I use two systems for my photography. I use a Fujifilm APS-C system based on their XT5 for my travel and street photography and a few other things. I use my Canon 5DsR with a set of L zooms for my landscape photography… and a few other things.
There is no question in my mind that the Canon R system is very good. (In fact, my wife, who also uses tow systems, has an R system body and lenses.) So why do I continue to use a camera that was introduced a decade ago with older EF L lenses?
First off, the 5DsR remains an excellent camera for landscape photography. Its sensor has slightly higher resolution than anything in the R system. (If Canon had introduced a higher resolution R body I would have moved to R.) In other ways the R system cameras (such as the R5II have improved on my DSLR… but not in ways that are all that relevant to the photography I do with the camera.
Initially, I assumed that Canon would introduce an industry leading high resolution successor to the 5DsR, and I was ready to move to it. But that hasn’t happened, and I’m less convinced that it will.
The second reason has to do with the effect of Canon introducing an entire new RF lens system. For me (see above) the body itself would not be a compelling reason to move to R — I would also want to take advantage of advances in lenses since my system came out so long ago. That means that if I were to move to R I would replace my existing lenses with RF lenses. (I know about adapters and, with one possible exception, I’m not going that route.)
What this means is that if I move to Canon R I will be updating all of my lenses. That changes the situation for buying a new body. Typically, the lenses don’t change, so we can move to a new body and bring along the existing lenses. That means that I’d have to see a huge advantage from an alternative system before I would consider other formats and brands. But that factor is gone…
… so I would now consider a wider range of options including other brands and formats. At the moment the most likely for me would be to move to a Sony system. Their cameras and lenses are now mature and cover any needs I would have, and they already have a slightly higher resolution camera… rather than Canon’s slight decrease in sensor resolution. A second-place alternative woul be to move to a miniMF system, though so far lens availability is holding me back a bit.
The great thing about the old 5DsR is that its continuing competence allows me to go slow and not feel that I need to immediately jump in and buy something.
For me
Until canon addresses the lack of small fast sharp primes (and zooms) built specifically for their aps-c line I won’t be buying nothing more.
The tragedy is, even if they did release a trio of fast 1.4 primes, they would be so expensive you would jump ship to other brands, so in essence their aps-c line is basically a dead duck. The FF have the crop option so it is only a matter of time before 60+ mp arrives across the FF range then there will be absolutely no point whatsoever of buying a canon crop sensor body.
Pixelpuffin wrote:
For me
Until canon addresses the lack of small fast sharp primes (and zooms) built specifically for their aps-c line I won’t be buying nothing more.
The tragedy is, even if they did release a trio of fast 1.4 primes, they would be so expensive you would jump ship to other brands, so in essence their aps-c line is basically a dead duck. The FF have the crop option so it is only a matter of time before 60+ mp arrives across the FF range then there will be absolutely no point whatsoever of buying a canon crop sensor body.
If I had purchased a 5DMK4, I probably wouldn't have gone with the RF system. I went from s 6dmk2 to an R6, then R6II. Then, for 7 months, I had the R7 but sold it last week.
My reason for selling the R7 was because of the inaccurate AF system. I agree with you regarding wanting more small, fast primes for APS-C, but after my negative experience with the R7, I'm sticking with my R6II for now.
Pixelpuffin wrote:
For me
Until canon addresses the lack of small fast sharp primes (and zooms) built specifically for their aps-c line I won’t be buying nothing more.
The tragedy is, even if they did release a trio of fast 1.4 primes, they would be so expensive you would jump ship to other brands, so in essence their aps-c line is basically a dead duck. The FF have the crop option so it is only a matter of time before 60+ mp arrives across the FF range then there will be absolutely no point whatsoever of buying a canon crop sensor body.
Why do you need APS-C primes? You are losing over a stop relative DOF and not enough weight difference to matter. If you really need APS-C then go with Sony E (only one-eyed though) or perhaps Fuji X. Canon is not a good choice for croppers.
$$$ is the reason. My 1Dx mkII probably wouldn't have any resale value. And if I got a convertor to use my lenses, they are the major weight, so why would I bother?
About a year and a half ago I was considering an r5 and instead on kind of a whim bought a 50s2 gfx plus lens for a great price. That became my slow camera and the 5d4 hangs around for wildlife and sports shooting.
For now it’s pretty amusing to adapt several of my ef lenses to use on the Fuji, and postpone the decision about swapping out the dslr.
Changing systems was pretty fun and moderately good for my creativity but I suspect there’s a point in the future when I consolidate back to one camera which might look like an r5ii or it’s larger pixel count follow on. Not in a huge rush however.
Rainbow Chaser wrote:
Does the Canon community have something to enjoy the way Nikon shooters can pair their Zf bodies with Voigtlaenders?
Are these the lenses you mean? https://www.voigtlaender.de/lenses/?lang=en
I assume they are optically advanced updates of the 20th century paradigm, a bunch of small primes and rangefinder bodies since zooms stunk back then. I would not enjoy manual focus, no zooms, and no optical IS. Maybe 60 years ago that was all normal, but it is more pain and suffering than enjoyment to relive in 2025.
If there was a need for Voigtländer I'd use E mount versions on the a7rV. That sensor is fantastic for IQ.
I enjoy the Canon lenses on Canon bodies. 135 TS-E, 70-200/2.8, 28-70/2, EF 500/4, 600/4, etc. Even the old EF 400/4 DO II is nice to use. Focus bracketing with the RF lenses is a game changer.
EB-1 wrote:
Why do you need APS-C primes? You are losing over a stop relative DOF and not enough weight difference to matter. If you really need APS-C then go with Sony E (only one-eyed though) or perhaps Fuji X. Canon is not a good choice for croppers.
EBH
You are right canon is not a good route for croppers… but many of us were here when EF-s came about and many of us followed canon to the ef-m too, naturally we followed again to the RF-s….only this time canon decided to change the rules slightly and not offer dedicated lenses…please don’t say those horrendous slow consumer zooms.
So we as canon users have been loyal, yet loyalty has kicked sand in our faces
This is why I and others are upset.
If it’s a toss up of a small camera and lens or a phone I’ll definitely consider the camera - if it’s small camera and FF glass …. It’s the phone every time. I really don’t want to haul big cumbersome lenses on the off chance I’ll see something to take a snap of… no, I’ll just settle for a cell phone pic instead.
This is why canon M was their biggest seller., it tapped into a niche area where folks like me who like to take pictures but are not dedicated enough to want to be burden down with gear.
If I was a landscapes only photographer, perhaps I would still be using my 5D4. A camera I loved, resolution, speed, accuracy, IQ.
My first mirrorless was the R as I used my 5D4 for birds for the higher resolution despite _all_ the superbness of my 1DX. Switched it for the R and switched that for the RP to get focus stacking. I don´t use it often. But for macro it is simply fantastic.
For landscape I often use my Zeiss lenses. The tools to focus manual lenses with mirrorless bodies are at least as gamechanging as the present day AF. Now when I use my 5DsR and try to zoom in the viewfinder... I cant... Add IBIS, and no, there is no way I would be on DSLR´s anymore. Image quality would still be good enough. But the tools to get the images have gone through a revolution with the mirrorlesses.
_IF_ I was using a 5D4 or a 5DsR _with_ Canon (=AF) IS lenses for _just_ landscapes, perhaps I would still be DSLR only. No, i´m too curious and want to try new things! YOLO!
I haven't gone R yet in lenses. In a way, I am using the EOS R as better autofocusing EOS camera, no FF, no BF, no MFA, lens that required MFA on DSLR nail focus on R. To me it seems that R can drive the older EF lenses right at the limit of sharpness - the AF being more precise than the PDAF of the DSLRs I was using - granted, I've never used the 61pt AF EOS. I've used the good version of the 45pt AF (1D2N), and I think the sensor-focusing AF of EOS R is still a wee bit better.
