Thanks everyone, I will send it to Canon as you suggested.

Upgraded yesterday - Haven't tested the eye and AF changes, but boy is the touch/drag so much smoother and nicer to use now! Just this alone makes the firmware upgrade worth it.

I switched the tracking area from from right half of the screen to full screen, and it seems to be really good at not detecting my nose as a focus change point. Anyone else notice this? I think I may have just switched it to half screen previously without even checking, based on experience with previous cameras such as the m5 and fuji. Was it always this good, or did I just assume previously that it was bad?

Viggo said:

That’s the same with the R. If you have highspeed display activated it’s not all that easy to see it gets disabled when activating AntiFlickering, but it does

Click to expand...

Ahhh.... so even though it is turned on in the menu it gets disabled when you shoot? Trying to understand. Both mine are on in the menu. It does turn off when not in Continuous Hi.

Edit: You guys are right. Weird.

Hi dcm.
Thanks for the effort to find him, this is the only social media I do so I never even thought about looking elsewhere.
So pleased to hear he is still going strong!

Cheers, Graham.

unfocused said:

True, but I seriously cringe at the direction things seem to be headed in terms of aesthetics. There is a rush to the bottom, where we are conditioning people to think of good pictures as overly romantic, highly processed, unnatural images. "Fake Pictures" is an apt term. As we fast approach the perfection of digital imaging to the point where it is impossible to tell the real from the manufactured, we all may be doomed to endure a world where no one is satisfied with authentic images when they can saturate their digital life with visual porn.

Click to expand...

I understand your sentiment but that's just the way things have always been. Many people thought color film was aesthetically inferior to Black and White when it first appeared and in many instances it was. But that sorted itself out and I think the new tech, despite it's current aesthetic challenges, will sort itself out as well. As far as real vs fake goes I'm not sure what that even means. As an examle: Focal planes and depth of field are artificial artifacts of contemporary lens designs. You could make the argument that depth of field is fake and that cameras of the future should have infinite fields of focus. Aesthetics are defined by human choices not tools. Superior tools improve aesthetic opportunities they don't diminish them. Of course the world is full of people with terrible taste that abuse every advancement in human culture but that's just the way things work. We shouldn't use that as an excuse not to advance. At least that is the way I see it.

Don Haines said:

have you seen any third party filters yet? I remember reading something about an astronomy filter for light pollution to be introduced, but have no idea if it is out yet.

Click to expand...

That one is an insert for the 'regular' EF-RF adapter, not of the filter adapter: kickstarter page.

I shoot only Raw almost all of the time. Usually I just use AWB, knowing that I will adjust in ACR. A surprising amount of the time, "As Shot" is amazingly good, better than ACR's "Auto."

The exception is that sometimes when I'm shooting near sunset and it is the look of the light itself that I want to preserve, even when not shooting the sunset itself. Then I will often set the WB for "Daylight" so that it opens with the right look in ACR. And if I don't think to do that when shooting, I will use ACR's "Daylight" setting as the starting point. I don't want the picture to try to look like it was made at noon.

juststeve said:

snip/

The caveat here is that I am neither an engineer or a patent lawyer, so I could be full of poo.

Click to expand...

That's the only qualification you need to post here!

neuroanatomist said:

Canon sold over 5,000,000 ILCs last year. If they’d saved 10¢ per camera, that would mean half a million dollars extra profit.

It’s sort of like, “If I had a nickel for every stupid post on CR...”

Click to expand...

Didn't an earlier post in this now VERY long thread...find that using 24p is not licensing related?

wockawocka said:

So hear me out. I'm only talking from my own perspective right now but I'm not a fan of focus by wire, feel the lenses are way heavier than their EF counterparts even with the adapter and when comparing L lenses they're just as sharp on an R body other than the 50 1.2

On the subject of the RF50 it's staggeringly sharp, but massive at the same time and doesn't have the softer more organic look of the EF50 which doesn't have the back focusing issues once on the R.

The 85 1.2 is frikking massive again and we have a great EF 1.4

The 28-70 is awesome but HUGE and heavy.

The RF35 while having a nice macro feature can't seem to acquire focus at distance in low contrast and the STM hunts lots in servo when the EF 35 F2 IS nails it always.

It's almost as if in the pursuit of being different Canon went too far and stepped backwards...other than in the IQ department which is def improved but only for pixel peeping?

Click to expand...

I understand where you are coming from. For me, if I bought into the R system at the moment, the only RF lens I might actually buy is the RF 24-105. Taking into account price, weight, size, and what you can get for your money with an EF lens, I wouldn't buy any of the others. I have to admit the RF 28-70 does catch my eye, but I am not interested in paying the current asking price for it. Of course, I'm not saying the RF lenses aren't good - clearly they are, and the RF 85 has substantially better CA control than any other fast 85mm lens I've seen (interested to know if anyone else has seen another 85mm which is comparable). All I'm saying is that, for me, when I look at what I can get with Canon EF lenses and third party EF lenses, I don't see enough in the RF lenses, from the the sample shots I've seen around the place and my very limited time trying out a couple, to make me keen to spend the money. (And of course, RF lenses mean an R system body, which means things like an EFV and poorer battery life, which I'm not keen on either - although I do like the sound of what I read about the AF accuracy.)

That said, from what I've read, one of the big benefits of the RF lenses seems to be AF speed. (Accuracy seems to be down to the R bodies rather than the lens, so applies to EF and RF lenses, I gather.) I have handled the RF lenses only briefly so maybe if I spent more time with them, the AF benefit would make me change my mind.

Also, I wonder if I would feel differently if I shot professionally. The costs would be business costs then, so might feel a little easier to swallow. On the other hand, if my old lenses were still working fine, you'd have to question whether changing to RF lenses was really going to increase income.

Anyway, I'm really pleased for the people who've bought into the R system and are enjoying it. For my own part, though, I'm not in any hurry given the current RF lens prices. And if I buy an R system body, I expect I'd mainly be using with EF lenses for the time being.

Regarding the lens hood's lack of flocking (i.e. fuzz), thank you Canon, for getting rid of a lining that loves lint and dislikes liquid. The textured matte surface works just great!

ebergram said:

Will this High Mega EOS R have.
1. Same or better ISO performance?
2. Same or better dynamic range?
3. Same or faster high speed frame rate in servo?

Click to expand...

This is actually macro lens convo .
Sounds like you dont want high resolution camera if want all 3 thing too .
General purpose sony A7r iv or canon 5div would suit better ,those cameras wont do compromises to get as high mpixel count as possible.

unfocused said:

LOL! The only thing "telling" about that statement is that you shouldn't rely on a machine translation as interpreted by a website that appears to be based in Colombia (.co).

My machine translation (Google) of the original interview reads: “The EOS R system equipped with a 35mm full-size image sensor still has a limited number of people to enjoy. Expansion of the system is the most important issue. (Expanding performance, price, etc.) Expand to areas above and below the current model."

Which is more like: "We haven't yet realized the full potential of the market" not "it is not popular."

Click to expand...

Thanks for clarification.
The actual Japanese sentence "まだ楽しめる層が限られている" should be translated to "it is enjoyed by a limited category of users" not "a limited number of people". Which is true and reflects that there are still EOS-R models to come to be enjoyed/used by pros, enthusiasts, etc., and as you mentioned it indicates that the full potential of the market is yet to be realized.

NadaMal said:

I should add its the 70-200 II that I have. I was using the EOS R with my 50 f/1.2 at the weekend and I have to say I am more than impressed!

The issue I've had with the 70-200 II on the EOS R was tracking moving subjects, I had several sequences of shots of erratic moving subjects where most of the shots missed focus. The new firmware is tomorrow though and I'm off to the Highland Safari Park in Scotland on Saturday so I'll try out the new firmware properly on Saturday. I'm taking my toddler son with me so I'll get him to run around a bit and see how the 70-200 handles his wild and wobbly antics.

Click to expand...

I think active portraits with longer focal-lengths might be problematic with this EVF. Please let us know how it goes!

Third party chargers are a worry. Which, the UK Consumer Magazine, has just tested a range of USB chargers. All but a tiny few satisfied safety standards.

Does anyone maybe get some further informations about when the Firmware-Updates for the 70-300 and the 90mm Macro are avaiable?
Would realy need them in the next few months^^

Jethro said:

Yeah - you won't regret it ...

Do you, by the way, have any experience of a rain cover for the EOS R? I was looking only yesterday at the Peak Design 'Shell', presumably in 'medium' size.

Click to expand...

No. I'm a fair weather photographer

Keith_Reeder said:

Do they overheat that much?

Click to expand...

Stop, drop, and roll!

I still love my 85mm 1.2 II. Yes its tricky on the focusing on 1.2 but results are great when it hits the mark.
I think it makes you more careful about taking the photograph.
With care and attention its sharp. I've found it extremely sharp with flash.
For reliability and accuracy the 70-200mm 2.8 II is a great lens for portraits. I use it when it has to work.
When I have a little more flexibility and need to be creative I choose the 85MM 1.2 II.

I've never felt the need for a stabilised version of this lens. 100mm and longer, sure but I shoot at a minimum of 1/125 sec at all times anyway.

YuengLinger said:

I was wondering the other day about how Canon collects info leading to changes and improvements. While no single post here on CR will have any result whatsoever, I believe a preponderance of feedback from youtube reviewers does catch Canon's attention. Interestingly, I do remember reading some of the comments about features, ergonomics, etc for different bodies HERE before seeing them mentioned in reviews. Might just be coincidence, but it does seem that many of the grumblings we read here do eventually get translated into action.

One example recently comes to mine: The MF-n Touch Bar on the EOS R...Did we not see a rumor that Canon wouldn't be using that on future bodies? Of course this is a feature that has been widely maligned--but who complained first? And how many of the online Fro's and Mavens and Dustins, etc, do dip into CR?

Click to expand...

That touch bar has not been used by myself yet. Maybe that will be where the rumored new type of joystick will go?

koenkooi said:

The internet led me to believe that this combination couldn't take pictures, but it's working just fine.

View attachment 185563

Click to expand...

The internet is always right. We are just fools .

There is a whole thread on this already https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...aturing-lens-shift-image-stabilization.37618/