StoicalEtcher said:

I go straight to 'New Posts" instead, which doesn't get updated just for likes. True, you need to look into each thread then to see the actual comments, but that's what I'm looking at anyway...

Click to expand...

Same...

Isn’t that so the selected starting point is the same when you switch modes? I used to so annoyed that my initial point wasn’t in the same starting position when swapping between single and auto tracking.
Not sure if this function is the same as I described though.

Really nice.

I' curious about the IQ.

Cancelled my order until I get the R5 in hand and see how she handles the current set up. The 560mm will work just as well in crop mode as the 100-500.

Nice indeed.

I came into this thread expecting watches though

Honestly, airplane mode. Solves a lot.

I was totally unable to login using Firefox. Ended up using Brave. Cleared cache, and basically deleted everything associated with Canon from teh Firefox privacy pages, and no joy. Decided to use another browser. Whatever Canon/Firefox did, it was not good.

Mac OS X

Very nice series. Well done, jabird56.

YuengLinger said:

Interesting. I thought that the shape and position of the eye within the shape of the face was more involved. So does the camera lose track completely of head movements while eyes are closed? Does the Eye AF snap back right away when the eyes are open again? I wonder if different makeup applications have an effect? Did you try with different lenses?

I'm also curious about how the EVF is in bright daylight. I was using the Hoodman Eyecup for my dSLRs for years. The R does not have any straightforward, aftermarket kind of eyecup that fits, so I often struggle in slanting morning and afternoon sunlight. In fact it can be a major PITA! (Or, more precisely, a major PITE(ye). )

Click to expand...

I'm assuming that one of the things the camera looks for is a round shape and if you're squinting, it confuses the camera. One blogger tried making crude sketches of a duck's head and the camera locked onto the eye in the drawing. The camera will instantly react to an eye being exposed and if the model moves her head, it will jump to the other eye. If it can't find an eye, the camera will typically focus on the head. The big thing for me is understanding how the camera reacts in certain circumstances so I can anticipate its reaction.

I haven't had much of a chance to try the eye focus with my 100-500mm yet.

The EVF gets washed out by sunlight and I have the EVF brightness setting on my custom menu so I can jack it up easily. It is set normally at 3 and I move it to 4 for bright sunlight. I want to get an eye cup for mine as I think that will help. I don't wear glasses when shooting but it's still hard to block out the light that comes in from around your head.

Joules said:

No offense, but that typo is really fitting for all your vaporware products

I respect the passion you demonstrate with your posts, but I don't think you can blame people for arguing with your spotless record of predictions and products we'll see eventually

Click to expand...

I finally decided the best thing to do with a phony liar like him is put him on ignore.

Venus Laowa is is making their Zero-D Cine lenses available for RF mount..

So, just so it's easier for me to understand, no good for wireless tethering for a studio session? Even using the EOS software?

Joules said:

But vocal groups on the internet are not 'the market'. What backlash is there in the market? As far as I'm aware the pre-orders are still not all fulfilled from people who ordered on the first day. The demand is huge, and once the dust settles, I suspect the R5 will be a milestone for Canon. The outcry seems louder and greater, because so many people are interested in this camera this time and therefore the absolute number of disappointed people is greater too.

I would suspect Canon to go all out in the neir future. It started with the M6 II, and the R6 and especially R5 are just taking the technology that was hinted there to their logical conclusion. In hindsight, the 1DX III is pretty conservative still, but that is also what one would expect from the 1-series. The R5S/R3, R1 and potentiall R7 will likely push the boundaries even further.

Click to expand...

Ooh I do agree with you. I really hope that Canon doesn't go back into their "comfort zone", the R5 has been more than everything I've been looking for. All I wanted was full-frame 4K60 (for b-roll) and possibly 10-bit interal (as hinted by the 1Dxiii). What I have now is a very useful tool for 4K23:98 and 4K120 (for b-roll) all in 10-bit recorded internally. I've never overheated or recieved a temp. warning since take delivery 7/30.

The only thing that would make me possibly replace my R5 would be a fullframe version of the C70 only because of DGO. (I was looking at old Arri Alexas prior to deciding on an R5; the prices aren't that much far apart now.)

I use my 24-240 for around the house photos of my cats and as a walk around lens, and it does a very good job.
Not as good as my rf24-105, but the reach is very handy, and the images are pretty good.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

Do you also believe in perpetual motion? Lenses curve different colors of light different amounts. You add more elements to try and neutralize it, at least in the center. Each lens is ground imperfectly and the glass has flaws too. You keep adding them, usually 5 or 7 elements to the point where there are diminishing returns. It will never produce a better image than the bare lens.

