MdB

6 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Do you want to be banned? Heading the right way.

You're an irritant.

Ban people because they don't agree with you... classy. 

"Dishonest. Misleading. Unnecessary." Selection and omission Andrew, ever heard of it? 

7 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I am talking about the superb internal Nikon colour and codec.

You said specifically Log. Log is only through the HDMI. Log is only on an external recorder. 

8 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

You are a jealous Canon fanboy and an idiot of the first order.

Everyone must conform or hit the highway eh? Ohhh look at the Nikon, it's superb. Boy Canon are shit. Better? 

7 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

The full frame 4K looks like D850++ And that already looked like a 1D C. VERY cinematic.

Almost looks as good as a Canon, weird praise Andrew. 

8 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

It has superb colour. Nikon's colour science is just as good as Canon's, maybe even a bit better. Great dynamic range. Flat profile and now they have LOG as well. You only have to see some of the early sample videos to see how nice the skin tones are.

Wait, wait, wait. Has logic totally escaped you? This is what you have to say about the EOS R (which we know deep down you love and why you keep pulling his / her hair): 

"10bit is only via HDMI. Some may see this as progressive. I don’t. It’s a hangover from the past that pleases nobody but the external monitor manufacturers. HDMI is the worse connector known to man. Back in 2014 I did not want to use a bulky recorder on the Sony A7S to get 4K, yet they think I want to use it here just to get a small incremental improvement in image quality?

HDMI is not really an uncompressed signal. It isn’t like having 14bit RAW data or real 10bit ProRes 4444. It is crippled 10bit and looking at the image might not even be real 4:2:2. On top of that the shitty cable can fall out at any moment.

The 10bit processing is INSIDE the EOS R so I don’t see why I should have to buy an expensive add-on to get at it. Panasonic and soon Sony with the A7S III and Fuji with the X-T3 route their 10bit processing to an SD card, without any compromise to ergonomics, weight, wobbly cables or added costs."

This issue seems to only apply to Canon, because once we are talking about Nikon again it is like the saviour has come to town to offer us 10bit and Log ONLY via HDMI. Let's say that again, in order to use Log or 10bit on the NIKON you need an external recorder. Now want to re-read what you said about those things? 

12 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I expect MdB will reply next saying why you should buy a shitty EOS R instead, haha.

At least it would have log and *surprise* also look like a 1DC. 

13 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I only have one concern and that is the AF via Nikon F adapter. The native lenses are a bit boring for the price. It clearly has great video AF with those Z lenses but if it has great video AF with Nikon F lenses as well, I am sold, because I already have a bunch of those including Sigma ART.

Lolololol "I only have one concern - the complete lack of any interesting lenses to actually, you know, use on the thing"... 

25 minutes ago, Nikkor said:

But it's not s35mm, it's more like gh5 territory if I'm not mistaken.

Why not 1" or 1/2.3"? It's closer to S35 than it is any other standard format. 

2 hours ago, Snowbro said:

Wrong on your first 3/5 responses mr troll.

Oh here we go 'bro'. Clearly you're a clueless drongo and one with nothing to back up his mouth. So let's try starting here: https://www.eoshd.com/2017/08/slow-mo-shootout-camera-gives-detail-120fps/

The A99 II comes out on top. Ahead of the GH5 which is ahead of the Leica SL which is ahead of...wait for it... Your drongo noggins 1DX II. The A99 II is the same as the A7R III. The A7 III is considered to be better than the A7R III. 

2 hours ago, Snowbro said:

Go watch some sony videos and you can see the background jump in & out of focus very fast sometimes.

That's not focus breathing. Get a clue, then come back. 

2 hours ago, Snowbro said:

Not conventional focus breathing where it hunts (which I see too).

Also not breathing. 

2 hours ago, Snowbro said:

I used the box for the focus point while on a gimbal.

For what? Got an example? 

2 hours ago, Snowbro said:

So many videos showcasing how bad the 120p looks on sony. It is soft, full of artifacts, lacks color depth and jitters from lower than needed bit rate. 

*sigh* get a clue. Find an example where the A7 III is demonstrably worse than the 'top' contenders? 

2 hours ago, Snowbro said:

I thought you had to go be a canon apologist somewhere about now? Lol

Bro, I don't care about brands. Just dumb shit comments. 

1 hour ago, JurijTurnsek said:

That Nikon 2.8 zoom will have 24mm. Big difference. Also, you need to consider the T value of the f2.0 zoom. And IBIS. Also, freaking f2.8 DOF on FF is already damn shallow, just improve the high ISO performance Canon, sheesh.

Hahaha sounds like a bunch of excuses. Sooooo 1 stop difference is lens is unimportant, but going from crop to full frame is a world away. Do people have an actual clue? 

14 minutes ago, Django said:

What about the 58mm f0.95 from Nikon rumoured at $4-6K? where are the LOLZ about that one?

I think I may have. When it was rumoured on the fanboy sites it was the most amazing thing ever. When reality struck and it was a $6k behemoth that is MF only... LOLZ. 

The 50/1.2 from Nikon won't be a dime cheaper. Wonder if we'll dig this up then (in a few years when it actually finally lands). 

In the mean time instead of spending $3k on a miraculous f/2 zoom lens, we can instead all rush out and spend $2400 on a Nikon f/2.8 zoom plus another $250 for an adapter and LOLZ all the way to the bank with our very savvy $350 saving Because that Canon is clearly RIDICULOUSLY overpriced. 

LOLZZZZZZZZZZZZ

16 minutes ago, Shield3 said:

But if you go with native R lenses, you don't have the ND filters.  Like if I kicked in the 3k for the 28-70 F/2 - I'm still either using a matte box with drop in filters or screwing some on the end.  The ND adapter is only for adapting EF lenses.  Or did I miss something?

Sure didn't. That is one thing that is kind of annoying for sure. Only works with adapted lenses. I don't know how that means much in my hypothetical C50 / C100 III? I was just presenting the same camera in a slightly different guise for an alternative context. 

2 hours ago, Snowbro said:

Focus breathing

Focus breathing is from lenses, not AF systems. 

2 hours ago, Snowbro said:

inanimate objects (not tracking, just gimbal etc).

I don't know what focus modes people use, but the AF is excellent in the modes where you just have a focus box and keep it over your subject. Tracking gets murkier. People confuse tracking and AF-C all the time. 

2 hours ago, Snowbro said:

120p FHD looks extremely soft and mushy details with artifacts. It also is jittery, probably due to the need of an increased bit rate. 

Are you sure you're looking at the right camera? I've seen you say the same thing in a lot of threads, but the A7 III 120p spanks most things out there. Perhaps someone was using the S&Q modes (which work differently to the 100/120p mode)? Or maybe you're referring to the A6300/6500 which indeed had pretty awful 120p. 

2 hours ago, Snowbro said:

The lenses are good from sony, but dang.. I want another 70-200 2.8 and I can literally get it for (new) $1,000 cheaper going with canon than sony (or nikon)

Just keep in mind that adapted lenses effectively get no AF on the A7 III. I am not a huge fan of the Sony lens range (there is some good stuff in there) but as someone who uses a number of different brands I like to keep to EF because it is adaptable, but does limit the uses on a Sony. The Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 RXD however is an absolute peach of a lens, small, fast, awesome AF, great on gimbals etc plus it is VERY reasonably priced. I would take the extra stop of the Sony + Tamron combo over the Nikon + f/4 zoom personally. Nikon has 10bit, but only to an external recorder and the situations your in that is going to be very awkward IMO. You also don't get Log internally either. Sony's Picture Profiles enable you to create pretty much whatever colour look you want in camera - Which is handy as well. 

2 hours ago, Snowbro said:

It is frustrating that there is no clear choice (thank you canon for the eos r).

It does seem like Canon are making you sad. Not those other brands though, they seem like they're both perfect  

4 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Well I don't have the money to piss away on over hyped, under delivering toys. Seems to me the EOS R has it in spades. Sort of like legalized rape.

So what ever will you use? I think they all seem like over hyped, under delivering toys (except the BMP4K). And of those toys, because that's all any of them are, the Canon suits me best. 

3 minutes ago, mkabi said:

You know what I've learned over the years.... especially about Canon... Do not believe the hype!!!

3 minutes ago, mkabi said:

I can't even remember where I last posted about how disappointed I am in the rumored specs... now that its become reality, I'm not really surprised...

Seems to me there was no hype. Hype perhaps that it was going to be mega disappointing? 

4 minutes ago, mkabi said:

Its always a let down...

You thought it was crap before and now think it's what? Where is the let down?

4 minutes ago, mkabi said:

You know what I think... I think that they don't know how to get rid of the crop...

At least something we can agree on. Sony do. Samsung did. Nobody else has what it takes at the moment. Canon steadfastly use their own sensors (except in compacts). When they design them for video they make them to the right pixel dimensions. When they make hybrids, there's a crop. 

7 minutes ago, mkabi said:

In fact, I predict that they will release a 50MP Mirrorless in 6 months with a greater crop (what is that? a 2.3 crop?)... Mark my word...

5DSR II sensor. Definitely. Do you think that will be a video-centric model? Do Sony and Nikon do video centric models with massive MP counts? Also it won't be 50MP, more like 60MP. Will be a scaled up version of the M50 sensor. If that uses the same area for the crop, I dunno what that works out to 3x maybe? It's about 1" on the M50. It will be about as good in video as the 5DSR is...

1 minute ago, webrunner5 said:

Hell that camera IS better for video than a 1DX mk II, and it is a 1/3 the price.

Is it? Well looks like you have a winner. Buy three  

I had the A7 III, couldn't sell it fast enough. At least I made a few bucks on it because of the queue to get one (not scalping either, still well below retail). Sold within 10 minutes. 

I will buy this R. I have zero doubt I prefer it over the A7 III and haven't even used it yet. 

Your experience may be different. 

3 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Hell this isn't 2010 anymore. It doesn't make a shit what Canon has. They are so far behind it isn't funny. They are living on their Past achievements. Sony is out to kill, and it seems Nikon is also. Canon better wake the hell up, it days have passed..

Sorry does the A7 III have 10bit? 3.6MP EVF? 2.1MP LCD. Usable touch interface? Good colour? All-I internal codec? Dual pixel AF? Fully articulated screen? 

WHY are you living in 2005 SONY?!

Seriously don't get the rage. 

7 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

t is suppose to be a FF camera. Make the God Damn thing FF! How hard is that.

It sure is. Apparently it is quite hard. RED crop in different resolutions. So do Arri. But lets all cut ourselves because a $2k Canon (we were never going to buy anyway) does too

Just now, webrunner5 said:

Yeah but they seem to just Half-Ass everything as of late and still want top dollar! God there seems to be no end to it. It's not rage as much as serious frustration. God they had a chance to Kill everyone on this, but NO!

Top dollar? You were expecting better than 1DX II performance in a $2.3k camera? It is significantly cheaper than the 1DX (1/3) a grand cheaper than the 5D IV, but eclipses them both in video (1DX does have some advantages). But then look at the C line, the C200 doesn't have 10bit. It has a similar sized sensor area for video (somewhat bigger) but also has Log, DPAF, EVF, ND filters etc. This is not 'that' far off a C200, for $2.3k. Why all the hand wringing? It's not a terrible camera. If you can't do something decent on this I doubt a full frame is going to save you (I don't mean 'you' specifically, I mean it in a general sense). Blackmagic S35 sensors aren't quite S35. Nobody complained when Canon APS-C is 1.6x crop vs 1.5x crop, everybody just thinks it's the same. The minor difference here is just that, minor. 

Let me ask you this: Canon release a brand new 'C50' or maybe 'C100 III'. It has a 1.7x 8MP 'close to' S35 4K sensor. It does 4K 10bit out with C-Log, but still only has 8bit internal. Has ND filters. It has the best EVF and LCD to date on any C-series camera. Has DPAF across the whole frame with touch selection, peaking, DPAF focus aids and more. Fits really well on a Gimbal too. What would you think is a reasonable price for that camera? $50? Total rubbish wouldn't wipe you butt with it? 

