Upvote
0
The Canon EOS R8 will be announced at CP+ in February
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Yeah, I never thought about it, but it makes totally sense; the battery is REALLY crap!
With the R6 in can squeeze al least double (900/1000 using the viewfinder) of the CIPA rated shots, while with the R10 I'm just around (250/280 shots using viewfinder) the CIPA ratings.
Probably with IBIS the R10 wouldn't feature more then 200 shots is real life, and without the existence of a vertical grip, you really are changing batteries very often; I can shoot an entire wedding day on R6 with a single LP-E6, but i would need at least three LP-E17 to to the same with the R10.
Upvote
0
As has been pointed out, the R10 is aimed at being much smaller / lighter - for comparison it is 382g (429g with card and battery) as compared to the R7 (530 g (612g with card and LP-E6 battery)) or the R6 (598 g (680 g with card and battery)), and the battery reflects that, even before IBIS starts chewing it up. In any case I'm not sure it's an obvious choice to shoot a wedding.
Upvote
0
The mirror is a two edged sword. When it flips up and down it fans air inside the light box that moves dust around, so dust that originally lands near the front of the light box or on the mirror can eventually wind up on the sensor stack due to the mirror flipping up and down.
Upvote
0
What's the difference between the A7mk iii which sells for around 1.600-1.700 € and the A7 mk iii which sells for less than 1.000 € now?
Upvote
0
I've never had to manually clean an APS-C sensor while shooting at least one-third of a million frames with them, mostly sports/action.
But the last time I used anything besides either an EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II or a Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OSM | Sports on an APS-C body was in 2011. Neither lens changes external volume when zooming, and I rarely change either lens when in the field.
I've had to clean all of my FF sensors a few times even though I tend to shoot far fewer frames per year with them.
I do tend to change lenses much more often on the FF bodies, and more frequently in the field. Two of my most used lenses on the FF bodies are the EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS and the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L, both of which change volume significantly as they are zoomed to different focal lengths. When using primes, mostly an EF 35mm f/2 IS, EF 50mm f/1.4, EF 85mm f/1.8, and EF 135mm f/2 L, I tend to change them even more often than the zooms. The 50mm changes volume as the focus position changes, the others do not.
So it's hard for me to tell if it's the higher frequency of lens changes in less than ideal environments or if it is the use of zoom lenses that change volume significantly as they are zoomed that allow more dust to wind up on the front of the sensor stack.
Upvote
0
Higher ISO
better continuous AF
higher FPS
4k video
For full comparison feel free to look here:
https://cameradecision.com/compare/Sony-Alpha-A7-III-vs-Sony-Alpha-A7-II
Compared to the RP the A7mk ii looks like a better/ more attractive option with only the missing 4k as a letdown... but that's just comparing the specs sheets, not my experience from using both cameras...
Upvote
0
It does not show up in the specs but the a7 II kind of sucks.
This is not Sony hate.
The a7 III and a7 IV are perfectly fine.
Upvote
0
Totally agree. It took until the 3rd generation for Sony to fix all that was wrong with the first 2 generations of the A7. I bought one to replace my 6D at the time and luckily it took almost no time to realize that the only thing Sony had to brag about was the sensor. I still remember taking it out that first day and looking through the EVF and then reaching up to remove my sunglasses....only I wasn't wearing any. Camera underexposed by 1.5 to 2 stops, ergonomics were (and alas still are) awful. Color was bad, JPGs were bad, well, I think you get the drift.
Upvote
0
That's the difference between the α7 II and α7 III. Your original comment was comparing the "A7mk III" to the "A7 mk III".
Upvote
0
I would like to see an RP successor with the original R6 sensor and the R10 focusing system. It would have a low mechanical FPS, no continuous FPS for the electronic shutter and lower video capabilities, the R10 battery and I wouldn't care if it had the 30min recording limit but it must have an EVF. I wonder if there would be a market for a camera like this?
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Why do you want Canon to actively limit the capabilities? So far they’ve not artificially limited the fps on any R body, it would be a shame if they started doing that.
Upvote
0
Because they maybe will be offering, due to marketing segmentation, a castrated camera for a lower price, and lower prices are good?
Not everyone needs fast fps; actually, I shoot digital since the 10D (thru 20D, 550D, 100D, 60D, 5D, 5DII, 6D, now R6 and R10, so I had a few...) and I don't recall EVER moving the drive from single shot (apart from self timer/remote when needed), I probably never took a burst in my entire life.
In the past I knew the dot pitch of the single photo sensor of my cameras, but I don't know which is the frame rate of my actual and past cameras, it's just a specification I don't register in my brain even if I read it because is totally useless to me.
So, if Canon would release an RP successor with locked 1fps, the R6 sensor (but even the "old" R 30mpx sensor is totally fine for me), but with processor, AF and video capabilities of the R6/R10 (even 4k50p crop is fine, as long as there's full DPAF on all video res/framerates), for the same price of an RP (around 1000€/$), I'll sell my R6 and buy one RP II immediately; there are people, I'll do my example, who feels the R6 is already an overkill for them, I'll gladly renounce to double slot and high frame rates (if any frame rate!) for a smaller and cheaper camera, if AF and video are on par with today standards (and in fact, as backup to R6, for the same price I got an R10, not an RP).
If they release a castrated camera there's no one forcing you to buy it, you'll wait for the next, or switch to another brand that offers you what you need for the price you like
Upvote
0
Lower prices are bad for Canon.
Which means that instead of selling a camera for $2K to the potential buyer of your used R6, Canon will sell a camera for $1K to you.
Why would Canon want that?
Upvote
0
I don’t think Canon would reduce the mp in their base FF model as at that level of the market, generally, it could be perceived as a downgrade. However like you I too would love an RP with the R6 sensor. My guess would be that the next incarnation of the R ‘Popular’ would get the sensor from the 5DIV / R, and a very fine one it is too.
Upvote
0
I was just thinking market segmentation for an entry level FF, and I'm trying to be realistic about the features. I personally wouldn't care if they made the electronic shutter single mode only and maybe 3-5 FPS mechanical. It wouldn't effect the mid range/high end FF models.
I was thinking the same thing that the market would most likely perceive the R6 20MP vs RP 26MP as a downgrade
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
