Will I regret getting a Canon RP?
Will I regret getting a Canon RP?
Read our detailed comparison of the Canon EOS R6 vs Canon EOS RP to find out their strengths and weaknesses, and decide which one to choose.
As an enthusiast that takes portraits, travel, some macro, some wildlife, and a desire to do more sports and birding; I've always wanted to upgrade my SL1 to a full frame sensor/mirrorless.
Price is a big deal for me, and I want to buy once cry once--i want a camera that will last me the next 8+ years. Reviews on the RP look great, and I don't pretend to be an expert--im confused though, because while the R6 mkii has a few nice features I can't see why it costs twice as much. Is the R6 mkii worth the upgrade, and/or will it be more future proof?
Being price-sensitive, I would suggest looking really hard at the lens ecosystem. Canon has blocked the production of third-party autofocus lenses for RF mount with legal threats, and the more desirable first-party options tend to be pricey. Nikon allows some third-party lenses on Z-mount, and Sony of course has a huge selection on E-mount.
Nikon has a somewhat comparable option in the Z5, but with Sony, the budget option is used. Both the A7 III and A9 are selling for a bit over $1000 on Ebay if you're patient.
They did what now?! Source?
With that in mind I know I won't be buying Canon...It was pretty well-documented - here's one source. Most of the manufacturers have some sort of limits or controls on third-party lenses, usually with patents that should have failed the obviousness test. I believe the state of the mirrorless ecosystem is:
Third-party AF lenses forbidden:
- Canon RF
Third-party lenses approved on a case-by-case basis:
- Fuji X
- Fuji GFX
- Nikon Z
Open (some may charge a license fee):
- Sony E
- Micro four-thirds
- L-mount
Ooh, a whole new world not limiting myself to Canon--from glancing around and some of the other comments it looks like Sony has some really nice options.
Thank you!
Sports and birding? A full frame sensor will make these more difficult than with APSC, simply because of reach and weight.
Get yourself an EOS R10 with the 18-150, and for longer reach the 100~400mm IS USM.
Nothing else needed, you'll be set for years.
I agree on the smaller sensor. I'm not so sure about the R10 due to the closed lens ecosystem and the smaller format in a multiformat mount usually being a second-class citizen. It seems like Fuji is the only camera maker that really puts effort into its APSC system.
M43 is also particularly good at both macro and birds, with lightweight telephotos and high-magnification macro lenses - the new 90mm from Olympus has 2x magnification, or 4x with a teleconverter.
I agree with M43 for birds and the OM-1 for sports. That's an extraordinary camera although it's twice the price of the R10 with a lens.
The Canon closed system isn't really a problem though. The two lenses mentioned are good enough for anything and well worth the money.
The overall value of the whole kit makes it very competitive and the impression I had from the OP was that budget is important.
There's also the added familiarity with Canon that shouldn't be underestimated.
Make sure the glass you want is available.
I came close, and like you want full frame, but the lack of glass i want just isn’t there. I got a newer eos m, i like the 22mm pancake so much for 35mm equiv and the fast 50mm equiv primes.
M system is pretty much EOL'd, so it may not be the best choice for future proofness as the OP wants.
It's a good point about lens availability, though. The best selection in the mirrorless world will be Sony, due to the system being more mature and Sony not being hostile to third party makers like Canon and Nikon are.
Spending more of your budget on lens to compliment the cheaper rp would be a good call. If you get the right lenses it’ll def last you a long time. A body less so.
Just think twice about investing in full frame system. Everything is a lot more expensive and heavy for benefits you might not see depending on what type of photography you’re shooting.
I have an RP and an original R6, and they are very different cameras. The RP's compact size and light weight are excellent features that, for me, go a long way to offset its limitations, but to that end If I were buying today, I would go for the R8 over the RP.
The RP's sensor was already showing its age a year or two ago, and that's more true now, I'm sure, in terms particularly of dynamic range. And for wildlife and sports, the improved autofocus on the more recent Canon models will be a significant benefit, as will the in-body stabilization.
In terms of "will the camera work in the future", I have no reason to worry about the longevity of any Canon camera. But if you're at all averse to owning an "outdated" camera, skip the RP in favor of either the R8 (lightweight and much better for travel, but no IBIS) or a used R6 or an R6 MKII.
I love my RP - i picked one up second hand a few months ago. I've always been a budget shooter, though, and it's the newest camera I've had (upgraded from an original sony a7) so ymmv. I love how compact it is, and the ability to use OF lenses - but that part is true of all of them!
I bought the RP specifically for portraits (for the extra bokeh) and I love it. But it's not a good choice if you're doing wildlife, sports, and birding. In addition to Sony, take a look at the Fujifilm line of cropped sensor cameras.
I have a R6 body with some lenses. First and foremost you should confirm the lens lineup is what you want. There really aren't any practical third party lenses for the RF mount, so what you see on Canon's site is what you should plan for. For me the lenses are fine, though I would be lying if I didn't mention my jealousy towards the X, E and L mount lense collections. The R6 body does two things well in my eyes: low grain high iso and superb IBIS. Personally, coming from an EOS-M system, these were the primary reasons I was wanting to upgrade in the first place. That being said, the R8 is now out and for the price I think I would go with that if I were buying today. As for other cameras, I find Canon cameras to be infinitely more comfortable than most others. Judging by pictures I've seen, perhaps Nikon or Lumix cameras might be fine these days, but the Sony and Fujifilm cameras I've tried were designed for either aliens or small hands. Neither of what apply to me.
Also regarding price differences, NOTHING in these price categories are going to be 1:1. This applies to literally any kind of non-essential good. After a certain point the value/dollar exponentially decreases.