In Light of the EOS R

Nov 5, 2019
3
1
With all the wailing and gnashing of teeth today about how the Sony a7III is so much better than the canon offering, my question is, wouldn't you still be better off getting the canon R to be able to use native glass and lenses like the 28-70 f2. Are those lenses possible on the sony mount? Canon glass always seems better than the competition and as everyone in any photography forum points out glass matters much more than the camera body.

Also as a landscape photographer the variable neutral density filter would encourage me to shoot with EF lenses and that adapter for some time. Besides this camera seems like a slight upgrade to the 5D at a price around or less than what the 5D sells for used.

Canon could have done more, and probably should have but they seem to rely on selling their system through their lenses rather than camera specs
 

Bennymiata

EOS 6D MK II
I was in a similar position and decided to get the R rather than the Sony or Nikon.
Don't listen to those specsheet chasing warriers, the R is a fantastic camera, and the eye focus after the latest update is fantastic.
The EF adaptors work really well, if a bit expensive, especially those with the filter holders - but for convenience, they can't be beaten.
Nothing beats Canon lenses, and nothing beats Canon colour either.
Some cameras are better here, or better there, but nothing beats the R for for its all-around ability or image quality.
The R is not for fast action work, but I've gotten some nice bif with it.
 

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
4,212
773
After being with Canon for 15 years (DSLR’s) I know they have always delivered. Sometimes some things isn’t there when I want them, but I understand why, and I know they’re coming. They have REALLY stepped it up going into mirrorless wholeheartedly and everything is rock solid. It’s what I want. I have no desire for anything but the best, and Canon keeps delivering.

the RF50 and RF85 combined with the R is simply fantastic, classleading.
 

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,577
679
Southeastern USA
Sorry, guys, I can only partially agree with your conclusions.

Three days of events involving normal activities of adults and children in school settings...I can definitely say I won't be buying a second R, and I won't buy anymore Rf lenses until Canon produces a mirrorless with a better EVF, and with quicker transition from standby to capture. Just too many missed "decisive moments" when shooting spontaneous scenes that dSLR's have handled well for years. Note that I was using it along with a 5D IV.

I did use the R with the ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. The EVF is slightly more jerky than with native RF lenses, but the tracking seemed to work a little better than on the 5D Mark III, not as well as on the 5D IV. (Note these are subjective observations based on a few sessions. Different settings and practice should improve my results.) I used Zone AF, which was probably a mistake, as the User Manual states, that, with Expand AF Area, "focusing is easier with this AF method than with Zone AF." Most of my outdoor, active shots were taken with 1-point AF, and as long as I kept the AF point on the subject, focus was accurate. (But the EVF makes this a challenge!)

The silver lining was classroom, low-light shooting with the Rf 50mm 1.2L. Very easy, as motion was minimal, and the EVF allowed precise exposures without needing to bracket or chimp frequently. AF is also precise, able to shoot through a crowd or between classroom objects when composing. However, in burst mode, the EVF does NOT keep up with facial expressions when somebody is animated, say giving a lesson or reading with gestures and a little "face acting" for the younger kids. There is just too much motion-stutter to know which expression was actually caught and which was missed.

Another positive here, at ISO 1250, the images look wonderful. I find that even with the same sensor in the 5DIV, ISO 1250 is just starting to be a bit of an issue, not much, but entering that less than stellar zone. With the R, even at ISO 2500, things look very good for candid and impromptu available light shots of people. Skin tone, detail, etc.

These were important shots for myself and the events' organizers. A second card would have been comforting--especially as I did have some Windows 10 file-folder weirdness (which had absolutely nothing to do with the SD card, and was completely resolved).

I keep coming to the same conclusion, though I keep hoping to find work arounds: The R is a magnificent portrait camera.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Chz

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,150
385
Canon could have done more, and probably should have but they seem to rely on selling their system through their lenses rather than camera specs
I think the design of the R was limited by timing more than the result of a marketing strategy of using lenses rather than camera specs to sell the system. The R uses the 5DIV sensor because the advanced sensors were not ready for prime time and they wanted to get an RF camera out the door. The situation with processing and firmware was similar. The 90D and the M6II are aps-c precursors of future Canon RF fullframe cameras.
 

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,577
679
Southeastern USA
I think the design of the R was limited by timing more than the result of a marketing strategy of using lenses rather than camera specs to sell the system. The R uses the 5DIV sensor because the advanced sensors were not ready for prime time and they wanted to get an RF camera out the door. The situation with processing and firmware was similar. The 90D and the M6II are aps-c precursors of future Canon RF fullframe cameras.
Side-by-side, is the M6II's optional EVF smoother than the R? If so, is it a newer design? Or is there just less info to process because of the cropped sensor?
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,748
3,078
Side-by-side, is the M6II's optional EVF smoother than the R? If so, is it a newer design? Or is there just less info to process because of the cropped sensor?
Does the amount of info depend on whether it is a crop or FF or on the number of pixels worth? The MII has ~10% more pixels than the R.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,017
115
Another positive here, at ISO 1250, the images look wonderful. I find that even with the same sensor in the 5DIV, ISO 1250 is just starting to be a bit of an issue, not much, but entering that less than stellar zone. With the R, even at ISO 2500, things look very good for candid and impromptu available light shots of people. Skin tone, detail, etc.
I wondered if it was just my imagination but going through RP files last night, I wondered if DPP doesn’t clean up mid-range ISO RAW files from that camera ever so slightly better than files from the 5D4...perhaps as in, slightly less blotchy noise pattern. This is not a reflection on differences in the untouched output from the cameras so much as how such details are processed by the NR engine in the DPP software. Hmm...
 

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,577
679
Southeastern USA
I wondered if it was just my imagination but going through RP files last night, I wondered if DPP doesn’t clean up mid-range ISO RAW files from that camera ever so slightly better than files from the 5D4...perhaps as in, slightly less blotchy noise pattern. This is not a reflection on differences in the untouched output from the cameras so much as how such details are processed by the NR engine in the DPP software. Hmm...
True, as I do my culling in DPP, that might be a factor. But then I'm seeing the quality translated to LR CC's default settings too. So maybe a little of the latest processors, plus software improvements?