EOS-R - It's out. Thoughts?

With all the pre release noise on the eos-r, it can (hopefully) make the next release even better and perhaps more cost aligned with its features and function compared to Sony offerings. Can't wait to see the next announcement, I don't think I will buy this first ff generation from Canon, unless I find a great deal in the coming months.

Wilt wrote in post #18712339
Not ridiculing your statement, but retrospectively I do find it highly amusing, having covered weddings a few decades ago with a medium format film SLR which required this...

1. inserting dark slide at end of roll
2. pressing release button to remove film magazine
3. putting depleted film magazine away, pulling out a magazine with a fresh roll
4. attaching new film magazine
5. removing dark slide and advancing roll to first frame
6. repeat steps 1-5 as needed, and before all film magazines are depleted...do the following for every exposed film magazine
....pull out old roll, seal the paper seal and put roll in exposed film case, pull out new roll break the seal and load into film insert, place insert in film back.

so that 6 film magazines were sufficient to cover a wedding for 10-12 hours, resulting in 10-15 rolls of exposed film with 30 shots each...

...to then think that opening the battery door and replacing a run down battery every 300 shots could be so incredibly shot-losing an activity!

Yeah, but camera's have come a long way since the days of film and people don't compare what a new camera can do with something from decades ago, but with other, similar camera's of the day. Don't know how the Sony's and Nikons etc. mirror-less do when it comes to batteries though...

I do know that even my old 1DIIN did a little over 1000 shots on a full battery, and that was a camera from 2005. So yes, 200-400 shots do seem rather poor to me.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18712551
It isn't priced like a premium, it is priced at the level of a 6d, the entry low cost FF that Canon offered just 6 years ago.

I don't know. At 2539 euro I really wouldn't call it a "low cost" entry FF. The 6D was 2029 euro at launch (and dropped to 1600 within months). To me that's a significant difference.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #18712700
Yeah, but camera's have come a long way since the days of film and people don't compare what a new camera can do with something from decades ago, but with other, similar camera's of the day. Don't know how the Sony's and Nikons etc. mirror-less do when it comes to batteries though...

I do know that even my old 1DIIN did a little over 1000 shots on a full battery, and that was a camera from 2005. So yes, 200-400 shots do seem rather poor to me.

I don't know. At 2539 euro I really wouldn't call it a "low cost" entry FF. The 6D was 2029 euro at launch (and dropped to 1600 within months). To me that's a significant difference.

I guess we can see if Canon introduces something even lower than the EOS-R. I just think Canon has increased the costs across the board. I just don't see ever owning any of these RF lenses, for example. Those prices to me seem way too high, and if I am spending that on glass, I will just move to the Sony A9 with native glass. $1000 more than the EOS-R will get me a very lightly used A9, and the GM glass is cheaper than the new RF glass. I think the 6D2 dropped so quickly due to the lackluster reception it received. Perhaps the EOS-R might follow in those footsteps.

Here though, the price is 15% higher than the 6D2 when it listed. $2300 USD is hardly a high end FF body price though, because $3500 has always been the starting price point for Canon's FF DSLRs in the past. The original comment I replied to was from a member just 6 hours from me, thus this answer is completely valid.

300-400 (or 500) shots with an LP-E6 is pretty bad. The BP-511s from the xxD days and the 5D were around 300 or so. This is the WORST rating of any Canon camera that uses the LP-E6, and that goes back to the 5D2/7D days. I suppose it is due to having the VF being electronic, and the more advanced top display than a simple LCD screen, but still... I suspect it is more that the camera is doing so much more with the lenses and live image/AF/metering from the sensor than the DSLR design where the metering and AF were separate very mature and less power hungry components.

