High-resolution EOS R Camera, Where are you?

[DhlcadR6]

Sony not only occupies first place today in terms of technological innovations but they don\'t seem to make fun of their customers...

As a Sony a1 user, you are making a joke.

 

[Walrus]

Canon has lost leadership to Sony for sensors. Sony and Nikon manufacture excellent lenses which are also beginning to seriously compete with Canon.

Canon betrayed the trust of its wildlife photographer customers by talking about the future launch of a 600 MM EF F4 DO before abandoning this project of which they had nevertheless developed a 100% functional prototype (I had chosen Canon for this future optics). After that, not satisfied with themselves, they once again betrayed the trust of all of their customers this time by wanting to purely and simply remove the EF range and by wanting to impose the RF format on us. The RF format which was not necessary, the only purpose of this format is to force us to change our entire range of cameras and lenses and lose a lot of money ;-(

I am disappointed, disgusted by their behavior. If they believe that it is a way of retaining their hard-won customers over time to force them to change all their equipment, at prices which have suddenly increased by more than 30%, they are wrong. greatly ;-( Sony not only occupies first place today in terms of technological innovations but they don\'t seem to make fun of their customers...

Lol, that's too much even for me which I'm always super critical ahaha

I don't feel Canon is imposing RF lenses, otherwise they wouldn't have manufactured an adapter that makes EF lenses work as good (or actually even better) then on DSLR. Redesign of lenses is simply needed due to flange difference when you remove mirror. And the new lenses are better then the previous, that's a fact.

I'll agree on prices, and I would say the only real thing I want from Canon is letting in third party lenses (and manufacturing a damn 50 f1.4 ), but other than that, we really have nothing to blame with Canon, I think you went too far with that.

 

[Del Paso]

Canon has lost leadership to Sony for sensors. Sony and Nikon manufacture excellent lenses which are also beginning to seriously compete with Canon.

Canon betrayed the trust of its wildlife photographer customers by talking about the future launch of a 600 MM EF F4 DO before abandoning this project of which they had nevertheless developed a 100% functional prototype (I had chosen Canon for this future optics). After that, not satisfied with themselves, they once again betrayed the trust of all of their customers this time by wanting to purely and simply remove the EF range and by wanting to impose the RF format on us. The RF format which was not necessary, the only purpose of this format is to force us to change our entire range of cameras and lenses and lose a lot of money ;-(

I am disappointed, disgusted by their behavior. If they believe that it is a way of retaining their hard-won customers over time to force them to change all their equipment, at prices which have suddenly increased by more than 30%, they are wrong. greatly ;-( Sony not only occupies first place today in terms of technological innovations but they don\'t seem to make fun of their customers...

Welcome to Sony Paradise, where customers enjoy real love and care!

 

[neuroanatomist]

This relies on another misunderstanding - that you can compare different size sensors without equalizing the viewing size first - looking at a high res picture and seeing more blur is not because there is more blur - you have just choosen to compare with a picture which in fact is different and cannot be compared. If the low res shot is viewed at the same viewing size the blur will be equally visible.

Since reading comprehension is apparently so important to you, I extracted the relevant bits of the post to which you were replying:

the amount of blur is the same (assuming … But the blur is more visible because of higher resolution assuming same pixel-level magnification… Which matches my experience where, all else being equal, I see more blur with higher resolution sensors.

You may want to read the above, slowly and carefully, then reconsider your reply.

Or maybe you actually intended to vehemently agree with @roby17269 by labeling his agreement with you as a misunderstanding.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Welcome to Sony Paradise, where customers enjoy real love and care!

And a base ISO of 250. That’s real technological advancement, because 250 is a bigger number than 100.

 

[Phil995511]

As a Sony a1 user, you are making a joke.

The Sony a9 III seems to be the new benchmark in terms of housing.

Concerning myself, I bought a 5D MK IV with lenses a few years ago and all this equipment became obsolete with the change from the EF to RF mount.

I consider myself wronged by Canon's commercial policy which in this case is not respectful of a customer such as me.

 

[Phil995511]

Lol, that's too much even for me which I'm always super critical ahaha

I don't feel Canon is imposing RF lenses, otherwise they wouldn't have manufactured an adapter that makes EF lenses work as good (or actually even better) then on DSLR. Redesign of lenses is simply needed due to flange difference when you remove mirror. And the new lenses are better then the previous, that's a fact.

I'll agree on prices, and I would say the only real thing I want from Canon is letting in third party lenses (and manufacturing a damn 50 f1.4 ), but other than that, we really have nothing to blame with Canon, I think you went too far with that.

Since Canon has officially stopped producing new bodies and lenses for the EF line, they are forcing us to move to RF.

I am therefore obliged to resell my 5d MK IV if I want to benefit from lenses with better rendering such as for example the 100mm F2.8 macro which is not capable of doing better than a 20 Mp rendering.

Creating longer lenses for the mirrorless format is one thing, abandoning the development of the EF range is another !!!

Canon deliberately chose to scuttle the D series cameras and their EF series lenses. If your feelings about this are positive, mine are strongly negative. That's a good financial deal for Canon, but certainly not for its D and EF series customers. If Canon customers are naive enough to say yes and amen, we're all going to be screwed... ;-(

 

[Phil995511]

Welcome to Sony Paradise, where customers enjoy real love and care!

Canon's decision to cease development of the D and EF range is disrespectful to their customers. From what I read this year, 80% of the cameras sold in France were mirrored SLRs.

Authoritarianism is sadly a societal model in Japan. The people submit to the decisions of the authorities and/or their leaders instantly, even if these decisions are extremely bad and could put them all in danger (I have experienced this).

So no, for me it is not possible to be in paradise when I buy Japanese brands that behave like this towards me !!!

 

[koenkooi]

[...]I am therefore obliged to resell my 5d MK IV if I want to benefit from lenses with better rendering such as for example the 100mm F2.8 macro which is not capable of doing better than a 20 Mp rendering.[...]

You must have a bad copy, my EF100 non-L was very sharp on a 7D and EOS Ms (41MP or better FF equivalent) and EOS RP. In case you meant the EF100L, my copy of that was very sharp on an R5 (45MP) and M6II (84MP FF equivalent).

 

[Phil995511]

You must have a bad copy, my EF100 non-L was very sharp on a 7D and EOS Ms (41MP or better FF equivalent) and EOS RP. In case you meant the EF100L, my copy of that was very sharp on an R5 (45MP) and M6II (84MP FF equivalent).

Go to the DXO website, you will see that our 100mm F2.8 L Macro IS USM, mounted on a 5DS R 50 MP body, are not capable of going beyond 24 MP. It's an optic that dates from 2009 and needs to be updated not only in RF but in EF too !!!

DXOMARK

www.dxomark.com

 

[EricN]

Canon has lost leadership to Sony for sensors. Sony and Nikon manufacture excellent lenses which are also beginning to seriously compete with Canon.

Canon betrayed the trust of its wildlife photographer customers by talking about the future launch of a 600 MM EF F4 DO before abandoning this project of which they had nevertheless developed a 100% functional prototype (I had chosen Canon for this future optics). After that, not satisfied with themselves, they once again betrayed the trust of all of their customers this time by wanting to purely and simply remove the EF range and by wanting to impose the RF format on us. The RF format which was not necessary, the only purpose of this format is to force us to change our entire range of cameras and lenses and lose a lot of money ;-(

I am disappointed, disgusted by their behavior. If they believe that it is a way of retaining their hard-won customers over time to force them to change all their equipment, at prices which have suddenly increased by more than 30%, they are wrong. greatly ;-( Sony not only occupies first place today in terms of technological innovations but they don\'t seem to make fun of their customers...

I'm from planet Earth

 

[EricN]

The Sony a9 III seems to be the new benchmark in terms of housing.

Concerning myself, I bought a 5D MK IV with lenses a few years ago and all this equipment became obsolete with the change from the EF to RF mount.

I consider myself wronged by Canon's commercial policy which in this case is not respectful of a customer such as me.

Welcome to a world with progress in technology. There are still people using older technology and some of the prefer it obsolete or not.

 

[amorse]

Since Canon has officially stopped producing new bodies and lenses for the EF line, they are forcing us to move to RF.

I am therefore obliged to resell my 5d MK IV if I want to benefit from lenses with better rendering such as for example the 100mm F2.8 macro which is not capable of doing better than a 20 Mp rendering.

Creating longer lenses for the mirrorless format is one thing, abandoning the development of the EF range is another !!!

Canon deliberately chose to scuttle the D series cameras and their EF series lenses. If your feelings about this are positive, mine are strongly negative. This is a good financial deal for Canon, but certainly not for its D and EF series customers if their customers are naive enough to tell them yes and amen... ;-(

I don't really think Canon is forcing anything. I have a 5DIV as well, and my camera didn't stop working when RF was released. I just snapped up as much EF glass as I liked on a discount. Canon had to make a switch to their body/sensor design to take advantage of technologies which were available to mirrorless cameras, and in doing so they were left with the choice of preserving the EF line or building a new lens line and taking advantage of designs which wouldn't be possible on a full DSLR. Even in doing so, EF glass still works using the adapter for RF bodies, and in many instances with options that aren't available on an EF body. So between the choice of preserving legacy EF bodies or positioning for future innovation while enabling backward compatibility with EF, I know which option I'd prefer. The old addage remains true - date the body, marry the lens.

And as always, money talks. If enough people felt the way you do, then Canon would be bleeding customers and either shrink in size or cease to exist. The market will react and manufacturers will respond if it impacts them. With that said, I think both Nikon and Sony did the exact same thing in their transitions to mirrorless - Nikon F to Z, Sony A to E mount. So what makes Canon's transition any different? I don't think Sony is making any new A mount lenses, nor is Nikon releasing new F mount lenses.

I think it's just a reality of progress - sometimes we have to let go of the past to move forward, and sometimes change is painful. In this instance, it seems to me like the pain in the transition was worth it.

 

[koenkooi]

Go to the DXO website, you will see that our 100mm F2.8 L Macro IS USM, mounted on a 5DS R 50 MP body, are not capable of going beyond 24 MP. It's an optic that dates from 2009 and needs to be updated not only in RF but in EF too !!!

DXOMARK

www.dxomark.com

That doesn't match with my personal observations and on top of that, I don't trust those DxO lens tests since they don't publish their methodology.

 

[Del Paso]

Canon's decision to cease development of the D and EF range is disrespectful to their customers. From what I read this year, 80% of the cameras sold in France were mirrored SLRs.

Authoritarianism is sadly a societal model in Japan. The people submit to the decisions of the authorities and/or their leaders instantly, even if these decisions are extremely bad and could put them all in danger (I have experienced this).

So no, for me it is not possible to be in paradise when I buy Japanese brands that behave like this towards me !!!

N'importe quoi! Monsieur serait- il vexe par le grand mechant Canon?
And your stereotypes about Japan are just insulting.
Better troll elsewhere.

 

[Del Paso]

That doesn't match with my personal observations and on top of that, I don't trust those DxO lens tests since they don't publish their methodology.

Few "tests" are less reliable than DXO's.
Pseudo scientific blah blah blah.

 

[roby17269]

This relies on another misunderstanding - that you can compare different size sensors without equalizing the viewing size first - looking at a high res picture and seeing more blur is not because there is more blur - you have just choosen to compare with a picture which in fact is different and cannot be compared. If the low res shot is viewed at the same viewing size the blur will be equally visible.

Just to be clear, I though we were assuming FF sensor size, meaning the same sensor size, but different resolutions and therefore different pixel sizes.
In any case... I did not buy a 45mp camera to "treat" it like a 24mp or less camera. So I crop and I zoom in as I see fit.
I accept that the amount of blur is the same... but, for my purposes, using a 45mp images without comparing it to a 24mp image taken under the same circumstances, if I did not use proper technique to take the image, I usually end up seeing an amount of blur at pixel level that I consider unacceptable

 

[Walrus]

Since Canon has officially stopped producing new bodies and lenses for the EF line, they are forcing us to move to RF.

I am therefore obliged to resell my 5d MK IV if I want to benefit from lenses with better rendering such as for example the 100mm F2.8 macro which is not capable of doing better than a 20 Mp rendering.

Creating longer lenses for the mirrorless format is one thing, abandoning the development of the EF range is another !!!

Canon deliberately chose to scuttle the D series cameras and their EF series lenses. If your feelings about this are positive, mine are strongly negative. That's a good financial deal for Canon, but certainly not for its D and EF series customers. If Canon customers are naive enough to say yes and amen, we're all going to be screwed... ;-(

The EF body and lens tech is from 1987, the first R body and lens is I think from 2020...I'll say after 33 years they reached the ceiling of the tech they could do on lens design (given the required flange distance) and also in body design, which was bonded by the existence of the mirror.

When you remove the mirror, 33 years later, because the mirror as a technology is dead, let's face it, then you can explore new things on bodies, especially from AF side, and on lens design.

Your 5D IV certainly hasn't stopped working the day that the first Eos R saw the light, it's still a super valuable camera.
But R bodies are better in any way compared to dslr bodies, you can't continue develop tech that is obsolete; the telegraph was good back in the days, but optic fibre, or cellular lines, work better. You still can use a telegraph today if you want and need, but no one is doing research on how to improve the tech.

Regarding the lenses, I feel pretty lucky that my EF lenses work wonders on new R bodies; as you see in my signature I just have two RF lenses, the cheapest two of the bunch, the two no-brainers (and I even got them used for super cheap), while all the other stuff is EF. And, excluding the 70-200 that I have it from 15 years or so, all the other lenses were bought in the last 24 months, when I had already switched from dslr to mirrorless. So actually I didn't stop buying EF lenses, I actually bought more of them, and better then the ones I had before, because there's many people (their free choice) moving to RF, so the market is full of beautiful EF stuff sold for pennies.

Believe me that I'm one of the most Canon-critical guy in here, so critic that many consider me a troll; but critics needs to be on point, and I feel yours are too way off.

 

[Quack]

The Sony a9 III seems to be the new benchmark in terms of housing.

Concerning myself, I bought a 5D MK IV with lenses a few years ago and all this equipment became obsolete with the change from the EF to RF mount.

I consider myself wronged by Canon's commercial policy which in this case is not respectful of a customer such as me.

Sorry to be blunt. This is complete and total bullcrap. Your EF lenses are not only NOT obsolete, but work as well and can have additional functionality with 2 of the EF-EOS R adapters. Your 5D Mark IV is NOT obsolete now, nor will it be for it's lifespan.

You also said "they once again betrayed the trust of all of their customers this time by wanting to purely and simply remove the EF range and by wanting to impose the RF format on us. The RF format which was not necessary, the only purpose of this format is to force us to change our entire range of cameras and lenses and lose a lot of money."

Which is complete nonsense. They have not the imposed the RF format on anyone. Lots of photographers are not only buying EF lenses today, but have no plans to buy RF lenses anytime in the future as long as their EF lenses continue to function, which they do on the RF mount.

If someone wants to change their camera and lenses to the RF mount, it is a choice. No one is forcing anyone to change. In other words, you are lying. We don't appreciate liars here.

 

[Del Paso]

Sorry to be blunt. This is complete and total bullcrap. Your EF lenses are not only NOT obsolete, but work as well and can have additional functionality with 2 of the EF-EOS R adapters. Your 5D Mark IV is NOT obsolete now, nor will it be for it's lifespan.

You also said "they once again betrayed the trust of all of their customers this time by wanting to purely and simply remove the EF range and by wanting to impose the RF format on us. The RF format which was not necessary, the only purpose of this format is to force us to change our entire range of cameras and lenses and lose a lot of money."

Which is complete nonsense. They have not the imposed the RF format on anyone. Lots of photographers are not only buying EF lenses today, but have no plans to buy RF lenses anytime in the future as long as their EF lenses continue to function, which they do on the RF mount.

If someone wants to change their camera and lenses to the RF mount, it is a choice. No one is forcing anyone to change. In other words, you are lying. We don't appreciate liars here.

I might add that his statistics (French market=80% DSLRs) are pure invention.