Click to expand...

Again, it depends on what you are comparing and I explained the specific case where adding this adapter will lead to sharper results with potentially slightly less chromatic aberrations than without it. Will the flare become worse with the extra elements? Will the bokeh rendering change? Possible.
There are quite a few comparisons regarding the Metabones Speed Booster which you can look up if you want.
With the Canon adapter there are no side-by-side examples as of yet, but on the first look video, it looks to be even a bit better than the Metabones (maybe because it is even more optmised for the Canon sensor size)

I frequently see UFOs. I'm really bad at identifying flying objects.

I am thinking, after quite a bit of analyzing what I really want and what I like to shoot, I’m going to let the 70 -200 go. Even the RF mount.

I am instead going to go after theRF 100-500. The 70-200 never had quite enough reach– –for me. But I am excited about the RF 100- 500

old-pr-pix said:

Why would they show the Sony logo on the camera? Plus, I agree the footage wasn't all that impressive. But the lens certainly is.

Click to expand...

They always use Sony cameras with broadcast lens advertisements. Its just honesty to show it rather than hide it. Virtually all the big broadcasters use Sony cameras but Canon or Fujinon lenses. Canon makes sure the lenses work with Sony.

Japanese competitors often work together and buy items and components from each other.

Tugela said:

What tight spaces are you referring to? Rabbit burrows? I have never had an issue getting a gimbal into spaces.

IS is still nowhere near what a gimbal does. Like I said, it is intended to replace a tripod, not a gimbal. You can use it for walking and such, but it is still inferior to a gimbal, professional or otherwise.

Click to expand...

LOL, seriously, you've never had to use a camera in a space too tight for a gimble?
I rest my case.

SteveC said:

Hefty Fifty is an understatement.

That sucker is so heavy it bends light OUTSIDE the shell, without the use of refraction.

If you know what I mean

Click to expand...

For a 50 I guess it's kinda big... but it's about the same weight as the 24-70 f2.8... so not terrible. It's the 28-70 f2 that starts warping space/time.

Chris.Chapterten said:

early reports seam to indicate that h.265 4:2:2 is not supported by the new nvidia cards... hopefully one of the other options coming out will support it...

Click to expand...

It now looks like the Intel tiger lake GPU may support h.265 4:2:2 decode... fingers crossed

Seeker said:

Well this is interesting timing.

Saw on B&H this SSD:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1507930-REG/delkin_devices_djugbm1tb_1tb_usb_3_1_gen.html

It is a drive that you plug into the usb-c port.

Seems to be for direct recording to Blackmagic cameras. Wonder if they can adapt it to an R5?

Click to expand...

Actually, thanks for the reminder... I have an otg adapter and was going to try to write out to USB on the R5. I'll report back if the camera sees the OTG as a drive it can use, which will the the answer if it would work for this. (I checked in the manual and it say usb is for charging and displaying only... but doesn't hurt to try).

Update - It does nothing...

One of the prior shots now edited. I got a 60% discount on a perpetual licence for Capture One so now layers and brushes are all in my tool kit, which mostly means I can recover the eyes without fussing with the dodge brush in Photoshop.

Yep any update on this?

rightslot said:

I think we are stuck, until some Japanese company canon/NIKON/maybe even Panasonic or even Fuji comes up with a small Japanese Swiss Army knife equivalent for 24-70, we are stuck.
{By Swiss Army knife I mean some kind of Japanese engineering magic!}.

Seems to me if we want the light gathering capability of full frame we are stuck with a bigger kit. And I know what it is to have smaller because when I had my Fuji XT-3 the 18-55 was on my camera 85% of the time.

But of course that is a smaller sensor to allow for those smaller lenses. I wouldn’t consider the RF 24- 70 a walk around lens but for an upcoming trip I’m going to use it as such. I am sure after a while it’s going to get on my nerves – – the size and weight. But it’s only lens I’ll take so I’m going to have to get used to it.

Click to expand...

I don't consider the rf 24-70 to be too big as a walk around lens as it isn't even a half of a pound more than the 24-105 which is a good weight to image quality imo.

Here's something to chew on for a few of the rf zooms (also neat tidbit for reference is a can of diet soda is about 0.82 lbs)...
24-105 f4 = 1.54 lbs
24-70 f2.8 = 1.98 lbs
70-200 f2.8 = 2.64 lbs w/ mount
28-70 f2 = 3.15 lbs
100-500 f4.5-7.1 = 3.35 lbs w/ mount

For walkaround even the 70-200 is just doable for me and the 28-70 is not. Oddly enough the shape of the 100-500 is better than the 28-70 for me... go figure.