Canon EOS R Series Cameras

[robinsslee]

Canon you done so well here....

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRXU34DD6pM

 

[Chipper]

Canon you done so well here....

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRXU34DD6pM

Ihave just watched this and the Canon didn’t do well at all....

 

[Phil V]

Ihave just watched this and the Canon didn’t do well at all....

At the risk of sounding like a Canon apologist, the ‘conclusions’ in that video were at best ‘questionable’. Sony beat canon for their lens offerings, despite the fact Canon designed a camera and adaptor system that work flawlessly with the best range of lenses available.

 

[woof woof]

At the risk of sounding like a Canon apologist, the ‘conclusions’ in that video were at best ‘questionable’. Sony beat canon for their lens offerings, despite the fact Canon designed a camera and adaptor system that work flawlessly with the best range of lenses available.

I'm sure you know Phil that he's possibly thinking about native lenses there.

I don't wish to sound like a Canon knocker (please remember that I used Canon for something over 10 years SLR and DSLR) but "the best range of lenses available?" The best? They may have some good to very good lenses and they may have a few that are best in class but they also have some very average and even some dross so I'd qualify "best" a little and maybe say that they have a wide range and a large number of lenses available to use via an adapter.

 

[Phil V]

I'm sure you know Phil that he's possibly thinking about native lenses there.

I don't wish to sound like a Canon knocker (please remember that I used Canon for something over 10 years SLR and DSLR) but "the best range of lenses available?" The best? They may have some good to very good lenses and they may have a few that are best in class but they also have some very average and even some dross so I'd qualify "best" a little and maybe say that they have a wide range and a large number of lenses available to use via an adapter.

For number and quality you know that Canon have the edge, to the point where photographers have been known to switch brands just to use a particular lens.

I’m aware he was only discussing ‘native’ which IMHO he did on purpose in order to underscore the Canon, that was my point. Likewise overplaying IBIS and then dismissing Canons superior video focussing because of the 4K crop.

But we’re all entitled to our opinions, and all I’m saying is that I disagree with the opinion of the guy on the video. You’re just as entitled to disagree with me, and likewise I believe you’re wrong.

 

[RedRobin]

I don't wish to sound like a Canon knocker (please remember that I used Canon for something over 10 years SLR and DSLR) but "the best range of lenses available?" The best? They may have some good to very good lenses and they may have a few that are best in class but they also have some very average and even some dross so I'd qualify "best" a little and maybe say that they have a wide range and a large number of lenses available to use via an adapter.

.... I can't comment on Sony lenses as I have never used them (except fixed in an excellent RAW-shooting RX100-II compact which had outstanding low light performance but crap zoom) but I have always found that Nikon and Canon lens quality are mostly equal to each other. Canon probably has a more extensive range and their new RF lenses are looking extremely promising indeed.

If Nikon haven't produced a Control Ring Adapter equivalent they are suddenly behind! That Canon adapter is a game changer if you have EF lenses.

 

[RedRobin]

I agree with @Phil V : I think the reviewer attached too much importance to the lack of IBIS.

However, I'm not kidding myself by claiming that the EOS R is the best - The camera which is the best is the one which best suits what you photograph and which you feel most comfortable with physically (not to be underestimated). What other camera gear you already own and like is also a major factor.

Each of the main 3 contenders have their strengths and weaknesses but I my gut feeling, and if I'm honest my hope of course, is that in the longer term Canon will have an edge even though Sony appear to be ahead in may ways currently. Sony will progress too, and Nikon, but there are some fundamentals in the Canon EOS system which I think will win through.

But, anyway, the bottom line is that it's an individual choice and does it really matter if another photographer is shooting on a slightly 'better' camera?

 

[jonneymendoza]

I agree with @Phil V : I think the reviewer attached too much importance to the lack of IBIS.

However, I'm not kidding myself by claiming that the EOS R is the best - The camera which is the best is the one which best suits what you photograph and which you feel most comfortable with physically (not to be underestimated). What other camera gear you already own and like is also a major factor.

Each of the main 3 contenders have their strengths and weaknesses but I my gut feeling, and if I'm honest my hope of course, is that in the longer term Canon will have an edge even though Sony appear to be ahead in may ways currently. Sony will progress too, and Nikon, but there are some fundamentals in the Canon EOS system which I think will win through.

But, anyway, the bottom line is that it's an individual choice and does it really matter if another photographer is shooting on a slightly 'better' camera?

I think there are things from canon that won't make them win per say but being 3rd best is fine.

Just because a system doesn't sell number 1 does not mean its a fail. There's a market for 3 maybe 4 full frame systems.

 

[Phil V]

I think there are things from canon that won't make them win per say but being 3rd best is fine.

Just because a system doesn't sell number 1 does not mean its a fail. There's a market for 3 maybe 4 full frame systems.

Were note talking about winning per-se and being ‘best’ and camera sales aren’t the same thing ‘never were’, the sun is not the best newspaper, the Toyota Corolla is not the best car etc etc. Canon have managed to bethe best seller for years whilst having ‘2nd rate’ sensors.

What we’re discussing is the idiot on the video, upmarking to suit one manufacturers features and downmarking others, which is frankly pathetic from what is supposed to be an objective comparison.

 

[simonbarker]

At the risk of sounding like a Canon apologist, the ‘conclusions’ in that video were at best ‘questionable’. Sony beat canon for their lens offerings, despite the fact Canon designed a camera and adaptor system that work flawlessly with the best range of lenses available.

It's worth remembering it's a video comparing the new bottom range mirrorless cameras, for its intended audience I think it's entirely reasonable to conclude having the largest range of native glass (remembering that new designs tend to have better performance both optically and functionally, which should become more apparent when higher end models come out) and having the ability to adapt from several other systems is a viable advantage.

If you change the requirements it would be very easy to instead say Canon has the best lenses available but that's a different set of requirements and most people who post here often can better answer that than that DPR video ever could.

 

[HoppyUK]

Were note talking about winning per-se and being ‘best’ and camera sales aren’t the same thing ‘never were’, the sun is not the best newspaper, the Toyota Corolla is not the best car etc etc. Canon have managed to bethe best seller for years whilst having ‘2nd rate’ sensors.

What we’re discussing is the idiot on the video, upmarking to suit one manufacturers features and downmarking others, which is frankly pathetic from what is supposed to be an objective comparison.

The reviewer is between a rock and a hard place. In those very brief videos that increasingly seem to hold sway, there's no time for proper debate. He can't ignore things like the lack of IBIS, single card slots, video performance and the limited native lens range etc and there would be uproar if he did. However, all those things are of little consequence to me and many others - most of my lenses are image stabilised anyway, somehow I manage to scrape by with just one card slot, I don't shoot video, and I'd be using adapted EF lenses very happily thanks. But I accept that they're all major considerations that can't be swept aside in an objective review and count against Canon.

I'd make a rather different criticism. Like most people looking at those cameras, the question for me is how does the EOS-R compare to it's DSLR counterparts? I'm simply not going to spend £10k swapping systems, so how does the EOS-R stand up against the 5D4? And for Nikon users, how do the Zeds compare side by side with Nikon DSLRs? I think we'd find that there's life in the old DSLR yet

 

[HoppyUK]

It's worth remembering it's a video comparing the new bottom range mirrorless cameras, for its intended audience I think it's entirely reasonable to conclude having the largest range of native glass (remembering that new designs tend to have better performance both optically and functionally, which should become more apparent when higher end models come out) and having the ability to adapt from several other systems is a viable advantage.

If you change the requirements it would be very easy to instead say Canon has the best lenses available but that's a different set of requirements and most people who post here often can better answer that than that DPR video ever could.

These are all £2k-plus cameras, not entry-level by any stretch of the imagination and the great majority of buyers will be coming from an existing system where they are quite likely heavily invested in one brand. It's a great video for prompting debate, which is what photo forums are primary about so top marks for that, but rather misses the point as far as actual buyers of these cameras are concerned (as I mentioned above).

