EOS R TECH THREAD- Its time for others who will jump into canon Mirrorless bodies

WilsonFlyer wrote in post #18982642
You guys tickle me. I took tens of thousands of pictures for 30 years with no "IS" whatsoever and you're worried about forgetting to turn it on so you don't miss a once in a lifetime picture of a castle that doesn't even move. Much. Give me a break.

Put another battery in your pocket and get over it. Jeez.

For the record, my OP was intended as tongue in cheek, but Jeez. Enough is enough. Find something worth worrying about.

That is your opinion which is valid. What does it matter to you about others. I always used IS and purposely did not by a lens if it didn't have it except for one. Why is it enough? This is a technical thread and maybe someone will get something out of the Power savings - that are very poorly described. Personally I don't like my iS running for 30 seconds whenever take a shot.

I tried a few more things. Here is more info. Display off set to 1 minute. Auto power off to 30 seconds. Auto review set to 2 seconds. I took a shot. Image review did last 2 seconds and the IS did not shut off. It ran for a minute until the screen went blank. IS was still running and it ran another 30 seconds until it powered off.

WilsonFlyer wrote in post #18982642
You guys tickle me. I took tens of thousands of pictures for 30 years with no "IS" whatsoever and you're worried about forgetting to turn it on so you don't miss a once in a lifetime picture of a castle that doesn't even move. Much. Give me a break. ...

IS is not for moving subjects. In fact, it does nothing to minimize subject motion blur. It does however minimize camera motion which happens whether your shooting a moving or stationary subject. I too have been shooting for many years without IS and have been digitizing the old images. It's surprising how many you can clearly see camera motion blur once digitized.

I know that. The joke was for Tom. Believe me. He got it.

crofter wrote in post #18982644
I got used to this IS behaviour when I first got my M50,it's not something I think about with the R,just take pics.

Yes this is true but I think the R and RP are new breed. They are being used with the big lenses which use more juice. Of course take picks but it does not mean we can't discuss it in a technical thread. I'l probably get chewed for this as well. I just posted where the IS ran for 90 seconds after a shot. If the EFV wakes up that cycle starts again. That is a lot pf wear and tear and in the IS assembly for nothing. It's OK. I've been chewed up here before.

All I want is as menu to bypass movie mode. Not much to ask for and nothing happens if you don't pursue. Canon has made lots of changes from feedback. That is were the BBF come from.

digital paradise wrote in post #18982670
I tried a few more things. Here is more info. Display off set to 1 minute. Auto power off to 30 seconds. Auto review set to 2 seconds. I took a shot. Image review did last 2 seconds and the IS did not shut off. It ran for a minute until the screen went blank. IS was still running and it ran another 30 seconds until it powered off.

Just tied it with my 100-400II. IS shut off after after a minute when the screen went blank. Both RF and EF lenses respond differently to Auto Power off settings. I suspect the RF is working as it was designed to.

digital paradise wrote in post #18982684
Just tied it with my 100-400II. IS shut off after after a minute when the screen went blank. Both RF and EF lenses respond differently to Auto Power off settings. I suspect the RF is working as it was designed to.

That could be it, Canon giving you hints to upgrade, Sony does the same tactics. I adapt nothing on the canon.

I don't understand why people struggle so much turning IS on and off on the lens. Surely you must know whether you need to use it or not.

I only turn on IS when my shutter speeds are slower than twice the reciprocal of the focal length. After that, shutter speed have always been enough to snuff out camera movement.

I have had some here try to convince me that IS will somehow still make a superior result even if I am at 1/2000 for sports, but actually I have seen the opposite. I have had to toss images due to IS actually getting in the way and negatively impacting shots.

It is strange how IS just stays on with the latest milc Canon bodies, but it seems to not really affect battery life that much, people are getting much more than the original advertised life even.

john crossley wrote in post #18982699
.
I don't understand why people struggle so much turning IS on and off on the lens. Surely you must know whether you need to use it or not.
.

.
It's not that I struggle "so much". . It is that every once in a great while I may forget that it is in the OFF position, and it could cost me some sharpness in an image or two .... which is a huge freaking deal to me!

It's kind of like leaving my cell phone at home. . I know that because I have jobs where I'm on call 24/7, I can never leave my house without my cell phone. . Yet, even knowing that I can never go anywhere without my phone, I may forget for a minute, and go out to my driveway, get in my car, start it up, and then realize that my cell phone is still inside on the kitchen counter. . So I have to go back in and get it before I drive off.

See - I knew something full well, something that I do many times each day - and yet I can still forget it briefly every once in a while.

So it is with camera and lens settings. . Even though I know that they need to be set a certain way for 99% of the photographs I take, there still may be a few times each year when I get caught up thinking about how to approach my subject, and forget to double check the IS switch on my lens.

The problem with forgetting to adjust my camera settings is that the photos I take are so extremely important to me. . The quality of my life is measured by the quality of the wildlife photos I take. . That is truly the only thing in all the world that I honestly care about very much.

I am still haunted by photos that I took years ago that could have been a little bit better if I had just done something a wee bit different. . Like the 2008 photo of the sow and cub bear that I took at 350mm when I thought I was zoomed all the way in to 400mm. . That mistake haunts me to this day, because I could have gotten more pixels on the subjects, but didn't. . Or that one 2014 photo of a Whitetail buck that could have been sharper, but for some unknown reason just isn't ... kills me. . Or the big buck in 2013 that I got very good images of, but they could have been better if I had gotten down just a couple inches lower. . Or the 2015 opportunity with the burning tree where I wish my ISO had been lower. . Or the 2016 Bighorn image that I wish ...

There are hundreds of photos that could have been a bit better in one way or another, and I spend a lot of my life thinking back over those opportunities and wishing I could have them back, so that my pictures would be a little better than they are. . Every tiny little bit of image quality matters SO MUCH because I will think about it over and over again for the rest of my life.

Maybe some of you have families or careers or things in your life that are more important to you than your photos, but for me the photos I take are everything to me that matters in this world and I never ever ever want to take a photo that isn't the very best it could have possibly been.

.

I don't understand why people tell others how they should be using their equipment. Surely people set it up that best suits their shooting style.

digital paradise wrote in post #18982771
I don't understand why people tell others how they should be using their equipment. Surely people set it up that best suits their shooting style.

That's all well and good, and I agree. Within the parameters set forth by the manufacturer. And therein lies the rub, and likely where you and I may disagree.

The manufacturer provided a method for disabling IS in the example above. Whenever the user desires, as a matter of fact. The "rub" lies in the fact that some apparently don't see the solution as satisfactory. That's when you trade the Ford for a Chevy if you don't like the way it drives that much. That's just the way Ford builds cars. Chevy's are a little different. The problem with most people is that as soon as they trade, they find 5 things they liked better with their old car and sometimes it's even to the point that wish they had never traded.

There are no perfect solutions. And there are no 100% customize-able cameras, or any other CE device for that matter. The sheer number of variables involved simply doesn't lend itself to such a solution from an engineering perspective, so we accept... compromises. Some we can live with, and some are so bad we go to another solution. It's really that simple.

Could Canon "fix" this? I really don't know. I think there are a lot of situations here that the folks discussing it aren't taking into consideration, not the least of which is the fact that we used to shoot EVERYTHING through the eyepiece, so it was very predictable when the camera was actually "in use." Touchscreens and hence "live view" screens changed a lot of things for the good, but they have unintended side effects too. Witness what I just exampled. Now when is somebody actually shooting? And that's just a simple and small example.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18982711
I only turn on IS when my shutter speeds are slower than twice the reciprocal of the focal length. After that, shutter speed have always been enough to snuff out camera movement.

I have had some here try to convince me that IS will somehow still make a superior result even if I am at 1/2000 for sports, but actually I have seen the opposite. I have had to toss images due to IS actually getting in the way and negatively impacting shots.

It is strange how IS just stays on with the latest milc Canon bodies, but it seems to not really affect battery life that much, people are getting much more than the original advertised life even.

I have never turned it off since 2006. An exception as a tripod and sometimes I'd forget but I don't use one that often. I had to with the 300 F4 iS as that generation did not auto detect no movement. I use with a monopod sometimes at 800mm and it helps.

The manuals warn about battery life and I can't see it not effecting it. Of course you can just change it. In one scenario my test showed it ran for 90 seconds and that was if the viewfinder did not detect something and start over. You would think that if it didn't run for all that extra time it would make a difference. There must a reason why there is a 2 second shut off with a DSLR.

I have read about and been long aware of IS and higher shutter speeds. I have not noticed a major negative effect as I always come home with plenty of keepers. Also that is what mode 3 is for. These were from my 2nd day out with my 7D and 300 F4 in 2009. I think the shutter speeds were around 1/5000 with IS on. People told me not to use it but I was getting my feet wet with BIF and just wanted to get the shots to build confidence.

WilsonFlyer wrote in post #18982778
That's all well and good, and I agree. Within the parameters set forth by the manufacturer. And therein lies the rub, and likely where you and I may disagree.

The manufacturer provided a method for disabling IS in the example above. Whenever the user desires, as a matter of fact. The "rub" lies in the fact that some apparently don't see the solution as satisfactory. That's when you trade the Ford for a Chevy if you don't like the way it drives that much. That's just the way Ford builds cars. Chevy's are a little different. The problem with most people is that as soon as they trade, they find 5 things they liked better with their old car and sometimes it's even to the point that wish they had never traded.

There are no perfect solutions. And there are no 100% customize-able cameras, or any other CE device for that matter. The sheer number of variables involved simply doesn't lend itself to such a solution from an engineering perspective, so we accept... compromises. Some we can live with, and some are so bad we go to another solution. It's really that simple.

Could Canon "fix" this? I really don't know. I think there are a lot of situations here that the folks discussing it aren't taking into consideration, not the least of which is the fact that we used to shoot EVERYTHING through the eyepiece, so it was very predictable when the camera was actually "in use." Touchscreens and hence "live view" screens changed a lot of things for the good, but they have unintended side effects too. Witness what I just exampled. Now when is somebody actually shooting? And that's just a simple and small example.

There is a 2 second shut off using a DSLR. They must have done that for a reason. Why didn't they program all the DLRS's I have owned to run full time as well.

Again I'm just suggesting they got the first MILC out and might have just copied LV programming. I can't back that. There very well may be a technical reason why they couldn't/can't add an override. Some don't care which is perfectly fine. I'm just curious about it. I don't think too many people would turn down more battery life. I suspect the pro body will come with an override to match how a DSLR works.

Also I really had no idea how the ECO and Auto off worked until I read about the IS. The RF24-105 is so quiet you can't tell. I didn't shoot with EF lenses a lot and when I did I was spending time trying to figure it out. I thought ECO shut it off but it doesn't. If anything I learned a lot about it over the last few days and will be able to better to program to my needs.

There are so many reports of the LP-E6 running 2-3x the stated time that Canon put out at the R's announcement, and therefore I have to believe that the continuous IS just isn't that detrimental to battery life. Chances are that reviewing images and looking at menus and the EVF being on have more to do with battery life than the IS system. The M50 is terrible with its little battery, and I eek out about 200-300 tops on that camera, and I have a few lenses with IS.

Trying to get to the bottom of this with Canon is wasted effort. They are simply going to say that is how this is engineered, they are looking at alternatives in future models, and there will be no update of any kind to the R/RP/M series to fix this at this time.