Canon EOS R full frame mirrorless talk hots up

[Mako Sports]

ummm wtf

[Snowbro]

3 minutes ago, jonpais said:

What does any of that have to do with the EOS R? and if you've got a problem with a  joke I made, why not bring it up with @Andrew Reid? No point in cluttering up the thread with personal attacks.

 

Yeah, I agree. Let's go to the part where you say sony renders greens in a superior way (contradicting the video you screenshotted and ignore the fact that the sony image in the screen is highly altered with andrews profile, not stock). I post a screenshot disproving that and you get quiet on the greens. 

4 minutes ago, Mako Sports said:

ummm wtf

That is the kind of stuff he posts. Advertising footage he films of teenage girls in southeast asia while giggling. No one wants that here, just stop jon. 

[Mako Sports]

this isn't the thread for personal attacks but that is kinda creepy..

[Snowbro]

3 minutes ago, Mako Sports said:

this isn't the thread for personal attacks but that is kinda creepy..

I agree. He just likes to go around and talk crap on everything with a closed mind. Some people like controversy, which he has a right to do, I just call him out on some things he makes up on the spot. Andrew was getting close to banning him in another thread I believe this month for it. I dont really care that much, I think he adds some excitement to a camera forum of all places ?

[Django]

The problem with Jon is he clearly has zero interest in EOS R (or Nikon Z, XT3, P4K etc). His only purpose in these threads is to point out the cameras limitations ad eternum & try and prove how superior his own camera is (currently A7III, formerly GH5). He isn't the only member using such tactics.. they exist on every gear forum, but often times it gets quite snarky, borderline troll.. and threads get derailed like this one right now.. again.

 

[Yurolov]

Let's get back on topic:

 

@7:50 1080p footage with the new rf lens - looks quite detailed. I am quite surprised. 

[Django]

yep as i stated after my first hands-on, the RF lenses really bring out full FHD resolve power (especially RF 50mm F1.2). I got laughed at for mentioning RF lenses brought EOS R IQ close to C100 but that sentiment stands, I even had to check if RF footage was shot in 4K or FHD it was that detailed.. which is why again i feel EOS R + RF combo is greater sum than parts.

[Andrew Reid]

14 hours ago, Yurolov said:

@DaveAltizer has done a very nice test. 

I habe to disagree though after viewing the footage that the color science is largely irrelevant. I still think the Canon looked much better. If all you care about is image pick the Canon. Clog is so easy to work with and looks so nice. I can't say the same for the Sony. The skintones were off and all you have to do is look at the color of the grass in the background to see who has the more sophisticated image. Too bad for the Canon that the RS makes it unusable for everything but static shots. 

Nice review Dave. And yes the colour science has a cinematic mojo. A7 III with EOSHD Pro Color is cinematic as well but different. And I'd rather have Canon LOG than S-LOG 2. So I have to agree that the colour is a big reason to shoot with the EOS R, just as it was on the Canon 1D C.

In fact, the moment you stop thinking about it as a full frame camera and simply as a APS-C 4K Canon with a picture to rival the C200, is the moment it 'clicks' and you think - ah, maybe it's not so bad after all.

The real killer is that rolling shutter. It's BAAAD.

So you will want to use a wide lens for vlogging, to avoid that - and you'll want to be careful handheld with anything longer than a 35mm. It will restrict a few shots, may ruin you at any moment so be careful. However I have enjoyed cameras before with a lot of rolling shutter - Samsung NX1 and A6500 to name but two - and it really does depend on your shooting style whether it's a real problem or not.

The flippy screen and EVF are done well on this camera.

The EOS R is quite like a GH5S in some ways (aside from that dreadful RS) bundled with a free 5D Mark IV for stills.

I wouldn't use the 1080p - it's too soft and dated - but I would use this camera for stills and 4K when I need that flippy screen and Dual Pixel AF.

It goes very nicely with the Sigma 18-35mm in 1.6x crop mode (Canon APS-C). In fact when you hit record the 4K crop is hardly noticeable compared to that APS-C mode. A bit like the Fujifilm X-H1.

The other cameras are certainly more bang for your buck though. X-H1 has IBIS. A7 III has full frame 4K. So Canon gave us a poor deal, but not without also giving us one of the best 4K codecs and colour on the market.

EOS R... Not all bad.

[Robert Collins]

I certainly get the argument that there isnt much inherently wrong with the EOS-R that you cant find a work around. I can also see the rationale - for those with a large collection of Canon lenses - to say that it is the best mirrorless option out there for them.

The problem as I see it, is that the 'shortfalls' in the EOS-R that we see seems to be indicative of a far greater 'structural' problem at Canon - I dont think they will magically disappear with the next mirrorless release. As I see it, cropped 4k, terrible rolling shutter and 120fps at 720p with no autofocus are mostly a function of the fact that both Canon's sensor tech and its processing tech is well behind the competition (and there are similar arguments for its stills.). (I dont really buy the 'avoid crippling' its Cinema argument.)

As such, it just seems an incredibly big 'ask' to try and persuade anyone who isnt incredibly entrenched in their ecosystem to invest in a brand new mount.

[Django]

Don't forget 1DX2 does 4K60p at APS-H format which is still larger sensor coverage than any of the competition. As well as some of the best 120fps at 1080p.

So Canon aren't that far behind tech wise when they want to. In fact i believe 1DX2 was by far first to do 4K60p in a hybrid cam.

It's hence quite forseeable that the higher end pro model mirrorless Canon have been hinting at will inherit 1DX2 specs and maybe even give us FF 4K.

