Canon FF mirrorless...

RedRobin said:
.... I think it's fair to say that the last revolutionary camera (apart from say Phase One or Hasselblad etc) was the first digital Canon EOS about 30 years ago. It was so different from the early digital Nikons in its physical interface. Its introduction caused me to sell my Nikon body and 4 Nikkor lenses and switch to Canon.
Click to expand...
I think it's fair to say say mirrorless is the last revolution for ILC and where now seeing why
 
RedRobin said:
.... And the RF lenses without IS are clearly primarily intended for the higher spec EOS R bodies when they are released. This suggests that the higher-end bodies may have IBIS?

I know that many here don't like Tony Northrup but he is saying that the RF 24-105mm F/4L IS is as sharp as the RF 28-70mm F/2L which costs about three grand. < I hope I got that right.
Click to expand...

the 35mm f/1.8 macro is a perfect lens for me. exactly what I want in terms of size, prime and capability. I would be very very surprised if quality isn't good.
 
jonneymendoza said:
In 20 years. Dedicated cameras will be dead...
Click to expand...

Chipper said:
Or maybe they will implant something into our heads to transmit directly......
Click to expand...

.... Following the success of their EOS Mirrorless system over the last 20 years, Canon announce the EOS Brainless system.

What makes you guys think you'll still be alive in 20 years? Regardless of how old you are now, there is no guarantee.
 
jonneymendoza said:
For me there was many reasons to switch from canon.
Click to expand...

Just as many reasons why I won’t be buying any of the current FF mirrorless but none of them revolutionary.

Is there going to be a revolution in cameras for the masses in the next 5 years? Hard to see where it’s coming from. What’s left to revolutionise? The sensor maybe.

What I would like to see is more thought given to producing camera that are able to be tailored better to the owner. So instead of one grip you get different options. I know that this is out there at the moment to a degree. My Olympus EM 5 MkII has two options, one just a larger grip and the second the battery pack which screws on the bottom of the grip. It’s a neat idea. Something like this could be developed even further where you have different sized grips that can be replaced to give owners the feel that they want from their camera. Create a Mini of the camera world!!

More use of the lens to operate custom functions. Canon have done his to an extent with the big lenses for a while and, now with the R body, seem to have developed it a bit further. I’m sure that there’s more scope.
 
Gaz J said:
More use of the lens to operate custom functions. Canon have done his to an extent with the big lenses for a while and, now with the R body, seem to have developed it a bit further. I’m sure that there’s more scope.
Click to expand...

Actually one nice feature with the EOS R native lenses is the additional ring which can be used to vary aperture, shutter, ISO, or exposure compensation.

I also like their commitment to existing EF lens owners by introducing (in addition to the basic converter supplied with the camera), the ring mount adapter which has the extra control ring - effectively adding this functionality to older lenses if you want it.
 
C&C said:
Actually one nice feature with the EOS R native lenses is the additional ring which can be used to vary aperture, shutter, ISO, or exposure compensation.

I also like their commitment to existing EF lens owners by introducing (in addition to the basic converter supplied with the camera), the ring mount adapter which has the extra control ring - effectively adding this functionality to older lenses if you want it.
Click to expand...

One thing I have noticed is that older wider angle lenses with a bulb element may be worth keeping because of the rear ND adaptor, since you won't be able to use it for the R mount when they come out. Meaning old lenses say like the Sigma 20/1.4 or anything like that will be able to have ND or polariser added much easier than putting it on the front.
 
C&C said:
Actually one nice feature with the EOS R native lenses is the additional ring which can be used to vary aperture, shutter, ISO, or exposure compensation.
Click to expand...
Whatever will they think of next? Separate rings for aperture and shutter speed? Like on my 1918 cameras?
 
A guy called Alan phan(u can gogle him on facebook) has this camera.

His first impressions are that it focuses really quick but its one ugly camera lol
 
I received an email yesterday from Canon Europe announcing that the "New EOS R System On Sale Now", so perhaps the UK retailers will have it available in stock any day now. I have one on pre-order*

I notice that in the specification overview it states "8fps continuous shooting" and "30.3 Megapixels on Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor". Our discussions here so far seem to have overlooked the fact that 30 Mpx on FF is a sweet spot to be.

*I have just heard that I'll be getting an email to say they can send it in the next few days. Christmas has come early!

If I don't like it I am able to send it back - It would be rude for me not to try it!
 
RedRobin said:
I received an email yesterday from Canon Europe announcing that the "New EOS R System On Sale Now", so perhaps the UK retailers will have it available in stock any day now. I have one on pre-order*

I notice that in the specification overview it states "8fps continuous shooting" and "30.3 Megapixels on Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor". Our discussions here so far seem to have overlooked the fact that 30 Mpx on FF is a sweet spot to be.

*I have just heard that I'll be getting an email to say they can send it in the next few days. Christmas has come early!

If I don't like it I am able to send it back - It would be rude for me not to try it!
Click to expand...

Great news if Canon have managed to offer 8 fps with continuous AF / AE.
Most have been saying that 24mp is the sweet spot of FF sensors ..... now that 30mp FF is here, it might be the new the sweet spot.
Personally for me it comes down to performance vs resolution.

Park Camera's have some stock...

https://www.parkcameras.com/p/10121...on-eos-r-full-frame-mirrorless-digital-camera
 
Last edited:
Riz_Guru said:
Great news if Canon have managed to offer 8 fps with continuous AF / AE.
Most have been saying that 24mp is the sweet spot of FF sensors ..... now that 30mp FF is here, it might be the new the sweet spot.
Personally for me it comes down to performance vs resolution.
Click to expand...

.... My 1DX-2 is 'only' 20mp but certainly delivers high quality images. The more I think about it the more I am thinking that the EOS R with kit lens and EF control ring adapter is likely to be a very useful and valuable additional to my shooting wildlife options. Watch this space - We'll see.

Agreed that the EOS R first version doesn't have fast performance in certain areas but hey, I enjoyed and took some excellent pictures on my 70D a few years ago (on Flickr) and I do have Canon's flagship as my usual go-to body.

Riz_Guru said:
Park Camera's have some stock...
Click to expand...

.... I have had bad experiences with Park Cameras so I refuse to recommend them. I much prefer Wex - The difference in my opinion is like between chalk and cheese! Prices are very similar if not exactly the same but I don't care when Park are cheaper - I won't buy from them.
 
I think its 8fps on 1 shot (5fps with Servo AF).
Rob.
 
RedRobin said:
.... My 1DX-2 is 'only' 20mp but certainly delivers high quality images. The more I think about it the more I am thinking that the EOS R with kit lens and EF control ring adapter is likely to be a very useful and valuable additional to my shooting wildlife options. Watch this space - We'll see.

Agreed that the EOS R first version doesn't have fast performance in certain areas but hey, I enjoyed and took some excellent pictures on my 70D a few years ago (on Flickr) and I do have Canon's flagship as my usual go-to body.



.... I have had bad experiences with Park Cameras so I refuse to recommend them. I much prefer Wex - The difference in my opinion is like between chalk and cheese! Prices are very similar if not exactly the same but I don't care when Park are cheaper - I won't buy from them.
Click to expand...
What bad experience.?

I've had nothing but amazing experience from them!
 
I have read through all 56 of these pages today, and whilst I still have a love of Canon at heart, I can't see what would drive me to change back from Fuji. The new Canon body looks just like a DSLR, one of the prime reasons I moved to Fuji was the ability to use the knobs on the top plate to change settings rather than menus, and I just loved the retro looks.

One does have to ask, does FF on a mirrorless body make sense? Generally people shift to mirrorless to save weight & size, both of which are lost when you have to increase everything to take a FF sensor.

And by the way, I'm not a pro, but I wouldn't consider a new body that doesn't have dual slots, as I have had a card fail on me in the field.
 
I just saw this "it features the world’s fastest autofocus system" I wonder under what trial / lens this was made with as this would insinuate my 1dxmk2 with my 600f4 mk11 is slower to AF.
Rob.
 
Jelster said:
I have read through all 56 of these pages today, and whilst I still have a love of Canon at heart, I can't see what would drive me to change back from Fuji. The new Canon body looks just like a DSLR, one of the prime reasons I moved to Fuji was the ability to use the knobs on the top plate to change settings rather than menus, and I just loved the retro looks.

One does have to ask, does FF on a mirrorless body make sense? Generally people shift to mirrorless to save weight & size, both of which are lost when you have to increase everything to take a FF sensor.

And by the way, I'm not a pro, but I wouldn't consider a new body that doesn't have dual slots, as I have had a card fail on me in the field.
Click to expand...

I initially bought into MFT to save bulk and weight but I had a couple of reservations, some issues with higher ISO's and DR and that old film era 35mm lenses now had a x2 crop factor. Moving to a Sony A7 cured those two issues and before anyone jumps on me for mentioning the dreaded Sony please remember that there were only two companies offering FF mirrorless at that time, Sony and Leica (I think...) so the choice was effectively made for me - Sony. These days we have more choice.

With the A7 and a compact lens like the Sony 35mm f2.8 and 55mm f1.8 and the Voigtlander 35mm f1.4 I still have a very compact package and IMO it's really only when you get to the 24-70mm and 70-200mm f2.8's and the longer primes that the package savings become more questionable. The same will doubtless be true of the new Canon and Nikon mirrorless systems and it will no doubt be possible to have a quite compact camera and lens package when you want that.

Once I gained more familiarity with mirrorless I began to see that bulk and weight savings weren't the only good things and I came to value the EVF and all it brought such as being able to see the DoF and the exposure, having an in view histogram and level etc. and having accurate focus with none of the MA or variability that DSLR's inherently have when not in live view.

So, to answer your points. Yes you can have a compact FF system if you stick to a compact body and a compact lens, probably in the 24 to 85mm and f1.8/2.8 sort of range where bulk and weight can be kept reasonable and even if there were no bulk and weight savings with mirrorless and the kit was exactly the same bulk and weight as a DSLR it'd still be worth considering because of the other advantages mirrorless brings and indeed there are those on line who are saying that what they want is a mirrorless version of their existing DSLR.
 
Last edited:
Have to agree Alan that there is more to mirrorless than size & weight, and I love the EVF of my T2's, love the silent shooting with the electronic shutter (handy for remote wildlife work) but a body and a single prime is such a joy to use, because it's light & compact. Good post though Alan and it makes a lot of sense. That Canon is fugly though.....
 
Yup, I forgot silent shooting and actually I forgot another BIG advantage that mirrorless has for me and it's the ease with which you can focus manually. Peaking is nice and helps at times and the highly magnified view is simply wonderful and allows extremely accurate manual focusing if you have the time to do it. A mirrorless camera used with the magnified view IMO probably enables the most accurate focusing to date.

PS.
And yet another thing mirrorless brings... face / eye / object detect.

I'm finding that face detect gives me the chance to capture very natural wider aperture shots with the subjects face at my chosen position in the frame. Previously the framing would be limited by the location of AF points (clustered around the centre of the frame) or I'd be struggling to move the focus point quickly enough or I'd have to settle for a smaller aperture and zone focus. These days I can choose the aperture and the framing at let the camera look after focusing on the subjects face no matter where it is in the frame.

This may not be the greatest ever shot but I like it and it was captured very quickly and yet her eyes are very sharp on my screen (it'll suffer for being posted here.) 85mm at f1.8. I couldn't have taken this picture so quickly with any DSLR with focus points clustered around the centre of the frame.

1-DSC01573.jpg
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
One thing I have noticed is that older wider angle lenses with a bulb element may be worth keeping because of the rear ND adaptor, since you won't be able to use it for the R mount when they come out. Meaning old lenses say like the Sigma 20/1.4 or anything like that will be able to have ND or polariser added much easier than putting it on the front.
Click to expand...

Good point :)

Also, ultra-wide lenses, especially with fast max apertures, should benefit most from the short back-focus distance available with mirrorless. It'll be interesting to see what Canon can do here with smaller, lighter and sharper lenses - hopefully without those bulbous front elements that make attaching filters very difficult and are more prone to flare. Could be some real upsides (y)
 
GyRob said:
I think its 8fps on 1 shot (5fps with Servo AF).
Rob.
Click to expand...

.... I know you are correct (thanks) but, like you, I have 14fps on my 1DX-2 and so I know what I am getting into. The EOS R is essentially to replace my EOS M5 (with EF Adapter) and will suit me much better for lots of reasons. Anyway, I can always send it back or replace it with a faster fps version later. I'm 71yo and jumping onboard while I can! I shoot wildlife several times a week.
 
woof woof said:
Yup, I forgot silent shooting and actually I forgot another BIG advantage that mirrorless has for me and it's the ease with which you can focus manually. Peaking is nice and helps at times and the highly magnified view is simply wonderful and allows extremely accurate manual focusing if you have the time to do it. A mirrorless camera used with the magnified view IMO probably enables the most accurate focusing to date.
Click to expand...

.... This is exactly why I shall be primarily using it to shoot minibeasts. I am familiar with some of the EOS mirrorless features in my soon-to-go M5.

Another advantage (I think) is the option of being able to sometimes mount my 2x III on my 100-400mm L II without losing any AF and with grabbing the light better < Not an option I will use too often as I normally carry both Extenders and either my 500mm or 100-400mm in the field when on walkabout rather than both.

Gotta dash out now and take some shots of a friend's dog.
 
Jelster said:
One does have to ask, does FF on a mirrorless body make sense?
Click to expand...

Must make sense to a lot of people because I think the Sony are outselling the rest of the mirrorless cameras. ;)

Jelster said:
Generally people shift to mirrorless to save weight & size, both of which are lost when you have to increase everything to take a FF sensor.
Click to expand...
Some people want the smaller size and weight reductions mirrorless cameras offer, Canon and Nikon seem to think that there is a market for a camera that is not so small or light, but has the option of many quality lenses either natively, or via an adapter.

Jelster said:
And by the way, I'm not a pro, but I wouldn't consider a new body that doesn't have dual slots, as I have had a card fail on me in the field.
Click to expand...

I agree that the one card slot are a poor decision on cameras costing over £1000+, especially when smaller cameras have that as an option. :rolleyes:
 
Jelster said:
One does have to ask, does FF on a mirrorless body make sense? Generally people shift to mirrorless to save weight & size, both of which are lost when you have to increase everything to take a FF sensor.
Click to expand...

....I think that FF on a mirrorless makes absolute sense. You have only to ask yourself what is the fundamental advantage of a camera with FF sensor and the answer is higher image quality. What serious photographer, whether amateur or professional, does not seek higher image quality.

Although mirrorless technology offers the ability to save size and consequently weight, opting primarily for less weight and smaller size significantly compromises physical balance when in use with very high quality lenses, durability due to materials such magnesium, a degree of weatherproofing, and importantly ergonomics < All these features are compromised adversely. The Canon EOS M5 when coupled with EF lenses is a very good example of such compromises.

The compromises of the M5 (in use with EF lenses) is exactly why I am replacing it with an EOS R (being delivered to me tomorrow, Thursday). I am very relieved that Canon's EOS R mirrorless body is as large as it is and I consider it to be the perfect size < Which I hope to confirm tomorrow when I have one physically at home.

Because I exclusively shoot wildlife (including captive, domestic, and farm animals), I need telephoto lenses which can deliver high image quality. Such lenses are relatively large and heavy and actually I prefer them that way.
 
RedRobin said:
Because I exclusively shoot wildlife (including captive, domestic, and farm animals), I need telephoto lenses which can deliver high image quality. Such lenses are relatively large and heavy and actually I prefer them that way.
Click to expand...

My X-T2, grip, XF100-400 & 1.4TC are heavy to an extent, but about 40% less than my old 7D2, grip, and 150-600 Sport. The saving with a FF body would have probably been even better. I'm not saying that it won't work, my original thoughts were that you don't really get much saving in weight or size with a FF Mirrorless.

However, the technology the Mirrorless brings to the party is also important, and I had overlooked that.
 
Jelster said:
My X-T2, grip, XF100-400 & 1.4TC are heavy to an extent, but about 40% less than my old 7D2, grip, and 150-600 Sport. The saving with a FF body would have probably been even better. I'm not saying that it won't work, my original thoughts were that you don't really get much saving in weight or size with a FF Mirrorless.

However, the technology the Mirrorless brings to the party is also important, and I had overlooked that.
Click to expand...

.... I agree. Mirrorless brings some very nice features to the party - My small M5 taught me that first hand.

But although you feel that you don't get much saving in size with the new Canon FF mirrorless camera body, that relatively small saving is enough to make a big difference when carrying in the field and especially when as a second body.

EOS%20bodies.jpeg
 
How does the R work when you start using it at very small apertures (f/11 etc)? What's the behaviour like at small apertures with different focus modes?
 
simonbarker said:
How does the R work when you start using it at very small apertures (f/11 etc)? What's the behaviour like at small apertures with different focus modes?
Click to expand...

....The R has over 5,000 AF points and a Dual Pixel sensor. Are you thinking that AF behaviour is slowed down at F/11 and smaller apertures? AF behaviour also depends on the capability of the lens and also whether or not an Extender is mounted.

Apparently, the R body still has functional AF when a 2x III is mounted on a 100-400mm L II, which is not the case on D-SLR bodies. So does this perhaps indicate that behaviour is improved?

If no-one else can answer your question, I may be able to throw some light on it after later today (Thursday) when I receive mine. However, I'm not expecting any issues on the subject, are you?
 
GyRob said:
I think its 8fps on 1 shot (5fps with Servo AF).
Rob.
Click to expand...

I’m not being funny, but 8fps on a single shot. Is that entirely useful?! Maybe for something that doesn’t move like a tree I guess.

Biggest disappointment is the AF FPS. I’m guessing it opens the doors to the next model once Canon has sold loads of these.

Also the lack of mode dial, the stranger slider, the lack of joystick to select AF points, the single card slot and few other features really hold this camera back.

Shame really, I was holding out to see what it could offer for me but it’s a non starter for me.

But for everyone else, their needs are different so it will be a great camera for them.
 
Last edited:
Jelster said:
Have to agree Alan that there is more to mirrorless than size & weight, and I love the EVF of my T2's, love the silent shooting with the electronic shutter (handy for remote wildlife work) but a body and a single prime is such a joy to use, because it's light & compact. Good post though Alan and it makes a lot of sense. That Canon is fugly though.....
Click to expand...

Agree. My A7iii with 70-200 is quite a beast, but can just as easily put on a 35mm 2.8 making it pretty compact.

But if you put the size to one side I agree with silent shooting. Never thought I would need it but when the misses was doing indoor dressage the other day it was very quiet in the arena so I shot in silent at 8fps.

Lesson learnt after though. 8fps in silent mode for dressage is too quick. You really don’t realise how many photos you have taken until you get home!!
 
RedRobin said:
.....

Apparently, the R body still has functional AF when a 2x III is mounted on a 100-400mm L II, which is not the case on D-SLR bodies. So does this perhaps indicate that behaviour is improved?
Click to expand...
A D-SLR using will AF with that combination using Liveview (contrast detection).....it's the phase detection AF that is inhibited above f/8.
 
Canon Bob said:
A D-SLR using will AF with that combination using Liveview (contrast detection).....it's the phase detection AF that is inhibited above f/8.
Click to expand...

....That's useful to know. I don't often use Live View as I'm usually targetting wildlife through the viewfinder.

Live View needs to be a touch screen to fully exploit what it has to offer, imo. And furthermore an articulated screen to complete that feature package < What the R body offers and something I know I will take full advantage of from my once owning a 70D, a great camera in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top