Canon EOS R review

Go read what you posted again. Maybe you'll see how nonsensical it is.

you can't buy a bad camera in 2018

@davev8 Really, no bad cameras in 2018? I dare you to plunk down your hard-earned on the new Yashica DigiFilm. You'll be singing a different tune.

ha ha i will give you that one .....

Exactly no bad cameras in 2018, only bad value cameras in 2018.

it depends what you want from a camera ....different cameras have different value to different folk ...if you want the best low light AF and don't want to take a hit changing lenses really like the output over other cameras want a flappy screan and like the canon touch interface you like astro photography so want a camera that not mess with the RAW file with NR (that rule out sony and nikon )then to that guy the R is the best value ......but obviously its not to folk who line up spec sheets

Except the Canon EOS R is from 2013

which part of it? ...as of 2018 has the best color science, the best touch interface the best low light AF ..its the only camera ever that can AF on a single star only FF MILC with a flappy lcd .....canon seams to be the only one that taking advantage with lenses making use of the short flange distance ...sony has not really done that in 5 years..if you remember milcs from 2013 did not really have AF that worked and some still have not matched low light AF to a DSLR ,,i think comments like that just make you look silly

If a camera is the sum of the parts so R is not at all a bad camera, it took me 15 minutes to understand how it operates and the controls on the lenses are beautiful, the new control ring is really helpful and it's part of the sum.

Sony users are making so many really great videos with their cameras... videos of how they feel about Canon is getting very entrenched as a genre. It's like advertising for Sony, but it's done willingly by their users. "Canon makes me lust for vengeance! look at me shooting Sony!!!!"
See the very sassy in action on the DPR forums... it's practically harassment... Sony users are anti-social apparently. We need some Sony police to manage their users.

I have no problem with low light AF with the Olympus EM5.2 and EM1.2

the R tracs well at 5fps and apparently the keeper rate is very good so making up some what for the low fps

So mais51 the only spaces left for non-smartphone cameras are video and sports?

I allready Have a smartphon..

If you think a phone is all that's needed if you dont need those functions ----- quit photography. Now.

Maybe a 6dm2 for $1100 would have been a better purchase.

@Jens Evensen
the main problem with the camera is the price. If you are happy to shell out what Canon asks for it and it fits your bill that is cool.

@Vignes
you might want to present that as your own opinion, Sony are not "cheap" by any means. They definitely have a lighter duty construction but that does not qualify them as cheap. I have now heavily used 3 Sony bodies and I have not had a single problem with them. I am talking professional work from sports, to wedding, to events, studio, etc. Even in bad weather. If your definition of cheap means that the camera gets the job done and it does not break under standard professional use, I will take that AND the additional performance features.
Actually my A9 went now though about 1M images, that would have been 2 shutter replacements for the 1DX. So stop talking about thin air.

@Jens Evensen
just reinforcing that the R is at this time targeting the existing Canon users attached to the system and sure Canon is making them pay for :-) milking every sigle penny. But again why the R and not the 5DIV? It is definitely worth the price difference, even if the the 5DIV also is overpriced.
On a different note the A7III is definitely cheaper and far more capable than the R.

@Thoughts R Us - when one sum all your (Oscar P, Peter NR) enormous effort here to praise Canon and Nikon and bash Sony, only two things will pop up - hurt feelings, aka ego or payed job, there's nothing else. I'll put my money on second thing...

Well, if you prefer a life that's dull and boring, go for it!

Yeah but most people are only making boring crappy pics with their “exciting mirrorless gadgets. we know dslrs are the camera of choice if photographing on the frontlines of war, sports and action.

T Rus wrote: "And while the future is mirrorless, DSLR's are still the proven and refined workhorses. I think of DSLR's like trucks, and mirrorless like cars"

While both the truck and the car can get you from A to B, I'll take the car over the truck any day

No bad camera in 2018 of course not! But not every camera gets a review like this either!

The sensor cover for lens changing is a very practical idea. I think that is one of the more truly innovative things about the camera.

What about Control ring.

Yes, those 2 features are incredibly practical to real world users, but ones that do not impress most reviewers, because reviewers do not have the same perspective on equipment that a real world consumer does.

Reviewers value gadgety type features, the bells and whistles, and ignore practical features of immense value to consumers. It's the nature of their work, where the live with a camera for a few days or weeks, then ship it off and move on to the next. They also like the bells and whistles because it is more interesting to them.

However to real consumers spending real money, the simple idea of having a cover over the sensor when changing lenses matters a whole lot. Same with basic reliability, where Canon comes out way ahead of the gadget king Sony.

We can learn from reviews, but we should not trust them entirely.

Also new Flexible Priority Fv Mode.

That's an example of Canon innovation being ignored by reviewers. They have their favorite bells & whistles, like the 6-stop Sony push. That gets their attention.

@Yake: reviewers love stuff like the 6 stop shadow push: it gives them something technical to write about, it makes them seem smart, and it allows for them to differentiate between models even when differences are small or negligible. In short it keeps their jobs. I saw the same thing happen in the world of HiFi growing up: increasingly reviewers became obsessed by trivialities and ignored the stuff that mattered.

And this is no knock on reviewers: most try their very best, but I do think many do not realize that their perspective is flawed and not always authoritative.

There needs to be a review of the review community, to assess whether they are focusing on the stuff of most value to their audience. That 6 stop shadow push is a great example...does it matter to most? Are most consumers better served by a shutter curtain for the sensor when changing lenses rather than that 6 stop push? And we haven't even gotten to talking lenses yet, where again the R system shines.

I found that feature interesting too. But, some tech guys mentioned that the shutter is more fragile than the sensor. And if the dust settles on the shutter blades it will sooner or later settle somewhere else in the body as they are moving really fast. Does the R have some dust absorber inside?

Unfortunately no attractive lenses or roadmap..

So wait... you’re telling me that in spite of your best efforts, there are still people who like Canon and a lot of them? And that frustrates you? You need help. I can’t understand why someone’s choice of brand would frustrate you so much that you have to post over and over again in a Canon product review. If you are happy with your gear, stick with it. Someone else’s choice is immaterial.

yes Arun there are a lot of people still loving whatever Canon releases (but this species is one its way out). This is called brand loyalism has nothing to do with objectivity. So when they (and you) come to patronise others (even the review authors!) in the comment section of an objective review, you’ll understand that we are more than a few to point the irony.

Jay- Carey and I had a very decent and rational conversation that is documented under the editors choice comments. The review is objective, the conclusion subjective and reasonable people can disagree and still live happy lives and respect each other.

As mentioned several times there and elsewhere, we have plenty of excellent reasons why we choose Canon that goes beyond brand loyalty. With about 50% of the market in sales and a mirrorless offering that will keep even more customers with Canon, they are here to stay. And so is Sony. I never once tell Sony users they are making bad choices but for some reason Sony users feel compelled to make it their life’s mission to tell Canon users how wrong they are and how their lives will be all sunshine and roses if only they convert.

The success of Sony does not give me heartburn because it forced Canon to make better sensors. Canon’s success should similarly be something you should be happy about.

In Human thinking there is “fundamentalism”, which seems to be an anxiety to have final answers to all questions.
Religious fundamentalism
Science fundamentalism
Brand fundamentalism
This is emerging as a mental health issue.

Those Rebel kits in the right hands is all one will ever need. Canon knows it too.

Kevin: why don't you rent one and try it out? Also rent the Sony with adapter so you can use it with current lenses. For about $250-$300, you'll be able to decide for yourself which is the right camera for you. Opinions (including mine) are cheap, but ultimately it is your money. Both big rental houses have nice Black Friday sales going on. Either will be a massive upgrade over what you have now and I'd be surprised if you will be able to tell a difference other than in handling and ergonomics in casual shooting.

Kevin - Canon move very slowly so don't expect dramatic improvements and don't expect their cameras to be state-of-art. If you want the "latest and greatest" in terms of tech, get a Sony.

Canon cameras are generally fun and easy to use, but if you are looking to get an EOS-R, be sure to play with one for at least several minutes before purchase, to make sure you are happy with the unusual ergonomics. And beware that battery life is quite short.

Nikon? The Z6/7 seem to have better ergonomics than the EOS-R but apart from that there isn't much to choose between them. Cosinaphile's suggestion of Fujifilm (XT-2) is sensible if you are happy to stay with APS, but again I'd caution you to spend some time playing with one before purchase, as the handling characteristics are very different to your Rebel.

I agree with Arun: rent before buying. In the long run it will save you money.

As you see, everyone has their own opinions, which may differ from yours. Myself I find the R to be a great camera with the best ergonomics of any mirrorless right now. The colors are amazing, and the RF lenses are the start of something great. in the long run I believe the RF lenses will come to dominate, just like the EOS EF lenses have.

But I am just one person, and again you won't know until you try. Anything else you are spending a lot of money based on someone else's opinion, and that can be a dangerous thing.

There's no need to get rid of your Canon EF lenses. I am a Canon user who bought a Sony A7II. I am using my existing EF lenses (35/1.4L, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 17-40/4L, 24mm TS-E, 45mm TS-E, etc.) on it using the Sigma MC-11 adapter. Everything works fine. Autofocus, IBIS, face AF all work fine with my Canon lenses (except for the TS-E lenses, which don't have AF because they are manual focus lenses). I took advantage of the recent sales and price reductions. I got the A7II with the Sony 28-70 kit lens for $998. I got the MC-11 for $149. I bought a 3rd party battery grip for $55 (2x battery life, portrait grip). That adds up to only $1202! I'm very happy. With all the money I saved, I can put it towards more lenses in the future. I already added the Samyang FE 35/2.8 pancake lens-- a great compact street shooting lens! It's also on sale, for $249.

I highly recommend the MC-11 adapter for Canon users wanting to continue to use their EF lenses on Sony bodies.

Keep your glass, move to Sony a7rii

thank you dexter for helping to "kill" the myth of an image quality gulf between the 2 sensors
as you say some advantages exist, but not the extremes imagined...

'"killer "comment

Dexter wrote: "the technology is so good that the difference between the two (FF and APS-C) is insignificant." I believe that is true, and in reality the same could be said of the difference between cameras and brands, for the most part, at least so far as IQ is concerned.

I mean when was the last time you looked at a picture and said that had to taken with brand X? The only time I have ever said so is due to Canon colors...I do believe they make a difference in some cases.

IMHO, the main differences come down to ergonomics and lenses. That is one reason why I always say that these reviews that pit one camera against another are usually misleading and do not reflect the way most people choose.

In general, I would advise anyone to buy the camera they feel most comfortable using, and the one with the lenses they want. I would also pay attention to build quality and reliability. Anything else is just splitting hairs.

Agree to a point, I never feel there is anything lacking shooting my D500, but the images coming out of my D850 are noticeably superior in all areas. That being said this only really applies to print output where resolution will always help. If you only shoot for web display MFT is enough for anyone.

Fuji ISO cheat or call it "different ISO rating" if you don't wanna trigger the fanboys.
Let me put it that way. In order to get the same exposure, the actual ISO of a Fuji has to be 2/3 of a stop higher.
Therefore does not match any full frame. Not even close.

In reply to
kodacolor200
Micro 4/3rds is great for printing, your comment that implies that it is only good for web display is utter rubbish and a stupid comment, have you seen some prints from the Olympus micro 4/3rds? i and many others have, they are fantastic, oh!! and dont forget the 1" sensors that you can get a cracking A3 print from, all the micro 4/3rds cameras and 1" models can produce extremely pleasing prints, not just your beloved Nikon, also there is much excellent software out there that is capable of re-sizing images without loss that allows you to print out poster size prints from virtually any sized sensor!!

I own a Olympus Em5 mark ii as a family/walk around camera and I enjoy it for that purpose.The print output is fine for certain professional work. However for the types of printing I do, I need high quality resolution. I make Ultra prints that require 36mp minimum for what I want to achieve - sorry MFT doesn’t cut it here. The Olys hi res mode is useless for the type of work I make.

This why Panasonic and possibly Olympus will also be entering the FF market. The MFT system is the most complete mirrorless system and it’s great in that respect. However once they shift to FF I can see MFT winding down.

kodacolor - MFT isn't for me, but I'd be surprised if MFT winds down. Allthough I don't like the ergonomics or menus of Olympus cameras, they provide good enough resolution to meet many people's needs, and the lenses are so small and light that you could easily carry an outfit twice the size of an APS or FF set-up.

Also, Olympus cameras are extremely weather-resistant - I know someone who slipped and dropped her EM1 Mkii in a river a month ago. Luckily the river was only a couple of feet deep and she was able to retreive it. Amazingly, after a few minutes drying out in the sunshine the camera was functioning perfectly again - and is still functioning perfectly!

I agree the difference in image quality is insignificant. However, in the film days I totally fell in love with my 50mm f1.4, and that's not something APS-C can give you. So the EOS R is a very welcome addition to my camera collection. And yes, it's wonderful even when it's not perfect, as it's a big improvement over my previous 5DMkII. And other systems can be better, who cares, I'm not re-buying all those lenses :-)

Are you talking about the Sony A7II that is under $1000 with lens and come with 5-stop IBIS?

Yes, the A7ii that had overheating issues and poor battery life? And probably won't hold up as long as an EOS R? And has a lesser lens system?

@Thoughts R Us
the A7II might not hold up against the R but the R does not hold up against the A7RII which is currently $800 cheaper.

When I first saw the photos from the 50mm f/1.2, I was blown away. I commented that the lens may be enough reason to buy the camera. If I had a lens like that, I would happily shoot with it using any camera it would work with.

Well Arun you have that now so you can pay the price canon is asking and can use it as much as you want.

I don’t see anything that is coming in your way here.

Very much agree. That’s why I think the eos r system has a future and the z system does not. Look at those lenses! Nevertheless, I think there is little reason to buy an eos r now, because even canon has implied that they will release an ibis body. Probably with full frame 4K to boot, I guess those that can wait should.

Well, DPR names EOS R “class leading in low-light AF” and I have my reservations EOS R. I tested Sony’s top model about 1.5 years ago and it failed badly in low-light. On-sensor AF seems to struggle with low light conditions without high-contrast objects to focus on.

@Jylppy
you might want to check out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX1sfy__7A4&t=537s
fast forward to 19:35
With a fast lens my A9 easily beats my 1DX in low light. So my experience is in line Max's test.

@Jylppy
"A9 might be better than the A7 something I tried"
So did you actually try the A9? If you did not try the A9 then the best AF 1.5 years ago was from the A7RII which is not even close to current Sony models. If you did try the A9, what lenses were you using on the A9? Mirrorless AF is far more sensitive to the lens speed. As I said I tested the 1DX against the A9 and the A9 easily wins. Note that I must have shot with my A9 ~1M pics and about the same with my 1DX. I shoot sports and events in low light, so you better have some pretty convincing evidence to persuade me differently. I am very VERY skeptical that the 5DII is even close to any of the current Sony cameras unless you are shooting somewhere around F4-5.6 in low light.
Note that the A9 is far better than any of the other Sony bodies does not just AF in lower light exceptionally well, but it does it also accurately. So if you did not actually try the A9 then your argument is completely invalid.

Badly exposed at 0.75 EV??? Are you kidding me?

EV -3 und shadow 100%. Not kidding

Reviewers have to try to find ways to differentiate between equipment; if they cannot do that then their jobs have no practical use. Now that sensor tech is this good, and all sensors get the job done very well, they have to find all types of weird tests divorced from real word usage.

I remember not too long ago when everyone seemed to be obsessed about DXO scores for sensors; people would argue and fret over a one or two point difference in one parameter. That fad seems to have faded, as people realized that the number was not definitive, the tests had their own subjectivity, and that it was all splitting hairs and had no connection to reality.

Some people like to live on the edge I guess. Faced with a scene like that, I would bracket regardless of what body I was using. Whether I chose to use a single exposure or do a composite is something I would decide after the fact.

//The photo is badly exposed.//

The photo was purposely exposed to prevent blowing out highlights. For a brighter exposure (the definition 'proper exposure' often depends on the photographer and what he or she is aiming for), then having the shadows look brighter would have meant more loss of color in the sky as more of it would have blown to white.

NicoPPC if you need to darken the photo 1.5EV is because it was too bright. On a digital camera, you always try to avoid that, as it's easier to get detail from the shadows than from the highlights. That would be a great exposure on film, but a bad exposure on digital.

OWarning: Time Warp Bubble ahead!
Back in the day,1970, with my Sekonic L-3 light meter and experience from working in a darkroom, I had no difficulty applying experience to my light meter reading while looking at the scene in front of me. I got perfect exposures every time. I spent almost no time “photoshopping” my shots in the darkroom. I still have the prints to prove it.
Today I find it absolutely absurd not to make a good exposures with today’s cameras. And I find it a total disservice to all photographers, especially beginners, to present results from grossly under exposed shots and going on adnauseam and comparing sensors on this dubious basis. This has nothing to do with photography! Stop it!!!

Get over it guys, It's a fair review. Maybe Canon will make something that gets better ratings next time.

Well, in the modern digital world, things are slightly different. For the best possible image quality, in addition to a good photographer at the viewfinder, we need the best lenses we can afford, but we also need the best sensors we can afford, as they contribute equally to the technical quality of the final image.

In truth we need to keep upgrading our lenses *and* our camera bodies (although not as often as most people think - every iteration for lenses, and every 2 iterations for camera bodies sounds right to me).

Also we need to be using a camera that we feel comfortable and confident with, so ergonomics play an important role.

Digital changes nothing: the lenses are still the most important part of the camera system. That doesn't mean the sensor and other attributes don't matter, but the lenses are still paramount.

Consider the RF 28-70 f2. That's a one stop advantage over an f2.8 standard zoom. We obsess over one sensor having a third of a stop improvement over the prior generation. With current tech, it can take years for a sensor to improve by one stop over the prior gen. Yet here we have a lens that, thanks to the new RF mount, gives us a one stop advantage right off of the bat. That's impressive.

If anything, because in digital all cameras are so good, the lenses become even more important. If I had to choose between a better lens and lesser camera, or the other way around, I would choose the better lens. Just like in HiFI I would choose to spend money on better speakers over a better receiver or turntable.

One other point to make: in HiFi it was always advisable to spend more money on speakers than the rest of the system. If you were an audiophile, that was your rule: spend the largest part of your budget on speakers. If you didn't, then you did not optimize your sound. And the speakers would be a better investment anyway, since they would last longer and you could use them with any upgraded equipment in the future.

In cameras, it should be the same thing. If we are not spending the largest part of our photography equipment budget on lenses, then we are doing something wrong. And lenses are also the better investment; they will last longer than a camera body and as you upgrade you can still use the lenses.

Thoughts R Us: great points. Plus a lens will hold its value a lot longer than a camera which has a life cycle of 4 years. Consider that the 1 t f/2L and the 400 f/5.6L are over two decades old and still work perfectly and give great results with modern cameras.

Arun: thank you for your comments.

I agree with what you said about spreading the cost of a lens over the larger amount of time, and that many Canon lenses remain relevant for decades. As I think you meant, the 135 f2 L is still a classic, and it came out in 1996.

For instance, there is a high probability I will buy the $3000 28-70 f2 RF lens. But I will still be using it 10 years from now and beyond. Really that lens will end up costing me at most a few hundred dollars every year, which is cheap considering the quality and uniqueness of that lens. And Canon will release newer R bodies that will make that lens shine even more.

Yes I meant the 135 f/2L. And I actually purchased the 400mm used last year. It is an optically superb lens that works flawlessly on my 5d4. Zero field curvature, takes an extender well, focuses lightning fast, tracks perfectly and has beautiful color rendition. Here I am getting wonderful results with my gear and I am being told that I don’t know what I am talking about and really should be spending thousands of dollars switching to a different system because the review gods say so.

@Thoughts R Us

U'r 50% right (!)... cameras and lenses walk together... using speakers/headphones/IEM w/ poor HiFi/dac is just a waste... the same in photography... having a fantastic/amazing 50/1.2 RF w/ a poor/not-so-great/not-at-the-same-level-as-the-lens sensor is a waste of money and opportunities... lenses are nothing w/o a camera as cameras are nothing w/o lenses.

No. not again the hifi analogy. Can’t believe it.

Arun & ThoughtsRus - We'll have to agree to differ on this one. In my view a brilliant lens is a waste of time if the sensor is mediocre, and vice versa. The two components work as a pair and for premium image quality it's essential to keep "up to date" on both items, hence the need to periodically upgrade cameras.

@entoman: the problem is that the sensor is not bad; all current modern day digital sensors are really fantastic. The review community has come up with ways to split hairs and try to differentiate that are out of sync with real world usage. Think of all of the great images, including by pro's, including award winners, taken with a sensor on par or even rated less than this one.

In reality all sensors are great these days, hence the lenses become even more important.

It is truly like the HiFi era, where reviewers came up with all sorts of creative ways to try to differentiate audio equipment, including measuring frequencies outside of the range of human hearing, all sorts of graphs and curves, etc. None if it mattered when you actually listened, and again, often times the elite brands did not have the best specs.

Thoughts - I agree that the differences between sensors are exaggerated, but don't you also agree that the differences between lenses are equally exaggerated?

Of course, a decent photographer can easily produce a large stunning print from a 10 year old DSLR with a 20 year old lens.

But in terms of *technical quality* a state-of-art sensor will produce that same quality at a much higher ISO rating and with greatly improved ability to recover shadow and highlight detail.

Arun - I'm afraid you are misquoting me and misinterpreting me. I've never said that Canon sensors are "bad" - I wouldn't be using Canon cameras including my current 5DS and 5DMkiv if I believed that!

What I said was that Canon sensors are not "state-of-art", or to put it plainly, they are not as good as Sony sensors of similar MP in terms of DR and high ISO noise control. I happily concede that Canon's dual pixel AF tech is the best for video, but that's irrelevant to me and to the high percentage of others who only shoot stills.

Arun continued - Of course you are right that getting the exposure "correct" is of paramount importance in minimising noise (even half a stop error makes a significant difference to noise), but that applies to any sensor, not just Canon.

The sensor in the 5DMkiv (& EOS-R) is a great improvement on that in the 5DMkiii, but still cannot handle the contrast range of a strongly sunlit scene without irrecoverable loss of shadow and highlight detail. The a7Riii and D850, both of which I've used, have superior shadow/highlight recovery at both low and high ISO, and Canon needs to match or better that performance.

Bracketing of course does not extend the DR, it merely gives you more choice about whether to sacrifice shadow and/or highlight detail.

entoman - If I misquoted you, it was not deliberate.

As it relates to sensors, it is useful to be clear what we are looking at. Bill Claff's numbers (linked in the review) have the 5D4 and EOS R at 10.6; the Sony and D850 are at 11.6 stops of print dynamic range. So we are talking about one stop of DR here. In return for which the Canon sensor offers a better implementation of DPAF and no banding (in contrast to the Z6). The low light focusing is also very useful for astro work - it is a huge time saver for me.

And I never claimed that bracketing increases dynamic range. A bracketed set of exposures, however, can be combined to yield a HDR image. If anyone believes that a one stop DR advantage eliminates the need for bracketing or HDR, then I'll respond by saying you are choosing to shoot a very highly restricted set of landscapes. Or, as DPReview seems to have done in the landscape photo shown, cooking the image to make a specious point.

Arun - As always, a lot depends on the genres of photography one shoots. DR is clearly less important than banding to you, but for myself and many others DR is an important issue where seriously Canon needs to up its game.

Yes it's possible to increase DR (and reduce noise) by merging bracketed exposures, but it's a third rate workaround, only suitable when both the subject and camera are completely static. For anyone who shoots sports, wildlife, action, events, weddings, portraits and most other genres it is useless because these genres contain moving subjects.

Even for landscapes it has very limited value, as it turns foliage into a mush, and falsifies the appearance of moving water. If multiple images could be captured in 1/500 sec and merged accurately and instantly, it might be useful, but camera technology is still a long way from achieving such a goal.

Great Review for a Great Camera!

An accurate review for a stylish but technically underwhelming camera with far from perfect ergonomics.

Forgive the criticism, which is not intended to be personal, but it's pointless to come out with one-liners such as "Great Review" or "Lousy Review" unless you actually say something constructive, i.e. *why* you think it's a great/lousy review, or *why* you think it's a great/lousy camera.... and *what* you would reasonably like the manufacturer to do to improve it.

The problem with the ratings is that they imply a scientific accuracy but in reality are very subjective and can be confusing, esp. if a reader hasn't read this site for very long.

Also the ratings don't take into account long term factors like basic reliability. Sony may rate high in specs, but I would have a problem trusting a Sony for rugged use over the long term. They are dainty gadgets.

A friend of mine is a big Sony fan but even he admits that he's had some problems. He just had his a7iii replaced, and that's not the first time he's had problems with his Sony gear. Another friend of mine, who is into video, complains about constant overheating on the Sony while he is on a job. He has to use his iPhone to make up for the times when his Sony can't be used due to overheating.

Yet most reviewers ignore or gloss over reliability, because they can't measure that in a span of a few days or weeks. But to a real consumer that matters about as much as anything.

Jay-A: the 79% certainly means something - it represents what three individuals- Carey Rose, Barney Britton, and Richard Butler consider to be important. It is a subjective score, not a mathematical constant like Pi or e, or the Gravitational Constant of Newton’s law. Open your mind to the possibility that a lot of people are capable of judging the many different positive attributes of camera systems and coming to an independent conclusion of what works for them instead of being so weak minded that they have to rely on a single number that someone else who likely uses their camera in a different way came up.

The numerical ratings are so arbitrary and confusing that it's no wonder people continue to have questions about them. And to someone relatively new to the site, they get even worse, because of course the models on the market change over time, but someone may see a higher score for an older camera model and think it to be superior to newer camera with a lower score, when in reality it is not.

If they want to hand out bronze, silver, gold, etc...then fine. We all understand that it is subjective. But numbers usually imply precision and these are anything but. It is very easy to find flaws and inconsistencies.

And once again, to be really thorough, we should get a reliability score...of course this won't happen since reviewers use the equipment for such a short period of time.

Personally I think that the percentage scores and the awards are nothing but fairly meaningless shortcuts created for folk who are too damned lazy to actually read the reviews. The sensible procedure is:

1) Think very hard about whether you actually really need a new camera or whether you just need to learn to become a better photographer with what you already own.

2) If you're convinced that a new camera would be beneficial, and if you can afford the expense of possibly having to buy a complete set of new lenses, visit lots of websites and read as many reviews as you can.

3) Produce a shortlist of 2 or 3 cameras and then visit a store to try them out. Do they balance well in your hands? Can you operate the controls easily? Is the camera you've chosen actually the best one for *your* type of photography?

Brendon - I get that the things I listed do not matter to you or maybe they are less important than other things. As a free thinking person, you are at liberty to buy a different system. I'm very sorry, but that does little to change the reality that they DO matter to a lot of people. For example, the 1.8 crop in 4K video is irrelevant to me. But I love how my 5D4 will focus instantly on a very dim star in Live View. I respect that it is different for others. I have no issue with the body of the review - just the very subjective way in which different attributes are combined together to come up with a very subjective score and recommendation.

You're getting it all mixed. Reviewers that 'modify their weightings' to reflect 'what customers want' are usually called sales representatives, not reviewers.

Emphasis on iso invariance has not decreased because reviewers have suddenly seen the light, but because Canon has done something about it after years of being bashed by reviewers.

A reviewer who is out of touch with how the public uses the products they review is no different from an opinionated internet commenter.

And as for ISO invariance, the Nikon D5 is far from ISO invariant. That didn’t stop it from getting a gold award, an acknowledgement that there is more to a camera than that. It actually took Nikon making a non ISO invariant camera to knock some sense into their heads.

I have come to believe that Canon Derangement Syndrome is very real. It seems to drive a certain segment of people nuts that there are so many people that care about features different from what matters to them!

Brandon: nice of you to insult all of the Canon customers. I am sure you will win them over with that kind of argument.

Canon values what the largest part of the market does and that is why they have the largest market share by far.

It's kind of like the weather person on the news: if they are constantly wrong then do you blame the weather or the forecaster?

If some reviewers are out of sync with the what the market truly values...that's fine and it is their right...it's only their opinion...but one then should wonder why value what those reviewers write?

It's like with movies...if I find a reviewer tends to trash movies that I really like, I conclude that at least for me I can't use that reviewer's opinions to guide my choices. In fact my wife jokes that sometimes it would be more accurate to go by the reverse of what some movie reviewers write, because they are so out of sync with our personal tastes. She'll say, well if this reviewer doesn't like it, then it must be a good movie!

@Arun H.... the reason for Canon's commercial success is not what they do well today but what they used to do well. Unfortunately, they are spending that brand equity at an alarming rate.

@Arun H... I don't have anything against Canon but from my own observations Canon isn't alarming anyone and hasn't for some time. While the competition should always be aware of Canon's huge customer base and their power in marketing and distribution, those aren't things that make it very far into most discussions on a gear forum.

I suppose you could just read the review for this camera and just about every other Canon camera released in the last few years. I don't think my comments were that hard to understand.

What’s perfectly clear is that you have never shot a high end canon let alone this camera. What’s also perfectly clear is you don’t shoot enough to understand that the practical differences between these cameras is minimal in real world use. Probably why your thoughts are lost in those that I actually shot canons. I shoot nikon, but totally get why my contemporaries shoot canon. There is no real difference, it’s simly a matter of preference.

@kodacolor200.... you can try to move the goalposts (this has become a specialty of Canon users in recent years) but you can't with any shred of credibility say that Canon has released many cameras that an unbiased professional would consider to be class leading in a number of years. Maybe you could fine one and that is pretty optimistic. I suppose you're trying to convince me that the bar should be set at "all cameras are good today" and while I agree with you that they are... I would also say that is a terrible place for your brand to be. Is the next marketing slogan going to be "Choose Canon, we have great lenses and cameras that are good enough!"

Well said Clayton1985, i also wonder at the amount of professionals who have ditched the Canikon systems and moved to micro 4/3rds, and growing, no overheating issues in video mode either, Panasonic solved this completely with the introduction of the GH5, ok smaller sensor, so what? still great photos and stunning video if used properly, and blows Canikon out the water any day, in video creation and total features!!

At voyager- not enough to worry Canon obviously. Many professionals move up in the game with regards to video to a 1dx mark I or c700 both of these cameras by any professional standards smoke the GH5 - you might cry price! But in the scheme of things these are high value offerings - the GH5 is more of an enthusiast camera in comparison hence you will get into the game at a much lower price, however you will be restricted in what you can offer as a professional.

@Clayton, I guess you understand where Sony is heading now. I shoot Nikon DSLR’s , however I have shot a canon 5d mark iv enough to say that this a better camera than any Sony I have used period. I prefer the haptics, responsiveness and overall output. Spec are meh, I know I shoot a D850. I consider the 5d a class leading stills camera. As a professional it is a far more reliable and confidence inspiring camera than any Sony ever produced - including the A9 - I really want to like the A9 but sorry- it does not inspire the same confidence as a Canon DSLR. Whilst it has Sony class leading specs it’s haptics and overall experience are rather average. Get it? This is why Canon do well.

@Kodacolor200... we can exclude Sony from the conversation and my point is just as valid which should be eye opening to you if you'd take a minute to step away from being an unreasonable brand defender and consider the truth. Nikon has consistently produced better cameras over the last few years and that includes the new mirrorless cameras. Canon does well because they are living off of the past. Get it?

kodacolor200
1dx mark I or c700 both of these cameras by any professional standards smoke the GH5
Aye right, the c700 is a totally made for professional video-camera (unfair comparison) and you know that, we are talking mirror/ mirror-less cameras here, not professional video-cameras, anyways Panasonic and sony professional made for video cameras blow Canikon out of the water in all aspects of video quality, and yes i agree the 1dx mark i smokes the GH5 alright, thats because it overheats so much in video mode, and watch out for the smoke alright, ya best bring a good ice-sided coolbox to place it in after 10mts worth of video mode, lol, better than the GH5 in video-mode, aye right, lmfao!!

@Thoughts R Us -
In spite of these damage control fan-boyish posts, EOS R will sell very mediocre and be the launch of a new FF MILC system that will propel Canon to number 2 in FF MiLC sales.

Canon has been slouch for years in spite of golden/silver reviews for years, because users have a bad habit of chronological belief in Canon marketing of a glorious system that will keep their ego high as on crack.

The R is far from fabulous camera, far worse than the sum of its parts and the RF lens system is already class leading in price levels. Not enough said.

Nikon Z series cameras looks and feels better than Canon and it will be better over years. Sony, your archenemy and reason for bad digestion is even light years ahead.

Try harder!

Yeah, in October the R had its glory month on BCN sales. But that's already over, the #1 FF sales spot is again taken by the A7III at the moment. On Amazon the R never outsold the A7III.

This says a lot about how 'very well' the R will sell. There are already black friday bundle deals, and pay attention to the 6DII-style price drop right after the holiday season.

Canon sells well, it's true, but only at the low end where price matters more than quality - they know how to handle this. Concerning the high end, they lost their mojo after the 5DII and their #1 spot a year ago.

Oh by the way, I accidentally got the numbering wrong. The EOS R was not #34, it was actually #43. (You can see the correct rank number in the screen shot.) I got the two digits reversed. My bad.

Hahaha...the notion of using Amazon as a measure of overall sales has been debunked many times over.

And sure, it will take some time...I never expected Canon to take over on 1 month...but come back in a year and I bet Canon is #1 in FF MILC sales.

And BTW, Sony has already seen their market share drop precipitously, and that's before the Panasonic L series hits the market and challenges them in video. There's a reason why they pulled their a7s3 release and ordered it to be redesigned.

@T3: very well researched post, even if I disagree with your use of Amazon as some market barometer.

I hope Sony pays you well to do that kind of research and post that kind of promotional material here...

@Thoughts R Us - "I never expected Canon to take over on 1 month"

The problem is, even FF MILCs that have been in the market for quite a while are outselling the EOS R. You also have to think about where these Sony FF MILC buyers are coming from. A lot of them are coming from Canon and Nikon DSLR users, whereas EOS R buyers are mainly coming from existing Canon DSLR users.

"but come back in a year and I bet Canon is #1 in FF MILC sales."

Really? That's your argument now? Come back in a year? What happened to your proclamations that Canon's FF mirrorless would immediately annihilate Sony FF mirrorless? That clearly has not happened.

"And BTW, Sony has already seen their market share drop precipitously"

It was expected that there would be an initial spike in sales for any Canon FF MILC based on pent-up demand for such a camera. But it looks like that initial spike has passed.

"use of Amazon as some market barometer."

It is corroborated by NPD's sales data: https://goo.gl/TdEC8c

@T3: once again your research is thorough and I am glad you function as a Sony rep on this site.

That being said, I never predicted that Canon would take over #1 in a month, only that Sony market share would drop quickly...which it has.

That NPD survey was paid for by Sony...so Sony rigged a survey to say they were #1 in a very specific cherry picked time frame when they happened to have a new camera out and Canon/Nikon did not. In fact given that I am surprised that Canon wasn't that far behind, even by Sony's own spin.

By now Sony has slipped again...we just don't know how much yet.

@Thoughts R Us - Now you're going to make the argument that the NPD data is a "rigged survey"? You sound like Donald Trump: "It's a rigged system! Fake news!" No, NPD does not base their data on "surveys." They are an independent market research firm. This is how NPD gets their data:

"NPD measures how consumers shop across all channels, sourcing data from both retailers and consumers to quantify sales, share, distribution, and velocity. The market research company collects point-of-sale data, tracking retailers, distributors, and foodservice operators, measuring what’s selling at 1,250 retailers, across 300,000 stores."

T3 - You seem to have forgotten that Sony have no less than 7 FF models currently in production and advertised on their website: a7, a7ii, a7iii, a7S, a7Rii, a7Riii and a9, whereas Canon only has one i.e. the EOS-R, which has only just been launched. This rather distorts your claim that "Sony FF MILC is outselling the EOS R 12:1 on Amazon".

And does it really matter what other people buy? Too many people have their minds influenced by what someone else uses, or says. Far better to read the specification sheets and then actually go to a store and handle several brands and models. Some have the wisdom to make alternative choices based on their own needs, rather than on the needs and opinions of others.

Canon has sold over 300 million lenses. How many has Sony sold? 1 Million. LOL You Sony fanboys have no idea of how this will be impossible, specially with the limitation of an e-mount.

Thoughts R Us, why do you say sony's marketshare has dropped? I'm sure they still have about 90+% of the mirrorless FF market. It's not because canon sold a few thousand cameras that it would change the millions of sony's already out there.

@david ramos: those 300 million EF lenses (you’re actually wrong its 130 million) focus just fine on sony bodies. The day Sony made a body that can focus EF lenses, we knew some things would change didn’t we.

@kodacolor200
"What canikon have translated better than any Sony is a DSLR feel to their mirrorless cameras, fitting them with better EVFs and grips than their Sony equivalents. "
Are you so naive to think that Sony cannot produce such ergonomics and EVFs? It is all marketing strategy. If they need and I am sure the pressure is on now, it will happen pretty fast considering too that Sony cameras have much faster cycles.
I do see more struggle with Nikon and Canon to match some of the performance you see in Sony models (i.e. see A9). I would not be surprised to start seeing on Sony global shutters too in a near future.
Note that I would be VERY excited to see Canon matching Sony performance, I have lots of white large lenses with a red ring waiting for a successor for my 1DX. But I suspect it is going to be a while....
Meantime... happy shooting with my A9 and A7RIII, a killer combo.

@kodacolor200 - "Fact is with a 5 year head start Sony is already under threat from Canikon."

On the contrary, beyond the initial spike in sales due to pent-up demand, it does not appear that Canon's or Nikon's FF mirrorless entries are nearly as threatening as many thought they would be. These are all the FF cameras in the top 50 of Amazon's Best Sellers in Mirrorless currently:

#1. Sony A7II kit
#9. Sony A7III body
#14. Sony A7RII body
#21. Sony A7II body
#25. Sony A7RIII body
#26. Sony A7III kit
#37. Sony A7 kit
#46. Sony A7III kit
#49. Sony A7III kit

Screenshots here:
https://ibb.co/hgjFzq
https://ibb.co/cCS2eq
https://ibb.co/fMxDkV

The Canon and Nikon's FF MILCs are being severely outsold by Sony FF MILCs. So where are the "loyal base highly invested in lenses?" Many of them are opting to buy Sony FF mirrorless after waiting to see what Canon and Nikon have released. People are starting to realize that Sony's 5 year head start is actually quite significant.

Well Sony have had 5 years to translate the ergonomics and overall haptics of a DSLR over and it’s doesnt appear to be as simple as you assume, they haven’t even managed to get it right with the A9. Canonikon seem to have understood the importance right off the bat. This is Canons first offering and I suspect rushed a little due to Nikon’s release. However you will be getting your 1DX mirrorless equivlent. Canonikon have the larger high end customer base than Sony could ever dream of. Are you so naive to think that Canikon don’t have a strategy of their own. Not to mention a distinct home ground advantage in their huge professional base? I suspect as Canikon refine their mirrorless systems more and more Sony will be getting dumped on the secondary market.

@kodacolor200 - As for the notion that CaNikon's "professional DSLR base" that is "loyal" and "highly invested in lenses" will be protection for Canon and Nikon, remember that Nikon users used the same argument in dismissing the rising threat of Canon EOS on Nikon's user base. But it didn't work. Nikon lost a lot of pro usership and users who were "highly invested in lenses" to Canon EOS. Nikon underestimated people's willingness to switch. Besides, switching is easier than ever these days thanks to smart adapters. Switching was far more painful in the SLR era because we didn't have smart adapters back then!

Also remember that the camera market is far more than just pro users. Canon rose to dominance not just with pro users but also by taking over the consumer market with their popular consumer SLRs such as Rebel EOS line. If anything, the pro base is smaller than ever because of the decline of photojournalism and elimination of photography jobs by news agencies.

@T3 you are missing the point. These sales reflect very little of what is pending re: shifts in the professional market. These sales reflect consumer spending. These are the types of customers that dump and switch systems. . Sony’s aggressive price slashing is reflected in these sales also: Canikons are charging at a premium as with all new anticipated releases. The hype around canikons mirroreless releases is due to what this represents as the future of professional photography. Everyone knew they didn’t have to match Sony spec for spec- they just need to present then possibilities of what their systems will be offering. I think that both of these cameras have met expectations and beyond. They are actually exciting releases and a very decent first outing. Sony knows this and hence the price slashing.

@kodacolor200 - I hate to break it to you, but Sony is making inroads into the pro market as well. Sony are being extremely aggressive in pursuing pros. Sony is attacking the market on all fronts. It's just like what Canon EOS did back in the 1990s. They attacked the market on all fronts. And Nikon users always said, "Ah, the Nikon pro base is too loyal! They have too much invested in lenses! Canon will never hurt Nikon's pro base!"

@t3 arbitrary points that have little to do with reality today.. If Sony was the “Canon EOS” of mirrorless as you put it. it would have a different mount. Both canikon have used the advantage of creating a new system to create a new and future proof mount. I suspect this is reasons for the slower entry into the marketplace. Sony has used a recycled mount that is inferior to both mounts.

It’s Sony, going by you very own argument that is actually the Nikon is this fantastical scenario that has little if any basis in reality. You see Sony had a chance to make a new mount with their A7 ,but they didn’t.....

Sony can attack all it wants, canikon a professional base is built and their services established for decades.

@kodacolor200 - "Sony can attack all it wants, canikon a professional base is built and their services established for decades."

First of all, as I said, the camera market is not just about the professional base. And if anything, the professional base is smaller than ever. Secondly, you are naive to believe that the professional base is a fixed, static, immovable, unchangeable pool. It's not. People thought the same of Nikon's pro base back in the 1990s. Thirdly, these are the US FF market share numbers for the first half of 2018 (DSLR + MILC):

https://ibb.co/diUCCA

You can bet that pro buyers were contributors to those Sony sales, absolutely. And my guess is that those market share numbers are not going to look much better for Canon or Nikon when the 2nd half of 2018 is reported out. The reality is that most users are not really as fanatically loyal to a camera brand as some people here seem to think they are. History has proven this.

@T3 you again ignore my main points and push your Sony stance. Sony’s mount is not specifically designed for mirrorless. Canikons are. Your very own argument contradicts what you are saying. Canon took sales from Nikon due to their mount being designed specifically to cater to AF. the mount and the lenses offered as a result of that EOS mount is what took sales Nikon. Canikon now offer mounts specifically designed for mirrorless and already show the advantages of their new mounts with the first lens offerings. Canon didn’t steal Nikon’s domination overnight with their EOS mount. Sony won’t loose users overnight either. In the long term the future for both Canikon looks bright. It is indeed the professional market that trickles down to inform the masses. You would note that not only does Canonikon dominate the professional market but also dominate consumer sales overall. Your sales chart does not reflect overall camera sales of which dslrs still dominate.

@ T3. - read below to see why the mount does indeed matter in this argument.

According to Leica manager the E mount was never really designed to go FF. Now apply to you Canon EOS argument from the 89’s

https://www.diyphotography.net/sony-e-mount-wasnt-designed-for-full-frame-cameras-says-leica-manager/

kodacolor200 it's interesting how you put such an emphasis on the pro market.

Canon just released yet another non competitive camera. You talk about how good canon's ergonomics are, but the biggest complaint I've been reading from canon users is exactly how badly made the camera is. From the MFN bar to the on/off button.

Then we have the power. The camera doesn't perform as well as the competition. And canon has a real problem there with the lack of processing power. Not sure they'll be able to fix that in the next couple of years...

What saves the day are the lenses, but canon just said they wanted to build a new set just for the R. So anyone that has EF lenses will have to switch eventually to R lenses because that's where canon is moving towards.

Not sure how many pros will want to wait a few more generations (eventually up to 9 years) to have a camera that will perform as well as a camera they could buy today from another brand.

@kodacolor200 - You're grasping at straws. You'll remember that back in the late 1980's/early 1990's, Canon users claimed that the larger 54mm EF mount was so far superior to Nikon's much smaller 44mm F mount that Nikon would no longer be able to compete with Canon's superior lens image quality, and that it would probably mean the end of the Nikon F system, or at the very least, discerning pro users would abandon it. Obviously, that didn't happen. Nikon F survived, and Nikon continued making great lenses for it. The lens mount size argument was basically a red herring. Likewise, the same is true of the Sony E-mount. And clearly, it's not having an effect on Sony FF mirrorless sales because people realize it's a red herring.

It’s because if you want to understand canons dominance, it has a lot to do with the professional market and its trickle down effect in informing consumer choice. This is why canon dominates in both high and low end markets - it’s brand recognition that sells canon cameras. The professional market feeds this recognition and brand awareness.

Canons cameras are powerful enough obviously. they wouldn’t have such a large presence in wedding, fashion, sports and press photography otherwise.

Regarding lenses, I think you’ll find that many will be shooting with both R and L lenses happily. However I think you’ll find that Canikon won’t have as much technical restrictions in the same manner Sony does with its small mount. This is the long term game and where the larger mount will show true benefits. I think you’ll find lenses will be coming out faster than their Sony equivalents simply because lens design will be technically less demanding.

kodacolor200, I'm a fashion photographer and the sony cameras are already strong in the market. Same with wedding photographers, specially with the possibility of doing stills and video.

But you're totally right with the trickle down effect. Many choose canon because of the name, but those are usually uninformed users. And right now it's very easy to google a camera and most people start to see that on-line canon isn't the chosen one. Just check the new DPR video.

Sony has already taken #1 FF camera sales in the US, including DSLRs. People are looking on-line before buying a camera. People paying $2k for a camera won't buy one just because of the name without doing some research.

And the technical limitations you're talking about, we'll have to wait and see. The 50 1.2 has strong vignetting. The 24-105 isn't better or smaller than the sony version. The 24-70 f2 is huge... So, with a very decent lens lineup, I can't see those limitations you're talking about on the sony.

I don’t doubt you are seeing more Sony cameras , Though not many professionals have totally ditched the DSLR, let alone the lenses, also many go back to the dslr simply due to preference . This will change and I think that the talk around mirrorless market is huge atm thanks to announcements from Canon, Nikon as well as Panasonic entering the FF market. To say that Sony will come out on top here in premature to say the least. Especially where the global market is concerned, which differs greatly from T3s cherry picked amazon charts. Sony has a 13.3% share of overall system camera sales globally. This was taken before canikon FF releases.

https://petapixel.com/2018/08/01/sony-has-a-13-3-market-share-of-the-system-camera-market/

Canon dominates global sales and to write canon out of the FF mirrorless market due to this camera is small minded. Canikons first efforts give Sony a run for their money. I’m only now considering FF mirrorless because of canikon not sony. I’m not alone.

The talk about mirrorless is huge and canon isn't getting very positive reviews.

And sony dominated the FF market, even before the R fiasco, and including DSRL.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/sony-celebrates-no-1-overall-position-in-us-full-frame-cameras-with-launch-of-historic-be-alpha-campaign-300697369.html

I'm sure canon won't stop existing, but right now I'm not sure they'll be able to translate the DSLR dominance into the mirrorless market.

It's an interesting article. A brand new camera from one of the biggest camera manufactures. A camera that people have been waiting for years. And still 67% of the buyers of new mirrorless chose sony.

Usually people say that the first couple of months are not fair because when a new camera hits the market, more people will buy that camera from that brand. And japan is one of the few places where canon can really sell mirrorless cameras. Still, only 22% chose canon. 2 out of 3 buyers chose sony over everything else...

I wouldn't call that dominance. :\

Guys, does it really *matter* who dominates global sales? Are we not capable of looking beyond that and appreciating cameras (of all brands) for their performance, ergonomics and versatility?

It doesn't really *matter* whether we own a Canon, Sony, Nikon, Pentax, Fujifilm etc, just as long as each of us gains pleasure from using the brand and model we choose, and produces stimulating photographs with it.

In the hands of a competent photographer, *all* modern cameras are absolutely capable of producing stunning photographs. Camera choice should really be based on what model works best for us as individuals, not on what *someone else* buys, recommends or slates.

kodacolor200, the #1 brand of mirrorless in japan starts selling a FF mirrorless and gets only 22% of sales in the first month. People are 3x more interested in a 6 month camera from the 3rd brand ? That's a bad sign.

Sony won't have it's share halved because the consumers won't multiply... You're just gonna have a transition from canon DSLR users to mirrorless users. You'll keep the same percentage if no one changed brands. But i've seen more canon users saying they're switching to sony with the R than the opposite. So there's a big possibility that those users switching from DSLR to Mirrorless will be lost to other brands that have an established mirrorless system.

And as canon keeps dropping the ball on 4k, fps, focus, etc, and the lenses don't really offer a good value for costumers, the disappointment will take even more users away from canon. Who wants to invest in a system that doesn't innovate and can't even compete in price with better cameras?

@kodacolor200
"Well Sony have had 5 years to translate the ergonomics and overall haptics of a DSLR over and it’s doesnt appear to be as simple as you assume"
I cannot believe you really have such a simple mind:
No brand will give you the perfect camera, each brand will try to edge the others in some aspects leaving room for improvement in others for the next iterations. Sony with a new system could not initially appeal to pros but enthusiasts interested in new territory, i.e. small and light, cutting edge. Additionally in the FF market Sony had no pressure until now to develop more "pro looking" bodies. Expect cameras like the A9II to start shaping differently (realistically better buttons and dials, and proper weather sealing it is all that it needs). I really hope they will not change its size. I really like the small size of the Sony.

Additionally:
"Well Sony have had 5 years to translate the ergonomics and overall haptics of a DSLR "
People used to DSLRs that cannot switch way of operating tend to assume that DSLRs have best ergonomics in absolute terms. It is sensible that Canon and Nikon did choose to make a DSLR looking mirrorless because the majority of their user are accustomed to such feel. Mirrorless are different animals from DSLRs and should have different ergonomics. As I said, better weather sealing and better buttons are needed on the Sony, and you can rest assured that they are coming to the next cameras. Do not assume that Nikon and Canon approach of shaping the mirrorless is better. That is matter of taste.

kodacolor - "Many like myself feel that whilst packed with tech and value, Sony don’t really seem to get photographers like Canon & Nikon do"

... and there you have it, in a nutshell.

armandido - "Do not assume that Nikon and Canon approach of shaping the mirrorless is better. That is matter of taste."

No, it's a matter of the shape of human hands and how easy it is to grip and operate a machine with them.

@kodacolor200 - "However Sony have a far more mature line up with multiple bodies and the cheapest FF on the market, Canon taking 22% in the first month whilst simultaneously “dropping the ball” is noteworthy."

Actually, given the fact that Canon has such massive usership, the fact that they can only squeak to 22% in the Japanese market where they are hugely popular is an indicator that many consumers do feel that they've fallen short with the EOS R. And the EOS R is doing even worse in the US. Look at Amazon's sales rankings:
https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Mirrorless-Cameras/zgbs/electronics/3109924011

As of this writing, the EOS R is at #65. Like I said, given Canon's massive usership, it really be doing MUCH better. It really should be #1. And the EOS R was supposed to be Canon's hot seller this year! Aside from the initial spike in sales due to pent up demand, sales of this camera have clearly fallen off sharply.

@entoman - "No, it's a matter of the shape of human hands and how easy it is to grip and operate a machine with them."

Canon dropped the ball on the EOS R design:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-T60nkpHco&t=2s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ko-REdnHH50

As for the shape of the human hand, everyone's hand is different. I recently ordered this grip extender for my A7II based on the recommendation of a friend who loves it:

https://www.amazon.com/Lennon-Release-Bracket-A7RIII-Batteries/dp/B07B9G6X83/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1543082194&sr=1-1-fkmr0&keywords=lennon+grip+extender

It kills two birds with one stone for me: it extends the grip length and it give me a quick release plate for my tripod. I also already have a battery grip for my A7II:

https://www.amazon.com/Powerextra-VG-C2EM-Battery-Replacement-Digital/dp/B06VW3HNT2/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1543082366&sr=1-3&keywords=a7+II+battery+grip

Plenty of ways to tailor my A7II

T3 - If you had actually read my comments properly you would have seen that I made no mention of brands or models, and that my comment was a direct answer to armandidio's assertion that ergonomics is "a matter of taste".

I made no mention of brands or models myself. If you read my other threads in this comment section you would also be aware that I have strongly criticised the ergonomics of the EOS-R, which I personally find to be significantly inferior to those of Canon's DSLRs.

@entoman - People act as if they are changing a million settings at a time when they go out shooting. That's just not true. There are only a certain set of controls you need to really access, and I've found that I can do all of those things very well with the A7II. I've found that the controls on the A7II to be nicely laid out. I've customized it to my liking. Everything is in reach of my right-hand index finger or my thumb-- even the on-off switch. I never have to move my left hand from its position -- which is the way I think cameras should be designed! Operation and usability are great. It's not rocket science.

T3 - My own (limited) experience with a7Riii is that it handles quite well, although I find the grip a bit small, with not much room between grip and fingers. Most other things are just a case of taking a few days to adapt from another camera.

To be honest though, I just don't Sony cameras pleasurable to use. But that's probably because I've used DSLRs and SLRs for many years and am reluctant to change (getting old!).

For that reason I was hoping that the EOS-R would work for me as a mirrorless addition to my DSLRs, but it's under-specified for my needs (single slot, no AF joystick, slow burst with C-AF, lousy battery performance etc).

I'm not in any hurry to switch or upgrade, as my 5D4 and 5DS between them fulfil most of my needs, but I'm hoping the "pro-EOS-R", when it's eventually released will extend my capabilities. If it disappoints, I may find myself considering a "Sony a7Riv" in a few months time.

@entoman - Everyone is different. I went from using a Canon 60D as my daily shooter to a Sony A6000. Quite a big difference.

https://ibb.co/TtSr1fb

But I never found it to be an issue. And I find the A7II to be better to use than the A6000 because it just has so many more buttons and controls that can be accessed and customized on its body. I also ordered the Lennon grip extender, and I have the battery grip for it too. I also ordered a leatherette half-case for the A7II for times when I want to dress it up.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1367983-REG/megagear_mg1124_ever_ready_leather_camera.html/?ap=y&gclid=CjwKCAiAiuTfBRAaEiwA4itUqD7WGmbKSegQxlZ0OmOQ2uy97CUOwur1LNnqB9NTi5PZM7t8oOZUcBoCSBoQAvD_BwE&lsft=BI%3A514&smp=Y

I like having cameras be configurable and customizable. I wish cameras were more modular (ie, replaceable grips, etc.)

T3 - Yes, certainly some people find it easy to switch from one control configuration to another. Some people even run two completely different systems e.g. APS and MF...

But unfortunately, although I'm a very competent photographer, as I get older I find it harder to lose the "muscle memory" that comes from years of using a particular brand and genre of camera. I like continuity, and because I shoot fast moving wildlife, I need cameras that I can operate intuitively.

@Arun I sure hope Canon business leaders are sharing those millions with you. You deserve some of it!

OK I freely admit I'm a very satisfied Canon user, having used the system professionally and since retirement 8 years ago, so yes I may be a little biased. But the scorn poured on the 6DMkii is undeserved. The sensor and AF aren't state-of-art, but it's a pleasurable camera to use, and is perfectly capable of producing large prints that would satisfy any *photographer* as opposed to someone only interested in paper specifications.

The problem I have with the 6d Mark II is that the noise characteristics of that sensor are actually worse than the original 6d. Now that is legitimately inexcusable.

I think the down grade on the 6DM2 sensor was intentional. The 6DM1 senor was so good that Canon realised they were potentially loosing 5DM3 / 5DM4 sales to it. So in typical Canon fashion they 'fixed' the problem with the new 6DM2 sensor which, of course, was worse.
Fortunately, they are one of the only camera companies who actually think that doing something like that is being clever by 'protecting' their existing product lines. Very sad for all Canon customers really.

Personally I see Canons brand dominance running many parallels with Apple.Whilst not the most powerful on paper, Canon like Apple, manage to get a very fluid and user friendly experience out of their hardware. For someone that is either a time conscious professional or an inexperienced hack, the results straight out of camera are great. Combined with some of the best erogonomics, haptics and lenses in the industry and you start to understand what people really value in a system.

This is why Canon like Apple dominate. Create the best user experience for your customers and the rest is really superfluous. I own Nikon’s but have shot Canons extensively- they are as great as any camera going and from a user perspective -a long way ahead of Sony. I Most photographers are not specheads, they are creatives that just want to make great images with ease. Canon caters to this market.

@entoman
how about having both FF and 1.5 crop? That is what Sony offers and it is the best of both worlds. And no, the R 1.8 crop does not give a better magnification, because the R 4K badly trails in details, it is almost a 1080 upsampled file.
I understand your defensive position toward Canon for making reliable solid cameras supported by a solid system and pros really appreciate that. But for too long Canon has been leveraging these facts to justify feeding customers incremental upgrades while other brands are running circles around them. It really kills the enthusiasm.

@Thoughts R Us: Give it up. You dont need to be a Canon cheerleader in every, single thread that says the R is not a great camera. Don't you have better things to do?

C@David Ramos: Of course Canon has sold a ton of lenses - they have been around since 1937. Sony on the other hand is the relative new boy on the block so I would expect that there are more Canon lenses out there.
The shame for Canon is that is that Sony has outsold everyone else over the past year and is now generally recognised as one of the leading camera / chip design innovators in the marketplace today largely because they have invested billions of $'s in R&D. Canon's R&D expenditure over the past 6 years has steadily been on the decline, and it shows.
Canon still make good reliable cameras (I shoot Canon) but they are no longer class leading, that's all. No biggie...

David ramos those lenses are sold and that figure is not for what canon going to sell. Company's future is decided by what they are going to sell.

If you are too high on history then you shall know that sony doesn't also have shabby history. But thats irrelevant to things coming in future.

Yes, Northrup. Because KR is so "yesterday."

Yes, when did Tony Northrup become the ultimate authority on everything photographic?

I think he's a nice likable guy, I give him credit for building a viable business, I think sometimes his info is valuable, but to constantly cite him as some ultimate authority is a bit much.

TN has one thing in common with KR: they both know how to generate click counts. I give them huge credit for that. Facts, reality, all that takes a back seat to being able to rabble rouse and boost those clicks. Best to ignore all of them.

I ignored KR many years ago. TN as well. DPR's subjective conclusions fall in that category also, although the body of their reviews are still very fair, balanced, ad valuable.

If one is to add the wonder RF lenses one is also to add $2000-$3000 in price and 1-1.5 kg in weight - oh and the truck to carry all this too.

@entoman - people say one year from now for the pro model. That's very little time to do the R&D that has been missing in the first R model. Maybe they will postpone, who knows.

jay-A - The R&D is probably largely completed, Canon just chose to launch the stylish but gimmicky and under-specified EOS-R first. What I expect to follow, is:

A budget model (minus slide-bar, and with 24MP sensor) in early 2019. Canon traditionally captures the novice market with cheap DSLRs, so they need to do the same with FF mirrorless.

Next, a mirrorless semi-pro "5DMkiv" in late 2019. Most likely a slightly larger body, twin SD cards, fast burst speeds, decent battery life and a new gen 36-40MP sensor. Possibly also a semi-pro "5DS" with slower burst speed and 60-70MP sensor.

Finally in early 2020, in time for the Olympics, a true pro "1DXiii" mirrorless shooting 20fps, ultra-low-light capability and a 22MP sensor.

I think we'll see a lot of high-specification lenses released, firstly zooms, wide primes and portrait teles, followed by big whites in time for the Olympics.

Just my opinion, of course.

If Canon were capable of making a mirrorless with a 40MP sensor and fast burst rates, we would have seen it already. They are nowhere close to that lol. The 30MP R can barely do 3fps. You are dreaming if you think Canon has the ability to match Sony's sensor prowess, they can't come close.

Dexter - Here we go, another "LOL" merchant. Try engaging your brain.

Over 3 years ago, Canon made a 50MP sensor that does 5fps, and a 20MP sensor that does 14fps (constrained only by the mirror mechanism), so they certainly have the *ability* to produce a 36-40MP sensor that can run at 10-12fps right now, and they'll certainly be able to bash out a 22MP sensor that can run at 20fps in a couple of years time, if not already.

What you fail to understand is that (much to the annoyance of Canon owners) Canon deliberately cripple their cameras in order to protect sales of other models. If they made the EOS-R run at 10fps it would kill sales of their 5DMkiv. It's called clever marketing, and it's what's made them the biggest selling camera brand in the world.

@Dexter Canon can do it but they just don't want to do it.

I'll believe Canon can do it when I see it because up until now, Sony has smoked them in every way possible in regards to image sensors. After shooting Canon DSLRs for 15 years, I got tired of waiting for them to finally deliver a solid FF mirrorless and got the a7iii, been perfectly happy with that. Even if Canon can finally deliver a real FF mirrorless a pro like myself can use, its going to be $4k, I'll pass. Competition offers more at much better prices.

Ok Dexter... out of sheer idle curiosity... since you are a happy Sony customer with no intent of switching back, how does any Canon action affect you? Are you so insecure in your current choice of system that you need periodic validation of that choice by posting in the comment section of a Canon review?

First off, I didn't "switch", I still own Canon gear. I also own a Fuji camera too. I dont believe in being tied to only one system. I would gladly take the R as a backup to my a7iii if it were to drop to around $1500, which is what it should have been priced. The 50 f/1.2 is grossly overpriced as well, but I'd bite if it came down to reasonable prices.

Dexter - If you've used Canon cameras for 15 years you'll be well aware of the fact that Canon cameras and lenses are *always* considerably overpriced at launch, e.g. compared to Nikon or Pentax. They get snapped up by first adopters desperate to own the "latest and greatest" at any cost, but wiser people wait until the cost drops to a realistic level and the inevitable bugs have been ironed out.

Every brand and model has its merits and its disadvantages, so running 2 or 3 systems can be beneficial, but you're lucky if you can switch back and forth between cameras without your "muscle memory" getting confused. One of the reasons why many people stick with the same brand for many years is that they miss fewer shots if they are using a machine with a familiar layout.

Carey, so why is it not mention in your conclusion at the end. in "the things you like about the Camera''? No other competing Camera has this feature and it's exactly why thousand of bloggers are complaining about the Sony lack of. Yet it's never mention as a feature at the end. Please spare me the excuses...

@David Ramos - Maybe its because they aren't the kind of bloggers that need a selfie screen for their video shooting, so they don't see the flippy screen as being as much of an asset as you do. By the way, it's a bit ridiculous to complain that they aren't giving the screen enough attention when the flip out screen is so obviously and blatantly shown in the very first photo in the article!!! LOL

As it’s blantantly obvious you assume just blogger want this feature. Just about every photographer I know wants a fully articulating screen because of the many ways it allows the photographer to be creative. So again please spare me the BS.

@Ramos: Scrounging for pennies comes to mind. Surely you aren't that desperate.

I mean, in the broad scheme of things, 79 isn't that bad.

Ok, I take that back. It is.

@Carey Rose - Meanwhile, you have no problem calling the 4K crop a con. There are many videographers that actually prefer the crop, wildlife to name just one, yet it’s a con to YOU. I assume you rate it this way because it would be a negative to vloggers who work in close quarters? These are the same people that would appreciate the flip screen. By this logic, shouldn’t the screen be a pro if the crop is a con?

@PhotoPhoolish - So by your logic, APS-C and smaller format cameras are a "pro" versus FF cameras? If people want a crop camera for videography, they'll buy a crop camera for videography. If they prefer the crop for wildlife, they'll by an m4/3 camera for video. But most people who buy FF do it so that they can have FF. So I guess by your logic, it would have been even *better* if Canon had a 2x crop for 4K video. Maybe they'll do that in the EOS R II for you.

PhotoPhoolish, the crop video is a con not because of the crop video itself, but because it doesn't offer the FF video.
Other cameras offer the crop for wildlife, and still offer the FF for almost everyone else. And it's not only vloggers that want FF 4K.
The front facing screen can be great for people that film of photograph themselves but at the same time they are annoying for others. Filming someone else on a gimbal with a screen out brings other set of problems to balance and to turn the gimbal upside down.

Most FF cameras can shoot video in FF/near FF and have the ability to crop to APS-C and even m4/3 level. Having that freedom of choice is a positive. Being forced to crop is a negative.

What I find curious...

The viewfinder on the Eos R has one of the highest resolutions in the industry with that of the A7III being very weak in comparison. The rear lcd of the Eos R also has more than double the resolution of the A7III...and is a fully articulating.

...yet at DPR, in the comparison tool, the Sony A7III "viewfinder and screen" rate higher. Odd that, no?

Like any measure of length is measured against the standard item for 1 foot or 1 meter, every camera at dpreview is measured against the spec sheet of the A7III or A7rIII. In the dpreview world there is no room for squares, or cubes. There is only the standard one-dimensional Sony P-length. P stands for performance here, most likely.

That is all fine as long as you live in the same one-dimensional world. If you apply different perspectives, the dpreviews become less meaningful. So we should all accept that measured by Sony P-standard the R is just a 79%. Measured by your standards YMMV.

It’s amazing how three of you missed the point entirely. I didn’t post to say the 4K crop shouldn’t have been a con. It was stated for how it relates to the flip screen not being a pro. I was relating to the OP, which all of you fail to do, except PAntunes, who actually included the screen in his reply. Thank you.

At least two of you did so with some level of respect and accuracy. T3 on the other hand should stick to hocking the Amazon links. Where did I say crop was pro where full frame wasn’t again? And you said this yourself: “If people want a crop camera for videography, they'll buy a crop camera for videography.” You mean like this camera? Do I really have to list the benefits this camera would have over APS-C and m4/3? I will no longer respond to your posts; it’s unfair and unkind of me to argue with the mentally challenged.

@PhotoPhoolish - As others have stated, and I stated as well, when people buy a FF camera they expect to be able to use it at FF, even for video. But to be forced to use it in a severe crop, with no option to use it in FF for 4K video, is not a positive. As Get Rekt said, it seems like people are "scrounging for pennies" with respect to the EOS R. Many people are finding the EOS R to be a lackluster introduction, in much the same way the 6DII. The good news (a silver lining to all of this) is that the 6DII saw a huge price cut (from its original $1999 price) within a year of its introduction, so maybe Canon will do the same with the EOS R.

Carey - You're absolutely right "not to make an absolute call (pro/con) on whether a fully articulating screen is better or worse relative to a screen that only tilts".

Fully articulating screens probably have the highest number of advantages e.g. they can be positioned at almost any angle, and they can be reversed to protect the screen. Tilt-only screens however have the benefit that they are always on-axis with the lens, which makes it much easier to use them to follow action.

I look forward to the day when someone designs a screen that can be flipped above or below the camera, remains on-axis, can be used for vertical compositions, and reverses inwards to protect it when not in use. It's hardly a major technical problem to manufacture a folding arm, positioned at the top or bottom of the frame, with a ball head to allow full articulation.

@cbphoto123

Significant complaints about the viewfinder's performance here:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r/9

More resolution doesn't automatically mean it's a better viewfinder.

@entoman

"I look forward to the day when someone designs a screen that can be flipped above or below the camera, remains on-axis, can be used for vertical compositions, and reverses inwards to protect it when not in use. It's hardly a major technical problem to manufacture a folding arm, positioned at the top or bottom of the frame, with a ball head to allow full articulation."

The cable is the problem. Too much flexing and you lose reliability. And they're not that easy to replace, since you have to disassemble the top and back of most cameras to get to the body side connector.