Canon FF mirrorless...

[woof woof]

I tend to believe that the differences at the top end are now so minimal IQ wise that it doesn't matter, fair enough it looks like there remains a bigger gap between Canon and Nikon/Sony from a sensor perspective (like we see with the DSLR's too) - I doubt anyone would be able to tell much of a difference between a Z7 or A7r3 shot (and thats speaking as someone who's used the D850 and A7R3) its a wash.

Looking at that graph there doesn't seem to be a wafer thin mint between any of them (which was my point Swiss Toni, not fanboy knocking as I'm sure you really knew...) and personally I'd be looking more to features, price, handling and any gaps in the system. OK the gaps in the system thing is maybe difficult for Canon and Nikon at the moment but it's only day 1.

 

[woof woof]

Is there any sense in one of the EOS R owners starting a ‘Canon EOS R Owners’ thread as there are for pretty much all of the other cameras? That way people can go to that thread if the wish to discuss the camera, or stay on this thread if they want to argue? It’s just that this thread might have some useful comments about the camera in, but finding them in the swamp of crap is difficult.

Whilst I could start the thread myself, I’m not an EOS R owner yet, so I feel it should really be done by one of the early-adopters.

It was the same in the Sony thread for ages with page after page of sniping. Unfortunately sometimes it's just the way forums go but thankfully on it's worst day this site isn't as bad as some others are every day.

 

[niko]

Looking at that graph there doesn't seem to be a wafer thin mint between any of them (which was my point Swiss Toni, not fanboy knocking as I'm sure you really knew...) and personally I'd be looking more to features, price, handling and any gaps in the system. OK the gaps in the system thing is maybe difficult for Canon and Nikon at the moment but it's only day 1.

not really as canon have created a new lens mount that using the ef with an adaptor has no af penalty (as the owners on here have confirmed) at all so that's a huge lens line up available from day one with zero need to upgrade. that's is the only ff mirrorless system that applies to so far

 

[twist]

not really as canon have created a new lens mount that using the ef with an adaptor has no af penalty (as the owners on here have confirmed) at all so that's a huge lens line up available from day one with zero need to upgrade. that's is the only ff mirrorless system that applies to so far

Sony can now use A mount without penalty, the latest update opened up all af modes for a mount via laea3... I think. Not that it's really worth buying into A mount.

 

[Brazo]

Or if we want insubstantiated lies about their lens compatibility we know where to come

I think you’ll find all the lenses are compatible Phil

 

[Phil V]

I think you’ll find all the lenses are compatible Phil

At what point are you going to stop trolling posts with the b****x about their performance?

 

[woof woof]

not really as canon have created a new lens mount that using the ef with an adaptor has no af penalty (as the owners on here have confirmed) at all so that's a huge lens line up available from day one with zero need to upgrade. that's is the only ff mirrorless system that applies to so far

I use adapted lenses a lot but some seem to be of the opinion that it's a stop gap. For some people it probably will be but others may be happy... Time will tell I suppose but there may be a point in the future at which all Canon will introduce will be mirrorless lenses but when that might be is anyones guess. I'd guess that there will be a sloooow move to mirrorless though and that DSLR lens introductions and updates will eventually slow.

 

[the black fox]

A lot I suppose hinges on the uptake , the move from film to digital was shockingly fast , the move to mirrorless has started off slowly till this year , but now the big two have made a serious effort at catch up ,it should move a lot faster . ... personally I think the whole market will move towards mirrorless with the uptake gathering momentum as older DSLR reach uneconomic repair levels . The manufactures are showing common sense by allowing lens compatibility .. and also as more are seen out there , .... I’m already getting more and more people (when in bird hides) commenting on how quite my mirrorless camera is ,I believe canons offerings are also quiet ... it’s little advances like that will be the incentive to make people change

 

[Phil V]

the move from film to digital was shockingly fast

It wasn’t though, ignoring early ‘digital cameras’, if we start counting from the early Kodak Canon and Nikon collaborations, it moved very slowly until Canon broke the sub £1000 barrier with the 300d, it took close to 10 years to get to there, and then in the next 5 years we’d virtually seen the end of film cameras.

If you count from the first ‘digital camera’, adoption was glacially slow. It could also be argued though that mirrorless has had problems getting a foothold, with lots of perfectly good cameras being largely ignored by ‘photographers’ until fairly recently.

 

[Brazo]

At what point are you going to stop trolling posts with the b****x about their performance?

Phil pm me if you wish to carry your nonsense on, the mods previously asked people to stop derailing this thread. Oh and watch your blood pressure

 

[Swiss Toni]

Considering nothing really constructive or different is being posted I can’t see any reason for that.

I'm sure RedRobin and SRHmoto will be delighted to hear that!

No doubt when more buyers that are forum members start to write things up it will get more interesting till then we are all free to comment.

Comment certainly, but obvious trolling and lies from fanboys no!

Or do you just want spurious posts about how great the new camera is

If you think that then you couldn't be more wrong, see above.

edit: See post above this and it would appear the mods. agree.

 

[Phil V]

Phil pm me if you wish to carry your nonsense on, the mods previously asked people to stop derailing this thread. Oh and watch your blood pressure

There’s no need to worry about my health, my blood pressure is fine ta
No need for a PM I’d just like you to stop repeating your unsubstantiated nonsense about EF lens compatibility, but so far your tactic seems to be...
tell a lie
Be told you’re wrong
Try to defend
Be told ‘no you’re definitely wrong, we use them, we’d know’
Ignore that
Wait two weeks
Tell the lie again

It’s tiresome, just let it stop please, because you know how some people read the internet, if they see two opposing views, they don’t know which to believe, and it’s not good for the forum to have people being influenced by a lie.

 

[john.margetts]

A lot I suppose hinges on the uptake , the move from film to digital was shockingly fast , the move to mirrorless has started off slowly till this year , but now the big two have made a serious effort at catch up ,it should move a lot faster . ... personally I think the whole market will move towards mirrorless with the uptake gathering momentum as older DSLR reach uneconomic repair levels .

I think the marketplace has room for many variations. We could look at the introduction of the 35mm SLR in the late 1940s. They became the norm amongst serious photographers fairly quickly, ousting the rangefinders. Yet rangefinders survived (Leica seem to have a soft spot for them) as did viewfinder cameras and point-and-shoot cameras.

With the move from film to digital, that went so fast that Kodak have just reintroduced Ektachrome film because the demand was too great to ignore.

 

[Brazo]

There’s no need to worry about my health, my blood pressure is fine ta
No need for a PM I’d just like you to stop repeating your unsubstantiated nonsense about EF lens compatibility, but so far your tactic seems to be...
tell a lie
Be told you’re wrong
Try to defend
Be told ‘no you’re definitely wrong, we use them, we’d know’
Ignore that
Wait two weeks
Tell the lie again

It’s tiresome, just let it stop please, because you know how some people read the internet, if they see two opposing views, they don’t know which to believe, and it’s not good for the forum to have people being influenced by a lie.

Phil my comments have only been about af performance, I’m really struggling to see any comments about compatibility are you confused again?

 

[Phil V]

Phil my comments have only been about af performance, I’m really struggling to see any comments about compatibility are you confused again?

But the AF performance is unaffected (AF performance is surely included in the umbrella term ‘compatibility’). And you keep ignoring it when people tell you that; despite the fact no one else has ever reported AF as being affected, and plenty of people have confirmed it’s unaffected.

And every time you’re told this, you have a rest for a couple of week then repeat the lie.

And yes it is a lie, if no one had ever given more detail, you could be forgiven for being mistaken - but we keep telling you the facts, then you go on and repeat the lie.

I have no idea what your motivation is, but it’s just daft.

I’m not upset or angry, just flabbergasted that a seemingly ordinary fairly intelligent person could make something up, then despite being publicly corrected, keep repeating the thing they made up.

 

[woof woof]

A lot I suppose hinges on the uptake , the move from film to digital was shockingly fast , the move to mirrorless has started off slowly till this year , but now the big two have made a serious effort at catch up ,it should move a lot faster . ... personally I think the whole market will move towards mirrorless with the uptake gathering momentum as older DSLR reach uneconomic repair levels . The manufactures are showing common sense by allowing lens compatibility .. and also as more are seen out there , .... I’m already getting more and more people (when in bird hides) commenting on how quite my mirrorless camera is ,I believe canons offerings are also quiet ... it’s little advances like that will be the incentive to make people change

Must admit that when digital came along I was still happily using my Nikon SLR but I started to be disappointed with the prints I got back, hairs, spots, scratches etc. At the time I put it down to some quality problems probably due to costs cutting but in the end in frustration I bought a digital, a Fuji S602 and after that I got a Canon DSLR because everyone said Canon were ahead of Nikon at that time and I stayed with Canon for 10 years or so. If for whatever reason and whatever was going on my 35mm prints hadn't had those problems I'd almost certainly have stuck with film longer.

 

[woof woof]

It wasn’t though, ignoring early ‘digital cameras’, if we start counting from the early Kodak Canon and Nikon collaborations, it moved very slowly until Canon broke the sub £1000 barrier with the 300d, it took close to 10 years to get to there, and then in the next 5 years we’d virtually seen the end of film cameras.

If you count from the first ‘digital camera’, adoption was glacially slow. It could also be argued though that mirrorless has had problems getting a foothold, with lots of perfectly good cameras being largely ignored by ‘photographers’ until fairly recently.

That was my first DSLR. 10D, 20D and 5D followed. I thought I'd never need a better camera than that 5D, dust bunny magnet that it was

 

[Phil V]

That was my first DSLR. 10D, 20D and 5D followed. I thought I'd never need a better camera than that 5D, dust bunny magnet that it was

Mine too, followed by 20d, 40d, 7d, and then the 6d. Though theres numbers hidden there, we had 2 20s, 2 7d’s and 2 6d’s

Don’t know where to next, possibly a 6dII for the improved AF.

 

[Canon Bob]

...... I thought I'd never need a better camera than that 5D, dust bunny magnet that it was

Ah, the 5D.....Canon's first "mirrorless" camera......(at least some were when the mounting glue succumbed to heat and humidity).

 

[woof woof]

I had the 20D for over 7 years and it went everywhere with me but using the Sigma 12-24mm and 50 and 85mm f1.4's made me want to try them on a 5D so eventually that's what I went for.

But apparently I'm a Sony fan boy.

 

[woof woof]

Ah, the 5D.....Canon's first "mirrorless" camera......(at least some were when the mounting glue succumbed to heat and humidity).

hahaha

I bought mine used and it had already been modified.

 

[Brazo]

But the AF performance is unaffected (AF performance is surely included in the umbrella term ‘compatibility’). And you keep ignoring it when people tell you that; despite the fact no one else has ever reported AF as being affected, and plenty of people have confirmed it’s unaffected.

And every time you’re told this, you have a rest for a couple of week then repeat the lie.

And yes it is a lie, if no one had ever given more detail, you could be forgiven for being mistaken - but we keep telling you the facts, then you go on and repeat the lie.

I have no idea what your motivation is, but it’s just daft.

I’m not upset or angry, just flabbergasted that a seemingly ordinary fairly intelligent person could make something up, then despite being publicly corrected, keep repeating the thing they made up.

Phil there are no lies in this thread, only opinions and you are disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

My opinion was simply that adapted canon lenses aren’t ‘perfect’, user reports even in this thread, back this up. Your opinion (post #2707) was that ‘perfection’ had been achieved. Your welcome to your opinion.

 

[Mike.P]

My opinion was simply that adapted canon lenses aren’t ‘perfect’, user reports even in this thread, back this up.

Do they? Where does anyone on this thread say they have a fault with adapted lenses?

Both users have said that the AF tracking is poor but that is a camera issue and not the adapted lens because one is using the native lens and the other a EF on adapter.

 

[droj]

That might be more down to my creative maturity rather than the sensor used.

I love this sentence! And it poses a question - if someone is creatively immature, will they necessarily be ignorant of that fact.

 

[srhmoto]

Do they? Where does anyone on this thread say they have a fault with adapted lenses?

Both users have said that the AF tracking is poor but that is a camera issue and not the adapted lens because one is using the native lens and the other a EF on adapter.

In my case i.e. using an EF lens via the adaptor, I'd qualify that further by saying in my experience so far, AF tracking is poor for tracking a bird in flight in woodland in rapidly falling light levels on an f4 lens. That's all I can say because that is the only experience I have with it so far. However, in no way am I expecting the EOS R to be up there with the performance of the 1DX or 7D series of cameras, because of, as @Mike.P says, the choice of focusing system used (duel pixel AF). That will no doubt be a problem to some but not to others.

Simon.

 

[Brazo]

Do they? Where does anyone on this thread say they have a fault with adapted lenses?

Both users have said that the AF tracking is poor but that is a camera issue and not the adapted lens because one is using the native lens and the other a EF on adapter.

I didn’t refer to a fault only the af performance issue that you allude to. I’m aware it’s an adapted lens/camera issue. Regardless of where the issue lies, adapted lenses have never been great when compared to their main body counterparts.

 

[Phil V]

Phil there are no lies in this thread, only opinions and you are disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

My opinion was simply that adapted canon lenses aren’t ‘perfect’, user reports even in this thread, back this up. Your opinion (post #2707) was that ‘perfection’ had been achieved. Your welcome to your opinion.

No, you have repeatedly stated that EF lenses won’t work as well on mirrorless bodies as native lenses. You have been told repeatedly this is incorrect.
You have twisted comments made by actual users and been told you were incorrect, but it doesn’t stop you.

And as for ‘an opinion’, that’s ridiculous, you’ve been told you’re factually incorrect. You’re allowed to think the earth is flat, but you can’t be surprised to be called an idiot for stating it as if it’s a fact.

No one who has used a latest generation mirrorless canon camera and used EF lenses has found them to be worse than native lenses. So yes it’s a lie, unless you have experience to prove otherwise or indeed you can point to scientific tests to prove your ‘opinion’.

 

[simonbarker]

It didn't take long -- Wex have a S/H R for £2199 (open box)!!

They've got a used Z7 too, I guess it must be down to one very indecisive person.

 

[chris malcolm]

Must admit that when digital came along I was still happily using my Nikon SLR but I started to be disappointed with the prints I got back, hairs, spots, scratches etc. At the time I put it down to some quality problems probably due to costs cutting but in the end in frustration I bought a digital, a Fuji S602 and after that I got a Canon DSLR because everyone said Canon were ahead of Nikon at that time and I stayed with Canon for 10 years or so. If for whatever reason and whatever was going on my 35mm prints hadn't had those problems I'd almost certainly have stuck with film longer.

I had a similar experience. I've always been surprised by the fuss that some digital photographers make about dust spots and having to clean the sensor now and then on their exchangeable lens digital cameras. It's true it's a nuisance. But it's so much less bother than keeping hairs and dust off film negatives! And so much easier and cheaper to repair a shot where hairs and dust have intruded!

 

[Cagey75]

I love this sentence! And it poses a question - if someone is creatively immature, will they necessarily be ignorant of that fact.

Very possibly, when I look at some of my images from just a few years back I do face-palm at times. Well over processed, awkward framing, boring subjects etc ... but I leave them be, it's a sign to me at least, that I have improved

 

[Brazo]

No, you have repeatedly stated that EF lenses won’t work as well on mirrorless bodies as native lenses. You have been told repeatedly this is incorrect.
You have twisted comments made by actual users and been told you were incorrect, but it doesn’t stop you.

And as for ‘an opinion’, that’s ridiculous, you’ve been told you’re factually incorrect. You’re allowed to think the earth is flat, but you can’t be surprised to be called an idiot for stating it as if it’s a fact.

No one who has used a latest generation mirrorless canon camera and used EF lenses has found them to be worse than native lenses. So yes it’s a lie, unless you have experience to prove otherwise or indeed you can point to scientific tests to prove your ‘opinion’.

I now, finally (!) see your mistake.

I have repeatedly said that EF lenses won’t work as well on a mirrorless body than their native body i.e a 5D mk iv.

Not once did I compare to a native lens such as the new 28-70/2.

My comments have only ever related to adapted lenses.

 

[wooster]

I wish there was a thread on here discussing the new Canon camera. I'd be really interested in that

 

[Phil V]

I now, finally (!) see your mistake.

I have repeatedly said that EF lenses won’t work as well on a mirrorless body than their native body i.e a 5D mk iv.

Not once did I compare to a native lens such as the new 28-70/2.

My comments have only ever related to adapted lenses.

But you haven’t always made that perfectly clear... and that’s f*** all about the lens, and all about the body anyway.

If an EF lens works as well on an EOS R as an R lens, then it’s irrelevant that it doesn’t ‘work’ as well as it would on a 5d, it works as well as the camera tech allows. And as R cameras get better, the lenses will perform better, both EF and R lenses.

 

[Brazo]

But you haven’t always made that perfectly clear... and that’s f*** all about the lens, and all about the body anyway.

If an EF lens works as well on an EOS R as an R lens, then it’s irrelevant that it doesn’t ‘work’ as well as it would on a 5d, it works as well as the camera tech allows. And as R cameras get better, the lenses will perform better, both EF and R lenses.

Then perhaps next time seek clarification rather than going off half cock in classic Phil V style.

 

[Phil V]

Then perhaps next time seek clarification rather than going off half cock in classic Phil V style.

You’re still wrong in stating that adapted lenses don’t work as well as native.
Which is what you’ve stated whether you meant that or not.

 

[Faldrax]

I now, finally (!) see your mistake.

I have repeatedly said that EF lenses won’t work as well on a mirrorless body than their native body i.e a 5D mk iv.

Not once did I compare to a native lens such as the new 28-70/2.

My comments have only ever related to adapted lenses.

Mark,

I actually think you and Phil V have both got it slightly wrong.

Canon appear to have made compatibility with existing EF lenses a priority, and what I have read suggests that if a hypothetical Canon DSLR existed with identical specs to the EOS R, then an EF lens on such a camera would behave the same as it does on an EOS R.
Of course, such a camera is purely hypothetical, making comparisons more complex.
An EF lens on a given DSLR might out perform the same lens on the EOS R, but that would be down to the AF abilities on the DSLR being better then on the EOS R in that particular style of use (such as tracking at high FPS), rather than down to the EF lens compatibility.

Canon have also changed the lens interface for the EOS R, to provide the opportunity for improved camera / lens communication - so as new 'native' lenses are brought out for the EOS R (and subsequent models of the EOS R with improved FPS, etc), the AF performance of these new native lenses will have the potential to exceed that of the older EF lenses - as the EOS R will be able to control native lenses in ways that are simply not possible for EF lenses which lack the new interface.

So it's not a case of "EF lenses not working as well", but rather that "Native can work better".

 

[Brazo]

You’re still wrong in stating that adapted lenses don’t work as well as native.
Which is what you’ve stated whether you meant that or not.

No Phil I haven't, by all means quote me but having just been back through the last ten pages not once did I say that, its in your head mate.

 

[redhed17]

A 'real world' review of the EOS R by the CameraStoreTV. Seems a balanced review, although I can't believe the only gripe the wildlife photographer had was the slider. I have to say the size of that 28-70mm lens is ridiculous imho.

View: https://youtu.be/KcsZmK90fHQ

 

[Phil V]

No Phil I haven't, by all means quote me but having just been back through the last ten pages not once did I say that, its in your head mate.

I expected to have to look harder

I’m aware it’s an adapted lens/camera issue. Regardless of where the issue lies, adapted lenses have never been great when compared to their main body counterparts.

Do you really need me to trawl evrery other page to see how many times you’ve posted exactly the same thing.

 

[Brazo]

I expected to have to look harder



Do you really need me to trawl evrery other page to see how many times you’ve posted exactly the same thing.

Really Phil? Where do I use the term native lens?

That just confirms what I have been saying all along