On an R body this is NOT the lens to buy :(

Canon_Guy wrote:

davel33 wrote wrote:

Any weight or balance issues are just a case of getting used to it.

I disagree with your statement, its not getting used to it, its putting up with it.

All this body-lens "balance" thing is fully artificial issue. When holding the combo properly, right hand carries only a small fraction of the whole weight. Left hand supports majority of the weight by supporting lens from below in the center of balance of the combo. Potential front/back imbalance of the combo is solved by moving the left hand forward/backward on the bottom of the lens barrel. Therefore there is no "unbalanced" combo (when considering normal weight lenses <1.5 - 2 kg).

Your 100% correct on this.  I should of been more precise in my response. I did not mean to imply that my comment was also about balance as well was weight.  It was only about weight.  In high school photo class I was thought to  keep my left hand under the balance point of the lens/body.  It became 2nd nature to me and I never stopped to think about it

davel33 wrote:

Tannin wrote:

You got the problem the wrong way around. I had constant trouble getting reliable focus with my EOS R and EF 70-300L. I got rid of the dreadful EOS R and replaced it with another SLR and all was well.

It does seem like you supported my post with your story, thank you

No, the EOS R was just as bad with any other lens. Complete dog of a camera. Canon should never have released it.

Tannin wrote:

davel33 wrote:

Tannin wrote:

You got the problem the wrong way around. I had constant trouble getting reliable focus with my EOS R and EF 70-300L. I got rid of the dreadful EOS R and replaced it with another SLR and all was well.

It does seem like you supported my post with your story, thank you

No, the EOS R was just as bad with any other lens. Complete dog of a camera. Canon should never have released it.

Then you have a bad copy. I ordered my copy the day it was announced and have never had a problem with it. Go over to the EOS R forum and you will find the same respect for it.

I have seen some nice work with the R.  It appears that you need to use it within its parameters.  Most say it is not really a sports/action camera but does many other things well.

tdbmd wrote:

I have seen some nice work with the R. It appears that you need to use it within its parameters. Most say it is not really a sports/action camera but does many other things well.

100% correct.  Use the correct tool for the job

tdbmd wrote:

I have seen some nice work with the R. It appears that you need to use it within its parameters. Most say it is not really a sports/action camera but does many other things well.

It was a dog doing landscapes too. I never expected it to be much good for wildlife, but it was amazingly unreliable doing landscapes too. And the ergonomics were dreadful. Worst Canon camera since ... well, worst I have ever known, and I've owned a lot of them.

Tannin wrote:

tdbmd wrote:

I have seen some nice work with the R. It appears that you need to use it within its parameters. Most say it is not really a sports/action camera but does many other things well.

It was a dog doing landscapes too. I never expected it to be much good for wildlife, but it was amazingly unreliable doing landscapes too. And the ergonomics were dreadful. Worst Canon camera since ... well, worst I have ever known, and I've owned a lot of them.

Given some of the photos I have seen from the R, that surprises me that it was not good for landscapes.  I have heard that the ergonomics were so so.

davel33 wrote:

dave_bass5 wrote:

Any weight or balance issues are just a case of getting used to it.

I disagree with your statement, its not getting used to it, its putting up with it.

Well disagreeing doesn't make you any more ‘right’ than anyone else.

If you cant make it work for you then fine. I make it work, love it and take photos.

What am i doing wrong 😂