Canon EOS R Series Cameras

twist said:
You still keeping your RP or are you fully Olympus now?
Click to expand...

.... I have never had a RP but am keeping my EOS-R for now to continue as my second body (with battery grip) with choice of RF 24-105mm, EF 100mm Macro and EF 8-15mm lenses.

My Olympus E-M1X and telephoto lenses replace my Canon 1DX-2 and EF 500mm II. The M1X body is just like a smaller size 1DX and I am loving it.

So, for now I have a foot in both Canon and Olympus camps, as do one or two other photographers here (@Chipper for example).
 
robinsslee said:
@RedRobin didn't know you've dumped Canon for Olympus! :eek: :D but the new 1DxIII looks pretty good though.
Click to expand...

.... I still love my Canon gear. The new 1DX-3 specs look very exciting indeed but faced with the very expensive options of upgrading and then possibly upgrading my EOS-R to a future 'RX' versus scaling down the size and weight of my system overall without any further expense attracted me when I handled someone else's Olympus E-M1X + PRO lens and started seeing its features - It feels physically just right for me. So far I am loving it! I still have time to return it no questions asked if I want.
 
That's a long loan; I suppose they have to sell it on as open box?
 
Chipper said:
That's a long loan; I suppose they have to sell it on as open box?
Click to expand...

.... Most likely but I haven't discussed with them how they would sell the Olympus gear if I returned it but out of courtesy and gratitude I have now informed them I am keeping it. It was all paid for in full before the 'loan'. I could still change my mind in theory but can't see that happening and especially as I now have an interest in someone buying my EF 500mm F/4L II.

I was offered the same when I bought my EOS-R (which I have also kept) but I returned the new RF 24-240mm after a week when I was disatisfied with the heavy vignetting in RAW (fully reported in this thread) and wasn't satisfied with Canon's advice that I could easily solve it in DPP. Apparently such vignetting is a common issue with wide angle long range zoom lenses < It's a compromise due to the necessary optics in extending from as wide as 24mm to as long as 240mm.
 
Good luck with the 500 f4 sale. I would be interested hearing how much that went for privately if you don't want it known. I am not selling mine, just curious. I keep an eye on 2nd hand prices with dealers.
 
Chipper said:
Good luck with the 500 f4 sale. I would be interested hearing how much that went for privately if you don't want it known. I am not selling mine, just curious. I keep an eye on 2nd hand prices with dealers.
Click to expand...

.... Thanks Chipper! A friend of a friend is interested and so it might be gone before I have even advertised it! I'm totally happy to let you know what it sells for when completed - PM would be less off-topic than here in this thread and I have scribbled a reminder to contact you.
 
Sharky said:
Has anyone tried the RF 15-35mm f/2.8L? Thinking of trading in my 16/35 F4L + 18/35 F1.8A for one.
Click to expand...
New lens has arrived and initial impression are very good and looks chunky on the body!

I've taken a few test shots in the drizzle and image quality is excellent, distortion well handled, IS smooth and the focus is accurate / quick / near silent. My only gripe is i wish they'd just extended the barrel that extra 1 or 2cm so it was internal zooming. It's the reason i won't swap out my 70/200 2.8L III for the new RF mount edition.


2019-11-08 13_56_37-20191108_134608[1].jpg
 
Sharky said:
New lens has arrived and initial impression are very good and looks chunky on the body!

I've taken a few test shots in the drizzle and image quality is excellent, distortion well handled, IS smooth and the focus is accurate / quick / near silent. My only gripe is i wish they'd just extended the barrel that extra 1 or 2cm so it was internal zooming. It's the reason i won't swap out my 70/200 2.8L III for the new RF mount edition.


View attachment 259886
Click to expand...
I am genuinely curious, why the dislike for extending zooms?
 
Tdes said:
I am genuinely curious, why the dislike for extending zooms?
Click to expand...
Honestly aesthetics, a small worry of dust / moisture but mostly just how they look /operate.
 
Last edited:
Managed to pick up an R second-hand today from someone disappointed with the performance of an adapted sigma long lens. First impressions very good. The eye-tracking in particular.
 
newbie1 said:
Managed to pick up an R second-hand today from someone disappointed with the performance of an adapted sigma long lens. First impressions very good. The eye-tracking in particular.
Click to expand...

what glass are you using?
 
addicknchips said:
what glass are you using?
Click to expand...

I have only canon EF glass. At today’s event i used the R with 300 2.8 for speakers on a dark stage then 16-35 f4 for group pics afterwards. Both worked very well. With the 300 I had usable shots down to 1/30th sec. the frame rate is quite slow so I’m not giving up on the 1DXii just yet, good combination together.
 
Last edited:
I'm really impressed with the eye-tracking (v1.4 firmware). Easy to move between faces and eyes, and it's very sticky as they move around.
 
The only thing turns me off the R is no IBIS. The slower fps wouldn't affect me as I'm almost always a single shot shooter. Very , very rare that I rattle off shots or even use C-AF. I know it's easy enough do without IBIS, but I like having it. It's why I opted for the XH1 over the XT3
 
Cagey75 said:
The only thing turns me off the R is no IBIS. The slower fps wouldn't affect me as I'm almost always a single shot shooter. Very , very rare that I rattle off shots or even use C-AF. I know it's easy enough do without IBIS, but I like having it. It's why I opted for the XH1 over the XT3
Click to expand...

.... Until I placed one of my feet (or two of my tripod legs!) in the Olympus camp I used to think that IBIS was unimportant. I think that IBIS is absolutely essential in the m4/3 Olympus system but am not convinced yet that it is so important for the Canon EOS mirrorless bodies. My reasoning is that because the smaller m4/3 sensors need lower ISO values set to avoid noise they need IBIS to then offer slower shutter speeds to compensate. Whereas the full-frame EOS-R offers higher ISO settings before noise becomes unacceptable.
 
Cagey75 said:
The only thing turns me off the R is no IBIS. The slower fps wouldn't affect me as I'm almost always a single shot shooter. Very , very rare that I rattle off shots or even use C-AF. I know it's easy enough do without IBIS, but I like having it. It's why I opted for the XH1 over the XT3
Click to expand...
I thought it had ibis for a moment during the first shoot yesterday. As above, 300mm 2.8 tack sharp at 1/30th sec in low light, what the heck? I read somewhere the connection to lens stabilization is improved somehow and certainly seems to be the case.
 
RedRobin said:
.... Until I placed one of my feet (or two of my tripod legs!) in the Olympus camp I used to think that IBIS was unimportant. I think that IBIS is absolutely essential in the m4/3 Olympus system but am not convinced yet that it is so important for the Canon EOS mirrorless bodies. My reasoning is that because the smaller m4/3 sensors need lower ISO values set to avoid noise they need IBIS to then offer slower shutter speeds to compensate. Whereas the full-frame EOS-R offers higher ISO settings before noise becomes unacceptable.
Click to expand...

It was M43 spoiled me when it came to IBIS. Even the original em5 which had an older, less effective IBIS system than more up to date models was still much better than IBIS on other systems. Using primes and vintage tele lenses on there with the feature gave the lenses a whole other dimension. I have pretty steady hands I like to think, but it's not just for slower SS shooting I like IBIS. It's also great for framing when manually focusing, be it for macro or smaller wildlife or just manual focused close ups. I could live without it, none of my Nikon or previous Fuji bodies had it. But I really only returned to Fuji from M43 for the XH1, that was too pricey for my liking when it first appeared.

I did have a Sony A200 a long time back that had 'steady shot' but if that even had 2-stops of stab I'd be surprised. The SS system also failed on that camera after a few months. It was Olympus and Panasonic really nailed it, and of course the smaller sensors helps a lot


newbie1 said:
I thought it had ibis for a moment during the first shoot yesterday. As above, 300mm 2.8 tack sharp at 1/30th sec in low light, what the heck? I read somewhere the connection to lens stabilization is improved somehow and certainly seems to be the case.
Click to expand...

In the better cases, there's nothing really between IBIS and OIS, which is fine if you plan to mostly use OIS lenses. But I would be more looking to primes, and also using some vintage glass. IBIS just works so good for those, not essential as I say, but I find it really nice to have. Honestly, if the RP had IBIS I would probably choose it over the R but as it stands the R is more appealing.
 
Last edited:
RedRobin said:
DON'T TRY THIS AT HOME !!! :

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/20...ed-teardown-of-the-canon-rf-70-200mm-f2-8-is/

Make sure you read the 'Conclusions and Impressions' at the end.

And enjoy!
Click to expand...
Just got around to following the link and wow what a beautiful piece of engineering, I'd love to have the skills and patience to be able to do that but I haven't so I'll listen to your advice and not try it at home. There is the other problem that I don't have the lens to try it anyway.
 
The claims of 7-8 stops of IBIS when combined with an OIS lens make this ridiculous, I mean, there's a big difference between 7 and 8 stops for one, so which is it? And even the best at doing IBIS in the industry, Olympus, can only claim up to 6.5 stops with IBIS and OIS combined. Someone is over exaggerating a bit, whether i's Canon throwing out wild claims without any back up, or these rumour sites click baiting before any actual evidence as per usual
 
Cagey75 said:
The claims of 7-8 stops of IBIS when combined with an OIS lens make this ridiculous, I mean, there's a big difference between 7 and 8 stops for one, so which is it? And even the best at doing IBIS in the industry, Olympus, can only claim up to 6.5 stops with IBIS and OIS combined. Someone is over exaggerating a bit, whether i's Canon throwing out wild claims without any back up, or these rumour sites click baiting before any actual evidence as per usual
Click to expand...

I think it is click bait, they just make stuff up and have built their whole business around it.

The only way we will ever know with 100% certainty is when canon release it.

T
 
I just bought an RP!!! Needed to downsize and release a few funds, but picked up an RP and 35mm F1.8stm. Looking forward to joining the club.

Thoughts on the 85mm F1.8 lens through the adapter?
 
Welcome to the club. With the R all my EF lenses have worked perfectly. Can’t comment on the RP.
 
AndrewSt said:
I just bought an RP!!! Needed to downsize and release a few funds, but picked up an RP and 35mm F1.8stm. Looking forward to joining the club.

Thoughts on the 85mm F1.8 lens through the adapter?
Click to expand...

I used the Canon 85 1.8 USM on a Fuji camera using a fringer pro AF adapter and it worked pretty good, I would imagine it'll be just like Native on the RP with the Canon adapter
 
That would be some camera if true!
 
Just wondering as I'm seeing different reviews on this on youtube etc, but do the R and RP both perform the same AF wise?
 
jonneymendoza said:
I'd snap that up if all those specs became true
Click to expand...
If those specs are accurate then the price could be a prohibiting factor. Something like that could be £5-6k
 
PeteStewardson said:
Just wondering as I'm seeing different reviews on this on youtube etc, but do the R and RP both perform the same AF wise?
Click to expand...

Pretty much the same yess! The RP works in slightly less dark conditions but that's it. I'm now back int he market for an RP having got rid of the R, so keeping my eyes open! Hopefully the new EOS R knocks down the RP prices a bit!
 
Those specs could be real. Camera companies have a habit of advertising specs which are only possible to use in limited scenarios.

E.g The R5 will most likely have those specs with the following limitations
- An 8k 30 time lapse mode
- 4k 120 with a heavy crop and very short time limit
- 4k 60 with a Super35 crop
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top