DPR is not the only entity rating the EOS R as a "show" (third place, for those of you who don't frequent the track) in this race. Is any non-Canon sponsored review site claiming the Canon is the best of these three?
Upvote
0
One's got to be pretty naive to believe that a Hawai trip would not have a positive incidence on the review. Of course, personal preferences and experiences also matter.
Probably not, but when did you use a body in isolation? I always needed to use a lens with one and if you look at the body and lens system for a keen photographer the R wipes the floor with the other two. Who else makes a 50 f1.2, or a workhorse mid zoom at f2? Nobody. As a photographer I am far more interested in lenses than if ia body has ‘eye’ focus or ‘face’ focus.DPR is not the only entity rating the EOS R as a "show" (third place, for those of you who don't frequent the track) in this race. Is any non-Canon sponsored review site claiming the Canon is the best of these three?
I doubt that, I expect Canon spent way more developing the new lens system than the other two combined, well we know they spent more than Sony because they spent zero on it as it’s a legacy holdover.In a nutshell:
1. Sony, maturing product line
2. Nikon, good first try
3. Canon, I guess we have to release something if Nikon does
The ranking reflects resources invested in developing them
Gee, it's almost as if different people have different tastes, preferences, and requirements, isn't it?Ditto.
The features / specs or things they tend to comment on as major considerations are things that I couldn't care less about. The things that are important to me as a photographer...they skim over and give little consideration over. It's like a site written by technology fan boys.
The critical aspects, which apparently everyone here has just chosen to turn a blind eye to, are:When European car companies were no longer allowed to let journalists "test" their luxury models on weekends, many reviews became out of a sudden less positive. Coincidence???
One's got to be pretty naive to believe that a Hawai trip would not have a positive incidence on the review. Of course, personal preferences and experiences also matter.
No, there's no documented evidence of anybody at DPR working under an edict to intentionally slant reviews and copy. There is documented evidence that staff at DPR have accepted some pretty nice weekends from multiple companies—every company, in fact—but acknowledging that is not the same as throwing around claims that writers have been bought. Again, see point #2 above. Phrasing matters.Do try to remember that although accusing someone of hiding behind a forum name to make false claims when those claims are supported by documented evidence is not, in fact, illegal...it does make the accuser appear rather foolish.
Yes, even if you're not hiding behind a forum name and you really are Mr. Ace Flibble.
OR the heavily cropped 4k, and the weird Multi-function swipe-strip thingy, and the lack of a sensible AF-point selection control. It's a camera that shows Canon has big things ahead, and, because I'm invested currently in EF lenses, and I'm looking forward to the great RF lenses, I'm happy to wait for the RF body that works for me.In a nutshell:
1. Sony, maturing product line
2. Nikon, good first try
3. Canon, I guess we have to release something if Nikon does
The ranking reflects resources invested in developing them
DPR is not the only entity rating the EOS R as a "show" (third place, for those of you who don't frequent the track) in this race. Is any non-Canon sponsored review site claiming the Canon is the best of these three?
Great response. Yes, and good photographer is going to take many excellent photos with any of these. I don't know how much a few hundred dollars in price affects reviews, but it is important to remember the class of camera Canon has released. It is NOT a follow up to a 5D IV, even if it shares the sensor tech.I don't think so. I think the bigger issue is "value." The R was initially priced higher than I think it should have been, and there are already discounts available on the R (via street price, etc.). That reflects more on Canon marketing strategy than anything else. They're trying to get the highest profit possible, so they drop the price over time. Remember when the 24-70 f/4 IS debuted around 1500? Or the 35 f/2 IS, 24 f/2.8 IS and 28 f/2.8 IS in the 600-800 range? With 6D2s going between 1000-1500 and 5D4s going around 2500, the R will follow a similar curve, but I think it will be faster because of the Z6/A7III pricing and because of the upcoming R bodies.
If the R were priced at 1800 or 1900, I don't think there would be as much angst, but I do think it's going to fall to those values quickly. The DPR video said that all three cameras are mature and will take great pictures. That is the baseline. But it doesn't tell a good story if the lowest gets a 95 and the highest a 98, so they stress the differences -- IBIS, 1 vs 2 card slots (although how many people write video to both cards at the same time), etc. I take video of the kids' plays, and I still choose to use 1080p even though I have the 5D4 and the R. The R is more efficient, but 4K can still take up to 120 Mbps or 15 MBps or 54 GB/hr. I'm not willing to go through 54 GB of hard drive space for a 1 hr video.
I got the R and the 24-105 kit at effectively 20% off (20% back in points to spend later). I thought that was an ok deal. But as privatebydesign stated the reason to get the R is the lenses. The 50 f/1.2 is fantastic (where is Viggo when you need him to swoon ). The focusing with EF fast primes is more accurate than my 5D4 off center. The R is positioned to kill off the 6D2, not the 5D4. I still prefer the 5D4, but the R is growing on me. I use the control ring for ISO, and the multifunction bar to lock/unlock drag AF. The wheels moves the AF point several points per press (pad is slower), but it's still too slow to move across the screen because the R has so many AF points. That is where the touch/drag helps.
The R is more efficient, but 4K can still take up to 120 Mbps or 15 MBps or 54 GB/hr. I'm not willing to go through 54 GB of hard drive space for a 1 hr video.
H.265 isn't the future, it is the next step forwards, it might last 5 years before something even more efficient will come out, and we'll need it if we start going to 6k and 8k because competition dictates cameras have to have it.In the future, H.265 will be your best friend. Archiving 4K footage in H.265 is the way to go. Even if you're still shooting 1080, it's nice to archive it in H.265 at around 3-5 mbps.
Both the Sigma MC-11 and Metabones adapters would be more than capable of adapting Canon EF lenses to FE mount with full auto-focus at almost the same performance as on an EF body.
Not being aware of those would mean you're not very familiar with the Sony system.
Wide lens are alright but Tele lens results were not that good. there is more than AF. The EF/RF adaptor is a passive adaptive compared to Metabones. modern day lens has lens data and don't think metabones can convert all lens data and translate it to Sony protocol. you lose out on this plus every time Canon updates lens FW, who is going to rewrite and fix the FW. It's a messy solution. Sony pumped lots of money working with Metabones but now they have many G master lens to sell, do you think Sony long term plan is to keep supporting this helping Canon sell more lens.
One of these days, the Canon lens will stop working on a Sony and the user now has to decide to chose between lens maker or body maker.
Instead of blaming DPReview for a "biased review", why not blame Canon for not making a better camera? It's 2018 and the specs are lagging. That's not to say the EOS R is a bad camera, it isn't. It's just not a good value camera considering the specifications and most expensive in it's class price tag.
- No IBIS, No full frame 4K, No new sensor, no dual card slots and so on.
Where is your evidence supporting the claim that a mirrorless camera is cheaper to produce than an equivalent DSLR? Are you aware of the fact that unit production cost is only one component companies use to determine a market price, and generally not the most important one? (As an extreme example, a certain medication for cystic fibrosis is billed at $300K/year but costs about the same as aspirin to manufacture.) Incidentally, the Z6 costs the same as the D610 at launch, and the Z7 costs more than the D850 at launch. Doesn't exactly square with your logic. Oh, and to which comparable Sony DSLR are are you comparing the a7III?yes. That was in the past. Mirrorfree cameras can be made at lower cost and we should see *at least some* of that cost advantage reflected in prices. Sony and Nikon apparently both decided to do so (to an extent) with A7 III and Z6 pricing.
I agree, being convinced of something regarding which you know nothing is not very smart.Without knowing ... I am convinced ... Not very smart.