Stunning AF demo of the R8 by the Fro

ActionPhotoPassion wrote:

Watched the video and impressed by the AF. I'm eager to see where the AF of ML cameras will be in 2y from now.

OTOH the "busy" thingy when buffer is full is not a good thing. I understand that it is a 1500 usd camera but Sony did have the A77ii bursting at 12fps in 2012 (a 1200 usd camera with kit lens) facing the Nikon D500 and nobody liked the "busy" thinggy of the Sony. I still have my A77ii and I my mself dislike when it's locked in "busy" after a burst...

For us action shooters (shooting full RAW), it’ll be important to use a very fast card. My Sony G Series is waiting.

R2

MAC wrote:

ActionPhotoPassion wrote:

Watched the video and impressed by the AF. I'm eager to see where the AF of ML cameras will be in 2y from now.

OTOH the "busy" thingy when buffer is full is not a good thing. I understand that it is a 1500 usd camera but Sony did have the A77ii bursting at 12fps in 2012 (a 1200 usd camera with kit lens) facing the Nikon D500 and nobody liked the "busy" thinggy of the Sony. I still have my A77ii and I my mself dislike when it's locked in "busy" after a burst...

you just put the R8 in craw mode and 20 fps - you get 10 seconds of shooting - 200 shots

I don't shoot compressed. For what I shoot I also learned to trigger just before something interesting happen to avoid to have to fill buffer.

But yes using compressed or OOC jpeg remains a workaround..

R2D2 wrote:

ActionPhotoPassion wrote:

Watched the video and impressed by the AF. I'm eager to see where the AF of ML cameras will be in 2y from now.

OTOH the "busy" thingy when buffer is full is not a good thing. I understand that it is a 1500 usd camera but Sony did have the A77ii bursting at 12fps in 2012 (a 1200 usd camera with kit lens) facing the Nikon D500 and nobody liked the "busy" thinggy of the Sony. I still have my A77ii and I my mself dislike when it's locked in "busy" after a burst...

For us action shooters (shooting full RAW), it’ll be important to use a very fast card. My Sony G Series is waiting.

R2

The more the time is passing and the morz manufacturers are delivering and the less I see myself going ML with Sony actually.

Sony has a powerful marketing machine at selling specsheets. That's what I understood since the first A7 and it has gone wilder and wilder by the release of new revisions.

ActionPhotoPassion wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

ActionPhotoPassion wrote:

Watched the video and impressed by the AF. I'm eager to see where the AF of ML cameras will be in 2y from now.

OTOH the "busy" thingy when buffer is full is not a good thing. I understand that it is a 1500 usd camera but Sony did have the A77ii bursting at 12fps in 2012 (a 1200 usd camera with kit lens) facing the Nikon D500 and nobody liked the "busy" thinggy of the Sony. I still have my A77ii and I my mself dislike when it's locked in "busy" after a burst...

For us action shooters (shooting full RAW), it’ll be important to use a very fast card. My Sony G Series is waiting.

R2

The more the time is passing and the morz manufacturers are delivering and the less I see myself going ML with Sony actually.

Sony has a powerful marketing machine at selling specsheets. That's what I understood since the first A7 and it has gone wilder and wilder by the release of new revisions.

I suspect R2 meant his Sony SF-G SD card, not a Sony camera. I also have an SF-G SD card waiting for the R8, the SF-G and SF-M series have been performing very well and reliably for me the past years.

koenkooi wrote:

ActionPhotoPassion wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

ActionPhotoPassion wrote:

Watched the video and impressed by the AF. I'm eager to see where the AF of ML cameras will be in 2y from now.

OTOH the "busy" thingy when buffer is full is not a good thing. I understand that it is a 1500 usd camera but Sony did have the A77ii bursting at 12fps in 2012 (a 1200 usd camera with kit lens) facing the Nikon D500 and nobody liked the "busy" thinggy of the Sony. I still have my A77ii and I my mself dislike when it's locked in "busy" after a burst...

For us action shooters (shooting full RAW), it’ll be important to use a very fast card. My Sony G Series is waiting.

R2

The more the time is passing and the morz manufacturers are delivering and the less I see myself going ML with Sony actually.

Sony has a powerful marketing machine at selling specsheets. That's what I understood since the first A7 and it has gone wilder and wilder by the release of new revisions.

I suspect R2 meant his Sony SF-G SD card, not a Sony camera. I also have an SF-G SD card waiting for the R8, the SF-G and SF-M series have been performing very well and reliably for me the past years.

Ah yes sorry didn't get that.

Well fast card is indeed always the best choice when one wants the best out of the camera in burst mode

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

BirdShooter7 wrote:

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.

I never pre-order, but in this case, I sold some stuff to B&H and pre-ordered the R8 which I think is a generational camera

Will look forward to your review

R2D2 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.

It’s one of the reasons that the R7 just didn’t work out for me as an action shooter. I admit to shooting a lot of fast moving subjects (birds, planes, bikes, skiers, indoor sports, and so-forth). Fortunately I have other bodies that can do the job.

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.

Sure. If you don’t ever pan, then you won’t see it in the backgrounds. Only in subjects occasionally.

Also, of course, if the background is blurry enough, and the verticals aren't important, even if they are slanted, it doesn't matter.

I beg to differ. Slanted backgrounds get noticed, whether it’s a stand of trees, a fenceline, gym walls, utility poles, or buildings in the background, even when substantially OOF. This phenomenon is usually very hard (and time consuming) and often impossible to correct in post.

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.

If you want to simply dismiss it, go ahead. Doesn’t mean it’s not obvious to other viewers. Being free of rolling shutter effects is absolutely more preferable to having them.

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

R2

Does anyone have the R8’s sensor readout figures?

Canon EOS R8 Review (the-digital-picture.com)

Bryan has the R5 vs R8 speeds here

12 .5 ms for the R8 vs 16.3 ms of R5 - a 12% improvement over the R5

The R7 is 31 ms which is 250% worse than the R8

for me, FF all the way since we also have affordable long RF lenses

It’ll be interesting to see how it’ll perform. The Fro’s samples do look promising.

R2

MAC wrote:

Canon EOS R8 Review (the-digital-picture.com)

Bryan has the R5 vs R8 speeds here

12 .5 ms for the R8 vs 16.3 ms of R5 - a 12% improvement over the R5

The R7 is 31 ms which is 250% worse than the R8

for me, FF all the way since we also have affordable long RF lenses

You probably wanted to write "14.5ms".

Other articles show slightly different numbers, for example DPReview states (for R6 II): "In terms of rolling shutter, we measured it as 18ms (1/56 sec).", which would be quite a bit higher. For the R5 dpreview states: "At a measured readout rate of 16.2ms". Hard to say who is spot on.

It is safe to assume though that R5, R8 and R6 II are very similar with minor differences, that will not be discernible in the final image. I have not seen any other data that would contradict this.

Preordered the R8 as well btw, as a companion to the R5.

R2D2 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.

It’s one of the reasons that the R7 just didn’t work out for me as an action shooter. I admit to shooting a lot of fast moving subjects (birds, planes, bikes, skiers, indoor sports, and so-forth). Fortunately I have other bodies that can do the job.

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.

Sure. If you don’t ever pan, then you won’t see it in the backgrounds. Only in subjects occasionally.

Also, of course, if the background is blurry enough, and the verticals aren't important, even if they are slanted, it doesn't matter.

I beg to differ. Slanted backgrounds get noticed, whether it’s a stand of trees, a fenceline, gym walls, utility poles, or buildings in the background, even when substantially OOF. This phenomenon is usually very hard (and time consuming) and often impossible to correct in post.

That's why I mentioned the vertical not being important. Your examples are all of verticals that people would expect to be vertical, because they would be recognizable, even when OOF. Not all background elements are familiar to viewers.

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.

If you want to simply dismiss it, go ahead. Doesn’t mean it’s not obvious to other viewers. Being free of rolling shutter effects is absolutely more preferable to having them.

I agree, and I'm not dismissing it. I cite that example, because no-one who didn't know about that particular sign would have expected it to be vertical, as opposed to slanting. That's why the poster had to specifically tell us that the actual sign wasn't slanted. We didn't know that in advance. Obviously, buildings and trees are a different matter (though I have seen some dramatically slanted trees on the California coast).

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

R2

Does anyone have the R8’s sensor readout figures?

If it's the same sensor as in the R6II, as everyone seems to be saying, won't it be the same readout speed?

It’ll be interesting to see how it’ll perform. The Fro’s samples do look promising.

R2