Llewtwo wrote:
Wow, personally don't think the lack of an auto sensor cleaner is a deal breaker. If they didn't include them on nearly every camera now you wouldn't know you were missing one. It's pretty easy to clean a sensor and most of the time you will have a lens on the body. I will concede I kind of wondered where your post was going at times. You should have picked up a R5 II and a 24-105.
I have (also) R50, and sort of feel that leaving out sensor cleaner was a bad idea.
It doesn't look like a big deal at first, but I think we're mostly used to DSLRs sensors covered by shutter. However, R50 doesn't cover the sensor with the shutter, so the sensor is ALWAYS exposed. It could really use that sensor cleaner IMO, exactly because the sensor is never protected.
Cliff L. wrote:
Then people would bitch even more about poor battery life. My GP-E2 does the job very nicely.
It's not easy to obtain one around the place I live at, but fortunately, I lucked out on a second hand seller list... I find it cumbersome, but I got it exactly because of its independent battery.
GPS could have been at least the part of the R5/6 battery grips. There would be more juice to feed it, too.
I feel your pain! Many times we have high expectations of some equipment only to be disappointed when finally get a chance to use it. Been there many times. I've jumped around to several systems many times, and I've come up with one ugly truth; every system/camera/lens has its limitations/flaws. We just have to be willing compromise and find which limitations/flaws we are wiling to live with.
I'll spare you all the details (plus I'll probably be roasted here as usual). My suggestion is for you to try out some equipment before you buy it. I know that's not easy especially if you don't have a camera retail store nearby. Also, don't rely too heavily on reviews and suggestions here, as many members are just paid influencers who most likely don't even own the equipment they brag about. I'm one of the few "not so smart" folks who actually wasted way too much money on equipment from different systems (Nikon FF DSLR's, Sony Full Frame, Canon Full Frame AND APS-C both DSLR and mirrorless, and Micro Four Thirds). I have the pictures, files, and purchase reciepts to prove it.
In the States there are a number of rental houses and that is what I have been doing quite a bit for the past ten years. I'm not sure what there is in the UK. I've blown 10s of thousands on gear that was hardly used.
Very weird omission by Canon. Especially since they added a sensor shade feature introduced in the original R5/R6. I can see that on the severely crippled R100 but on the R50?? Pretty lame.
I'm kinda interested in the R50 V and now wondering if it has been omitted there as well.
gossamer88 wrote:
Very weird omission by Canon. Especially since they added a sensor shade feature introduced in the original R5/R6. I can see that on the severely crippled R100 but on the R50?? Pretty lame.
I'm kinda interested in the R50 V and now wondering if it has been omitted there as well.
Downloaded the R50 V manual and NOPE...no sensor cleaning...still interested though
Perhaps if certain people would do the proper research BEFORE buying a camera they would not end up having to whine about a camera that does not meet their requirements.
Imagemaster wrote:
Perhaps if certain people would do the proper research BEFORE buying a camera they would not end up having to whine about a camera that does not meet their requirements.
Yeah I personally definitively made a mistake. But the sensor clean was such a basic thing included in all classes of cameras including Rebels (not sure about the super cheapo 4-digits), that not including it anymore was a totally unexpected move from Canon for me.
I would not do a research whether a RF camera has or has not an Av mode either.
When you search Google for specs, the AI-generated specs and summary come up first. This information is scraped from the darkest recesses of the 'net, and filled with BS and misinformation, including claims that the R50 and R100 have automatic sensor cleaning. With that said, I haven't found much difference in the amount of sensor dust between cameras with and without sensor cleaning. Of course, I live in the humid tropics where static and clinging dust isn't a problem. I mainly suffer static cling on sensors during travel to low-humidity areas like Las Vegas. The vibrating sensor clean cycle isn't very effective for those conditions.
But other really big thing I failed to research on the R50 is the backward incompatible flash hotshoe which needs this AD-E1 widget so I can connect an EX Speedlite.
I can sympathize with thinking the bottom end of the R-line is less than adequate. I bought the R10 & R100, basically to play with. I played with them, found no real advantage in them, compared to my 90D, and sold them on E-Bay. R10 & R100 were purchased from Canon Refurbished, during sales. Both kits sold readily on E-Bay. I still prefer dSLR cameras and the 90D does what I need done. I gave up on low-end full frame after the disappointment that was the 6DII.
I can understand that one might assume it has it since they are pretty common. It's not something I think a lot about. I use my three Canon camera bodies pretty heavily but don't really think that the sensor cleaning on board does much.
Whether the sensor vibrator is keeping it cleaner or there is some combined effect from the sensor cover or both, I find it indispensable. I used to send my 1Ds/1Ds II/1Ds III bodies in for cleaning service frequently and the newer cameras with vibration only need it after several years if they are not obsolete by then.
