Canon RP a bad choice to pick up?My $60 EOS-M is on its last legs since I've even abusing it for 11 years now.$650 for a body is in my price range.I film automotive repairs and want something that can film 4K at 30fps.I borrowed a EOS R last year and liked it a lot. The quality it produced was great.My clips are usually 1-2 min long, so overheating isn't an issue.Battery life isn't an issue either as I always have a fresh batt ready to go No need for stabilization since I'm always on a tripod filming things that don't move fast.(Like my hand on a wrench)I'd like to get a Canon RF mount since I have a friend who will give me a 35mm f 1.8.That should be the same FOV as my current EOS-M+22mm pancake.Give me your best and worse takes.
>>4508396No, not for you. Use the right tool for the job. The RP obviously sucks at filming. Maybe this is just bait, but if not, then the stupidity of getting a FF mirrorless with bad hybrid-features just for 1-2min clips is so staggering, that you should probably just get a gopro for half the price but double the filming specs. Any of the small creator filming cams will work just fine, even smartphones. And unlike the RP, these will have features you will actually use. And they don't mind being dropped or getting dirty or wet nearly as much as the RP+lens do.
>>4508401>GoPro>Creator cameras I've tried those and they suck.Quality is terrible.The FOV is also too wide.& By 1-2 min clips, I mean filming 1-2 hours of footage.But they are all split up into little segments.That's how you film instructional videos.I'm basically asking for a EOS-M with better image quality.
>>4508402Truly, I don't check file names. But to finish the thought: anything is better than the EOS-M and the AF with the 35mm f/1.8 while filming on the RP is sad. Also aim for either 5-10sec or at least 5min clips, everything else is sickening or not worth showing.
>>4508396You'd be better off just setting up your phone on a tripod for this usecase.
>>4508396The RP isnt good for anyone. Its an objectively shit camera. A 6DII with the OVF removed and a bitch battery. Under sane market conditions the 6DII should be ~$350 and that’s what the RP is worth too. You couldn’t pay me to buy either. The 5DIV and R8 are the minimum canon POSes. I mean, EOS. But you’re poor and your friend is giving you a free lensSo don’t be stupidYou can buy a nicer camera later
>>4508404I dont use auto focus.I do 99% static shots where I just focus it manually.>>4508405Mang, phones are shit at everything.I want better quality, like what the EOS-R gave me.
>>4508409lowball everyone selling a used rp on ebay until one bites. you dont need fucken 8k log for youtube garage howtos
>>4508411>you dont need fucken 8k log for youtube garage howtosTrue, but my viewers liked the 4K footage.My EOS-M is dying so idk how long it'll last for.It can take photos anymore.And a lot of the settings cause error codes.Probably because I knocked the poor girl over 10K times.
Why don't you just buy a dedicated video camera? It sounds like that's all you want to do and buying a still camera that also does video is retarded for that use.
>>4508414>dedicated video camera?Arn't those almost always normal fag consumer grade trash?
It will probably fit your needs anon. 4k isn't ultra crisp on that particular model and there will be a crop, but I am sure you know that already. The 35mm is a great lens though.
>>4508396>$650 for a bodyCrazy they still go for thatCanon promos then to retail employees for $500 new
>Disclosure: I own an R8 and love it despite the cripplehammer battery and shutter>>4508396The RP is basically a proto-R8. Uses an older sensor, doesn't have as much features, the video is handicapped (who cares), but it's mostly the same camera. It's good, but not stellar. But, you also dont need much money to buy one. It's basically what I'd recommend to someone who would otherwise be buying a 5D/6D but wants a MILC and to not spend $1400.Now motherfucker, you want 4k30. So you're actually legitimately better off buying an R50V. Hybridization is gay, and you should feel gay, but unironically the R50V will do better video (4k60 @1.5x crop) but you could spend less, have cheaper lenses, and a smaller footprint.
>>4508396RP 4k is pretty rough, you can see comparisons with other cameras 4k here:https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-rp-review/7The 4k on an RP is so heavily cropped, you'd be better off with an APSC that shoots uncropped 4k, like the R50v which is even oversampled from 6k>>4508487Very sensible answer
>>4508409>I want better quality, like what the EOS-R gave me.
>>4508487>R50VSo even with the smaller sensor, the r50v films better 4k footage.Interesting >>4508489Compared to the EOS-M the Canon R was miles ahead.How would a R50V compare to say a R8 filming wise?
>>4508490Sensor size isn't everything. It's a lot, but not everything. Doubly so when discussing video because the marketing schmoes deciding to put the beeg "4K120" on the side of their products dont even bother including an azterix anymore.Video can be oversampled, undersampled, cropped, or not. Sensor design can introduce more, or less noise and artefacting. Heat production can also vary wildly, and in video applications is crucial. So the old addage of there's no replacement for displacement doesn't actually mean fucking anything when talking consumer video.Despite being a smaller sensor, the R50V is a modern sensor with less overheating potentinal, better video support, better features overall for video, and (I think, go double check me on this last one) oversamples its 4k video. Oversampling is likely the biggest factor in why it looks much sharper than the smooshy EOS R's 4k.
>>4508491So if I'm using a r50v with a aps-c sensor, the crop factor would be the same as my EOS-M.A 22mm pancake lense was the perfect FOV for my filming.I'd assume a 22 mm or similar would work with the R50V?Or am I missing info somewhere.
>>4508396>$60 EOS-MHow?!
I like mine but I don't use it for videoObviously if you spend more money you can get a better one
>>4508418>makes retarded gearfag thread>has preconceived notions about gamera gearwhy is it always like this?you are a literal retard who knows nothing about photography or videography and who has to come to beg on 4channel for advice, and yet you somehow determined that the entire field of dedicated video cameras is not worthy of your consideration?you fucking entitled faggots deserve ZERO fucking help. deeply uncurious wastes if oxygen
>>4508396>photo board>spergs out about videohow about you kys yourself?
>>4508495You assume correctly. Canon APS-C cameras (so, EF-S, RF-S and M-Mount) have a 1.6x crop. So you take your Focal Length printed on the barrel, and times that by 1.6 and you get your approximate full-frame FoV. Handy enough when thinking of framing like you are. A 22mm lens is 35mm FoV on APS-C. So for instance if you went a full-frame camera you'd buy a 35mm lens and have more or less the exact same FoV as your 22mm on the EOS-M. There's 16/24/28/35/50mm primes for RF mount, with 50 definitely being too long for your use case, but it's a cheap lens that exists as an option.The RF 28mm f/2.8 is optically superb and is a prime candidate for APS-C camera use because its biggest flaw is barrel distortion which all but is elimiated with the crop.The 16mm is not as superb but would be a bit wider than you're used to, and isn't terribly expensive either.You could even get a zoom like the RF-S 10-18mm or even just use the kit RF 18-45mm and it would still be very usable (even if the kit lens is smushy in comparison to these other lenses).>>4508525Fuck off to /k/ if you're going to be a whiny nigger woman.
>>4508525>Negative Nancy has shown up Enjoying life it seems?
>>4508534little anons might not know about aps-h canons