7 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

Actually I dont think we really 'know this.' In fact nearly all the shortfall in performance seems to point to Canon being unable to pull data off the sensor fast enough - heavily cropped 4k, rolling shutter in cropped 4k, no 1080 120p, relatively poor fps in photos, no continuous eye focus etc... And the problem with mirrorless is that it is very sensor dependent. If Canon is behind here and cant catch up, this will be a bigger problem long term than simply starting with an underwhelming entry level camera.

Honestly the 1DX II sensor would have probably 'fixed' all the complaints. But being Canon they would have come thick and fast anyway. There seems to be some weird genuine rage at this camera (and company... and anyone who isn't enraged). I think a 1DX II sensor version is coming. People will probably cry about it too. But 'maybe' they will have slightly less rage. 

3 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

The 28-70 is absolutely enormous and mega heavy. Nearly 2kg like the old BMCC.

1.4kg is 'nearly' 2kg? Maybe it's 'nearly' a tonne? 

Obviously it is heavy, but it really isn't much bigger than (say) my 85mm Art. That's hardly massive. People shoot with 70-200mm f/2.8's every, single, day. Let's have some perspective. Also there are plenty of UWA lenses that are getting in this same territory, I don't hear to hand wringing about that. 

21 minutes ago, gingercat said:

Wonder if there’s people out there that get in lather about sewing  machine brands that don’t have the features they want.

Absolutely! Those Singer fanboys are militant  

6 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

When I die, I want Canon to lower my casket at my funeral so they can let me down one last time.

Zing!

1 hour ago, Robert Collins said:

Seems that reception for the Eos R is pretty muted from this poll taken in the Eos R mirrorless forum on DPR.

Looks like. It is a fairly bland camera. Always knew Canon were going to mirrorless-ify the 5D IV guts. It was always going to be not that fast (anyone used a 5D IV in live view? The claims about it's abilities were grossly over exaggerated by fanboys - Claim about how great DPAF is). 

I don't think there are going to be many rushing to buy it. 

1 hour ago, Robert Collins said:

A similar poll taken in the Z mirrorless forum gives the Nikon Z system a much better response.

To be fair, 5D IV users (and 1DX II and 6D II) already have the majority of what's 'new' in mirrorless, i.e. decent live view. Nikon users are 'gaining' much more for their system with the Zeeees than Canon users are with the R. 

11 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

As opposed to a $500 35mm

With the Nikon being $800? 

11 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

a $1100 24-105

So is Nikon's... but 35mm shorter. 

11 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

a $2300 50

Yep. But it's also an f/1.2. 

11 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

and a $3000 zoom

Well that's a pretty unique f/2. Very unique in fact. Plus it is only marginally more expensive than the latest round of f/2.8 pro zooms. This lens is a big deal. I expect this lens will cause more interest and potential professional switchers than any mild body spec differences (especially in video). Lenses like this make a system. How many event and wedding shooters are going to be lining up for this? The body isn't that interesting, the lenses are. 

Buy the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 and latest Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 and you've saved a whopping $300 over the Canon 35mm f/1.8 IS Macro and 28-70mm f/2. Well plus you'll need the adapter which is how much again? $249? Now you've saved $50. I'll take the Canon thanks. 

11 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

How many are going to buy a $3000 zoom or a $2300 prime over adapting EF lenses?

That's kind of the point though no? I mean you're right, the new R and Z are really mostly for existing users to use adapted lenses right? So at least the Canon launch lenses are offering something unique. Something that makes people actually want to bother with buying new ones rather than just adapting. I've never found f/2.8 standard zooms very exciting. Now I am buying in a system just for one (reasonably expensive) standard zoom. 

11 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

Right now they're both counting on existing DSLR users adapting lenses until they round things out.

Sure! But they aren't just making replicas of their DSLR line in the mirrorless mount. They are actually taking advantage of the differences to make unique lenses (the 24-105 less so really, but lets call it a kit zoom). Yes I'm aware that Nikon's f/1.8 primes are more advanced than their DSLR counterpart, but Sony released similar(ish) lenses for their system 5 years ago and got slammed for not being 'professional' enough. Same with their f/4 trinity, panned for not being professional and 'slow'. 

11 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

But what's worse is the fact that they've shown zero sensor advancement in the two years since the 5d4 was released.

A7R III has the same sensor as A7R II from two years ago. Z7 same year old sensor as the D850. The D750 had the same sensor as the D600... And RX1 and A99 and VG900 and A7 etc kept pumping that thing out for a good half decade (or more). A7 III has a downgraded sensor from the nearly 2 year old A9. Sorry where is the miraculous new tech being poured into all these cameras that aren't the R? 

11 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

We already know Nikon has 2.8 zooms and a number of primes coming in the next year.

Their f/2.8 standard zoom is going to be how much cheaper than the Canon f/2? I mean it's only another year away, a lot of releases can happen in that time too. If one wants f/2.8 zooms they can adapt the ones already available. Again just replacing like for like. 

11 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

All of your Zed bashing are issues Canon has as well

Really? These are my 'Zed bashings': 

- They haven't released any lenses to entice me to the 'system'. As a non F-mount user they offer me nothing. I don't buy a system just because it has one body with a mild spec increase. Especially not from a brand that has a distinct history of abandoning anything at the drop of a pin if it doesn't make them a buck in an over bloated company. 

- I see no distinct advantage over the Sony's, despite what fanboys like to think (not a bad thing if you are an F-Mount user these are finally a great option to you, the Sony's are a very capable bit of gear and to come even close to them is an achievement, let alone exceeding them on spec in some areas). 

So for the first one, yes the R DOES have some lenses I am interested in. I also suspect that Canon will have a C line camera with this mount in the near future. The adapter with drop in filter is MORE useful to me than any video feature that Nikon has. That simple thing alone. Plus yes, I am invested in EF glass so anything that can take EF (which is the point) is more interesting to me than something that doesn't or won't. 

Second. Sure. Mostly the R isn't as good as the Sony's either. Except for the use of EF glass, which is pretty good on the Sony's for stills but lacks in the video dept. 

The Canon isn't perfect. The Nikon isn't perfect. The Sony isn't perfect. The Fuji isn't perfect. The Panasonic isn't perfect...

6 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

You get a clue, every reviewer has said that the AF works the same as on native Fmount camera, it is even weather sealed.

Hahaha, still not native. Try again. 

6 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

Now the AF system is quite different in use than traditional Nikon system, so some who have only used it for 1 hour might have got it wrong, but if it failed or had quirks, it affected both system.

Fanboy talk. 

6 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

Dpreview even makes the bold claim (at least until the Canon eosR) that the z7 had the best video AF period. Or perhaps if you spent a week with the camera you could tell us your experience !!!

I don't need to, I have zero interest in it - Did you not understand that? They have no lenses I want and I'm not about to start buying F mounts to try and fill in the enormous gaps. The Zee launch was at best pathetic as a new system. Way behind what Sony managed to do 5 years ago. Way behind Fuji. Way behind what Canon did days later. No amount of minor 'spec' differences and fanboyism is going to change that for me. MAYBE if they opened the mount so there would be a future better selection of lenses than what Nikon wants to provide and the ability to say adapt EF mount, but until then the 'system' is rubbish. It's ONLY use is for existing F-mount fanboys. Then you bang on about how compatible it is with F-mount. Guess who doesn't care?! ANYBODY who doesn't have F mount. 

6 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

At least two people have tested  sigma art lens with the adapter and it worked as good as on traditional Fmount camera.

Oh wow!

6 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

I am realistic

Yeah you sound it. "It's so perfect with every lens ever because some paid Nikon F mount fanboy said so..."

6 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

and contrary to Sony and M4/3 (M4/3 is by nature open) they had some catch up to do, so they willingly open theirs

Nikon have the catching up to do. Again, this camera is for existing fanboys only. 

6 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

In fact I am grateful that gave that choice so I don't have to change system overnight and don't feel pressured at all to invest thousands to renew my lens collection.

Fanboys are always grateful, they 'take it' so gleefully. 

6 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

As a Nikon user

You don't say. 

6 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

even if I dislike Sony zombie colors

Seems like you're chock full original thought too. 

6 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

Nikon has done a great job for video, it is still the only FF camera with 10 bit 422 LOG capable until now

What do you mean 'still'? It has been 'announced' for a week. It has been available on the market ZERO amount of time. The Canon might have a crop, but it too has LOG and 422 10bit (at least it has log internally) AND it works with my lenses. Granted I think the EOS R ALSO is just for fanboys with existing lenses. I am not so much a fanboy of Canon (ugh, can't think of anything worse) but I do have a lot of EF glass because it has become the de facto standard for adaptability, I can use it on pretty much any mount... EXCEPT Nikon. If only Nikon had some really compelling glass... a promise of a dumb 58mm later is not compelling. 

6 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

By the way, I don't give a shit about your need

By the way I don't give a shit that you don't give a shit. I shit on your lack of giving a shit. I also will happily shit on your Nikon. 

6 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

a place for people to share but not spout nonsence about low info people that live only on sound bite and don't take 5 minutes to do some research and share something constructive to the group.

Bahahaha! So being constructive to the group is circle jerking over your favourite brand. Funny. 

7 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

If else it would be suicide, I don't see anyone now moving from Nikon moving to them.

Not when they've got great fanboys like you

7 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

if you can't do nice video with them, it is your fault and not the camera

Oh about time some logic... How about you go and apply that. 

7 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

Until Pana lauch its FF camera, this round I would give to Nikon in the FF MILC and if rummors turn out true about Fuji, the Fuji for the Apsc MILC.

Fuji looks great, at least it has some lenses

5 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

But so far I agree, Nikon has moved the needle the most.

A me too product with a slight spec boost but no lenses. It's hardly a game changer. It stops the exodus from the big two. Same with the R. 

5 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

I still think Panasonic's announcement will be the mysterious 8k ILC they've been hinting at, which would be something in the neighborhood of a 40mp 3:2 sensor. I still believe using the EF mount makes the most sense too, otherwise it'll be an incredibly small volume camera, and anything Panasonic is already small volume compared to CaNikon and even Sony.

Sounds super interesting. Something I could definitely get behind. 

1 hour ago, Danyyyel said:

What is mediocre about 80 lens line up + 100 more third party

Three native lenses champ. A slow zoom and two expensive f/1.8 primes. Astonishing. Talking adapted? What a joke. Get a clue. 

1 hour ago, Danyyyel said:

want you can adapt almost any other lens brand because it has the smallest flange.

Bahahaha yeah except Nikon are locking down the mount and protocols. 

1 hour ago, Danyyyel said:

efore talking such nonsence people should take 5 second and inform themselves so as not to look like a fool.

Got a bit more of a clue then some mindless fanboy spouting his mouth off. 

1 hour ago, Danyyyel said:

And tell me what should have the fanboys have wanted that much more than great body and sealing, great/best evf, FF DX 4k, 120 fps fhd, IBIS, great video AF and 10 bit/nlong with my Ninja flame. All of that for $ 2000? Tell me another camera that does that much for this price nowwwwwwwwwwwww, and not some mythical camera that will come in the future and at this price. Because lets be clear the A73 just came out 6 month ago and I don't think it will be upgraded to A74 for at least a year.

Great and still only useful for F mount fanboys... which is what I said to begin with. Not going to build up a base of F mount lenses just to mount on a camera that is flavour of the month with some small ‘spec’ advantage. The ‘system’ has ZERO enticing about it (again unless you’re already a die-hard Nikon fanboy, in which case it will be the ‘best’ anyway). 

As for all that for $2k. I wouldn’t care if it was $500 I still have no use for it. If you gave me one for free I’d sell it to fund something useful. 

I’m pretty sure there has never been a more pointless turd of a camera...

18 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

 

MbD. Canon apologist of the year.

 

Andrew Reid - struggles with accuracy of a string of a whopping 3 letters  

I can think of worse things to using this Canon, like dribbling over the Nikon Zeeee...

You mocked the 1DC. AFAIK in 2018 you still own that camera. Crop and rolling shutter and all. 

13 minutes ago, dvcrn said:

Maybe the thing that bugs me more than the 4k crop is 120fps 720p

Agree with that. 4K is preferred to me. I don’t mind having a FF option if available, but want a close to S35 crop as the primary. 

Just now, Django said:

Yeah this is an awesome feature for focus pulls, never thought i'd see it outside of Canon's C line.

Me either. But also has implications for stills here too, especially with the adaptability the mount will have. 

4 hours ago, Django said:

Focus Guides + Peaking

 

Thank you! So it did inherit the focus aid that uses the DPAF to determine focus. That to me is a HUGE HUGE advantage over everything else, hands down. 

Now the question: is it only with native lenses? that would be very disappointing if so...

This looks better than I expected. The C-Log and 10bit our are way more than I thought they were going to give us. The crop doesn’t bother me. Rolling shutter isn’t great, but can be worked around. Can always shoot in 1080 as well. 

1 minute ago, JurijTurnsek said:

The EOS R full-frame mirrorless camera will be available in October, 2018 for $2,299, or $3,399 with the RF 24-105 F4 L IS lens. The EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM will cost $500 and arrive in September, the RF 50mm f/1.2 L will cost $2,299 when it arrives in October 2018, the RF 28-70mm f/2 lens will cost $2,999 and come to stores by December 2018. The RF24-105 F/4 L IS USM lens will cost $1,099 and hit stores in December, 2018.

And 35mm f/1.8 IS Macro is $499. 

1 minute ago, mercer said:

Yeah according to Engadget there is the 1.7x crop... ugh... so close Canon. Without IBIS and with the crop... $2200 is too rich for my blood. Oh well. Maybe in a year or two. 

That’s a grand cheaper than the 5D IV, plus ships with Log, has a better codec and does 10bit out. It’s actually not horrendous. 

5 minutes ago, Snowbro said:

They have to be nuts asking literally double for the new 50mm 1.2. The first one dropped for $1,599. It is also a full pound heavier; they should have just updated it like everyone wanted and sold it for 2k or less. Who is actually going to buy that for 3k?? 

Does anyone know the dynamic range for stills/video? I would be shocked if it was higher than the 5d iv

The 50mm is $2299. 

What’s actually wrong with the 5D IV’s DR? 

1 hour ago, Mokara said:

Cropping is due to limitations of the processor, not the sensor.

 

Not so. The various output feeds from the sensor for different modes are based on the sensor’s abilities also. There are plenty of sensors that can only read out the whole pixel range at sufficient depth for a subsection (crop) of the sensor. The Z7 and A7R III aren’t reading out full pixel data at 30+ FPS of their 8K+ sensors and then that is pixel binned by the processor. That occurs on a sensor level or the whole thing would explode. 

1 hour ago, Mokara said:

any case, Samsung did it before Sony IIRC

This is relevant how? Nobody is getting their sensors from Samsung... so...?

1 hour ago, Mokara said:

Sensor size has nothing to do with frame rates, bit depth or bit rates. The only things that affect those parameters are pixel numbers and processing power.

In terms of processing those signals, no, you’re right. However smaller sensors tend to have higher speed read outs at greater depth than larger sensors (but those eventually catch up). Very early 4K camcorders with 1/2.3” sensors had 4K60 long before bigger sensor mainstream products (like GH5 and 1DX II). 

21 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Amazing I can shoot at all! ?

Same can be said about the complaints pegged at Canon. 

22 minutes ago, Cliff Totten said:

they got the biggest marketing balls.

They needed to so they didn’t shut down the whole division. 

23 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

here pan the Nikon Z's, but they got a lot more right than Canon. The bodies are a compelling alternative to their DSLR's and offer features not found in any other Nikon body. At least if you're buying a Z6/7, you're bringing something new to your kit beyond a EVF. That's not the case with the R.

Zeees are just a mirrorless body for F mount users. Same as the R. Nobody expected anything more surely? That’s all the fanboys needed. The compelling thing for RF other than the EVF is the lenses, makes one want to actually buy some new lenses, not just adapt them. Nikon Zeee bodies have arguably better specs, but there is nothing enticing about their mediocre lens lineup. Canon on the other hand have made all four lenses really indispensable and a huge part of buying into the new format. For Canon that in itself is a much more useful thing to do.