Canon EOS R Series Cameras

TimHughes said:
I had this when testing with a lens cap on and set to only take pictures when focus confirmed, could it be something like that?
Click to expand...
Thanks for responding Tim. I've pointed it at several high contrast scenes, but no luck. I think it has failed :(

Debating now whether to buy a cheap 3rd party one or head to MPB. I know I can use my phone, but it's a bit of a fiddle.
 
Bebop said:
Thanks for responding Tim. I've pointed it at several high contrast scenes, but no luck. I think it has failed :(

Debating now whether to buy a cheap 3rd party one or head to MPB. I know I can use my phone, but it's a bit of a fiddle.
Click to expand...

@Bebop I have got a spare intervalometer if you’re interested?
 

Attachments

  • 8AEB047E-D0ED-4419-BB15-697D4AD620F7.jpeg
    8AEB047E-D0ED-4419-BB15-697D4AD620F7.jpeg
    163.8 KB · Views: 3
  • F6A7AA16-367D-4C52-ADBC-57A91131D9A9.jpeg
    F6A7AA16-367D-4C52-ADBC-57A91131D9A9.jpeg
    110.2 KB · Views: 3
  • 2B2910A2-7F28-4793-90EE-03C2C06BF094.jpeg
    2B2910A2-7F28-4793-90EE-03C2C06BF094.jpeg
    112.1 KB · Views: 3
I covered my first football match under floodlights last night using my R3 combined with the EF 300mm f2.8 L IS II USM lens. It was a local derby cup match and the lights certainly are not Premiership standard! It was mainly a test to see what results I could get and I was blown away with what I got at very high ISO. It was something I could never do with my old camera.

Even the images taken at 20000 ISO they looked great and with a little noise reduction in Lightroom. I'm sure other software could clean them better but I wasn't expecting such good results. I even tried switching on the anti-flicker setting to see what difference it would make and I think it worked reasonably well but perhaps I should use a custom white balance to get more consistent results.
 
Anyone suffered any shutter shock with an R5 (or 6 or similar)?

When I got my R5 last year (upgrading from 7D Mk1 i've used for 11 years or more I took both out to brands hatch and oulton park but found it much harder to shoot clean images on the R5 even at higher shutter speeds of 1/300 or above (using both EF 70-200 F4, and 300 F4L. I put this down to

A.) lack of practice - I hadn't done any serious motorsport for years, maybe only 1 or 2 events a year
B.) the high resolution difference between the R5 and the 7D

It was only when I started doing more regular motorsport last year that i got a bit puzzled as my images didn't get any better with the R5..... I started to think I'd lost my touch or wasn't understanding the auto focus too well.

However it was only when I read about this phonominan of shutter shock that i started to think, there might be something in this....

Ever since I've shifted the R5 to electronic shutter I can pan down to 1/50 of a second or similar and be confident i will get the shot again.... can shoot the larger 300mm hand held down to much below the reciprical rule without a problem again... but with mechanical shutter the problems persist.

Anyone else seen this? Not tried to see if the new firmware fixes this.
 
Last edited:
A_S said:
Anyone suffered any shutter shock with an R5 (or 6 or similar)?

When I got my R5 last year (upgrading from 7D Mk1 i've used for 11 years or more I took both out to brands hatch and oulton park but found it much harder to shoot clean images on the R5 even at higher shutter speeds of 1/300 or above (using both EF 70-200 F4, and 300 F4L. I put this down to

A.) lack of practice - I hadn't done any serious motorsport for years, maybe only 1 or 2 events a year
B.) the high resolution difference between the R5 and the 7D

It was only when I started doing more regular motorsport last year that i got a bit puzzled as my images didn't get any better with the R5..... I started to think I'd lost my touch or wasn't understanding the auto focus too well.

However it was only when I read about this phonominan of shutter shock that i started to think, there might be something in this....

Ever since I've shifted the R5 to electronic shutter I can pan down to 1/50 of a second or similar and be confident i will get the shot again.... can shoot the larger 300mm hand held down to much below the reciprical rule without a problem again... but with mechanical shutter the problems persist.

Anyone else seen this? Not tried to see if the new firmware fixes this.
Click to expand...
I remember when the Nikon D800 first came out people were finding the high MP sensor that it was more difficult to get images sharp at lower shutter speeds. That’s interesting you’re finding the electronic shutter less of an issue. I’d guess if it was shutter shock then slow shutter speeds on a tripod for landscape images would potentially have the same issue.
 
I haven't noticed the same issue as much on a tripod to be honest, but in landscape images i take, its always wide angle, so you don't expect razor sharp detail when pixel peeping on 12mm images however I did see them as a bit more soft than i was expecting at the start. handheld I was having to really press the camera upto my face and wedge it in to get sharp shots... rather than a looser more relaxed grip on the camera that i was used to, but I switched to electric shutter for those anyway as the perceved disadvantages (panning) of electric didn;t apply to these type of photos

I'm only hypothosising anyway, which is why I am interested to know if others have seen similar
 
@A_S I can't say I have noticed, but when doing panning shots with my Olympus, I realised that the IBIS was working against me. My success rate went right up once I set it to the right direction or turned it off. The R5 has IBIS and the 7D does not - could that be the difference in your panning shots?
 
Not sure if this is ok but I thought it may help others ? that are looking for a lens coat for the RF 100 macro Lens I have the canon r5 and just started to get my Macro Gear sorted I have got the Canon RF 100 macro lens to go with the r5 and was looking for a good lens coat for the Rf100 and I have found a brilliant one so if anyone is looking for one I would recommend this one from https://www.outdoorphotographygear.co.uk
 
cruso said:
Not sure if this is ok but I thought it may help others ? that are looking for a lens coat for the RF 100 macro Lens I have the canon r5 and just started to get my Macro Gear sorted I have got the Canon RF 100 macro lens to go with the r5 and was looking for a good lens coat for the Rf100 and I have found a brilliant one so if anyone is looking for one I would recommend this one from https://www.outdoorphotographygear.co.uk
Click to expand...
Very tempted by the RF 100 macro. What’s it like? I read that there were some autofocus issues initially. Hopefully a firmware update sorted this? Would be interested to hear what you think of it.
 
Bebop said:
@A_S I can't say I have noticed, but when doing panning shots with my Olympus, I realised that the IBIS was working against me. My success rate went right up once I set it to the right direction or turned it off. The R5 has IBIS and the 7D does not - could that be the difference in your panning shots?
Click to expand...

Good thinking but it’s been fine since I turned mechanical shutter off so ibis will still be on!
 
A_S said:
Anyone suffered any shutter shock with an R5 (or 6 or similar)?
Click to expand...

I had this when I first got my R5, and like you when looking into it I found out about shutter shock. the proposed solution that came up a lot was to switch from the original camera default (of mechanical shutter) to electronic first curtain. I switched to this at the time, it cured my issue, haven't changed that setting since. If you've not come across this solution or tried that yet, I'd say give it a go!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: A_S
Steve
Steve K said:
I had this when I first got my R5, and like you when looking into it I found out about shutter shock. the proposed solution that came up a lot was to switch from the original camera default (of mechanical shutter) to electronic first curtain. I switched to this at the time, it cured my issue, haven't changed that setting since. If you've not come across this solution or tried that yet, I'd say give it a go!
Click to expand...

Steve - that’s exactly what I did and it cured the problem for me too.
 
Still more cat photos... This from a test with the EF 100mm f/2.8 (which had to go back because the IS motors were making a horrible grinding sound!) As a first foray into close up work, I'm looking forward to my next copy... Sadly, eye detection failed with this mainly because Crow could barely keep his eyes open and there was often nothing to focus on. Being able to use the back button to switch between AI-f and standard spot focus quickly is a real boon. Praise the lord for customisable cameras!

R6_I0423.jpg
 
I’m just going around in circles looking into a long lens option. I was all for going for a mk1 400mm f4 until I properly read several reviews. The low contrast is a worry along with the age of the lens. I’ve had a look at the mk2 but they are circa £5k for an excellent condition one. Whilst it would be my ultimate lens it’s a lot of money.

I’ve since found out the 300mm f.8 mk2 is 2.4kg which surprised me as that’s around 0.5kg lower than the Nikon equivalent I’ve used in the past (along with 200-400 which 3.5kg).

I loved what the Nikon 300mm f2.8 gave as is was so sharp, rendered nicely and was great in low light. The canon 300mm f2.8 would potentially be a good option as I’ve missed the low light capability but although not much heavier than the 400mm f4 I’m not sure it gets back to weigh issue I experienced previously as I’d probably still need to use a tripod too. When I had a Nikon 300mm f2.8 I had 36MP with the D810 so room to crop a little. There would still be room to crop a little on the R6 but just not as much.

I’m also wondering if I’d be better waiting for the RF version to come along but I’d guess that would be £7k+ so out of my budget really.

I think I will just procrastinate for several more months. It’s just so much easier than making a decision!
 
rob-nikon said:
I’m just going around in circles looking into a long lens option. I was all for going for a mk1 400mm f4 until I properly read several reviews. The low contrast is a worry along with the age of the lens. I’ve had a look at the mk2 but they are circa £5k for an excellent condition one. Whilst it would be my ultimate lens it’s a lot of money.

I’ve since found out the 300mm f.8 mk2 is 2.4kg which surprised me as that’s around 0.5kg lower than the Nikon equivalent I’ve used in the past (along with 200-400 which 3.5kg).

I loved what the Nikon 300mm f2.8 gave as is was so sharp, rendered nicely and was great in low light. The canon 300mm f2.8 would potentially be a good option as I’ve missed the low light capability but although not much heavier than the 400mm f4 I’m not sure it gets back to weigh issue I experienced previously as I’d probably still need to use a tripod too. When I had a Nikon 300mm f2.8 I had 36MP with the D810 so room to crop a little. There would still be room to crop a little on the R6 but just not as much.

I’m also wondering if I’d be better waiting for the RF version to come along but I’d guess that would be £7k+ so out of my budget really.

I think I will just procrastinate for several more months. It’s just so much easier than making a decision!
Click to expand...
The EF lenses work really well with the R bodies and the new AF system means the results are better than with DSLRs. If you pick one of the long teles, i don't think you can go wrong.
 
TimHughes said:
The EF lenses work really well with the R bodies and the new AF system means the results are better than with DSLRs. If you pick one of the long teles, i don't think you can go wrong.
Click to expand...
I’m sure there isn’t a wrong lens as such. It’s all the researching then second guessing myself after kind of making a decision as I’ve never used one of them before on a canon camera. There’s also remembering about how I felt with their extra weight. If I’m honest I didn’t like carrying the weight but the image quality outcome now looking back is probably one of their benefits.

Annoyingly the 300mm f2.8 mk2 isn’t available on the test drive. I think I’m going to go back through lightroom to see what focal lengths I’ve used in the past before making a decision. I’ve got a few more months until I will like to use it for the early summer growing of deer antlers. I may try to hire the 400mm f4 around that time so I can try to get a feel for that.
 
I haven't bought any RF lenses yet and I see no reason to really.

The aperture flex cable on my EF 24-105 F4L mk1 has been broken for about 9 months and I was thinking it was a perfect time to get my first R lens.... but I got the cable fixed and after the first few photos i took with it - I thought - what on earth was I thinking? why pay upto 2k on a new lens when i remembered the quality of this one! Same with my 300 F4L IS.... can't see anything in the R line up that will make upgrading worth it....
 
rob-nikon said:
I think I’m going to go back through lightroom to see what focal lengths I’ve used in the past before making a decision.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a good plan. I've ended up collecting a few over the years - 200 2.0, 300 2.8, 400 2.8 and 600 4.0 - each one perfect for specific situations. The results they produce is my motivation to get to the gym so the weight is not an issue. I would not part with any of them.
 
A_S said:
I haven't bought any RF lenses yet and I see no reason to really.

The aperture flex cable on my EF 24-105 F4L mk1 has been broken for about 9 months and I was thinking it was a perfect time to get my first R lens.... but I got the cable fixed and after the first few photos i took with it - I thought - what on earth was I thinking? why pay upto 2k on a new lens when i remembered the quality of this one! Same with my 300 F4L IS.... can't see anything in the R line up that will make upgrading worth it....
Click to expand...
If you’ve already got EF lenses I can’t see any reason to swap to RF equivalents. I have purchased the 24-105 f4 and 70-200 f4 in the RF Mount as I didn’t have any lenses to start from and they should be two of my most used lenses. There is also the smaller size benefit of the Rf 70-200’s. I’d like a ultra wide lens and it makes sense for me to look at the EF 16-35 f4. Second hand it’s about 1/3 of the cost of the RF equivalent. For the limited use it would get it makes more sense going EF than Rzf for that lens. The use of EF Mount long lenses is one of the reason I move from Sony as there wasn’t any faster lens options than 400 f2.8 which is around £8-9k used.
 
TimHughes said:
Sounds like a good plan. I've ended up collecting a few over the years - 200 2.0, 300 2.8, 400 2.8 and 600 4.0 - each one perfect for specific situations. The results they produce is my motivation to get to the gym so the weight is not an issue. I would not part with any of them.
Click to expand...
I did like the 300mm f2.8 as it was a fantastic lens performance wise. I think getting down to the gym may not be a bad idea!
 
Last edited:
rob-nikon said:
If you’ve already got EF lenses I can’t see any reason to swap to RF equivalents. I have purchased the 24-105 f4 and 70-200 f4 in the RF Mount as I didn’t have any lenses to start from and they should be two of my most used lenses. There is also the smaller size benefit of the Rf 70-200’s. I’d like a ultra wide lens and it makes sense for me to look at the EF 16-35 f4. Second hand it’s about 1/3 of the cost of the RF equivalent. For the limited use it would get it makes more sense going EF than Rzf for that lens. The use of EF Mount long lenses is one of the reason I move from Sony as there wasn’t any faster lens options than 400 f2.8 which is around £8-9k used.
Click to expand...

Its maybe a bit of a personal thing, but for wide angle I'd recomend the Laowa 12mm F2.8. Manual lens but just set it to infinity and don't worry about it! Love the perspective and lovely lens, but then again my general walk around lens is my 16-35 F2.8 mk2 so maybe I like wider than most...!
 
rob-nikon said:
I’m just going around in circles looking into a long lens option. I was all for going for a mk1 400mm f4 until I properly read several reviews. The low contrast is a worry along with the age of the lens. I’ve had a look at the mk2 but they are circa £5k for an excellent condition one. Whilst it would be my ultimate lens it’s a lot of money.

I’ve since found out the 300mm f.8 mk2 is 2.4kg which surprised me as that’s around 0.5kg lower than the Nikon equivalent I’ve used in the past (along with 200-400 which 3.5kg).

I loved what the Nikon 300mm f2.8 gave as is was so sharp, rendered nicely and was great in low light. The canon 300mm f2.8 would potentially be a good option as I’ve missed the low light capability but although not much heavier than the 400mm f4 I’m not sure it gets back to weigh issue I experienced previously as I’d probably still need to use a tripod too. When I had a Nikon 300mm f2.8 I had 36MP with the D810 so room to crop a little. There would still be room to crop a little on the R6 but just not as much.

I’m also wondering if I’d be better waiting for the RF version to come along but I’d guess that would be £7k+ so out of my budget really.

I think I will just procrastinate for several more months. It’s just so much easier than making a decision!
Click to expand...

I did see your post a few weeks back saying you were thinking about the Mk1 400mm.

As you say, these white primes ain’t exactly ‘pocket money’ to buy
So I didn’t want to comment saying “just get the II instead”….

A good friend of mine has a MkII and I can safely say it feels a LOT lighter to carry around than even the likes of the 200mm and 300mm weight / sized lenses.

I’ve noticed WEX have decided to hike the price of their latest one by a grand - compared to the last 2 they’ve had…
But if funds do permit. I’d definitely recommend one.
 
Last edited:
rob-nikon said:
I’m just going around in circles looking into a long lens option. I was all for going for a mk1 400mm f4 until I properly read several reviews. The low contrast is a worry along with the age of the lens. I’ve had a look at the mk2 but they are circa £5k for an excellent condition one. Whilst it would be my ultimate lens it’s a lot of money.

I’ve since found out the 300mm f.8 mk2 is 2.4kg which surprised me as that’s around 0.5kg lower than the Nikon equivalent I’ve used in the past (along with 200-400 which 3.5kg).

I loved what the Nikon 300mm f2.8 gave as is was so sharp, rendered nicely and was great in low light. The canon 300mm f2.8 would potentially be a good option as I’ve missed the low light capability but although not much heavier than the 400mm f4 I’m not sure it gets back to weigh issue I experienced previously as I’d probably still need to use a tripod too. When I had a Nikon 300mm f2.8 I had 36MP with the D810 so room to crop a little. There would still be room to crop a little on the R6 but just not as much.

I’m also wondering if I’d be better waiting for the RF version to come along but I’d guess that would be £7k+ so out of my budget really.

I think I will just procrastinate for several more months. It’s just so much easier than making a decision!
Click to expand...

Have you considered the sigma 300mm f2.8? Sell for under a grand used and work well on the new bodies
 
TimHughes said:
Sounds like a good plan. I've ended up collecting a few over the years - 200 2.0, 300 2.8, 400 2.8 and 600 4.0 - each one perfect for specific situations. The results they produce is my motivation to get to the gym so the weight is not an issue. I would not part with any of them.
Click to expand...
You're missing a 500 f/4 then? :naughty: :exit:
 
Really glad I ordered all of my gear when I did.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top