Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 05 Sep 2018 (Wednesday) 02:31
Search threadPrev/next
POLL: "How's the new EOS-R stack up for you?"
It's Amazing!
69
26.5%
It's kind of a let down
88
33.8%
It's trash
22
8.5%
It's good for the price
61
23.5%
It helped me pick a new body
20
7.7%

189 voters, 260 votes given (3 choices choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EOS-R - It's out. Thoughts?

 
this thread is locked
05Xrunner
Goldmember, Flipflopper.
Avatar
5,732 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 493
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Pittsburgh PA
     
Sep 13, 2018 11:12 |  #841

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18707105 (external link)
I don't consider orange stage lighting in a futuristic neon-esque set up good lighting? He didn't complain about it either. He mentioned that it hunted, but then it worked right after, then shrugged...

So how big is your Canon check. You seem to do anything you can to defend everything about it.


My gear
Fuji X-T2, Fuji 18-55 2.8-4 OIS, Fuji 35 f2, Fuji 56 1.2, Fuji 90 f2, Fuji 55-200 3.5-4.8 OIS
Sony RX100 II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Chet
my rates fluctuate
Avatar
43,160 posts
Gallery: 130 photos
Likes: 2019
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 13, 2018 11:24 |  #842

05Xrunner wrote in post #18707119 (external link)
So how big is your Canon check. You seem to do anything you can to defend everything about it.

Sounds like a personal attack. Let's not go there.


Curator of the Bob's Pickle Emporium experience. -As always, One location to serve you better!
~Feel good today and donate to this great forum~ LINK
My Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
49,440 posts
Gallery: 156 photos
Likes: 5996
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Sep 13, 2018 11:27 |  #843

gossamer88 wrote in post #18707054 (external link)
Jared Polin had to take down his RAW files ....

I wondered why that had not happened yet. Thanks to Jared for taking the risk :)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
49,440 posts
Gallery: 156 photos
Likes: 5996
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
Post edited 6 months ago by CyberDyneSystems.
     
Sep 13, 2018 11:29 |  #844

Thanks Chet, and yes,

let's not start calling people names just because they like something you don't.

Chet wrote in post #18707131 (external link)
Sounds like a personal attack. Let's not go there.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
05Xrunner
Goldmember, Flipflopper.
Avatar
5,732 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 493
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Pittsburgh PA
     
Sep 13, 2018 12:08 |  #845

well they are going to do more testing but it looks like the EOS R is still holding to the typical soft canon video even with the much higher bit rates
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=LLXBRFMGkaA (external link)
So we shall see when they do more test to see if the GH5s is that much better


My gear
Fuji X-T2, Fuji 18-55 2.8-4 OIS, Fuji 35 f2, Fuji 56 1.2, Fuji 90 f2, Fuji 55-200 3.5-4.8 OIS
Sony RX100 II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,064 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2720
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Sep 13, 2018 12:09 |  #846

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18707136 (external link)
Thanks Chet, and yes,

let's not start calling people names just because they like something you don't.

eh... i got blasted a few times along the way.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,064 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2720
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Sep 13, 2018 12:15 |  #847

For the record... I absolutely say 1,000x over that Canon has the best glass out there period. Sure they don't have "all" the types of glass but they do have the best. This is my feeling based on build, focus accuracy, durability, weather sealing and IQ. This is why people stay with subpar cameras is because of the glass. I decided to switch the body out then I decided to add some native glass to take advantage of certain features. It doesn't mean I left Canon.

I am curious to what the top of the line brings. It may get me to jump back because right now the 400 2.8 IS III was released and I would prefer a canon glass over the sony.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,564 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5614
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 13, 2018 12:24 |  #848

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18707105 (external link)
I don't consider orange stage lighting in a futuristic neon-esque set up good lighting? He didn't complain about it either. He mentioned that it hunted, but then it worked right after, then shrugged...

it's not uncommon for adapters to work slightly less than native lenses, otherwise how would canon or anyone else really, be able to sell native lenses ;-)a

Recall that the EOS-M had horrific adapter support for years, so there is a precedent.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcoren
Senior Member
Avatar
624 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 303
Joined Mar 2015
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
     
Sep 13, 2018 13:07 |  #849

Charlie wrote in post #18707170 (external link)
it's not uncommon for adapters to work slightly less than native lenses, otherwise how would canon or anyone else really, be able to sell native lenses ;-)a

Recall that the EOS-M had horrific adapter support for years, so there is a precedent.

Are you saying that reduced performance using adapters is intentional?

I don't agree, but if it's true, it's something they need to be very careful about. It sounds to me as though a large investment in high-end EF glass is the only thing keeping some people in the Canon ecosystem. If these people come to believe that they have to buy new lenses anyway to get the performance they're used to from the EOS R, then they have no reason not to buy Sony or Nikon.

Mike


Canon EOS 7D Mark II, EOS M5, and EOS 100 (film SLR)
A bunch of Canon lenses and a couple of Sigmas
A backpack, a bicycle, and a pair of hiking boots

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,523 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 2314
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Sep 13, 2018 13:24 |  #850

mcoren wrote in post #18707201 (external link)
Are you saying that reduced performance using adapters is intentional?

I don't agree, but if it's true, it's something they need to be very careful about. It sounds to me as though a large investment in high-end EF glass is the only thing keeping some people in the Canon ecosystem. If these people come to believe that they have to buy new lenses anyway to get the performance they're used to from the EOS R, then they have no reason not to buy Sony or Nikon.

Mike


1000% agree

the adapters better work and performance need to be there


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,564 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5614
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 13, 2018 13:35 |  #851

mcoren wrote in post #18707201 (external link)
Are you saying that reduced performance using adapters is intentional?

I don't agree, but if it's true, it's something they need to be very careful about. It sounds to me as though a large investment in high-end EF glass is the only thing keeping some people in the Canon ecosystem. If these people come to believe that they have to buy new lenses anyway to get the performance they're used to from the EOS R, then they have no reason not to buy Sony or Nikon.

Mike

yes

considering that the new RF lenses have more pins, there's got to be some scenarios where they would perform better than adapted. If that is the standard you are going by, then adapters will inherently have reduce performance COMPARED to RF lenses. Canon has indicated that the RF lenses transfer data faster, and that alludes to adapted lenses not being up to par of native lenses by design.

being canon with canon adapters, performance is likely "good enough" and "practically native".


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,589 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4995
Joined May 2002
Location: Cannelton
     
Sep 13, 2018 13:45 as a reply to  @ mcoren's post |  #852

They cannot make the adapters intentionally work less to force sales of things, otherwise if it ever was discovered as such, you would have an uproar much like when it was discovered that Apple was intentionally slowing down the iphone as the battery aged, despite it "being in the best interest of the consumer that we do that". The recall/replacement effort is still in full swing, Verizon is in the middle of replacing our employer's employee base right now, roughly 30K.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcoren
Senior Member
Avatar
624 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 303
Joined Mar 2015
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
     
Sep 13, 2018 13:53 |  #853

Charlie wrote in post #18707231 (external link)
yes

considering that the new RF lenses have more pins, there's got to be some scenarios where they would perform better than adapted. If that is the standard you are going by, then adapters will inherently have reduce performance COMPARED to RF lenses. Canon has indicated that the RF lenses transfer data faster, and that alludes to adapted lenses not being up to par of native lenses by design.

being canon with canon adapters, performance is likely "good enough" and "practically native".

Rereading your original post, I see you were talking about lenses with adapters not performing as well as native lenses. That may be true. If Canon can achieve better performance from a native RF lens on an R body, that IMO is fair game.

I inferred that you were also saying that some amount of this reduced performance was intentional, but I might have misunderstood your meaning. My post was that intentionally making an EF lens on an R body, using Canon's adapter, perform worse than that same EF lens on a comparable EF body (say a 6Dii or 5Div), in order to encourage the purchase of RF lenses, is a risky game for Canon to engage in.

Mike


Canon EOS 7D Mark II, EOS M5, and EOS 100 (film SLR)
A bunch of Canon lenses and a couple of Sigmas
A backpack, a bicycle, and a pair of hiking boots

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommydigi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,592 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 454
Joined May 2010
Location: Chicago
     
Sep 13, 2018 14:22 |  #854

This looks like it will be a great camera but for me, and I'm sure others who are shooting travel, casual etc., it's size/weight that is the big draw to mirrorless. I understand full frame will require bigger bodies and lenses but I'm starting to think ASP-C is the way to go with mirrorless.

That being said I would seriously consider this with the adaptor as a future upgrade to my Canon setup but I'm still wanting something small that I can take anywhere and this would not be a solution for that.


Website (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)
Canon 5DII • 7DII • G7XII • 24LII • 50L • 100L • 135L • 40 STM • 16-35L F4 IS • 100-400L II • 600EX II • 270 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
12,893 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 475
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
Post edited 6 months ago by RDKirk.
     
Sep 13, 2018 14:36 |  #855

Charlie wrote in post #18707170 (external link)
it's not uncommon for adapters to work slightly less than native lenses, otherwise how would canon or anyone else really, be able to sell native lenses ;-)a

Recall that the EOS-M had horrific adapter support for years, so there is a precedent.

I'm rather disquieted about that, though. I'll be extremely interested in seeing how the undeniably production models fair.

I could excuse a bit of delay in 3rd party adapters as a matter of the adapter having to translate communication protocols between different lense and body manufacturers.

But the R adapters should be feed-through...no protocol translation needed for an EF lens to operate as well on an R body as on an EF body.

But I would not be surprised if an R lens operated faster on an R body than an EF lens on an R body. That's a matter of lens advancement.

And I'm very glad to see such lenses as the RF 28-70mm f/2 for the R series. I'll never buy that lens, but it means Canon has committed to the R line.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

115,796 views & 1,660 likes for this thread
EOS-R - It's out. Thoughts?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is charleslvajr
963 guests, 345 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.