Canon EOS R8 hands-on

Introduction

The EOS R8 is Canon’s latest full-frame mirrorless camera, an entry-(ish)-level model that the company says will slot in just above the EOS RP, whose price will be formally reduced to the $1000 it’s already been selling at.

It’s a 24MP camera that borrows many of the significant capabilities, including image quality, autofocus performance, burst rates and video modes from the much more expensive EOS R6 II. If that sounds too good to be true in a $1500 camera, there are some distinct limitations to ensure it doesn’t tread too hard on the R6 II’s toes.

There’s no in-body stabilization, the viewfinder is lower resolution, there’s no AF joystick, the build quality isn’t as substantial, there’s only one card slot and the battery is much, much smaller.

I’m going to look at what the camera offers, what it lacks and where that leaves it, both in terms of Canon’s range and the market as a whole. I’ve shot with all the cameras I’m going to write about, so I’m basing my comments on experience, not spec sheets.

Sensor/capability

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the EOS R8 is that it has the 24MP sensor and Digic X processor from the EOS R6 II. This means it brings a lot of the key capabilities of that $2500 camera to a much more affordable kit.

It’s easy to look at the R6 II’s dated-sounding sensor specs – a 24MP, front-side-illuminated CMOS chip – and shrug your shoulders. But you shouldn’t. Yes, it’s lower in pixel count than either the EOS RP or EOS R, no it doesn’t use the newer fabrication techniques used by other chip foundries, but regardless of these details it’s very good.

Though its resolution is lower than the Sony a7 IV (another $2500 camera), it’s in line with the similarly priced Nikon Z5 and Sony a7C, as well as the higher-priced Nikon Z6 II, Panasonic S5 II, and Leica SL2-S, for that matter.

There may be some marketing pressure to raise pixel counts. but it remains something of a trade-off between detail capture, speed, suitability for video and, to a lesser extent, noise performance at very high ISOs.

The sensor in the R6 II and R8 strikes a balance that gives good levels of detail capture while also having the speed to deliver very good AF, at up to 40 fps capture, and oversampled 4K video with no crop at up to 60p.

Image quality

Because the EOS R8 shares so much of its hardware with the R6 II, we can be pretty confident that its image quality will be the same. And that’s an area of strength. If the EOS R delivers more detail at base ISO, it’s fair to assume the R8 will deliver significantly lower noise at higher ISO, not because of the pixel count difference so much as that, even five years ago, we concluded that the EOS R’s ‘dynamic range and noise performance lag behind the competition.’

The EOS R’s 30MP chip came from an era of Canon sensors with higher read noise, which meant lower dynamic range than their rivals offered. We’ve found the EOS R6 II to offer more flexible Raws at low ISO settings and better high ISO performance than the EOS R’s chip could.

Performance

As I alluded to, though, sensor choice is about more than just image quality. Readout speed helps define AF performance, burst rates and video capabilities, and the EOS R6 II chip is competitive in all these respects.

The EOS R8 gains the new AF system from the EOS R6 II, including its subject recognition modes, meaning it tracks very well and has algorithms trained to recognize a wide range of subject types. For photographing people, in particular, the R8 proved to be excellent and require very little user input.

It’s difficult to appreciate how good the latest AF systems are until you’ve used them. An AF system that dependably focuses on eyes near the AF point you’ve selected means that you don’t have to give any thought at all to focus and can instead concentrate on light, exposure and communicating with your subject. Sure, you’ve lived without it up until now, but I can assure you that you won’t want to go back.

The R8 are also provides goodies such as 10-bit HEIF capture for HDR TV playback that nothing else in this class offers.

Burst shooting and video

In another trick from the R6 II’s book, the EOS R8 gets the fast burst rates of up to 40fps in JPEG and 30fps Raw bursts with 15-frame pre-buffering. There’s rolling shutter and a dynamic range reduction in these modes (just as with see with most cameras’ video modes, the R8 has to drop from 14-bit to 12-bit readout for its fastest e-shutter modes). The R8 also has a smaller buffer than the R6 II, letting you capture around 120 JPEGs or 52 Raw+JPEG images in a burst at these higher speeds, with a V60-rated UHS-II card.

Video specs are also impressive, with the R8 able to capture UHD 4K footage at up to 60p, taken from the 6000-pixel full width of the sensor. It can shoot its standard color modes in 8-bit H.264 or 10-bit H.265 if you want to shoot footage for HDR TVs in the HDR PQ mode, or C-Log3 if you plan on color grading in the edit. Again, an unusually high spec for this class.

The camera has both mic and headphone sockets, and a multi-pin interface in the front of the hotshoe lets you add an XLR adapter if necessary. The 4K/60p or 1080/120 and 180 modes risk overheating, so are initially limited to 30 or 20 minute clips, respectively. Oversampled 4K/30 can record for 2 hours but in all these cases battery life is likely to be more of a limitation than temperature.

Battery life

Battery life is perhaps my biggest concern about the EOS R8. The relatively small LP-E17 battery is rated to deliver 290 shots if you use the rear screen but just 150 shots per charge if you use the viewfinder. CIPA numbers tend to significantly underestimate how many shots you’ll actually get (for my own style of shooting and chimping, I tend to get around double, when the battery’s new). And there is a power saving mode that boosts these numbers to 370 and 220, respectively. But if you’re a reasonably keen photographer, or plan to use the video function much, you should factor in the cost of at least one spare battery and possibly an external charger, to keep it topped-up.

Of course, if you really are a keen photographer, you should probably be considering an EOS R6 II, and this isn’t accidental. Nor, from the manufacturer’s point of view, is it a mistake. For me, the small battery feels like the cut-back too far, even for the less committed photographer. That said I got multiple hours of pretty intensive shooting out of a single battery, so it’s hard for me to truly anticipate the impact on less frantic shutterbugs.

Also, given Canon’s focus on size and price, it’s understandable that the compact EOS RP body, with its necessarily small battery would be re-used, rather than incurring the cost of a redesign.

Other distinctions

So what else does the EOS R8 forego to keep the cost down and to separate it from the R6 II? Other than the battery, perhaps the next most noticeable downgrade is the 2.36M dot (1024 x 768 pixel) viewfinder. Its optics give it 0.7x magnification, which makes it appreciably smaller than the 0.76x finder in the R6 II. Its 3.69M dot OLED panel means 1280 x 960 pixel resolution: 25% higher in each direction.

Then there’s the lack of a joystick. You can tap on the screen or use the rear screen as an AF touchpad, but as an enthusiast photographer (not the target audience) and a left-eye -shooting one at that, it’s another factor to consider when contemplating the EOS R8.

Beyond that, the R8 is rather nice to shoot with. The card goes in the base of the camera, rather than having its own compartment – something that has more impact on usability for me than the absence of a second card slot – but I generally enjoyed shooting with the EOS RP more than I did with the original R, so I have to say I quite like the EOS R8.

Where it sits

The first thing to recognize is that the EOS R8 is a comparatively inexpensive camera. $1500 is a decent chunk of cash and launch prices always look high when compared to exiting models being sold at a discount. The picture is made even more muddled when much older models are left lingering on the market, well past their sell-by dates, at temptingly low prices, but $1500 isn’t especially high.

In the US, at least, only two full-frame cameras have ever been launched at a lower price. And it’s important to acknowledge this before considering what has and hasn’t been included.

Canon’s original attempt to serve the entry/mid and enthusiast markets with a single camera resulted in the EOS R with a launch price of $2300. Addressing those customers with two cameras means that enthusiasts can pick the much, much nicer EOS R6 II for $200 extra, while the R8 gives entry/mid-level buyers an option that’s $800 less.

Doing that requires corner-cutting and compromise, but the alternative would be that everyone has to spend $2300 to buy an EOS R Mark II. Be careful what you wish for, and all that.

Where it sits, relative to its rivals

The circa-$1500 market for full-frame cameras now looks pretty interesting (not a phrase I thought I’d be writing, back when a high-end APS-C DSLR like the Nikon D300 cost $1800).

The most direct rivals are Nikon’s Z5 and Sony’s a7C, which cost $1400 and $1800 respectively, at launch. Launch price matters because that’s the only figure we have for the R8, and comparing like-for-like gives a good idea of where the R8 will sit relative to the other two in six months or so.

Both of those direct rivals offer in-body stabilization, marking it out as probably the Canon’s most visible weakness. The R8’s kit zoom is stabilized, which balances things a little if that’s the main lens you use. The 24-105mm F4L has IS, too, if you decide to upgrade. But video shooters in particular can benefit from in-body, rather than in-lens IS.

Like the R8, the a7C only has a mechanical return shutter, to keep cost and complexity down, and it also lacks an AF joystick. Sony’s approach has been to use an older generation of sensor and processor, which means 8-bit video with a crop on 30p mode, along with a menu system that the rest of the lineup has (thankfully) moved away from.

The Nikon Z5 keeps some premium hardware such as an AF joystick and twin card slots but again adopts an older sensor, which lowers burst rates and hamstrings its video capabilities (there’s a roughly APS-C crop to get 4K/30 out of the Z5’s sensor).

The point is that all these models have had corners cut. While both the Z5 and a7C cut theirs in terms of the sensor, offering older chips, Canon has chosen the opposite route: delivering most of the R6 II’s image quality, capture speed and autofocus smarts in a more rudimentary body. It’s up to each buyer to decide which approach they prefer. Although, frankly, lens choice and availability should probably rank as highly as any of these considerations when making your pick.

Summary

In short, the R8 is a relatively inexpensive full-frame camera in which, to some, the compromises made to get its price down will represent unacceptable limitations.

But to others they won’t. For instance, consider the lack of twin card slots: a feature that’s most valuable to more dedicated users such as wedding photographers or videographers, for whom the EOS R6 II is probably the better choice on multiple levels.

So we get a camera with the slightly limited but well-designed ergonomics of the EOS RP but now with the photographic performance of our pick of the $2500 camera class. If the RF lineup has the lenses you need, I find it hard to be unimpressed with that.

Shame about the battery life, though.