No wonder Sony did not bother...

Started Feb 12, 2020 | Discussions thread
PWPhotography Forum Pro • Posts: 10,854
Re: No wonder Sony did not bother...

sportyaccordy wrote:

PWPhotography wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

There's no pain with Canon. EF lenses and batteries are usable on both systems, and unlike as is claimed in Sony land, EF glass actually does work better on RF bodies. On top of the better accuracy, you also get great video AF and useful continuous shooting, which can't be said for Sony, maybe outside of the A9. A reliable 2.5-5 FPS is much better than the useless 2.5 FPS I've experienced with pretty much every Sony body I've adapted glass on.

I'd not believe the hype until sport PJs and wildlife photogs start shooting sports and BIFs by adapting EF 400l/2.8, 500L and 600L on EOS-R series. Until then, it's a huge hype So far EOS R AF-C tracking is not impressive in fast moving subject.

Sport PJs and wildlife photogs are far from the only people to use MILCs. Comparing an $1800 camera to a $4500 one is also a bit silly.

And Canon is committed to filling out the RF lens lineup aggressively. 9 lenses in a year! The most FE lenses Sony has released in 1 year is 7 I think. The Canon train is gathering momentum and I bet a lot more Sony users will be defecting.

As aggressively as Sony did in last 3 years? I don't see RF 100-400L IS, RF xxx-600L IS, and any RF super-tele lenses in their roadmap. I don't believe the adapted EF long lenses will have the same performance as on DSLR bodies as they are not designed on ML technology. Until then, it's a huge hype

Until then sadly Caninkon owners need two systems - DSLR for sport/wildlife and ML for everything else, two systems, two mounts, not good.

RF system is not even 18 months old; obviously they haven't been as aggressive.

Not sure why you say EF long glass can't perform well on RF bodies... I'm certain I could pull up posts from you speaking to how EF glass performs "better" on Sony FE bodies.

And someone who doesn't shoot wildlife/sports obviously won't need a wildlife/sports focused body, which is most enthusiasts. The great irony here is I actually HAVE a 5D4 and I never use it. The R is much better for the general 24-105mm range photography I and I imagine most people do. And now Canon has an answer to all the spec fan boys who said they were done and washed up. It's great

So after your many words, you have no proof those EF long lenses have no compromises at all via adapter, right? I'd only believe if I see sport and wildlife photogs start shooting with these long lenses adapted on EOS R.

At this moment these long EF lenses AF-C tracking on 5D IV are much better than adapted on EOS-R, that is what I know and have heard.

Otherwise your adapted EF 24-105L IS doesn't prove anything in static AF-S shots.

Let's see that ultimately Canon and Nikon have to develop native RF and Z long lenses in order to have full performance on their respective high-end ML cameras.  DSLR and ML have very different AF technology and their lenses have to be designed and optimized on respective platforms.

 PWPhotography's gear list:PWPhotography's gear list
Canon EOS-1D Mark III Sony a7R IV Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG OS Macro HSM +16 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow