Canon EOS R Series Cameras

Messages
527
Edit My Images
Yes
AF and optics are moving a target. I still have a old Canon EF 100-300mm. It can AF for sure but its AF is not as good as even the latest tamron 70-300.
I doubt they'll update EF lenses much longer... think we may be seeing last of the EF lens updates soon (if not already ceased)



Sure but there are also small lenses - RF35, 70-200, 15-35 etc. :)
But you are also kind of proving my point in that you are not adapting EF glass forever, you have already invested in RF glass. I doubt you'll ever see RF level optics on EF. Likelihood is you'll eventually make a full swap. While adapter is nice its a faff unless you have one adapter per lens which can get expensive quickly (also at which point it may be prudent to sell now when there is a market and buy equivalent RF lens when it available) or you have body with adapter permanently stuck to it.
I have been there with adapting some glass and have some native ones. Starts of fun but doesn't cut it tbh, you'll notice its a faff. Same reason I have individual adapter per MF lens I own.
There are smaller lenses in the EF range too. It’s not a benefit of Mirrorless.

The only reason I opted for the RF 50mm is due to it (reportedly) being the best in its class. Not because of it being an RF lens.
I certainly wouldn’t trade my 24-70 II in favour of the 28-70.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
7,404
Edit My Images
Yes
There are smaller lenses in the EF range too. It’s not a benefit of Mirrorless.

The only reason I opted for the RF 50mm is due to it (reportedly) being the best in its class. Not because of it being an RF lens.
I certainly wouldn’t trade my 24-70 II in favour of the 28-70.
The RF35 is undoubtedly smaller and more capable than adapter+EF 35 f2
The RF 70-200mm is also fair bit smaller than adapter+EF 70-200.
The RF 28-70 is not an 24-70/2.8 alternative.

Mirrorless do benefit from smaller flange distance which reduced the overall length of lens+body which would be lost because of the adapter.
Also mirrorless design really does make a size difference for UWA lenses.
Also mirrorless lenses will balance better than adapter+DSLR lens.

As I said been there done that, it will lose its novelty soon enough especially once there is a better native version :p
 
Last edited:
Messages
13,502
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
RF35 and 70-200mm sure are.
The 35 1.8 macro is the lens that has me wanting, I could happily just use that alone for 90% of my shooting, with maybe some form of tele lens besides. Just for that lens I am still tempted by the RP, but then my adapted lenses won't have IBIS and that saddens me.
 
Messages
527
Edit My Images
Yes
The RF35 is undoubtedly smaller and more capable than adapter+EF 35 f2
The RF 70-200mm is also fair bit smaller than adapter+EF 70-200.
The RF 28-70 is not an 24-70/2.8 alternative.

Mirrorless do benefit from smaller flange distance which reduced the overall length of lens+body which would be lost because of the adapter.
Also mirrorless design really does make a size difference for UWA lenses.
Also mirrorless lenses will balance better than adapter+DSLR lens.

As I said been there done that, it will lose its novelty soon enough especially once there is a better native version :p
Personally, I haven’t seen any stone set specs on the weight and size of the new RF 70-200. Also to whether it extends or not at its longest focal length...

I know the 24-70 isn’t an alternative to the 28-70. But it’s certainly the closest counterpart in the EF lineup.
I’m just stating that (due to the stellar output of the adapted lenses) that I’d never consider changing it.
 
Messages
22,943
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
Size, AF and optics
The lens design benefits of mirrorless are seriously over-hyped and niche. We seem to have got by pretty well with DSLR optics so far, and many of the allegedly native mirrorless lenses that we'll be seeing shortly will be nothing more than DSLR designs with a built-in adapter anyway - check out the new Sigma Art lenses for example. Sure, there will be some nice new RF lenses coming soon that will be better in all sorts of new (if minor) ways, but that's always been the case with Mk1, Mk2 and Mk3 versions of DSLR lenses.

I'm not questioning the desirability of all this new stuff, just the cost of it all - which I believe explains Canon's strategy with the EOS-RP. It's very affordably priced, and if you're an existing Canon user you don't need new lenses right away because you've already got them and they perform just as well on a mirrorless body with the adapter so you can phase the transition at an affordable pace. This also explains why the RP is not as appealing on photo forums because those people want nothing less than a Sony A7R3 rival to argue about.

