Well, I've finally done it, and ordered a new Canon R5.
Some of you may have seen my comments about looking into new cameras and gear in another post, A couple of days by the River Deben in Suffolk, and my apologies to Dave for the unintended hijack so I've set up a new thread to keep folks updated.
To continue from my comments, as many of you will be aware, I've been grounded by my falling apart body, but i've nothing but praise for the nurses, consultants, doctors and anyone else involved it working hard to resolve the situation.
We've all heard the old saying, the devil makes work for idle hands, well, include computer and mouse into that, and I've been researching into mirrorless cameras, which is the future, whether we like it or not.
Me, I'm intrigued and like the concept, but not the costs.....
Why the Canon R5?
Well, first and foremost, my son said go for it!
Some of you may be aware his partner walked out on him eighteen months ago, which almost rendered him homeless. While we would happily have taken him back, after a chat with my wife, his mother, I gave him a large chunk of my savings and agreed to be guarantor for his mortgage. I never gave any repayment terms, but he did ask how much, and has transferred some of the money back to me, enough to cover the R5.
I've been using Canon cameras for many decades, and I feel they are on a par with Nikon and the other big brand names, the only problem is, if you change to another brand, then you need to change all your lenses and other associated kit as well.
My research started with the cost of upgrading and also, many camera manufacturers also offer conversion kits, or adapters, so you can use your existing lenses on the new breed of cameras.
Also, my research shown that could I use my existing lenses, the cable and wireless remotes would work, so will the Speedlite flashgun. The only extra items required are the lens mount adaptor, and the memory cards, which are still the existing SD Card, or, the faster and more capable CF Express card, whereas the 5D4 will use a Compact Flash card.
Also, the battery pack for the R5 is the same is the 5D4, which I understand is the same as the 5D3.
This appealed.
However, the cost was still going to be steep.
My local postie, who we had for 20+ years, a very friendly chap, I never realised he did wedding photography, and offered to show me his cameras, which are Nikon, and how he managed to make the change to mirrorless.
We both agreed, Nikon, Canon or any of the other big names, you can't really go wrong.
After a very interesting three hours and numerous cuppas, and some time handling his cameras in the garden, and to play safe, I sat down to use them rather than stand and risk falling or dropping them, I was nicely impressed with what I saw.
There are some trade offs and caveats with electronic view vs live view, but I'm not one to be negative. Obstacles are there to be beaten, not beat you.
The one big downside, if it is a downside, is video. The final quality is good, however, when panning a moving subject, there is a noticeable lag. But then I don't do much video, and to be honest, my current 5D4 has some lag, because that in video mode uses the large TTF screen and not the optical viewer, which is live view.
I said obstacles are to be beaten, not beat you.
The video quality is superb, and a bigger plus, the electronic viewfinder shows the same as the large TTF screen, but the big bonus with the EVF, is you block out all the viewing intrusions that using a TTF screen came impose.
There will be more to this no doubt, as I start a new journey mirrorless, and I will be happy to share.
However, it is costly, and to make things more costly than desired, my nearest emporium haven't stock of the R5, so I've had to order from elsewhere, and not being able to go far, that means no trade in of my 5D4, which if I'm honest, I am reluctant to part with.
The new camera is on order, and should be with me in the next couple of days, all I need is for my leg to sort itself out.
Mike
Flickr: Peak Rambler
Unknown said:Sharpness with the R5 has been an interesting experience for me, and something I’ve been playing around with, particularly with small, and moving subjects. The results have been very mixed, and I’ve concluded for now, though I will persevere, a lot is down to me.
Something easily missed is the impact of the resolution increase between the 5D4 and R5. More resolution means it's easier to get blurred pics, especially with moving subjects where stabilisation is pretty useless. It might simply be a case of bumping the shutter speed up a little to compensate
___
Find me on Flickr / All about your camera - The Getting off Auto Index
Unknown said:
Cheshire Lad said: Sharpness with the R5 has been an interesting experience for me, and something I’ve been playing around with, particularly with small, and moving subjects. The results have been very mixed, and I’ve concluded for now, though I will persevere, a lot is down to me.
It does make sense, though I think the comments regarding using the 100-400 MkI are also very valid.
I'm trying to avoid the obvious, that really is to make the move and get a dedicated RF lens rather than make do with an old EF lens plus adaptor. At least the filter dia is still 77mm, same as my current lenses.
regards
John
Unknown said:I'm trying to avoid the obvious, that really is to make the move and get a dedicated RF lens rather than make do with an old EF lens plus adaptor
You could go for the half-way option - a Mk2 EF100-400L. Likely plenty of good second-hand options of those (and it works fine with the R5, it's what I'm generally using as my walkaround lens). It was a much better lens than the Mk1 all round.
Well I got my R7 back from Canon, after sending it back for poor performance ater owning it for 2 weeks. I also sent my Canon 70-300L lens that I mostly use. The report said: 'Function check - no fault found. Suggest using different settings and possiby use Canon software. No work required.' So there you go, we know where the fault lies ... . There was no charge anyway.
Since then I have been out doing a bit, and have posted my observations and opinions below.
I tend to shoot in AF, and given the chance, ISO set to auto can on occasions be very high - I have had several at 5,000. I find that ISO upto about 1600 is quite good and can easily be corrected in RAW, but if it is too high, apart from background noise, it also affects the finer details, making images appear flat. Keeping the ISO under 1600, even if the shutter speed is a bit low, works much better.
I tend to use small single point for focusing, and I think it is very accurate. So much so that slightly off and the focus will miss, so if it is a bird on a branch, focus could be on a tree behind, leaving the subject way out of focus.
Auto-focus needs decent light and pretty good contrast or it can show as focused when not. I found to counteract this I would focus on something close to the subject with more contrast, or swith to manual focus.
Some settings I have been using regularly, quite succesfully are AV mode, F/6.3, ISO 1,000, Shutter electronic first curtain, Continuous fast speed, AF Servo. Letting the camera set the shutter speed. If the image is a bit bright or dull I have the 'Control Ring' type converter, so I adjust to suit. I think that if the image is stationary, I get a better result with a slightly lower shutter speed than a higher ISO.
Anything like views or groups of people has no problem at all.
It seems that unless focus has been completely missed, my settings errors show up when I zoom right in, which I often do
I haven't tried the birds in flight, since I got it back, but I think Angus is right with the 'Full Screen' AF area.
It seems to be a learning curve now as they say. I am getting some good shots (for me), and more keepers the more I practice.
Just a few observations, I have probably missed some, but I will post more if and when they occur ...
I think progress is being made, and I am sure that I will master it.
I will post some photos as soon as I get the chance.
Billysdad said:
Auto-focus needs decent light and pretty good contrast or it can show as focused when not. I found to counteract this I would focus on something close to the subject with ore contrast, or swith to manual focus.
Manually entered end of quote because of poor software ************************************************************************
I don't understand your logic in shooting wildlife in AV when probably the most important thing for the photographer to control is shutter speed. Personally I would shoot in manual with Auto ISO and use either partial metering or centre weighted metering - after all you aren't really interested in the exposure at the edges of the frame because you're more than likely cropping the end result. Shooting with Auto ISO means that you can use the aperture and shutter speed to control the ISO but with the knowledge that you are in control of shutter speed. I would hazard a guess that most of the time in the UK with that lens, you are usually shooting at f5.6 anyway to get as much light as it can - apart from the last few days odf strong sunshine. I would also use the expanded AF point (9 squares) and back button focusing. The advantage of the 9 squares is the the centre square will pass the subject onto one of the outer squares if there is a little movement and its amazing how much movement there is with a telephoto lens as the shutter button is pressed.Glad to hear that there is nothing wrong with the kit and you can now begin to experiment with what suits you best.
Thanks for your input Ed. I will give your settings a try tomorrow. Always willing to accept advice ...
Ed D said:My start setup programmed into Custom 1 is Shutter - 1/1250, F7.1 and Auto ISO and I use Electronic shutter mode mainly I then vary the shutter and sometimes the F stop as the time of day and subject determines. I am still experimenting and fire off loads shots hoping that one will come out. ;-) Lots to learn yet for me too. :-) Ed
Try mechanical shutter and then first curtain shutter and see if your keeper rate improves, especially for action shots. I had heard that there are issues with rolling shutters but would have thought that they might be ironed out in the R7 but worth a try to compare.