The mirrorless war has been raging for some time now, particularly since Canon and Nikon entered the frame. Not all were well received, one of which has just been called "the most underrated camera of 2019" by a prominent YouTuber.
The Canon EOS R got very mixed reviews upon release. The general consensus seemed to be underwhelmed, and I was firmly in that camp. Matti Haapoja has shot with a number of cameras, and like many of us, wasn't overly interested in the EOS R when it came out. However, he seems to have done a 180 on that.
Now, it's worth noting that Haapoja's work is primarily in video, but to that end, he believes that around 80% of the video he has shot since owning the EOS R, has been shot with it. He doesn't deny that the specs are not up to grade, but instead believes the strengths lie elsewhere, like colors and bitrate. A lot of the reasons Haapoja gives are generally personal preference and little hazy on the details.
I'm still not quite sold, how about you? Do you agree it's the most underrated camera of 2019?
When someone looks at you photo they don’t care what camera was used unless it’s a gear head !!
Yes I have seen his videos where he clams color science is important, but ibis and dual slots are not. He have been building up to this over a few videos now. Sorry but some Youtubers seems to be bought and payed. To me it gets sickening when he pulls out bitrate to argue Canons case. The message is, please Canon, send me the new lenses. I am sure they will be happy to send him both.
Being McKinnon’s shadow you really can’t trust anything he says about Canon. Both are highly paid Canon shills.
nope.
I'm not sponsored by Canon but says he does get free gear from them.
So, he's received a camera which is worth what, half a month's salary for an average person. Wow, that's so generous, yes, he's going to live on that for 2 weeks. Sorry, what about all the Sony apologists out there? Oh, I moved to the Sony A7III R because, blah, blah, blah. As he says, he has the choice of a whole bunch of different cameras, but uses the EOS R 80% of the time because of the image quality, and the autofocus system and usability of the camera. I concur. It's very usable. And the images are awesome,and that's even without using the Dual Pixel RAW.
Who remembers when the “SwitchPod” became the trend on Youtube ? When youtubers turned their backs on Joby for views.
This is when i realized that most Youtubers are only loyal to views. And that most of these Youtubers are terrible reviewers especially after DJI Osmo screen lag. Like how could some of them miss that ?
Oh lets not forget when youtubers say that they “paid for the item with their own money” but actually have a solid return policy and return the product after they are done reviewing it.
Its all clear now.
I only enjoy a few channels now.
I’m no pro so not sure what my opinion is worth. But this year I finally graduated to full frame. I had bought a used Sony a7R II from a local camera store and was really excited. It was a great camera but I also do a lot of macro work and had learned that the Canon EOS RP (not the R) was going to have focus bracketing. I used focus bracketing a lot in my work but had to do it manually which was very tedious. I also wanted to start doing landscape photography which could also benefit from focus bracketing. So I decided to put down a deposit for the RP before it came out. The day I got it I fired up the focus bracketing and I was so happy. It worked flawlessly with my EF 100mm f2.8L Macro. I actually just sold some canvas prints up to 30x40” using that combination. Funny thing is every time I had taken both my 42MP Sony (with Sigma MC-11 adapter) and my EOS RP on trips and ended up using the EOS RP 90% of the time. It’s a good thing too because it ended up with a bad sensor and I swapped it out for a used Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L II which also works great on the RP. I do wish it had better dynamic range after playing with a Sony but I’m hoping Canon fixes that in their future pro body.
What's up with these "I received this product at a discounted price in exchange for an honest and unbiased review." disclaimers.
"I have to this day never ever gotten paid at all. Zero dollars. From canon. Yes I’ve gotten a free camera. I’ve gotten this one for free. And I think I got a canon 6d mk2 for free way back . But that’s about it. I’ve never ever been paid by canon. I’m proud to be able to say that."
Might as well rename this article "Canon EOS R Vs Sony A9, The Truth"
Here's a variation of the "I received this product at a discounted price in exchange for an honest and unbiased review."
"I write this from a bullet train to Sendai from Tokyo, paid for by Fujifilm, to tour their factory. The only reason I’m in Japan at all is for Fujifilm, paid for by Fujifilm. While this could call my objectivity in to question, I would usually merely repeat that any company I work with gets the warning before we start that I will be completely honest about anything they show me, even if it’s profoundly negative. In this case, I feel I don’t even need to lean on my morals and integrity; the specs of their cameras speak for themselves."
Im sorry but that video was painful to watch. While I agree with a lot of what he is saying about the camera ( I own an R and love it!! I think it is very under rated) this guy just talks and talks and talks without really saying anything.I had to stop after 11 minutes, this video shouldnt have been more than 5 minutes TOPS!
Also getting free gear is a form of payment, someone needs to teach him that.
More time for more ads to pop up. That's the only reason.
