Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

New Canon vistavision mirrorless: EOS R

D

David Peterson

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
1,109
Reaction score
3
Points
38
Location
Auckland, New Zealand
Surprise surprise, the Nikon Z6 is still a better and cheaper camera for us filmmakers than the newly announced Canon EOS R!


Sure, it gained 10bit output and log (just like the Nikon Z6), but it basically is still a Canon 5Dmk4 (which means an awful crop, so why bother buying a FF camera in the first place? And no IBIS!).


Nikon (and Panasonic + Sony) need to respond to these two features which will be popular with videographers/filmmakers/vloggers:

Flip out screen for selfie mode.

Variable ND adapter from the camera manufacturer itself.
 
Fuji has a way of making FF35/VV redundant. See the X-H1 and the X-T3. Having said that, I tend to prefer S35 for most things, whether for photo or video. So it's easy for me to say.

The only FF35 camera I really, really like is the A7rIII, for its hi-res mode. Some Olympus bodies have this as well.

The GH5s is also a winner IMHO. I'd still pick the Fujis for the most part.
 
Ill stick to sony now for dslr's. they are killing it with the A7III.

i dont get why canon would go this route and not keep it EF and not have to make new lenses?
anyway, too little too late.
 
I like the direction that canon is taking with some out of the box thinking on the R. The 28-70 2.0 will be amazing . The multi function ring on the lens and the cool adapters with ND . I think they will have higher end bodies coming soon .
 
jordan levy said:
i dont get why canon would go this route and not keep it EF and not have to make new lenses?
Click to expand...

They HAVE in fact "kept it EF". There is 100% compatibility with all existing EF glass, even to the point where an old lens from 15 years ago can be mounted on the 'control ring adapter' and get full functionality that way. There is no degradation or crop or anything like that with normal EF lenses.

In order to include the new electronic functionality, they needed more pins, which meant a new mount standard. As for the reason of shortening the flange distance, Canon has taken what they've learned for the last few decades and created a new mount with the following benefits:


  1. Large diam. rear elements much closer to the sensor — enhancing performance
  2. Significantly higher IQ for a lens' size — compared to EF
  3. High performance, large aperture primes for FF
  4. Brighter zooms w. constant aperture — while still small

This is a very simplified list. Canon's white paper goes into much detail explaining why they did what they did. That is, if you actually want an answer to your question.
 
AndreeMarkefors said:
They HAVE in fact "kept it EF". There is 100% compatibility with all existing EF glass, even to the point where an old lens from 15 years ago can be mounted on the 'control ring adapter' and get full functionality that way. There is no degradation or crop or anything like that with normal EF lenses.

In order to include the new electronic functionality, they needed more pins, which meant a new mount standard. As for the reason of shortening the flange distance, Canon has taken what they've learned for the last few decades and created a new mount with the following benefits:


  1. Large diam. rear elements much closer to the sensor — enhancing performance
  2. Significantly higher IQ for a lens' size — compared to EF
  3. High performance, large aperture primes for FF
  4. Brighter zooms w. constant aperture — while still small

This is a very simplified list. Canon's white paper goes into much detail explaining why they did what they did. That is, if you actually want an answer to your question.
Click to expand...

yes, got that obviously. almost every mirrorless camera can have an adapter and use EF. its just now, why would you if there is yet a better lens that is native. that's all i was saying. this could of been nice a couple years ago when the A7's came out, but now, it's all about sony.
 
Totally agree about that mulitfunction ring. That's some interesting innovation with a fair bit of potential.
 
jordan levy said:
Its just now, why would you [use EF] if there is yet a better lens that is native. that's all i was saying.
Click to expand...

Let me assure you that I'm not trolling you Jordan, but I'm reading your posts like "why didn't they just keep it EF" and then in the next post "…because RF lenses are better and native".

It doesn't quite add up to me. But I think we agree on that the RF mount has potential to be better (there are already lenses pointing to that). I'd say that was the reason for the shift.

And the reason people would use EF lenses is that they already have a bunch of them and it will take Canon a while to build out the RF set. And they're cheaper. The new RF 50mm 1.2 is like $3650.

jordan levy said:
…this could of been nice a couple years ago when the A7's came out, but now, it's all about sony.
Click to expand...

I've never owned a Sony DSLR or mirrorless and I have zero interest in doing so. So it isn't 100% about them. Each to their own!
 
If Canon and Nikon had kept their SLR mounts, the new cameras would be no better than DSLRs with live-view permanently activated. Sony was also smart enough to not use the A mount on their mirrorless bodies. Also note that Micro 4/3 cameras do not use the 4/3 mount.

F and EF are shit mounts, but not the only ones.

P.S. No, Jordan, it's Fuji! ;-)
 
i guess i cant speak for whats going on in the rest of the world as i se eyou are in australia and switzerland, but every dp i know has a Sony A series of some model for scouting and every pov rig or b/c cam set up is on a sony dslr here in the states. i havent seen canon 5d's in years on a set or in any dp's hands. mainly because of the size is the reason i switched. then the price is almost half. i went fuji at first, wasnt that happy really, specifically in the video department.
also, andree, miscommunication i guess, i was just meaning i hate adapters, i always try to go native on a dslr.
 
Cropping the sensor

Cropping the sensor

How much do you loose by cropping the sensor. More noise less DR?
 
richiel said:
How much do you loose by cropping the sensor. More noise less DR?
Click to expand...

Since it's a 1:1 pixel readout of the center, it's exactly the same image as if you had the full sensor—just less of it.

I think it makes much more sense to compare sensors at 100% crop level. For final output you need to weigh in all other aspects like other systems (such as RED) being able to capture at a higher resolution and then scale the output back down—which has a number of benefits (as well as some downsides).

Since noise scales with the rest of the image, scaling down will reduce its prominence. If you shoot the new Canon R in UHD and then deliver in UHD there is no scaling, so the noise is what it is. DR is the same.

Keep in mind that you can use EF-S lenses when shooting video. The Sigma 18-35 f1.8 and the ND adapter will probably be an interesting combo.

Regardless, this isn't the video camera in the RF system. I'm hoping Canon launches a 1Dx mkII level camera in this system "soon".
 
Why would one bother about Canon R if Nikon z7 is far superior?? I gave up on Canon years ago. Dinosaur Company not flexible enough to change or adapt protecting C-line all the Time. Well done Panasonic and Nikon and Fuji and Sony!
Nikon colours, great sensor,full frame 4K, 10 bit 4:2:2 out and Nikon-log with Atomos under $4K! Forget Canon R unless Magic Lantern will do something with it.
 
For pictures it's a fine camera, for film Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K (+ a speedbooster) is the better choice in this price range.
 
Misha Engel said:
For pictures it's a fine camera, for film Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K (+ a speedbooster) is the better choice in this price range.
Click to expand...

It is good to know you are impressed with it because i ordered two. I am sure you have TESTED that camera already before you made that statement.
 
Jiri Vrozina said:
It is good to know you are impressed with it because i ordered two. I am sure you have TESTED that camera already before you made that statement.
Click to expand...

I didn't test it, but others did and the results look amazing for this price level. We always first rent before we buy. We are used to the large file sizes, since we own 2x UMP so that won't be a problem.
The sensor used in the pocket 4k performed good in the GH5S and now with the stronger codec(12bits cDNG RAW) we have high hopes.

Still hope the succesor of the UMP will be something like 8k with cineformRAW so we can run it max-res, max-quality in a 8k timeline on a $2.000 laptop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top