000 (or more) for an advanced camera boy or for a very high-quality, very fast lens — though, of course, like anyone else I would prefer lower prices.
But, today’s camera bodies and top-end lenses are technological miracles. There is so much innovation, technology, componentry and labor that goes into them, Just like getting a high-end smartphone or computer.
But, $70 for a lens hood. Just a cheap piece of plastic. That is criminal. That is stupid. There is no way I will pay for such. You can get 3 lens hoods, though not snap-ons, on Amazon for $7.
I am really disappointed and disgusted with Canon. You don’t set out to rape customers so.
I am a bit of a contradiction when it comes to full-frame. I like the SIZE of the full-frame sensor and the BIGGER picture I get with it — BUT, at the same time I have never been that fond of wide-angle shooting! The irony here being that the largeness of a full-frame sensor is such that you are already into wide-angle even before you start. Hence, the contradiction.
Appears that I am in the minority.
Yes, I can get non-Z Nikon lenses that cover this range, BUT I would like native mirrorless glass.
So, that is my problem.
I am definitely, of course, getting the 24-70mm — the only native zoom. I was thinking of getting the 50mm. MAYBE I might think about the new 14-30mm — and experiment with ultra-wide-angle (at least for I).
It was lack of IBIS that was the deal killer for I.
Way back in August — September 2018 I genuinely thought I was going to get the Canon EOS R. I initially did NOT believe that it was NOT going to have IBIS. Well, when that was confirmed, I totally lost interest. I like and rely upon IBIS. I tend to shoot at low shutter speeds and IBIS in my Sony A7 II indulges I.
I was then all set to get a Nikon Z6. But, I had said all along that I would not buy it ahead of the Holidays and wait until the new year. Recently, with winter upon us, I decided to push that back to at least March — possibly April. No point getting a fancy, brand new camera when the light isn’t great and it is freezing outside. I am just going to be dissapointed with picture quality.
So, if I am willing to wait until March — April …
If the announced a Canon EOS R with IBIS early in the year with April availability I will definitely wait to see what it is like. I like the Canon FF mirrorless lenses and their adapters. Kind of exciting. CHOICE. The only problem might be that Canon makes it a high resolution camera, i.e., more than 35 MP.
Some of the ‘Blind Test’ comparison pictures.
Click to ENLARGE.
Doesn’t matter which one is better. They are pretty close.
The DAMN Sony lens is 2.2 MORE EXPENSIVE.
I can pay 2.2 less and have the same image quality!
The test is in Japanese BUT, luckily, Google does an excellent job translating.
I did NOT have to do the whole test.
By the time I looked at 4 pictures I knew that my CONTENTION re. Sony was proved — BIG TIME.
My only gripe about Sony has been the prices of their lenses — especially full-frame, FE-mount lenses. They are ridiculously expensive. Yes, I could afford them BUT I would have a hard time justifying their prices. That is the reason I want to go with Nikon.
Until now, I couldn’t because Nikon didn’t make mirrorless, and I committed myself to mirrorless over 3-years ago.
The Nikon z6 is thus the ideal camera for I. Full-frame mirrorless, 5-axis In-Body Image Stabilization and affordable lenses (though I am not that convinced that the new lenses are superlative).
So, here is the CRUX of the Blind Test.
By definition, a Blind Test, compares similar offerings.
So, the image quality Nikon vs Sony was going to be CLOSE. And it is.
But, here is the kicker. The lens on the Sony is 2.2 MORE EXPENSIVE than that of the Nikon.
2.2 MORE Expensive and you can’t tell the DIFFERENCE.
Give me a break. I will have the CHEAP Nikon PLEASE.
The list of lenses were helpful. That is the main reason I am sharing so you too can have that list.
I happened to see this review (on Google News) from “Digital Camera World”. The two pictures they included — both above — impressed me NONE. They are SOFT. Reminded me of that damning photo taken with the new Canon EOS R.
I think I know what is wrong with the top picture. Aperture TOO WIDE. I would NOT have shot that at under f/11. More likely f/22 and I would have cranked the ISO upto 800, if not 1000.
So, it isn’t as if I don’t take pictures each and every day … and, moreover, post at least 7 a day on this blog. So, you can check out my pictures — which are ALWAYS UNTOUCHED JPEGs, straight-out-of-the-camera.
Yes, in my hands this lens would have fared much better.
So, two of my pictures, with my Sony a7 II …