Canon EOS R Series Cameras

Messages
8,335
Edit My Images
No
I see this as a game changer - for anyone shooting canon glass this looks like a very reasonable move - if necessary. What’s difficult though - if you’re out shooting wildlife and getting excellent results with your 600/4, 500/4 etc etc and earning money from these - why upgrade?
Why not?
 
Messages
8,335
Edit My Images
No
Yes you need an adapter. However - af performance is not affected. It’s not a question of using an adapter or not - it’s more about not taking a backwards step in performance for your existing glass.
Some existing glasses perform better in a mirrorless body. case point the 85mm 1.2 that I use adapted to my Sony a7r3.
 
Messages
635
Edit My Images
Yes
Some existing glasses perform better in a mirrorless body. case point the 85mm 1.2 that I use adapted to my Sony a7r3.
I imagine you are referring to AF accuracy due to the different type of AF system employed in mirrorless cameras? If so, those advantages will pass on through the new R5. For other lenses, sports and wildlife etc. af speed and accuracy are paramount and it's been well documented that both speed and accuracy suffer when using canon lenses on the sony a7 bodies as well as limiting af functions depending on adapter.

With that in mind - there's no way I would opt for a non-native solution if I was using big, fast super telephoto lenses.
 
Messages
852
Edit My Images
No
Canon has never crippled their video specs. The idea that they held back from offering 120fps or uncropped 4k to protect the cinema line is IMO complete nonsense. They simply haven't had the sensor technology to deliver sufficient sensor readout rates or to do so without overheating.

Their 8K video won't be full sensor readout 10bit 4:2:2 raw 240fps. But it won't be crippled, it'll just be butting up against the limits of their sensor technology.
The 8k video is likely to be in the Motion JPEG (MJPEG) format which are crazy big file sizes.... and don't support audio :oops: :$
 

LongLensPhotography

Th..th..that's all folks!
Messages
15,329
Name
[Censored]
Edit My Images
No
the RF glass how ever good it is is extremely over priced in my eyes... you could buy a a7iii and 85gm for the cost of the 85rf
It is a little overpriced vs EF glass but actually like for like comparison with Sony ie. 70-200/2.8 or 24-70/2.8 cost quite similar...

85 f/1.4 vs f/1.2 is not really a fair comparison. We all know that aperture difference can turn images into something quite different. If you are stopping it down perhaps you should look into EF 1.4L IS version or even wait for cheap 1.8 copy. Many are indeed better off using 70-200mm zoom. I am going to buy my prime specifically when I require f/1.2 (or 1.4)
 
Messages
852
Edit My Images
No
Got to applaud Canon for this..... finally a move away from the cable/memory card plug into computer to transfer photos.

 
Messages
4,723
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
really its just double the resolution, then many could argue handling and colour science(though people would say its been debunked many a time)
if its capable of similar AF/iso and buffer then they will be a step ahead.

I will be interested to see what they price it at though. the RF glass how ever good it is is extremely over priced in my eyes... you could buy a a7iii and 85gm for the cost of the 85rf
A step ahead in resolution but not really anything else the A9 is a completely different type of camera because of the stacked sensor which this won’t have. The new R5 and the A9 series shouldn’t really be compared.

A better comparison would be with the A7RIV which doesn’t have as fast FPS but does have higher resolution.

The new Canon does looks interesting though and I will taking a careful look at it as a potential replacement for my A7RIV as the spec of this would mean that I could use it for work as well as the personal stuff I currently use my A7RIV for.

I wouldn’t be changing my A9II or my A9’s for these though. Very different beasts due to the stacked sensor.
 
Messages
14,830
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
So Chelsea has had her paycheck from Canon, but Tony is still living off the last Sony one :ROFLMAO:
Aye, I would rather watch any pre/review than one of theirs. But fear not, upon release he'll have one out bashing the most insignificant niggle points, it'll be an hour long and littered with adds for Squarespace
 

LongLensPhotography

Th..th..that's all folks!
Messages
15,329
Name
[Censored]
Edit My Images
No
Got to applaud Canon for this..... finally a move away from the cable/memory card plug into computer to transfer photos.

I truly hope this will not be mandatory and can be completely disabled. For one I don't want to rely on network connection, 2) I don't want Canon to have any access to and presumably use of my files unless I choose to for variety of reasons, namely why I don't post anything on adobe, FB or instafail, and 3) this may enable a "kill switch" so you can't take any images in ticketed venues, sports, or protests.... This already sort of works on cell phones - mine wouldn't work a year ago at all at Gloucester NY fireworks event but was good again outside of gates.
 
Messages
8,335
Edit My Images
No
I truly hope this will not be mandatory and can be completely disabled. For one I don't want to rely on network connection, 2) I don't want Canon to have any access to and presumably use of my files unless I choose to for variety of reasons, namely why I don't post anything on adobe, FB or instafail, and 3) this may enable a "kill switch" so you can't take any images in ticketed venues, sports, or protests.... This already sort of works on cell phones - mine wouldn't work a year ago at all at Gloucester NY fireworks event but was good again outside of gates.
Yea that I fully agree with you
 
Messages
14,830
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
How will that work out for the machine gun style shooters? Every image they rattle off gets auto uploaded? That's going to be a pain to clear out after every session
 
Messages
5,431
Name
matt
Edit My Images
Yes
Website showing the price as 9,999 Euros but they think it might just be a "holder" until real price is known. CanonWatch
 
Last edited:
Messages
14,830
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Website showing the price as 9,999 Euros but they think it might just be a "holder" until real price is known. CanonWatch
If it was to be anything close to that I think most would tell them where to shove it .... sideways! :D If it's even close to 3K I think it'll be the same. If they really want to compete this needs to be in around the 2K mark
 
Messages
8,693
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
No
If it was to be anything close to that I think most would tell them where to shove it .... sideways! :D If it's even close to 3K I think it'll be the same. If they really want to compete this needs to be in around the 2K mark
Around 2k might be wishful thinking. I think it'll cost more than the eos r launched at.
 
Last edited:
Messages
14,830
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Around 2k might be wishful thinking. I think it'll cost more than the eos r launched at.
Maybe so, but they need to price it right or nobody will buy it. You can have an A7RIV for 2.2K grey. What will this R5 do better? It won't matter to the likes of me either way, I wouldn't be thinking on buying one until they hit the used market after a year or more at much reduced prices. I do like the look of it though, always said I'd like an R if only it had IBIS
 
Last edited:
Messages
852
Edit My Images
No
Around 2k might be wishful thinking. I think it'll cost more than the eos r launched at.
I agree - the price of the R5 will be in line with the UK Sony A7R 4 price.
 
Messages
14,830
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
If that is the case, and probably most likely I guess, who's buying it at £3.5k? I don't see them flying off the shelves at that
 
Messages
14,830
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Maybe the same people who bought the mark iv and didn't see the eos r as an upgrade.
Many of them probably already gone to Sony. This might bring them back, who knows ... not me :D Just pondering. Do you think you will buy one?
 
Messages
8,693
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
No
Many of them probably already gone to Sony. This might bring them back, who knows ... not me :D Just pondering. Do you think you will buy one?
Some for sure but I have some doubts it's not the millions that the Internet tries to make out.

Depends on price. So probably not near launch as I think it'll cost more than an a9 and not be as good. I think it'll priced in line with the mark iv.
 

LongLensPhotography

Th..th..that's all folks!
Messages
15,329
Name
[Censored]
Edit My Images
No
If that is the case, and probably most likely I guess, who's buying it at £3.5k? I don't see them flying off the shelves at that
If it starts at 3.5k RRP it will have to quickly get close to 2k from "grey" market, or else a7IV is an easy choice.
 
Messages
852
Edit My Images
No
If it starts at 3.5k RRP it will have to quickly get close to 2k from "grey" market, or else a7IV is an easy choice.
Depends, the people that have held onto their Canon gear are probably going to stick with Canon. Those that wanted to move systems have already done so.
 

LongLensPhotography

Th..th..that's all folks!
Messages
15,329
Name
[Censored]
Edit My Images
No
Depends, the people that have held onto their Canon gear are probably going to stick with Canon. Those that wanted to move systems have already done so.
I hear you, but honestly I am the prime counter-example to that statement, and I guess I'm not alone. I am not into sports or wildlife so my canon lenses would be just fine on Sony for the moment... I tried a few of mine on MC11 in the exhibition last year and it behaved just fine as far as I could tell. Eventually most of the EF gear will need to get sold on both sony and canon RF. I may keep the likes of 400/5.6L (landscape detail lens for me) or even get a cheap 135/2L but the valuable ones like 24-70/2.8IIL should part-fund the new ones.
I held off from mirrorless due to both financial reasons and I didn't really like anything they had before A9ii or this mkIV thing. A7R mkIII is OK for sensor tech, but it has a few rough edges here and there, and is too small for me to use full time.
 
Messages
1,445
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
I hear you, but honestly I am the prime counter-example to that statement, and I guess I'm not alone. I am not into sports or wildlife so my canon lenses would be just fine on Sony for the moment... I tried a few of mine on MC11 in the exhibition last year and it behaved just fine as far as I could tell. Eventually most of the EF gear will need to get sold on both sony and canon RF. I may keep the likes of 400/5.6L (landscape detail lens for me) or even get a cheap 135/2L but the valuable ones like 24-70/2.8IIL should part-fund the new ones.
I held off from mirrorless due to both financial reasons and I didn't really like anything they had before A9ii or this mkIV thing. A7R mkIII is OK for sensor tech, but it has a few rough edges here and there, and is too small for me to use full time.
A big plus point for RF is you don’t need to sell EF lenses.
 
Messages
2,430
Edit My Images
No
A pro sports photographer I chat to on here, who has added to A9ii's to his kit bag [Canon] reckons that the R5 will be a similar price to the 1DX3. IF that is the case, I will be sticking with my 1DX2.
 

LongLensPhotography

Th..th..that's all folks!
Messages
15,329
Name
[Censored]
Edit My Images
No
A big plus point for RF is you don’t need to sell EF lenses.
Technically no, but practically I don't wish to see them depreciate to nearly nothing over next 5 years. Besides native glass will surely have benefits such as better resolution....
In that regard I see little difference Vs going Sony route, except once I get the glass I'm stuck with one or the other.

A pro sports photographer I chat to on here, who has added to A9ii's to his kit bag [Canon] reckons that the R5 will be a similar price to the 1DX3. IF that is the case, I will be sticking with my 1DX2.
I don't have insider sources but common sense says it is replacing 5div and lack of mirror only makes it cheaper.... If it's not they can blame themselves for losing long standing customers
 
Messages
297
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
I don't have insider sources but common sense says it is replacing 5div and lack of mirror only makes it cheaper.... If it's not they can blame themselves for losing long standing customers
I think it is not replacing the 5d iv as an equal but has more spec so I imagine it will cost more (based on each 5d costing more than the last version on its release date). I see it as the mirrorless version of what would be the 5d mkV. The release RRP of the 5d iv was £3,599 so would imagine it would be around that or slightly more to start with (dropping over time as they all do!).

Could be completely wrong, I know i won't be an early adopter tester, but will wait until the price drops and the glitches are ironed out before buying (depending on its low light capability).

T
 
Messages
1,445
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
Technically no, but practically I don't wish to see them depreciate to nearly nothing over next 5 years. Besides native glass will surely have benefits such as better resolution....
In that regard I see little difference Vs going Sony route, except once I get the glass I'm stuck with one or the other.
ok, understand. Depreciation is inevitable as technology advances, I plan to replace as and when needed. For the long primes, I doubt that will be soon.
 
Messages
7,105
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
Hopefully someone hasn't already posted this here - Info about the forthcoming R5 and RF 100-500mm : [I switched to Olympus E-M1X Pro system last November so don't visit this thread much]

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3...rf-100-500mm-lens-under-glass-at-wppi?slide=5

Had I stayed with Canon (EOS-R & 1DX-2) the RF 100-500mm would be extremely attractive given I know how good the EF 100-400mm is and also had an EF 500mm. But, I don't regret my switch and I'm certainly not here to disrespect Canon's advances.
 
Messages
7,105
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
I must admit that discussions about IBIS (In Body Image Stabilisation) much earlier in this EOS-R thread did not make me think I wanted or needed it when shooting Canons. However, now that Canon have announced its introduction to the EOS-R5 and that I have experienced it on my Olympus, I can say that it really can make a very big difference (as Keith @Cagey75 has been telling us for a long time!).

This image of my daughter's kittens was handheld at 1/8s - I am impressed with what IBIS can enable and I post this Olympus-shot image only as an example of IBIS in use. My flash unit was mounted but switched off, hence "on, did not fire" stated on Flickr :

YIN-YANG by Robin Procter, on Flickr
 
Messages
14,830
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
I must admit that discussions about IBIS (In Body Image Stabilisation) much earlier in this EOS-R thread did not make me think I wanted or needed it when shooting Canons. However, now that Canon have announced its introduction to the EOS-R5 and that I have experienced it on my Olympus, I can say that it really can make a very big difference (as Keith @Cagey75 has been telling us for a long time!).

This image of my daughter's kittens was handheld at 1/8s - I am impressed with what IBIS can enable and I post this Olympus-shot image only as an example of IBIS in use. My flash unit was mounted but switched off, hence "on, did not fire" stated on Flickr :

YIN-YANG by Robin Procter, on Flickr
I did harp on about how important it can be over time :D It's one of those things, once you've had it, you cannot go without. I'm glad to see Canon add it to the R line, I hope they do same for a more budget friendly body too. An RP+ or so, even the same all round, just add IBIS and I think it'll sell a whole lot more

Lovely image btw :)
 
Messages
297
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
I did harp on about how important it can be over time :D It's one of those things, once you've had it, you cannot go without. I'm glad to see Canon add it to the R line, I hope they do same for a more budget friendly body too. An RP+ or so, even the same all round, just add IBIS and I think it'll sell a whole lot more

Lovely image btw :)
I've never had a camera with IBIS, I assume if you are shooting moving objects then IBIS is no help, it only works for still subjects, is that correct?

T
 
Top