Canon FF mirrorless...

jj_glos said:
Having the massive second hand market behind the Canon is what it makes it attractive to me. That and the potential for completely new lens designs like the 28-70 f2 make it very interesting to me. I think I'll be selling the A9 and 5D4 soon, and I'm tempted to give the EOS R a try before I sell all my Canon lenses...
Click to expand...

I personally wouldn't make that move. The 28-70/2.0 and 50/1.2 are amazing but it seems that is the only thing that is attractive at the moment. It seems the 5D4 is still a better camera so if you have that, there is little reason to switch.

 
Raymond Lin said:
I personally wouldn't make that move. The 28-70/2.0 and 50/1.2 are amazing but it seems that is the only thing that is attractive at the moment. It seems the 5D4 is still a better camera so if you have that, there is little reason to switch.

Click to expand...
Both the 28-70mm f2.0 and 50mm f1.2 have NO IS! :o
I agree with you @Raymond Lin , I wouldnt make the move either.
 
jj_glos said:
Having the massive second hand market behind the Canon is what it makes it attractive to me. That and the potential for completely new lens designs like the 28-70 f2 make it very interesting to me. I think I'll be selling the A9 and 5D4 soon, and I'm tempted to give the EOS R a try before I sell all my Canon lenses...
Click to expand...

I'm still not convinced by significance of the bigger mount, you do know that Sigma have already made a f1.8 zoom for APS-C and a f2 one for FF and that the cough has at least one 50mm f0.95 all be it a MF one? If the significance isn't really there the system and the lenses are still nice but maybe there isn't really all that much of a significant potential that exclusively comes down to the new mount. Anyway, I'm being a killjoy so I'll stop.
 
Riz_Guru said:
Both the 28-70mm f2.0 and 50mm f1.2 have NO IS! :eek:
I agree with you @Raymond Lin, I wouldn't make the move either.
Click to expand...

They don't and I have a feeling that not because they can't, it's because if they do, it will be even bigger as the lens elements need space to shift. It's already big enough. If this is correct then it means most fast lenses will never have IS in them.
 
woof woof said:
My point was that "we" should have enough information available to make informed choices and I think "we" should be able to talk about these choices without being told even if ever so politely to stop mentioning Sony and only talk about Canon.
Click to expand...
But that’s not what my post said, neither is it a fair reflection of the discussion.

It’s all about where ‘reasonable behaviour’ is judged.

There’s nothing wrong with pointing out a cameras flaws, or that another camera might be ‘better’ in some regards.

But some people just spam threads with a constant repetition of those 2 points, that’s not debate, discussion or even helpful. It’s just puerile willy waving.
 
Raymond Lin said:
I wish everyone have your perspective, then my lenses will hold its value for agessssssssssssssss.
Click to expand...

I’m sure in your work that you own high quality lenses so no reason why they wouldn’t. Also for canon to replace the 12 DSLR bodies they currently make will take some time. They may even decide not to make mirrorless at the cheaper end of the market. Sony seem to be happy to continue to produce their previous bodies and knock them out cheaper as a way of expanding their range. Canon, as Robin has pointed out, have said that the MkIII EF lenses will have a performance boost with an adaptor on the R. The couple of lenses I tried on the R where certainly quick focusing. The only doubt I have is if the LP-E6 batteries can drive the big lenses as quickly as the larger ones found in the 1 series bodies. When Canon brought out the 7DMkII they said it was the first LP-E6 body that could drive then superteles as fast but I never found that to be the case in comparing it to my 1DX.
 
Raymond Lin said:
They don't and I have a feeling that not because they can't, it's because if they do, it will be even bigger as the lens elements need space to shift. It's already big enough. If this is correct then it means most fast lenses will never have IS in them.
Click to expand...
Canon have always said they put IS in the lens because they can tailor hardware specifically for each lens, whereas IBIS continues to be a compromise BUT someday it may not and if/when that day happens they might put in IBIS.
They have had this stance ever since they introduced in lens IS.
Of course this could all be marketing speak as they dont want to lose face, they are Japanese after all.
 
nandbytes said:
Also to be a good photographer its important to understand the limitations of your tools. Because let's face it no camera system is perfect. They are all limiting in someway.
Click to expand...

Well I can’t pretend to be a good photographer.
The limitations of my gear are way down my list of considerations when I’m taking a shot, I’m too busy with trivialities like light, composition and timing.

Maybe I’d be a better photographer if I was spending that time worrying about 1/2 stop of dynamic range

Just in case you believe I’m taking your statement above seriously, I’m not... it’s utter and complete [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER].

I have books by the greatest (IMHO) photographers in the world, I’ve seen them interviewed, and not once have I looked at their images and considered their gear, or heard them hand wringing about the DR or noise handling of their sensors.
 
jj_glos said:
I'm really liking the Fuji X-T3 at the moment, so will be keeping all that kit. Unless the EOS R tempts me enough...
Click to expand...
I had a play with one in store and its a cracking camera...... its still in the back of my mind..... :o
 
Raymond Lin said:
I personally wouldn't make that move. The 28-70/2.0 and 50/1.2 are amazing but it seems that is the only thing that is attractive at the moment. It seems the 5D4 is still a better camera so if you have that, there is little reason to switch.

Click to expand...

5D4 isn't mirrorless, I like the mirrorless tech (WYSIWYG EVF and more consistent AF etc.). If the 5D4 worked as well in live view as a mirrorless body I'd likely never have even bothered trying the A9 out.
 
Last edited:
Riz_Guru said:
Both the 28-70mm f2.0 and 50mm f1.2 have NO IS! :eek:
I agree with you @Raymond Lin , I wouldnt make the move either.
Click to expand...

I can see why people like IS/IBIS etc. But it's actually quite low on my list of requirements. I'm pretty much always shooting subjects that are moving so being able to hand hold at low shutter speeds etc. isn't of much benefit.

Being lazy with a 28-70 f2 lens on the camera all day... Yeah I can see that being fun. It'll be on a strap so the lens size isn't a big issue, beats carrying a bag with more primes in for sure.
 
woof woof said:
I'm still not convinced by significance of the bigger mount, you do know that Sigma have already made a f1.8 zoom for APS-C and a f2 one for FF and that the cough has at least one 50mm f0.95 all be it a MF one? If the significance isn't really there the system and the lenses are still nice but maybe there isn't really all that much of a significant potential that exclusively comes down to the new mount. Anyway, I'm being a killjoy so I'll stop.
Click to expand...

That's probably why you're not a camera engineer :D
 
woof woof said:
If I walk into a car showroom and ask the salesman "What should I buy?" I'll get an answer but if I ask my mate who knows all about cars I may get a different answer. Will it matter what I buy? Maybe not but while I'm spending my money why shouldn't I get the best I can get even if I only use half its abilities. And who knows, if enough people stop buying the second best the company who make it might put a bit more effort into making it the best.
Click to expand...

But does that car have 2 cup holders?
 
Riz_Guru said:
I had a play with one in store and its a cracking camera...... its still in the back of my mind..... :eek:
Click to expand...

I've only really played with it for a day, but I'm white impressed with it. It's more of a jump in performance than the X-T2 from the X-T1 was.

Going back to the X-T2 after using the A9, well it just felt sluggish in comparison. I use AF-C all the time on the A9 and it's great, but on the X-T2 is not the same experience. I have focus priority enabled (that's how I use all my cameras) and you'd miss a shot on the X-T2 waiting for the box to go green. With the X-T3 the box is pretty much always green now, and this is even with the 23mm f1.4 , 35mm f1.4 and 56mm f1.2 lenses. It's still early days, but colour me impressed!

Still love the stacked sensor of the A9 though... If the Sony lenses weren't so expensive and the second hand market such a minefield (I've been surprised by the apparent copy variation of some Sony lenses) I probably wouldn't have waited to try the X-T3 and gone all Sony.
 
Last edited:
jj_glos said:
I can see why people like IS/IBIS etc. But it's actually quite low on my list of requirements. I'm pretty much always shooting subjects that are moving so being able to hand hold at low shutter speeds etc. isn't of much benefit.

Being lazy with a 28-70 f2 lens on the camera all day... Yeah I can see that being fun. It'll be on a strap so the lens size isn't a big issue, beats carrying a bag with more primes in for sure.
Click to expand...
Sometimes the IS lenses are better than their non-IS counterparts though in respect to contrast, sharpness etc. As an example Canon's 70-200 F4 IS is regarded as a sharper lens than the non-IS version, I believe the IS version has more elements.
 
MatBin said:
Sometimes the IS lenses are better than their non-IS counterparts though in respect to contrast, sharpness etc. As an example Canon's 70-200 F4 IS is regarded as a sharper lens than the non-IS version, I believe the IS version has more elements.
Click to expand...

Oh I have IS lenses, the feature just doesn't get used that often. I have used it on occasion, so it's useful to have. I just wouldn't miss it if I didn't have it. If turning the IBIS off on the A9 actually saved battery that's how I'd leave it.
 
Yea but there is no mirrorless 5d4 yet so just stick with what you got.
jj_glos said:
5D4 isn't mirrorless, I like the mirrorless tech (WYSIWYG EVF and more consistent AF etc.). If the 5D4 worked as well in live view as a mirrorless body I'd likely never have even bothered trying the A9 out.
Click to expand...
 
Phil V said:
Well I can’t pretend to be a good photographer.
The limitations of my gear are way down my list of considerations when I’m taking a shot, I’m too busy with trivialities like light, composition and timing.

Maybe I’d be a better photographer if I was spending that time worrying about 1/2 stop of dynamic range

Just in case you believe I’m taking your statement above seriously, I’m not... it’s utter and complete b****x.

I have books by the greatest (IMHO) photographers in the world, I’ve seen them interviewed, and not once have I looked at their images and considered their gear, or heard them hand wringing about the DR or noise handling of their sensors.
Click to expand...

Whether they talked about gear or not is a different matter. They probably knew how to use them well. Understanding how to use your tool which includes knowing it's limitations will only help you.

If you think that utter bull poo then that's up to you.
 
MatBin said:
Canon have always said they put IS in the lens because they can tailor hardware specifically for each lens, whereas IBIS continues to be a compromise BUT someday it may not and if/when that day happens they might put in IBIS.
They have had this stance ever since they introduced in lens IS.
Of course this could all be marketing speak as they dont want to lose face, they are Japanese after all.
Click to expand...

No doubt IBIS will stop being a compromise when they introduce it.
 
nandbytes said:
Whether they talked about gear or not is a different matter. They probably knew how to use them well. Understanding how to use your tool which includes knowing it's limitations will only help you.

If you think that utter bull poo then that's up to you.
Click to expand...
There’s a big difference between knowing how to use it and wanking over spec sheets. ;)
 
Phil V said:
...Maybe I’d be a better photographer if I was spending that time worrying about 1/2 stop of dynamic range...
Click to expand...

Phil,

while you are suggesting this as something irrelevant (and in the context you intend it, it probably is), I suspect you DO worry about 1/2 stop dynamic range reasonably frequently - when you decide to dial in a 1/2 stop -ve exposure compensation to avoid blowing the highlights.

And if you compare a 'typical' DSLR of 5 years ago to the best in terms of DR today, it's a 3 stop difference - which for a landscape photographer could mean the difference between having to use a 3 stop grad or not, for example.

So while in some respects theses are just numbers, and with a modicum of skill it is possible to work around the differences, for some people the difference will be important.
 
Faldrax said:
Phil,

while you are suggesting this as something irrelevant (and in the context you intend it, it probably is), I suspect you DO worry about 1/2 stop dynamic range reasonably frequently - when you decide to dial in a 1/2 stop -ve exposure compensation to avoid blowing the highlights.

And if you compare a 'typical' DSLR of 5 years ago to the best in terms of DR today, it's a 3 stop difference - which for a landscape photographer could mean the difference between having to use a 3 stop grad or not, for example.

So while in some respects theses are just numbers, and with a modicum of skill it is possible to work around the differences, for some people the difference will be important.
Click to expand...
Have a read of your post.
Of course there’s a technical consideration, but as you’ve already noted, more than one technical solution.
The photographer will decide whether to use an ND grad, to bracket, to hope to pull enough out of the raw file....

Or whether they really need the later camera with a wider DR.

Now I appreciate some photographers will run to the new technology and sing from the rooftops that they’ve bought the best tool for the job

I just hear that and (considering the other options) see that as rather sad.

I’m not a Luddite I like tech as much as the next guy, but as has been stated by the sensible folk on photo forums since the beginning of time...

People have been taking amazing photos for years without owning the latest high tech camera. And they’ll continue to do so.

Back to my post from last night, why aren’t the owners of all the superior gear taking all the best pictures?

Because people take pictures, not cameras.
 
But Phil, that is a different topic altogether, that is the philosophy of what makes a great image, this is a forum and topic of a specific camera, the gear.

If the argument is "if people have always taken great images with old cameras", then I ask you this.

How come you are not shooting with a Canon AE-1?
 
Raymond Lin said:
But Phil, that is a different topic altogether, that is the philosophy of what makes a great image, this is a forum and topic of a specific camera, the gear.

If the argument is "if people have always taken great images with old cameras", then I ask you this.

How come you are not shooting with a Canon AE-1?
Click to expand...

I am! :D:snaphappy: well still shooting with a Canon AE-1, great images? Well probably not :whistle:
 
So going back to my earlier question, how does the R work in continuous AF at a small aperture (e.g. f/11)? Does it always focus wide open? Does the exposure simulation option change the focus behaviour?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top