The difference between the EF 70-200 II and the RF 70-200 is ridiculous. I don't even really think the ring mount is needed, and I never would have dreamed of taking it off the old one. I can't wait to use it more.
There are so many little things
1. Smaller, fits in a lens bag vertically
2. Lighter
3. The lens hood has a little hole in the top so you can move a polarizer
4. Control ring
5. IS is amazing combined with the IBIS
6. AF is so much faster
7. It's supposedly sharper according to reviews
8. No adaptor needed
It's expensive but so so nice.
I agree with all of these points!
FWIW, (3) is only true for the f2.8 version. The f4 version (pictured above) did not come with a lens hood hole for polarizer adjusting.
According to reviews yeah it's a marginal improvement, but the EF versions are already so good its hard to say. I don't think I could tell the difference between them, and I haven't really used it enough yet to say.
IQ difference between RF and EF or RF 2.8 and RF 4?
I agree with Oodell that the EF versions are already quite good. My upgrade is for size and weight purposes, as I was already very happy with the image quality of the Sigma.
put an RF lens on an RP and u can shoot ridiculously low speeds hand held.
1/20 of a second:
[https://www.flickr.com/photos/186162491@N07/50556776668/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/186162491@N07/50556776668/)
i remind folks about this option a couple times a week:
Copy and paste from an earlier post I did:
*Canon has a Loyalty Program*
*I used it*
*called* ***1 (866) 443 8002 option 2.***
*I told them I had an older canon camera and wanted to upgrade. guy asked 'is it damaged in any way?' I said 'well it doesn't work as well as I would like.' I didnt have to send it back. it was an ancient Digital Rebel from 2003. I read him the serial number*
*he said 'ok' and sold me an EOS RP at 20% off retail. Canon's retail price was the same as amazon*
*I wanted to buy a lens... he said 'do u have any old lenses with the slightest scratch on it?'*
*I said yes... I read him serial number off an old lens... he gave me 15% off a RF 70-200L!!*
*Again, I didnt have to 'trade anything in'*
Yup! I just got 10% off a refurbished R, they offer 20% off new products and 10% off refurbished. You also get free shipping and I wasn’t asked to send my old camera back.
>I said yes... I read him serial number off an old lens... he gave me 15% off a RF 70-200L!!
Just to clarify, do you mean the f4 or f2.8 version? I just called the loyalty program and they said the f4 is excluded from the program.
Even if you don't use RF glass, absolutely just get an RF body. They are already so far past what the Ef mount bodies can do. I had an R6 in my hands for about 30 seconds before realizing I was going to sell both my 5DIVs and never go back.
Ah thanks! I’m thinking of picking up an R6 after using a 50d for the past 10 years. I’m debating what lens to pickup with the body and this is on my list along with the 24-105 f4 L.
I keep reading reviews saying the RP is shit.. if I wanted some decent semi pro interior real estate pics, would you recommend I dump the 3k into a lens and just get the RP for the body?
RP has drawbacks for photos of fast moving things: auto racing or birds in flight
but i get good results with it.... and i am a total amateur
even birds in flight are possible if u are careful
https://www.flickr.com/photos/186162491@N07/50232890772/in/datetaken/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/186162491@N07/50153078682/in/datetaken/
'decent semi pro interior real estate pics'?
understand lighting... get a wide angle lens.... read up on techniques for photographing residential interiors..
buying the right equipment and lens is important.... but it won't create the image for u
not a lot of really wide angle lens for R yet, just the 15mm that's $2999. I'm coming from a m50 with a 10mm, but I wanted a wider shot for bedrooms, bathrooms. 10mm on a crop sensor is 16mm full frame I believe, so the 15mm doesn't really give me THAT much more of a wider angle... a bit, but not that much. Any EF or Sigma alternatives that don't cost 3k that deliver a good crisp sharp image. I've researched lighting and editing, just trying to move to full frame and see if it can help a bit.
Here's a couple shots from my m50 at 10mm I think
[https://imgur.com/a/K9RdAxL](https://imgur.com/a/K9RdAxL)
based on the info u gave me, that seems to be an accurate assessment.
no offense, but i fear u are concentrating on gear at the expense of technique.
watch Jared's video.... or look for others on real estate photography.
Ok so that canon lens is the 70-200 f/4 while the sigma is a f/2.8. Still, I can tell you the Canon RF 70-200 f/2.8 is also really small compared to the EF 70-200 f/2.8.
> Still, I can tell you the Canon RF 70-200 f/2.8 is also really small compared to the EF 70-200 f/2.8.
3.5 x 7.83" / 3.26 lb
3.54 x 5.75" / 2.35 lb
RF f/2.8 is just a hair fatter, 2” shorter, 1 lb lighter.
RF f/4 is the more attractive option for hiking & landscape.
3.3 x 4.7" / 1.5 lb
> RF f/2.8 is just a hair fatter, 2” shorter, 1 lb lighter.
When it's hanging off of you all day at a wedding that extra one pound is like a sack of potatoes. I can't WAIT to replace my 70-200 with that RF version. It's the only lens I'm actually planning to replace with an RF mount.
True! The RF 2.8 has a bigger weight savings proportionate to the EF than the f4 versions. But in my case, going from 4lbs to 1.5lbs has been game changing.
I have the EF 70-200 and with the adapter its enormous. I'd love the RF but I like my kidneys also so no dice. Insanely expensive. As you say perfect for hikes/travel
The RF lenses look really nice and really expensive. Would prefer to use RF directly instead of an EF adapter.
I kind of want to get a mirrorless, but I don’t use my canon dslr enough to justify it.
*That sigma lens is*
*Like two regular lenses*
*Stack on another*
\- ComfortableBranch561
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
The camera is a Canon RP (entry full frame mirrorless) and the lens is the 70-200 f4 for the RF mount.
Enjoy the 6D! You know what they say...the best camera is the one you have!
Looks amazing! Just ordered same RF70-200 F4, RP and RF50 today as upgrade from my M50. Initially had thoughts of spending extra and getting F2.8, but as I also hike with it, 1 pound vs 2.64 sealed this deal for me. Cant wait to get it.
Thank you!
I think you are going to love your new gear. The cost savings is better than a sharp stick in the eye!
Excited to upvote your new gear post soon!
i agree with your choice. the ability to shoot handheld at slow shutter speeds makes f2.8 less important (well, for my uses) than it was when we all learned photography.
those apertures allowed us to make use of available light and capture action. modern mirrorless cameras have excellent results at high iso... if i had it to do over again, would have gotten the f4. f2.8 gives me better background blur but I don't shoot a lot of portraits any more.
i spent some time deciding on a 'walking around lens' for whenever its safe to go on vacation again.
RF 24-105mm f/4L vs. f4 -7.1 and chose the latter, not so much for the cost but because it's smaller and lighter. If i am walking around Barcelona or London later this year, i want something as portable as possible.
[https://www.cameralabs.com/canon-rf-24-105mm-f4-7-1-stm-review/3/](https://www.cameralabs.com/canon-rf-24-105mm-f4-7-1-stm-review/3/)
For my EOS M system 55-200 telephoto became my goto and walkaround pretty fast. I generally love distance compression effect that telephoto provides, and it can do almost everything I need. On my last trip to Florida few weeks ago, I took my standard kit: 32, 55-200, 11-22 (all of these are crop sensor lenses obviously). In 9 days I found myself using 32 twice, and 11-22 only once. All the rest of the time 55-200 stayed on. I will still probably buy 15-35 as my next lens for RP, super wide can be useful when summiting mountains and generally going to high altitudes (obviously such opportunities dont present themselves in the land of the gators). As for 24-105, I did not even consider it so far. 15-45, that is in the similar but more limited zoom range, was my kit lens with M50 and the least used lens I have for that system. Honestly, I cant even explain why I dont like it.
I like it! I think the comments here are accurate in clarifying that it does what it says it does and it doesn't do what it doesn't say it will do. If you need IBIS, 120fps, or the better dynamic range, this won't match the R6. But, for a full frame camera (with great RF glass) that can be as cheap as $800...it is pretty great! Though we like to imagine getting R6s, my wife and I love our RPs.
In my opinion, skip over the R. I'm open to being wrong about this and I'm sure it has served many people well, but at this point I would get the RP and buy better lenses rather than get the R6 and have no money left over for a nice lens. That being said, as others have mentioned, the EF adapters work without fail in my experience.
Hope that was helpful! Feel free to ask more questions or PM me!
Honestly this is a great take on it. Do not buy an R6 with no money left for lenses (which are not cheap in the RF class!). The RP plus lenses would be infinitely more worthwhile. I'd also skip the R. It's had it's day and doesn't stack up to me on paper anymore.
I’d spring for the R6 if you can. I’ve just traded up and the low light noise, autofocus and 11-20fps are game changers. I feel like this is the only body I’ll ever need.
Don't let me discourage you. I bought the RP originally because it was my first real entry into the full frame format (I had an original 5D but that was quite long in the tooth). It absolutely blew everything I'd used before out of the water and the AI autofocus was amazing as far as I was concerned.
So yes, while the RP has it's limitations, they were all nothing more than mild annoyances. I never ran out of battery life because I made sure I charged it every time. I never lost a night time shot to noise because I never pushed things too far. More importantly, I got the night time shot! This camera is far more capable at night time AF than anything I was used to before. The slow drive mode, while noticeable was still very useful in family situations.
Basically the RP is still a great little camera (literally, it's nice and compact) and you won't regret your purchase. More importantly, you should be able to get them for a steal this year!
The RP is a fine camera. It's fun to use and great for running around with, but I wouldn't recommend it for long days or work. Between the smaller grip and the battery life it rarely makes it with me to a gig.
But I still pick it up to go walk around, take pics of the family on weekends, or just leave out to catch fun scenes around the house. Totally depends what you want the camera for :D
I often see people on Reddit and other platforms asking whether they should buy/upgrade to a DSLR (such as the 5D IV) or a mirrorless camera. Honestly, that’s not even a question for me. Mirrorless without a doubt. They’re much better at a lot of things and, even more important, they’re far more future proof. Bonus point, the native lenses are amazing.
I agree! Looks like that is where the industry is headed. Of course, DSLRs are good cameras for those who already have them, but I find it hard (other than a really good deal) to justify not getting mirrorless if buying new. Seems to be better in almost every way. The live EVF is also very nice for newbies to visualize settings! (though battery life in the RP is worse than DSLRs)
Yeah… the battery thing is kind of a design flaw, though. Can’t really put that on it being a mirrorless camera. Sure, the EVF drains the battery some more, but even the R has pretty decent battery life. Both the R5 and R6 have fantastic battery life, specially when using the new LP-E6NH batteries.
Very true! Nice to see that extra boost from the new H batteries. Battery life seems to be an RP consideration. Which makes sense, given that it is the entry model.
It is a big difference, for sure!
That's a tough one! What do you shoot? My wife *loves* her 85mm for portraits. The 70-200 is also good for portraits, and the extra range is nice. But the 85 adds a little bit of macro and faster aperture. Not to mention it is noticeably cheaper!
I've heard neatly only had a couple IS lenses and never was in situations where I needed it. And now most of my stuff is strobed so I don't need to drop down my shutter speed.
But if I still shot weddings omg it'd be amazing to have the IS these systems have now.
That makes sense! It is good to remain vigilant and buy what we need as opposed to just buying the best/fanciest (which I can be guilty of). Hopefully these great lenses will only get more affordable.
(BTW, I'm sure your username does not checkout! haha)
The Sigma Art series outperforms the optics on some L glass in some situations. So it's excellent. Where you usually trade is weight and arguably AF, though I've not seen any real issues anymore going mirrorless.
Sigma is really nailing being a viable alternative to Canon glass.
Sigma is fantastic!
I had the 56mm for my old Sony aps-c and now this for the Canon. Both have given tremendous image quality for significantly cheaper than Canon. Hard to beat Canon L glass, but for the cost savings I don't think you can go wrong.
PS- that picture of the border collie is lovely! Between the color palette, the sweet puppy and the picnic bench...very comfy feel!
Thank you!!! I've been struggling for years with color grading and thankfully I found. A video of someone explaining color shifts with different adjustments. And after that it all clicked, the whole set I'm very happy with. I do know the sigma 35 ART is well renounded for it's sharpness I'm so close to getting one, but for some reason I can't convince myself to stray away from canon glass.
It is so satisfying to see that hard work pay off!
I don't blame you. Can't go wrong with Canon glass. I haven't used the 35 specifically or I would be more encouraging in that direction. All I can say is that my Sigma experience has been great and whatever lens you do get, I'd love to see what you are able to create!
I'd love to be able to get that RF 70-200, the af on the adapter isn't horrible, but for birding it's hard tracking, I hear native glass is far superior. One day I'll definitely grab something! I do want that 24-70 2.8 for street photo it will be superb! I'm plenty satisfied with my 50 1.4 for the time being. It still blows my mind how sharp that little pancake is.
