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

Jurke wrote in post #18981439
...greez from Germany/Spreewald...

Hosted photo: posted by Jurke in
./showthread.php?p=189​81439&i=i139005270
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by Jurke in
./showthread.php?p=189​81439&i=i233381648
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

I like your processing!

edmidlifecrisis wrote in post #18981941
I posted this in the R tech thread here but got no responses. In the Facebook EOS R group two people responded that they were having the same issues, one with long primes and one with a zoom combo see below.

With my 3002.8 prime and 2x TC both the newest versions. If the lens focus point is say resting at or near infinity and I pick the camera and lens up to focus on something closer, the AF doesn't move. I have to manually move it to the closer range for it to lock on. The opposite happens too. It the lens is sitting focused close and I place something in the viewfinder far away, nothing happens until I give the focus a "running start". It is like there is not enough juice to run the whole focus range in the camera on this combo. This of course makes my standard 300 f2.8 with 2.0 TC@ that I use so successfully on my 5DIV and 7DII useless on the R for wildlife. So far I have not had this issue on the 100-400 ii with the R. Someone on Facebook said he has this issue with the 100-400 and the 1.4 TC. I also use that combo but have not tried it on the R yet with the TC. Maybe I will today. EDIT: Same thing happens with the 100-400 and 1.4TC. A little better but still basically the same issue- not enough juice to go from infinity to up close.

I am wondering if this is an intrinsic limitation or a setting that needs to be changed. I can't figure it out. But it is not making me happy.

Ed

For some reason I put continuous AF on the first day I used which really messed things up. As soon as I moved the camera somewhere else it focused on that. That is another story.

I use the 400 DO II and 2X and sometimes it was slow to respond when I made drastic distance changes. I found the focal range settings on the lens are very sensitive and need to be set correctly for the range you are shooting. DLSR bodies are more forgiving.

Mine is set up that way.

The rambunctious Dark-Eyed Junco...

squashed wrote in post #18981987

Very nice. Lovely detail in this.
I find it very appealing.

digital paradise wrote in post #18982004
For some reason I put continuous AF on the first day I used which really messed things up. ...

I made that mistake as well early on,. good news was that I immediately saw it was a bad choice and turned it back off.

john crossley wrote in post #18982015

[ HOSTED PHOTO DISPLAY FAILED: ATTACH id 1017719 has been deleted. ]

Based on a quick test I just did that did the trick!!! Thanks guys!!!

Ed

Just to clarify: to solve your issue you had to set it "on" or "off"?

Gianpaolo wrote in post #18982115
Just to clarify: to solve your issue you had to set it "on" or "off"?

I set it to "on". It had been set to "off" by default I think. It did not cause problems except on the long lenses with teleconverters. It's sort of the oppposite of what the manual that John excerpted above says. But it seems to work now. It is raining like crazy and dark so it was only quick test so I will spend some more time at it tomorrow outdoors and make sure it works better now. It did in the fast test I did a little while ago.

Thanks everyone!

Ed

For a while now I've been trying to find a raw workflow in Linux using open source software and some work around like wine and Adobe dng converter and while I've managed to get images I found most to be lacking punch, were flat dull and washed out and other stuff, I've mentioned on this thread.

I've also seen other mentions of flat images coming out of the dng conversion throughout my searching on the net.

I've noticed when using my windows box, DPP produces better looking previews and so on, meaning I was never really satisfied with my workflow on Linux.

There could be a number of reasons for this I suppose, Canon actually supports windows, Mac and Adobe and their own DPP and works with them...

Adobe could say, no free lunch with the dng converter, slightly mute the conversion and if you want better color accuracy, pay up!

For the most part Linux software is open source and some standards are reverse engineered, or Linux just don't support the profiles or what not.

Anyway, I thought this was interesting when I pulled up the straight out of the camera processed jpg (top left-hand image) and the dng converted raw file in rawtherapee bottom. I took a screenshot of things. Didn't pull up the edited dng file because it wasn't much better then the dng.

The jpg looks much better. Not sure what is going on. Maybe white balance, maybe in camera sharpness and saturation and other in camera settings.

Maybe the dng is supposed to look like that and I've been used to seeing the metadata pulled into and applied to the raw images in DPP on a windows PC and maybe my usual editing style I've been using for years with DPP / Lightroom and older windows version (7) and an older 5dmkii has left me out of touch with editing. I do understand that raw and dng files need developed, but the development I've done with them using Foss has left me underwhelmed.

Makes me wonder if trying to use Linux for this is more of a hindrance and I'm really shortchanging my self, images and gear... Or I can just shoot jpgs

I use Linux (Darktable) for RAW 'development'. I haven't been able to try the CR3 format, so EOS R/EOS M50 etc are off limits for me. Saves me money...

If you could post a DNG and the associated jpg so I can download them, I can try editing DNG with Darktable, to see what I can get. I used Rawtherapee long time ago and it was a lesser product than Darktable, but things may be different now.

These two are inseparable...

(Taken with RF 15-35mm f/2.8L - Still not in the Gear List )

Photo from LoneRider's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (1017775)

Might be a while before I get around to that unfortunately. I don't even think I know where to host them. BTW what distro are you using?

//

Also found an interesting little tidbit on the R and that is if you happen to transfer files via the Canon connect app to your phone or something then disconnect, power off the camera for a bit, sit it in the bag and forget about it for a while, seems "off" don't turn the wifi and Bluetooth connection off and thus sucks down the battery... One would think it wouldn't be necessary to disable the wireless functions when turning the camera off.