[Dan Rentea]

Why develop new lenses for the new mount?

The R5 will be the camera that in my opinion will launch the true "war" between Canon, Nikon, Sony and even Fuji and Panasonic. With 12 and 20fps at 45mp, 8k at 30p without crop and with dual pixel af (4k at 120p), IBIS that will work combined with the stabilisation from the lenses, eye af with body recognition also for birds and animals, 5GHz wifi, first true mirrorless sensor...it will make some waves. Given the R5 specs and given that a 75mp camera is also on the way, there aren't many EF lenses capable to resolve high mp sensors and we know that from the 50mp 5DsR camera. R5 is close to 5DsR in terms of resolution. The EF lenses (some of them) will show their wecknesses once mounted on such resolution cameras. You won't have this problem with RF lenses.

I really don't know how Ricoh will react based on Nikon, Sony, Panasonic and Fuji response to EOS R5. Will Ricoh launch a D850 equivalent in 2 years that will make a lot of Pentax users happy? They will go even higher and skip the 45mp sensor and go for the 61mp sensor which somehow will not pursue the idea of a field camera anymore? They will risk and join the mirrorless market while is still not fully developed? The Pentax users, the sales reports and the general market will probably give us an answer in the next 2-4 years.

---------- Post added 04-04-20 at 10:53 AM ----------

The 28-70/2 (not 24, and that's an important distinction) also weighs more than my K-1with 28-105

The 28-70mm f2 it'a a completely different beast than 28-105mm lens.

Look at Pentax 15-30mm f2.8 vs. RF 15-35mm f2.8L. The RF lens is smaller, lighter and it has extra 5mm on the long end. Put a K1 with a 15-30mm f2.8 next to an R5 when will come with the RF 15-35mm f2.8 and then you'll have a direct comparison in terms of weight.

The RF 70-200/2.8 has an extending design and doesn't look particularly sharper than the EF version.

Just a tad faster to focus, a tad sharper and 400g lighter.

Mirrorless lenses are not exempt from the laws of physics and their associated compromises.

Of course not. But when we hear manufacturers saying that the new mount gives them new option in terms of optical performance and thet back up their comments with new lenses that perform better than DSLR equivalents (RF 85mm f1.2L vs. EF 85mm f1.4L, RF 15-35mm f2.8L vs. 16-35mm f2.8L III, etc.), I as a user I'm happy because I can choose to shoot with either the EF lenses that I have or buy/rent and shoot with the new ones.

---

Last edited by Dan Rentea; 04-04-2020 at 03:59 AM.

[biz-engineer]

The R5 will be the camera that in my opinion will launch the true "war" between Canon, Nikon, Sony and even Fuji and Panasonic.

I agree. Probably the first mirrorless camera model having a proprietary designed sensor for mirrorless. It's not going to be cheap, probably between 3K and 4K or more. And we don't know how good image quality will be (dynamic range) compared to legacy Sony sensors.

[Serkevan]

The R5 will be the camera that in my opinion will launch the true "war" between Canon, Nikon, Sony and even Fuji and Panasonic. With 12 and 20fps at 45mp, 8k at 30p without crop and with dual pixel af (4k at 120p), IBIS that will work combined with the stabilisation from the lenses, eye af with body recognition also for birds and animals, 5GHz wifi, first true mirrorless sensor...it will make some waves. Given the R5 specs and given that a 75mp camera is also on the way, there aren't many EF lenses capable to resolve high mp sensors and we know that from the 50mp 5DsR camera. R5 is close to 5DsR in terms of resolution. The EF lenses (some of them) will show their wecknesses once mounted on such resolution cameras. You won't have this problem with RF lenses.

I really don't know how Ricoh will react based on Nikon, Sony, Panasonic and Fuji response to EOS R5. Will Ricoh launch a D850 equivalent in 2 years that will make a lot of Pentax users happy? They will go even higher and skip the 45mp sensor and go for the 61mp sensor which somehow will not pursue the idea of a field camera anymore? They will risk and join the mirrorless market while is still not fully developed? The Pentax users, the sales reports and the general market will probably give us an answer in the next 2-4 years.

---------- Post added 04-04-20 at 10:53 AM ----------



The 28-70mm f2 it'a a completely different beast than 28-105mm lens.

Look at Pentax 15-30mm f2.8 vs. RF 15-35mm f2.8L. The RF lens is smaller, lighter and it has extra 5mm on the long end. Put a K1 with a 15-30mm f2.8 next to an R5 when will come with the RF 15-35mm f2.8 and then you'll have a direct comparison in terms of weight.



Just a tad faster to focus, a tad sharper and 400g lighter.



Of course not. But when we hear manufacturers saying that the new mount gives them new option in terms of optical performance and thet back up their comments with new lenses that perform better than DSLR equivalents (RF 85mm f1.2L vs. EF 85mm f1.4L, RF 15-35mm f2.8L vs. 16-35mm f2.8L III, etc.), I as a user I'm happy because I can choose to shoot with either the EF lenses that I have or buy/rent and shoot with the new ones.

Of course! My point is that mirrorless is not a magic bullet - and that the new lenses come with drawbacks and a very hefty price tag while being "slightly" better (to a degree that is only really noticeable for extremely demanding professionals or DPRs professional... nit-picking pixel-peepers

Personally I think that the RF 70-200/2.8 is a stroke of genius and if I were into MILC and had the money (the thing is almost two months of my salary, yikes!), but I don't know how much is the flange distance, how much is Canon saying that internal zoom wasn't a constraint they had to follow, and how much is the diameter of the rear element (which is gigantic IIRC). Now I want to know how an EF lens that sacrificed the internal zooming would be...

---------- Post added 04-04-20 at 04:16 AM ----------

I agree. Probably the first mirrorless camera model having a proprietary designed sensor for mirrorless. It's not going to be cheap, probably between 3K and 4K or more. And we don't know how good image quality will be (dynamic range) compared to legacy Sony sensors.

I'm betting on 3500 to put it next to the A7R4 and A9. Dynamic range will probably be good enough (how many images do we take at maximum DR?) but people will still complain because it will most likely not reach the state-of-the-art of current Sony sensors.

[Dan Rentea]

Of course! My point is that mirrorless is not a magic bullet - and that the new lenses come with drawbacks and a very hefty price tag while being "slightly" better (to a degree that is only really noticeable for extremely demanding professionals or DPRs professional... nit-picking pixel-peepers

The trinity of lenses have the same release price as the EF equivalents when were lunched. The only exception being 70-200mm f2.8 which is a little more expensive. Yes, the RF lenses are more expensive compared to today prices of EF lenses.

Personally I think that the RF 70-200/2.8 is a stroke of genius and if I were into MILC and had the money (the thing is almost two months of my salary, yikes!), but I don't know how much is the flange distance, how much is Canon saying that internal zoom wasn't a constraint they had to follow, and how much is the diameter of the rear element (which is gigantic IIRC). Now I want to know how an EF lens that sacrificed the internal zooming would be...[COLOR="Silver"]

There is an article from Canon. I will look for it when I will open my laptop.

I'm betting on 3500 to put it next to the A7R4 and A9. Dynamic range will probably be good enough (how many images do we take at maximum DR?) but people will still complain because it will most likely not reach the state-of-the-art of current Sony sensors.

Canon confirmed that R5 will be a 5D equivalent camera, so the price should be between 3500$ and 3800$. 1Dx Mark II already has a tad better dynamic range than A9, while A7R IV has quite impressive dynamic range. I'm more than ok with 12Evs of dynamic range but I understand the advantage of high dynamic range in some situations. Again, it all comes to each of us preferences and features needed based on what we shoot.

[biz-engineer]

If you ask me, this affirmation has a lot to do with the fact that on mirrorless cameras you don't have front/back focus and I suspect that on DSLRs people didn't noticed the front/back focus when it wasn't far off.

You do have front focus and back focus with mirrorless systems due to lens AF steps of lenses being of finite quantity, friction of moving elements in the lens etc. Let me explain a little bit: the reason why you have to take 30 shots with AF calibration software for DSLR is to separate AF repeatability from systematic AF error. For example, when I measured the spread of AF error relative to max resolution, I found that AF dispersion from run to run is as large as AF systematic error, so even after AF fine tuning to correct systematic AF error, there was still a random error amount different from run to run. And so, by construction mirrorless doesn't have the systematic AF error but still never achieve perfect focus every time due to lenses AF motors and gearing not able to reach the ideal AF position every time and depending on initial lens focus position. The quicker the lens focuses the less repeatable is AF, regardless if you are using a calibrated DSLR or a MILC, still the same problem + area of AF point vs ability to lock focus at low light level or low contrast.