I can’t blame the lack of sunlight on the lens. Even well composed landscapes are flat and boring if there’s no light.
Hi py6km, I moved from 5D Mark IV to the original R and then added R5. I only have EF lenses. With the RF to EF adaptor, the EF lenses work perfectly. Canon helped a lot with that. With the improved AF capabilities of the R and R5, the results are more reliable than the 5DM4. If the R5 price is a bit steep, try the R6? In my case, for events and sports I'm reaching for the R5 almost every time. I still have the 1DXM2 which sometimes has the edge for low-light sports. If you're shooting landscapes maybe the new features won't add much.
I have had an R6 since about April 2021. I ran it alongside my 1dx2, leaving the 5d4 at home [shooting basketball indoors]. The resolution was about the same and it was good in the low light. The project I was running was completed in the spring of this year and I sold the 1dx2 as the FPS for the R6 were more than enough. I guess a key question is what will you want it for? I have decided against shelling out for the R3 as I want resolution in my second camera body. I suspect that the R5 will became my main body [when it gets here] and the R6 will be the main body when I shoot NBL indoors [keeps the size of folder of files under control too]. The thing that tipped me over was doing what my very wise wife suggested ie shooting with the R6 exclusively since early summer. We were away in Seahouses last week and I used the 5D4 a couple of times and I found myself missing things that I had grown accustomed to. I never thought I would dispatch my 5D4 but it felt limiting last week. Hope that helps.
It Makes me even less likely to consider buying anything canon in the future.
I think this is where the real money / profit is buy selling cameras bodies like R8 & R10 cheaply people will buy into R glass ! !
That is good to know. Did they give any indication of a fix being worked on for other modes?
This was sadly always a possibility with third party lenses reverse engineered for Canon DSLRs. If I remember correctly neither canon or Nikon ever shared their mount engineering information with third party manufacturers. The third party manufactures always had to reverse engineer their lenses. Those DSLR reverse engineered lenses weren’t ever designed for mirrorless cameras hence the possibility there would be some difficulty in ensuring they work perfectly with mirrorless cameras AF systems. There was always a risk third party lenses wouldn’t play nicely with new canon camera releases even before mirrorless.
No not park thank god.
I will be very interested to read your thoughts. Just switched to mirrorless and my R5 arrived yesterday. I have my eye on the 100-500 as I found having the 70-200 I didn't use the 100-400ii that often and I traded it - not that these have been normal times so hearing whether the extra reach is a game changer or not will be really helpful.
Most of my photographic work is sports related. For motorsport, I tend to use the 1DX2 coupled with the 100-400 L II, and for athletics, the 1DX2 with 70-200 L II. The 7D2 is a backup camera, usually with a different lens attached, but occassionally I use it as the primary body rather than a teleconverter. Given that mirrorless is the future, and I've had the 7D2 for 6 years and the 1DX2 for 4, so they're getting due for a replacement.
I used the 1dx2 for an indoor sport [basketball] project for 6 years; it was a very reliable beast but too heavy for my shoulder with thee 70-200. I added the R6 and ttraded my 70-200 for an RF 70-200 and it is lighter than the 1dx2 w EF24-70. I decided to move the 1dx2 on as the R6 was doing a good job. Myy 400 doii is great for BIF but that extra reach when I can't tale the 400 could be a deal maker. I may use the r5 for sport outside but mainly for its resolution for my personal work as I move on and also for birds - love the Bewicks at winter.
Let me know how you get on. I've had my 1DX for over 10 years now so I'm well overdue an update.
I was in Clifton today and asked about this thing - launching cameras without enough stock - 6 months for the R7 was mentioned.
Can’t quite believe there’s high demand of nearly £20k lenses unless they just thought they would only sell a couple!
When me and a couple of others tried to explain why that £20k lens is a relative bargain, we were mocked by a few on here.
As a tool for work I’m sure it does make sense. I can’t see demand will be high outside professional photographers/agencies. There probably aren’t as many amateurs that will stretch to £20k lens for a hobby, whereas there was quite a few that could when they were £6-7k (not exactly sure what the price has been over recent years). Making the pool smaller (professionals only) should lower effectively demand unless those professionals are upgrading equipment that is possibly many generations old.
The previous 1200mm was circa £60k and had been for over 20 years.
