Updating a couple of cameras mirrorless or not

I've got both. The EF adapters work perfectly on the R.

If I'm using manual focus I really like the focus peaking on the R. It's also lighter and more compact, but I would say the 5d4 is a better overall camera and more reliable for shooting action. I'm not sure about for studio use, but I'm more inclined to rely on my 5d4.

Edit: also to add if you use back button focusing I think that it's slightly more awkward on the R
 
Last edited:
Bebop said:
I've got both. The EF adapters work perfectly on the R.

If I'm using manual focus I really like the focus peaking on the R. It's also lighter and more compact, but I would say the 5d4 is a better overall camera and more reliable for shooting action. I'm not sure about for studio use, but I'm more inclined to rely on my 5d4.

Edit: also to add if you use back button focusing I think that it's slightly more awkward on the R
Click to expand...

cheers, the 5dmk4 is winning :)
 
Studio488commercial said:
5dmk4 or EOSr with EF adapter ? anyone got both ? or changed from one to the another ? for us in the studio
Click to expand...

I have the same dilemma.

The plan was always a 5D4 as soon as the dust settled on our recent house move. A substantial upgrade on the 5D2, particularly AF, a familiar control layout with same CF cards etc. Easy choice.

Then the EOS-R came along. Initially disappointed, but now the new firmware v1.4 appears to have transformed eye-AF performance and I want that. An articulating screen would also be handy, particularly for tripod work that I do a lot of and almost always in live view. Then there's the clincher...

I would be using adapted EF lenses and Canon makes an adapter with a variable ND filter built in https://www.cliftoncameras.co.uk/Canon-Dropin-Variable-ND-Filter-for-EFEOS-R-Adapter I do a lot of work with flash outdoors and using ND filters is the best way (for me) of keeping the shutter speed within x-sync when shooting with low f/numbers in daylight. Compared to high-speed sync, the ND method effectively increases flash output by at least one stop and in bright sun you usually need all the flash power you can muster. In other words, a Godox AD400 would be putting out as much light as an 800-1000Ws head in HSS mode, maybe more. With a DSLR's optical viewfinder, you can't use more than a couple of stops ND before the viewfinder gets unusably dark and that's just not enough (3-6 stops is the ideal ND range).
 
I don't know much about the Canon range, but assuming you like the handling of both then I'd suggest the EOS R saving you both money (assuming buying new) and weight
 
If you can wait 2-3 months for next EOR R (high res model?) to come out.

Personally I prefer handling of full size slr bodies, but EOS R is one of the better mirrorless physical designs out there.

If values and longevity are of any importance, mkIV is still priced very high and is old, so will drop like a stone soon. I expect R as a beta test model to do same soon when new gen is out.
 
HoppyUK said:
I have the same dilemma.

The plan was always a 5D4 as soon as the dust settled on our recent house move. A substantial upgrade on the 5D2, particularly AF, a familiar control layout with same CF cards etc. Easy choice.

Then the EOS-R came along. Initially disappointed, but now the new firmware v1.4 appears to have transformed eye-AF performance and I want that. An articulating screen would also be handy, particularly for tripod work that I do a lot of and almost always in live view. Then there's the clincher...

I would be using adapted EF lenses and Canon makes an adapter with a variable ND filter built in https://www.cliftoncameras.co.uk/Canon-Dropin-Variable-ND-Filter-for-EFEOS-R-Adapter I do a lot of work with flash outdoors and using ND filters is the best way (for me) of keeping the shutter speed within x-sync when shooting with low f/numbers in daylight. Compared to high-speed sync, the ND method effectively increases flash output by at least one stop and in bright sun you usually need all the flash power you can muster. In other words, a Godox AD400 would be putting out as much light as an 800-1000Ws head in HSS mode, maybe more. With a DSLR's optical viewfinder, you can't use more than a couple of stops ND before the viewfinder gets unusably dark and that's just not enough (3-6 stops is the ideal ND range).
Click to expand...
Sorry, I know this off topic.
What do you photograph that needs a high ND filter but lots of flash power? Having read a few of your (excellent) posts I know you'l have a good and valid reason, just intrigued that's all.
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
With a DSLR's optical viewfinder, you can't use more than a couple of stops ND before the viewfinder gets unusably dark and that's just not enough (3-6 stops is the ideal ND range).
Click to expand...

3-4 stops looks just a tad darker than a CPL filter. That's easy. Even 9 stops still leave a legible, but very dim view in normal daylight.
 
MatBin said:
Sorry, I knw this off topic.
What do you photograph that needs a high ND filter but lots of flash power? Having read a few of your (excellent) posts I know you'l have a good and valid reason, just intrigued that's all.
Click to expand...

Outdoor portraiture in bright sun with low f/number for shallow DoF.

Using flash outdoors is very different to a darkened studio where you can do most things with modest power and x-sync is never a problem. And if you do need more power in a situation where there's no significant ambient light, then bumping the ISO is effectively the same as doubling the flash power with every stop.

Outdoors, the ambient light level sets your baseline and sunlight is very bright. To beat that with flash needs at least 400Ws (that's a handful of speedlights minimum) and preferably much more for a softbox at a decent distance. Then to shoot at say f/1.4 on a bright day you simply run out of fast enough shutter speeds for correct exposure, so even without flash and at base ISO, a couple of stops ND filter is needed just to get a usable shutter speed. Then when adding flash into the equation, the shutter speed needs to be pulled down much further to 1/200sec or so, requiring a much darker ND filter (maybe six stops-ish).

ND filters over about three stops are simply impractical IMHO when using a DSLR's optical viewfinder. I have a four stops ND but it's too dark and I never use it as I just can't properly see what's going on. It's usable for basic framing but hopeless for portraits when you're trying to capture subtle gestures and fleeting expressions.

Of course, high-speed sync is the obvious answer but that is inherently very inefficient and most of the light is simply wasted - you lose a couple of stops of effective flash output just by switching it on.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
3-4 stops looks just a tad darker than a CPL filter. That's easy. Even 9 stops still leave a legible, but very dim view in normal daylight.
Click to expand...

"Just a tad darker...?" I've never tested a polariser darker than 1.9 stops and most are around 1.5-1.7 stops, with the lighter-toned variety only 1.2 stops.

You have obviously never tried shooting a live, moving subject with a dark ND filter on a DSLR. They are not landscapes with a tripod. It's not fun.
 
HoppyUK said:
Outdoor portraiture in bright sun with low f/number for shallow DoF.

Using flash outdoors is very different to a darkened studio where you can do most things with modest power and x-sync is never a problem. And if you do need more power in a situation where there's no significant ambient light, then bumping the ISO is effectively the same as doubling the flash power with every stop.

Outdoors, the ambient light level sets your baseline and sunlight is very bright. To beat that with flash needs at least 400Ws (that's a handful of speedlights minimum) and preferably much more for a softbox at a decent distance. Then to shoot at say f/1.4 on a bright day you simply run out of fast enough shutter speeds for correct exposure, so even without flash and at base ISO, a couple of stops ND filter is needed just to get a usable shutter speed. Then when adding flash into the equation, the shutter speed needs to be pulled down much further to 1/200sec or so, requiring a much darker ND filter (maybe six stops-ish).

ND filters over about three stops are simply impractical IMHO when using a DSLR's optical viewfinder. I have a four stops ND but it's too dark and I never use it as I just can't properly see what's going on. It's usable for basic framing but hopeless for portraits when you're trying to capture subtle gestures and fleeting expressions.

Of course, high-speed sync is the obvious answer but that is inherently very inefficient and most of the light is simply wasted - you lose a couple of stops of effective flash output just by switching it on.
Click to expand...
Are you doing this so that flash is the primary light source then, or do you still need to do all this just for fill flash in certain situations?
 
If it were me I would wait for the higher res mirrorless version, especially for studio work.

If I had to buy now I would opt for the R (I have an R and moved from a 77d but have used 5d's on various jobs).

Once you get used to the R, its handling and controls it is hard to go back to a dslr! Eye tracking is a god send!!
 
HoppyUK said:
"Just a tad darker...?" I've never tested a polariser darker than 1.9 stops and most are around 1.5-1.7 stops, with the lighter-toned variety only 1.2 stops.

You have obviously never tried shooting a live, moving subject with a dark ND filter on a DSLR. They are not landscapes with a tripod. It's not fun.
Click to expand...