So now I am buying "old" EF stuff I could not justify buying a good decade ago, like 8-15L or 70-300L for nice prices.
I do have one RF lens though, but its EF equivalent is still tad expensive (and large and heavy ) so I went with RF 800/11.
Getting on R camera was a no brainer compared to getting on common RF lenses.
Ummm, because my DSLR's still get it done for me just fine. Heck, I even still use my old Canon 5D sometimes and it doesn't disappoint. Got a 5DSr as my main FF DSLR and it takes wonderful images with all the glass I have. I keep a 7D MKII permanently attached to me 600/4 and then my original 7D as a backup. Why replace them with a R camera when they all still work so well? It's not like they suddenly stopped being able to take great pictures just because mirrorless came around.
7D MKII with 600/4, hmmmm.... works just fine.
Now I will admit as I've aged I've run into a problem manually focusing. For decades I've used a slew of outstanding old manual focus glass adapted to me Canon DSLRs. I even have a matte focusing screen swapped into the 5D for that purpose. But my close focus has gone to crap. So I have added a mirrorless to the mix. But that was a Leica SL for it's gamechanging EVF. BAM! Back in business again with my adapted lenses. Then a SL2 popped up locally for a really good price and with a bunch of added extra's. Snagged it up too. With the IBIS and upgraded sensor I'm set for years.
I can now use all my Leica R, CY Zeiss, Oly, m42 screwmount, and Mamiya 645 lenses on the Leica bodies and get great results. If I so desire, my EF lenses can work with the Leica's also if I buy another adapter.
This was one of the first shots with my Mamiya 645 200/2.8 APO on the Leica
My DSLR's will continue to see use as my main wildlife and actions tools until I encounter repeated times when they just don't get the work done for me. Why spend money for the latest and greatest when what I have works for me and totally meet my needs?
EB-1 wrote:
I assume they are optically advanced updates of the 20th century paradigm, a bunch of small primes and rangefinder bodies since zooms stunk back then. I would not enjoy manual focus, no zooms, and no optical IS. Maybe 60 years ago that was all normal, but it is more pain and suffering than enjoyment to relive in 2025…
EBH
Speaking as someone who shot rangefinder bodies, SLRs with manual-only focus, pathetically bad zoom lenses, and as a kid cameras with “guesstimate focus” rings…
… I don’t get the fascination with manual-only prime lenses these days.
I do think that small cameras with prime lenses have their place, and I use one for my travel and street photography. But I vastly prefer using modern AF lenses on the system. (I do MF my landscape photographs when working from the tripod, but that’s for photographic reasons, not “enjoyment.”) You can always MF your AF lens, but you can’t AF your MF-only lenses.
Sometimes I wonder if this is one of those “you aren’t a real photographer unless you…” things so popular with a certain group of photography fans. ;-)
I specialize in Food and Lifestyle images so most of my shots are done on a tripod and tethered to a computer, I don't feel like ML would make much difference in my work. I have a couple 5DIV's and a 1Dx plus all the L lenses that I need or want so why would I go to a ML system? I know about the EF/RF adapter but the electric viewfinder and AF hasn't motivated me yet.
Like Dan, I'm still enjoying the 5DSR. Incredible resolution, EF L lenses are still just as sharp and capable as they were 5-10 years ago, and it just feels more sturdy to me for when the weather is bad. I picked up an R5 on a great deal, but don't see the point in migrating all my lenses to R and selling the 5DSR just to gain a little sharpness or weight savings. My photography is all slow and deliberate, and cases where it isn't the R5 is good enough. Plus, I don't like the reliance on software correction for the RF lenses.
Those of you still shooting DSLR’s
Why haven’t you gone R?
What would canon need to do for you to make the change?
The main reason is probably all the condescension and garbage I got on here for staying DSLR. Just got sick of hearing about mirrorless, special thanks to the sony trolls. And nonsensical claims of "DSLR'S are dead!" vs discussion of if I should go mirrorless if I dont really care about 30fps that much or need eye af (doesn't work on my subjects.)
I just kept running into roadblocks considering the lenses. The rf 24-105/4 looked great but $1200 made it harder to switch, the cheap Rf 24-105/4-7.1 loaded with computational imaging and inferior optically to non L EF 24-105/3.5-5.6 plastic kit lens predecessor, etc. If they'd come out more conservatively spec'd 18/4 or 17/3.5 not requiring much computational imaging (i don't really need 2.8 or 16mm) and re-did the 28-70 II or something, put them in kit mounts for ~$250 I'd probably be at least looking to go R, but everyone is doing computational imaging these days, not just Canon, and they didn't do that
I hate AI. It's likely to raise your electric bill due to massive power demands (if it hasn't already,) massive layoffs recently over AI, and Microsoft is trying to get Three Mile Island nuclear power plant going again to power their stupid computers, not that Fukushima nuclear disaster is even close to being resolved. I doubt I'll be able to avoid AI, my phone carrier constantly foists stuff on there, but that's just another reason to avoid subscription software, likely similar.
I love AI. A few weeks ago I had a case and the critical issue was determining the difference between a grace period and a late payment penalty provision in a contract that I was litigating. Yes I could have gone on my legal research program to look for an answer but for those of you who have ever done that (which I am sure if none or very very few) you know can get lost in all the case citations and spend a whole lot of time trying to find an answer to your question.
Instead, I went on to ChaptGPT and typed in the exact question. Within literally seconds I had the answer and relevant case cites. I then check those specific cases in my legal research program and they were accurate.
In another case I needed to determine the difference between 1st degree and 2nd degree misdemeanor Petit Theft both as to the dollar amount thresholds and penalties. I typed in the question in Chatgpt and in a few seconds had an accurate answer. My client thought he committed the 2nd degree version and I had to inform him that he committed the 1st degree version. I could given you many other example where this hated technology has assisted me in properly representing my clients.
The potential benefits in medical diagnoses, available procedures and when you do or do not choose one and so many other areas of that practice is phenomenal. AI will eventually lead us to cures for many non-curable conditions we deal with today.
Your hate of AI is misplaced. It is now changing and will continue to change the way we do many things for the better. There are still bumpy roads to travel but we will get there and we will all be the better for it.
John Power wrote:
I love AI. A few weeks ago I had a case and the critical issue was determining the difference between a grace period and a late payment penalty provision in a contract that I was litigating. Yes I could have gone on my legal research program to look for an answer but for those of you who have ever done that (which I am sure if none or very very few) you know can get lost in all the case citations and spend a whole lot of time trying to find an answer to your question.
Instead, I went on to ChaptGPT and typed in the exact question. Within literally seconds I had the answer and relevant case cites. I then check those specific cases in my legal research program and they were accurate.
In another case I needed to determine the difference between 1st degree and 2nd degree misdemeanor Petit Theft both as to the dollar amount thresholds and penalties. I typed in the question in Chatgpt and in a few seconds had an accurate answer. My client thought he committed the 2nd degree version and I had to inform him that he committed the 1st degree version. I could given you many other example where this hated technology has assisted me in properly representing my clients.
The potential benefits in medical diagnoses, available procedures and when you do or do not choose one and so many other areas of that practice is phenomenal. AI will eventually lead us to cures for many non-curable conditions we deal with today.
Your hate of AI is misplaced. It is now changing and will continue to change the way we do many things for the better. There are still bumpy roads to travel but we will get there and we will all be the better for it. ...Show more →
The future is upon us. Better to embrace than to hate.
) so I went with RF 800/11.
