I didn’t get any chance to test the new cameras but had a chance to explore them for a while at the camera launch.
Looking forward to working with them, when they arrive in late Aug. & Nov.
I didn’t get any chance to test the new cameras but had a chance to explore them for a while at the camera launch.
Looking forward to working with them, when they arrive in late Aug. & Nov.
1 Like
Yeah it’s a boomtime for Canon shooters. You look mighty pleased with yourself there - any interesting tidbits to report about what you did get to mess with?
1 Like
Have fun with your new baby!
1 Like
Interesting titbits:
It has precapture of half a second, first in Canon, that means 15 frames in Raw in R 5 & 20 frames in R 1.
One of the very best auto focus.
Back side illuminated stacked sensor.
Pre-capture is a game changer in many ways. I’ve had it at similar capacity to what you describe on my original G9 since it came out, but the M2 goes to 1.5 seconds which is wicked dangerous. Want to guess the number of pictures of the same bird just sitting there? LOL. Hilarious. With the improved AF, you will be filling memory cards in no time!
1 Like
While I appreciate that these new cameras (or most other new cameras) are a dream come true for many people I’ve come to the realization that there is nothing, and I mean nothing in these new cameras that I long after. It’s actually a very pleasant feeling to tell the truth.
I primarily shoot landscapes, I always use a tripod, I manual focus and I don’t print larger than 18x24”. Most of the time I only make 7x10” prints on 8.5x11” paper because in all honesty, what am I going to do with big prints?
I still shoot with the now ancient Canon 5D mark 4 DSLR and I hope I get to shoot with it for a very long time to come. I’m so glad that I’m no longer in the never ending chase after something new because it’s supposedly “better”.
I rarely shoot wildlife so I’m far from an expert on the subject but I can sort of understand the argument that fast frame rates and eye tracking autofocus can help one “get the shot” but then again, there have been countless photographers that were able to shoot impressive wildlife photos without all these bells and whistles. Also, doesn’t it take a little bit of the magic and sense of accomplishment away?
What I wonder about though is whether people that run workshops “need” the latest and greatest gear. Either to seem as if they’re more credible in some odd way, or more practically, so they know their way around the new tech and can help participants with their own gear. I don’t mean this in any derogatory way, I’m simply genuinely curious.
1 Like
Pardon me, Jagdeep for answering ahead of you. I’ll delete if you want. Not trying to horn in too badly.
Mostly I hear where you’re coming from Tom and it’s refreshing to find someone who is satisfied with his gear. Since you’re using something pretty top shelf, it’s not surprising and given your love of landscape, the perfect tool. I’ve kept my 2018 camera alongside an updated version because I like it and for similar work it’s also a perfect tool.
But you bring up wildlife and birding etc. That’s where a newer camera with updated burst modes, tracking and better focus is key. For me the tech help doesn’t erode my sense of accomplishment at all because it’s the result I’m after, not a bunch of deleted shots or wasted film and the bitter dregs of disappointment. I’d have had ZERO success with hummingbirds with any of my cameras prior to my original G9 and so I’m very happy to have many excellent birdie photos in my catalog. They bring me joy as much as the little fluttery things themselves.
Whether or not I needed to upgrade in order to keep shooting them is debatable and probably I didn’t, but since I was planning to add a second body for when I’m in the kayak, it made sense to have a new one and an old one and I’m pretty darn happy.
I don’t lead workshops so can’t speak to that.
1 Like
Absolutely, everyone should be doing brings them joy and who am I to say what that should be. Doing what you enjoy is the most important thing and what works for me doesn’t necessarily need to work for someone else and vice versa. I just kind of surprised myself when I realized that the longing I had for new gear in the past was gone and that I didn’t get excited by the announcement by Canon. It’s a good place to be and I’m content.
For sure if that’s what you’re after then I agree. I guess there are two objectives or aspects of photography (among many others I’m sure). One is getting the shot and the other is how you get the shot. Both are valid and everyone can go after either or both. Like I said I almost never shoot wildlife so I say this as an armchair wildlife photographer but I think I’d get more satisfaction from an image that I shot with a manual camera than a camera that I just pointed at something and camera did most of the hard work - I’m oversimplifying here but I hope you get my point . Then again, maybe it’s a case of not knowing what I’m missing because I’ve never tried the new tech first hand.
@Tom_Nevesely I can relate to your opinion as someone who started wildlife photography about 35 years ago with mechanical cameras. My photographic journey continued from mechanical to electronic cameras; from MF to AF; from film to digital; from DSLR to mirrorless and most of the times the photographers standing next to me had better equipment. But I managed to consistently deliver good images for a long period. For the first 7 years of photography, I used to dream about 2.8 lenses and for about 12 years I used to dream about 500 mm lens. I used to see the images but couldn’t execute due to lack of equipment.
For me getting the shot is most important, how I got it is just a part of the story. If technology helps me getting better & multiple shots, I don’t mind that. The brand, the equipment or the style or story doesn’t matter.
Recently I won a prize in national level competition with a shot taken in the year 2007, with a crop sensor camera Canon 30D, can you imagine a crop camera of 2007 competing with modern full frame mirroless cameras. But if I had, say a Canon R 1 in the year 2007, not only I had taken a better image IQ wise & moment wise but could have taken about 10 variations of it. I’ll share the image when they declare the results by the end of this month.
Also, if I have the finances to get new technology, I would go for it otherwise I’ll continue to shoot with the existing equipment.
@Kris_Smith you are always welcome to give your valueable input, this is how we all learn 
Awww, thanks Jagdeep. Glad it wasn’t intrusive.
I don’t know, Tom. If you decided to take up wildlife photography and tried to go about it all manual, or at least low-tech, you might end up more frustrated than satisfied. If you had enough passion and drive for it, you would probably stick with it and suffer through the deletions and almost-got-its until you had a reasonable keeper rate. How long it would take you depends on how fast you master all the skills needed.
At my age (mid-50s) I don’t want to wait that long, and frankly, I have way more fun if my keeper rate is slightly artificially better with the new stuff. Having shot film for more than 20 years, hell, I’m kind of happy not to have the hassle anymore about a lot of things. Still plenty to wrap my brain around and train myself to use, which also helps give a sense of accomplishment.
You talk about having the shot versus getting it and going after both and I think we all can. Enjoying being in nature, seeing the wonders that excite us and having the desire to capture and share it drives what we do and keeps us out there. Your work reflects that and I hope you never lose that sense of wonder. Being happy with your gear is a bonus, but don’t think of me as being unhappy, think of it as having another sense of wonder, the ‘what will they come up with next?’ kind of wonder.