Rafavox
Well-known member
EOS R is still worth it? Read that Canon is not manufacturing those cameras anymore , how it performs for travel/ landscapes/ active kids? the autofocus is a problem for moving subjects?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
EOS R for photography only still worth?
- Thread starter Rafavox
- Start date
Care to share some of the shots? Maybe we are talking about completely different styles (in terms of subject isolation, environment conditions, type of action, ...).
Let me showcase the typical behaviour of EOS R, Z6 (II), Z7 (II). The girl in the next photo is 1,5 years old. This means she is not especially fast, nevertheless the mentioned cameras will struggle to keep up in ~50-70% of the shots. The EOS R is actually even a bit worse than the Z6/Z7. Here an example of the Z6:
Looks ok to you? It was saved to a certain degree in post processing. Let's take a look at the RAW image in 200%:
Even though the focus point was on the eye (sorry, don't have a plugin for that in lightroom but can see when viewed in the camera), ears and hair are sharp, eyes are not. And this is quite typical. This does not mean that you will never get sharp shots, but it means that you will have a lot of waste and the confidence in the cam is not really high. As I said the EOS R is even slightly worse, some examples from that camera (100% view , simple screenshots out of lightroom, no export (thus no exif), but you can see it on the top left of each image:
Arm and hand is sharp, neither eye is, even if this was the confirmed focus area. Even shot in One-Shot AF (Servo) with Focus Priority, not Release Priority. But it really doesn't matter much if one of the AF zones, a single focus point, eye detection or auto modes, One Shot or Continuous are being used. The issue is the AF speed that is simply not fast enough, the focus points are typically on the eye or face. Combined with those cameras I took around 80k images, >50% of them portraits and I would never recommend either camera for agile kids.
Kids on swings:
Back focused.
Front focused.
Front focused.
Of couse, sometimes you get lucky as well.
Kids on swings are absolutely not fun on those cameras.
R6, R5 etc are on a different level for those kind of shots and do not show those weaknesses and a much much higher keeper rate with critically sharp images. Here I can shoot whole series of fast running kids with critically sharp images, even with "slower" lenses like the RF 85 f/2.
For different shooting styles, the issue might not be that critical though, I like to shoot wide open and to fill the frame. And unlike others in this forum I am not shy of criticizing my own purchases, I do not need to defend those products, I could report a lot of bad things about the later EOS R cameras (e.g. R5) as well..
Let me showcase the typical behaviour of EOS R, Z6 (II), Z7 (II). The girl in the next photo is 1,5 years old. This means she is not especially fast, nevertheless the mentioned cameras will struggle to keep up in ~50-70% of the shots. The EOS R is actually even a bit worse than the Z6/Z7. Here an example of the Z6:
Looks ok to you? It was saved to a certain degree in post processing. Let's take a look at the RAW image in 200%:
Even though the focus point was on the eye (sorry, don't have a plugin for that in lightroom but can see when viewed in the camera), ears and hair are sharp, eyes are not. And this is quite typical. This does not mean that you will never get sharp shots, but it means that you will have a lot of waste and the confidence in the cam is not really high. As I said the EOS R is even slightly worse, some examples from that camera (100% view , simple screenshots out of lightroom, no export (thus no exif), but you can see it on the top left of each image:
Arm and hand is sharp, neither eye is, even if this was the confirmed focus area. Even shot in One-Shot AF (Servo) with Focus Priority, not Release Priority. But it really doesn't matter much if one of the AF zones, a single focus point, eye detection or auto modes, One Shot or Continuous are being used. The issue is the AF speed that is simply not fast enough, the focus points are typically on the eye or face. Combined with those cameras I took around 80k images, >50% of them portraits and I would never recommend either camera for agile kids.
Kids on swings:
Back focused.
Front focused.
Front focused.
Of couse, sometimes you get lucky as well.
Kids on swings are absolutely not fun on those cameras.
R6, R5 etc are on a different level for those kind of shots and do not show those weaknesses and a much much higher keeper rate with critically sharp images. Here I can shoot whole series of fast running kids with critically sharp images, even with "slower" lenses like the RF 85 f/2.
For different shooting styles, the issue might not be that critical though, I like to shoot wide open and to fill the frame. And unlike others in this forum I am not shy of criticizing my own purchases, I do not need to defend those products, I could report a lot of bad things about the later EOS R cameras (e.g. R5) as well..
Attachments
Last edited:
Rafavox
Well-known member
Care to share some of the shots? Maybe we are talking about completely different styles (in terms of subject isolation, environment conditions, type of action, ...).
Let me showcase the typical behaviour of EOS R, Z6 (II), Z7 (II). The girl in the next photo is 1,5 years old. This means she is not especially fast, nevertheless the mentioned cameras will struggle to keep up in ~50-70% of the shots. The EOS R is actually even a bit worse than the Z6/Z7. Here an example of the Z6:
Looks ok to you? It was saved to a certain degree in post processing. Let's take a look at the RAW image in 200%:
Even though the focus point was on the eye (sorry, don't have a plugin for that in lightroom but can see when viewed in the camera), ears and hair are sharp, eyes are not. And this is quite typical. This does not mean that you will never get sharp shots, but it means that you will have a lot of waste and the confidence in the cam is not really high. As I said the EOS R is even slightly worse, some examples from that camera (100% view , simple screenshots out of lightroom, no export (thus no exif), but you can see it on the top left of each image:
Arm and hand is sharp, neither eye is, even if this was the confirmed focus area. Even shot in One-Shot AF (Servo) with Focus Priority, not Release Priority. But it really doesn't matter much if one of the AF zones, a single focus point, eye detection or auto modes, One Shot or Continuous are being used. The issue is the AF speed that is simply not fast enough, the focus points are typically on the eye or face. Combined with those cameras I took around 80k images, >50% of them portraits and I would never recommend either camera for agile kids.
Kids on swings:
Back focused.
Front focused.
Front focused.
Of couse, sometimes you get lucky as well.
Kids on swings are absolutely not fun on those cameras.
R6, R5 etc are on a different level for those kind of shots and do not show those weaknesses and a much much higher keeper rate with critically sharp images. Here I can shoot whole series of fast running kids with critically sharp images, even with "slower" lenses like the RF 85 f/2.
For different shooting styles, the issue might not be that critical though, I like to shoot wide open and to fill the frame. And unlike others in this forum I am not shy of criticizing my own purchases, I do not need to defend those products, I could report a lot of bad things about the later EOS R cameras (e.g. R5) as well..
That was an amazing explanation for toto do the jump straight to the R6 mark 2 instead of the R…having a very active 1 year old I know how important is the autofocus to be fast enough
Alastair Norcross
Forum Pro
Wow! My R would have absolutely no problem with those shots. It nails focus in much more challenging situations. As does my M6II. The R7 is clearly even better, but both the R and M6II, with similar generation AF, are more than up to these tasks. Are you using the latest firmware? There's definitely something wrong here.Care to share some of the shots? Maybe we are talking about completely different styles (in terms of subject isolation, environment conditions, type of action, ...).
Let me showcase the typical behaviour of EOS R, Z6 (II), Z7 (II). The girl in the next photo is 1,5 years old. This means she is not especially fast, nevertheless the mentioned cameras will struggle to keep up in ~50-70% of the shots. The EOS R is actually even a bit worse than the Z6/Z7. Here an example of the Z6:
Looks ok to you? It was saved to a certain degree in post processing. Let's take a look at the RAW image in 200%:
Even though the focus point was on the eye (sorry, don't have a plugin for that in lightroom but can see when viewed in the camera), ears and hair are sharp, eyes are not. And this is quite typical. This does not mean that you will never get sharp shots, but it means that you will have a lot of waste and the confidence in the cam is not really high. As I said the EOS R is even slightly worse, some examples from that camera (100% view , simple screenshots out of lightroom, no export (thus no exif), but you can see it on the top left of each image:
Arm and hand is sharp, neither eye is, even if this was the confirmed focus area. Even shot in One-Shot AF (Servo) with Focus Priority, not Release Priority. But it really doesn't matter much if one of the AF zones, a single focus point, eye detection or auto modes, One Shot or Continuous are being used. The issue is the AF speed that is simply not fast enough, the focus points are typically on the eye or face. Combined with those cameras I took around 80k images, >50% of them portraits and I would never recommend either camera for agile kids.
Kids on swings:
Back focused.
Front focused.
Front focused.
Of couse, sometimes you get lucky as well.
Kids on swings are absolutely not fun on those cameras.
R6, R5 etc are on a different level for those kind of shots and do not show those weaknesses and a much much higher keeper rate with critically sharp images. Here I can shoot whole series of fast running kids with critically sharp images, even with "slower" lenses like the RF 85 f/2.
For different shooting styles, the issue might not be that critical though, I like to shoot wide open and to fill the frame. And unlike others in this forum I am not shy of criticizing my own purchases, I do not need to defend those products, I could report a lot of bad things about the later EOS R cameras (e.g. R5) as well..
--
“When I die, I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather. Not screaming in terror, like the passengers in his car.” Jack Handey
Alastair
anorcross
Keen hobbyist since teaching myself film photography as a teenager in the 70s, using manual SLRs and black and white film. Love photographing people and animals.
anorcross.smugmug.com
No it is not. This is typical behavior. As I said we actually have two EOS R, a Z6 and a Z7, all of them with the latest firmware. And of course I have shown examples that are intentionally bad. I have enough keepers as well and the next shot of the girl I showed initially was sharp, but the overall keeper rate is not very satisfying. Please lets not start a discussion about "this focus method would have worked" or "something must be defective", I actually know what I am doing.
If you do not have a lot of experience with this specific type of photography (agile kids that fill the frame in close range with razor thin "DOF" / or alternatively crazy movement like swings, skids or playground carousels ) then it is easy to miss the limitations of those cameras. Just try it yourself the next time you have the chance. For other types of photography the EOS R is still fantastic, I can even do some birding with it, but "Kids in flight" are much tougher than BIF.
Last edited:
Alastair Norcross
Forum Pro
And so do I. I've been taking photographs for nearly fifty years. I started out with fully manual everything, and loaded my own film cartridges with Tri-X.
I don't have much opportunity for photographing really small kids, at least until our son decides to give us a grandchild. People don't take kindly to strange men sticking cameras in their kids' faces. But I have plenty of opportunity to photograph fast-moving people close up (mostly runners), and my R has worked well for them, even with relatively slow-focusing lenses like the RF 50 F1.8 and RF 85 F2. Perhaps my R wouldn't work well for kids on playground carousels (I'll let you know when I get the chance to test it on that subject), but it definitely works for fast-moving people close up. I accept that my R7 is better, as are the other R models that have similarly recent AF, but it is highly misleading to say that the R can't cope with fast moving kids altogether. For all we know, the OP doesn't want to take pictures of his kids on playground carousels. A kid running towards the camera, for example, is no more challenging than an adult doing so (and often less, because the kid won't be running as fast).
I agree with that, so long as we're talking large birds (like your examples). Small birds are harder than kids. Nice shots, by the way.
--
“When I die, I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather. Not screaming in terror, like the passengers in his car.” Jack Handey
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile
Last edited:
I’ve used the R for a couple of years now. shooting mainly landscapes and family photos of of my kids.
I tend to shoot lenses wide open for portraits (1.4 to 2.8) and don’t have any problem with the eye af. I think it really comes down to what you’re trying to capture…. Kids playing in the house, walking, even running towards you are all easy to capture with the R. If we are talking about kids running around the garden making erratic moves which I guess is similar to what you would experience with sports then yes the R will miss some shots.
I tend to shoot lenses wide open for portraits (1.4 to 2.8) and don’t have any problem with the eye af. I think it really comes down to what you’re trying to capture…. Kids playing in the house, walking, even running towards you are all easy to capture with the R. If we are talking about kids running around the garden making erratic moves which I guess is similar to what you would experience with sports then yes the R will miss some shots.
KEG
Veteran Member
Because they are most likely discontinued by Canon Europe!
Sittatunga
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 8,316
- Solutions
- 33
- Reaction score
- 5,390
KEG
Veteran Member
I checked 3 different local stores:
- 1st one lists neither R nor RP (and is the importer also)
- 2nd one has them on clearing sale (20% discount)
- 3rd one lists RP as special order and doesn't even mention R
--
KEG
Last edited:
Sittatunga
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 8,316
- Solutions
- 33
- Reaction score
- 5,390
I don't know about the US, transatlantic buying is too much hassle. Both models are freely available in Europe and you're still in the EU. I'm sure it would have been mentioned on the two Japanese sites I linked to if Canon Japan had stopped production. I linked to the Dutch Canon store as Canon's European operation is based in Amsterdam, so i should think that's the store that will run out first when Canon do stop production.
Last edited:
ZX11
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 6,156
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 2,839
I can't share the kid shots since they are not my kids. And, I really don't post people photos on the internet. The shots at the birthday party where such of a kid riding horsey back on another running (as fast as you would with someone on your back, jog) straight to me. Kid holding bat over head, running up to threaten another kid, joking like. Kids trying to bat the piñata. Kid by themselves away from the action, on a swing, looking sly-ish smile towards the camera when they realized I was pointing the camera at them through the jungle gym set. That kid wasn't swinging straight at me but was moving with the out of focus jungle gym parts framing the face.Care to share some of the shots? Maybe we are talking about completely different styles (in terms of subject isolation, environment conditions, type of action, ...).
Let me showcase the typical behaviour of EOS R, Z6 (II), Z7 (II). The girl in the next photo is 1,5 years old. This means she is not especially fast, nevertheless the mentioned cameras will struggle to keep up in ~50-70% of the shots. The EOS R is actually even a bit worse than the Z6/Z7. Here an example of the Z6:
Looks ok to you? It was saved to a certain degree in post processing. Let's take a look at the RAW image in 200%:
Even though the focus point was on the eye (sorry, don't have a plugin for that in lightroom but can see when viewed in the camera), ears and hair are sharp, eyes are not. And this is quite typical. This does not mean that you will never get sharp shots, but it means that you will have a lot of waste and the confidence in the cam is not really high. As I said the EOS R is even slightly worse, some examples from that camera (100% view , simple screenshots out of lightroom, no export (thus no exif), but you can see it on the top left of each image:
Arm and hand is sharp, neither eye is, even if this was the confirmed focus area. Even shot in One-Shot AF (Servo) with Focus Priority, not Release Priority. But it really doesn't matter much if one of the AF zones, a single focus point, eye detection or auto modes, One Shot or Continuous are being used. The issue is the AF speed that is simply not fast enough, the focus points are typically on the eye or face. Combined with those cameras I took around 80k images, >50% of them portraits and I would never recommend either camera for agile kids.
