-= Canon EOS R owners unite! Post photos and discuss.

MatthewK wrote in post #18758701
When I try to upload portrait-orientation photos to POTN, for some reason they look horrible, all mangled and mushy. So, to counter it, I upload to Flickr and then share a super-small sized photo here, and it clears up the mushy/pixelation because it's all compressed and too small to see And quite often, I want to caveat my posted photos with: "looks better on my Macbook".

My photos definitely lose sharpness when uploaded to Flickr, I think they do better when uploaded here. I've gone back and forth between image on computer and image on Flickr, Flickr is doing some sort of compressing or scrunching down in some way.

MatthewK wrote in post #18758701
John, I'm probably incorrect here somehow, and you'll surely let me know if I am... anyways, I think I know what you're saying, maybe? When I try to upload portrait-orientation photos to POTN, for some reason they look horrible, all mangled and mushy. So, to counter it, I upload to Flickr and then share a super-small sized photo here, and it clears up the mushy/pixelation because it's all compressed and too small to see And quite often, I want to caveat my posted photos with: "looks better on my Macbook".

No, what John is saying is that the largest image you can see on POTN when using its AMASS facilities to upload and view images is that of roughly a index card. 1600 pixels on the longest side....

Any camera, even going back to the 20D/30D days with an 8Mpx sensor, can produce very nice looking small index card results. When you resize a large image down to such dimensions, it looks less noisy, looks to be sharper, etc.

Couple that with different people's post processing tools and skills, and you cannot easily assess the quality of a camera based on posted results without at least knowing more about the image. Was it cropped and resized? Was it a 100% crop? Was it a full size image resized down? etc...

It is neither negative or positive in attitude, it is just a fact of how image processing works.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18758767
No, what John is saying is that the largest image you can see on POTN when using its AMASS facilities to upload and view images is that of roughly a index card. 1600 pixels on the longest side....

Any camera, even going back to the 20D/30D days with an 8Mpx sensor, can produce very nice looking small index card results. When you resize a large image down to such dimensions, it looks less noisy, looks to be sharper, etc.

Couple that with different people's post processing tools and skills, and you cannot easily assess the quality of a camera based on posted results without at least knowing more about the image. Was it cropped and resized? Was it a 100% crop? Was it a full size image resized down? etc...

It is neither negative or positive in attitude, it is just a fact of how image processing works.

If you post a downrezzed sample from a noisy, unsharp image or one from a super sharp image, they'll both look decent shared on the web, meaning you can't tell from web sizes if the originating image is actually sharp or detailed. I got that part, no problem. Related to that, I guess, is that if I post a smaller image in portrait mode here it looks better than at the 1280 or 1600 resolution because it isn't as pixelated. Or so I think, I don't know, I stopped trying to post portrait oriented photos here because of this.

My take on it is that John is trying to temper expectations due to forum excitement based on web samples. He's providing the voice of reason amid all of the excitement. That's understood, and people may need to differentiate his intentions. He isn't saying that photos aren't sharp and the camera isn't performing, he's saying that users shouldn't get overly excited by sharp web-sized photos because the actual end results may not be that much better than what they're currently shooting.

And this is the sad intersection of the art and the science. Personally, I don't try to look under the hatch too much because I'd rather just enjoy the photos.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18758767
No, what John is saying is that the largest image you can see on POTN when using its AMASS facilities to upload and view images is that of roughly a index card. 1600 pixels on the longest side....

Any camera, even going back to the 20D/30D days with an 8Mpx sensor, can produce very nice looking small index card results. When you resize a large image down to such dimensions, it looks less noisy, looks to be sharper, etc.

Couple that with different people's post processing tools and skills, and you cannot easily assess the quality of a camera based on posted results without at least knowing more about the image. Was it cropped and resized? Was it a 100% crop? Was it a full size image resized down? etc...

It is neither negative or positive in attitude, it is just a fact of how image processing works.

I think all of John words were directed at myself so I'm just gona say One thing and I hope its never brought up again..

There is no need to defend anyone or find some kind of right and wrong in any of that nastiness that was unpleasant for even the shooters that only read the goings on..

I know because they reached out to me as many have my personal info outside of and inside of POTN.

When your standing in a room full of great photographers its a really good idea to not pretend they need to be " Learned UP " as they say.. They will dismiss you as preaching.

We may not like to get into the technical end of photography like some... But that doesn't mean we do not understand.

If you look at the images around POTN you find a huge number....." HUGE ".... number of really talented people. Please don't pretend we are not in control of our faculty's

We are.... The images we post did not happen by accident. Everyone interested in the EOS R saw and felt the same thing on these pages and none of it needs to be

explained or defended.. We would like to simply go back to the business of sharing our experiences with the EOS R. I think this needs to be over... Period

Shooting the birds yesterday I was using the slower Servo AF and High frame rate... its about 5 frames a second I think...

I wonder how I would have done shooting in One shot and High frame rate...

Yes it doesn't AF between frames but its more than twice as fast say 8 fps and mostly the small birds are standing in one spot and looking very quickly I might add left to right..

I will have to try it... but right now the snow is falling very hard making it not very nice shooting weather..

Pondrader wrote in post #18758801
Shooting the birds yesterday I was using the slower Servo AF and High frame rate... its about 5 frames a second I think...

I wonder how I would have done shooting in One shot and High frame rate...

Yes it doesn't AF between frames but its more than twice as fast say 8 fps and mostly the small birds are standing in one spot and looking very quickly I might add left to right..

I will have to try it... but right now the snow is falling very hard making it not very nice shooting weather..

Hosted photo: posted by Pondrader in
./showthread.php?p=187​58801&i=i95866471
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Hey Jeff. I've been sporadic in this thread. What did I miss? Did you pick up another R?

nqjudo wrote in post #18758805
Hey Jeff. I've been sporadic in this thread. What did I miss? Did you pick up another R?

Im afraid so lol.... Some may like the idea others not so much..hehe

I hope you hang around Norm ... I'm sure you will be joining the Canon mirrorless group sooner than you think. If only out of curiosity..

I think I made the right choice... and you got more money for your camera in the end.. This thing is very interesting to shoot... and thats what I needed right now.

Pondrader wrote in post #18758810
Im afraid so lol.... Some may like the idea others not so much..hehe

I hope you hang around Norm ... I'm sure you will be joining the Canon mirrorless group sooner than you think. If only out of curiosity..

Good for you, Jeff. I know that it was a difficult decision and it is good to see you've moved on with it quite happily. I think the R is great in many ways and I'll be keeping an eye out for the future. I've culled my gear by about 50% already. There is a change coming. For now I'm going to stick with what I have in-hand but you did convince me to subscribe to this thread so keep em coming ...

Coderunner wrote in post #18758361
I really liked this camera until i found out it wasn't sharp

Hosted photo: posted by Coderunner in
./showthread.php?p=187​58361&i=i241075906
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by Coderunner in
./showthread.php?p=187​58361&i=i134805371
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

How did you find that out?

It certainly wasn't from me.

I never said that the R "isn't sharp". Pay attention to what I actually wrote, and not what other people have suggested that I wrote, as they sarcastically laugh at this strawman of their own creation with their "hahahah"s and "pfffft"s.

Somebody gave a wow-like response to the sharpness of an image of unknown cropping level, which that person could only see at 0.5MP on the page, and only as much as 1.44MP if they clicked on the spectacles, and then on "Zoom to 100%". I then said that these small images do not represent the sharpness of the original captures, especially at 100% view of original pixels, which is where critical sharpness is generally gauged (I don't look through a series of images on the LCD of my camera with no zoom to decide which were sharp and in focus! I zoom in all the way, and judge relative sharpness there). Then, many ganged up on me to ridicule me for insulting Pondrader's photography, which I never did, and no rational, literate person could ever have interpretted that from what I wrote.

I have never said anything negative about Pondrader's photography here, including its sharpness. I just suggested that the difference between the R and the 7D2 at high ISOs is not as huge as he suggested, and is only conditional. Then, I questioned someone declaring a special level of sharpness, when it was in fact heavy downsizing and the methods to get the image to web page size that accounted for the sharp presentation, possible with even a soft image. That does *NOT* imply anything about Pondrader's photography; only about judging critical sharpness from web images of an unknown downsampling ratio.

Now, a kangaroo court is trying to brand me as someone saying that Pondrader can't take a sharp shot, which I never, ever said, or even implied.

Pondrader wrote in post #18758810
Im afraid so lol.... Some may like the idea others not so much..hehe

I hope you hang around Norm ... I'm sure you will be joining the Canon mirrorless group sooner than you think. If only out of curiosity..

I think I made the right choice... and you got more money for your camera in the end.. This thing is very interesting to shoot... and thats what I needed right now.

That answers my question on what way you went. Great to see!

Cyberex wrote in post #18758656
Mk3 have pretty narrow DR, but EOS R and mk4 have much better DR, so you can push up shadows very well

The R doesn't seem to be fully up to 5D4 standards in base ISO shadows, but is better than any other 5-series or either 6D, especially the 6D2 (in base ISO shadows).

MatthewK wrote in post #18758701
John, I'm probably incorrect here somehow, and you'll surely let me know if I am... anyways, I think I know what you're saying, maybe? When I try to upload portrait-orientation photos to POTN, for some reason they look horrible, all mangled and mushy. So, to counter it, I upload to Flickr and then share a super-small sized photo here, and it clears up the mushy/pixelation because it's all compressed and too small to see And quite often, I want to caveat my posted photos with: "looks better on my Macbook".

One quick check to see what is happening to your images in web pages (or in software) is to make an image that is a simple black and white checkerboard with one pixel checks like this:

BWBWBW...
WBWBWB...
BWBWBW...
WBWBWB...
....

... then see what happens when it is re-sized. If the checkerboard pattern changes and distorts, but all the pixels are still black or white, then it is distorting the detail with Nearest Neighbor or a hybrid. The actual distortion depends on the exact downsizing ratio, so always use a resolution the same as the image you would normally use to see the effect. A good resampling will give you lots of greys. Of course, some people like the look of a poor quality downsample, because it looks as sharp as pixels can possibly look on the screen, but it is not friendly to low-exposure/high-ISO photography because it increases noise, and the "detail" is sharp, but not realistic or natural.

Guys, please don't hate me. I returned the kit and the 35/1.8 to B&H today.

I have big hands and my 5D4 just works better ergonomically for me. I'm also a look through the viewfinder shooter. I guess a lifetime of holding a VF to my eye is a hard habit to break. And selecting AF points while looking through the VF is just plain easier for me with the 5D4. I did experiment with various selection methods on the R, the dials, the 4 way key pad, the screen. Using the screen, of course, turns off the VF and it's slow to turn back on causing frustration.

I love the lenses! So cool. So sharp. So I want give the RF ecosystem another try when they release a body that seems like it will be a better fit for me ergonomically. And I will continue to enjoy the incredible photos you all are getting with this system.

AeroSmith wrote in post #18758856
Guys, please don't hate me. I returned the kit and the 35/1.8 to B&H today.

I have big hands and my 5D4 just works better ergonomically for me. I'm also a look through the viewfinder shooter. I guess a lifetime of holding a VF to my eye is a hard habit to break. And selecting AF points while looking through the VF is just plain easier for me with the 5D4. I did experiment with various selection methods on the R, the dials, the 4 way key pad, the screen. Using the screen, of course, turns off the VF and it's slow to turn back on causing frustration.

I love the lenses! So cool. So sharp. So I want give the RF ecosystem another try when they release a body that seems like it will be a better fit for me ergonomically. And I will continue to enjoy the incredible photos you all are getting with this system.

lol Josh ... there is no hate around here lol... I also returned it after ten days.. I wear a XL glove and tend to rip them at the seams.. but I fined holding the R very nice but that comes down to just how you hold the camera to get the images you like.. Theres no wrong answer..

I'm betting you were coming to the end of the return date and didnt want to get stuck with a camera that you were unsure of... Been there done that... kept me up at night.

With all the stuff going on I was more " testing the camera " than just shooting it... it was a night mare trying to decipher good and bad, right and wrong...

Then I realized this time I should just shoot... just get out there and forget the camera and just shoot...

Now I realize more realistically just how and where I can go with this tech.... I'm getting use to it and its growing on me..

You already know what you got in the 5Div and will do superbly ... I'm sure.

AeroSmith wrote in post #18758856
Guys, please don't hate me. I returned the kit and the 35/1.8 to B&H today.

I have big hands and my 5D4 just works better ergonomically for me. I'm also a look through the viewfinder shooter. I guess a lifetime of holding a VF to my eye is a hard habit to break. And selecting AF points while looking through the VF is just plain easier for me with the 5D4. I did experiment with various selection methods on the R, the dials, the 4 way key pad, the screen. Using the screen, of course, turns off the VF and it's slow to turn back on causing frustration.

I love the lenses! So cool. So sharp. So I want give the RF ecosystem another try when they release a body that seems like it will be a better fit for me ergonomically. And I will continue to enjoy the incredible photos you all are getting with this system.

There is nothing to hate, the 5D4 is a hugely capable and even better camera than the EOS-R in many types of situations. Despite the derision of others, some that have used the EOS R extensively, some that bought it to try it for a period of time, etc, the EOS-R, to me, still seems like a 6D3 in mirrorless form. That doesn't make it bad, in fact it is a great upgrade over the 6D series, even more so than what the 6D2 was over the 6D. In limited cases, it is even better than the 5D4 with more AF points and ability to AF at f11. This opinion of mine wasn't forged in ignorance, nor emotionally, but formed via the interviews directly from Canon, where they talk about what this release really meant for Canon, what others are saying across various forums, and then the typical well-known photographers' reviews.

It has the 5D4 sensor underpinnings (not exactly the same but pretty close), plus it is a gateway to a new lens line, which you don't get with any other body right now, and you are able to use a HOST of other lenses, not a feature available on any Canon DSLR. These 3 features alone are simply amazing and make the EOS R a very interesting body even where it might be lacking in regards to the 5D4. I have spent the better part of last week considering the sale of my 7D2 since I rarely use it, and then use the funds to jump on a sale price EOS-R, or used one from here or FM. I have to ignore most of the RF lenses simply due to price and bulk, I don't find them as necessary, I get sharp enough results with MKII lenses now to point I have soften portraits in post.

However with the NBA season in full swing, along with youth sports, I decided to wait a bit. March will be my next decision milestone.