Canon EOS RP user report (why the RP is not so important for photographers) 22 May 2019

On 9 February this year I posted a discussion around the title “Why is the Canon EOS RPimportant?’.

I fell for my own argument and bought one with the RF 35mm f1.8 lens.

Now having used this camera for two months I have come to the view that my pre-purchase enthusiasm was misplaced.

I think that while the RP may well be important to Canon it is much less likely to be important to photographers for whom there are better options aplenty.

There are many  descriptive reviews of this camera, explaining what it can and cannot do and how the controls work and so forth.

I want to concentrate on some other matters which are in my view more important to potential buyers. These are things like:

* Who is it for ?

*What is it for ?

* For what type of photography is the R best suited ?

Over the years I have used many different cameras of different types with a range of sensor sizes.

I think we have come to the point that most modern cameras can produce excellent pictures in competent hands. When I compare pictures made with cameras having full frame, APS-C, M43 and “One inch” sensors I struggle to see a meaningful difference between them in image quality.

When  pictures are displayed by print or projection at my local camera club none of the members, some of whom are very experienced, can tell what type of camera made which picture.

It is not useful to say that large sensor cameras produce better or worse pictures than small sensor cameras because in practice they can all make excellent pictures.

However cameras which use the 43mm diagonal (full frame) sensor (the old 35mm film size) have characteristics which make it easier for the photographer to get good results in specific circumstances than, say, M43 cameras with a sensor 21.6mm diagonal. 

Full frame cameras make it easier to achieve a softly blurred background.

They may also if one has the right (big, wide aperture, expensive) lens and the right (high speed, high frame rate, advanced AFC) body make it easier to get good sport/action/BIF pictures in marginal lighting conditions.

Conversely smaller sensor cameras make it easier for the photographer to get good results in different circumstances.

Often in street, documentary, reportage and hand held landscape and architectural pictures we want everything in frame rendered sharp. This is easier to achieve with small sensor cameras.

In addition most small sensor cameras are smaller, lighter and less expensive than those with a larger sensor.

So, with that out of the way where does the EOS RP fit into the picture ?

Having used the RP for a while I have to say that it is like all the Canons I have used and tested over the last 10 years or so, that is, limited.  Apparently deliberately limited by the manufacturer.

It has limited specifications, capabilities, image quality  and performance. It is well built and does all the things the maker claims it can do. But the range of those things is quite restricted.

The unique selling point of the EOS RP is that it is the least expensive full frame mirrorless interchangeable lens camera on the market at the time of writing.

I think this tells us where Canon is going with the RP.

It is an entry level model.

This could be an entry into full frame for EOS-M (APS-C) users.

It could be an entry into mirrorless for Canon DSLR users, either full frame or mirrorless.

It appears to me very much pitched at existing Canon ILC owners/users who already have some EF lenses or prefer to stay within the Canon brand.

So my answer to the question “Who is it for ?” is “Canon”  The RP is part of Canon’s response to a complex problem forced on camera makers by technological developments and a giant shift in user preference to smartphones.

Canon wants to keep the faithful in the tent and the RP is part of a marketing strategy designed to achieve that.

I recently visited a well known tourist location in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. Most of the thousands of visitors recorded their experience with a smartphone. But quite a few had cameras and most of these were DSLRs including EOS 6Ds which their owners were using as snapshot cameras.  I call these low demand users.

My point is that many people using entry level full frame interchangeable lens models are probably wasting their money on a product they don’t need.

Of course they are entitled to do that if they can afford it. And if they feel better about having a full frame camera with the Canon brand they are entitled to that also.

My second question is “What is it for” and I think the answer to that question is basically as laid out in the discussion on “who is it for”.

It is mostly about Canon’s sales strategy and not much about photographers or their enjoyment of the process of making photos.

You see the RP is not an exciting or even particularly interesting model.

Yes it competently makes pictures and video but so does almost every other camera and smartphone on the market.

Even though it is pitched at a low price point for a full frame model it is still considerably more expensive than many APS-C and M43 cameras out there from Sony, Fuji, Panasonic and Olympus, many of which have much better specifications, features, capabilities and performance than the RP.

My third question is “For what type of photography is the RP best suited ?”   I think the answer to that is “general/family/scenic/travel/vlogging”.

The problem for Canon and the other makers pushing hard to upsell customers into full frame is that  nobody actually needs full frame for these purposes.

Full frame works best at the upper end of the price/capability scale.

Here we find cameras with very large pixel counts which can be used to make huge billboards which look sharp even close up.

Or super high speed models which can capture peak sport/action moments even when the sun is not shining and simultaneously blur out those busy, intrusive backgrounds.

Or nail focus on a prime minister’s fleeting expression while making a speech and at the same time keep the background unobtrusive.

By the way I think this might explain why Panasonic is entering the mirrorless full frame market at the high end. The Lumix S1 and S1R models are pitched at professionals who actually need those full frame  characteristics.

Will the EOS RP  be a success ? 

Canon sure knows more about marketing than me. They have managed to hold on to the market lead with a string of models which I have tested and found to be half-baked, mediocre, disappointing things none of which I chose to keep.

One photography commentator has described this type of camera as an example of a minimum viable product.

So maybe the RP will sell well, presumably to those low demand users for whom a well known brand name is more important than product capability.

I remain confused about Canon’s RF lens release strategy however.

Surely the best match for the RP would be a 24-105mm f3.5-5.6 kit lens of good but not necessarily outstanding quality. Match the (relatively) low price of the body with a (relatively) low price general purpose kit lens.

But we don’t have one. That’s odd. Like the lens gang and the body gang work in totally different teams and don’t talk to each other.

Instead we have a 35mm f1.8 IS prime which is reasonably priced and optically excellent but hardly fits the bill for general photography. And it’s a macro, which is an odd focal length for close-up work as it places the front element of the lens extremely close to the subject.

After that we have an expensive standard zoom and two non stabilised super lenses which might suit the as-yet-non-existent-but-presumably-coming-some-day high end R model.

The EOS RP is a camera. It makes nice still pictures and reasonable 1080p video.

But lots of other cameras which cost less can also make nice still pictures and better quality video.

Note these represent my opinion which might not be shared by others.

* Does the RP make a good case for  owners of other brand cameras to come across to Canon ?  I think not.  Sony, Nikon and Panasonic have full frame mirrorless cameras with higher specification, capabilities and performance. Sure they cost more but the buyer who is price sensitive would do better to look at APS-C and M43 offerings.

* Does the RP make a good case for EOS 6D/6D.2 DSLR owners to come across to mirrorless ?

I think not.  Why would they ? There is no significant improvement in image quality or performance and there is no budget priced RF kit zoom.

* Does the RP make a good case for current EOS-M owners to move up to full frame ?

The problem here is that there is no up/down compatibility between EOS-M and EOS-R.

So the EOS-M owner might just as well look at other brands as a move to EOS-R requires a complete change of body and lenses.

I apologise to dedicated Canon supporters for the negative view of the EOS-RP presented here.

I too, was a solid Canon user for about 20 years from 1990 to 2010. Canon had been the technology front runner during the latter part of the 20^th Century in the process gaining a well earned reputation for industry leadership.

But somewhere along the way Canon drifted away from leadership and innovation in technology to marketing tactics with underwhelming products.

I started to look outside the Canon tent and found the energy, innovation and enterprise which Canon appeared to have lost.

The EOS-RP is not a great leap forward.