Canon FF mirrorless...

OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
20,586
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
:D



I have been pondering too much lately, considering a move back to Dslr just to pull away from all this latest ML malarky and worry more about getting out and shooting! But I sat down with the G80 last night, setting up custom menus - since I got a replacement everything was a bit all over the shop. And I couldn't help but admire how well put together this little camera is. The ease of use, the ultra-responsive touch screen - and for everything, not just limited to AF or swiping through previews, you can pretty much use the touch screen for all settings without ever touching a button. Then I thought about the image quality, and for the money it is tough to beat, I've never found it wanting in decent lighting, images are ultra sharp [thanks to no AA filter partly] the ISO performance is just as good as many APSC cameras, whether ML or dslr [I fiddled about in DPR's image comparison, pitting it against other possible options it stands up much better than I would have thought] - it's got a lot of the things we see people yearning for like very decent 4K, excellent IBIS, the flippy-flappy screen, weather sealing, solid construction [bar the issues I've had with hinges] and I would say ergonomically sound - though, I do wish it was a little bigger/taller so my pinky has a place to rest. I do like a nice grippy camera. Pondering even more so now if it's a G9 I want to upgrade to ... I don't think I want to lose all those features you just do not get with a dslr. The G9 adds dual slots, even better IBIS, larger grip, 6K and high res shooting modes, better ISO performance [just a tad] more resolution, better evf etc ... then in the new year when all the dust has settled on these FF ML models, see what I fancy then.
The things like most about my Panasonic MFT cameras are the compact size and the responsiveness. A FF camera will almost certainly be bigger than my RF style cameras but if they can keep it reasonably compact and retain the speed of operation a future Panasonic FF CSC could well eclipse the Canikons for me.

With the MFT cameras I have I don't have to focus and shoot, I just point the camera and by the time my finger has gone from meter and focus to shoot it already has :D but it's hard to imagine that a FF camera could retain that speed if only because it'll be moving bigger glass about but if they can do it it'll be an interesting camera :D
 
Messages
380
Edit My Images
No
If this is true, it makes Sony charger prices look cheap, hopefully its not true and the Canon R comes bundled with a charger.
I guess its sometimes the price you have to pay to wear the Canon name :D lol
Yes, it comes with a standard LC-E6E battery charger supplied (for LP-E6N batteries).

Should you want to buy another one they're currently £43.99 at WEX.
 
Messages
6,405
Name
Riz
Edit My Images
No
Yes, it comes with a standard LC-E6E battery charger supplied (for LP-E6N batteries).

Should you want to buy another one they're currently £43.99 at WEX.
That's more like it :)
 
Messages
380
Edit My Images
No
no not really. the quote i linked is about a USB charger one.
A very quick google...

There's scant info available. Canon mention the USB Power Adapter PD-E1, but searching their site reveals nothing further.

Other sources incorrectly claim this is supplied with the camera...not according to Canon UK.

Bristol Cameras are offering it for sale at £119, but the info is:

Canon PD-E1 USB Power Adapter FREE DELIVERY ON THIS ITEM - The Canon PD-E1 is a USB power adapter charger for use with the Canon BG-E22 battery grip for the Canon EOS R full frame mirrorless digital camera. Turns the BG-E22 battery grip into an external battery charger when plugged into the optional EC809 USB adapter.

So you apparently need the £329 grip as well!

Or, you could buy a LP-E6N USB charger from Amazon for around £10. No idea if these work well, but the battery used by the R is the same standard one used by many other current Canon cameras.
 
Messages
22,917
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
That's right up there with Apple will release a new phone next year.
(y)

I think he's right but missing the point, Canon will get some sales due to those unique lenses but we're talking tiny numbers due to their cost/size/weight. It would be a bad idea just to recreate the current EF range in RF, this helps sell the new system even if most of it is psychology.
A few respected names are making far too much of the new larger lens mount IMHO. And if it's true that a big mount is the key to optical nirvana, then Sony is properly stuffed already. I don't think so. And until a couple of weeks ago I don't remember a) any great clamour for an f/1.0 prime or f/2 zooms, nor b) anyone saying it was impossible with DSLR mounts - perhaps because it's obviously not.

A big lens mount and short flange-back distance only benefits short focal length lenses with apertures below approx f/1.4 with primes, and broadly speaking f/2.8 with zooms but even then there's no free lunch. With f/numbers that low, size, weight and cost skyrocket and when the lens gets too close to the sensor, vignetting becomes even more serious than it already is with fast apertures (off-axis pixels don't collect light as efficiently) and flare issues can arise with light received at extreme angles conflicting with the sensor stack (UV, IR and AA a filters in front of the sensor) as users of heritage Leica/Zeiss super-wides have discovered when adapted to Sony mirrorless bodies.

Basically, these exotic lenses make nice halo products but will account for a tiny number of actual sales. And claiming that the new mount somehow throws the door open to untold new optical delights is simply untrue.

ps One thing that doesn't seem to get mentioned is getting rid of the mirror also gets rid of the mirror-box that sits immediately behind the lens. That's the thing which gets in the way of super-fast lenses and physically blocks the huge light cone that comes from sub-1.4 lenses. Check images from Canon's 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 and note how off-axis highlights at maximum aperture are often not nice round orbs, but clipped into igloo shapes by the mirror-box intrusion.
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,042
Name
nik
Edit My Images
No
Which proves his point that it's been rushed to the market
not really jonney. you have just jumped on my last sentence.
fact of thr matter is it hasn't been released yet, only announced.
it could well ship with these features on. and if not waiting a week or two is hardly a big deal. people are so impatient these days its daft.
 
Messages
12,274
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
I would say there's warehouses full of these cameras set to go already, I reckon these previews are precisely what is being shipped in the first batches
 
Messages
7,117
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
I think I need to clarify a few things

- It’s not really a big deal or not whether it is released with or without these features
- It’s not really my concern whether it will ever get these features as I have no plans to get this camera

But my conclusion on why this is rushed is because they are putting in software in the immediate month following released, it basically means they are working 24/7 on it now and don’t have time to put it in the cameras they have made to stock all the stores world wide. If this camera were to have a later release date, say next January, it would come with the new features.

It’s not about big or small deal. It’s like day 1 patch for computer games, I don’t care, I rather them have it than not, but they are doing these day 1 patches is because the games has been shipped and they need to work on it some more and had they given enough time, it would’ve been in the final code instead of Day 1 Patch.
 
Messages
995
Name
Tyson
Edit My Images
Yes
Where are you based?

Happy to bring a 5D4 and a A73 with a Sigma MC-11 adaptor for you to take some images and then go home to edit to see for your self. The sensor in the 5D4 will be the same, you can then see how sharp the Canon can be, although I’d be honest with you, no matter how much I macro adjust, I can’t get it 100% as sharp when compared to using Dual Pixel AF.

Or I can send you some RAW files with each, let me know what kind of lenses you like, I am sure I can find some samples.

My overall feeling and experience is that the Sony is sharper (no doubt IBIS plays a part), but the Canon isn’t soft like it has vaseline all over it.

thank you very much for the offer.
I am in Central Essex
I would love to meet up as your idea sounds like a plan !

Do you find the EF24-105L f4 is a bit soft at 105 ! ?

My current DSLR is the EOS 7Dii ( only 16k shutter count ) is at Colchester cameras having the AF calibrated as I have found focusing optically is not as sharp as Dual Pixel AF in live view !
The 7Dii AF system is better than the 7D though some have mentioned it is a tad slower than 7D. As most of my shoots are sports / wild life the quick AF with multi AF points is vital to me. Live view for stills would be hopeless, however video mode is another subject. all together.
I have recently purchased a used sigma 150-600 contemporary and that it away for calibration as well. I would love to own the EF 100-400L MkII though it is just too expensive even a used version.
IBIS I do believe is the way forward and should become the norm soon. A mate of mine has the A6500 APSC camera which has IBIS and eye detect. When I put my 50mm f1.8 OSS on the A6500 it nails focus 95% of the time !

I do appreciate canon's tough build as my old 7D travelled the world with me and worked fine
 

StewartR

Efrem Zimbalist Jr
Advertiser
Messages
12,043
Name
Stewart
Edit My Images
Yes
Weren't mirrorless camera's developed so that camera bodies could be made smaller?
No. The primary motive is to make them cheaper to build (no moving parts). I suspect that a secondary motive is to get consumers locked into faster upgrade cycles, like the phone manufacturers have done, which will be easier once those awkward moving parts are done away with.

Don't forget, the manufacturers are doing this for their benefit, not ours.
 
Messages
69
Edit My Images
No
If this is true, it makes Sony charger prices look cheap, hopefully its not true and the Canon R comes bundled with a charger.
I guess its sometimes the price you have to pay to wear the Canon name :D lol
So am i right in thinking that you can't just charge it up with a standard USB C cable and plug that you'd already have for laptops? Thats really annoying if so!
 
Messages
7,770
Edit My Images
No
Last edited:
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
20,586
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
A few respected names are making far too much of the new larger lens mount IMHO. And if it's true that a big mount is the key to optical nirvana, then Sony is properly stuffed already. I don't think so. And until a couple of weeks ago I don't remember a) any great clamour for an f/1.0 prime or f/2 zooms, nor b) anyone saying it was impossible with DSLR mounts - perhaps because it's obviously not...

A big lens mount and short flange-back distance only benefits short focal length lenses with apertures below approx f/1.4 with primes, and broadly speaking f/2.8 with zooms but even then there's no free lunch...
I suppose there are reasons for larger apertures, I suppose DoF for artistic reasons and I suppose a genuine need for speed. Dunno if I've missed anything :D

I'm a bit of a fan of thin DoF but only sometimes and sometimes I think it can be waaaaay overdone. I wonder how many shots really suit f1.x apertures. I don't think the genuine need for speed aspect affects me too much especially as if going that route the f1.x aperture is going to mean that very little is sharp so I wonder how often I and others really should be using f1.x rather than just wanting to.
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
20,586
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
There's a Hits and Misses article at Luminous Landscape. I wont provide a link as it's a subscription site but those who've either paid or are willing to can Google their way to it.

One thing that strikes me is the lack of a joystick and it doesn't look like there are many custom buttons.
 
Messages
4,216
Name
matt
Edit My Images
Yes
I suppose there are reasons for larger apertures, I suppose DoF for artistic reasons and I suppose a genuine need for speed. Dunno if I've missed anything :D
Used to get a brighter image in the viewfinder with SLR or so I was told, didnt really notice it unless comparing f1.8 with say f4 lens, even then it wasnt massive, so I doubt there's much advantage between 1.8 and 1.2 in the viewfinder.
Suppose it might be usefull in astrophotography to gain as much speed as possible if taking long exposures which might come down from 2 mins to 1 min for a stop advantage.
 
Messages
4,216
Name
matt
Edit My Images
Yes
Maybe stopping down a really fast lens by a couple of stops as opposed to an F4 would gain you a better image whilst maintaining a fast aperture when compared to the f4 stopped down to f8?
Although I believe a Canon f4 IS 70/200 is sharper than the f2.8 non IS stopped to f4, so maybe that "rule" no longer holds true?
Whatever, it's going to be a big lump.
 
Messages
5,701
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
I suppose you have to balance the light gathering advantage of the wider aperture against the disadvantages for the image.
....Irrespective of 'disadvantages' or 'advantages' for the image (this being a matter of personal taste), isn't Canon's (and other's) L lenses ability to gather maximum light at the lens's maximum aperture always instructed (until the shutter is released) regardless of the user's aperture selection and will therefore greatly assist tracking moving subjects?

I'm wondering if being mirrorless cancels out this feature of wide open aperture gathering - I hope not!

Personally I very rarely need to set an aperture wider than F/4 but we are all different. But I also think that the option of being able to select such wide apertures can add to and enrich the photographer's creative choices.

[ARTY FARTY ALERT! The word "creative" was mentioned] :D
 
Last edited:
Messages
22,917
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
I suppose there are reasons for larger apertures, I suppose DoF for artistic reasons and I suppose a genuine need for speed. Dunno if I've missed anything :D

I'm a bit of a fan of thin DoF but only sometimes and sometimes I think it can be waaaaay overdone. I wonder how many shots really suit f1.x apertures. I don't think the genuine need for speed aspect affects me too much especially as if going that route the f1.x aperture is going to mean that very little is sharp so I wonder how often I and others really should be using f1.x rather than just wanting to.
Agree :) There are lots of reasons for wanting super-fast apertures but in reality there are also some major downsides in terms of big jumps in size, weight and cost, plus optical compromises.

Take the new Canon R-system lenses. I would much rather have the current 24-70mm f/2.8 than that massive 28-70mm f/2 at £3k. And the 50mm f/1.2, lovely thing though it is, I'd take a state-of-the-art 50/1.4 at half the size and cost every time.

If it's super-low f/numbers we're wanting, the facts of physics say primes are much better than zooms, but even then there's a limit to how thin DoF can get before it becomes a problem in itself. Anyone who's used the current Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 wide open for portraits will testify to how difficult it is to use, regardless of the camera's AF capability, when DoF is down to a few mms and just breathing moves the plane of sharp focus.

And all that aside, the benefits of the new mount and reduced flange-back distance are way over-egged. It just makes the optical design of a few extreme lenses a bit easier, but it's not a deal-breaker as a long history of super-fast lenses testifies. Canon introduced the EF-mount 50mm f/1.0 in 1981 and I was using a Nikon 55mm f/1.2 (borrowed!) as a teenager back in 1970 and that was on the much smaller F-mount of course.
 
