Here are the full Canon EOS R specifications

Fascinating that Canon have introduced just two small(ish) lenses with this really quite small FF camera, and two whoppers. Hardly fits the "mirrorless is meant to be small" philosophy. Must be some subliminal message there from Canon on how they intent to take the "R" series forward.

I believe it's got an AA filter ? If so congratulations on getting that bit right.
.

You can't get F2 on a zoom without some big glass, is just physics. You want full frame and big F, you get big glass, that is life.
This drama was already solved when people noticed that high end glass on Sony is big ...
Simply put, the camera is smaller, lighter, and you don't have to use all time the big guns.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
Well yeah, because it was just photos. For some of us, specs matter, and we’re not apologists. We want the best tech and canon isn’t bringing that, whether it’s a lack of experience in the new tech or an unwilling to make a high spec camera and risk cannibalizing their high end dslr market. Which honestly is fine, if that’s the marketing strategy that they want to use, more power to them.
For people like me it’s now a decision of whether we wait until they hopefully release an actual pro version or we move to a different brand with third party adapters for our canon glass (or just sell them and get some first party mounted glass).

Canon isn’t going to make everyone happy. Some people want the best specs & quickly and some people want the conservative approach. I think for people like me it’s whether they will even mention the pro version tba on the 5th.

There will be a pro version, but "people want the best specs" is entirely subjective. The best specs are opinion and #s don't always give the full story or what is "best" for any one individual. For some of us the best spec might very well be comfort and heavy weight (me, because the sensor is already fantastic as far as I am concerned... for me). For some the best spec is an optical viewfinder. Some of us couldn't care less about 46 megapixels. We don't want to have to keep buying hard drives. Yup, file size can be selected in camera, but higher and higher megapixels don't impress us. I think Canon (and everyone else) take this into consideration and make the camera for the people they target for sales.
 
Upvote 0

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
If you’re interested in this, might as well look at other mirror less offerings Since you’ll be starting off with a new lens mount. The specs simply are boring, crippled even, compared to all other mirrorless offerings from all other manufacturers. No ibis. Everyone offers faster shooting speeds and deeper buffers. I think even Olympus offers better video capabilities.

There’s really nothing standout here at all. I don’t understand why people will buy this, though I guess it’s canon fanboys who will think it’s something smashing. But you have to have blinders on to think that.

Yeah, you can use older canon lenses, but they’ll be crippled and way less useful than native lenses. That’s not a good reason to get this.

How would EF be crippled and less useful than native?
 
Upvote 0

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
CR Pro
Nov 11, 2012
4,719
1,537
Yorkshire, England
You can't get F2 on a zoom without some big glass, is just physics. You want full frame and big F, you get big glass, that is life.
This drama was already solved when people noticed that high end glass on Sony is big ...
Simply put, the camera is smaller, lighter, and you don't have to use all time the big guns.

Hear that whooshing noise ?
It was my point going straight over your head. :rolleyes:
 
Upvote 0
I’m in no hurry. I don’t want mirrorless for the sake of mirrorless. I buy things when they pique my interest, or offer me some new functionality I want to use.

Same. 5D IV is more than enough for my photographic needs. Just a case of GAS and some extra money for new toys. I don't mind waiting until EOS R is more mature to make it a worthy upgrade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Sep 3, 2018
258
229
Super fast M4/3 lenses are not by any means unobtainable.
I think in the context of this discussion my reference is to Canon’s mirrorless option and it’s direct competition all being 36mmx24mm full frame sensors.

None of the lenses you list were designed to cover anywhere near a full frame sensor and physics ductates fast, high quality lenses for FF will be big and heavy.
 
Upvote 0

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
I think in the context of this discussion my reference is to Canon’s mirrorless option and it’s direct competition all being 36mmx24mm full frame sensors.

None of the lenses you list were designed to cover anywhere near a full frame sensor and physics ductates fast, high quality lenses for FF will be big and heavy.

The problem, though, is with the physics of the design. Not physics itself. Yes, we were speaking about FF, but it is the design "type" that requires the lenses to be large. There were fast FF lenses in the 35mm (FF) film days that were much smaller because of the design "type". So saying that fast glass in a smaller package is unobtainable (That is what you said, meaning "can't be done.) just is not true. With the current type? Maybe. Maybe lenses will be issued later that are fast, smaller, and lighter that are of a different design and still offer quality. What level of quality must they be anyway? Assuming that all FF users require L quality isn't true either. Just look at the EF line of non-L lenses. They are decent quality lenses and people use them on FF cameras, but not many are fast in the Canon line... not true with 3rd party.

I happen to like big heavy lenses. But I also use manual focus 40+ year old manual focus lenses that are small, light, and some are very good quality to my eyes. Let's face it, without MTF charts most people don't see much difference and most don't pixel peep.

Somebody will eventually come up with a really good formula that is FF, small and perfectly acceptable to most people.

I consider Canon's EF 50mm f/1.4 to be fast, small, light, and of good quality. Canon sells gobs. So, not unobtainable at all.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Sep 3, 2018
258
229
The problem, though, is with the physics of the design. Not physics itself.
Obviously, I’m not trying to be Stephen Hawking here.

Yes, we were speaking about FF, but it is the design "type" that requires the lenses to be large. There were fast FF lenses in the 35mm (FF) film days that were much smaller because of the design "type". So saying that fast glass in a smaller package is unobtainable (That is what you said) just is not true..
Film is a different beast all together and lenses never nededed to resolve as highly or cope with how sensors accept light at extreme angles. I’ve used plenty of small symetrical lenses on MFD with a pancake cameras and while excellent suffered terrible light fall off and colour cast towards the edges of the frame that needed correction after each capture. Not something any photographer wants and the only solution is to make these small lenses bigger for better coverage meaning you are back to square one. Big symetrical design lens or big retrofocus design whicjh we have now.
 
Upvote 0
Apr 25, 2011
2,510
1,885
Super fast M4/3 lenses are not by any means unobtainable.

Don't know why they expect tiny bodies, but there are super fast m4/3 lenses.
Olympus: 17,25,45 f/1.2
Olympus 17,25,45 f/1.8
Olympus 12 f/2
Olympus 14-35 f/2 zoom
Olympus makes many f/2.8 lenses
*Voigtlander 10.5mm f/0.95 Nokton*
*Voigtlander 17.5mm f/0.95 Nokton*
*Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 Nokton*
*Voigtlander 425mm f/0.95 Nokton*
*Handevision IBELUX 40mm f/0.85*

Crop factor is 2.
Which, for every practical purpose, makes them effectively 2 stops slower than marked.

Sony upgrades their models almost every year.
Still, a Minolta DSLR with a A7III equivalent sensor could be an interesting camera.
 
Upvote 0

Sharlin

CR Pro
Dec 26, 2015
1,415
1,433
Turku, Finland
Well surely they can cut down the price by $500 if they leave the mirror box and pentaprism out. I'm sure those add about $500 for the price.

So $2990 it is.

A) economy and price setting doesn't work like that and B) the EVF is one of the most expensive components of a mirrorless camera.
 
Upvote 0