Mirrorless Cameras (MILC) and Lenses

[LunarMist]

Don't expect reliable and fast AF from Canon lenses on S*ny bodies. I have Metastones and Sigma adapters and dozens of FW updates.
Canon EF lenses work very well with the Canon EF-RF adapter, in some cases better than they did on EF. Don't buy weird brand EF-RF adapters.
Some of the new RF lenses are optically worse than the EF lenses that they replaced. It's rather sickening, but weight is more of a priority than image quality according to Canon. Other lenses (180/3.5 macro, 500/4s, TS-Es, etc.) have not yet been produced in RF, so I'm using about 50% EF vs. RF. Of course there are some really nice new lenses like the RF 28-70/2, 100-500, and 70-200/4.
I only use S*ny lenses on S*ny, but that is mainly the specific combination of the 200-600 on the a7RV.

 

[Mercutio]

My Sony body usually gets used with a wide FOV at medium apertures, lately the EF-S 18-135, or with a 24/2.8, which goes a long way to make my life easy with it. It's also used more for video than photos.

 

[LunarMist]

Video AF is rather different. My understanding is that you need slow, but steady AF and good tracking.
For sure all MILS suffer from AF acquisition with tele lenses since the on-sensor AF has an inadequate effective base length. The better MILS now use some kind of AI logic to decide if the AF is going the wrong way when it cannot see ANY change in the totally OOF subject. Sometimes you have to use a left forearm to nudge the AF. It is a critical limitation that you just have to live with.

 

[LunarMist]

So the crappola de Canon continues. R1 resolution is rumored to be only 30MP.

 

[Mercutio]

So the crappola de Canon continues. R1 resolution is rumored to be only 30MP.

That's 50% better than the 1dx mk3!
Canon definitely has different priorities from Sony and Nikon but with the R3 as sport-centric as it is, I was thinking the R1 would be a more well-rounded device. It may still be. Worst case scenario is that Canon makes a camera you won't buy. C'est la vie.

 

[LunarMist]

30MP was well rounded in 2016. Now it is for sports and events.
The R5 is killing me. Where are the R5 II and R5s?

 

[Mercutio]

Are you still hoping to see something more than 45MP? Looking for Quad-Pixel AF?

Other than missing the digital shoe and the lens level correction some of the newer bodies have, the R5 still seems like a dream body to me.

 

[ddrueding]

Thanks for all the info. The 100-400 II and 180 Macro were the two big lenses I didn't want to replace, and they are big anyway. The 24/1.4 will depend a lot on whether I end up APS-C or FF. Time to research the new Canon bodies.

 

[LunarMist]

Those work fine with Canon adapters. I have two of the 100-400 IS II. They were the first lenses I ever used on the R5. Canon croppers pretty much suck due to archaic sensor designs.

 

[ddrueding]

OK, R8 body and lens adapter ordered. Thanks again to both of you for all the help.

 

[LunarMist]

You will want spare batteries. A 7.5Wh battery does not go far for MILS.

 

[ddrueding]

Yup, this is kind of a toe in the water. If I'm happy with it I'll get a bunch of accessories for it and get the Mrs an R100. If I want more I'll get the R6II and all the accessories for it, and the Mrs will get this one

 

[LunarMist]

I don't know about Swedish prices, but the smaller Canon batteries are rather much per Wh.
The R5 II should be really good when it is finally released.

 

[LunarMist]

Are you still hoping to see something more than 45MP? Looking for Quad-Pixel AF?

Other than missing the digital shoe and the lens level correction some of the newer bodies have, the R5 still seems like a dream body to me.

The R5 was a bit of a nightmare in 2020 and better with 2021 FW. An R5 II and an R5s with more pixels would be nice.
From the start the R5's reduced bit depth, fixed 20FPS, and mediocre scan speed were all a headache in ES mode.

 

[ddrueding]

Thanks again for the advice, the R8 is great. Even with the adapter the AF actually seems better on the 100-400 II than it did on the 5DII.

 

[LunarMist]

The 5D II was a suck in many ways - one of the worst cameras I ever bought. Of the Canon bodies only the 1D series had decent AF in 2008.
The 100-400 II was first shipped in late Q4 2014. It deserved at least the contemporary 5D III or 1DX and was designed to meet the optical demands of the 5Ds/R of June 2015.

 

[Handruin]

I felt the same with my 5DmkII and eventually sold it. The most modern dslr I own now is the 5DmkIII and it still works fine for my needs.

 

[LunarMist]

The R5 II is almost here. https://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-eos-r5-mark-ii-we-have-now-seen-it/
Unfortunately they already screwed up the camera with more video crapola.

 

[Mercutio]

The R5 II is almost here. https://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-eos-r5-mark-ii-we-have-now-seen-it/
Unfortunately they already screwed up the camera with more video crapola.

There's always Fuji?

 

[LunarMist]

Doesn't Fujifilm still live in the fringes of APS-C and mini-medium format sensors with a big fat gaping hole in the FF/FX size?
Canon seems to be slower than ever with new designs, but they sure have some nice patents if they ever choose to implement.
I just want somebody to come out with a 60+MP sensor with a decent readout speed. The a7RV is a mechanical shutter camera for anything moving more than slowly.