POLL? How many are preordering the EOS R?

[3kramd5]

Canon needs to get their heads out of the sand and start to keep up with the likes of Sony "primarily"

Canon doesn’t need to play “keep up with the Jonses”; it’s not their business model.

what Sony is offering in a $2K body is amazing10 fps with AF tracking
Dual card slots "this is a deal braker for me on the R"
...snip...
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 you think the value proposition is amazing, why not buy one? Your canon lenses aren’t an impediment.

 

[northphoto]

Canon doesn’t need to play “keep up with the Jonses”; it’s not their business model.

Canon can do whatever they want as far as keeping up with the joneses, but if you don't think for a min that people are noticing what Sony is doing you are wrong obviously from other posts here and els ware.
It took them 4 years to see the value in the mirrorless game, lets hope they improve on it now.
as far as business models go, Canon provides the masses equipment, if the masses demand and want something and canon does not bend, well we have all seen businesses falter.

If you think the value proposition is amazing, why not buy one? Your canon lenses aren’t an impediment.

Well I've been trying to find a review of the Sigma 120-300 S plus a 1.4X Sigma TC on a A7III but not many out there.
I do a lot of College even / sports photography which is what I would want the A7III for so I want to make sure people are happy with that combo.
I currently shoot with a 7DMK2, but want a full frame for better isolation / background blur
my 5D3 shots look amazing but the speed just isn't there.

Honestly I may just pick up a A7III to use as a backup to my 5D.

 

[3kramd5]

Well I've been trying to find a review of the Sigma 120-300 S plus a 1.4X Sigma TC on a A7III but not many out there.
I do a lot of College even / sports photography which is what I would want the A7III for so I want to make sure people are happy with that combo.
I currently shoot with a 7DMK2, but want a full frame for better isolation / background blur
my 5D3 shots look amazing but the speed just isn't there.

Honestly I may just pick up a A7III to use as a backup to my 5D.

I don’t know about that combo (good luck with your search), but people are typically happy with the sigma adapter for sigma lenses. This may be because sigma has licensed the basic e-mount specifications, so they aren’t doing reverse engineering like with their products on canon and nikon.

 

[Geek]

Really, I don't see that the R brings much if any value over the 5D4. If I need the absolute best focus, I can use live view and focus with the sensor just like the R and other MILC, for faster servo focus, I have the option of using the regular focus sensor of the 5D4. The R is lighter, but that's not really an issue to me. The R also focuses in lower light, but you mostly have to be using a tripod or very high ISO's, so I don't take many pictures in less light than the 5D4 with focus in anyway.

To me, the only real advantage is the R series lenses and the advantages that they have, but at this point in time they are kind of few and are demanding a premium price.

In a few years when the R series has a good selection of glass and the premiums prices have stabilized a bit and there is a selection of bodies available. Then it's time to reevaluate. But for now, I'll be slapping mirrors and trying to learn how to take better pictures.

 

[Graphic.Artifacts]

As a practical matter, if I needed a new Canon body, which I don't, it's hard to imagine that you'd buy anything else from Canon other than the R right now. If you don't absolutely need one, I can't imagine why anybody would buy any body from Canon right now. There just isn't enough clarity into Canon's future plans for me to invest with any confidence.

I expect resale value of EF lenses will soften so how many of them do you want to be holding when that happens. At least that's the way I see it. I've already taken a significant resale hit this year from some of the lens updates. I don't really need any more gear although Canon certainly makes a lot of lenses that I would like to own. Yes I know, EF will be around for a while etc. etc. but there are millions of EF lenses out there and there won't be millions of people that want to own them if EOS R takes off. It's simple market economics.

If the R is a dud, you'll be glad you waited. If it's a success the eventual replacement will be even better and in the meantime you can take advantage of the inevitable fire sale on used EF lenses that will result.

I put all investment in new Canon gear on hold a while ago and nothing about the R has changes my thinking on that.

If Canon expects me to invest in an entirely new proprietary platform they are going to have to try a lot harder because they are wading into a market with some serious competitors.

 

[Kit Lens Jockey]

My issue with dynamic range is that one or two stops more isn't, generally, going to make the difference.

What is "the difference" though?

If there's a difference in the ability to recover shadows, there's a difference. Worrying about tiny details in every aspect of taking a photo, the framing, the composition the camera settings, etc, is what makes a great photo. You can argue that at a certain point a minor difference is not going to be that significant. But then again you can also argue that point all the way to the point where you just have a crap photo because you decided that XYZ didn't make enough of a difference to worry about.

So honestly I don't care if it's a stop or a fraction of a stop more dynamic range. It will allow my photos to be that much better. And note that I didn't say it will make them that much better, because of course it's all about what you as the photographer do with the camera that makes the photo. But ultimately the better the camera, the less constrained you are by what you can do with it.

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.

What Ansel Adams did was significant because of the time that he did it in and the way he pushed the level of technology he had at the time. And yes it was important and significant, but honestly anyone could take photos like him today because just about any camera made is more capable than what he was dealing with, and it's exponentially easier to carry out into the wilderness than the equipment he had to lug around. As you said, we can do much better than he even could, and we should, and we should continue pushing the limit of what our photographic technology can do today, and as far as landscapes go, that means being able to properly expose a very contrasty scene.

And in the situation I was talking about, I wasn't "contriving" some sort of theoretical situation just to try to trip up my camera. It was one of the most beautiful things I've ever taken photos of, and I was genuinely disappointed afterward when I got home and realized that I couldn't quite recover the shadows as much as I would have liked to.

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.

If incremental improvement is insignificant to you, then by all means, stop buying new gear for a decade, enjoy what you have, and come back in 2028 when cameras will be significantly improved enough for you to actually consider it worth the effort. But honestly I'm surprised that that's truly the way you feel if you're on this forum that's heavily devoted to discussing every tiny rumor or development of Canon's photographic technology.

I want the best that current technology can offer, because ultimately everything you take a photo of, you only get one chance at, and due to that I'd prefer the photos to be the best they possibly can be, even if the improvement is only one or two stops of DR.

 

[bhf3737]

Everyone's needs are unique. For me being able to shoot in silent mode, snappy auto focus in low light, no need to AFMA, ability to use both EF and EF-S lenses and manual focus with focus guide are very much appreciated. These were on my wishlist for the next gen of 5D series and all seem to be fulfilled in the EOS R offering. Therefore I pre-ordered one. I'll keep 5DSR for landscape shots but 5D4 is redundant and will go away.

 

[scyrene]

What is "the difference" though?

I think the point being made was twofold. One, the difference in this regard between Canon and other manufacturers is currently tiny, despite the rhetoric of some on these forums and elsewhere, and two, that no matter what brand you used, you'd have had to use e.g. HDR, because the extra ~1 stop you get with the others isn't going to cover the full DR of the scene. More is always good, but your example doesn't show Canon to be deficient; every camera would fail to capture the whole scene, so that's when other things (like ND filters, blended exposures, etc) come into play. It's therefore unfair to criticise Canon specifically on the basis of that scene.

 

[dak723]

....
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??

Because Canon has better color, ergonomics, weather sealing, exposure accuracy, AF in most situations, a much wider selection of lenses (including cheaper alternatives) when you include EF lenses, and Canon service and reliability.

Why would I buy the Sony?? Two card slots.

 

[fullstop]

I put all investment in new Canon gear on hold a while ago and nothing about the R has changes my thinking on that.

If Canon expects me to invest in an entirely new proprietary platform they are going to have to try a lot harder because they are wading into a market with some serious competitors.

+1

 

[privatebydesign]

What is "the difference" though?

In this context being able to capture the scene's complete DR in one shot.

 

[bhf3737]

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??

Well, A7III may be a capable and cheaper camera. But is it a better camera for my needs?
A couple of days ago, Joel Grimes, a well known pro photographer, had a review of the R camera titled: Canon EOS R: Putting It To The Test.
In which he explained the capabilities of this 1st iteration EOS R camera. While many of the click-bait reviewers focus on gimmicky capabilities of cameras and preach for "everyone in the neighborhood has it, so must Canon" he focused on the core capability of this camera which is taking good pictures. IMHO the FF mirrorless system that Canon introduced with the EOS R and the lenses that came with it is quite solid and I can confidently invest into the system for the future years to come.

 

[privatebydesign]

I think the point being made was twofold. One, the difference in this regard between Canon and other manufacturers is currently tiny, despite the rhetoric of some on these forums and elsewhere, and two, that no matter what brand you used, you'd have had to use e.g. HDR, because the extra ~1 stop you get with the others isn't going to cover the full DR of the scene. More is always good, but your example doesn't show Canon to be deficient; every camera would fail to capture the whole scene, so that's when other things (like ND filters, blended exposures, etc) come into play. It's therefore unfair to criticise Canon specifically on the basis of that scene.

Exactly .

Not even criticize, modulate expectations.

 

[amorse]

I'm probably not buying, but maybe. I use a 5D IV and right now that camera is better suited to my need. Honestly, I think I'd be better served by taking that money and putting it toward a 100-400L ii.

I actually really like the camera and I could see it as a great backup (since I sold my other body to buy the 5D IV), but I'm in no rush so my plan is to wait and see what comes next. If they release a very high resolution mirrorless body next, I may be tempted to look at that as a new primary, and transition the 5D IV to secondary. Alternatively, if the R drops in price it becomes more attractive.

I always like to look at new camera gear purchases and weigh my priorities based on which options open up more creative opportunities. A second camera gives me more security, but a new lens lets me get photos I can't get now. Since this is a hobby for me, security/backups aren't my top priority.

 

[takesome1]

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.

Ansel Adams

Your situation Ansel Adams solved.
In some instance it may only be once, but often twice. For a short period of time during the day you can balance the light inside with the light outside.

The problem is we live in an impatient world. Using your method seems to be old and antiquated now (or some people want it to be). There is a group that seems to think Cameras should have unlimited dynamic range.

I suppose technology is replacing skill over time.
Few have the patience to wait for hours to have just the right light. What is worse many do not know that they can wait for hours for just the right light and spend countless hours online complaining about a cameras range.

 

[takesome1]

the difference in this regard between Canon and other manufacturers is currently tiny, .

Total nonsense. Gear Junkies can point to several items on a spec sheet that say different things.

But without the Exif data, can any of them look at a random picture on the internet and tell what it was shot with?

 

[3kramd5]

The problem is we live in an inpatient world.

Note the blown out window

 

[takesome1]

Note the blown out window

inpatient but not outpatient?
You must have patience.
Come back around sunset.

Typo corrected.

 

[privatebydesign]

Total nonsense. Gear Junkies can point to several items on a spec sheet that say different things.

But without the Exif data, can any of them look at a random picture on the internet and tell what it was shot with?

I think you are misunderstanding

Your situation Ansel Adams solved.
In some instance it may only be once, but often twice. For a short period of time during the day you can balance the light inside with the light outside.

The problem is we live in an impatient world. Using your method seems to be old and antiquated now (or some people want it to be). There is a group that seems to think Cameras should have unlimited dynamic range.

I suppose technology is replacing skill over time.
Few have the patience to wait for hours to have just the right light. What is worse many do not know that they can wait for hours for just the right light and spend countless hours online complaining about a cameras range.

I'm presuming English isn't your first language, it certainly seems your understanding isn't.

 

[privatebydesign]

Total nonsense. Gear Junkies can point to several items on a spec sheet that say different things.

But without the Exif data, can any of them look at a random picture on the internet and tell what it was shot with?

And again...