The EOS-R and RP are not the cameras I was personally hoping to see either, though I can see it makes good business sense for Canon and IMHO may turn out to be a canny move, particularly because it's a game that Sony just can't play.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
7,404
Edit My Images
Yes
Personally, I haven’t seen any stone set specs on the weight and size of the new RF 70-200. Also to whether it extends or not at its longest focal length...

I know the 24-70 isn’t an alternative to the 28-70. But it’s certainly the closest counterpart in the EF lineup.
I’m just stating that (due to the stellar output of the adapted lenses) that I’d never consider changing it.
I believe its an extending design. But regardless it'll still be smaller especially for storage.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
7,404
Edit My Images
Yes
The lens design benefits of mirrorless are seriously over-hyped and niche. We seem to have got by pretty well with DSLR optics so far, and many of the allegedly native mirrorless lenses that we'll be seeing shortly will be nothing more than DSLR designs with a built-in adapter anyway - check out the new Sigma Art lenses for example. Sure, there will be some nice new RF lenses coming soon that will be better in all sorts of new (if minor) ways, but that's always been the case with Mk1, Mk2 and Mk3 versions of DSLR lenses.

I'm not questioning the desirability of all this new stuff, just the cost of it all - which I believe explains Canon's strategy with the EOS-RP. It's very affordably priced, and if you're an existing Canon user you don't need new lenses right away because you've already got them and they perform just as well on a mirrorless body with the adapter so you can phase the transition at an affordable pace. This also explains why the RP is not as appealing on photo forums because those people want nothing less than a Sony A7R3 rival to argue about.

The EOS-R and RP are not the cameras I was personally hoping to see either, though I can see it makes good business sense for Canon and IMHO may turn out to be a canny move, particularly because it's a game that Sony just can't play.
I am not saying one can't make good optics for DSLRs, just saying soon all updated optics will be made for mirrorless and will cease for DSLRs. Also no first party manufacturer or 3rd party manufactures apart from sigma is just sticking adapter to DSLR lenses. Zeiss, tamron, samyang, tokina, sony, canon, nikon, panasonic have all made newly designed lenses for FF mirrorless. Even sigma has done the same for APS-C/m43 just not for FF.

It will come at a cost for sure. As per my original point above if you will eventually end up swapping to one of these mirrorless mounts, RF or otherwise it will come at a cost unless one plans on adapting forever. It will be better to do it now (by which I don't mean right now i.e. overnight!) when there is demand for DSLR lenses still.
 
Last edited:
Messages
22,943
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
I believe its an extending design. But regardless it'll still be smaller especially for storage.
I'm sure it's a great lens, but the compact design just for storage doesn't make me want to spend £2k+ and there's no reason why they couldn't have done exactly the same for an EF version. The optical benefits of the short flange-back distance simply evaporate past 50-60mm focal length or so.

And there are real downsides to a short flange-back distance too, that can cause severe vignetting and flare issues within the sensor's filter stack.

I am not saying one can't make good optics for DSLRs, just saying soon all updated optics will be made for mirrorless and will cease for DSLRs. Also no first party manufacturer or 3rd party manufactures apart from sigma is just sticking adapter to DSLR lenses. Zeiss, tamron, samyang, tokina, sony, canon, nikon, panasonic have all made newly designed lenses for FF mirrorless. Even sigma has done the same for APS-C/m43 just not for FF.

It will come at a cost for sure. As per my original point above if you will eventually end up swapping to one of these mirrorless mounts, RF or otherwise it will come at a cost unless one plans on adapting forever. It will be better to do it now (by which I don't mean right now i.e. overnight!) when there is demand for DSLR lenses still.
You're missing the point. It doesn't matter how good an idea it might be to fully invest up front if you simply don't have the cash.
 
Messages
13,502
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Doing a few rough sums, the cost for me of moving to Canon mirrorless is just the cost of the body. If I swap to any other brand, I'm looking at something like £8k and that's not going to happen.
I have no idea what you do for a living, but I'm guessing photography is your main income? otherwise why on earth would it cost you £8K?? Is that merely to replicate what you already have, or would this be a need? Genuine Q, as I do wonder at times whatever happened to the enthusiast who could get by with one camera and a simple 50mm prime!