IBIS however hasn't been done in any Canon camera AFAIK and really needs to happen soon. Fuji did it, less than 2 years after claiming it was impossible so I don't see why a camera company with as much R&D as Canon couldn't solve it either.

 

[Mattias Burling]

I suspect Canon might keep on skipping IBIS since their lens IS is mostly good enough (at least imo). And I happily use the digital IS for non-narrative stuff. It gets the job done.

On another note. This guys camera seems to have crashed. Bummer.

(Watch the beginning and then skip to the end for the camera stuff.)

 

[mercer]

Canon has a patent for IBIS so I imagine it’s only a matter of time before they implement it. But they also have said that they feel Lens IS is more effective than sensor stabilization... so who knows.

This is kind of interesting...

https://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-not-closing-the-door-on-in-body-image-stabilization/

“Note that the second image stabilization is not limited to electronic image stabilization, and may be, for example, image stabilization performed by controlling a mechanical movement of the image capturing device, or image stabilization performed by controlling a movable optical element in the camera body”

The last part of the statement is intriguing... “image stabilization performed by controlling a movable optical element in the camera body” so I wonder if that is something that could be implemented into a future EF adapter for the R series?

 

[Django]

Lens IS is nice but cmon it isn't available on most lenses including the new mighty expensive RF 50mm F1.2 & 24-70 F2.. they need to implement IBIS ASAP imo.

[ade towell]

They certainly do and there's no Canon  I.s. lens I've used that has the same level of stabilisation as dual IBIS coming from Panasonic and Olympus and now it seems Nikon (Sony's is not so great). Canon need to get their arse into gear

[Mattias Burling]

Ive handheld 150mm with Canon IS and thought it was very steady. That floaty look from dual ibis on Panasonic is not very pleasing imo. But we all have different preferences of course. I for example genuinely dislike the look of gimbals.

And just to clarify, I want them to implement ibis as much as you guys. I was just giving my reason to why I think you will have to keep dreaming for a while

[Django]

I hate the floaty gimbal look too, but IBIS is nice for eliminating micro jitters & shake.

Not to mention IBIS can be crazy useful for low light stills shooting as well. 

Anyways I think Canon can & will implement IBIS.. FF 4K..dual card slots etc. 

Some of it is limited by tech but some of it is also held out as an upgrade path to upcoming models.

Canon are pros at product segmentation.

Let's remember Sony didn't have IBIS, 4K, dual card slots etc on their first gen A7.. and putting everything in A73 has complicated A7S3 development. 

[Mattias Burling]

I hope you are right. And I hope they don't follow Sony exactly because the A7xii ibis certainly didn't compete with IS imo.

[Andrew Reid]

Surprisingly I find Digital IS pretty capable on the EOS R so far, with only a small extra crop but a LOT more steady compared to nothing... And competitive with IBIS... which is the most surprising thing. There aren't any artefacts from micro-jitter. It's pretty well locked down. Even pans work out well.

IBIS on the Z7 is superior, but yes the floaty look is there and not very cinematic. The lazy temptation is there to use it and leave your handheld camera skills and tripod at home

The Z7 IBIS seems in-between Sony and Panasonic for effectiveness, so it's an improvement on the A7 III but not as good as a GH5.

I'd put the EOS R DIS in between the two as well. So actually more locked down than an A7 III.

So far the EOS R is earning a bit of a niche for itself in my crowded camera bag. And that too is unexpected.

It's a bit like a Canon GH5S.

That also has a 1.8x crop and no IBIS.

On the EOS R we have 480Mbit ALL-I or 120Mbit IPB codec so pretty similar to the GH5S as well. The 10bit vs 8bit issue is controversial and needs proper testing, because the Canon colours appear at first impressions to bridge the gap or even exceed how pleasing the 10bit files are on the GH5S.

Even the ergonomics feel similar between the two cameras. Both have very similar screen quality, same articulated design, similar EVF resolution and size.

The one area the GH5S is definitely superior is rolling shutter.

But the EOS R is FAR superior for video AF and tracking.

Also it is a 5D Mark IV standard full frame camera with your EF lenses for stills and 1080p, whereas the GH5S requires a Speed Booster to get close to that look and it is not 30MP.

Stay tuned for my EOS R review tomorrow, it may surprise.

[Mattias Burling]

17 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Surprisingly I find Digital IS pretty capable on the EOS R so far, with only a small extra crop but a LOT more steady compared to nothing... And competitive with IBIS... which is the most surprising thing. There aren't any artefacts from micro-jitter. It's pretty well locked down. Even pans work out well.

Yup, I use it all the time with a docu style camera movent for shorts at work. B-roll, pans, tilts, standing interviews, you name it. The IQ drops a little but it is still webb worthy imo. This is why Im happy with just a minor improvement in the EOS-Rs HD.

28/1.8 is my goto lens but the digital IS definitely works ok for 50mm as well. And only use mode 1 btw.

23 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Stay tuned for my EOS R review tomorrow, it may surprise.

Cool, looking forward to it. 

Personally Im still waiting on mine. At least 10 stores within driving distance have had it in stock all week. But not the one where I bought it

Im fighting the urge to go "screw the 15% sale, Im buying one at full price just to not have to wait!". But I can probably hold out a few more days

[Andrew Reid]

At ISO 1600, again surprising.

Canon LOG on the EOS R is virtually noiseless, very smooth indeed, with abundant colour info.

The X-H1 shot, same ISO, F-LOG, has more noise in the blacks and a harsher look overall. Why does Canon LOG keep so much colour info and the warmness of the light, whereas F-LOG washes it out?

EOS R:

Fuji X-H1: