Anything wrong with the current R or RP that makes you so desperate?I wish canon would hurry the F up with the R2 or RP2
Upvote
0
Anything wrong with the current R or RP that makes you so desperate?I wish canon would hurry the F up with the R2 or RP2
You laugh at me, but you defend the pathetic crap Canon did with the EOS-M line? I laugh at you. LOL I hate seeing stuff like this. The M50 accomplished exactly what it was intended, but they left a lot of potential on the table which is why I abandoned their APS-C cameras for Fujifilm. It never matured into the camera system that matched the performance capability of the M6 Mark II. Adapting EF and EF-S lenses completely negates the benefits of building a small mirrorless system,"Failures" lol. They learned they can sell a lot of cameras without needing to produce a big range of dedicated or high end lenses. I would expect them to release some of the other M lenses as RF-S because of the minimal development costs, but beyond that I think you misunderstand who they aim these things at. You want higher end, you use RF or adapted EF.
(If they won't put weather sealing in consumer superteles that you might expect to use in rain like the RF 800 f/11, I think there's no chance the APS-C ones will get it).
The Canon speedbooster isn't specific to the C70, the "not compatible" talk seems to deal with lens corrections being available, not with actual compatibility. In one of the R7 live streams someone asked Rudy Winston about it and he said something like "I think it will work... <pause> ehm... <pause> I'm not sure why it isn't officially supported, maybe software?" It was funny to see Rudy remember the official line after starting to answerTo change the subject slightly, do you think Canon will introduce a 1-stop speed booster for the APS-C R-mount cameras like they have available for the C70? Doing the math, with a 1.6X crop factor, they could conceivably do a 1-1/3 stop booster.
Anything wrong with the current R or RP that makes you so desperate?
I suspect an RP2 would be the same as the original, but with the R6 sensor and Digic X. It will probably lack IBIS as well.RP was a letdown, crap battery etc.. RP2 hopefully will have same pixels or even slightly higher, maybe an upgrade in fps, LPE6 battery, proper 4k, no recording limit or increased to an hour at leasta d hopefully it can come in under $1400.
Maybe lack of ibis?Anything wrong with the current R or RP that makes you so desperate?
I was really sad to hear that the M-series cameras were on their way out. I had just decided to buy one. I rented a M6 for a trip instead of taking one of my other cameras and I LOVED the size, weight, and, ultimately, the picture quality. Not the greatest but certainly acceptable for the use. So, rather than buying a camera with a known short-ish lifespan, I'm holding off until Canon drops the replacement. I like that my RF lenses may come into use. On the other hand, most of my RF lenses are NOT small, light and versatile. So.. we'll wait and see. Maybe Canon will come out with a small RF lens to match the small body. I dunno.More than likely just up like the Canon M200. As much as it sucks to hear it they are going to gear the camera towards VLogging. The small % of people that will complain about the minor things it has issues with when it comes to photography will not be a priority to them as it most likely won't be enough people to matter. For the general public most will be happy with the stills capabilities it will have at that price point, just as they were with the M200.
Unlike you, I'm still rather in the EF sytem (14 EFs, 1 RF lens...).I was really sad to hear that the M-series cameras were on their way out. I had just decided to buy one. I rented a M6 for a trip instead of taking one of my other cameras and I LOVED the size, weight, and, ultimately, the picture quality. Not the greatest but certainly acceptable for the use. So, rather than buying a camera with a known short-ish lifespan, I'm holding off until Canon drops the replacement. I like that my RF lenses may come into use. On the other hand, most of my RF lenses are NOT small, light and versatile. So.. we'll wait and see. Maybe Canon will come out with a small RF lens to match the small body. I dunno.
Meh.. I should probably just buy the M6. I have an AE-1 and an A-1.
I do still have a number of EF lenses. Heck, I even have some FD lenses! LOL. (Yes.. sometimes I put them on the EOS R and then decide I hate them there and put them back where they belong. But I can. I don't have gear syndrome in regard to buying cameras. But I have a weakness for lenses.) But.. yeah.. I think I'm gonna get one too. I wish the prices would come down a bit. But.. meh.. it's only money, right? LOLUnlike you, I'm still rather in the EF sytem (14 EFs, 1 RF lens...).
That's why I've decided to buy an M6 II. The M system is not yet discontinued, even though , it seems, no longer evolving. But a good camera last 1 or more decades, so, getting an M 6 can't be an error. I doubt the "mini" APS/C R will as small, and the RF lenses rather huge...
M6 plus 3 lenses, and you have an excellent lightweight system, for certainl less money than the RF APS /C equivalent.
Oh dear. Listen, I have no strong opinions about the M line. I just don't imagine every device or range has to meet my personal needs, or those of every potential customer. Some things are aimed at casual users, newbies, or people for whom price or size trump all other considerations. I'm quite willing to believe Fuji's APS-C offerings are better for enthusiasts or professionals, but they are a very different company with different goals (or rather, they seek to achieve the same goal, maximising profit, by a different strategy to Canon).You laugh at me, but you defend the pathetic crap Canon did with the EOS-M line? I laugh at you. LOL I hate seeing stuff like this. The M50 accomplished exactly what it was intended, but they left a lot of potential on the table which is why I abandoned their APS-C cameras for Fujifilm. It never matured into the camera system that matched the performance capability of the M6 Mark II. Adapting EF and EF-S lenses completely negates the benefits of building a small mirrorless system,
A Quality Control manager at a previous employer maintained that it was the good customers who complained. The poor customers just went away and you never knew what you had to do to keep them as a customer.Gentle complaints are often the most effective
According to the Q&A on B&H for the Canon 1.4X speed booster, originally intended to use with the C70, that booster does work with both the R7 and R10. The responses to questions for both Metabones were pretty negative.Agreed. So Metabones it is. I own one (1.4x) to attach EF lenses to an M5. It's pretty erratic but the image quality is better than I expected.
Please remove the extremely irritating "consent to cookies" window that pops up every time I click on any link on this site.
My experience:Maybe lack of ibis?
This is what bothers me most, when using my "new" baby, the EF 180 macro.
Thanks for the info. 1 stop improvement will not justify the acquisition of a new body, money saved for travel!My experience:
Using the 180mm macro on 5DS, 5DMkiv and R5 bodies, IBIS only makes a very small amount of difference to hand-holdability - probably about a 0.5 to 1 stop improvement with the R5 in my case (IBIS effectiveness will vary according to how "shaky" the photographer is).
Using my other EF lenses (that have OIS) on the above bodies shows that by far the biggest contribution to reducing camera shake comes from the OIS, not the IBIS.
The longer the lens, the more important OIS and less importance of IBIS.My experience:
Using the 180mm macro on 5DS, 5DMkiv and R5 bodies, IBIS only makes a very small amount of difference to hand-holdability - probably about a 0.5 to 1 stop improvement with the R5 in my case (IBIS effectiveness will vary according to how "shaky" the photographer is).
Using my other EF lenses (that have OIS) on the above bodies shows that by far the biggest contribution to reducing camera shake comes from the OIS, not the IBIS.
I haven't noticed any (big) improvement in the resulting pictures either, but the EVF is a lot more pleasant to use with IBIS enabled.My experience:
Using the 180mm macro on 5DS, 5DMkiv and R5 bodies, IBIS only makes a very small amount of difference to hand-holdability - probably about a 0.5 to 1 stop improvement with the R5 in my case (IBIS effectiveness will vary according to how "shaky" the photographer is).
Using my other EF lenses (that have OIS) on the above bodies shows that by far the biggest contribution to reducing camera shake comes from the OIS, not the IBIS.