Peter Greggs called the EOS R, "the camera of the year". It was an honest mistake on his part. To his credit he did redue the test with a native lens and it preformed better.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
DPR Review of EOS R vs Reality
- Thread starter Larawanista
- Start date
-
- Tags
- nikon d600 nikon d610
Larawanista
Senior Member
Good point. The risk is when reviewers have more or less similar preferences, that when "unmet" would collectively whine then.
Larawanista
Senior Member
Larawanista
Senior Member
I am actually on the 5DMIV, M5 and EOS R combo right now. The M5 image quality is not in the league of these FF bodies. The controls however are similar to that of the EOS R, including the touch and drag focusing on the display. It does help that I used it before owning the EOS R. Made the learning curve a lot more manageable.I have not even looked at the M5... can you tell me what you think of it?
I have 2x5d4's and a 5d3 as an extra that use an extra and sometimes give to second shooters. Your comment makes me curious
David Hull
Veteran Member
The M5 is a very small APS-C camera that I find perfect for travel. It has a UI very similar to the "R". I like it a lot. What I have been doing with it is taking photos of the destinations that myself and a small group of friends have been going to on Viking and AMA European River Cruises. I print them as books on Blurb and sell them to the other participants. I don't make much money at it (usually enough to get mine freeI have not even looked at the M5... can you tell me what you think of it?
I have 2x5d4's and a 5d3 as an extra that use an extra and sometimes give to second shooters. Your comment makes me curious
). The photos are more than good enough for that sort of thing. It is an APS-C camera that is very similar to the 80D in image quality. It will do anything that an APS-C DSLR camera will do. However, It is "slower" in terms AF acquisition than the "R". Oh yes, and it eats batteries a bit more -- pick up a couple spares.I pack the M5 with the 15-45 mm kit lens, the 22mm pancake and the 11-22 mm wide and a flash in a Think Tank sling bag. The whole thing tips the scales at about 6 lbs.
I like it a lot, but on my next trip I will probably take the "R". I am going to take a couple hikes with it, though, to see how I hold up. I got the M5 because I didn't want to pack the 5DIII kit which weighs in at about 18 lbs.
For more fun, read the A7III review's conclusions. None of these actual A7III cons made DPR's list of "What we don't like":
- grip too close to body with some lenses
- terrible menu system
- no top-level LCD
- no fully articulating flip out screen
- drop in DR when shooting compressed raw in continuous mode
- lack of classic aspect ratios like 1:1 and 4:3
- small aps-c lens mount
- total reliance on 3rd parties for adapters (with mixed results)
Last edited:
George Zip
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,633
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 1,430
I actually have a M2. It was a release that never made it out of Japan. It was on eBay absurdly cheap as a kit with 2 lenses, the smallest flash you have ever seen and a EF adapter. I carry it around with me all the time.The M5 is a very small APS-C camera that I find perfect for travel. It has a UI very similar to the "R". I like it a lot. What I have been doing with it is taking photos of the destinations that myself and a small group of friends have been going to on Viking and AMA European River Cruises. I print them as books on Blurb and sell them to the other participants. I don't make much money at it (usually enough to get mine freeI have not even looked at the M5... can you tell me what you think of it?
I have 2x5d4's and a 5d3 as an extra that use an extra and sometimes give to second shooters. Your comment makes me curious
I pack the M5 with the 15-45 mm kit lens, the 22mm pancake and the 11-22 mm wide and a flash in a Think Tank sling bag. The whole thing tips the scales at about 6 lbs.
I like it a lot, but on my next trip I will probably take the "R". I am going to take a couple hikes with it, though, to see how I hold up. I got the M5 because I didn't want to pack the 5DIII kit which weighs in at about 18 lbs.
I think it has the same sensor as the 600D. There is something about that sensor that I really like. I have gotten some really nice images from M2 provided the ISO is at a reasonably low setting. I even had an amusing street photo shown on a TV show from the M2. I just find it hard to use as I have gorilla fingers and find it fiddly.
I might keep an eye out for a M5 if a secondhand body bobs up cheap and utilisethe 2 M lenses I have.
Did they also mention that while on paper Sony has 1080p with 120fps, the video is soft and auto focus is not that good? Did they mention that Sony only has 100 MBPS in 4K that falls apart under heavy grading? Did they mention that compared to other cameras, it overheats more quickly while recording 4k? That when shooting in bright conditions, the LCD screen is so poor that it makes exposure simulation practically useless.
They also compared the video quality of the EOS R to the fuji X-T3. According to Fuji's own spec sheet, in 4k video mode there is a 20 minute recording limit when shooting 60fps and 30 minute when shooting 30fps. But yet very few reviewers talks about this limitation. Can you imagine if Canon did such a thing? There would be endless reviews about how Canon "cripples" their cameras.
I am not saying that these negative factors make Sony a bad camera. I am just using this as examples of how biased reviewers are against Canon.
Larawanista
Senior Member
Well, I guess there are compromises that are acceptable in certain camera brands by their judgment. These are again professional reviewers. They are paid to render their opinion.
Rawpaul
Senior Member
Some people just don,t like Canon whatever they produce , i don,t know why though
The very example of this, like I said on another branch of this thread, is the "choosy charger" thing.
Canon did absolutely the right thing. They correctly implemented the industry standard for charging devices over USB. The same industry standard used by Google, Apple, Dell and major vendors on their devices, and still somewhat ignored by manufacturers of cheap "compatible" devices.
Yet, it appear under the minuses. I get the feeling that just not doing what other trendy vendors are doing is a minus, no matter what it is.
Prehaps you are right but it really looks like they did that because they want to sell chargers for 190$.
Since they implemented the industry standard, you don't really have to buy theirs, do you? Actually, since they implemented the industry standard, you can use any charger implementing said standard, and be reasonably sure it will work, and not damage the camera.
Last edited:
Jonathan Brady
Veteran Member
Well, that's kind of a necessary aspect if your review is going to be applicable to the greatest number of people as well as to try and prevent bias (ie, be neutral or brand agnostic). The reader should read the review carefully and apply what they're reading to their own situation.
Also, DPR did in fact address Canon users specifically when they said:
Speaking of neutrality and advocacy (and I'll introduce the opposite: critic), given that you criticized DPR for not doing what they did do, what say you of your position towards DPR and also your position towards Canon? Where do you think you fall on the critic-to-neutral-to-advocate continuum?
[/QUOTE]
Jonathan Brady
Veteran Member
Not really. From the review...
the emphasized portion is why they criticized the USB charging implementation.
Rawpaul
Senior Member
You are exactly right ! i use a 20 dollar LG phone charger (including USB-C cable) .
It works perfect.
--
light is the source of all life.....
Last edited:
That's either a bug, or a protection feature, depending on how you see it, (I can even tell why it happens) and it affects you exactly each time you attach a charger that is not compliant with the standard for USB power delivery.
Now is that's an issue to be listed to the minuses of the camera and not the charger?
Let me add this: a good share of the cheap chargers that can't be bothered with properly implementing PD aren't even compliant with the relevant electrical safety regulations. They have flimsy insulation from mains, bad regulation, huge ripple and can cause damage to your devices when not become dangerous to people and property.
Refusing to work with them is what any vendor should do.
Last edited:
If I remember correctly Canon does not recommend using third party chargers (even if they are 100% compilant to standard). They only recommend using their own. That means they are greedy or their solution is not implemented to industry standard.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum