amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Yes, that's a smart idea. If you must use an adapter, why not have added functionality?

However so far they only offer two types of filtration: Circular Polarizer ($299) and Variable Neutral Density ($399). To have both "dedicated" filters, due to external controls to manipulate the filters. Cannot use another filter type (such as a fixed strength, screw-in ND filter). Hopefully Canon... or someone else... will eventually offer a filter "drawer" that allows use of standard, screw-in filters and/or gel filters (as they do for the super tele lenses). As it stands now, you also have to buy two of the adapters if you want both the CPL and the VND... the filters do not appear to be offered separately (as they are for the super teles). Maybe these things will change in time.

I'm not quite clear, either, if the adapters with the CPL and VND filters also have the control ring, like the $199 adapter does. Or, aside from the filter slot, are they the same as the $99 "plain" adapter?

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Personally I am not in the market for a FF mirrorless (more interested in a compact APS-C mirrorless), but have studied the EOS R to get some idea where Canon is going with mirrorless. I use their DSLRs and many lenses & accessories, so would prefer to stick with the brand. In addition to what's already been mentioned, some other EOS R/RF lens PROS:

- Besides the sheer number of AF points (over 5600!), they also cover almost the entire image area. 100% of the "short side" of the rectangle and something like 88% of the "long side". That leaves only a small strip at either end of the image rectangle that's not covered by AF points. In other words, you can selectively focus almost anywhere in the image area, aren't restricted to AF in a rather centralized area of your images, as with all DSLRs more or less. Might be less necessary to "focus and recompose" (though that remains an option). This also makes things like face detection much more versatile and useful.
- Canon claims the AF is capable of focusing to -6EV.... that's close to moonless-night light levels and is about 3EV lower light levels that even the best DSLRs (and most other mirrorless) can do. It's 5EV lower light levels than many of the more mainstream models are able to AF.
- Canon rates the EOS R to be able to autofocus f/8 and even f/11 lens/teleconverter combos. Ken Rockwell experimented with stacked teleconverters and even found the AF to be fast with effective f/12.6 to f/16 effective aperture!
- Along with this, the electronic viewfinder makes it possible to see what you're shooting, whether it's at very low light levels or when using very small effective aperture lens/TC combos. That's not the case with a DSLR's optical viewfinder. (This is true of most mirrorless that use an EVF, not exclusive to the EOS R by any means.)
- Canon claims the EOS R's AF is the fastest ever in any camera to date.
- Supposedly adapted Canon lenses don't lose any performance at all (AF, IS or image quality). This isn't the case when mixing brands, such as adapting Canon or Nikon lenses for use on Sony.
- No Micro Focus Adjustment required.... EVER! Since the AF is done right at the image sensor plane, there's no need for it (MFA is used to correct for minor misalignment of the separate phase detection array in DSLRs, which is in the mirror box of the camera, not on the sensor itself, with the image redirected to it via mirrors... In Live View where DSLRs switch to using image-sensor-based AF they also don't need MFA, which is why Live View can be used to check and adjust a DSLRs viewfinder-based AF system.)
- Electronic viewfinder has focus peaking and in-viewfinder magnification to help with manual focus (not exclusive to EOS R).
- Short 20mm lens register will allow many different vintage lens mount systems to be adapted for manual use on the camera. Very many 35mm SLR and 35mm rangefinder system lenses will be usable.
- Silent shutter! That can be nice in some situations.
- The price of the EOS R is pretty amazing.... basically $1000 cheaper than the 5D Mark IV, while providing similar sensor/image quality and other performance factors.

It also has some other CONS that haven't yet been mentioned. From my perspective, the most important CONS:

- Heavy battery drain from using an EVF means far fewer shots per charge. There are a lot of variables effecting this, but depending upon usage I'd expect 1/2 or 1/3 as many shots per charge as 7D Mk II, 80D, 6D Mk II & 5D Mk IV, using the same batteries. As a result I'd have to carry 2X to 3X more batteries. And since I now carry a dozen (6 loaded in the battery grips on three cameras, plus 6 extras).... that might mean buying and hauling around an additional 12 or more batteries!
- Slowed continuous shooting rate I really don't understand. If the AF is such high performance, why can't it at least match or beat the 5D Mark IV? Why does it need to slow when using AI Servo tracking?

