Canon to announce EOS-1D X equivalent EOS R system camera in 2021?

Otara

EOS RP
Jul 16, 2012
363
156
Do you wear glasses when using the camera? Does the diopter after work just as well with evf as it does with ovf?
I have intraocular lenses (in my eyes), and my nightsight isnt great. I find the diopter adjustment works well with and without glasses for me, I usually use it without.

I have a 500 f4 II and it works well with it, not sure if that helps regarding the 1.
 

CanonFanBoy

Really O.K. Boomer
Jan 28, 2015
5,041
3,102
Irving, Texas
EOS R owner here.

I do not shoot Wildlife so I can't comment on that, but for landscape, portrait, street photography, events, the EOS R is doing incredibly well. I miss the dual card slot and the IBIS, for me those are the 2 important features that the camera is missing and for the price I got it months ago should have.

The RF glass is simply incredible and is by far the best of the mirrorless canon lineup. The 50mm 1.2 is billions time better than the old 1.2, the 85 1.2 is so much sharper than the EF and without aberrations, the 28-70 f2 is a beast, nearly no aberrations and sharp corner to corner... and you know what is missing here? IBIS, the camera has enough megapixels to get blurred images even with the classic double the aperture shutter speed rule.

To me, what I would like to see is:
  • More resolution (at least reach the 50mpx mark)
  • IBIS so I can handhold the 50/85/28-70 without bumping the ISO because I have to use fast shutter speed.
  • Double card slot.
  • Improved dynamic range (this hurts pretty badly on landscape or trying to recover some images). I really want to see the specs for the new high resolution sensor, if they keep the same dynamic range is going to be a serious issue for me, specially compared with Sony or Fuji on this aspect.

The comments about the evf, in my personal opinion, are bull****, the evf is fantastic and once you start using it you don't want to come back to ovf, for me, the only situation where I miss my 5dmkii viewfiender is on low light situations, there the evf really struggles where a normal ovf is not that bad.
I have also been impressed with the EVF. I love seeing the histogram in the EVF. IBIS is on the way. And the RF glass is simply sublime. For $2k USD the R is a steal, in my opinion. It really is. IBIS and a second card slot would have driven up the price. I set the camera for exposure simulation and have no complaints about it in low light.

It will be very interesting to see whether Canon releases any more super fast glass in 2020. The RF 28-70mm f/2L covers the short end for me just fine, though a possible super 35mm and the already out super 50 are very tempting. Glass is going to be my main focus for now as the R serves me just fine.
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
840
875
This is exactly why so many of us get frustrated. You admit that you posted out of ignorance, but when you were unable to rationally argue your points you chose name calling, rather than acknowledging your lack of knowledge. See your comment below:



Personally, and as I have posted many times, I am not anxious to buy RF glass. (Well, maybe the 15-35, but it's fairly low on my priority list right now). I own the 24-105 because I took advantage of a tremendous Canon Price Watch deal and, since this is my most used lens I wanted to try the RF version and have the convenience of not using an adapter and constantly switching the EF lens between the R and the 5D.

With a mirrorless touch screen, joysticks are no longer needed. After just one day of test driving the R (rented before buying) I was happy to trade the touch screen for the joystick and every time I use the 5D, 1D or 7D I find myself wishing I had a touchscreen rather than a joystick.

I actually had to look at the R to see what you are talking about regarding the mode dial. There is a simple button that says MODE on it. Easier to use than any dial and much easier than the 1D system for changing modes. Someone would have to be pretty stupid not to be able to figure that out.

I don't know what you mean by "the buttons don't look comfortable." The AF On button isn't in the most convenient spot, but I hardly ever use it anyway, since focusing in servo using the touch screen is much easier and more accurate than a DSLR.

Yeah, the multi-function bar isn't all that useful and definitely needs a few tweaks. I suspect most of the problems could be solved by a firmware revision, but honestly, nobody has to use the bar if they don't want to. You aren't giving up anything that a DSLR has by turning it off.

I don't know what is mediocre about the R. I retails for $700 less than a 5DIV and, from personal experience, I would say that I get about 98% of the 5D performance for approximately 75% of the price. Plus, there are advantages that I can't get on the 5DIV or the 1D at any price (like the wonderful touch screen focus point selection, the massive increase in focus point coverage and never having to worry about AFMA).

I've never used another EVF, so I can't really declare whether the R is middle-of-the road or not, but since you've never used the R, I suspect you don't know either. Maybe it just sounded like a good thing to write or maybe you are just quoting some random reviewer. I know this, I thought I would hate the EVF, but I've found I actually like it quite well. Seeing the impact of exposure changes in real time is excellent. No more having to trust the DSLR's +/- exposure compensation markers and then checking the screen after the picture has been taken. In low light or difficult lighting situations (such as stage performances), being able to see what the exposure is going to look like and not having to guess is a real plus.

I guess "minimal" weather sealing is in the eyes of the beholder. Roger Cicala's teardown indicates very good weather sealing around buttons and knobs (the places that are the most vulnerable) and reliance on tightly fitting components for the body. I don't consider that "minimal" so much as a design and manufacturing change where today parts can be assembled to closer tolerances. Rubber seals might actually be less desirable than well fitting parts. I'm no manufacturing engineer so I'm not qualified to judge, but then I doubt if you are either.

I know some people feel like a single card slot is a deal breaker. So be it. As for me, I consider it silly. But then, I only had one film slot for most of my life and I had a lot more failures from the film not catching on the take up spool than I will ever have from a bad card.

Not sure what the basis is of your pronouncement that it isn't very good for sports or other action. Although I'm primarily a sports photographer, I've only tried some limited experiments with the R. I'm getting paid to bring back quality sports pictures and like most people who have to satisfy a client or employer, I'll stick with what I know, which is the 1Dx II and limit my experiments to times when I've already gotten what I need. But then, I''d say the same of the 5DIV. I've tried some sports and some birds in flight and have gotten both great shots and massive misses, so I'm still learning what is my fault and what are the camera's weaknesses. Still, Sports Illustrated photographer Peter Read Miller seemed pretty impressed. I think I will take his word over yours.

So, I guess you can just label me a zealot if you want. But, at least I'm commenting out of actual experience instead of "feelings."
I couldn't agree more!:)
 

privatebydesign

I don't preorder, I'm not a paid beta tester!
Jan 29, 2011
8,811
2,732
120
This is exactly why so many of us get frustrated. You admit that you posted out of ignorance, but when you were unable to rationally argue your points you chose name calling, rather than acknowledging your lack of knowledge. See your comment below:



Personally, and as I have posted many times, I am not anxious to buy RF glass. (Well, maybe the 15-35, but it's fairly low on my priority list right now). I own the 24-105 because I took advantage of a tremendous Canon Price Watch deal and, since this is my most used lens I wanted to try the RF version and have the convenience of not using an adapter and constantly switching the EF lens between the R and the 5D.

With a mirrorless touch screen, joysticks are no longer needed. After just one day of test driving the R (rented before buying) I was happy to trade the touch screen for the joystick and every time I use the 5D, 1D or 7D I find myself wishing I had a touchscreen rather than a joystick.

I actually had to look at the R to see what you are talking about regarding the mode dial. There is a simple button that says MODE on it. Easier to use than any dial and much easier than the 1D system for changing modes. Someone would have to be pretty stupid not to be able to figure that out.

I don't know what you mean by "the buttons don't look comfortable." The AF On button isn't in the most convenient spot, but I hardly ever use it anyway, since focusing in servo using the touch screen is much easier and more accurate than a DSLR.

Yeah, the multi-function bar isn't all that useful and definitely needs a few tweaks. I suspect most of the problems could be solved by a firmware revision, but honestly, nobody has to use the bar if they don't want to. You aren't giving up anything that a DSLR has by turning it off.

I don't know what is mediocre about the R. I retails for $700 less than a 5DIV and, from personal experience, I would say that I get about 98% of the 5D performance for approximately 75% of the price. Plus, there are advantages that I can't get on the 5DIV or the 1D at any price (like the wonderful touch screen focus point selection, the massive increase in focus point coverage and never having to worry about AFMA).

I've never used another EVF, so I can't really declare whether the R is middle-of-the road or not, but since you've never used the R, I suspect you don't know either. Maybe it just sounded like a good thing to write or maybe you are just quoting some random reviewer. I know this, I thought I would hate the EVF, but I've found I actually like it quite well. Seeing the impact of exposure changes in real time is excellent. No more having to trust the DSLR's +/- exposure compensation markers and then checking the screen after the picture has been taken. In low light or difficult lighting situations (such as stage performances), being able to see what the exposure is going to look like and not having to guess is a real plus.

I guess "minimal" weather sealing is in the eyes of the beholder. Roger Cicala's teardown indicates very good weather sealing around buttons and knobs (the places that are the most vulnerable) and reliance on tightly fitting components for the body. I don't consider that "minimal" so much as a design and manufacturing change where today parts can be assembled to closer tolerances. Rubber seals might actually be less desirable than well fitting parts. I'm no manufacturing engineer so I'm not qualified to judge, but then I doubt if you are either.

I know some people feel like a single card slot is a deal breaker. So be it. As for me, I consider it silly. But then, I only had one film slot for most of my life and I had a lot more failures from the film not catching on the take up spool than I will ever have from a bad card.

Not sure what the basis is of your pronouncement that it isn't very good for sports or other action. Although I'm primarily a sports photographer, I've only tried some limited experiments with the R. I'm getting paid to bring back quality sports pictures and like most people who have to satisfy a client or employer, I'll stick with what I know, which is the 1Dx II and limit my experiments to times when I've already gotten what I need. But then, I''d say the same of the 5DIV. I've tried some sports and some birds in flight and have gotten both great shots and massive misses, so I'm still learning what is my fault and what are the camera's weaknesses. Still, Sports Illustrated photographer Peter Read Miller seemed pretty impressed. I think I will take his word over yours.

So, I guess you can just label me a zealot if you want. But, at least I'm commenting out of actual experience instead of "feelings."
Great back and forth.

My personal experiences seem to be counter to some users/owners but closer to the critics. I do not own the R or RP but I have now used both on multiple occasions at paying gigs, so a professional environment. I really like some aspects of the mirrorless design and enjoy using my M5 for casual use.

Very strong features I like when using the R:-
1: Touch drag focus. If you don't like it you haven't used it properly, I can't imagine trying to utilize that many focus points with a joystick!
2: The vastly expanded AF area, anybody that can't creatively use this feature is stuck in a 'Rule of Thirds' box of their own making, get out of it!
3: Silent operation. Once you have it and realize it is actually silent it can be enlightening and a game changer in and of itself, even if you don't shoot professionally having friends and family not switch to 'camera face' mode gets you the natural images you always wanted. If you are a landscape shooter it won't do anything for you, I agree.

Things I just don't yet like when using the R:-
1: Shooting dim events I found the focus lock and hit rate didn't compare to the 1DX MkII. The 1DX MkII AF is like a guided missile to focus in light I can barely compose in.
2: I didn't get on with the EVF because:-
  1. I found it being brighter than the scene to be distracting and not a positive for exposure confirmation, rather a negative for this and the other reasons listed.
  2. I personally found the DR of the EFV to be very disappointing. Maybe I'm not stating the technicality correctly but it seemed to me to have way too much contrast with blocked up shadows and no real detail.
  3. I found the refresh rate/lag to be very distracting, If I panned across a scene the delay seemed eternal and the 'catch up' nauseating. It was worst in a dim venue where I had two widely spaced subjects and I switched constantly from one to the other, something I can do with OVF's for days, a couple of hours with an EVF and I just didn't want to do it.
3: Build quality. Unfair comparison maybe but that is the choice we currently have, the R doesn't even compare in robustness to the 5 series let alone the 1 series and again, it is not really a fair comparison but I don't understand going backwards that far and it makes the R, for me personally, unusable in a professional environment. If I am constantly worrying about the care of the camera I am distracted to the point of not doing my job well enough.


These were the biggest take aways for me personally shooting with what I had. For the most part I was using a 1DX MkII with an original 70-200 f2.8 L IS (a 15 year old lens) and an R with an RF 24-105 f4 L IS.

I can see the usefulness of EVF's and the features these cameras have, personally at this point in their development I see them as complimentary tools to a current OVF kit not a replacement. If I can take two cameras it will be an OVF and an EVF for the enhanced capabilities, if I can only take one camera it is the 1DX MkII every time, I know it will deliver.
 
Last edited:

privatebydesign

I don't preorder, I'm not a paid beta tester!
Jan 29, 2011
8,811
2,732
120
The RF glass is simply incredible and is by far the best of the mirrorless canon lineup. The 50mm 1.2 is billions time better than the old 1.2, the 85 1.2 is so much sharper than the EF and without aberrations, the 28-70 f2 is a beast, nearly no aberrations and sharp corner to corner.
At this stage I am past it. Who cares? If your images are dependent on the differences between the lens quality of EF glass and RF glass then you have a bigger issue. I have been very fortunate in being able to buy pretty much whatever glass I want/need, I couldn't see the utility/value in 'upgrading' my 24-70 f2.8 L MkI to the MkII despite the fact that I tried three different copies. The change made no difference to my income or the visual interest in my images.

My most used lens doing the photography I enjoy the most is the very modest EF 35 f2IS, I don't care if the RF 35 f1.8 is a bit faster or sharper because it won't change how compelling, or not, my images are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jprusa

Bob Howland

EOS RP
Mar 25, 2012
516
118
Still, Sports Illustrated photographer Peter Read Miller seemed pretty impressed. I think I will take his word over yours.
OK, I took the bait and looked at his review of the R. He states right at the beginning that the R mount is larger than the EF mount. It isn't. It's the same diameter. My take is that it was a paid spokesman taking a swipe at Sony and I almost stopped watching. Other than that, the review was pretty good. He does mention that the R is only 5FPS which is slow. I had to laugh when he mentioned trying to get a shot of a baseball in contact with the bat. I have hundreds of shots trying to get just one. Maybe a 30FPS raw burst will help.

There was also a link to his discussion on lenses for sports, which was even better. He clearly likes the 7D2 for outdoor sports on a budget, especially with the 100-400. He recommends the 400 f/2.8 but that seems to be with the 1DX. I use a 300 f/2.8 L IS, 100-400 and Sigma 150-600S with a 7D but am seriously thinking of replacing it with a 90D. 32.5MP has gotten my attention.
 
Last edited:

Viggo

EOS R5
Dec 13, 2010
4,536
1,223
At this stage I am past it. Who cares? If your images are dependent on the differences between the lens quality of EF glass and RF glass then you have a bigger issue. I have been very fortunate in being able to buy pretty much whatever glass I want/need, I couldn't see the utility/value in 'upgrading' my 24-70 f2.8 L MkI to the MkII despite the fact that I tried three different copies. The change made no difference to my income or the visual interest in my images.

My most used lens doing the photography I enjoy the most is the very modest EF 35 f2IS, I don't care if the RF 35 f1.8 is a bit faster or sharper because it won't change how compelling, or not, my images are.
Not dependent on RF vs EF in general. But absolutely the RF50 and RF85 makes a huge difference compared to their EF counterpart. If one can’t see the differences, well...
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

canonnews

EOS RP
Dec 27, 2017
663
1,030
Canada
www.canonnews.com
May be Canon's main obstacle at the moment is IBIS. May be Canon doesn't want to release a 5DV type mirrorless without IBIS. After all, reading the forums, it appears that Canon will be doomed if it doesn't have IBIS in its next FF mirrorless.
it could very well be a hindrance.

as we've seen in the countless patents surrounding Canon's implementation of IBIS + IS integration there is a ton of considerations to it.

I don't think we've seen Canon work as hard as they are now on AF improvements via firmware as we are seeing with the RF series cameras. That also seems to have been used jointly with the EOS-M and EOS EF firmware bases as well, which the 90D and the M6 Mark II sport significantly advanced mirrorless based AF.

There's a logical but steady work flow from looking back to the 1DX Mark II forward on how Canon is progressing;

Canon is working on optimizing it's AF performance with both eyeAF and subject tracking and detection on DPAF sensors as we have seen with the EOS R/RP especially with this next firmware release. That's important - if not even hyper-critical to get done. Canon now can handle 14FPS *WITH* DPAF tracking. that's an insanely good performance increase. People should be looking at what the M6 Mark II can do and thinking. This is coming.

According to the noise levels recorded for the 90D there hasn't been a generational improvement over the current 24MP APS-C sensors, so I'm not sure we're seeing that much sensor advancement, it could very well be waiting for the 1DX Mark III to show Canon's latest and greatest sensor. Since this is what they did with the 1DX Mark II, it makes sense that the 1DX Mark III would kick things off. 1DX Mark II demonstrated the first full frame DPAF sensor with integrated slope ADC's running on a sensor produced by an entirely new sensor fab line (Canon moved from 500nm to 300nm).

For those that seem to always suggest that it will cost billions for canon to upgrade their fabs, they did it without anyone even knowing between the 1DX and the 1DX Mark II for their full frame sensors. They may even have been forced to do it again for the 1DX Mark III.

IMO, life would simpler for Canon if they could get their 180nm quad metal fabrication that they are currently using for APS-C sensors, working for full frame. But to be honest, Canon hasn't even discussed *how* they are making full frame sensors these days. Are they still doing three exposures to make the full surface area of the sensor, or have they reduced that down to 1 exposure (a stepper and other equipment have a maximum size, which is why APS-C and also APS-H came into being, because it was less than the maximum size that a stepper could expose).

This turned into a longer post than I originally wanted :p

Summary. there are alot of moving parts to where Canon needs to get to, and it's only been 1 year since the RF mount came into being.
 

rbielefeld

EOS M6 Mark II
Apr 22, 2015
96
189
I’m jealous of your travels
Enjoy Antarctica
I am being stubbornly loyal to canon but am almost frightened to see what the new A9 will be like.
Maybe I’ll keep my L lenses and 7d but just add a Sony body with one lens?
Ugh don’t want to learn a new UI and worry about adding having 2 lens collections.

How would you pull that off?
I am doing what you are thinking about doing. I have a 5DIV, 1DxII, and now a Sony a9. Canon glass adapts and works well with the a9 for what I do. Birds and Birds in Flight. I have done a lot of comparing between Sony 200-600mm, 400 2.8, 100-400mm and Canon 100-400 and 600 f/4 on the a9. The a9 paired with native lenses is very capable and better than my 1DxII in the AF and Tracking departments. With adapted glass it is not quite as good, but, again, it works for me.

To me the a9 AF system and no blackout EVF really are class leading. I love being able to see the exposure through the viewfinder and how quite it is compared to my 1DxII, which at times does cause issues related to disturbing birds and other wildlife.

The a9II will be something to watch very closely to see what it brings to the table that the a9 does not. Canon will, within a couple of years, most likely, have a pro mirrorless to compete with the Sony a9, but for now, I am using the Sony a9 with adapted Canon glass and the Sony 200-600mm. I will keep my 1DxII and my Canon glass until I see what Canon offers in a pro mirrorless. I am confident it will be very good.
 

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,775
891
UK
www.flickr.com
After the past couple of months I actually started saying that I think Canon is going to wind down commitment to nature photographers.
It's only just a year since they released the 400 and 600 mark III lenses, I don't see that as winding down... Just because there are lulls in what they release doesn't mean we can discern any overarching pattern. I doubt very much a company that has made such a big deal of wildlife photography will just abandon the sector, even if the 7D3 never appears (and that is still uncertain).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joaquim

privatebydesign

I don't preorder, I'm not a paid beta tester!
Jan 29, 2011
8,811
2,732
120
Not dependent on RF vs EF in general. But absolutely the RF50 and RF85 makes a huge difference compared to their EF counterpart. If one can’t see the differences, well...
I think you are missing the point, you and I can see the difference, but in the scheme of things how more or less compelling are the respective images to the target market? I'd say your images pre and post RF are effectively the same, in the same way that you can see the difference between your Profoto and Broncolor images but nobody else can unless you point them out. The people that look at your images are much more impacted by the juxtaposition of the subject on the swing/climbing frame etc than if the corner of the image has less CA or fractionally more sharpness.

That doesn't mean you don't get more keepers with the RF, or enjoy using it more, my comment was purely directed at the point that we were well into incremental changes and that doesn't impact the actual content of images to any meaningful degree.
 

raistmaj

I'm New Here
Jul 7, 2019
9
15
I don't use the touch bar in the EOS R, I would prefer a Joystick but that doesn't mean other people don't find it useful. If you ask me, I would like it removed

About the RF - EF topic, as a photographer you have to study your composition/light/surroundings/etc to get the shot, sometimes you don't have that time to get a good shot, having a tool that allows me more extreme conditions (backlights, low light, more out of focus areas) knowing that I don't have to pay attention to those factors and still get high quality/contrast/sharpness that I can sell the print/image to a customer without expending hours in post is something important to consider. For amateur, beginner (or if you are not going to use it) I would never consider such expensive glass, I would love to have the 200-400 1.4, I have the money to get it, but I don't because I wouldn't use it, that doesn't mean I can't appreciate that is a superb lens and I can get results with that optic that it would be way harder with others.

As personal experience, I started with a 50mm EF 1.4, upgrading to the EF 1.2 was a bit of a disappointment as at the end I didn't get too much quality and the results, because of the aberrations and general softness, made me sell that lens as I was always stepping down to the same apertures of the EF 1.4, if I buy a fast lens I want to use that lens at those apertures, if the lens is not usable because of the quality, personally, is not worth, I'm my biggest critic so I would never sell to a customer any picture that I don't consider good from all points, composition, light, technical..., I would simply not show them the shot, I don't care if they like it or I like it, for me it must be perfect on every aspect..

Getting the RFs allowed me to take pictures that in the past I simply couldn't take because of the points I mention or I had to expend hours in photoshop to sharpen, remove aberrations and for me, that is really not worth, specially when you have to do this for hundreds of pictures. Personally, I know nobody that has tried these new lenses for more than s week, and has that opinion, their only comments are about how expensive they are and I have to agree with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joaquim

tvb

Apr 12, 2019
6
9
I personally found the DR of the EFV to be very disappointing. Maybe I'm not stating the technicality correctly but it seemed to me to have way too much contrast with blocked up shadows and no real detail.
It simulates chosen Picture Style. If you shoot RAW, you can choose less-contrasty style (or adjust contrast slider in the chosen style) to have a bit more shadow detail in EVF.
 

Viggo

EOS R5
Dec 13, 2010
4,536
1,223
I think you are missing the point, you and I can see the difference, but in the scheme of things how more or less compelling are the respective images to the target market? I'd say your images pre and post RF are effectively the same, in the same way that you can see the difference between your Profoto and Broncolor images but nobody else can unless you point them out. The people that look at your images are much more impacted by the juxtaposition of the subject on the swing/climbing frame etc than if the corner of the image has less CA or fractionally more sharpness.

That doesn't mean you don't get more keepers with the RF, or enjoy using it more, my comment was purely directed at the point that we were well into incremental changes and that doesn't impact the actual content of images to any meaningful degree.
I can agree with that to a point indeed. I tend to forget some people shoot for other people, clients etc. Whenever I’m happy with a shot people sometimes like something I shot with my iPhone better. It’s quite insulting. JK :ROFLMAO:
 

privatebydesign

I don't preorder, I'm not a paid beta tester!
Jan 29, 2011
8,811
2,732
120
Or put another way, the EF 20-35 f2.8 was a dog of a lens, but it was the best we had. The 16-35's improved on that to the point that the MkIII is a very good lens, the 16-35 f4 IS is an amazingly good and cheap ultra wide and the 11-24 gave me a perspective I couldn't get with anything else at an IQ basically matching anything at equivalent focal lengths and apertures. So in EF I have the choice of f2.8's of very high quality, and f4's with unique focal length ranges or price points and with IS. What does an RF 15-35 f2.8 IS give me that I don't already have, a few more LPPMM?

I don't care about a few more LPPMM, in my opinion the $2,500 is better spent on a workshop or travel, they will make a much bigger difference to my output.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joaquim

Drcampbellicu

EOS 90D
Jul 31, 2019
127
90
I am doing what you are thinking about doing. I have a 5DIV, 1DxII, and now a Sony a9. Canon glass adapts and works well with the a9 for what I do. Birds and Birds in Flight. I have done a lot of comparing between Sony 200-600mm, 400 2.8, 100-400mm and Canon 100-400 and 600 f/4 on the a9. The a9 paired with native lenses is very capable and better than my 1DxII in the AF and Tracking departments. With adapted glass it is not quite as good, but, again, it works for me.

To me the a9 AF system and no blackout EVF really are class leading. I love being able to see the exposure through the viewfinder and how quite it is compared to my 1DxII, which at times does cause issues related to disturbing birds and other wildlife.

The a9II will be something to watch very closely to see what it brings to the table that the a9 does not. Canon will, within a couple of years, most likely, have a pro mirrorless to compete with the Sony a9, but for now, I am using the Sony a9 with adapted Canon glass and the Sony 200-600mm. I will keep my 1DxII and my Canon glass until I see what Canon offers in a pro mirrorless. I am confident it will be very good.
This was helpful
Thank you
I might add a new body and just one lense If it sounds like canon won’t have anything new for me in a year
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joaquim

AlanF

Stay alert, control the camera, save photos
Aug 16, 2012
6,824
5,831
I use the 7DMII as my main camera (wildlife) and just retired my original one that had over 380 K clicks (rated for 200 K) even though it was still functioning without a problem and bought another one because I see nothing that Canon is currently offering that is equivalent or beats it. I bought the R thinking I could use it for a walkabout camera, landscape shots, low light shots, and "maybe" even wildlife since I originally started with the Rebel 350 and figured it couldn't be worse than that. Well, for me it is. It's just fine if you stick with wide angle lenses or any little light weight lens but if you go to the 70-200/2.8 or the 100-400 II there is no way you can handhold the lens, touch focus on the screen, back button focus and trip the shutter--you have to be an octopus! It's not a problem with the 24-105 lens and smaller. Also the touch sensor just is not accurate with a rapidly moving bird in the frame and the intelligent autofocus leaves something to be desired for rapidly moving subjects. No problem with still subjects. I find it to be a camera that does well in certain limited situations but general wildlife where there is a chance of movement is not one unless you want to risk the chance of missing the focus.
As far as weather sealing, a recent post this this forum from an R owner revealed water encroachment in the EVF after minimal shower exposure (compared to what his other equipment had experienced). He was shocked at how insignificant the exposure was that resulted in the damage (which thankfully was reversed by dehumidification treatment). My take away from Cicala's teardown was that Sony's not known for being very weather resistant and the R looks just like the Sony so don't think it's any better. My just retired 7DMKII warhorse had been to 7 continents, multiple times to Africa, the Andes, the Gobi, Kolihari and Namibian deserts, both the Arctic and Antarctic multiple times--and looked like it--but never missed a beat. It had only been in for general and sensor cleaning. I doubt I'll be able to say the same for the R after reading the recent reports. That's still not to say that I haven't taken some nice shots with it, it's just not as versatile for me as the 7DMKII
Catherine
Recent trip to Farne IS for Puffins. First from the R; second from the 7DMKII:
The R has lots of fine features and is clearly a competent camera giving fine results for many activities. But, I am cheesed off with R owners telling us how wonderful the EOS R is for wild life photography when it is clear that they haven't a clue about shooting wild life with long lenses and following birds and the requirements for real nature photography. There are too many reports about its inadequacies and even Neuro, who is no slouch, has posted how he can't use it for birds in flight. I am still getting good results from my ageing DSLR Canon gear and am looking forward to getting a 90D next week, which should give me great resolution on good, dry, days. But, when it comes to mirrorless, Sony is years ahead. The A9 II is going to be announced next month and is rumoured to have a 36 Mpx sensor to go with the best available mirrorless AF and proper weather resistance. Sony have also brought out the 200-600mm f/6.3, which is performing superbly on the A9 and the 6400.

An earlier post told Catherine in her mid 70s to wait for the 1DX mirrorless. Come off it! It will be a long wait and if it has the heft of the current 1DXs it won't be suitable for us oldies who are not only in a hurry but don't have the biceps of youngsters.
 

slclick

Cyclist, photog, drummer & sardonic haiku writer
Dec 17, 2013
4,121
2,061
May be Canon's main obstacle at the moment is IBIS. May be Canon doesn't want to release a 5DV type mirrorless without IBIS. After all, reading the forums, it appears that Canon will be doomed if it doesn't have IBIS in its next FF mirrorless.
Funny, it's not even in my top ten of what I want in a 5D level mirrorless body from Canon. The IS in the L lenses is top notch, I have never been left wanting.