Canon FF mirrorless ...

[dxqcanada]

Hmm, is R going to be better than Z ? Some unknowns still.
Canon rumors Home

 

[Destin]

Looks pretty comparable to me. Certainly not something that will draw new users, but may well keep people from leaving.

Same as the Z.

I think anyone just now getting into photography or investing in a new system would be dumb to choose the Z or the R.

 

[Derrel]

I looked at about eight pages of the specifications...looks pretty good in terms of specifications. I was impressed/glad to see that it can shoot to multiple capture formats: Full-frame at 3:2 aspect, APS-C at 3:2, and also 4:3 aspect, 16:9 wide-format aspect, and also 1:1 aspect ratio, AKA square. Very nice in terms of the possible capture formats. At times, the 3:2 aspect ratio is just "too wide", or more often "too tall and skinny", as in when photographing people in the vertical format--that 3:2 aspect ratio is just, well, too tall...or too skinny...or both! 5:4 or 4:3,either, can be better for single- and two-person portraits in a lot of cases. And also, being able to capture to different aspect ratios can make having one lens, or one zoom lens, much handier. Sometimes one WANTS to shoot on an APS-C type camera, not an FF type camera. Square? That too can be pretty nifty on some subjects.

I like the idea of 30 megapixels at the FF, 3:2 aspect ratio. Thirty megapixels sounds pretty good to me...more than 24, fewer than 36 or 45.

I suppose that over the next week the camera specifications will be endlessly discussed on the www. From what little I have seen, just specifications on-line, it appears that the camera ought to be at least good.

Better than the Nikon Z-series Z6 and Z7 models? I do not think that would be too awfully difficult for Canon to achieve. Canon has good marketing skills, so I think they'll probably do okay with this offering.

I really do NOT think that I would buy a first-generation mirrorless from either Canon nor Nikon; Sony's A7R models had some issues in their first incarnations, but those have largely been rectified now, now that they have hit the III (third) generation.

 

[jcdeboever]

I looked at about eight pages of the specifications...looks pretty good in terms of specifications. I was impressed/glad to see that it can shoot to multiple capture formats: Full-frame at 3:2 aspect, APS-C at 3:2, and also 4:3 aspect, 16:9 wide-format aspect, and also 1:1 aspect ratio, AKA square. Very nice in terms of the possible capture formats. At times, the 3:2 aspect ratio is just "too wide", or more often "too tall and skinny", as in when photographing people in the vertical format--that 3:2 aspect ratio is just, well, too tall...or too skinny...or both! 5:4 or 4:3,either, can be better for single- and two-person portraits in a lot of cases. And also, being able to capture to different aspect ratios can make having one lens, or one zoom lens, much handier. Sometimes one WANTS to shoot on an APS-C type camera, not an FF type camera. Square? That too can be pretty nifty on some subjects.

I like the idea of 30 megapixels at the FF, 3:2 aspect ratio. Thirty megapixels sounds pretty good to me...more than 24, fewer than 36 or 45.

I suppose that over the next week the camera specifications will be endlessly discussed on the www. From what little I have seen, just specifications on-line, it appears that the camera ought to be at least good.

Better than the Nikon Z-series Z6 and Z7 models? I do not think that would be too awfully difficult for Canon to achieve. Canon has good marketing skills, so I think they'll probably do okay with this offering.

I really do NOT think that I would buy a first-generation mirrorless from either Canon nor Nikon; Sony's A7R models had some issues in their first incarnations, but those have largely been rectified now, now that they have hit the III (third) generation.

That's the one thing I wish Fuji had, a 5:4 format. I just get my composition and then take two or three steps back but always leaves a uneasy feeling in my gut. I'm used to shooting 135 film cameras but for some reason, it bugs me more on digital, maybe it's the WYSIWYG.

 

[waday]

I think anyone just now getting into photography or investing in a new system would be dumb to choose the Z or the R.

I don't think anyone just getting into photography would want the initial costs of either system.

 

[petrochemist]

From the specs I've seen it can AF at -6EV rather odd considering the camera only meters to -3EV!
Shame it doesn't have IBIS, but it's outside my price range anyway.

 

[tecboy]

I’ll bet the specs is not as good as other today FF dslrs.

 

[astroNikon]

It only has one SD card slot, so it must have been designed for beginners.
LOL

looks like a nice camera. Though IBIS seems to be the way to go nowadays.

 

[Derrel]

Yes, only ONE,single UHS-II SD card slot in the new Canon EOS R mirrorless body!
The Canon EOS R isn't a mirrorless 5D IV, but it's a start

Quoting dPreview: "And if there's one thing we learned from recent reaction to the Nikon Z7 it's that only one card slot means EVERYTHING IS TERRIBLE AND WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIEEEEEEEEEEE!

If you, or anyone you know has been affected by the inclusion of a single card slot in a digital camera, we want to hear from you. Asking for help is the first step."

Not super-impressive according to the two guys at dPreview DPReview TV: First thoughts on the Canon R

 

[jaomul]

It and the Nikon z cameras look fabulous when not compared to other existing models but not so much so when Sony etc are in the comparison.

No doubt these are all great, but if one was initially starting out I think money could be spent better

 

[pixmedic]

the comments on both the Nikon and Canon mirrorless cameras are kinda funny... people are like:

for years now: OMG Nikon and Canon dont make a mirrless camera...they suck! they arent doing their business right! they arent doing right by their consumers!

Nikon and Canon finally produce mirrorless cameras: OMG Nikon and Canon arent making mirrorless cameras to the exact specs that "I" think they should be! they suck! they arent doing their business right! they arent doing right by their customers!

 

[photoflyer]

So at what point will the DSLR go away and the mirorless become the only option? I think it will take about about 10 years. The technology is getting to the point (especially battery life) where pros will eventually make the move. I am really looking forward to hearing from TPF members who get one and report back after they've had one for a while. Thoughts?

 

[tecboy]

Naw, it is not about the specs and the cameras. It's all about style and aesthetic. The mirrorless Rs cameras are too feminine and 5D and 1D are much more masculine.

 

[photoflyer]

Naw, it is not about the specs and the cameras. It's all about style and aesthetic. The mirrorless Rs cameras are too feminine and 5D and 1D are much more masculine.

I know you jest but humans are not rational. I still prefer a real newspaper to a digital copy. Of course a paper does not weigh several pounds (except the Sunday Washington Post I delivered as a kid in the 70's) and get dragged around all day to various events.

 

[astroNikon]

When they start integrating small solar panels to the camera body, then battery life (on outside, bright excursions) will soar and it won't be a problem. Hey, they do it for watches. LOL

I really like the slightly small body on mirrorless cameras compared to the DSLR. Also the lack of mirror slap noise too. The D500 is nice and quiet compared to my D750, and a mirrorless has no mirror slap. But feature for feature I'm waiting to see what Nikon does at the D5600 & d7500 level for mirrorless.

Sony and Fujifilm, etc have come a long way in the past 5 years with mirrorless to bridge the gap in functionality. So has Nikon and Canon now.

Now, I wonder how the R&D budget is going to be at Nikon/Canon for the DSLR/Mirrorless lines. If they provide that as public information, it would be very telling on their future strategy.