POLL? How many are preordering the EOS R?

I'm sitting on the fence on this one.
My 5d3 is still working really well, and I love my M5 too, but as my 5d3 is now getting on to 6years old I have been thinking of getting a 5d4.
This new R certainly has most of the things I wanted in a new camera and the 28-70 F2 would be very useful for the events I do. I love the touch and drag focussing of the M5 and would imagine it is even better on the R.
A single card slot would be OK I guess, as I have never had a card failure, but 2 would be safer.
I'll wait until they are on display and have a play with one to see if I like it.
If I do, I'll probably buy one with the 28-70, as I can use my EF lenses on it anyway and my 24-105 is now getting onto 10 years old.
 

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,485
121
More like for a Taurus.
I get that, but as I’ve said a few times now, my needs in a camera has changed, and I can’t carry the weight anymore. So there are a lot of things I love with the R that the 1dx2 doesn’t do. I’m sure I’ll miss a few things for a while, but I’ve gotten used to everything in my life that was once new so it’s not an issue.:p

And out of 13 shots of my son walking very slowly I got 2 okay shots and the rest is off or completely off, so how can the R be worse?
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Likes: 3kramd5
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
151
i will not preorder EOS R. Neither the body nor the initial RF lens lineup meet my expectations. But will certainly also not buy more EF lenses or mirrorslappers.

EOS R is bigger than i'd like


and given its specs also overpriced. Nikon Z6 and Sony A7 III both offer better price/value.

still want to consolidate from 2 systems (EF-M and EF) to only one (stills) system that is 1. FF-sensored and 2. as compact/light as possible and 3. "affordable".

Don't need hi-end large f/1.2 primes or f/2.0 zooms. Looking for small and "decent-enough" f/1.8 primes and f/4 zooms.

Totally open at this point whether my future system will be Canon, Nikon or Sony. Don't expect the upcoming Panasonic to be stills-centric, but if it is, also a candidate. Good to have some choice.
 
Last edited:

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,485
121
Errr... Wouldn't getting your camera fixed have been a good idea, Viggo?
Lol, absolutely nothing wrong with it at all. With a 70-200, 200, 35 L II etc it’s flawless... and the 85 L IS is just as bad with any other camera. I get the occasional result, but the difference in precision in lots of light and with center point and closer to the edge in normal daylight is huge. And indoors even with a lot of natural light it just doesn’t do... I’m just so dead tired from it.... so the R might make it better, the same or worse, we’ll see...
 
Aug 14, 2018
6
5
Yes...i will buy it. But first i want to try it on a store.
I do wedding and portraits.
If the af will work great with ef lenses...than i don't see any reason not to upgrade.
If you have a 6d...6d2 or 5d3...than it is a great upgrade.
I see all comments ar about video specs... And nothing about stills.
I think this is a great camera for stills and a good one for video. You all need 4k... Whait... What?
4k it's still not as mature... You need a powerfull machine to process that...and that machine costs a lot more than a the camera itself.
There are a lot of clients who complain about 4k beeing a theatre experience... Not a movie one.
You shoot in 4k to downscale then in 1080...lol...just tu have a better quality then the nativ 1080...instead ow shooting 1080 nativ and upscale to 2.7k
I have friends videographers who use 80d..6d2 and the results are a lot better then others with a63...
You really have to know your ghear...to invest in you and stuning lenses...
Also...most rated photograpers for weeding are using mid level cameras... With stunnig result.
Who care if it does not have 5 stops of DR
If you have this problem... Then you have to consider very seriously to change your photography career.
Watch this with a simple 6d...
This complains are just resons of beeing not a photographer...it does not have that... It does not have that... Bla bla... Bla bla...
An yes... It does not have that because you don't know to use your camere...you don't know the phisics end the fundamental low of photograpy.
First invest in yourself... In lenses... In good lights... And then in camera badys
We want more...and do less.
And i'm really not a pro.
 

Attachments

Likes: bokehmon22

LDS

EOS 80D
Sep 14, 2012
1,377
35
Not interested in a mirrorless camera yet. It doesn't add anything to my needs and style of photography. Some of those RF lenses are indeed interesting, but I've finished a couple years ago to build my EF lenses lineup, and really don't want to start again for a while, as long as it fully covers my needs.
 
Aug 14, 2018
6
5
And another thing...for peoples who will whait for the next mirrorless camera...
You will buy that camera then or just whait for the next next mirrorless =))
Yes...technology can improve your performance...but technology is changing all the time...
Canon R it's all about lanses...not the camera...it is a new step for developing higher performance and image quality.
Look at the history...when canon change the fd mount to ef...with 54mm mount...what a performance there...a new perspective was open for large apertures...
Now we see f2 zooms...and f1. 2 or 0.95 lenses.
I see a lot of bad photographers who complains about shooting at f1. 4 or eaven f2 subjects that are mooving and the pics are not sharp =)) yes...a good and very fast af can help you ghetting in sharp... But man... At f1. 2 or 2...with a 35mm or a 85...you have all the chance to get bad result...due to verry short in focus plan...corelated with the difference between the moment you press the shotter...the lock af and the subject moovment...=))
You will need a tele lens with a f2. 8 maximum aperture...a long distance from the mooment subject to have bigger in focus plan...and a more commpressed background.
Stop complaining and buy the ghear that make you happy...brings you money etc etc.
Tell me what client will pixelkiki your 4k foothage =))
Yes...it should be sharp... But the moust impact are other things like...colours...emotions...what is in that photo/video...what is transmited...
Eaven with 12mp you can print 30cm by 60cm albums with no difference then with a 24mp camera.
Still no difference on a 4k tv waching 1080 or a 4k content at a normal distance view.
Any good camera can deliver 12-14 stops of DR and it is a lot...
But if you shoot in jpg...then stop complaining
Still no difference in iso3200 on 5d2 and 6d and all copared camere...
Yes... With newer models you can shoot up to iso 12000 and have usable image
Where do you shoot with 6400 iso? In a verry dark ambient or in a prety decent light conditions? Because it is a verry big differece there...
With a nice light setup i shoot at the restaurant with iso 400-800 maximum. See ex in attach.
I shoot first cortain with higher speed shutter... And second cortain with low shutter speed depending on the situation.
I shoot only central point =)) because i don't do sports...and eaven if i have 9 or 41 af points...practical i have only one and other 9 or 40 useless
One focus point has moust medium format cameras =))
Yes...af is the big deal...it has to be fast... And accurate...to track well
On shooting portraits it's a plus having face or eye detect...make life easy... But still you have to know how to use it.
How fast it is that single point and how accurate it is on different situatio s...this is the problem...and game changer
Moust of any pro photographers have more then they need with this camera these days.
This is a plus.
Specs don't matter...on the paper. Real use is the important thing
Ergonomic... Easy to use.. Reability... Final quality...all make a camera to be good or bad.
Beeing able to do everithing...but nothing very good it is less important then dooing few things very good.
Experience show me that underrated camera outperfom modern cameras simply beacouse they do the job right... They have ergonomics... They are easy to use/change setting etc etc and delliver quallity.
 

Attachments

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,485
121
Are you just here to talk down to everyone or what’s the deal? You’re generalizing way too much, and it sounds pretty condescending ....
 
Aug 14, 2018
6
5
Are you just here to talk down to everyone or what’s the deal? You’re generalizing way too much, and it sounds pretty condescending ....
You don't get the point.
A lot of peoples here are complaining about not buying the camera because of that or that or other =)) a lot of reasons why not =))
With What camera do they shoot now? Do they feel limited?
There is a saw in my country
The fox when it does not reach to the grapes... she say that they are acrylic
And yes... The R is a good upgrade to the 6d 6d2 and 5d3.
I am talking only for peoples who complain...with no sustenable argument.
 
