cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

More R5 info

John_SD
Whiz

Hopefully this won't get deleted, but Tech Radar interviewed David Parry of Canon (a product marketing specialist) and asked several questions about the R5. Some interesting stuff. I look forward to the camera's release. The last time I posted some info about the R5, in which a Canon source confirmed specs, our crackerjack mods deleted it almost immediately. 

54 REPLIES 54

I am with Ernie on this one.  Canon (the competition also) hasn't created a compelling reason for me to go mirrorless.  I don't want a lighter body because I like the way the heft of the 1 series provides a counterbalance to the heavy glass.  Battery life is important to me because I will shoot a lot of images at a sports event.  But most critically, an EVF is inferior to an optical viewfinder for fast action sports.

 

I will happily adopt new technology when there is a compelling reason to do so but mirrorless of itself doesn't yet provide a better total platform compared to a DSLR.  AF performance is incredible with the 1DX series and at 10 minutes or less to calibrate a lens I am happy to stay with the excellent AF system in those bodies. If mirrorless provided noise and sharpness performance at ISO 25,600 equivalent to ISO 1,000 I would jump on it in a heartbeat.  But just because it doesn't have a mirror isn't sufficient reason to get a lot of us to switch.  So count me out of the evangelical mirrorless movement for now 🙂

 

Rodger

EOS 1DX M3, 1DX M2, 1DX, 5DS R, M6 Mark II, 1D M2, EOS 650 (film), many lenses, XF400 video

Don't get me wrong.  I'm not about to jump ship to the EOS R system, either.  I doubt if I will, because I am too old and too invested in the EF mount.  If I had to recommendation a path for someone just starting out, I would not encourage them to rule the RF mount.  

--------------------------------------------------------
"The right mouse button is your friend."

I agree Wadidizzle with the caveat to make sure it is the right system for them regardless of design/technology. 

 

Photography beyond the phone type is fighting an uphill battle for a large part of the consumer market because so many are happy with the convenience of the camera that always goes everywhere with them and is already mirrorless.  For that group, the larger mirrorless body with the required larger lens which provide the additional capabilities are still huge and heavy compared to their phone. 

 

A natural for mirrorless design is at the compact, integrated lens, low price end of the market to provide a step up above typical smartphone capability.  But a mirrorless in the same size range as traditional "35 mm style" bodies probably won't be any more succesful than the various digital/HD radio systems have been in keeping a large segment of the younger generations listening to broadcast radio because they prefer the other alternatives and attempts to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear fail. 

 

To be sucessful, companies will have to hit on a product that does something that the target market really values and does it well and investment in developing mirrorless and a new line of lenses optimized to it is likely to provide a ROI that causes companies to refocus resources on product lines with a better rate of return.  Corporations are cold and logical beasts because they have to be and if money invested in still imaging products doesn't appear likely to offer equal or better returns than other lines then they will be subject to pruning.  Most of us have spent most of our lives in a time when video wasn't nearly as convenient or practical to shoot and view as it is now and instead of "pixel peeping" for high quality stills the mass market craves entertaining video and given the popularity of "reality TV" and the "amazing fails" genre on Youtube, neither technical nor content quality is held to a high standard.  Many local news stations happily run video shot with smartphones from their viewers in a sign that content is far more important than quality currently.  At one point, the home entertainment market at the better end focused upon creating realistic reproduction of the source material but the home entertainment industry has strayed very far from that concept and the idea of highly realistic capture of events in photography has similarly moved heavily into "artistic" edits of captured reality. 

 

Rodger

EOS 1DX M3, 1DX M2, 1DX, 5DS R, M6 Mark II, 1D M2, EOS 650 (film), many lenses, XF400 video

" I am too old and too invested in the EF mount."

 

Bingo!  Been there done that!  Canon got me once to the tune of many zeros behind the $.  It AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN again.

One big reason now is old age.   I didn't have it then but I do now.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!


@kvbarkley wrote:

Many are appreciative of the mechanical shutter in the Canons because it protects the sensor from dust and fingers.


The EOS R can protect its' sensor when no lens is attached.  But that feature was not included in the EOS RP.

 

/some owners of older great whites are discovering that their lenses can focus better with the EOS R than with their DSLRs.  Mirrorless focusing means lenses that may back/front focus with a DSLR are always spot on with the EOS R bodies.  No AFMA is needed.

--------------------------------------------------------
"The right mouse button is your friend."

ebiggs1
Legend
Legend

"...our crackerjack mods deleted it almost immediately."

 

And they delete arbitrarily and with out reason. Could at least tell us why?

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!


@ebiggs1 wrote:

"...our crackerjack mods deleted it almost immediately."

 

And they delete arbitrarily and with out reason. Could at least tell us why?


I asked the same question weeks ago, and in fact posted a topic that was explicitly addressed to the mods in the Subject line. 

 

It never received a reply and appears to have been deleted itself. 

 

EDIT: Actually, it did receive replies from scammers. But no mod replied to my query.


@John_SD wrote:

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"...our crackerjack mods deleted it almost immediately."

 

And they delete arbitrarily and with out reason. Could at least tell us why?


I asked the same question weeks ago, and in fact posted a topic that was explicitly addressed to the mods in the Subject line. 

 

It never received a reply and appears to have been deleted itself. 

 

EDIT: Actually, it did receive replies from scammers. But no mod replied to my query.


Censorship is a sore subject, at least in the U.S. Those who do the censoring are seldom willing to engage in debates about their decisions or to explain the process that led to those decisions.

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA

Canon making a business decision is hardly "censoring".


@RobertTheFat wrote:

@John_SD wrote:

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"...our crackerjack mods deleted it almost immediately."

 

And they delete arbitrarily and with out reason. Could at least tell us why?


I asked the same question weeks ago, and in fact posted a topic that was explicitly addressed to the mods in the Subject line. 

 

It never received a reply and appears to have been deleted itself. 

 

EDIT: Actually, it did receive replies from scammers. But no mod replied to my query.


Censorship is a sore subject, at least in the U.S. Those who do the censoring are seldom willing to engage in debates about their decisions or to explain the process that led to those decisions.


I agree with you, Robert. Now, if there is obvious profanity, stalking, harrassment, spamming, hacking, outright lying about a poster, etc., then yes, those posts should be deleted and no explanation is necessary. 

 

The problem here is that there is no consistency from one mod to the next. Often, one is left wondering what rule was violated that led to a post's deletion. That's what I asked of the mods and received no response. Thus, I cannot be held to any unstated standard that they refuse to divulge. 

 

Generally, this seems to be a pretty good group, and I have seen almost nothing in the way of profanity, harrassment, etc. Yes, now and again, one of us may be a tad abrupt or snarky in our tone when dealing with an obvious fool. Big deal. That comes with any online forum and is to be expected, and shouldn't lead to post deletions. I like the forum and would like to remain a member here, but the mods could do better in their communication, especially when it is unclear why they removed a posting. 

Avatar
click here to view the gallery
Announcements