Stunning AF demo of the R8 by the Fro

MAC wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

antonio-salieri wrote:

Laqup wrote:

antonio-salieri wrote:

But EFCS is good for situations where you want to avoid shake, but still want full-bit depth images/to avoid some ES downsides, and ES gets you the highest frame rates (though it's better on the newer cameras than on the R5 for rolling shutter). In short... it's still good to have all three options. Having only two is a downside. But it's not a dealbreaker anymore.

The R5 is as good as the R6 II. The R6 is a bit slower and the R7 is really slow.

Ah, yes, it does seem the R5/6ii/8 have similar ES readout. Then the R7/10/50 are slower. The R3 is faster, though.

The R6II is a bit faster than the R5, but the difference probably isn't noticeable. I find even the 'slow' R7 to be more than fast enough for my shooting. Out of about 10,000 shots taken so far with e-shutter, I have noticed rolling shutter distortion in precisely 3 of them. It all depends on what you are shooting, of course, but too many posters here say silly things like 'the R7 in e-shutter is useless for fast-moving subjects'. That's patently false, of course. It all depends on the angle and direction of the movement. I have lots of e-shutter shots of fast moving subjects that show no rolling shutter distortion at all. I love the e-shutter on my R7, and find it very useful indeed. I just wish I could set a burst rate somewhere between the slow 3fps and the (usually) too fast 15fps. The 10fps of my old 7DII was fast enough for most of my action shooting.

I actually get quite a lot of rolling shutter in my R7 action shots (esp seen in the backgrounds while panning). Just something one has to be aware of.

Yes, it all depends on how much panning you do and what is in the background when you pan. I haven't done much (any) panning with prominent verticals in the background, which is mostly what would show up. Also, of course, if the background is blurry enough, and the verticals aren't important, even if they are slanted, it doesn't matter. Someone recently posted a shot with a blurry signpost in the background, with slanted verticals. He said that the actual sign isn't slanted. But it didn't matter at all to the shot. Who cares or knows whether those verticals are actually slanted? It didn't look at all unnatural.

R5 and R6ii are much better, with only occasional rolling shutter effects.

R2

I guess it’s up to personal taste. For me slanted posts, buildings, bokeh… does bother me and for that reason I tend to use EFCS a lot more with the R7 than the R5 and even tend to try to use it with the R5 did I think there will be action potentially. Really I think the only way I’d go all in with ES is the R3 but I’m not willing to pay that much so there will be plenty of EFCS in my foreseeable future.

The shot you referenced was from the R5 by the way, R7 would be even more slanted.

and R6II/R8 has even a faster read time and better AF than R5/R6 - get with the program greg;)

since you shoot jpg, R8 will likely keep up with buffer and may meet your needs because 20 or 40 fps in getting the shot out ways the occasional infrequent rs bend that ruins the shot imo - as fro says - besides you wear out mechanical shutters more than most others - and using e-shutter will save you large dollars going forward ...

that said, if you are still finding a lot of bend in trees and fence posts and barns as you pan birds flying around with the R8, then the mechanical shutter of the R6II with the faster mechanical shutter and longer shutter life may be for you

Yes, I’m happy to get any improvement in readout speed and definitely impressed with what’s been reported about the R8.  Looking like it’ll be a great camera.  I’m still very surprised by how much Canon is giving us for $1500.