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:In particular, do bird's wings warp horribly?
I don't have the R7 - when I'm using two cameras I've been reaching for the 5D4 to run alongside the R5, so, unless Mrs WJ decides she fancies one I doubt I'll add it to the collection. However, looking at mirrorless pictures generally, I can definitely say that insect wings warp horribly (they move much faster). I'd imagine you'll see issues with a hovering Goldcrest but not with a slow flying Marsh Harrier, but where the boundary of acceptability is.... Who knows, it would be a personal decision.
I can't see any firmware change making a difference to either of the issues you mention, they're hardware related I suspect - and are highly likely to be invisible to the majority of photographers. It reminds me of the fuss and bother about R5 overheating when it first came out - YouTubers delighted in crawling all over the camera and slagging it off for overheating - and it was true, it would. But only if you used it in a manner that any professional film-maker would laugh at and in situations where any camera would do the same (except no other camera could do everything the R5 did at the time anyway!). Even then, because that was a deliberate limitation in firmware by Canon to protect the hardware, it was something that relaxed in an update once they had confidence it wouldn't cause excessive damage long term.
So I would simply go out and get one - you're missing a lot of opportunities by not doing so. Chances are you won't use electronic shutter - you get so many pictures you get sick of sorting them, so most people I know have stuck with mechanical where you also get some tactile feeling of just how many shots you're filling the buffer & card with! The shock issue sounds like it only affects some lenses at some speeds (one commenter I read was testing a 400mm at 1/200 sec - who uses that for their BiF shots?)
Just wanted to pick up on the 90D comment as well - I don't think it was ever really a proper successor to the 7D2 - it was just an upgrade to the 80D. The AF still didn't match the 7D2 certainly, it was still the 80D's (perfectly OK, but not as snappy when tracking). Build, buffer, cards, all lacked the 7D2's capabilities. Whether the R7 picks up the crown now I don't know
___
Find me on Flickr / All about your camera - The Getting off Auto Index
Unknown said:
As you say Joe, Canon did say the 90D was to replace the 80D and the 7D MKii. I have the 90D now which I upgraded to from the 70D. I did not get the 80D as there did not seem much improvement. The wait for the release of the 90D went on forever, with others awaiting rumours of a 7D Mkiii. Eventually Canon said a 90D was going to be released to replace both - as there was not going to be a 7D Mkiii. As soon as they were availableI I got mine from my local camera shop, went out on a nice day and fired away. Unfortunately I was highly disappointed, the focus was generally missed and the colours were 'mushy', not sharp at all. Not to give in straight away I went out the next day with both my 70D and 90D and took identical shots - the 70D was better. So I took it back to the shop. They were very good and returned it to Canon. Canon re-calibrated and adjusted bits and bobs and returned it within a week. It was like a new camera. Much better colour and focussing. I have now had it 3 years and still find it vey good, but do find a few problems. Focus can be a bit hit and miss, particularly in low light. When it gets it, it can be spot-on, but can miss. Also the images can be noisy at higher ISOs. I tend to generally use upto 800 and 1,000. Over that the images do start to degrade. As I said earlier in this thread I spoke to my local camera shop about buying an R7, and they advised to keep hold of what I have for the time being. I must say that the higher megapixels of the 90D (32MP), make it great for zooming in and cropping.
I currently have a very old and low end (APS-C) Canon DSLR and am toying with buying a high end lens for it to improve my photos. Good idea or would I be better off scrapping that idea and spending more on a mirrorless camera and a similar lens for that? I'm sure the lenses I currently have are holding my camera back, but I can probably stretch to upgrading both at the same time.
Options I was considering were the Canon 100-400 EF lens to add to my current camera or a lightly used R6 plus the 100-500 RF mount lens?
I don't know canon specifics as I shoot Nikon, but the 100-500 automatically gets you 25% more reach which is significantly better for wildlife, and the new mirrorless bodies are a definite step up in quality and features from "old low end" cameras. However, I think conventional wisdom is buy the best lens you can afford, as that will improve even a " bad" camera, but a poor lens can nullify any bonus from a good camera. If that makes sense :o) Forum member Whistling Joe has some links in his footer about cameras and stuff, definitely worth a read, and he's posted in this thread.
simonali said:
Budget is the main consideration here - if you can afford it all in one go then change your camera and go for the R6 or R7 and the 100-500 RF lens - not only do you get in the mirrorless zone but you have a lot less weight to carry about.
However if you can't manage that expense all at once then go for the lens update first and of for the mk2 100-400 lens. This will vastly improve your current camera. Then when you can afford it go for a mirrorless body, by which time you will have the choice of used R6 full frames R5 full frames and R7 Crop sensors and you will still have a totally usable L series lens to go with it. Personally I wouldn't get too hung up on the difference between 100-400 and 100-500 as its not majorly significant in my view though the weight difference is a good advantage.
The 100-400L Mk2 lens is very good used it with my 5DMk4 and now on the R6, took some action shots of a friend's dog's on the beach and she was very happy with them,
Jim
My Pictures
My Fbook Group
So, I popped into LCE earlier today to discuss options. A thing that occurred to me is that, if I do camera AND lens, I have no requirement to stick with Canon as I only have cheapo glass not worth keeping to put on a new body. I was offered a Sony A7R IIIA and their 200-600mm lens for just over £3000, both brand new. Obviously the body is a few generations old now but it was half the price of the 7R IVA (4A) which was £3000 on its own. The Canon R6 was also reduced a little to £1900, which seemed a bargain compared to the used one they had in the window for £1699. I bought a second hand Manfrotto tripod while I was in there and did a few trial garden shots using it and they came out just as fuzzy as my handheld ones. This says to me that either my lens is poor quality or the camera isn't working correctly...
simonali said:This says to me that either my lens is poor quality or the camera isn't working correctl
You make a good point re not having to be loyal to any one brand if you've not got much of a collection, though it's probably worth trying to pin down the problem with current kit. If you share a pic on here with its exif we'll try and work out what might be happening. A picture of something in front of a fence or wall is ideal, taken on an angle (that helps show if the camera is front or back focussing)