Canon EOS R5 Unite and Discuss!

Jared5 wrote in post #19132954
This is exactly why anyone who wants/needs to shoot more than 8 frames per second on a regular basis may want to hold out until the EOS R1 is announced next year. Having 'big boy batteries' like the existing 1D series will help solve the frame rate below 60% battery capacity issue.

I don't need more than 8 frames per second so I'm OK with the 60% battery limitation, but someone who buys the R5 expecting 12 frames per second all the time needs to know this limitation before dropping their hard earned cash.

I agree. I don't always need 12 frames per second as I won't always be shooting BIF or sports. Hell, I cut down shutter speeds on my 7D2 and 1D bodies, so I am not spraying too much. But, like the other poster stated, get a grip to add that 2nd battery. I won't shoot any camera without a grip and a 2nd battery. I will always have a fresh set of batteries if needed (i.e 4 total), so if I ever needed to get back those 4 fps, I'd just swap in the 2nd set of fresh batteries. Besides that, I envision the new camera being $7k and I just spend that kind of money on camera body that will be old in 1-2 years. I'd invest in glass and buy it later.

It's good to finally get some perspective using the R5 with sports.

umphotography wrote in post #19132912
He is showing distorted balls and goal posts with electronic shutters and he wasnt real happy with eye focus. He says to stick to single point---also....So many frames to go through with electronic shutter use

he is a 1Dx2 shooter and prefers it to the R5 for sports work

Positive reports for portrait work

He only spent 2 days with the camera, which I don't think is enough time to hone in the correct settings. He probably should've used face detection as that has a much larger surface to attach to when shooting athletes. He didn't get into the exact AF setting he used though. He may have had the settings where the AF shifts to the next subject vs sticking to the prime subject. Basically, I think it was his settings that was causing focus to shift to the net as the athlete moved. I say this because folks have reported that they have issues where they can't make the focus jump to another subject that they want to focus on when using the eye/animal detection; they had to setup a separate BB AF setting so they could quickly switch to a single AF point to move focus to the subject they want. In the end, he loved the camera, but said he wouldn't buy it because he did not need another camera because he already has 3 cameras for his needs.

I need to get out there and test it myself when the world of sports opens up to everyone again.

Methodical wrote in post #19132989
I agree. I don't always need 12 frames per second as I won't always be shooting BIF or sports. Hell, I cut down shutter speeds on my 7D2 and 1D bodies, so I am not spraying too much.

These very annoying. I don't accept it, but perhaps am more likely to comprehend it in something like the 90D, but in a more expensive camera like the R5, you would think that you could pick lower burst speeds. I set my 7D2 to 7fps within a day of seeing that it triggered a destructive IS feedback loop at 10fps in the zoom lens I was using at the time, and never turned it back up to 10fps over the next 5 years.

I am now thinking about carrying around a lot of older or partially-charged batteries to lower the R5's burst rate when I get it, assuming AF ability is not also reduced. It is totally ridiculous that we even have to think about work-arounds like this.

umphotography wrote in post #19132912
He is showing distorted balls and goal posts with electronic shutters and he wasnt real happy with eye focus. He says to stick to single point---also....So many frames to go through with electronic shutter use

he is a 1Dx2 shooter and prefers it to the R5 for sports work

Positive reports for portrait work

Most of the issues with rolling shutter seems to be during pans especially fast panning. I don't see these effects when following just a player at normal human speeds. Yes you end up with a lot of frames to look through on the computer when done, but that would be an issue no matter what camera you use at 20fps.

Also I have eye AF turned on but during the last event, it seemed to use face detect more often when it couldn't see the eyes and that worked well too.

Methodical wrote in post #19132999
He only spent 2 days with the camera, which I don't think is enough time to hone in the correct settings. He probably should've used face detection as that has a much larger surface to attach to when shooting athletes. He didn't get into the exact AF setting he used though. He may have had the settings where the AF shifts to the next subject vs sticking to the prime subject. Basically, I think it was his settings that was causing focus to shift to the net as the athlete moved. I say this because folks have reported that they have issues where they can't make the focus jump to another subject that they want to focus on when using the eye/animal detection; they had to setup a separate BB AF setting so they could quickly switch to a single AF point to move focus to the subject they want. In the end, he loved the camera, but said he wouldn't buy it because he did not need another camera because he already has 3 cameras for his needs.

I need to get out there and test it myself when the world of sports opens up to everyone again.

Agreed. It seemed like a "premature evaluation" to do a review after only 2 days: https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=IJlQk-r_c8U

I'm recording my 2-month review this weekend.

Adaptors in stock at B&H
https://www.bhphotovid​eo.com …_mount_adapter_​ef_rf.html

Can anyone recommend a wireless shutter release?

WarriorPoet wrote in post #19133065
Can anyone recommend a wireless shutter release?

I have one of these for my R,cheaper than the Canon one and just as good.
https://www.amazon.co.​uk …_1330733031_t2_​B06X92TNR3

WarriorPoet wrote in post #19133065
Can anyone recommend a wireless shutter release?

Isn't there is an app for this???

I haven't read through the whole thread, so my apology if this question has been addressed already.

For those of you with experience using the Canon Mount Adapter, either standard or control ring or both, is it worth double the price to go with the control ring edition? What does it do that you can't program in the R5 itself?

SYS wrote in post #19133110
I haven't read through the whole thread, so my apology if this question has been addressed already.

For those of you with experience using the Canon Mount Adapter, either standard or control ring or both, is it worth double the price to go with the control ring edition? What does it do that you can't program in the R5 itself?

The control ring is just another dial that you can set to do whatever function you wish. The RF lenses all have control rings, so the control ring edition of the adapter provides that function for EF lenses. Page 824 of the R5 PDF Manual shows all the functions you can assign to the control ring (as well as what you can assign to the other three dials). I haven't used the control ring much yet, but I suspect I'll find it handy as I get used to it.

SYS wrote in post #19133110
I haven't read through the whole thread, so my apology if this question has been addressed already.

For those of you with experience using the Canon Mount Adapter, either standard or control ring or both, is it worth double the price to go with the control ring edition? What does it do that you can't program in the R5 itself?

I love the control ring. For me, it's a matter of putting all three essential exposure controls on dials that I can easily manipulate with the camera at my eye.

I'm old enough to have used the Canon FD system, which had the aperture dial surrounding the lens. I initially intended to set the RF control ring to aperture control as well.

But since the film days, I've learned to tweak ISO first for exposure correction (because ISO in modern digital cameras has the least effect on the appearance of the image over the widest range of exposures), and the control ring is the handiest location for a control, so I set the control ring for ISO in manual mode. Right now I set it for exposure compensation in auto modes, but that may change as I get more used to FV flexible mode. But FV mode is another case for having another control right at the fingertips for eye-level operation.

My most dicey exposure situation is live stage productions because lighting changes dramatically and rapidly, or I change rapidly from one subject to another subject that is lighted dramatically differently. With exposure simulation turned on, I'm riding the ISO on the control ring with my left fingers to counter lighting changes. My right thumb is moving the focus point with touch-and-drag, and my right index finger is setting the focus and releasing the shutter. Having experienced shooting this way, I'd kvetch and moan a lot if I had to go back to a DSLR for stage productions.

A1original wrote in post #19133049
Adaptors in stock at B&H
https://www.bhphotovid​eo.com …_mount_adapter_​ef_rf.html

Showing "more on the way" already so those apparently went fast.

LJ3Jim wrote in post #19133132
The control ring is just another dial that you can set to do whatever function you wish. The RF lenses all have control rings, so the control ring edition of the adapter provides that function for EF lenses. Page 824 of the R5 PDF Manual shows all the functions you can assign to the control ring (as well as what you can assign to the other three dials). I haven't used the control ring much yet, but I suspect I'll find it handy as I get used to it.

RDKirk wrote in post #19133138
I love the control ring. For me, it's a matter of putting all three essential exposure controls on dials that I can easily manipulate with the camera at my eye.

I'm old enough to have used the Canon FD system, which had the aperture dial surrounding the lens. I initially intended to set the RF control ring to aperture control as well.

But since the film days, I've learned to tweak ISO first for exposure correction (because ISO in modern digital cameras has the least effect on the appearance of the image over the widest range of exposures), and the control ring is the handiest location for a control, so I set the control ring for ISO in manual mode. Right now I set it for exposure compensation in auto modes, but that may change as I get more used to FV flexible mode. But FV mode is another case for having another control right at the fingertips for eye-level operation.

My most dicey exposure situation is live stage productions because lighting changes dramatically and rapidly, or I change rapidly from one subject to another subject that is lighted dramatically differently. With exposure simulation turned on, I'm riding the ISO on the control ring with my left fingers to counter lighting changes. My right thumb is moving the focus point with touch-and-drag, and my right index finger is setting the focus and releasing the shutter. Having experienced shooting this way, I'd kvetch and moan a lot if I had to go back to a DSLR for stage productions.

Thank you for your responses. I read a review that said the control ring adapter is "practically useless" for heavy lenses. The reviewer mentioned Sigma 60-600 when making that statement. I don't know anything about that particular lens, but I gather that I'd experience the same with my Sigma 150-600C? I'm going to be using R5 (once I get it) for bird photography primarily with that lens.

f8andBeThere wrote in post #19133150
Showing "more on the way" already so those apparently went fast.

Yeah I figured they would go quickly. Just happened to see them at 3:00am this morning.