Wireless file transmitter for the Canon EOS R5 appears for certification

shunsai

EOS R5
Oct 15, 2011
278
196
Yeah. Or it affects sales of 5DIV and R. Canon doesn't want to kill 5DIV and R does it?
Pretty much everyone who wants a 5D Mark IV (and can afford one) has already bought one. It's been on the market for just over four years. The EOS R has been on the market for almost two years. Neither can be expected to sell as many units as even a cosmetic "replacement" (e.g. 5D Mark V or EOS R Mark II with no substantive improvements) would be expected to sell.
For the record @Quarkcharmed, the sarcasm was obvious to me...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Quarkcharmed

SteveC

M6 mk II
Sep 3, 2019
749
564
I am not complaining, I am just sad. Man, I am tired of seeing the same top headline for past few days at CR...about file transmitter! Please, @Canon Rumors Guy, I hope you are doing well. Please, post something new; CR1, CR0, CRx, CRxxx, it doesn't matter.
My butt is getting tired of sitting on the edge of my seat, too. It looks like a camera I want, but I need a price!!!

Maybe this is the calm before the storm.

We're getting up to the time Canon would most likely be announcing stills specs for the R5...if things had not been shut down. They did announce video specs during the timeframe of a cancelled video event.
 

AEWest

EOS 80D
Jan 30, 2020
152
169
what stills specs? its clear the camera has at least 45MP , 12fps mechanical and 20fps eletronically. What other "stills specs" are you looking for?
I would like to know what new sensor tech they are using. Is it a stacked sensor? What about dynamic range? Canon has indicated it is an all new sensor. It will be interesting to see - I expect the announcement this week.

Hopefully some youtubers will have had a chance to test it and provide first impressions - I'd hate to rely only on marketing spin from Canon.
 

x4dow

EOS M50
May 16, 2020
30
20
I would like to know what new sensor tech they are using. Is it a stacked sensor? What about dynamic range? Canon has indicated it is an all new sensor. It will be interesting to see - I expect the announcement this week.

Hopefully some youtubers will have had a chance to test it and provide first impressions - I'd hate to rely only on marketing spin from Canon.
Likely will be worse at stills than a a7r4, specially DR. If all you do is stills, that's the exciting camera to get
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Michael Clark

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
792
413
Likely will be worse at stills than a a7r4, specially DR. If all you do is stills, that's the exciting camera to get
Apart from the dynamic range being slightly better and the resolution being better, the A7R4 looks outdated already (of course it will drop in price significantly after the R5 so it remains an attractive choice)
It only shoots 10fps, the buffer clearing is slow, the grip, handling, IBIS, EVF, screen, menus, lens options (including adapted) all going better on the Canon. While Sony came up with many new models over the years, they only made smaller steps forward as opposed to Canon with less updates but much bigger steps forward.
 

David_E

Macrophotography
Sep 12, 2019
102
125
www.flickr.com
I don't believe in adapters even if it's from the vendor...
If you mean in the same sense that you don’t believe in the tooth fairy, then you are wrong. Adapters exist; I own one to use my EF lenses with my RP.

If you mean in the sense that adapters somehow provide an inferior experience, you’re still wrong. The EF-to-RF adapter is invisible; it has no downside.
 

herein2020

Run | Gun Shooter
Mar 13, 2020
155
222
If you mean in the same sense that you don’t believe in the tooth fairy, then you are wrong. Adapters exist; I own one to use my EF lenses with my RP.

If you mean in the sense that adapters somehow provide an inferior experience, you’re still wrong. The EF-to-RF adapter is invisible; it has no downside.
I assume you missed my reasons why I do not use adapters, from your perspective "The EF-to-RF adapter is invisible; it has no downside" ; making such a statement does not make it true it simply means that you refused to consider viewpoints that are not your own. So, I will repeat my list of why I do not use adapters again below since you missed it the first time:

  • Adaptors are another set of contacts between the body and the lens (i.e. something else that can break)
  • Adaptors are one more thing that can go wrong during a shoot, if you misplace it, lose it, or forget it you can't use the lens
  • Adaptors are another entry point for dust, moisture, and water
  • Optically with all else equal typically the native lens will yield the highest quality (faster AF, better communication between lens and camera, native lenses are typically optically superior than adapted ones)
  • I could keep going but if you don't get the point by now a longer list won't matter
Obviously adapters exist, no I don't believe in them nor do I use them and no a discussion on CR will not change my mind. If EF was already perfect Canon would not have created a new lens mount so if you want to get the best experience from an RF mount camera you will need to get RF mount lenses...it's that simple. Can you get a great experience using an adapter, I'm sure you could, can you save a lot of money sticking with EF lenses and adaptors for your RF mount camera, I'm sure you could, will anyone notice the quality difference between an EF mount lens on an RF mount body, probably not. Does any of that mean I will get an adaptor and use EF lenses on an RF body if I buy one...no I will not for the reasons that I previously stated.
 

x4dow

EOS M50
May 16, 2020
30
20
Apart from the dynamic range being slightly better and the resolution being better, the A7R4 looks outdated already (of course it will drop in price significantly after the R5 so it remains an attractive choice)
It only shoots 10fps, the buffer clearing is slow, the grip, handling, IBIS, EVF, screen, menus, lens options (including adapted) all going better on the Canon. While Sony came up with many new models over the years, they only made smaller steps forward as opposed to Canon with less updates but much bigger steps forward.
its a better sensor. whatever ergonomics, terrible menus and so on. the final image, its better on the sony, more likely to be taken on time/in focus, better DR/ISO/Colour depth etc. But i understand this is a canon forum and fanboys gonna be offended and start going on about colour science.
 

yeahright

EOS T7i
Aug 28, 2014
80
48
If you mean in the same sense that you don’t believe in the tooth fairy, then you are wrong. Adapters exist; I own one to use my EF lenses with my RP.

If you mean in the sense that adapters somehow provide an inferior experience, you’re still wrong. The EF-to-RF adapter is invisible; it has no downside.
EF-to-RF adapters are clearly a disadvantage if you are using both EF and RF lenses. Either you buy each EF lens its own adapter, then it's not so much of an issue except for cost. Or you keep switching lenses and adapters when you go from an EF lens to an RF lens. In situations where quick lens swaps are desired, I would consider it a PITA to switch from EF lens A to RF lens B to EF lens C. If the adapter stays on EF lens A after use, during the switch from RF lens B to EF lens C you'd have to 1) remove adapter from EF lens A, 2) remove EF back lens cap from EF lens C, 3) attach EF back lens cap to EF lens A, 4) attach adapter to EF lens C, 5) remove RF lens B from body, 6) remove adapter RF back lens cap, 7) attach RF back lens cap to RF lens B, 8) attach EF lens C with adapter to body. Without adapters (i.e. with only RF lenses) you'd only have to 1) remove RF lens B from body, 2) remove back lens cap from RF lens C, 3) attach back lens cap to RF lens B, 4) attach RF lens C to body. That's 4 steps instead of 8.
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
792
413
its a better sensor. whatever ergonomics, terrible menus and so on. the final image, its better on the sony, more likely to be taken on time/in focus, better DR/ISO/Colour depth etc. But i understand this is a canon forum and fanboys gonna be offended and start going on about colour science.
Guess what, the final image is heavily affected by the camera's handling. So a camera, that handles better, more enjoyable, less frustrating etc. will actually take better images for most people.
And we can move onto the lenses as well, Canon lenses are big, heavy and very expensive, but also very high-end, they are really hard to fault.

I purposefully left it out because Sony users seems to be overly sensitive to it, but yes, colours are still better on the Canon as well.
Sony is slowly catching up, they are not as bad as they've used to be, but still considerably behind.
The dynamic range is a little better on the Sony, but really not by much and with the latest Canon sensor like the 1DX III, the ISO is not better anymore, it is likely to be similar (the A7RIV actually got a little worse in exchange for more megapixels, they probably employ a bit of clever noise-reduction to the baked RAW files, so it is difficult to compare).

So all things considered, the difference between sensor performance is not that big, but there are other differences, mainly regarded to the camera's operation, that are far more significant and also the system itself, with the lenses and everything.

Check out this article, the worst part about Sony is actually the community behind it, I have to agree with this assessment.
 

Otara

EOS RP
Jul 16, 2012
323
100
EF-to-RF adapters are clearly a disadvantage if you are using both EF and RF lenses. Either you buy each EF lens its own adapter, then it's not so much of an issue except for cost. Or you keep switching lenses and adapters when you go from an EF lens to an RF lens. In situations where quick lens swaps are desired, I would consider it a PITA to switch from EF lens A to RF lens B to EF lens C. If the adapter stays on EF lens A after use, during the switch from RF lens B to EF lens C you'd have to 1) remove adapter from EF lens A, 2) remove EF back lens cap from EF lens C, 3) attach EF back lens cap to EF lens A, 4) attach adapter to EF lens C, 5) remove RF lens B from body, 6) remove adapter RF back lens cap, 7) attach RF back lens cap to RF lens B, 8) attach EF lens C with adapter to body. Without adapters (i.e. with only RF lenses) you'd only have to 1) remove RF lens B from body, 2) remove back lens cap from RF lens C, 3) attach back lens cap to RF lens B, 4) attach RF lens C to body. That's 4 steps instead of 8.
You can use the back lens caps interchangeably, with the 35mm at least. Anything else I wouldn't be rushing anyway.

You only need 2 adapters at worst to avoid it for the vast majority of situations, and a spare can be good to have anyhow. It only becomes a risk once you have enough money to buy multiple RF lenses anyway so cost shouldnt be a problem.

I didnt like the EF-M adapters but these are a lot more usable and even have some advantages with the optional extras (if wanted). I have the variable ND adapter and its awesome for its intended use - can change any lens without needing to change it. I dont tend to use the dial on the other but other people seem to like them.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,428
1,915
120
EF-to-RF adapters are clearly a disadvantage if you are using both EF and RF lenses. Either you buy each EF lens its own adapter, then it's not so much of an issue except for cost. Or you keep switching lenses and adapters when you go from an EF lens to an RF lens. In situations where quick lens swaps are desired, I would consider it a PITA to switch from EF lens A to RF lens B to EF lens C. If the adapter stays on EF lens A after use, during the switch from RF lens B to EF lens C you'd have to 1) remove adapter from EF lens A, 2) remove EF back lens cap from EF lens C, 3) attach EF back lens cap to EF lens A, 4) attach adapter to EF lens C, 5) remove RF lens B from body, 6) remove adapter RF back lens cap, 7) attach RF back lens cap to RF lens B, 8) attach EF lens C with adapter to body. Without adapters (i.e. with only RF lenses) you'd only have to 1) remove RF lens B from body, 2) remove back lens cap from RF lens C, 3) attach back lens cap to RF lens B, 4) attach RF lens C to body. That's 4 steps instead of 8.
If you are regularly switching. three lenses you should be running two bodies, sorted.
 

AEWest

EOS 80D
Jan 30, 2020
152
169
its a better sensor. whatever ergonomics, terrible menus and so on. the final image, its better on the sony, more likely to be taken on time/in focus, better DR/ISO/Colour depth etc. But i understand this is a canon forum and fanboys gonna be offended and start going on about colour science.
It may be a better sensor compared with existing Canon sensor, but this is supposed to be a new design so it may be as good or better than Sony. Time will tell.