As I see it now, the only legitimate complaint about an EVF qua EVF (as opposed to just complaining about a low quality or older EVF) is that it does burn battery. But if someone has used an R5 (or R6) and still doesn't like the EVF for some other reason than the battery drain, I await correction. (And I suppose it also depends on the 60 vs 120 p modes of the EVF. I just left mine in whatever state the camera ships; I should probably put that setting in my custom menus.)
There will not be an EOS 5D Mark V [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Does Tamron lenses work well with Sony A7rIII ...like 100-400 ! or there are limitations if you buy NonSony lens...
I guess it depends upon your idea of "qua EVF." I think it is legitimate to prefer having an OVF.
What, specifically, about the R5 EVF is worse than an OVF? Before the R5, I know there were legit functional grips like blackout and lag and battery power. As far as I can tell the only one of those that remains is battery power. Now if you're thinking just a matter of personal taste, that's different from a "complaint" but if there's an actual disadvantage...that's what I was looking to find out.
Really, what I mean is personal taste. So it's not like there is some technical tweak they could do to the EVF to suit me. I don't do fast action or need long battery life, so the OVF is not really going to make a real difference I can think of for my picture taking. I prefer spinach to turnip greens. Someone might suggest that is not a legitimate preference. I haven't read the specs as to which is superior, and doubt it would make a difference if I did. If people like and want to eat turnip greens, I have no problem with that and no desire to convert them.
My only extended experience with an EVF is the popup one on my G5X II. The adjustment on it is so fussy that I doubt I have the diopter quite right for my left eye. But it is good enough for composing the picture when it is too sunny to get a good look on the screen. I'm thankful it is there for when I need it. I briefly looked through the viewfinder of the M50 in the store. It seemed nice. I assume the viewfinders on the R cameras are at least as good.
It doesn't bother me that people use these cameras. I feel no urge to convert anyone or have them involuntarily treated for catoptrophobia, spectrophobia, or eisoptrophobia, as the case may be.
Personal taste inherently cannot be argued with, and I wasn't trying to. I was addressing technical/usability issues that people used to bring up (but don't any more). Because, apparently, most of the reasons not having to do with personal taste, are finally gone.
For me, the question is about affordability. I have shot Canon cameras since 1978 and have quite a few EF lenses. While I have an EOS R with the RF 24-105L lens and the RF 35 Macro Lens, I also have a 5DS, 6D Mark II and 7D Mark II. The R camera and lenses are great, but I am not sure they are that much better than the EF system that I already have. When every lens you need in the RF line costs 2k or more, you really need to want the new system. At 2.5K, even the 5D Mark IV is about $500 more than what it really should be. If Canon released a 5D Mark V, how high could they price it? I doubt it could be sold for anything more than 3k. So eventually we will all be adapting our EF glass to the R series. It could be worse, like when we left our beloved F-1 AE and FD lens collection behind.
I think the EVF drawback in battery and feel of unrealistic is one side, personally I can see and feel it's pixels and feels disconnected to the scene is another.
One more major consideration hindering me from investing in the MILC system is durability, during the course of regularly using my 5D 3 since it's released despite I never took video, there are more stuck pixels over time of 8 years, the MILC inevitably uses the CMOS and other stuffs much more often than a DSLR, plus it's tracking means continuously use the AF motor and IS module, I am ok to spend some $10k in gears that serves 10+ years, but if the CMOS breaks down every 5-6 years and lens turned into junk once the AF motor is broken (manual coupling vs focus by wire) I am a bit skeptic especially on investing even more than the 5D system back then
One more major consideration hindering me from investing in the MILC system is durability, during the course of regularly using my 5D 3 since it's released despite I never took video, there are more stuck pixels over time of 8 years, the MILC inevitably uses the CMOS and other stuffs much more often than a DSLR, plus it's tracking means continuously use the AF motor and IS module, I am ok to spend some $10k in gears that serves 10+ years, but if the CMOS breaks down every 5-6 years and lens turned into junk once the AF motor is broken (manual coupling vs focus by wire) I am a bit skeptic especially on investing even more than the 5D system back then
Indeed. And it's almost impossible now to repair yourself the new body's and lenses. The design is so complicated and everything is linked together in firmware replacing something other then a button or flex cable is impossible.
Sad, sad, sad! Don't like the electronic viewfinder in the R at all. Advanced autofocus is for amateurs! No sport in handling the gear left. I'm still waiting for the 5Dm5! Or maybe I buy another new 5Dm4 if they don't release it. 5Dm4 is a fantastic camera!
You might like the EVF in the R5 or R6 better. They apparently have greatly improved it.
EOS R gives all 5D mkIV feature for around $700 discount without few buttons and EVF...thats how they saved $700
We should all forget about a new 5D.
With no more new EF lenses in development there is no way the EOS D EF mount body line will have a future.
The EF line has more than 30 years now, following the FD line. And now is the RF one.
There is less and less cameras sellings worldwide due to the improvements of cameras in smartphones. Dont forget that.
So no one should expect a replacement for the 5d4 other than the R5.
I hear the worries about the EVF. I tried the EVF on the R5 and i'm sure it will make me forget the 5D3 fast.
With no more new EF lenses in development there is no way the EOS D EF mount body line will have a future.
The EF line has more than 30 years now, following the FD line. And now is the RF one.
There is less and less cameras sellings worldwide due to the improvements of cameras in smartphones. Dont forget that.
So no one should expect a replacement for the 5d4 other than the R5.
I hear the worries about the EVF. I tried the EVF on the R5 and i'm sure it will make me forget the 5D3 fast.
DSLRs are tanking hard. That is why Canon are not doing anything more with them, the market for them is evaporating fast. In Japan they are down to ~21% of the ILC market, lol.
My 6D2 should last me for probably as many years as I have left, and I don't miss anything it doesn't do. If the 5D V came out, I probably wouldn't buy it. I was tempted to get a 5D IV when it was on sale a few months ago. If it had a flippy screen, I would have ordered it with no hesitation. If I get one, I will still use the 6D2 when I want to use that feature, but use the 5D IV almost all the time when I want to use the OVF. If I'm solvent when they have another sale I'll probably want to get one while I can.
I did consider getting an M50 when I was getting a new travel camera, but chose to go with the G5X II instead, based on my good experience with the G7X II and its pocket size. It has a popup EVF for when it is too bright out to use the screen. That's as close as I have come, or am likely to come, to getting a mirrorless camera with interchangeable lenses. The fast lens on the G5X II has enough focal length range for my travel pictures, except occasionally on the wide end. If I am in close quarters in an interior or am shooting a vast vista and need something wider than its 24mm equivalent, I'll do some shots to make a panorama in Photoshop.
I did consider getting an M50 when I was getting a new travel camera, but chose to go with the G5X II instead, based on my good experience with the G7X II and its pocket size. It has a popup EVF for when it is too bright out to use the screen. That's as close as I have come, or am likely to come, to getting a mirrorless camera with interchangeable lenses. The fast lens on the G5X II has enough focal length range for my travel pictures, except occasionally on the wide end. If I am in close quarters in an interior or am shooting a vast vista and need something wider than its 24mm equivalent, I'll do some shots to make a panorama in Photoshop.
I am enjoying my R5 at least as much as my DSLRs. For the first time ever using mirrorless for me, it's giving great battery life - some 1500 shots using my 100-400mm II on a full charge for my first serious longer sessions of shooting - more than I have ever got on my 5DIV or 5DSR. Admittedly, I have been shooting short bursts, which is energy efficient, and I use the EVF with the rear screen off, folded into the backed.
good for you, i dont feel the way you do, I have the eosr and 5div, I still prefer my ovf when shooting wildlife, I can use my camera as a spotting scope and not eat battery as I enjoy watching the subject through the lens, in real time and no lag all day long.
Absolutely! If I were primarily a wildlife shooter I'm sure I'd think the same way.