I do find the apologetic comments around "oh that isn't bad, just keep extra batteries" kinda funny, because I already keep extra batteries with me, and now I need twice as many. I will shoot nearly 1000 shots at any given game, perhaps a bit more. Between 4-5 bursts on heavy action, a ton of crowd shots, and halftime shows, etc, this means I now need 6-8 batteries on me instead of 4 across the two bodies I carry around, plus a TC in the pocket, my phone for transmitting photos, etc. 3 extra batteries takes up an entire pocket (which I don't have), and I am not even sure I should be putting loose lithium batteries together in a pocket. So the next answer will be "get a photo vest, or a waist bag", I can hear it already.

Plus obviously we should have goals for the products we buy be "oh please, make the batteries last less than prior versions, I love charging batteries and bringing extras" vs "hey we have great technology these days, please find a way to really make the battery life even better than before, please be a bit more green".

Or just a a bit more than the r you can get a used 5d4. Between the two im still not seeing why i would choose the r.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18712709
I guess we can see if Canon introduces something even lower than the EOS-R. I just think Canon has increased the costs across the board. I just don't see ever owning any of these RF lenses, for example. Those prices to me seem way too high, and if I am spending that on glass, I will just move to the Sony A9 with native glass. $1000 more than the EOS-R will get me a very lightly used A9, and the GM glass is cheaper than the new RF glass.

except you will be forced to use an adapter on the Sony and you will compromise performance- You forgot that

I Think I will be a wait and see as to what canons is going to introduce with the R line up for glass

A 24-70F/2 is an eye opener

So is crop glass and L glass working on the same adapter from canon

And I think price points and what the market is willing to pay will dictate where they price these new R lens

last thought. 1.4 and 2.o extenders. No one knows what they will do as well

Its exciting times for photographers but i will caution. More than ever you have to educate yourself on whats out there, what works and how you want to spend your $$$ on gear

So many options and not enough $$ or time

Unless your talley

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18712673
It seems that this lens serialization recognition is pretty new and only on a few models. I wasn't aware Canon made that change, as I only have one of each of my lenses. I know they made a change to allow AFMA at the ends of a zoom, and that AFMA recognized a lens vs a lens plus TC. Somebody already confirmed this behavior earlier on the 5D4 and a couple other bodies. Good to know though!

Don't know what you consider new, but 6D will recognize different lenses of the same make and model. It also does wide/tele measurements for zooms.

CR reporting 24-70 2.8 IS in both RF and EF coming next year, possibly early.

elitejp wrote in post #18712713
Or just a a bit more than the r you can get a used 5d4. Between the two im still not seeing why i would choose the r.

well for sure on this release

but the technology and optics are very promising

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #18712700
Yeah, but camera's have come a long way since the days of film and people don't compare what a new camera can do with something from decades ago, but with other, similar camera's of the day. Don't know how the Sony's and Nikons etc. mirror-less do when it comes to batteries though...

I do know that even my old 1DIIN did a little over 1000 shots on a full battery, and that was a camera from 2005. So yes, 200-400 shots do seem rather poor to me.

I don't know. At 2539 euro I really wouldn't call it a "low cost" entry FF. The 6D was 2029 euro at launch (and dropped to 1600 within months). To me that's a significant difference.

You seem to have missed the point I was chuckling to myself about.:
In the days of shooting weddings with rollfilm cameras, every 15-30 shots a photographer had to change film...for Hassy and Bronica shooters that meant you could speed things up (during the more hectic moments) by changing film backs, but that is still NOT an instantaneous process. Even then, when you have used up all your magazines, you have to RELOAD EVERY magazine with a new roll of film. A slow process that affords a lot of time in which to 'miss shots' if you try to do all of them at the same time. Back then, pros could DEAL with the situation with just a bit of planning. In 10-12 hours, there are more than 'a few minutes' of idle time during a wedding/reception in which to perform all of those tasks, assuming one does just a bit of planning.

