Canon EOS R Series Cameras

Theres no red ring on the 85 so hopefully it doesnt come in to expensive.

Hope the new cameras are good at high ISO with those long lenses being f/11, they are tiny though.

about £600 for the 85 seems a sensible start.

F11 is a bit of a head scratcher and not interesting me at all.

Really hoping the R6 isn't too expensive. I have stuff in the calendar from September that I should really have a body with a 2nd card slot.
 
about £600 for the 85 seems a sensible start.

F11 is a bit of a head scratcher and not interesting me at all.

Really hoping the R6 isn't too expensive. I have stuff in the calendar from September that I should really have a body with a 2nd card slot.

Ah, I see the price is underneath, £650 launch isnt bad, it'll settle below that which would make it good value (esp with STM, close focusing and IS)
 
about £600 for the 85 seems a sensible start.

F11 is a bit of a head scratcher and not interesting me at all.

Really hoping the R6 isn't too expensive. I have stuff in the calendar from September that I should really have a body with a 2nd card slot.

Canonrumours saying the R6 is likely to be around £2,500. Would be nice if its £2000.
 
Canonrumours saying the R6 is likely to be around £2,500. Would be nice if its £2000.

That is a big ouch if true, but then as that would be £500 more than the R, unless of course the R gets a price drop once the R5 & R6 hits the shelves.
 
Those f11 lenses are fascinating and if nothing else it's nice to see something different coming onto the market. Assuming they've made them usable/acceptable in terms of AF they are an incredibly affordable (and crucially, manageable) way into super-tele photography.
 
I thought £650 seemed a bit steep for an 85 F2, but then realised it's a 1:2 macro also, that would be a sweet acompaniment to the current 35 1.8 for those [like me] who love their close ups as much as general shooting. Snap a Raynox 250 on front [perfect filter thread size at 67mm for the snap on adapter] and you'll be 1:1 or even greater I'd imagine when needed. Get those used for £50

Just checked the Raynox calculator http://extreme-macro.co.uk/raynox-adapter-techniques/, you only require the Raynox 150 [even cheaper] to achieve just over 1:1, with the 250 you actually get 1.5:1 because of the close focusing ability for this FL [35cm] coupled with the 0,5 x default mag

Only con I can see is that it doesn't look to be an IF lens, no IF marking and no mention in the description. If it was an L then it would probably have IF but then it would no doubt cost a chunk more.
 
Last edited:
Canon rumours are saying £4199 for the R5 body. Bit more than I want to pay.
 
I thought £650 seemed a bit steep for an 85 F2, but then realised it's a 1:2 macro also, that would be a sweet acompaniment to the current 35 1.8 for those [like me] who love their close ups as much as general shooting. Snap a Raynox 250 on front [perfect filter thread size at 67mm for the snap on adapter] and you'll be 1:1 or even greater I'd imagine when needed. Get those used for £50

Just checked the Raynox calculator http://extreme-macro.co.uk/raynox-adapter-techniques/, you only require the Raynox 150 [even cheaper] to achieve just over 1:1, with the 250 you actually get 1.5:1 because of the close focusing ability for this FL [35cm] coupled with the 0,5 x default mag

Only con I can see is that it doesn't look to be an IF lens, no IF marking and no mention in the description. If it was an L then it would probably have IF but then it would no doubt cost a chunk more.

Consider the Sony was around £650+ at launch and its RRP is £600 and thats got no close focus or IS. Also, Fujis 56mm 1.2 was $999 or £999 at launch... again, no IS, ridiculously slow AF and no close focus and APSC image circle.

It looks IF, the barrel just seems a bit to thin otherwise. Could be wrong.
 
Last edited:
I don't cross compare aperture values, I leave that to the likes of the Northrups :p or those who are extremely picky about 'bokeh' or blowing 90% of an image OOF. F2 is still F2 to me no matter the format, whether FF or M43 as I can get the same light. At such close distances and that kind of magnification I think having more in focus is a bonus tbh [I still reckon M43 is possibly the best system for macro] because your plane of focus is going to be extrmely shallow even stopped down. If you reverse the equivilance in that case with smaller sensors you don't have to stop down as much. On M43 I often shot 1:1 macro at 5.6 - f/8, with APSC I find I need to step down to F11, for the same DOF on FF I'd be going F16 or so.

