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

DigitalTuned wrote in post #18840474
me during these arguments

[GIFS ARE NOT RENDERED IN QUOTES]

That's a very crafty way of getting a lady to accept what you're saying is true.....Linda means pretty in Spanish

Cuttlefish wrote in post #18840705
That's a very crafty way of getting a lady to accept what you're saying is true.....Linda means pretty in Spanish

hahaha true

umphotography wrote in post #18840079
I have not seen any reports by anyone, anywhere, indicating superior performance to the 5D4 in ANY category----I have looked extensively....and from my limited use of the EOS R in studio...No way now how does it outperform a 5D4.....this is why I did not get one for studio use despite the fact that I think its a great studio camera. Not enough there for me to ditch that 5D4 with a single slot memory card camera

Low ISO and image quality and very close and similar to the 5D4. I was at 100-400 ISO....everything is great at those ISO levels

When I mention or lament the lack of noise progress in the most recent Canon offerings, I am talking about the deep shadows of low ISOs and relatively higher tones at high ISOs. For "good", slide-like exposures at low and medium-high ISOs, or ETTR of scenes with modest DR, the RP, R, and 6D2 all give very good imaging; better than their predecessors.

I am waiting for a FF MILC that is progressive with read noise, too. I hope the hi-res model has better noise. I just replaced my 12-year-old desktop with a system with no bandwidth bottlenecks to get ready for those big files.

mdvaden wrote in post #18840690
Do you own a 5DS or 5DS R?

I'm guessing you don't , but thought I'd at least ask.

Otherwise, what umphotography noted sounds realistic within the scope of his style, needs and wants.

Maybe one of my biggest unanswered curiousities, is whether a future pro RF full frame will contain one processor or two processors. Because may reflect a sizeable variation in cost.

My comment had nothing to do really with his desires so much as to say that I believe that the prospect of thinking the pro version will be only 24M is, in my opinion; unrealistic. If you think they were raked over the coals for the R, let them try to pull that on the YouTube community. They will chew them up and spit them out.

SereneSpeed wrote in post #18840275
The 5D4 and EOS R image qualities are nearly equal in low light performance. Good luck telling them apart without (ridiculous) pixel peeping.

Sorry, but even at ISO 6400, you can see a noise benefit to the 5D4 in the unpushed shadows, and the difference is bigger at ISO 102K. Canon is not catching up to Nikon or Sony in this department; the 1DxII is still Canon's best FF camera for high ISOs, and it is a bit behind the best from Nikon or Sony at ISO 102K.

I didn't say that the R doesn't have some advantages. I said that it has more read noise, at both low and high ISOs. It has a better chance of focusing in very dark situations than previous Canons. If it had less noise, though, it would work even faster or in greater darkness, since the sensor is used for AF.

I really don't get this "friend or foe of a camera" vibe that many people seem to have and project a thumbs-upper or thumbs-downer

True; however, focus may be achieved, too, with a less AF-capable system that has better IQ.

I don't give monolithic wins. I am interested in subsystem rankings, and ranking for different aspects of various needs.

But hey, bring on the hate. This thread wouldn't be the same without NON-owners uniting in their negativity...

What "hate"?

It seems to me that if we put together the lists of advantages of each (EOS-r Vs. EOS 5D4) into two columns,. there is no question at all which column will be longer.

now of course each of us is going to weight each advantage differently, based on what we shoot, the features we prefer, .. and just personal taste. Some of these advantages will be more subjective than others, like weight and "feel" vs. advantages that are purely numeric and thus a clear "winner" (for that specific advantage)

In the end we will chose which is better for our own selves,.


....but I am sorry to say that the 5D4 column will simply be longer.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18840811
....but I am sorry to say that the 5D4 column will simply be longer.

That's what he said!

John Sheehy wrote in post #18840803
Sorry, but even at ISO 6400, you can see a noise benefit to the 5D4 in the unpushed shadows, and the difference is bigger at ISO 102K. Canon is not catching up to Nikon or Sony in this department; the 1DxII is still Canon's best FF camera for high ISOs, and it is a bit behind the best from Nikon or Sony at ISO 102K.

I cannot see the noise difference at 6400. Perhaps you can. And perhaps that matters to you. But, for me, the difference is imperceptible.

You and I most definitely evaluate images differently. Most certainly with a opposite brain hemispheres.

I have never in my life looked at a beautiful image and evaluated the noise. Never.

But, that's your prerogative. And I respect that.

Cheers.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18840811
It seems to me that if we put together the lists of advantages of each (EOS-r Vs. EOS 5D4) into two columns,. there is no question at all which column will be longer.

[...]

....but I am sorry to say that the 5D4 column will simply be longer.

I think this is where there is a communication breakdown.

If we look at 'spec sheets', then I will agree with you and previous posters. The 5D4 specs can be presented in a way to make them appear stronger than the EOS R in a direct apples-to-apples comparison.

But a direct apples-to-apples comparison becomes impossible when one spec list contains items that are not on the other. Or at least, it becomes impossible for me.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18840811
now of course each of us is going to weight each advantage differently

I do not evaluate a system the way many people do. I do not see a 'list' of items. Where some people may see:
-8 fps
-super duper servo AF for BIF
-41 cross type
-auto group switching perimeter customization
-case modes
-better subject tracking
-rgb feedback tracking
-no blackout
-2 slots
-better battery life
-etc...

I see:
-this one works better for me
-in areas the other one is completely unable to compete

I'm not sure why it seems so easy for people to evaluate cameras based on the spec sheet. I don't put much value into them. I have a completely different way of deciding if a camera is for me.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18840811
In the end we will chose which is better for our own selves,.

Yes. Just like we will evaluate the strengths in ways that are better for ourselves.

.
.
.
.
.

Other than the 2nd card slot. What does the 5D4 do that the EOS R cannot? And, how big is that list?

Conversely, what does the EOS R do that the 5D4 cannot? Now, which list will be longer?

mdvaden wrote in post #18840643
Because the pure nature of a forum like POTN denotes a purpose and environment of spreading opinions and information. It doesn't just connote, but denotes. Wasn't what you just wrote an opinion too?

"Spreading" can and should be "sharing" instead of "evangelizing". Sharing your preference for one camera body does not mean that you must persuade others the same. And reducing everything to "well that's an opinion too" is a facile way to try to distract from those differences in tone and intent. You know it and I know it.

For what its worth. I am enjoying this dialog. And I appreciate the views of all the posters who have taken the time to weigh in.

On that note. The last two pages of this thread are the very best example of Canon's business genius. Look at how varied and passionate the responses have been when it comes to comparing Canon's camera range and deciding on a superior body.

Canon leads this industry because of their flawless product diversification.

We have posters in the thread who own 5Dsr's, 1Dxii's, 5D4's, 7D2's, etc... (all professional grade cameras) who also own the EOS R. Who can recognize enough strengths in both bodies that they want to own both. And, many are still lusting after the unreleased...

Canon knows exactly what they are doing.

So um, when's the new firmware coming?

SereneSpeed wrote in post #18840840
I see:
-this one works better for me
-in areas the other one is completely unable to compete

The thing I keep coming back to in my hand-wringing is: for all the list of things I said I didn't like about it (and stand by), my favorite images were captured by it, in the span of a week. With a sharp-but-pedestrian f/4 zoom. It does also hit some bullet point that the 5D4 simply does not, including in-body charging. Would I get used to the handling?

Also, can anyone weigh in on whether I would expect the 24-240 to do better than the 18-135STM on an SL2 or 18-150 on M50? Knowing that of course such a lens is a compromise anyway, but it seems the bigger sensor has to help, and then I can put in the 35 for low-light.

Mid-April

Have you seen the announcement?

It has everything I was hoping for

LonelyBoy wrote in post #18840862
Would I get used to the handling?

I don’t know.

But I did not like the mF-n bar, thumb wheel, or touch and drag AF, for at least two weeks when I started using the R.

I now prefer them over other controls I used to like, on my other cameras.