Last edited:
Messages
4,216
Name
matt
Edit My Images
Yes
I bought the 85 1.8 because it is a much more practical lens, the 1.2 has as you say virtually no DoF and 1.4 has massive amounts of glass (as does the 1.2) to haul around before it can achieve focus, thereby slowing down AF to the point of becoming a "worse" lens than the 1.8.
 
Messages
5,701
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
A few respected names are making far too much of the new larger lens mount IMHO. And if it's true that a big mount is the key to optical nirvana, then Sony is properly stuffed already. I don't think so. And until a couple of weeks ago I don't remember a) any great clamour for an f/1.0 prime or f/2 zooms, nor b) anyone saying it was impossible with DSLR mounts - perhaps because it's obviously not.

A big lens mount and short flange-back distance only benefits short focal length lenses with apertures below approx f/1.4 with primes, and broadly speaking f/2.8 with zooms but even then there's no free lunch. With f/numbers that low, size, weight and cost skyrocket and when the lens gets too close to the sensor, vignetting becomes even more serious than it already is with fast apertures (off-axis pixels don't collect light as efficiently) and flare issues can arise with light received at extreme angles conflicting with the sensor stack (UV, IR and AA a filters in front of the sensor) as users of heritage Leica/Zeiss super-wides have discovered when adapted to Sony mirrorless bodies.

Basically, these exotic lenses make nice halo products but will account for a tiny number of actual sales. And claiming that the new mount somehow throws the door open to untold new optical delights is simply untrue.
....It sounds like you may not have read the white paper pdf which Gary (Gaz J) posted a while ago which describes Canon's reasoning on pages 7-9. It made good sense to me when I read it and still does, especially as it considers future developments. I have downloaded it but don't know how to upload a pdf to this forum.
 
Messages
22,917
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
....It sounds like you may not have read the white paper pdf which Gary (Gaz J) posted a while ago which describes Canon's reasoning on pages 7-9. It made good sense to me when I read it and still does, especially as it considers future developments. I have downloaded it but don't know how to upload a pdf to this forum.
I have read it Rob. It's marketing, and it doesn't change anything. The new mount etc is nice to have, but in reality it will make no difference to me and I strongly suspect no difference to most others.
 
Messages
6,405
Name
Riz
Edit My Images
No
I have read it Rob. It's marketing, and it doesn't change anything. The new mount etc is nice to have, but in reality it will make no difference to me and I strongly suspect no difference to most others.
Correct..... :D exotic lenses will be sold in small numbers to a very niche crowd..... low volume = higher costs usually.
 
Messages
5,701
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
I have read it Rob. It's marketing, and it doesn't change anything. The new mount etc is nice to have, but in reality it will make no difference to me and I strongly suspect no difference to most others.
....Even if it is marketing or at least if it has a significant marketing spin, the hard information contained in the document should not be ignored if someone wants to learn more about Canon's EOS R products.

The new mount is going to physically strengthen the lens to body connection and as a user of heavy glass, I see that alone as a plus.

Perhaps I am being naive and too much of a Canon fanboy*, but I didn't read the document as being marketing biassed enough to ignore - It is hardly bull poo in my opinion.

[*I am more of a Canon enthusiast in reality and not blind nor even blinkered]
 
Last edited:
Messages
5,701
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
Correct..... :D exotic lenses will be sold in small numbers to a very niche crowd..... low volume = higher costs usually.
....This begs the question of when is a lens considered to be "exotic"? Is it only a term relating to price?

There are professional photographer TP members aren't there? Perhaps not well known high earning ones, but I expect they are very happy that so-called 'exotic' lenses are offered if only just to hire them for a shoot.

Even serious amateurs like and will buy 'exotic' lenses if it suits their aspirations and efforts. Okay, they may be a minority but I say long may lens designers strive to raise the bar higher and give everyone choices.
 
Messages
22,917
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
....Even if it is marketing or at least if it has a significant marketing spin, the hard information contained in the document should not be ignored if someone wants to learn more about Canon's EOS R products.

The new mount is going to physically strengthen the lens to body connection and as a user of heavy glass, I see that alone as a plus.

Perhaps I am being naive and too much of a Canon fanboy*, but I didn't read the document as being marketing biassed enough to ignore - It is hardly b******t in my opinion.

[*I am more of a Canon enthusiast in reality and not blind nor even blinkered]
It's a a sales brochure dressed up with the apparent gravitas of a White Paper. I'm not saying there are no advantages to the new lens mount and reduced flange-back distance, just that it only makes a small difference to the design of a very few niche and very expensive lenses.

To put it another way, what is it that's now possible with the new R-mount that was previously not possible with EF? If it's just a stronger lens mount, that's not very compelling even if true.
 
Messages
9,133
Name
Jeremy Moore
Edit My Images
No
....This begs the question of when is a lens considered to be "exotic"? Is it only a term relating to price?

There are professional photographer TP members aren't there? Perhaps not well known high earning ones, but I expect they are very happy that so-called 'exotic' lenses are offered if only just to hire them for a shoot.

Even serious amateurs like and will buy 'exotic' lenses if it suits their aspirations and efforts. Okay, they may be a minority but I say long may lens designers strive to raise the bar higher and give everyone choices.

And some amateurs will buy exotic lenses "because they're there". And possibly never even use them?

Personally I can't imagine ever needing a f1.2 lens or an f2 standard zoom, and I'm a professional (just)........ It looks to me as if Canon (for example) offer these exotic lenses because they can.
 
Messages
22,917
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
It's a a sales brochure dressed up with the apparent gravitas of a White Paper. I'm not saying there are no advantages to the new lens mount and reduced flange-back distance, just that it only makes a small difference to the design of a very few niche and very expensive lenses.

To put it another way, what is it that's now possible with the new R-mount that was previously not possible with EF? If it's just a stronger lens mount, that's not very compelling even if true.
That's a tricky question to answer given that we don't know what Canon is planning, so let's look at what they've shown so far to showcase the new mount.

The new ER 28-70mm with f/2 max aperture is possible because it only goes down to 28mm rather than 24mm, which is the crunch end in terms of optical design. The 50mm f/1.2 is not at all revolutionary, DSLR history is littered with similar spec and even faster DSLR lenses going back many years. Nikon's new Z mount 58mm f/0.95 is pushing things a lot further optically, but just look at it! It's colossal, weighs half a ton and costs $6k (manual focus only). It's not going to be a big seller.

I'm not dissing the new mount and its associated benefits, just wanting to add some realism. If anyone thinks it's some kind of optical new dawn and that we'll see a whole new range of amazing lenses that we'll all be wanting and using, they're going to be disappointed.
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,405
Name
Riz
Edit My Images
No
That's a tricky question to answer given that we don't know what Canon is planning, so let's look at what they've shown so far to showcase the new mount.

The new ER 28-70mm with f/2 max aperture is possible because it only goes down to 28mm rather than 24mm, which is the crunch end in terms of optical design. The 50mm f/1.2 is not at all revolutionary, DSLR history is littered with similar spec and even faster DSLR lenses going back many years. Nikon's new Z mount 58mm f/0.95 is pushing things a lot further optically, but just look at it! It's colossal, weighs half a ton and costs $6k (manual focus only). It's not going to be a big seller.

I'm not dissing the new mount and its associated benefits, just wanting to add some realism. If anyone thinks it's some kind of optical new dawn and that we'll see a whole new range of amazing lenses that we'll all be wanting and using, they're going to be disappointed.
Correct...... :D
 
Messages
5,701
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
And some amateurs will buy exotic lenses "because they're there". And possibly never even use them?

Personally I can't imagine ever needing a f1.2 lens or an f2 standard zoom, and I'm a professional (just)........ It looks to me as if Canon (for example) offer these exotic lenses because they can.
....I think it's a great shame when people buy anything 'exotic' and never use them. I lose respect for them and am reminded of the time when I art directed a shoot on a 10x12 plate camera with a then professional photographer who is very wealthy indeed (inherited and with titles and estates) and on the wall of his (very large) studio reception area was an exotic racing bike. At the time I was an amateur time triallist bike racer and in talking to him about it (it was my first visit to his studio) I quickly discovered that he knew absolutely nothing about it - It was merely an ornament. My respect nose-dived!

I can't imagine wanting such a fast lens either but as I suggested earlier, I am sure that there others who do and who will use them creatively whether they are professionals or amateurs. If they can afford them, why shouldn't they?

Yes, I agree that Canon do them because they can (the 'Can' in 'Canon'? :D), but it reinforces their overall brand positively as an innovator and leader. Also it is by exploring the barriers that technology makes advances which in time can filter down to more 'mundane' products as well.

We should all keep a more open mind to future potentials < Something I'm not reading a lot of in this thread I'm sorry to say.

:)
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,340
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
Yes
Brownish wool things: Amateur photographers
Black and white things: marketing departments and Brand ambassadors
Whistling noise: Executive boards of the camera Brands
Given the level of 'dissent' in this thread, it seems we have a significant number of 'black sheep' in out midst :D
 
Top