1. Riz_Guru

    Riz_Guru

    Messages:
    6,268
    Name:
    Riz
    Edit My Images:
    No
    lol :D hehehehehe beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeh :D
     
  2. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,698
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Back in the film days I mostly had relatively small prints and a lot of the time thin DoF or slight misfocus was hidden to an extent but these days I can pixel peep at 100%+ very easily and I can see if the DoF is very thin and if shooting half to three quarter body portraits at 85mm f1.8 isn't going to be enough to get enough DoF for me if I look closely. I know there are a lot of people who like having next to nothing sharp but a lot of the time I tend to like to get the whole head in the DoF.

    I may be wrong but I think that in these days of good very high ISO performance I'm beginning to think that the very widest apertures tend to be more for the pleasure of ownership and very occasional rather than regular use.
     
  3. meduk1

    meduk1

    Messages:
    67
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Well interestingly it suggests the adapter is to turn the battery grip into a charger? So does that mean you need both?
     
    Riz_Guru likes this.
  4. Raymond Lin

    Raymond Lin

    Messages:
    6,417
    Name:
    Raymond
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Looks like a power brick for the wall.
     
    Riz_Guru likes this.
  5. jonneymendoza

    jonneymendoza

    Messages:
    7,106
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Yes looks like it
     
  6. HoppyUK

    HoppyUK

    Messages:
    22,643
    Name:
    Richard
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Very true. That's exactly what I'm thinking when I look at that gorgeous new 50/1.2, but would I actually make much use of it? Err, no.

    I love nice soft and blurry background portraits, but don't like it when eyes are sharp and the nose is not, which is unavoidable at extremely low f/numbers. But there's a way around that.

    Another way of getting beautifully blurred backgrounds but with greater depth-of-field is to shoot with a longer lens and move back. It seems to be a little known fact that doubling focal length and shooting distance blurs the background by the equivalent of a two stops lower f/number. In other words, instead of a 50mm f/1.2 at 1m, a 100mm f/2.4 lens at 2m gives the same background blur, but two stops greater depth-of-field (y) One of the reasons why Canon's wonderful 135/2L is known as the portrait bokeh machine.

    Easy to see with this excellent background blur and DoF simulator https://dofsimulator.net/en/
     
    maarten.dhaese likes this.
  7. RedRobin

    RedRobin

    Messages:
    4,424
    Name:
    Robin
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    ....Even if only used very occasionally rather than regularly, such as a fisheye or tilt-shift lens for example, then surely having a latest-state-of-the-art ultra wide aperture lens in your arsenal (assuming you can afford it) can be justified.

    As always, doesn't it depend on what subject you are shooting and in what lighting conditions? Indeed high ISO performance has greatly improved and continues to do so but sometimes a photographer prefers the results from selecting a lower ISO value with a wider aperture setting to help capture their desired image. Also, each lens model can bring its own look to the party - Photography can be about so much more than just capturing a perfect reproduction.

    Just because a lens isn't required by one photographer, or a group of specialists, it doesn't mean that others can't make good use of it and I don't think it matters how often or not that occurs. Why should it matter?

    For example, I have only used my Canon fisheye lens a few times but it has been the perfect lens for some shots I have wanted and consequently been able to enjoy taking.

    I would like to add that I am not aiming this at anyone in particular here but am saying generally that photographers can benefit from keeping an open mind to what new technologies have to offer and especially if they are a professional in a commercially competitive arena.

    It's very early days and it remains to be seen what I will add to or replace or not in my Canon EOS system but I am very excited by what Canon have recently announced and undoubtedly what their products will have to offer. At the very least I think there are obvious improvements to user controls, their customisation and also ergonomics even before I have personally experienced them hands-on.

    No camera gear is ever perfect but that is offset when we embrace new potentials.
     
  8. RedRobin

    RedRobin

    Messages:
    4,424
    Name:
    Robin
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    ....Most wildlife photographers who use telephoto lenses will know that without having to look at simulators. I very rarely shoot portraits of people but occasionally shoot dragonflies on my Canon 500mm F/4L II + 2x @1,000mm and am very satisfied by DoF on the subject but with soft bokeh. But I really dislike the dead flat featureless backgrounds which look like a studio wall backdrop and which some bird toggers on TP rate so highly.
     
  9. HoppyUK

    HoppyUK

    Messages:
    22,643
    Name:
    Richard
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Nothing wrong with that Rob, but I think you're missing the point. Or at least the point I'm trying to make, which is that you don't need a fancy new lens mount to do all of those things. The Canon R mount and reduced flange-back distance (ditto Nikon Zed) only makes the design of some super-fast sub-f/1.4 lenses with shorter focal lengths a bit easier.

    Realistically, the only designs I can think of which fit that category would be something like 50/35/24mm f/1.0. At longer focal lengths than that, the new lens mount offers no benefits whatsoever. And yes, those lenses would be fantastic but on my (long) lens wants list, they'd be right down the bottom. YMMV ;)
     
  10. HoppyUK

    HoppyUK

    Messages:
    22,643
    Name:
    Richard
    Edit My Images:
    No
    (y)

    Absolutely agree there - a bit of background/context helps a lot IMHO. I guess if someone has bought a 600/4 at great expense, the temptation to use it wide open is irresistible, especially as it gives the option to use a faster shutter speed and/or lower ISO, but it's often a mistake I think.
     
    jerry12953 likes this.
  11. RedRobin

    RedRobin

    Messages:
    4,424
    Name:
    Robin
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    ....Have you noticed that I often miss the point :LOL: LOL

    True your point about the lens mount but I think that there may be advantages to Canon's larger lens mount which we haven't seen yet but which were hinted at in that 'white paper' (I mean marketing document! :D).
     
    HoppyUK likes this.
  12. HoppyUK

    HoppyUK

    Messages:
    22,643
    Name:
    Richard
    Edit My Images:
    No
    The new R-mount is exactly the same 54mm diameter as EF, it's only the reduced flange-back distance that offers any benefits (and some downsides mentioned earlier in the thread).
     
    RedRobin likes this.
  13. RedRobin

    RedRobin

    Messages:
    4,424
    Name:
    Robin
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    ....Slightly off-topic but I have been surprised by how well my Canon 500mm F/4L II performs regarding bokeh when set at any of the wider range of apertures. By "performing well" I mean that there are usually enough hints of the background habitat evident to satisfy my taste. I always shoot Manual-mode.

    Being a wildlife photographer, most of my wildlife togger friends I sometimes meet up with shoot on the 600mm F/4L II but they are all very experienced users, more so than I am < I must ask one in particular who is a pro whose work I greatly admire.

    ....Cheers, Richard!

    Is it just me who goes into sniggering schoolboy humour mode whenever the word "flange" is mentioned? :D
     
    SsSsSsSsSnake, meduk1 and Phil V like this.
  14. meduk1

    meduk1

    Messages:
    67
    Edit My Images:
    No
    No :)
     
    RedRobin likes this.
  15. SsSsSsSsSnake

    SsSsSsSsSnake

    Messages:
    8,948
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    @Riz_Guru :p
     
    Riz_Guru likes this.
  16. SsSsSsSsSnake

    SsSsSsSsSnake

    Messages:
    8,948
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Now why would that possibly make us laugh :facepalm:
     
  17. Riz_Guru

    Riz_Guru

    Messages:
    6,268
    Name:
    Riz
    Edit My Images:
    No
    You called sir? :D
     
    SsSsSsSsSnake likes this.
  18. RedRobin

    RedRobin

    Messages:
    4,424
    Name:
    Robin
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    LostInSpace and Cagey75 like this.
  19. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,431
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No

    As soon as he said he was in Hawaii I was about to cut it off, but he is actually being a lot more critical than any of the others. I much prefer straight up honesty like this. None of these cameras are even remotely close to perfect, and the flaws have to be pointed out. For me, from all the previews I've seen, there's 2 things I dislike about the R. 1. No IBIS 2. Price. I don't like that crappy looking touch bar either, it seems a bit pointless and fiddly, but meh, it's not a big deal. A joystick would have been so much better as he says.
     
  20. MatBin

    MatBin

    Messages:
    3,821
    Name:
    matt
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Surely then it isn't a different mount than EF, all that is different is the face of the mount to sensor distance is less, so only a simple spacer is required to make an existing EF lens work on an R body. Perhaps you could use a macro tube if the depth of the tube was correct. If it is just a simple spacer I can see a Chinese knock-off being available before the camera is even released for sale. How about an EF-S to EF converter, the rear of an EF-S lens protruding into the body shouldn't be a problem as it would probably not go further than the spacer ring anyway.
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2018
  21. HoppyUK

    HoppyUK

    Messages:
    22,643
    Name:
    Richard
    Edit My Images:
    No
    The diameter of the new R mount may be the same as EF, but it's not the same bayonet and has a load more electronic communication contacts inside. You could describe the EF-to-R adapter as a simple tube but there's rather more to it than that. It also allows EF-S lenses to be fitted to an R camera with full functionality.

    No doubt there will be cheap knock-off adapters available but Canon seems to have got that angle pretty well covered by supplying a free adapter with the camera body, and extra adapters (there are three different options available) are priced from £99.
     
    redhed17 and MatBin like this.
  22. redhed17

    redhed17

    Messages:
    5,435
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I think the camera comes with the EF>EOS R adapter, at least initially, which is £99. The EF>EOS R adapter with control ring is £199, the EF>EOS R adapter with drop in Polariser is £299, and the EF>EOS R adapter with drop in ND filter is £399.

    I'm not sure whether I read that the adapter bundled with the camera is a limited time thing. Well done to them for having the adapter with the camera though, I think Nikon is charging £100 for the F>Z adapter. A cynic could say that the Canon adapter price is included in the cost of the camera, but until there is an option for the camera without the adapter, at the same or different price, lets think they are being generous.
     
  23. GordonM

    GordonM

    Messages:
    152
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I’ve got a couple of FL lenses. I worked for a Canon dealer when FD changed from twist ring to twist lens...
     
  24. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas

    Messages:
    2,077
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    His hands appear gigantic.
    Is he a sasquatch?
    It's like the opposite of those Chinese camera adverts with a girl with tiny hands ...
     
  25. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,431
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Can't say I noticed, but you did remind me of something. I think the whole hand size thing is over exaggerated. I've seen people post things like "My hands are too big for small cameras" - nonsense! I can understand that people like different ergonomics, I like a chunky grip - which is why I don't like RF style bodies. But your hands are never too big for any camera. I'm sure there's been many a giant handed ogre used Leica film camera through the decades without any hassle.
     
  26. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,698
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Yup.

    Although I manage ok with RF style bodies. I don't go for them for any longing for the RF's of the film days but because they're smaller or at least the Panasonic GX80 and GX9 are.
     
    Cagey75 likes this.
  27. gerry s

    gerry s

    Messages:
    659
    Name:
    Gez
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Kevin Rabner from luminous landscape.... now there’s a man that knows what he’s talking about.
     
    RedRobin likes this.
  28. SsSsSsSsSnake

    SsSsSsSsSnake

    Messages:
    8,948
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    And many a Leprechaun doing the same :D
     
  29. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,431
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Wish I could find one! Been looking for 40 yr! I needs that pot o' gold
     
    SsSsSsSsSnake likes this.
  30. snerkler

    snerkler

    Messages:
    12,877
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I’m not so sure I agree tbh. I find my fingers foul against the lens with the A7 bodies so this is a prime example of my hands being too big for the body. I tried altering my grip but it didn’t make a difference. Physics are physics at the end of the day (y)
     
  31. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,431
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I like a decent grip, but I can get used to any body given time. Unless you have King Kong hands, what would you have done way back when most cameras were tiny? The Sony cams don't look really comfy to me either, but I know I'd just get used to it. I didn't like the feel of the Xpro1 at all, but I got used to it ...
     
  32. SsSsSsSsSnake

    SsSsSsSsSnake

    Messages:
    8,948
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    But you dont wear a lab coat like Toby :D
     
  33. Riz_Guru

    Riz_Guru

    Messages:
    6,268
    Name:
    Riz
    Edit My Images:
    No
  34. RedRobin

    RedRobin

    Messages:
    4,424
    Name:
    Robin
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    ....Jeeze! Is this your equivalent of the comment "Did she speak?" when watching a pretty weathergirl showing the forecast? :D

    Chelsea Northrup has a lovely mouth but actually speaks a lot of sense as well [in my opinion].

    As well as being honestly critical I thought that Kevin Rabner pointed out some important positives and especially regarding the likely future of the EOS R system addition. It was realistically well balanced.
     
  35. snerkler

    snerkler

    Messages:
    12,877
    Edit My Images:
    No
    But if there physically wasn't enough room to fit your fingers between the grip and lens how can you "get used to it given time"? Can you shrink your fingers? :p

    I can use tiny cameras (although don't particularly like to do so), and I can comfortably use my OM1, but that doesn't have a grip and therefore I don't have to squeeze my fingers between this and the lens. Don't forget I can use my EM1 very comfortably too, and I've tried the Z7 which was fine. For some reason Sony continue to decide to give a narrower space between grip and lens.
     
  36. HoppyUK

    HoppyUK

    Messages:
    22,643
    Name:
    Richard
    Edit My Images:
    No
    If there's anyone who doesn't need dual card slots, it's vloggers. They have to do a dozen takes of everything before they've got the words right, and even then they're rarely worth listening to. Select any secondary feature, think of a minority situation where this may conceivably be a problem (usually wedding photographers and vloggers who account for less than 1% of the market) and say "this is a deal-breaker, what were they thinking when they could just have asked me, me, me."

    One message comes over loud and clear though - "please give it a 'like' and don't forget to subscribe so that I can waste another ten minutes of your life next time."
     
  37. redhed17

    redhed17

    Messages:
    5,435
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I keep on hearing the word 'innovation' in a lot of the videos for these new cameras (not just the Canon). Ring on lens! Been done before, and buttons too. ;) Filter in an adapter! Been done before, etc. :rolleyes: The slider is new afaik, I'll give them that. ;) It is good taking a lot of the better ideas from different products to try and make the best product, as long as you don't wander into any intellectual property problems. ;)

    And in this video specifically, did I miss something, do Nikon not also have mirrorless FF cameras. :thinking: Considering the Nikon Z's came out a few weeks before, and is a first entry into the FF mirrorless by one of the largest company's, I would have at least expected a slight mention, considering they have so much in common, similar size, one card slot, ;) limited lenses for new mount, etc. :thinking:

    I posted a comment on YT below the video last night mentioning the above, or at least I thought I did, because it no longer seems to be there. :eek: Not sure if that is my fault or theirs as I had to change some Google account settings to be able to comment. :thinking:
     
  38. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,698
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    There are people out there for whom nothing exists until their brand does it and then it's the first time it's happened in the history of the universe and it's wonderful.
     
  39. redhed17

    redhed17

    Messages:
    5,435
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Ah, makes sense now. ;) Thank you. :LOL:

    I'm surprised he acknowledged the existence of Fuji and Sony. And mentioning Fuji when they are APS-C sensor's too instead on Nikon just highlighted the absence for me. :thinking:
     
  40. RedRobin

    RedRobin

    Messages:
    4,424
    Name:
    Robin
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    ....I sold the Sony which didn't have a grip and that was just a small compact! It had an awesome sensor though but the worst zoom range.

    Obviously I can take good photos on my Canon mirrorless M5 and the grip is ok but the whole controls set is too small and fiddly for my taste < That's just my personal preference.

    A good grip is essential when using big telephoto lenses - My Canon M5 will deliver excellent images on my 500mm F/4L II but is only useable when mounted on a tripod, not even on a monopod. And so I very warmly welcome the grip on Canon's first EOS R body and even though I haven't handled one yet you can see that it has an excellent grip. I'm not interested in buying this first R body but am confident that the higher spec R bodies will have a similarly good grip and will definitely be seriously considering buying one.
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2018

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice