Canon EOS R Series Cameras

Right I don’t have any noticeable delay. There may be a delay but it’s the same time it takes me to move from the shutter button to the video record button so not a problem.
 
TimHughes said:
Right I don’t have any noticeable delay. There may be a delay but it’s the same time it takes me to move from the shutter button to the video record button so not a problem.
Click to expand...
So definitely some setting or something wrong on mine. I shot 10 continuous frames and then tried to shoot video - but took about 10 seconds or so to save them (red light on the back of the camera while saving) and then once stopped flashing, the video button actually would work when you depress it. And that’s a genuine 64gb Sandisk cf express bought from Henry’s camera in store! I need to talk to a canon rep I think at some point!
 
stickytape said:
So definitely some setting or something wrong on mine. I shot 10 continuous frames and then tried to shoot video - but took about 10 seconds or so to save them (red light on the back of the camera while saving) and then once stopped flashing, the video button actually would work when you depress it. And that’s a genuine 64gb Sandisk cf express bought from Henry’s camera in store! I need to talk to a canon rep I think at some point!
Click to expand...
Is it a UHS-II SD card? ie write speed around 200 MB/s with two rows of pins? A older UHS-I card with one row of pins has a slower write speed. The speed written on the card is the read speed not the write speed.
 
Tysonator said:
4K video recording you do need a V90 UHS-II card, check the write speeds
Click to expand...
I do just fine with V60 UHS-II. Maybe it is closer to 90 than 60, who knows.
 
Just out of curiosity - How much more acurate/quick are RF lenses at tracking?

I've been messing about with my flash this christmas trying to shoot some photos of the Cat. no issues with tracking and focus for a static Cat (R5, 24-105 F4 Mk1) but as soon as we started trying to get some shots of her pouncing and moving quickly the lens seemed to loose the tracking.

I still need to mess about with the case settings (I had it locked on, eye tracking enabled, tracking sensitivity at -2 and accel/decel tracking 0 - maybe needed this at +1/2) but I was surprised how quickly it lost focus as the Cat came towards the camera. I must have been about 1m away so double the min focusing distance.

I am in the market for upgrading some lenses this year, either the 24-70 2.8 or, if it comes the 70-200 2.8, either EF or RF, So I am just wondering if anyone thought using an RF lens would be any better, or whether its just a case of a difficult subject - more testing still to be done...
 
A_S said:
Just out of curiosity - How much more acurate/quick are RF lenses at tracking?

I've been messing about with my flash this christmas trying to shoot some photos of the Cat. no issues with tracking and focus for a static Cat (R5, 24-105 F4 Mk1) but as soon as we started trying to get some shots of her pouncing and moving quickly the lens seemed to loose the tracking.

I still need to mess about with the case settings (I had it locked on, eye tracking enabled, tracking sensitivity at -2 and accel/decel tracking 0 - maybe needed this at +1/2) but I was surprised how quickly it lost focus as the Cat came towards the camera. I must have been about 1m away so double the min focusing distance.

I am in the market for upgrading some lenses this year, either the 24-70 2.8 or, if it comes the 70-200 2.8, either EF or RF, So I am just wondering if anyone thought using an RF lens would be any better, or whether its just a case of a difficult subject - more testing still to be done...
Click to expand...
Tricky subject, what’s the light level like? Is it a black cat?
I think as a rule the RF lenses are faster. however, I don’t think that’s a universal truth and some EF lenses will be faster than some RF.

I think my rf 85 is slower than my ef 1.8 but not noticeable to me.

Also I think the RF 70-200 2.8 is faster than my EF non IS (I had it on test drive)
 
A_S said:
Just out of curiosity - How much more acurate/quick are RF lenses at tracking?

I've been messing about with my flash this christmas trying to shoot some photos of the Cat. no issues with tracking and focus for a static Cat (R5, 24-105 F4 Mk1) but as soon as we started trying to get some shots of her pouncing and moving quickly the lens seemed to loose the tracking.

I still need to mess about with the case settings (I had it locked on, eye tracking enabled, tracking sensitivity at -2 and accel/decel tracking 0 - maybe needed this at +1/2) but I was surprised how quickly it lost focus as the Cat came towards the camera. I must have been about 1m away so double the min focusing distance.

I am in the market for upgrading some lenses this year, either the 24-70 2.8 or, if it comes the 70-200 2.8, either EF or RF, So I am just wondering if anyone thought using an RF lens would be any better, or whether its just a case of a difficult subject - more testing still to be done...
Click to expand...
From experience R6 will slow down tracking speed and accuracy quite noticeable in low light. It seems like it drops off the cliff very suddenly. So that's one potential reason, and no 2 will be that you are way too close and use way too wide lens. Moving cat starts at 200mm, ideally 400mm. Third, lens is very soft and slow making it hard for camera to focus it properly.
I definitely don't see how going from EF to RF will improve the speed significantly. USM motor is already very very fast as you can see it in better light. STM only gets worse from there.
So you are looking for much sharper glass, and RF mid-range zooms are NOT it.

Besides, I have feeling EF 70-200mm f/2.8 II or III is a waste of time on R5 and 5Ds level cameras. Definitely on 5Ds, so R5 has to be same. It resolves R6 just fine, so should be also good on R3 but hopeless beyond that. Plastic fantastic RF might be sharper at ridiculous price. It is your money at the end of the day.

I think the old 200mm f/2.8 prime is a much better glass and value.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately there is not enough space to use 200mm in this case. But it’s a good shout - why would it be better at the longer zoom regarding focusing - other than subject isolation?

Interested in why you think the 70-200 2.8 II/III would not be good on the R5? Prime is not an option as I need it for other stuff I.e more flexible

Other thing I’d add is that I am not a pixel peeper - I am more interested in what works in the real world and the results I get from the 24-105 even on the R5 are good enough for me - i’m more interested in whether the newer lenses would get more consistent results re tracking and IS (when shooting pans at 1/30 second etc)
 
Last edited:
A_S said:
Unfortunately there is not enough space to use 200mm in this case. But it’s a good shout - why would it be better at the longer zoom regarding focusing - other than subject isolation?

Interested in why you think the 70-200 2.8 II/III would not be good on the R5? Prime is not an option as I need it for other stuff I.e more flexible

Other thing I’d add is that I am not a pixel peeper - I am more interested in what works in the real world and the results I get from the 24-105 even on the R5 are good enough for me - i’m more interested in whether the newer lenses would get more consistent results re tracking and IS (when shooting pans at 1/30 second etc)
Click to expand...
I’ve resisted switching to RF lenses so far. I’ve found AF tracking with EF lenses on R5 almost flawless. I’ve borrowed some RF and didn’t notice any difference in AF tracking. Considering a like for like comparison of lenses, 70-200 in this case, this review confirms
View: https://youtu.be/ETk4cZVam-0?si=WVTEFQopfjdDyPwl
.

So the evidence suggests switching to RF is the solution for your energetic cat.

With the same lens you could try:
- check you have animal tracking switched on
- frame to have good contrast with the background
- try without flash

If all else fails I would fix the focus and wait for the cat to enter the area in focus.

I’m not sure if faster lenses improve AF tracking on the current technology. I recall that used to make a difference. You could look into whether switching to a 2.8 or faster lens would help.

Note if you’re tempted by the 28-70 f2 note that it is 1.4kgs.
 
A_S said:
Unfortunately there is not enough space to use 200mm in this case. But it’s a good shout - why would it be better at the longer zoom regarding focusing - other than subject isolation?
Click to expand...
There might be actually space if you are both at the opposite ends of a reasonably sized room for example.

the movement appears "slower" from farther away so you can react more easily and keep the thing in the frame whereas from up close it can jump out of frame instantly and you can't even follow fast enough most of the time. The faster you have to move the camera, the harder the AF has to work. All this may sound as a bit of bs until you try following fast animal outdoors with 400mm and then attempt same with 100mm. You can go from 100 to nearly zero % keepers almost instantly. I'm not talking about a still or relatively still animal. You can do it even with 14mm if you fancied.

A_S said:
Interested in why you think the 70-200 2.8 II/III would not be good on the R5? Prime is not an option as I need it for other stuff I.e more flexible
Click to expand...

Because it is frankly no good with 5Ds. AF will be more accurate on Rx but the resolution is just not there at 8K, and it has annoying focus breathing issue at 200mm where you are stuck either at f/2.8 or f/8. It is an outdated design for ~6K sensors where it performs pretty well. I don't shoot 5Ds to scale image down to 20MP. That would be a waste of a sensor. There is R6 for that.

A_S said:
Other thing I’d add is that I am not a pixel peeper - I am more interested in what works in the real world and the results I get from the 24-105 even on the R5 are good enough for me - i’m more interested in whether the newer lenses would get more consistent results re tracking and IS (when shooting pans at 1/30 second etc)
Click to expand...
You might get marginally better results particularly on the IS front. at 1/30s you have substantial subject movement so things won't be perfectly sharp no matter what. It is a combination of factors and lens resolution that really limit the resolution far below R5 capability to more like R6 levels or under...
 
  • Like
Reactions: A_S
TimHughes said:
I’m not sure if faster lenses improve AF tracking on the current technology. I recall that used to make a difference. You could look into whether switching to a 2.8 or faster lens would help.
Click to expand...
faster AND sharper wide open is the required combination. This also presumes no major alignment issues.
I would take sharper f4 lens vs soft 2.8 even if they are about equal at f/4 onwards. Usually the situation is the opposite where slower lens is also softer but not always.


Add good light levels with reasonable scene contrast and clarity.


Sharpness and contrast wide open in the relevant area really matters. Some lenses are a little hazy (like EF 70-200mm f/2.8 II) and that can confuse the AF. Sony has the advantage of focusing at fixed aperture. I think canon is about to adapt this too sine we now have the ring on the latest RF lenses. I am completely guessing here if a body would know to focus a particular lens at slower aperture because wide open is known to cause problems. There are some reports that would indicate this might be the case.

Personally I would not spend over £2K on RF lens just for a cat image. There are better and cheaper ways of dealing with it.
 
i forgot to mention - yes contrast maybe an issue as she is black and white.

There might be actually space if you are both at the opposite ends of a reasonably sized room for example.

the movement appears "slower" from farther away so you can react more easily and keep the thing in the frame whereas from up close it can jump out of frame instantly and you can't even follow fast enough most of the time. The faster you have to move the camera, the harder the AF has to work. All this may sound as a bit of bs until you try following fast animal outdoors with 400mm and then attempt same with 100mm. You can go from 100 to nearly zero % keepers almost instantly. I'm not talking about a still or relatively still animal. You can do it even with 14mm if you fancied.
Click to expand...


Great shout on the less movement at longer lens - as I don't shoot animals often I haven't had to think of that.

I’ve resisted switching to RF lenses so far. I’ve found AF tracking with EF lenses on R5 almost flawless. I’ve borrowed some RF and didn’t notice any difference in AF tracking. Considering a like for like comparison of lenses, 70-200 in this case, this review confirms
Click to expand...

Tim - I've had no problems on the R5 with moving subjects but the cat movement is just in another league to say a vehicle or person which is why I am wondering if there is a genuine benefit for these very fast moving objects!

I'll watch the video tomorrow

Personally I would not spend over £2K on RF lens just for a cat image. There are better and cheaper ways of dealing with it.
Click to expand...

Nor me, abs not - it was more a bi product of what it might allow me to do. I am needing quick AF and hopefully a bit of lateral stabalisation for stuff like this... although i appreciate the limiting factor here is my timing to a large extent... but because they are such hard shots to nail anything advantagous is a help...


5G4A0047.jpg


5G4A9089.jpg
 
Last edited:
I would take a cat over these cars from the roadside every single time :LOL:

The cars don't really give you much notice, but I bet it is still more than the cat, and they are more predictable [hopefully - I might add] in the path that they travel. So as you pan, it allows the AF to adjust and lock. Whereas a cat essentially presents an unpredictable movement.

