Out with the EOS R and 100-400mm for a quick walk this morning, I could see that the camera and adapter struggle to keep up with even the slow movement of a perched butterfly’s wings. I was warned. Several reviewers mentioned that the R’s AF was not in the same league as that of the R5/R6.
Having spent a few hours last night poring over archived photos as well as various online resources, my choice was the least bad one: a 90D. With horrible shadow noise, mild shutter shock, and a generally noisy sensor to begin with, my line of defense would be DXO’s excellent denoising and a more disciplined technique in the field.
It did not escape me that the 90D’s relative reach without the extender is almost 20% greater than the EOS R’s with the extender. And the 90D and lens actually weigh 355 grams less than the mirrorless setup. While I was grimacing at the thought of using an “old” DSLR, it occurred to me that the 90D is actually almost a year newer to the market than the EOS R.
A quick midday trip to the shop area, and I was ready to head into the field by early afternoon. With the focus limiter on, AF was almost instant most of the time. The setup nailed every shot with critical accuracy. I was amazed to see AF pick up an erratically-flying swift over rippled water. Any other camera would focus on the textured background.
What to do with the EOS R now? Well, according to the rumors websites, there’s an RF 100-400 coming in September. If it can take the teleconverter while collapsed and, more importantly, if I can actually get my hands on a copy, I’ll give that setup a try as well.
After all, part of the idea when I made this move was to be able to chase critters on full frame, something I’ve been able to do with limited success only on the much-maligned SL2, and even there mostly with too-short or second rate glass.
Whatever happens, happens. I’m ready to just shoot for a while now . . .