Thank you for providing that list. I have a number of first generation image stabilization lenses, and others that are not on the twelve frames per second list. Do you know or have an idea what might happen, with them? Would they still work? Would it be less frames per second? Thank you.
Greg Futral wrote:
Viewfinder Review
Set to [Enable] for viewfinder display of your shots immediately after you shoot.
1. Select [ : Image review].
2. Select [Viewfinder review].
3. Select an option.
Note
[Viewfinder review] settings take effect when [Image review] is set to an option
other than [Off].
2
I couldn't get page 258 from the English Manual to post in the same format as the instructions appear.
To me this would imply that one would need set the Viewfinder Image Review to "on". I think you can look at a lot of footage, but until you determine what the camera settings of those videos are, one cannot really determine how things work. I agree with tifa3 that we will have to wait until someone does a better test. I had asked Vanessa Joy if one could turn the Viewfinder Image Review off, and she checked around and the consensus was that you can. If you cannot turn this off, I don't understand how one will be able to photograph quickly moving objects because you will not be able to follow them as you couldn't with the EOS R.
Greg Futral wrote:
lighthound and all others who might know....
Thank you for providing that list. I have a number of first generation image stabilization lenses, and others that are not on the twelve frames per second list. Do you know or have an idea what might happen, with them? Would they still work? Would it be less frames per second? Thank you.
It's my understanding they will work but at a slower frame rate. I assume the new R5/6 bodies will "throttle" them down so as not to damage them because they were not designed for such speeds.
lighthound wrote:
I see several like that which doesn't make sense.
I suspect this list is not a formal list and is simply what they have put together at this time.
Yeah I guess Canon was short supplied with lenses and couldn’t test them all. The lists have made no sense since I first found them on Canon Japan last week. Even less sense after we see conflicting lists for 12FPS in the user guide vs online. Not much coordination happening in Canonland but what else is new
If the 400DOII really doesn’t support 12 FPS and drops down into that horrible mode that T&C showed then that will make my R5 purchase decision easy until more native RF supertele are released.
Thank you. There are just so many things I don't understand. I use a 600 F4 IS lens with a 1DX Mark II which I think does slightly more, perhaps fourteen frames per second. I guess we'll see.
arbitrage wrote:
Yeah I guess Canon was short supplied with lenses and couldn’t test them all.
It might not be based on testing at all. I recall a firmware update for my 1D(s) Mk III bodies that was said to improve AF performance with some newer lenses including the 100–400mm II. My assumption was that the lenses do protocol* negotiation with the bodies, so that if it's a new body it will use the new protocol and if it's an old body the old protocol. Dually, a new body will have to use the old protocol with an old lens that doesn't support the new one.
Therefore, the R5 will have to use the old protocol with lenses that don't have support for the new one. The list would simply be the list of lenses with firmware support for the new protocol.
The lists have made no sense since I first found them on Canon Japan last week. Even less sense after we see conflicting lists for 12FPS in the user guide vs online. Not much coordination happening in Canonland but what else is new
The manuals and user documentation have been slipshod all along. We've been waiting at least ten years for the (totally unnecessary) flash compensation vs. EV curve the cameras use with fill flash unless you set the flash metering to averaged.
* In computing, a protocol is the rules for how and when messages are sent between two pieces of computer equipment over a connection.
I can confirm there’s no major lag like the R when testing the R5/R6 at my camera store using mechanical shutter 12fps. There is a slight stutter but it’s worlds better than the R. No concerns
tifa3 wrote:
I can confirm there’s no major lag like the R when testing the R5/R6 at my camera store using mechanical shutter 12fps. There is a slight stutter but it’s worlds better than the R. No concerns
We will start getting more reports about that which will be positive. Now the big one. How good is it for BIF, particularly small birds. I don't need eye AF for that. I just want to know how well tracks and the AF is.
There were questions regarding the 400DO II performance on the R5. I tried it out today and honestly couldn't tell the difference between the 400DO and the 100-400 - other than the max f-stop.
Seemed to be cranking out at 12 fps with no issues. No blackout, the "slideshow" was virtually irrelevant, especially when compared to the R.
I just started bird photography last year after retiring so maybe I haven't experienced the situations that I should be concerned with. Can anyone explain what the issues might be? Thanks
I just got home from my local park and Barn Swallows in crappy late evening light. I’ve shot these birds fairly extensively with the A9/200-600 and 1DX3/600iii, where the A9/200-600 was the superior combo. I shot them with the R5/600iii tonight. I have not reviewed images on the computer yet. My initial impressions are the R5/600iii combo had a bit more difficulty actually getting on the bird than the Sony combo, particularly if the focus was nowhere near where the bird was when I put the camera up. If focus was fairly close, the camera did a very good job of picking the bird up and tracking it. It was just about as good as the Sony combo I have. Again, the lighting was really bad tonight so it’s not really a fair comparison. It seemed the R5/600iii has a harder time tracking very small in the frame birds, particularly dark birds against dark backgrounds, than the A9/200-600. However, I’d never really keep any of these photos, so it may be a moot point.
The other factor to consider is my shooting style with the A9/200-600 is to generally start at 200mm and zoom in quickly to 600mm once focus is acquired with the Sony, so that obviously affords a large advantage to the Sony combo. I have not used the Sony 600 with the A9, so I can’t make a comparison there.
Overall the R5/600iii seemed far superior to the 1DX3 both in picking up the birds against varied backgrounds and continuously tracking them. It seemed the Sony *might* track better, but I cannot be sure how much of that is the difference in lenses. I have to do more testing, but I was thoroughly impressed with the R5/600iii.
I tried some electronic shutter shots and felt that the experience was much improved over the EOS R, however it wasn’t quite the live feed of the A9. My experience with the A9 live feed is that it is extremely good cause but as the card starts to fill, it starts to have a nearly identical experience to the R5 where it gets a bit of the slight “stuttering” of the image.
I just got home from my local park and Barn Swallows in crappy late evening light. I’ve shot these birds fairly extensively with the A9/200-600 and 1DX3/600iii, where the A9/200-600 was the superior combo. I shot them with the R5/600iii tonight. I have not reviewed images on the computer yet. My initial impressions are the R5/600iii combo had a bit more difficulty actually getting on the bird than the Sony combo, particularly if the focus was nowhere near where the bird was when I put the camera up. If focus was fairly close, the camera did a very good job of picking the bird up and tracking it. It was just about as good as the Sony combo I have. Again, the lighting was really bad tonight so it’s not really a fair comparison. It seemed the R5/600iii has a harder time tracking very small in the frame birds, particularly dark birds against dark backgrounds, than the A9/200-600. However, I’d never really keep any of these photos, so it may be a moot point.
The other factor to consider is my shooting style with the A9/200-600 is to generally start at 200mm and zoom in quickly to 600mm once focus is acquired with the Sony, so that obviously affords a large advantage to the Sony combo. I have not used the Sony 600 with the A9, so I can’t make a comparison there.
Overall the R5/600iii seemed far superior to the 1DX3 both in picking up the birds against varied backgrounds and continuously tracking them. It seemed the Sony *might* track better, but I cannot be sure how much of that is the difference in lenses. I have to do more testing, but I was thoroughly impressed with the R5/600iii.
I tried some electronic shutter shots and felt that the experience was much improved over the EOS R, however it wasn’t quite the live feed of the A9. My experience with the A9 live feed is that it is extremely good cause but as the card starts to fill, it starts to have a nearly identical experience to the R5 where it gets a bit of the slight “stuttering” of the image.
Tracking my puppy in our backyard, I can confirm that mechanical shutter provides minimal blackout and lag that impacts tracking. I was extremely impressed. Electronic shutter is lag and blackout free.
Chimping wrote:
Tracking my puppy in our backyard, I can confirm that mechanical shutter provides minimal blackout and lag that impacts tracking. I was extremely impressed. Electronic shutter is lag and blackout free.
What lens were you using?
I need you to track a kestrel against a busy background...
Pius Sullivan wrote:
What lens were you using?
I need you to track a kestrel against a busy background...
I have only tried my RF 85 1.2 so far. I couldn’t believe how well and fast it tracked. It was like a different beast compared to using it on my EOS R.
I would have done more testing with different lenses tonight, but I managed to get in trouble with the missus. Tomorrow and Saturday will be better. I’m heading out to Frank Lake near Calgary, which is a bird sanctuary. I’ll be using my 600mm f/4 L II primarily.
Nice first impression comments. Perhaps bring your A9 along for the next trip, test them both back to back under similar lighting and subjects. Lock your Sony lens at 600mm.
KINGOFKNGS wrote:
I just got home from my local park and Barn Swallows in crappy late evening light. I’ve shot these birds fairly extensively with the A9/200-600 and 1DX3/600iii, where the A9/200-600 was the superior combo. I shot them with the R5/600iii tonight. I have not reviewed images on the computer yet. My initial impressions are the R5/600iii combo had a bit more difficulty actually getting on the bird than the Sony combo, particularly if the focus was nowhere near where the bird was when I put the camera up. If focus was fairly close, the camera did a very good job of picking the bird up and tracking it. It was just about as good as the Sony combo I have. Again, the lighting was really bad tonight so it’s not really a fair comparison. It seemed the R5/600iii has a harder time tracking very small in the frame birds, particularly dark birds against dark backgrounds, than the A9/200-600. However, I’d never really keep any of these photos, so it may be a moot point.
The other factor to consider is my shooting style with the A9/200-600 is to generally start at 200mm and zoom in quickly to 600mm once focus is acquired with the Sony, so that obviously affords a large advantage to the Sony combo. I have not used the Sony 600 with the A9, so I can’t make a comparison there.
Overall the R5/600iii seemed far superior to the 1DX3 both in picking up the birds against varied backgrounds and continuously tracking them. It seemed the Sony *might* track better, but I cannot be sure how much of that is the difference in lenses. I have to do more testing, but I was thoroughly impressed with the R5/600iii.
I tried some electronic shutter shots and felt that the experience was much improved over the EOS R, however it wasn’t quite the live feed of the A9. My experience with the A9 live feed is that it is extremely good cause but as the card starts to fill, it starts to have a nearly identical experience to the R5 where it gets a bit of the slight “stuttering” of the image.
JaimitoFrog wrote:
Nice first impression comments. Perhaps bring your A9 along for the next trip, test them both back to back under similar lighting and subjects. Lock your Sony lens at 600mm.
