|
3 months after putting in the order, my R5 arrived.  I tested the eye tracking on a sleeping cat, it works good. I did not realize how loving bad the AF on my 80D was.
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 19:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 06:34 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/nokishita_c/status/1322300456874303489?s=21 https://twitter.com/nokishita_c/status/1321706086081032192
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 04:32
|
|
|
Not sure how I feel about that external zoom...
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 04:12
|
|
|
I hate it too but it looks drat compact when shrunk down which I can definitely support. Long as the front element doesn't spin I could deal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 04:26
|
|
|
Not surprising it's external zoom given that they did the same thing with the f2.8 version, but my biggest complaint about the design is that they aren't compatible with the new RF teleconverters. It'd be nice to move to the smaller/lighter RF zooms, but I use the EF 70-200 + 1.4x combination enough that making that lens switch isn't really an option
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 04:48
|
|
|
astr0man posted:Not surprising it's external zoom given that they did the same thing with the f2.8 version, but my biggest complaint about the design is that they aren't compatible with the new RF teleconverters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 06:23
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:Is that an announcement or where does it say not compatible with the RF 1.4x? I guess there's no official word on the F4 version yet, but the RF 70-200 F2.8 is not compatible with the new RF teleconverters. On the F2.8, the rear element is almost flush with the lens mount, so there's no room for the part of the TC that goes into the back of the lens.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2020 01:54
|
|
|
I read that it’s the same case with the f4. So what lenses *do* work with the RF TCs?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2020 18:11
|
|
|
Probably the /11 pair? Didn't realize the 70-200/2.8 was a no go on the extender. 100-500 too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2020 20:01
|
|
|
I wonder if this will be like the EF 70-300L that didn't work with Canon TCs but did work with third party versions (once they're out, I assume there aren't any yet).
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2020 20:15
|
|
|
Yeah, currently they only work with the 100-500 and the f11 primes
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2020 02:14
|
|
|
This might be a question for the gear thread and if I am better posting there please tell me. I picked up a 5D MkII earlier this summer and grabbed a 20-70mm F4 L IS USM. I picked up the lens for $500 in perfect condition. I want to get another lens and don't know what I should be looking for. The person had a UV filter on the 20-70 and I was hating the color and results I was getting from the camera until I removed the filter and now I am getting some good stuff. I have the nifty fifty 1.8, so those are my two lenses. I am generally taking photos of my kids, photos of cars, and photos of RC cars and occasionally product photos at work. This is purely a hobby but finally being able to capture the kind of photos I have really wanted to I am wondering what the next step should be for a lens. Should I consider finding a 20-70 F2.8? 85mm? 16-35mm? I am trying to be somewhat budget smart and see if I can grab some pro-gear from someone making the jump to mirrorless. The 5D and lenses was the move I went to instead of spending ~$5K on a mirrorless/lens setup which ultimately seemed a silly thing for what are essentially snapshots.  I am taking photos like this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2020 23:51
|
|
|
Probably a dumb question, but is there a way on auto to get the t7i to not default to flash on? I want flash to be off by default.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2020 00:00
|
|
|
Somewhat Heroic posted:This might be a question for the gear thread and if I am better posting there please tell me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2020 00:40
|
|
|
GreenBuckanneer posted:Probably a dumb question, but is there a way on auto to get the t7i to not default to flash on? I want flash to be off by default. I haven't used Auto or P modes...ever on the DSLR, so I don't remember the exact difference, but I suspect in your case P mode is going to accomplish what you want. However, it may also do some stuff you don't want so read the manual a little bit. Somewhat Heroic posted:This might be a question for the gear thread and if I am better posting there please tell me. "Next step up" is a bit of a broad term here. The answer to the "I like the range of the 24-70 F/4, but need/want a little shallower depth of field and/or to work in a little dimmer light" is an F/2.8 lens. If you want more zoom on either the wide angle or telephoto end that's a different question. On the telephoto end, the 70-200mm F/4's are fantastic lenses and sell for great prices used these days. I see the non-IS going for ~$350 fairly often and the IS going for $500 or less as well. The IS II has the same optics as the IS, but improved coatings and isn't worth the extra cost. This lens is fairly compact considering what it can do and is very sharp even at its widest aperture. I also see some of older versions of the 70-200mm F/2.8 go for around those prices, but it's generally less sharp and also much larger and heavier. The extra stop of light is nice though. On the other end of the spectrum is ultrawide angle lenses. I'm less familiar with the full frame options here since I've always shot APS-C bodies. The 16-35mm F/4 is maybe the best option here, but it's still fairly pricey used. I'm completely unfamiliar with the Sigma/Tamron options for full frame so there may be a good value, sharp lens there that I'm not familiar with. Budget first-party option is the 17-40 F/4, which is older, lacks IS, and is soft in the corners, but also pretty cheap for a FF zoom. The other option is more wide aperture primes, either overlapping with your current lenses or outside of it. Unless you're finding the 50mm just a little bit too short, I'm not sure I'd jump on the 85mm F/1.8, although it is a great value. The 135mm F/2 is a killer lens, albeit more expensive, but obviously you're limited to that focal length.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2020 01:15
|
|
|
I don't know why you'd decide to buy a new lens without having a specific problem your current lens doesn't solve. Once you're in L glass territory there's no magic upgrade to make your pictures kick 100% more rear end.. like BeastOfExmoor said, decide if you want a new focal length or a bigger aperture and go from there. If neither, just stick with what you got. I guess a 70-200 would be useful for kid shots but everything else you've mentioned you already got a great lens for.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2020 02:01
|
|
|
BeastOfExmoor posted:"Next step up" is a bit of a broad term here. The answer to the "I like the range of the 24-70 F/4, but need/want a little shallower depth of field and/or to work in a little dimmer light" is an F/2.8 lens. If you want more zoom on either the wide angle or telephoto end that's a different question. Thank you - this is really good info. I have been just trying to decide if the 2.8 aperture would be worth the upgrade to get the focus a bit more tight. The F4 has been very good. I think trying to find a good 70-200 F4 IS would be the way to go. I just want something that will be able to focus a little faster was the reason I was thinking about the 2.8 as well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2020 22:03
|
|
|
Somewhat Heroic posted:
Or be boring and get a standard zoom (2x/70 2.8)
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2020 00:36
|
|
|
I can confirm that the 70-200 f/4 is great for trying to snap pictures of your kids, especially outdoors. Got mine for less than $400 in essentially new condition.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2020 17:59
|
|
|
This is a heavy crop from a shot with the 70-200 f/4L IS taken from a moving train. The lens is goddamn witchcraft.  IMG_8771.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 17:27
|
|
|
I've been ignoring any camera gear news/videos for at least a year now just to escape the gear treadmill for a while, but it looks like my original 1DX might finally be in trouble so I need to think about a replacement. From what I can see the new R5 is Canon's top of the line mirrorless offering, correct? Is anyone shooting with one? Do EF lenses all perform well with it? I'd love any actual impressions from goons using one if possible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 20:03
|
|
|
InternetJunky posted:From what I can see the new R5 is Canon's top of the line mirrorless offering, correct? Is anyone shooting with one? Do EF lenses all perform well with it? I'd love any actual impressions from goons using one if possible. This is correct. I "only" have the R6 but all EF lenses work wonderfully with it with the adapter (which you can get for free if you're a CPS member and buy a body).
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 20:11
|
|
|
I got my R5 about a month ago now and all my lenses have worked flawlessly with it. Canon's 24-105 f/4, Tamron's 70-200, and Tamron's 150-600. AF is perfect. My EF-S lenses work as well, the camera auto crops to 1.6 when you put one on. (18-55 f/2.8 and 10-22mm).
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 20:14
|
|
|
gschmidl posted:This is correct. I "only" have the R6 but all EF lenses work wonderfully with it with the adapter (which you can get for free if you're a CPS member and buy a body). xzzy posted:I got my R5 about a month ago now and all my lenses have worked flawlessly with it. Good to hear. Have you had a chance to try out this "animal detect" stuff? It's the one feature that is really pushing me to mirrorless instead of another 1DX.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 20:19
|
|
|
InternetJunky posted:Good to hear. Have you had a chance to try out this "animal detect" stuff? It's the one feature that is really pushing me to mirrorless instead of another 1DX. Only on my cats and coming from an 80D it's pretty insane how good it is. I never considered myself a wildlife photographer but with this body I'm considering doing the unthinkable and shooting birds.  (the only moving stuff I traditionally have shot is motorsport and when the plague is over I can't wait to try it again) Shooting a series usually the first frame is just slightly out of focus but once it's locked on the eyes it stays stuck there, maybe with some misses if the animal is moving their head a lot or you're dragging the shutter. In a burst series you can see tiny microadjustments but all the images are usable. It does break down in bad light, as in 20 minutes past sunset levels. Completely unable to identify subjects, much less their eyes. It's really refreshing to have a series of images where my biggest problem is "which perfectly sharp image to keep" instead of "this is the only one in focus so I guess that's the one."
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 20:30
|
|
|
InternetJunky posted:That's really good news. I don't suppose you have any super-telephotos you've used with the adapter? Does the Sigma 150-600 count? If yes, I've used that and feel like it works even better than on the 80D I had before.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 21:09
|
|
|
So I just watched this video on the R5: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svfMrg55bBQ Seems like a very fair review, and the one thing that has me really worried is this spool up time on the evf. 90% of my shooting is standing in -30 temps waiting for my subject to suddenly move, and it sounds like this camera just isn't going to be able to help me there. Either I keep the evf active and drain the battery in 10 minutes or I just miss out on the action completely. Does that seem like a fair assessment or is this guy's experience not typical?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 22:15
|
|
|
InternetJunky posted:So I just watched this video on the R5: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svfMrg55bBQ I'd just rent one and an adapter and give it ago instantly ready and low passive battery use are big DSLR features you tend to forget how much you rely on. There's also rumours of a potential R1 and R7 (maybe crop?) coming next year.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 22:39
|
|
|
Yes, there's four options in the menus for the EVF. From the manual: The third option (always use viewfinder) completely disables the rear screen and the EVF will stay lit at all times. You can configure a button to swap between the AUTO1 and AUTO2 modes. I will say my one grip with the body is the sensitivity of the eye sensor. You will constantly cause the camera to switch to EVF when messing with the touch screen if you're using your right hand no matter how careful you think you're being with avoiding that little black box.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 22:46
|
|
|
The one negative I've found with the EVF on the R6 is that when it's dark and you have IS on, it "swims" pretty hard (i.e. a noticeable lag).
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 22:53
|
|
|
The R5 can apparently be powered over USB-C (although it still needs a battery), so you plausibly hook up a huge USB battery pack and run it for a lot longer. That said, this is a pretty hacky workaround for a $4500 camera.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 22:53
|
|
|
BeastOfExmoor posted:The R5 can apparently be powered over USB-C (although it still needs a battery), so you plausibly hook up a huge USB battery pack and run it for a lot longer. That said, this is a pretty hacky workaround for a $4500 camera. Well I did that anyways with my 80D when I was doing meteor showers. Got a giant battery brick off Amazon and powered my dew heater with it plus the camera. That's how lfie goes when when you want to leave it turned on for long periods. Being able to do it with USB-C on the R5 is actually a bonus because you won't need the dummy battery. But battery life is a much bigger concern with mirrorless, thing drinks power like it's water.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 23:05
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Well I did that anyways with my 80D when I was doing meteor showers. Got a giant battery brick off Amazon and powered my dew heater with it plus the camera. That's how lfie goes when when you want to leave it turned on for long periods. Being able to do it with USB-C on the R5 is actually a bonus because you won't need the dummy battery.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2020 00:18
|
|
|
Thanks folks for the info/feedback. I think this is what I'll try out first just to see how fast the battery drains in regular shooting conditions for me: jarlywarly posted:I'd just rent one
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2020 01:21
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:If the R5 and R6 work similarly to the R, they can be charged by USB-C, but they can't be on simultaneously, and the battery won't charge while the camera is powered on. Hacking it to use continuous power is actually difficult and a huge pain in the rear end. Last I checked, you have to get a dummy battery that plugs into an AC adapter, and all of the ones currently available are low quality garbage that is almost guaranteed to toast your $4000 camera since you're plugging it directly into a wall outlet. I don't own an R5 but have been looking at getting one. What I've read is that it does support using the camera over USB power, but you need a high spec USB PD charger. The manual for the R5 says the canon USB charger will power the camera. It's not clear what spec PD you need to power the camera, but since the canon one can do it, probably a third party can. Maybe you need something rated to power a laptop. https://cam.start.canon/id/C003/manual/html/UG-09_Reference_0030.html
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2020 04:00
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:This is a heavy crop from a shot with the 70-200 f/4L IS taken from a moving train. I'll see your 70-200 f/4L IS (a lens I also own and love) and raise you a 40mm pancake on a moving boat 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2020 04:04
|
|
|
Lens bragging: 150-600, 1/5000 at 6400, indoors, stationary cat, in direct sunlight. View that sucker full size and start counting cat hairs! This is the original Tamron 150-600, the "bad" one. I was extremely disappointed with it on the 80D because it had a miserable time focusing on anything and was getting set to sell it for a big loss. The R5 pumped life in to it. (I was trying to get a feel for shadow recovery but this particular frame didn't need it. there's no noise reduction on if you want to see how noisy it is)
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2020 04:40
|
|
|
Graniteman posted:I don't own an R5 but have been looking at getting one. What I've read is that it does support using the camera over USB power, but you need a high spec USB PD charger. The manual for the R5 says the canon USB charger will power the camera. It's not clear what spec PD you need to power the camera, but since the canon one can do it, probably a third party can. Maybe you need something rated to power a laptop. The official canon one supports outputting either 5V or 9V, so I think anything that supports PD 2.0/3.0 and can output at least 9V should work. Basically any USB-C power brick/charger that's advertised as rated to actually charge a nintendo switch or laptop should do it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2020 04:40
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Lens bragging: 150-600, 1/5000 at 6400, indoors, stationary cat, in direct sunlight. View that sucker full size and start counting cat hairs! Hey I have that lens too! Not bad for shooting from foulpole to foulpole. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2020 05:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 06:34 |
|
|
I rented a big white 600mm you can count the feather barbules on this swan and that's only 24MP on an 80D with the 1.4x Mute Swan by Aves Lux, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2020 09:29
|
|