# POLL? How many are preordering the EOS R?



## clicstudio (Sep 6, 2018)

Just for fun and out of curiosity... I would like to know how many people plan to buy/upgrade to the new EOS R and what lenses are u considering...

It looks like a winner to me. The price is totally right. I wish it had at least 40MP but it is a steal with the 24-105.

The $3K price for the 28-70 F2.0 is steep but it's an industry first, so it should be worth it.

Cheers

Pat


----------



## amorse (Sep 6, 2018)

As a rule I don't pre-order anything, but I am curious about the EOS R. I could end up buying one, but not until I've scrutinized it to death over several months and changed my mind no less that 8 times.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 6, 2018)

amorse said:


> As a rule I don't pre-order anything, but I am curious about the EOS R. I could end up buying one, but not until I've scrutinized it to death over several months and changed my mind no less that 8 times.


----------



## amorse (Sep 6, 2018)

clicstudio said:


>


What can I say, I'm very indecisive!


----------



## jd7 (Sep 6, 2018)

I have no plans to get an EOS R at least at this stage. I will keep an open mind and see what happens, but I don't see it being on my shopping list. I guess I might well end up with an RF mount camera at some point but I don't see it being soon. Will see what happens with RF lens development over the next couple of years. If the EF line continues to be developed, I doubt I'll be in any hurry.


----------



## dak723 (Sep 6, 2018)

Never would pre-order a camera (not that impatient), but do plan on trying the new R. Probably can't afford the new lenses, so will get the adapter.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 6, 2018)

Way too early for me. The camera lacks many of the features that would attract me to mirrorless so no way am I buying this one..... but who knows what the next revision brings? High burst rate and video may be how this one is differentiated from the next realease.....


----------



## zim (Sep 7, 2018)

^^^^ What they said


----------



## Bennymiata (Sep 7, 2018)

I don't preorder anything, but I am interested in buying this, but in 6-12 months, Canon will release another model so I'll wait awhile.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 7, 2018)

I'm unlikely to be in the market for a new camera in the next five or so years, other than I might upgrade to some successor of my G7X II for my travel camera.

I don't really have any lens in mind right now to purchase. I might rent a TS lens to play with some week. That could inspire me to put one on my wish list, or get the idea out of my system.


----------



## sdz (Sep 7, 2018)

I'm considering buying this camera. But I'll not preorder it. I'm not sure the RF lenses would make me happier than the lenses I now own, especially given their premium prices. So, for me, the camera will need to sell itself. The fact that it is a mirrorless camera is only an afterthought. I would consider buying the EOS R had it been a 6D III with most of the same technology.


----------



## Zeidora (Sep 7, 2018)

Not for me. Pre-ordered the 5DsR back then. if/when the 5DsR II comes out, I likely pre-order that one.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 7, 2018)

No, it’s a downgrade from what I use now. The 28-70 is the only thing I find interesting.


----------



## MrFotoFool (Sep 7, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> No, it’s a downgrade from what I use now. The 28-70 is the only thing I find interesting.


What 3kramd5 said exactly.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 7, 2018)

Most of my work is wildlife and sports and I need tracking/burst rate for much of that so no.
I will certainly keep a close eye on it though because I may be willing to compromise a bit of size over my MFT gear especially if they can bring out some super-dinky short-to-wide lenses.


----------



## Labdoc (Sep 7, 2018)

The WYSIWYG EVF, silent shutter and eye focus are tempting but not enough over the 5D4. Will wait for next Canon MLC, if it can replace my 5DsR for megapixels will do. Not buying any more EF lenses, only RF and will move over in the next 2 or 3 years for sure.


----------



## Geek (Sep 7, 2018)

Nope, I finally upgraded to a full frame 5DIV from the 7DII. I'm extremely happy with it and won't have money to spend for a long time. Took me about 8 years to accumulate my stable of L glass - 16-35 f4, 24-105 f4, 70-200 f2.8 II and 100-400 II. No hurry to change. I like the size of the 5D and 7D series.


----------



## bhf3737 (Sep 7, 2018)

Basically, EOS R can take comparable or a little better still pictures than 5D4. Has much better video spec than 5D4. Is smaller, lighter and has silent shutter. Doesn't need lens calibration. Comes with some interesting and innovative lenses. And has a few interesting perks such as CPL/ND adapter for EF and also EF-S lenses.
Do I want it? Yes, it is tempting. Do I need it? No. Because 5D4/5DSR are still very capable cameras.
Does it really matter (to the photographers) how many will upgrade?


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

bhf3737 said:


> Basically, EOS R can take comparable or a little better still pictures than 5D4. Has much better video spec than 5D4. Is smaller, lighter and has silent shutter. Doesn't need lens calibration. Comes with some interesting and innovative lenses. And has a few interesting perks such as CPL/ND adapter for EF and also EF-S lenses.
> Do I want it? Yes, it is tempting. Do I need it? No. Because 5D4/5DSR are still very capable cameras.
> Does it really matter (to the photographers) how many will upgrade?


Still capable but already 2 years old. Technology is moving faster than that. In my opinion, it's not an upgrade/downgrade. It's a different camera all together. That is what makes it interesting to me. Look at some of the 2500 ISO samples on DPR. The 5D4 can't do that...


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

Geek said:


> Nope, I finally upgraded to a full frame 5DIV from the 7DII. I'm extremely happy with it and won't have money to spend for a long time. Took me about 8 years to accumulate my stable of L glass - 16-35 f4, 24-105 f4, 70-200 f2.8 II and 100-400 II. No hurry to change. I like the size of the 5D and 7D series.


Fortunately for you, there is an adaptor for ALL your lenses and with full compatibility. The only investment is the $2299 for the body. IMO, a great price for new technology and things that the 5D will never be able to do like the swivel screen or EVF and not to mention a new processor and sensor.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

Maybe it's me but I like having the latest available. I will preorder the new iPhone XS Max or whatever they decide to call it as soon as it comes out next week. I am even considering the EOS R as a backup for my A7R III since I just sold my 1DX II. I like new things that do more than they did a year or 2 ago...
Maybe it's just me. I think the price is a steal for what you get. I love the mid-size body. It's just right for small or big hands and the available vertical grip will give you better handling if u need it. I think the 28-70 is amazing but too expensive for the moment. Although it's a breakthrough in the industry and I applaud Canon for doing something unique and different. I think they did it to improve the chances to sell the EOS R. Some people will get the Camera, just because it can take the new F2.0 zoom... It easily replaces 2 or 3 lenses... Low light, available light, landscapes. That 28-70 might never leave your camera...
Just my opinion...


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 7, 2018)

Yes I think I'm going to pre-order it. It doesn't require me to compromise on image quality compared to the 5D4, and it seems to have some advantages.

There have been times when the 5D4 still won't focus in low enough light for me, so lower light focusing would be really nice. Sounds like it will have better ISO performance than the 5D4 due to the new DIGIC processor.

I also really like being able to shoot without a shutter, first because it's quieter, and second because then I can fire off a ton of photos with no concern of wearing out a shutter. I'm bummed to hear it cannot do silent burst shooting, but apparently this will come in a firmware update.

So, I have no reason not to get it. If it had IBIS I'd be really thrilled to have it, but as it is I think it still offers things that will be useful for me over a 5D4.

I will probably ditch my Sony A7III to buy this. I'll be sad to see the IBIS go, but that camera is a usability nightmare. I'm glad to have a mirrorless option from Canon now.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 7, 2018)

I preordered the last camera that ticked all my boxes, the 1D X. Actually, it’s still meeting my needs quite well, with the exception of a very small camera kit for family travel...and the EOS M6 meets that need very well. So, at this point I have no intention of ordering an EOS R, much less pre-ordering one. I may pick up the version of the EOS R with more characters in it’s name...specifically 5, D and s.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Yes I think I'm going to pre-order it. It doesn't require me to compromise on image quality compared to the 5D4, and it seems to have some advantages.
> 
> There have been times when the 5D4 still won't focus in low enough light for me, so lower light focusing would be really nice. Sounds like it will have better ISO performance than the 5D4 due to the new DIGIC processor.
> 
> ...


Most of us lived without IBIS for decades. SO u are not going to miss it. I don't understand why Canon wouldn't add it like Nikon or Sony... Bad move but surely a future model will have it. I think we can expect a more Pro version of the EOS R soon with all the missing stuff form this one.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> I preordered the last camera that ticked all my boxes, the 1D X. Actually, it’s still meeting my needs quite well, with the exception of a very small camera kit for family travel...and the EOS M6 meets that need very well. So, at this point I have no intention of ordering an EOS R, much less pre-ordering one. I may pick up the version of the EOS R with more characters in it’s name...specifically 5, D and s.


u can get $1500 for your 5 year old 1DX and a few more bucks for the M6 and get the R, I think it's a wise choice.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 7, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Some people will get the Camera, just because it can take the new F2.0 zoom... It easily replaces 2 or 3 lenses... Low light, available light, landscapes. That 28-70 might never leave your camera...
> Just my opinion...


Eh, I dunno if I agree with that. an f2 zoom is cool, but it's still more than a stop slower than the fastest primes, and if you're in a situation where you're scrounging for any available light, a full stop matters.

I really applaud Canon for making an f2 zoom. I might even own one someday, but I do feel like it's maybe spreading itself a little thin... It's not quite as fast as a prime, it's not quite as wide as a 24-70. It's maybe a little too much of a compromise in all directions, still resulting in a very heavy, expensive lens. But, more choice in lenses is always better.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Eh, I dunno if I agree with that. an f2 zoom is cool, but it's still more than a stop slower than the fastest primes, and if you're in a situation where you're scrounging for any available light, a full stop matters.


I don't agree. People are still thinking of the limitations of 2-5 year old technology. You CA get a lot more light into the camera with higher ISO. U don't have to be afraid anymore. 1600 is what 400 was a few years back. A F2.0.zoom with the new camera is going to be amazing. Think about it.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 7, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Most of us lived without IBIS for decades. SO u are not going to miss it. I don't understand why Canon wouldn't add it like Nikon or Sony... Bad move but surely a future model will have it. I think we can expect a more Pro version of the EOS R soon with all the missing stuff form this one.


Yes, yes I will miss IBIS though. I miss it every time I'm trying to take a shot of something that's still (or something moving that I want to be blurry) and the shutter speed I wish I could use is slower than what I can hold steady with my hands, and I have no tripod with me.

Just because I've never had the feature (until I briefly had the Sony) doesn't mean I won't miss it or wouldn't utilize it.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 7, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Maybe it's me but I like having the latest available. I will preorder the new iPhone XS Max or whatever they decide to call it as soon as it comes out next week.


And I am so unlike that. I enjoy having new toys from time to time, but I'm planning on getting the battery replaced in my iPhone 6S for $29.95 by the end of the year. I might consider upgrading if they came out with one a little smaller (SE size) with latest processors and such, but the trend seems to be larger and larger.

My almost-4-years-old iMac 5K still seems fast, even using Photoshop, FCP X, and Compressor. 

My DSLR and lenses should hold me for 5 years or so. So far I am not ready to give up an OVF. If there is a significant upgrade to the G7X II that I use when traveling, I might consider that in a year or two.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 7, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> I don't agree. People are still thinking of the limitations of 2-5 year old technology. You CA get a lot more light into the camera with higher ISO. U don't have to be afraid anymore. 1600 is what 400 was a few years back. A F2.0.zoom with the new camera is going to be amazing. Think about it.


No, I'm not thinking of the limitations of 5 year old technology. On a 5D4 I've taken photos at ISO 32000, 1/80 sec, f1.2, and it was still too dark.

Give me a camera that has a faster lens or can go to higher ISOs, and I'll make use of them both. As far as I'm concerned there's probably never going to be a point where I'll say "ok, the cameras have high enough ISOs now, I don't need fast lenses." I want to continue to be able to shoot in more and more adverse lighting conditions, and have the camera be able to do it and produce a clean photo. So I want both fast lenses and high ISOs.

And please don't tell me to get a flash. If you're using one in a studio or to get a specific look in your photo that you want, that's fine. But I want my photos to look how the scene really looked without the added light from my flash. In that case the flash would just be a crutch and trying unnaturally to compensate for a camera that isn't capable of capturing whatever scene is in front of me.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 7, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Yes, yes I will miss IBIS though. I miss it every time I'm trying to take a shot of something that's still (or something moving that I want to be blurry) and the shutter speed I wish I could use is slower than what I can hold steady with my hands, and I have no tripod with me.
> 
> Just because I've never had the feature (until I briefly had the Sony) doesn't mean I won't miss it or wouldn't utilize it.


The in-lens IS works so well that I still marvel at it, so I can't say I've missed IBIS. Handheld shots @400mm with the 100-400mm II are great. I got a really clear picture of Mars that way a few weeks back.

The software IS in conjunction with the in-lens makes really stable looking video with my 6D2. I realize it is not the same thing as IBIS, but works really well.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 7, 2018)

stevelee said:


> The in-lens IS works so well that I still marvel at it, so I can't say I've missed IBIS. Handheld shots @400mm with the 100-400mm II are great. I got a really clear picture of Mars that way a few weeks back.
> 
> The software IS in conjunction with the in-lens makes really stable looking video with my 6D2. I realize it is not the same thing as IBIS, but works really well.


Yes, if your lens has it. And the only fast prime we've gotten with it is the 85 1.4. Heck, the staple professional lens, the 24-70 2.8, still doesn't have it. So, I don't buy the argument that lens stabilization is good enough unless all lenses have it.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> No, I'm not thinking of the limitations of 5 year old technology. On a 5D4 I've taken photos at ISO 32000, 1/80 sec, f1.2, and it was still too dark.
> 
> Give me a camera that has a faster lens or can go to higher ISOs, and I'll make use of them both. As far as I'm concerned there's probably never going to be a point where I'll say "ok, the cameras have high enough ISOs now, I don't need fast lenses." I want to continue to be able to shoot in more and more adverse lighting conditions, and have the camera be able to do it and produce a clean photo. So I want both fast lenses and high ISOs.
> 
> And please don't tell me to get a flash. If you're using one in a studio or to get a specific look in your photo that you want, that's fine. But I want my photos to look how the scene really looked without the added light from my flash. In that case the flash would just be a crutch and trying unnaturally to compensate for a camera that isn't capable of capturing whatever scene is in front of me.


I don't use on-camera flash. I think it ruins everything. I do use studio flashes and on location remote flashes but flashes were invented to compensate for the lack of camera dynamic range. Now u can push the raw file to.almost flash levels. That's something u couldn't do 5 years ago


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 7, 2018)

What do you even mean "you can push the raw file to almost flash levels?" That truly makes no sense and isn't based on any relatable or defined standard.

I'm telling you that I have taken photos at f1.2, the slowest shutter that I could use in the situation, and about the highest ISO that I could reasonably use on the camera (32000.) The photo was still underexposed.

And if your statement was meant to mean that you can push a dark raw file up to normal levels, believe me, you can't when it was already taken at ISO 32000.

So for me, in a lot of situations, stepping down to an f2 lens, even though it's a more versatile zoom lens, would probably not be a tradeoff I'd be willing to make. But again, I love that Canon is at least pushing lens technology forward, and maybe someday I would still have a 28-70 f2 in my bag.

Ask me again once cameras can take pretty clean photos at ISO 200,000 or so, then maybe I'll be ready to give up fast primes.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> What do you even mean "you can push the raw file to almost flash levels?" That truly makes no sense and isn't based on any relatable or defined standard.
> 
> I'm telling you that I have taken photos at f1.2, the slowest shutter that I could use in the situation, and about the highest ISO that I could reasonably use on the camera (32000.) The photo was still underexposed.
> 
> ...


I'm afraid to ask what do you take photos of that you would need 200,000 iso...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 7, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> u can get $1500 for your 5 year old 1DX and a few more bucks for the M6 and get the R, I think it's a wise choice.


Is the EOS R a wise choice for birds in flight? Does DPAF track BIF as accurately Does the EOS R offer 12 FPS with AF tracking so I get my choice of wing positions for greatest impact?

Is the EOS R a wise choice for shooting winter raptors in New England, being outside in temps sufficiently cold to temporarily stop LCDs from working?

Is the EOS R a wise choice for good balance on the back end of a 70-200/2.8 held in my hand for a few hours via an E1 hand strap?

With respect, I scoff at your ‘wisdom’.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 7, 2018)

The night I got my 6D2, I went outside about 11pm and took pictures with the kit f/3.5-4.5 lens, everything set to auto. I took handheld pictures of bushes in front of the house by the light of the lamppost down the street and whatever spilled over from the front porch light. At ISO 40000, the pictures were noisy, but clear and with decent color. I could barely see with my naked eyes, so your situation sounds close to pitch darkness and unavailable light.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 7, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> I don't use on-camera flash. I think it ruins everything. I do use studio flashes and on location remote flashes but flashes were invented to compensate for the lack of camera dynamic range. Now u can push the raw file to.almost flash levels. That's something u couldn't do 5 years ago



Have you seen the dynamic range of images taken at ISO 25,000? It is a dynamic range of about 4 stops - nd that is an increase of barely one stop 5 years ago. Even noise has improved only about 1.5 stops. 
You can get much more usable images compared to 5 years ago but they are still nowhere near flash levels.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Is the EOS R a wise choice for birds in flight? Does DPAF track BIF as accurately Does the EOS R offer 12 FPS with AF tracking so I get my choice of wing positions for greatest impact?
> 
> Is the EOS R a wise choice for shooting winter raptors in New England, being outside in temps sufficiently cold to temporarily stop LCDs from working?
> 
> ...


First of all, nobody has used the camera yet so not me or you know how capable the camera is or will be. Everybody has different needs. I totally agree with you about your setup but the new camera might still fit your needs. Who knows.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 7, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> I'm afraid to ask what do you take photos of that you would need 200,000 iso...



I'm saying that if that were possible, it wouldn't be necessary to use fast primes to take photos in low light any more. It would open up the possibility of using a zoom in any condition, since an f2.8 zoom at ISO 200,000 would be equivalent to an f1.2 prime at about 40,000, the limit of what today's cameras can do.

However if I'm honest with myself, I've grown to like the shallow DOF of primes, so I may still stick with them even if this were possible.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 7, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> I flashes were invented to compensate for the lack of camera dynamic range.



Whaaaat?


----------



## fish_shooter (Sep 7, 2018)

I am not preordering but will eventually get an R body as I have quite a few EF lenses. As well, I am interested in trying out my Leica rangefinder lenses on it. Sounds like the R is set up with off-set microlenses that would help.


----------



## scipion (Sep 7, 2018)

I don't. And will not order anyway. Because I basically like reflex viewfinder, am satisfied with my two Canon reflexs and have already tried a Sony. Since I was not convinced, this one has no more chance to change my opinion.

However I will certainly try it when I can  Sure this is an interesting new development in Canon offer.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Whaaaat?


Well... why else would you use a flash if not to add light where there isn't?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 7, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Well... why else would you use a flash if not to add light where there isn't?



*That* is the reason.
It was not invented “to compensate for the lack of camera dynamic range.” Add light where there is not light. Same story for other methods of illumination.

Flash was applied to photography because it delivered very bright light (as opposed to candle power, for example - this predates the light bulb), allowing for shorter exposures.


----------



## snappy604 (Sep 7, 2018)

amorse said:


> As a rule I don't pre-order anything, but I am curious about the EOS R. I could end up buying one, but not until I've scrutinized it to death over several months and changed my mind no less that 8 times.



I feel same way.. I need to know it's something I really want before forking out that kind of money. So far I'm really not sure this does what I want for that price.


----------



## snappy604 (Sep 7, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Fortunately for you, there is an adaptor for ALL your lenses and with full compatibility. The only investment is the $2299 for the body. IMO, a great price for new technology and things that the 5D will never be able to do like the swivel screen or EVF and not to mention a new processor and sensor.



+ adaptors... they're not free


----------



## snappy604 (Sep 7, 2018)

stevelee said:


> The night I got my 6D2, I went outside about 11pm and took pictures with the kit f/3.5-4.5 lens, everything set to auto. I took handheld pictures of bushes in front of the house by the light of the lamppost down the street and whatever spilled over from the front porch light. At ISO 40000, the pictures were noisy, but clear and with decent color. I could barely see with my naked eyes, so your situation sounds close to pitch darkness and unavailable light.



porch lights with stationary shrubbery can be very bright compared to inside pubs with bands prancing about.  the FPS has me nervous as I often do deal with this situation


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> + adaptors... they're not free


$199 for the control ring adaptor. not so bad...


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> porch lights with stationary shrubbery can be very bright compared to inside pubs with bands prancing about.  the FPS has me nervous as I often do deal with this situation


do u really need more than 6 FPS unless you are shooting sports?


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> porch lights with stationary shrubbery can be very bright compared to inside pubs with bands prancing about.  the FPS has me nervous as I often do deal with this situation


and pubs have some kind of light on the stage right? I go to concerts all the time and even my iPhone captures great photos...


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 7, 2018)

stevelee said:


> The night I got my 6D2, I went outside about 11pm and took pictures with the kit f/3.5-4.5 lens, everything set to auto. I took handheld pictures of bushes in front of the house by the light of the lamppost down the street and whatever spilled over from the front porch light. At ISO 40000, the pictures were noisy, but clear and with decent color. I could barely see with my naked eyes, so your situation sounds close to pitch darkness and unavailable light.


Actually I tried shooting some photos with normal available light and super high iso's just for fun. The results were pretty awesome. The files looked like old film. Especially if turned into black and white. Try it, just for fun.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 7, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Still capable but already 2 years old. Technology is moving faster than that. In my opinion, it's not an upgrade/downgrade. It's a different camera all together. That is what makes it interesting to me. Look at some of the 2500 ISO samples on DPR. The 5D4 can't do that...



Specifically which areas of which images. I haven't seen anything IQ wise that is an overwhelming difference, certainly not in the RAW files. The DIGIC 8 is doing it's job on the jpegs.


----------



## snappy604 (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> and pubs have some kind of light on the stage right? I go to concerts all the time and even my iPhone captures great photos...


some do, many don't.. bands depends on type. Punk / rock bands tend to move a lot and are often in dark venues. While you can get grainy/blurry pics with a phone, it's not something I'd show off 

<edit> and in case it's not clear... it may be a decent camera for this, just can't tell. FPS helps for me, but low light performance does too.. I was close to going for a 6d2 and this is better, but the fps gives me pause as some settings take it from 8 to 3 fps.. massive difference.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> $199 for the control ring adaptor. not so bad...


Yes, I really like the idea of the control ring on the R lenses, and the idea of putting it on the EF adapter, so now all my legacy glass has the control ring, is absolutely brilliant.

This camera isn’t the one for me, as I want some higher specs..... but there are several things about the R that are winners....

1) NO MORE AFMA! A great reason to go mirrorless....

2) that control ring....

3) the control ring on the adapter for legacy glass....

4) that the legacy glass should work as well on the new R bodies as it does on the old ones...

5) they FINALLY are using UHS-2


And a few losers (at least for me)

A) not a fast enough burst rate

B) no high speed video

C) battery life

D) Why would you have Bluetooth and not support a Bluetooth headset? ? ? ?


----------



## AlanF (Sep 8, 2018)

For Don's reasons plus more. It is an entry level model and my 5DSR and 5DIV have higher specs for bird photography plus other uses. Further, we don't know enough about its AF other than it has a low burst rate of 5 fps for AF at each shot, which drops to 3 for intelligent tracking. To pre-order now before any proper reviews are available is to pre-order a proverbial pig in a poke unless you are in the market for a new entry level model or have uncontrollable GAS. I will wait for the next round of models.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 8, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Yes, I really like the idea of the control ring on the R lenses, and the idea of putting it on the EF adapter, so now all my legacy glass has the control ring, is absolutely brilliant.
> 
> This camera isn’t the one for me, as I want some higher specs..... but there are several things about the R that are winners....
> 
> ...


6) DPP Express looks very interesting.
7) The adapter with the CPL and variable ND
8) USB-C charging, like it or not it is the future.
9) 10 bit 4.2.2 C-Log clean HDMI out with no time limit.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 8, 2018)

No plan to buy a "almost as good as" camera. I've seen nothing that he camera does that is better, except autofocus in very low light, but there, I will wait and see. The camera basically uses a 5D MK IV sensor, so the ISO performance will be the same, unless you shoot out of camera jpeg where the new processor will be a slight improvement.


----------



## jd7 (Sep 8, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> some do, many don't.. bands depends on type. Punk / rock bands tend to move a lot and are often in dark venues. While you can get grainy/blurry pics with a phone, it's not something I'd show off
> 
> <edit> and in case it's not clear... it may be a decent camera for this, just can't tell. FPS helps for me, but low light performance does too.. I was close to going for a 6d2 and this is better, but the fps gives me pause as some settings take it from 8 to 3 fps.. massive difference.



What makes you say an EOS R is better than a 6DII? The EOS R has some advantages but also some disadvantages, for my use. For example, 6DII has much better battery life, faster FPS if you want AF at the same time, OVF (subjective as to whether that's an advantage, I realise) and query better ergonomics particularly with larger/heavier lenses (will see when more people have tried an EOS R). From what I know about the EOS R at this point, I'd prefer a 6DII (even if they were the same price). Obviously some people will prefer what the EOS R offers, but I don't think it's a case a of the EOS R being simply better.


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

My 5D4 and 5DsR are so much better. Not only I do not preorder I will not even order! Saving money for 5DsRmkll ....


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Yes, I really like the idea of the control ring on the R lenses, and the idea of putting it on the EF adapter, so now all my legacy glass has the control ring, is absolutely brilliant.
> 
> This camera isn’t the one for me, as I want some higher specs..... but there are several things about the R that are winners....
> 
> ...


E) Single cards

F) Not nice balancing with big lenses


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> u can get $1500 for your 5 year old 1DX and a few more bucks for the M6 and get the R, I think it's a wise choice.



May I suggest asking yourself a question: Since you like having the latest available, why do you own an A7R3, and not a newer A73?

Likely answer: A73 would be a downgrade. I too have a 1Dx. The EOS-R would clearly be a downgrade. 


privatebydesign said:


> 8) USB-C charging, like it or not it is the future.



...it’s the present.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 8, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> 6) DPP Express looks very interesting.
> 7) The adapter with the CPL and variable ND
> 8) USB-C charging, like it or not it is the future.



Definitely positives..., particularly the USB charging!


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 8, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> ...it’s the present.


Not for me just yet (apart from my Ronin-S), but come the New Year I am going all in on dongle life.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 8, 2018)

tron said:


> E) Single cards
> 
> F) Not nice balancing with big lenses



I'm sure that there is going to be a higher spec model out in the next year or so.... That's where things are going to get real interesting.....


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

Yes but this about now not the always better future...


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

And if my cameras behave nice with my lenses I see no reason to downgrade to Eos R...


----------



## AlanF (Sep 8, 2018)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> No plan to buy a "almost as good as" camera. I've seen nothing that he camera does that is better, except autofocus in very low light, but there, I will wait and see. The camera basically uses a 5D MK IV sensor, so the ISO performance will be the same, unless you shoot out of camera jpeg where the new processor will be a slight improvement.


Canon pulled a fast one with the low light AF. They quoted it for an f/1.2 lens, which is 1.5 stops faster than for an f/2, which is the usual standard. So, it is really -4.5 ev, not -6.


----------



## Act444 (Sep 8, 2018)

As a rule, I never pre-order stuff. 

I’m interested to TRY the camera at this point. Shortly after it hits the market I will see if my local store has a display model to check out. 

But that’s probably as far as I will go for now. If I take a trip next year, I’ll consider one to reduce travel weight, but otherwise I’ll probably wait it out another year to see what more becomes of the RF system first.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 8, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Definitely positives..., particularly the USB charging!



You can only charge it with the Canon USB charger, it won't charge with just a standard USB. I fail to see any advantage to that. The battery is in the camera and you cannot use the camera until its charged. Of course, you can charge the battery outside the camera in a standard charger for lp-E6N batteries.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 8, 2018)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> You can only charge it with the Canon USB charger, it won't charge with just a standard USB. I fail to see any advantage to that. The battery is in the camera and you cannot use the camera until its charged. Of course, you can charge the battery outside the camera in a standard charger for lp-E6N batteries.


Where does it say that you can't use any USB? The PD-E1 is the Canon specific one, but I thought the point of USB was it is Universal.


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

It is so simple to get a small battery pack and a USB LP-E6(N) charger to charge a second LP-E6(N) battery. I see people get carried away with simple things and forget about the practical ones.Also why can't we use the camera while it is being charged? Even a cheap phone can do that!


----------



## Bennymiata (Sep 8, 2018)

USB C charging is NOT just normal USB2 charging.
Notice the PD in Canon's name of the charger?
That is proper USB C charging.
PD chargers charge at up to 20v rather than 5v of normal USB charging.
PD chargers put out at least 40 watts whereas fast USB2 charging is less than 4 watts.

You can buy PD battery boxes, and I have one to charge my laptop when on the road.
One of the best things with PD battery boxes is that you can charge a 20,000 mAh box in under 4 hours if you have an ac PD power supply.

You'll also be able to get the photos off the camera very much faster than through a USB 2 plug.


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

Interesting info. Thanks for sharing. I didn't know about that. But I stick to my way of charging an LP-E6(N) battery mentioned before being simpler. I have done it already. So this way of charging isn't an advantage for me. And the photos are fast to get using usb3 from 5DsR and 5D4 anyway. But even easier to get them via a card reader. All these do not present a practical advantage for EOS R.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

usb-c is the new thing. My new Mavic 2 Pro comes with a usb-c to usb-c cable with a couple of adapters for the remote controller charging.
My Mac Book Pro has 4 usb-c ports.
If you can just plug in the EOS R to your Mac book to download the images and charge the camera at the same time, then that is a winner... I don't know if it is possible or not. I am just assuming. Does anyone know?


----------



## goldenhusky (Sep 8, 2018)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> You can only charge it with the Canon USB charger, it won't charge with just a standard USB. I fail to see any advantage to that. The battery is in the camera and you cannot use the camera until its charged. Of course, you can charge the battery outside the camera in a standard charger for lp-E6N batteries.



Exactly my thoughts...


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> May I suggest asking yourself a question: Since you like having the latest available, why do you own an A7R3, and not a newer A73?
> 
> Likely answer: A73 would be a downgrade. I too have a 1Dx. The EOS-R would clearly be a downgrade.
> 
> ...


the almost 3 years old 1DX II was not as good as the A7R III. That's why I switched. It's clear that technology is better 3 years later. I don't think it would be a downgrade. Just a compromise on certain things. But, really, nobody cares which camera you used to take a picture when they see it. It's all about the results. I never had more on-focus and sharper photos than I do now with the Sony. Never. This thing doesn't miss. Also one thing that most of you are missing is the almost 100% focus area on the new EOS R. I struggle with the 1DX to take a full body photo in portrait mode because thee focus points were too low to focus on the face. I don't have that problem with the Sony cause it reaches the whole frame. The Canon will have that too. That means less out of focus photos. I can vouch for that now cause I used both systems simultaneously for a month... And the EVF... At first I hated it, now I can't live without it. WYSIWYG... Priceless.


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> usb-c is the new thing. My new Mavic 2 Pro comes with a usb-c to usb-c cable with a couple of adapters for the remote controller charging.
> My Mac Book Pro has 4 usb-c ports.
> If you can just plug in the EOS R to your Mac book to download the images and charge the camera at the same time, then that is a winner... I don't know if it is possible or not. I am just assuming. Does anyone know?


It will download the photos quickly but you will have to leave the camera much more time connected for it to be charged. No winner at all!


----------



## AlanF (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> usb-c is the new thing. My new Mavic 2 Pro comes with a usb-c to usb-c cable with a couple of adapters for the remote controller charging.
> My Mac Book Pro has 4 usb-c ports.
> If you can just plug in the EOS R to your Mac book to download the images and charge the camera at the same time, then that is a winner... I don't know if it is possible or not. I am just assuming. Does anyone know?


The point of USB-C downloads is that it takes only seconds or a minute or two. You are not going to get much charge into your battery during that time.
The USB-C charging may be a useful addition but it is not a "winner".

Edit - Oops Tron, I posted the same as you were adding your comment!


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

tron said:


> It will download the photos quickly but you will have to leave the camera much more time connected for it to be charged. No winner at all!


how do you know? it might charge faster than the ac adapter. USB-c is fast. I can charge my iPhone as fast as I can with a 5w adapter directly from my Mac book pro. Nobody can tell how things are going to be. it's just assumptions now. we will all have to wait and see real world users testing things out.
Like I said... IF, you can download and charge at the same time, it is a winner. If it takes 2 hours to charge, then it won't. Also remember the vertical grip should have 2 batteries. It would be great to charge both at the same time over USB-C without even removing the batteries from the camera.
BTW it takes a good 2 hours to charge 100% the battery of my 1DX II. That's a long time because the battery is huge and will last u days. 
The crappy batteries they are using on the new cameras are small and have less power so they should be quick to charge.


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> how do you know? it might charge faster than the ac adapter. USB-c is fast. I can charge my iPhone as fast as I can with a 5w adapter directly from my Mac book pro. Nobody can tell how things are going to be. it's just assumptions now. we will all have to wait and see real world users testing things out.
> Like I said... IF, you can download and charge at the same time, it is a winner. If it takes 2 hours to charge, then it won't. Also remember the vertical grip should have 2 batteries. It would be great to charge both at the same time over USB-C without even removing the batteries from the camera.


And how often will you put a usb cable in and out the camera during the years you will have it? Good luck with it!


----------



## goldenhusky (Sep 8, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Where does it say that you can't use any USB? The PD-E1 is the Canon specific one, but I thought the point of USB was it is Universal.



Equivalent to SuperSpeed USB (USB 3.1 Gen 1)
• For PC communication
• For WFT-E7 (Ver. 2) connection
 Shared with terminal for in-camera charging with the USB Power Adapter PD-E1.
 In-camera charging: although it is compatible with USB Type-C (5V/1.5A) equivalent, do not charge
the camera other than with the USB Power Adapter PD-E1

You can see that on page 13 of the following pdf
https://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/EOS-R-PDF-Specifications.pdf


----------



## goldenhusky (Sep 8, 2018)

Bennymiata said:


> USB C charging is NOT just normal USB2 charging.
> Notice the PD in Canon's name of the charger?
> That is proper USB C charging.
> PD chargers charge at up to 20v rather than 5v of normal USB charging.
> ...



Does this mean it is possible a PD Portable Charger or an adapter used to charge a PD Portable Charger can be used to charge this camera?


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

tron said:


> And how often will you put a usb cable in and out the camera during the years you will have it? Good luck with it!


what's the problem with that? the usb-c is a much better cable than before. and it's bi-directional. it can go any way u want. it's easy and small. I don't see a problem using a standard cable instead of a card reader that will also need a cable or an adaptor anyway.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

USB 3 from the older cameras has a max speed of 5Gbps the new camera has USB 3.1 and effectively double the speed to 10Gbps. That means half the time to download your huge raw files. who doesn't want that?
My 2018 Mac Book Pro has 4 usb-c ports. Each port can deliver up to 15W of charging power so I can charge my iPhone X 3 times faster than with the wall adapter.
I like that option. One less thing to worry about. Just plug in your camera, download the photos and charge up to 2 battreries all at one. Winner to me


----------



## goldenhusky (Sep 8, 2018)

In regards to pre-ordering the EOS R I am on the fence. The biggest deal breaker for me on this camera is the AA filter. Had they removed it I would have replaced my 5D4 with this. At this point sometimes I think I will pre-order and then I think let me wait for a high megapixel variant. I know for sure it is purely GAS nothing more that that 

One thing not sure if anyone has noted only the following will ship in late October
EOS R initial price of $2299 (available late October)
Mount Adapter EF-EOS R initial price of $99.99 (available late October)
Control Ring Mount Adapter EF-EOS R initial price of $199.99 (available late October)
RF 50mm F1.2 L USM initial price of $2299 (available late October)
Speedlite EL-100 initial price of $199.99 (available late October)

The below two are shipping in December
RF 28-70mm F2 L USM initial price of $2999 (available December)
RF 24-105mm F4 L IS USM initial price of $1099 (available December)

The adapter with drop in filters will ship only in Feb 2019

So Unless one has $2300 for EOS R and another $2300 for the RF 50mm there is no other RF lenses shipping with the EOS R in late October. If not spending money on the RF 50mm one will be limited to the two adapters and EF lenses. One thing I am not sure is that if anyone orders the EOS R + 24-105 kit the whole thing will ship only in December or the camera will ship in late October and then the lens in December. Bare minimum one need to spend $2400 to use only with EF lenses and $2500 to use EF lenses and have the control ring.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> Equivalent to SuperSpeed USB (USB 3.1 Gen 1)
> • For PC communication
> • For WFT-E7 (Ver. 2) connection
> Shared with terminal for in-camera charging with the USB Power Adapter PD-E1.
> ...


thanks for pointing out the PDF. I didn't know about it. Now, this is dumb. Canon want you to use only their adapter. Of course, what are they gonna say? Like when I use a generic battery on my Canon SX-730HS, there is a message that asks if the Canon logo is displayed on the battery. You have to say yes or no. If no, you can still use the camera with the generic battery just fine, if u say yes, the camera thinks the battery is defective and it will shut off. I Never had any problems with the generic batteries on many cameras I've used in the past.
Canon will always try to sell you the original stuff. Which makes sense but I am sure you can charge the camera with from a laptop with USB-c without a problem.
I hope so actually HEHEHE


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> In regards to pre-ordering the EOS R I am on the fence. The biggest deal breaker for me on this camera is the AA filter. Had they removed it I would have replaced my 5D4 with this. At this point sometimes I think I will pre-order and then I think let me wait for a high megapixel variant. I know for sure it is purely GAS nothing more that that
> 
> One thing not sure if anyone has noted only the following will ship in late October
> EOS R initial price of $2299 (available late October)
> ...


There is a kit with the 24-105 and I think it will be available from the start. I think that;'s what most people will get.


----------



## goldenhusky (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> thanks for pointing out the PDF. I didn't know about it. Now, this is dumb. Canon want you to use only their adapter. Of course, what are they gonna say? Like when I use a generic battery on my Canon SX-730HS, there is a message that asks if the Canon logo is displayed on the battery. You have to say yes or no. If no, you can still use the camera with the generic battery just fine, if u say yes, the camera thinks the battery is defective and it will shut off. I Never had any problems with the generic batteries on many cameras I've used in the past.
> Canon will always try to sell you the original stuff. Which makes sense but I am sure you can charge the camera with from a laptop with USB-c without a problem.
> I hope so actually HEHEHE



Agreed Canon just want to sell their original batteries and accessories. In this case I hope since the USB 3.1 spec is universal someone will come up with a third party adapter to charge the battery inside the camera but we will have to wait and see. OTOH I prefer to charge batteries on the dedicated charger at the same time I understand the need for other to charge the battery over a regular USB-C connection.


----------



## goldenhusky (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> There is a kit with the 24-105 and I think it will be available from the start. I think that;'s what most people will get.



If the 24-105 kit is available starting late October that would be nice but I am bit skeptical at this point. Hope Canon proves me wrong


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> Agreed Canon just want to sell their original batteries and accessories. In this case I hope since the USB 3.1 spec is universal someone will come up with a third party adapter to charge the battery inside the camera but we will have to wait and see. OTOH I prefer to charge batteries on the dedicated charger at the same time I understand the need for other to charge the battery over a regular USB-C connection.


Canon doesn't offer a dual battery charger for the LP-E6N, that means you have to buy a Chinese generic one (which canon doesn't want you to) or charge one battery at a time if u have the Vertical grip. How is that so different than charging from a computer? I think it's more practical to leave the batterie/s and the SD card in the camera


----------



## Jethro (Sep 8, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> If the 24-105 kit is available starting late October that would be nice but I am bit skeptical at this point. Hope Canon proves me wrong


The pricing so far has shown a bundled price for the body and the 24-105, so I was assuming it would be available immediately. Weird otherwise.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> If the 24-105 kit is available starting late October that would be nice but I am bit skeptical at this point. Hope Canon proves me wrong


we will have to see. B&H should have one of the first batches in the US.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> how do you know? it might charge faster than the ac adapter. USB-c is fast. I can charge my iPhone as fast as I can with a 5w adapter directly from my Mac book pro. Nobody can tell how things are going to be. it's just assumptions now. we will all have to wait and see real world users testing things out.
> Like I said... IF, you can download and charge at the same time, it is a winner. If it takes 2 hours to charge, then it won't. Also remember the vertical grip should have 2 batteries. It would be great to charge both at the same time over USB-C without even removing the batteries from the camera.
> BTW it takes a good 2 hours to charge 100% the battery of my 1DX II. That's a long time because the battery is huge and will last u days.
> The crappy batteries they are using on the new cameras are small and have less power so they should be quick to charge.



You can work it out how long it takes to charge. The maximum output of a USB-C port is 15 watts. The LPE6N battery is 1865 milliamphours. The voltage is 7.2v. Therefore, if you can charge it at 15 watts, it will take 0.895 hours or 54 minutes.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

Jethro said:


> The pricing so far has shown a bundled price for the body and the 24-105, so I was assuming it would be available immediately. Weird otherwise.


there is no discount for buying the kit. it's the same price adding both items.
I think they will be available early. It is in Canon's best interest to have the new stuff on people's hands asap.
Also remember the UHS-II cards... About $100 for a 64GB and an extra battery $64... So it keeps adding... Still not a bad price in my opinion.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

AlanF said:


> You can work it out how long it takes to charge. The maximum output of a USB-C port is 15 watts. The LPE6N battery is 1865 milliamphours. The voltage is 7.2v. Therefore, if you can charge it at 15 watts, it will take 0.895 hours or 54 minutes.


that's awesome, thanx. It's not so bad. I don't know how long it takes on a regular wall charger but I don't think it will be much faster... I don't know cause I don't use those batteries...
And... that is for a fully depleted battery. Nobody will let the battery go to 0%, I assume. So knock off a good 10 minutes and it should take about 45 minutes. not bad


----------



## AlanF (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> that's awesome, thanx. It's not so bad. I don't know how long it takes on a regular wall charger but I don't think it will be much faster... I don't know cause I don't use those batteries...
> And... that is for a fully depleted battery. Nobody will let the battery go to 0%, I assume. So knock off a good 10 minutes and it should take about 45 minutes. not bad


Canon may not let you charge it at 15 watts as excessively fast charging will shorten battery life and it may well heat up too much at that rate. 54 minutes is the fastest possible, and I shouldn't bank on anything less than 2 hours. The LPE6Ns take 2.5 - 4 hours on the supplied charger, depending on temperature.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Canon may not let you charge it at 15 watts as excessively fast charging will shorten battery life and it may well heat up too much at that rate. 54 minutes is the fastest possible, and I shouldn't bank on anything less than 2 hours. The LPE6Ns take 2.5 - 4 hours on the supplied charger, depending on temperature.


Then even at 54 minutes it is twice as fast as the wall charger... if not more. That's pretty good


----------



## AlanF (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Then even at 54 minutes it is twice as fast as the wall charger... if not more. That's pretty good


Read what I wrote: that’s the theoretical maximum and I doubt if Canon will allow that charging rate.


----------



## bitm2007 (Sep 8, 2018)

Will wait at least a year for the price to settle (I never preorder at the release price), and to see how others are fairing with the camera.


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Read what I wrote: that’s the theoretical maximum and I doubt if Canon will allow that charging rate.


I do not think he cares to notice. He started raving about minor insignificant details of the charging as if this a super important thing with the camera.


----------



## stochasticmotions (Sep 8, 2018)

Seems like Canon has come out with an interesting new system, so far it seems that the hook is the new lenses and I would imagine that new 50 1.2 is going to be a favourite. The first camera doesn't seem to fit into a category that makes me want to buy it. If they had come out with a high resolution version with the current specs I could see that making sense for me as a possible 5ds replacement but currently I think I will wait to see what is next in the line up. Now if they had come out with something close to the A7III or A7RIII I would likely be in line and waiting to stick it on my 500. For now I'll wait to upgrade the 5DS and 5DIII until there is really an upgrade that makes it worth while and I will continue using the sony stuff as well. 

It took Sony more than 3 generations to get a focusing system that was at the level I wanted for nature/bird photography, I don't think it will take Canon as long as I think it is mostly processing power that they likely need to push. Oh, and put another SD card slot in it, I'm one of those people who have lost contents of a couple of days in the jungle and really prefer the immediate duplication.

On the other hand I love the new 400 and 600 (still waiting on the 600 DO).


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 8, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Specifically which areas of which images. I haven't seen anything IQ wise that is an overwhelming difference, certainly not in the RAW files. The DIGIC 8 is doing it's job on the jpegs.


Are you sure that the improved processor does nothing with respect to raw files? I mean, I know it's "raw," as in, unprocessed, but surely the camera has to do some work on the fly in order to package the data into a raw file, right?

If nothing else, the native ISO range on this camera goes up to 40000, whereas the 5D4 only went to 32000. Do you think that Canon just decided they needed to show some proof of progress, so they just allowed the ISO setting to go higher without any definitive reason for allowing it to? That seems a little dubious. I have to think that there's some aspect of the camera that allows it to perform better at higher ISOs if they rated the native ISO range as higher.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 8, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Are you sure that the improved processor does nothing with respect to raw files? I mean, I know it's "raw," as in, unprocessed, but surely the camera has to do some work on the fly in order to package the data into a raw file, right?
> 
> If nothing else, the native ISO range on this camera goes up to 40000, whereas the 5D4 only went to 32000. Do you think that Canon just decided they needed to show some proof of progress, so they just allowed the ISO setting to go higher without any definitive reason for allowing it to? That seems a little dubious. I have to think that there's some aspect of the camera that allows it to perform better at higher ISOs if they rated the native ISO range as higher.


Yes I'm pretty sure the DIGIC 8 doesn't do anything to the RAW file, why is that a safe assumption? Because Canon only ever claim improvements on the OOC jpegs. I don't have a clue what criteria Canon have for setting the highest rating for the ISO, but 32000 - 40000 is 1/3 of a stop, hardly anything worth writing about.

Nevertheless I'd like to know where, exactly, people think they are seeing an improvement, because I have not seen anything that makes me think _"a 5D MkIV couldn't do that"_. Not that I don't find may of the features of the R system interesting and improvements, just that IQ isn't one of them. 

I very interesting comparison is going to be a 5D MkIV with EF 50 f1.2L and the R with the RF 50 f1.2L, as far as I can see Canon are saying the big IQ improvements are because of the optical freedom that extra 20mm gives them. Lenses are the difference, not the sensor or processor, for RAW files.


----------



## dpc (Sep 8, 2018)

Nope. The camera looks very interesting. I would like one but it's too expensive here in Canada. The pre-order price at the camera shop is $2999.99. I may get a Fuji X-T3 instead to replace my X-T10. I'd rather have the R, but money does talk. On the other hand, I may wait and see what happens with the price over time. I'm in no hurry to buy anything, although my X-T10 is getting rather tatty (lost the thumb support on the back after trying to keep it on; the faux leather coating on the body is beginning to come loose on the front).


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Yes I'm pretty sure the DIGIC 8 doesn't do anything to the RAW file, why is that a safe assumption? Because Canon only ever claim improvements on the OOC jpegs. I don't have a clue what criteria Canon have for setting the highest rating for the ISO, but 32000 - 40000 is 1/3 of a stop, hardly anything worth writing about.
> 
> Nevertheless I'd like to know where, exactly, people think they are seeing an improvement, because I have not seen anything that makes me think _"a 5D MkIV couldn't do that"_. Not that I don't find may of the features of the R system interesting and improvements, just that IQ isn't one of them.
> 
> I very interesting comparison is going to be a 5D MkIV with EF 50 f1.2L and the R with the RF 50 f1.2L, as far as I can see Canon are saying the big IQ improvements are because of the optical freedom that extra 20mm gives them. Lenses are the difference, not the sensor or processor, for RAW files.


I completely agree with the comparison with 5DMkIV (I wouldn't lose mine except for a 5DMkV!). Also, the RF 24-105 does not seem seriously improved over EF24-105II. And since Canon has proved they can do some really good fast lenses like 35mm 1.4L II and 85mm 1.4L IS I do not believe they cannot do a similarly improved EF 50 1.2L II if they want to.


----------



## scipion (Sep 8, 2018)

tron said:


> I completely agree with the comparison with 5DMkIV (I wouldn't lose mine except for a 5DMkV!). Also, the RF 24-105 does not seem seriously improved over EF24-105II. And since Canon has proved they can do some really good fast lenses like 35mm 1.4L II and 85mm 1.4L IS I do not believe they cannot do a similarly improved EF 50 1.2L II if they want to.



totally agree with that. it's only a matter of continuing engineering . Also the new 24-105 II was really disappointing and Sigma already proved that Canon can do far better with the excellent 24-105 Art...


----------



## AlanF (Sep 8, 2018)

tron said:


> I completely agree with the comparison with 5DMkIV (I wouldn't lose mine except for a 5DMkV!). Also, the RF 24-105 does not seem seriously improved over EF24-105II. And since Canon has proved they can do some really good fast lenses like 35mm 1.4L II and 85mm 1.4L IS I do not believe they cannot do a similarly improved EF 50 1.2L II if they want to.



Also, I am sure the difference in iso makes no difference in practice for RAW. For the very high isos you get exactly the same DR and noise if you increase the iso by 1 stop or you push by 1 stop in post. This is why the 5DSR maxing out officially at iso 6400 can be pushed to 12800 or 25600 by shooting at 6400 and pushing 1 or 2 stops,


----------



## AlanF (Sep 8, 2018)

tron said:


> I do not think he cares to notice. He started raving about minor insignificant details of the charging as if this a super important thing with the camera.


And, I did the calculation to answer that even if the battery was being charged while files were down loaded, very little charging could occur in that 1 minute or so.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

tron said:


> I do not think he cares to notice. He started raving about minor insignificant details of the charging as if this a super important thing with the camera.


those minor insignificant changes added up make a newer, better, different camera. Technology that wasn't available 2 years ago. I notice everything.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 8, 2018)

Man U can't ever have peace in these forums. U either get attacked for switching to a better camera that is NOT a Canon or get attacked for liking and defending a new Canon camera that hasn't even come out yet. I'm done with comments. People live in the past and are afraid of change, it's clear. I know Pro photographers that still don't know how to use Photoshop or Lightroom. People that claim 5 year old systems are better than the new ones. I like to move forward, whatever it takes, to make a better picture. Newer is not always better but it will never be a downgrade. People live by OVF and still they never used an EVF. There is a lot of fear of change and compromise. I am not afraid. I don't like rules or do I follow them. I like to create my own rules to make my work better. It's all about the final photo. It doesn't matter what camera, exposure, lens or setting you used. If it's good nobody cares. Cheers


----------



## jkk1943 (Sep 8, 2018)

New Mirrorless full frame system looks interesting but I am keeping my 5D4. The weight difference is insignificant, only about 4-5 ounces between 5d4 and new full frame mirrorless body. Same with the 24-105 L kit lenses, weight difference is insignificant. I thought the whole purpose of mirrorless was a new lighter form factor. I love the new M bodies , there like a mini 80-D. They are small, very light and very capable. The catch is the lack of a serious, high quality native lens lineup. After 5 years of producing M bodies Canon finally came out with a 50 mm 1.4. When and if they come out with a 35 mm 1.4 I will pull the trigger and buy into the system. Since I am 74 years old I am not holding my breath or cashing in my life insurance policy.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Man U can't ever have peace in these forums. U either get attacked for switching to a better camera that is NOT a Canon or get attacked for liking and defending a new Canon camera that hasn't even come out yet. I'm done with comments. People live in the past and are afraid of change, it's clear. I know Pro photographers that still don't know how to use Photoshop or Lightroom. People that claim 5 year old systems are better than the new ones. I like to move forward, whatever it takes, to make a better picture. Newer is not always better but it will never be a downgrade. People live by OVF and still they never used an EVF. There is a lot of fear of change and compromise. I am not afraid. I don't like rules or do I follow them. I like to create my own rules to make my work better. It's all about the final photo. It doesn't matter what camera, exposure, lens or setting you used. If it's good nobody cares. Cheers


Crazy, I'm not attacking anything, I am simply asking you to say what area of what image that you have seen posted leads you to think _"a 5D MkIV couldn't have done that"_, why is that such a difficult thing to do? It leads to a relevant discussion on the camera output rather than constantly shouting irrelevant personal opinions.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> People that claim 5 year old systems are better than the new ones.



An objective reading of the datasheets reveals that this camera is indeed a downgrade from the (6 year) older one two of us mentioned we own, for specific use cases. It’s not a claim, it’s factual.

That doesn’t mean something can not come along which would be better. Indeed a couple cameras did (although to me they weren’t better enough to justify the cost). This camera, however, will not be. It is possibly better in the studio environment, but for fast wildlife it is merely newer and, as pointed out previously, even you don’t buy things which are newer but with lesser capabilities.


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> those minor insignificant changes added up make a newer, better, different camera. Technology that wasn't available 2 years ago. I notice everything.


Very significant technology! Do not forget to buy it when it is released! I on the other hand will keep enjoying my 5DIV and 5DsR while waiting for their newer better incarnations!


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 8, 2018)

I'm very happy that early adopters will help Canon work out the bugs. In the meantime, I will wait for in body stabilization and dual card slots and faster FPS. Upgrading eventually appears to be the only way to get a new version of the 50mm 1.2, as I doubt much more new will be coming for the legacy EF mount. ( I hope I'm wrong about this last and Canon will give us a Christmas surprise.)


----------



## bf (Sep 8, 2018)

1- where is the poll?
2- I'm not! I'll get ef-m 32 f1.4 if it goes on sale to complete my compact M6 kit. The APSC system fits better my outdoor adventures.


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> I'm very happy that early adopters will help Canon work out the bugs. In the meantime, I will wait for in body stabilization and dual card slots and faster FPS. *Upgrading eventually appears to be the only way to get a new version of the 50mm 1.2, as I doubt much more new will be coming for the legacy EF mount.* ( I hope I'm wrong about this last and Canon will give us a Christmas surprise.)


This seems like a blackmail to me!


----------



## scipion (Sep 8, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> I'm very happy that early adopters will help Canon work out the bugs. In the meantime, I will wait for in body stabilization and dual card slots and faster FPS. Upgrading eventually appears to be the only way to get a new version of the 50mm 1.2, as I doubt much more new will be coming for the legacy EF mount. ( I hope I'm wrong about this last and Canon will give us a Christmas surprise.)



well...Sigma or Tamron will do it in the end if Canon doesn't... so stay tuned!

and the current Canon one is not that bad.


----------



## snappy604 (Sep 8, 2018)

jd7 said:


> What makes you say an EOS R is better than a 6DII? The EOS R has some advantages but also some disadvantages, for my use. For example, 6DII has much better battery life, faster FPS if you want AF at the same time, OVF (subjective as to whether that's an advantage, I realise) and query better ergonomics particularly with larger/heavier lenses (will see when more people have tried an EOS R). From what I know about the EOS R at this point, I'd prefer a 6DII (even if they were the same price). Obviously some people will prefer what the EOS R offers, but I don't think it's a case a of the EOS R being simply better.



Sorry better for "me". Opinions like this like this are subjective, but keep forgetting they come off as literal. Like a lot of canon releases lately, it seems some steps forward, several backwards... which is frustrating to put it mildly. It gave a better sensor, lighter, new features and new lens possibilities, much wider focus areas (a huge drawback on the 6dmk2 for me) better low light, etc... but damn yes what the hell with the fps and battery life? however, right now we're working of spec sheets and some really hurried reviews... it may be a hidden gem waiting for a bit of polish (software changes)... or .. just another meh.. hence waiting.


----------



## snappy604 (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> $199 for the control ring adaptor. not so bad...



depending on version, but that really makes it a $2300 + $200 or $2500 USD + taxes camera.. each bit adds up


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> Sorry better for "me". Opinions like this like this are subjective, but keep forgetting they come off as literal. Like a lot of canon releases lately, it seems some steps forward, several backwards... which is frustrating to put it mildly. It gave a better sensor, lighter, new features and new lens possibilities, much wider focus areas (a huge drawback on the 6dmk2 for me) better low light, etc... but damn yes what the hell with the fps and battery life? however, right now we're working of spec sheets and some really hurried reviews... it may be a hidden gem waiting for a bit of polish (software changes)... or .. just another meh.. hence waiting.


 Since you admit that there are many issues like fps and battery life and let me add a single card and no joystick to change focus points while you look through the finder and you have to wait why you say it is better for you?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 8, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Crazy, I'm not attacking anything, I am simply asking you to say what area of what image that you have seen posted leads you to think _"a 5D MkIV couldn't have done that"_, why is that such a difficult thing to do? It leads to a relevant discussion on the camera output rather than constantly shouting irrelevant personal opinions.


Sometimes the internet is like the schoolyard. When asked a question they can't answer, some kids throw a tantrum and run away.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 8, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> An objective reading of the datasheets reveals that this camera is indeed a downgrade from the (6 year) older one two of us mentioned we own, for specific use cases. It’s not a claim, it’s factual.


Nonsense. Newer is always better. Anyone who doesn't buy the latest release is a Luddite.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 8, 2018)

Isn't a "better for me" (or "not better for me") response an appropriate one for a "who is preordering" question? And that's not necessarily "subjective"; idiosyncratic, yes.


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 8, 2018)

stevelee said:


> Isn't a "better for me" (or "not better for me") response an appropriate one for a "who is preordering" question? And that's not necessarily "subjective"; idiosyncratic, yes.


What is yous? Miss Manners?


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> do u really need more than 6 FPS unless you are shooting sports?


Yes - for BIF, for example: it's impossible to have too many FPS for that.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 8, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> I'm very happy that early adopters will help Canon work out the bugs.



This. I would never ever pre-order, but I'm glad some people do!


----------



## snappy604 (Sep 8, 2018)

tron said:


> Since you admit that there are many issues like fps and battery life and let me add a single card and no joystick to change focus points while you look through the finder and you have to wait why you say it is better for you?



it was in my message? "It gave a better sensor, lighter, new features and new lens possibilities, much wider focus areas (a huge drawback on the 6dmk2 for me) better low light, etc... "

like I said... some steps forward, many back..


----------



## snappy604 (Sep 8, 2018)

stevelee said:


> Isn't a "better for me" (or "not better for me") response an appropriate one for a "who is preordering" question? And that's not necessarily "subjective"; idiosyncratic, yes.



I'm going to admit I am not quite sure how to read your comment... 

but "Isn't a "better for me" (or "not better for me") response an appropriate one for a "who is preordering" question? " .. I thought so, but someone took me literally?

"And that's not necessarily "subjective"; idiosyncratic, yes"
"sub·jec·tive - based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions. " seems correct? we each have different wants/desires out of what the equipment will do based on many factors such as types of photography, cost etc?


----------



## goldenhusky (Sep 8, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Canon doesn't offer a dual battery charger for the LP-E6N, that means you have to buy a Chinese generic one (which canon doesn't want you to) or charge one battery at a time if u have the Vertical grip. How is that so different than charging from a computer? I think it's more practical to leave the batterie/s and the SD card in the camera



For you it might be more practical to leave them inside but for someone else it may not be. A simple example is I try to shoot until the batteries deplete and then replace it with a fully charged battery. (I have 4 batteries in total for my 5D4) So let's say if I start to shoot when the battery is at 30% and the battery runs out after sometime, I relpace that with a fully charged battery. At this time I can charge the depleted battery while I am still shooting. In this scenario if I where to charge the battery in the camera I cannot use the camera. There are claims about not to discharge the Li-ion battery every single time, memory effect, etc. Based on what I have read so far people often contradict on those. I am not a battery expert so I will stay away from those type of discussions. I am just stating my style of handling the battery hence charging the battery in the camera is not always a convenience at least for me

I use vertical grip only on the Sony cameras. I have 4 batteries for them as well. So once one battery is completely depleted I simply take it out move battery in slot 2 to slot one, insert a fully charged battery in slot 2. This way I spread the use of the batteries.


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 8, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Yes - for BIF, for example: it's impossible to have too many FPS for that.


And even event photography benefits when facial expressions count. Includes weddings, other ceremonies, etc. Having the best, most flattering (if that is the objective) "decisive moment" is always nice at the end of an event that cannot be repeated.


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> it was in my message? "It gave a better sensor, lighter, new features and new lens possibilities, much wider focus areas (a huge drawback on the 6dmk2 for me) better low light, etc... "
> 
> like I said... some steps forward, many back..


So will you be able to change focus points while you target your theme through EVF just like we do with DSLRs?


----------



## stevelee (Sep 8, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> I'm going to admit I am not quite sure how to read your comment...
> 
> but "Isn't a "better for me" (or "not better for me") response an appropriate one for a "who is preordering" question? " .. I thought so, but someone took me literally?
> 
> ...



My perception of whether I need a certain feature can easily have subjective factors. But whether the feature is present in a given camera is rather straightforward. It either has 1080p @ 120fps or it doesn't. Whether that feature is needed can well be rather straightforward. Does one use slow motion when editing video, would be a main consideration. If the answer is no, but one really feels left out without the feature, then that is rather subjective, I admit. My point, which I now belabor far beyond its worth since I apparently wasn't very clear, is that something peculiar to individuals is not necessarily subjective. In plain language, I might have use for something that you don't, or vice versa. That doesn't make either of us to be a drama queen. We may just do different stuff. And whether a given camera has a particular feature is not a matter of how you or I feel about it.

I was responding to the objection that people were answering for their individual situations when asked whether they were preordering a camera. Maybe I read too much into the objection.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 8, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> And even event photography benefits when facial expressions count. Includes weddings, other ceremonies, etc. Having the best, most flattering (if that is the objective) "decisive moment" is always nice at the end of an event that cannot be repeated.



I grew up in the era when I couldn't afford a motorized film camera, and never felt the need for one (and wouldn't have wanted to pay for all that extra film). I learned to shoot at the peak of an action and to try to time my shutter press to capture the decisive moment. Maybe that is a lost art, or just a luxury that a pro can't afford now.

I would be afraid that the moment I wanted fell between the automated shots. I don't have a sense of how many fps I might need for a given activity to prevent that. There are enough instances when I have looked for something frame by frame in a 30fps video and found it only on a frame or two, that I would be wary of 8 or so shots a second capturing what I want all the time.


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 8, 2018)

stevelee said:


> I grew up in the era when I couldn't afford a motorized film camera, and never felt the need for one (and wouldn't have wanted to pay for all that extra film). I learned to shoot at the peak of an action and to try to time my shutter press to capture the decisive moment. Maybe that is a lost art, or just a luxury that a pro can't afford now.
> 
> I would be afraid that the moment I wanted fell between the automated shots. I don't have a sense of how many fps I might need for a given activity to prevent that. There are enough instances when I have looked for something frame by frame in a 30fps video and found it only on a frame or two, that I would be wary of 8 or so shots a second capturing what I want all the time.


Yes, but at least the odds are increased with 5 fps, more so with 8 fps, etc. I think in the past we made do with what we had, photographer and subject accepting the limitations as the norm. We made do with manual focus. We made do with film and waiting a week for the prints. There is, as you say, "lost art." But there are also benefits.

And any photographer can set to one-shot and enjoy the satisfaction of having nailed it with one, or the disappoint of having missed it. If that makes the art/craft/fun richer, why not?


----------



## snappy604 (Sep 8, 2018)

tron said:


> So will you be able to change focus points while you target your theme through EVF just like we do with DSLRs?


not sure that is possible for me to answer given the camera is not available nor sure why you'd ask me as if I could answer. its partially why I wouldn't pre-order, I don't know? but at same time what you describe isn't necessarily how I shoot (you may be different). I currently tend to focus once where I need it and shoot and refocus manually. The low light situations currently make it challenging to continually focus accurately... having said that, this is more sensitive focus in low light... so maybe it's better? won't know until further reviews.


----------



## snappy604 (Sep 8, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> Yes, but at least the odds are increased with 5 fps, more so with 8 fps, etc. I think in the past we made do with what we had, photographer and subject accepting the limitations as the norm. We made do with manual focus. We made do with film and waiting a week for the prints. There is, as you say, "lost art." But there are also benefits.
> 
> And any photographer can set to one-shot and enjoy the satisfaction of having nailed it with one, or the disappoint of having missed it. If that makes the art/craft/fun richer, why not?



agree fully.. yes we could shoot with older cameras and usually we found work arounds... but why not leverage technology where avail? I agree BIFs in and other action pics sometimes you need to burst for a bit to get that right shot. This is in a pub... the lighting is only a bit brighter than incandescents.... but I'm trying to capture that moment during a jump which conveys 'rock n roll' (this is not my best, but tend to avoid posting faces without permission).. and before you say it.. I can't afford $5k and over, its a hobby.. no income from it.


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> not sure that is possible for me to answer given the camera is not available nor sure why you'd ask me as if I could answer. its partially why I wouldn't pre-order, I don't know? but at same time what you describe isn't necessarily how I shoot (you may be different). I currently tend to focus once where I need it and shoot and refocus manually. The low light situations currently make it challenging to continually focus accurately... having said that, this is more sensitive focus in low light... so maybe it's better? won't know until further reviews.


Shoot and refocus manually (or If I guess correctly, focus, lock and recompose maybe which is both a usual and useful old method). In that case even a 6DII is more than that. Despite its non satisfactory AF system you underutilize it. Which means there is no practical AF advantage of the EOS R for you (and many more including myself). I enjoy being able to set a focus point (or points) while looking through the viewfinder. So 5000 points are not more useful than 1, 5, 9 or even 61 or 65 if you cannot select them while looking your theme. And for now both 5DMkIV and 200D can focus (and shoot if configured) anywhere you touch the back screen.


----------



## snappy604 (Sep 8, 2018)

tron said:


> Shoot and refocus manually (or If I guess correctly, focus, lock and recompose maybe which is both a usual and useful old method). In that case even a 6DII is more than that. Despite its non satisfactory AF system you underutilize it. Which means there is no practical AF advantage of the EOS R for you (and many more including myself). I enjoy being able to set a focus point (or points) while looking through the viewfinder. So 5000 points are not more useful than 1, 5, 9 or even 61 or 65 if you cannot select them while looking your theme. And for now both 5DMkIV and 200D can focus (and shoot if configured) anywhere you touch the back screen.




not quite... estimate where I'll need my focus (think his head).. using 1.4 primes for extra light so very shallow dof.. recompose too much and its out of focus so I focus near the edges. The spread on the mk2 was clustered too much to the centre.


----------



## bluediablo (Sep 8, 2018)

Amateur here on a crop body and would like to move to full frame and owning a few full frame lenses maybe I'm the target market for this camera. I would love it and the new 50...but I'm probably better off with a used 5Dii and a used 50 1.4 . Certainly then with the money I saved I could take a photo trip... happier wife...still I don't know. I really do want the new RF 50 but I also like the way film looks.


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> not quite... estimate where I'll need my focus (think his head).. using 1.4 primes for extra light so very shallow dof.. recompose too much and its out of focus so I focus near the edges. The spread on the mk2 was clustered too much to the centre.


Yes (I understand and I agree) but at least you can choose a different AF point while looking through the viewfinder. You may change position of your subject by moving your camera and choose a different AF point without moving your eye from the viewfinder. I may not have the 6DII but I did have the 5D2 then the 5D3 and finally the 5D4 so I remember the few AF points of 5D2.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 8, 2018)

tron said:


> So will you be able to change focus points while you target your theme through EVF just like we do with DSLRs?


I would take that as a given. If they sell a camera with 5000 selectable AF points you have to take your face away from the eyepiece to select, they deserve to be *******. They aren’t that foolish.


----------



## tron (Sep 8, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> I would take that as a given. If they sell a camera with 5000 selectable AF points you have to take your face away from the eyepiece to select, they deserve to be *******. They aren’t that foolish.


Maybe! But we still have to wait and see.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 9, 2018)

snappy604 said:


> agree fully.. yes we could shoot with older cameras and usually we found work arounds... but why not leverage technology where avail? I agree BIFs in and other action pics sometimes you need to burst for a bit to get that right shot. This is in a pub... the lighting is only a bit brighter than incandescents.... but I'm trying to capture that moment during a jump which conveys 'rock n roll' (this is not my best, but tend to avoid posting faces without permission).. and before you say it.. I can't afford $5k and over, its a hobby.. no income from it.


cool shot. looks like a 60's photo!


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 9, 2018)

tron said:


> Maybe! But we still have to wait and see.


In 10 years we will just think where to focus and the camera will do it...  wait!. Canon already had laser eye focus 20 years ago... the closest thing to thinking where to put the focus points... What happened to it?


----------



## tron (Sep 9, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> In 10 years we will just think where to focus and the camera will do it...  wait!. Canon already had laser eye focus 20 years ago... the closest thing to thinking where to put the focus points... What happened to it?


Not laser but after calibration it could detect where you were looking. That was the EOS50E (in US it was an ELAN model).
I did have it and the system worked. But the specific model has a plastic body and it was the only one with many damages: the back wheel and the mode button. In contrast my EOS620, 600 (=630 for the US) and the RT were tough. Back to eye controlled AF: That could be a solution.


----------



## tron (Sep 9, 2018)

Speaking of fps a friend got Sony RX10MkIII (there wasn't a IV yet) and he takes group portraits at many fps. So he can find a shot
where everyone looks nice!


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 9, 2018)

tron said:


> Not laser but after calibration it could detect where you were looking. That was the EOS50E (in US it was an ELAN model).
> I did have it and the system worked. But the specific model has a plastic body and it was the only one with many damages: the back wheel and the mode button. In contrast my EOS620, 600 (=630 for the US) and the RT were tough. Back to eye controlled AF: That could be a solution.


I wonder why they didn't improve on the system...


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 9, 2018)

tron said:


> Speaking of fps a friend got Sony RX10MkIII (there wasn't a IV yet) and he takes group portraits at many fps. So he can find a shot
> where everyone looks nice!





tron said:


> Speaking of fps a friend got Sony RX10MkIII (there wasn't a IV yet) and he takes group portraits at many fps. So he can find a shot
> where everyone looks nice!


FPS doesn't make everyone look nice. I took a 20-cheerleader shot once and I had to photoshop faces around. it was fun.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 9, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> Yes, but at least the odds are increased with 5 fps, more so with 8 fps, etc.



And I'm not sure why that would improve the odds. It seems easier to me to shoot at the right moment rather than to shoot at precisely a multiple of 1/5 second (or whatever) before the right moment.


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 9, 2018)

stevelee said:


> And I'm not sure why that would improve the odds. It seems easier to me to shoot at the right moment rather than to shoot at precisely a multiple of 1/5 second (or whatever) before the right moment.


Anticipate, burst, choose.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 9, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> cool shot. looks like a 60's photo!


That doesn't make it a good shot, in the context of the discussion (which is improved camera capabilities). It just shows that you like shots that have a '60s vibe.

When I shoot gigs, I want the images to _look _like it's the 2010s, not the 1960s...


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 9, 2018)

stevelee said:


> And I'm not sure why that would improve the odds.


Yikes!

It's well saying that you don't shoot sport or wildlife!



It took me about 50 frames to get this _one shot _of Hamish, the baby Polar bear at the Highland Wildlife Park in Scotland, at _just _the point I wanted, of his pounce on the seal proxy he was playing with.

You can anticipate until you're blue in the face, you won't get "the shot" by clicking the shutter once...


----------



## aa_angus (Sep 9, 2018)

I'm stunned that *some* people in here are implying that you can't manually select the AF point while shooting with the EOS R. The spec sheet (even the leaked one I'm pretty sure) and the hundreds of videos on YouTube say you use the back of the screen to drag the AF point manually. To me, this sounds MUCH faster than using the joystick on the 5DIV. 

Also, (on paper) this camera acquires focus faster than ANY other camera on the planet. Period. 0.05 seconds. I am thinking this camera will be an absolute AF beast. If you shoot professional sports, sure there aren't enough FPS. For everyone else, this camera will outperform AF expectations (including ease of manual AF point selection). 

I have pre-orderd, and yes, I am selling one of my 5DIV. I genuinely believe the R will be a much nicer camera to use, and I am postive it will outperform the 5DIV in all aspects of AF.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 9, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> I don't have a clue what criteria Canon have for setting the highest rating for the ISO, but 32000 - 40000 is 1/3 of a stop, hardly anything worth writing about.



This is the native range, right? If so it would seem
to indicate that amplifiers with a tiny bit more gain are being used.


----------



## tron (Sep 9, 2018)

aa_angus said:


> I'm stunned that *some* people in here are implying that you can't manually select the AF point while shooting with the EOS R. The spec sheet (even the leaked one I'm pretty sure) and the hundreds of videos on YouTube say you use the back of the screen to drag the AF point manually. To me, this sounds MUCH faster than using the joystick on the 5DIV.
> 
> Also, (on paper) this camera acquires focus faster than ANY other camera on the planet. Period. 0.05 seconds. I am thinking this camera will be an absolute AF beast. If you shoot professional sports, sure there aren't enough FPS. For everyone else, this camera will outperform AF expectations (including ease of manual AF point selection).
> 
> I have pre-orderd, and yes, I am selling one of my 5DIV. I genuinely believe the R will be a much nicer camera to use, and I am postive it will outperform the 5DIV in all aspects of AF.


I am stunned that someone considers that manually selecting through the back of the screen as changing the focus point while shooting! That can happen - as I mentioned - in the EOS 5DIV and 200D already! Nothing new!

I said many times: WHILE LOOKING THROUGH THE VIEWFINDER (=EVF)

I believe that while someone looks through the viewfinder he/she cannot touch the back screen at the same time (common sense?).


----------



## aa_angus (Sep 9, 2018)

tron said:


> I am stunned that someone considers that manually selecting through the back of the screen as changing the focus point while shooting! That can happen - as I mentioned - in the EOS 5DIV and 200D already! Nothing new!
> 
> I said many times: WHILE LOOKING THROUGH THE VIEWFINDER (=EVF)
> 
> I believe that while someone looks through the viewfinder he/she cannot touch the back screen at the same time (common sense?).




No, I am saying that you can select the AF on the back of the LCD screen *while looking through the viewfinder. *This is common to most, if not all mirrorless cameras. Why do you think there's no joystick?


----------



## tron (Sep 9, 2018)

aa_angus said:


> No, I am saying that you can select the AF on the back of the LCD screen *while looking through the viewfinder. *This is common to most, if not all mirrorless cameras. Why do you think there's no joystick?


Don't you press your face against the back of the camera while you look through the viewfinder?
In the case where you have moved it (articulating...) do you have 3 hands ? (one the camera, one the lens one the lcd?) Only when using the lightest/smallest possible lens you have the luxury to not hold it at all...


----------



## aa_angus (Sep 9, 2018)

tron said:


> Don't you press your face against the back of the camera while you look through the viewfinder?
> In the case where you have moved it (articulating...) do you have 3 hands ? (one the camera, one the lens one the lcd?) Only when using the lightest/smallest possible lens you have the luxury to not hold it at all...



I suggest you look at videos on YouTube to see how this works. You can limit the LCD screen to only use the top-right corner for AF point selection while using the viewfinder. Also look at how far the eyepiece protrudes from the EOS R. Like I said, this method of AF point selection is *very* common in mirrorless cameras. The EOS R is no different.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 9, 2018)

tron said:


> Don't you press your face against the back of the camera while you look through the viewfinder?
> In the case where you have moved it (articulating...) do you have 3 hands ? (one the camera, one the lens one the lcd?) Only when using the lightest/smallest possible lens you have the luxury to not hold it at all...


The literature indicates the cross buttons allow you to select AF points.


----------



## aa_angus (Sep 9, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> The literature indicates the cross buttons allow you to select AF points.



Yes, that is also an option (albeit slower) if you are scared of/not comfortable using the LCD screen drag AF point selection.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 9, 2018)

aa_angus said:


> Yes, that is also an option (albeit slower) if you are scared of/not comfortable using the LCD screen drag AF point selection.


I suspect the touchscreen will be easier for right-eyed shooters. For us lefties it could be awkward.


----------



## aa_angus (Sep 9, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> I suspect the touchscreen will be easier for right-eyed shooters. For us lefties it could be awkward.



I did not consider that anyone would shoot with their left eye. I suspect you're right and things might not work as designed for you.


----------



## martti (Sep 9, 2018)

Sorry, Canon EOS R but you do not seem stable to me. You are lacking in depth as well, you are not exactly the sharpest spade in the shed.
Sony A7III comes for the same price.
No competition.


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 9, 2018)

martti said:


> Sorry, Canon EOS R but you do not seem stable to me. You are lacking in depth as well, you are not exactly the sharpest spade in the shed.
> Sony A7III comes for the same price.
> No competition.


Except the Canon works better with more and superior lenses, has better support, and fastest AF currently available...And focuses in very low light, about a stop lower than the "competition."


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 9, 2018)

martti said:


> Sony A7III comes for the same price.
> No competition.



If you ignore all the well-documented issues around Sony's colours; support; planned obsolescence on obscenely short timescales; ergonomic incompetence; dismally limited lens choices; and unproven reliability compared to Canon, you're right of course.

Meanwhile, back in the Real World, everyone still buys Canon.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 9, 2018)

aa_angus said:


> I did not consider that anyone would shoot with their left eye. I suspect you're right and things might not work as designed for you.


I do.

He is.


----------



## aa_angus (Sep 9, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> I do.
> 
> He is.



Shame for you nobody at canon does.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 9, 2018)

aa_angus said:


> Shame for you nobody at canon does.


What a _weird_ comment. Do Nikon and Sony make cameras for left-eye shooters?

Yet I still take better pictures than most, because instead of whining about what this manufacturer or that manufacturer didn't do _for me, _ I just get on with it and learn to use the kit I buy, well.

There's a moral there for many on here...


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Sep 9, 2018)

Don't think it's for me. If I didn't already have a 5D mark IV I'd certainly consider it but if you already have a recent Canon full frame and you're not a vlogger it's hard to see what this really brings to the table in the near term. Single card slot is a huge negative for me as a travel camera and the read rates are too slow for video on a gimbal where I'd love something lighter than a 1DXII. I think I may invest in a simple Fuji X-T3 kit for travel and gimbal video while I wait for the R ecosystem to fill itself out a bit. Canon really has to address their sensor read and processing issues. Fuji could barely do video and now they're reading 4K60P from a 20+ MP section of the sensor with minimal rolling shutter. Canon really should own that space completely given their superior AF and experience from the cinema line. Now that they've reached close to parity on DR that should be a priority IMO. Sweet glass though.


----------



## dak723 (Sep 9, 2018)

I think many folks on this forum have the mistaken belief that the majority of camera owners are constantly looking to replace their current rig with the newest similar camera - either made by the same brand or by switching brands. I think those types are pretty rare. So, in my opinion, there will be no quick and fast migration from DSLR to mirrorless. I think most current FF camera owners (not forum dwellers) will most likely wait for the next generation - or even the generation after that - to make their next camera buy. That may be 2 to 7 or so years down the road.

The most likely buyers in the short term - it seems to me - are those looking to go FF who do not currently have a FF camera and those looking for a 2nd or backup FF camera. That is the target market at the moment, in my opinion. Because, as many have stated, there may not be enough reason to switch from DSLR to mirrorless at this time (despite the incredible internet hype) Most folks are not so gullible as to fall for all the hype (I hope).

For me, I do not have a FF camera, so I may be an early purchaser. It also checks my most important boxes: It has Canon color, it has an EVF for WYSIWIG exposure, it has touch and drag AF point selection. I'm also happy to see that the R will close the shutter curtain when turning off the camera to create a barrier to block dust when changing lenses. May be a small thing, but shows me that Canon is addressing the important details that others miss.


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 9, 2018)

The EOS Rs will be released shortly.
I am waiting for it.


----------



## Talys (Sep 9, 2018)

I think that I will preorder, but probably not for one of the more common reasons. I have a good friend who lent me his A7R3 with all of his lenses and accessories for close to two months, and really wants to have a good try at the R. After I take it for a spin, I'll return the favor. 

For me, being already heavily invested in Canon lenses and accessories, the R is not a very risky investment even on preorder. The only real question for me is whether a more pro model will come out just a short while later, that I want more.


----------



## jd7 (Sep 9, 2018)

aa_angus said:


> Also, (on paper) this camera acquires focus faster than ANY other camera on the planet. Period. 0.05 seconds. I am thinking this camera will be an absolute AF beast. If you shoot professional sports, sure there aren't enough FPS. For everyone else, this camera will outperform AF expectations (including ease of manual AF point selection).
> 
> I have pre-orderd, and yes, I am selling one of my 5DIV. I genuinely believe the R will be a much nicer camera to use, and I am postive it will outperform the 5DIV in all aspects of AF.



I'm pretty sure Canon's claim is the EOS R is the world's fastest focusing full-frame mirrorless camera (and I think maybe that should be full-frame mirrorless interchangeable lens camera - pretty sure I saw that in a footnote somewhere)
https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/news/eos-r-system-launch/

I don't think Canon has said how AF speed compares to a DSLR (full-frame or crop) or even a crop MILC.

There is also the fact the FPS drops significantly if you want AF at the same time - the maximum FPS is with AF locked from the first frame, as I understand it.

The EOS R sounds like it has some good AF features but I am certainly not expecting it to outperform the 5D IV - or many other DSLRs - in all aspects of AF.


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 10, 2018)

aa_angus said:


> I am postive it will outperform the 5DIV in all aspects of AF.



I think you may be disappointed if you are wanting to use it for sports and action.
Canon is really pushing the body as a portraiture, landscape and travel lens rather than a sports and action body.
For those actions I think Canon gave you enough information that they are indicating it will perform as well as a 5D IV.

Often it is as important as what is said when reading the sales literature.
So if you make the assumption it will out perform the 5D IV for sports and action, you shouldn't blame Canon when it does not.
They didn't claim it would.


----------



## meywd (Sep 10, 2018)

No budget to get the R, and not that interested about the camera itself, I would love a 1D X II, but the 50 f1.2 interests me, I love bokeh and I want to know how different is that lens from the current 50f1.2, is it sharper, better at focusing, has smoother bokeh, since its bigger it seems there are some changes.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 10, 2018)

Talys said:


> I think that I will preorder, but probably not for one of the more common reasons. I have a good friend who lent me his A7R3 with all of his lenses and accessories for close to two months, and really wants to have a good try at the R. After I take it for a spin, I'll return the favor.
> 
> For me, being already heavily invested in Canon lenses and accessories, the R is not a very risky investment even on preorder. The only real question for me is whether a more pro model will come out just a short while later, that I want more.


Two months? There has to be a very good reason for that. They have so much other gear they didn’t miss it, they hated it, they were trying to kick the habit, broke both arms, they are a saint, you were blackmailing them?


----------



## Talys (Sep 10, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Two months? There has to be a very good reason for that. They have so much other gear they didn’t miss it, they hated it, they were trying to kick the habit, broke both arms, they are a saint, you were blackmailing them?


Hahaha  my friend was out of the country and didn't want to take an expensive camera with a bunch of heavy lenses with him. He took his apsc Sony instead, and left me with his all his FF Sony stuff.


----------



## Zeidora (Sep 10, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> No, I'm not thinking of the limitations of 5 year old technology. On a 5D4 I've taken photos at ISO 32000, 1/80 sec, f1.2, and it was still too dark.
> 
> Give me a camera that has a faster lens or can go to higher ISOs, and I'll make use of them both. As far as I'm concerned there's probably never going to be a point where I'll say "ok, the cameras have high enough ISOs now, I don't need fast lenses." I want to continue to be able to shoot in more and more adverse lighting conditions, and have the camera be able to do it and produce a clean photo. So I want both fast lenses and high ISOs.
> 
> And please don't tell me to get a flash. If you're using one in a studio or to get a specific look in your photo that you want, that's fine. But I want my photos to look how the scene really looked without the added light from my flash. In that case the flash would just be a crutch and trying unnaturally to compensate for a camera that isn't capable of capturing whatever scene is in front of me.



You know, there is a manual setting for exposure. Brighten up by 2 f-stops with 1/20 s. Done. That is not a problem of the camera.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 10, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> What a _weird_ comment. Do Nikon and Sony make cameras for left-eye shooters?
> 
> Yet I still take better pictures than most, because instead of whining about what this manufacturer or that manufacturer didn't do _for me, _ I just get on with it and learn to use the kit I buy, well.
> 
> There's a moral there for many on here...


Right? 

I am left-eye dominant. I often shoot with my head tilted so my right eye sees the whole scene while my left is glued to the VF. Occasionally if my left gets fatigued I’ll switch. It feels weird but it’s no problem. Eye dominance has never gotten in my way.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 10, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Yes I'm pretty sure the DIGIC 8 doesn't do anything to the RAW file, why is that a safe assumption? Because Canon only ever claim improvements on the OOC jpegs. I don't have a clue what criteria Canon have for setting the highest rating for the ISO, but 32000 - 40000 is 1/3 of a stop, hardly anything worth writing about.
> 
> Nevertheless I'd like to know where, exactly, people think they are seeing an improvement, because I have not seen anything that makes me think _"a 5D MkIV couldn't do that"_. Not that I don't find may of the features of the R system interesting and improvements, just that IQ isn't one of them.
> 
> I very interesting comparison is going to be a 5D MkIV with EF 50 f1.2L and the R with the RF 50 f1.2L, as far as I can see Canon are saying the big IQ improvements are because of the optical freedom that extra 20mm gives them. Lenses are the difference, not the sensor or processor, for RAW files.


I don't think you're right in regard to this.

Firstly, the ISO setting in a camera obviously affects even the RAW file. So something within the camera is doing the boosting of the signal coming from the sensor, even when you shoot in RAW. If this weren't the case, the ISO setting you use wouldn't matter when you're shooting in RAW. But it still very much does.

Second, Canon does seem to call out that the processor in the camera plays into the image quality, even in relation to RAW. This is an old article, but still certainly relevant...

http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2012/digic_processors.shtml

"What are the benefits? The combination of a 2-line 16-channel simultaneous signal readout from the CMOS sensor and the super-fast
14-bit analog-to-digital conversion (handled by four separate processing circuits, before the info reaches the Dual DIGIC 5+ processors) makes possible the following:

• Increase the sensor’s sensitivity by approximately two stops over previous models, meaning higher ISOs with the lowest noise of any EOS digital camera. The standard maximum ISO changes from ISO 12,800 on the previous EOS-1D Mark IV and ISO 1600 on the 1Ds Mark III up to ISO 51,200 on the EOS-1D X — without any ISO expansion applied."

So it seems that there's more going on upstream of the DIGIC processor that plays into RAW image quality. It doesn't seem like Canon fully specifies if it's upgraded from camera to camera. But if they're quoting a higher ISO range, I think something has changed.


----------



## fentiger (Sep 10, 2018)

Talys said:


> I think that I will preorder, but probably not for one of the more common reasons. I have a good friend who lent me his A7R3 with all of his lenses and accessories for close to two months, and really wants to have a good try at the R. After I take it for a spin, I'll return the favor.
> 
> For me, being already heavily invested in Canon lenses and accessories, the R is not a very risky investment even on preorder. The only real question for me is whether a more pro model will come out just a short while later, that I want more.



Rudy winston at Canon USA has stated that the EOSR is midrange camera, So i expect a lower and higher spec version to be announced in due course.


----------



## Talys (Sep 10, 2018)

fentiger said:


> Rudy winston at Canon USA has stated that the EOSR is midrange camera, So i expect a lower and higher spec version to be announced in due course.



Yeah, the 5/8fps essentially sets it up there to leave space for a 7/10 or 8/11fps camera. And, the single card slot. While I would love UHS-II and more fps, I'm not entirely sure I'd care enough to spend an extra $1,000 for it. But with Canon, I would not be surprised that the R Pro will have something else on it that I think, "wow, I wish I had that".


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 10, 2018)

fentiger said:


> Rudy winston at Canon USA has stated that the EOSR is midrange camera, So i expect a lower and higher spec version to be announced in due course.


I think he was using the term 'midrange' in context of existing cameras and where in that line-up the EOS-R is aimed.


----------



## Timedog (Sep 10, 2018)

Will wait for Dynamic Range testing. I need ~14 stops. If they tweaked the 5DIV sensor a bit to squeeze a bit more dynamic range out of it, I'll buy it. I also kinda want to see what the "pro" mirrorless they're likely releasing next year has, and how much it costs over this. The R is good enough that I don't feel terrible about having a bunch of Canon lenses though, which is a change from 1 week ago.


----------



## martti (Sep 10, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> Except the Canon works better with more and superior lenses, has better support, and fastest AF currently available...And focuses in very low light, about a stop lower than the "competition."



And how exactly do you *know* all this?


----------



## scipion (Sep 10, 2018)

martti said:


> And how exactly do you *know* all this?



indeed. from all we know, Sony is by far the first if the choice is between a ML Canon or Sony....


----------



## martti (Sep 10, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> If you ignore all the well-documented issues around Sony's colours; support; planned obsolescence on obscenely short timescales; ergonomic incompetence; dismally limited lens choices; and unproven reliability compared to Canon, you're right of course.
> 
> Meanwhile, back in the Real World, everyone still buys Canon.



I appreciate your opinion even though it is in conflict with the sales figures presented on this site.

If you are lazy to click, here is a screenshot. Oops. Your pants are on fire!


_Source: The NPD Group, Inc., U.S. Retail Tracking Service, Detachable Lens Camera, Sensor Size: Full Frame, Based on Dollars Share, Jan.- Jun. 2018._


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 10, 2018)

martti said:


> I appreciate your opinion even though it is in conflict with the sales figures presented on this site.
> 
> If you are lazy to click, here is a screenshot. Oops. Your pants are on fire!
> View attachment 180303
> ...



1st half of a year where Sony had new releases - and finally getting the camera anywhere near right after 5 years of trying, Canon had no releases and Nikon had the D850 that on-one can get hold of in the US. Do you remember the headline 2 years ago when Sony were #1....after a series of cashback offers and price reductions and look how long that lasted. 
Now Canon and Nikon have announced their FF mirrorless let us wait to see end of year figures and 1st half of 2019. 

I am not saying Sony will not stay #1, just that Sony are very selective of their research.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 10, 2018)

martti said:


> I appreciate your opinion even though it is in conflict with the sales figures presented on this site.
> 
> If you are lazy to click, here is a screenshot. Oops. Your pants are on fire!
> View attachment 180303
> ...


I thought we were talking numbers of units not value of units? Might be a technicality, it might be that you can manipulate figures to illustrate any point of view.

Meanwhile I'm taking pictures with my antiquated Canon DSLR and archaic lenses and enjoying life.


----------



## martti (Sep 10, 2018)

76% of FF mirrorless camera buyers are buying something else than Canon.
Explain that away if you can.
I did not create these figures. I have no horse in this race. I have a Canon 5D3 and a 5D4.
I am innocent.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 10, 2018)

Timedog said:


> Will wait for Dynamic Range testing. I need ~14 stops. If they tweaked the 5DIV sensor a bit to squeeze a bit more dynamic range out of it, I'll buy it. I also kinda want to see what the "pro" mirrorless they're likely releasing next year has, and how much it costs over this. The R is good enough that I don't feel terrible about having a bunch of Canon lenses though, which is a change from 1 week ago.



I don’t know if any consumer camera with 14 stops. How are you getting by now if you need it?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 10, 2018)

martti said:


> 76% of FF mirrorless camera buyers are buying something else than Canon.
> Explain that away if you can.



Color me confused, but notwithstanding unfilled orders, aren’t 100% of FF mirrorless camera buyers buying something else than Canon?


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 10, 2018)

martti said:


> 76% of FF mirrorless camera buyers are buying something else than Canon.
> Explain that away if you can.
> I did not create these figures. I have no horse in this race. I have a Canon 5D3 and a 5D4.
> I am innocent.



76%? I presume you mean 66%

In a market where there are three solid contenders then I would expect a fairly wide split, where each has its advantages, especially when one of them has a unique product. 
One thing that has been Sony's weak point is a new pool of Sony devotees and that comes from having an entry level camera. For the last 5 years Sony has relied on poaching people from CaNikon and now that chain has been disrupted - how far only time will tell. And if Sony makes a new push to the APS-C/budget end of the range.


----------



## martti (Sep 10, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Color me confused, but notwithstanding unfilled orders, aren’t 100% of FF mirrorless camera buyers buying something else than Canon?


You have a point there. The word 'mirrorless' was my bad. This is all the FF camera bodies.
I cannot even count. I need some coffee.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 10, 2018)

martti said:


> 76% of FF mirrorless camera buyers are buying something else than Canon.
> Explain that away if you can.
> I did not create these figures. I have no horse in this race. I have a Canon 5D3 and a 5D4.
> I am innocent.


That is NOT what the figures you are posting say. They are talking about value of sales not sales numbers. Don't get me wrong, I'd like 1% of that amount, but you are misrepresenting what you are posting.

So if Canon sell 2 6D MkII's, $1,599, and Sony sell one A9, $4,098, Canon have sold twice as many FF cameras, Sony have come first for US dollar sales amount. Which is 'better'? You are saying Sony are, I am offering a counterpoint and pointing out what this figures actually tell us.

I think you mean 66% and they are for all FF cameras not just MILC.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 10, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> That is NOT what the figures you are posting say. They are talking about value of sales not sales numbers. Don't get me wrong, I'd like 1% of that amount, but you are misrepresenting what you are posting.
> 
> So if Canon sell 2 6D MkII's, $1,599, and Sony sell one A9, $4,098, Canon have sold twice as many FF cameras, Sony have come first for US dollar sales amount. Which is 'better'? You are saying Sony are, I am offering a counterpoint and pointing out what this figures actually tell us.
> 
> I think you mean 66% and they are for all FF cameras not just MILC.



I think that also underlines why companies are moving to real development the higher-bracket cameras - you need sell fewer bodies for the same profit.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Sep 10, 2018)

How many are preordering the EOS R?

I am not.
This new body and the new Mount just made me re-think my future "Investments" in lenses and bodies.

Now I use my M6 alone, but also as an optional backup in case my 6D fails during an expensive holiday (the kind of holiday you don't want to end without pictures due to a body failure).
What will happen in the future? RF is already compatible with APS-C Canon lenses: will the recent EF-M 32mm F/1.4 be the last "M" release? Will Canon introduce a crop "R" / RF to replace both the APS-C bodies and the "M System"?
I don't know but, in that case, I should sell my M body and lenses and adopt the crop "R" if I still want my APS-C mirrorless to be a backup for my (future) "R" (R1, R2, whatever) body.
Let's see.

And of course I don't know whether to replace my 6D with a 5D Mark IV or with a R... or to wait for the R2, R3 etc.

But, first of all, I don't buy a new model before trustworthy websites (like Dustin Abbott) or magazines write a comprehensive review.


----------



## tron (Sep 10, 2018)

And what if the review is positive? (It will be). Will this mean that your 6D (or 5D4 or 6DII should you decide to upgrade) is not very good camera ?


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 10, 2018)

aa_angus said:


> I'm stunned that *some* people in here are implying that you can't manually select the AF point while shooting with the EOS R. The spec sheet (even the leaked one I'm pretty sure) and the hundreds of videos on YouTube say you use the back of the screen to drag the AF point manually. To me, this sounds MUCH faster than using the joystick on the 5DIV.
> 
> Also, (on paper) this camera acquires focus faster than ANY other camera on the planet. Period. 0.05 seconds. I am thinking this camera will be an absolute AF beast. If you shoot professional sports, sure there aren't enough FPS. For everyone else, this camera will outperform AF expectations (including ease of manual AF point selection).
> 
> I have pre-orderd, and yes, I am selling one of my 5DIV. I genuinely believe the R will be a much nicer camera to use, and I am postive it will outperform the 5DIV in all aspects of AF.


Well said


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 10, 2018)

tron said:


> Don't you press your face against the back of the camera while you look through the viewfinder?
> In the case where you have moved it (articulating...) do you have 3 hands ? (one the camera, one the lens one the lcd?) Only when using the lightest/smallest possible lens you have the luxury to not hold it at all...


you Can use your nose!


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 10, 2018)

JohanCruyff said:


> But, first of all, I don't buy a new model before trustworthy websites (like Dustin Abbott) or magazines write a comprehensive review.


Honestly, I just have to kind of chuckle and/or shake my head about statements like this.

What earth shattering revelation do you expect to come out in a review that you can't already pretty well surmise from all of the information and previews that have already come out with regard to the camera?

I think you probably already have a preconceived notion about whether or not this camera is good enough for you to buy, and you'll probably view any review of the camera with that preconceived notion in mind.

I'll tell you what the reviews are going to say... They're going to say "Things A and B work really well on this camera, however things C and D sometimes aren't so great, and we really wish this camera had this feature on it. But regardless, it's still a pretty good camera that will be useful and work well for many people."

Do you really think that there is anything that will be said in any review that's much different from that? Canon has probably spent billions of dollars developing this camera. They are not going to release some rattle trap of a camera that would warrant completely panning it in reviews after all that money invested.

So basically, all of the reviews are going to say it's a pretty good camera, while not perfect. Some of the reviews might say that a Sony or Nikon are probably a better buy compared to this camera, and some will say that this is the best camera to get. And ultimately it's really not going to move the needle much one way or another compared to the expectations and opinions you've already formed about the camera based on what we've seen so far.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 10, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> I don't think you're right in regard to this.
> 
> Firstly, the ISO setting in a camera obviously affects even the RAW file. So something within the camera is doing the boosting of the signal coming from the sensor, even when you shoot in RAW. If this weren't the case, the ISO setting you use wouldn't matter when you're shooting in RAW. But it still very much does.
> 
> ...


The stuff going on upstream of the processor like the on chip ADC and on chip noise reduction does make a difference to both RAW and JPEG, but the Digic does not process RAWS. Canon has commented on this in the past. BSI will allow for even better processing ahead of the digic which will provide cleaner RAW images. This are basically sensor related improvements. A new Digic may process RAWS faster, but that doesn't affect IQ.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 10, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> That is NOT what the figures you are posting say. They are talking about value of sales not sales numbers. Don't get me wrong, I'd like 1% of that amount, but you are misrepresenting what you are posting.
> 
> So if Canon sell 2 6D MkII's, $1,599, and Sony sell one A9, $4,098, Canon have sold twice as many FF cameras, Sony have come first for US dollar sales amount. Which is 'better'? You are saying Sony are, I am offering a counterpoint and pointing out what this figures actually tell us.



They also say nothing of profit. In a parallel field, Apple is only the #3 seller of smart phones by volume, but they are by far the most profitable.


Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The stuff going on upstream of the processor like the on chip ADC and on chip noise reduction does make a difference to both RAW and JPEG, but the Digic does not process RAWS. Canon has commented on this in the past. BSI will allow for even better processing ahead of the digic which will provide cleaner RAW images. This are basically sensor related improvements. A new Digic may process RAWS faster, but that doesn't affect IQ.


a new processor may run cooler, though (all else being equal... if they increase the load never mind), and less heat would benefit image quality


----------



## tron (Sep 10, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> you Can use your nose!


You could reply like a normal person like 3kramd5 and aa_angus !


----------



## hmatthes (Sep 10, 2018)

Yes -- will be ordered with the control ring EF adapter but without lenses. Then I can gradually sell EF glass to replace with RF glass. Some EF will remain for a very long time. I might get a CPS loaner to compare with my EF, then decide.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 10, 2018)

tron said:


> You could reply like a normal person like 3kramd5 and aa_angus !


im trying to sound like you...


----------



## tron (Sep 10, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> im trying to sound like you...



The other two members explained technically how this is achieved. You just behaved like a 15 year old!


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 10, 2018)

tron said:


> The other two members explained technically how this is achieved. You just behaved like a 15 year old!


More like a 12 year old...


----------



## tron (Sep 10, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> More like a 12 year old...


Can't disagree on this


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 10, 2018)

tron said:


> Can't disagree on this


----------



## jd7 (Sep 11, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Honestly, I just have to kind of chuckle and/or shake my head about statements like this.
> 
> What earth shattering revelation do you expect to come out in a review that you can't already pretty well surmise from all of the information and previews that have already come out with regard to the camera?
> 
> ...



Really?! I'm with JohanCruyff - I'd be waiting for a lot more reviews/information before I was willing to put down my money. 

At the moment, we have:
spec sheets - which give us an idea of some theoretical functions and capabilities, but doesn't tell us how those functions and capabilities perform in real use
Canon's marketing materials - which, possibly, might not be quick to give us a warts and all assessment of the bad as well as the good(!)
Initial comments from photographers associated with Canon
Some comments from a few reviewers who have been granted early access to a camera - quite possibly not for any great length of time though, and in any event no one could have had a chance to test a camera extensively yet.

I can't say I think that makes for a compelling body of evidence on which to make a decision.

I agree that reviews will probably say it's a pretty good camera but not perfect, but don't you want exactly which things are A and B (in your email) that work really, and which things are C and D which don't work so well? Surely you want to know that so you can work out whether the camera is likely to suit you?


----------



## JonSnow (Sep 11, 2018)

have the 5D MK4.. waiting for the higher end model.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 11, 2018)

jd7 said:


> Really?! I'm with JohanCruyff - I'd be waiting for a lot more reviews/information before I was willing to put down my money.
> 
> At the moment, we have:
> spec sheets - which give us an idea of some theoretical functions and capabilities, but doesn't tell us how those functions and capabilities perform in real use
> ...



I just don't know what feature or function you're so unsure or unclear about that would skew your decision that much one way or another.

What's going to work really well? Everything we can pretty much assume will based on Canon's track record... The functionality, reliability, build quality, overall image quality, basically everything we know that Canon knows how to do well.

What's going to work not so perfectly? Everything that's brand new territory for this camera... The eye AF, that weird touch bar, etc... It's all probably gonna be pretty good, but not perfect.

I dunno, I'm just picturing what scenario a review is going to really change anyone's mind just by watching a review, I mean if you're already close to dropping two grand on this camera to begin with. I mean, are you just gonna be like "Oh man, eye AF only works _some of the time?? _That's it! I'm not buying it!" I mean, don't you already know that? Or "What?? You mean the battery life is pretty good but not on the level of a DSLR?? Forget it, I'm not buying!" Again, I just can't conceive that any of the reviews will have anything in them that is so unexpected that it would really sway such a big decision that far either way. Either you want a Canon mirrorless or not. Do you really question the level of performance that the camera will have so much that it would sway your decision that severely? I mean, at least to the point where you'd be so sure you didn't want it that you didn't even want to give it a try with the knowledge that you could return it of you hate it that much?


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 11, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> I just don't know what feature or function you're so unsure or unclear about that would skew your decision that much one way or another.
> 
> What's going to work really well? Everything we can pretty much assume will based on Canon's track record... The functionality, reliability, build quality, overall image quality, basically everything we know that Canon knows how to do well.
> 
> ...



Some people need to be told what to buy. 
Just be sure to click on the buy feature they include with their review.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 11, 2018)

You should all watch the Fro Knows Photos preview. Pretty insteresting points.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 11, 2018)

Is the right-eye-left-eye thing still an issue with the screen flipped out to the left of the camera? Maybe an issue of not enough hands, but not eyedness?


----------



## Romz26 (Sep 11, 2018)

martti said:


> I appreciate your opinion even though it is in conflict with the sales figures presented on this site.
> 
> If you are lazy to click, here is a screenshot. Oops. Your pants are on fire!
> View attachment 180303
> ...


It would be great to show the sales figures of the canon 5d mk4 when it first came out to the 2018 sony sales. I think it would be a different story. The people who would of bought the 5d would already have it. The sony was brand new, so of course it would sell more.


----------



## jd7 (Sep 11, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> I just don't know what feature or function you're so unsure or unclear about that would skew your decision that much one way or another.
> 
> What's going to work really well? Everything we can pretty much assume will based on Canon's track record... The functionality, reliability, build quality, overall image quality, basically everything we know that Canon knows how to do well.
> 
> ...



I understand your reasoning for how you expect the EOS R to perform but at the end of the day you are still making assumptions about what you think is likely to be the case. I would rather have more information about what actually is the case before I made such a "big decision". It may turn out exactly as you anticipate - or it may turn out there are surprises. I would want to see independent reviews - and user comments (as against reviews) - which describe how things perform in real use before I decided to buy. I mean, to give a simple example, you say no should expect battery life to be as good as for a DSLR. Fine, but what is the difference in real use? Actually quantifying the difference may sway some people one way or the other. Another example is the Digital Photo Preview talking about the touch screen being laggy. If I thought I was seriously a potential buyer for the R (unlikely at this point), I would want to hear more about exactly how it performs in use under different conditions.

And no, it's not a case of "either you want a Canon mirrorless or not". I'm sure some people think that way, but for me - and I think many others - I do not fundamentally care whether the camera has a mirror or not. I am just interested in what the camera is like (its pros and cons) to take photos (or video for those interested in that).

As for buying and returning it, I assume you are in the US. Not everyone has such relaxed and generous returns policies. If I bought the camera and simply didn't like it, I'd have to sell it on the second-hand market. If I was somewhere where I could easily buy and return, I expect I'd be much more likely to say why wait for someone else's review when I could buy it and try it for myself risk free.

Anyway, there are always going to be people who are keen early adopters, and that's fine. If you are happy to spend your money that way, great (or maybe you have the option of buy and return so there is no real risk for you). What I don't understand though is thinking it laughable that some people aren't keen to put their money on the line when there is only very limited information available.


----------



## martti (Sep 11, 2018)

How about you try to buy a Sony A7III in any internet store today at the list price 1998 dollars?
I tried. It is impossible. It is sold out.
Yesterday, a Japanese store still had two items at 2300 USD. Now they are gone.
It seems Sony could sell as many items as they can make at the moment. 
The market is right in the end, always.


----------



## Kit. (Sep 11, 2018)

stevelee said:


> Maybe an issue of not enough hands, but not eyedness?


It seems to me that the issue of not enough hands is an even stronger one than of eyedness.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 11, 2018)

martti said:


> How about you try to buy a Sony A7III in any internet store today at the list price 1998 dollars?
> I tried. It is impossible. It is sold out.
> Yesterday, a Japanese store still had two items at 2300 USD. Now they are gone.
> It seems Sony could sell as many items as they can make at the moment.
> The market is right in the end, always.



It's easy here in the UK


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 11, 2018)

man people are looking at this camera as if it was $10K. It's only $2300. And most online retailers like B&H or Adorama have 30 day return policies.
U got 30 days to play with it and to decide if it works or not for your needs.
I think it's going to be a great camera. People are afraid of change and new things. I like to move forward, if possible, and not stay in the past. In 2-3 years, if not less, the DSLR will be dead. It's the evolution of things. Remember the shift from Film to Digital. It was painful for some but then again, the technology wasn't comparable to today. Going from DSLR to ML is inevitable and it makes sense. 
There are a lot of benefits with the new camera, mainly the EVF, once u use it, u will see the light... Literally...


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 11, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> People are afraid of change and new things.



Why do you keep on coming out with that rubbish? Especially on a site whose very basis is rumours about advances in technology?


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 11, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> There are a lot of benefits with the new camera, mainly the EVF, once u use it, u will see the light... Literally...


Actually the EVF was one of the things I hated most about the A7 III. It's disorienting and simply doesn't give the same visual connection to what you're shooting as looking through an OVF. However I recognize that mirrorless cameras are inevitable, and EVFs will continue to get better, so I'm trying to get accustomed to it.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 11, 2018)

jd7 said:


> I understand your reasoning for how you expect the EOS R to perform but at the end of the day you are still making assumptions about what you think is likely to be the case. I would rather have more information about what actually is the case before I made such a "big decision". It may turn out exactly as you anticipate - or it may turn out there are surprises. I would want to see independent reviews - and user comments (as against reviews) - which describe how things perform in real use before I decided to buy. I mean, to give a simple example, you say no should expect battery life to be as good as for a DSLR. Fine, but what is the difference in real use? Actually quantifying the difference may sway some people one way or the other. Another example is the Digital Photo Preview talking about the touch screen being laggy. If I thought I was seriously a potential buyer for the R (unlikely at this point), I would want to hear more about exactly how it performs in use under different conditions.
> 
> And no, it's not a case of "either you want a Canon mirrorless or not". I'm sure some people think that way, but for me - and I think many others - I do not fundamentally care whether the camera has a mirror or not. I am just interested in what the camera is like (its pros and cons) to take photos (or video for those interested in that).
> 
> ...



I didn't realize that you're in a place that it's very hard to return a camera from. That would affect my decision a little bit.

However, you can still go on youtube right now and find hours of videos from reviewers right now giving their impressions of using the camera completely hands on. They outline what they like and dislike about the camera. So beyond this I'm not sure really what more insight you're expecting to get from a final review of the camera. They even give impressions of adapting EF lenses to it, right down to using the variable ND filter adapter.

If all of the hands on experience with the camera so far is still not adequate for you to be able to make an informed decision about whether or not the camera is for you, then frankly it probably just isn't. I still fail to see what is missing in all of the hands on assessments that you can go watch on youtube right now, or what you expect to change so dramatically about the user's opinions of the cameras from now until they actually get the camera to keep, or what additional info you expect to learn by watching hours more youtube videos once the camera is actually out.

You seem to think that by watching enough opinions by other people that you will eventually amass enough knowledge about the camera that it will be analogous to actually using the camera yourself, but I think you fail to realize that there will always be many people with many varying opinions about it that will often clash with each other, and ultimately the only way you will know if the camera will work for you is to use it yourself.

Case in point, there are many glowing reviews of the Sony A7 III, you can't even find one in stock new, yet I still really don't like the camera myself.


----------



## jd7 (Sep 11, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> You seem to think that by watching enough opinions by other people that you will eventually amass enough knowledge about the camera that it will be analogous to actually using the camera yourself, but I think you fail to realize that there will always be many people with many varying opinions about it that will often clash with each other, and ultimately the only way you will know if the camera will work for you is to use it yourself.
> 
> Case in point, there are many glowing reviews of the Sony A7 III, you can't even find one in stock new, yet I still really don't like the camera myself.


I do realise that, and completely agree that actually using a camera (or lens or whatever) myself is the only way to really know if it will work for me. It's just that unless I can find a way to borrow one to try out, I have to spend money to try it and I almost certainly won't be able to get all the money back if I don't like it. That means reading other people's opinions is often simply the best I can do before spending the money, however imperfect that system may be. Also, anyone putting up reviews (or previews) of an EOS R now cannot have really had much experience with it yet, and anyone with access to one now is likely to have some got to use it at a Canon event where the positives were no doubt being hyped, etc. So, I read/watch with interest what is being posted at the moment, but personally I would want more info from people who've had more time with the camera and got to try it out in a wider variety of situations (and who may have less association with Canon) before I was willing to put down my money (unless perhaps I simply had a desperate need to buy a camera immediately). As I gather more information, I am of course looking for opinions from people who seem to use the camera in the way I expect I would, as that is probably going to give me the best guide as to how happy I would be with it.

Anyway, I'm certainly not saying it would be silly to buy an EOS R at this point - it all comes down to each person's situation, and if someone is happy to spend the money now (or have the safety net of being able to return it), awesome. My point was only that I don't think it's silly that some people want more information than is available yet before deciding whether to buy. The information which comes out in future may simply confirm the information available now, but the camera really has not been extensively tested yet (at least by people outside Canon) so there must be a possibility there will be some surprises (good or bad).

If you get the camera, I will be interested to read your opinions on it if you post them! (But yes, you are right - I doubt I'm gong to be a buyer for an EOS R. I'm still interested to learn more about it though.)


----------



## Jethro (Sep 13, 2018)

So, on the first 'pre-order' day (in Australia), the EOS-R price is AUD3200, and there is a roughly15% discount on the 6D2 (now AUD1995) and the 5D4 (now AUD3950). Assuming the latter 2 will drift back up a bit over time, and the EOS-R will drift down, it gives an interesting insight into where the EOS-R is seen to sit in the FF range. And some practical choices on what to buy (if you're in the market).


----------



## pj1974 (Sep 13, 2018)

Jethro said:


> So, on the first 'pre-order' day (in Australia), the EOS-R price is AUD3200, and there is a roughly15% discount on the 6D2 (now AUD1995) and the 5D4 (now AUD3950). Assuming the latter 2 will drift back up a bit over time, and the EOS-R will drift down, it gives an interesting insight into where the EOS-R is seen to sit in the FF range. And some practical choices on what to buy (if you're in the market).



As a fellow Aussie, that's interesting news to me (I hadn't checked sites for pre-order info / prices today). 

I was expecting that approximate price (i.e. about AUD3200 vs USD2300). And yes, I agree with the reasoning, that the EOS R street price will fall with time, whereas the 5D4 and 6D2 will remain mostly steady, or possibly even increase if they are currently attracting discounts. 

For my purposes, the EOS R brings a number of advantages to the table over FF DSLRs - particularly that I can use my EF-S lenses on them with the adapter (e.g. I have the 10-18mm STM, 15-85mm USM, Sigma 8-16mm, etc). Plus I have some L glass (100mm macro and 70-300mm L). A bonus (from my perspective) - that it uses the same batteries I mainly use (LP-E6)

As I currently have a relatively reasonable competent faster FPS / AF tracking ability via my 7D and 80D APS=C DSLRs, I would mainly use the EOS R for static (or slower moving) subjects, nature and landscapes. So I would rather have the EOS R than the 6D mkII, and possibly even over the 5DmkIV... particularly with the interesting RF lenses coming out.

I will stay tuned... something interesting for the future. 

PJ


----------



## martti (Sep 13, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> It's easy here in the UK



Did you try?


----------



## chrysoberyl (Sep 13, 2018)

I was interested in the R and 50mm together, but no longer since I saw the The Digital Picture images. For the cost, I hoped for sharpness exceeding the other 50mm lenses and matching the Sigma 135 Art. I'm sure the AF is fine, but that's not enough.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 13, 2018)

martti said:


> Did you try?



Three stores that I looked on their website have them marked as 'in stock'.
Take the lead from here

https://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/


----------



## Durf (Sep 13, 2018)

If it had IBIS I'd order one just to shoot all my old antique Takumars, Pentax's, and Helios lenses with, but, then again, I need another camera like I need a hole in the head.....


----------



## Lurker (Sep 13, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Fortunately for you, there is an adaptor for ALL your lenses and with full compatibility. The only investment is the $2299 for the body. IMO, a great price for new technology and things that the 5D will never be able to do like the swivel screen or EVF and not to mention a new processor and sensor.



That's 2299 for the body and 100 for the adapter. Still cheaper than the 5D IV. But . . .

I'm with Geek on this one. Just upgraded from 50D to the 5D IV and very happy. For me the R has 3 major problems: *#1 it isn't available *_(and I was ready to buy)_, #2 it isn't known/understood (what are the problems, short comings, things that slick marketing is covering up), #3 Even when it does come out it will be several more months to get the firm ware update to get full functionality. 

My mother-in-law, God bless her soul, always said enough is abundance to the wise. The 5D IV is enough for my needs and has plenty of room for growth. ilty-swively screen may be useful for me on rare occasions but certainly not needed. Sounds like the EVF is really nice but I don't know that I'll miss the bells and bobbles, I've lived without it all for over 20 years.

Maybe it's age that gives perspective , maybe it's living without. After many long years of waiting, I'll take my bird in hand, thank you very much.


----------



## dak723 (Sep 14, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> I didn't realize that you're in a place that it's very hard to return a camera from. That would affect my decision a little bit.
> 
> However, you can still go on youtube right now and find hours of videos from reviewers right now giving their impressions of using the camera completely hands on. They outline what they like and dislike about the camera. So beyond this I'm not sure really what more insight you're expecting to get from a final review of the camera. They even give impressions of adapting EF lenses to it, right down to using the variable ND filter adapter.
> 
> ...



Not sure why you keep hammering away at someone who is looking to get more information from reliable reviewers? More information is good. Watching the majority of the YouTube reveiwes at this point would be an enormously stupid idea as many - if not most - are trolling for a specific company (Sony). Plus no one has gotten to use the camera for an extended period of time and has used all the features. This is Canon's first FF mirrorless - and, my guess is, rushed the release date by a few months. How can getting a thorough hands-on review from a reviewer that you trust be a bad idea. Maybe not necessary for you and others - but you keep hammering away as if it is a bad idea.


----------



## dak723 (Sep 14, 2018)

chrysoberyl said:


> I was interested in the R and 50mm together, but no longer since I saw the The Digital Picture images. For the cost, I hoped for sharpness exceeding the other 50mm lenses and matching the Sigma 135 Art. I'm sure the AF is fine, but that's not enough.



You do understand that the sharpness is mostly determined by the sharpness setting that the user chooses. So you can't really compare sharpness results from different cameras.


----------



## Shellbo6901 (Sep 14, 2018)

would like to see both the canon and the new nikon FF mirrorless fight it out first, and then see about diving in. Since this is the first one, and I'm not really a fan of their other mirrorless so far. will wait for the 2nd one, and then maybe buy the old one if the price can go down. but being a fan of canon moreso will definitely sway my decision alot


----------



## Refurb7 (Sep 14, 2018)

I never preorder anything. I think the R looks pretty good overall, but I don't feel it's so urgent to buy one.


----------



## tron (Sep 14, 2018)

Refurb7 said:


> I never preorder anything. I think the R looks pretty good overall, but I don't feel it's so urgent to buy one.


I more than agree. I am not interested in this model. Can I ask which body(ies) do you have?


----------



## pj1974 (Sep 14, 2018)

chrysoberyl said:


> I was interested in the R and 50mm together, but no longer since I saw the The Digital Picture images. For the cost, I hoped for sharpness exceeding the other 50mm lenses and matching the Sigma 135 Art. I'm sure the AF is fine, but that's not enough.



It appears you may not have accurately seen the test results. I am not a pixel peeper, but the optical quality of the RF 50mm L lens is really impressive. The real world sample images really show that also.

Here are some statements from Bryan, of The Digital Picture: 

"Ready to be impressed? Check out this comparison (visualize the resolution difference) "
 Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L compared to the Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L Lens 
"This might be the 50mm lens you've been waiting for."

"The R with the RF 50 f/1.2 easily rules over the 5D IV with the EF 50 f/1.2."

Bryan does outline in detail, that the default sharpness of the EOS R is different to the 5DIV. He also explains to take these differences into account. 

The combination of the EOS R and 50mm sets a great benchmark for a FF with AF 50mm f/1.2 lens. 
Having said that, if someone can't get great to amazing images with a EOS 5DIV and EF 50mm f/1.2 - then it's probably the photographer!
Photographers with decent skill get amazing photos with the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM and EF 50mm f/1.4- with 'lesser DSLRs'. As I have said for 20 years in digital photography, it is often more about the skill than the kit.

PJ


----------



## jd7 (Sep 14, 2018)

pj1974 said:


> It appears you may not have accurately seen the test results. I am not a pixel peeper, but the optical quality of the RF 50mm L lens is really impressive. The real world sample images really show that also.
> 
> Here are some statements from Bryan, of The Digital Picture:
> 
> ...


While I generally agree, once you put the RF 50 against the Sigma 50 Art and the Zeiss Otus 55, the RF 50 doesn't seem so impressive to me. I think that might have been what chrysoberyl was getting at. Yes the RF 50 is up there but it doesn't seem to me to be a step forward over what was already available. (That said, sharpness isn't everything so will be interesting to see more comparisons.)


----------



## martti (Sep 14, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Three stores that I looked on their website have them marked as 'in stock'.
> Take the lead from here
> 
> https://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/


Thank you. None of them deliver abroad. B&H doesn't either, nor Amazon. 42 Street Photo will email me when they have stock. A Hong Kong shop would but not at 1998 dollars.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Sep 14, 2018)

No chance. I'll wait for their real mirrorless effort. Until they have a much better sensor with fast readout, they'll struggle for AF performance. The body is nice, the lenses are nice, but not interested in a video crippled, no IBIS, mirrorless 6DII with a 5D4 sensor.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Sep 14, 2018)

I already have two ML FF bodies from Canon's R(angefinder) system, including some nice "R" lenses... 

Seriously, I am going to test an EOS R when my local shop has it available, and then I'll make my mind up. I am tempted by some RF lenses (the more expensive ones I fear)...


----------



## chrysoberyl (Sep 14, 2018)

dak723 said:


> You do understand that the sharpness is mostly determined by the sharpness setting that the user chooses. So you can't really compare sharpness results from different cameras.



Oh, absolutely. The Sigma 135 Art on a 5DS is bound to look sharper than the 50 on the R. I expect the next Canon FF mirrorless will have substantially more pixels and will be a fairer comparison. At the moment, I would really like to see the Sigma 135 Art adapted to the R.

Some features of R are very appealing. If I was just switching to FF, this would be the camera for me.


----------



## Refurb7 (Sep 14, 2018)

tron said:


> I more than agree. I am not interested in this model. Can I ask which body(ies) do you have?


I have 5D Mark III, 6D, 70D and 77D.


----------



## tron (Sep 14, 2018)

Refurb7 said:


> I have 5D Mark III, 6D, 70D and 77D.


I have 5D Mark IV, 5DsR and 7D MkII. I might sell the 7D MkII since I use 5DsR for birding now. I am satisfied by both 5D MkIV and 5DsR.


----------



## Takingshots (Sep 14, 2018)

The 2 sticking points from what I read is lack of full 4 K and IBIS. If these 2 features are there, Canon would have sent a message to their competitors that they are still at the forefront of photography. Too bad at $2300 US, a little steep in price with features lacking in today's consumers' want lists. Canon if you are listening, can you upgrade the firmware to the any of the above features. Tempting to buy one but ...waiting to see if competitors upcoming equipment


----------



## tron (Sep 14, 2018)

Takingshots said:


> The 2 sticking points from what I read is lack of full 4 K and IBIS. If these 2 features are there, Canon would have sent a message to their competitors that they are still at the forefront of photography. Too bad at $2300 US, a little steep in price with features lacking in today's consumers' want lists. Canon if you are listening, can you upgrade the firmware to the any of the above features. Tempting to buy one but ...waiting to see if competitors upcoming equipment


I do not think these two features are only firmware dependent. In that case they would have done it. For now Canon has announced that they will adress other points in firmware like eye-af working only in one shot af.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 15, 2018)

Takingshots said:


> The 2 sticking points from what I read is lack of full 4 K and IBIS. If these 2 features are there, Canon would have sent a message to their competitors that they are still at the forefront of photography. Too bad at $2300 US, a little steep in price with features lacking in today's consumers' want lists. Canon if you are listening, can you upgrade the firmware to the any of the above features. Tempting to buy one but ...waiting to see if competitors upcoming equipment



What makes you think that the others did not know this already? I ask because most of the internet seems to have already guessed.
As to whether these define the 'forefront of photography' is highly questionable.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 15, 2018)

Takingshots said:


> The 2 sticking points from what I read is lack of full 4 K and IBIS. If these 2 features are there, Canon would have sent a message to their competitors that they are still at the forefront of photography. Too bad at $2300 US, a little steep in price with features lacking in today's consumers' want lists. Canon if you are listening, can you upgrade the firmware to the any of the above features. Tempting to buy one but ...waiting to see if competitors upcoming equipment


I have a 5D MK IV, like many others, I do not use it for video, but having the capability is fine. A dedicated video camera is the way to go for those who actually make a living doing high end video, there is a lot more involved than just 4K.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 15, 2018)

I’m buying!  Selling my 1dx2.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 15, 2018)

Takingshots said:


> The 2 sticking points from what I read is lack of full 4 K and IBIS. If these 2 features are there, Canon would have sent a message to their competitors that they are still at the forefront of photography.


So 4K _video_ is required to be at the forefront of _photo_graphy? Sounds like an oxymoron to me.


----------



## brad-man (Sep 15, 2018)

Takingshots said:


> The 2 sticking points from what I read is lack of full 4 K and IBIS. If these 2 features are there, Canon would have sent a message to their competitors that they are still at the forefront of photography. Too bad at $2300 US, a little steep in price with features lacking in today's consumers' want lists. Canon if you are listening, can you upgrade the firmware to the any of the above features. Tempting to buy one but ...waiting to see if competitors upcoming equipment


I have no doubt that Canon could add IBIS with a _firmware update_


----------



## LesC (Sep 15, 2018)

I think we all have very personal requirements as to what we feel the perfect camera for us is. My main camera is the 6D MKII and for ME it's just what I require; FF, small & relatively light, articulating screen and importantly built in GPS.

I think the EOS R is a very good statement of intent from Canon (and indeed the first mirrorless camera to convince me that they will eventually replace dslrs), but for me, no GPS and the price point means I have no need for one at the moment but I suspect in 5 years time most of us will be mirrorless  The new lenses certainly look tempting too and if a R mount 24-70 L with IS is in the pipeline, that would tempt me.


----------



## tron (Sep 16, 2018)

I am pre-ordering the 5DMkV. Oh wait I have to wait a couple of years!


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 16, 2018)

Takingshots said:


> The 2 sticking points from what I read is lack of full 4 K and IBIS. If these 2 features are there, Canon would have sent a message to their competitors that they are still at the forefront of photography. Too bad at $2300 US, a little steep in price with features lacking in today's consumers' want lists. Canon if you are listening, can you upgrade the firmware to the any of the above features. Tempting to buy one but ...waiting to see if competitors upcoming equipment


A firmware update will NOT give you IBIS...


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 16, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> A firmware update will NOT give you IBIS...


Unless it’s there and not enabled, like with DPAF in the C100 and C300 before the 70D was released. A firmware update gave those cameras DPAF.

Note: I don’t think that is the case with the EOSR and IBIS, but it’s not unprecedented.


----------



## canonmike (Sep 16, 2018)

sdz said:


> I'm considering buying this camera. But I'll not preorder it. I'm not sure the RF lenses would make me happier than the lenses I now own, especially given their premium prices. So, for me, the camera will need to sell itself. The fact that it is a mirrorless camera is only an afterthought. I would consider buying the EOS R had it been a 6D III with most of the same technology.


I, almost always pass on pre-orders. It's like going down to your local car dlrship and getting the fever so bad you cough up MSRP dollars, only to find much better pricing in just 4-6 mos. Since my current eqpt works just fine, even though I think I would like a new EOS-R, I can wait. Very much surprised that there is not a better break on RF 24-105mm kit pricing. Buy them separate or buy them together, basically same price. In fact, you can buy them separate and save a dollar. Explain that marketing strategy, Canon, or Canon retailer.


----------



## canonmike (Sep 16, 2018)

clicstudio said:


> Maybe it's me but I like having the latest available. I will preorder the new iPhone XS Max or whatever they decide to call it as soon as it comes out next week. I am even considering the EOS R as a backup for my A7R III since I just sold my 1DX II. I like new things that do more than they did a year or 2 ago...
> Maybe it's just me. I think the price is a steal for what you get. I love the mid-size body. It's just right for small or big hands and the available vertical grip will give you better handling if u need it. I think the 28-70 is amazing but too expensive for the moment. Although it's a breakthrough in the industry and I applaud Canon for doing something unique and different. I think they did it to improve the chances to sell the EOS R. Some people will get the Camera, just because it can take the new F2.0 zoom... It easily replaces 2 or 3 lenses... Low light, available light, landscapes. That 28-70 might never leave your camera...
> Just my opinion...


I love this new RF 28-70 F2 lens and would love to have one but at $3000.00, it's not too difficult to resist, especially without IS at that price point.


----------



## Durf (Sep 16, 2018)

canonmike said:


> I love this new RF 28-70 F2 lens and would love to have one but at $3000.00, it's not too difficult to resist, especially without IS at that price point.



This 3 thousand dollar lens (without IS) is for those that have more money than sense in my opinion; sure it may be a nice lens, but I just don't see 3 grand of nice lens! Especially not having IS and being limited to the RF mount....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 16, 2018)

canonmike said:


> Very much surprised that there is not a better break on RF 24-105mm kit pricing. Buy them separate or buy them together, basically same price. In fact, you can buy them separate and save a dollar. Explain that marketing strategy, Canon, or Canon retailer.


The strategy is to avoid having lots of discounted white box versions showing up on the market.


----------



## sdz (Sep 16, 2018)

Durf said:


> This 3 thousand dollar lens (without IS) is for those that have more money than sense in my opinion; sure it may be a nice lens, but I just don't see 3 grand of nice lens! Especially not having IS and being limited to the RF mount....



The $3,000 price for the 24-70 MM lens is far from being the most expensive of Canon's lenses. Some buy these pricey lenses. That said, there are few substitutes for an 800 MM lens whereas the customer can choose from more than one of the many 24-70 MM lenses on the market, every one of which costs less than the new 28-70 MM. Having choices means having to justify the purchase price for the costliest lens. Much like when a buyer considers buying a Zeiss Otus, the buyer must answer what he or she would one be willing to pay for the small increases in image quality that distinguish these expensive lenses from their less costly kin? The 28-70 MM lens may be superior to every 24-70 MM lens, but are these quality differences worth the price differences?. Moreover, that $3,000 price would need to include the cost of the EOS R as well. That's a lot of money for minor improvements located on the margins of cost/quality curves.


----------



## Durf (Sep 16, 2018)

sdz said:


> The $3,000 price for the 24-70 MM lens is far from being the most expensive of Canon's lenses. Some buy these pricey lenses. That said, there are few substitutes for an 800 MM lens whereas the customer can choose from more than one of the many 24-70 MM lenses on the market, every one of which costs less than the new 28-70 MM. Having choices means having to justify the purchase price for the costliest lens. Much like when a buyer considers buying a Zeiss Otus, the buyer must answer what he or she would one be willing to pay for the small increases in image quality that distinguish these expensive lenses from their less costly kin? The 28-70 MM lens may be superior to every 24-70 MM lens, but are these quality differences worth the price differences?. Moreover, that $3,000 price would need to include the cost of the EOS R as well. That's a lot of money for minor improvements located on the margins of cost/quality curves.



Yeap, to own and use the 28-70 it would cost one approx. 5500.00 bucks.....personally I don't believe this will be one of Canon's best selling and most popular lenses! LOL


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 16, 2018)

sdz said:


> That's a lot of money for minor improvements located on the margins of cost/quality curves.



The 28-70 has a full stop wider aperture than the 24-70.

If you compare the price of the 70-200 f/4 to that of the /2.8 (also a full stop apart), you’ll find that the latter is about 65% more expensive.

This R lens asks for roughly the same premium over the 24-70.


----------



## sdz (Sep 16, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> The 28-70 has a full stop wider aperture than the 24-70.
> 
> If you compare the price of the 70-200 f/4 to that of the /2.8 (also a full stop apart), you’ll find that the latter is about 65% more expensive.
> 
> This R lens asks for roughly the same premium over the 24-70.



Although your argument can justify the price difference in absolute terms, which suggests that Canon is not overcharging for the new lens, it cannot motivate per se anyone to spend their money for the 28-70 MM. Some cannot afford the 28-70. Some can afford it but do not see the need for that lens when the alternatives to that lens are good enough. That's why I characterized the changes as occurring at the margin. The buyer pays dearly for just 1 stop of light.


----------



## sdz (Sep 16, 2018)

Durf said:


> Yeap, to own and use the 28-70 it would cost one approx. 5500.00 bucks.....personally I don't believe this will be one of Canon's best selling and most popular lenses! LOL



Purchasing the EOS R will, for most, include purchasing an adapter for the EF lenses. That's hundreds more!


----------



## Durf (Sep 16, 2018)

sdz said:


> Purchasing the EOS R will, for most, include purchasing an adapter for the EF lenses. That's hundreds more!


 basic adapter to use EF lenses on the EOS-R is 100.00 bucks.....


----------



## Viggo (Sep 16, 2018)

The only reason I don’t use zooms is because the slow aperture, this lens splits the difference, and buying primes from 28, 35, 50, 85 for example is a lot more than 3 grand and a lot more bulk, changing lenses etc too. I think they know what they’re doing


----------



## bhf3737 (Sep 16, 2018)

Durf said:


> basic adapter to use EF lenses on the EOS-R is 100.00 bucks.....


The basic adapter is included in the box with the EOS-R body only and lens kit versions. The other ring and ND/CPL adapters are optional.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 16, 2018)

bhf3737 said:


> The basic adapter is included in the box with the EOS-R body only and lens kit versions. The other ring and ND/CPL adapters are optional.



In the UK (and probably the whole EU) the bundling of the adapter is advertised as part of 'pre-order now and get the adapter'. I don't know if this will go past the pre-order period but previous releases such offers (eg 'get a free battery grip') stop once the camera has been released.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 16, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> In the UK (and probably the whole EU) the bundling of the adapter is advertised as part of 'pre-order now and get the adapter'. I don't know if this will go past the pre-order period but previous releases such offers (eg 'get a free battery grip') stop once the camera has been released.



The 1DX MkII's came with a CFast card and reader and that continued for quite a while after release.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 16, 2018)

sdz said:


> Although your argument can justify the price difference in absolute terms, which suggests that Canon is not overcharging for the new lens, it cannot motivate per se anyone to spend their money for the 28-70 MM. Some cannot afford the 28-70. Some can afford it but do not see the need for that lens when the alternatives to that lens are good enough. That's why I characterized the changes as occurring at the margin. The buyer pays dearly for just 1 stop of light.




I wasn’t trying to justify it (I’m not buying the camera so the lens is out of the question), just wrap it in some context.

With that said, people often use a relative measures to justify purchases. That’s why car dealers often pinpoint a customer’s price point and show them something far more expensive before showing them the target item: doing it that way makes the target seem cheaper. People are weird.

To some, a “just” 100% increase in light gathering capability will be worth the expense. To most, it will not.


----------



## Durf (Sep 16, 2018)

Perhaps in a year or two when they come out with a ramped up and tricked out pro version EOS-R Camera they might sell a bunch of these 28-70 lenses.....as it stands right now and in my opinion only a select few will buy this lens (those with a pocket full of cash and nothing better to spend it on)....

I just can't see a bunch of pro wedding and/or event photographers running out to buy this 3 grand lens when all they have is the EOS-R to shoot it with.

Seems a bit like an expensive novelty item to me right now.....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 16, 2018)

sdz said:


> Although your argument can justify the price difference in absolute terms, which suggests that Canon is not overcharging for the new lens, it cannot motivate per se anyone to spend their money for the 28-70 MM. Some cannot afford the 28-70. Some can afford it but do not see the need for that lens when the alternatives to that lens are good enough. That's why I characterized the changes as occurring at the margin. The buyer pays dearly for just 1 stop of light.


That stop of light always costs dearly, whether the lens is an ultrawide angle or a super telephoto. If there were no market for that extra stop of light, I trust that Canon would not release such a lens


----------



## sdz (Sep 16, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> That stop of light always costs dearly, whether the lens is an ultrawide angle or a super telephoto. If there were no market for that extra stop of light, I trust that Canon would not release such a lens



There is a market for the lens. It's a small one. The markets for this, this and this are also small. Like the latter, the 28-70 may also find a home and a large audience at the rental houses.


----------



## Takingshots (Sep 16, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> So 4K _video_ is required to be at the forefront of _photo_graphy? Sounds like an oxymoron to me.


I did not state that it is an absolute requirement of the forefront for photography. Are you're saying people like yourself is okay paying a newer phone(2018) with a camera that is 2 megapixel. Our argument is why Canon spec in crippled features 4K (1.7) while competitors are offering full 4K as std features with better or similar pricing. So don't be defensive but who can blame you ... perhaps you work for them?


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 16, 2018)

sdz said:


> There is a market for the lens. It's a small one. The markets for this, this and this are also small. Like the latter, the 28-70 may also find a home and a large audience at the rental houses.


 
Why not compare it with lenses at its price point.
Those comparisons just made your point look ridiculous.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 16, 2018)

Takingshots said:


> I did not state that it is an absolute requirement of the forefront for photography. Are you're saying people like yourself is okay paying a newer phone(2018) with a camera that is 2 megapixel. Our argument is why Canon spec in crippled features 4K (1.7) while competitors are offering full 4K as std features with better or similar pricing. So don't be defensive but who can blame you ... perhaps you work for them?



It's not 'crippled'. Canon have made it clear that they do not believe they have the technology to deliver FF downsampled to 4K with the reliability they want to deliver. That isn't 'crippled' that is called not being able to do it.

Why do you assume someone who disagrees with you, or points out the failure in your logic, is working for Canon? Do you come here and criticise Canon because you work for Sony?

For me, Canon spend their dollar on things I would rather use than video.


----------



## docsmith (Sep 17, 2018)

Takingshots said:


> I did not state that it is an absolute requirement of the forefront for photography. Are you're saying people like yourself is okay paying a newer phone(2018) with a camera that is 2 megapixel. Our argument is why Canon spec in crippled features 4K (1.7) while competitors are offering full 4K as std features with better or similar pricing. So don't be defensive but who can blame you ... perhaps you work for them?



I am glad Canon released the 28-70 f/2. It is a statement lens. Perhaps you are right and the final market might not be large (I think it will be large, btw). But I am glad to see Canon making statements showing what they can do in general, and, more specifically, what they can do with a new mount. 50 f/1.2...another statement. Granted, it is really similar to the Sigma 50A...so that is a bit of a one up (f/1.2) and mostly a "me too" statement. But I am still glad to see Canon putting out a lens like that.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com...LensComp=941&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 17, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Canon have made it clear that they do not believe they have the technology to deliver FF downsampled to 4K with the reliability they want to deliver.



Never mind that whole C700 4K full frame thing


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 17, 2018)

docsmith said:


> I am glad Canon released the 28-70 f/2.


If they expand it to 16-35 and 70-200 also f/2, I might bite on a body.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2018)

sdz said:


> There is a market for the lens. It's a small one. The markets for this, this and this are also small. Like the latter, the 28-70 may also find a home and a large audience at the rental houses.


Please don't be disingenuous. There's a world of difference between a $3K lens and $13-80K gear. There are lots of 5-series cameras sold, a $3K lens that at f/2 can potentially replace multiple prime lenses is rather reasonable and will likely find its way into many kits. That's very different from Red camera or a $13K lens like my 600/4 II.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2018)

Takingshots said:


> I did not state that it is an absolute requirement of the forefront for photography. Are you're saying people like yourself is okay paying a newer phone(2018) with a camera that is 2 megapixel. Our argument is why Canon spec in crippled features 4K (1.7) while competitors are offering full 4K as std features with better or similar pricing. So don't be defensive but who can blame you ... perhaps you work for them?


4K *VIDEO. *Forefront of *PHOTO*graphy. Geez, do I need to draw you a map?


----------



## sdz (Sep 17, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> Why not compare it with lenses at its price point.
> Those comparisons just made your point look ridiculous.



So you say.


----------



## sdz (Sep 17, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Please don't be disingenuous. There's a world of difference between a $3K lens and $13-80K gear. There are lots of 5-series cameras sold, a $3K lens that at f/2 can potentially replace multiple prime lenses is rather reasonable and will likely find its way into many kits. That's very different from Red camera or a $13K lens like my 600/4 II.



There is nothing disengeneous about the point I made. To me, there is no great difference between Canon's EF 200 F/2, a Red 8K camera or an Otus. They are too expensive. I won't buy them. I won't because I can't. There are many like me. We are strongly budget constrained. For me, a $3,000 lens is as unobtainable as a $90,000 lens. The markets for choice gear are small because many lack the disposable income to purchase this gear. If some can make money from the 28-70 that they would not be able to make otherwise, so be it. 

I'm certain that everyone who complained about the 24-70 F/2.8s will quickly and joyfully rush to market their old gear while dropping nearly $6,000 on an EOS R, a lens and an adapter.

I'm not sure what point of mine you want to oppose or if you merely want to pick nits for the sake of having an argument.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2018)

sdz said:


> There is nothing disengeneous about the point I made. To me, there is no great difference between Canon's EF 200 F/2, a Red 8K camera or an Otus. They are too expensive. I won't buy them. I won't because I can't. There are many like me. We are strongly budget constrained. For me, a $3,000 lens is as unobtainable as a $90,000 lens. The markets for choice gear are small because many lack the disposable income to purchase this gear. If some can make money from the 28-70 that they would not be able to make otherwise, so be it.
> 
> I'm certain that everyone who complained about the 24-70 F/2.8s will quickly and joyfully rush to market their old gear while dropping nearly $6,000 on an EOS R, a lens and an adapter.
> 
> I'm not sure what point of mine you want to oppose or if you merely want to pick nits for the sake of having an argument.


The point is that regardless of your inability to afford them, the 5DIV, 24-70/2.8 II and 70-200/2.8 II are staple items in the kits of many wedding/event photographers, and they cost $3500, $2300, and $2500 at launch, respectively. All are in the ballpark of an EOS R and a 28-70/2 launching at $2300 and $3000. Your 'comparators' of a $13K lens and an $80K camera are disingenuous at best, but asinine would be as apt a description.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 17, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> The point is that regardless of your inability to afford them, the 5DIV, 24-70/2.8 II and 70-200/2.8 II are staple items in the kits of many wedding/event photographers, and they cost $3500, $2300, and $2500 at launch, respectively. All are in the ballpark of an EOS R and a 28-70/2 launching at $2300 and $3000. Your 'comparators' of a $13K lens and an $80K camera are disingenuous at best, but asinine would be as apt a description.


Myself, I wear two hats.....

At work, I NEED! low light ability as I shoot in some very poorly lit areas. The idea of a F2.0 24-70 is very tempting.... it would certainly be the right tool for the job!

At home, I worry more about portability and have greater budget restrictions. Although I can afford the lens, I have no need for it and most certainly do not want to carry it around for days/weeks..... One of the things that I am hoping to see from the M cameras (and lenses) are some SLOWER L quality lenses, so that I can have quality and low(er) weight, but at the expense of aperture....

That said, they have only introduced a few lenses so far..... way to early to comment on the R lens lineup, but what I will say is Kudos to Canon to keeping the EF lenses compatible with the new mount, and adding the control ring on the adapter is brilliant! Eventually, I will get an R, and that adapter ring will be programmed for ISO.....


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 17, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> If they expand it to 16-35 and 70-200 also f/2, I might bite on a body.


16-35 I can see..... but a 70-200 is going to be a massive lens about the size of a 200F2.0


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> 16-35 I can see..... but a 70-200 is going to be a massive lens about the size of a 200F2.0


But..:but...it's for mirrorless. That means much smaller lenses, right?


----------



## pwp (Sep 17, 2018)

I won't be tempted by the EOS R with this first release. It's a 6D MkIII as I see it. There's too much missing.

Future pro level R Series bodies will definitely be a part of my kit without doubt. It's the future. 

-pw


----------



## sdz (Sep 17, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> The point is that regardless of your inability to afford them, the 5DIV, 24-70/2.8 II and 70-200/2.8 II are staple items in the kits of many wedding/event photographers, and they cost $3500, $2300, and $2500 at launch, respectively. All are in the ballpark of an EOS R and a 28-70/2 launching at $2300 and $3000. Your 'comparators' of a $13K lens and an $80K camera are disingenuous at best, but asinine would be as apt a description.



The pieces I used to compare with the 28-70 were apt. The reason: you claimed the 28-70 will have a market, or that Canon believed this to be so. Since I never stated anything to the contrary, your point was a red herring. I went on to stat that pricier gear also havery markets. This point is not asinine. How could it be when it's true. I stated this because your claim was irrelevant to the points I made and, besides being irrelevant, was trivially true in any case. Would Canon seek to sell a lens it believed lacked a market? No, it would not.

All of this because I described some of the factors in play when someone considers buying this lens....

I'm done with this one. You've already indulged in ad hominen remarks and have ignored the gist of my argument. So, I see no reason to discuss or debate this with you. You're wasting my time.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 17, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> 16-35 I can see..... but a 70-200 is going to be a massive lens about the size of a 200F2.0


A certain Yoda quote comes to mind


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 17, 2018)

sdz said:


> The pieces I used to compare with the 28-70 were apt. The reason: you claimed the 28-70 will have a market, or that Canon believed this to be so. Since I never stated anything to the contrary, your point was a red herring. I went on to stat that pricier gear also havery markets. This point is not asinine.



Perhaps not, but the assertion that there is no great difference between them because you can not afford them certainly is.

You also, by extension, can’t afford a Gulfstream, but a jet is greatly different from a lens. So is a cinema camera.

A fundamental difference between the 28-70 and the products you mentioned is their markets. The latter (notwitstanding the Leica lens) will mostly be purchased by businesses, at whom they are aimed. Many businesses may buy 28-70/2 lenses (event photographers for example might be able to replace multiple primes with it), but a sizable portion of owners I expect will be enthusiasts.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 17, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> A certain Yoda quote comes to mind


Now I am curious.... What quote?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 17, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Now I am curious.... What quote?


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 17, 2018)

Judge me not by my size, for my ally is the four's (5D Mark IV's), and a powerful ally it is!


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 17, 2018)

sdz said:


> So you say.




As would many. Your examples are ridiculous.


----------



## nonac (Sep 17, 2018)

I’ll borrow one from CPS after they are released and try it out. The first one I actually buy though will need a dual card set-up, so the wait continues.


----------



## sdz (Sep 17, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Perhaps not, but the assertion that there is no great difference between them because you can not afford them certainly is.
> 
> You also, by extension, can’t afford a Gulfstream, but a jet is greatly different from a lens. So is a cinema camera.
> 
> A fundamental difference between the 28-70 and the products you mentioned is their markets. The latter (notwitstanding the Leica lens) will mostly be purchased by businesses, at whom they are aimed. Many businesses may buy 28-70/2 lenses (event photographers for example might be able to replace multiple primes with it), but a sizable portion of owners I expect will be enthusiasts.



It's not asinine to claim that objects that are priced beyond my means share one property: they are priced beyond my means to purchase them. I would buy a Red if I could afford it. But I have budget constraints. These budget constraints are objective facts. They refer to measurable properties that are valid for any rational person. These properties are also social facts. They, as such, can be described and explained by refering to the distribution of wealth in this society. A jet also belongs to the category, things SDZ cannon afford. A jet shares a property with the Red camera: I lack the means to buy it. It does not matter what distinguishes a jet from a camera. I'll buy neither.

If these considerations seem silly what talking about cameras and lenses, they are very difficult matters when one is forced to compare medicines and food, rent and clothes, etc. Marginal analysis can make clear why a $3,000 lens may be uneconomic for even a business when a $1,799 lens would be good enough.


----------



## sdz (Sep 17, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> As would many. Your examples are ridiculous.



If life were a popularity contest....


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 17, 2018)

sdz said:


> It's not asinine to claim that objects that are priced beyond my means share one property



Agreed. Where we part is the idea that things sharing a single property demonstrates that there is no great difference between them. 



sdz said:


> Marginal analysis can make clear why a $3,000 lens may be uneconomic for even a business when a $1,799 lens would be good enough.



Agreed again, though I don’t think most would consider a 100% increase marginal (comparing the $3k and $1.8k items). Also, they may consider the ability for one $3k item to stand reasonably in the place of multiple less expensive items (say f/1.4 primes, which are the same amount wider than f/2 as f/2 is than f/2.8, but are less flexible and for thus working photographers often necessitate dedicated camera bodies).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2018)

sdz said:


> It's not asinine to claim that objects that are priced beyond my means share one property: they are priced beyond my means to purchase them.


It's not reasonable to suggest that your personal threshold for affordability is relevant to anyone but you. You went to the trouble of looking up and actually linking products in a different league aimed at a different market, and then persisted in defending them as appropriate comparators not meaningfully different from the RF 28-70/2. That's where you crossed over into asinine commentary.


----------



## fullstop (Sep 17, 2018)

well, i'd argue that "consumer products" with prices above national median (net) monthly income levels are beyond "affordable".

while in the past electrical household products such as stoves, washing machines, fridges etc where in that range, we are luckily beyond that thanks to sufficient global competition for these products. Today it is typicallly only cars in the "need a loan to buy" product category. at least in economically well developed countries.

imaging gear priced beyond 3000 USD/€ are pure "luxury goods" in the same category as luxury watches, jewellery, works of art, etc.

of course true fanbois (Canon or any other brand) will consider any price "justified" and even the most exotic product follies a "piece of art", be it a "normal fov" lens like a Z 58mm/0.95, a standard tele zoom like a "grandmaster" 70-200/2.8 or a "standard zoom" like a 28-70mm/2.0 or "middle-class" cameras with pedestrian specs priced at 2500 USD/€. in reality a manual focus 58/1.2 lens irca zeiss Otus are asinine "Ford Edsel" type products in late 2018.

all of those high priced imaging products are objectively outside the realm of being "affordable" to regular income earners in even the most affluent countries on this planet.

it is also an objective fact that the highly oligopolist nature of the imaging gear industry and their extremely "proprietary" technology and "anti competition business practices" are the main reason for those high prices. basically it is a state similar to the car industry up to the 1970s, before japanese (remember those early datsuns and hondas?) and later on korean manufacturers (remember those first, sorry little hyundai ponyies and see where Hyundai and Kia are today) broke the price regime of the US and European car makers oligopoly. up until then every last Buick or oldsmobile clunker and every sorry Fiat or Renault rust heap cost an inordinate amount of money and could still be sold to customers who had little or no choice.

regrettably the only joint/common standard initiative in the digital imaging gear market was and still is (Micro) Four Thirds ... unfortunately with a sensor too small to effectively compete. not oin gear size, not in performance, not in price. duh. 

unfortunately nobody saw fit to join forced abd enter the market with a common, OPEN STANDARD mirrorfree FF-sensored system about 5 years ago, when the window of opportunity was wide open.

Had Fuji, Panasonic, Olympus, Sigma, Ricoh, Cosina, Samsung, Samyang, Leica - or just some of them - joined forces for a mirrorfree 36x24mm "FF" system back in 2012, instead of all trying their own proprietary systems with wrong sensor tech (sigma, Fuji) and/or too small imaging circle stuff, they could have broken the Canon/Nikon/Sony triopol and had a realistic chance to be the leading force in the market by today.

and all of us "non-fan boys" would have a choice of reasonable, non-exotic and affordable imaging gear along the lines of eg the new, compact, decent Samyang AF lenses - but without any compromises in functionality as a result of "reverse engineering" of proprietary tech which the triopol refuses to license.

as it stands, we can only hope for the next wave of disruptive technology to open a new window of opportunity. it will likely be the paradigm shift technology that finally frees us from large glass optics ... multi-camera/lightfield type computational imaging. Lytro and Light (L16) were "too weak, too little, too early", but it will happen, eventually.

unfortunately we are still a number of years away from that. meanwhile canon, nikon, sony can continue to offer exotic follies like f/0.95 lenses at 5k a pop or 28-70/2.0 zooms at 4k a pop ... INSTEAD OF "truly useful to many users" products like an up-to-date, decent IQ 50/1.4 IS lens priced at a reasonable, fair and affordable 399 usd or €.

so much for "affordable" and "imaging gear" market.


----------



## meywd (Sep 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> well, i'd argue that "consumer products" with prices above national median (net) monthly income levels are beyond "affordable".
> 
> while in the past electrical household products such as stoves, washing machines, fridges etc where in that range, we are luckily beyond that thanks to sufficient global competition for these products. Today it is typicallly only cars in the "need a loan to buy" product category. at least in economically well developed countries.
> 
> ...



Really? why go FF? you have the rebel line if you want affordable, you have the M camera and lenses, if you want to buy Pro gear then you are not looking for affordable? you speak of home appliances, do you know how much a pro grade mixer is worth from a good brand? a pro stove? LG sells waching machines for 3k-4k and these aren't pro level


----------



## fullstop (Sep 17, 2018)

meywd said:


> Really? why go FF? you have the rebel line if you want affordable, you have the M camera and lenses, if you want to buy Pro gear then you are not looking for affordable? you speak of home appliances, do you know how much a pro grade mixer is worth from a good brand? a pro stove? LG sells waching machines for 3k-4k and these aren't pro level



i do NOT consider imaging gear as "pro", only because it has an FF sensor inside. 

No acceptable reason, why a camera with pedestrian specs like EOS R [minus video recording st*ff] should not be available as low as 999,-


----------



## meywd (Sep 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> i do NOT consider imaging gear as "pro", only because it has an FF sensor inside.
> 
> No acceptable reason, why a camera with pedestrian specs like EOS R [minus video recording st*ff] should not be available as low as 999,-



Thats your choice, you have cheaper options, if its about price , and they say the camera is only 5% of the photo


----------



## fullstop (Sep 17, 2018)

meywd said:


> Thats your choice, you have cheaper options, if its about price , and they say the camera is only 5% of the photo



No, i have no choice. I want a universally capable stills-only FF for little money. Plus a few matching, moderately fast lenses. "Pro" or not I don't care.
But ... I will "eventually" get pretty exactly what I want, because I am right in the middle of of the (relatively) largest imaging gear market niche: stills, enthusiast.


----------



## docsmith (Sep 17, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> If they expand it to 16-35 and 70-200 also f/2, I might bite on a body.


Yeah, combine this with Don's sentiment that for work, at times he needs all the light he can get, this is why there might be a large market for these lenses.

But as others have noted, it might not be a 70-200, so let's play with this. It would be nice if Canon released similar lenses with the same filter size (which they occasionally do), so if we reverse the general math on the 95 mm front filter of the 28-70 (that is a big boy), 95 x 2 = 180 mm. The 28-70 is a 2.5x zoom, if Canon repeated that, then we'd be looking at a 70-175 f/2. Final calc to ballpark the lens, but 200/2.8 = 71.4 mm. 71.4/77 = 92.7%. So reversing and applying the max focal length / max aperture = filter size calc, 95x2*92.7% = 176 mm. 

I could see the tele being somewhere between 70-135 f/2 and 70-180 f/2, but, if I were to guess, I think we could be looking at a BIG 70-175 f/2. No complaints here. Weight would likely be an issue, but if they could control that, that would be one popular lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> No acceptable reason, why a camera with pedestrian specs like EOS R [minus video recording st*ff] should not be available as low as 999,-


No reason acceptable _to you_. You don't get to decide what is acceptable for anyone else. Obviously there are acceptable reasons to price it at $2300 for the many people who will buy it, and for Canon. 

But don't stress about it, just wait a few years and I'm sure you can pick up a used EOS R for a price you'll find acceptable.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> No, i have no choice. I want a universally capable stills-only FF for little money.


Then it's a good thing you live in the AvTvM Universe where that's possible, because out here in reality, you'd be f*ck'd, dude! 

Edit: actually, I'm wrong on that. There are a crap ton of 'universally capable stills-only FF for little money' available...just go to eBay and search "film SLR".


----------



## fullstop (Sep 17, 2018)

Don't worry about me. I usually get what I want, even if it may take a little while.


----------



## sdz (Sep 17, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> It's not reasonable to suggest that your personal threshold for affordability is relevant to anyone but you. You went to the trouble of looking up and actually linking products in a different league aimed at a different market, and then persisted in defending them as appropriate comparators not meaningfully different from the RF 28-70/2. That's where you crossed over into asinine commentary.



My personal threshold for affordability was merely an example. I could have written the whole passage from the perspective of the generalized other. I didn't because personalizing as I did gives the reasoning I used the weight of someone who has actually thought through the issue as a practical task. I crossed over no line putting me into asinine commentary.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2018)

sdz said:


> My personal threshold...
> I crossed over no line putting me into asinine commentary.


Based on your personal threshold, no. Based on the thresholds of others on this forum, absolutely. Most people would likely not consider a $3K lens and an $80K cinema video camera to be a reasonable comparison.


----------



## sdz (Sep 17, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Agreed. Where we part is the idea that things sharing a single property demonstrates that there is no great difference between them.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed again, though I don’t think most would consider a 100% increase marginal (comparing the $3k and $1.8k items). Also, they may consider the ability for one $3k item to stand reasonably in the place of multiple less expensive items (say f/1.4 primes, which are the same amount wider than f/2 as f/2 is than f/2.8, but are less flexible and for thus working photographers often necessitate dedicated camera bodies).



Marginal Concepts

The claim that an increase or decrease is marginal of a quantity or quality means that the increase or decrease of a quantity or quality moves a limit or constraint. It does not mean large or small.


----------



## tron (Sep 17, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Then it's a good thing you live in the AvTvM Universe where that's possible, because out here in reality, you'd be f*ck'd, dude!
> 
> Edit: actually, I'm wrong on that. There are a crap ton of 'universally capable stills-only FF for little money' available...just go to eBay and search "film SLR".


The answer at least a few months ago was a EOS 6D. B&H sold them for 999 and it was offering at the same time an SD card 64gb extreme pro and a portable 4TB WD my passport disk. That offer was then but now you can get it also for 999 but with less gift value. For the record I do not work in that shop I cannot even buy from that shop due to living in different continent. But the point is that there are cheap FF DSLRs that are very decent by the way. (Obviously this answer is not meant for neuro who doesn't need one more FF camera but for fullstop)


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 17, 2018)

docsmith said:


> Yeah, combine this with Don's sentiment that for work, at times he needs all the light he can get, this is why there might be a large market for these lenses.



At work, it is a question of the right tool for the job.... Sometimes that tool is a FF camera and a fast lens, most of the time it is any Oly and 12-50 lens (very light weight and easily fits in tool bag), and sometimes a phone camera.... 

There is no such thing as "pro gear", a pro uses whatever the job requires....


----------



## jeffa4444 (Sep 17, 2018)

After the launch period and maybe six or seven months time if the price has dropped slightly, then yes. I pre-ordered the 6D MKII only to see the price fall within six months of launch so I won't make that mistake again.


----------



## Durf (Sep 17, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> There is no such thing as "pro gear", a pro uses whatever the job requires....



I'm a _"professional amateur"_, but I totally agree with your comment.

I if I was a pro I'm sure my kit would be a bit different, or even perhaps not. Just doing what I do (Landscape and nature stills mostly) as a hobby and for therapy  my kit may sound a bit overboard, but for the most part I use everything I have rather quite often. If I left most of my stuff at home I would be frustrated I didn't have a certain lens etc for a certain scene I found....I'm very used to my kit and 1 lens forgot at home would be noticed quickly out in the feild.

I mentioned in a previous post that I thought the RF 28-70 F2 was an over-priced novelty item; for me and what I do it is, but for others it may be the cats meow.

I'm sure if I had a EOS-R and that lens for a day to use I'd have a blast with it and love it. (and probably wish I had the money to buy it)......but, it's not needed in my kit and world of photography.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 17, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Never mind that whole C700 4K full frame thing



In DSLRs. Look at the heat sinking involved for the C700 - that is how Canon do it properly. They do not have the processing capacity in the sensor nor in the processor to do it in a DSALR without risking heating issues.


----------



## Utonagan (Sep 17, 2018)

I try to avoid first gen and it's not only where Canon is concerned. More proven updated models like a 7Dmk3, yes.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 17, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> In DSLRs. Look at the heat sinking involved for the C700 - that is how Canon do it properly. They do not have the processing capacity in the sensor nor in the processor to do it in a DSALR without risking heating issues.


I don’t know that I buy they *can’t*, or that the limitation is thermal, but my post was a bit tongue in cheek anyway.


----------



## jolyonralph (Sep 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> i do NOT consider imaging gear as "pro", only because it has an FF sensor inside.
> 
> No acceptable reason, why a camera with pedestrian specs like EOS R [minus video recording st*ff] should not be available as low as 999,-



Well, Canon haven't launched a DSLR without video since the 5D Mark II was released in 2008, so the chances of them doing a camera without video just for you are pretty close to zero.

Also, the video recording stuff probably adds only a tiny fraction to the cost of the camera. It certainly wouldn't reduce the price by 50% or more


----------



## Takingshots (Sep 18, 2018)

docsmith said:


> I am glad Canon released the 28-70 f/2. It is a statement lens. Perhaps you are right and the final market might not be large (I think it will be large, btw). But I am glad to see Canon making statements showing what they can do in general, and, more specifically, what they can do with a new mount. 50 f/1.2...another statement. Granted, it is really similar to the Sigma 50A...so that is a bit of a one up (f/1.2) and mostly a "me too" statement. But I am still glad to see Canon putting out a lens like that.
> 
> https://www.the-digital-picture.com...LensComp=941&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0


Agree


----------



## Takingshots (Sep 18, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> It's not 'crippled'. Canon have made it clear that they do not believe they have the technology to deliver FF downsampled to 4K with the reliability they want to deliver. That isn't 'crippled' that is called not being able to do it.
> 
> Why do you assume someone who disagrees with you, or points out the failure in your logic, is working for Canon? Do you come here and criticise Canon because you work for Sony?
> 
> For me, Canon spend their dollar on things I would rather use than video.


I don't work for Sony. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.


----------



## Takingshots (Sep 18, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> 4K *VIDEO. *Forefront of *PHOTO*graphy. Geez, do I need to draw you a map?


I hope this one is the best seller of the year. Pre-orders are thru' the roof... If not, Canon is in the right direction in this FF mirrorless. 
Btw, you can draw whatever map you want and shove it up your ... / Thank you kindly.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 18, 2018)

Takingshots said:


> I don't work for Sony. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.



Which is fine. So why make similar accusations against those who disagree with you?


----------



## jayphotoworks (Sep 18, 2018)

I'd like to wait and see. Not because of its recent EOS R release, but more specifically how they plan to slot in upcoming RF lenses and its impact on EF lenses. Selfishly, I had hoped that a native EF mount EOS R would have been ideal for my own needs. I would have continued to leverage my investment in EF lenses on my BM/DSMC2 bodies, while eventually transitioning back to Canon from Sony for my hybrid bodies over the next 2 years or so instead of maintaining two lens systems. Had the EOS R been more competent in its video performance, I would have even considered adapters to start, but as it stands, there is some real functionality that I use all the time that is entirely missing compounded with the uncertainty of Canon's lens ecosystem.

For now, I'll wait for the rumored EOS R pro-body in the next 6+ months at which point I might be able to glean some additional clarity on how all of this plays out. Canon really made a statement with its starting group of lenses, but it seems misplaced, at least currently with what they had to show with their first mirrorless release. Now that I'm also shooting Sony, I'm sure the A7Siii will also be a compelling upgrade for my needs as well in the near future.

On a side note, in terms of Canon's EOS Cinema lineup, will future C200II, C300 cinema bodies have the option of supporting RF? When I was shooting a C200, the 24-105II was excellent w/ DPAF, but some lenses were clunky. I would assume all RF lenses would be consistent, fully supporting DPAF with quick and smooth AF and aperture adjustments. More questions than answers at this point...


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 18, 2018)

jayphotoworks said:


> On a side note, in terms of Canon's EOS Cinema lineup, will future C200II, C300 cinema bodies have the option of supporting RF?



That would be a seemingly trivial option (different front end and perhaps different interface PCB), but I suppose much of it depends on the market success of the RF lenses.


----------



## jayphotoworks (Sep 18, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> That would be a seemingly trivial option (different front end and perhaps different interface PCB), but I suppose much of it depends on the market success of the RF lenses.



Agreed. I do believe a native RF mount would make more sense than an EF mount that cannot mount RF lenses.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 20, 2018)

Ugh, look at about one minute into this video. Yes granted recovering a photo 5 stops is never advisable, but this does not look good. I did not expect to give up anything on the EOS R compared to the 5D4 image quality wise. This may not be the case in actuality.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 20, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Ugh, look at about one minute into this video. Yes granted recovering a photo 5 stops is never advisable, but this does not look good. I did not expect to give up anything on the EOS R compared to the 5D4 image quality wise. This may not be the case in actuality.


If it’s the same sensor, but the entire signal chain from read out to processing is continually exercised in order to feed the viewfinder in one and not the other, it stands to reason that there will be more heat generated in the former, and therefore more noise/lower dynamic range unless there is better management of that heat.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 20, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> If it’s the same sensor, but the entire signal chain from read out to processing is continually exercised in order to feed the viewfinder in one and not the other, it stands to reason that there will be more noise associated with heat in the former, thus lower dynamic range


I'm pretty disappointed by this. With the increased ISO range, I expected lower noise, not more. And yes, I understand that high ISO noise is different from noise pushing a dark photo to the extreme at lower ISO, but I'm weary of how well shadows will be able to be recovered on the EOS R compared to the 5D4 under any conditions based on this. 

And again I know pushing a photo 5 stops is never ideal. But where the flaws are readily apparent after pushing 5 stops, I worry that they'll begin to creep in sooner, at a level where you would normally push a file.


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 20, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Ugh, look at about one minute into this video. Yes granted recovering a photo 5 stops is never advisable, but this does not look good. I did not expect to give up anything on the EOS R compared to the 5D4 image quality wise. This may not be the case in actuality.



I am sorry, I couldn't watch it. Thirty seconds in was enough.
When they do not have enough expertise to get their sound right on a review video how can I take this as a reliable source.
An understanding and ability to use the mediums they are reviewing is mandatory IMO for any amount of credibility.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 20, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> And again I know pushing a photo 5 stops is never ideal. But where the flaws are readily apparent after pushing 5 stops, I worry that they'll begin to creep in sooner, at a level where you would normally push a file.



What level would you normally push a file? That answers your question.

Personally I find talk of five stop lifts laughable, and always have. I have never seen an image from any camera where that level of adjustment leads to a good result, but that's just me. For a lower level of adjustment, particularly in the shadows there isn't going to be a *meaningful* difference between the 5D MkIV and the R, if you are happy with the adjustments you do to a 5D MkIV RAW file you will be equally happy with an R RAW file.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 20, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> I'm pretty disappointed by this. With the increased ISO range, I expected lower noise, not more. And yes, I understand that high ISO noise is different from noise pushing a dark photo to the extreme at lower ISO, but I'm weary of how well shadows will be able to be recovered on the EOS R compared to the 5D4 under any conditions based on this.
> 
> And again I know pushing a photo 5 stops is never ideal. But where the flaws are readily apparent after pushing 5 stops, I worry that they'll begin to creep in sooner, at a level where you would normally push a file.





Kit Lens Jockey said:


> I'm pretty disappointed by this. With the increased ISO range, I expected lower noise, not more.



And increased non-boost ISO range talks to increased analog amplification, not necessarily lower noise at base ISO.

But let’s look at it qualitatively.

What is the thermal solution? Ultimately, conduction to the surrounding air, where air is a poor conductor. (There will be some natural convection, and occasionally wind for forced convection, but conduction is the primary mechanism). All else being equal (materials, finishes, etc), a camera with more surface area will dissipate heat better.

Since the camera is smaller, and since the electronics are always running full tilt to process the EVF resolution feed, as well as the EVF itself running, the fact that (per Tony Northrup) dynamic range is only slightly worse indicates that they likely used lower power electronics to accomplish more. If there is a larger body coming, I’d expect better performance, again all else being equal.


----------



## Jethro (Sep 20, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> What level would you normally push a file? That answers your question.
> 
> Personally I find talk of five stop lifts laughable, and always have. I have never seen an image from any camera where that level of adjustment leads to a good result, but that's just me. For a lower level of adjustment, particularly in the shadows there isn't going to be a *meaningful* difference between the 5D MkIV and the R, if you are happy with the adjustments you do to a 5D MkIV RAW file you will be equally happy with an R RAW file.


Yes and yes, but it is interesting that there seems to be a different result coming from (we're assuming) the same sensor. Frankly (as a 6D owner contemplating upgrading) the idea of being able to recover anywhere near 5 stops, and get a usable result (even if it then needs manipulation in finishing) is still sounding good to me.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 20, 2018)

Jethro said:


> Yes and yes, but it is interesting that there seems to be a different result coming from (we're assuming) the same sensor. Frankly (as a 6D owner contemplating upgrading) the idea of being able to recover anywhere near 5 stops, and get a usable result (even if it then needs manipulation in finishing) is still sounding good to me.



To me it would be more of a surprise to get the same results from the two cameras. They are different types, they have different main processors and they use the sensor in completely different ways.

If you are a 6D owner, MkI or MkII, fear not, the R RAW files are a big leap over your current camera in adjustment capabilities.


----------



## bhf3737 (Sep 20, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Ugh, look at about one minute into this video. Yes granted recovering a photo 5 stops is never advisable, but this does not look good. I did not expect to give up anything on the EOS R compared to the 5D4 image quality wise. This may not be the case in actuality.


As mentioned in the other thread, the difference may be because of poor/sub-optimal conversion of RAW files and nothing more. The publisher of video should have disclosed the tool used for RAW conversion, and threats to validity of the experiment. Of course we shouldn't expect more from click-bait pseudo-info-tainers.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 20, 2018)

To me it seems that the added heat and continuously feed from the sensor may be what causes this..

I learned yesterday that it is in fact just 3 fps with focus priority when tracking, that and this banding makes it a lot less desirable than I initially thought... I know they always try to do the best they can and to get to the final products it is always a fine balance and a lot of engineering and design and problem solving, which leads me to think they just don’t have the tech others may have, and that’s surprising.... especially since the lens designers and engineers are the best there is....


----------



## mb66energy (Sep 20, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> I am sorry, I couldn't watch it. Thirty seconds in was enough.
> When they do not have enough expertise to get their sound right on a review video how can I take this as a reliable source.
> An understanding and ability to use the mediums they are reviewing is mandatory IMO for any amount of credibility.



I stopped at 8:32 after the comparison EOS R <=> 7R M iii : The images of EOS R showed detail of subjects much larger than the Sony which is disturbing because the the Sony has much more pixels. And this exaggerates the noise of the Canon.

Comparing the prices was another joke: EOS R costs new 2500 with adapter and Sony is about 2600 2nd hand. I would compare EOS R with standard adapter 2400 EUR/$ and Sony new with metabones adapter for about 3500 EUR/$.

The banding may be an issue but for well exposed photos I prefer the overall look of detail of the EOS R. For me as a non-professional photographer taking photos for joy and for material for physics lessons I rely on my set of lenses from 10 ... 400 (800 with converter) mm of Canon lenses - the EOS R would be the natural solution.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 20, 2018)

At 7:41, how is that a comparison when the Canon shot is MUCH higher exposed? Did I miss something ?


----------



## aa_angus (Sep 20, 2018)

justaCanonuser said:


> I already have two ML FF bodies from Canon's R(angefinder) system, including some nice "R" lenses...
> 
> Seriously, I am going to test an EOS R when my local shop has it available, and then I'll make my mind up. I am tempted by some RF lenses (the more expensive ones I fear)...
> 
> View attachment 180405



umm didn't you say in another thread that you didn't need AF, or any digital features to take the world's best images? Now you're investing heavily into EOS R and lenses? That was a quick turnaround.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 20, 2018)

Jethro said:


> Yes and yes, but it is interesting that there seems to be a different result coming from (we're assuming) the same sensor.



I don't find it particularly surprising - I see the same sort of thing in audio and the last generation of Sony there were comments about how the DR improvements seemed more about signal processing than the actual sensor technology. 
Raw is not really raw because it needs to undergo conversion from digital to analogue and although we like to think the signal will be processed as little as possible to give the photographer maximum flexibility, it also gives the manufacturer scope on noise reduction etc. One example is the Sony processing known as 'star eater' - low noise raw images to the detriment of astrophotography.


----------



## docsmith (Sep 20, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Ugh, look at about one minute into this video. Yes granted recovering a photo 5 stops is never advisable, but this does not look good. I did not expect to give up anything on the EOS R compared to the 5D4 image quality wise. This may not be the case in actuality.


I may have missed it, but weren't these jpgs? If so, that will mean something to jpg users that recover something by 5 stops.....but if those were jpg, it could be a processing artifact and will not be the same experience when using the RAW file. 

I watched twice and I do not think it is mentioned if they are RAW or JPG. But I could have missed it.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 20, 2018)

docsmith said:


> I may have missed it, but weren't these jpgs? If so, that will mean something to jpg users that recover something by 5 stops.....but if those were jpg, it could be a processing artifact and will not be the same experience when using the RAW file.
> 
> I watched twice and I do not think it is mentioned if they are RAW or JPG. But I could have missed it.


They are dng converted raw files

So not optimal, but I doubt a finished raw profiler would make a difference to that banding.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Sep 20, 2018)

I just want to see how many of you guys(maybe a girl or two might post here) are seriously buying it.


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 20, 2018)

Not me. I'm waiting for the next version, hopefully with performance and features more in line with the 5D IV. 

The controls on the R look a little rough. The little touch strip? Choosing AF points on the touch screen? Too hard to judge fairly just seeing the first-look videos. If it comes to Best Buy and I can try it, I might like the controls. No other "camera stores" within 100 miles.

BUT, if a new EF version of the 50mm f/1.2L comes out, I could wait even longer.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 20, 2018)

I'm not either, as Canon call the R a middle level camera I will await the more interesting versions, though it has piqued my interest in trying out the new system where I didn't think it would.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 20, 2018)

I am! Sold and delivered my 1dx2 to its new owner today and confirmed I’m getting the R on the first batch


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Sep 20, 2018)

Hopefully going to have a play on Monday. We will see.

I don't think that is the camera for me but it would be silly not to give it a go!


----------



## ken (Sep 20, 2018)

Viggo said:


> I am! Sold and delivered my 1dx2 to its new owner today and confirmed I’m getting the R on the first batch



Wow! I hope it meets your expectations! I wouldn't have considered such a move without renting it first. Let everyone know your thoughts after you've used it for a bit!


----------



## Viggo (Sep 20, 2018)

ken said:


> Wow! I hope it meets your expectations! I wouldn't have considered such a move without renting it first. Let everyone know your thoughts after you've used it for a bit!



No such thing as rent one here. Besides, I already knew before the R I wasn’t keeping my 1-series anymore. First time in 10 years I don’t own one, lol.

I’ll absolutely share my thoughts on here at first I will be using EF lenses 35 L II and 85 L IS, and then later I’ll probably sell the 85 and go for the RF 50


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 20, 2018)

I pre-ordered it. The extreme low-light focusing was the clincher for me. If it can focus in even darker conditions than the 5D4, I'm sold on it. I've lost so many good photos while the camera is struggling to find something bright/contrasty enough to focus on in very dark situations. The 5D4's ability to take a photo in low light with a fast lens exceeds its ability to focus in low light with a fast lens. 

(And yes I understand that Canon kind of pulled a fast one when they rated it to -6EV by rating it with a faster lens than is normally used for that, but as I understand it, it still beats the 5D4 even with all else equal.)


----------



## sdz (Sep 21, 2018)

I'll wait. Newer versions will appear. The price for the R may drop. A new camera is not a compelling need I have, an itch I must scratch. So, I will wait.

I have no allegiance to mirrored or mirrorless, only to a better camera that's worth the money. These days, any crummy photo I take is due to operator error.


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 21, 2018)

Viggo said:


> I am! Sold and delivered my 1dx2 to its new owner today and confirmed I’m getting the R on the first batch



I hate car analogies.
But, statement sounds just like this "I just traded my Raptor for a new Mustang."
Sure they are both sporty, but one is made to race in the rain and mud, the other on the street.

That is a bold swap.
From apple to orange.


----------



## dak723 (Sep 21, 2018)

Yes, in all liklihood. Hopefully will get a chance to play with it in a store, but definitely am interested in a FF mirrorless. Can't afford a higher end model (nor would I ever need one), so this is likely the model for me.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 21, 2018)

Nah, I find it entirely uninteresting and a step down from my 1Dx. 

The 28-70 looks cool, but I’m not biting on the body just for that.




takesome1 said:


> I hate car analogies.
> But, statement sounds just like this "I just traded my Raptor for a new Mustang.”



More like for a Taurus.


----------



## LetsStewIt (Sep 21, 2018)

Going to wait until Cyber Monday sale. I'm only invested in a 7D, 35 f/1.4, and 16-35. So, will ditch those and go ahead and get into the R Ecosystem with the EOS R and 50 f/1.2. I'm hoping they throw in the grip with the body for a sale like they did with 5div(wishful thinking), and usually places have discounts on lenses on Cyber Monday so hopefully can take advantage of that with the 50 f/1.2 as well. No big rush though.


----------



## Bennymiata (Sep 21, 2018)

I'm sitting on the fence on this one.
My 5d3 is still working really well, and I love my M5 too, but as my 5d3 is now getting on to 6years old I have been thinking of getting a 5d4.
This new R certainly has most of the things I wanted in a new camera and the 28-70 F2 would be very useful for the events I do. I love the touch and drag focussing of the M5 and would imagine it is even better on the R.
A single card slot would be OK I guess, as I have never had a card failure, but 2 would be safer.
I'll wait until they are on display and have a play with one to see if I like it.
If I do, I'll probably buy one with the 28-70, as I can use my EF lenses on it anyway and my 24-105 is now getting onto 10 years old.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 21, 2018)

> More like for a Taurus.



I get that, but as I’ve said a few times now, my needs in a camera has changed, and I can’t carry the weight anymore. So there are a lot of things I love with the R that the 1dx2 doesn’t do. I’m sure I’ll miss a few things for a while, but I’ve gotten used to everything in my life that was once new so it’s not an issue.

And out of 13 shots of my son walking very slowly I got 2 okay shots and the rest is off or completely off, so how can the R be worse?


----------



## fullstop (Sep 21, 2018)

i will not preorder EOS R. Neither the body nor the initial RF lens lineup meet my expectations. But will certainly also not buy more EF lenses or mirrorslappers.

EOS R is bigger than i'd like


and given its specs also overpriced. Nikon Z6 and Sony A7 III both offer better price/value.

still want to consolidate from 2 systems (EF-M and EF) to only one (stills) system that is 1. FF-sensored and 2. as compact/light as possible and 3. "affordable". 

Don't need hi-end large f/1.2 primes or f/2.0 zooms. Looking for small and "decent-enough" f/1.8 primes and f/4 zooms.

Totally open at this point whether my future system will be Canon, Nikon or Sony. Don't expect the upcoming Panasonic to be stills-centric, but if it is, also a candidate. Good to have some choice.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Sep 21, 2018)

Nope will wait untill there is a mirrorless that is satisfactory for wildlife. Whenever that may be.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 21, 2018)

Nope. Just bought an as-new 1Dx instead.

I have it on good authority that wildlife likes mirrors...


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 21, 2018)

Viggo said:


> And out of 13 shots of my son walking very slowly I got 2 okay shots and the rest is off or completely off, so how can the R be worse?



Errr... Wouldn't getting your camera _fixed_ have been a good idea, Viggo?


----------



## Viggo (Sep 21, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Errr... Wouldn't getting your camera _fixed_ have been a good idea, Viggo?


Lol, absolutely nothing wrong with it at all. With a 70-200, 200, 35 L II etc it’s flawless... and the 85 L IS is just as bad with any other camera. I get the occasional result, but the difference in precision in lots of light and with center point and closer to the edge in normal daylight is huge. And indoors even with a lot of natural light it just doesn’t do... I’m just so dead tired from it.... so the R might make it better, the same or worse, we’ll see...


----------



## Andrei (Sep 21, 2018)

Yes...i will buy it. But first i want to try it on a store.
I do wedding and portraits. 
If the af will work great with ef lenses...than i don't see any reason not to upgrade. 
If you have a 6d...6d2 or 5d3...than it is a great upgrade. 
I see all comments ar about video specs... And nothing about stills. 
I think this is a great camera for stills and a good one for video. You all need 4k... Whait... What?
4k it's still not as mature... You need a powerfull machine to process that...and that machine costs a lot more than a the camera itself.
There are a lot of clients who complain about 4k beeing a theatre experience... Not a movie one. 
You shoot in 4k to downscale then in 1080...lol...just tu have a better quality then the nativ 1080...instead ow shooting 1080 nativ and upscale to 2.7k
I have friends videographers who use 80d..6d2 and the results are a lot better then others with a63...
You really have to know your ghear...to invest in you and stuning lenses...
Also...most rated photograpers for weeding are using mid level cameras... With stunnig result.
Who care if it does not have 5 stops of DR
If you have this problem... Then you have to consider very seriously to change your photography career. 
Watch this with a simple 6d...
This complains are just resons of beeing not a photographer...it does not have that... It does not have that... Bla bla... Bla bla...
An yes... It does not have that because you don't know to use your camere...you don't know the phisics end the fundamental low of photograpy.
First invest in yourself... In lenses... In good lights... And then in camera badys
We want more...and do less.
And i'm really not a pro.


----------



## LDS (Sep 21, 2018)

Not interested in a mirrorless camera yet. It doesn't add anything to my needs and style of photography. Some of those RF lenses are indeed interesting, but I've finished a couple years ago to build my EF lenses lineup, and really don't want to start again for a while, as long as it fully covers my needs.


----------



## Andrei (Sep 21, 2018)

And another thing...for peoples who will whait for the next mirrorless camera...
You will buy that camera then or just whait for the next next mirrorless =))
Yes...technology can improve your performance...but technology is changing all the time...
Canon R it's all about lanses...not the camera...it is a new step for developing higher performance and image quality.
Look at the history...when canon change the fd mount to ef...with 54mm mount...what a performance there...a new perspective was open for large apertures...
Now we see f2 zooms...and f1. 2 or 0.95 lenses. 
I see a lot of bad photographers who complains about shooting at f1. 4 or eaven f2 subjects that are mooving and the pics are not sharp =)) yes...a good and very fast af can help you ghetting in sharp... But man... At f1. 2 or 2...with a 35mm or a 85...you have all the chance to get bad result...due to verry short in focus plan...corelated with the difference between the moment you press the shotter...the lock af and the subject moovment...=))
You will need a tele lens with a f2. 8 maximum aperture...a long distance from the mooment subject to have bigger in focus plan...and a more commpressed background. 
Stop complaining and buy the ghear that make you happy...brings you money etc etc. 
Tell me what client will pixelkiki your 4k foothage =))
Yes...it should be sharp... But the moust impact are other things like...colours...emotions...what is in that photo/video...what is transmited...
Eaven with 12mp you can print 30cm by 60cm albums with no difference then with a 24mp camera. 
Still no difference on a 4k tv waching 1080 or a 4k content at a normal distance view. 
Any good camera can deliver 12-14 stops of DR and it is a lot...
But if you shoot in jpg...then stop complaining
Still no difference in iso3200 on 5d2 and 6d and all copared camere... 
Yes... With newer models you can shoot up to iso 12000 and have usable image
Where do you shoot with 6400 iso? In a verry dark ambient or in a prety decent light conditions? Because it is a verry big differece there...
With a nice light setup i shoot at the restaurant with iso 400-800 maximum. See ex in attach. 
I shoot first cortain with higher speed shutter... And second cortain with low shutter speed depending on the situation. 
I shoot only central point =)) because i don't do sports...and eaven if i have 9 or 41 af points...practical i have only one and other 9 or 40 useless
One focus point has moust medium format cameras =)) 
Yes...af is the big deal...it has to be fast... And accurate...to track well
On shooting portraits it's a plus having face or eye detect...make life easy... But still you have to know how to use it. 
How fast it is that single point and how accurate it is on different situatio s...this is the problem...and game changer 
Moust of any pro photographers have more then they need with this camera these days. 
This is a plus. 
Specs don't matter...on the paper. Real use is the important thing
Ergonomic... Easy to use.. Reability... Final quality...all make a camera to be good or bad. 
Beeing able to do everithing...but nothing very good it is less important then dooing few things very good. 
Experience show me that underrated camera outperfom modern cameras simply beacouse they do the job right... They have ergonomics... They are easy to use/change setting etc etc and delliver quallity.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 21, 2018)

Are you just here to talk down to everyone or what’s the deal? You’re generalizing way too much, and it sounds pretty condescending ....


----------



## Andrei (Sep 21, 2018)

Viggo said:


> Are you just here to talk down to everyone or what’s the deal? You’re generalizing way too much, and it sounds pretty condescending ....


You don't get the point.
A lot of peoples here are complaining about not buying the camera because of that or that or other =)) a lot of reasons why not =)) 
With What camera do they shoot now? Do they feel limited? 
There is a saw in my country
The fox when it does not reach to the grapes... she say that they are acrylic
And yes... The R is a good upgrade to the 6d 6d2 and 5d3.
I am talking only for peoples who complain...with no sustenable argument.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 21, 2018)

Andrei said:


> Who care if it does not have 5 stops of DR
> If you have this problem... Then you have to consider very seriously to change your photography career.


I care about how much dynamic range it has and how well underexposed shadows can be recovered. And just because you're too oblivious about the situations in which you need dynamic range to understand its value doesn't mean people who do want lots of dynamic range need to "change their photography career."

Last summer I was on top of the Angeles mountains taking photos of the Los Angeles area below. The area below the mountains was very bright in comparison to the lower parts of the mountains in front of me because of all of the artificial light in the city. The camera was on a tripod, but if I left the shutter open long enough to properly expose the dark mountains, the city below would have been completely blown out. If I properly exposed the city, the mountains would have been too dark to see any detail at all.

Granted, you could get around this by doing an HDR image, but aside from this, a situation like this is where you need a camera with lots of dynamic range. There was no way for me to light up the mountains or to dim down the city, all I could do was to try to expose for both of them as best I could and hope that I could recover the shadows and the highlights later on. And yes, maybe if I had something like a graduated ND filter it might have helped, but I don't own one of those, and it's not really a perfect solution to the problem anyway.

Not being able to properly expose a scene with very high contrast is not due to a lack of skill, it's just a fact of photography.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 21, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> Not being able to properly expose a scene with very high contrast is not due to a lack of skill, it's just a fact of photography.


My issue with dynamic range is that one or two stops more isn't, generally, going to make the difference. 

A scene I come up against regularly is shooting the interior of a room and needing to see the view out the window, in that situation I'll do a seven shot bracket with 1 1/3 stops between the images, to hold detail in the clouds and see detail in the carpet under the bed is going to cover close to 20 stops, no camera in the foreseeable future is going to cover that.

Arguing over 1 stop or even less is ridiculous, we have more photographic dynamic range than we have ever had, if Ansel Adams could get the tonality he wanted with the equipment he had then we can do much much better. Very rarely is the dynamic range the limiting factor in capture, yes we can contrive scenarios where it all falls down, but generally we can make scenes work.

My point is few images that are limited by the cameras dynamic range need to be shot with one capture, those that do we have more DR than ever. The 'DRone wars' were relevant when there was a decent gap between manufacturers capabilities, Canon lagged for quite a while, but we have plateaued with regards DR, Sony are not improving, Nikon are going backwards, Canon have more than caught up. Nothing is going to change until we go to 16 bit files and then we will get a maximum of 2 more stops, which in my opinion, is still not worth the effort as it still won't cover the shadowed mountain valley and cityscape in one capture, nor my interior with view scenario.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 21, 2018)

If money were no object, I'd get one with the two standout lenses, the 50 and the 28-70. But realistically if I buy another camera (and I feel no strong need), it would likely be a secondhand 1Dx.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 21, 2018)

Viggo said:


> I get that, but as I’ve said a few times now, my needs in a camera has changed, and I can’t carry the weight anymore. So there are a lot of things I love with the R that the 1dx2 doesn’t do. I’m sure I’ll miss a few things for a while, but I’ve gotten used to everything in my life that was once new so it’s not an issue.
> 
> And out of 13 shots of my son walking very slowly I got 2 okay shots and the rest is off or completely off, so how can the R be worse?



You could miss all 13! 

Seriously, though, your needs are your needs. Buy this, sell that, it’s no skin off my back. I was just poking fun at the analogy.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 21, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> You could miss all 13!
> 
> Seriously, though, your needs are your needs. Buy this, sell that, it’s no skin off my back. I was just poking fun at the analogy.


Haha! Yes i could miss all 13, and that makes the choice to go for the RF 50 much easier, I’m kind of hoping that’s the case, jk

With the R I can at least rule out a lot like Afma etc, either it works or it doesn’t


----------



## Andrei (Sep 21, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> I care about how much dynamic range it has and how well underexposed shadows can be recovered. And just because you're too oblivious about the situations in which you need dynamic range to understand its value doesn't mean people who do want lots of dynamic range need to "change their photography career."
> 
> Last summer I was on top of the Angeles mountains taking photos of the Los Angeles area below. The area below the mountains was very bright in comparison to the lower parts of the mountains in front of me because of all of the artificial light in the city. The camera was on a tripod, but if I left the shutter open long enough to properly expose the dark mountains, the city below would have been completely blown out. If I properly exposed the city, the mountains would have been too dark to see any detail at all.
> 
> ...


Sorry
My bad. Not 5 stops... 12 stops or more. 
I saw Tony comparison between R and 5d4 or A73.
He underexposed by 5 stops and do the comparison bringing back the exposure in Lr wit 5.5 stops. Who will ever shoot like that.
The scene was alredy very dark... So...if you are glad with the fact that sony sensors ar a little better probably wit 1 stop... Then... No comment 
Who will ever need/want to have all the photos HDR just based on DR camera capabilities?
Your camera let you see things that you never see with your own eyes. 
12...14 stops are realy great and the gap between sony nikon and canon it's really small now.
My extreme recovery of exposure was with +/- 3 stops and shadows at full bring back... And i was safe... No damage to the photo.


----------



## northphoto (Sep 21, 2018)

RayValdez360 said:


> I just want to see how many of you guys(maybe a girl or two might post here) are seriously buying it.



I'm waiting for the next R to come out
if you are a pro shooter the specs just don't add up for the money
Canon needs to get their heads out of the sand and start to keep up with the likes of Sony "primarily"
what Sony is offering in a $2K body is amazing
10 fps with AF tracking
Dual card slots "this is a deal braker for me on the R"
and we still don't know how Sigma / Tamron EOS mount lenses will work on this camera with the adapter.
This camera should have been introduced at $1800, this would have been a better price point

If you are a first time mirrorless purchaser and don't have any lenses yet, why would you choose the Canon R over the A7III?? 
the only reason I'm not purchasing the Sony A7III is because I have a lot invested in EOS mount glass, and I'm hopping the R mount converter will perform as well as the R mount native lenses
if it doesn't I will be debating if I should switch to Sony or not. You know Sony will be retaliating with a A7IV that is going to WOW us all.

I'm hoping to see a pro level R camera with Dual SD slots at least 10FPS, fully weather sealed body for under $2800 next! 
Canon is loosing market share to SONY and soon enough you will have Sigma and Tamron offering all of their lenses in the E mount and Sony will be adding more lenses to appease all the pros out there.

Don't get me wrong, I love Canon but business is business and bang for the buck is important.

Just my 2C


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 21, 2018)

Andrei said:


> He underexposed by 5 stops and do the comparison bringing back the exposure in Lr wit 5.5 stops. Who will ever shoot like that.


What did you not understand about my last post? When you're dealing with a scene with very high contrast (some areas of what you're viewing are very bright, some are very dark), you have to choose between overexposing the bright areas, or underexposing the dark areas. You always need to make a compromise, and depend on your camera's ability to be able to bring back detail in dark areas, or bring back detail in highlights. You would never want to underexpose an entire photo by 5 stops, but if what you're taking a photo of has very bright areas and also very dark areas, you may need to underexpose the dark areas by that much so that the bright areas are not too bright.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 21, 2018)

northphoto said:


> Canon needs to get their heads out of the sand and start to keep up with the likes of Sony "primarily"



Canon doesn’t need to play “keep up with the Jonses”; it’s not their business model.



northphoto said:


> what Sony is offering in a $2K body is amazing10 fps with AF tracking
> Dual card slots "this is a deal braker for me on the R"
> ...snip...
> the only reason I'm not purchasing the Sony A7III is because I have a lot invested in EOS mount glass, and I'm hopping the R mount converter will perform as well as the R mount native lenses



If you think the value proposition is amazing, why not buy one? Your canon lenses aren’t an impediment.


----------



## northphoto (Sep 21, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Canon doesn’t need to play “keep up with the Jonses”; it’s not their business model.
> 
> Canon can do whatever they want as far as keeping up with the joneses, but if you don't think for a min that people are noticing what Sony is doing you are wrong obviously from other posts here and els ware.
> It took them 4 years to see the value in the mirrorless game, lets hope they improve on it now.
> ...



Well I've been trying to find a review of the Sigma 120-300 S plus a 1.4X Sigma TC on a A7III but not many out there.
I do a lot of College even / sports photography which is what I would want the A7III for so I want to make sure people are happy with that combo.
I currently shoot with a 7DMK2, but want a full frame for better isolation / background blur
my 5D3 shots look amazing but the speed just isn't there.

Honestly I may just pick up a A7III to use as a backup to my 5D.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 21, 2018)

northphoto said:


> Well I've been trying to find a review of the Sigma 120-300 S plus a 1.4X Sigma TC on a A7III but not many out there.
> I do a lot of College even / sports photography which is what I would want the A7III for so I want to make sure people are happy with that combo.
> I currently shoot with a 7DMK2, but want a full frame for better isolation / background blur
> my 5D3 shots look amazing but the speed just isn't there.
> ...



I don’t know about that combo (good luck with your search), but people are typically happy with the sigma adapter for sigma lenses. This may be because sigma has licensed the basic e-mount specifications, so they aren’t doing reverse engineering like with their products on canon and nikon.


----------



## Geek (Sep 21, 2018)

Really, I don't see that the R brings much if any value over the 5D4. If I need the absolute best focus, I can use live view and focus with the sensor just like the R and other MILC, for faster servo focus, I have the option of using the regular focus sensor of the 5D4. The R is lighter, but that's not really an issue to me. The R also focuses in lower light, but you mostly have to be using a tripod or very high ISO's, so I don't take many pictures in less light than the 5D4 with focus in anyway.

To me, the only real advantage is the R series lenses and the advantages that they have, but at this point in time they are kind of few and are demanding a premium price.

In a few years when the R series has a good selection of glass and the premiums prices have stabilized a bit and there is a selection of bodies available. Then it's time to reevaluate. But for now, I'll be slapping mirrors and trying to learn how to take better pictures.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Sep 21, 2018)

As a practical matter, if I needed a new Canon body, which I don't, it's hard to imagine that you'd buy anything else from Canon other than the R right now. If you don't absolutely need one, I can't imagine why anybody would buy any body from Canon right now. There just isn't enough clarity into Canon's future plans for me to invest with any confidence. 

I expect resale value of EF lenses will soften so how many of them do you want to be holding when that happens. At least that's the way I see it. I've already taken a significant resale hit this year from some of the lens updates. I don't really need any more gear although Canon certainly makes a lot of lenses that I would like to own. Yes I know, EF will be around for a while etc. etc. but there are millions of EF lenses out there and there won't be millions of people that want to own them if EOS R takes off. It's simple market economics.

If the R is a dud, you'll be glad you waited. If it's a success the eventual replacement will be even better and in the meantime you can take advantage of the inevitable fire sale on used EF lenses that will result. 

I put all investment in new Canon gear on hold a while ago and nothing about the R has changes my thinking on that. 

If Canon expects me to invest in an entirely new proprietary platform they are going to have to try a lot harder because they are wading into a market with some serious competitors.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 21, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> My issue with dynamic range is that one or two stops more isn't, generally, going to make the difference.


What is "the difference" though?

If there's a difference in the ability to recover shadows, there's a difference. Worrying about tiny details in every aspect of taking a photo, the framing, the composition the camera settings, etc, is what makes a great photo. You can argue that at a certain point a minor difference is not going to be that significant. But then again you can also argue that point all the way to the point where you just have a crap photo because you decided that XYZ didn't make enough of a difference to worry about.

So honestly I don't care if it's a stop or a fraction of a stop more dynamic range. It will allow my photos to be that much better. And note that I didn't say it will make them that much better, because of course it's all about what you as the photographer do with the camera that makes the photo. But ultimately the better the camera, the less constrained you are by what you can do with it.




privatebydesign said:


> Arguing over 1 stop or even less is ridiculous, we have more photographic dynamic range than we have ever had, if Ansel Adams could get the tonality he wanted with the equipment he had then we can do much much better. Very rarely is the dynamic range the limiting factor in capture, yes we can contrive scenarios where it all falls down, but generally we can make scenes work.


What Ansel Adams did was significant because of the time that he did it in and the way he pushed the level of technology he had at the time. And yes it was important and significant, but honestly anyone could take photos like him today because just about any camera made is more capable than what he was dealing with, and it's exponentially easier to carry out into the wilderness than the equipment he had to lug around. As you said, we can do much better than he even could, and we should, and we should continue pushing the limit of what our photographic technology can do today, and as far as landscapes go, that means being able to properly expose a very contrasty scene.

And in the situation I was talking about, I wasn't "contriving" some sort of theoretical situation just to try to trip up my camera. It was one of the most beautiful things I've ever taken photos of, and I was genuinely disappointed afterward when I got home and realized that I couldn't quite recover the shadows as much as I would have liked to.



privatebydesign said:


> Nothing is going to change until we go to 16 bit files and then we will get a maximum of 2 more stops, which in my opinion, is still not worth the effort as it still won't cover the shadowed mountain valley and cityscape in one capture, nor my interior with view scenario.


If incremental improvement is insignificant to you, then by all means, stop buying new gear for a decade, enjoy what you have, and come back in 2028 when cameras will be significantly improved enough for you to actually consider it worth the effort. But honestly I'm surprised that that's truly the way you feel if you're on this forum that's heavily devoted to discussing every tiny rumor or development of Canon's photographic technology.

I want the best that current technology can offer, because ultimately everything you take a photo of, you only get one chance at, and due to that I'd prefer the photos to be the best they possibly can be, even if the improvement is only one or two stops of DR.


----------



## bhf3737 (Sep 21, 2018)

Everyone's needs are unique. For me being able to shoot in silent mode, snappy auto focus in low light, no need to AFMA, ability to use both EF and EF-S lenses and manual focus with focus guide are very much appreciated. These were on my wishlist for the next gen of 5D series and all seem to be fulfilled in the EOS R offering. Therefore I pre-ordered one. I'll keep 5DSR for landscape shots but 5D4 is redundant and will go away.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 21, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> What is "the difference" though?



I think the point being made was twofold. One, the difference in this regard between Canon and other manufacturers is currently tiny, despite the rhetoric of some on these forums and elsewhere, and two, that no matter what brand you used, you'd have had to use e.g. HDR, because the extra ~1 stop you get with the others isn't going to cover the full DR of the scene. More is always good, but your example doesn't show Canon to be deficient; every camera would fail to capture the whole scene, so that's when other things (like ND filters, blended exposures, etc) come into play. It's therefore unfair to criticise Canon specifically on the basis of that scene.


----------



## dak723 (Sep 21, 2018)

northphoto said:


> ....
> If you are a first time mirrorless purchaser and don't have any lenses yet, why would you choose the Canon R over the A7III??



Because Canon has better color, ergonomics, weather sealing, exposure accuracy, AF in most situations, a much wider selection of lenses (including cheaper alternatives) when you include EF lenses, and Canon service and reliability.

Why would I buy the Sony?? Two card slots.


----------



## fullstop (Sep 21, 2018)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> I put all investment in new Canon gear on hold a while ago and nothing about the R has changes my thinking on that.
> 
> If Canon expects me to invest in an entirely new proprietary platform they are going to have to try a lot harder because they are wading into a market with some serious competitors.



+1


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 21, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> What is "the difference" though?



In this context being able to capture the scene's complete DR in one shot.


----------



## bhf3737 (Sep 21, 2018)

northphoto said:


> If you are a first time mirrorless purchaser and don't have any lenses yet, why would you choose the Canon R over the A7III??


Well, A7III may be a capable and cheaper camera. But is it a better camera for my needs?
A couple of days ago, Joel Grimes, a well known pro photographer, had a review of the R camera titled: Canon EOS R: Putting It To The Test.
In which he explained the capabilities of this 1st iteration EOS R camera. While many of the click-bait reviewers focus on gimmicky capabilities of cameras and preach for "everyone in the neighborhood has it, so must Canon" he focused on the core capability of this camera which is taking good pictures. IMHO the FF mirrorless system that Canon introduced with the EOS R and the lenses that came with it is quite solid and I can confidently invest into the system for the future years to come.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 21, 2018)

scyrene said:


> I think the point being made was twofold. One, the difference in this regard between Canon and other manufacturers is currently tiny, despite the rhetoric of some on these forums and elsewhere, and two, that no matter what brand you used, you'd have had to use e.g. HDR, because the extra ~1 stop you get with the others isn't going to cover the full DR of the scene. More is always good, but your example doesn't show Canon to be deficient; every camera would fail to capture the whole scene, so that's when other things (like ND filters, blended exposures, etc) come into play. It's therefore unfair to criticise Canon specifically on the basis of that scene.


Exactly .

Not even criticize, modulate expectations.


----------



## amorse (Sep 21, 2018)

I'm probably not buying, but maybe. I use a 5D IV and right now that camera is better suited to my need. Honestly, I think I'd be better served by taking that money and putting it toward a 100-400L ii.

I actually really like the camera and I could see it as a great backup (since I sold my other body to buy the 5D IV), but I'm in no rush so my plan is to wait and see what comes next. If they release a very high resolution mirrorless body next, I may be tempted to look at that as a new primary, and transition the 5D IV to secondary. Alternatively, if the R drops in price it becomes more attractive.

I always like to look at new camera gear purchases and weigh my priorities based on which options open up more creative opportunities. A second camera gives me more security, but a new lens lets me get photos I can't get now. Since this is a hobby for me, security/backups aren't my top priority.


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 21, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> A scene I come up against regularly is shooting the interior of a room and needing to see the view out the window, in that situation I'll do a seven shot bracket with 1 1/3 stops between the images, to hold detail in the clouds and see detail in the carpet under the bed is going to cover close to 20 stops, no camera in the foreseeable future is going to cover that.
> 
> Ansel Adams



Your situation Ansel Adams solved.
In some instance it may only be once, but often twice. For a short period of time during the day you can balance the light inside with the light outside.

The problem is we live in an impatient world. Using your method seems to be old and antiquated now (or some people want it to be). There is a group that seems to think Cameras should have unlimited dynamic range.

I suppose technology is replacing skill over time.
Few have the patience to wait for hours to have just the right light. What is worse many do not know that they can wait for hours for just the right light and spend countless hours online complaining about a cameras range.


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 21, 2018)

scyrene said:


> the difference in this regard between Canon and other manufacturers is currently tiny, .



Total nonsense. Gear Junkies can point to several items on a spec sheet that say different things.

But without the Exif data, can any of them look at a random picture on the internet and tell what it was shot with?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 22, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> The problem is we live in an *inpatient* world.



Note the blown out window


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 22, 2018)

3kramd5 said:


> Note the blown out window



inpatient but not outpatient?
You must have patience.
Come back around sunset.

Typo corrected.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 22, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> Total nonsense. Gear Junkies can point to several items on a spec sheet that say different things.
> 
> But without the Exif data, can any of them look at a random picture on the internet and tell what it was shot with?


I think you are misunderstanding


takesome1 said:


> Your situation Ansel Adams solved.
> In some instance it may only be once, but often twice. For a short period of time during the day you can balance the light inside with the light outside.
> 
> The problem is we live in an impatient world. Using your method seems to be old and antiquated now (or some people want it to be). There is a group that seems to think Cameras should have unlimited dynamic range.
> ...


I'm presuming English isn't your first language, it certainly seems your understanding isn't.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 22, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> Total nonsense. Gear Junkies can point to several items on a spec sheet that say different things.
> 
> But without the Exif data, can any of them look at a random picture on the internet and tell what it was shot with?


And again...


----------



## Deleted member 378664 (Sep 22, 2018)

I will not buy or preorder the EOS R. At least not necessarily immediate. But that is not the fault of the EOS R and its specs itself. I am pretty satisfied with what I have (EOS M5 and EOS 6DMarkII). If I didn't replace my 5DMarkII with the 6DMarkII last December things would look different. I never bought the next iteration or model of a camera when it came out (350D -> used 40D -> 5DMII (two months before the MIII was announced, kept the 40D) -> 6DMII; EOS M -> EOS M5)
For my kind of photography work the specs of the EOS R are really be more than sufficient. The main critics (Dual SD card slot, no IBIS, no 4k60p, crop 4k) are all not relevant to me. Fore sure this EOS R route will be my route in the future. Currently I'm not willing to pay the price of the EOS R. Canon tells us they see the EOS R in the 5D league. This is not my league since the 5DMarkIII came out. So, I'm hoping for 6D league EOS R. But I will be a happy 6DMarkII User for at least the next two years. So, Im not in a hurry with oncoming EOS R releases.
So for the time being I guess I won't buy any further EF lenses either as I see my future in the RF system + the M system.

regards
Frank


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 22, 2018)

Who is keeping a tally in this thread?

While I'm not buying it, I'm glad Canon got its first mirrorless FF launched, and that its specs satisfy enough early adopters who will help Canon develop an even better version! I'm not being facetious. I really am grateful to those who go first when new tech is launched. It will be nice to read full reviews and long-term ownership reviews to see how the ergonomics are working out, as well as the EOS R's durability.


----------



## GooberGrape (Sep 22, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> I hate car analogies.
> But, statement sounds just like this "I just traded my Raptor for a new Mustang."
> Sure they are both sporty, but one is made to race in the rain and mud, the other on the street.
> 
> ...



I'll be keeping my 1DXMII as well as my 5DMIV and adding the R. I see a need and use for all of them including my new RF 50mm lens. Now I have apples, oranges and grapefruits.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 22, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> I think you are misunderstanding
> 
> I'm presuming English isn't your first language, it certainly seems your understanding isn't.


Sorry, I don’t follow the language problem with suggesting shooting when the light is right rather than some more technological solution. 

But then most of my ancestors and I have had not quite 300 years of experience with English.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 22, 2018)

stevelee said:


> Sorry, I don’t follow the language problem with suggesting shooting when the light is right rather than some more technological solution.
> 
> But then most of my ancestors and I have had not quite 300 years of experience with English.


Because the three quotes were completely misunderstood and the meaning so butchered that the contradictory nature of the replies largely agreed with the original premises.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 22, 2018)

bhf3737 said:


> As mentioned in the other thread, the difference may be because of poor/sub-optimal conversion of RAW files and nothing more. The publisher of video should have disclosed the tool used for RAW conversion, and threats to validity of the experiment. Of course we shouldn't expect more from click-bait pseudo-info-tainers.



He should also discuss well capacity. He claims there is reduced dynamic range merely by examining noise characteristics.


----------



## RGF (Sep 23, 2018)

Not this body. Too crippled. I had hoped that Canon would introduce something in the 5D range (7-8 FPS) or perhaps a camera that had a high frame rate.


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 23, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Because the three quotes were completely misunderstood and the meaning so butchered that the contradictory nature of the replies largely agreed with the original premises.




While your assumption is incorrect, the accuracy of your conclusion is spot on.
Sorry if this offended you, it wasn't meant to.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 23, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> While your assumption is incorrect, the accuracy of your conclusion is spot on.
> Sorry if this offended you, it wasn't meant to.


Of course it didn't offend me! It's a close to pointless camera rumors forum where we discuss largely irrelevant minutiae with people we don't know, can't trust and will never meet.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Sep 23, 2018)

martti said:


> I appreciate your opinion even though it is in conflict with the sales figures presented on this site.
> 
> If you are lazy to click, here is a screenshot. Oops. Your pants are on fire!
> View attachment 180303
> ...



The US isn't "the world". You know this, right?


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 23, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Of course it didn't offend me! It's a close to pointless camera rumors forum where we discuss largely irrelevant minutiae with people we don't know, can't trust and will never meet.



Nailed it.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 23, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> In this context being able to capture the scene's complete DR in one shot.


You seem to have grasped my question in a literal sense, but either ignored or did not grasp the philosophical aspect of it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 23, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> You seem to have grasped my question in a literal sense, but either ignored or did not grasp the philosophical aspect of it.


My apologies for answering the question and not theorizing on your ruminations.


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 23, 2018)

Kit Lens Jockey said:


> You seem to have grasped my question in a literal sense, but either ignored or did not grasp the philosophical aspect of it.



I went back and re-read the post this originally refereed to.
Responding to it, sure it would be nice to have more DR.

Dynamic Range that would cover the entire range that the human eye can distinguish would be great.

Ansel Adams overcame his limitations by patience and an understanding of light and his equipment limits. His Skill.

It would be great to have a camera with more dynamic range. But the better our cameras today the less skill needed. 
Do we reach a point that composition is the only skill required?

Possibly not all, but most current equipment short coming's can be overcome by skill and work.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 23, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> I went back and re-read the post this originally refereed to.
> Responding to it, sure it would be nice to have more DR.
> 
> Dynamic Range that would cover the entire range that the human eye can distinguish would be great.
> ...



Ansel Adams was an artist, he had the time, and a relatively comfortable family background that gave him the ability to invest the time he had into creating art. When I am creating artistic images I too take the time and stand on the shoulders of those that learnt and went before us to maximize the limitations of the equipment we use. I don't have to work out the zone system because Adams did it for me and wrote it down, I often bracket a natural scene in 2/3 stop and use tonal blending (dodging and burning in Adams day) though normally end up using a single exposure and find I am not DR limited.

However Adams didn't have the pressures of actual commercial high turnover work, he had the wherewithal to pick and choose his work, I don't, for me to achieve the volume of images I need to to keep afloat I need to use other techniques others might call tricks, or cheating. Multiple exposures, flambient exposures etc etc, I overcome the DR limitations I come up against in the timeframe I have in other ways, my skill.

This has all gotten away from my original point which was all comparable cameras are within a stop of each other with regards DR, Canon, once justifiably seen as being a fair distance behind, are not behind now to any meaningful degree and no camera company is pushing any new boundaries, to get any meaningful improvements in DR we are going to need to go to 16 bit files and even then the difference between now and another couple of stops isn't that meaningful.

My 'issue', such that it is, is a DR range much bigger than 12-14 stops, or. 14-16 stops, it is closer to 20 stops. But even in those extreme situations I can still get the images I need and my customers demand. People clamoring for 'more DR' don't seem to give the impression that they actually look at their images or know where their cameras limitations actually are. They have become parrots constantly repeating what they have heard over the last couple of years without any deep understanding of what the words mean, where their camera truthfully is compared to it's competition and without realizing what modest gains are possible within current technology.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 23, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> flambient



I learnt a new word today!


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 23, 2018)

scyrene said:


> I learnt a new word today!


THAT is the true joy of posting here. 

I've been doing flambient exposures since before they were called that, but now the HDR ship has sailed it is the basic exposure that most real estate interior teachers teach as the base exposure, it is often used by itself but the true power of it is the foundation for several more advanced techniques.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 23, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> THAT is the true joy of posting here.
> 
> I've been doing flambient exposures since before they were called that, but now the HDR ship has sailed it is the basic exposure that most real estate interior teachers teach as the base exposure, it is often used by itself but the true power of it is the foundation for several more advanced techniques.



I've always been in awe of people who can combine flash and ambient light, as I never learned how.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 23, 2018)

scyrene said:


> I've always been in awe of people who can combine flash and ambient light, as I never learned how.


Are you interested in portraits style balancing or real estate/scenic balancing? I can certainly point you to some great tutorials, the Canon flash system makes it very easy to do either but it does a lot of 'behind the curtain' calculations and assumptions so can take a little bit to understand for consistent auto results.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 23, 2018)

Turn off the flash, camera in M, set your exposure for ambient. Turn on and place the flash, turn up and down the power until it lights your subject the way you want, do not touch the camera settings once the flash is on. Easypeasy


----------



## ethanz (Sep 23, 2018)

I learned a new word too. Thanks PBD, very interesting technique. 

If only you had a Sony, then you wouldn't need to even mess with a flash, just capture all that DR in one picture.


----------



## Kit Lens Jockey (Sep 24, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> My apologies for answering the question and not theorizing on your ruminations.


Ah it's ok, apology accepted.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 24, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Are you interested in portraits style balancing or real estate/scenic balancing? I can certainly point you to some great tutorials, the Canon flash system makes it very easy to do either but it does a lot of 'behind the curtain' calculations and assumptions so can take a little bit to understand for consistent auto results.



That's a kind offer. But tbh I have little use for it, and my flash is currently out of action. Thanks very much all the same!


----------



## meywd (Sep 25, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Ansel Adams was an artist, he had the time, and a relatively comfortable family background that gave him the ability to invest the time he had into creating art. When I am creating artistic images I too take the time and stand on the shoulders of those that learnt and went before us to maximize the limitations of the equipment we use. I don't have to work out the zone system because Adams did it for me and wrote it down, I often bracket a natural scene in 2/3 stop and use tonal blending (dodging and burning in Adams day) though normally end up using a single exposure and find I am not DR limited.
> 
> However Adams didn't have the pressures of actual commercial high turnover work, he had the wherewithal to pick and choose his work, I don't, for me to achieve the volume of images I need to to keep afloat I need to use other techniques others might call tricks, or cheating. Multiple exposures, flambient exposures etc etc, I overcome the DR limitations I come up against in the timeframe I have in other ways, my skill.
> 
> ...



I believe the search for more DR or any other technical aspect of cameras is based on the need to overcome the skill gap without actually acquiring the skill, for example; higher FPS with fast shutter help shaky hands without learning the best way to stabilize the camera while shooting handheld, more DR reduce the need for HDR, Perfect Exposure, learning ETTR, or using ML, or checking histogram for clipped areas, also a better AF system and the hardships of MF without a proper focusing screen on your 5D III or focus peaking, its the need to get better in the easiest/shortest way possible, even if by throwing money at the issue.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 25, 2018)

meywd said:


> I believe the search for more DR or any other technical aspect of cameras is based on the need to overcome the skill gap without actually acquiring the skill, for example; higher FPS with fast shutter help shaky hands without learning the best way to stabilize the camera while shooting handheld, more DR reduce the need for HDR, Perfect Exposure, learning ETTR, or using ML, or checking histogram for clipped areas, also a better AF system and the hardships of MF without a proper focusing screen on your 5D III or focus peaking, its the need to get better in the easiest/shortest way possible, even if by throwing money at the issue.


While I agree that SOME people do this, it’s certianly not the case for everyone. Newer and better cameras are tools to minimize compromise. A sport shooter could do away with MF sometimes, but no way ever that we would see the quality and the number of spectacular shots we have today, with MF only or 1-2 fps.

The same goes for everything, I think many people would absolutely need/want 25600 iso that looks as clean as today’s 100 iso, and why not?

The tool is to make the result easier to get, that’s why I use power tools instead of old school manual ones, does that mean I can’t swing a hammer? Of course not, but I want to finish my deck before winter and not break my body doing so.


----------



## meywd (Sep 25, 2018)

Viggo said:


> While I agree that SOME people do this, it’s certianly not the case for everyone. Newer and better cameras are tools to minimize compromise. A sport shooter could do away with MF sometimes, but no way ever that we would see the quality and the number of spectacular shots we have today, with MF only or 1-2 fps.
> 
> The same goes for everything, I think many people would absolutely need/want 25600 iso that looks as clean as today’s 100 iso, and why not?
> 
> The tool is to make the result easier to get, that’s why I use power tools instead of old school manual ones, does that mean I can’t swing a hammer? Of course not, but I want to finish my deck before winter and not break my body doing so.



Please don't misunderstand, I am not saying the whole technical aspect is used in place of skill, I am saying seeking the bleeding edge of technology and the latest features is, and like anyone else I am guilty of it, it's not a bad thing if you seek it, but its not a good thing to depend on it, however, shooting sports or birds or action in general with low FPS is asking for low hit rate, or using 600mm in MF while chasing players, or using MF in events, maybe if you want few photos, its like going full manual in a challenging lighting while going for auto ISO will make your life easier.

The point is, new features and better aspects help make the life easier, but sometimes learning a few skills can help a lot.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 25, 2018)

meywd said:


> Please don't misunderstand, I am not saying the whole technical aspect is used in place of skill, I am saying seeking the bleeding edge of technology and the latest features is, and like anyone else I am guilty of it, it's not a bad thing if you seek it, but its not a good thing to depend on it, however, shooting sports or birds or action in general with low FPS is asking for low hit rate, or using 600mm in MF while chasing players, or using MF in events, maybe if you want few photos, its like going full manual in a challenging lighting while going for auto ISO will make your life easier.
> 
> The point is, new features and better aspects help make the life easier, but sometimes learning a few skills can help a lot.


Agreed, there are those who think a new camera will make poor pictures suddenly become very good, but lacking the skill it’s of little use to upgrade.

I just felt like you generalized and claimed people just needed to learn how to use the gear.


----------



## Takingshots (Sep 25, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Which is fine. So why make similar accusations against those who disagree with you?


Did he disagree to my assumption?


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 25, 2018)

Takingshots said:


> Did he disagree to my assumption?


Yes I did. And you asked said I should not be defensive and suggested it was because I work for Canon


----------



## jeffa4444 (Sep 28, 2018)

Having spent a lot of time with the EOS R at Photokina I’m truly in two minds about it. On the one hand I like the smaller form factor, the four new lenses, how quick it focuses, and the quality of the images but on the other hand the control layout compared to the DSLRs is totally different and takes time to get used too. 
The back button focus button could be further over to the left for my liking I found it irritating after awhile. 
The FV function is pretty cool and I’m sure once used continuously the layout will become second nature so only time will tell. 
The adapters work really well with EF lenses I used a EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM III and it focused quicker than it does on my DSLRs. Same was true with the EF 100 f2.8L IS USM. 

Something says wait and that likely what I will do.


----------



## xps (Sep 29, 2018)

jeffa4444 said:


> Having spent a lot of time with the EOS R at Photokina I’m truly in two minds about it. On the one hand I like the smaller form factor, the four new lenses, how quick it focuses, and the quality of the images but on the other hand the control layout compared to the DSLRs is totally different and takes time to get used too.
> The back button focus button could be further over to the left for my liking I found it irritating after awhile.
> The FV function is pretty cool and I’m sure once used continuously the layout will become second nature so only time will tell.
> The adapters work really well with EF lenses I used a EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM III and it focused quicker than it does on my DSLRs. Same was true with the EF 100 f2.8L IS USM.
> ...



This is my intention too. The usage ist really different, also the swipe bar. But, like I learned to deal with Sony, I will learn to do this too.
But one big reason, why I´m really thinking of buying the EOS is, that I´ve spent a lot (really a lot) on cleaning my "dustophile" 7R Mk III sensor. So I´m in hope, the Eos R will behave better with the closed curtain.


----------



## xps (Sep 29, 2018)

Some maybe-customers at photokina talked about the rumored pro model of the Eos R. They rumored: 26MP, 15-20 fps... a competitor to the A9 from Sony. . Would be great if this comes true.


----------



## Neutral (Sep 29, 2018)

xps said:


> This is my intention too. The usage ist really different, also the swipe bar. But, like I learned to deal with Sony, I will learn to do this too.
> But one big reason, why I´m really thinking of buying the EOS is, that I´ve spent a lot (really a lot) on cleaning my "dustophile" 7R Mk III sensor. So I´m in hope, the Eos R will behave better with the closed curtain.


Best solution in this respect (dust protection) is Fujifilm GFX 50S and R and future GFX100.
To protect sensor from dust they put glass protection filter 9mm in front of the sensor in the lens mount assembly. This also clearly seen on published pictures.
So no dust on the sensor, easy clean protection filter ( the same as front protection filter on lens).
Also as filter is 9mm away from sensor then dust on the filter practically not affecting image compared when dust is in the sensor itself and clearly visible on the image.
This one could be very strong reason to go with Fuji GFX instead of anything else, let alone other reasons.
Possibly GFX100 could be my next camera, i spend some time with GFX50S and really liked how everything is designed and done. Attention to every important detail. E.g. in eye AF they have selectable left or right eye priority, very convinient feature, lack of this in Sony a7/a9 is very irritating, as their eye AF pick eye almost randomly, frequently focusing on eye which is half closed by hairs and as result focus is not on eye but on hairs in front of eye. With GFX i can tell camera which eye, left or right to use for focus. Very handy.


----------



## BeenThere (Sep 29, 2018)

Neutral said:


> Best solution in this respect (dust protection) is Fujifilm GFX 50S and R and future GFX100.
> To protect sensor from dust they put glass protection filter 9mm in front of the sensor in the lens mount assembly. This also clearly seen on published pictures.
> So no dust on the sensor, easy clean protection filter ( the same as front protection filter on lens).
> Also as filter is 9mm away from sensor then dust on the filter practically not affecting image compared when dust is in the sensor itself and clearly visible on the image.
> ...


Left eye. - Right eye AF, that’s a new one. What’s next, blue eye vs green eye?


----------



## stevelee (Sep 29, 2018)

It's rare that I would want to photograph a person (or bird for that matter) with one eye in focus and the other one blurred, much less to have the eye in focus and its eyelashes blurred.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 29, 2018)

For me, the more shallow dof, the better


----------



## stevelee (Sep 29, 2018)

Viggo said:


> For me, the more shallow dof, the better


And for me that's a special effect I use sparingly. I find my f/3.5-5.6 kit lens works well for me almost all the time. I don't see much point in putting on an f/1.4 lens just to wind up shooting at f/8. It's great to have choices and to have our own styles and tastes.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 29, 2018)

stevelee said:


> And for me that's a special effect I use sparingly. I find my f/3.5-5.6 kit lens works well for me almost all the time. I don't see much point in putting on an f/1.4 lens just to wind up shooting at f/8. It's great to have choices and to have our own styles and tastes.



Agreed! I normally shoot my lenses wide open, if I frequently stopped down I could do with a zoom besides the “one eye in focus” argument is only valid with headshots, using the 35 f1.4 L II for full body shots renders the entire person sharp wide open.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 29, 2018)

Viggo said:


> For me, the more shallow dof, the better


I went through that phase for a while.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 29, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> I went through that phase for a while.



It’s been 15 years and I’m still there so I guess it will be a long phase


----------



## Viggo (Sep 29, 2018)

Do I need more dof? Nope


----------



## mirage (Sep 29, 2018)

Neutral said:


> E.g. in eye AF they have selectable left or right eye priority, very convinient feature,



Luckily with Canon one does not have to invest large sums in big Pseudo-MF gear to get such amenities. Even the lowly "entry level" crop-sensor EOS M50 for 500 bucks lets user select "other eye" in Eye-AF ... if so desired. 



> While Eye Detect AF will normally focus upon the eye nearest to the camera, *if you want to concentrate on the subject’s other eye, that’s easy to do* — just press the AF Point Select button, on the back of the camera, twice. You’ll see the smaller “box” surrounding the detected eye jump to the subject’s other eye.


http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2018/eos-m50/eos-m50-autofocus.shtml


----------



## scyrene (Sep 29, 2018)

Viggo said:


> Do I need more dof? Nope



This is a good use of shallow DOF. The whole subject is in focus (at least without pixel peeping), but the background isn't so blurred that you can't tell what it is. I have to say I found with the 85L 1.2 that sometimes the background was *too* out of focus, and my totally amateur observation of a lot of portraiture is that the background is included to some extent, especially where the person's living or working space is part of the story.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 29, 2018)

scyrene said:


> This is a good use of shallow DOF. The whole subject is in focus (at least without pixel peeping), but the background isn't so blurred that you can't tell what it is. I have to say I found with the 85L 1.2 that sometimes the background was *too* out of focus, and my totally amateur observation of a lot of portraiture is that the background is included to some extent, especially where the person's living or working space is part of the story.


Thanks!

I want wide open, and include/exclude using the distance between me and the subject and subject to background.

That shot was wide open with the 200 f2.0


----------



## scyrene (Sep 29, 2018)

Viggo said:


> Thanks!
> 
> I want wide open, and include/exclude using the distance between me and the subject and subject to background.
> 
> That shot was wide open with the 200 f2.0



Ah! A lens I have dreamed of but will probably never own


----------



## Viggo (Sep 29, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Ah! A lens I have dreamed of but will probably never own


I’ve owned two and sold them both and regret it every day. But it is too heavy for me. It’s everything you think and more


----------



## lenspacker (Sep 30, 2018)

I´ve seen the EOS R today at the photokina in cologne (ger) with a intense chance to try and test it. It is a very good camera with impressive low light skills. The colors produced by the new chip are very awesome and worth to buy it. But cause of the lack of many standard features this is not my camera and I will not order or buy it. 
According to an interview, I`ve seen in the web, with a higher german canon employee the R-system is only a complement to the DSLR`s - and no replacement. So I can sleep very well and wait for a 5Dsr-R or a 1 dx-R sometimes - - - so it is a nice entry into the world of mirrorless cams, but nothing more.... so wait and see....!!!


----------



## Jethro (Sep 30, 2018)

jeffa4444 said:


> Having spent a lot of time with the EOS R at Photokina I’m truly in two minds about it. On the one hand I like the smaller form factor, the four new lenses, how quick it focuses, and the quality of the images *but on the other hand the control layout compared to the DSLRs is totally different and takes time to get used too*.
> The back button focus button could be further over to the left for my liking I found it irritating after awhile.
> The FV function is pretty cool and I’m sure once used continuously the layout will become second nature so only time will tell.
> The adapters work really well with EF lenses I used a EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM III and it focused quicker than it does on my DSLRs. Same was true with the EF 100 f2.8L IS USM.
> ...


I get that this is a downside (and it will be to me too although I've probably used less customisation etc over the years than most here) - but isn't this always the case with a major upgrade? For people using it as a 2nd camera (for eg) with a Canon DSLR, it will mean switching lay-outs with switching cameras, but for those moving to the EOS-R as a primary camera, isn't it just a few weeks of familiarity? Everything else you are saying sounds very positive, and a real-world confirmation of the marketing points


----------



## Durf (Sep 30, 2018)

Viggo said:


> Do I need more dof? Nope


 That's a great shot! great job with the DOF, distance, speed, light, and photographic art work.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 30, 2018)

Durf said:


> That's a great shot! great job with the DOF, distance, speed, light, and photographic art work.


Thanks! It’s a Siros 800 L ,camera right, in a “BeautyBox 65” white beauty dish, and sun top left


----------



## stevelee (Sep 30, 2018)

Durf said:


> That's a great shot! great job with the DOF, distance, speed, light, and photographic art work.


For my tastes, the background calls attention to itself when it is too blurry and therefore becomes the distraction.


----------



## sleepnever (Oct 1, 2018)

Nope. No interest in it. I'm really hoping the 5DsR II rumor comes to fruition early next year. If that doesn't happen, I dunno what I'm doing.. =\


----------



## JonSnow (Oct 1, 2018)

had my hands on with the canon at photokina.

i found the eye af to be terrible to be honest.
maybe as good as the eye af in a A6000 camera (which i never used because of it´s "performance").

more a problem for me are the reports about banding.
an issue that the nikon Z7 has too as it seems (dpreview).

EVF is nice, build quality was canon like... nothing to complain here.
i would have given the EOS R a joystick instead of the touch bar.
i guess that will be a feature that vanishes on later models.
i did not like it that much.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Oct 2, 2018)

JonSnow said:


> more a problem for me are the reports about banding.
> an issue that the nikon Z7 has too as it seems (dpreview).



They should open a sub domain:
https://vastlyunderexposedimagespushedinpost.dpreview.com


----------



## RGF (Oct 4, 2018)

I got to try an R body today. Very nice but layout is not as good as 5D or 1Dx. Too many compromises. IMO not well thought out to help users switch.


----------



## Pooshoes (Oct 8, 2018)

RGF said:


> I got to try an R body today. Very nice but layout is not as good as 5D or 1Dx. Too many compromises. IMO not well thought out to help users switch.


I'm considering the switch, what does it compromise vs 5DMKIV other than no dual cards, no joystick and different button layout?


----------



## aa_angus (Oct 8, 2018)

JonSnow said:


> had my hands on with the canon at photokina.
> 
> i found the eye af to be terrible to be honest.
> maybe as good as the eye af in a A6000 camera (which i never used because of it´s "performance").
> ...




The banding is indeed a _major_ issue..if you underexpose by >5 stops and expect clean results.
Sounds like you'll never own a R series if you're holding out for a joystick. Touch n drag is for real and there's no going back


----------



## RGF (Oct 9, 2018)

Pooshoes said:


> I'm considering the switch, what does it compromise vs 5DMKIV other than no dual cards, no joystick and different button layout?



Don't have it yet. I will try it on a trip in November, if I like it I will use it alot, if not it will be backup. Either way it will be a learning experience


----------



## Memirsbrunnr (Oct 10, 2018)

amorse said:


> What can I say, I'm very indecisive!


Indecisiveness rulez!!!


----------



## james75 (Oct 10, 2018)

Not going to purchase one either. Had this camera come out last year at his time, before I bought my 5d4, then I'd probably be getting one. I'm going to wait for canon's more professional camera to come out and then decide. Even then, I'll probably wait for the second generation of these cameras and for the line to mature even more before making a move. My 5d4 and 6d will be plenty good for years to come.


----------



## Pooshoes (Oct 11, 2018)

james75 said:


> Not going to purchase one either. Had this camera come out last year at his time, before I bought my 5d4, then I'd probably be getting one. I'm going to wait for canon's more professional camera to come out and then decide. Even then, I'll probably wait for the second generation of these cameras and for the line to mature even more before making a move. My 5d4 and 6d will be plenty good for years to come.


I sold my 5d IV and came out ahead on the eos R, very glad I did, this camera is familiar yet more powerful. Only thing some people complain about that really matters vs the 5d IV is the single card slot. Insurance is always a good idea but for me I only used SD cards anyway so it didn’t matter. This is an improved 5d in my opinion. Some weird stuff missing though, where’s my built-in intervalometer? Otherwise ergonomics are perfect, not missing any old controls. Video is similar. Photos are similar, AF is better, flippy screen is better, battery life is good, Audio is better, and the lens adapter is an awesome tool to only need one variable ND TO RULE THEM ALL (don’t have it yet but I can speculate it will be good)! best of luck do everyone but I’m glad I switched.


----------

