Nelu wrote:
Are you serious now?
A sparrow on a fence?
I could have taken that shot with any camera, digital or not.
What's the big deal about it?
Might be a big deal at a dog show where there are lots of people and dogs mixed together. Probably horse shows too, and of course the annual Rabbit Breeders Championships.
Nelu wrote:
Are you serious now?
A sparrow on a fence?
I could have taken that shot with any camera, digital or not.
What's the big deal about it?
I deal with the tracking issue all the time with horses and their riders. Having an auto feature will make that easier for sure, meaning I won't have to use the AF On button to manually over ride the auto tracking if it gets it wrong, in theory. We will have to wait and see with actual hands on production camera feedback.
icantbebigwill wrote:
Were you shooting bursts? If so, what was the hit rate?
100%
He reported the below on the other thread.
docusync wrote:
Anyways, I asked each kid to run towards me, and at 30 fps every single frame was in critical focus, at f/1.2.
The lens is the RF 85/1.2DS which is definitely not the fastest lens on the market. Also 85mm doesn't offer much working distance like a supertele, so the kids approached quickly. I normally perform this test on all my cameras. I never was able to get even half of the frames in acceptable focus with the original R5. The A1 was much better, and the A9III was almost perfect but it could lose critical focus during a rapid approach, when the person is close. I could never imagine that a 100% success rate is possible, and now I'm scared to think what the R1 can do.
I'm likely going to swap the R5II for an R1 whenever it becomes available, and will keep the A9III for action portraiture with strobes.
Now after Canon made such mind blowing cameras they seriously need to release the "promised" 200-500. Yeah, I know nobody promised anything, but still...
P.S. Another neat new feature is the ISO "shortcut". It allows you to have a few "favorite" ISOs (like the second gain ISO) one line above the full ISO list for a quick access/selection....Show more →
goalerjones wrote:
I deal with the tracking issue all the time with horses and their riders. Having an auto feature will make that easier for sure, meaning I won't have to use the AF On button to manually over ride the auto tracking if it gets it wrong, in theory. We will have to wait and see with actual hands on production camera feedback.
I'm not familiar how this auto feature works.
Let's say you have a rider on a horse. The rider is your intended subject but the horse is also a valid subject.
How can the camera possibly know which one to pick?
Yes it is! And as he had mentioned, just imagine what the R1 with it's cross-type AF system must be like. Those folks at the Olympics have got to be in high heaven using these new rigs.
After seeing how the R1's AF worked in some early reviewers video, I can see where the long ago "leak" about the R1 was that is was "Insane" came from.
Because it is.
And the fact that they put the same AF algorithm in the R5II is fantastic news, even though it didn't get the cross-type sensor.
Nelu wrote:
I'm not familiar how this auto feature works.
Let's say you have a rider on a horse. The rider is your intended subject but the horse is also a valid subject.
How can the camera possibly know which one to pick?
Nelu wrote:
I'm not familiar how this auto feature works.
Let's say you have a rider on a horse. The rider is your intended subject but the horse is also a valid subject.
How can the camera possibly know which one to pick?
Yeah, I'm not sure how that would work. I shoot horse shows professionally with R6 Mark IIs. For showjumping, I have the camera set to People, not Auto, and I use single AF point + expansion to help the camera acquire initial focus on the rider's face / helmet. Tracking generally does the rest.
I think Auto may be useful for a general, walk-around situation, but I would not use it for sporting events, or whenever you are following a specific subject.
Jeff I’m with you, Still like to use my old EF 400 f4 DO II to this day even though I love my RF 400 f 2.8, It is so compact and extremely sharp. I would love to have an RF 600 f 4 DO lens.
Is video bird/animal AF vastly improved over the original R5? Is video stabilization improved? Is ISO performance and dynamic range improved? Can electronic shutter be used while bracketing exposures?
AlphaPhotography wrote:
Is video bird/animal AF vastly improved over the original R5? Is video stabilization improved? Is ISO performance and dynamic range improved? Can electronic shutter be used while bracketing exposures?
Both Canon and the early reviewers say that the wide-angle IBIS wobble when filming is gone. That would be a huge improvement for me when filming my kids.
stanj wrote:
I shoot always raw on the R3 because I can tell the difference in the shadows. I shoot raw on the R5 for night photos (long exposures, or very high ISO) because there I can see the difference, too. Everything else cRaw for sure.
I tried craw once. I had looked at lots of analysis and concluded that if the subject is properly exposed and ISO is high (>800) there is not much difference and the files are smaller and you get 50% more in a burst. My tentative conclusion was that craw was okay (as compared to 12bit electronic raw) for wildlife (higher iso) but not optimal for on the tripod work (iso 100/14bit).
But after shooting craw for wildlife, I forgot to switch to raw when I switched to landscape at night.
I turned off craw permanently after that - I did not buy 14bit raw to not take advantage of it. And 80 burst I can make it work with care. And drives are cheap compared to cameras.
The new R5ii craw mode is going to be even harder to justify for me, because r5ii electronic is 14bit (unlike the the r5 12 bit), so its likely a bigger downgrade to go craw.
