Interview: Understanding the Canon EOS R

Aug 21, 2018
108
72
#21
I, too, am disappointed in some of the EOS-R specs, but don't underestimate the importance of ergonomics and ease of use. Awkward, hard to use cameras will cause you to miss many many shots and videos that you would have otherwise captured with a well-designed camera. And some cameras can be so frustrating to use that you'll just stop picking them up before too long.
Agreed. I dont mean to dismiss ergonomics altogether... I'd obviously much rather have an intuitive and comfortable camera in my hands. But I won't prioritize that over sensor performance.
 

Act444

EOS Rebel T7i
May 4, 2011
866
34
#22
And if you're truly that concerned about IQ you're shooting a 42/45/50mp sensor, or medium format digital.
...and even that has its own set of pros and cons. Pros are obvious, some cons: worse high ISO performance, increased difficulty of getting sharp images, greater demand on lenses.

In the right conditions (and with the right “technique”), a 5DSR type camera can be head and shoulders above the rest. But in a suboptimal environment, I’d rather have a crisp (if lesser detailed) smaller 30 or 24MP image than a blurry or fuzzy 50MP one
 
Sep 19, 2010
1,266
39
Ottawa Ontario
#23
Agreed. I dont mean to dismiss ergonomics altogether... I'd obviously much rather have an intuitive and comfortable camera in my hands. But I won't prioritize that over sensor performance.
If you always have the time to set up shots, making sure that you get it right, like in still life photography or in a studio, then probably sensor performance is the top priority. But in a live action situation ... some cameras will leave you with far fewer useable shots. At the end of the day it's about going home with the shots.
 
#24
None of that is at all surprising. They used existing/old technology and therefore have all of the limitations of their current camera systems now present in their brand new mirrorless.

I know many people will defend anything Canon does, but there is no question that Canon offers much less for the money vs. their competitors. And with the EOS R, they have clearly committed to continuing this.

I've only ever used Canon. I like my Canon cameras. But I also like the benefits of new technology and forward thinking. I unfortunately have to take a loss on my glass collection as I transition to a competing brand. EOS R is not a bad camera, it's just not a great camera. And at it's price point, it offers poor value. :/
No forward thinking at Canon? Really? These may not ALL be Canon inventions but:

air sphere coatings

fluorine coatings

blue spectrum refractive optics

UD glass, Super UD glass

sub-wavelength structure coating

an 11-24 mm zoom

A fish-eye zoom lens!!!

A 28-70 f2.0 for crying out loud!!!

What are you looking for? IBIS? Is that it? They put 5 stops of IS in lenses and that ain't enough? Sure they don't ALL do that, but for every omission of great ILIS they offer a version WITH.

Sorry to un-load on you, nothing personal, but I read ad nauseam the mass perception that Canon is just sitting on their hands, raking in the cash with no regard for their customers. I use their cameras to make my living because there is NO ONE ELSE making what I need (excellent TS lenses) and backing their dependable-like-no-one-else's technology with the very best support. I shudder to think what I'd do if Canon abandoned rock-solid usable hardware to chase after every techno-feature the blog-o-sphere fancies this week.

Rant over. Apologies in advance.
 
Aug 21, 2018
108
72
#25
If you always have the time to set up shots, making sure that you get it right, like in still life photography or in a studio, then probably sensor performance is the top priority. But in a live action situation ... some cameras will leave you with far fewer useable shots. At the end of the day it's about going home with the shots.
What I'm after is more usable shots. I often have shots that I can't use because they look too grainy and dont have the ability for adjustment due to low dynamic range.

I haven't shot with the sony A7III, but I have worked with files from another photographer. Big difference. Shadow recovery while preserving detail in highlights was superior and iso6400 looked like iso 3200 on my canon files in terms of noise.

Perhaps the ergonomics of the sony would cause me to miss some shots that I otherwise would have captured on my canon and therefore negate the additional sensor performance. Somehow I doubt it though.
 

neuroanatomist

Spends too much time on this forum
Jul 21, 2010
23,360
399
#26
For me the entire purpose of a camera is the output and I therefore value the highest quality sensor performance that I can get.
So obviously you’re shooting medium format. MF seriously trumps FF, just as FF trumps APS-C. Since you value the highest quality sensor performance you can get, you must be shooting medium format. If not, then either you should be...or perhaps your values aren’t exactly as you claim them to be.
 
Aug 21, 2018
108
72
#27
No forward thinking at Canon? Really? These may not ALL be Canon inventions but:

air sphere coatings

fluorine coatings

blue spectrum refractive optics

UD glass, Super UD glass

sub-wavelength structure coating

an 11-24 mm zoom

A fish-eye zoom lens!!!

A 28-70 f2.0 for crying out loud!!!

What are you looking for? IBIS? Is that it? They put 5 stops of IS in lenses and that ain't enough? Sure they don't ALL do that, but for every omission of great ILIS they offer a version WITH.

Sorry to un-load on you, nothing personal, but I read ad nauseam the mass perception that Canon is just sitting on their hands, raking in the cash with no regard for their customers. I use their cameras to make my living because there is NO ONE ELSE making what I need (excellent TS lenses) and backing their dependable-like-no-one-else's technology with the very best support. I shudder to think what I'd do if Canon abandoned rock-solid usable hardware to chase after every techno-feature the blog-o-sphere fancies this week.

Rant over. Apologies in advance.
No need to apologize.

I'm looking for higher dynamic range and better high iso performance, IBIS or IS in EVERY lens, 1080p 120fps, 4k with minimal crop.

The point I am making is that EOS R is up against cameras that do this stuff for less money.
 
Likes: navastronia
Sep 26, 2017
62
19
Madison, WI
#28
The good news is that the competition is not standing still, which means that Canon has to keep improving too. The new Leica/Panasonic/Sigma(and maybe Olympus) L-Mount system has the potential to be a game changer, with multiple camera companies all sharing a standard full frame+ mount. The 4/3 system definitely did benefit from multiple companies using the same system and the video side of the system has a potentially very aggressive panasonic behind it.

It'll be interesting to see what the market looks like 5 years from now. If Leica really is coming up with a 'open' mount system that has a minimal license fee it could be a game changer.
 
Aug 21, 2018
108
72
#29
So obviously you’re shooting medium format. MF seriously trumps FF, just as FF trumps APS-C. Since you value the highest quality sensor performance you can get, you must be shooting medium format. If not, then either you should be...or perhaps your values aren’t exactly as you claim them to be.
Edit: highest quality in FF. I'd rather not spend boatloads on Medium Format. Would be hard to make that a worthwhile investment.
 
Aug 21, 2018
108
72
#30
The good news is that the competition is not standing still, which means that Canon has to keep improving too. The new Leica/Panasonic/Sigma(and maybe Olympus) L-Mount system has the potential to be a game changer, with multiple camera companies all sharing a standard full frame+ mount. The 4/3 system definitely did benefit from multiple companies using the same system and the video side of the system has a potentially very aggressive panasonic behind it.

It'll be interesting to see what the market looks like 5 years from now. If Leica really is coming up with a 'open' mount system that has a minimal license fee it could be a game changer.
I agree here. Can't wait to see that new partnership and what it will bring to the market.

I had preordered an A7III after the EOS R announcement, but canceled it because I wanted to see the A7SIII which should be out in October. But there may be some more options out there now ;)
 

dtaylor

EOS Rebel T7i
Jul 26, 2011
912
58
#31
In terms of sensor performance, I'm looking for more high iso performance and dynamic range. I do mostly low light and high iso stuff (concerts, events, etc.). I have worked with my canon raw files and also sony A7III raw files. Say what you want, but the Sony files are much better quality and offer much more workability in post for my purposes.
I'm not saying what I want like it's a personal preference. I'm reporting on available test data. RAW files shot under strict conditions to remove any other influence (i.e. exposure and lens variations). Those tests do not support the claim of higher IQ or "much more" workability, except of course for shadow push at base (not high) ISO. If your experience has been different I would look for variables like exposure.

Note that I am speaking of stills only. For low light video the A73 will do better for the simple fact that the 4k frame is produced from nearly the entire FF sensor while on Canon's 30mp sensor it's produced from a region approximately super 35 in size.
 
#32
No need to apologize.

I'm looking for higher dynamic range and better high iso performance, IBIS or IS in EVERY lens, 1080p 120fps, 4k with minimal crop.

The point I am making is that EOS R is up against cameras that do this stuff for less money.
I hear you and appreciate the need for better DR, but as to IS in 'every' lens—does anyone really ever need or purchase 'every' lens? I've got IS in all three of the lenses I need it in and don't ever expect to see it in my TS lenses, I just simply would never use it—I have other reasons for using a tripod that can't be addressed with ANY kind of IS, in-lens or otherwise. And I'm willing to pay for the level of dependability and support I get from Canon, can't expect that to come for free. Saving a few bucks is no savings at all when I have to wait two weeks for a repair, or if I have to own four copies of everything I use 'just in case'...
 
Aug 21, 2018
23
2
#33
Would you say that they been degsining ot for 4 or 5 years?
The limitation are partly down to that as well as not using other companies sendors.
 
Oct 1, 2015
74
2
#34
I know many people will defend anything Canon does, but there is no question that Canon offers much less for the money vs. their competitors. And with the EOS R, they have clearly committed to continuing this.

except for the lenses. these are "system cameras" a lot of us have bought into the system. Canon lenses are generally great quality and value, though Sigma and Tamron are making inroads. I think this may be a problem for Canon if they really are going to switch away from EF. If I have to buy a bunch of new lenses, I might buy a different body too.
 
Aug 21, 2018
108
72
#35
I hear you and appreciate the need for better DR, but as to IS in 'every' lens—does anyone really ever need or purchase 'every' lens? I've got IS in all three of the lenses I need it in and don't ever expect to see it in my TS lenses, I just simply would never use it—I have other reasons for using a tripod that can't be addressed with ANY kind of IS, in-lens or otherwise. And I'm willing to pay for the level of dependability and support I get from Canon, can't expect that to come for free. Saving a few bucks is no savings at all when I have to wait two weeks for a repair, or if I have to own four copies of everything I use 'just in case'...
If they gave me faster glass with IS I would be happy to forego the lack of IBIS. I need a 35mm f1.4 IS, 16-35 f2.8 IS, 24-70 f2.8 IS.
For me, the IS is more for video work.

Speaking of video, one of the most difficult things to accept with the EOS R is the lack of 1080p 120fps. Give this thing 1080p 120 fps and release a bunch of IS glass and I think it would be a real competitor when you consider Canon's ergonomics and colors. Lower DR and ISO performance would be easier to accept if those other features were there.
 
Aug 21, 2018
108
72
#36
I know many people will defend anything Canon does, but there is no question that Canon offers much less for the money vs. their competitors. And with the EOS R, they have clearly committed to continuing this.

except for the lenses. these are "system cameras" a lot of us have bought into the system. Canon lenses are generally great quality and value, though Sigma and Tamron are making inroads. I think this may be a problem for Canon if they really are going to switch away from EF. If I have to buy a bunch of new lenses, I might buy a different body too.
As much as I like to praise the competitions bodies, I can't say the same for glass. I love my Canon L glass. I think Canon makes the best lenses on the market. But given the lack of IBIS with EOS R, if I have to start buying a bunch of new RF lenses to get IS (assuming Canon will offer these lenses), then I might as well consider other bodies that have better features.
 
Likes: peterzuehlke

transpo1

EOS Rebel SL2
Jan 12, 2011
625
33
#37
None of that is at all surprising. They used existing/old technology and therefore have all of the limitations of their current camera systems now present in their brand new mirrorless.

I know many people will defend anything Canon does, but there is no question that Canon offers much less for the money vs. their competitors. And with the EOS R, they have clearly committed to continuing this.

I've only ever used Canon. I like my Canon cameras. But I also like the benefits of new technology and forward thinking. I unfortunately have to take a loss on my glass collection as I transition to a competing brand. EOS R is not a bad camera, it's just not a great camera. And at it's price point, it offers poor value. :/
I agree with this but will add that Canon does have innovative technology in the EOS-R- DPAF, functional adapters that add value instead of just getting in the way, multi-functional control ring- it's just not the innovative technology that many of us want. It's funny to me that Canon can engineer such ergonomic quality and innovations, yet they do not have the sensory or processor technology to implement 4K video with less than a 1.7x crop.

I'll be keeping my Canon glass to use adapted to other systems such as RED, Sony, Fuji, but will wait until Canon releases the next generation of sensors and image processors to jump into this system. It's unfortunate, because I miss the usability and dependability of Canon bodies.
 

jolyonralph

Kodak Brownie
Aug 25, 2015
941
122
49
London, UK
www.everyothershot.com
#38
The biggest problem have is that Sony have a 4 year lead on Canon in terms of sensor technology and quality. The A7RII has a 42 megapixel BSI CMOS sensor with IBIS and incredibly good sensitivity. It too Canon two years to get sensors anywhere close in terms of sensitivity, and they still don't have a high resolution sensor of that capability.

The biggest advantage that Canon have is that they have almost everything else right, including what is probably the best lineup of lenses when you compare quality with price.

Canon really do have to catch up in the sensor department, but a sensor isn't the only thing that makes a great camera. I look forward to see how the R series develops.
 

Mikehit

EOS 5D Mark IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,074
277
#40
It's funny to me that Canon can engineer such ergonomic quality and innovations, yet they do not have the sensory or processor technology to implement 4K video with less than a 1.7x crop.
I'm on the opposite side. It seems funny to me that Sony can engineer the sensor which is the difficult bit, yet makes such a poor rendition of ergonomics considering its history in consume electronics, including phones !
Sensors are covered by patents, ergonomics are (largely) not. And that is the problem, the spoils go to the company who get the first patents and it may well be that Canon are having to work round that - and anyone who has any experience in product development knows that getting that first key step is a huge amount of luck. So to me it is not at all surprising that Sony has it but Canon do not. What I find amusing is those who say Canon 'should' have it for no other reason than they are the biggest company, or claim they have the technology but do not use it because they do not want to cannibalise their multi-thousand buck video system.