Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Mirrorless Cameras => Topic started by: shadowblade on August 14, 2018, 10:10:47 pm
-
Because there's a Nikon thread already...
https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/confirmed-new-canon-mirrorless-camera-to-be-announced-on-september-4-5/ (https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/confirmed-new-canon-mirrorless-camera-to-be-announced-on-september-4-5/)
Appears to use the LP-E6 battery:
https://www.canonrumors.com/updated-modules-registered-for-certification/ (https://www.canonrumors.com/updated-modules-registered-for-certification/)
-
The camera body reminds me of the good old AE1. I also notice a proper aperture ring on the depicted lens - a feature I really enjoy with my Fujifilm lenses. Canon's announcement promises to be interesting!
-
The camera body reminds me of the good old AE1. I also notice a proper aperture ring on the depicted lens ...
The image resembles the AE1 because it is a retro fan-fiction concept from 2012 called the AE-D, not anything that Canon is likely to offer:
https://petapixel.com/2012/03/22/canon-ae-d-mirrorless-camera-concept/
Do you really expect a camera with no grip, so less battery room, and a reversion to the on-lens aperture ring and top plate ISO dial that Canon left behind in 1987?
-
Is Sept 4th confirmed?
This is going to be one of the most interesting months in the history of camera releases!
I just hope that Canon will have gone all the way.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
My understanding is that its been pushed back to at least October. I'm also really interested in the Panasonic LX100 mkII release August 23rd.
EDIT - need morning coffee
-
I assume you mean October?
My guess is that it is at least 6 months away from actual availability. They will play the usual rumor game to keep people waiting. ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I assume you mean October?
My guess is that it is at least 6 months away from actual availability. They will play the usual rumor game to keep people waiting. ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
Yes I think if we were going to get it this year we'd have something more concrete by now. I'm guessing a fairly vague announcement at Photokina that "we're working on it" and then a Nikon-esque teaser campaign a few months later.
-
I still hope that the Sept 4th rumor is true, but this isn’t what Canonrumors is currently saying.
https://www.canonrumors.com
It will be interesting to see whether Canon will be able to match Sony regarding the weight of their new 400mm f2.8 or whether they will only update the coating.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
It will be interesting to see whether Canon will be able to match Sony regarding the weight of their new 400mm f2.8 or whether they will only update the coating.
Btw the way, the new Sony 400mm f2.8 is 3,000 Euros more expensive in Tokyo than their Canon/Nikon counterparts. Those dreaming of a Sony monopoly may want to think twice... ;)
Bernard... sometimes I don’t understand you... you complain about people insisting in bringing Sony to some threads and now you do it here... out of the blue... talking about a 400mm lens in a thread it just talks about the rumor of a Canon mirrorless camera.
P.D.: who will really want the dominance of a brand in a market... monopolies are not good for the users.
P.D.2: Not sure about japan market... 400 mm does not have that big price difference in Europe or EEUU (markets that I follow more closely in the news). Yes, it is more expensive than Canon or Nikon... in the usual higher price Sony lenses always have over their Canon and Nikon counterparts...
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
Yes, you are right David, apologies.
I will edit this out.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
An early September announcement seems more likely now, according to the latest from Mirrorlessrumors, Canonrumors and others.
Rumoured specs:
- 28MP
- Dual-pixel AF
- IBIS
- 10fps
- 4k/30fps and 1080p/60fps
- 1900USD
Clearly, it is in the same price bracket as the A7III. But the specs so far don't tell us very much about the role of the camera and where it will fit in the lineup, although we can probably infer a few things. It could be an entry-level full-frame camera (the launch price is similar to that of the 6D2), but it could also be an ideal general-purpose/event/wedding camera, like the A7III. Perhaps the two concepts have mostly merged and are one and the same now, just as action stills and video cameras are likely to merge at some point in the near future - 24-30MP full-frame sensors are more than enough for weddings/events, while entry-level AF has improved to the point where no system is likely to have problems focusing on static or slow-moving scenes, leaving dual cards/data redundancy as the main requirement for event/wedding photography that isn't necessarily covered by every camera.
28MP could mean anything. Is it an old-style Canon sensor without column-parallel ADC and limited low-ISO DR, or is it a 5D4-type sensor with low-ISO performance in the same ballpark as Exmor-type sensors? One would hope it's the latter, or Canon could be shooting themselves in the foot in terms of initial uptake.
Dual-pixel AF was expected, but is a win all-round. It's theoretically a better system than the separate AF layer currently used by Sony, and now Nikon (in fact, Sony has now patented its own dual-pixel AF system for that reason) - the fact that the A9/A7r3/A7III have better AF than the Canon 6D2 or M-series bodies is not because the underlying AF method is better, but because there's simply more of it, with faster processors and more dedicated AF electronics (similar to how the D5/1DxII focus a lot faster than entry-level Canon/Nikon bodies, even though all are using off-sensor PDAF based on the same underlying technology), and because most existing Canon lenses have moving parts that aren't optimised for mirrorless AF modes (which is why even the FE-mount Sigma Art series lenses don't focus as quickly or smoothly on Sony bodies as the EF and F mount versions do on Canon/Nikon bodies - the mechanics simply aren't optimised for mirrorless, regardless of the compatibility of the electronics). I would hope it also includes eye focus, face detection and other AI-based AF modes, since these are the areas which have the potential to give mirrorless a huge advantage over the 'dumb' SLR AF systems, and which, in the cases of face detection and eye focus, could mean the difference between an entry-level camera and a fantastic event/wedding/human-centric camera that can nail focus with thin-DOF lenses every time.
10fps is neither here nor there - fast enough for action without marking it as an action-oriented body. Looking at cameras from the past year or so, it seems that 9-10fps is the new 'gold standard' for general-purpose bodies - any new body that can't manage it had better have a good reason, such as 16-bit output that's measurably different from standard 14-bit, or a truly huge number of megapixels.
In any case, I'm hoping for dual card slots - almost regardless of the other specs (provided the AF meets a certain minimum standard, which isn't all that strenuous), this, along with the initial lens lineup, may be the main feature which decides if the new camera becomes a top-class event/wedding/portrait/general-purpose body, like the A7III, or just another entry-level full-frame mirrorless body that doesn't give someone with an existing Canon lens collection much reason to buy it over an already-existing SLR body.
-
Any conjectures on batterylife yet?
-
Any conjectures on batterylife yet?
There's been no mention of it, so nothing to comment on.
-
I wonder whether Canon will stay with CFast, use SD for now and promote this is price-friendly choice for an entry level FF camera, or join the inexorable movement towards CFexpress at the high end. Nikon and PhaseOne are going that way, through offering an XQD slot that will be firmware-upgradable to CFexpress after those cards arrive. I view "CFexpress" as a face-saving name for what could be called "XQD2", the Compact Flash Association having initially backed the wrong horse with SATA (as in CFast) instead of using PCIe (as in XQD and CFexpress.)
I would expect nothing but column-parallel ADC from Canon (or any competitive ILC) going forward. Have any Canon cameras had dual-pixel AF but not column-parallel ADC, and if so, how recently?
-
I wonder whether Canon will stay with CFast, use SD for now and promote this is price-friendly choice for an entry level FF camera, or join the inexorable movement towards CFexpress at the high end. Nikon and PhaseOne are going that way, through offering an XQD slot that will be firmware-upgradable to CFexpress after those cards arrive. I view "CFexpress" as a face-saving name for what could be called "XQD2", the Compact Flash Association having initially backed the wrong horse with SATA (as in CFast) instead of using PCIe (as in XQD and CFexpress.)
I would expect nothing but column-parallel ADC from Canon (or any competitive ILC) going forward. Have any Canon cameras had dual-pixel AF but not column-parallel ADC, and if so, how recently?
The 6D2 doesn't appear to have column parallel ADC, at leas according to its DR vs ISO charts. But it's also an unashamedly entry-level full-frame body - Canon may have been using its old fab lines to produce the sensor, which wouldn't have been suitable for higher-end products. It remains to be seen which market segment the new mirrorless camera is aimed at, but it would be a huge mistake not to put a top-tier sensor into it, since this is a period in which Canon and Nikon both need to build up market share in a new system, with any users likely to stay with whichever system they buy into for the long haul.
-
An early September announcement seems more likely now, according to the latest from Mirrorlessrumors, Canonrumors and others.
Rumoured specs:
- 28MP
- Dual-pixel AF
- IBIS
- 10fps
- 4k/30fps and 1080p/60fps
- 1900USD
Sounds good. Any word on the mount?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Canon may have been using its old fab lines to produce the sensor, which wouldn't have been suitable for higher-end products.
Who says Canon *has* new fab lines?
Sony are now the Usain Bolt of sensors - competing in every race and winning it.
Edmund
-
Sounds good. Any word on the mount?
Cheers,
Bernard
No.
Regardless of whether it's EF, EF-M or a new mount, you'd still want new lenses. EF lenses without linear stepper motors just can't focus as well or as quickly as lenses which have them, regardless of how fast the electronics work. Just look at the difference between Sigma Art FE-mount lenses and native Sony lenses, or between Sigma FE lenses vs the same lenses with EF or F mount on an SLR.
-
Who says Canon *has* new fab lines?
Sony are now the Usain Bolt of sensors - competing in every race and winning it.
Edmund
They must. Otherwise either all their sensors would have column parallel ADC, or none of them would. 1Dx2 and 5D4 have it, but 6D2 does not.
-
No.
Regardless of whether it's EF, EF-M or a new mount, you'd still want new lenses. EF lenses without linear stepper motors just can't focus as well or as quickly as lenses which have them, regardless of how fast the electronics work. Just look at the difference between Sigma Art FE-mount lenses and native Sony lenses, or between Sigma FE lenses vs the same lenses with EF or F mount on an SLR.
Not sure you'd need new lenses. Nikon is showing that you can get good AF performance with existing glass on a mirrorless sensor (according to reports, hard to distinguish from DSLR performance), if the AF is designed not to need contrast AF to reach sufficient accuracy.
So this is really a technological implementation story.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Not sure you'd need new lenses. Nikon is showing that you can get good AF performance with existing glass on a mirrorless sensor (according to reports, hard to distinguish from DSLR performance), if the AF is designed not to need contrast AF to reach sufficient accuracy.
So this is really a technological implementation story.
Cheers,
Bernard
The reports all seem to mention hunting, and a certain sluggishness that isn't there when using the same lenses on an SLR. Sounds similar to Sony bodies with adapted Canon lenses, really, and similar to what you get with Sigma Art FE-mount lenses. It's not an issue when you don't need fast AF anyway - no problems for landscapes or still portraits - but doesn't sound great for shooting action.
(Yes, I know there are plenty of examples of A9 and A7r3 bodies being used successfully with Canon superteles and other lenses to shoot wildlife. It works. It just isn't as quick or responsive as the same lenses on a Canon SLR, even when the Canon body doesn't normally have as good an AF system as the Sony, e.g. A9 vs 5D4. Same goes for FE-mount Art lens on a Sony body vs the EF-mount version on a Canon, so you can't blame it on the Metabones adapter either).
-
I don't believe it will have on sensor stabilization, at best it will have software stabilization for video like the current M models. I'm not sure Canon even has patents covering on sensor stabilization.
-
I don't believe it will have on sensor stabilization, at best it will have software stabilization for video like the current M models. I'm not sure Canon even has patents covering on sensor stabilization.
You mean... like this ones?
- https://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-not-closing-the-door-on-in-body-image-stabilization/
- https://www.canonnews.com/canon-patent-application-on-sensor-stablization
-
Well if they do it I'll be happy because IBIS is great. I just don't believe it will happen soon. Signed, a long time Canon user :p
-
Well if they do it I'll be happy because IBIS is great. I just don't believe it will happen soon. Signed, a long time Canon user :p
Yes, I was also a Canon user... and a bit skeptical about what they do now in the future aswell :), although I will be happy for Canon to make me wrong :)
-
Not sure you'd need new lenses. Nikon is showing that you can get good AF performance with existing glass on a mirrorless sensor (according to reports, hard to distinguish from DSLR performance), if the AF is designed not to need contrast AF to reach sufficient accuracy.
So this is really a technological implementation story.
Cheers,
Bernard
Actually in an interview with Nikon engineers it appears like the focus accuracy with legacy lenses won't be as good as with new lenses and AF in dim light with f2 and slower lenses will suffer.
-
Actually in an interview with Nikon engineers it appears like the focus accuracy with legacy lenses won't be as good as with new lenses and AF in dim light with f2 and slower lenses will suffer.
Could we keep this thread focused on Canon?
Nikon said that focus accuracy with F mount lenses on FTZ will be as good as it is on a D850 (which is great) and that native Z lenses will be even more accurate. That’s what they said, not the negative partial interpretation you are attempting to turn it into.
The part about f2 isn’t coming from Nikon engineers. The word “actually”, in it’s generally accepted English meaning, doesn’t belong to your sentence. Apologies if you are not an English native speaker.
Look, if you are right that the Nikon Z is an inferior product, presenting objective information about it should be sufficient for the world to understand, right?
DPreview has just released a Z7 vs a7rIII comparison. I am comfortable with they conclusions, are you?
In short, Z7 more pleasant to use (body, EVF,...), Sony faster. Sony more lenses but Nikon probably better quality potential.
Choose what matters to you and go take some great photographs, please.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Accuracy is only one aspect of AF performance. Speed is equally important if the subject is moving. Then there are also special modes (e.g. eye detection).
'Accuracy' itself can be divided into two aspects - accuracy (how close to the target it gets) and precision (how wide the spread is). Jim Kasson has tested and compared the A7r3 and D850 exhaustively. In AF-S mode, the A7r3 is much more accurate and precise than a D850, even with proper microadjustment - it doesn't front- or back-focus and has a smaller spread. In AF-C mode, the A7r3 has similar precision to the D850, but greater accuracy - it still doesn't front- or back-focus, but loses some precision, since CDAF plays less of a role. The D850 has the same accuracy and precision in both modes.
Where the D850 wins out in some circumstances is speed. Some of this is actually perception rather than reality - in AF-S mode, the A7r3 can sometimes appear to hunt, but, by the tine it starts doing that, it has already engaged PDAF and is already focused as accurately as the same camera in AF-C mode, or the D850 in any mode. What it's doing then is using AF-C to refine focus further, which is why AF-S on the camera is so accurate and precise. It is programmed to do that because, if you are using AF-S, the target is presumably not moving much, giving you more time to achieve better focus. When heavily stopped down, PDAF may not even engage, the camera using the far slower (but highly accurate) CDAF instead. In AF-C mode, both cameras are just as fast at achieving focus on a static subject - where PDAF is possible, the A7r3 does not appear to use CDAF much (if at all) for refinement in this mode. The D850 is probably faster at tracking certain subjects as they move, but that is an all-or-nothing issue - either the system is fast enough for a certain subject, in which case the ability to move faster makes no difference, or it's not fast enough. There's no such thing as 'moves slower, but still keeps up' - it either keeps up or it doesn't. The net effect is that the D850 can track slightly faster-moving subjects than the A7r3 (relative to subject distance). When they can track, both systems are just as effective as each other, but the D850 can track in a slightly greater range of situationsthan the A7r3. But this all changes when the system can engage eye focus. In that case, the A7r3 can maintain accurate and precise focus through almost any movement, and outperforms every camera other than the A9 (and sometimes even that, where the combination of distance and resolution allows the A7r3 to engage eye detection, while the A9 is unable to).
So, in general terms:
Still = A7r3
Very fast non-human (e.g. pets at close range) = D850
Moving human with eyes visible = A7r3
Most moving subjects outside the extremes = no difference
-
Bernard the only time you mentioned Canon in your post was when you requested to keep this thread focussed on Canon.
Perhaps we should have a new thread to compare between the now multiple mirrorless offerings.
-
Bernard the only time you mentioned Canon in your post was when you requested to keep this thread focussed on Canon.
Perhaps we should have a new thread to compare between the now multiple mirrorless offerings.
Martin,
You are leaving me speechless... how on earth am I to blame for the posting of blatantly incorrect information about a Nikon camera in a thread that should be devoted to Canon...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Really, the aspects most relevant to the market success of the new Canon camera are the ones which haven't been commented on much - card slots, shutter modes, AF performance, intelligent AF modes, buffer, video output and lens availability at launch and within the first year or so.
The exact specifications of the sensor don't actually matter all that much. Whether it's 24MP or 28MP, it's not a megapixel monster - it's not competing against the A7r3, D850 or Z7 for ultimate image quality or base-ISO output. It just needs to be a decent all-rounder, performing well at ISO 6400 as well as ISO 200. And almost any sensor Canon could possibly put out should meet the necessary standard.
Most of the exact details of the RF mount also don't particularly matter. No matter what it is - even if it's physically identical to the EF mount - you're going to be up for new lenses. Same applies if you move to Nikon or Sony, so there's no disadvantage to Canon there - if you want to move from SLR to mirrorless and take full advantage of the technology, you'll need new lenses. The one thing that would make a difference is if the new mount can actually accept EF-mount lenses without an adapter. That would allow Canon to design all future EF-mount lenses with linear stepper motors, allowing equal use on both SLR and mirrorless bodies, giving Canon a major advantage during the transition period (before the AF performance of their mirrorless bodies can match the best of their SLRs).
But these other factors will determine which section of the market it suits, how well it fulfils its role and whether it provides a compelling reason to switch now (as opposed to waiting 2-3 generations).
Dual card slots mean the difference between a camera suitable for professional use and one that's not. Even if it's a one-in-a-million chance of failure, if you miss someone's wedding or lose half the photos at a function, you're not getting hired again (and could be up for a large chunk of money). And many non-pros also don't appreciate spending $15k and several weeks' leave to go shooting photos somewhere exotic, only to come back with nothing. Considering that the Sony bodies have two slots and the new Nikons only have one, this will be a major factor in determining where the Canon fits within the mirrorless ecosystem.
AF performance is the second big factor. Is it at the level of the A9/A7r3/A7III, or more like the A7II/A7r2 (as the Z6/Z7 are supposed to be)? Can it match the 5D4 AF-wise, or will an early adopter be sacrificing AF performance compared to an SLR, even using native mirrorless lenses? This will be one of the big factors determining whether it makes sense for people to switch to Canon mirrorless now or whether it makes sense to wait another generation or two, since SLR would still give better performance and they'd get little out of switching except a smaller, less-capable body. Intelligent AF modes - face detection, eye focus, etc. - will be equally important. At 24-28MP, and without long telephotos to go with it, this is neither a wildlife camera nor a landscape/non-action camera. A lot of the time, it will be used to take photos of people - portraits, events, weddings, concerts, etc. At the moment, eye focus gives Sony a major trump card over SLRs in these settings. Whether Canon can match this could mean the difference between having a real contender for for that purpose, or just another camera that's almost an 'SLR with an EVF'.
Video output will be another big factor. This is a general-purpose camera, not a dedicated megapixel monster. Shooting events (whether in amateur or professional hands), it will likely be shooting a combination of stills and video - event and wedding photographers are increasingly doing both as part of combined multimedia packages. And mirrorless cameras, much more than any SLR, are well-suited to capturing video - a mirrorless camera is effectively a video camera that shoots extremely high-resolution video at an extremely slow frame rate, with EVFs, focusing systems, etc. all being the same. The new Nikons appear to have a very capable log format - can Canon match this?
Finally, the lenses available at launch, and within the first year of release (after 1 year, you may as well wait for the next generation of bodies), will have a major impact on uptake. Is Canon going to release slower, smaller lenses, indicating a focus on the downsizing and light-travelling crowd (with serious photographers expected to either stick with SLR or go for Sony), or f/2.8 zooms and f/1.4 primes, which would indicate a focus on capturing the higher-end market before Nikon can?
-
Fair enough Bernard. But you wrote let’s keep this focussed on Canon then never mentioned Canon again. You have to see the humour in that?
-
They must. Otherwise either all their sensors would have column parallel ADC, or none of them would. 1Dx2 and 5D4 have it, but 6D2 does not.
What is it about column parallel ADC that makes it a fab issue (vs design)
thx
-
What is it about column parallel ADC that makes it a fab issue (vs design)
thx
It requires fitting more components and more circuitry into the same space, so calls for the ability to manufacturer smaller components and finer architecture.
-
Thanks ...
-
Fair enough Bernard. But you wrote let’s keep this focussed on Canon then never mentioned Canon again. You have to see the humour in that?
:D
Cheers,
Bernard
-
If these rumors are correct, it causes me to wonder about Canon's strategy... Why go with a single, relatively unambitious body? It isn't especially high resolution, it isn't especially high speed, and it isn't groundbreakingly cheap. Maybe there's something that hasn't appeared in the specs to date - very small? Native EF mount? Unusual image quality in some way? Very high maximum ISO (or very low minimum ISO)?
Assuming that the specs we haven't seen contain no surprises:
The Sony A7III is around the same price, but has a full system behind it - unless it's native EF, the Canon won't at first. (it also has very effective IBIS, which the Canon may or may not)
Older editions of the A7 series are either much cheaper (A7, A7II) or around the same price, but with a much higher resolution sensor with class-leading image quality (A7rII) - possibly at the cost of some video quality and features (we don't know exactly what the Canon has). They also tie in to the full Sony system.
The Nikon Z6 is about the same price and resolution, significantly faster (unless the Canon's 10 FPS spec is wrong), and has high-grade weather sealing (Sonys don't - we don't know about the Canon).
The Fuji X-T2, upcoming X-T3 and X-H1 are cheaper, offer similar resolution (albeit on a smaller sensor), and offer superb image quality with a line of lenses matched to the sensor. One of the disadvantages of APS-C other than Fuji is that APS-C lenses tend to be low-end (with a few exceptions), and FF lenses are both needlessly large and have odd equivalent focal lengths. Fuji solved that problem with a big line of superb custom lenses. At most, there's a half-stop noise and DR difference between really good 24 MP APS-C and 24 MP full-frame (unless Canon is sitting on a sensor breakthrough), and it might be less than that. 24 MP FF makes sense largely due to the lenses, with puts Fuji as a serious competitor.
It's possible, of course, that the new Canon has some "Aha" feature that suddenly makes it make sense. If it's essentially a 6D mkII with an unusual mount, for significant extra money, what makes it appealing?
-
... Maybe there's something that hasn't appeared in the specs to date ... Native EF mount?
At the rumored price, I very much doubt any jump forward in image quality. But I do expect that, for around $2100 plus a tube of superglue, there will be a DIY EF-mount version, and thus the biggest (and according to some, the best) selection of first party lenses of any ILC.
As with Nikon Z, I think some people are underestimating the preference that many camera buyers have for the Canon and Nikon lens systems over any other 35mm format system, and expectations that many of the technological advantages that those two companies have can carry over from their SLR systems. Not to mention the more vague "halo effect" of brand prestige.
-
It's possible, of course, that the new Canon has some "Aha" feature that suddenly makes it make sense. If it's essentially a 6D mkII with an unusual mount, for significant extra money, what makes it appealing?
Just putting Canon onto the front of the camera makes it appealing to the masses.
-
Who says Canon *has* new fab lines?
Sony are now the Usain Bolt of sensors - competing in every race and winning it.
Edmund
As a long time Canon shooter (albeit older 5DMII), got my 'feet wet' on mirrorless with a Sony RX-10IV and love it, now I've got want bumps for the A7III. 24MP is all I need.
-
As a long time Canon shooter (albeit older 5DMII), got my 'feet wet' on mirrorless with a Sony RX-10IV and love it, now I've got want bumps for the A7III. 24MP is all I need.
I think that the RX10 is unique.
But if you want a Sony SLR, maybe at $1K the old A7II is unbeatable. For features, with fullframe and IBIS, it's unbeatable.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1102008-REG/sony_ilce7m2_b_a7ii_mirrorless_digital_camera.html
In the end one can mostly carry only one camera, unless a cartful of equipment is one's business. I think the RX10 hits a sweet spot, where portability and functionality combine, just like the RX100, the Leica Q, the Fuji X100 and ... the iPhone (or Android). Once you are distant from that combination of portability and functionality, what you have is a specialised tool, or a gadget.
Edmund
-
Courtesy of Nokishita
EOS R body
EOS R 24105 kit
RF 35 mm F 1.8 M IS
RF 50 mm F 1.2 L USM
RF 28 – 70 mm F 2 L USM
RF 24 – 105 mm F4 L USM
M adapter R
Quick thoughts
Must not have IBIS with IS lens designation.
28-70 probably takes advantage of slightly shorter range + small flange distance to not require retrofocal design on wide end.
Fantastic early lineup. Add the new EF 70-200/4 on an adapter and dual slots (if only for peace of mind) for a near complete pro system outside specialty glass.
I don’t actually care about dual slots but apparently the internet does.
Here we go again.
-
Courtesy of Nokishita
EOS R body
EOS R 24105 kit
RF 35 mm F 1.8 M IS
RF 50 mm F 1.2 L USM
RF 28 – 70 mm F 2 L USM
RF 24 – 105 mm F4 L USM
M adapter R
Quick thoughts
Must not have IBIS with IS lens designation.
28-70 probably takes advantage of slightly shorter range + small flange distance to not require retrofocal design on wide end.
Fantastic early lineup. Add the new EF 70-200/4 on an adapter and dual slots (if only for peace of mind) for a near complete pro system outside specialty glass.
I don’t actually care about dual slots but apparently the internet does.
Here we go again.
Looking interesting, and if true, more ambitious than Nikon's initial launch. A few thoughts:
1. I think the "M" designation could mean the lens is EF-M type, with a rear element that would protrude too much. Hence the need for the adapter M > R?
2. There is no adapter apparently from EF > RF. So the mount would be the same for both lens lines? Perhaps a new electronic contact on the RF mount would recognize which lens type is on the camera?
-
Looking interesting, and if true, more ambitious than Nikon's initial launch. A few thoughts:
1. I think the "M" designation could mean the lens is EF-M type, with a rear element that would protrude too much. Hence the need for the adapter M > R?
2. There is no adapter apparently from EF > RF. So the mount would be the same for both lens lines? Perhaps a new electronic contact on the RF mount would recognize which lens type is on the camera?
1. I wondered that but since they've confirmed the launch of a 32mm 1.4 EF-M that would be a bit similar, unless of course this is actually the lens they're getting.
2. I'm perplexed on the mount. Engineering wise I cant see a 28-70/2 coming in at an acceptable size with a 44mm flange distance. On the other hand there would be an EF adapter if it was a new mount.
I just hope the zoom isn't a halo lens like the 58mm Noct. I'd like something useful for work thanks Canon.
-
Looking interesting, and if true, more ambitious than Nikon's initial launch. A few thoughts:
1. I think the "M" designation could mean the lens is EF-M type, with a rear element that would protrude too much. Hence the need for the adapter M > R?
2. There is no adapter apparently from EF > RF. So the mount would be the same for both lens lines? Perhaps a new electronic contact on the RF mount would recognize which lens type is on the camera?
I highly doubt that the R mount is the same as EF mount... if not Canon will use the same nomenclature (if rumors are true).
Also, if that it is so... the M to R adaptor will need to have a lens elemento on it... I see it unlikely...
But I may be wrong...
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
Specs are one small part of the story, what matters is the quality of the lenses.
From a spec standpoint, the 28-70 f2 is the one interesting thing here although if the body doesn’t have IBIS... Still it would open up the enveloppe of shooting for some use cases. Now is f2 more useful for pros using this kens than the most important 4 mm btwn 24mm and 28mm? I am not too sure. There is a reason why all the pro zooms have been going down to 24mm for years.
Then i would depend on the roadmap.
The encouraging thing is that, since it would make no sense to release a 28-70 f2 with a non pro body, we can expect the first body to be the very very best Canon can deliver in mirrorless. That is exciting!
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I can't see a 28-70/2 zoom coming in with an acceptable size with any flange distance. Sigma has a 24-35/2 zoom and that thing is already both heavier and longer than the Canon 24-70/2.8 zooms.
-
I can't see a 28-70/2 zoom coming in with an acceptable size with any flange distance. Sigma has a 24-35/2 zoom and that thing is already both heavier and longer than the Canon 24-70/2.8 zooms.
The hardest thing to manage size wide with these zooms is complex retrofocal designs required on the wide end. A short flange distance and change to 28mm could *perhaps* lead to an acceptably sized design.
As Bernard said, going to have to wait for a spec list before drawing any conclusions. Personally I hope they go for ergonomics, usability and compact lenses over absolute IQ.
I think it will have IBIS.
-
I can't for a moment believe they would release a 24-105 with no stabilization, so this means to me that the source they got this from did not document the lenses correctly (and they likely all have IS), or the camera does have IBIS. Some Sony (and maybe Nikon?) have dual I think.
-
I can't for a moment believe they would release a 24-105 with no stabilization, so this means to me that the source they got this from did not document the lenses correctly (and they likely all have IS), or the camera does have IBIS. Some Sony (and maybe Nikon?) have dual I think.
Olympus and Panasonic have combined IBIS and IS for some time now.
-
The hardest thing to manage size wide with these zooms is complex retrofocal designs required on the wide end. A short flange distance and change to 28mm could *perhaps* lead to an acceptably sized design.
Tamron 28-75 f2.8 for Sony FE is quite small... I remember reading an interview with a Tamron representative that making it 28 instead of 24 make it more easy to create a small lens... that those extra 4 wide mm makes everything more complicated in terms of lens design requiring bigger elements to have a good performance in f2.8
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
Tamron 28-75 f2.8 for Sony FE is quite small... I remember reading an interview with a Tamron representative that making it 28 instead of 24 make it more easy to create a small lens... that those extra 4 wide mm makes everything more complicated in terms of lens design requiring bigger elements to have a good performance in f2.8
http://dgpfotografia.com
Indeed. By going 28mm only, they can perhaps make an f2 zoom the same size as a 24-70 f2.8 zoom?
More info:
https://www.canonrumors.com/heres-the-full-list-of-gear-canon-will-announce-on-september-5/
Canon are also announcing new versions of their EF 400 and 600mm lenses.
-
Courtesy of Nokishita
EOS R body
EOS R 24105 kit
RF 35 mm F 1.8 M IS
RF 50 mm F 1.2 L USM
RF 28 – 70 mm F 2 L USM
RF 24 – 105 mm F4 L USM
M adapter R
So, the lenses are pretty consistent with what I said earlier about product positioning.
One body, presumably in the 24-30MP range. No matter its other specs, it can compete with Sony and Nikon as an entry-level body based on price (although all three manufacturers could well introduce an even lower-end entry-level body at some stage). If it has dual card slots, decent video output and decent AF (5D4 standard, or even 5D3 standard, not necessarily 1Dx2 standard) it would also be an ideal body for events and weddings, given the right lenses.
Combined with a 24-105/4, it will do well as an all-in-one, general-purpose kit, just like the classic 5D with 24-105 combination.
Combined with a 28-70/2 and you'd have an ideal setup for event photography. Add in a 70-200/2.8 (presumably not far off - this is a priority lens for most manufacturers). Add in one or two fast primes - the 50/1.2 is a good start, and, unlike the Nikon 58/0.95, presumably has full AF capabilities - and you'd have a pretty comprehensive lens setup for wedding photography.
Of course, it all depends on the exact specs of the body - lack of dual slots, crippled video or poor AF would kill the camera for all but entry-level amateur use and make the development of a 28-70/2 questionable as an initial lens, although none of these are particularly onerous requirements.
But, if Canon did their homework right and included all these aspects, plus a few event/people-photography-friendly features such as face detection/eye detection, this looks like a much more serious challenge to Sony than the Z6/Z7, at least until the Nikon lens lineup gets going (by which time the next generation will almost be due). Throw in a good flash system from the start - or full compatibility with the current Speedlite series - and it would be even stronger.
-
If these rumors are correct, it causes me to wonder about Canon's strategy... Why go with a single, relatively unambitious body? It isn't especially high resolution, it isn't especially high speed, and it isn't groundbreakingly cheap. Maybe there's something that hasn't appeared in the specs to date - very small? Native EF mount? Unusual image quality in some way? Very high maximum ISO (or very low minimum ISO)?
It doesn't need to be any of them. It's not trying to compete with the D850/A7r3/Z7 for resolution/non-action photography, nor is it trying to compete with the A9/D5/1Dx2 as an action camera. For a general-purpose camera, which this seems to be, the resolution and fps are just about the least important aspects of the body, so long as certain (low) requirements are met. 24-30MP is plenty for this type of body. 10fps is fast enough even for an action/sports body - just not as fast as the latest ones. Even if it had been 24MP/7fps, it would be more than competitive, provided other features were there.
High-ISO performance, dual card slots, AF performance, a solid flash system and a large, fast-clearing buffer will all do much more for the camera than a few extra megapixels or a few extra fps. I doubt it will have a low minimum ISO - this isn't a studio/landscape body and is more likely to be used to shoot candlelit events at night than to make 3m-wide landscape prints demanding the utmost in resolution and dynamic range.
Assuming that the specs we haven't seen contain no surprises:
The Sony A7III is around the same price, but has a full system behind it - unless it's native EF, the Canon won't at first. (it also has very effective IBIS, which the Canon may or may not)
Assuming the Canon AF system is in any way competitive - if it's not, it doesn't even meet the first criterion for consideration - the A7III will be its most significant competitor, although the upcoming A7s3 could provide some pressure from the higher end, if it's boosted to 24MP with top-class low-light and video performance. Why would you go for the Canon instead of the Sony? It really depends on the other features. Certainly, the 28-70/2 and 50/1.2 lenses take a lot of pressure off Canon lens-wise, since they cover a large part of what event photographers need; the Nikon Z6 will have no such luxury at launch, which will likely cost it market share. The 24-105/4 will do a similar job for the casual/travel/entry-level photographers, much as it does for Canon's SLR lineup; Nikon's 24-70/4 will almost certainly be optically better, given it's a less ambitious lens design, but, so long as Canon's 24-105 gives credible performance (and the SLR versions are no slouches) the extra range will likely more than make up for the optical performance for these users.
The thing about lenses is that you don't need a huge lineup, either in your own collection or available for your mount. You need lenses which do the jobs you need them for, and no more. By targeting one or two specific market segments at a time (in this case, it appears to be kit-lens-only and event photographers), Canon can make the camera system ready for users within that segment to jump straight in, with all the required gear available early on, moving to the next segment only after the requirements of the first segment have been met; Nikon could also have done this, but doesn't appear to have done so, going instead for a 'something-for-everyone' approach that doesn't fully meet the needs of any one segment and doesn't seem to provide a compelling reason for any particular user to switch.
Apart from lenses, the thing that would help Canon most is a strong flash system - specifically, full compatibility with Canon's current Speedlite system. Sony's flash system is weak. Unlike with flashes, you don't need new motors or hardware to make a flash work properly on a mirrorless camera as opposed to an SLR - all you need is a compatible mount and suitable software/firmware. Canon already has a decent flash system. It makes sense to use it. This would also tie into a focus on event photography (which the 28-70 and moderate body specs would indicate), since such photographers tend to be heavy users of on-camera and portable off-camera flash.
Older editions of the A7 series are either much cheaper (A7, A7II) or around the same price, but with a much higher resolution sensor with class-leading image quality (A7rII) - possibly at the cost of some video quality and features (we don't know exactly what the Canon has). They also tie in to the full Sony system.
Canon is targeting one or two market segments strongly here, not hit every segment with a body that works out to being average at everything. No doubt they'll release a high-resolution body at some stage - that may be why we haven't seen a 5Ds2 yet. But that's not the market segment which this body is trying to target.
The Nikon Z6 is about the same price and resolution, significantly faster (unless the Canon's 10 FPS spec is wrong), and has high-grade weather sealing (Sonys don't - we don't know about the Canon).
It also doesn't have a 24-105/4 (or 24-120/4, since that's Nikon's kit lens) for the kit-lens-only photographer, nor does it have anything particularly compelling for the event/wedding photographer. If you were shooting fast action or after ultra-high resolution, you wouldn't be looking at either body anyway.
As for the frame rate, these cameras aren't targeted at wildlife/fast action anyway, and long lenses won't be available for a while (at least as per Nikon's roadmap). Even if they were, and suitable lenses were available, have you ever been in a situation where 10fps wasn't fast enough but 12fps was? No-one ever complained that Nikon's D5 could only make 12fps, while Canon's 1Dx2 could make 16fps. The 1D3 shot at 10fps and the D3 shot at 9fps, so 10fps is more than fast enough for most action.
-
I highly doubt that the R mount is the same as EF mount... if not Canon will use the same nomenclature (if rumors are true).
Also, if that it is so... the M to R adaptor will need to have a lens elemento on it... I see it unlikely...
But I may be wrong...
http://dgpfotografia.com
It doesn't have to be identical. It wouldn't be the first time Canon has made a two-in-one mount - the EF-S mount can take both EF-S and EF lenses. And the large diameter of the EF mount leaves plenty of space for a narrower, shorter-flange mount inside.
-
@shadowblade, are you suggesting an arrangement with the 54x44 EF mount, and then inside it the 47x18 EF-M Mount? That might barely work, though some extreme rays passing the EF throat coming into the corners of the frame might be blocked, for a touch of vignetting. Maybe no EF lens actually uses that extreme optical path; it would need to be both faster than f/4 and with a quite high exit pupil. I could compute the f-stop/exit pupil limits if anyone is curious!
-
Re: retrofocus designs
These are actually a good thing.
Digital sensors like all the incident light to be coming from the same direction. If the spread is too wide, you can end up with heavy vignetting and colour shifts in the corners, particularly with Bayer arrays, unless you specifically design your microlenses, cover glass and conversion software to compensate for this. Even then, compensation isn't perfect, and designs made to compensate for this don't do nearly as well with normal lenses (since the microlenses don't move to take different lenses into account). It's why Leica M-mount lenses may be great for film, but aren't great on digital.
Retrofocus and image space telecentric designs negate this by making light exiting the back of lens less divergent (or even parallel). They may be larger than simpler designs, but do much more for image quality than simply bridging the flange distance in front of the sensor, particularly for wide-angle lenses. Obviously, including both a zoom group and a retrofocus group results in quite a large lens; however, size has never been an absolute barrier for more specialised lenses (see Nikon 58/0.95, Noctilux lenses or Sigma 105/1.4).
In fact, telecentric lenses even allow for Z-shift focusing without changes to magnification. With Sony's highly accurate sensor movement system (used for pixel shift) this may be the future of lens design. You'd be able to eliminate focusing elements and motors in all lenses, allowing for smaller and sharper designs, with fewer aberrations. And you could make every lens focus just as fast as any other (including specialty lenses such as tilt-shifts) and faster than any lens with moving elements, since moving a sensor is far quicker and more precise than moving heavy glass elements. All it really requires is one extra axis of motion in the IBIS system.
-
@shadowblade, are you suggesting an arrangement with the 54x44 EF mount, and then inside it the 47x18 EF-M Mount? That might barely work, though some extreme rays passing the EF throat coming into the corners of the frame might be blocked, for a touch of vignetting. Maybe no EF lens actually uses that extreme optical path; it would need to be both faster than f/4 and with a quite high exit pupil. I could compute the f-stop/exit pupil limits if anyone is curious!
I doubt the RF mount is the same as the EF-M mount, otherwise there would be no need for an adapter. It could well be a different mount that still fits inside the EF mount, without causing interference. But, given that there seems to be a M-to-RF adapter but no EF-to-RF adapter, mount compatibility between EF and RF may be a possibility. Either that or the adapter just isn't ready, and will be announced later...
-
1) I missed the M adaptor (surely for EF-M), so maybe R lenses go into something like a 50x18. Then the outer EF option goes away eventually.
2) the desirable Telecentric feature (high exit pupil) can still go with rear elements sitting close to the focal plane; that is how some lenses in compact cameras are.
-
1) I missed the M adaptor (surely for EF-M), so maybe R lenses go into something like a 50x18. Then the outer EF option goes away eventually.
2) the desirable Telecentric feature (high exit pupil) can still go with rear elements sitting close to the focal plane; that is how some lenses in compact cameras are.
The comment was that the short flange distance allows wide-angle lenses to be made without a retrofocus (or telecentric) design to save space. I mentioned why it wasn't a good idea.
You can put the rear element of the lens anywhere. The important thing is that you have a retrofocus or telecentric design, rather than going without it just to save space.
-
The comment was that the short flange distance allows wide-angle lenses to be made without a retrofocus (or telecentric) design to save space. I mentioned why it wasn't a good idea.
You can put the rear element of the lens anywhere. The important thing is that you have a retrofocus or telecentric design, rather than going without it just to save space.
Agreed; my comment was more to Alex Waugh than to you. In fact the use of telecentric zoom designs with rear elements very close to the sensor in compact cameras suggests that this helps to keep size down, which is why new shallower mount options benefit mirrorless cameras even when the high exit pupil of a near-telecentric design is needed (so that the designs are very different from wides for rangefinder film cameras; those can be even smaller)
-
Agreed; my comment was more to Alex Waugh than to you. In fact the use of telecentric zoom designs with rear elements very close to the sensor in compact cameras suggests that this helps to keep size down, which is why new shallower mount options benefit mirrorless cameras even when the high exit pupil of a near-telecentric design is needed (so that the designs are very different from wides for rangefinder film cameras; those can be even smaller)
I did a bit more research and it looks like you're right. Glad to learn something new, thanks for the help!
I am extremely interested in seeing these lenses, I hope if they're big the body is also an appropriate size.
-
Specs and pictures are up, sorry I don't have time to embed.
https://www.nokishita-camera.com/2018/09/eos-r.html
Pretty wild design from Canon.
-
Specs and pictures are up, sorry I don't have time to embed.
https://www.nokishita-camera.com/2018/09/eos-r.html
Pretty wild design from Canon.
Hum... but does it have IBIS and 2 memory card slots? :D
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hum... but does it have IBIS and 2 memory card slots? :D
Cheers,
Bernard
Can't even mention the good points can you ;D
Probably puts a dirty taste in your mouth!
More importantly, no joystick or wheel. I am interested to see how this contraption works.
-
More information (https://www.canonrumors.com/here-are-the-first-images-and-specifications-for-the-canon-eos-r-and-the-new-rf-mount-lenses/)
- 30.3MP sensor. Despite the similar resolution, it has to be a completely different design to the 5D4 sensor, in order to incorporate dual pixel AF. If it even matches it in image quality, it will be more than a credible sensor given its product placement, but, given that the 5D4 is two years old, there's a reasonable chance the new sensor will outperform it.
- AF to EV -6. This is a big one - neither Nikon's nor Sony's current offerings (whether SLR or mirrorless) can match this. Of course, being technically able to focus in such darkness is different from actually being competent and reliable when doing so - if you can even see what you're trying to focus on in the first place.
- AF coverage - 100% vertical, 88% horizontal. Meh - unless you're tracking wildlife, since when did you need to focus on things at the edge of the frame? Even when tracking wildlife, you'd probably be acquiring focus somewhere around the middle third of the frame anyway. AF near the edge is mostly to continue tracking the subject as it moves within the frame, not to actually shoot with. And we probably won't have long, fast superteles for action/wildlife photography for a while anyway - not within the product cycle of this first-generation body (except see last point).
- 4K video. Good, but is this at 60fps or 25/30fps? And what's the output format?
- Same battery as the 5D series, so lots of power available.
- 580g weight. No indication of whether this is with or without the battery. Either way, it's tiny.
- 54x20mm lens mount. This would clash with an EF mount, so the mount won't be able to take both EF and RF lenses.
- The adapter mentioned is an EF-to-R adapter. So definitely no dual-capable mount, otherwise they wouldn't need it. There was mention of a 'control ring adapter' and a 'drop-in filter adapter' - no idea if they're the same thing. [EDIT: Looks like they're three different adapters]
Re: long telephotos:
- No RF-mount long telephotos likely in the immediate future, but the 400/2.8 III and 600/4 III are due to be announced at around the same time. If these use linear stepper motors instead of Canon's ring USM system, they should be usable on mirrorless bodies with no loss of AF capability (this goes with both Canon and Sony bodies, via a Metabones adapter). Most older lenses, obviously, will not have these motors and will suffer a loss of performance. Really, with mirrorless and video taking off and adapters playing a significant role, there is little reason for Canon, Nikon and Sigma to design any future lenses without linear stepper motors, for dual use on mirrorless and SLR bodies.
-
Looks more interesting to me than the Nikon offering. AF to -6. As you say shadow. How can you even see what you are focussing on. Except of course with a good EVF the signal is boosted and you will see I suppose. 30 MP is a little more than expected but not so much. Funny but it falls in a sweet spot for me. Commercially I always think of 24as a bit too little for some stuff hardly ever need over 40 I sort of bounce between the two and have both. With a 30MP I would be tempted to go with just that.
Really like my Sony system but this is quite interesting.
-
More information (https://www.canonrumors.com/here-are-the-first-images-and-specifications-for-the-canon-eos-r-and-the-new-rf-mount-lenses/)
- 30.3MP sensor. Despite the similar resolution, it has to be a completely different design to the 5D4 sensor, in order to incorporate dual pixel AF. If it even matches it in image quality, it will be more than a credible sensor given its product placement, but, given that the 5D4 is two years old, there's a reasonable chance the new sensor will outperform it.
- 4K video. Good, but is this at 60fps or 25/30fps? And what's the output format?
- Same battery as the 5D series, so lots of power available.
- with just 0.1 difference... I will not be surprised if it is just a version of same sensor design... to recover money of the design of the 5D Mark IV design.
- 4K vídeo good... but more important, which codec? If Canon uses the same one as original Mark IV camera will be a disaster... even if it does 60fps... unless you use an external recorder.
-Z7 uses same battery as D850... and bad CIPA rating... so I will not be surprise if the same happens here
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
Looking at the lenses, it looks like there's a raised, textured ring on each lens, just behind the red ring. This ring isn't there on Canon SLR lenses.
I wonder if this is a control ring or simply cosmetic. Given that it's on the control ring adapter and not the other two, I'm guessing it's some sort of control ring. No indication as to the function, though - maybe it's a programmable control ring, a bit like the programmable lens buttons on Sony lenses.
Probably the best thing Canon could do along with the mirrorless launch on Sep 5 is announce a lens and body timeline, just like Nikon has - it would provide more insight into their plans and give various segments of photographers some idea as to when they can expect the mirrorless system to be ready for them.
Certainly, I'd expect a 70-200/2.8 fairly soon, as the other primary lens for wedding/photojournalistic work, with a 16-35/2.8 not long after that. A 100-400 will probably also come relatively quickly, since it's such a useful and universal lens for general photography, filling different roles in different kits. I'd also expect a 24-70/2.8 at some stage - the 28-70/2 does not replace this, since it would leave a gap between 24mm and 28mm when combined with a 12-24 or 11-24 lens, although the existence of the 28-70 makes this lens much less of a priority than it would otherwise have been.
Prime-wise, I'd expect fast (f/1.2 or f/1.4) 35mm and 85mm lenses to be among the first, as well as some kind of macro. Superteles may not happen for a while - not until other niches are filled and there is a suitable, A9-type body to go with them. A 200/2 or 200/1.8 may happen sooner, though, due to its use by wedding and portrait photographers. Tilt shifts will probably not happen for a long time - not only are they a small niche, but there is also no penalty to using existing ones via an adapter, since they don't autofocus anyway.
-
Spec wise this looks closer to a mirrorless version of 5D4 so I'm highly skeptical of the 2K price tag. But I'd be happy to be proven wrong. EF adapter with drop in filters sounds pretty cool.
-
The rumored R lenses are mostly USM (ring motors) rather than linear stepper motors. This goes with a interview I read where Canon says that, with its dual pixel AF, USM is still the fastest for AF, with linear motors only best for video, for their quietness.
If so, the fears of worse AF performance with adapted lenses might be unfounded.
-
The rumored R lenses are mostly USM (ring motors) rather than linear stepper motors. This goes with a interview I read where Canon says that, with its dual pixel AF, USM is still the fastest for AF, with linear motors only best for video, for their quietness.
If so, the fears of worse AF performance with adapted lenses might be unfounded.
This would also indicate a pure PDAF approach, with no CDAF or AI-based (e.g. eye detection) refinement. Ring motors are fast for single, fast moves, but not much good at the small movements for refinement. If USM is faster for these bodies, it would indicate the lack of a refinement mechanism. In that case, I'd be interested in seeing comparisons of AF accuracy and precision between it and the Sony bodies, in both AF-S and AF-C modes.
-
Can't even mention the good points can you ;D
Probably puts a dirty taste in your mouth!
I was obviously joking. Although I am still on the fence about the Z7 because of this single memory card issue...
The R sounds like a very decent FF mirrorless body. The AF sensitivity is very appealing. That is currently the main aspect I can see myself salivating for. But I don’t know if we need -6, I have never had problems focusing my DSLR specced at -4 even in very dark places.
0n the other hand, I am scratching my head a bit about the lens line-up. The 24-105 is obviously a great alrounder, 50mm f1.2 great too. But why a 28-70 f2 lens? Why not a 24-70 f2??? How useful is a transtandard lens going no wider than 28mm? The main purpose of a zoom lens is to cover a majority of the shoothing circumstances you may encounter without having to change lens, right? But I used to always try to go wider than 28mm when I was shooting events with my 28-70 f2.8.
And if I don’t attempt to cover this typical range, then why not with a prime that is lighter, more compact and descrete, better optically, cheaper,...?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I was obviously joking. Although I am still on the fence about the Z7 because of this single memory card issue...
The R sounds like a very decent FF mirrorless body. The AF sensitivity is very appealing. That is currently the main aspect I can see myself salivating for. But I don’t know if we need -6, I have never had problems focusing my DSLR specced at -4 even in very dark places.
0n the other hand, I am scratching my head a bit about the lens line-up. The 24-105 is obviously a great alrounder, 50mm f1.2 great too. But why a 28-70 f2 lens? Why not a 24-70 f2??? How useful is a transtandard lens going no wider than 28mm? The main purpose of a zoom lens is to cover a majority of the shoothing circumstances you may encounter without having to change lens, right? But I used to always try to go wider than 28mm when I was shooting events with my 28-70 f2.8.
And if I don’t attempt to cover this typical range, then why not with a prime that is lighter, more compact and descrete, better optically, cheaper,...?
Cheers,
Bernard
A 24-70 f2 would be huge. Making it a 28-70 f2 allows for a size that is acceptable. Most likely we'll see the traditional 16-35, 24-70, 70-200 f2.8 zooms at later releases.
-
If that 28-70 f2 is really a f2.0 (rather than a f2.8 with a widely repeated specification error), it is much more interesting than the body. Sigma has made a few zooms faster than f2.8, but they share three characteristics.
1.)Very short zoom ratios (they are about 2:1, and they are all unusual zoom ranges we haven't seen in many years - I don't think one of them was actually a 35-70, but they're that kind of ranges).
2.)They're huge
3.)Most, if not all of them are APS-C
This is a full-frame lens, with a 2.5:1 zoom ratio over a useful zoom range (28-70 was the professional standard until a relatively recent move to 24-70). Stretching a (slower) wide zoom to 28 to meet it shouldn't be that much of a challenge - Canon has had a reasonable-sized 16-35 for years, which makes me think that a 14-28 instead of a 14-24 is probably not an optical unicorn.
We haven't seen any specifications on size or weight, but the images that are out there (none of which show f2.0 markings) suggest that it's only a little chunkier than the 24-105 f4. If we assume that lens is reasonably average-sized for a 24-105 f4 (which is a common lens) then this one isn't wildly oversize. As a matter of fact, it's pretty much the expected size for a 28-70 f2.8.
I think it's a mislabeled f2.8 lens.
...The other option is a breakthrough. Is it a DO (fresnel) lens? Canon's DO (and Nikon's PF) telephotos are unexpectedly small and light for their aperture, and they look about a stop slower than they actually are. I've never heard of a fresnel normal lens, and I'm not sure if it would work.
If it is f2.0, it is within 1/3 of a stop of three popular primes. How's the image quality - if it's DO, there have been some quirks so far - are they worked out?
-
28-70/2.0 would complement, not replace, a 24-70/2.8.
For shooting events. 28mm is more than wide enough for group portraits and environmental portraits, while f/2.0 gives much better subject isolation for portraits against busy or unappealing background you have little control over, as well as more light for indoor settings when you don't want to use flash. Combined with a 16-35/2.8 and 70-200/2.8, it would be a full setup for wedding photography as well, for some photographers obviating the need for a fast prime setup as well.
But, for a more general-purpose kit, where you wanted to include a 12-24 or 11-24 lens, you'd still want the 24-70 (or 24-105, if you can get away with f/4 and slightly less sharpness in that range). I'd be hesitant to leave a gap between 24-28mm, since that represents a significant difference in composition, and because UWA zooms are rarely particularly good at the long end of their focal length range. But, with a 28-70 for the event photographers and a 24-105 kit lens at launch, and no 11-24 lens in the immediate future, the 24-70/2.8 can probably now wait a bit longer than it otherwise could have.
I can't imagine them bringing out a 28-70/2.8 - that would be a big step backwards compared to what everyone has been bringing out over the past decade and a half. And, looking at the photos, the 28-70 appears significantly larger than the 24-105 - around 25% longer and wider, or quite a lot larger than the difference between the EF 24-70/2.8 and EF 24-105/4.
-
Sigma has made a few zooms faster than f2.8, but they
but they are for dSLRs, when you make for it dSLM you save size wise @ wider end and by not going to 24 save more...
-
AF to -6.
AF always spec'd for a particular aperture (usually @ F2.0)... if this is for F2.0 and not say marketing trick by saying EV-6 @ F1.2 (with Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM) than it is a very good step... but even EV-6 @ F1.2 is stil better than EV-4 @ F2.0
-
More EOS-R leaked info via EOS-HD here (https://www.eoshd.com/2018/09/canon-eos-r-official-specs-and-pictures-leak-same-sensor-as-5d-mark-iv/)
-and in Japanese on Nokishita here (https://www.nokishita-camera.com/2018/09/eos-r.html)
-
After all the last gasp hopes for Canon's 36x24mm mirrorless system to use EF mount and avoid the dreaded adaptors — and my failed prediction of using EF-M mount or some tricky dual-mount system — Canon has gone the opposite way, with a third mount and three different types of adaptors needed for:
- EF lenses on EOS-M bodies
- EF lenses on R bodies
- R lenses on EOS-M bodies
I like the idea of using the dead space in some adaptors for drop-in filters.
P. S. The slender new ring near the front of some R lenses is described as a "multi-function ring" at this EOSHD page (https://www.eoshd.com/2018/09/canon-eos-r-official-specs-and-pictures-leak-same-sensor-as-5d-mark-iv/): put aperture there if you want? Or even ISO speed??
-
Canon Rumours recently posted this:
"We were sent the following last night and have been unable to confirm any of the information in this post. Please do not take this post as fact. It is rated [CR1] and comes from an unknown source.
More Canon EOS R Rumored Specifications:
EOS R 4K Spec
30p 4K All-I or IPB
Canon Log, internal or external
10-bit 4K HDMI clean output support BT.2020 color matrix, not the old BT.709.
Focus Guide from Cinema EOS, no need to worry about using MF Lens
The bar next to EVF is a touch Bar, swipe or tap OK, can be mapped for different functions.
The traditional back dial is moved to the top because there’s where your thumb will put on a smaller body.
The ring on the lens is a control ring, it lets you use both hands to control the camera, like in M mode, you use it with the dials on the body, then you can adjust Tv, Av and ISO with both hands.
No distance scale on the as the distance info will be projected on the EVF directly.
0.05sec AF speed should be the fastest among the FF ML DSLR."
-
All the 35mm mirrorless cameras (not just Canon) are shown with the sensor exposed when there's no lens mounted. Can anybody explain why? I think it's insane - can't they close the shutter when there's no lens to prevent dust from getting on the sensor? I thought Sony is just being dumb when I saw this behavior on my A7 but maybe there's a better reason?
-
All the 35mm mirrorless cameras (not just Canon) are shown with the sensor exposed when there's no lens mounted. Can anybody explain why? I think it's insane - can't they close the shutter when there's no lens to prevent dust from getting on the sensor? I thought Sony is just being dumb when I saw this behavior on my A7 but maybe there's a better reason?
nobody keeps body laying around w/o lens or body cap... do you ?
-
nobody keeps body laying around w/o lens or body cap... do you ?
No but I do change lenses and dust gets in. Annoying in general and especially annoying on outdoor trips when you can't clean it easily.
-
A 24-70 f2 would be huge. Making it a 28-70 f2 allows for a size that is acceptable. Most likely we'll see the traditional 16-35, 24-70, 70-200 f2.8 zooms at later releases.
Yes, but who is going to buy a 28-70 f2 and a 24-70 f2.8?
I fully understand the appeal of an f2 zoom, don’t get me wrong, but is the combo of a 24-70 f2.8 and 2 good primes opening at f1.8 or f1.4/f1.2 not a better solution for a large majority or cases?
I am not trying to run down this lens, it is great to have options and I am sure it will be very good optically, I am just trying to understand the thinking process of potential buyers and how they would position it relative to the rest of their lenses.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Yes, but who is going to buy a 28-70 f2 and a 24-70 f2.8?
I fully understand the appeal of an f2 zoom, don’t get me wrong, but is the combo of a 24-70 f2.8 and 2 good primes opening at f1.8 or f1.4/f1.2 not a better solution for a large majority or cases?
I am not trying to run down this lens, it is great to have options and I am sure it will be very good optically, I am just trying to understand the thinking process of potential buyers and how they would position it relative to the rest of their lenses.
Cheers,
Bernard
No-one is going to buy both. You buy one or the other, depending on need - 11-24, 24-70 and 70-200 (or 100-400 if you can deal with the gap and don't need the speed at those focal lengths) for general photographers, or 16-35, 28-70 and 70-200 if you specifically shoot events and weddings (potentially dropping either the 16-35 or 70-200 if you don't need those focal lengths, or replacing the 70-200/2.8 with a 135/1.8 or 105/1.4).
-
https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-eos-r-full-specifications/ (https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-eos-r-full-specifications/)
- The AF system sounds very promising. That was always likely to be the case - dual-pixel AF has more potential than the separate AF layer used by Sony/Nikon. The fact that it can shoot at EV -6 is less interesting for the 'shooting in the dark' aspect than for the fact that it likely means good performance in less extreme situations - say, -3 or -4.
- SD cards. Still no mention of whether it's 1 or 2 of them. This will be the difference between an entry-level camera and a well-specced event/wedding camera, and a deal-breaker for a significant subset of users. Sony will be relieved if it turns out to be one slot - no real competition for at least another year or so.
- Battery life marginally better than the Nikon. Of course, CIPA is a crapshoot.
-
Yes, but who is going to buy a 28-70 f2 and a 24-70 f2.8?
I fully understand the appeal of an f2 zoom, don’t get me wrong, but is the combo of a 24-70 f2.8 and 2 good primes opening at f1.8 or f1.4/f1.2 not a better solution for a large majority or cases?
I am not trying to run down this lens, it is great to have options and I am sure it will be very good optically, I am just trying to understand the thinking process of potential buyers and how they would position it relative to the rest of their lenses.
Cheers,
Bernard
Hi Bernard,
Tamron released this year the 28-75 f2.8 for E mount. There was a huge expectation about this lens... at least for Sony users... so, yes, I will say there is a market for such a lens.
Regards,
David
-
No but I do change lenses and dust gets in. Annoying in general and especially annoying on outdoor trips when you can't clean it easily.
I have been shooting with Sony FE cameras for more than two years now... I don't get more dust than with my old Canon 5D Mark II (I tended to use it in liveview all the time for manual focus). 10 years now of mirrorless cameras and it does not seem to be a huge deal...
-
Surely it has USB- C? Do my eyes deceive me. I hate the old connector for tethering.
-
Hi Bernard,
Tamron released this year the 28-75 f2.8 for E mount. There was a huge expectation about this lens... at least for Sony users... so, yes, I will say there is a market for such a lens.
Regards,
David
I would say that was more price- and size-related than anything else. An expensive, 1.4kg f/2.0 zoom is a completely different beast, with a whole different target audience.
-
Yes, but who is going to buy a 28-70 f2 and a 24-70 f2.8?
I fully understand the appeal of an f2 zoom, don’t get me wrong, but is the combo of a 24-70 f2.8 and 2 good primes opening at f1.8 or f1.4/f1.2 not a better solution for a large majority or cases?
I am not trying to run down this lens, it is great to have options and I am sure it will be very good optically, I am just trying to understand the thinking process of potential buyers and how they would position it relative to the rest of their lenses.
Cheers,
Bernard
May have a to do with cinematic properties. Perhaps the 24 is targeted at stills, the 28 at video with possibly anti-focus-breath measures a la the new Nikon lenses.
-
Worth noting the lens used to achieve -6EV
"Distance measurement range: EV - 6 to 18 (23 ° C at room temperature · ISO 100 with F1.2 lens)"
:)
-
Canon's decision to have a deeper flange distance, which means in the current EOS R body the flange protrudes a bit, will pay dividends in future on any bigger pro bodies as they will be able to make the camera body flush to that flange and much stronger to support larger lenses...
The turning moment on mirrorless camera lens for a given optical design is much higher than mirror box cameras...
Nikon specs warn a maximum of 1.3 kg lens for body holding. Probably the limit of comfort for the user in any case...
In that respect I do not see one mount being superior to the other as there are pro and cons...
Sony have the bigger issue to face with their APS C mount that is being used with a Full frame sensor. That will limit them more...
-
This lens and its weight is interesting when considering the body and mount designs
"Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM
Lens composition: 13 groups 19 sheets
Minimum focus distance: 39cm (15.35 inches)
Filter diameter: 95mm
Size: 103.8mm (4.08 inches) × 139.8mm (5.5 inches)
Weight: 1430g (3.15lbs)"
-
Hi Bernard,
Tamron released this year the 28-75 f2.8 for E mount. There was a huge expectation about this lens... at least for Sony users... so, yes, I will say there is a market for such a lens.
Regards,
David
Difference being is the Tamron is a nice light lens...the Canon is a pig.
-
Difference being is the Tamron is a nice light lens...the Canon is a pig.
F2 comes with a price... you cann't have it lighter and being a f2 zoom...
-
I fully understand the appeal of an f2 zoom, don’t get me wrong, but is the combo of a 24-70 f2.8 and 2 good primes opening at f1.8 or f1.4/f1.2 not a better solution for a large majority or cases?
I make my money photographing people and I'd prefer a 28-70mm f/2 to a 24-70mm f/2.8. 24mm is too wide for me- it looks crap photographing women because perspective distortion is almost unavoidable in UK-sized shooting spaces. 28mm is usable with care for wide shots, but by 24mm you almost inevitably have nasty results.
Other photographers with other working patterns might differ, but I'd actually RATHER not have that excess 24 mm on the wide end, and have f/2 instead.
So I'd definitely take a 28-70mm f/2 plus a fast 85mm as my basic shooting kit instead of my current "go to" set ups of 24-70 f/2.8, 28mm, 35mm, 55mm, 85mm if the quality was there. Longer at the telephoto end would be better, but 28mm is way better for me than 24, and I wouldn't cry if it pushed up to 30-plus too much.
My dream all in one lens would be a 35mm-135mm f/2 zoom with stellar optics, in fact. But physics probably forbids.
Obviously, it depends on the optical quality, weight, etc.. but having at least one set up in the kit cupboard which avoids lens-swapping for dusty environments is always good so a two body set-up with a 28-70 f/2 and a 70-200 f/2.8 would hit the sweet spot for me personally.
Cheers, Hywel
-
AF always spec'd for a particular aperture (usually @ F2.0)... if this is for F2.0 and not say marketing trick by saying EV-6 @ F1.2 (with Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM) than it is a very good step... but even EV-6 @ F1.2 is stil better than EV-4 @ F2.0
so I was right @ f1.2... still a very good one !
-
No but I do change lenses and dust gets in. Annoying in general and especially annoying on outdoor trips when you can't clean it easily.
it does not bother you with dSLRs though ? mirror is not a serious protecion at all
-
I have been mirrorless for two years. Definately get more dust but it is definately easier to clean. I keep a little blower with me at all times little thing and weighs nothing. I do live in an arid place. Would also like something to cover the sensor when changing lenses.
-
it does not bother you with dSLRs though ? mirror is not a serious protecion at all
On my Canons the shutter is closed when there's no lens mounted. I still get dust on the sensor there but less than on my Sony.
-
Incredibly, it appears that there will be no IBIS and no eye detection with the latest PDF leak.
Short of having the worlds most incredible sensor, (unlikely), I am increasingly likely to add one or two Sony bodies. First with an adaptor to my Canon and Sigma optics collection, and then a strong possibility of replacing much of it with native Sony lenses, including my big whites.
My patience with Canon has been long but there is a limit. I am sure there would be issues with Sony too, but image quality and full integration of features does not seem to be one of them.
As a side, does Sigma offer native mount swapping on their Art series?
-
No IBIS sucks but for me it's about the feature crippling/price ratio. If we get 5D4-ish sensor in a <2K body I will consider getting one as a hiking/outdoors camera, replacing my A7ii. I have no native Sony lenses and I'm constantly fighting colors coming out of the Sony (and usually not winning).
-
Sorry if this was already posted: https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-eos-r-full-specifications/
So amongst the newer details in those many pages:
- USB-C, or a Canon proprietary variant thereof, and USB charging,
- thousands of AF points (literally!)
- weight with battery and card very close to Z6/Z7 (15g lighter)
but it looks like
- only 8FPS, with a tailwind (lots of caveats, like One-shot AF)
- No IBIS, so no yaw correction and no IS for non-IS lenses, including some of the new RF lenses
- No eye AF
- A single card slot, for SD/SDHC/SDXC; no SD express, CFast or CFexpress
- yet another lens mount, with adaptors needed for EF lenses, and to use RF lenses on EOS-M bodies.
- rehashed 5D Mk IV sensor, vintage 2016.
So I think it is safe to say that Canon RF is DOOMED!!! Just as it has already been proved that Nikon Z is doomed, and so is Sony FE due to its teeny-tiny lens mount that will never support all-important f/0.95 primes or f/2 zooms. So Panasonic is going to sweep in with an 8K-capable "FF" system and dominate this market! </troll>
-
I keep reading that Canikon are protecting their DSLRz by releasing mirrorless bodies that are lower end featurewise (one memory card only).
I don’t believe this to be correct.
I believe that they are protecting the upcoming higher end mirrorless bodies instead.
Now, the Z seems to be positioned a bit higher specwise than the R, with IBIS, slightly better specced viewfinder, XQD card slot, more speed (Z6) or more resolution (Z7) but I believe that this is just a decision in terms of body introduction roadmap.
This should not be used to assess the potential of the mount (or lack thereof).
Perhaps the Canon lens roadmap (if they decide to release one) may reveal when they plan to release pro spec bodies to match the f2.8 zoom lenses. I bet that the pro body(ies) will be released in the same timeframe and would bet that will be some time in 2019 like Nikon.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
WOW - that Canon 28-70 f2 is a pig - guess it isn't a DO lens... 95 mm filter size? That's larger than most 100-400s, and larger than any 70-200 f2.8 I'm aware of. The only lenses I know of that use a 95mm filter are some of the Sigma x-500mm zooms (maybe the Nikkor 200-500 as well)?
1430 grams? It weighs almost exactly as much as a Canon 70-200 f2.8 (the latest IS III version), or the Nikon equivalent, and about 150% as much as any 24-70 f2.8 (they're mostly right around 900 g, Canon's is a little lighter, and the Sigma Art is a bit heavier). Why build a lens like that for a mirrorless camera? Especially as one of the first few lenses available? If it sat on top of the EF normal zoom range, where there is already a 24-70 f2.8 and a smaller, lighter f4 option, it would be an understandable lens... It might actually balance on an EOS-1 series body...
We have one body, and it's roughly a 6D mkII equivalent. How many people even use the trinity f2.8 zooms on their 6D mkII? I bet most of them are paired with the f4 lineup, unless they are backup bodies to EOS-1Dx models (or maybe 5D mkIV). Why build an exotic lens (and this is unabashedly exotic - I bet it's over $3000) for a single midrange body? Especially for a body whose advantage is mobility?
Of the first four lenses, we have a reasonably sized 35mm, a fast (but big - right around 1 kg) 50mm, this monster and a 24-105 that is reasonably sized for what it is, but perhaps not the first choice for a compact mirrorless body?. Nikon got this aspect right (at least in terms of specifications) - their first lenses are compact and lightweight, supposedly with excellent image quality - we'll see. Fuji has always gotten this right.
-
Fuji has always gotten this right.
you mean with their first slow focusing (because of shitty AF motors) 1.4 lenses ? always indeed
-
I believe that they are protecting the upcoming higher end mirrorless bodies instead.
which will in turn then again be less spec'd vs D6 or 1DXmkIII ;D ... it will take them no less than 3 generations to get to the point.
-
As a side, does Sigma offer native mount swapping on their Art series?
Yes they do. They can take your EF mount Sigma lenses and convert them to the Sony mount.
-
you mean with their first slow focusing (because of shitty AF motors) 1.4 lenses ? always indeed
He was talking about compact and high image quality but you already knew that.
Yes, they are slower to focus but between the 35 F1.4 and the faster focusing 35 F2 I'll take the former whenever I don't need the WR or the compactness.
