The RF mount “Holy Trinity” should be ready to ship before the end of July 2019 [CR2]

epiieq1

EOS 5D III, 1DX
Aug 9, 2013
33
17
Some people who don't know any better will put them on an R or even an RP. They might not even upgrade if and when a camera of the same level comes along, whatever that means. Either the chicken or the egg has to come first.
Or, they could've announced them together. This isn't the late 80's, and there's a wide variety of options out there. Canon can do what they want, of course, but for those of us that are looking for pro-options for a body (honestly, I would've bought an R if it had 2 card slots), Canon is being very tight-lipped and not giving us a reason to buy into their new lens system yet.
 
Reactions: MrFotoFool

unfocused

EOS 5D SR
You clowns are hilarious. These lenses will be great on an R...
So true. Honestly, the R is a great camera. I wouldn't use it to shoot sports, but I don't generally use the 5DIV for sports either. Most of the comments here are from people who don't know enough to realize they are making fools of themselves.
 

mpb001

EOS M50
Sep 10, 2016
29
19
Canon clearly believes that Pros need to be convinced that top RF lenses are a priority, otherwise why pay attention to mirrorless. There's no doubt that a high end body is on the way.

I have the opposite problem. I am becoming convinced that Canon does not intend to serve the needs of small, one-man-band, mixed media content creators. Sony and Panasonic are leading there.
Well, then, you might be right. I don’t remember what Canon’s approach was regarding the two-tiered L lenses when they were just making SLRs. It may have been the same. Build the larger aperture lenses first, then the f4 series L lenses later?
 

Scooter

I'm New Here
May 19, 2014
11
24
I bought the RP to be a travel camera and barely had it for two weeks before I went on a dream vacation to the Mediterranean. I seriously don't understand why having a lower feature, lower cost, lighter full frame camera is a bad thing. It was great for carrying around Barcelona, Nice, Monaco, and Cinque Terre. I didn't need 12 fps or a billion autofocus points. Even Swiss Army Knives come in many sizes and configurations.
 

dwilz

I'm New Here
Nov 16, 2018
9
23
So true. Honestly, the R is a great camera. I wouldn't use it to shoot sports, but I don't generally use the 5DIV for sports either. Most of the comments here are from people who don't know enough to realize they are making fools of themselves.
Some sample shots with my R last week using the latest firmware with tracking Servo AF
 

Attachments

unfocused

EOS 5D SR
I bought the RP to be a travel camera and barely had it for two weeks before I went on a dream vacation to the Mediterranean. I seriously don't understand why having a lower feature, lower cost, lighter full frame camera is a bad thing. It was great for carrying around Barcelona, Nice, Monaco, and Cinque Terre. I didn't need 12 fps or a billion autofocus points. Even Swiss Army Knives come in many sizes and configurations.
Obviously, you didn't understand that you were using an inferior camera that prevented you from taking good pictures. If you had just listened to the experts on this forum, you would have realized that it was a waste to try to take pictures with such a pathetic instrument and you would have just stayed home.
 

unfocused

EOS 5D SR
Some sample shots with my R last week using the latest firmware with tracking Servo AF
Good stuff. I stand corrected.

But, understand I didn't mean you can't shoot sports with the R. Obviously you can and can get great shots. I was just making the point that different cameras lend themselves to different uses and if you have a choice of bodies, it can make sense to use a body optimized for the use case. I'm fortunate, in that I have a 1Dx II, which I am accustomed to. So for me, that would be my body of choice for sports.

My sense, after just one day of using the R, is that it has a lot of strengths that can make it a good professional tool. In my limited experience the silent shutter was absolutely brilliant for taking photos in meetings where I did not want to disturb the participants. In that use case, it is far superior to the 1Dx II.

Overall point is that too many people are writing off the R because of arbitrary standards and without having used the camera.
 

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
958
189
So true. Honestly, the R is a great camera. I wouldn't use it to shoot sports, but I don't generally use the 5DIV for sports either. Most of the comments here are from people who don't know enough to realize they are making fools of themselves.
Well, as has already been pointed out, there is that card slot issue.
 

dwilz

I'm New Here
Nov 16, 2018
9
23
Good stuff. I stand corrected.

But, understand I didn't mean you can't shoot sports with the R. Obviously you can and can get great shots. I was just making the point that different cameras lend themselves to different uses and if you have a choice of bodies, it can make sense to use a body optimized for the use case. I'm fortunate, in that I have a 1Dx II, which I am accustomed to. So for me, that would be my body of choice for sports.

My sense, after just one day of using the R, is that it has a lot of strengths that can make it a good professional tool. In my limited experience the silent shutter was absolutely brilliant for taking photos in meetings where I did not want to disturb the participants. In that use case, it is far superior to the 1Dx II.

Overall point is that too many people are writing off the R because of arbitrary standards and without having used the camera.
I have one as well and it's a beast to carry around. For a simple soccer club game it was a joy to carry around the R with an old first generation 24-105 f/4 attached. The final photo was taken with the 200 f/2.8. Looking forward to getting the new 70-200 f/2.8 when it comes out. Will be a great match for this type of shooting with the R.
 
Reactions: FramerMCB

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,611
181
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
I hate to be 'that guy' but where's my RF35 1.2L :D
I think thats why they chose a non L 35 released concurrently with the L 50. The EF L 50 is/was a bit overdue for replacement meanwhile Canon just made the new 35L. It was more appealing to the sales people Im sure to offer the new 50 in the RF first as a reason to go MILC. The 35 will come, but it not an immediate priority. I put my 35 on the R with the adapter. Perfectly satisfied
 

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,611
181
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
Now if he could just find a photographer. ;)
I guess he needs a camera that has true full auto. Not only does it read your mind to set the look you want with perfect exposure but can also offer 20 stops of IS with self-levitation so i can compose the shot for you, hands free, while instantly posting to facebook and getting it placed at the top of google searches. Not to mention the ability to print 24x36 high definition canvas straight from the camera.... or he could just be a terrible photographer who can make a Hassleblad look like an iPhone 3
 

lawny13

I'm New Here
Mar 6, 2019
18
28
Good stuff. I stand corrected.

But, understand I didn't mean you can't shoot sports with the R. Obviously you can and can get great shots. I was just making the point that different cameras lend themselves to different uses and if you have a choice of bodies, it can make sense to use a body optimized for the use case. I'm fortunate, in that I have a 1Dx II, which I am accustomed to. So for me, that would be my body of choice for sports.

My sense, after just one day of using the R, is that it has a lot of strengths that can make it a good professional tool. In my limited experience the silent shutter was absolutely brilliant for taking photos in meetings where I did not want to disturb the participants. In that use case, it is far superior to the 1Dx II.

Overall point is that too many people are writing off the R because of arbitrary standards and without having used the camera.

Exactly. I keep reading that canon has no pro body to go with the pro lenses. But unless you are shooting weddings (and need two cars slots) or shooting mainly sports the R is a pro camera. Or are those the only two pro genres now? Cause studio, portraits, fashion, landscape, baby, maternity/pregnancy etc etc, the R can do all of those without issue.

There was a time that people were saying that the A7II and the A7RII could be used professionally... and the R is a step above both of those (except when it comes to MP compared to the R).

35f1.8, 50f1.2, 28-70f2, 24-105f4 and now the trinity lenses, portraits 85 and now probably a 60+ MP pro grade camera maybe this year. Canon doing all of that in just a year!! Now that is something.

Sony on the other hand didn’t release the 24-70 and 70-200 GMs till much later (2016, compared to 2014 for the A7II). Not to mention the QC issues they were plagued with in the first few years with the E-Mount.
 

woodman411

EOS T7i
Aug 1, 2017
94
38
USA
To get back on topic. I really can't wait to see what the price of the 70-200 is and what the reviews are like.
My problem is, I currently have the EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS II and the drop in filter adapter, and like them a lot. I like the new RF 70-200 design, but the IQ will need to be a noticeable step up for me to give up both.

PS - any word on whether Canon will make RF drop in filters?
 
Reactions: FramerMCB