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
mccamli
Senior Member
Avatar
589 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 538
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Perth, WA
     
Oct 02, 2018 21:25 as a reply to  @ post 18721141 |  #1651

I'm not a pro so lost photos aren't a disaster. I've had a number of cards fail though. I've had an SD card fail completely and two SD cards with intermittent and seemingly random failures. One of those failed in my A7r but continued to work flawlessly in my 7D. I currently have a compact flash card that fails very occasionally with single images...once in a blue moon. I continue to use it.

Despite those failures I've opted to use the second card slot in my 7Dii to enable Wi-fi.

I'd prefer two slots on a new camera but wouldn't use one as backup, I'd use it for overflow.


Flickr (external link)
500PX (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,354 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2385
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited 5 months ago by Wilt.
     
Oct 02, 2018 21:26 |  #1652

Up to 2012, the following Canons had dual memory slots:


  1. 1D Mark II
  2. 1D Mark IIN
  3. 1D Mark III
  4. 1D Mark IV
  5. 1D Mark 1X (dual CF)
  6. 1Ds Mark II
  7. 1D Mark III


...so are we to conclude that none of the other Canons back then were suitable for professional usage?!

Then these additional cameras came with two slots:


  1. Canon 5D Mark III
  2. Canon 7D Mark II
  3. 1DX



..wow how did pro photographers survive before?  :p

You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mdvaden
Goldmember
Avatar
2,895 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1042
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Post edited 5 months ago by mdvaden. (3 edits in all)
     
Oct 02, 2018 22:15 |  #1653

Charlie wrote in post #18721149 (external link)
Film had been long removed, irrelevant and not a competing product.

This is a camera costing 2 Grand, looks like Canon wants you to pay 3 Grand for a dual cards camera.... Consider if you shoot dual bodies, that's 6-7K in bodies....

Yet the concept or reality of having images on one thing is not irrelevant or long removed.

As for a Canon camera costing three thousand dollars, it could be considered a bargain for 5 thousand dollars compared to what calculators used to cost for the tiny functions those did when they were first released.

For a camera that probably costs tens of millions to develop, I think three thousand is a reasonable amount of money to pay the company and the wide assortment of workers and technicians who put in their weekly work shifts to get the job done.

On my lesser days, I may make $100 in a day. But when I've earned up to over $1000 a day doing pruning, my primary profession, I wouldn't squabble about a three thousand dollar camera body that stockholders, workers and camera store owners have to earn a living from above and beyond production costs.

If it wasn't for penny-pinchers driving profits down, Sony, Canon, Nikon or Olympus's cameras may be worth 30% more than the selling prices.


vadenphotography.com (external link) . . . and . . . Coast Redwoods Main Page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcoren
Senior Member
Avatar
624 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 303
Joined Mar 2015
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
     
Oct 02, 2018 22:16 |  #1654

mdvaden wrote in post #18721141 (external link)
This reminds me of film photographers. What happens if their ONE ROLL OF FILM malfunctions that was used during part of a ceremony? Was it a real nail-biter for photographers who did not have dual film rolls in their 35mm camera?

The photographer who did my sister's first wedding lost a bunch of the film. In the end it was no big deal, the marriage didn't last that long. :)

This thread has come a full 360 degrees. There will now be several pages of postings on one card slot versus two, followed by adapted versus native lenses, followed by IBIS versus lens-based IS, followed by how much better Sony's bodies are (even though Canon's lenses are better), followed by which lenses Canon should migrate to the RF mount next, all of this intermixed with what Canon MUST do to prove that they're serious about mirrorless and appeal to POTN members. Eventually, after another 50-70 pages of posts, it will return to one versus two card slots.

Our only hope to break out of this "Groundhog Day" scenario is for (a) some POTN members to actually get their EOS R's and report on how they really perform, and (b) for Canon to announce the next bodies and lenses.

(A generous sprinkling of :)'s in the preceding statements!)

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
mccamli
Senior Member
Avatar
589 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 538
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Perth, WA
     
Oct 02, 2018 22:25 as a reply to  @ mcoren's post |  #1655

Damn you Mike...you've spoiled the next 60 pages for me ;-)a


Flickr (external link)
500PX (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elitejp
Goldmember
1,701 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 185
Joined Mar 2008
     
Oct 02, 2018 23:35 |  #1656

I blame it on that there is nothing to talk about with this camera. We have the specs which we can debate and we have youtube bloggers feeding us a very limited amount of info. There is really not much you can say by only using a camera for a few days. So this is what you get...many pages of nothing. However I keep getting drawn back :cry:


6D; canon 85mm 1.8, Tamron 24-70mm VC, Canon 135L Canon 70-200L is ii

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,402 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Oct 03, 2018 03:41 |  #1657

mdvaden wrote in post #18721051 (external link)
Why would 38 Mb be a turnoff? Wouldn't MEDIUM file size work as an option? Or is there a deterioration in a lower file setting?

