This is similar to Apple's tactic, making older devices slower intentionally to get you to HAVE TO buy the newer ones...quite sinister actually...In other words, we have no way of knowing but it is always easy to say "cripple hammer".
Upvote
0
This is similar to Apple's tactic, making older devices slower intentionally to get you to HAVE TO buy the newer ones...quite sinister actually...In other words, we have no way of knowing but it is always easy to say "cripple hammer".
That hasn't been my experience when my 7 year old MBP was running at the same speed as when I bought it but wasn't powerful enough for my new R5's images and video.This is similar to Apple's tactic, making older devices slower intentionally to get you to HAVE TO buy the newer ones...quite sinister actually...
the official press release/blurb says fixes minor issues... too minor to mention explicitlyIs that it? All a bit underwhelming. Whenever they mention 'bug fixes' I wish they'd tell us what bugs have been fixed.
Some? The use cases that don’t involve using a tripod will involve setting the camera on a concrete block, on a brick wall, on a steel beam, and similar setups.Does the feature automatically disable lens IS? Some use cases for this high res mode will be tripod shots,
Canon does usually let us disable lens IS without disabling IBIS.Does the feature automatically disable lens IS? Some use cases for this high res mode will be tripod shots, and Canon recommends to disable lens IS when using a tripod.
I just downloaded 1.8.1 and the manual. Yes, it does disable lens IS and it is meant to be used only on a tripod (and a stable one at that). I took a couple of shots with and EF 200mm f/2.8L set at f/4 (one of the sharpest lenses I have) and gave it a go. The result compared well to a decent 600mm lens and the JPEG file is 170 MB. It takes LR several seconds to zoom in on a fast computer. Given the JPEG output, this is only good for situations with decent lighting, but the final result is remarkably sharp for nearly 10x the pixel count of the sensor. When I get some decent light, I will try some wide shots with the RF 14-35. This is not something you would use every day, but it defintely has a place.Canon does usually let us disable lens IS without disabling IBIS.
I wonder if that is still the case with this new feature.
Let's look at things logically. People expected great things due to rumors, not facts, nor even based on what firmware updates typically include - even in the very recent past. Did Canon add these updated AF features to the R6? NO. They put them in the Mark II version of the camera. So isn't it logical that Canon will do the same with the R5?Very true, but IMO that doesn't excuse them.
It should have been perfectly possible to add the AF updates found in the R3/R6ii/ and even in the "cheap" R7. It should also have been possible to add pre-capture (even if only for JPEGs), not to mention variable fps and exposure bracketing in ES.
They clearly made a *choice* to NOT include these features, which are probably far more useful to the bulk of users. With no sign of a R5ii on the horizon, it's pretty disappointing. I suspect it's part of a cunning plan by Canon to get people who want these features to buy a R6ii or R7 as a second body.
Good heavens Man! What a totally, ridiculously, mature adult attitude! I'm afraid you will now be banned from CR!I am an R3 owner.
While I do get jealous of cheaper Canon cameras getting features I do not feel entitled to any of them.
If I was not happy with what the R3 had at the time that I bought it then I would not have bought it.
I thought it was included for the R3 - Maybe I am missing something @neuroanatomistI generally agree, although I will admit I would be rather miffed if they didn’t provide compatibility with the EL-5 flash.
You’re orrect. My point was that I’d be frustrated if they hadn’t provided compatibility.I thought it was included for the R3 - Maybe I am missing something @neuroanatomist
You have obviously spent no time in Sony forums ;-)Nah, Sony can do no wrong, Sony cameras are absolutely perfect in every possible way, everyone else is d00med
Perhaps some people’s setups aren’t as stable as they think. I have a rock solid tripod and head (RRS TVC-33 and BH-55). When I set them up in my living room, there’s vibration transmitted through the hardwood flooring over a wooden subfloor. In the basement (tile/wood over concrete slab) or garage (bare concrete slab), there is none.Seems like the real question here is why are some people getting weird artifacts, while others are not and their test images look amazing.
More research needs to be done.
Ah, yep went right over my head:You’re orrect. My point was that I’d be frustrated if they hadn’t provided compatibility.
Same application as in my SL2. Works well for landscapes and moonshots in particular.In my experience, Sony's implementation is a half-baked gimmick. Creates multiple files in camera that must be moved to a computer and converted to a single RAW file using Sony's slow and clunky Imaging Edge software. My A7RIV has no motion compensation and the movement artifacts require so much editing it's not worth it. The A7RV now has motion compensation but without in-camera RAW files it's a no-go.
Lumix's version works exceptionally well. Single 187MP RAW file in-camera. Two configurations for motion detection and I use both depending on the subject. It's about as close to having a camera with a 187MP sensor as you can get.
Was hoping to move back to Canon for smaller/lighter R5 body and better lens selection but this doesn't look quite there yet.
Right, that's how I managed to get a test photo after careful handholding was a bust. I did not see the artifacts but It was not a very careful photo of my coffee mug at mfd.Some? The use cases that don’t involve using a tripod will involve setting the camera on a concrete block, on a brick wall, on a steel beam, and similar setups.