I wouldn't compare this to the Fuji 56 [a lens I've never considered as it's CFD is very poor] I'd see them as completely different lenses bar FL on paper. I would shoot very different with each and this 85 because of the other specs is much more appealing. If anything I'd equate this more to the Fuji 60mm 2.4, because they are designed for similar puprose. I would have owned that lens by now only for it's apparently the slowest of all Fuji lenses, inc the 56. But it does do 1:2 macro and is a nice FL on APSC for that purpose.

Regardless, once I noted the 1:2 magnification and close focus ability, it seemed more like a good price. So long as it turns out to be nice and sharp even wide open with no issues [CA, horrible flaring etc] but I would bet on it being very good if not excellent.

Looks to me like it'll extend at the front when close focusing though could be wrong, be nice if it does have IF
 
Last edited:
I don't cross compare aperture values, I leave that to the likes of the Northrups :p or those who are extremely picky about 'bokeh' or blowing 90% of an image OOF. F2 is still F2 to me no matter the format, whether FF or M43 as I can get the same light. At such close distances and that kind of magnification I think having more in focus is a bonus tbh [I still reckon M43 is possibly the best system for macro] because your plane of focus is going to be extrmely shallow even stopped down. If you reverse the equivilance in that case with smaller sensors you don't have to stop down as much. On M43 I often shot 1:1 macro at 5.6 - f/8, with APSC I find I need to step down to F11, for the same DOF on FF I'd be going F16 or so.

I wouldn't compare this to the Fuji 56 [a lens I've never considered as it's CFD is very poor] I'd see them as completely different lenses bar FL on paper. I would shoot very different with each and this 85 because of the other specs is much more appealing. If anything I'd equate this more to the Fuji 60mm 2.4, because they are designed for similar puprose. I would have owned that lens by now only for it's apparently the slowest of all Fuji lenses, inc the 56. But it does do 1:2 macro and is a nice FL on APSC for that purpose.

Regardless, once I noted the 1:2 magnification and close focus ability, it seemed more like a good price. So long as it turns out to be nice and sharp even wide open with no issues [CA, horrible flaring etc] but I would bet on it being very good if not excellent.

Looks to me like it'll extend at the front when close focusing though could be wrong, be nice if it does have IF

Depends on what you're shooting, I don't buy fast lenses to shoot at kit lens apertures. Also, if its purely for light, then the faster lens on the bigger sensor usually wins... At the same shutter speed.
 
Last edited:
Depends on what you're shooting, I don't buy fast lenses to shoot at kit lens apertures. Also, if its purely for light, then the faster aperture on the bigger lens usually wins.

You must rarely shoot macro then? or landscape? But I get it, I'm same, if I buy an F2 prime it's going to be parked at F2 for pretty much all else, and I'm not anti-bokeh, I like it .... just don't see massive differences when people compare F2 to 1.4 [same format] - I had the Fuji 35 1.4 for example, and the diference between that and the 35 F2 on the same camera was minimal, apart from you could shoot a stop faster in lower light [or a stop lower ISO]
 
You must rarely shoot macro then? or landscape? But I get it, I'm same, if I buy an F2 prime it's going to be parked at F2 for pretty much all else, and I'm not anti-bokeh, I like it .... just don't see massive differences when people compare F2 to 1.4 [same format] - I had the Fuji 35 1.4 for example, and the diference between that and the 35 F2 on the same camera was minimal, apart from you could shoot a stop faster in lower light [or a stop lower ISO]

Yup, not my kind of thing 99% of the time unless on holiday somewhere nice, then it's ultra wide at like f11.

After a lot of years using fast primes I definitely prefer the look I get from 1.4 lenses on ff format, it's not so much the closer distances but more full body shots where the difference is noticeable, like on 35, environmental portraits.
 
There is definitely a FF look, even stopped down. It's the first thing I noticed the first time I switched to Fuji from FF Nikon years back, I needed to get closer to get that kind of 'pop', but I adjusted and never really looked back too much. I found even the X-T1 files could be as pleasing once I learned to process to my personal liking. There's times I do wish I had FF, but the reasons are are simple, better ISO performance, and I guess that look - images are usually crisper and you can play around with them a bit more - you have more crop room for one [much as I do try to get framing bang on in post, it's not always possible ... or I get lazy]
 
Oh the other reason being with the modern FF bodies you can adapt a shed tonne of old but still decent dslr lenses, possibly the main reason in fact I'd switch. I certainly wouldn't be looking to £2K new mount pro lenses
 
Oh the other reason being with the modern FF bodies you can adapt a shed tonne of old but still decent dslr lenses, possibly the main reason in fact I'd switch. I certainly wouldn't be looking to £2K new mount pro lenses

It's a big feature, especially when performance is native / better because of evf focus aids and ospdaf accuracy, there are so many lenses at varying budgets to choose from.
 
It's a big feature, especially when performance is native / better because of evf focus aids and ospdaf accuracy, there are so many lenses at varying budgets to choose from.

It's fair to say I wouldn't be using the RF system if the adapted EF glass didn't perform how it does.

I've noticed a couple of issues at the long end of some 3rd party lenses, but that's it.
 
It's a big feature, especially when performance is native / better because of evf focus aids and ospdaf accuracy, there are so many lenses at varying budgets to choose from.
It's fair to say I wouldn't be using the RF system if the adapted EF glass didn't perform how it does.

While i’m not using the RF system yet, if EF glass didn’t work and Canon removed all form of compatibility then I wouldn’t even consider it.

I've noticed a couple of issues at the long end of some 3rd party lenses, but that's it.

Which issues on which lenses ?. The only reason I asked is because last night I finally ordered the Tamron Tap-In Console for my 100-400 so I am able to makes slight changes if need be, but also to update the firmware so that it gives better compatibility and accuracy on RF systems.
 
It's fair to say I wouldn't be using the RF system if the adapted EF glass didn't perform how it does.

I've noticed a couple of issues at the long end of some 3rd party lenses, but that's it.

I guess Canon cant really account for what 3rd party manufacturers do with every lens.
 
Which issues on which lenses ?. The only reason I asked is because last night I finally ordered the Tamron Tap-In Console for my 100-400 so I am able to makes slight changes if need be, but also to update the firmware so that it gives better compatibility and accuracy on RF systems.

Tbh it may be solved that way. I had the tamron 70-210 f4 which was great but took its time to acquire focus at 210mm. Replaced it with the canon ef 70-200mm f2.8 and its lightning fast.

Just got the sigma 150-600 and it won't acquire focus at 600mm when looking at objects far away. Other than its great.

No issues with my sigma primes.
 
Tbh it may be solved that way. I had the tamron 70-210 f4 which was great but took its time to acquire focus at 210mm. Replaced it with the canon ef 70-200mm f2.8 and its lightning fast.

Just got the sigma 150-600 and it won't acquire focus at 600mm when looking at objects far away. Other than its great.

No issues with my sigma primes.

I just had a brief look on the Sigma website and there is an update for the 150-600mm but it is to improve AF accuracy on Sigma & Nikon mounts, no mention of Canon unfortunately. Maybe they are designing their own RF 150-600 ?. Only a guess as haven’t used much of their gear.
 
anyone tuning into the livestream reveal later? looks like everything has been leaked now regarding specs and whats coming. just confirmation on price would be nice
 
Both the R5 & R6 look fantastic, but realistically thinking the R6 is going to be more my budget.
 
Just need to see what the new sensor is like with Dynamic range, Canon are normally pretty poor there but if they've got that sorted the R5 is very tempting.

I presently shoot Sony as it was the only real choice when I fully switched to mirrorless but I can't say that I enjoy using them.
 
Back
Top