Canon FF mirrorless...

[jj_glos]

I haven’t forgotten that at all. I know it’s not good enough but neither is the canon, even if the canons a bit better it’s still not good enough.

Have you used the Canon? YouTube celebs day that whilst the FPS is down it does track well. AF-S performance is great. Differences in DR and ISO don't make it a bad camera and Eye AF isn't the magic bullet you may think it is.

 

[wooster]

I have a prediction that I am 100% confident is correct.

No matter what camera Canon releases next and no matter what camera Nikon releases next and no matter how many people want to start threads to discuss them, within about 5 replies, the same people will still be talking about Sony, even if nobody in the thread has the slightest interest in Sony. It's really tedious.

 

[Brazo]

I have a prediction that I am 100% confident is correct.

No matter what camera Canon releases next and no matter what camera Nikon releases next and no matter how many people want to start threads to discuss them, within about 5 replies, the same people will still be talking about Sony, even if nobody in the thread has the slightest interest in Sony. It's really tedious.

Is it unreasonable to compare any product to its competition?

I suspect you’ll won’t find a single review that doesn’t mention the Sony either and no self respecting reviewer can ignore such a comparison.

Sony is such a huge elephant in the room for Canon right now, the mere fact that using a Sony camera with canon lenses is a very credible alternative even if for some it’s tedious (and difficult) to hear.

 

[redhed17]

I have a prediction that I am 100% confident is correct.

No matter what camera Canon releases next and no matter what camera Nikon releases next and no matter how many people want to start threads to discuss them, within about 5 replies, the same people will still be talking about Sony, even if nobody in the thread has the slightest interest in Sony. It's really tedious.

I think you mean '100% confident will be correct'.

How you think you know what people will be interested when reading a thread is beyond me, but you seem a 'confident' person.

You also seem to want to stir this thread up when there is no need imho. Why write a post like that when everything seems to have calmed down is baffling. And imho, is only done for one reason, but I'll let others decide what they think your motives are.

 

[jj_glos]

Is it unreasonable to compare any product to its competition?

I suspect you’ll won’t find a single review that doesn’t mention the Sony either and no self respecting reviewer can ignore such a comparison.

Sony is such a huge elephant in the room for Canon right now, the mere fact that using a Sony camera with canon lenses is a very credible alternative even if for some it’s tedious (and difficult) to hear.

Are you using Canon lenses on a Sony body?

 

[jonneymendoza]

Are you using Canon lenses on a Sony body?

I do

 

[jj_glos]

I do

So do I.

 

[jonneymendoza]

After today I think I have arrived at a conclusion about what this first generation EOS R does and doesn't do for my photography.

I spent the whole of today wandering around coastal wetlands in Dorset armed with my R + RF 24-105mm and 1DX-2 + EF 500mm plus both 1.4x and 2x Extenders and my Gitzo travel tripod with Flexline Pro head. I started off with the R on the 500mm but soon decided that the 1DX-2 + 500mm was going to be a much more reliable combo to cover all the usual aspects of wildlife action after missing focus on some inflight opportunities. The R is simply too small and lightweight to balance a 500mm prime when handheld and, as already known, badly lacks fps burst rate. Its image quality looks as if it's going to be stellar though when processed - Exposures and colours are top notch.

However, the R + RF 24-105mm combo got me a lovely misty landscape picture en route in the early morning and later also some very good dragonfly photos from about 1.5ft away. When I go out with my EF 100mm Macro mounted on the R, it's going to fulfil the reasons I bought the R for - Everything else has been an exploration to see what the EOS R can additionally offer me.

But this is not a problem and it is not a failure. Just as the EOS R for my second body needs is a major advance over the M5, a future EOS R model may be a further advance. But the 1DX-2 is still king!

Horses-for-Courses.

Care to share some of those pics?

 

[Swiss Toni]

Are you using Canon lenses on a Sony body?

I don't know why you're bothering to argue with him, he clearly hasn't tried Canon lenses on Sony or Canon bodies and is just trolling the thread, ignore him and he'll go away.

 

[wooster]

I think you mean '100% confident will be correct'.

How you think you know what people will be interested when reading a thread is beyond me, but you seem a 'confident' person.

You also seem to want to stir this thread up when there is no need imho. Why write a post like that when everything seems to have calmed down is baffling. And imho, is only done for one reason, but I'll let others decide what they think your motives are.

I'm always a bit suspicious of slightly odd late night posts especially on a Saturday, but I will respond.

1. I 'm pretty sure I did mean to say "is correct. Surely, while the event I am predicting is in the future, my prediction is in the present and therefore the present tense is correct. If I had said "I am proved correct" instead of "I will be proved correct", then you would be right.

2. It's obvious that people started the thread to talk about Canon hence no abnormally high level of confidence ( or, I assume, "confidence" though I'm not clear what you mean by that ) is required to determine with reasonable .... ermm .... confidence where their interest lies. I might be wrong but it seemed a fair assumption to me. Nothing sinister here.

3. My post was an observation based on posts of today where people were - and are - still discussing Sony. Indeed the post two above mine was doing just that as are several below. I don't feel my post was aggressive or insulting and it was only expressing boredom with what seems to me to be a current trend whereby so many threads on various forums about Canon or Nikon degenerate into a bashing from those preferring other systems. Again nothing underhand or sinister in this.

Now you could have said it was unfortunate I posted, or that I misjudged the thread, or I was not being clear, or you could have defended the continuing Sony discussion by saying it was relevant to the thread and explained why I was mistaken. If you had, whether or not I disagree, your points might be said to have had some validity, but it seems to me to be a bit of a pity that you decided to impute the very worst of motives to me right off the bat. I don't really understand the reason why you did this - but so be it.

It's a tad frustrating when people decide to second - guess other posters' thought processes or motivations especially when they come to a conclusion that is so negative but obviously you have your own ideas as to why I posted and, although they are misguided I can't prove to you otherwise.

Other than to say that I have no interest in stirring anything up and that your own confidence in your assumptions is misplaced, I don't have much to add. People tend to make up their minds about things for a whole raft of reasons and it's often a bit pointless to try and challenge them.

So in a spirit of goodwill, I will wish you well and go to bed

 

[wooster]

Is it unreasonable to compare any product to its competition?

I suspect you’ll won’t find a single review that doesn’t mention the Sony either and no self respecting reviewer can ignore such a comparison.

Sony is such a huge elephant in the room for Canon right now, the mere fact that using a Sony camera with canon lenses is a very credible alternative even if for some it’s tedious (and difficult) to hear.

Fair enough and I take your point. I was reacting in a flippant way, to my own feelings of overload about similar discussions all over the internet, many pursued in an aggressive and unfriendly fashion. I can see my post ruffled some feathers and I sort of regret making it now but it wasn't meant to be offensive

 

[jj_glos]

I don't know why you're bothering to argue with him, he clearly hasn't tried Canon lenses on Sony or Canon bodies and is just trolling the thread, ignore him and he'll go away.

Fair point, it's what the ignore button is for I guess.

 

[redhed17]

I'm always a bit suspicious of slightly odd late night posts especially on a Saturday, but I will respond.

Are you talking about my post or yours as being odd!

1. I 'm pretty sure I did mean to say "is correct. Surely, while the event I am predicting is in the future, my prediction is in the present and therefore the present tense is correct. If I had said "I am proved correct" instead of "I will be proved correct", then you would be right.

If you want to discuss grammar after that first sentence of your original post then go ahead. As long as you know what you meant that is OK.

2. It's obvious that people started the thread to talk about Canon hence no abnormally high level of confidence ( or, I assume, "confidence" though I'm not clear what you mean by that ) is required to determine with reasonable .... ermm .... confidence where their interest lies. I might be wrong but it seemed a fair assumption to me. Nothing sinister here.

This thread is about Canon FF Mirrorless, not Canon per se. A Canon FF mirrorless camera was not going to be making its own niche market, it was entering a market that Sony were dominating, unsurprisingly after three generations of cameras, and they also had Nikon beat them to the same market by a couple of weeks too. It was never going to exist in isolation, and so will be compared, as every new camera is, with what is already there before it that is similar. It will also get compared to what is to come when the information is rumoured/released, and also compared to what comes after it from the same manufacturer, in this case Canon themselves. And that has already happened with a rumoured Canon FF mirrorless cameras below and above the EOS R in specs.

3. My post was an observation based on posts of today where people were - and are - still discussing Sony. Indeed the post two above mine was doing just that as are several below. I don't feel my post was aggressive or insulting and it was only expressing boredom with what seems to me to be a current trend whereby so many threads on various forums about Canon or Nikon degenerate into a bashing from those preferring other systems. Again nothing underhand or sinister in this.

At the moment I just happen to have Canon, Nikon and Sony cameras. In the past I have also had a couple of Fuji cameras too. I have a slight affinity to Nikon, but I like to think I am objective and just discuss the equipment and the specs. In a thread discussing a FF mirrorless camera, the competition and the specific features they have in common, and different, can and should be discussed imho. That is an aspect of a section of the site that discusses Equipment.

Now you could have said it was unfortunate I posted, or that I misjudged the thread, or I was not being clear, or you could have defended the continuing Sony discussion by saying it was relevant to the thread and explained why I was mistaken. If you had, whether or not I disagree, your points might be said to have had some validity, but it seems to me to be a bit of a pity that you decided to impute the very worst of motives to me right off the bat. I don't really understand the reason why you did this - but so be it.

I could have said a lot of things, but I wanted to keep it brief (that moment seems to have gone ) and make the point I wanted to make, that I thought your post was unnecessary and potentially incendiary when things seem to have calmed down. I saw no point in discussing what could happen months or years down the line to try and make a point and have a dig at some poster's at this time.

It's a tad frustrating when people decide to second - guess other posters' thought processes or motivations especially when they come to a conclusion that is so negative but obviously you have your own ideas as to why I posted and, although they are misguided I can't prove to you otherwise.

Other than to say that I have no interest in stirring anything up and that your own confidence in your assumptions is misplaced, I don't have much to add. People tend to make up their minds about things for a whole raft of reasons and it's often a bit pointless to try and challenge them.

So in a spirit of goodwill, I will wish you well and go to bed

I do think it is slightly ironic that you say "It's a tad frustrating when people decide to second - guess other posters' thought processes or motivations" when in your original post you also said "even if nobody in the thread has the slightest interest in Sony."

Also in the spirit of goodwill, seeing as you may have gone to bed, I hope you had a nice sleep if and when you see this, and have a nice day too.

 

[Phil V]

Is it unreasonable to compare any product to its competition?

Let’s have a think about what’s ‘reasonable’ though...

It’s perfectly reasonable to make the point that the Sony is better at x,y and z (when the Nikon D5 and D500 were launched I posted there to say the implementation of radio flash was woeful, I wasn’t still posting in there about it 2 months later)

But is it reasonable to make 30 posts saying exactly the same thing (I wouldn’t behave that way, nor would the ‘reasonable’ people I know) (someone with a Sony camera has posted 200 times in this thread)?

Is it reasonable to become abusive when told you’re trolling because the thread becomes about this instead of the camera in question?

Would i be a complete dick if I joined every ‘long lens’ thread to say that no one made them as well as Canon?

I’m afraid using ‘I’m interested in all gear’ as an excuse to troll threads to just create friction is also ‘unreasonable’

I think that it’s reasonable to ask yourself what your motives are for posting, and not to bother if they're not sincere or helpful*.

*Yes im well aware I’ve posted plenty of abusive comments, but in context that could be considered reasonable as they’re a tiny % of all my posts and fairly insignificant compared to the ‘help’ I offer IMHO. YMMV

 

[Brazo]

Let’s have a think about what’s ‘reasonable’ though...

It’s perfectly reasonable to make the point that the Sony is better at x,y and z (when the Nikon D5 and D500 were launched I posted there to say the implementation of radio flash was woeful, I wasn’t still posting in there about it 2 months later)

But is it reasonable to make 30 posts saying exactly the same thing (I wouldn’t behave that way, nor would the ‘reasonable’ people I know) (someone with a Sony camera has posted 200 times in this thread)?

Is it reasonable to become abusive when told you’re trolling because the thread becomes about this instead of the camera in question?

Would i be a complete dick if I joined every ‘long lens’ thread to say that no one made them as well as Canon?

I’m afraid using ‘I’m interested in all gear’ as an excuse to troll threads to just create friction is also ‘unreasonable’

I think that it’s reasonable to ask yourself what your motives are for posting, and not to bother if they're not sincere or helpful*.

*Yes im well aware I’ve posted plenty of abusive comments, but in context that could be considered reasonable as they’re a tiny % of all my posts and fairly insignificant compared to the ‘help’ I offer IMHO. YMMV

Yes it’s reasonable because it’s a competing product that has been/will be used as the yard stick in all the reviews. I’m sorry but Canon can’t be viewed in a bubble.

What concerns me about your post the most Phil is when you ask is:

Is it reasonable to become abusive when told you’re trolling because the thread becomes about this instead of the camera in question?

Can you link me to my abuse?

 

[Phil V]

Yes it’s reasonable because it’s a competing product that has been/will be used as the yard stick in all the reviews. I’m sorry but Canon can’t be viewed in a bubble.

What concerns me about your post the most Phil is when you ask is:

Is it reasonable to become abusive when told you’re trolling because the thread becomes about this instead of the camera in question?

Can you link me to my abuse?

When did I say you’d been abusive?
I was commenting on the thread in general.

Someone has made 200 posts here (also mentioned) that’s not you either.

You can ask yourself whether your posts here are reasonable, I don’t think I’ve noticed you being unreasonable have I?

 

[Brazo]

When did I say you’d been abusive?
I was commenting on the thread in general.

Someone has made 200 posts here (also mentioned) that’s not you either.

You can ask yourself whether your posts here are reasonable, I don’t think I’ve noticed you being unreasonable have I?

Is it reasonable to become abusive when told you’re trolling because the thread becomes about this instead of the camera in question?

The above was cut and paste from your post quoting mine

 

[Phil V]

Is it reasonable to become abusive when told you’re trolling because the thread becomes about this instead of the camera in question?

The above was cut and paste from your post quoting mine

A very long post about ‘the thread’.
A ‘response’ to your post, I’d have thought it was obvious the whole post wasn’t ‘about you’,

You’ve made less than 40 posts, I commented about someone who’d made 200

Read my post again, you’ll see how wrong your assumptions were.

 

[Gaz J]

Is it unreasonable to compare any product to its competition?

I suspect you’ll won’t find a single review that doesn’t mention the Sony either and no self respecting reviewer can ignore such a comparison.

Sony is such a huge elephant in the room for Canon right now, the mere fact that using a Sony camera with canon lenses is a very credible alternative even if for some it’s tedious (and difficult) to hear.

But it’s not a credible alternative because the R appears to work well with all focal lengths of EF lenses with and without converters. The Sony cannot do that. Yes, for anyone who plans to gradually move over to Sony lenses they’ll accept that limitation but for anyone with a significant investment in Canon lenses that alternative isn’t viable or acceptable. People on here who own Sony cameras are saying that it’s not all smiles using adapted lenses.

Robin says that the R is struggling with BIF. I can assure you the Sony is no better with a 500 strapped to it.

Canon are well aware that Sony leads the market and the A73, A7R3 and A9 are great cameras but they are not perfect. I’m sure Sony will address some of the issues in a future release. However, to really get people like myself to move over they are going to have to release lenses of the same focal length in different forms. At the moment they are concentrating on the high end of photography. There’s a far bigger mid and lower end market they could be tapping into.

For me to move to an A9, 100-400 and 400 f2.8 would cost around £16000. Spending the money isn’t the issue, it’s spending it for small gains in some respects and losses in others. That doesn’t make it viable for me and many others.

 

[Brazo]

But it’s not a credible alternative because the R appears to work well with all focal lengths of EF lenses with and without converters. The Sony cannot do that. Yes, for anyone who plans to gradually move over to Sony lenses they’ll accept that limitation but for anyone with a significant investment in Canon lenses that alternative isn’t viable or acceptable. People on here who own Sony cameras are saying that it’s not all smiles using adapted lenses.

Robin says that the R is struggling with BIF. I can assure you the Sony is no better with a 500 strapped to it.

Canon are well aware that Sony leads the market and the A73, A7R3 and A9 are great cameras but they are not perfect. I’m sure Sony will address some of the issues in a future release. However, to really get people like myself to move over they are going to have to release lenses of the same focal length in different forms. At the moment they are concentrating on the high end of photography. There’s a far bigger mid and lower end market they could be tapping into.

For me to move to an A9, 100-400 and 400 f2.8 would cost around £16000. Spending the money isn’t the issue, it’s spending it for small gains in some respects and losses in others. That doesn’t make it viable for me and many others.

Im only talking about adapted lenses. I’m not suggesting the Sony is better but like you I acknowledge the R isnt great either.

 

[Brazo]

A very long post about ‘the thread’.
A ‘response’ to your post, I’d have thought it was obvious the whole post wasn’t ‘about you’,

You’ve made less than 40 posts, I commented about someone who’d made 200

Read my post again, you’ll see how wrong your assumptions were.

Ok Phil, if that’s the case I apologise. Was any of it about me? Joking aside if you could be clearer next time as I have trouble reading between the lines and would like to respond to any pertinent points.

 

[RedRobin]

But it’s not a credible alternative because the R appears to work well with all focal lengths of EF lenses with and without converters. The Sony cannot do that. Yes, for anyone who plans to gradually move over to Sony lenses they’ll accept that limitation but for anyone with a significant investment in Canon lenses that alternative isn’t viable or acceptable. People on here who own Sony cameras are saying that it’s not all smiles using adapted lenses.

Robin says that the R is struggling with BIF. I can assure you the Sony is no better with a 500 strapped to it.

Canon are well aware that Sony leads the market and the A73, A7R3 and A9 are great cameras but they are not perfect. I’m sure Sony will address some of the issues in a future release. However, to really get people like myself to move over they are going to have to release lenses of the same focal length in different forms. At the moment they are concentrating on the high end of photography. There’s a far bigger mid and lower end market they could be tapping into.

For me to move to an A9, 100-400 and 400 f2.8 would cost around £16000. Spending the money isn’t the issue, it’s spending it for small gains in some respects and losses in others. That doesn’t make it viable for me and many others.

.... I will add that in my experience the R struggles with BIF and similar action whichever lens or lens combo is mounted. This is not helped by me deciding to set Dual Pixel RAW and this fact is written as a warning in the R user guide (which I sensibly read before buying) but personally I want maximum image quality when shooting minibeasts (and also occasional quick landscape snaps and horse portraits etc) and that is why I bought the R as a second body to the Canon flagship D-SLR. I am happy to compromise burst rate rather than image quality and practicality carrying it as a second body with either Macro or RF lens mounted.

Canon have never claimed this first generation R is a sports/wildlife camera and although we don't know when one will be released I think it's a safe to assume it's a case of when rather than if.

I knew what I was buying would have limitations as indeed all cameras do (even Sony!).

 

[Phil V]

Ok Phil, if that’s the case I apologise. Was any of it about me? Joking aside if you could be clearer next as I have trouble reading between the lines and would like to respond to any pertinent points.

I quoted a single pertinent line from your post in a discussion about ‘the thread’.

I’m not known for hiding the meaning of my posts between the lines, I post quite direct language. You’ll be in no doubt if I ever think you’ve been unreasonable.

Now back to my point...

Do you think it’s ‘reasonable’ for nearly 10% of the posts in this thread to have been made by the same person? If their only point is that they don’t like the camera being discussed?

Do you think it’s reasonable that people with a genuine interest in the camera have felt the need to put several users on ‘ignore’ in order to get something useful out of the discussion?

I’m all for a balanced view, but I don’t think it’s reasonable to have this level of childish repetition.

 

[robinsslee]

.... I will add that in my experience the R struggles with BIF and similar action whichever lens or lens combo is mounted. This is not helped by me deciding to set Dual Pixel RAW and this fact is written as a warning in the R user guide but personally I want maximum image quality when shooting minibeasts (and also occasional quick landscape snaps and horse portraits etc) and that is why I bought the R as a second body to the Canon flagship D-SLR. I am happy to compromise burst rate rather than image quality and practicality carrying it as a second body with either Macro or RF lens mounted.

Canon have never claimed this first generation R is a sports/wildlife camera and although we don't know when one will be released I think it's a safe to assume it's a case of when rather than if.

I knew what I was buying would have limitations as indeed all cameras do (even Sony!).

One of the reason I wasn't even consider the 5D4 because of the fps rate and buffer on it. I have rented 5D4 on NYC trip, used 2 cameras on my helicopter photographer open door ride experience and am glad to have 2 cameras with me at the time. I enjoyed the 5D4 to be honest and the files, but didn't do as much as the 5DsR. I already have the ultimate 1DX2 so would prefer the high MP count (for widlife portraiture and landscape) hence 5DsR, still here with me

 

[RedRobin]

Im only talking about adapted lenses. I’m not suggesting the Sony is better but like you I acknowledge the R isnt great either.

.... Just to clarify (and my apologies if I am misinterpreting your post in the wrong context), the Canon EF lenses (with Canon Adapter) with or without either Canon Extender MkIII, function and perform seamlessly and very well indeed on this first generation EOS R body. As you know, I am sharing my findings from direct firsthand experience in the real-world.

In fact as I reported earlier, the R is fully functional with all AF points when a 2x III is added to the EF 100-400mm F/4L II - It just becomes a 'F/11' max aperture lens but offers a 200-800mm zoom without compromising image quality and is handholdable. The D-SLR bodies, even a 1DX-2, lose AF with this lens combo. So that is actually offering a 'better' performance option with an EF lens.

When the R Control Ring Adapter is available (I have one on order), the EF lenses will have extra customisable options when mounted on an EOS R body. That fact shouldn't be dismissed.

Frankly I don't care two flying figs how any Canon lens performs on another camera brand's body because I prefer to stick with my EOS system < [/end of].

 

[Phil V]

Here’s an example...

I’m not suggesting the Sony is better but like you I acknowledge the R isnt great either.

It’s not true! Canons mirrorless cameras perform faultlessly with Canon EF lenses

You keep repeating it, despite being repeatedly told it’s not true...

Stop it!!

Nothing hidden between the lines, nothing ambiguous and I do believe you’ve been told before (if it wasn’t you that’s been told before I apologise).

 

[robinsslee]

.... Just to clarify (and my apologies if I am misinterpreting your post in the wrong context), the Canon EF lenses (with Canon Adapter) with or without either Canon Extender MkIII, function and perform seamlessly and very well indeed on this first generation EOS R body. As you know, I am sharing my findings from direct firsthand experience in the real-world.

In fact as I reported earlier, the R is fully functional with all AF points when a 2x III is added to the EF 100-400mm F/4L II - It just becomes a 'F/11' max aperture lens but offers a 200-800mm zoom without compromising image quality and is handholdable. The D-SLR bodies, even a 1DX-2, lose AF with this lens combo. So that is actually a 'better' performance with an EF lens.

When the R Control Ring Adapter is available (I have one on order), the EF lenses will have extra customisable options when mounted on an EOS R body. That fact shouldn't be dismissed.

Frankly I don't care two flying figs how any Canon lens performs on another camera brand's body because I prefer to stick with my EOS system < [/end of].

Fingers crossed for high MP resolution for the next EOS R, better fps or match that 5DsR but bigger buffer please. That 2xIII and 100-400mm could be a win situation for travelling...

 

[Brazo]

I quoted a single pertinent line from your post in a discussion about ‘the thread’.

I’m not known for hiding the meaning of my posts between the lines, I post quite direct language. You’ll be in no doubt if I ever think you’ve been unreasonable.

Now back to my point...

Do you think it’s ‘reasonable’ for nearly 10% of the posts in this thread to have been made by the same person? If their only point is that they don’t like the camera being discussed?

Do you think it’s reasonable that people with a genuine interest in the camera have felt the need to put several users on ‘ignore’ in order to get something useful out of the discussion?

I’m all for a balanced view, but I don’t think it’s reasonable to have this level of childish repetition.

Honestly Phil I think it’s reasonable for any posts to be valid if they are on topic. I don’t use numbers or statistics to justify who can and who can’t post.

I don’t use the ignore button as quite simply I’m a big boy.

By your own admission your posting history does reflect abuse (which is sad because I genuinely think you have the potential to be a credible poster but your reputation does precede you) and no posts your posts aren’t always clear.

 

[Brazo]

Here’s an example...


It’s not true! Canons mirrorless cameras perform faultlessly with Canon EF lenses

You keep repeating it, despite being repeatedly told it’s not true...

Stop it!!

Nothing hidden between the lines, nothing ambiguous and I do believe you’ve been told before (if it wasn’t you that’s been told before I apologise).

Look Phil you can rant and rave all you like (you certainly don’t scare me) but Robins already confirmed (as have many others) that adapted lenses can work well but longer lenses suffer when tracking etc.

 

[TheBigYin]

I quoted a single pertinent line from your post in a discussion about ‘the thread’.

I’m not known for hiding the meaning of my posts between the lines, I post quite direct language. You’ll be in no doubt if I ever think you’ve been unreasonable.

Now back to my point...

Do you think it’s ‘reasonable’ for nearly 10% of the posts in this thread to have been made by the same person? If their only point is that they don’t like the camera being discussed?

Do you think it’s reasonable that people with a genuine interest in the camera have felt the need to put several users on ‘ignore’ in order to get something useful out of the discussion?

I’m all for a balanced view, but I don’t think it’s reasonable to have this level of childish repetition.

I've had a little "count up" and read the content of a certain persons posts in this thread - IMO they are simply posted as to be "disruptive" to the thread - bordering on trolling. They're currently no longer able to post about how wonderful their kit is in this thread. Let's see if it calms down, or if one or two others need to be sent to sit on the naughty step as well.

Note: they're not banned outright from the forum, jsut can't post on this thread - to the best of my knowledge, they'll probably be able to "like" posts on here that are doing the same disruptive activity that they're engaged in. If they overdo that, someone RTM them will you and I'll make their naughty step for the entire forum for a while...

We're getting SICK of reports from these gear threads now - it's time to play nice folks, or we'll simply take your toys away from you.

 

[RedRobin]

One of the reason I wasn't even consider the 5D4 because of the fps rate and buffer on it. I have rented 5D4 on NYC trip, used 2 cameras on my helicopter photographer open door ride experience and am glad to have 2 cameras with me at the time. I enjoyed the 5D4 to be honest and the files, but didn't do as much as the 5DsR. I already have the ultimate 1DX2 so would prefer the high MP count (for widlife portraiture and landscape) hence 5DsR, still here with me

.... I think it's both far more relevant and more informative in this thread discussion to compare the EOS R with other Canon bodies than it is with other brands.

A friend has the 5DsR and is blown away by the image quality but he says it performs very poorly indeed at anything above ISO 1000. He shoots wildlife subjects.

Because I was used to 10fps on the 7D-2, I found the slower fps (7?) of the 5D-4 a disappointment but loved its FF image quality even to the extent that adding an MkIII Extender on an EF telephoto L lens delivered an image capable of enlargment often better than on the 7D-2. How many times does one NOT need to crop and enlarge a wildlife image! So when the short window of opportunity presented itself with Wex to part-ex my 5D-4 for a new 1DX-2 with a 4-figure saving it was a non-brainer. The 5D-4, which I owned and regularly used for 6 months, had been my first experience of a digital FF and I now much prefer Full-Frame.

P.S. - I am really enjoying your pictures on social media.

 

[Phil V]

Honestly Phil I think it’s reasonable for any posts to be valid if they are on topic. I don’t use numbers or statistics to justify who can and who can’t post.

I don’t use the ignore button as quite simply I’m a big boy.

By your own admission yoir posting history does reflect abuse (which is sad because I genuinely think you have the potential to be a credible poster but your reputation does precede you) and no posts your posts aren’t always clear.

Numbers do tell stories, though to be understood they need some background knowledge of what the numbers are saying. People who ignore that are very often incapable of understanding factual evidence.

You are entitled to your opinion, I know I sometines cross a line, but I have received plenty of thanks for the help and advice I give, compared to some who ‘only’ post in the gear threads and then do so to just stir trouble.

 

[Phil V]

Look Phil you can rant and rave all you like (you certainly don’t scare me) but Robins already confirmed (as have many others) that adapted lenses can work well but longer lenses suffer when tracking etc.

Read his post...
he’s confirmed the camera struggles to track no matter what lens is fitted, he’s also confirmed more than once (as have I) that there’s no difference between EF lenses and native lenses,
.

In fact as I reported earlier, the R is fully functional with all AF points when a 2x III is added to the EF 100-400mm F/4L II - It just becomes a 'F/11' max aperture lens but offers a 200-800mm zoom without compromising image quality and is handholdable. The D-SLR bodies, even a 1DX-2, lose AF with this lens combo. So that is actually a 'better' performance with an EF lens.

It’s not supposed to scare you, it’s factual information you keep ignoring before posting what is in effect a lie!

 

[RedRobin]

Fingers crossed for high MP resolution for the next EOS R, better fps or match that 5DsR but bigger buffer please. That 2xIII and 100-400mm could be a win situation for travelling...

.... I must try it on a tripod just to establish what's going on because it can be wobbly in the EVF as if the lens IS doesn't work in that 100-400mm + 2xIII combo on the current R. Perhaps IBIS on a future R body would solve it - I don't know what's happening, perhaps it's an EVF laggy thingy?

I think I have already tested the R + 100-400mm combo with the 1.4x III but will do so again to be sure.

 

[TheBigYin]

Numbers do tell stories, though to be understood they need some background knowledge of what the numbers are saying. People who ignore that are very often incapable of understanding factual evidence.

the problem often is, when confronted, the people posting "trolling" comments just say "ahh, but it's jsut banter, haven't you got a sense of humour"... In all honesty, while most of the staff are pretty well rounded people, we're also human. When ALL we see from these gear threads is people complaining that xxx is a troll or yyy is swearing at me or zzz is just winding people up, we get a little jaded. Then we look at the thread, realise it's 68 pages long, impossible to pick apart and clean, and we have 2 options - tell everyone to use the ignore button and remove the irritation, or for US to remove the irritation going forward. There's a third option, where we close the thread, but I@m sure none of you want that - even the trolls want somewhere to come out from under their bridge to.

As I say guys, play nice. If anyone want's to report any distruptive behaviour in the thread, use the Report button under the post and maybe we'll have to exclude a few other people as well - it's the only other place to go other than closing this thread alltogether, which we really, really don't want to do.

 

[RedRobin]

Read his post...
he’s confirmed the camera struggles to track no matter what lens is fitted, he’s also confirmed more than once (as have I) that there’s no difference between EF lenses and native lenses,
.
It’s not supposed to scare you, it’s factual information you keep ignoring before posting what is in effect a lie!

.... Your post has reminded me, Phil, that I haven't tested tracking on the RF 24-105mm F/4L IS yet. So much depends on the subject as well as the lens focal length. Isn't photography grand? It would be boring if it wasn't a challenge but it is said that wildlife is the greatest challenge of all.

Scary scary scary! Trick or Treat! Halloween is fast approaching

 

[niko]

Read his post...
he’s confirmed the camera struggles to track no matter what lens is fitted, he’s also confirmed more than once (as have I) that there’s no difference between EF lenses and native lenses,
.


It’s not supposed to scare you, it’s factual information you keep ignoring before posting what is in effect a lie!

I believe for full frame mirrorless making non-native (ef) behave as native is a 1st. Well done canon as it really does mean ef lens owners don't need to upgrade. this combined with a highly ergonomic camera means for me two of the big issues with other brands have been overcome. not perfect but I think when money allows I will end up with one, or other yet to be released version.
nice thing for me is in the mean time I can add more ef glass to use with my 6d and not have to worry about changing to the new mount.

 

[RedRobin]

the problem often is, when confronted, the people posting "trolling" comments just say "ahh, but it's jsut banter, haven't you got a sense of humour"... In all honesty, while most of the staff are pretty well rounded people, we're also human. When ALL we see from these gear threads is people complaining that xxx is a troll or yyy is swearing at me or zzz is just winding people up, we get a little jaded. Then we look at the thread, realise it's 68 pages long, impossible to pick apart and clean, and we have 2 options - tell everyone to use the ignore button and remove the irritation, or for US to remove the irritation going forward. There's a third option, where we close the thread, but I@m sure none of you want that - even the trolls want somewhere to come out from under their bridge to.

As I say guys, play nice. If anyone want's to report any distruptive behaviour in the thread, use the Report button under the post and maybe we'll have to exclude a few other people as well - it's the only other place to go other than closing this thread alltogether, which we really, really don't want to do.

.... Please please please don't close the thread, or even worse, delete the thread. Personally, for whatever it's worth, as one of first users of the EOS R in the real-world contributing to this thread I have spent hours of my time to share my experiences in this thread. To close it would award success to the trolls, in my opinion. But you are the boss.

 

[Phil V]

I believe for full frame mirrorless making non-native (ef) behave as native is a 1st. Well done canon as it really does mean ef lens owners don't need to upgrade. this combined with a highly ergonomic camera means for me two of the big issues with other brands have been overcome. not perfect but I think when money allows I will end up with one, or other yet to be released version.
nice thing for me is in the mean time I can add more ef glass to use with my 6d and not have to worry about changing to the new mount.

It’s only a ‘first’ in FF terms, the Canon M series have been doing it a while now.

However, whenever there’s a post that to that effect, it’s ignored. When people questioned whether the R would do it; several of us posted ‘of course it will, the M does’.

Followed by people saying ‘ah but it wouldn’t work’, again followed by ‘but it already does’.

I joked recently that the M series is bullied, but honestly from the POV of M users, other people’s attitude to them is completely bonkers.

Look above^ an owner posts that native lenses work perfectly, followed by someone who’s never used one posting that they don’t work properly (and not for the first time, and with almost a promise they’ll keep doing so). Completely illogical.

 

[RedRobin]

I believe for full frame mirrorless making non-native (ef) behave as native is a 1st. Well done canon as it really does mean ef lens owners don't need to upgrade. this combined with a highly ergonomic camera means for me two of the big issues with other brands have been overcome. not perfect but I think when money allows I will end up with one, or other yet to be released version.
nice thing for me is in the mean time I can add more ef glass to use with my 6d and not have to worry about changing to the new mount.

.... And if you do buy an EOS R body, whether this first generation or a future one, you will also have a choice of (currently) 3 Canon EF-RF Adapters with very valuable features according to what subjects you shoot. I'm referring to the Control Ring Adapter and also the one with variable ND filtration and also circular polariser. I say "(currently)" because Canon may introduce additional adapters although I can't think what they might be.

The Canon EOS system future looks bright!