Raw files (for most, but not all, digital cameras) contain a Bayer array, which needs to be "de-bayered" (or "de-mosaiced") in order to produce an RGB image file. In order to create a raw image with reduced pixel dimensions it's likely that some artefacts will be introduced, depending on how bits of the Bayer array are thrown away.

I've not used the smaller raw sizes on recent bodies, but I understand that older bodies could produce some pretty nasty moire.

For JPEG it's less of an issue; as an RGB image is needed in order to write out a JPEG anyway (so the camera must de-bayer). How good the subsampling is (that takes the full resolution image and reduces the pixel size) may have a negative effect on the quality, vs taking a full size JPEG and subsampling it in post.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,402 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Oct 03, 2018 03:46 |  #1658

Wilt wrote in post #18721153 (external link)
Up to 2012, the following Canons had dual memory slots:


  1. 1D Mark II
  2. 1D Mark IIN
  3. 1D Mark III
  4. 1D Mark IV
  5. 1D Mark 1X (dual CF)
  6. 1Ds Mark II
  7. 1D Mark III


...so are we to conclude that none of the other Canons back then were suitable for professional usage?!

Then these additional cameras came with two slots:


  1. Canon 5D Mark III
  2. Canon 7D Mark II
  3. 1DX



..wow how did pro photographers survive before?  :p

Yea, but only Canon still thinks it's 2012 :mrgreen:


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,316 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2072
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Oct 03, 2018 05:21 |  #1659

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18720818 (external link)
Flagship as in a high resolution landscape camera or flagship in the way of a fast sports camera? That is really the big question here. :)

If somehow they were able to marry the two, that would be great. 50Mpx when you want slower non sports AF at 10fps, or 28Mpx when you want fast AF and 20fps. Throw on the dual cards and proven AF tech, and my checkbook opens up!

Woke up with a brainstorm this morning, probably be downhill from here ... but isn't the recently announced R the current mirrorless "flagship"?

So January they may introduce a new ML flagship.

And then 2020 a new ML flagship.

I'm curious what the naming system is going to look like. That would help plot the direction a bit.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
StarJack
Senior Member
602 posts
Likes: 90
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Sugar Hill, GA
     
Oct 03, 2018 07:44 |  #1660

sploo wrote in post #18721285 (external link)
Raw files (for most, but not all, digital cameras) contain a Bayer array, which needs to be "de-bayered" (or "de-mosaiced") in order to produce an RGB image file. In order to create a raw image with reduced pixel dimensions it's likely that some artefacts will be introduced, depending on how bits of the Bayer array are thrown away.
I've not used the smaller raw sizes on recent bodies, but I understand that older bodies could produce some pretty nasty moire.
...

If you would, please clarify for me. Are you saying using M-Raw or S-Raw for smaller file sizes produces an inferior image when compared to the full sized raw files?


Regards,
Steve

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,402 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Oct 03, 2018 07:57 |  #1661

StarJack wrote in post #18721383 (external link)
If you would, please clarify for me. Are you saying using M-Raw or S-Raw for smaller file sizes produces an inferior image when compared to the full sized raw files?

Yes.

A good post here: https://www.fredmirand​a.com/forum/topic/9063​67/2#8553893 (external link)

Some other searching revealed issues with highlight recovery on the 5D3 with the reduced size raws. Unfortunately I couldn't find the original article I was thinking of (that showed moire problems).


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
StarJack
Senior Member
602 posts
Likes: 90
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Sugar Hill, GA
     
Oct 03, 2018 08:34 as a reply to  @ sploo's post |  #1662

I've never used the smaller raw sizes because storage cards are so large, but I would not have understand the trade off if I had chosen to do so. Knowledge is good! Thanks Spoo!


Regards,
Steve

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,520 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 2302
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
Post edited 5 months ago by umphotography.
     
Oct 03, 2018 09:01 |  #1663

Wilt wrote in post #18721153 (external link)
Up to 2012, the following Canons had dual memory slots:


  1. 1D Mark II
  2. 1D Mark IIN
  3. 1D Mark III
  4. 1D Mark IV
  5. 1D Mark 1X (dual CF)
  6. 1Ds Mark II
  7. 1D Mark III


...so are we to conclude that none of the other Canons back then were suitable for professional usage?!

Then these additional cameras came with two slots:


  1. Canon 5D Mark III
  2. Canon 7D Mark II
  3. 1DX



..wow how did pro photographers survive before?  :p


Your talking to someone who has been on a dual card camera since the 1DMKII1 so I knew back then the advantages of dual cards

How did photographers survive before ? Most did not and developed a bad reputation. Back then you did not have a viewing screen to see if the images were good or bad either. You had to know WTF you were doing

So what did they do ? They ate crow and were failures in their clients eyes. They were also likely on a film camera. We walked into a wedding with 12-14 rolls of film and we hoped for 250-300 usable images that a lab could develop and we could present proofs to clients for prints

If we lost a roll we only lost 25-30 shots and did not loose 1000+ thats on a modern card with todays cameras. So you only lost Part of the images and not all of them

Using many small cards is a lame move and argument as well. You stand a far greater chance of misplacing a card v/s having 2 larger cards with al the information in one place

So your statement is really not accurate nor relevant for how photography is captured and presented in todays markets

If you are a wedding photographer and you are using a single card camera you are in idiot. Today, people will sue your pants off and will win huge judgements against you for gross negligence. Judges and courts are fully aware that cameras have dual cards and data loss is very preventable.....despit​e what you think your contract says about data loss. Your going to get sued big time and have a judgement against you unless you take adequate protection and steps to prevent data loss. Tell a judge you had a single card only and see what happens.

sorry Wilt. With much respect...I completely disagree with that thought process


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,402 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Oct 03, 2018 09:55 |  #1664

umphotography wrote in post #18721422 (external link)
Your talking to someone who has been on a dual card camera since the 1DMKII1 so I knew back then the advantages of dual cards

How did photographers survive before ? Most did not and developed a bad reputation. Back then you did not have a viewing screen to see if the images were good or bad either. You had to know WTF you were doing

So what did they do ? They ate crow and were failures in their clients eyes. They were also likely on a film camera. We walked into a wedding with 12-14 rolls of film and we hoped for 250-300 usable images that a lab could develop and we could present proofs to clients for prints

If we lost a roll we only lost 25-30 shots and did not loose 1000+ thats on a modern card with todays cameras. So you only lost Part of the images and not all of them

Using many small cards is a lame move and argument as well. You stand a far greater chance of misplacing a card v/s having 2 larger cards with al the information in one place

So your statement is really not accurate nor relevant for how photography is captured and presented in todays markets

If you are a wedding photographer and you are using a single card camera you are in idiot. Today, people will sue your pants off and will win huge judgements against you for gross negligence. Judges and courts are fully aware that cameras have dual cards and data loss is very preventable.....despit​e what you think your contract says about data loss. Your going to get sued big time and have a judgement against you unless you take adequate protection and steps to prevent data loss. Tell a judge you had a single card only and see what happens.

sorry Wilt. With much respect...I completely disagree with that thought process

I spotted our wedding photographer changing cards quite often during the day - especially in small lulls in a shoot. He explained it was so that in the event of (dual) card failure he'd always have at least a few shots from each "scene" across the whole day. I guess it puts more wear on the cards and camera by changing more often, but I can see the logic.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,354 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2385
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited 5 months ago by Wilt.
     
Oct 03, 2018 12:11 |  #1665

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18721327 (external link)
Woke up with a brainstorm this morning, probably be downhill from here ... but isn't the recently announced R the current mirrorless "flagship"?

So January they may introduce a new ML flagship.

And then 2020 a new ML flagship.

I'm curious what the naming system is going to look like. That would help plot the direction a bit.

'flagship' is reference to a ship which a flag rank naval officer (i.e., admiral) uses for his command, but which is under the command of the ship's captain...IOW someone runs the ship, the admiral just has an office in it.
Applied to cameras, the 'top of the line' (fanciest, most 'professional') camera ordinarily is the flagship. Since Canon has already declared its intention of introducing a fancier mirrorless better intended for the pro community, although the EOS R is the current fanciest, most 'professional' mirrorless from Canon, I don't think we can call the EOS R the 'flagship'.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

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

115,326 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 EugeneTindall
909 guests, 350 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.