Mark D5 TEAM II
Proud N0ink 0wnz0r / crApple iFruitcake H4t3r
C-Log also comes free, unlike the paid firmware upgrade for the 5D4, so that's another $200 less.
Upvote
0
Here is the Canon EOS R announcement live
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Apparently this is only USM RF lens claiming Nano USM tonight. The other two just say USM without definition.
Jordan Drake from DPR is at the event and stated that the lenses (plural, presumably all of them) are FBW.
- A
Upvote
0
It might sound silly to some, but I'm now seriously contemplating selling my 5D4 right away. I forgot about the dual card system advantage (shows how much I used it). But if my calculations are correct, I might be able to sell/trade the 4 and get the R + control ring adapter and break even.
Upvote
0
Wasn’t it that the FW upgrade is only needed for 5D4s sold before the C-log update, new bodies come with C-log built in?
Upvote
0
Agree with most of your statement. Except: EOS R offers exactly what a 6D III should have been, at 6D III price. It is a Nikon Z6 / A7 III competitor.
Speed/performance is just nowhere near 5D IV.
But ... mirrorfree 5D IV / Nikon Z7 / A7R III / A9 competitor in the works and hopefully coming soon.
Upvote
0
Focus by wire is absolutely fine. IF it is implemented really right: 100% responsive, precise/smooth operation. I don't see a reason why it could not also be combined with a [mechanical] "hard stop" at both MFD and infinity. Then it would be truly perfect.
If all new aircraft are FBW, why should 21st century lenses not be? I fully welcome FBW. Actually, I would not even manual focussing capability at all.
FBW just has a bit of a bad rap because of so many (earlier) cr*ppy implementations - eg in compact cameras - with all sorts of lag, "play", coarse, unprecise, wobbly, underpowered operation.
If all new aircraft are FBW, why should 21st century lenses not be? I fully welcome FBW. Actually, I would not even manual focussing capability at all.
FBW just has a bit of a bad rap because of so many (earlier) cr*ppy implementations - eg in compact cameras - with all sorts of lag, "play", coarse, unprecise, wobbly, underpowered operation.
Upvote
0
The minimum focus distance is written on the lens, it implies more that it might be a bit slower without it...
EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM
Having a focus delimiter implies good things for max magnification, no?
- A
Upvote
0
it will happen fast now. I think they got the higher-end EOS R "almost ready" but could just not finish it in time for photokina 2018 announcement. I do expect launch around next photokina - May 08-11 2019.
Upvote
0
Startup time 0.1s vs. 0.9s.
OVF as a scope (and in general, we haven't yet seen if the EVF is about as good as the OVF for evaluating the scene in non-WYSIWYG mode)
More information on the top LCD (but it's also about not burning batteries as fast as with back LCD turned on).
Upvote
0
No. Even if they would physically mount (which I doubt they will to avoid people making such errors), the ND adapter would make anything other than macro focus impossible by increasing the back focus distance.
Yes. See the third bullet point in Canon’s press release:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/0463137161/new-32mm-f1-4-stm-joins-canon-s-ef-m-lens-collection
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
For me, the main reason to choose an EOS R over the 5D4 would be to make use of those new RF mount lenses... Like that new 50mm...
I get the impression that this is how Canon are promoting the EOS R at launch too, as they seemed to have a lot more to say about the RF lens mount and the new glass than the actual camera body.
I note that they are also being careful to send out the message that RF will live alongside EF for the foreseeable future... or at least, until they have an RF mount pro-body and enough long RF glass to change their marketing message.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
