KevinRA wrote:
thunder storm wrote:
It's the kind of camera that the M5 should have been. 80D sensor, great AF, no nonsense.
When the M5 came out - no camera had the advanced AF the R10 has - even the 1D series. The M6II AF would have been the best a M5II would have got at that time.
It was the time Canon was sleeping and didn't see the true potential of mirrorless. Now Canon sees the potential Canon is hoping there's any potential for a new aps-c system left with very fast focusing bodies and no fast focusing lenses in that price range.
Now Canon is finally succeeding it's mirrorless 80D it's a bit late to the party imo. And if you like portraits (who doesn't?) the M50II has the huge advantage of being compatible to the ef-m sigma 56mm f/1.4.
+1. Come on canon - allow a RF Sigma 56m!
And the RF 35mm f/1.8 will give you f/2.8 56mm equivalent, being just too tight for a general walk around lens, and it's equivalent max aperture isn't very exiting either, especially for the price. The RF 24mm f/1.8 is even more expensive.
+1 These are prime lenses for full frame in in any value proposition - not attractive on RFS crop. Only vaguely useful one is the RF 16mm f/2.8 but I have the Sigma 16 f/1.4 for EFM.
Last not but least the stm AF of these lenses will hold back the AF performance of the camera. The fast focusing non L zooms aren't a great match to the typical high ISO performance of a crop camera when using shutter speeds typical for situations needing great AF. The L zooms are waaay too expensive for this budget camera.
To a point - that said I use albeit my EF L's on my R10 - and they work very very well. The deep (albeit narrow) grip working well.
Yes, but the sharp EF L's are still pretty expensive. I got my EF 24-70mm f/2.8 mkII for 1000 euro. The used prices went up since I got it. The f/4.0 lenses are not in the same ballpark, especially on crop. The 70-200mm's aren't going down in price as the price of the RF options is so steep. I got a Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HSM Sports for 800 euro, but a deal like that is hard to find, and it's a boat anchor especially relative to a light weight body..... A 50-100mm f/1.8 Art give more light but is reach limited and not stabilized.
For wide angle you'll need to adapt old ef-s lenses..... Finishing the mirrorless 80D for a new mount with only 2 crop lenses makes us wait even longer before we can shoot that mirrorless 80D with the glass it needs.
True - although I don't quite agree with the 80D analogy - only precise similarity really is 24MP,
Both are fast focusing 24Mp bodies. I didn't see any fast focusing 24Mp crop body since the 80D. The 90D compares to the R7. So the 80D compares to....
the same (albeit not crop) resolution of the R3 and R6II - which is plenty.
Yeah, but full frame is squeezing more optical detail out of your lenses despite having the same pixel count. It's easier to count pixels than anything trying to measure optical detail, but nonetheless it plays an at least equally important role.
I still fail to see the headline of this camera. In combination with non L glass the AF advantage is gone.
True for wide angle. There are some good options for telephoto work already - the RF100-400
Not that sharp on crop, pretty dark aperture, DLA range.
and RF 85 f/2
Simply doesn't bring that shiny AF of the R10 to life. Focal length isn't that flexible on crop.
pair nicely for starters - as do the 600 and 800 primes if they are your thing
Slow AF, pretty dark aperture, DLA range, not that sharp on crop. All in all not allowing you to take true advantage in situations needing fast AF.
. It pairs very nicely with lots of adapted EF lenses - for example the 60 macro, 55-250 STM or even in my view the EF 100-400 II.
If you're 80D + 18-135mm got broke and you don't shoot with other lenses and you're on a budget it makes sense to replace it with R10+18-150mm. If you want anything more than that I would go RP any day, as that one at least squeezes all the optical detail out of the non L RF lenses, while it sits around the same price. A used R is even more bang for the buck, and not a whole lot more expensive these days.
Different usage - poorer AF -
If it's hindered by stm lenses or too dark apertures it doesn't matter anyway.
slower frame rate (much slower on RP)
I don't care, but that's just my preference, granted.
- and no AF joystick -
That's true for the RP. However, as long as the lenses don't allow for true action or event shooting it doesn't matter anyway.
Look, Canon would have made some affordable RF USM primes it would have been a match in heaven, but with the current stm options or the too dark non L stm zooms all those event/sports AF guiding bells and whistles don't bring you much.
For fast AF needing situations adapting EF 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses with USM/HSM AF will work fine, however, those lenses - although being adapted options - are still pretty expensive.
and the awful touch bar on the R.
That's an argument vs the R7, but for the R10 it's 2 dials vs 2 dials (or 3 vs 3 counting the ring on lenses/adapter). The touch bar at least gives you some extra buttons, so I would consider it an advantage to have it.
The R also has even worse rolling shutter. Also for tele work, the crop and higher pixel density works well too for more distant subjects.
That's mostly a matter of picking the right lens, and when you're needing the longest lenses you're talking about either the f/11 primes which are well in DLA range for this crop sensor and not sharp enough to really make a huge difference compared to the R, or you're talking big while L primes which are not in the same price range as this camera. Those spending the big bucks on the big white L primes will opt for the R7 anyway.
There is also evidence and Canon state that the sensor is not identical to the 80D - just like the R7 is not identical to the 90D.
It's not identical. The Mp-counts are the same.
Particularly in Raw and DxO one can get great images from the R10 - and far more of an action camera than either the R or RP.
Raw and DxO can be used with the full frame sensor as well, so the difference remains.
We just need more lenses - Canon or Third Party which work at wide and normal range. So for now, keeping my M series
I'm using the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 HSM Art + Sigma 50mm f/1.4 HSM Art on my M6II, so for those lenses I'm set for crop RF camera's. If Canon ports over that 32mm and gives it faster AF that would be nice with the R10. But I'm not going to buy it. I'm tired of Canon and crop systems. I'm not willing to spend again on a 32mm, it will certainly come with slow AF again, and the price of the R10 is really too high for what it is.
-- hide signature --
45 is more than enough, but 500.000 isn't
