EOS-R - It's out. Thoughts?

rantercsr wrote in post #18711051
When i use my canon Ef 35mm f1.4 L mkii on my sony a7r3, it shows as a "DT 35mm f1.4 SAM" on the exif data , and when i post the photos to flickr

That’s interesting. The adapter must be attempting to fool the body into thinking it’s native glass. Is this with the MC-11? I’ve not noticed my MB V showing anything except the Canon info, then again, it could be lens specific I suppose.

Yes im using the mc11 sigma adapter

Thoughts? It's a mirrorless 6D. Not very interesting.

Dual card slots and I probably would be investing in the new system I have shot for so many years now with them I really dont want not to .I love the piece of mind I have knowing of the redundancy I have at all my paid shoots especially weddings! A couple of years ago I went to shoot an engagement session and forgot to put one of my sd cards back in the 5d Mark IV I got to the session and realized it wasn't there so shot the session with the CF card that was still in the camera from the day befores photo session and there is yet another reason to have dual slots.

Amarinelli wrote in post #18711130
Dual card slots and I probably would be investing in the new system I have shot for so many years now with them I really dont want not to .I love the piece of mind I have knowing of the redundancy I have at all my paid shoots especially weddings! A couple of years ago I went to shoot an engagement session and forgot to put one of my sd cards back in the 5d Mark IV I got to the session and realized it wasn't there so shot the session with the CF card that was still in the camera from the day befores photo session and there is yet another reason to have dual slots.

It’s hard to dispute the safety factor in dual slots. I can see Canon putting effort in a new system but immediately and deliberately excluding dual cards probably retains more mirrored shooters sticking with the 7dmk2, 1d series and 5d series.

As they release this mirrorless body they are capturing more enthusiast than a demanding shooter wanting redundancy.

I am appreciating the effort canon is putting into an untapped FF sensor mirrorless body as far as canon world is concerned. They see potential in getting piece of pie in the mirrorless market.

rogue.guineapig wrote in post #18711003
OK so I did a little sleuthing because Tony is probably busy with Pre-Photokina stuff, and I had some questions.
He made all the files available, so I downloaded all of them, opened them up in ACR and PS.

Observations:
- On EOS-R image 7369 I started seeing banding pop up with a mere +1.00 on the exposure sliders in ACR.
- In EOS-R image 7382 it's also visible with a decent little bump to shadows and a half-stop exposure bump. Neither of these seem like real hard pushes to me.
- With Tony's brick walls and textures I think it helps mask the issue but if you look at the solid dark gray posters it seems more apparent. I'm using a Retina 5K screen here for reference.

But then there was a question of glass:
- The Canon systems shot with the 70-200 f/2.8L II IS
- The Sony A73 shot with the Sony 70-200 2.8 GM OSS
- The Sony A7Riii shot with what photoshop file data calls the "DT 70-200 F2.8 SAM" which I believe is the Sigma 70-200?

In all cases Tony shot wide open, which (to me) would make the glass more obvious and less "transparent" (softness, fall off, etc) in the test shots that are supposed to highlight the sensor, not the glass.

The A7iii looked just abysmal in that test so I did a bit of thinking. Some of the comments said, "yeah it looks BAD but not like SENSOR-BAD but like GLASS-BAD" which I agreed with.
I seemed to recall reading something rather unfavorable about that Sony Lens, and did a little looking to find:
An Update and Comparison of the Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS

The LensRental tests used ONE body (A7R2) for the Sony, Nikon and Canon 70-200 pro-level 2.8 zooms, and they did not find the Sony to be overly great (a bummer, because that lens is **** expensive).

Tony's results seem to confirm that not only are the Canon 70-200 and the "DT 70-200 F2.8 SAM" lenses really great wide open, but that the Sony 70-200 lens is certainly NOT...and that's consistent with the Lens Rentals tests.
So Tony seems to have accidentally made a good case about glass... and also banding with the EOS-R.

Personally I'd love to see all these cameras mounted and adapted to a single piece of glass for these tests just to control all variables save for the sensor.
I realize adapters aren't perfect but in this case I think they'd be fine since there's no AF speed needed or quirky lighting going on.
Anyway. Enough geekery.

This

and this is my reasoning why Sony is in deep crapola

Joel grimes nails it. The body is just a tool. Thats it. Nothing more nothing less- we all forget this.

Its always been about the glass

After listening to Joel I was quickly reminded about this. He is right again. Its not the body.Its not mirrorless....... Its the mount

Looks to me that canon can continue to produce what photography is all about. Light and optics. Nothing more nothing less

If as promised the adapters allow seamless applications with older canon glass then this will be huge for the canon community

I concur with the earlier post about Tonys finding. Sony Glass is not all that

I have so much $$$ invested in great glass. It has to work on an R mount just like it does on the EF- end of story for canon shooters- some of the comments recently suggest this will be the case for current canon shooters. Seamless application. We are all going to find out when this thing is released that is for sure.

Amarinelli wrote in post #18711130
Dual card slots and I probably would be investing in the new system I have shot for so many years now with them I really dont want not to .I love the piece of mind I have knowing of the redundancy I have at all my paid shoots especially weddings! A couple of years ago I went to shoot an engagement session and forgot to put one of my sd cards back in the 5d Mark IV I got to the session and realized it wasn't there so shot the session with the CF card that was still in the camera from the day befores photo session and there is yet another reason to have dual slots.

Im a wedding photographer

No dual slots is a No Go for me

In my 14 yrs as a wedding photographer I have had 2 card failures. Both times on a dual card body. Both times the back up card had the images

If your a hobbyist thats one thing- you can take the risk. There are no Do Overs for weddings

If you are a professional, make a living with the camera, then you cant risk reputation or a lawsuit from a single card camera

If EOR R had dual cards, I would probably order- Its a no go for me for this reason alone

Next update and there is a dual card camera, I replace this 5D3 with 150K plus on the shutter with a R mount....IF current L lens work seamlessly

umphotography wrote in post #18711150
Joel grimes nails it. The body is just a tool. Thats it. Nothing more nothing less- we all forget this.

Its always been about the glass

Unless you're a landscape guy (who would really benefit from the best possible resolution and dynamic range)... ok, as well as good glass.

Sony (bodies/sensors) do well there.

sploo wrote in post #18711164
Unless you're a landscape guy (who would really benefit from the best possible resolution and dynamic range)... ok, as well as good glass.

Sony (bodies/sensors) do well there.

I'm a landscape guy and to me the glass is still very important. I still shoot with a 5D II and have no issues getting the dynamic range I need out of it through the use of filters. I've upgraded my glass over the years, but not the body yet. I've improved corner sharpness and detail in my photos drastically while using the same body.

Why haven't I upgraded? I want something in the 50MP range and the 5Ds R has that but I don't feel the sensor is THAT much of an improvement over the 5D II to justify the cost yet, especially when I still have no issues getting the shots I need. But yeah, larger resolution and better DR will be the key for me when I do upgrade. I'm waiting for a few more years to see about a possible 5Ds R successor as well as A7R IV and then decide from there.

the poll isn't that good.
My thoughts is that the EOS-R is a not aimed at people like me with limited budgets.
If I was making a living on photography I would seriously consider it.
But until then, I'll stick with what I have.

AS_Photo wrote in post #18711175
I'm a landscape guy and to me the glass is still very important. I still shoot with a 5D II and have no issues getting the dynamic range I need out of it through the use of filters. I've upgraded my glass over the years, but not the body yet. I've improved corner sharpness and detail in my photos drastically while using the same body.

Why haven't I upgraded? I want something in the 50MP range and the 5Ds R has that but I don't feel the sensor is THAT much of an improvement over the 5D II to justify the cost yet, especially when I still have no issues getting the shots I need. But yeah, larger resolution and better DR will be the key for me when I do upgrade. I'm waiting for a few more years to see about a possible 5Ds R successor as well as A7R IV and then decide from there.

That's the hole in Canon's lineup for me at the moment; a body (mirrorless or DSLR) with the 5Ds resolution, and the 5D4 dynamic range. Whilst not quite matching the Sony sensors for DR, I suspect that's what would draw a fair few guys back to Canon (those former Canon shooters that are using an A7R with adapted EF glass). Probably not a massive market from Canon's point of view I'd accept.

sploo wrote in post #18711188
That's the hole in Canon's lineup for me at the moment; a body (mirrorless or DSLR) with the 5Ds resolution, and the 5D4 dynamic range. Whilst not quite matching the Sony sensors for DR, I suspect that's what would draw a fair few guys back to Canon (those former Canon shooters that are using an A7R with adapted EF glass). Probably not a massive market from Canon's point of view I'd accept.

I'd say most landscape shooters would want something like that. I don't need something like the Sony DR, but it would be nice. If I HAD to pick something right now, it would be the A7R III and adapters. I'd keep my Canon DSLR's for portrait stuff. For landscape, converted lenses are fine. I use manual focus currently anyway.

DTBaan wrote in post #18711053
first you are praising about canon and the future of their lens being superior and added the video, but this post is now backing away from that and we are now talking about the rabbit and the turtle.

I noted some good stuff about Canon, but I was addressing a comment you wrote, so I will backtrack to what I said about Ansel Adams. If you ran your same comment or idea by him, if he were alive, it would clarify what you implied or joked about.

In other words, would how much Ansel talks about his gear vs. someone talking about their new Sony really matter how they felt about their gear or photography?

Lyndön wrote in post #18711039
Just a couple of observations.

First, the 70-200 SAM is the older Sony Alpha (Minolta) lens, not a Sigma. I’ve never used that lens, but it’s hard for me to believe that Sony would release a new lens that performs worse than one they released in 2003.

Second, I’m aware that lensrentals wasn’t impressed in their OLAF testing with the 70-200GM, but DXOMark said “If we compare the Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 to the equivalent Nikon and Canon f/2.8 telephoto zooms tested on their respective highest-resolution DSLRs, we see that the Sony comes out top for low-light performance, light transmission, and sharpness.” So the results seem to be dependent somewhat on the method of testing, if we assume none have a bias toward one brand vs another. DXOMark Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS lens review

So who do we believe? Lensrentals says it’s expensive junk, and DXOMark says it’s significantly better than the Canon or Nikon. Personally, I don’t shoot test charts or any of that kind of stuff (well, not anymore since I don’t have to MFA with my Sony), I just use the lens and compare shots from similar situations side by side. I happen to own both the Canon EF 70-200 2.8 IS II and the Sony FE 70-200 2.8 GM and I’ve found my Sony (+ A7iii) to be pretty much equal to the Canon (+ 7D2 & 5D3) in terms of sharpness. Side by side it looks just a bit sharper than the Canon sometimes, but to say it’s significantly better would be a stretch. Would I see a difference on a 5DSr vs A7R3? It’s possible I suppose, but I don’t have a need (or desire) for huge MP images at the moment. I haven’t done a side by side test with the Canon lens + adapter on the A7iii since my 70-200 is mostly used for sports and the A7iii’s Tracking AF doesn’t play nice with adapters at high fps... but in my experience on their native bodies they both perform as they should. Maybe when I have time I’ll do a test using both on the A7iii and see what I come up with.

Yes, I’ll admit that the GM’s price is kind of ridiculous, but that’s the price you have to pay for a fast 70-200 these days if you need to shoot high fps and track a fast moving subject on a Sony.

I would say this: LensRentals did shoot photos of charts side by side with the other glass and concluded the Sony was softer. That's not really any different from what Tony did in a sense.
YOUR Sony 70-200 may not be soft (it probably isn't if you haven't noticed it side-by-side your other glass), but maybe that raises another question: what about copy to copy variance?

The problem I'm running into is this:
the A7iii looks bad. I mean really bad. Like barely eeking out over the 6D2 bad.
And it's (apparently) not using the same glass as any other body in the test.
So I either need to conclude that the A7iii sucks far worse than anyone realizes (which...man that feels like a stretch), or I need to conclude that the glass is in question--which seems more reasonable.

soeren wrote in post #18711020
Thats disapointing. I would have assumed Northtrup knew better and at least shot with the lenses stopped down Really too bad since I was begining to find their videos informative.

Until you put repeated what Northrup was doing, I didn't think much about it. I had already seen his presentation too. Regarding Northrup, I've seen some good tips from him, but with some content, I question his priority sometimes. He maintains a channel. So is he trying to cover one small sliver to get something for viewers to see? Or is what he did exactly how he would do it for his own personal gear selection choice? In one way the video offered a couple things to look at, but the apertures, subjects and lighting were rather limited. In low light, quite a few photographers may choose to shoot wide open, but they don't all shoot wide open the same way.