To the points you raised...Yes, technology has changed a bit in the ensuing years. One would hope a photographer today is also able to do just a bit of planning to find the time to change a 300+ shot battery during 30 seconds of downtime in the action. Perhaps other digital cameras have 2-3x more battery capacity in number of shots, but that really is not that great a handicap even for a camera that only gets 300 shots per battery...after all, rollfilm shooters MANAGED their problem (which was far greater of a problem than a 300 shot battery). Certainly, half the capacity means carrying TWICE as many batteries, and having to manage them (and find space for that), and admittedly that is certainly more bothersome a task than it needs to be, but not a crippling one that makes that camera a washout in the market.

Canon has already made an explicit statement that the EOS R is the 'middle' camera, and a lower cost entry camera and a higher cost pro camera are in their plans.

umphotography wrote in post #18712723
except you will be forced to use an adapter on the Sony and you will compromise performance- You forgot that

No, I said if I had to buy RF glass at the current asking prices, then I would just get an A9 and native glass, it would probably be cheaper, and no issues with adapters.

I almost jumped on a lightly used A9 yesterday for $3300, but then thought perhaps I might find these a bit less here in coming days.

Weddings these days amount to cramming 10 pounds of poop into a 5 pound sack. Constantly dealing with film was just as big of a deal as dealing with batteries and keeping moving these days. Both are manageable, but only if the photog is already on top of all the other things going on around them.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #18712700
Yeah, but camera's have come a long way since the days of film and people don't compare what a new camera can do with something from decades ago, but with other, similar camera's of the day. Don't know how the Sony's and Nikons etc. mirror-less do when it comes to batteries though...

I do know that even my old 1DIIN did a little over 1000 shots on a full battery, and that was a camera from 2005. So yes, 200-400 shots do seem rather poor to me.

I don't know. At 2539 euro I really wouldn't call it a "low cost" entry FF. The 6D was 2029 euro at launch (and dropped to 1600 within months). To me that's a significant difference.

!!!!
why are you here?? are you interested in getting an iioss are?? you are welcome to the soleknee thread!

Wilt wrote in post #18712339
Not ridiculing your statement, but retrospectively I do find it highly amusing, having covered weddings a few decades ago with a medium format film SLR which required this...

1. inserting dark slide at end of roll
2. pressing release button to remove film magazine
3. putting depleted film magazine away, pulling out a magazine with a fresh roll
4. attaching new film magazine
5. removing dark slide and advancing roll to first frame
6. repeat steps 1-5 as needed, and before all film magazines are depleted...do the following for every exposed film magazine
....pull out old roll, seal the paper seal and put roll in exposed film case, pull out new roll break the seal and load into film insert, place insert in film back.

so that 6 film magazines were sufficient to cover a wedding for 10-12 hours, resulting in 10-15 rolls of exposed film with 30 shots each...

...to then think that opening the battery door and replacing a run down battery every 300 shots could be so incredibly shot-losing an activity!

lol wow that's complicated! thank goodness for technology

RDKirk wrote in post #18712393
Better than rewinding the film and changing cartridges every 36 shot.

Or changing roll film every 12 or 24 shots.

Hint from the past: When the battery meter first hits the last segment, take the next predictable lull in activity to change it.

every shot has to be good and has to matter because every shot costs money. and the curiosity of how the pictures will turn out before having them developed. :P

Battery life will be directly related to EVF use.
My experience with the A7 - I could shoot all day on one battery, while my partners couldn't, because they did lots of reviewing in the EVF instead of the back of the camera. I also had done some research and turned several resource hogs off, and I'm thinking I got in the 400-600 range easy. And that was the orginal.

My guess is as the current reviews haven't tagged the battery life as a problem, some have commented the opposite, and we all should wait and see what the range and conditions are for shot amounts before we start forming opinions.. but I'm betting it will be better than 300, just a guess.

Rudy already alluded to this during an interview, but did not sound very positive that the count will be that much higher. Even at 500 shots, if you could eek that out, is worse than most the others, if not all of them. I hope the next model to be announced is better.

I will be happy to be proven wrong though for this model's battery life.