Black and white is actually not as bad as a solid backlit black for tracking purposes. You have contrasty edges here and there. So that will work with conventional spot or zone based AF modes. The problem is anticipating where it will be in the next frame. You may need to do some baiting and anticipation here.
In animal mode it will essentially look for the eyes first and you absolutely want to make sure those eyes get plenty of reflections. When it falls back to whole body it might not understand a concept of black and white cat... I bet a ginger will yield better results every single time. So you want those eyes and a mostly front lit situation.

P.S. You can always use camera strap for some extra stabilisation as long as you use the LCD for framing.
 
Minor niggles with R7.

I usually set the AF point to the middle of the screen. However I find that having stored the camera in my backpack, the AF point has moved off centre when it is next used. I usually notice and reset to the centre, but sometimes I take a few shots before I realise.

Similarly with the Dioptric control.

I don’t have these issues with my other Canons.

Any (polite) suggestions?
 
Hi, is anyone using the Canon RF 1.4x Extender on the RF 100-500l hopefully my lens should be with me today and was wondering if it slows down the autofocus and any loss of quality at all, I had a 1.4Ef and a 2x Ef on my Canon 500mm f4l and they wasn't that great

Thanks
 
Brentor said:
Minor niggles with R7.

I usually set the AF point to the middle of the screen. However I find that having stored the camera in my backpack, the AF point has moved off centre when it is next used. I usually notice and reset to the centre, but sometimes I take a few shots before I realise.

Similarly with the Dioptric control.

I don’t have these issues with my other Canons.

Any (polite) suggestions?
Click to expand...

Question is what is causing it to move - the button or is it touch shutter (if the r7 has this?)

Turn the control off in the menu is all I can think off - either the joystick or touch shutter

Other option is to turn the camera off
 
carper said:
Hi, is anyone using the Canon RF 1.4x Extender on the RF 100-500l hopefully my lens should be with me today and was wondering if it slows down the autofocus and any loss of quality at all, I had a 1.4Ef and a 2x Ef on my Canon 500mm f4l and they wasn't that great

Thanks
Click to expand...

were the extenders the version 3 ones ?
they improved the image quality and optimised them for the white primes with version 3
with my 300mm the 1.4 is almost no different to bare lens and 2.0 still excellent
 
Last edited:
carper said:
Hi, is anyone using the Canon RF 1.4x Extender on the RF 100-500l hopefully my lens should be with me today and was wondering if it slows down the autofocus and any loss of quality at all, I had a 1.4Ef and a 2x Ef on my Canon 500mm f4l and they wasn't that great

Thanks
Click to expand...
I haven’t actually used it first hand with the lens you mention.
But I decided to get one earlier than planned (due to the current double cashback offers) to use with my new RF 600.

As I said; I haven’t got any personal experience with the combination. But the majority of the sites I read had been using it with the 100-500; and had nothing but praise to say about the pairing.

I suppose it depends on what you’re expecting. I mean, all lenses have a certain degree of degradation using the extenders. But I was very happy using the 1.4x III with my 500m II whenever it was required.
 
Brentor said:
Minor niggles with R7.

I usually set the AF point to the middle of the screen. However I find that having stored the camera in my backpack, the AF point has moved off centre when it is next used. I usually notice and reset to the centre, but sometimes I take a few shots before I realise.

Similarly with the Dioptric control.

I don’t have these issues with my other Canons.

Any (polite) suggestions?
Click to expand...
Same here on my R6 mark II. I have touch shutter disabled but haven’t yet found the setting to disable the AF point being moved by touching the screen. I’ll keep mining the menu and let you know if I find it.
 
Brentor said:
Minor niggles with R7.

I usually set the AF point to the middle of the screen. However I find that having stored the camera in my backpack, the AF point has moved off centre when it is next used. I usually notice and reset to the centre, but sometimes I take a few shots before I realise.

Similarly with the Dioptric control.

I don’t have these issues with my other Canons.

Any (polite) suggestions?
Click to expand...
I have not had, or at least noticed, this problem with R5.

As a workaround, why not use one of the custom modes? Save with the AF point where you want it, and every time you switch it back on it will be there.
 
camairish said:
Same here on my R6 mark II. I have touch shutter disabled but haven’t yet found the setting to disable the AF point being moved by touching the screen. I’ll keep mining the menu and let you know if I find it.
Click to expand...
On R5 it's "touch and drag AF" settings in the AF menu. I have it disabled.
 
carper said:
Hi, is anyone using the Canon RF 1.4x Extender on the RF 100-500l hopefully my lens should be with me today and was wondering if it slows down the autofocus and any loss of quality at all, I had a 1.4Ef and a 2x Ef on my Canon 500mm f4l and they wasn't that great

Thanks
Click to expand...
I have an RF 2x that I use on occasion on the 100-500 - yes it does slow down the AF a bit but that's as nothing trying to find the thing you were about to take a picture of when you're wielding a 600-1000mm lens...

The thing to know is that the RF teleconverters both prevent use in the 100-300 range when coupled with the 100-500 so you get a 420-700/600-1000 and lose a stop (1.4x) or 2 (2x) as well
 
camairish said:
Thanks Tim, I disabled touch and drag in settings but the AF point still moves when I touch the screen!
Click to expand...
From my Google search it seems that unless you disable the touchscreen for everything, it will still move the AF point ie there is no option just to disable the touchscreen AF point control.
 
camairish said:
Thanks Tim, I disabled touch and drag in settings but the AF point still moves when I touch the screen!
Click to expand...
seems to be a bug....

Another option is to activate multi-function lock for the touch control in the settings menu. With that enabled, pressing the "lock" button will stop the AF point being moved by any accidental touch of the screen.
 
Brentor said:
From my Google search it seems that unless you disable the touchscreen for everything, it will still move the AF point ie there is no option just to disable the touchscreen AF point control.
Click to expand...
it's not a bad workaround, just press the lock button when you do want to activate the screen to change settings. an annoying bug I can see that.
 
Excellent advice Tim thanks, I’ll either do that or just configure the set button to return the AF spot to the centre.

I’ve figured most of it out but there’s one situation I can’t seem to fine tweak. I have single shot AF isolated to the AF-ON button (no AF when I half depress the shutter) and the * button next to it set to toggle between single shot and SERVO. I’m only taking photos of either static subjects in a studio or garden wildlife outdoors. I’ve activated ‘subject to detect’ (animals) and ‘eye detection’ in the AF menu which works in SERVO mode but unfortunately it’s also active when I toggle back to single shot AF mode. Any way I can configure ‘subject to detect’ & ‘eye detection’ to only be active in the SERVO mode or do I need to set up C1-3 for this for the wildlife?

Many thanks for the assistance, thought I was going crazy with the touchscreen situation.
 
camairish said:
Excellent advice Tim thanks, I’ll either do that or just configure the set button to return the AF spot to the centre.

I’ve figured most of it out but there’s one situation I can’t seem to fine tweak. I have single shot AF isolated to the AF-ON button (no AF when I half depress the shutter) and the * button next to it set to toggle between single shot and SERVO. I’m only taking photos of either static subjects in a studio or garden wildlife outdoors. I’ve activated ‘subject to detect’ (animals) and ‘eye detection’ in the AF menu which works in SERVO mode but unfortunately it’s also active when I toggle back to single shot AF mode. Any way I can configure ‘subject to detect’ & ‘eye detection’ to only be active in the SERVO mode or do I need to set up C1-3 for this for the wildlife?

Many thanks for the assistance, thought I was going crazy with the touchscreen situation.
Click to expand...
Any reason to use single shot? Wouldn't servo mode work for everything? Then you could use * and the button next to it for different AF options.
 
Thanks Tim, I’ve set up a separate wildlife profile in C1 which appears to keep the two different shooting styles completely separate, thanks for your input.
 
camairish said:
Thanks Tim, I’ve set up a separate wildlife profile in C1 which appears to keep the two different shooting styles completely separate, thanks for your input.
Click to expand...
The alternative I use is to have the AF-ON button for single point (static subjects) and the * button for eye focus.

However there's no benefit at all to not have Servo AF constantly when using BBF of any description. press to focus, release, shoot, shoot again etc, then to focus on something else, press to refocus, release shoot.

Also I don't see how the AF point not being centred is inconvenient when you lift the camera. As soon as you look at it, you can see the AF point surely? I'm the laziest photographer I know and I'd not shoot without having seen where the AF point is. My camera is set up so all I have to do is frame, focus and shoot (option to change DoF as I'm in aperture priority), and I struggle to see how that bare minimum is difficult.
 
Thanks Phil, I’m just getting used to the camera and probably getting lost in the menus. I want eye detection and animal detection switched on when photographing birds but not when doing static subjects since it’s a distraction. I’ve set up BBF with AF-ON for single point and * to switch to SERVO (no eye focus on my R6II) but I can’t seem to get the eye detection/animal detection to work in SERVO mode only. Apologies if I’m missing the obvious, first serious venture into a Canon menu since my old EOS 100…
EDIT: have taken on board Tim & Phil’s comments, AF-ON button set to SERVO as should be fine static subjects and * button set to eye detection for garden birds. Will give this a whirl. Thanks all.
 
Last edited:
Dael_Pix said:
Is the R5 able to use 5DMKIV batteries?
Click to expand...
Yes
It just won’t charge them in camera, and arguably they don’t last as long.

However, I use a mix of the one OEM for the R6, some old OEMs from previous DSLRs and a couple of new 3rd party, and there’s no noticeable difference

Just get used to them not lasting as long as you’re used to.
 
A_S said:
Just out of curiosity - How much more acurate/quick are RF lenses at tracking?

I've been messing about with my flash this christmas trying to shoot some photos of the Cat. no issues with tracking and focus for a static Cat (R5, 24-105 F4 Mk1) but as soon as we started trying to get some shots of her pouncing and moving quickly the lens seemed to loose the tracking.

I still need to mess about with the case settings (I had it locked on, eye tracking enabled, tracking sensitivity at -2 and accel/decel tracking 0 - maybe needed this at +1/2) but I was surprised how quickly it lost focus as the Cat came towards the camera. I must have been about 1m away so double the min focusing distance.

I am in the market for upgrading some lenses this year, either the 24-70 2.8 or, if it comes the 70-200 2.8, either EF or RF, So I am just wondering if anyone thought using an RF lens would be any better, or whether its just a case of a difficult subject - more testing still to be done...
Click to expand...
This is an interesting question as I believe low light will impact the focus speed if the mirrorless sensor has a slower read out speed and relatively lower usable ISO ceiling.
Which I suspect is all about processing the data quickly enough in low light while AF and then adding on a Speedlite function. I often wonder if some mirrorless cameras need dual processors to handle the different data functions !
 
It is time for my mini review of Smallrig 4160 L - bracket for R5 and R6

Would I recommend it? - Yes, with caveats
Is it perfect? - NO. Very far from it.
Extension height 13mm. Better than expected. Makes handling R6 feel a lot better.
Stability on tripod (with additional) RC4 plate. - better than naked R6, but still not perfect due to flex in cheap camera plastic. 4160 to RC4 is essentially solid and better centered than R6 hole.
Access to battery? - OK, removal not needed.
Workmanship precision? - Shoddy at best. It doesn't follow body contours as well as it could. You feel it in hand. Vertical bracket faulty.
L bracket vertical arm? - Unusable / faulty - doesn't even go into arca holder of DJI RS2. Shape of horizontal rail is very different to vertical. Obvious design fault. Removed and forgotten.
Price - absolutely overpriced given all of the above.

I only recommend it because camera has even worse design, so it sort of makes it handholdable (not as well as 5d), and useable on tripod.

Only time will tell if it doesn't fall apart before long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top