So as soon as they release an RF 11-24, RF TS-E 17, RF 15mm f2.8 fisheye, RF 100 macro, RF TS-E 50, RF 1.4 and RF 2x TC's, some RF extension tubes and an RF 300mm f2.8 I'll be able to join you?
Wireless file transmitter for the Canon EOS R5 appears for certification
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Yes I'm aware, but to me its another set of contacts between the body and the lens, its one more thing that can go wrong during a shoot, if you misplace it, lose it, or forget it you can't use the lens, it's another entry point for dust, moisture, and water; optically with all else equal typically the native lens will yeild the highest quality...my list goes on. So no, I've never purchased or used an adapter.
I've chosen to spend that amount building out a C200 rig instead, after that last Canon discount I just couldn't resist.
Attachments
Exactly, I'm ready to get this camera, and use it until I forget to even read the DPR review or watch the stupid youtube reviews or heard what Tony Northrup has to say let alone Rishi Sanyal and his technical muzak.
Holy S%$@, is that a camera store or your house? Do you ever actually get out and shoot, or do you just take pictures of your lens collection?
People are still using that non-secure mess over public networks?
Admittedly, you do need to use the external WFT with the 1D X Mark III to use encryption.
Last edited:
You can have 5 GHz built in to any device, but as the distance increases the actual data rate will go down. In most homes, by the time you are three or four rooms away, 2.4GHz is actually faster than 5GHz in how much data it can really move.
I have a 6:00 A.M. shoot tomorrow, it will probably be the TS-E 50 or the TS-E 17 with a 2x TC and three 600EX-RT's, the boxes for those are behind the 300mm box, yes there is a second row...
But most of it is pretty old and doesn't owe me anything by now, I must be honest the thought of 'starting again' with the R system really doesn't appeal especially given the drop in secondhand EF prices, the premiums the RF glass attracts and the fact that there is still comparatively little native choice of RF glass in my particular use case. I'll probably get the R5SR or whatever the high resolution body is but only to use with an EF adapter.
Extended range, same as the 1D X Mark III. The external WFT can work faster over longer distances than the internal WiFi can. It's just a more powerful radio.
sure, but tell me just this one thing... are we there yet?
Oh boy, a new R5 thread!
Oh wait, it's just a WFT!
I think they meant WTF!
Children, if you don't quiet down back there and stop asking if we are there yet I'm going to turn this car around and go straight home right now!
In other words, Canon's strategy worked and they've already reeled you in hook, line, and sinker?
EF works fine on the R why are RF lenses a necessity? Because of the resolution?
It was partly a joke (Canon wants to convince you that you need RF lenses)...but mainly because if you are paying as much as I think people will be paying for the R5 body the EF lenses will become the limitation vs the R5 body. The EF lenses are fantastic (hence why I see no need to move to the RF family) but IMO they will be the limiting factor with a body like the R5, otherwise Canon would never have went to the RF mount to begin with.
The way I see it, if you are paying $4K+ for a camera body I would think you would be all in on the RF system as well since clearly cost is no issue.
I have a 6:00 A.M. shoot tomorrow, it will probably be the TS-E 50 or the TS-E 17 with a 2x TC and three 600EX-RT's, the boxes for those are behind the 300mm box, yes there is a second row...
But most of it is pretty old and doesn't owe me anything by now, I must be honest the thought of 'starting again' with the R system really doesn't appeal especially given the drop in secondhand EF prices, the premiums the RF glass attracts and the fact that there is still comparatively little native choice of RF glass in my particular use case. I'll probably get the R5SR or whatever the high resolution body is but only to use with an EF adapter.
I'm up at 7AM tomorrow myself, 5DIV, 70-200 2.8, XPLOR 600, 24" beauty dish, a GH5 with a Voigtlander 17.5mm lens, Ronin S, and some white foam board for fill lighting for the video portion. Can't forget the T6S rebel with the EF-S 10-22mm to shoot a timelapse during the sunrise while I wait for the model to arrive. If the timelapse turns out good I'll put it in her video, if it doesn't she'll never know I tried, or after she leaves I'll shoot a midday one which is easier .
All of my camera bodies and lenses are at least 4yrs old and still work great. I spend more on accessories such as audio, lighting, stands, backdrops, etc. than I do on the bodies and lenses. I have so many different tripods, sliders, etc I think I've spent over $400 on tripod plates alone; that's why I don't get excited anymore over lenses and bodies.
I don't thinks that is possible with all the waiting game going on....
I just really wish I knew what the best options were for inexpensive wildlife/ birding rig to upgrade to from a 7d Mark ii/ 100-400 Mark ii....
"TALK" of EOS R series APS-C in 2021, "Talk" of high end M series APS-C, but nothing close to any real idea where Canon is going with it. It doesn't leave many good options, so I am thinking the R5 and use in crop mode for birding/sports where I need the reach (still get close to 20 MP) and have the advantage of full frame the rest of the time. But this is a lot more expensive than an $1800 7D2!
What's wrong with the 7D2? How many more birds would you have filmed if you had the R5?
Why are people obsessed with boxes? I asked the guys at Roberts when I was trading in gear and they don't even want them. They take up too much room on their shelves. So I toss them.Or are they just pictures of empty boxes????
Actually, I love the 7D2 for birds. I am thinking of picking up a second used one just as spare/ back-up because I think it is a great camera.
However, I have started doing photos for a high school swim team. Indoors, poor light, fast action.... I shoot at f/2.8, 1/700 and about 2500 ISO. That ISO really pushes the limits of the 7D2 and there can be a lot of noise. Sometimes fixed easy enough in PP for what I need, but other times you just cant make the image look the way you want. So, I have been looking for a way to improve that.
Any suggestions?
My 5DIV at 2500 ISO doesn't look very good either, unless I went high to ETTR then pushed back down the exposure in post. Personally I would back down the shutter speed before raising the ISO in your situation. I tend to drop down to 1/400 or even 1/320 to get more light when needed; I'd rather a little motion blur over higher ISO. If you are using a long lens and no monopod getting a monopod might make you look at your camera with new eyes...the blur could be coming from camera shake at the lower shutter speeds...not motion blur.
Ultimately I always ask myself...will my client notice the difference and is that difference big enough to warrant the expense of new equipment? The final resting place for 99% of my images is 960x1200 images on someone's instagram or 1920x1080 images on someone's website, if I'm the only one who doesn't like a picture I took then I did something right. For higher end clients such as magazines and when I know they will make prints, then yes I go the extra mile to get every ounce of quality that I can...but that type of customer is few and far between for me.
I keep mine for two reasons,
1: If I have to send it in for service it is nice to use the packaging it came in, it's free and a secure and perfect fit.
2: I have always sold my retired gear privately and in that instance having the box and all paperwork/packaging makes for an easier sell, in my experience.
I have the space so why not? I wouldn't say I am obsessed with them.
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