Would you buy an RP? if not, why not? since you seemed to be defending it earlier, just wondering. If it's a perfectly fine option then why not jump to that and get yourself an adapter?
 
Last edited:
Messages
22,943
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
I have no idea what you do for a living, but I'm guessing photography is your main income? otherwise why on earth would it cost you £8K?? Is that merely to replicate what you already have, or would this be a need? Genuine Q, as I do wonder at times whatever happened to the enthusiast who could get by with one camera and a simple 50mm prime!

Would you buy an RP? if not, why not? since you seemed to be defending it earlier, just wondering. If it's a perfectly fine option then why not jump to that and get yourself an adapter?
I'm semi-retired really, but I test stuff for photo magazines and websites with the odd professional gig now and then. It's not hard to spend £8k, and more - two A7R3 bodies, a Trinity of zooms and a couple of fast primes, flash guns etc, and we're into double figures. Maybe that's more than the average enthusiast but even with one body and a modestly decent set of lenses we're looking at £5-6k.

Right now I'm embroiled in moving house and not exactly sure how my needs will evolve, but I wouldn't buy an RP even though it'd probably do me perfectly well in practise. Canon mirrorless cameras have yet to surpass DSLRs, ditto Nikon, and I've been sitting on the fence for a long time now waiting for a 'mirrorless 5D4'. When that arrives as it surely will, then we'll have to see but short term I'm tempted to just buy a 5D4 and see how the market shapes up. I like to use good gear as we all do, but best and newest are not always the same thing.

Edit: even though I'm sure I'll move to mirrorless eventually, meanwhile I'll not hesitate to invest further in EF lenses. I know they'll work just fine with an adapter.
 
Last edited:
Messages
13,502
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
I'm semi-retired really, but I test stuff for photo magazines and websites with the odd professional gig now and then. It's not hard to spend £8k, and more - two A7R3 bodies, a Trinity of zooms and a couple of fast primes, flash guns etc, and we're into double figures. Maybe that's more than the average enthusiast but even with one body and a modestly decent set of lenses we're looking at £5-6k.

Right now I'm embroiled in moving house and not exactly sure how my needs will evolve, but I wouldn't buy an RP even though it'd probably do me perfectly well in practise. Canon mirrorless cameras have yet to surpass DSLRs, ditto Nikon, and I've been sitting on the fence for a long time now waiting for a 'mirrorless 5D4'. When that arrives as it surely will, then we'll have to see but short term I'm tempted to just buy a 5D4 and see how the market shapes up. I like to use good gear as we all do, but best and newest are not always the same thing.
Completely understand, I was force retired through injury pretty much, but at one point I was able to walk into a camera store and swipe £6k on a camera and lens, just because I thought I wanted it. I wasn't even trying to be a gearhead at the time, I'd just read some reviews and went 'that's the shot!' - I was a bit ignorant to my actual needs. The same money would have gotten me so much more with a little research, I think that's why I might be so anal about it all today - now give me the most capable bang per buck camera/lens combo and just push me out the door! :)
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
7,404
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm sure it's a great lens, but the compact design just for storage doesn't make me want to spend £2k+ and there's no reason why they couldn't have done exactly the same for an EF version. The optical benefits of the short flange-back distance simply evaporate past 50-60mm focal length or so.

And there are real downsides to a short flange-back distance too, that can cause severe vignetting and flare issues within the sensor's filter stack.



You're missing the point. It doesn't matter how good an idea it might be to fully invest up front if you simply don't have the cash.
I already said I am not saying they can't make similar optics for EF/DSLR mounts but they won't and that's my point. All updated optics and mechanics for that matter will be for mirrorless in near future.

I don't think those are really issues of short flange distance. Just how the lenses are made. But even if they are downsides we are stuck with them now. All manufacturers are moving in this direction. No point in fighting it.

As I said in brackets which you didn't highlight when I say now I don't mean right now or overnight with full upfront cash. I understand that most people could not do that. But slowing moving on and replacing when and where your can would see you better off in longer run.
 
Last edited:

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
7,404
Edit My Images
Yes
Having said all that EF mount lenses will probably last quite a long time since they can be adapted to all the other mirrorless mounts. F-mount on the other hand will probably follow a-mount's fate eventually/sooner.

Canons mount and lens design decisions have certainly held them well.
 
Last edited:
Messages
8,019
Edit My Images
No
Must really suck transporting it around always extended out.
you should just buy a 400mm prime
oh wait sony doesn't have one (unless you want to spend 10K), too bad you moved from canon
Wtf. You just said Sony don't have one and then later mentioned the one they have lmao!

And you do know the Canon one costs more lmao
 
Messages
161
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
Forgive my ignorance but I don’t fancy reading 23 pages of posts :p

I’m planning on being the R, I’m coming from the original 6D. I mainly do landscapes and cityscapes, a bit of street. I recently have started some portraits with a friend but my main question is, how does the camera perform for concern photography? I will be using an EF 24-70mm f2.8 with the body
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
7,404
Edit My Images
Yes
Forgive my ignorance but I don’t fancy reading 23 pages of posts :p

I’m planning on being the R, I’m coming from the original 6D. I mainly do landscapes and cityscapes, a bit of street. I recently have started some portraits with a friend but my main question is, how does the camera perform for concern photography? I will be using an EF 24-70mm f2.8 with the body
For landscapes I'd suggest anything but canon.
R is actually decent but none the less competitors will give you more latitude in general.
 
Messages
1,872
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
No
Just took delivery of a Sigma 150-600mm Sport lens. Looking forward to using with my EOS R for some wildlife (small garden birds mainly) photography. Unable to get out to use it anger this weekend, so had to make do with some tests shots with one of my son's toys.

Lens Testing
by Simon Harrison, on Flickr

Just like every other EF mount lens I've mounted on to my EOS R via the adaptor, it works absolutely perfectly.

Cheers,

Simon.
 
Messages
6,368
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
Messages
2,280
Edit My Images
No
There were a bunch of lenses in a cabinet at the show yesterday. I think it was that list. They didn’t look lightweight! A talk I saw showed the R in a good light although very few of them from Andy Rouse were for BIF but he claims to be all in for it doing more environmental stuff. Impressive IQ. His 5D4 has gone but he has kept his 1DX2s .... interesting though. I was tempted for a short time. I went and picked it up and quite liked that bar thingy that seems to have been a flop with most.
 
Last edited:

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
7,404
Edit My Images
Yes
R is good. If you ignored the internet hyperbole (I know hard to imagine :p ) it's actually rather decent.
But at the same time there is some truth in that it wouldn't make people swap to it from other mounts and maybe that isn't canon's intension for now. I think they just want to plug their leaky bucket i.e. stop people moving to Sony/Fuji/Nikon. As they claimed recently they are good at catching up and I think they'll release some nice things soon. At the same time they are already releasing some outstanding glass. They've always been good with lenses. I am hoping they'll make a R version of my favourite EF glass 100mm f2 :D
I use 85mm F1.8 as a workaround but 100mm was perfect for me and renders nicely. It was such a nice piece of glass.
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,368
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
For landscapes I'd suggest anything but Canon.
R is actually decent but none the less competitors will give you more latitude in general.
.... I think it is more down to the photographer than the camera as to how good someone's landscape photography is.

My friend Guy Edwardes is a landscape (and wildlife) pro who shoots on Canon and has done so for many years. Check out how good his landscapes are on a Canon :

https://www.guyedwardes.com/portfolio/

Btw, he hasn't added a mirrorless Canon to his EOS system yet but I am still working on him! :D I think he'll do so later when a pro body 1DX equivalent gets released.
 
Messages
1,110
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
No
.... I think it is more down to the photographer than the camera as to how good someone's landscape photography is.

My friend Guy Edwardes is a landscape (and wildlife) pro who shoots on Canon and has done so for many years. Check out how good his landscapes are on a Canon :

https://www.guyedwardes.com/portfolio/

Btw, he hasn't added a mirrorless Canon to his EOS system yet but I am still working on him! :D I think he'll do so later when a pro body 1DX equivalent gets released.
His camera still works, he's probably a smart lad who doesn't spend unnecessarily when the current gear still works and produce good results.
 
Messages
6,368
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
Forgive my ignorance but I don’t fancy reading 23 pages of posts :p

I’m planning on being the R, I’m coming from the original 6D. I mainly do landscapes and cityscapes, a bit of street. I recently have started some portraits with a friend but my main question is, how does the camera perform for concern photography? I will be using an EF 24-70mm f2.8 with the body
.... Did you mean to write "concert" photography? - I no longer shoot concerts (I used to back in the SLR days of 35mm film) but many photographers are reporting that the EOS-R performs very well in concert conditions and I have certainly seen some great shots on it in that genre.

What really will be a very valuable feature is the Vario-angle screen of the EOS-R (I don't know if your 6D has one) - It should not be underestimated!

Oh, and invest in a fast SDXC UHS-II card. Sony offer some very good ones which can write up to 299Mbs.
 
Messages
6,368
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
His camera still works, he's probably a smart lad who doesn't spend unnecessarily when the current gear still works and produce good results.
.... Yes and no. He doesn't spend unnecessarily but does have gearslut tendencies. He is very successful and so can afford to buy what he wants but only buys what he thinks will sufficiently fine tune what he already has and so he has a wide variety of bodies but all full-frame. As always, whether you shoot cameras or guns, it's a matter of choosing the right gun for the mission.
 
Messages
161
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
.... Did you mean to write "concert" photography? - I no longer shoot concerts (I used to back in the SLR days of 35mm film) but many photographers are reporting that the EOS-R performs very well in concert conditions and I have certainly seen some great shots on it in that genre.

What really will be a very valuable feature is the Vario-angle screen of the EOS-R (I don't know if your 6D has one) - It should not be underestimated!

Oh, and invest in a fast SDXC UHS-II card. Sony offer some very good ones which can write up to 299Mbs.
I did, I shouldn’t use my phone to write replies haha. Yeah my 6D doesn’t, it’s something I have missed from my very first camera which was a PowerShot G2.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
7,404
Edit My Images
Yes
.... I think it is more down to the photographer than the camera as to how good someone's landscape photography is.

My friend Guy Edwardes is a landscape (and wildlife) pro who shoots on Canon and has done so for many years. Check out how good his landscapes are on a Canon :

https://www.guyedwardes.com/portfolio/

Btw, he hasn't added a mirrorless Canon to his EOS system yet but I am still working on him! :D I think he'll do so later when a pro body 1DX equivalent gets released.
I never said one can't take good Landscape pictures with canon. I can show you examples of great landscapes taken with an iPhone too. So would we now advice simply buying an iPhone?
The fact remains competitors give more latitude thus more artistic freedom in some cases.

The photographer's skill is certainly important but we aren't talking about that. The question asked wasn't "how do I improve my landscape skills?", The question was "would we suggest canon R for landscapes".
I personally wouldn't because for lot less money you can go lot better than R for landscapes as far as camera bodies go.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,872
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
No
@nandbytes - if you read Crusader's first post, his main question is around how the R performs for concert photography (or concern photography as originally written :LOL:). While he states he mainly does some landscape, cityscape, a bit of street and has just started doing some portrait photography, what he specifically wanted to know was suitability for concert photography.
 
Messages
6,368
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
I never said one can't take good Landscape pictures with canon. I can show you examples of great landscapes taken with an iPhone too. So would we now advice simply buying an iPhone?
The fact remains competitors give more latitude thus more artistic freedom in some cases.

The photographer's skill is certainly important but we aren't talking about that. The question asked wasn't "how do I improve my landscape skills?", The question was "would we suggest canon R for landscapes".
I personally wouldn't because for lot less money you can go lot better than R for landscapes as far as camera bodies go.
.... Fair enough. And yes, I have taken some great landscape shots on my iPhone, although I should strictly call them snaps because they tend to be quick and spontaneous.

I still think that it always comes down to the photographer rather than the camera as Ansel Adams' quote in my signature below.

But, unlike yourself, I think that the EOS-R + RF 24-105mm is an excellent, practical and flexible combo for landscapes :

ISLE OF PORTLAND AS A PASTEL VISTA
by Robin Procter, on Flickr
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
7,404
Edit My Images
Yes
@nandbytes - if you read Crusader's first post, his main question is around how the R performs for concert photography (or concern photography as originally written :LOL:). While he states he mainly does some landscape, cityscape, a bit of street and has just started doing some portrait photography, what he specifically wanted to know was suitability for concert photography.
I initially read it as "how does the camera perform for the concerned photography". So I read the typo in a differently :D

The concerns he mentioned were landscape, cityscape etc. Hence my reply.

Even with concerts put into the mix my suggestion is not unchanged :)
 
Top