Reading mode: Light Dark

Northrup's conclusion "All purpose family camera for mums.."

Go to last post
olstrup said:
Rawpaul said:
Noogy said:
Volodja said:
Hello Canon EOS R community!

Few days ago in Nikon forum we were discussing opinions on T@C N review of Z6. Opinions most of real Z-system users where very different and facts presented in video were actually not confirmed.

Today they released review on Canon EOS R.

Would be nice to hear thoughts of people who spent more time shooting with camera and used it professionally on those critical points from the review.
Click to expand...
The image quality of EOS R is something I've made money from. Quite similar RAW headroom with that of the 5DMIV. The functionality in general makes it suitable for a lot of paid work on portrait, landscape, etc. For sports and action oriented stuff, I tend to default to my 5DMIV because of how balanced it feels with my longer lenses. Other than that, there's hardly anything else that my 5DMIV can do that the EOS R can't.
Click to expand...
The strange thing is that people who really used the Eos R are mostly positive.

And people who haven't , all find something to wine about... mmm makes me wonder :-|
Click to expand...
Really? All people not using Canon R? I use Sony A7X because it works for me and it's what I have been invested in for 4 years (Nikon SLR before that and at rare occations now), but I believe the Canon R and Nikon Z are excellent cameras which I could just as happily use. We are lucky these days that there are very few bad cameras out there and most often it's small performance margins and ergonomic details which separates them. Almost all of them can give great results in the hands of users posessing basic photographic workmanship.
Click to expand...
Sorry ,I exclude you.

I know it's not all People i was generalising.

You are obviously a nice exception of the rule :-)
 
Rawpaul said:
olstrup said:
Rawpaul said:
Noogy said:
Volodja said:
Hello Canon EOS R community!

Few days ago in Nikon forum we were discussing opinions on T@C N review of Z6. Opinions most of real Z-system users where very different and facts presented in video were actually not confirmed.

Today they released review on Canon EOS R.

Would be nice to hear thoughts of people who spent more time shooting with camera and used it professionally on those critical points from the review.
Click to expand...
The image quality of EOS R is something I've made money from. Quite similar RAW headroom with that of the 5DMIV. The functionality in general makes it suitable for a lot of paid work on portrait, landscape, etc. For sports and action oriented stuff, I tend to default to my 5DMIV because of how balanced it feels with my longer lenses. Other than that, there's hardly anything else that my 5DMIV can do that the EOS R can't.
Click to expand...
The strange thing is that people who really used the Eos R are mostly positive.

And people who haven't , all find something to wine about... mmm makes me wonder :-|
Click to expand...
Really? All people not using Canon R? I use Sony A7X because it works for me and it's what I have been invested in for 4 years (Nikon SLR before that and at rare occations now), but I believe the Canon R and Nikon Z are excellent cameras which I could just as happily use. We are lucky these days that there are very few bad cameras out there and most often it's small performance margins and ergonomic details which separates them. Almost all of them can give great results in the hands of users posessing basic photographic workmanship.
Click to expand...
Sorry ,I exclude you.

I know it's not all People i was generalising.

You are obviously a nice exception of the rule :-)
Click to expand...
Actually, I believe I belong to a big majority. You just don't hear us much because we don't whine loudly about other peoples perfectly legitimate choices and don't participate in partial brand feuds. :-)
 
olstrup said:
Rawpaul said:
olstrup said:
Rawpaul said:
Noogy said:
Volodja said:
Hello Canon EOS R community!

Few days ago in Nikon forum we were discussing opinions on T@C N review of Z6. Opinions most of real Z-system users where very different and facts presented in video were actually not confirmed.

Today they released review on Canon EOS R.

Would be nice to hear thoughts of people who spent more time shooting with camera and used it professionally on those critical points from the review.
Click to expand...
The image quality of EOS R is something I've made money from. Quite similar RAW headroom with that of the 5DMIV. The functionality in general makes it suitable for a lot of paid work on portrait, landscape, etc. For sports and action oriented stuff, I tend to default to my 5DMIV because of how balanced it feels with my longer lenses. Other than that, there's hardly anything else that my 5DMIV can do that the EOS R can't.
Click to expand...
The strange thing is that people who really used the Eos R are mostly positive.

And people who haven't , all find something to wine about... mmm makes me wonder :-|
Click to expand...
Really? All people not using Canon R? I use Sony A7X because it works for me and it's what I have been invested in for 4 years (Nikon SLR before that and at rare occations now), but I believe the Canon R and Nikon Z are excellent cameras which I could just as happily use. We are lucky these days that there are very few bad cameras out there and most often it's small performance margins and ergonomic details which separates them. Almost all of them can give great results in the hands of users posessing basic photographic workmanship.
Click to expand...
Sorry ,I exclude you.

I know it's not all People i was generalising.

You are obviously a nice exception of the rule :-)
Click to expand...
Actually, I believe I belong to a big majority. You just don't hear us much because we don't whine loudly about other peoples perfectly legitimate choices and don't participate in partial brand feuds. :-)
Click to expand...
You could have a point there , but the silent majority isn't on this forum

To complain about almost anything you can imagine.

And that is what I read every day.

I think personally that positivity is the way to go.

and i think there's no bad camera's just bad users.

To each his own is my perspective .... :-)
 
Last edited:
Raucous Raven said:
Raucous Raven wrote
Click to expand...
Raucous Raven said:
But they were also pretty frustrated by the slow AF (especially with longer glass) and in particular how difficult that made it to use the camera in a sports setting. This isn't new and it's not specific to them. I've seen that complaint from both professional sports and bird photographers - or at least the ones who don't have an infinite budget for long/fast glass.
Click to expand...
i haven’t watched the video, but the R focuses faster with most EF lenses than the 5d4. The 100-400 L ii is fantastic with the R. The 100 2.8 macro is also much faster and more accurate with the R.

Joe
 
Hoka Hey said:
Hoka Hey said:
Raucous Raven wrote

But they were also pretty frustrated by the slow AF (especially with longer glass) and in particular how difficult that made it to use the camera in a sports setting. This isn't new and it's not specific to them. I've seen that complaint from both professional sports and bird photographers - or at least the ones who don't have an infinite budget for long/fast glass.
Click to expand...
i haven’t watched the video, but the R focuses faster with most EF lenses than the 5d4. The 100-400 L ii is fantastic with the R. The 100 2.8 macro is also much faster and more accurate with the R.

Joe
Click to expand...
I came from 5DIV to R.

The R focus system is better for static and lowlight subjects. Eye AF made my portraiture hit rate 100%.

In Servo AF with moving subjects even toddlers, the 5DIV focuses much more confidently. This coupled with the lag-free VF makes it better suited for that use case.

But yes for macro & landscape & portraiture the R is superior.
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
Hoka Hey said:
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
Raucous Raven wrote

But they were also pretty frustrated by the slow AF (especially with longer glass) and in particular how difficult that made it to use the camera in a sports setting. This isn't new and it's not specific to them. I've seen that complaint from both professional sports and bird photographers - or at least the ones who don't have an infinite budget for long/fast glass.
Click to expand...
i haven’t watched the video, but the R focuses faster with most EF lenses than the 5d4. The 100-400 L ii is fantastic with the R. The 100 2.8 macro is also much faster and more accurate with the R.

Joe
Click to expand...
I came from 5DIV to R.

The R focus system is better for static and lowlight subjects. Eye AF made my portraiture hit rate 100%.

In Servo AF with moving subjects even toddlers, the 5DIV focuses much more confidently. This coupled with the lag-free VF makes it better suited for that use case.

But yes for macro & landscape & portraiture the R is superior.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your observations Ebrahim.

My experience is different from yours. The 100 - 400 L ii focuses significantly faster and more accurately on the R that it does for me on the 5d4. I also get more keepers from action shots on the R then the 5d4.

Cheers.

Joe



ec143b7d3f174f79a6438b5f4876f887.jpg



4cb83cd846344ca4a94f763af48e057b.jpg
 
Hoka Hey said:
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
Hoka Hey said:
Hoka Hey said:
Raucous Raven wrote

But they were also pretty frustrated by the slow AF (especially with longer glass) and in particular how difficult that made it to use the camera in a sports setting. This isn't new and it's not specific to them. I've seen that complaint from both professional sports and bird photographers - or at least the ones who don't have an infinite budget for long/fast glass.
Click to expand...
i haven’t watched the video, but the R focuses faster with most EF lenses than the 5d4. The 100-400 L ii is fantastic with the R. The 100 2.8 macro is also much faster and more accurate with the R.

Joe
Click to expand...
I came from 5DIV to R.

The R focus system is better for static and lowlight subjects. Eye AF made my portraiture hit rate 100%.

In Servo AF with moving subjects even toddlers, the 5DIV focuses much more confidently. This coupled with the lag-free VF makes it better suited for that use case.

But yes for macro & landscape & portraiture the R is superior.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your observations Ebrahim.

My experience is different from yours. The 100 - 400 L ii focuses significantly faster and more accurately on the R that it does for me on the 5d4. I also get more keepers from action shots on the R then the 5d4.

Cheers.

Joe

ec143b7d3f174f79a6438b5f4876f887.jpg

4cb83cd846344ca4a94f763af48e057b.jpg
Click to expand...
Nice sharp action shots! Thank you for sharing!
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
Hoka Hey said:
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
Raucous Raven wrote

But they were also pretty frustrated by the slow AF (especially with longer glass) and in particular how difficult that made it to use the camera in a sports setting. This isn't new and it's not specific to them. I've seen that complaint from both professional sports and bird photographers - or at least the ones who don't have an infinite budget for long/fast glass.
Click to expand...
i haven’t watched the video, but the R focuses faster with most EF lenses than the 5d4. The 100-400 L ii is fantastic with the R. The 100 2.8 macro is also much faster and more accurate with the R.

Joe
Click to expand...
I came from 5DIV to R.

The R focus system is better for static and lowlight subjects. Eye AF made my portraiture hit rate 100%.

In Servo AF with moving subjects even toddlers, the 5DIV focuses much more confidently. This coupled with the lag-free VF makes it better suited for that use case.
Click to expand...
What focus mode(s) and lens(es) have you used with moving subjects? I've noticed M50 with 85mm f1.8 lens, af is very confident when using 1 focus point & servo. (I'm normally shooting sports with 5d3 + 135L, using 1 focus point + 8 surrounding points, so I have compared those two systems.) M50 is slow to "wake up" and VF is also slow, but I cannot blame the AF with fast lens &;1 focus point. I've heard R's AF is also fast and confident when using 1 focus point & fast lens. (I would think better than M50.) Not so good in auto selection / tracking mode...
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
But yes for macro & landscape & portraiture the R is superior.

--
Egyptian 24 year old Dentist loves filmmaking/photos
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Miki Nemeth said:
it was advertised as "professional mirrorless"
Click to expand...
Canon UK has some vague references that some people at Canon regards EOS R a professional camera.

canon.co.uk/cameras/eos-r-system
canon.co.uk/cameras/eos-r-system



--
Thank you for taking the time reading. I use DPReview as my photography/videography blog. If you like it, click Like, or leave some comments.
Have fun on http://www.flickr.com/photos/99398503@N07/sets
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top