The first supertelephoto for the RF mount to be an RF 500mm f/4L IS [CR1]

[Equinox]

I'm no wildlife or sport shooter but this surely means if true (noted its CR1) that a EOS 1R type pro weather sealed, mid range MPix, insane AF, pro ergonomics, badman of a camera is coming?

I really hope so, I am a unequivocal canon fanboy and would love Canon to smash it out the park!

 

[YuengLinger]

I'm no wildlife or sport shooter but this surely means if true (noted its CR1) that a EOS 1R type pro weather sealed, mid range MPix, insane AF, pro ergonomics, badman of a camera is coming?

I really hope so, I am a unequivocal canon fanboy and would love Canon to smash it out the park!

Right. I don't see how they can release this BEFORE at least an RF equivalent of a 5D IV. Still, apparently, no sooner than next year?

 

[Anthny]

I would really like to see a RF 200-600mm lens at a reasonable price ($3000-$4000). I plan on switching to mirrorless when the new camera comes out. I currently have a 5DIV, which is a wonderful camera.

 

[neuroanatomist]

...an RF equivalent of a 5D IV.

I keep seeing comments like this, but I don’t understand them. The EOS R is pretty much a 5DIV, actually a bit better in some ways. People fixate on two fewer frames per second in Servo, but ignore the fact that the RAW buffer on the R is more than twice as deep. The R can track faces in Servo AF. The only significant advantage of the 5DIV is a second card slot, and using it for the only purpose it can be reasonably claimed it’s necessary (writing files to both cards in case one fails) means slower shooting once that shallower buffer is full, and substantially longer time to clear that buffer. I wonder how many comments like this can be attributed to 5DIV owners feeling bitter that an equivalent if not better camera was released for over $1K less than they paid.

Now, if the argument is there will be no RF supertele before an RF mount 1-series equivalent body, I see the logic there.

 

[BillB]

I keep seeing comments like this, but I don’t understand them. The EOS R is pretty much a 5DIV, actually a bit better in some ways. People fixate on two fewer frames per second in Servo, but ignore the fact that the RAW buffer on the R is more than twice as deep. The R can track faces in Servo AF. The only significant advantage of the 5DIV is a second card slot, and using it for the only purpose it can be reasonably claimed it’s necessary (writing files to both cards in case one fails) means slower shooting once that shallower buffer is full, and substantially longer time to clear that buffer. I wonder how many comments like this can be attributed to 5DIV owners feeling bitter that an equivalent if not better camera was released for over $1K less than they paid.

Now, if the argument is there will be no RF supertele before an RF mount 1-series equivalent body, I see the logic there.

Might be envy. Might also be infatuation with bells and whistles and/or magic numbers.

 

[Jack Douglas]

I keep seeing comments like this, but I don’t understand them. The EOS R is pretty much a 5DIV, actually a bit better in some ways. People fixate on two fewer frames per second in Servo, but ignore the fact that the RAW buffer on the R is more than twice as deep. The R can track faces in Servo AF. The only significant advantage of the 5DIV is a second card slot, and using it for the only purpose it can be reasonably claimed it’s necessary (writing files to both cards in case one fails) means slower shooting once that shallower buffer is full, and substantially longer time to clear that buffer. I wonder how many comments like this can be attributed to 5DIV owners feeling bitter that an equivalent if not better camera was released for over $1K less than they paid.

Now, if the argument is there will be no RF supertele before an RF mount 1-series equivalent body, I see the logic there.

I can accept this to a degree but here are my thoughts, having bought the R and fairly quickly decided it was not for me ... provided a larger camera is on the horizon. I was fortunate in that my daughter wanted a new camera and so my purchase was fail-safe. For now I'm the owner of two relatively expensive (useless) adapters.

We shot together for enough time for me to get a feeling for the camera based on her results but unfortunately my hands were on it very little. I love a lot about the camera (and the ND filter adapter!). However, my biggest negative would be it's too small size in relation to a larger telephoto. I would also not be pleased with some aspects of its lack of programmability and 1 level features such as a narrower spot focus.

It does make sense as a backup to a 1DX2 but it's a burr in the saddle relative to its higher MPs that can be so helpful when one is reach limited. It reminds me of shooting with the 1D4 and having the 6D as the second camera, with the 6D being so much better at high ISO and having more MPs but being poorer relative to AF (in the present case one can not fault the 1DX2 on ISO performance relative to the R, since it is very good, but I suspect better 1 level AF is on the horizon).

If I were Canon I'd definitely want the 1 level R camera to knock it out of the park and to me that means there must be an option to have a choice of super fast with less MPs and slower with more MPs but that's because I'm often reach limited. In other scenarios 20 MPs is fine.

It no longer makes any sense to force those who want/need 1 level features to be stuck with significantly less resolution such as is presently the case ... and carrying two cameras hiking for miles is not my idea of a great solution.

Jack

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I meant shorter than 400 X2 - wouldn't that be realistic? The 400 DO II is my reference for length and weight that I handle fairly well.
Now we have a lighter 400 2.8 but the performance seems to be quite compromised with the extenders.

From what I've seen the mkII 400 LIS is just as good optically as the mkI....just a lot lighter and the new mkIII is even more lighter and optically with 2x TC...looks a little bit better.

The optics of the mkI with a 2x were never in question, but it's ability to accurately and quickly focus with a 2x is questionable.
I've had some astonishingly sharp images wide open with a 2x TC on my mkI. But only if I use live view focusing.

 

[SecureGSM]

I keep seeing comments like this, but I don’t understand them. The EOS R is pretty much a 5DIV, actually a bit better in some ways. People fixate on two fewer frames per second in Servo, but ignore the fact that the RAW buffer on the R is more than twice as deep. The R can track faces in Servo AF. The only significant advantage of the 5DIV is a second card slot, and using it for the only purpose it can be reasonably claimed it’s necessary (writing files to both cards in case one fails) means slower shooting once that shallower buffer is full, and substantially longer time to clear that buffer. I wonder how many comments like this can be attributed to 5DIV owners feeling bitter that an equivalent if not better camera was released for over $1K less than they paid.

Now, if the argument is there will be no RF supertele before an RF mount 1-series equivalent body, I see the logic there.

--- snip ----

Lensrentals did a teardown of the Canon EOS R - same level of weather sealing as the Sony A7RIII.

I do really wish, that more mirrorless cameras would seal as well as the DSLR cameras. But I would still prefer a mirrorless camera and a bag for weather protection than a DSLR.

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/10/teardown-of-the-canon-eos-r-mirrorless-camera/

Summary in article - Speaking of the Sony A7RIII, it’s taken a bit of internet trashing for its lack of weather sealing. Throw no stones from your glass house, oh Canon shooters. The Canon EOS-R is just about the same; well-sealed buttons and dials, not much else. That means, I think, that it will be fine in a misty rain for a while, but don’t get it saturated and don’t set it somewhere wet.

--- snip -----

not willing to kick start an argument. An observation only. the below is my reasoning while EOS R is no match to a 5D series bodies:


just really quickly: the lack of solid weather protection sets makes any camera non-option for any outdoor shooter that has to keep shooting no matter the weather conditions.
second card is a must.

I can provide numerous examples of where i was requested to assist with file recovery over CF card failure. All professional photogs shooting with 1-Series body but neglected to utilise the second card for redundancy.

joystick is highly desirable and for three reasons:

see if you can touch control your af points with your fingers wet, durty (rain, snow, sweaty, etc.)
see if you can touch control af points with your face right against the screen
see if you can touch control af points with gloves on while shooting

 

[Antono Refa]

I suppose it could be possible on the weight standpoint (they made the 400 and 600 lenses lighter twice), I would not expect it to be shorter. For a telephoto lens, the shorter flange distance is really of no benefit

Would the weight benefit be due to the shorter flange distance?

I'm no expert, but unless the lens benefits somehow from the improved electronics, it seems to me Canon would be better off releasing new super teles with EF mount.

 

[unfocused]

I would really like to see a RF 200-600mm lens at a reasonable price ($3000-$4000). I plan on switching to mirrorless when the new camera comes out. I currently have a 5DIV, which is a wonderful camera.

Only if you are thinking f6.3 or slower, which is possible with the R series I guess.

 

[unfocused]

I keep seeing comments like this, but I don’t understand them. The EOS R is pretty much a 5DIV, actually a bit better in some ways. People fixate on two fewer frames per second in Servo, but ignore the fact that the RAW buffer on the R is more than twice as deep..I wonder how many comments like this can be attributed to 5DIV owners feeling bitter that an equivalent if not better camera was released for over $1K less than they paid...

Not really sure why we are having this discussion in a thread about a lens, but...

I rented the R as a second body to use with the 5DIV for discrete shooting where I knew from experience the 1DxII with its joke of a silent shutter would be disruptive. I was pleasantly surprised and ended up using the R as the main body and the 5DIV as the second body. (By that I mean I mounted my most used lens on the R and used the 5D with the secondary lens.)

Without getting into a lot of detail, once I got used to shooting with the R, I found it had a lot of advantages inherent to its being a mirrorless body -- most notably the ability to move the focus point anywhere I needed it without taking my eye off the viewfinder.

I know now that one is in my future.

My point being: After having used an R for a grand total of one working day I believe people are having the wrong argument. Given the current state of technology, mirrorless cameras and DSLRs are two different animals.

Best analogy I can think of is a mule and a horse. You can ride either one and each can do a lot of things the other can do, but there are times when you really need a mule and times when you really need a horse and experienced riders know the difference and choose accordingly.

 

[juststeve]

joystick is highly desirable and for three reasons:

see if you can touch control your af points with your fingers wet, durty (rain, snow, sweaty, etc.)
see if you can touch control af points with your face right against the screen
see if you can touch control af points with gloves on while shooting

Touch control works fine with the right gloves on. Black Diamond fit me best but others are available which enable touch control. My experience is based on two weeks photographing wildlife in ID and Yellowstone with a rented R and mostly the 500/4 L IS ii, and 100-400 L IS ii.

 

[MrFotoFool]

... However, my biggest negative would be it's too small size in relation to a larger telephoto...
Jack

I agree completely. I have not used an R, but for my large hands, 5D4 is just about perfect and I can tell the R would feel too small. (Actually the Nikon D850 is the perfect size for me because it's just a bit taller but not as tall as the monstrous 1D series). With a large telephoto I think the R would indeed feel unbalanced (which I think is a problem with mirrorless systems in general, though the Canon R is a better size than other brands).

 

[FramerMCB]

I think Canon RF lens development is more focused on lenses that Sony E-Mount doesn't cover like 50/1.2, 85/1.2 which should explain going for the 500/4 at this point.

I think the other aspect of 'going' for the 500mm in RF mount had to do with Canon's timetable for Big White development (new iterations). The just announced, then came out with the 400mm f/2.8L IS Mk III and the 600mm f/4.0L IS Mk III EF mount lenses only a few months prior to the EOS R announcement. The way Canon had previously upgraded their Super-tele primes was such that the 300mm f/2.8 and the 500mm f/4.0 Mk III's were the next in line. So it does make some sense, at least from Canon's perspective to 'refresh' this pair of Super-tele primes as RF mount lenses. I wonder if Canon will ever refresh their 1200mm f/5.6 in an RF mount?

But. What. Does. This. Mean. For DSLR and EF development? Will there be a any further-releases/more-development in EF Super-tele Primes? Will Canon ever bring out a new EF 800mm f/5.6L IS II? Or introduce a new EF 400mm f/5.6L IS?

 

[unfocused]

I would really like to see a RF 200-600mm lens at a reasonable price ($3000-$4000). I plan on switching to mirrorless when the new camera comes out. I currently have a 5DIV, which is a wonderful camera.

Okay, thinking about this a bit more and letting the imagination run wild.

In the RF Mount, Canon no longer has to be bound be its self-imposed restriction of not producing a lens with a narrower aperture than 5.6. So, let's say Canon introduces an "L" quality RF lens competitor to the Sigma/Tamron 600mm zooms. Given that the Sigma Sports is under $2,000, a $3,000 Canon R "L" with a 6.3 aperture doesn't sound unreasonable.

What camera would that be paired with? Probably not the 1 series-style R, but a full frame 36mp-ish camera capable of 8 or 9 fps would pretty much fill the niche currently filled by both the 5DIV and the 7DII, especially if Canon were to release 1.4 and 2X teleconverters in the R mount.

Downside would be the likely cost of the camera. Could they bring it in for about the same cost as the 5DIV? It would certainly be much more expensive than a 7DIII would cost. Do they lose the 7D customer niche? Or, do they figure that birders will dig deep to buy such a combination?

Or, rather than take that risk, do they go with a sure thing and introduce a 150-500 f5.6 at about the same price and drop a $2,000 7DIII beast (28 mp, 14 fps, next generation autofocus) into the market?

 

[neuroanatomist]

However, my biggest negative would be it's too small size in relation to a larger telephoto.

My opinion: people thinking a ‘5DIV-like EOS R’ will be anything close to the 5DIV in size are going to be disappointed. Personally, I think the R is too small even for the RF 24-105; ergonomics is one reason why my go-to camera remains the 1D X (whereas size is the reason my travel camera is now the EOS R).

 

[Dantana]

I keep seeing comments like this, but I don’t understand them. The EOS R is pretty much a 5DIV, actually a bit better in some ways. People fixate on two fewer frames per second in Servo, but ignore the fact that the RAW buffer on the R is more than twice as deep. The R can track faces in Servo AF. The only significant advantage of the 5DIV is a second card slot, and using it for the only purpose it can be reasonably claimed it’s necessary (writing files to both cards in case one fails) means slower shooting once that shallower buffer is full, and substantially longer time to clear that buffer. I wonder how many comments like this can be attributed to 5DIV owners feeling bitter that an equivalent if not better camera was released for over $1K less than they paid.

Now, if the argument is there will be no RF supertele before an RF mount 1-series equivalent body, I see the logic there.

Yeah, I tend to agree that the R is the "5DIV-like EOS R."

It may not have all of the features that some people think absolutely have to be in that camera, but no camera body is going to have every feature on a wish list

I think we will be waiting for a V2 of the R for dual card slots, IBIS, maybe a joystick.

This is V1 of the all around R. We got the budget version, we'll get the high MP version, at some point their will be the action version (especially after seeing news of big white R's). I doubt there will be another model squeezed in there somewhere until the second iteration of the R. But that's just an opinion.

I'm not saying anyone's wants or perceived needs are wrong, just that this is what Canon has decided to produce.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Lensrentals did a teardown of the Canon EOS R - same level of weather sealing as the Sony A7RIII.

I do really wish, that more mirrorless cameras would seal as well as the DSLR cameras. But I would still prefer a mirrorless camera and a bag for weather protection than a DSLR.

just really quickly: the lack of solid weather protection sets makes any camera non-option for any outdoor shooter that has to keep shooting no matter the weather conditions.

Your implication is that the 5DIV is an option for any outdoor shooter that has to keep shooting no matter the weather conditions, and I disagree with that. What meets that need are the more recent 1-series cameras. I would (and have done so on many occasions) use my 1D X in heavy rain. I would not do that with my R, nor with a 5-series body.

second card is a must.

I can provide numerous examples of where i was requested to assist with file recovery over CF card failure. All professional photogs shooting with 1-Series body but neglected to utilise the second card for redundancy.

Interesting that your examples to support the need for a second card slot come from people who actually had a second slot and didn’t use it. Kinda puts a crimp in the argument. Personally, I have never had a CF card fail. But on my 1D X I do have cards in both slots and write files to them both for redundancy. For sports/action shooters, there is a good reason to not use that second slot, as mentioned above it slows you down when shooting bursts (either during capture if you fill the buffer, or after the burst when the buffer is being cleared). The only exception is the 1D X (MkI only), which is the only Canon body where both slots use the same card type.

Also, you specify failure of CF cards. Unlikely that a current MILC would use a CF card due to the larger size. How many SD cards have you had to recover due to failure?

joystick is highly desirable and for three reasons
see if you can touch control your af points with your fingers wet, durty (rain, snow, sweaty, etc.)
see if you can touch control af points with your face right against the screen
see if you can touch control af points with gloves on while shooting

I do like the joystick on my 1D X (and the fact that it’s replicated in portrait orientation), but...

• With thousands of AF points a joystick is probably not the most efficient way to move between them
• I had no problems using the touchscreen for AF point movement (with the thumb of my left hand) when using the EVF and the screen next to my cheek, you can see the AF point selection moving in the EVF and it’s actually a great way to put it on the subject (I find it faster than the joystick on my 1D X, actually)
• I had no problems using the touch screen for AF selection or anything else wearing e-tip gloves (in fact, most of my use of the EOS R to date has been while snowshoeing in freezing temperatures, wearing gloves)

I’m curious: do you own or have you used an EOS R and had problems with these issues, or are these are just theoretical concerns expressed from your armchair?

 

[degos]

If I were Canon I'd definitely want the 1 level R camera to knock it out of the park and to me that means there must be an option to have a choice of super fast with less MPs and slower with more MPs but that's because I'm often reach limited. In other scenarios 20 MPs is fine.

If you're reach limited then selectable MP in the same camera won't help, since it doesn't change the pixel density. The best solution to that problem is still a super-high-density APS-C sensor like the rumoured 90D, which will still out-density the forthcoming R pixel-monster.

It sucks that Canon won't put a high-density sensor in a 1-series body.

 

[SecureGSM]

** Your implication is that the 5DIV is an option for any outdoor shooter that has to keep shooting no matter the weather conditions, and I disagree with that. What meets that need are the more recent 1-series cameras.

SGSM: 5D series are sufficiently enough weather protected camera bodies according to numerous weather test and experience of wedding photogs. ( just an example).

** Interesting that your examples to support the need for a second card slot come from people who actually had a second slot and didn’t use it
SGSM: obviously because this group of careless people are affected by their own negligence the most. People that use both cards would not need an emergency recovery as they would have had a copy of the failed card content replicated on to the second card as backup. It’s a non-issue for them. Goes to demonstrate that backup is a must.

* Also, you specify failure of CF cards. Unlikely that a current MILC would use a CF card due to the larger size. How many SD cards have you had to recover due to failure?

SGSM: CF cards only in my experience but only due to the fact that CF was the only card that was used. No second card as per above.

* For sports/action shooters, there is a good reason to not use that second slot, as mentioned above it slows you down when shooting bursts
SGSM: it is a trade off. Chose between certain performance degradation or risk your entire card content with potential implications. Many sport photogs shoot JPEGs tethered in order to delivery content to agencies ASAP. These are seemingly unaffected by card failure issue but also less affected by decreased frame rate issue.

*** With thousands of AF points a joystick is probably not the most efficient way to move between them

SGSM: Is a theoretical concerns expressed from.... etc. there is no such a Canon camera exist yet hence we can only theoritise about such a system. I would imagine that you should be able to set joystick to push and hold mode as in a continuous af point selection mode. Meaning that if you hold the joystick say pushed to the right, selected af point will be changed rapidly from left to right and camera will continue to do so until joystick was released. With Approx 50 af points across, I see this as a viable option potentially.

* I had no problems using the touchscreen for AF point movement (with the thumb of my left hand) when using the EVF and the screen next to my cheek

SGSM: are you saying that instead of supporting you long and heavy lens with your left palm you let lens go, hold camera in your right hand and while you hold long and heavy assembly singlehandedly by the camera body grip you use your left hand to move af points around?
I do not see this being practical unless the lens attached is a smaller one.
It has to be done with The same hand you holding camera in. I have tried. It did not work for me the way I expected. Joystick Would address the issue.

I wear glasses. This augments the issue further as you put smudges on your glasses when you touch around screen while you hold camera next to your cheek.

I have not tried gloves. E-tip gloves should work. I agree.
What about wet fingers? 5DIV touch screen does not respond to a wet touch.

Yes, I used my friends EOS R for about an hour.