Canon confirms that the EOS R5 is the 5D series equivalent for mirrorless

[derpderp]

yes, a rhetorical question, I suppose. For someone who use strobes or flash extensively, EVF does not let see the exact representation of the image which will be produced by the camera.

I'll have to defer to your experience with flashes and strobes. Perhaps because of our different styles of photography, we have different needs. But I can only speak from my experience, which is that I'm quite pleased with the EVF for what I do

Frankly, I'd feel a little lost with an OVF.

 

[Starting out EOS R]

Continue reading...

So, decisions decisions, I pretty much want the R5 and will trade in my R. I have a price for trade in based against buying the R5 but the decision is, as we're all in lockdown for the next month or so and its not likely I'll be using my R for any serious work in a while, do I trade it in now and get the current price and be without the R until the R5 is released, or, wait until the R5 is released and then trade in, knowing that the trade in price is likely to drop?? I can live without the R for a month or so as we're in lock down but I really cant decide what canon will do, delay the launch until supplies are back to normal which could be September or even later, or release as originally planned in July with pre orders probably in May or June. Any sensible thoughts people??

 

[privatebydesign]

IBIS and superior RF lenses are two examples right off the bat...

My needs are well catered for with the IS lens selection in the EF range so I have no need for IBIS, I wouldn’t not use it if I had it, but I certainly don’t need it.

Show me a single image these precious and expensive RF lenses can take that my old school EF lenses can’t. Sure the RF designs are wonderful, but I haven’t seen a single image that makes me think I couldn’t have taken that with an EF camera.

 

[AEWest]

Can you please accept that it is not working for me and that I am arguing from my perspective?

How many sports/action photogs do you know, that prefer EVF over OVF today? (No matter what brand)

It might surely does work even better for portrait or available light in night scenes. But that is not my main subject.
But a hammer isn't the right tool to unscrew, is it?

You had asked "why change", I did not know you were talking specifically about your needs, it could have been a general question for all photographers. That is the shortcoming with these forums - very little room for explaining context.

 

[MORphoto.net]

No fight.

There is a lag time between the action and what you see in the viewfinder with a mirrorless. With DSLR it's the speed of light. Mirrorless uses more battery power. I needed a battery grip with my R. I don't use one with my 5DIV. Mirrorless takes longer to wake up after going to sleep. Personally, I've found the mirrorless autofocus hunts much more and goes wildly out of focus under certain circumstances. Canon says that autofocus is more responsive on DSLRs than mirrorless. It feels that way to me too. Some people don't like the look of the electronic viewfinder. It doesn't really bother me, although under certain lighting conditions I've noticed that the viewfinder doesn't give an accurate reflection of the camera capture (for example, under harsh stage lighting).

You didn't ask, but what I find great about mirrorless is the truly silent shutter, the selection of focus points with your thumb and the fact that you can pick a focus point across the entire frame, which I think really improves my composition.

I've never noticed viewfinder lag. I guess technically there must be, but I can't detect it. At any rate, I'm with you on the battery life! Huge difference. Thanks for the detailed reply!

 

[AEWest]

My needs are well catered for with the IS lens selection in the EF range so I have no need for IBIS, I wouldn’t not use it if I had it, but I certainly don’t need it.

Show me a single image these precious and expensive RF lenses can take that my old school EF lenses can’t. Sure the RF designs are wonderful, but I haven’t seen a single image that makes me think I couldn’t have taken that with an EF camera.

You had specifically asked what a mirrorless camera (RF mount) could do that a 1dx3 (i.e. EF mount) couldn't. I gave two examples - IBIS and RF lenses.

Whether these features are unnecessary for your work is a separate matter that only you could answer.

I myself will eventually get the new compact 70-200 RF lens due to to its size and weight advantages. But first I must buy an RF mount camera!

 

[MORphoto.net]

So, decisions decisions, I pretty much want the R5 and will trade in my R. I have a price for trade in based against buying the R5 but the decision is, as we're all in lockdown for the next month or so and its not likely I'll be using my R for any serious work in a while, do I trade it in now and get the current price and be without the R until the R5 is released, or, wait until the R5 is released and then trade in, knowing that the trade in price is likely to drop?? I can live without the R for a month or so as we're in lock down but I really cant decide what canon will do, delay the launch until supplies are back to normal which could be September or even later, or release as originally planned in July with pre orders probably in May or June. Any sensible thoughts people??

I'm personally not too worried about the value of the original R dropping when the R5 is released. The R5 development has been announced so everyone already knows it is just around the corner. They are two very different price points as well. You can already find a new R for $1500ish if you look hard enough, and the R5 will probably be around $3500. Long ago, I sold my original 24-70 2.8 lens when the version 2 development was announced. The price was dropping so I thought I better sell sooner than later. I got about $900 for it at the time. When the official announcement with price came out, it was so much more expensive than the original that the value went up for the old one. I could have gotten $1200 - $1300 for it if I waited. Not sure this story has anything to do with the current decision you are trying to make, but all this typing makes for some great "time killing" while I'm stuck at home.

 

[Maximilian]

You had asked "why change", I did not know you were talking specifically about your needs

In my first post in this thread here I said about my personal needs/wants:

As for the (not so well) performance of the EVF I am still in the market for a 5D Mark V. Not yet willing to jump system and do all the invest again.
Though the rest of the R system is very interesting...

And this was quoted when it came about invest and EF vs. RF lenses and then you jumped in.
So sorry, but please follow the whole conversation you try to argue with.
But I'm fine now

 

[AEWest]

I'm personally not too worried about the value of the original R dropping when the R5 is released. The R5 development has been announced so everyone already knows it is just around the corner. They are two very different price points as well. You can already find a new R for $1500ish if you look hard enough, and the R5 will probably be around $3500. Long ago, I sold my original 24-70 2.8 lens when the version 2 development was announced. The price was dropping so I thought I better sell sooner than later. I got about $900 for it at the time. When the official announcement with price came out, it was so much more expensive than the original that the value went up for the old one. I could have gotten $1200 - $1300 for it if I waited. Not sure this story has anything to do with the current decision you are trying to make, but all this typing makes for some great "time killing" while I'm stuck at home.

There are two reasons why I didn't buy the R - lack of IBIS and it being version 1.0 of Canon FF mirrorless system. In tech, I've learned never to buy version 1.0 of any product line - let the bleeding edge folks find all the flaws so they can be fixed for version 2.0.

 

[Starting out EOS R]

I'm personally not too worried about the value of the original R dropping when the R5 is released. The R5 development has been announced so everyone already knows it is just around the corner. They are two very different price points as well. You can already find a new R for $1500ish if you look hard enough, and the R5 will probably be around $3500. Long ago, I sold my original 24-70 2.8 lens when the version 2 development was announced. The price was dropping so I thought I better sell sooner than later. I got about $900 for it at the time. When the official announcement with price came out, it was so much more expensive than the original that the value went up for the old one. I could have gotten $1200 - $1300 for it if I waited. Not sure this story has anything to do with the current decision you are trying to make, but all this typing makes for some great "time killing" while I'm stuck at home.

You make a good point, I've never seen trade in prices go up and I don't think it will in this case but sending it to the company to process the trade in is problematic at the moment anyway, as getting to the postal service to arrange transit is not that easy with the lockdown. Plus it means i'm without the R for an unknown period.
Its so easy to overthink things like this and worry about stuff you cant affect. Whatever I do it will be a little bit of a gamble so I might just hang on until the release date is announced, that way It's not a problem if it is delayed a few months.
Having too much time on our hands is causing its own set of issues lol.

 

[privatebydesign]

You had specifically asked what a mirrorless camera (RF mount) could do that a 1dx3 (i.e. EF mount) couldn't. I gave two examples - IBIS and RF lenses.

Whether these features are unnecessary for your work is a separate matter that only you could answer.

I myself will eventually get the new compact 70-200 RF lens due to to its size and weight advantages. But first I must buy an RF mount camera!

Ok it kinda moved on from there but if we were talking generalities, as you suggest, RF lenses don’t come into it, they are not a required factor of a MILC just a part of one of Canon’s MILC systems.

So the advantages of MILC in your point of view are IBIS, so could you list the Canon MILC bodies that have IBIS that I could go and buy today?

 

[AEWest]

Ok it kinda moved on from there but if we were talking generalities, as you suggest, RF lenses don’t come into it, they are not a required factor of a MILC just a part of one of Canon’s MILC systems.

So the advantages of MILC in your point of view are IBIS, so could you list the Canon MILC bodies that have IBIS that I could go and buy today?

No - that is why I am waiting as well. But it has been confirmed for R5. Canon rushed out the R so they could develop and sell RF lenses - then to catch up with a proper mirrorless body. It has taken longer than expected.
For me to switch from DSLR to mirrorless I do need the advantages of IBIS to justify the switch along with the better RF glass.

 

[MORphoto.net]

There are two reasons why I didn't buy the R - lack of IBIS and it being version 1.0 of Canon FF mirrorless system. In tech, I've learned never to buy version 1.0 of any product line - let the bleeding edge folks find all the flaws so they can be fixed for version 2.0.

Okay.

 

[privatebydesign]

No - that is why I am waiting as well. But it has been confirmed for R5. Canon rushed out the R so they could develop and sell RF lenses - then to catch up with a proper mirrorless body. It has taken longer than expected.
For me to switch from DSLR to mirrorless I do need the advantages of IBIS to justify the switch along with the better RF glass.

That’s my point. “No”. The advantages you think you might get in a MILC you don’t own are IBIS which isn’t available from Canon yet or Canon RF lenses that don’t work on other MILC systems, hardly a compelling answer for somebody needing to take images today, or tomorrow, or next month...

What I can say is the rate at which EF gear is depreciating and the clamor for MILC makes EF gear an absolute bargain for people actually taking pictures!

 

[ildyria]

Canon rushed out the R so they could develop and sell RF lenses - then to catch up with a proper mirrorless body. It has taken longer than expected.

I totally agree with the fact that the R was slightly rushed. However Canon did not really had much choice, they had to get their a mirrorless FF out.
Sony was getting pretty visible, especially with the a9 and Nikon was making a lot of teasing and noise with their "In Poursuit Of Light" trailer .
As a result they needed something that was close to the level of a 5D in term of sensor quality rather than a 6D (Yes lots of people cried "No IBIS, No dual card")...

Given how long it takes them to release the R5, I think it was also a good idea to get the R out early, I do think a few photographers (& instragamers/influencers) would have switch boat otherwise...

Personally, I started on mirrorless and coming from the m50, the R was a big upgrade in my case, and with update 1.4 it got the eye-AF pretty close to Sony level. So I have absolutely no regret for having gone to "version 1". If canon had not released the R, I might have gone Sony (I'm really glad I didn't).

Also getting the R out to develop great lenses and then get pro bodies out is IMHO a better approach than what Nikon did: great body but no glass.

 

[AEWest]

That’s my point. “No”. The advantages you think you might get in a MILC you don’t own are IBIS which isn’t available from Canon yet or Canon RF lenses that don’t work on other MILC systems, hardly a compelling answer for somebody needing to take images today, or tomorrow, or next month...

What I can say is the rate at which EF gear is depreciating and the clamor for MILC makes EF gear an absolute bargain for people actually taking pictures!

I also want to future proof my purchase - as you know lenses are everything in an ILC system whether mirrorless or not. And I don't see a long term future in EF glass.
But I do see current value in EF mount and have said as much - 5d4 is excellent at still photos for many as well as benefit of cheaper EF glass.

We are currently in a technological transition stage and it is up to each photographer to see what best meets his or her needs. For me the best decision is to move forward with the new tech represented by the R5 or R6.

 

[Ian_of_glos]

Definitely sounds like a 5D mark V is coming. I had lots of issues with autofocus on the 5D mark IV so I'm sticking with mirrorless. My favourite focal length is also 50mm so the R series is a much better choice... the EF 50mm lenses aren't very good at all

What were the autofocus issues you had on the 5D mk4? I have had my 5D mk4 for nearly 3 years now and I have not had any problems with the autofocus.
Recently I was on a training course and one of the other photographers made the same comment. He gave that as his main reason for switching to an EOS R. He is very pleased with it, but when we compared the results on his EOS R with 24-105 F and my 5D mk4 with 85mm F1.4L there was little to choose between them. In both cases the focussing was sharp and accurate. To be perfectly honest I would be happy to use either of these cameras.

 

[privatebydesign]

I also want to future proof my purchase - as you know lenses are everything in an ILC system whether mirrorless or not. And I don't see a long term future in EF glass.
But I do see current value in EF mount and have said as much - 5d4 is excellent at still photos for many as well as benefit of cheaper EF glass.

We are currently in a technological transition stage and it is up to each photographer to see what best meets his or her needs. For me the best decision is to move forward with the new tech represented by the R5 or R6.

I understand that, my point was purely answering the question what can a DSLR do that a MILC can't, I said a couple then you came back with a couple both of which are not currently available together.

Of course we all need to work out what will work best for each of us as individuals, but it seems to me many are caught up in a wave of enthusiasm for an entirely different system for relatively minor reasons.

 

[AEWest]

I understand that, my point was purely answering the question what can a DSLR do that a MILC can't, I said a couple then you came back with a couple both of which are not currently available together.

Of course we all need to work out what will work best for each of us as individuals, but it seems to me many are caught up in a wave of enthusiasm for an entirely different system for relatively minor reasons.

Quite possibly. I tend to invest in a new camera very infrequently (my camera is now 7 years old and long in tooth). So I am looking to upgrade. And future proofing is a big part of the decision - I don't mind spending a little more upfront now as I expect the new camera to last for another 8-10 years.

I don't feel comfortable investing in an EF mount camera right now even though the prices are lower. I do want to start acquiring RF glass over the next few years so that the next camera I buy after this year's camera will have current glass.

 

[unfocused]

I've never noticed viewfinder lag. I guess technically there must be, but I can't detect it...

Earlier this spring, before the coronavirus apocalypse, I was shooting portraits of softball players. They all wanted pictures where they threw the ball up into the air and stood looking at the camera with the ball in mid air. I was trying to shoot with the R and no matter what I did the viewfinder never matched up with the shutter/flash. There was always a lag and I had to just guess and pray. A few days later, I tried it with the 5D4. No problem. That's when it really became apparent to me. Example attached. I did it, but it took many more tries and as I say, I just had to guess and not rely on the viewfinder.