Nov 12, 2016
319
81
Who care if it does not have 5 stops of DR
If you have this problem... Then you have to consider very seriously to change your photography career.
I care about how much dynamic range it has and how well underexposed shadows can be recovered. And just because you're too oblivious about the situations in which you need dynamic range to understand its value doesn't mean people who do want lots of dynamic range need to "change their photography career."

Last summer I was on top of the Angeles mountains taking photos of the Los Angeles area below. The area below the mountains was very bright in comparison to the lower parts of the mountains in front of me because of all of the artificial light in the city. The camera was on a tripod, but if I left the shutter open long enough to properly expose the dark mountains, the city below would have been completely blown out. If I properly exposed the city, the mountains would have been too dark to see any detail at all.

Granted, you could get around this by doing an HDR image, but aside from this, a situation like this is where you need a camera with lots of dynamic range. There was no way for me to light up the mountains or to dim down the city, all I could do was to try to expose for both of them as best I could and hope that I could recover the shadows and the highlights later on. And yes, maybe if I had something like a graduated ND filter it might have helped, but I don't own one of those, and it's not really a perfect solution to the problem anyway.

Not being able to properly expose a scene with very high contrast is not due to a lack of skill, it's just a fact of photography.
 
Likes: Viggo

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,147
143
118
Not being able to properly expose a scene with very high contrast is not due to a lack of skill, it's just a fact of photography.
My issue with dynamic range is that one or two stops more isn't, generally, going to make the difference.

A scene I come up against regularly is shooting the interior of a room and needing to see the view out the window, in that situation I'll do a seven shot bracket with 1 1/3 stops between the images, to hold detail in the clouds and see detail in the carpet under the bed is going to cover close to 20 stops, no camera in the foreseeable future is going to cover that.

Arguing over 1 stop or even less is ridiculous, we have more photographic dynamic range than we have ever had, if Ansel Adams could get the tonality he wanted with the equipment he had then we can do much much better. Very rarely is the dynamic range the limiting factor in capture, yes we can contrive scenarios where it all falls down, but generally we can make scenes work.

My point is few images that are limited by the cameras dynamic range need to be shot with one capture, those that do we have more DR than ever. The 'DRone wars' were relevant when there was a decent gap between manufacturers capabilities, Canon lagged for quite a while, but we have plateaued with regards DR, Sony are not improving, Nikon are going backwards, Canon have more than caught up. Nothing is going to change until we go to 16 bit files and then we will get a maximum of 2 more stops, which in my opinion, is still not worth the effort as it still won't cover the shadowed mountain valley and cityscape in one capture, nor my interior with view scenario.
 

scyrene

EOS 6D Mark II
Dec 4, 2013
2,285
133
UK
www.flickr.com
If money were no object, I'd get one with the two standout lenses, the 50 and the 28-70. But realistically if I buy another camera (and I feel no strong need), it would likely be a secondhand 1Dx.
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D Mark IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,612
137
I get that, but as I’ve said a few times now, my needs in a camera has changed, and I can’t carry the weight anymore. So there are a lot of things I love with the R that the 1dx2 doesn’t do. I’m sure I’ll miss a few things for a while, but I’ve gotten used to everything in my life that was once new so it’s not an issue.:p

And out of 13 shots of my son walking very slowly I got 2 okay shots and the rest is off or completely off, so how can the R be worse?
You could miss all 13! :p

Seriously, though, your needs are your needs. Buy this, sell that, it’s no skin off my back. I was just poking fun at the analogy.
 
Likes: Viggo

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,485
121
You could miss all 13! :p

Seriously, though, your needs are your needs. Buy this, sell that, it’s no skin off my back. I was just poking fun at the analogy.
Haha! Yes i could miss all 13, and that makes the choice to go for the RF 50 much easier, I’m kind of hoping that’s the case, jk:LOL:

With the R I can at least rule out a lot like Afma etc, either it works or it doesn’t:p
 
Aug 14, 2018
6
5
I care about how much dynamic range it has and how well underexposed shadows can be recovered. And just because you're too oblivious about the situations in which you need dynamic range to understand its value doesn't mean people who do want lots of dynamic range need to "change their photography career."