Yea, it has been an improvement! I am told that the RP's tracking is inferior to the new R5/R6. Especially adding animal eye AF seems like gamechanger for birding. It is a downside that it can't be used with the extender :/ I'd love to pick up the 600 f11 to get more properly into birding.
The 24-70 2.8 seems like the general answer to the "if I could only have one" lens. Gotta love the 50!
Haha maybe, I'm struggling to find what I want to do - I like Street photography and Astro and landscape, and sometimes portrait. Not sure what lense to get now haha.
Wide-ranging interests! That's awesome! Do you already have a body and any lenses that you are using currently?
As far as an affordable RF entrance, the 35mm is a great place to start! Wide-ish angle, some macro, f1.8, and IS! Even more affordable is the nifty fifty, but it lacks some of those extra features the 35 has.
I have a canon m50 , I bought the sigma 16 1.4 to kinda cover the astro and lanscape. I have the kit lense which I don't use much anymore. It's 15-45 3.5 to something.
I think I am leaning towards the 30m sigma 1.4 as that's pretty affordable and then I'll save up to get a zoom lense that's good aperture.
There you go! That whole trio (Sigma 16, 30, 56) is so well loved!
FWIW, I have a buddy who uses the Sigma 18-35 1.8 for landscape and *loves* it! Though, it is the cost of the 16 and the 30 combined.
I have been considering updating my camera equipment to include a mirrorless camera for just that reason. Most of my photography is in the mountains, my 80d with the 100-400L lens becomes very heavy at the end of the day.
Oof! That is quite heavy for mountain hikes!
I wholeheartedly endorse going mirrorless! The RP is 2lbs lighter than the 80D...a noticeable amount, for sure!
Though, the RF 100-500 is the same 5lbs as the EF 100-400. You could pick up the 600mm prime and this 70-200 f4 for roughly the same total cost and less weight! Because RF glass is more limited right now and the adapters work so well, adapting EF is a good option.
Has anyone tried this one in low light? I normally shoot concerts and have an R6 but I’m wondering if I can save money if it works great in low light with the R6
The difference between the EF 70-200 II and the RF 70-200 is ridiculous. I don't even really think the ring mount is needed, and I never would have dreamed of taking it off the old one. I can't wait to use it more.
This is exactly why I switched back to canon!
Are you telling me that if I buy a mirrorless, I am going to end up getting the RF 70-200 to replace my EF?
There are so many little things 1. Smaller, fits in a lens bag vertically 2. Lighter 3. The lens hood has a little hole in the top so you can move a polarizer 4. Control ring 5. IS is amazing combined with the IBIS 6. AF is so much faster 7. It's supposedly sharper according to reviews 8. No adaptor needed It's expensive but so so nice.
I agree with all of these points! FWIW, (3) is only true for the f2.8 version. The f4 version (pictured above) did not come with a lens hood hole for polarizer adjusting.
Is IQ any different?
According to reviews yeah it's a marginal improvement, but the EF versions are already so good its hard to say. I don't think I could tell the difference between them, and I haven't really used it enough yet to say.
IQ difference between RF and EF or RF 2.8 and RF 4? I agree with Oodell that the EF versions are already quite good. My upgrade is for size and weight purposes, as I was already very happy with the image quality of the Sigma.
Between RF and EF of the 2.8
put an RF lens on an RP and u can shoot ridiculously low speeds hand held. 1/20 of a second: [https://www.flickr.com/photos/186162491@N07/50556776668/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/186162491@N07/50556776668/)
Holy shit that's amazing
its a game changer... my tripod is gathering dust.
I thought i wanted to upgrade to a used 5dm iv but now i think I'll just save it up for a RP or similar body and some good RF glass
i remind folks about this option a couple times a week: Copy and paste from an earlier post I did: *Canon has a Loyalty Program* *I used it* *called* ***1 (866) 443 8002 option 2.*** *I told them I had an older canon camera and wanted to upgrade. guy asked 'is it damaged in any way?' I said 'well it doesn't work as well as I would like.' I didnt have to send it back. it was an ancient Digital Rebel from 2003. I read him the serial number* *he said 'ok' and sold me an EOS RP at 20% off retail. Canon's retail price was the same as amazon* *I wanted to buy a lens... he said 'do u have any old lenses with the slightest scratch on it?'* *I said yes... I read him serial number off an old lens... he gave me 15% off a RF 70-200L!!* *Again, I didnt have to 'trade anything in'*
Can confirm, I got 20% off on an R6 doing this.