Some of the shortcomings Canon might fix with firmware updates. It wouldn't be the first time! They often make minor fixes, but have also made major ones on occasion. For example, the original 7D got a big increase in image buffering via a free firmware update, midway during it's production life. I bet we'll see some of that sort of thing with the EOS R, too. They might have pushed to get it out as quickly as possible and had to just live with some things they had hoped to resolve, and eventually will.

Finally, it concerns me a bit that Canon is now producing four lines of lenses for still cameras (plus other lenses for video cams). EF and EF-S have a lot of similarity and interchangeability, same lens register and all.... Full frame DSLRs require EF, but APS-C DSLRs can use both. And now the EOS R also can use them via an adapter. But there are also EF-M lenses for the M-series, APS-C mirrorless cameras... which Canon has only developed 8 lenses for in over five years of production, and all of which rely upon STM "stepper motor" auto focus drive, which is fine but just not as fast as USM "ultrasonic" motor (or the new "Nano USM" being used in a few lenses). Due to their shorter 18mm lens register, EF-M lenses are not adaptable to the EOS R. But EF & EF-S lenses can be adapted for use on the M-series cameras (however, Canon's adapter for that costs 2X what the EF/EF-S to R adapter costs!)

There are rumors that the next version of some lenses in development that were planned for EF mounting on the DSLRs have been redirected to be developed for the EOS R instead. That's good for the R, but bad for the DSLR line. There may be other effects on future camera lens and body development due to the R, if that's where Canon focuses more of its resources. Will the M-series be neglected (even more than it's already been?) Will we see less in the future for the DSLRs?

PeterBergh

I have had an EOS R for a couple of months and I am very pleased with it. Somebody mentioned that it "eats" batteries. For me, that is not a problem, since I make maybe 50 exposures on a successful outing. Since I don't shoot video, it does not worry me that the video is cropped. For me, it has produced some very good images with the kit lens (24-105 F4L) -- the only RF lens I have. Since I don't shoot for clients, the lonesome card slot does not bother me, either.

BTW and FWIW, Canon Rumors mentioned that a 75 MP EOS R is in the works. They mentioned a release time of the second half of 2019.

rydabyk Loc: Florida Panhandle

Thank you!

rydabyk Loc: Florida Panhandle

Thanks, I also saw the rumor but I think that would be way more than I'm willing to spend right now.

rydabyk Loc: Florida Panhandle

Thanks, the one card slot does not bother me a bit (I guess I'm lucky but I've never had one fail) nor does the video limitations since I don't do any video at all.

PeterBergh

We all have financial limitations. Given that the projected release date is the second half of 2019. it's too early to speculate about price. My WAG is that the price would be in the same ball park as the 5DS.

User ID

`

Re: Various mentions of tracking AF-C running slower
than "similar" SLR cameras. This is prolly unavoidable
at present tech levels. The crux of the problem is that
SLRs go for approximate focus and live view cameras
go for exact focus. Being so exacting take a bit more
time per focus movement. For single frames it's hard
to notice, but the small difference is cumulative when
shooting AF-C bursts.

.

sergiohm

I used it for a week.
If you shoot street, landscape and general photography it is a good camera.
But for sports, Birds in flight, forget it!
The inconsistency in exposure is a major issue, you take one picture, then after 2 mins take the same picture, the exposure is different !
The EVF is great but the picture taken does not match what you saw in the EVF in terms of exposure.
The 24-105mm native lens is excellent except there is a lot of CA.
Video is poor.
Not a strong offering considering the competition.

User ID

`



No problem. Simple fix. But you only had it for a week
and that doesn't leave much time to read the manual.


.

PeterBergh

The full manual is ~600 pages. Given that the contents are highly technical, I figure it might take close to a year to read and absorb the manual.

User ID

Another simple fix.
The PDF version is machine searchable :-)

.

PeterBergh

Searching a PDF may help when you know a) what you are looking for and b) the manufacturer's term for it. For me, unfortunately, at least one of a) and b) applies.

rydabyk Loc: Florida Panhandle

Well, I've had the camera for only a few days and Youtube has been my friend! There are tons of reviews, how to set it up etc. videos and I think I've watched about 10 hours of them. Now to go outside (if it quits raining) and play with it.
Thanks for all of the replies and comments.