I'd be fairly surprised if the 2020 R5 stays in Canon's catalog very long after the R6Mark III is released.
Upvote
0
The Canon EOS R6 Mark III is Canon’s Next Full-Frame Release
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
I'd be fairly surprised if the 2020 R5 stays in Canon's catalog very long after the R6Mark III is released.
The R3 was more than a 'little" over $4K when launched, and for a good while after, though. It was $2K more.
Upvote
0
Ive deliberately held off buying the R5 MKII to see whether the R6 MKIII has a higher MP sensor than the MKII. If the rumoured 32MP sensor turns out to be accurate then I think that's the sweet spot for a stills centric camera (much like the original EOS R). If so then I will not be buying the R5 MKII but I will hold onto the R5 and the R6MKII. What will likely go will be the R10.
Upvote
0
Indeed, but since there is only one camera in a given price bracket, everyone gets stuck with the same trade-offs. I'm not a fan of trading off image quality & low light performance in the name of faster readout speeds. There are plenty of other cameras on the market that already have faster readouts.
Upvote
0
I've not heard many, if any, others say that it's a problem. Your contributions to this forum seem relentlessly negative, what's the point?
Upvote
0
You’ve posted this nonsense before, yet you have never used the RF200-800mm lens. And you are wrong about the AF motor of the RF200-800mm lens.
Roger Cicala was and still is right when he said: “Sonyfanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy with other equipment. “
Upvote
0
I just gave the standard search response, a Googling your argument would be with them
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I've used Canon in the past. And Nikon. And other brands. Currently I mostly own Sony, it is true. I bought Sony because they offer things that Canon refuses to. I don't think it's unreasonable to demand better when you're spending good money.
I don't know why Canon users seem terrified of demanding better and instead defend the corner-cutting and low-budget things that Canon does when still charging premium prices.
Upvote
0
If it makes you happier to think that, go ahead.
Personally I want Canon to do better. And Nikon to do better. And Sony to do better. None of them are perfect.
Canon puts crappy AF motors into many of their lenses and sells "RF" super-teles that are just EF lenses with flanges. Worse, they sell the 800 and 1200 that are ridiculously the 400 and 600 with 2x TCs built in. "But they perform better than using the standard 2x extender" I hear you say. Then why didn't Canon just make & sell special 2x extenders for their 400 & 600? Charge $1k for them. Nope, gotta charge $20k for a lens with an extender permanently installed instead. SMH.
Nikon to their credit has been working on a lot of their issues. Their AF has gotten a LOT better, and the new ZR looks very promising as a start of a cine lineup. But they still won't allow Sigma onto FF Z, they seem to be terrified of them. They also limit Tamron. And of course many Z lenses still have STM AF, even a number of quite expensive S line lenses. There are various video issues as well. Nikon is also very bad about cutting corners to hit price points and has too many recalls. Lenses falling off cameras. Strap lugs falling out of cameras. The Z8 is made of plastic instead of a full magnesium frame. They've been working hard. If I was buying into mirrorless today from scratch, I would seriously consider a Z8 even with the issues.
Sony is fanatical about keeping their different cameras segmented. The upcoming A7V is almost certainly going to use the A7IV sensor and still be limited to 10fps because Sony will not put a faster sensor into their base FF camera, they will not allow it to get closer in performance to their higher end bodies. They won't give it better video features so it can't steal sales from the A7S series. They limit video features in their FX line to protect sales of higher end cine cameras. They won't/can't bring out something to compete with the Z8 or R5II because they're terrified it would cannibalize A1 sales. Sony is also very bad about firmware updates. They didn't used to be this way (original A9 got GREAT firmware updates) but in recent years they have not provided anywhere near the same level of firmware support as (for example) Nikon has done. Sony also charges the most for their cameras. Oh, and while Sony does let pretty much any 3rd party glass onto E, they limit it all to 15fps and do not allow teleconverters. They also don't support some forms of in-camera correction such as the useful focus breathing correction in video.
None of these brands are perfect. They all have areas to improve. This is a Canon forum so it would be weird for me to talk about Sony or Nikon shortcomings here. It's important to call out these makers and push for them to do better. They DO read the forums. Of course they don't always listen.
Things will get even more interesting when the Chinese start making cameras. That day is coming fast. The early ones will likely suck but they will improve very quickly. If the Japanese makers don't get their houses in order PDQ, things are going to get ugly.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Well I kind of get it. It's a business over all and they want to make money. And there are probably very few people who would decide to buy Nikon over Canon just because of that top LCD. So it saves them money and they probably don't lose that many customers on it. And it may even convince few people to buy the R5 instead of the R6 (if they're on the fence).
I know not many people use it even on the R5, it's just a useful feature to me.
Upvote
0
Imagine that! Timex refuses to sell watches at very cheap prices that are as good as expensive Rolex watches! What is this world coming to?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
In terms of image quality, my EF 50mm f/1.4 is no better than the EF 50mm f/1.8 II that preceded it at f/2 and beyond. At f/1.8 the 1.4 is *slightly* sharper.
The big difference for me was usability and not worrying that the mount ring would crack in two during the middle of a shoot. Now that the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM has been around with all of the same usability and "build quality" advantages of the 50/1.4, I'd have zero qualms using it instead of the 50/1.4 should my current 50/1.4 break. (Though the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM seems to be getting pretty hard to find since it has been discontinued.)
Upvote
0
The AF issue had nothing to do with optical performance when the focus elements are able to reach the intended position. The issue was a mechanical weakness in the helical collar that could cause the lenses to get stuck at certain focus positions if the lens had been bumped even moderately with the front of the lens extended as it is for close focusing.
Upvote
0
You're blaming ISO for poor performance when the real issue is lack of light, and what little light there is being of very poor quality.
Upvote
0