Kids on swings:
Back focused.
Front focused.
Front focused.
Of couse, sometimes you get lucky as well.
Kids on swings are absolutely not fun on those cameras.
R6, R5 etc are on a different level for those kind of shots and do not show those weaknesses and a much much higher keeper rate with critically sharp images. Here I can shoot whole series of fast running kids with critically sharp images, even with "slower" lenses like the RF 85 f/2.
For different shooting styles, the issue might not be that critical though, I like to shoot wide open and to fill the frame. And unlike others in this forum I am not shy of criticizing my own purchases, I do not need to defend those products, I could report a lot of bad things about the later EOS R cameras (e.g. R5) as well..
The R will miss. The R5 and R6 are faster to lock on. I'm not sure their servo is faster once locked on. If you give the camera a moment to lock on, and let the servo figure out the movement, it seems to be accurate. But can't just press focus and shutter release at the same time with servo and have the R catch the movement. Like it fails at snap shots of action. Also, separating the focus press and the shutter release press helps me to smooth out my button press and not jostle the camera.
I figure the servo mode in my R will hunt a bit at first and then figure out the movement pattern so it tightens up. But then the servo will follow correctly even my fast dog. The R5 will do the same "hunt a bit then figure the movement" faster with it's better processor (maybe coding).
Like I said before in a post, I missed a kid skipping down the aisle at me. But I think my shooting technique was poor and rushed in that case. The flower girl was both feet in the air during the skip and would have been a good shot. But she wasn't from our side of the family so not a big deal.
If I upgrade to the R5mkII, it will be for easier snap shots of action. I think the R for family shots of kids in action is fine if the dad knows the limits. If the budget can handle it an R6 or even an R1 (when available) would be better.
Screen shots of JPEG's out of camera.
miss as she runs right up to the camera/me
Not sure the focus point is even keeping up with her eyes vs. lagging and me aiming behind her. No time to get the shot right so an R1 would be nice here.
Moving but not towards the camera. Might turn it into a head shot and print it.
--
"Very funny, Scotty! Now beam me down my clothes."
"He's dead, Jim! You grab his tri-corder. I'll get his wallet."
ZX11
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 6,156
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 2,839
Super close, is a no for me. Not enough time and things happen too fast. The change in focus point up close is too fast when near minimum focusing distance. 3mph three feet from you coming at you is fast. 20 feet out with a running 8mph dog is slower and more my shots.
My kid on a swing through the structure of the swing set was 24+ feet shot was 200mm at f2.8.
But with higher FPS, you are likely to have more keeper.
I can't speak for R but I had RP - much slower FPS. Reason I got 6R II was for my 7yo daughter because I kept missing shots.
Everyone talks about how kids are easier vs pro athletes.. it's true.. my 7yo doesn't run or pivot as fast as pro athlete, but I needed fps for her gymnastics, which she's very into. Her jumping off a spring board - doing aerial move and lading is on par with say, nba player taking off for a dunk and landing. I get hell of a lot more keeper than RP.
davel33
Senior Member
Dannh can I ask what version of firmware you have in your R. When the R was released, I had one from the first batch in portland and I had very bad luck with things that move but the new software (1.8.0) it's like night and day. I find myself using the R more than the R6, go figure.
--
"Just one more Lens, I promise....."
Dave
Last edited:
F
Foskito
Guest
Pros keep using all flavors of 5D bodies. I even use my RP for professional work too (product shots and fashion, not action).
So yes, an R is good enough.
So yes, an R is good enough.
R2D2
Forum Pro
If you do have the funds to make the jump to the R6ii right now, I’d say go for it. You’ll be way ahead of the curve. The (Eye) autofocus is fantastic, and its configurability (over its older relatives) is very welcome, especially for shooting people. For my event and sports shooting the R6ii is now my go-to body.
R2
KEG
Veteran Member
I think I would get R6 I or II, also there isn't that much of a difference between 24 and 30 MP.
Well, if the budget can handle it, go for the R3.
It's not merely a matter of knowing the limits of the camera, but also learning how to use it to its full potential. Kids on a swing or on a carousel...not a big problem because the action is repetitive and predictable. Success is a matter of learning the craft.
But we're talking about a couple of thousand dollars difference. That goes a long way towards buying a lens that will make a lot more difference in one's capabilities.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum