p.4 #2 · R6 vs. R5 vs. R6II EVF stutter/lag/blackout differences when following fast action
mfrank999 wrote:
Please let us know your experience next week when you shoot ES.
Again my main reason to go to Canon system was the availability of a lite weight 100-400.
By the way, does the r7resolve this issue better than the r6II?
No. IMO it's not as good as the R6II for action. The primary knock against the R7 is the slow sensor readout and much more noticeable rolling shutter effects. This means there are fewer action type applications where you'll want to use e-shutter in the R7 for a better viewfinder experience.
I had a loaner R7 when I also had the R3 and I could barely shoot with the R7 alongside the R3 because it was so different. Not just in the physical layout and user experience, but also nowhere near as responsive. Because of the rolling shutter, you need to shoot in a mechanical shutter mode and then you run into EVF blackout, etc. All the same problems as the R6 v1 but the R7.
The R7 could be much better with a faster readout sensor. I guess that will be the Mark II version.
That said, for 'casual' photography where things were more or less stationary, I enjoyed the R7 most of the time. But I wouldn't feel comfortable with it as an all-rounder solution compared to the R6II.
As an aside, I was just playing around with the high frequency flicker reduction feature and could make e-shutter under some artificial lighting scenarios usable.
p.4 #3 · R6 vs. R5 vs. R6II EVF stutter/lag/blackout differences when following fast action
mfrank999 wrote:
I originally had the A9. Was that considerably closer to real time than my R6?
Yes, the A9 is better than the R6 and R5 for following a subject. Closer to a real feed. A9 would be similar to the R3. A1 and Z9 are a bit better.
Everyone, myself included, always refer to the stacked sensor cameras as having a real time feed but in reality I really don't think any of them are perfect when actively firing shots.
But certainly the A9, A9II, A1, R3 and Z9 make it pretty easy.
The R5 (and I assume the R6) are better than any other non-stacked sensor cameras. But I still fell behind with the R5 and I really didn't like the "jolt" back to reality when you let off the shutter. Obviously the longer the burst the more you fall behind.
Still, I found the R5 to be good enough for shooting BIF, just not as easy as the stacked sensor cameras.
p.4 #4 · R6 vs. R5 vs. R6II EVF stutter/lag/blackout differences when following fast action
arbitrage wrote:
Yes, the A9 is better than the R6 and R5 for following a subject. Closer to a real feed. A9 would be similar to the R3. A1 and Z9 are a bit better.
Everyone, myself included, always refer to the stacked sensor cameras as having a real time feed but in reality I really don't think any of them are perfect when actively firing shots.
But certainly the A9, A9II, A1, R3 and Z9 make it pretty easy.
The R5 (and I assume the R6) are better than any other non-stacked sensor cameras. But I still fell behind with the R5 and I really didn't like the "jolt" back to reality when you let off the shutter. Obviously the longer the burst the more you fall behind.
Still, I found the R5 to be good enough for shooting BIF, just not as easy as the stacked sensor cameras....Show more →
Thanks for the explanation. Unfortunately I need the lighter weight of the rf100-400, if sony ever came out with a comparable weight lens I would be back to the a9.
p.4 #5 · R6 vs. R5 vs. R6II EVF stutter/lag/blackout differences when following fast action
arbitrage wrote:
I still fell behind with the R5 and I really didn't like the "jolt" back to reality when you let off the shutter.
That jolt really annoyed me a week ago with the R6 shooting a hockey tournament. It made it harder to move from player to player shooting a single shot as they were rapidly coming at me. Fortunately this aspect has been improved somewhat with the R6II. It's not perfect, but definitely better.
It's less of a problem when doing bursts as you can adjust your framing - kind of spray & pray - but as you mentioned, the longer the burst, the more you fall behind unless you intentionally overcompensate. This is more so when panning. When the action is more or less coming directly at the camera, it's a lot easier.
p.4 #6 · R6 vs. R5 vs. R6II EVF stutter/lag/blackout differences when following fast action
rscheffler wrote:
That jolt really annoyed me a week ago with the R6 shooting a hockey tournament. It made it harder to move from player to player shooting a single shot as they were rapidly coming at me. Fortunately this aspect has been improved somewhat with the R6II. It's not perfect, but definitely better.
It's less of a problem when doing bursts as you can adjust your framing - kind of spray & pray - but as you mentioned, the longer the burst, the more you fall behind unless you intentionally overcompensate. This is more so when panning. When the action is more or less coming directly at the camera, it's a lot easier....Show more →
Since the resolution and frame rate for the evf is similar to the a9, and the sensor is the cmos type, I assume it has to be the stacked sensor that makes the difference.
Dec 05, 2022 at 07:39 AM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.4 #7 · R6 vs. R5 vs. R6II EVF stutter/lag/blackout differences when following fast action
mfrank999 wrote:
Since the resolution and frame rate for the evf is similar to the a9, and the sensor is the cmos type, I assume it has to be the stacked sensor that makes the difference.
yes it's the stacked sensor, not the evf... the only way to get a true blackout-free evf is with fast stacked sensor readout, without that you'll typically have duplicated frames in the evf, to cover up the blackout.
p.4 #8 · R6 vs. R5 vs. R6II EVF stutter/lag/blackout differences when following fast action
osv2 wrote:
yes it's the stacked sensor, not the evf... the only way to get a true blackout-free evf is with fast stacked sensor readout, without that you'll typically have duplicated frames in the evf, to cover up the blackout.
I guess I will stay with the r6 with the rf100-400, since weight is important at my age.
Dec 05, 2022 at 07:12 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.4 #9 · R6 vs. R5 vs. R6II EVF stutter/lag/blackout differences when following fast action
that little zoom is on sale for only $500, what a bargain... i don't think that you can match those weight/price specs in any ff mount?
p.4 #10 · R6 vs. R5 vs. R6II EVF stutter/lag/blackout differences when following fast action
mfrank999 wrote:
Since the resolution and frame rate for the evf is similar to the a9, and the sensor is the cmos type, I assume it has to be the stacked sensor that makes the difference.
osv2 wrote:
yes it's the stacked sensor, not the evf... the only way to get a true blackout-free evf is with fast stacked sensor readout, without that you'll typically have duplicated frames in the evf, to cover up the blackout.
mfrank999 wrote:
I guess I will stay with the r6 with the rf100-400, since weight is important at my age.
A stacked sensor will certainly improve the EVF experience. But for the R6II vs. the R6, it's probably mostly the sensor but possibly also other aspects of the image processing pipeline that have been improved. The R6II EVF is apparently the same one in the R6, but my experience with the II so far indicates a smoother experience than the R6. It could mostly be due to faster sensor readout speed, but possibly also processor enhancements and other related hardware and software refinements. For sure the sensor is faster because the camera now will do 40fps with AF and has less rolling shutter, but given the camera is also more energy efficient, there are likely also processor improvements to complement the sensor.
You may have already explained it, but how is your R6 set up for your bird photography? E-shutter, EFCS? The EVF experience will improve with e-shutter and I feel like the R6II is smoother than the R6, but won't really know until I can shoot some sports/football with it, hopefully soon. But no, it's not going to be quite as 'real time' as the EVF experience from a stacked sensor. This was one aspect where I thought the R5 had some advantage due to the higher resolution sensor. It's not quite as necessary to fill the frame as much as possible, which makes keeping an erratic subject in the frame a bit easier.
p.4 #11 · R6 vs. R5 vs. R6II EVF stutter/lag/blackout differences when following fast action
rscheffler wrote:
A stacked sensor will certainly improve the EVF experience. But for the R6II vs. the R6, it's probably mostly the sensor but possibly also other aspects of the image processing pipeline that have been improved. The R6II EVF is apparently the same one in the R6, but my experience with the II so far indicates a smoother experience than the R6. It could mostly be due to faster sensor readout speed, but possibly also processor enhancements and other related hardware and software refinements. For sure the sensor is faster because the camera now will do 40fps with AF and has less rolling shutter, but given the camera is also more energy efficient, there are likely also processor improvements to complement the sensor.
You may have already explained it, but how is your R6 set up for your bird photography? E-shutter, EFCS? The EVF experience will improve with e-shutter and I feel like the R6II is smoother than the R6, but won't really know until I can shoot some sports/football with it, hopefully soon. But no, it's not going to be quite as 'real time' as the EVF experience from a stacked sensor. This was one aspect where I thought the R5 had some advantage due to the higher resolution sensor. It's not quite as necessary to fill the frame as much as possible, which makes keeping an erratic subject in the frame a bit easier....Show more →
I am shooting electronic shutter and High shutter speed.
p.4 #12 · R6 vs. R5 vs. R6II EVF stutter/lag/blackout differences when following fast action
Hi, I know this is an old thread but caught on to it because I was experiencing the same problem when I was using mirrorless cameras a few years ago. I shoot motorsports professionally, and found it really hard to pan vehicles at really slow shutter speeds (1/15 and slower). I was using the sony A9ii but traded them in for 1DX MKIII’s and haven’t looked back since.
The speeding up of the subject in the EVF was a real problem I had and made it hard for me to pan a race car due to the “speeding up effect”. It drove me nuts. When I borrowed a 1DX my world changed when I experienced an OVF.
I only experienced that weird effect when doing pans at really slow shutter speeds. But when the shutter speeds were fast enough for the EVF (just guessing) the image feed was seemless.
Now I’m looking at getting an R6 for the eye-AF tracking it can provide and help me take better composed photos of the drivers in the paddock rather than having to constantly crop. Of course, that means if I want to do pan shots with the R6, it’s back to the same old problem with the EVF.
While the 1DX mkiii live view AF is similar to a mirrorless camera two things i noticed when using it:
1. Eye AF isn’t always spot-on even with canon glass
2. I really don’t like shooting with the camera out in front of me to look at the back LCD.
That’s why I’m thinking of getting a 3rd body that’s a mirrorless camera for better “people AF”.
p.4 #13 · R6 vs. R5 vs. R6II EVF stutter/lag/blackout differences when following fast action
I don't see a problem with your plan to integrate a mirrorless 'people' camera with your 1DXIIIs. This is a strength of mirrorless camera AF capability and an R6 or R6II will easily use all of your existing EF lenses.
I can appreciate the mirrorless viewfinder delay problems you described and it's still a problem I experience with the R6 and R6II cameras I use when photographing sports action (I don't think those EVFs refresh as fast as the Sony a1/a9/a9II). As with every equipment choice, there are benefits and downsides. The EVF delay/stutter is definitely a downside, but I feel in general, the R6/R6II have been a significant improvement in overall AF performance compared to the 1DXII I came from. One of the most useful AF improvements/capabilities of these cameras over their DSLR predecessors is the subject/face/eye detection and tracking capability. I'm sure the 1DXIII is an improvement over the 1DXII, but after briefly using one, like you, I thought its impressive live view capabilities were somewhat wasted by not being able to comfortably use the feature without awkwardly holding the camera to view the rear display. One solution would be an LCD magnifier hood but I really wished Canon would have made the 1DXIII with a hybrid OVF/EVF viewfinder (an opinion that many didn't agree with). Had this been the case, I might have gone to the 1DXIII from the 1DXII back in 2020. Instead I waited on the sidelines for 2.5 years for Canon to fill out their mirrorless offerings. In some respects though it was fortunate I skipped the whopping price tag of the 1DXIII, in part due to pandemic-related industry impacts immediately after its release. But also because cameras like the R6 and R6II have proven to be as good, or even better, in respect to overall AF capabilities at a much more affordable price point.
I'll note that the R6/R6II eye detection/tracking capability is very good, but it's not perfect. That said, I have a lot more confidence in it than I did with my DSLRs, especially with off-center AF point placement. I would typically overshoot with the DSLR to ensure at least some images had focus where I wanted it, which is typically not necessary with the R6 or R6II.