 

[simonbarker]

These are all £2k-plus cameras, not entry-level by any stretch of the imagination

I've raised the point before that we should have high standards when spending so much but even so they are still the entry level full frame mirrorless systems from each respective manufacturer, how do you think they refer to them? The Sony is supposed to be cheaper but got a healthy mark up somewhere along the way and Canon could well go that way too assuming they intend to maintain their current ranges.

the great majority of buyers will be coming from an existing system where they are quite likely heavily invested in one brand

I agree but anyone that applies to should have a clear idea of what their requirements are, which illustrates the point I made about them having a better idea of their needs than a DPR video aimed at those who probably don't.

 

[redhed17]

At the risk of sounding like a Canon apologist,

Really, that's so out of character.

I found the video quite fair but then I like to think that I am quite objective, which I think Chris Niccols was too, rather than being

the idiot on the video

When Sony started with their mirrorless cameras the talk was of limited native lenses, now that Canon and Nikon are being judged in the same way, it is somehow different because Canon and Nikon have made adapters at the same time. Mmm.

As for IBIS, would a camera be better with it! Probably a more versatile product. Saying that lens stabilisation is better is probably true, but added to IBIS it could be even better. Add to that that Canon say that the lens stabilisation is better, and then not have any of the native lenses have it sort of emphasises that with the native lenses on the new camera you have no image stabilisation. And when there is talk of the next Canon camera may have IBIS, then that also sends out a mixed message, is IBIS a favourable feature or not!

The talk was also of poor AF performance with the Sony's at the beginning too, but they are far ahead of Canon and Nikon now, and both have a lot of catching up to do. In an objective review that can't be disputed, as they have done the testing with all the cameras. Same with all the features they compared. You obviously disagree with their review, which you have no problem with.

I agree with @Phil V : I think the reviewer attached too much importance to the lack of IBIS.

Another surprise!

Each of the main 3 contenders have their strengths and weaknesses but I my gut feeling, and if I'm honest my hope of course, is that in the longer term Canon will have an edge even though Sony appear to be ahead in may ways currently. Sony will progress too, and Nikon, but there are some fundamentals in the Canon EOS system which I think will win through.

Spoken like a true fan boy. Which I know you have no problem being.

When my brand is best, I will shout it from the roofs, when it is not it is not important. They may not be the best now, grudgingly admitted, but believe that they will be the best in the future. But that's not important is it! At the moment Canon and Nikon are behind Sony in many areas for mirrorless. I don't have any belief or confidence that either Canon or Nikon will catch up in a few areas any time soon, if ever. The good thing about being a fan boy is belief and confidence in your chosen brands future.

None of the manufacturers have delivered poor cameras, but is certain areas one may have an advantage over the other, and if the point of a comparison review is to highlight the areas where cameras are better or worse than the competition then something will always be best in particular areas, and the others will not be. Some people will have features that are important to them, and some that are not, but that doesn't mean they are not important to others. Best to have more reviews and comparisons than not to make a more informed decision if you are considering a purchase.

I say again, I think the DPReview video was fair. Feel free to disagree. Especially in this thread.

Canon will be sell by the bucket load regardless. In a way I hope they don't though, same with Nikon, because poor sales may speed up the evolution of their cameras to get closer to Sony, and maybe, you never know, surpass them in many areas. Everyone benefits when they are pushing each other.

 

[Phil V]

When Sony started with their mirrorless cameras the talk was of limited native lenses, now that Canon and Nikon are being judged in the same way, it is somehow different because Canon and Nikon have made adapters at the same time. Mmm.

Because there’s a vast difference between a camera with a small number of native lenses that relies on 3rd party adaptors often paired with lenses from other camera manufacturers*, and a camera and adaptor designed by a manufacturer to support their own lenses and even adding functionality not available to users of those lenses on their native cameras.

A vast difference.

*theres still large numbers of Sony users pairing Canon lenses which they’re pleased to announce ‘work almost as fast as native’.

Edit to add... I’m beginning to feel like a broken record having to constantly point out I’ve said several times if I was starting tomorrow I’d have bought Nikon, and whenever I make recommendations it’s never on the basis of brand loyalty. I have very specific reasons to buy Canon, that makes me a Canon user not a fanboy or apologist.

 

[simonbarker]

When Sony started with their mirrorless cameras the talk was of limited native lenses, now that Canon and Nikon are being judged in the same way, it is somehow different because Canon and Nikon have made adapters at the same time. Mmm.

As Phil has pointed out they are not comparable, the key difference is there's no penalty in adapting Canon to Canon while you did it on Sony because at one point you had very little choice despite it being inferior.

As for IBIS, would a camera be better with it! Probably a more versatile product. Saying that lens stabilisation is better is probably true, but added to IBIS it could be even better. Add to that that Canon say that the lens stabilisation is better, and then not have any of the native lenses have it sort of emphasises that with the native lenses on the new camera you have no image stabilisation. And when there is talk of the next Canon camera may have IBIS, then that also sends out a mixed message, is IBIS a favourable feature or not!

I find the discussion around IBIS to be a little redundant, it's obviously of benefit especially so if your lens has none and irrespective of in lens being superior as the two are not mutually exclusive. A specific individual may not need it but it's clearly a disadvantage of the R to not have it while every comparable alternative does and I would be shocked if it wasn't present on future systems from Canon.

The talk was also of poor AF performance with the Sony's at the beginning too, but they are far ahead of Canon and Nikon now, and both have a lot of catching up to do. In an objective review that can't be disputed, as they have done the testing with all the cameras. Same with all the features they compared. You obviously disagree with their review, which you have no problem with.

Are they though? From what I've read its AF-C performance is well behind for both Nikon and Canon but for static subjects the Canon is apparently stellar, if that was my single criteria the Canon would be the best choice.

When my brand is best, I will shout it from the roofs, when it is not it is not important. They may not be the best now, grudgingly admitted, but believe that they will be the best in the future. But that's not important is it! At the moment Canon and Nikon are behind Sony in many areas for mirrorless. I don't have any belief or confidence that either Canon or Nikon will catch up in a few areas any time soon, if ever. The good thing about being a fan boy is belief and confidence in your chosen brands future.

That just seems a good way to get into pointless arguments.

My personal view is Sony has the better technology (in a general sense; the Z6 and R both have technical advantages over the A73 like the viewfinder, rear display etc) but all my complaints about Sony aren't due to the technology, they're due to the implementation (think really obvious omissions like no real touch screen etc), I'd be much happier if they sat down and fixed those things than giving me some amazing new sensor with an extra stop of DR or whatever. Put another way, technology improvements are inevitable, 10 years down the road we're going to have better sensors in every camera but that doesn't necessarily hold true for good design.

 

[HoppyUK]

<snip>

Canon say that the lens stabilisation is better, and then not have any of the native lenses have it sort of emphasises that with the native lenses on the new camera you have no image stabilisation.
<snip>

Two of the four new R lenses have IS.

 

[Chipper]

Ihave just watched this and the Canon didn’t do well at all....

Perhaps I should have concluded my sentence with this: but it doesn't matter really as plenty of people are finding it works very well. I have followed this thread from the beginning and have really liked some of the images posted on here. I have a Canon system which is geared mainly toward speed so I know this is not for me yet. Maybe the next version. I also like that they are experimenting. I guess also that they could have made it a higher spec thing first time out but as has been pointed out by a few on here - the lenses work with the adapters very well indeed.

 

[wooster]

I thought the video was fair. He did say he was comparing tech specs and as. reviewer he couldn't ignore them. He also kind of implied it was pretty pointless exercise at the end. I agree 100% that it's pointless. I would never buy Sony for example because no matter what their spec sheet says, they don't have what's important to me. I might buy Nikon if the Canon cameras didn't do what I want, but a) the Canon cameras do do what I want and b) previous experience with Nikon UK suggests not.

In Canon it does what I need, feels great, produces great results, is reliable and has good, back up and product support: bingo - we have a winner.

To others it's important that they have a camera with a spec sheet that exceeds all others if on the market even if the real - world differences don't matter. They have their choices too.

Listen, if IBIS is really important to you then you really would be an idiot to buy Canon, but it's a bit daft to get so defensive.

We make our choices. What are we defending?

 

[RedRobin]

Although this dates back to 9th September I don't think that this info from Canon Rumors has been posted before in this thread :

https://www.canonrumors.com/functio...1nhXuypq-6m1q5MRfOArHU38FrvzwuTol_sqWh0LB_kXw

Am I correct in thinking that firmware updates are more easily created in mirrorless than in D-SLR cameras?

 

[StewartR]

Am I correct in thinking that firmware updates are more easily created in mirrorless than in D-SLR cameras?

No. Its the same process.

But newer cameras and newer systems may be more amenable to having new functionality added, if they've been designed with that in mind. For a simple example, take a look at the top plate displays on the EOS R and on a Canon DSLR. The DSLR has lots of dedicated areas for displaying specific information, all packed in closely together, but there's not really much you can do with it. By contrast the R just has a rectangular block of pixels and the Canon engineers can do whatever they like with them.

 

[Phil V]

Am I correct in thinking that firmware updates are more easily created in mirrorless than in D-SLR cameras?

No...

No. Its the same process.

However, firmware updates for completely electronic cameras are capable of more fundamental upgrades than on DSLRs which rely on more mechanical parts .

 

[RedRobin]

No...

However, firmware updates for completely electronic cameras are capable of more fundamental upgrades than on DSLRs which rely on more mechanical parts .

.... So, forgiving my technical ignorance, a mirrorless camera isn't as capable of being upgraded by firmware as a completely electronic camera is? I'm not aware of any completely electronic cameras.

My earlier question in #300 was just wondering how far firmware upgrades could go. Either way, Canon will doubtless do however much or however little it finds practical to do. Time will tell.

Thanks for your answers Stewart and Phil.

 

[Phil V]

.... So, forgiving my technical ignorance, a mirrorless camera isn't as capable of being upgraded by firmware as a completely electronic camera is? I'm not aware of any completely electronic cameras.

My earlier question in #300 was just wondering how far firmware upgrades could go. Either way, Canon will doubtless do however much or however little it finds practical to do. Time will tell.

Thanks for your answers Stewart and Phil.

Sorry Robin I obviously failed...

I was making the distinction between a DSLR which has a lot of purely mechanical parts, and a mirrorless which relies more on software (firmware).

The firmware upgrade process is the same, but there’s possibly more advantages to be had for a mirrorless camera.

A future camera with a fully electronic global shutter and the option of a processor and memory upgrade would be a better bet still

 

[RedRobin]

Sorry Robin I obviously failed...

I was making the distinction between a DSLR which has a lot of purely mechanical parts, and a mirrorless which relies more on software (firmware).

The firmware upgrade process is the same, but there’s possibly more advantages to be had for a mirrorless camera.

.... Actually I think I probably failed to make myself clear in my original question

Thinking that the mirrorless relies on and is more software driven than a D-SLR, my expectation was that firmware updates would potentially offer more powerful features than historically with D-SLRs. But I wondered if I was correct in thinking this - Hopefully I am.

 

[redhed17]

Two of the four new R lenses have IS.

I stand corrected.

Canon 24-105mm f4 L IS USM RF Lens
Canon 35mm f1.8 IS Macro STM RF Lens

Canon 28-70mm f2 L USM RF Lens
Canon 50mm f1.2 L USM RF Lens

 

[smr]

I wondered about the ergonomics, it just doesn't look comfortable to hold from the pictures.

 

[srhmoto]

I wondered about the ergonomics, it just doesn't look comfortable to hold from the pictures.

Ergonomics are a very personal thing. Personally, I find the EOS R to be extremely comfortable to hold. My only real gripe in handling is the position of the AF ON button which is too far over to the right. However, I don’t use back button focus, so it is not a really big issue for me.

The only real way to see if the ergonomics work for you, is to go and handle one

Simon.

 

[RedRobin]

I wondered about the ergonomics, it just doesn't look comfortable to hold from the pictures.

.... Which camera are you referring to please?

Surely not the EOS R because it is particularly comfortable to shoot with and especially the grip - Even the haters praise the grip.

I think you should decide by actually handling one rather than relying solely on pictures.

The only criticisms I have about the ergonomics are that the AF-ON Back Button Focus position could be improved but it's far better positioned than on the mirrorless EOS M5 in my opinion. And I personally don't warm to the Multi-function Bar and so have it de-activated.