Right. This is the "film maker" who released the video telling the world just how bad the GH5 is. They (him and PM) did as similar job on the 6Dii - which I actually own - to try and convince everyone how great it is.
This video is boring as the Canon R camera. Yes, it is a solid camera that belongs more to the past than to the future. Yes, it can take decent photos, almost all cameras do it today. You can sing ode to Canon 80D or Nikon D5500, they do job as well. Please spare us senseless promotion.
Jan you have some beautiful images in your portfolio here and looks like you are a accomplished photog. You comment quite a lot on this site and I'm betting you have a lot of great input you could pass along in these comments but after looking back at your comment history so much of what you post seems to just be anger and bias against anything having to do with Sony with comments like how this site should be called "Sony fanboy stoppers" or "Sony camera’s are toys for boys". Feel free to ignore me but I bet you probably have some pretty valuable input you could choose to provide to these conversations versus the other which you have to admit doesn't do much to further the conversation regardless of how you feel this site might be biased towards one camera brand or another.
Welp, *cracks knuckles* time to throw my own opinion into the internet void.
Pure numbers and specs have not, do not, and will not tell the full story about a camera. This isn't a pure defense of the Canon EOS R, it's just the plain and simple truth. Yes, they can be used to make broad assumptions about a camera, but it will never take the place of real-world usage. I actually own a Sony A7RIII, but after recently renting a Canon EOS R, I'm seriously considering switching.
And quite frankly, most of the reasons why are purely opinion.
I like how the Canon EOS R fits in my hand better
I like Canon's AF in video more
I like the colors more
I like the innovation with the lenses
I like the smaller file sizes
I like the CLOG better than SLOG
Is it a perfect camera? No, and I will never say it is. And honestly, a title like "Most underrated camera" is a little too click-baity for me. So which is it?
It's both. It's a camera I really enjoyed using that suits me better, and Canon has a serious plan ahead for new innovations with their mirrorless technology.
So he doesn't seem sure if Canon sent him the 6d II for free or not, but it was his most underrated camera of 2017. And now he gets a free R and that's the most underrated camera of 2019.
Not sponsored though.
Disclaimer1: I am not a pro. Disclaimer2: I own an eosR camera. Given the thinks I already mentioned, I give you some of my thoughts. Why everyone keeps referring to a camera without talking about the lenses? The first I learned when I started with photography was that glass is more important than the body. Glass last for decades. Camera bodies on the other hand last for what? 5 years? The eosR in my opinion is a great camera because it gives you access to a very promising lens lineup while you can always use the existing and amazing EF lineup.. I can tell you for sure that EF lenses work exactly like native on the eosR. Add to that, that every reviewer on Youtube has praised the existing RF glass.Don't forget also that the eosR is a camera that gives you everything (and more) that the 5Div gives you (for less money mind you)... In that regard I must agree that indeed the eosR is highly underrated. One last thing.. It's clear to me that specs are not everything. Everyone agrees about it when you think about cars. A lot of people don't care about how many horse power a particular car has, or about how many miles per hour does it give you.. People don't care about these things. They look for things like how does it feel to drive the car, what is the history and the reputation of the car brand or what's like the sound of the engine. Some people buy a Ferrari because the love the red color on them.. So why is it strange for someone to buy a Canon camera because they like the red ring on the lens? If you wouldn't accuse a Mercedes Benz buyer for not buying a more fast car for less money why are you accusing an eosR buyer for not buying a better spec camera?
Totally agree with everything here, glad someone else shares my opinion.
It really is the most practical camera for people who film themselves. I wish it had 4k/60, stabilized sensor, and 2 slots like our GH5s, but our GH5s suck at keeping my face is focus and can't blur the background the same way. It's not unanimous but most viewers just prefer our R footage, so that's what we use now. Pretty simple stuff.
But does it matter if it's "necessary" though?... It's his channel, his money, his business, and his choice. YouTube tech channels sure as hell dont need to use a RED camera but they still do.
Can you do a video on the legalities of these non sponsored videos? If they aren't paying taxes on this gear they received for free they could end up getting screwed over pretty bad if they ever get audited.
Tony: that's interesting. I've only shot one lot of video on my EOS R, and I was blown away by the quality (of the video, my actual shooting was rubbish, but that's quite another matter)!
Matti... haters' gonna hate. You do you, bro.
I find it interesting that nobody seems to be doing the math on the costs of switching to this system. Partly it's because they don't have anything like enough RF lenses for a professionbal studio photographer to use only R lenses.
Ideally, I'd want the following set of lenses: Primes- 35, 50, 85, 135; Zooms-24-70, 70-200. I'm talking for studio work, not wildlife or landscape.
The closest package of current prime lenses in the RF system are a 35, 50, and 85. The 35 isn't L, the other two are. For zooms they have only the 28-70. If I went out and bought the R, and all these lenses, it would cost me roughly $10,000.
