Latest activity

Murkle · 2024-12-23T13:50:04-0500

Greece, 3rd Nov '24. Somewhere between Kalamata and Sparta. R6ii 24-105 F4L

DhlcadR6 · 2024-12-23T13:46:12-0500

Tbh Nikon and Sony always have advantages on sensors\' paper spec, but real life results differs

Murkle · 2024-12-23T13:44:02-0500

Weymouth, UK. Just before the Ironman swim start. R6ii RF70-200 2.8

Murkle · 2024-12-23T13:26:25-0500

Red Kites near Heathrow, UK. R6ii RF100-500L

LSXPhotog · 2024-12-23T13:17:39-0500

Just so we're clear, this sensor is performing WORSE than the R5 Mark II in electronic shutter and everyone was talking trash about for the past few months. So I'm prepared for more trash to be spoken. Is this performance in electronic shutter? Is it in mechanical shutter? In either case, not impressive.

It’s both funny and sad, the more I use my R1, the more impressed I am with my R3. That has primarily been because of ergonomic preferences, but I also haven’t personally seen any improvement in image quality at all. I was initially impressed with the R1’s high ISO performance until I took the same shots on the R3 and I conceded that the R3 was perhaps a little bit cleaner? I can’t properly test dynamic range scientifically, but it seemed just fine, but it is a bit of a shock to learn how good the R3 is - one full stop at ISO 100 better?! (I’m also exclusively shooting the R1 in electronic shutter and I would shoot the R3 in mixture of EFC and ES…the R3’s dynamic range and noise performance in ES is noticeably worse.) I would be curious to see the performance differences between the R1 and R3 in Electronic Shutter and Mechanical shutter, and if there is any improvement. I feel like the R3 may offer an advantage in mechanical shutter, but the R1 would perform better in electronic? Splitting hairs here...

There are a lot of quality of life improvements with the R1 that make me happy and would have me second guess ever moving back to the R3…but the R3 camera body design is PERFECT in my opinion and I haven't ruled out selling the R1 and going back to dual R3s. I actually really dislike the R1 body’s size and layout right now, it’s too wide (as wide as the 1DX) and I’m going to have to learn to love it or at least like it.

I kept one of my R3 bodies and don’t think I’ll be selling it. I’ve personally talked several R3 users out of purchasing the R1. Just by being honest...if you own an R3 and don't need full size HDMI, CLOG2, pre-capture, dual CFExpress, nearly flawless electronic shutter performance, and better AF - absolutely do not buy the R1. The market for this camera is very small and I scratch my head asking why Canon didn't or couldn't do more with the R1. Feel free to call me stupid and ignorant for acknowledging the minor improvements this camera made over the R3. They made the R3 too good? I'm not sure losing a full stop of dynamic range is a justifiable tradeoff for a stop faster readout. A full stop of dynamic range performance will absolutely be noticeable in some situations.

Just my $.02.

snudel · 2024-12-23T13:02:51-0500

Click said:
I really like this shot. Well done, snudel.

Thank you Click here is another Picture.

Click · 2024-12-23T12:45:57-0500

I really like this shot. Well done, snudel.

snudel · 2024-12-23T12:25:44-0500

Long-tailed tit in the last evening light

plusnq · 2024-12-23T12:13:21-0500

neuroanatomist said:
So far, I'm happy with the RF 24-240. Build quality is good, DxO PL handles the corner recovery well at the wide end. The lens will definitely work for my intended use of a one-lens travel kit (ok, TBH I'll bring the 28/2.8 or 24/1.8 as well).

Thank you for your assessment. I have always struggled with a travel lens but it is so much easier with a light smal kit on holiday. Cheers

neuroanatomist · 2024-12-23T12:02:42-0500

plusnq said:
I'd be interested in your thoughts regarding the 24-240mm. Please let me know what you thought. Cheers.

So far, I'm happy with the RF 24-240. Build quality is good, DxO PL handles the corner recovery well at the wide end. The lens will definitely work for my intended use of a one-lens travel kit (ok, TBH I'll bring the 28/2.8 or 24/1.8 as well).

AlanF · 2024-12-23T11:57:56-0500

Tmjc.wolf said:
I don't think that's a completely unrealistic thing to say as pre capture makes certain things soooo much easier to capture. Of course you could technically achieve everything without pre capture just through anticipation and a lot of trial and error, but the technology actually allows you to easily reproduce shots that were previously one in a million or even rarer to hit.

So something that was previously practically impossible in a shooting day is now possible.

I like the pre-capture on my R5ii so much that it is my default mode. But, to say it allows me to easily reproduce shots that were a million to one or rarer is completely over the top. Maybe it is for some clueless shooters but not for the moderately competent.

Pixel · 2024-12-23T10:24:26-0500

If we get more features, better software, stronger support services then I have no problem paying a minimal fee for it.

Pixel · 2024-12-23T10:18:48-0500

vikingar said:
This is 100% to be able to add subscriptions in the near future. So many companies have done it the same way with similar press releases, then dropped the hammer a few months later. It's so transparent.

They already charge 1$ monthly for DPP on iOS, so it's not like it's a new idea for them.

They'll start cheap enough for it to not matter, and once everyone is okay with it raise prices. Might take a few years until the pricing hurts, it's not going to happen overnight.

docsmith · 2024-12-23T09:31:32-0500

Just chiming in from my phone while vacation. Of course this came in while I am on vacation having taken the R5 and not my R1 (size and not needed to family functions).

First the ISO 200 bit is odd. I am still not sure I believe it.

Second, after some playing, yeah, I would have preferred higher DR at low ISOs (of course), but this essentially has the same low ISO performance as my 5DIV, which I thought was great. Never had an issue.

I am very happy with the images coming out of the R1. I’ve posted them here and other places.

My biggest issue with it was I do not want a reason to upgrade in a few years. 2028 Canon releases a R1 II with 15 stops DR. Ugh.

EOS 4 Life · 2024-12-23T07:58:06-0500

angelisland said:
From what I have seen, it’s just airplanes at night.

That is just what they want you to think.

EOS 4 Life · 2024-12-23T07:52:46-0500

Gogo7 said:
Everyone that was criticizing the Sony A9iii for its lack of dynamic range will now say: ohhh you see the Canon R1 is not that bad , it competes with A9iii , so it’s all good

I disagree.
I predict that we will see a wave of Canon bashing.
People can't stop complaining about the R5 II.

EOS 4 Life · 2024-12-23T07:49:22-0500

whothafunk said:
Also "R1 making previously impossible to capture photos now possible", then how the hell were photographers able to capture the photos before anyway?

They were not.
The same goes for the a9 III.
Both have captured photos that were impossible before.

Gogo7 · 2024-12-23T07:45:56-0500

Everyone that was criticizing the Sony A9iii for its lack of dynamic range will now say: ohhh you see the Canon R1 is not that bad , it competes with A9iii , so it’s all good . That’s called hypocrisy
But anyways , I love my R1 but it seems every camera company moving forward , makes a step backwards when it comes to image quality and It’s all about speed now .

Billybob · 2024-12-23T07:29:05-0500

This is oh so fascinating, but there is nothing here that would entice me to purchase one camera over the other. The IQ differences between the 4 cameras featured in this article are so minor, likely imperceptible in practice (especially without pixel-peeping). Now, from a purely academic point, it's interesting to see that the Sony A1 sensor from years ago still performing the best on these measures. Undoubtedly Canon and Nikon sensor designers consider the slight reductions in DR performance to be more than worth it in exchange for increased speed. I know I do.

Jowe-79 · 2024-12-23T06:55:51-0500

OldDudePhotog said:
it's 7 am on the East Coast in the Americas, many of us are still sleeping.

Ohh sorry!

Jowe-79 · 2024-12-23T06:55:04-0500

Is clean!! And this lines in mechanical shutter don't exists...only ES.

OldDudePhotog · 2024-12-23T06:54:21-0500

Jowe-79 said:
Please help??? Nobody understand me??

it's 7 am on the East Coast in the Americas, many of us are still sleeping.

OldDudePhotog · 2024-12-23T06:53:32-0500

Edited: just re-read the post and am removing my thought as it is not applicable.

Jowe-79 · 2024-12-23T06:53:13-0500

Jowe-79 said:
Hello, I have been shooting outdoors in natural sunlight this morning with the electronic shutter with the EOS R7 + EF-S 18-135 nano USM... and I notice although it is very subtle, but there are some kind of horizontal stripes or bands in clear areas of the blue sky like the photo attached here. I couldn't tell if it does it at low or high shutter speeds... but it is natural light (NOT LED OR ARTIFICIAL LIGHT) could it be some small effect of the electronic shutter? it's like noise in the form of horizontal bands... With a mechanical shutter or EFCS this problem disappears completely... Is it normal? Thanks.

I attached in drive link the original cr3 file without edit of the photo of blue sky...

R7G_8953.CR3

drive.google.com

I think is electronic shutter and i haven't not worry?
Thanks.

Please help??? Nobody understand me??

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics