I know what the words mean, I just don't want to assume what you mean to imply based on so few words.About the same difference as between being a professional and being a scholar.
You are missing my point completely.I know what the words mean, I just don't want to assume what you mean to imply based on so few words.
Here's what's on my mind: There are customers who bought an R5 and had a suspicion about its performance. They have independently invested time into confirming that suspicion with adequate test methods and shared their results on this forum, and in at least one instance also with Canon.
What is or isn't an issue is up to the individual user. The same is true for what degree of testing they require to feel satisfied with their gear. But at Canon, it is the engineering that matters and getting constructive feedback with good data is necessary in order for the engineers to address customer feedback.
In my opinion, ridiculing such endeavors does nothing positive and at worst (not in this context, but for other subjects) can discourage constructive discussions.
Was one of these points something you specifically wanted to critique as being out of touch or am I missing your point completely?
Okay, that makes sense. Guess you missed my point as well then, since I am not disagreeing with anything you say there.You are missing my point completely.
I see no real world use scenario where the only reason why one would not prefer mechanical shutter over EFCS in R5 would be shutter shock.
Nor the OP has proposed one.
The practical usefulness of the mechanical shutter is not limited by its shutter shock, it is limited by the EFCS being a generally better mode except for some rare scenarios where the shutter shock of R5 doesn't matter anyway.
Methodical is one who uses a method. Pedantic is one who pays attention to mostly irrelevant details.But none of that is what I commented on with the post you originally quoted, so that got me confused.
I don't. Do you? Does that make it wrong to care about it? Who is being hurt by posts that demonstrate how Canon can improve their product even further?If you shoot outdoor portraits in varying daylight, would you really worry that some flat chart samples could show you that some of your images might be slightly less than 45 megapixel sharp?
Nothing to worry about if you use EFCS for those situations
In case of mirrorless, it's even better. Mirror lockup increases the shutter lag, and a lot. EFCS decreases it.Sorry I am a bit late to the thread. With a DSLR, I'd use mirror lockup when any vibration would affect an image. Even though electronic versus mechanical shutter is not the same, it kind of is. I'll change to Electronic when I am really worried about camera (or shutter) shake and somehow carry on.
So far on the R6 I have found fully electronic to be the only option for birds in flight. Simply too much lag with the mechanical. TBH I am yet to try the Electronic first curtain. I really should do that.I'm still trying to determine when it's best to use mechanical shutter vs when to use electronic first curtain shutter. I primarily shoot wild life, and so far, with the R5, I've predominately used the full electronic shutter. However, sometimes there are benefits to using the other two shutter modes, and I'd like some further clarification as to when I should use one mode over the other.
Let's saying I'm shooting birds in flight using a 600mm f/4 lens. Would I be better off remaining on EFCS, or should I switch to full mechanical shutter?
I've heard about issues with fast shutter speeds and EFCS, but I always thought that problem was in combination with using fast primes at their widest apertures, such as f/1.2. In other words, from my understanding, shooting a f/1.2 lens at 1/2500s or 1/3200s would cause problems with bokeh, etc.
However, would shooting an f/4 lens at 1/2500s or 1/3200s (or faster) cause any issues for sharpness and/or bokeh?
I ask, because one other big benefit of using EFSC over full mechanical with both the R5 and R6 is the reduced shutter lag. If you're tracking fast action, the reduced shutter lag could be beneficial.
At least the 5DS/R has a special motorized mechanical shutter to reduce mirror slap. And it works. You just have to shot a little slower fps.I've noticed similar effects with my 5DS even with MLU, so it's not just mirrorless. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with your R5, just welcome to the world of very high resolution potential FF sensors
You mean motorised mechanical mirror ? Yes it does, and works well. I'm not aware of any differences in the 5DS shutter compared with say 5DIII.At least the 5DS/R has a special motorized mechanical shutter to reduce mirror slap. And it works. You just have to shot a little slower fps.
It's a substantial upgrade - also compared to the 5DIV. Think Canon made some promotional materials explaining how it works.You mean motorised mechanical mirror ? Yes it does, and works well. I'm not aware of any differences in the 5DS shutter compared with say 5DIII.