Canon EOS R - I need your advise :)

The adaptors are to help owners of EF lenses transition to mirrorless, but they are really a stopgap solution until the native lenses arrive. I would not recommend buying EF lenses specifically to use on the EOS-R, you won't get the best out of the lenses or the body doing that. Honestly, the EOS-R doesn't make lot of sense unless you already have a set of EF lenses that you want to use on a mirrorless.

...that rounded out my kit perfectly was a Canon 18-135mm. I think they have two models in this range but both are great. It is the ideal range with low distortion that reduces lens swapping by giving a healthy wide angle but a workable tele-zoom in the same lens. Along with a 55-250mm long, 11-18mm wide (Tamron) and the standard 18-55mm kit I have most things covered. Mind you I have several other lenses that I use but these fairly ubiquitous and reasonably priced lenses would work for most people. The 18-135mm lens however has essentially become my standard lens second to the 11-18mm and occasionally long lenses and a couple of mid range fixed lenses.

If I could only have one reasonably priced lens though it would be the 18-135mm. It has been a great performer. Longer ranges increase in distortions as a result. This one was a great trade off.

Berrin said:

I have Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 III. I love point shoot cams because it is easy to use.

I am panning to change my way to Canon EOS R

I have no idea how to create a set.

I took school kids photos and swimming and football and indoor events etc.

I like action pics.

I will need adopter also

Canon Mount Adapter EF-EOS R

Canon Control Ring Mount Adapter EF-EOS R

Canon Drop-in Filter Mount Adapter EF-EOS R

As a lens I like :

Canon - EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM

Canon - EF 28–300mm f/3.5–5.6L IS USM

Canon - EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM

Or should I go for :

24-105mm f/4L IS USM

Or this one would be just fine :

Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 IS USM

Do I need this one also:

Canon EF 1.4X III Telephoto Extender

Or this one:

Canon EF 2.0X III Telephoto Extender

Could you guide me ?

Thank you for your time

Click to expand...

Jumping from a 1" sensor to 24x36 mm is a huge step. Why make such a big jump?

You don't seem to own any lenses for that sensor size, so why Canon?

If you want interchangeable lenses, have you considered the m4/3 offerings by Panasonic and Olympus, the APS-C offerings by Fujifilm, Sony or Canon M, or the FF Sonys?

Being a happy Canon user myself, I'm glad to see someone wanting Canon's newest product, but to be honest, if I were starting to build a system today, I might want to stay on the fence to see if the Canon R catches on.

Berrin said:

I have Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 III. I love point shoot cams because it is easy to use.

I am panning to change my way to Canon EOS R

Click to expand...

The EOS R is a completely new, untested camera. It will inevitably show up glitches in the first few months (even years). It has only a few lenses designed for use on it - yes, people who already own EF lenses can use them on the EOS R but that won't get the best pout of either the lenses or the camera.

You own a camera that you like because it is easy to use but you want to move to a system which no one yet has any real experience of and which is bound to be difficult to learn.

I can understand anyone wanting to move up from a point and shoot camera but what you are thinking of is just about the worst possible way of doing so.

Berrin said:

I have no idea how to create a set.

Click to expand...

So you are planning to spend a lot of money on something you don't understand …

Forget about the EOS R; consider any of the well-established systems in APS-C or M43 sizes; they will give you a substantial step up from the RX10. For lenses you should analyse the shots you have already taken with the RX10 to discover the equivalent focal lengths you have used. Then find lenses in your chosen system that match.

Everyone has slightly different needs from a camera. There's no point asking us what focal lengths suit us: what matters is the lengths that suit you. Once you've worked that out you can come back for advice about the relative qualities of specific lenses.

Are you going to be a pro ? You will spend at least 3.5/4k of gears, that's a lot of poney, depending of your financial situation.
The eos r isnt the best action camera, its only 5 fps in af-c.
What about cheapest solutions like M4/3 caméra, 7d m2 or even the latest rx10 ?

Pixel Pooper said:

The adaptors are to help owners of EF lenses transition to mirrorless, but they are really a stopgap solution until the native lenses arrive. I would not recommend buying EF lenses specifically to use on the EOS-R, you won't get the best out of the lenses or the body doing that. Honestly, the EOS-R doesn't make lot of sense unless you already have a set of EF lenses that you want to use on a mirrorless.

Click to expand...

I don’t understand at all how the adapted lenses are deficient in any way. How do they prevent you from “getting the best out of the lens or the body”?

I think what you’re saying is simply incorrect.

Berrin said:

As a lens I like

Canon - EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM

Canon - EF 28–300mm f/3.5–5.6L IS USM

Canon - EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM

Or should I go for :

24-105mm f/4L IS USM

Or this one would be just fine :

Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 IS USM

Do I need this one also:

Canon EF 1.4X III Telephoto Extender

Or this one:

Canon EF 2.0X III Telephoto Extender

Click to expand...

You’ll probably want three lenses.

I suggest you begin with the 24-70 f/4.0 RF lens. You can buy the camera with this lens in a kit, which saves you some money, and you won’t need an adapter right away. This is the focal range you will use most often, and the lens is fairly small for a full frame zoom lens.

After you use the camera for a few months, you might want to buy a telephoto lens for sports. This would be something like the 70-200 f/2.8 or maybe the 100-400mm. Canon may have an RF telephoto by then, but I think the standard lenses with the adapters work perfectly fine. You can also find these lenses used quite easily.

The teleconverters are both wonderful, but only work with these telephoto lenses, and not all Canon lenses. Don’t buy one until you’re experienced with the telephoto lens. You’d think that the 2x converter would be better, but it has two issues: First, you lose two f-stops as compared to one. But it also makes your lens completely different. I have a 70-200mm lens. With a 1.4x converter, it’s 100-280mm. But with a 2x converter, it’s 140-400mm, which is not a bad thing unless you want to be able to shoot things a little closer. You see, it can change the character of a lens quite a lot. For sports it might be too much, but I think in nature photography it’s more commonly used.

Later in, you might want something like a 35mm f/2.0 or a 50mm f/1.4, so that you have a compact lens, when you don’t want to carry so much You can get this after using your 24-70 for a while; you’ll know what focal length you like the most

I personally would never buy something like a 24-300mm lens; this is such a large range, that the lens will have less image quality.

MarshallG said:

I don’t understand at all how the adapted lenses are deficient in any way. How do they prevent you from “getting the best out of the lens or the body”?

I think what you’re saying is simply incorrect.

Click to expand...

Mount adapters are a compromise, that's just reality. Have you read Canon's white paper on the EOS-R system? The RF mount was designed to overcome the limitations of the EF mount and lenses, but put an EF adapter on the camera and you have an EF mount camera with none of the benefits of the new RF mount. Not to mention that DSLR lenses are larger than mirrorless lenses, and the adapter moves the weight forward which increases angular mass and makes the camera feel heavier than it is. If you want a modern mirrorless experience you need lenses designed for mirrorless, and Canon will tell you the same once those lenses are available.

MarshallG said:

Pixel Pooper said:

The adaptors are to help owners of EF lenses transition to mirrorless, but they are really a stopgap solution until the native lenses arrive. I would not recommend buying EF lenses specifically to use on the EOS-R, you won't get the best out of the lenses or the body doing that. Honestly, the EOS-R doesn't make lot of sense unless you already have a set of EF lenses that you want to use on a mirrorless.

Click to expand...

I don’t understand at all how the adapted lenses are deficient in any way. How do they prevent you from “getting the best out of the lens or the body”?

I think what you’re saying is simply incorrect.

Click to expand...

of course the prior post is wrong, the adapter is just a metal ring with contacts. I use a cheap ($20) adapter with EF and EF-S lenses on mirrorless

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

Pixel Pooper said:

MarshallG said:

I don’t understand at all how the adapted lenses are deficient in any way. How do they prevent you from “getting the best out of the lens or the body”?

I think what you’re saying is simply incorrect.

Click to expand...

Mount adapters are a compromise, that's just reality. Have you read Canon's white paper on the EOS-R system? The RF mount was designed to overcome the limitations of the EF mount and lenses, but put an EF adapter on the camera and you have an EF mount camera with none of the benefits of the new RF mount. Not to mention that DSLR lenses are larger than mirrorless lenses, and the adapter moves the weight forward which increases angular mass and makes the camera feel heavier than it is. If you want a modern mirrorless experience you need lenses designed for mirrorless, and Canon will tell you the same once those lenses are available.

Click to expand...

That’s not an answer, sorry. All you’re saying is, “It’s better because it’s better.”

Look at the 24-70 f/2.8 for Sony. Still massive. The Sony 70-200 f/2.8? Massive.

We’ll probably see improvements in wide angle prime lenses, and that’s about it. I doubt that telephoto lenses will benefit from being able to put the rear element closer to the sensor, but if any physicists want to chime in, I’m all ears.

If this shallow mount mattered that much, where’s the kick-ass Sony lens? The one that blows past the Canon and Nikkors? We haven’t seen it, nor have we seen the super-compact Sony FF lens.

More importantly, there’s no indication at all that the new mount does anything to improve focus speed or accuracy.

So in my view, I think you’re making stuff up. At least, so far, we haven’t seen one of these “magic lenses” on any platform.

Roger99 said:

...that rounded out my kit perfectly was a Canon 18-135mm.

Click to expand...

It’s a nice lens, I had one. But that’s an APS-C lens, and the EOS R is a full-frame body. I think the lens will work, but of course it will be cropped, which is not acceptable for your primary, regular use lens.

MarshallG said:

If this shallow mount mattered that much, where’s the kick-ass Sony lens? The one that blows past the Canon and Nikkors? We haven’t seen it, nor have we seen the super-compact Sony FF lens.

Click to expand...

The kick-ass lenses are there like the Sony 90mm macro, so are the super compact like the 12-24mm.

MarshallG said:

More importantly, there’s no indication at all that the new mount does anything to improve focus speed or accuracy.

Click to expand...

I never mentioned focus speed or accuracy.

MarshallG said:

So in my view, I think you’re making stuff up. At least, so far, we haven’t seen one of these “magic lenses” on any platform.

Click to expand...

I never mentioned "magic lenses" either, so who's making stuff up here?

MarshallG said:

Roger99 said:

...that rounded out my kit perfectly was a Canon 18-135mm.

Click to expand...

It’s a nice lens, I had one. But that’s an APS-C lens, and the EOS R is a full-frame body. I think the lens will work, but of course it will be cropped, which is not acceptable for your primary, regular use lens.

Click to expand...

You're right there. Noticed my mistake yesterday but figured I'd leave it because similar ranges and ratios also seem to work and should work well on FF's (and my usual time limits for these updates). The ratios should still work well as a guidline.

Pixel Pooper said:

MarshallG said:

If this shallow mount mattered that much, where’s the kick-ass Sony lens? The one that blows past the Canon and Nikkors? We haven’t seen it, nor have we seen the super-compact Sony FF lens.

Click to expand...

The kick-ass lenses are there like the Sony 90mm macro, so are the super compact like the 12-24mm

Click to expand...

The Sony 90mm Macro costs $1,000, weighs 1.3 pounds, and is 5 inches long. What’s so amazing about it?

The exotic, ultra-ultra-wide zoom? Sure, there’s an advantage for ultra short focal lengths like that, but how many people buy such exotic glass? I think that lenses like 20mm to 35mm small, fast primes will be interesting for a mount like this, and maybe it can allow better Tilt/Shift lenses. But I don’t think the narrower mount does much once a lens hits 35 or 50mm.

MarshallG said:

The Sony 90mm Macro costs $1,000, weighs 1.3 pounds, and is 5 inches long. What’s so amazing about it?

Click to expand...

It is a 1:1 macro capable of tracking at 11fps, does continuous eye AF flawlessly, has the best ergonomics of any macro lens, is the second sharpest lens ever tested on DXO, and you can play PS4 games on it.

Pixel Pooper said:

MarshallG said:

The Sony 90mm Macro costs $1,000, weighs 1.3 pounds, and is 5 inches long. What’s so amazing about it?

Click to expand...

It is a 1:1 macro capable of tracking at 11fps, does continuous eye AF flawlessly, has the best ergonomics of any macro lens, is the second sharpest lens ever tested on DXO, and you can play PS4 games on it.

Click to expand...

And $300 more than Canon’s.

MarshallG said:

And $300 more than Canon’s.

Click to expand...

Canon doesn't have a comparable lens, and when they do it won't be $300 cheaper.

Berrin said:

I am pLlanning to change my way to Canon EOS R

Click to expand...

Canon Control Ring Mount Adapter EF-EOS

Canon - EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM

Canon - RF 28–70mm f/2L

Pixel Pooper said:

MarshallG said:

And $300 more than Canon’s.

Click to expand...

Canon doesn't have a comparable lens, and when they do it won't be $300 cheaper.

Click to expand...

What does that have to do with the lens mount? This started because you said, “you won't get the best out of the lenses or the body (using an adapted lens)?” Is there something about the lens mount which makes this particular lens better?