-
Three of the four new RF lenses have USM drive. Hopefully they have retained manual direct focus, albeit they could be the new linear USM motors and have manual focus by wire...
-
I haven't seen any guessing on pricing. The $2K mark among brands is for 24MP. Will they be able to add a premium for 30MP?
-
He was talking about compact and high image quality but you already knew that.
there is nothing special present in Fuji's lenses that is absent in lenses from other manufacturers optical-wise... as for compact-ness - it is simply a function of them being limited to APS-C image circle coverage, that is it...
-
I'm not sure Sigma will swap mounts from DSLR to mirrorless (or the other way around)? The flange distances are radically different. Swapping from one DSLR mount to another is relatively easy (and they will certainly do that on their Art lenses), because the dimensions are similar - there is probably just a spacer in the mount component (behind all the glass) that accounts for those few mm. The much greater difference between DSLR and mirrorless would mean either a different optical formula or (at least) a significant tube added to the lens behind the elements... Possible, but I'm not sure it's what Sigma has in mind.
-
WOW - that Canon 28-70 f2 is a pig - guess it isn't a DO lens... 95 mm filter size? That's larger than most 100-400s, and larger than any 70-200 f2.8 I'm aware of. The only lenses I know of that use a 95mm filter are some of the Sigma x-500mm zooms (maybe the Nikkor 200-500 as well)?
1430 grams? It weighs almost exactly as much as a Canon 70-200 f2.8 (the latest IS III version), or the Nikon equivalent, and about 150% as much as any 24-70 f2.8 (they're mostly right around 900 g, Canon's is a little lighter, and the Sigma Art is a bit heavier). Why build a lens like that for a mirrorless camera? Especially as one of the first few lenses available? If it sat on top of the EF normal zoom range, where there is already a 24-70 f2.8 and a smaller, lighter f4 option, it would be an understandable lens... It might actually balance on an EOS-1 series body...
We have one body, and it's roughly a 6D mkII equivalent. How many people even use the trinity f2.8 zooms on their 6D mkII? I bet most of them are paired with the f4 lineup, unless they are backup bodies to EOS-1Dx models (or maybe 5D mkIV). Why build an exotic lens (and this is unabashedly exotic - I bet it's over $3000) for a single midrange body? Especially for a body whose advantage is mobility?
Of the first four lenses, we have a reasonably sized 35mm, a fast (but big - right around 1 kg) 50mm, this monster and a 24-105 that is reasonably sized for what it is, but perhaps not the first choice for a compact mirrorless body?. Nikon got this aspect right (at least in terms of specifications) - their first lenses are compact and lightweight, supposedly with excellent image quality - we'll see. Fuji has always gotten this right.
Stop thinking mirrorless = small. That was 8 years ago, and that idea has probably held back mirrorless development and uptake more than anything else.
Yes, you can make mirrorless systems and lenses smaller than SLRs, if you sacrifice sensor size (M43), aperture (f/4 zooms or f/1.8-2.8 primes) or lens image quality (UWAs without a retrofocus or telecentric/near-telecentric design). The lack of a mirror box and pentaprism reduces the lower limit on size. But just because you can doesn't mean you should. Small size comes at a performance cost; if you want a more capable lens, you're going to have to go bigger. You can make a lineup of slow pancake lenses for the 'small camera' niche, but that is just a niche (albeit the easiest one to capture with the sluggish, slow-focusing early mirrorless cameras which really couldn't offer much else other than small size) and can't/isn't/won't be the primary target for a camera company trying to take mirrorless mainstream as an SLR replacement.
Many people shoot mirrorless - particularly full-frame mirrorless - for reasons other than size and weight. Those focusing on small size are shooting M43 or Leica anyway, or have a Sony body with a few pancake lenses; they are not the people currently using 5D4s and 6D2s who need to be encouraged to move over to mirrorless. Mirrorless allows for an EVF with through-the-sensor image preview (including exposure and colour settings), better video performance and (on cameras with the right hardware/firmware) features like IBIS, eye focus and other AI-based focus modes. There are many photographers out there who would choose a mirrorless body even if it were the size and weight of a D850.
The 28-70/2 is a perfect event photographer's lens. It covers most of the useful focal lengths for indoor and small-area events, works better in dim lighting and produces more subject isolation than a 24-70/2.8 and weighs no more than the 70-200/2.8, which is almost permanently attached to one of a wedding photographer's two cameras. Combined with a mirrorless body and a decent flash system (the Sony flash system doesn't count as 'decent'), it provides additional capability no SLR does. Event photographers can repeat many shots (posed individuals or groups) but only have a few seconds to do so (groups won't stay posed for half a minute while a photographer chimps, adjusts settings and re-shoots). They also commonly shoot in JPEG, due to the need to quickly produce a large number of images and prints for collection at the end of the night. EVFs offer real-time white balance, exposure and image processing (saturation, contrast, etc.) previews, making them far better for shooting JPEGs than SLRs, no matter the lens attached. The 28-70/2 on a mirrorless body is almost ideal for this kind of situation - and this kind of situation represents a significant number of Canon SLR users. Just turn up to any corporate or social evening function and look for the photographer carrying a 5D3/5D4 with 24-70 and flash attached. A mirrorless body with 28-70/2 does the same job, but better.
Canon didn't release a 24-70/4, and Sony/Zeiss didn't update theirs, because they already have a 24-105/4 which offers a much less limiting focal length range for the single kit lens user. The Sony 24-105/4 G is optically very good, and there's no reason the Canon one won't be too. And they're not dramatically larger or heavier than a 24-70/4.
-
there is nothing special present in Fuji's lenses that is absent in lenses from other manufacturers optical-wise... as for compact-ness - it is simply a function of them being limited to APS-C image circle coverage, that is it...
The statement remains valid. That’s it. There is nothing in what was said about other systems.
Fuji could have made the lenses much bigger with smallish benefits in image quality, see the 16-55, but went with compact and high quality. Depending on the real world results the Nikon 24-70 F4S seems to be in the same breed. The Canon 24-70 F2 is not.
-
The statement remains valid. That’s it. There is nothing in what was said about other systems.
Fuji could have made the lenses much bigger with smallish benefits in image quality, see the 16-55, but went with compact and high quality. Depending on the real world results the Nikon 24-70 F4S seems to be in the same breed. The Canon 24-70 F2 is not.
Nothing wrong with that, if you're willing to lock out entire large segments of the market (and have them go over to Canon or Sony).
Canon has the 24-105/4 - essentially the same 5D/6D with kit lens they've had for over a decade - as well as the 28-70/2 for dedicated event photographers (and likely as part of a future 16-35/28-70/70-200 wedding kit). If you want a one-lens, general-purpose, walkaround kit, you've got it with the mirrorless body and 24-105 kit (same with the Sony A7III and 24-105/4 G-series lens).
Nikon has a miniature 24-70/4 lens for the hipster crowd, but offers nothing at all at the moment if you want something which gives you more options. If you want the same kind of speed and background blur you're used to getting with SLR, you're stuck with SLR - or moving to Canon/Sony. Same thing if you need more reach - and the extra reach going from 70mm to 105mm is very useful, even if you don't need f/2.8, since it covers a lot of typical portrait focal lengths. 24-105/4 or 24-120/4 provides far more utility in a single-lens walkaround kit, and only weighs 150-200g more.
-
If there is a market among event photographers for a 28-70 f2, why not make it in EF mount? Instead of forcing people to buy a new body, shouldn't it fit the huge number of Canon bodies already out there? Especially because a lens that big won't balance well on a body the size of an EOS-77D - I'd want a 5D at a minimum, and it would really go well on a 1D series body. It's an entirely sensible lens if added to a large, established system as an exotic alternative. Same with a 50mm f1.2 - nothing wrong with having one, once you have bread-and-butter 50mm lenses in f1.8/f2.0 and f1.4.
-
If there is a market among event photographers for a 28-70 f2, why not make it in EF mount? Instead of forcing people to buy a new body, shouldn't it fit the huge number of Canon bodies already out there? Especially because a lens that big won't balance well on a body the size of an EOS-77D - I'd want a 5D at a minimum, and it would really go well on a 1D series body. It's an entirely sensible lens if added to a large, established system as an exotic alternative. Same with a 50mm f1.2 - nothing wrong with having one, once you have bread-and-butter 50mm lenses in f1.8/f2.0 and f1.4.
Then there would be less of a reason to switch. Providing this sort of capability only on the new body gives users a reason to switch to the new system. If they had made this lens for EF mount, they would be in much the same position as Nikon, with a new mirrorless system that doesn't provide much of an incentive for existing users to switch across.
Balance isn't an issue if you hold the setup by the lens, with the right hand only used to operate the controls. I can balance a 2.8kg lens on a Sony body with no problems.
-
The Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM would be even bigger and heavier in an EF mount...
The Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM probably has floating optics for better near field correction. Canon did not bother to do that on the EF version which is much lighter and has a more basic optical design (Lens construction (elements/groups) 8/6)
The RF mount gives Canon the freedom to make those lens designs they could not justify before...
Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM
Lens composition: 13 groups 19 sheets
Minimum focus distance: 39cm (15.35 inches)
Filter diameter: 95mm
Size: 103.8mm (4.08 inches) × 139.8mm (5.5 inches)
Weight: 1430g (3.15lbs)
Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM
Lens construction: 9 groups of 15
Minimum focus distance: 40cm (15.74 inches)
Filter diameter: 77mm
Size: 89.8mm (3.53 inches) x 108.0mm (4.25 inches)
Weight: 950g (2.09lbs)
-
I use larger lenses on my APSC sensor camera regularly. Turns the 90mm macro into a 135 which is much better for catalogue work and I also use it hand held for various things. The balance issue is a total non issue for me. You just learn to hold the system differently.
No IBIS on the new Canon? That’s total deal breaker for me. No way I’m buying a camera without IBIS. I was kind of hoping Nikon and Canon would come up with something really great but I’m not seezing it.
-
Nothing wrong with that, if you're willing to lock out entire large segments of the market (and have them go over to Canon or Sony).
...
No. Depends what you want for your system.
If you want it as an addition to the full frame or if you only have that system, I want the light and good sooner than later.
If you want the system as a replacement, than you can start with those big lenses. I would suspect the light and good first has more clients unless you offer a possibly needed lens not offered elsewhere, which is what Canon seems to be doing.
Either way, from the specs neither raises the bar significantly over current top mirrorless, be it m43, APS-C or full frame. Or even the cheaper medium format; if Fuji gets it's new GFX 50R at a lowish price there will be competition from above too.
-
Then there would be less of a reason to switch. Providing this sort of capability only on the new body gives users a reason to switch to the new system. If they had made this lens for EF mount, they would be in much the same position as Nikon, with a new mirrorless system that doesn't provide much of an incentive for existing users to switch across.
Balance isn't an issue if you hold the setup by the lens, with the right hand only used to operate the controls. I can balance a 2.8kg lens on a Sony body with no problems.
But the Canon mirrorless body sure isn't targeted at event or wedding shooters so this behemoth lens has no partner.
-
...
Nikon has a miniature 24-70/4 lens for the hipster crowd, but offers nothing at all at the moment if you want something which gives you more options. If you want the same kind of speed and background blur you're used to getting with SLR, you're stuck with SLR - or moving to Canon/Sony.
you forget you can use a lot of the fast F-Nikkor lenses on the Z with the adapter + they can use IBIS. a big +
Obviously you loose on size and weight, but that would be true anyway.
Nikon produced Z-lenses that offer something new : good quality , small and lightweight.
-
What is there about the optical design of the 28-70 that would make it significantly bigger or heavier in an EF-mount? I had always heard that the real extra flexibility of mirrorless was at extreme wide angles? According to Canon Rumors, the new RF mount is the same diameter as the current EF mount. Nikon had an extremely constrained throat in the F mount, so the Z mount's much wider opening is an advantage - but the (much newer) EF mount was already quite wide, and Canon doesn't seem to have opened it any more. The RF mount definitely has a shorter flange distance than EF. I was unable to find an optical diagram of the 28-70 to see if the rear element is very close to the mount, although fast normal zooms often do have a very close element, so the short flange could make a difference.
If it is mostly marketing strategy (lens would be fine on EF, but they released it on RF to get people to switch), I think that's a terrible idea... Would people who would use a lens like that be willing to switch to a completely unproven body? Especially one that is really the next generation of the EOS-6D? Event photographers at the level that they'd use a much heavier, much more expensive lens to gain a stop are using 5D series and 1D series bodies, not 6D series bodies. Fashion photographers are using the top bodies if not medium format... If they're really after the top end of the event market, they need to get a 1D class body out there...
There's also the theory that the lens isn't for taking pictures at all - it's an entry in the "see what I can do" contest among manufacturers, and in the "my lens is bigger than your lens" contest among a certain breed of hobbyists. The president of Leica once admitted in an interview that he could leave the sensor out of half the cameras he made, and the owners would never notice - they're prestige objects, not working cameras. Leica does it more than anyone else. in photography, but every manufacturer makes products for bragging rights - is this one of those?
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFaNE7MEFsE
Published on 3 Sep 2018
At 9:00 pm on September 5th, Canon Hongkong's full-line social platform will broadcast a Live Show for you. Here:
https://www.youtube.com/user/CanonHongkong/videos?disable_polymer=1
I guess they will have other global events round the world as normal
The HK one starts:
https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/to?iso=20180905T21&p0=102&msg=EOS+R&font=serif
Just over 21 hours...
-
What is there about the optical design of the 28-70 that would make it significantly bigger or heavier in an EF-mount? I had always heard that the real extra flexibility of mirrorless was at extreme wide angles? According to Canon Rumors, the new RF mount is the same diameter as the current EF mount. Nikon had an extremely constrained throat in the F mount, so the Z mount's much wider opening is an advantage - but the (much newer) EF mount was already quite wide, and Canon doesn't seem to have opened it any more. The RF mount definitely has a shorter flange distance than EF. I was unable to find an optical diagram of the 28-70 to see if the rear element is very close to the mount, although fast normal zooms often do have a very close element, so the short flange could make a difference.
If it is mostly marketing strategy (lens would be fine on EF, but they released it on RF to get people to switch), I think that's a terrible idea... Would people who would use a lens like that be willing to switch to a completely unproven body? Especially one that is really the next generation of the EOS-6D? Event photographers at the level that they'd use a much heavier, much more expensive lens to gain a stop are using 5D series and 1D series bodies, not 6D series bodies. Fashion photographers are using the top bodies if not medium format... If they're really after the top end of the event market, they need to get a 1D class body out there...
There's also the theory that the lens isn't for taking pictures at all - it's an entry in the "see what I can do" contest among manufacturers, and in the "my lens is bigger than your lens" contest among a certain breed of hobbyists. The president of Leica once admitted in an interview that he could leave the sensor out of half the cameras he made, and the owners would never notice - they're prestige objects, not working cameras. Leica does it more than anyone else. in photography, but every manufacturer makes products for bragging rights - is this one of those?
The EF and RF mounts have the same diameter (ID)
The EF flange is 44.0 mm so 24.0 mm deeper than the RF body flange
If the new lens has the rear element within 24mm of the rear, it would rule out Canon making a EF version with the same optical design, to get the same performance, it would likely then need a bigger lens...
I doubt Canon would limit the EF range this long if they could have made it a similar size and weight...
When Canon launched the EF mount, some of the original lenses were to show the capability of the mount. I guess history is repeating and they want to show what the RF mount allows...
-
(https://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/rflensesall.jpg)
The new 35mm appears to show case the ability to get the rear element into the body to reduce the distance further. Their slightly deeper flange distance than the Nikon Z is not stopping small compact lens designs... Macro lenses are normally bigger than a standard lens...
It would be typical of Canon to choose these designs to showcase the new mount...
Since USM lens are in the launch the EF range should work quite well on the RF bodies, albeit the new RF mount has extra contacts and some patents from canon suggest a possible next gen interface which can also work with legacy EF via the RF EF adapters...
If the rumour is true that this is the fastest full frame mirrorless AF then it will be related to the new interface tech that allows faster body to lens communication...
-
The 24-105 looks quite small compared to the 50.
-
The 24-105 looks quite small compared to the 50.
The pictures are not to scale
Here are the dimensions:
"Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM
Lens composition: 13 groups 19 sheets
Minimum focus distance: 39cm (15.35 inches)
Filter diameter: 95mm
Size: 103.8mm (4.08 inches) × 139.8mm (5.5 inches)
Weight: 1430g (3.15lbs)
Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM
Lens construction: 9 groups of 15
Minimum focus distance: 40cm (15.74 inches)
Filter diameter: 77mm
Size: 89.8mm (3.53 inches) x 108.0mm (4.25 inches)
Weight: 950g (2.09lbs)
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM Macro
Lens construction: 9 groups 9 pieces
Minimum focus distance: 17cm (6.69 inches)
Filter diameter: 52mm
Size: 74.4mm (2.92 inches) × 62.8mm (2.47 inches)
Weight: 305g (0.67lbs)
Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Lens construction: 14 groups 18 pieces
Minimum focus distance: 45cm (17.71 inches)
Filter diameter: 77mm
Size: 83.5mm (3.28 inches) × 107.3mm (4.22 inches)
Weight: 700g (1.54lbs)"
-
At 24 on the zoom the 50 is longer and the 50 is larger in diameter...
-
The 24-105/4 is actually smaller in comparison to the 50/1.2 than the photo suggests: same length rather than longer, a bit narrower, and 26% lighter.
-
So the new 24-105 is 700g, while their own dSLR version is 795. Meanwhile the Sony is 663 and Nikon 24-120 is 710. So no free lunch to be had here.
-
But the Canon mirrorless body sure isn't targeted at event or wedding shooters so this behemoth lens has no partner.
It looks pretty good for event photography to me. I wouldn't use it for weddings if it only has one card slot, but, for shooting events with a view to immediate sale/printing/publication (a very large group, for everything from parties to corporate events to live music gigs to nightclubs) it looks good compared to the 6D2, or even the 5D4. Don't underestimate the impact of real-time JPEG preview for exposure/colour (face detection is a nice bonus).
And Canon will almost certainly release a higher-end body in short order. Remember, they are only releasing one body, whereas Nikon is releasing two - there is room in Canon's lineup for a second body. Expect a wedding-oriented body (dual slots, etc.) when they release a 70-200/2.8 and 85/1.2. They'll probably also release a high-resolution mirrorless body at some point - i doubt there will be a 5Ds2.
-
you forget you can use a lot of the fast F-Nikkor lenses on the Z with the adapter + they can use IBIS. a big +
Obviously you loose on size and weight, but that would be true anyway.
Nikon produced Z-lenses that offer something new : good quality , small and lightweight.
You also diminish your AF capability.
Use your F-mount lenses on a Sony body and you can also get IBIS, in addition to having dual slots and an increased number of native lenses available. Or you can stick with SLR for another generation, keep your high-performance AF and keep your dual card slots.
(Incidentally, this also raises the issue of Sony's throat diameter. If you can fit an f/1.2 lens, 200/2 or 400/2.8 to a Sony body via an adapter with no issues, you can also make a native lens with the same focal length/aperture for it with no issues. I've had no clipping/vignetting with an 85/1.2 or 200/2, and I hear the new 400/2.8 works pretty well...)
-
You keep saying that F mount lenses will not peform as well AF wise on the Z compared to an F mount camera but:
- a large majority of hands on report claim just the opposite such as this one: https://youtu.be/t-nGejFGlO8 where the notoriously slow focusing 70-200 f4 is used successfully to shoot mountain bikers in a forest
- there are other advantages such as better coverage and on sensor AF that will remove the need to calibrate lenses.
Now, back on the Canon, is the value of the mirrorless R camera and lenses for a Canon current DSLR user more clear for you than the value of the Z for a D850 user?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
It IS the 4th where is it?
-
It IS the 4th where is it?
The rumor was updated to "September 5" some time ago, as confirmed by this from Canon Hong Kong: Canon Hong Kong R system teaser (https://youtu.be/mFaNE7MEFsE) (shall we now also debate whose teasers are lamer?)
Of course it is already the morning of the 5th in Japan (and Hong Kong).
On another subject: a lot of the recent debate claims one way or the other how well SLR lenses will autofocus on these new EVF bodies, with some insisting that the count of system native lenses is a dominant factor in the system's strength. I would say we can't know for sure until production bodies with production level firmware are out for testing, but Canon at least seems confident: the three biggest of the initial four R mount lenses have USM motors in and has said in an interview that USM is the faster AF system for its mirrorless cameras too, with STM only preferred for video. I cannot find where I originally read that, but here is a similar claim:
https://www.canon-europe.com/lenses/tech-guide/focusing/
-
"Of course it is already the morning of the 5th in Japan (and Hong Kong)."
And in Oz... but no offical news as yet... :-X
-
The rumors were apparently 100% true.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
But the key question - how many card slots? I mean - is it for PROFESSIONALS ???
-
So US$2299.00 body only...
-
So US$2299.00 body only...
Less than 50 cent by focussing point. ;)
Body and 50mm f1.2 available in October... the other 3 lenses in December. And we don't know what lenses will come after that since no roadmap was published as far as I can tell.
It will be interesting to see how much later the other Nikon lenses end up being released.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
You keep saying that F mount lenses will not peform as well AF wise on the Z compared to an F mount camera but:
- a large majority of hands on report claim just the opposite such as this one: https://youtu.be/t-nGejFGlO8 where the notoriously slow focusing 70-200 f4 is used successfully to shoot mountain bikers in a forest
And there are just as many saying it's slow and sluggish, and not up to the standard of either Nikon SLRs or Sony A7III/A7r3 bodies.
Out of all complaints in Z6/Z7 reviews so far, complaints about autofocus performance seems to be by far the most common. I think Tony Northrup compared it with the A7r2 - a generation and a huge gulf in capability behind the current generation.
- there are other advantages such as better coverage and on sensor AF that will remove the need to calibrate lenses.
None of which matter if the lens/AF system can't keep up in the first place.
I don't need AF to achieve perfect focus on nonmoving objects - I can do that even more accurately with manual focus. I need AF to track things that move. Going on reviews, it seems the Z6/Z7 don't do that as well as either SLRs or Sony bodies.
Now, back on the Canon, is the value of the mirrorless R camera and lenses for a Canon current DSLR user more clear for you than the value of the Z for a D850 user?
Yes. Largely because of one thing - the 28-70/2. It only applies to a subset of users (event photographers), but it is a significant subset - far larger than the pro sports or wildlife supertele users, or the artsy types who might want a manual focus 58/0.95 - but, for those, the 28-70/2 on mirrorless body with Canon flash system represents a significant new capability that wasn't available on SLR. Also, for entry level full frame users, or those looking for a single lens/body solution, the mirrorless body with 24-105 looks to be better in almost every respect than the 6D2/24-105 SLR combo (the 5D4 being in a completely different price category), with a leg up in resolution and low-light AF over the Sony competition (although losing out on the dual slots).
In the case of Z7 vs D850, there's basically nothing other than video that the Z7 can do that the D850 doesn't do better.
-
But the key question - how many card slots? I mean - is it for PROFESSIONALS ???
One. After all there needs to be something (apart from a higher MP sensor, presumably) to tempt buyers into purchasing a forthcoming higher spec model... ;)
-
OK, we will see... by X-Mas time when the 28-70 f2 becomes available. That leaves us 3.5 month to think about it.
The event photographers I have spoken to are saying that 24mm is much more important than f2 in a zoom lens... but other may think differently.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
No IBIS for those who consider that important.
-
Lots of info here: https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/explore/product-showcases/cameras-and-lenses/full-frame-mirrorless-system/resources?cm_sp=full-frame-mirrorless-_-nav-_-resources
-
A nice touch (from the white paper):
And, users have a choice of whether control ring rotation actually changes exposure only when the shutter button is pressed half-way (to minimize risk of inadvertent changes), or to have any movement directly impact exposure (with no need to first hold the shutter button half-way down).
-
The white paper section on the RF lenses makes for interesting reading! The (admittedly theoretical, but directly comparable as the EF charts are the same) MTF charts look very promising!
-
In Japan they market the R as "High amateur model" along side:
EOS 5D Mark IV etc
EOS 6D Mark II etc
EOS 7D Mark II and EOS 80D
"Professional model" is reserved for the EOS-1D X Mark II only
A great start for Canon into the full frame mirrorless world...
-
The event photographers I have spoken to are saying that 24mm is much more important than f2 in a zoom lens... but other may think differently.
Cheers,
Bernard
Of course it is, but 2 @ 70 is a different ballgame depending on actual performance and drawing. Wouldn't that be totally radically different: a zoom with lower speed at the wide angle? If it were possible and make the zoom smaller or better, that would work just fine from the useage perspective: 24-70, f/3.5-1.8 =:-/
-
I am in Hawaii at the Canon launch event. Expect to see several articles and videos over the coming days on the release of the NEW Canon EOS R camera. There's a lot to share. Many hits, some misses. We'll cover that too once we make sure we have a complete understanding of this new camera. Michael Durr one of our videographers is with me and we both will be shooting with this new camera over the next few days. We will also get to take one home to do further shooting with. It will be a late night as we get ready to post our first article and video. Stay tuned.
-
It's kind of interesting that there seems to be no number associated with the current release!? EOS R5 or whatever, perhaps productplacement wasn't as clear to Canon also.
-
The rumors were apparently 100% true.
Cheers,
Bernard
Many did not think it had this:
"Effect on portrait shooting, pupil AF * 1
Detects the subject's pupil and AF it [Eye pupil AF ※ 1 ] loaded. By default, the pupil closer to the camera is selected automatically * 2 . Even when the depth of field is infinitely shallow, you can focus on the pupil with focus.
※ 1
It functions when [One-shot AF], [Face + Tracking Priority AF], and [Pupil AF: Enable] are selected. If the distance between the pupil and the camera is about the same, select the pupil closer to the center of the screen.
※ 2
It can also be selected manually. Touch the eyes in the face selection frame to select it, or you can move the AF point with the four-way controller."
-
It's kind of interesting that there seems to be no number associated with the current release!? EOS R5 or whatever, perhaps productplacement wasn't as clear to Canon also.
That is how the launched the M
Once established after say R R2 R3 etc, they may flip it and do the pro as an 1R....
Not suggesting we will not see a pro model till then but it may be a way of establishing the line before business as usual nomenclature...
-
I am in Hawaii at the Canon launch event. Expect to see several articles and videos over the coming days on the release of the NEW Canon EOS R camera. There's a lot to share. Many hits, some misses. We'll cover that too once we make sure we have a complete understanding of this new camera. Michael Durr one of our videographers is with me and we both will be shooting with this new camera over the next few days. We will also get to take one home to do further shooting with. It will be a late night as we get ready to post our first article and video. Stay tuned.
Lucky man :D
-
So the price is not quite as low as 2K but it might get there next year with cashbacks and whatnot. If the EVF and AF is decent I'm interested in getting one. The only bummer is lack of IBIS.
-
A picture from the new Canon mirrorless camera that speaks a thousand words as to what I hate about the design philosophy behind Japanese cameras.
https://luminous-landscape.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/IMG_4155.jpg
-
Canon didn’t get the memo that the whole world is moving in the direction of smaller and lighter gear. Just as i expected, Canon is still thinking old school. The market for 99% of these cameras are amateur photographers and the “events” they shoot are youth soccer games, school graduations, and pictures of their cats and dogs. Do they need a a 28-70 f/2 zoom that weighs over 3 pounds? Does anyone? I personally would choose a Z7 with IBIS and an optically superb 24-70 f/4 zoom in a heartbeat over the new Canon with that f/2 zoom. This is like if Cadillac in 2018 were still trying to market 7,000 pound land boats that are dressed up with gigantic, gas guzzling engines and big tail fins.
The fallacy lies in in your whole argument that smaller lenses come at a performance cost. That’s only true if you define performance as the maximum aperture of the lens (which you clearly do). Using a smaller maximum aperture reduces size AND makes it easier to design a very high performance lens in terms of optical quality.
Stop thinking mirrorless = small. That was 8 years ago, and that idea has probably held back mirrorless development and uptake more than anything else.
Yes, you can make mirrorless systems and lenses smaller than SLRs, if you sacrifice sensor size (M43), aperture (f/4 zooms or f/1.8-2.8 primes) or lens image quality (UWAs without a retrofocus or telecentric/near-telecentric design). The lack of a mirror box and pentaprism reduces the lower limit on size. But just because you can doesn't mean you should. Small size comes at a performance cost; if you want a more capable lens, you're going to have to go bigger. You can make a lineup of slow pancake lenses for the 'small camera' niche, but that is just a niche (albeit the easiest one to capture with the sluggish, slow-focusing early mirrorless cameras which really couldn't offer much else other than small size) and can't/isn't/won't be the primary target for a camera company trying to take mirrorless mainstream as an SLR replacement.
Many people shoot mirrorless - particularly full-frame mirrorless - for reasons other than size and weight. Those focusing on small size are shooting M43 or Leica anyway, or have a Sony body with a few pancake lenses; they are not the people currently using 5D4s and 6D2s who need to be encouraged to move over to mirrorless. Mirrorless allows for an EVF with through-the-sensor image preview (including exposure and colour settings), better video performance and (on cameras with the right hardware/firmware) features like IBIS, eye focus and other AI-based focus modes. There are many photographers out there who would choose a mirrorless body even if it were the size and weight of a D850.
The 28-70/2 is a perfect event photographer's lens. It covers most of the useful focal lengths for indoor and small-area events, works better in dim lighting and produces more subject isolation than a 24-70/2.8 and weighs no more than the 70-200/2.8, which is almost permanently attached to one of a wedding photographer's two cameras. Combined with a mirrorless body and a decent flash system (the Sony flash system doesn't count as 'decent'), it provides additional capability no SLR does. Event photographers can repeat many shots (posed individuals or groups) but only have a few seconds to do so (groups won't stay posed for half a minute while a photographer chimps, adjusts settings and re-shoots). They also commonly shoot in JPEG, due to the need to quickly produce a large number of images and prints for collection at the end of the night. EVFs offer real-time white balance, exposure and image processing (saturation, contrast, etc.) previews, making them far better for shooting JPEGs than SLRs, no matter the lens attached. The 28-70/2 on a mirrorless body is almost ideal for this kind of situation - and this kind of situation represents a significant number of Canon SLR users. Just turn up to any corporate or social evening function and look for the photographer carrying a 5D3/5D4 with 24-70 and flash attached. A mirrorless body with 28-70/2 does the same job, but better.
Canon didn't release a 24-70/4, and Sony/Zeiss didn't update theirs, because they already have a 24-105/4 which offers a much less limiting focal length range for the single kit lens user. The Sony 24-105/4 G is optically very good, and there's no reason the Canon one won't be too. And they're not dramatically larger or heavier than a 24-70/4.
-
"Effect on portrait shooting, pupil AF * 1
Detects the subject's pupil and AF it [Eye pupil AF ※ 1 ] loaded. By default, the pupil closer to the camera is selected automatically * 2 . Even when the depth of field is infinitely shallow, you can focus on the pupil with focus.
※ 1
It functions when [One-shot AF], [Face + Tracking Priority AF], and [Pupil AF: Enable] are selected. If the distance between the pupil and the camera is about the same, select the pupil closer to the center of the screen.
※ 2
It can also be selected manually. Touch the eyes in the face selection frame to select it, or you can move the AF point with the four-way controller."
Indeed, that is nice if it works. Is it both AF-S and AF-C?
Did Canon mention it during the presentation?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
The market for 99% of these cameras are amateur photographers and the “events” they shoot are youth soccer games, school graduations, and pictures of their cats and dogs.
The new camera with 24-105 runs $3500. Doesn't sound like the soccer game and cats and dogs market to me.
-
For a current Fuji user thinking of moving to FF mirrorless for still photography (no video), and no investment in Canon, Nikon or Sony lenses, is there any reason to pick the Canon or Nikon over the Sony? I'm not seeing what these new systems bring to the table. Looks like me too offerings.
-
The market for 99% of these cameras are amateur photographers and the “events” they shoot are youth soccer games, school graduations, and pictures of their cats and dogs.
As a true amateur who has not needed to sell my pictures (well except for a few motor sport pictures I sold in the 1960s/70s 8)) and who now gives prints away I feel you have got the wrong impression of what an amateur photographer is. I am fairly typical and you can see typical amateur photography here. (http://www.david-rosser.com) >:(
-
Indeed, that is nice if it works. Is it both AF-S and AF-C?
Did Canon mention it during the presentation?
Cheers,
Bernard
Canon Technical Advisor Rudy Winston mentions it here and they show a very honest demo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jwwf9YWnSZI
As he says, really for static subjects. It appears to freeze the focal point when focus locks. So some subject movement on shutter release will not be a big issue as the depth will be correct and exposure locked too, subject to shutter speed of course. If it kept hunting to the point of shutter release it maybe more irritating, so I am glad it works that way...
I guess we will need to wait the next generation or pro models for faster eye tracking modes in continuous AF
I read on the Japanese site that while the sports focus is in larger blocks once it finds a subject the fine points are used for focus block movement automatically... Need to find out more about that, but it sounds very usable... I think the concern about too many focus points will be overcome for those that worry too much...
Looks like Canon will start to pull back users who bought Sony bodies...
Look forward to all the reviews...
-
Imaging resource has a nice summary, including a note on Eye AF
https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2018/09/05/canon-announces-the-new-full-frame-eos-r-mirrorless-camera
-
As a true amateur who has not needed to sell my pictures (well except for a few motor sport pictures I sold in the 1960s/70s 8)) and who now gives prints away I feel you have got the wrong impression of what an amateur photographer is. I am fairly typical and you can see typical amateur photography here. (http://www.david-rosser.com) >:(
Some of the best work I have seen is from "amateur" photographers. That's really not the point. The point is that a 24-70 f/2 lens that weighs 3+ pounds is, to me, a bad joke. The fact that Canon chose to release it as part of the small, initial group of lenses for its new mirrorless camera system tells me that Canon is still thinking old school. They persist in the pattern of making (1) big and heavy lenses that are fast, with better construction and overall better optical performance and a much higher price point to justify it, and (2) smaller, lighter lenses that are slower, much cheaper, and of lesser quality in terms of materials and optical performance. You know, it's like charging by the pound.
-
For a current Fuji user thinking of moving to FF mirrorless for still photography (no video), and no investment in Canon, Nikon or Sony lenses, is there any reason to pick the Canon or Nikon over the Sony? I'm not seeing what these new systems bring to the table. Looks like me too offerings.
Eventually the bodies of the big three will be similar in feature sets... Remember how the now failed Samsung had bat striking ball shutter release, if you don't mind camera bodies that are too small then Sony will probably chase the same gimmicks with the same risk of closing their camera operations as their dream of being number 1 continues to get disolved by the everyone is now doing mirrorless future and Canon is still number 1 for what that is worth...
Choice of Canon or Nikon is down to the choice of glass and if you like mounting and focusing in their respective rotations. Other than that for people photography I would give the edge to Canon, evidenced by retaining a low pass filter in their cameras and the typical glass they pitch at the high end. Their low end glass can be less than stellar, so not to everyone's taste. Nikon have been keeping up with things that concern landscape photography, and their new Z S primes seem tuned for sharpness, albeit wait for actual evidence as MTFs are computer predictions...
Really camera gear is a very personal choice and the V Loggers are just adding to the noise rather than helping as they all have their own bias... Fun to watch and worth watching for items, features and issues you may never have thought about, but best make up your own mind...
-
Some of the best work I have seen is from "amateur" photographers. That's really not the point. The point is that a 24-70 f/2 lens that weighs 3+ pounds is, to me, a bad joke. The fact that Canon chose to release it as part of the small, initial group of lenses for its new mirrorless camera system tells me that Canon is still thinking old school. They persist in the pattern of making (1) big and heavy lenses that are fast, with better construction and overall better optical performance and a much higher price point to justify it, and (2) smaller, lighter lenses that are slower, much cheaper, and of lesser quality in terms of materials and optical performance. You know, it's like charging by the pound.
Can't disagree with that, similarly what on earth are Nikon thinking with their giant 58mm f/0.95 manual focus lens? As an aside I once owned a Canon 7 with the 50mm f/0.95 Dream lens - quite useless, pity I didn't keep it though, they go for $3000.00+ now.
-
That 28-70/f2 lens is interesting to me. But then again I'm the sort of person who lugs around Sigma Art primes. At this point I'm not sure if I want to invest into RF lenses but it certainly is interesting. A 24-70/f4 RF, no matter how lightweight and great optically would just get a "meh, whatever" from me.
-
Can't disagree with that, similarly what on earth are Nikon thinking with their giant 58mm f/0.95 manual focus lens? As an aside I once owned a Canon 7 with the 50mm f/0.95 Dream lens - quite useless, pity I didn't keep it though, they go for $3000.00+ now.
Well, Nikon has published a perfectly logical yet innovative roadmap of lenses focusing on super high quality compact lenses + the pro zooms everyone needs... and one landmark lens that they have very clearly marked so by making it manual focus and assigning it an Otus like Noct brand.
Very different approaches compared to Canon who keeps following the DSLR approach of big + high quality + expensive OR small + average + cheap and keeps their customers in the dark about what’s coming as if they weren’t too sure.
You may prefer the Canon one, but it seems obvious that the strategies are extremely different.
The way I look at it, Nikon has understood the opportunities of mirrorless better. They have delivered what many were asking with their high end f1.8 glass. Meaning uncompromised quality without the bulk and cost. This is very close to what Leica should have done with the SL. This is the closest thing to a truly digital M system in fact.
And we won’t have to wait another 3.5 months to take photographs with these, the first 2 will be here in 3 weeks.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
A significant number of photographers are either Canon or Nikon users and have collections of their lenses. They will invariably stick with their brand and buy one of the new mirrorless offerings. For everyone else, Sony seems like the better play.
-
A significant number of photographers are either Canon or Nikon users and have collections of their lenses. They will invariably stick with their brand and buy one of the new mirrorless offerings. For everyone else, Sony seems like the better play.
Thinking now, after two weeks of Nikon Z release and now Canon R, having all the three systems, Sony, Nikon and Canon good and bad points. I see that actual Canon or Nikon user, if they jump mirrorless, will do it using their brands so they can have a good support of their lenses. Other people, not sure if they will pick Sony, maybe now they have more lenses, but I suppose in two or three years that difference will be more subtle... specially if brands like tamron, sigma, etc... start releasing lenses supporting all systems (I suppose it will depend on the time to reverse engineer the mount, although I don't expect Canon or Nikon to have gone from scratch with the interface..., so maybe it is quicker than expected).
-
A significant number of photographers are either Canon or Nikon users and have collections of their lenses. They will invariably stick with their brand and buy one of the new mirrorless offerings. For everyone else, Sony seems like the better play.
May be worth opening a thread to ask the advice more directly. Tell the forum what type of photography you want to do and which camera features inspire you...
Best of luck which ever system you choose...
-
The EF and RF mounts have the same diameter (ID)
The EF flange is 44.0 mm so 24.0 mm deeper than the RF body flange
If the new lens has the rear element within 24mm of the rear, it would rule out Canon making a EF version with the same optical design, to get the same performance, it would likely then need a bigger lens...
I doubt Canon would limit the EF range this long if they could have made it a similar size and weight...
When Canon launched the EF mount, some of the original lenses were to show the capability of the mount. I guess history is repeating and they want to show what the RF mount allows...
(https://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/rflensesall.jpg)
The new 35mm appears to show case the ability to get the rear element into the body to reduce the distance further. Their slightly deeper flange distance than the Nikon Z is not stopping small compact lens designs... Macro lenses are normally bigger than a standard lens...
It would be typical of Canon to choose these designs to showcase the new mount...
Since USM lens are in the launch the EF range should work quite well on the RF bodies, albeit the new RF mount has extra contacts and some patents from canon suggest a possible next gen interface which can also work with legacy EF via the RF EF adapters...
If the rumour is true that this is the fastest full frame mirrorless AF then it will be related to the new interface tech that allows faster body to lens communication...
Looks like the RF are all focus by wire. At least they have selectable response via the camera to fine adjust to taste...
Dan, beyond my replies this video better explains it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaDa5ewQ_DM
-
The new camera with 24-105 runs $3500. Doesn't sound like the soccer game and cats and dogs market to me.
Indeed—we need to get past this false dichotomy of:
- "professionals", who need the fastest possible lenses and/or the highest available resolution, or some such extreme of performance.
- "amateurs", who are unskilled snap-shooters, and probably should just use their phones or at most a super-zoom compact.
There are a lot of us who are rather far from either of those pigeon holes; some are well suited by either a US$2600 Nikon Z with 24-70/4 [$2750 if any F mount lenses are needed] or a $3400 Canon R with 24-105/4 [$3500 if any EF mount lenses are needed]. Also, given those prices, many other "tweeners" will continue to prefer a smaller, less expensive "enthusiast" level kit in one of the mainstream ILC format offerings, MFT or "APS-C".
-
Interesting, Canon rate the EOS R as having 40 times the AF processing power as the EOS 5D IV...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=795KC--r_cg
-
A lot of weird decisions here - not only the very heavy initial lenses, but DPReview's slideshow confirms that this is a 6D level camera in terms of weather sealing and build quality.
Maybe coming at the 6D level makes sense, but it shouldn't be $2299 AND 6D level, and it shouldn't be 6D level build with two of its four lenses being heavy, expensive exotics...
If it's a 6D level body (admittedly with a 5D sensor), it should be $1799 or so, and the lenses should be what matches a 6D - f4 zooms and f1.8 (possibly compact f1.4) primes.
OR they should provide a roadmap showing when additional lenses (and bodies?) are coming...
-
We cannot rule out the possibility that the brains of Canon designers/users vs Nikon designers/users are wired a bit differently.
The logic of this launch is escaping me a bit also, but many Canon users seem happy so it seems that the release is overall a good match for their needs/expectations for a system.
There are some near things for sure such as the multiple adapters (especially the drop in filters idea), the 28-70 f2, the AF specs,...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Yes this is a 6D level body with a non-crippled sensor (hopefully, heh). I don't think it's that weird. I might buy the body but I don't plan to buy any RF lenses yet and enjoy my EF lenses instead. As tempting as that 28-70/f2 sounds, it's also around 3K. And ironically with the drop in filters adapter the EF lenses might be actually more useful than RF lenses for many cases.
-
And ironically with the drop in filters adapter the EF lenses might be actually more useful than RF lenses for many cases.
This is the one option that might compel me to purchase this camera. The 17 TS-E with a CPL behind it offers many opportunities.
-
All the 35mm mirrorless cameras (not just Canon) are shown with the sensor exposed when there's no lens mounted. Can anybody explain why? I think it's insane - can't they close the shutter when there's no lens to prevent dust from getting on the sensor? I thought Sony is just being dumb when I saw this behavior on my A7 but maybe there's a better reason?
Canon have responded, skip to 10.30
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5eyvSXXQ2s
:D
-
We cannot rule out the possibility that the brains of Canon designers/users vs Nikon designers/users are wired a bit differently.
The logic of this launch is escaping me a bit also, but many Canon users seem happy so it seems that the release is overall a good match for their needs/expectations for a system.
There are some near things for sure such as the multiple adapters (especially the drop in filters idea), the 28-70 f2, the AF specs,...
Cheers,
Bernard
There is an interesting graphic at https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/ showing the comparative size of the Nikon Z7 with the new 24-70 f/4 lens, the Canon EOS R with the new 28-70 f/2 lens, and the Sony A7RIII with the Sony 24-70 f/2.8 lens. The Nikon Z7kit weighs 2.59 pounds, the Canon kit weighs 4.95 pounds and the Sony kit weighs 3.33 pounds. Now, assuming that the new Nikon 24-70 f/4 offers demonstrably superior optical performance to the Canon and the Sony zooms, which camera do you want to take on a hike? Which do you want to want to carry around in a city for travel photography? Oh, I forgot to mention that the Nikon lens is less than 1/2 the price of the Sony lens and less than 1/3 the price of the Canon lens. The Sony lens gives one extra stop of light. A big deal? the Canon gives you two extra stops, but the there is no IBIS. Whatever you gain with two stops you more than lose by the lack of IBIS.
Nikon's claims about the optical performance of its new, slower lenses may turn out to be marketing speak, but if true, I really think Nikon may be on to something where Sony has missed the ball. I knew Canon would. To me, Canon is like Chevrolet in the 1960's, churning out the same tired stuff. Little if any innovation.
-
It was pointed out in an editorial post at DPR that the R is the introductory body to use the RF mount in much the same way as the EOS 650 was the introductory body for the EF mount. I think this is a valid observation. Just as Canon didn't start off with the EOS 1, it hasn't started off with the "R1".
-
Completely valid - Canon may have some great bodies higher up the price/performance curve, and some great lenses further down the curve, awaiting release. If so, could some development have gotten out of sync, perhaps the "wrong" body being ready first? What if they were planning to release a $4000 body (a little bigger, super fast speeds, 4K 60P, EOS-1 build) with those initial lenses, and the body they wanted is still 3-6 months out - but the high-end consumer body (developed by a different team) was ready? What if there are a couple of lenses that would have made sense with this body that aren't ready yet? I can see Canon saying "the 16-35 f4 isn't ready, the 50 f1.8 isn't ready, why don't we launch the body we have with just the 24-105 f4 and the 35mm" - then the exotic lens team piped up and said "we've got two more lenses we did for the EOS-1R, which isn't ready yet"...
Here's a link to a Camerasize comparison (http://j.mp/2wK99mF) of the EOS R with the 24-105 to the Z7 with the 24-70 - it's a lot closer than the mirrorlessrumors comparison, although the Nikon is still quite a bit smaller.
-
I doubt it. The EOS 650 launched with the EF300f2.8L and EF 50f1.0L! I'd be rather astonished if Canon had their production schedule anything other than completely sorted.
-
I doubt it. The EOS 650 launched with the EF300f2.8L and EF 50f1.0L! I'd be rather astonished if Canon had their production schedule anything other than completely sorted.
On the other hand, could Canon really not have announced anything now?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Here's a very early EOS lens chart (http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/eos/eoscamera/620/images/lens1stdata.pdf) - it is not the very first, because there were 13 initial lenses and this shows 14 (the probable difference is the 55-200 L, which was released somewhat later). The 50 1.0 was not an original lens, although the 300 f2.8 was. There were a few exotics in here (the 300 f2.8, perhaps the soft-focus lens), but it was dominated by variable-aperture zooms...
Dan
-
We need 35 more pages to match the Z thread.
Either there is less to complain about or less to rave about.......or Canon users are more polite?
-
We need 35 more pages to match the Z thread.
Either there is less to complain about or less to rave about.......or Canon users are more polite?
Disappointing lack of essays from shadowblade :-)
-
There is an interesting graphic at https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/ showing the comparative size of the Nikon Z7 with the new 24-70 f/4 lens, the Canon EOS R with the new 28-70 f/2 lens, and the Sony A7RIII with the Sony 24-70 f/2.8 lens. The Nikon Z7kit weighs 2.59 pounds, the Canon kit weighs 4.95 pounds and the Sony kit weighs 3.33 pounds. Now, assuming that the new Nikon 24-70 f/4 offers demonstrably superior optical performance to the Canon and the Sony zooms, which camera do you want to take on a hike? Which do you want to want to carry around in a city for travel photography? Oh, I forgot to mention that the Nikon lens is less than 1/2 the price of the Sony lens and less than 1/3 the price of the Canon lens. The Sony lens gives one extra stop of light. A big deal? the Canon gives you two extra stops, but the there is no IBIS. Whatever you gain with two stops you more than lose by the lack of IBIS.
Nikon's claims about the optical performance of its new, slower lenses may turn out to be marketing speak, but if true, I really think Nikon may be on to something where Sony has missed the ball. I knew Canon would. To me, Canon is like Chevrolet in the 1960's, churning out the same tired stuff. Little if any innovation.
Nice comparation... but wouldn’t it be better... if you are comparing prices and weights doing it apple to apples... I don’t know... maybe using the price and weight of the Canon RF 24-105f4... and the Sony 24-70f4 Z or the 24-105G... at least they are all F4...
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
We need 35 more pages to match the Z thread.
Either there is less to complain about or less to rave about.......or Canon users are more polite?
Sony users appear to feel less threatened by the Canon R? ;D
Besides, Canon didn't share much until the last minute.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I would buy the Canon before the Nikon. Actually I think both cameras are a bit behind the current Sony generation and Sony is more likely to release a new camera before either Canon or Nikon. I see no reason at all to change fron Sony. I think I was expecting a big more all round.
Bernard I think you may be projecting a bit when you speak of “feeling threatened”. All three platforms are just fine for taking great photos. I really don’t thing the emotionally laden word threatened comes into it at all. If something comes along that allows you to be a much better photographer then just buy it. No need to get emotional.
-
Here's a very early EOS lens chart (http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/eos/eoscamera/620/images/lens1stdata.pdf) - it is not the very first, because there were 13 initial lenses and this shows 14 (the probable difference is the 55-200 L, which was released somewhat later). The 50 1.0 was not an original lens, although the 300 f2.8 was. There were a few exotics in here (the 300 f2.8, perhaps the soft-focus lens), but it was dominated by variable-aperture zooms...
Dan
Indeed the 50f1.0L came in '89. My memory sucks! :P
-
I would buy the Canon before the Nikon.
I am sure it is an excellent choice for your needs.
Bernard I think you may be projecting a bit when you speak of “feeling threatened”. All three platforms are just fine for taking great photos. I really don’t thing the emotionally laden word threatened comes into it at all. If something comes along that allows you to be a much better photographer then just buy it. No need to get emotional.
I totally agree with you. But how do you explain the irresistible urge demonstrated by some Sony users to convince the world about the total lack of value of the Z cameras?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Sony users appear to feel less threatened by the Canon R? ;D
Besides, Canon didn't share much until the last minute.
Yes... but if I understood Kevin correctly... they are allowing people in Hawaii to take the camera home... looks like Canon wants them now not to stop talking about the camera until it is released...
I think this camera it is more a threat to Sony users than Nikon... don’t read I’m saying that because I think it is better... I say that b cause there were much more Canon users switching to Sony than Nikon user switching to Sony... no those Canon users have an option to stay and go mirrorless...
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
I think this camera it is more a threat to Sony users than Nikon... don’t read I’m saying that because I think it is better... I say that b cause there were much more Canon users switching to Sony than Nikon user switching to Sony... no those Canon users have an option to stay and go mirrorless...
I agree 100%, but I wasn't talking about the reality, but about how some Sony users appear to perceive the reality.
Frankly, I have nothing negative to say about the Canon R. It is what it is and I am sure it will deliver value to some photographers.
I may even buy one with the 35mm lens when available to see how well it works.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I am sure it is an excellent choice for your needs.
I totally agree with you. But how do you explain the irresistible urge demonstrated by some Sony users to convince the world about the total lack of value of the Z cameras?
Cheers,
Bernard
I think if you spend money and time on a thing you become invested in it. Most of my friends shoot Nikon, non are shooting Sony. We don’t really talk cameras much. I meet Ince month with three other photographers to discuss trends and so on. The one guy is shooting with an 850, no idea what the others are shooting on, never occurred to me to ask. I think they would be surprised if I did.
I spend a bit more time than most looking at gear because it’s my living. I like new shiny stuff more than I should as well I suppose.
-
There is an interesting graphic at https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/ showing the comparative size of the Nikon Z7 with the new 24-70 f/4 lens, the Canon EOS R with the new 28-70 f/2 lens, and the Sony A7RIII with the Sony 24-70 f/2.8 lens. The Nikon Z7kit weighs 2.59 pounds, the Canon kit weighs 4.95 pounds and the Sony kit weighs 3.33 pounds. Now, assuming that the new Nikon 24-70 f/4 offers demonstrably superior optical performance to the Canon and the Sony zooms, which camera do you want to take on a hike?
Man that 28-70/f2 sure got on your nerves :-). If I was going hiking I'd take the 24-105/f4 of course, which Canon is also releasing for RF.
-
I like new shiny stuff more than I should as well I suppose.
Yes, same here... :)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Canon have responded, skip to 10.30
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5eyvSXXQ2s
:D
Most excellent news. Now I really want to get this R body and dump my Sony.
Also thank you Bernard for posting useful stuff in and around these threads, I appreciate it.
-
I may even buy one with the 35mm lens when available to see how well it works.
Added to a new Z7 kit? If your family finances work like mine, your wife must have one hell of a collection of new shoes and bags :-)
-
Added to a new Z7 kit? If your family finances work like mine, your wife must have one hell of a collection of new shoes and bags :-)
It would appear I am managing this aspect a bit better... ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
It would appear I am managing this aspect a bit better... ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
Any tips gratefully received :-)
-
Any tips gratefully received :-)
Always have separate checking and credit card accounts and don't ask how much the other one spends on clothes. this has worked very well for my wife and I for the 38 years we have been married!!!!
-
Always have separate checking and credit card accounts and don't ask how much the other one spends on clothes. this has worked very well for my wife and I for the 38 years we have been married!!!!
We have very similar practices! ;)
Plus I deliver many nice photographs of family events!
Cheers,
Bernard
-
We have very similar practices! ;)
Plus I deliver many nice photographs of family events!
Cheers,
Bernard
Well me too but my wife understands the significance of the arrival of new gold boxes and reacts accordingly :-)
-
Here's a fairer version of the Camerasize comparison (http://j.mp/2MOJ2pr) - all three lenses are f4 (Canon and Sony 24-105mm f4, Nikon 24-70mm f4). The Nikon maintains a size and weight advantage, but it also loses the range from 70mm to 105mm.
-
Well me too but my wife understands the significance of the arrival of new gold boxes and reacts accordingly :-)
You need a separate shipping location, unpacked lenses, to a none photographer, look very similar, just watch the number visible at one time ;)
-
Here's a fairer version of the Camerasize comparison (http://j.mp/2MOJ2pr) - all three lenses are f4 (Canon and Sony 24-105mm f4, Nikon 24-70mm f4). The Nikon maintains a size and weight advantage, but it also loses the range from 70mm to 105mm.
Just for fun :)
http://j.mp/2PKIbn3
If you don't like short links:
https://camerasize.com/compact/#724.681,799.788,794.784,213.277,ha,t
-
Nice comparation... but wouldn’t it be better... if you are comparing prices and weights doing it apple to apples... I don’t know... maybe using the price and weight of the Canon RF 24-105f4... and the Sony 24-70f4 Z or the 24-105G... at least they are all F4...
To me, both Canon and Nikon have reasonable options general purpose first "walkabout" lenses with the f/4 zooms and several normal to moderately wide primes. The exotic ones (50/0.95 and 28-70/2) are in large part to declare their serious intent for these systems in the longer run; they will serve the needs of some users, but only small fraction of all R and Z system users, I expect. And they both seem confident that adaptor-mounted SLR lenses will work just fine, with the latest developments of sensor-based AF.
-
Lets face it, I think many of us hoped Canon would be bold for once. While the initial lens selection points to a commitment of a strong system, this body is just another measured response by Canon, doing just enough to get by. Some will disagree, but you can't really say that this is the best effort they could have pulled off. There may be more to come, but they would have made a much stronger impression if they had also released a full blown higher end unit. It would have given more confidence for people to commit. They are truly their own worst enemy.
-
You need a separate shipping location, unpacked lenses, to a none photographer, look very similar, just watch the number visible at one time ;)
Bond, James Bond :-)
I guess what priompted my initial comment was surprise at the amount of money folk have available for their hobbies - are you guys all dentists? :-)
-
Canon Technical Advisor Rudy Winston mentions it here and they show a very honest demo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jwwf9YWnSZI
As he says, really for static subjects. It appears to freeze the focal point when focus locks. So some subject movement on shutter release will not be a big issue as the depth will be correct and exposure locked too, subject to shutter speed of course. If it kept hunting to the point of shutter release it maybe more irritating, so I am glad it works that way...
I guess we will need to wait the next generation or pro models for faster eye tracking modes in continuous AF
I read on the Japanese site that while the sports focus is in larger blocks once it finds a subject the fine points are used for focus block movement automatically... Need to find out more about that, but it sounds very usable... I think the concern about too many focus points will be overcome for those that worry too much...
Looks like Canon will start to pull back users who bought Sony bodies...
Look forward to all the reviews...
Why would someone jump from their Sony system to Canon with a camera that costs more and delivers less than the Sony equivalent?
-
Interesting, Canon rate the EOS R as having 40 times the AF processing power as the EOS 5D IV...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=795KC--r_cg
And yet can only squeak out a messily 3 fps in AF-C mode using focus priority.
-
This is the one option that might compel me to purchase this camera. The 17 TS-E with a CPL behind it offers many opportunities.
There has been some talk on FM regarding affecting the edges of the image if you place glass between the lens and sensor for wide lenses. I'd hold off if you are basing your buying decision on this feature until it's been tested.
-
Here's a fairer version of the Camerasize comparison (http://j.mp/2MOJ2pr) - all three lenses are f4 (Canon and Sony 24-105mm f4, Nikon 24-70mm f4). The Nikon maintains a size and weight advantage, but it also loses the range from 70mm to 105mm.
While this comparison is useful, I'm much more interested in a comparison that includes lens quality. I'm sick to death of mediocre "walk around" lenses.
-
While this comparison is useful, I'm much more interested in a comparison that includes lens quality. I'm sick to death of mediocre "walk around" lenses.
I agree, we will have to wait for real testing next month for both new Canon and Nikon systems. I will love see MTF from Lens Rentals... but... poor Roger Cicala will need to sacrifice a Nikon Z and a Canon R camera to do so for his bench, with also a reverse engeneering from the mount to do so, if I understood correctly thow their system works.
-
Most excellent news. Now I really want to get this R body and dump my Sony.
Also thank you Bernard for posting useful stuff in and around these threads, I appreciate it.
Thank you...
For those that missed it, Canon defaults to shutter down when the camera is off to project the sensor from dust...
Another interesting spot at 4.57 onwards, Fro says they will not only do a firmware upgrade for continuous silent shooting, but will also add eye focus in continuous too...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VaL9VndFoQ
Fro also confirms the focus is ultra fast so the world record claim is noticeable when using the Camera...
-
Why would someone jump from their Sony system to Canon with a camera that costs more and delivers less than the Sony equivalent?
I am talking about EOS EF lens users that got a Sony body and adaptor for their EF glass...
Some Sony's cost more...
Some Sony's have less megapixels
Some Sony's have no low pass filter if favoured
The ergonomics of Sony are inferior
The Sony interface is inferior
Some Sony users report cuts and abrasions with some lens to Sony body combos
Sony's A9 is limited to 5fps mechanical. No advantage for that type of shooting
Sony has some models with similar high pixel EVF yet everyone has said the EOS R and Nikon Z viewfinders are significantly better, clearer and more optical VF like...
Sony's have no weather sealing, they are designed and built like the original consumer APS C limited mount body types they started from and Sony have locked users into that smaller mount...
Some users may have had some EF lenses that did not work well on Sony and are happy to move back...
The EOS R is the first model with the worlds fastest AF... There will be more models getting better and better...
People are already posting their intent to shift back...
-
Frankly, I have nothing negative to say about the Canon R. It is what it is and I am sure it will deliver value to some photographers.
I may even buy one with the 35mm lens when available to see how well it works.
Cheers,
Bernard
(https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/rf/lineup/rf35-f18/image/spec/mtf.png)
(https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/rf/shared/image/mod/media-fig.png)
Canon appear to have changed their MTF charts. The used to have blue as F8 and Black wide open with 8 plot lines not 4
http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2013/reading_MTF_charts.shtml
I suspect the RF 35mm F1.8 Macro IS STM may be optimised for V loggers
Note the handling of the light spheres across the length of the top of the bridge:
https://www.canon.com.au/-/media/images/canon/carousels/eos-r/rf-35mm-f18-macro-is-stm/sample_image_6_rf-35mm-f1-8-macro-is-stm.ashx?mw=840
Fringing in Macro:
https://www.canon.com.au/-/media/images/canon/carousels/eos-r/rf-35mm-f18-macro-is-stm/sample_image_4_rf-35mm-f1-8-macro-is-stm.ashx?mw=840
I am sure it will take nice photos:
https://www.canon.com.au/-/media/images/canon/carousels/eos-r/rf-35mm-f18-macro-is-stm/sample_image_2_rf-35mm-f1-8-macro-is-stm.ashx?mw=840
https://www.canon.com.au/-/media/images/canon/carousels/eos-r/rf-35mm-f18-macro-is-stm/sample_image_3_rf-35mm-f1-8-macro-is-stm.ashx?mw=840
May not be the lens to judge Canon by...
-
https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/lineup/r/image/downloads/sample01.jpg
Shooting data
Shooting mode Manual exposure
lens RF 35 mm F 1.8 MACRO IS STM
Tv (shutter speed) 1/125
Focal length 35.0 mm
Av (Aperture value) 8.0
strobe Non light emission
Metering method Evaluation photometry
White balance Color temperature (4500 K)
Exposure compensation 0
AF mode Servo AF
ISO sensitivity 100
Picture style Focus on detail
-
May not be the lens to judge Canon by...
Hum... this sounds like a very average lens, nowhere near the Nikon 35mm f1.8 S.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I am talking about EOS EF lens users that got a Sony body and adaptor for their EF glass...
Some Sony's cost more...
Some Sony's have less megapixels
Some Sony's have no low pass filter if favoured
The ergonomics of Sony are inferior
The Sony interface is inferior
Some Sony users report cuts and abrasions with some lens to Sony body combos
Sony's A9 is limited to 5fps mechanical. No advantage for that type of shooting
Sony has some models with similar high pixel EVF yet everyone has said the EOS R and Nikon Z viewfinders are significantly better, clearer and more optical VF like...
Sony's have no weather sealing, they are designed and built like the original consumer APS C limited mount body types they started from and Sony have locked users into that smaller mount...
Some users may have had some EF lenses that did not work well on Sony and are happy to move back...
The EOS R is the first model with the worlds fastest AF... There will be more models getting better and better...
People are already posting their intent to shift back...
Have you ever shot with a Sony...thoughts so. Just read about things on the net...and you believe everything you read...even Fake News.
Lemmings jumping off the cliff.
-
Have you ever shot with a Sony...thoughts so.
Correct... Never did try...
Just read about things on the net...
Correct...
...and you believe everything you read
Does anyone, really... I doubt it...
...even Fake News.
I understand your concern, I have witnessed a lot of sites lying or just not bothering to research facts...
Lemmings jumping off the cliff.
I hardly think users of EF glass starting to come back to Canon will be seen such a way. Nor anyone that uses Canon exclusively...
If you like Sony and it works for you, you should enjoy it.
Sony do make some great consumer products that are leagues a head of their cheaper rivals
It is a bit like IBIS, some feel they must have it. If you need it go for it. The beauty of having choices...
The power of the NIKON and CANON brand is so strong they will just gain market share... Let's see how things go... They have both made a great start and seem strong in different areas. Both are very capable companies...
I am sure Canon will see growth as EF users come back. Just makes sense for them...
The elephant in the room... Panasonic... Not likely to gain much traction with Nikon and Canon users, I bet Sony feels the pressure there too. Sony have had a good innings in the full frame mirrorless market but they now have more competition than ever...
:)
-
Hum... this sounds like a very average lens, nowhere near the Nikon 35mm f1.8 S.
Cheers,
Bernard
The new Canon MTFs are wide open only like Nikon, so it is a fairly good lens sharpness wise, the Canon EF 35 F 1.4 L II USM MTF is better despite the wider apature...
The lights on the bridge will catch some lenses out but that did not look great... Maybe optimised for close range, typical of V loggers and their food pics... :D
I suspect the Nikon will be a better lens for sharpness and overall correction, but it is not a small macro so the Canon will get some love from its users... ;)
-
Correct... Never did try...
Correct...
Does anyone, really... I doubt it...
I understand your concern, I have witnessed a lot of sites lying or just not bothering to research facts...
I hardly think users of EF glass starting to come back to Canon will be seen such a way. Nor anyone that uses Canon exclusively...
If you like Sony and it works for you, you should enjoy it.
Sony do make some great consumer products that are leagues a head of their cheaper rivals
It is a bit like IBIS, some feel they must have it. If you need it go for it. The beauty of having choices...
The power of the NIKON and CANON brand is so strong they will just gain market share... Let's see how things go... They have both made a great start and seem strong in different areas. Both are very capable companies...
I am sure Canon will see growth as EF users come back. Just makes sense for them...
The elephant in the room... Panasonic... Not likely to gain much traction with Nikon and Canon users, I bet Sony feels the pressure there too. Sony have had a good innings in the full frame mirrorless market but they now have more competition than ever...
:)
I don't pick my gear based on market share...if that was the case I'd eat at McDonalds rather than my local brew pub. Others follow the crowds...that's fine.
-
IMO, both Canon and Nikon introduced some serious new systems with the Z and R cameras and lenses. Back when Sony introduced the Alpha 7, they had 3 lenses along side: ZA 55 f1.8, ZA 35 f2.8, and kit 28-70.
Canon and Nikon, with their new lenses, are making a serious statement.
-
I don't pick my gear based on market share...if that was the case I'd eat at McDonalds rather than my local brew pub. Others follow the crowds...that's fine.
"two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions, all on a sesame seed bun"
It is possible Sony will diversify, they could bring out Medium Format cameras and keep development of APS C at a pace to play to the strength of their sensors and the suitability of their small mount...
Their share of the full frame market could get to small for them to rely on, time will tell...
-
You need a separate shipping location, unpacked lenses, to a none photographer, look very similar, just watch the number visible at one time ;)
Reminds me that I used to run a service for 2 photographer friends that I called SPCE--Surreptitious Purchasers of Camera Equipment. These two women would save up cash for a new lens or camera purchase, I would order from B&H for them, deliver to them and accept cash. No paper trail for them. Not sure if their husbands didn't catch on or if they just didn't want to know, but happily both are still married. ;D
-
There has been some talk on FM regarding affecting the edges of the image if you place glass between the lens and sensor for wide lenses. I'd hold off if you are basing your buying decision on this feature until it's been tested.
The vast majority of these threads is speculation, which is fine, but certainly I'll wait until the reviews are out before buying.
Having said that, I'd bet Canon engineers when developing this adapter were targeting the 17 and wide zooms.
-
From canonrumors.com:
What’s coming in the firmware?
Eye detect AF in continuous shooting. The EOS R launches with the ability to do this in one shot.
Additional touch bar functionality added.
Continuous shooting in silent shutter mode. The EOS R only allows this feature in single shot at launch.
A “few tweaks” to video functionality. The 4K crop will not be changed, nor will the maximum frame rate in 4K.
Bug fixes
-
I took a high contrast RAW file from here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0ySKtnaGBY&feature=youtu.be
Developed with DCRAW, zero noise reduction applied.
IMPORTANT: the first 4 images were rescaled using nearest neighbour in order to display the same SNR as in any 100% crop, but with the advantage of seeing the entire scene.
0EV (original image)
(http://www.guillermoluijk.com/misc/eosr0.jpg)
+4EV
(http://www.guillermoluijk.com/misc/eosr4.jpg)
+6EV
(http://www.guillermoluijk.com/misc/eosr6.jpg)
+8EV
(http://www.guillermoluijk.com/misc/eosr8.jpg)
And this is the result of the +6EV and +8EV shadow push with a regular rescaling (SNR gets statistically improved):
+6EV
(http://www.guillermoluijk.com/misc/eosr6bis.jpg)
+8EV
(http://www.guillermoluijk.com/misc/eosr8bis.jpg)
I can see some banding in the deep shadows, but I think the DR is fine, the same as 5D IV's I guess.
Regards
-
Well, I was so impressed with the new Canon that I bought a Song A7R3 a week ago to use with adapters.
The image quality on the Sony files is just so much better than my 5DSR if you try to open things up more dramatically. You can not always exposure blend as a work around. You can also get pattern banding in the highlights in the Canon if you bring down detail too much from your "expose to the right" file.
I got a MB V and Sigma adapters; as this Sony is primarily for landscapes on a tripod the limitations are not a problem. Although the eye focus is still very workable with the Sigma optics.
My 1Dx2 still pleases me for what I use it for; wildlife and natural light portraits. It does not have the same banding issues as the 5DSR has. But I sort of wish I could just get a Sony A9 to have the same ergonomics with both.
This new body will be a holding pattern for me to get quality files for my landscapes while giving just a bit more time to see what Canon does with a pro mirrorless. If they do not get their sensor crap together I may consider a large change to Sony native lenses and just keep some Canon like the fleet of TS lenses I have. I like my Canon optics and do not want to change but I can not wait forever. I do not think many of the Sony lenses are actually that great, or I would change now. Nikon is too much in a state of flux to put my bets there.
The 12 pages of the Canon thread compared to 62 on the Nikon thread says something?
If we could combine Sony sensors with Canon ergonomics we could get excited.
-
Alongside of my Canon bodies I have a A7II. However better that sensor is I just can't get the colors to look the way I want with the Sony files, so I'll be testing the new R when it's available (should be soon).
12 vs 62 pages just says this thread doesn't have Bernard and shadowblade "arguing" back and forth in 800 posts *shrug*
-
Also struggled with Sony colour. Capture 1 sorted it out, to my surprise