Last summer I was on top of the Angeles mountains taking photos of the Los Angeles area below. The area below the mountains was very bright in comparison to the lower parts of the mountains in front of me because of all of the artificial light in the city. The camera was on a tripod, but if I left the shutter open long enough to properly expose the dark mountains, the city below would have been completely blown out. If I properly exposed the city, the mountains would have been too dark to see any detail at all.

Granted, you could get around this by doing an HDR image, but aside from this, a situation like this is where you need a camera with lots of dynamic range. There was no way for me to light up the mountains or to dim down the city, all I could do was to try to expose for both of them as best I could and hope that I could recover the shadows and the highlights later on. And yes, maybe if I had something like a graduated ND filter it might have helped, but I don't own one of those, and it's not really a perfect solution to the problem anyway.

Not being able to properly expose a scene with very high contrast is not due to a lack of skill, it's just a fact of photography.
Sorry
My bad. Not 5 stops... 12 stops or more.
I saw Tony comparison between R and 5d4 or A73.
He underexposed by 5 stops and do the comparison bringing back the exposure in Lr wit 5.5 stops. Who will ever shoot like that.
The scene was alredy very dark... So...if you are glad with the fact that sony sensors ar a little better probably wit 1 stop... Then... No comment
Who will ever need/want to have all the photos HDR just based on DR camera capabilities?
Your camera let you see things that you never see with your own eyes.
12...14 stops are realy great and the gap between sony nikon and canon it's really small now.
My extreme recovery of exposure was with +/- 3 stops and shadows at full bring back... And i was safe... No damage to the photo.
 
Likes: bokehmon22
Sep 21, 2018
2
0
I just want to see how many of you guys(maybe a girl or two might post here) are seriously buying it.
I'm waiting for the next R to come out
if you are a pro shooter the specs just don't add up for the money
Canon needs to get their heads out of the sand and start to keep up with the likes of Sony "primarily"
what Sony is offering in a $2K body is amazing
10 fps with AF tracking
Dual card slots "this is a deal braker for me on the R"
and we still don't know how Sigma / Tamron EOS mount lenses will work on this camera with the adapter.
This camera should have been introduced at $1800, this would have been a better price point

If you are a first time mirrorless purchaser and don't have any lenses yet, why would you choose the Canon R over the A7III??
the only reason I'm not purchasing the Sony A7III is because I have a lot invested in EOS mount glass, and I'm hopping the R mount converter will perform as well as the R mount native lenses
if it doesn't I will be debating if I should switch to Sony or not. You know Sony will be retaliating with a A7IV that is going to WOW us all.

I'm hoping to see a pro level R camera with Dual SD slots at least 10FPS, fully weather sealed body for under $2800 next!
Canon is loosing market share to SONY and soon enough you will have Sigma and Tamron offering all of their lenses in the E mount and Sony will be adding more lenses to appease all the pros out there.

Don't get me wrong, I love Canon but business is business and bang for the buck is important.

Just my 2C
 
Nov 12, 2016
319
81
He underexposed by 5 stops and do the comparison bringing back the exposure in Lr wit 5.5 stops. Who will ever shoot like that.
What did you not understand about my last post? When you're dealing with a scene with very high contrast (some areas of what you're viewing are very bright, some are very dark), you have to choose between overexposing the bright areas, or underexposing the dark areas. You always need to make a compromise, and depend on your camera's ability to be able to bring back detail in dark areas, or bring back detail in highlights. You would never want to underexpose an entire photo by 5 stops, but if what you're taking a photo of has very bright areas and also very dark areas, you may need to underexpose the dark areas by that much so that the bright areas are not too bright.