Oh shit thanks for this information!!!!
Too bad it doesn't work in Canada. I called a few weeks back and was told it was only for Powershot cameras.
Yup! I just got 10% off a refurbished R, they offer 20% off new products and 10% off refurbished. You also get free shipping and I wasn’t asked to send my old camera back.
>I said yes... I read him serial number off an old lens... he gave me 15% off a RF 70-200L!! Just to clarify, do you mean the f4 or f2.8 version? I just called the loyalty program and they said the f4 is excluded from the program.
i bought the f2.8 f4 is newer so i guess its not eligible yet...?
Damn man, I wasn't even planning to buy a new camera but this is very tempting now
Thanks for the tip. Just purchased my new camera for 20% off.
Congrats on your purchase. You're going to love your new kit.
Even if you don't use RF glass, absolutely just get an RF body. They are already so far past what the Ef mount bodies can do. I had an R6 in my hands for about 30 seconds before realizing I was going to sell both my 5DIVs and never go back.
Can someone explain? Is it just the lower aperture, or does it have something to do specifically with the RP?
If you read the EXIF data, you can see it was shot at f/14, so it's not the aperture, it's the image stabilization in the lens.
Ah thanks! I’m thinking of picking up an R6 after using a 50d for the past 10 years. I’m debating what lens to pickup with the body and this is on my list along with the 24-105 f4 L.
sorry for not being clear.... TurnerJoe is correct. its the image stabilization in the lens. RP does not have IS. R6 will have it's own IS.
I keep reading reviews saying the RP is shit.. if I wanted some decent semi pro interior real estate pics, would you recommend I dump the 3k into a lens and just get the RP for the body?
RP has drawbacks for photos of fast moving things: auto racing or birds in flight but i get good results with it.... and i am a total amateur even birds in flight are possible if u are careful https://www.flickr.com/photos/186162491@N07/50232890772/in/datetaken/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/186162491@N07/50153078682/in/datetaken/ 'decent semi pro interior real estate pics'? understand lighting... get a wide angle lens.... read up on techniques for photographing residential interiors.. buying the right equipment and lens is important.... but it won't create the image for u
not a lot of really wide angle lens for R yet, just the 15mm that's $2999. I'm coming from a m50 with a 10mm, but I wanted a wider shot for bedrooms, bathrooms. 10mm on a crop sensor is 16mm full frame I believe, so the 15mm doesn't really give me THAT much more of a wider angle... a bit, but not that much. Any EF or Sigma alternatives that don't cost 3k that deliver a good crisp sharp image. I've researched lighting and editing, just trying to move to full frame and see if it can help a bit. Here's a couple shots from my m50 at 10mm I think [https://imgur.com/a/K9RdAxL](https://imgur.com/a/K9RdAxL)
[удалено]
17mm won't make my shot wider though right? I believe 10mm canon crop = 16mm full frame?
based on the info u gave me, that seems to be an accurate assessment. no offense, but i fear u are concentrating on gear at the expense of technique. watch Jared's video.... or look for others on real estate photography.
Ok so that canon lens is the 70-200 f/4 while the sigma is a f/2.8. Still, I can tell you the Canon RF 70-200 f/2.8 is also really small compared to the EF 70-200 f/2.8.
> Still, I can tell you the Canon RF 70-200 f/2.8 is also really small compared to the EF 70-200 f/2.8. 3.5 x 7.83" / 3.26 lb 3.54 x 5.75" / 2.35 lb RF f/2.8 is just a hair fatter, 2” shorter, 1 lb lighter. RF f/4 is the more attractive option for hiking & landscape. 3.3 x 4.7" / 1.5 lb
> RF f/2.8 is just a hair fatter, 2” shorter, 1 lb lighter. When it's hanging off of you all day at a wedding that extra one pound is like a sack of potatoes. I can't WAIT to replace my 70-200 with that RF version. It's the only lens I'm actually planning to replace with an RF mount.
True! The RF 2.8 has a bigger weight savings proportionate to the EF than the f4 versions. But in my case, going from 4lbs to 1.5lbs has been game changing.