Now, Imagine Instead that I decided to go medium format. Specifically the new GFX 100. The images are going to be much better than the EOS R, and not just because it has 4 times the megapixels. And yes, it is much, much more expensive.
But the lenses are actually not that badly priced, particularly when you compare them to the 28-70 f2.
If you take the closest Fuji equivalents for the 35,50,85 and 28-70, plus the GFX 100 body, the costs is about $15,000. 50% more than the EOS R equivalents. The thing is, this is an artificially restricted list. There is no 135mm for the R yet. There's also no 70-200, a focal length I actually find quite useful for both portraiture and landscape. Given the the RF lenses are more expensive than the GF lenses, the bigger both companies lens portfolios become, the more the financial advantage of using the R system fades.
So who is going to be using the Canon EOS R?
Not me. I do some rough stuff with my gear, so i need a body as tough as the 5D series. That's not the R. Particularly given that the resolution isn't higher than the 5d mk iv, and is significantly lower than the 5dr. When the pro body comes out, will it be $4000 better?
I've also grown accustomed to quality lenses. Do they really expect me to drop $3000 to sub out my 24-70 2.8 for a 28-70 f2? Yes, it's a stop faster. It's also very marginally sharper in the corners. It's also 4mm longer and $3000, and weighs a kilo and a half (3 lbs). (more than my monstrous 100-400). If you needed to hike up a 600 meter rise, would you really want that thing on your back? What about the RF version of my other lenses, the 70-200 and the 100-400? If they undergo a similar transformation, I'm looking at what? 6 pounds for the 100-400, and 2 for the 70-200, plus 3 for the 28-70? That's 10 pounds of glass. Just the glass.
I can't tell you if the camera is under-rated until I know what it's purpose is. And again, it's unclear to me just exactly who this is for. Serious professional studio photographers, now being forced to stick with obsolescent equipment or switch systems, would frankly be crazy to choose this over the Fuji medium format.
Wildlife photographers aren't going to be thrilled with the cost of the lenses, nor of the Sherpa required to help you carry them.
Casual shooters won't drop that kind of coin to get into the game.
This camera isn't under-rated. It's hare-brained.
That's just the point. If you're a Canon user already, which many, many, many people are, it's an amazing camera, and they already have all their excellent EF and EF-S lenses and away they go. Oh, and you can now use your F4 lenses and an extender on the very, very, very good autofocus system. If you're in the middle ground, say a Canon 6D user, it's the perfect replacement. At the moment, Canon are using it as a test bed for lots of things, getting feedback, and then they'll bring out a pro-series camera. Instantaneous autofocus, brilliant eye autofocus and I personally don't give a toss about Sony, so why would I even look in that direction? And as I want new lenses, then I'll look at the superb new RF lenses, and by then Canon will have developed more sensors and other features. There are lots of clever little things about the Canon EOS R and I just keep finding more. And I don't really care if the Sony is the most amazing camera on the planet. To get that, I'd have to outlay way more money than I already have on my Canon gear, and so I can't be bothered. Also, I have a major beef with Sony, which they can never recover from, and it's a personal thing, so I'll never be buying anything Sony. If the Sony is a better camera, then all good for those who chose that way, but it doesn't diminish just how clever the Canon EOS R is. You can go in any direction you want. Go for it. It's just like all the people who prefer one type of car over the other, based on brand. No interest whatsoever. :)
The EOS R is the perfect replacement for the Canon 6D? In what sense? The basic setup (EOS R/ RF 28-70 f2) costs 6000 euros. The 6D equivalent (EOS 6D/ EF 24-70 2.8 mkiii) is half that price.
The R setup weighs 2 kilos. The 6d setup weighs 25% less, and the 6D body is significantly heaver, so the more lenses that you carry, the faster the EF weight advantage accumulates. The RF 50mm f1.2 is twice the weight of its EF equivalent. A perfect landscape kit for me involves 4 lenses. 4 Analogous lenses from the RF series are likely to weigh as much as 8 EF lenses..
I'm planning a multi day trip (by which I mean walking for several days) to the Picu Uriellu this year. That's 2 kilometers. Up, not across. You want to carry 8 lenses up a mountain? I sure don't. APS-C is looking better and better, huh?
I guess I could simply re-iterate my entire last post. You didn't really respond to it. I hate Sony as well (quite irrationally, I must add, their IQ is great but I just can't swallow the ugly as sin aesthetic of the design, the Torquemadan ergonomics of the grip, or the fact that I in no way want to be associated with that particular "tribe" of people)- so that's neither here or there.
You might as well be shooting that 28-70 tethered. And thus you might as well be shooting medium format.
You say that Canon's camera is clever? It's too clever by half.