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

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,254
173
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
If the EVF and fps don't get any better (in the next year) then dual slots is the least of your worries for those yearning for a Pro R model. Then again, we come full circle to 'What makes a Pro body' argument again. Seems like over and over the 5D4 is the solution and winner for many not getting the tidbits they cry for from Canon. But alas, people have to have new toys.
In my view the world is a world of compromises - and depending on your application you have to choose the best of those compromises.
I ordered the M50 to try a mirrorless with EVF and it was way better than I expect. The OVF IS clearer, crisper, shure. But the DPAF in combination with EVF lets me choose AF points with a vast amount of freedom compared to SLRs which is - for me - a significant upgrade compared to SLRs. And I never got such a high hit rate with EF with any SLR I used for medium slow applications: predictable accurate AF @f/1.4 in the close focus range with EF-M 32 . While not being a Pro I see professional photographers who might profit from that behaviour with EOS R cameras.

For sports or bif or other "faster" types of photography the M50 is not well suited, just the SL2 was better there. So this might be the domain of DSLRs at least in Canon land for the next year or two years.

But I am shure Canon is working with high pressure on a "Pro level" ML body including some surprising USEFUL features - not only for Canon users. Just my feeling, don't have any information.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ozturert
Aug 22, 2010
1,607
304
48
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
Lenses first, then the camera follows (maybe). A tight Hollywood suspense script in the works.
I believe that Canon are playing the long game and not the Sony "flash in the pan" approach. Sure...Sony may have the Japaneses market share of Mirror-less full frame camera bodies at the moment, but that's a very transitory market. All know a more pro orientated 5DSR Mirrorless is on the way, but I suspect that will still be the wrong camera for many (me included). What I want is a true 5D4 mirror less replacement before I consider merging RF into my camera bag. At the moment there is no credible offering from Canon for Wildlife shooting. I use a ef 400mm f2.8 LIS and my 5D series serve me far better than anything mirror less. Canon are still selling more full frame cameras and lenses than anyone else...in fact...there's a lot of Sony users who use EF glass. So I'm sure Canon will tie up their market dominance soon enough. As I said before, they are the masters of playing the long game...hence the lenses first approach.
 
Aug 22, 2010
1,607
304
48
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
Same with the 35 & 85 w 70-200. At one point I had 35, 50, 85, 135, 200 for weddings and the lens swapping was getting ridiculous.

I’m really waiting for a pro R body with two slots and I’m jumping ship to get the 28-70 f2 & 70-200. Sell all my primes and maybe pick up an 85, 105, or 135 RF depending on what comes out next year. Would love to get the benefits of nearly 3 primes in one lens with the f2 and just focus on shooting all day instead of swapping.
I used to run a 16-35 f2.8 on one camera, a 35 f1.4 on a 2nd camera and a 85 f1.2 on my third camera. Not much lens swapping and very accessible. When working primes...a camera per lens is the only way to go in my opinion. I'd take a 135L as my long lens of choice and pretty much my only swap out. My 2nd photographer would use her 100L IS macro...so she'd shoot all the ring shots. On sunny day weddings, I'd select my f2.8 zooms instead. Shooting f1.4 / f1.2 on a sunny day usually ends up with a smaller aperture due to bouncing off the upper shutter speed limit of the camera. So 16-35 f2.8 / 24-70 f2.8 / 70-200 f2.8 on three cameras. It's heavier and bulkier, but it's slightly quicker and slightly more versatile...although out of focus rendering and differential focusing is harder to achieve with the zooms. The older mk I 24-70 f2.8 was easier in that regard...you gain magnification as the focus draws into min focus compared to most lenses that actually lose magnification as the min focus draws in (like most 70-200's do). Most non-pros used to criticize the old reverse zoom of the 24-70 purely because it was different...but it held some major advantages over the current model (like the lens hood that actually works across the whole focal range). The new lens is optically superior...but less able to actually get the shot in the first place. But give me a bag of primes over the zooms any day ( on a dimly lit day).
 
Aug 22, 2010
1,607
304
48
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
I'm more of a 35/50/85 guy.
Not sure why but the difference between 35 and 50 seems really significant I need the opposite lens. I am always switching between the two. I bought into the Fuji X system for travel and only own 35 and 50 equivalents- the simplicity of only owning those two lenses is liberating.
Yep, for me a 35 and and 85 pair well. I find that a 50 needs a three lens line up, with a 24 / 50 / 100 or 135.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BillB

jd7

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 3, 2013
725
93
My small math exercise (in GBP):
  • Cost of R ~ 2k
  • Estimated cost of new trinity ~ 7k
  • Estimated value of old 5D IV ~1.5k
  • Estimated value of old trinity (Mk.III and 24-70Mk. II) ~ 4k
I don't doubt that R with new trinity will be great. But will it be £3.5k greater than existing setup? Considering that my trinity is probably worth less than 2k (16-35/f4, 70-200/2.8 Mk.II and Tamron 24-70/2.8 G1), the upgrade path will be ~ £5.5k. Will it be worth it for enthusiast? I don't think so.

Adapter makes it more affordable because I can still use existing EF lenses but my motivation to upgrade would be lenses, not the camera.
Similar to you, I think, my maths is telling me that going R would provide a great opportunity for me to spend a lot of money without significantly improving my photography :)

I'd like the focus accuracy and the ability to focus almost anywhere in the frame which the R cameras offer, but on the other hand I prefer OVF and I like having long battery life.

If I had an R camera I might be tempted by the RF 24-104L, but I'm not really excited about any of the current RF lenses. I'll be interested to see how the other announced RF lenses perform when they get here, but I'm not really expecting to be excited enough about any of them either to be quick to pay the sort of prices I'm expecting Canon will want for them, given the gear I already have. Maybe I'll change my mind once the RF lenses are here, but that's how I feel at the moment. I guess the good thing about that is I'm not feeling like I "need" to spend money :)
 

Photo Hack

Hi there
Apr 8, 2019
113
149
I used to run a 16-35 f2.8 on one camera, a 35 f1.4 on a 2nd camera and a 85 f1.2 on my third camera. Not much lens swapping and very accessible. When working primes...a camera per lens is the only way to go in my opinion. I'd take a 135L as my long lens of choice and pretty much my only swap out. My 2nd photographer would use her 100L IS macro...so she'd shoot all the ring shots. On sunny day weddings, I'd select my f2.8 zooms instead. Shooting f1.4 / f1.2 on a sunny day usually ends up with a smaller aperture due to bouncing off the upper shutter speed limit of the camera. So 16-35 f2.8 / 24-70 f2.8 / 70-200 f2.8 on three cameras. It's heavier and bulkier, but it's slightly quicker and slightly more versatile...although out of focus rendering and differential focusing is harder to achieve with the zooms. The older mk I 24-70 f2.8 was easier in that regard...you gain magnification as the focus draws into min focus compared to most lenses that actually lose magnification as the min focus draws in (like most 70-200's do). Most non-pros used to criticize the old reverse zoom of the 24-70 purely because it was different...but it held some major advantages over the current model (like the lens hood that actually works across the whole focal range). The new lens is optically superior...but less able to actually get the shot in the first place. But give me a bag of primes over the zooms any day ( on a dimly lit day).
Yeah we’ve always ran two bodies per person and that was enough. It worked out with my wife and I shooting, she would normally be closer to subjects and use 35 & 85 and I ran 50 & 135. Then ceremony time, the telephotos really came out. Since then I’ve mostly just been using traditional 24-70 & 70-200 all day and keeping a 50mm with me. She shoots 35 & 85 and brings out 70-200 for ceremony and reception.

Our style is heavy on compression and narrow depth of field and I can get that with the 70-200 and is my most used lens. Just a bummer it’s so big. Having two cameras on all day is cumbersome, don’t know how you guys do it with three, or two cameras plus a bag or Holdfast type setup.

Would really love to just go with one camera and one lens for Documenting and another lens for portraits. All on a smaller body and lens design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GMCPhotographics

Rivermist

5D Mk3, RP & SL2
Apr 27, 2019
25
43
Houston
This was - and still is- the traditional Leica M combo.
In the days of F-1 and FD lens, and before (affordable ) zooms were practical and of sufficient quality, my prime trinity (mainly for travel) was the FD 24mm f:2.0, FD 35mm 2.0 and the 100mm 2.8. I owned other lenses (17mm, 35mm TS, 50mm 1.4, 50mm macro, 85mm 1.2, 135mm 2.5, 200mm 4 and 300mm 5.6 plus a 35-70mm zoom) but if it was about compact and easy to change lenses, those were the 3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sanj
Aug 22, 2010
1,607
304
48
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
Yeah we’ve always ran two bodies per person and that was enough. It worked out with my wife and I shooting, she would normally be closer to subjects and use 35 & 85 and I ran 50 & 135. Then ceremony time, the telephotos really came out. Since then I’ve mostly just been using traditional 24-70 & 70-200 all day and keeping a 50mm with me. She shoots 35 & 85 and brings out 70-200 for ceremony and reception.

Our style is heavy on compression and narrow depth of field and I can get that with the 70-200 and is my most used lens. Just a bummer it’s so big. Having two cameras on all day is cumbersome, don’t know how you guys do it with three, or two cameras plus a bag or Holdfast type setup.

Would really love to just go with one camera and one lens for Documenting and another lens for portraits. All on a smaller body and lens design.
Yes I've used a 3 camera hold fast strap system for more years than I care to mention, I think I was one of their early customer. It's easier with primes lenses due to the weight and size.
I tend to favor my 135L over the 70-200. Close to min focus distance is very similar framing to the long end of the 70-200. It's smaller, less obtrusive and takes a 1.4x TC well too. I found that I rarely used the 70-200 at the wide end. But some times, I'd need the extra reach and it saves stepping closer.
It would be awesome if some one designed a 135 f2 to 200 f2.8 LIS. It's probably not that difficult technically. It might even be smaller and lighter than the 70-200.
 

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,254
173
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
In the days of F-1 and FD lens, and before (affordable ) zooms were practical and of sufficient quality, my prime trinity (mainly for travel) was the FD 24mm f:2.0, FD 35mm 2.0 and the 100mm 2.8. I owned other lenses (17mm, 35mm TS, 50mm 1.4, 50mm macro, 85mm 1.2, 135mm 2.5, 200mm 4 and 300mm 5.6 plus a 35-70mm zoom) but if it was about compact and easy to change lenses, those were the 3.
Fun to see someone referring to these old lenses - my setup was (in the mid 1980s) a 2nd hand Canon EF + the 2.5 135mm and later the 1.4 50 S.S.C. lens (after testing the unsatisfying New FD version). I still have these lenses + the 50mm Macro + 4.0 200 chome ring versions + a FD 4 17mm (would like to make TS lens for APS-C from that!).

Still waiting for dropping prices of EOS R bodies to reuse these lenses with adapter - EOS R is relatively expensive in germany (R: 25% more, RP: 20% more while SL3 and M50 are 10% less in germany - so it's not only taxes or currencies but some policy).
 
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia

degos

EOS RP
Mar 20, 2015
200
122
My small math exercise (in GBP):
  • ...
  • Estimated value of old trinity (Mk.III and 24-70Mk. II) ~ 4k
Nah, not a hope of that. New retail they don't even hit £3800 combined, and with the current cashbacks £3300.

For a trade-in you can expect about 40% to 50% of that, £1400 to £1700.

People still have this notion that Canon L lenses are an 'investment'. Not when a mint second-hand 24-70 sells for £1100... that's £600 down. And the big whites are even worse.
 

SecureGSM

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 26, 2017
1,150
188
Yes I've used a 3 camera hold fast strap system for more years than I care to mention, I think I was one of their early customer. It's easier with primes lenses due to the weight and size.
I tend to favor my 135L over the 70-200. Close to min focus distance is very similar framing to the long end of the 70-200. It's smaller, less obtrusive and takes a 1.4x TC well too. I found that I rarely used the 70-200 at the wide end. But some times, I'd need the extra reach and it saves stepping closer.
It would be awesome if some one designed a 135 f2 to 200 f2.8 LIS. It's probably not that difficult technically. It might even be smaller and lighter than the 70-200.
“... 135 f2 to 200 f2.8 LIS. It's probably not that difficult technically. It might even be smaller and lighter than the 70-200...”
This also likely creates an Av nightmare for some one who tends to shoot wide open with the lens. Your exposures would be all across the shop as the aperture number will be jumping up and down all the time as you zooming. And a one full stop difference is not a small change. One may end up having two subsequent frames exposed very differently.
As you know.
 
Last edited:
Aug 22, 2010
1,607
304
48
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
“... 135 f2 to 200 f2.8 LIS. It's probably not that difficult technically. It might even be smaller and lighter than the 70-200...”
This also likely creates an Av nightmare for some one who tends to shoot wide open with the lens. Your exposures would be all across the shop as the aperture number will be jumping up and down all the time as you zooming. And a one full stop difference is not a small change. One may end up having two subsequent frames exposed very differently.
As you know.
Only if you have your metering in Manual...AV will adjust shutter speed or Iso according to the required exposure. Hence the term Aperture Priority or Aperture Value as Canon like to call it. ;)
 

st jack photography

..a shuttered lens, backwards viewing backwards..
OK I get it Canon you invented the best largest-diameter mount ever, but they are pointless for me now. How about a camera that even comes near the full frame competition for burst speed, shoot speed, AF, eye focus, focus peaking, customability, ergonomics/design, 4k? Maybe 2020......? MAYBE. OK, see ya in 2020 or 2021. Jeesh. I got 4 grand here on a body, plus what I get selling my clunky 5dsr, so just produce it, and then maybe I'll take a look at one of those juicy RF lenses.
 
Last edited:

SecureGSM

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 26, 2017
1,150
188
Only if you have your metering in Manual...AV will adjust shutter speed or Iso according to the required exposure. Hence the term Aperture Priority or Aperture Value as Canon like to call it. ;)
You are correct, the minimum F number wont jump a full stop in an instant as you zooming , but in 1/3 of a stop steps anyway.
 

ozturert

EOS T7i
Jan 16, 2019
91
74
OK I get it Canon you invented the best largest-diameter mount ever, but they are pointless for me now. How about a camera that even comes near the full frame competition for burst speed, shoot speed, AF, eye focus, focus peaking, customability, ergonomics/design, 4k? Maybe 2020......? MAYBE. OK, see ya in 2020 or 2021. Jeesh. I got 4 grand here on a body, plus what I get selling my clunky 5dsr, so just produce it, and then maybe I'll take a look at one of those juicy RF lenses.
Large diameter? It has the same diameter as EF mount.
Shoot speed? What do you even mean?
AF? Do you mean AF-S or AF-C? AF-S with EOS R cameras is one of the best. AF-C isn't that behind although needs to be improved.
There is eye focus in EOS R, also with AF-C now. It isn't the best but I think it is very good.
Focus peaking? What? There already is focus peaking in EOS R!
Customizing? Customizing what? You need to be more specific because EOS R is highly customizable today. Can be better? Maybe but be specific about what you are asking.
Ergonomics? What? EOS R is incredibly ergonomic to hold and I can access all buttons easily. Are you sure you are not talking about Sony A7 series?
So many wrongs in one post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Del Paso

dba101

EOS M50
Sep 11, 2018
33
46
OK I get it Canon you invented the best largest-diameter mount ever, but they are pointless for me now. How about a camera that even comes near the full frame competition for burst speed, shoot speed, AF, eye focus, focus peaking, customability, ergonomics/design, 4k? Maybe 2020......? MAYBE. OK, see ya in 2020 or 2021. Jeesh. I got 4 grand here on a body, plus what I get selling my clunky 5dsr, so just produce it, and then maybe I'll take a look at one of those juicy RF lenses.
Don't go trashing your name before you get one. First rule of business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ozturert

masterpix

EOS 80D
Jun 29, 2016
109
69
I can understand calling them a "trinity". The "Holy" part of this reference is strange. ;) Besides, in my religion the trinity is zooms... 11-24, 24-70, 70-200
(15-28, 28-70, 70-135)
mine is 11-24 24-105 100-400... but we don't fight over religions...

wish I could buy the 11-24 though