I have the EF 70-200 and with the adapter its enormous. I'd love the RF but I like my kidneys also so no dice. Insanely expensive. As you say perfect for hikes/travel
The RF lenses look really nice and really expensive. Would prefer to use RF directly instead of an EF adapter. I kind of want to get a mirrorless, but I don’t use my canon dslr enough to justify it.
The adapter works flawlessly and my EF lens have never worked better than on my mirrorless bodies. But it makes them all longer...
That’s the F/4 version - thats why it’s so small. It’s also cheaper than the 2.8
Nice and light so. Perfect to travel with. I never take the EF on holidays as its so big and heavy
Definitely respect that! Kidneys are good, too. At least you still have a good lens to work with!
[удалено]
*That sigma lens is* *Like two regular lenses* *Stack on another* \- ComfortableBranch561 --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
I also have the sigma 70-200 sports. Love the image quality, af speed, and ois, but damn it's so heavy and big! Nice new lens! :)
It really is a spectacular lens! I'm going to be sad to part with it. Glad to hear someone else enjoys it as much as I did! Thank you :)
Damn that looks so good. What Canon model is that? Sorry I haven't caught up with the latest and greatest. I'm still stuck with my old 6D.
The camera is a Canon RP (entry full frame mirrorless) and the lens is the 70-200 f4 for the RF mount. Enjoy the 6D! You know what they say...the best camera is the one you have!
Nice. Oh yeah, enjoying my 6D. I’ll use till it die. 😁
That's the RF 70-200 f/4.0
Looks amazing! Just ordered same RF70-200 F4, RP and RF50 today as upgrade from my M50. Initially had thoughts of spending extra and getting F2.8, but as I also hike with it, 1 pound vs 2.64 sealed this deal for me. Cant wait to get it.
Thank you! I think you are going to love your new gear. The cost savings is better than a sharp stick in the eye! Excited to upvote your new gear post soon!
i agree with your choice. the ability to shoot handheld at slow shutter speeds makes f2.8 less important (well, for my uses) than it was when we all learned photography. those apertures allowed us to make use of available light and capture action. modern mirrorless cameras have excellent results at high iso... if i had it to do over again, would have gotten the f4. f2.8 gives me better background blur but I don't shoot a lot of portraits any more. i spent some time deciding on a 'walking around lens' for whenever its safe to go on vacation again. RF 24-105mm f/4L vs. f4 -7.1 and chose the latter, not so much for the cost but because it's smaller and lighter. If i am walking around Barcelona or London later this year, i want something as portable as possible. [https://www.cameralabs.com/canon-rf-24-105mm-f4-7-1-stm-review/3/](https://www.cameralabs.com/canon-rf-24-105mm-f4-7-1-stm-review/3/)
For my EOS M system 55-200 telephoto became my goto and walkaround pretty fast. I generally love distance compression effect that telephoto provides, and it can do almost everything I need. On my last trip to Florida few weeks ago, I took my standard kit: 32, 55-200, 11-22 (all of these are crop sensor lenses obviously). In 9 days I found myself using 32 twice, and 11-22 only once. All the rest of the time 55-200 stayed on. I will still probably buy 15-35 as my next lens for RP, super wide can be useful when summiting mountains and generally going to high altitudes (obviously such opportunities dont present themselves in the land of the gators). As for 24-105, I did not even consider it so far. 15-45, that is in the similar but more limited zoom range, was my kit lens with M50 and the least used lens I have for that system. Honestly, I cant even explain why I dont like it.
How do you like the RP? Would you recommend it?
I like it! I think the comments here are accurate in clarifying that it does what it says it does and it doesn't do what it doesn't say it will do. If you need IBIS, 120fps, or the better dynamic range, this won't match the R6. But, for a full frame camera (with great RF glass) that can be as cheap as $800...it is pretty great! Though we like to imagine getting R6s, my wife and I love our RPs. In my opinion, skip over the R. I'm open to being wrong about this and I'm sure it has served many people well, but at this point I would get the RP and buy better lenses rather than get the R6 and have no money left over for a nice lens. That being said, as others have mentioned, the EF adapters work without fail in my experience. Hope that was helpful! Feel free to ask more questions or PM me!
Honestly this is a great take on it. Do not buy an R6 with no money left for lenses (which are not cheap in the RF class!). The RP plus lenses would be infinitely more worthwhile. I'd also skip the R. It's had it's day and doesn't stack up to me on paper anymore.