I am not debating fun factor. In a studio it certainly wouldn't be fun. Outdoors I barely notice nd8 filter when I use it. It may not do anything good for af tracking fast subject but it will still function
 
There is rumour of an EOS R mark ii coming out ahead of Photokina in May.

I haven't use the eye autofocus. I still have mixed feelings about my R. I much prefer the ergonomics, customisation options etc. of my Olympus system and thought I would be selling my 5D4, but at the moment I still have all three.
 
snerkler said:
Are you doing this so that flash is the primary light source then, or do you still need to do all this just for fill flash in certain situations?
Click to expand...

O/T with apologies to the OP.

Yes, flash as primary subject light source and if you want to darken the sky/background, the flash needs to be at least a stop above the daylight. That's a big ask, with the options being to throw huge amounts of power at it and work with HSS (extra cost, extra weight, even more cumbersome) or try a more efficient method, ie heavy ND filter and a mirrorless camera with electronic viewfinder.

Fill-in flash usually requires much less power, like several stops less. HSS is perfect for that.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
I am not debating fun factor. In a studio it certainly wouldn't be fun. Outdoors I barely notice nd8 filter when I use it. It may not do anything good for af tracking fast subject but it will still function
Click to expand...

ND8 is only three stops, but that's my comfortable limit with a DSLR's optical viewfinder. If you're happy using more then good luck to you.
 
Tdes said:
If it were me I would wait for the higher res mirrorless version, especially for studio work.

If I had to buy now I would opt for the R (I have an R and moved from a 77d but have used 5d's on various jobs).

Once you get used to the R, its handling and controls it is hard to go back to a dslr! Eye tracking is a god send!!
Click to expand...

If the EOS-R with that pricey little vari-ND filter built in to the adapter works as well as I hope, I'll be very happy.

The 'R MkII' will surely be better, but it'll be many months yet before it actually becomes available and it'll be way more expensive. The current R has plenty of pixels for me and just one card slot hasn't let me down yet ;)
 
HoppyUK said:
If the EOS-R with that pricey little vari-ND filter built in to the adapter works as well as I hope, I'll be very happy.

The 'R MkII' will surely be better, but it'll be many months yet before it actually becomes available and it'll be way more expensive. The current R has plenty of pixels for me and just one card slot hasn't let me down yet ;)
Click to expand...

The current R is doing everything I need it to do, I am very happy with it!

I would like to upgrade my second camera (77d) and am interested in the R mk2 but if the features don't justify the price will probably end up getting a second R and selling the 77d. I am in no rush though, so time is on my side!

I have invested in the sony tough sd card, which gets scanned for any potential issues every time i put it in the mac, hopefully minimising any problems I may get!

T
 
Tdes said:
The current R is doing everything I need it to do, I am very happy with it!
Click to expand...

You very well may be. I'm just saying for people like me on the fence it makes total sense waiting a few months for a more mature model. There is really nothing that my mk3 can't do, just it can be done a little bit better, and it's getting worn out.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
You very well may be. I'm just saying for people like me on the fence it makes total sense waiting a few months for a more mature model. There is really nothing that my mk3 can't do, just it can be done a little bit better, and it's getting worn out.
Click to expand...

Completely agree, you have time on your side. If your mk3 stopped working then you are forced to decide now, but it is still going so would be foolish not seeing what is around the corner. If anything, the R will drop in price when the new version is out if the new one doesn't do what you want for the price!
 
Tdes said:
I have invested in the sony tough sd card, which gets scanned for any potential issues every time i put it in the mac, hopefully minimising any problems I may get!

T
Click to expand...
Just wondering what issues you think you might get with a card that you are scanning for - viruses? I've never had any issues with any card. I format them in camera after each use. I have heard of cards failing, but I didn't know you could scan them?
 
Bebop said:
Just wondering what issues you think you might get with a card that you are scanning for - viruses? I've never had any issues with any card. I format them in camera after each use. I have heard of cards failing, but I didn't know you could scan them?
Click to expand...

Just trying to avoid any issues https://www.sony.net/Products/memorycard/en_us/sd/ssu/ but it only works with sony cards.

The card is well built, no 'fins' on the connectors that can break. It is solid, no bending or flexing at all and they had got rid of the write protect switch which is a common point of failure. Compared to other cards it seems to be a step ahead and is also very fast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top