Canon EOS R Series Cameras

George said:
How did you get on?

I decided to go the full monty and get the 100-500 as an upgrade to the 100-400 mk2, so I can't compare as I didn't try the adaptor as I wanted the extra 100 reach and I changed from the 1Dx/2 to an R5/2

I'd be interested in your comparative results as perhaps I've spent a bit of cash unnecessarily!!!

100-500 is lovely however (as is the R5/2 once I master the AF!!!)
Click to expand...
From my limited tests I have to say that I was very impressed by the RF 100-500. I tried it on my R6 and R7. It was sharp, the AF and IS were very good and it was relatively light. I took some photos of birds and other animals today in less than ideal conditions and the results were very good. The birds were much further away than ideal, normally I wouldn’t bother, but the lens and cameras had no issues. I have a Sigma 150-600 and only tried the Canon 100-400 L IS ii on a trial basis. I would say that the RF 100-500 is the better lens, however it is more expensive, considerably more than a used 100-400 L IS ii.

I am testing the RF 200-800mm next month. I have my doubts about the aperture but the reach is impressive.

The AF on these R cameras is amazing but there are so many options and internet advice is as usual conflicting. Hopefully you will master them soon. Not sure I will.
 
George said:
How did you get on?

I decided to go the full monty and get the 100-500 as an upgrade to the 100-400 mk2, so I can't compare as I didn't try the adaptor as I wanted the extra 100 reach and I changed from the 1Dx/2 to an R5/2

I'd be interested in your comparative results as perhaps I've spent a bit of cash unnecessarily!!!

100-500 is lovely however (as is the R5/2 once I master the AF!!!)
Click to expand...
Just replace it, 100-500mm is better than 100-400mm Mk2.
 
At what point do you replace a camera?

Both my R6 Mk2s are about to hit 500,000 shots, all mechanical. They're rated to 400,000, but I thought mirrorless would be a little different. I'm a little concerned they could die at any moment.
 
PDub said:
At what point do you replace a camera?

Both my R6 Mk2s are about to hit 500,000 shots, all mechanical. They're rated to 400,000, but I thought mirrorless would be a little different. I'm a little concerned they could die at any moment.
Click to expand...
When they fail if you don't want to do it any earlier, I've seen people report over a million actuations on their DSLRs.

A lot of people, me included, always use electronic shutter. I've had my R3 since release and I've only used mechanical a handful of times, I've had the R1 since November and don't think I've used mechanical shutter at all on it yet. I photograph sports and electronic works well for me.

Edit: Just looked at your Insta and see you are a wedding photographer, that changes it slightly, I guess you can't have a body die mid-wedding. So for me I'd look to at least have 1 replaced. :)
 
Last edited:
switch to a model capable of flash in electronic shutter mode
 
Yeah, having them die mid-wedding isn't fun. I had a 5d3 die once.

For me theres too many reasons to stay on mechanical. With eletronic shutter the anti-flicker it doesn't work and the max shutter speed is also limited. Plus i would have to switch back to flash use as well.
Hanley said:
When they fail if you don't want to do it any earlier, I've seen people report over a million actuations on their DSLRs.

A lot of people, me included, always use electronic shutter. I've had my R3 since release and I've only used mechanical a handful of times, I've had the R1 since November and don't think I've used mechanical shutter at all on it yet. I photograph sports and electronic works well for me.

Edit: Just looked at your Insta and see you are a wedding photographer, that changes it slightly, I guess you can't have a body die mid-wedding. So for me I'd look to at least have 1 replaced. :)
Click to expand...
 
Hanley said:
When they fail if you don't want to do it any earlier, I've seen people report over a million actuations on their DSLRs.

A lot of people, me included, always use electronic shutter. I've had my R3 since release and I've only used mechanical a handful of times, I've had the R1 since November and don't think I've used mechanical shutter at all on it yet. I photograph sports and electronic works well for me.

Edit: Just looked at your Insta and see you are a wedding photographer, that changes it slightly, I guess you can't have a body die mid-wedding. So for me I'd look to at least have 1 replaced. :)
Click to expand...
1/2 is inconvenience. 2/2 or 1/1 is a disaster
 
PDub said:
Yeah, having them die mid-wedding isn't fun. I had a 5d3 die once.

For me theres too many reasons to stay on mechanical. With eletronic shutter the anti-flicker it doesn't work and the max shutter speed is also limited. Plus i would have to switch back to flash use as well.
Click to expand...
The newer models have all the features including anti flicker and flash available in electronic shutter mode. As a result. I don't use mechanical shutter mode any more with those models.
 
TimHughes said:
The newer models have all the features including anti flicker and flash available in electronic shutter mode. As a result. I don't use mechanical shutter mode any more with those models.
Click to expand...
From what I can see, HF anti-flicker in electronic mode is only available on the R6 mk2 in M and TV. I use aperture priority a lot, so that wouldn't work for me.

I would go to an R3 but lugging two R3's with a 28-70 f2 and an 85 1.2 on each would be absolutely brutal lol. A global shutter R6/R5 would be perfect, really.

I'll play around with the electronic shutter and maybe set something for a mechanical shutter on C1, etc., when I need anti-flicker.

I've just ordered 2 R5 mkii's to replace them, so the R6's will become backups/video bodies.
 
PDub said:
From what I can see, HF anti-flicker in electronic mode is only available on the R6 mk2 in M and TV. I use aperture priority a lot, so that wouldn't work for me.

I would go to an R3 but lugging two R3's with a 28-70 f2 and an 85 1.2 on each would be absolutely brutal lol. A global shutter R6/R5 would be perfect, really.

I'll play around with the electronic shutter and maybe set something for a mechanical shutter on C1, etc., when I need anti-flicker.

I've just ordered 2 R5 mkii's to replace them, so the R6's will become backups/video bodies.
Click to expand...
M mode with auto ISO and fix your aperture?
 
TimHughes said:
M mode with auto ISO and fix your aperture?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'll try that. In Av, I use the rear dial and control ring for exposure compensation, so I would just use the control ring for exposure compensation.

I always use Av with auto ISO within 100-12800, and set my minimum shutter speed to whatever it needs to be for giving time. Then, I just ride exposure compensation. I get pretty clean files exposed correctly at 12800, so I just shoot and ride the exposure compensation as i'm happy with anything in that range. It's a super quick way to shoot when I move around so much or the light changes loads for me.
 
PDub said:
I've just ordered 2 R5 mkii's to replace them, so the R6's will become backups/video bodies.
Click to expand...
good choice. Hopefully we will also soon get R6 III with pretty much R3 guts, maybe even more. Whatever then happens to R3 line after that is an obvious question but not one I care about in the slightest
 
Anyone got any suggestions for a filter for the 100-500? I was initially looking at protective but then thought a variable ND would be useful.. k&F seem okay. Any one ever used filters and have any feedback?
 
LongLensPhotography said:
good choice. Hopefully we will also soon get R6 III with pretty much R3 guts, maybe even more. Whatever then happens to R3 line after that is an obvious question but not one I care about in the slightest
Click to expand...
I was hoping it would have been announced already as I would have gone for it, but it's probably about 6 months away by the time they announce it, take pre-orders and then ship so went for the R5 Mkii's instead. Not a bad alternative. lol.
 
stickytape said:
Anyone got any suggestions for a filter for the 100-500? I was initially looking at protective but then thought a variable ND would be useful.. k&F seem okay. Any one ever used filters and have any feedback?
Click to expand...
Personally would leave 200mm+ without filters. There is a good chance it might affect sharpness. At least carefully compare before and after if you do
 
stickytape said:
Ah I see. Fair enough, my reasoning was just for protection that’s all.
Click to expand...

Keep the hood on for protection, use a disposable shower cap (for quick on/off) where there's a danger of wind blown sand, dust, debris. I've bought expensive clear filters in the past and only had bad results with them. I'm regularly on sandy beaches in all weather and have never had any damage from flying dust.
 
turbotoes said:
Keep the hood on for protection, use a disposable shower cap (for quick on/off) where there's a danger of wind blown sand, dust, debris. I've bought expensive clear filters in the past and only had bad results with them. I'm regularly on sandy beaches in all weather and have never had any damage from flying dust.
Click to expand...
Good point, may just be me being extra worried! St the end of the day, I’ll keep this lens for years so even if there is a slight mark, it wouldn’t impact the quality anyway! Wide words!
 
Hi folks, I hope all is well.

I'm contemplating selling my Lumix gear and switching over to Canon. I want a system that is better at capturing images of my pet (running) and although the S5ii is an upgrade to the S5, it's still not particularly good at fast moving subjects. (I use my OM1 MK1 for pets and action now).

I could sell the kit I have and not be far off a R6ii and the extending 70-200 F2.8. Or, I could get close to a R5ii but it would only have the 24-105 F4. I'd have to go grey market but there is a saving there to be made and I've never brought grey before.

Can you offer me any advice at all?
 
Adamcski said:
Hi folks, I hope all is well.

I'm contemplating selling my Lumix gear and switching over to Canon. I want a system that is better at capturing images of my pet (running) and although the S5ii is an upgrade to the S5, it's still not particularly good at fast moving subjects. (I use my OM1 MK1 for pets and action now).

I could sell the kit I have and not be far off a R6ii and the extending 70-200 F2.8. Or, I could get close to a R5ii but it would only have the 24-105 F4. I'd have to go grey market but there is a saving there to be made and I've never brought grey before.

Can you offer me any advice at all?
Click to expand...

I can only advise on the grey market part, If you do, go for Panamoz, great comms, and if you ever do need the warranty, it's cast iron. Speaking from personal experience not hearsay.
 
Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Z has already been released, the original RF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM is a cracking lens, but the new one is an internal zoom, and quite a bit pricier.
 
Adamcski said:
I understand they are about to release another 70-200 F2.8. Is that because the first version was poor or because it wasn't internal zoom?
Click to expand...
The original is a cracking lens, upside is that it’s light and relatively compact, obvious downside is that it’s not internal focussing

The z version is bigger heavier and more expensive
 
Adamcski said:
Hi folks, I hope all is well.

I'm contemplating selling my Lumix gear and switching over to Canon. I want a system that is better at capturing images of my pet (running) and although the S5ii is an upgrade to the S5, it's still not particularly good at fast moving subjects. (I use my OM1 MK1 for pets and action now).

I could sell the kit I have and not be far off a R6ii and the extending 70-200 F2.8. Or, I could get close to a R5ii but it would only have the 24-105 F4. I'd have to go grey market but there is a saving there to be made and I've never brought grey before.

Can you offer me any advice at all?
Click to expand...
1. You can use all of ef lenses via adapter. Amongst them there are some real gem sigma art primes that can be bought under budget. I wouldnt actually go for canons own lenses as they are truly a major step down. 70-200 f4 is mk1 in particular was just about ok, the other not even as much ...

2. R5ii sounds like a good plan or you might want to wait for r6iii if budget is limited. Action is preferably done using electronic shutter, and r6 or mk ii will have a bit of rolling shutter that may be quite visible in some shots. Workable but far from ideal. Still better than bloody mechanic and capped fps and century long blackouts

3. 24-105. Yuck

4. Just buy sony. You will have plenty of lens options to suit your budget. There is no way id buy canon if i was rebuilding from scratch
 
Last edited:
LongLensPhotography said:
1. You can use all of ef lenses via adapter. Amongst them there are some real gem sigma art primes that can be bought under budget. I wouldnt actually go for canons own lenses as they are truly a major step down. 70-200 f4 is mk1 in particular was just about ok, the other not even as much ...

2. R5ii sounds like a good plan or you might want to wait for r6iii if budget is limited. Action is preferably done using electronic shutter, and r6 or mk ii will have a bit of rolling shutter that may be quite visible in some shots. Workable but far from ideal. Still better than bloody mechanic and capped fps and century long blackouts

3. 24-105. Yuck

4. Just buy sony. You will have plenty of lens options to suit your budget. There is no way id buy canon if i was rebuilding from scratch
Click to expand...
Any particular Sony you would recommend that doesn't cost both my kidneys?
 
Adamcski said:
Any particular Sony you would recommend that doesn't cost both my kidneys?
Click to expand...
Im looking at a7riv used as a stopgap. My needs are quite different to yours. The coming a7 v may be very good choice, even a7 iv is quite reasonable despite slower fps. Definitely no worse for kidneys than r6 ii
 
robinsslee said:
Just replace it, 100-500mm is better than 100-400mm Mk2.
Click to expand...
I have a EF 100-400L Mkii adapted on my R7, and I want to compare it to RF 100-500. Problem is I have read / watched many reviews about the RF 100-500, and it seems a 60/40 split on the 100-500 not that sharp. However I believe the 100-400L Mkii is a sharp lens, and main advantage I can see for the 100-500 is the size and weight benefit.
IMO, the best way to decide is do the Canon Test Drive, and use the lens for a few days to get a feel for the it.
 
Tysonator said:
I have a EF 100-400L Mkii adapted on my R7, and I want to compare it to RF 100-500. Problem is I have read / watched many reviews about the RF 100-500, and it seems a 60/40 split on the 100-500 not that sharp. However I believe the 100-400L Mkii is a sharp lens, and main advantage I can see for the 100-500 is the size and weight benefit.
IMO, the best way to decide is do the Canon Test Drive, and use the lens for a few days to get a feel for the it.
Click to expand...

I had a test drive of the RF 100-500 recently and was very impressed. However it is not cheap so I would probably go for the EF 100-400L Mkii as it is a quality lens. As you say, a test drive is the only way to determine.
 
I’d be surprised if anyone who has used the RF 100-500 thought it was ”not that sharp” unless of course they were trying to cut bread with it…. Personally I think it’s a good tad sharper than the EF 100-400 mii but the IS is soooo much better it puts it in a different league
 
I ran 10,000 photos through the R5 MKII on the weekend—my findings after shooting close to 2 million photos through R6 and R6 MkII's.

Good points.
1. It feels like it has a dynamic range and a little more contrast in the RAW files. Files are lovely.
2. Feels a little better in the hands.
3. An anti-flicker in electronic shutter mode is nice to have.
4. 45 MP I guess is nice to have for some.
5. Limiting the continuous frame rate is nice in all three modes.
6. I prefer the Mode button instead of the dial to switch between Av and M, etc..

1. Battery life on anything other than the newer LP-E6P absolutely sucks. The frame rate is also dumbed down, as if you are shooting on an adapted lens. Also, electronic shutter hammers battery life, 800-1000 shots vs around 2000-2500 in mechanical.
2. AF isn't better than the R6 mkii.
3. The top display is pointless for me. Difficult to see in daylight.
4. I have to shoot in CRAW all the time now, or I'll spend over £1000 on CFExpress cards, as I would need 256 GB cards.
5. Random display messages annoy me, such as reviewing images, the prompt to switch between stills and video, or the older battery warning.

Overall, I'm a bit disappointed in the "upgrade." It's a great camera, no doubt, and if I were coming from something else or starting from scratch, I would be super happy.

Both cameras from Panamoz cost £5800. I spent another £500 on CF Express cards and a reader, and now I have to replace all my LP-E6NH batteries, which will cost another £500.

Yes, I know I may be a specific use case, as I shoot a lot of weddings, often 3 in a row. But I thought this was a more "professional" camera than the R6 mkii, and it doesn't feel like it to me. Depending on the R6 mkiii specs when announced, I may trade these in for it.
 
PDub said:
I ran 10,000 photos through the R5 MKII on the weekend—my findings after shooting close to 2 million photos through R6 and R6 MkII's.

Good points.
1. It feels like it has a dynamic range and a little more contrast in the RAW files. Files are lovely.
2. Feels a little better in the hands.
3. An anti-flicker in electronic shutter mode is nice to have.
4. 45 MP I guess is nice to have for some.
5. Limiting the continuous frame rate is nice in all three modes.
6. I prefer the Mode button instead of the dial to switch between Av and M, etc..

1. Battery life on anything other than the newer LP-E6P absolutely sucks. The frame rate is also dumbed down, as if you are shooting on an adapted lens. Also, electronic shutter hammers battery life, 800-1000 shots vs around 2000-2500 in mechanical.
2. AF isn't better than the R6 mkii.
3. The top display is pointless for me. Difficult to see in daylight.
4. I have to shoot in CRAW all the time now, or I'll spend over £1000 on CFExpress cards, as I would need 256 GB cards.
5. Random display messages annoy me, such as reviewing images, the prompt to switch between stills and video, or the older battery warning.

Overall, I'm a bit disappointed in the "upgrade." It's a great camera, no doubt, and if I were coming from something else or starting from scratch, I would be super happy.

Both cameras from Panamoz cost £5800. I spent another £500 on CF Express cards and a reader, and now I have to replace all my LP-E6NH batteries, which will cost another £500.

Yes, I know I may be a specific use case, as I shoot a lot of weddings, often 3 in a row. But I thought this was a more "professional" camera than the R6 mkii, and it doesn't feel like it to me. Depending on the R6 mkiii specs when announced, I may trade these in for it.
Click to expand...

This is interesting, I currently use a pair of R6mkii's for my gig shoots, I had considered condensing it down to a single R5mkii, i may just considering leaving as is for the moment.
 
sajo said:
This is interesting, I currently use a pair of R6mkii's for my gig shoots, I had considered condensing it down to a single R5mkii, i may just considering leaving as is for the moment.
Click to expand...
If you don't need to change, I probably wouldn't. If you crop loads, then the 45mp is handy. I don't crop much at all, so it's not much use to me.
 
Hi all just started with my macro for this season and was looking forward to it with the R5mk2 and my RF 1002.8 macro lens all was well till I put some extension tubes on for some really small stuff ! as Canon haven't brought any RF ones on the market so I found some Kenco RF ones that are supposed to work but don't as I am now getting the error 70 issue am I missing something with a Setting on the Camera ? I don't know I get no problem at all until I put the extension tubes on I was hoping someone can put me right and to let others know as well ?
 
I've got an R7 but the question probably equally applies to other R series models. Is there a difference in quality when reviewing images via the EVF vs the rear screen ?
I ask as I normally use the screen but due to the weather I used the EVF and the images appeared less sharp using this method compared to my normal review. Is this down to my perception or is one better than the other
 
taxboy said:
I've got an R7 but the question probably equally applies to other R series models. Is there a difference in quality when reviewing images via the EVF vs the rear screen ?
I ask as I normally use the screen but due to the weather I used the EVF and the images appeared less sharp using this method compared to my normal review. Is this down to my perception or is one better than the other
Click to expand...
EVF definitely appears to be badly pixelated on R6 as well. It is bad reviewing, but even worse shooting. It is basically a piece of s*** so I only really use the LCD for everything
 
LongLensPhotography said:
1. You can use all of ef lenses via adapter. Amongst them there are some real gem sigma art primes that can be bought under budget. I wouldnt actually go for canons own lenses as they are truly a major step down. 70-200 f4 is mk1 in particular was just about ok, the other not even as much ...

2. R5ii sounds like a good plan or you might want to wait for r6iii if budget is limited. Action is preferably done using electronic shutter, and r6 or mk ii will have a bit of rolling shutter that may be quite visible in some shots. Workable but far from ideal. Still better than bloody mechanic and capped fps and century long blackouts

3. 24-105. Yuck

4. Just buy sony. You will have plenty of lens options to suit your budget. There is no way id buy canon if i was rebuilding from scratch
Click to expand...


I might be about to start an argument... But I'd take this with a pinch of salt. I Kind of find this "pixel peeping" advice and a desire for nothing but perfection which is not a good reflection of reality. If you were doing 100% crops and printing on billboards it may be relevent but for every day use, specifically talking about taking images of your pet I'd say please ignore this advice.

A good example of this is the 70-200 F4 mk1 which to this day i still use manual focused on a remote and on my R5 mk1 takes pin sharp images and I've sold very many taken by it, both on the R5, and (in the last year i hasen to add) from remote 7D mk2s and the customers are more than happy. The images are also used on promotional material for events (from the remotes).

An alternative is an R5 mk1 - still available (as of last week at least) at Panamoz and then your choice of lens.
 
taxboy said:
I've got an R7 but the question probably equally applies to other R series models. Is there a difference in quality when reviewing images via the EVF vs the rear screen ?
I ask as I normally use the screen but due to the weather I used the EVF and the images appeared less sharp using this method compared to my normal review. Is this down to my perception or is one better than the other
Click to expand...

LongLensPhotography said:
EVF definitely appears to be badly pixelated on R6 as well. It is bad reviewing, but even worse shooting. It is basically a piece of s*** so I only really use the LCD for everything
Click to expand...

I don't have the R6 or R7... on the R1 I prefer to use the EVF to review images. I'm getting a bit long sighted now with age so I'm starting to need reading glasses to check the LCD. Even with reading glasses I find the EVF better. It's not impacted by ambient light for example. Check your display settings, maybe that can improve it? The underlying image is the same either way.
 
A_S said:
I might be about to start an argument... But I'd take this with a pinch of salt. I Kind of find this "pixel peeping" advice and a desire for nothing but perfection which is not a good reflection of reality. If you were doing 100% crops and printing on billboards it may be relevent but for every day use, specifically talking about taking images of your pet I'd say please ignore this advice.

A good example of this is the 70-200 F4 mk1 which to this day i still use manual focused on a remote and on my R5 mk1 takes pin sharp images and I've sold very many taken by it, both on the R5, and (in the last year i hasen to add) from remote 7D mk2s and the customers are more than happy. The images are also used on promotional material for events (from the remotes).

An alternative is an R5 mk1 - still available (as of last week at least) at Panamoz and then your choice of lens.
Click to expand...
I did highlight ef 70-200 f4 is mk1 as one of the better ones, but it does fall apart a little bit in the edges particularly at 200mm. And they are prone to collar failure which is now terminal for an older lens.

It is so easy to get perfect lenses that really buying old canons (and some new ones!) just means willingly throwing away edge resolution. Whether you need that right now is a different question. There is plenty of work where it matters, and its not just billboards.
 
TimHughes said:
I don't have the R6 or R7... on the R1 I prefer to use the EVF to review images. I'm getting a bit long sighted now with age so I'm starting to need reading glasses to check the LCD. Even with reading glasses I find the EVF better. It's not impacted by ambient light for example. Check your display settings, maybe that can improve it? The underlying image is the same either way.
Click to expand...
I expect r1 to be better. A lot better in fact.

No, you cant fix the evf in r6. You are not given the choice of resolution, or even to disable aggressive downsampling. Not even hdr / hlg so you get to enjoy a lot of 255 white all over the place
 
Well my lumix system is now gone. I had a good look at the R5 and R6 today. They seem very nice and I really liked the tiny RF 70-200. I am going to have to think long and hard and save a little more if I want the R5ii over the R6ii
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top