The fact that so much is programmable by the user greatly helps - We all have our own individual preferences.

 

[wooster]

Every other reviewer I have read or listened to has been very positive about the ergonomics of the R. Its one of the things I guessed that pleased most people. None has really liked the on off button place and few are positive about the slidey thing on the back top right

 

[Raymond Lin]

Every other reviewer I have read or listened to has been very positive about the ergonomics of the R. Its one of the things I guessed that pleased most people. None has really liked the on off button place and few are positive about the slidey thing on the back top right

That's pretty much it, it has a good grip but not very good button placement and that strange slide bar thing is just also a mis-step IMO.

 

[RedRobin]

Every other reviewer I have read or listened to has been very positive about the ergonomics of the R. Its one of the things I guessed that pleased most people. None has really liked the on off button place and few are positive about the slidey thing on the back top right

.... I very much like the On/Off switch dial and its position. However I'm not keen about the operation of anything currently programmable for the Multi-function Bar slidey thing.

 

[RedRobin]

My first ever JPEG - I usually always shoot RAW. However, a good friend who owns a fishmongers asked me for a quick favour to photograph some of his fish on his trailer in the local street market. They had to be urgently printed and laminated to make decorations to hang on a Lego Christmas Tree! But they needed doing fast and so it was a case of shooting JPEG and popping into Boots nearby to get them printed. The Boots machine prints were surprisingly good although they took a long time to initially load as each JPEG was about 6MB.

This is a relatively rare instance when I would have like two card slots so I could shoot RAW to one card and JPEG to the other but this was no big deal for what I was shooting.

I processed the original JPEG (shot in highest quality) in Capture One and then applied ON1 Effects plug-in via a TIFF in Photoshop CS6. I am pleased with the result and didn't expect a JPEG to offer so much in Capture One editing.

The conditions were very wet and very windy with poor light and I shot outdoors on the pavement on a white polystyrene lid (which blew away when very slimey Trout were on it!) as I prefer natural light. I shoot Manual-mode and have the lens Control Ring programmed to ISO to be able to override my default of Auto ISO and visually control the exposure in the viewfinder < I want that capability in my D-SLR!!

I found the zoom ring on the RF 24-105mm very stiff to change while in the viewfinder and hope it will loosen up - Also I have to get more used to not accidentally moving the manual focus ring instead of the zoom. But once set up I always get a strong feeling of confidence at the moment of shooting this camera - It feels rock solid.

As I use my 1DX-2 as my main camera and Back Button Focus on both bodies, I do find I have to consciously find the AF-ON button on the R and it's trickier to find when shooting handheld rather than on tripod. "You use an EOS R on a tripod?" I hear you say < Yes, I sometimes use my R mounted on a Canon 500mm F/4L II on a gimbal on Skimmer on a window sill overlooking my wildlife garden at home. The Skimmer is great for hides and also shooting from ground level when the R Vario-angle screen is invaluable.

THE HANDSOME JOHN DORY by Robin Procter, on Flickr

Am I the only one who finds this fish mesmirising!?

By the way, John Dory are an excellent table fish and one of my favourite white fish to eat.

 

[Chipper]

Thanks for keeping us up to date with your EOS R discoveries. I won't be getting one but it certainly looks as though I might get the next one, unless it is very very silly money!

 

[RedRobin]

Thanks for keeping us up to date with your EOS R discoveries. I won't be getting one but it certainly looks as though I might get the next one, unless it is very very silly money!

.... It's my pleasure and we all help each other by sharing our findings and opinions.

I might trade in mine for the next R too but very much subject to spec and providing that it has a Vario-angle screen and a faster fps burst rate - I'm not unhappy with mine as my extra body choice but there is no such thing as a perfect camera. I shoot enough images every week to know what I ideally want. Meanwhile, I enjoy what I've got.

I'm definitely going to be photographing more dead fish! Due to my good fishmonger friend I have endless opportunities whenever I want. Apparently (read on Flickr) there was a famous photographer in the 1860s Mathew Brady who took many daguerreotypes of dead fish but Google isn't throwing up any examples.

 

[redhed17]

This is a relatively rare instance when I would have like two card slots so I could shoot RAW to one card and JPEG to the other but this was no big deal for what I was shooting.

Were you not able to shoot Jpeg and RAW? No need for two card slots, just send two files to the same memory card.

With regard to your image, I saw the top half of the picture, and whilst reading you said that the fish was on polystyrene, I thought the colour was a bit warm, but when I scrolled down and saw the rest of the image, the bottom turns purple. Am I seeing that correctly, as I am on a computer in work. I know you said that you shot it outdoors, but was part of the image under artificial lighting?

 

[RedRobin]

Were you not able to shoot Jpeg and RAW? No need for two card slots, just send two files to the same memory card.

With regard to your image, I saw the top half of the picture, and whilst reading you said that the fish was on polystyrene, I thought the colour was a bit warm, but when I scrolled down and saw the rest of the image, the bottom turns purple. Am I seeing that correctly, as I am on a computer in work. I know you said that you shot it outdoors, but was part of the image under artificial lighting?

.... Fair point IF both RAW and JPEG can indeed be sent to the same single card* < I expect they can. BUT if not it would have meant losing my handheld position (literally in gale force wind gusts) while I reset to and fro between RAW and JPEG while the same subject was on the pavement and as I said in my post, JPEGs were all that were necessary. This whole session of shooting 10 fish species took 33 minutes and was needed in a hurry. I also didn't want to confuse Boots printing machines, which I had never used before, with RAW unsupported CR3 files on the same card. It simply wasn't practical to additionally shoot RAW in the circumstances.

*EDIT: I have checked the EOS R settings and there is the option to shoot both RAW + JPEG. However, as I pointed out before, I wasn't about to let my friend down by not being able to use the Boots print machines immediately after the session.

Re your lighting question, you have missed what I wrote :

I processed the original JPEG (shot in highest quality) in Capture One and then applied ON1 Effects plug-in via a TIFF in Photoshop CS6. I am pleased with the result and didn't expect a JPEG to offer so much in Capture One editing.

The conditions were very wet and very windy with poor light and I shot outdoors on the pavement on a white polystyrene lid (which blew away when very slimey Trout were on it!) as I prefer natural light.

Adding the ON1 Effects and graduated Filter have been applied to enhance my image as a picture rather than just as a photograph with a bland white polystyrene background. The filtration has also brought out the more golden parts of this fish species Zeus faber known as 'John Dory' - derived from the French 'jaune dore' meaning golden yellow.

However, if my picture is not to your taste, that is a different matter.

 

[RedRobin]

For anyone who uses Capture One Pro, version 12 just released now supports CR3 RAW files.

The downside is that the upgrade from version 11 costs £116 / $149 but at least there are plenty of exciting new features which will help my workflow.

https://www.phaseone.com/Capture-One/Supported-Cameras.aspx?c=canon

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvfJxcxUfFo&utm_source=AlexOnRAW.com+Newsletter&utm_campaign=23d84c1a2f-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_11_29_01_42&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_3bef7b0394-23d84c1a2f-111731505

 

[simonbarker]

Capture one 8 to 10 only cost me £90 and they're asking £169 for 10 to 12.

I do like Capture one but they (as far as I'm aware) don't offer free updates to support newer cameras so it's annoying to commit yourself and then find out you need a new version if you change your camera.

 

[RedRobin]

Capture One 8 to 10 only cost me £90 and they're asking £169 for 10 to 12.

I do like Capture One but they (as far as I'm aware) don't offer free updates to support newer cameras so it's annoying to commit yourself and then find out you need a new version if you change your camera.

.... Then you got lucky when you bought version 8 to 10. Everybody's prices increase, not just Capture One. It has developed well and positively in my opinion. ON1 has matured too but it still seems less professional and less sophisticated than Capture One and is crude by comparison.

If version 12 had not been ready yet CR3 support would have happened in a .dot update to version 11 as the list shows camera supports have happened in the past [see link to list below in the Version Added column]. But software engineering is trickier than most of us realise and we as consumers just want everything yesterday and also free of charge!

https://www.phaseone.com/Capture-One/Supported-Cameras.aspx?c=canon

I might as well go for version 12 tonight rather than just delay it.