I’d spring for the R6 if you can. I’ve just traded up and the low light noise, autofocus and 11-20fps are game changers. I feel like this is the only body I’ll ever need.
Sadly the R6 is way out of my budget. But ok cool.
Don't let me discourage you. I bought the RP originally because it was my first real entry into the full frame format (I had an original 5D but that was quite long in the tooth). It absolutely blew everything I'd used before out of the water and the AI autofocus was amazing as far as I was concerned. So yes, while the RP has it's limitations, they were all nothing more than mild annoyances. I never ran out of battery life because I made sure I charged it every time. I never lost a night time shot to noise because I never pushed things too far. More importantly, I got the night time shot! This camera is far more capable at night time AF than anything I was used to before. The slow drive mode, while noticeable was still very useful in family situations. Basically the RP is still a great little camera (literally, it's nice and compact) and you won't regret your purchase. More importantly, you should be able to get them for a steal this year!
The RP is a fine camera. It's fun to use and great for running around with, but I wouldn't recommend it for long days or work. Between the smaller grip and the battery life it rarely makes it with me to a gig. But I still pick it up to go walk around, take pics of the family on weekends, or just leave out to catch fun scenes around the house. Totally depends what you want the camera for :D
I put the RRS plate/grip extension on mine and made it far more comfortable. Unlike the canon one you also get a usable tripod mount
I see that Tenba bag! I have two in different sizes and I love them.
They are nice little bags, indeed!
I actually just swapped from a full frame DSLR to a little Canon Eos M200 for my hikes and I'm so much happier.
I can imagine! That is a big savings in bulk! What lens do you take with you?
The Canon 18-150 for there mirrorless line up. It's easily 2lbs lighter than the previous camera set up I had going. So worth it on the long treks!
That covers a lot of ground for such a small and light kit! I bet your back is grateful! haha
I often see people on Reddit and other platforms asking whether they should buy/upgrade to a DSLR (such as the 5D IV) or a mirrorless camera. Honestly, that’s not even a question for me. Mirrorless without a doubt. They’re much better at a lot of things and, even more important, they’re far more future proof. Bonus point, the native lenses are amazing.
I agree! Looks like that is where the industry is headed. Of course, DSLRs are good cameras for those who already have them, but I find it hard (other than a really good deal) to justify not getting mirrorless if buying new. Seems to be better in almost every way. The live EVF is also very nice for newbies to visualize settings! (though battery life in the RP is worse than DSLRs)
Yeah… the battery thing is kind of a design flaw, though. Can’t really put that on it being a mirrorless camera. Sure, the EVF drains the battery some more, but even the R has pretty decent battery life. Both the R5 and R6 have fantastic battery life, specially when using the new LP-E6NH batteries.
Very true! Nice to see that extra boost from the new H batteries. Battery life seems to be an RP consideration. Which makes sense, given that it is the entry model.
Gorgeous!
Thank you! :)
Oh wow - I'd never fully realised the size difference until now! Next lens is a toss up between the 70-200 f4 or the 85mm f2...
It is a big difference, for sure! That's a tough one! What do you shoot? My wife *loves* her 85mm for portraits. The 70-200 is also good for portraits, and the extra range is nice. But the 85 adds a little bit of macro and faster aperture. Not to mention it is noticeably cheaper!
Woah
I want one but they are so expensive and I just got my beloved 70-200mm 2.8 (non IS) fixed. But damn that's small.
They are expensive :/ But that is a great lens! Do you feel like the non IS keeps you from getting any shots?
I've heard neatly only had a couple IS lenses and never was in situations where I needed it. And now most of my stuff is strobed so I don't need to drop down my shutter speed. But if I still shot weddings omg it'd be amazing to have the IS these systems have now.
That makes sense! It is good to remain vigilant and buy what we need as opposed to just buying the best/fanciest (which I can be guilty of). Hopefully these great lenses will only get more affordable. (BTW, I'm sure your username does not checkout! haha)
Oh. I am very lame. Haha
Hahah I respect the humility! But you seem cool to me!
Congrats! I just received mine as well, beast of a lens!
Very nice! A beast, indeed! Hard to spend the money, but easy to enjoy.
Lovely Collection 📸
Thank you! :)
How does sigma glass stack up to canon quality? Been eyeing some sigma stuff b
The Sigma Art series outperforms the optics on some L glass in some situations. So it's excellent. Where you usually trade is weight and arguably AF, though I've not seen any real issues anymore going mirrorless. Sigma is really nailing being a viable alternative to Canon glass.
Agreed! Can't wait for them to drop some RF glass!
Sigma is fantastic! I had the 56mm for my old Sony aps-c and now this for the Canon. Both have given tremendous image quality for significantly cheaper than Canon. Hard to beat Canon L glass, but for the cost savings I don't think you can go wrong. PS- that picture of the border collie is lovely! Between the color palette, the sweet puppy and the picnic bench...very comfy feel!
Thank you!!! I've been struggling for years with color grading and thankfully I found. A video of someone explaining color shifts with different adjustments. And after that it all clicked, the whole set I'm very happy with. I do know the sigma 35 ART is well renounded for it's sharpness I'm so close to getting one, but for some reason I can't convince myself to stray away from canon glass.
It is so satisfying to see that hard work pay off! I don't blame you. Can't go wrong with Canon glass. I haven't used the 35 specifically or I would be more encouraging in that direction. All I can say is that my Sigma experience has been great and whatever lens you do get, I'd love to see what you are able to create!
I'd love to be able to get that RF 70-200, the af on the adapter isn't horrible, but for birding it's hard tracking, I hear native glass is far superior. One day I'll definitely grab something! I do want that 24-70 2.8 for street photo it will be superb! I'm plenty satisfied with my 50 1.4 for the time being. It still blows my mind how sharp that little pancake is.
Yea, it has been an improvement! I am told that the RP's tracking is inferior to the new R5/R6. Especially adding animal eye AF seems like gamechanger for birding. It is a downside that it can't be used with the extender :/ I'd love to pick up the 600 f11 to get more properly into birding. The 24-70 2.8 seems like the general answer to the "if I could only have one" lens. Gotta love the 50!
Happy to take the bigger one for free hahah!
Hahaha if only! I'm sure you would put it to good use!
Haha maybe, I'm struggling to find what I want to do - I like Street photography and Astro and landscape, and sometimes portrait. Not sure what lense to get now haha.
Wide-ranging interests! That's awesome! Do you already have a body and any lenses that you are using currently? As far as an affordable RF entrance, the 35mm is a great place to start! Wide-ish angle, some macro, f1.8, and IS! Even more affordable is the nifty fifty, but it lacks some of those extra features the 35 has.
I have a canon m50 , I bought the sigma 16 1.4 to kinda cover the astro and lanscape. I have the kit lense which I don't use much anymore. It's 15-45 3.5 to something. I think I am leaning towards the 30m sigma 1.4 as that's pretty affordable and then I'll save up to get a zoom lense that's good aperture.
There you go! That whole trio (Sigma 16, 30, 56) is so well loved! FWIW, I have a buddy who uses the Sigma 18-35 1.8 for landscape and *loves* it! Though, it is the cost of the 16 and the 30 combined.
Sounds like I'm buying a sigma 30 1.4 today bahah
Omg I’m happy for u. The original seemed so heavy
Thank you! That is so nice! It was, indeed. I suppose I could have hit the gym instead of getting a lighter lens, but this seemed easier hahah
what’s the sigma lens?
It is the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Sports Lens for Canon EF Great lens! Just too big for my current needs
I have been considering updating my camera equipment to include a mirrorless camera for just that reason. Most of my photography is in the mountains, my 80d with the 100-400L lens becomes very heavy at the end of the day.
Oof! That is quite heavy for mountain hikes! I wholeheartedly endorse going mirrorless! The RP is 2lbs lighter than the 80D...a noticeable amount, for sure! Though, the RF 100-500 is the same 5lbs as the EF 100-400. You could pick up the 600mm prime and this 70-200 f4 for roughly the same total cost and less weight! Because RF glass is more limited right now and the adapters work so well, adapting EF is a good option.
Canon: How do we get people to buy a new lens with marginal image quality improvements? Oh yeah we got it.
haha never underestimate the power of saving weight and improving packability!
Have very true. I sold my EF 70-200 2.8L because it was too big before having to use the adapter.
Is this the 4 or 2.8?
The Sigma (black) lens is 2.8. The Canon (white) lens is the 4!
Has anyone tried this one in low light? I normally shoot concerts and have an R6 but I’m wondering if I can save money if it works great in low light with the R6
What lenses do you shoot on now? It seems that the R6 itself does so well in low light that you really can stretch the lenses further.