[martind86]

Let me put a realistic & pragmatic view here: 

1) Obsolete sensor. No, it is not bad but when you look where the competition moved over the years (better low light, DR, rolling shutter...), putting a five-year old sensor (I mean performance-wise and sensor architecture-wise) from Mark IV into the new release of the whole new camera concept is quite embarrassing. 

2) Autofocus. 8fps without continual focus, so what for then ? Yes, 5fps with servo but based on first experiences, the 5fps is "hit & miss", the only acceptable amount of sharp shots is in  '3FPS tracking priority mode'. Quite tragic, mainly because if you put Canon EF mount glass to A7III, it works in 5 and 8 fps so better than with Canon. Eye AF, which is most useful in continual focus, doesnt work in continual focus with Canon, silent shooting doesn't work in continual either. There is no joystick, focus point selection is controlled via the touchscreen which is laggy and makes for frustrating experience. 

3) 1 SD card slot. SD cards are most prone to failure so putting a singe SD card slot here is just no-go for any (semi)pro. 

4) Video. 4K video is the same 1.8 crop as in 5D mark iv. Plus the electronic IBIS makes it 2.0 crop so the size of 4/3 sensor. For this reason, you can see the limited ISO range. I just cannot see how they can aim at vloggers with this. It is much better for them to buy cheap Panasonic with 4k and they don't need to bother with FF lenses. 120fps in HD? Please, it is 2018 and not 2015. 

5) The benefit of 'protecting a sensor behind the shutter from dust'. Well, not only is the fragile and expensive shutter exposed to an easy damage (certainly much easier to damage than unwanted touch of the sensor) but here is a question for big thinkers: What happens if you press the shutter after the dust was 'luckily' caught by the shutter? 

6) One of the key mirorless benefits should be compact size and lower weight which you certainly cannot tell about the 28-70/2 and 50/1.2 lenses (the crazy high prices putting aside). I know the primary reason for the existence of these particular lenses is 'bragging rights' but still I like the Nikon's lens roadmap with 1.8 primes better.  

7) This all goes for 2500 EUR, quite more expensive than Nikon and Sony. No, thank you. If I needed or wanted a FF mirorless solution today and looked at things realistically, I would still have to pick up Sony primarily for its practical results (mainly in the important AF area) and lens offer. I think both Canon and Nikon missed their first shot maybe except for stopping a migration of Canon and Nikon users to Sony/Fuji. And maybe that was the primary reason for their FF mirorless release anyway.

That is a lot of twisting things, in just one post...

1. The sensor is a new sensor. Based on the 5D mk IV sensor. Which is 2 years old. Not 5.

2. Canon has already said that the AF will be improved with a firmware update, including eye tracking in continuous mode.

3. I have not ever have a card fail. Ever. For those that care about two slots, yeah, buy a different body than this 1st EOS R.

4. The EOS R's 4K is 1.7x crop, not 1.8x. You don't have to "bother" with FF lenses either, you can use APS-C lenses like the EF-S 10-18mm IS STM. 

5. I have not every by accident "touched" the sensor of any camera, ever. So this made up fear of "touching the shutter" that goes around on these trolling tirades on forums is just dishonest nonsense, really. 

6. Canon gives you one of the key benefits of mirrorless cameras: EF-M lens range consists only of compact lenses. For the EOS R, they give a 50mm f1.2 with the same amount of elements as an OTUS 55mm f1.4, and keep the lens size and weight down compared to that lens. The lens has about the same size and weight as the new Pentax 50mm f1.4 SW, which also has 15 elements. Yet, the Canon lens is half a stop faster than both. Yeah, they do leverage that "key benefit of mirrorless".

7. It is fine for you to prefer Sony, with its crappy design and feel, bad RAW format implementation, crappy EVF implementations and so on. Obviously, the Sony E-mount lens line up will be much bigger than those of Canon EOS RF and Nikon Z for quite some time to come.

But yeah, thanks for the FUD ;-)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, as expected, this a typical fanboy reply but I know you just can't help it :-)

No, I know you would like to plant "FUD" to me but I have to strictly reject it. I don't care about fanboys wars, I try to see things realistically and soberly.

1) No. According to the dissection made by chiptuning guys, the inner architecture and design of the sensor is about 5 years old, so is the performance (for example, the sensor in then "old" Nikon D750 was definitely more advanced). But all in all, just the fact of the exact age determination of the old R sensor doesn't reduce the validity of my initial argument at all: Putting an obsolete sensor from Mark IV into the new release of the whole new camera concept is quite embarrassing. 

2) Well, I don't believe much in fw updates. Anyway, it is not available yet so my point is fully valid.  8fps without continual focus, so what for then ? Yes, 5fps with servo but based on first experiences, the 5fps is "hit & miss", the only acceptable amount of sharp shots is in  '3FPS tracking priority mode'. Quite tragic, mainly because if you put Canon EF mount glass to A7III, it works in 5 and 8 fps so better than with Canon. Eye AF, which is most useful in continual focus, doesnt work in continual focus with Canon, silent shooting doesn't work in continual either. There is no joystick, focus point selection is controlled via the touchscreen which is laggy and makes for frustrating experience. 

3) I'm sorry but what you did or didn't is statistically totally irrelevant. It is widely known in the industry (yes, statistics again) that SD cards are most prone to failurers. Actually I know a few pros and they did have SD card failures more frequently than CF. XQD is said to have the least failurers, practially none but I admit I haven' t seen any statistic data here yet.

4)  OK but again - 1.8 vs. 1.7 doesn't reduce the validity of my initial argument either. Maybe just that you can use aps-c  lenses but I really wonder you will buy such a combo together. 

5) Again, you are statistically irrelevant. As I stated above, I simply do think the shutter covering the sensor is not a very convenient solution. And the "protection from dust" is just a ridiculous argument.

6) This point is debatable of course. Yes, I think the canon R lenses are marvellous too, really. I love the idea of 28-70/f2 (revolutional!) and the great 50/1.2 lens. I followed many Lensrentals.com teardowns in detail and also think that Canon (L) lenses are the best in the industry among the mass-produced lenses (quality, tolerances, overall level of engineering). But I also see this as a kind of unfulfilled potential with Canon mirorless camera, see my point. Plus again I wonder how many buyers will get the current very expensive, heavy and pro R lenses with the amateurish, 6D-level body.

7) This is not an argument, just a rant. Take it easy. I'm just saying that Sony is still the most mature FF mirorless system at the moment and the latest CaNIkon releases didn' t change it. Despite the vast sources CaNikon have, they missed their chance since I think their latest release is even not on par with A7III. I consider sensor and AF being the key area, its practical implementation and continous shooting with AF tracking. And lenses too, of course. Because this is what matters most in praxis. But I also believe CaNikon could catch up soon.... I actually wonder how serious are with their mirorless lineup, i.e. how much they are willing to potentially cannibalize their ultimate DSLR lineups. I still cannot decide if they just want to stop CaNikons FF migration of some photographers to Sony or we are just witnessing the mirorless revolution (al least it is clear that the DSLR development is at the "dead end" and the mirorless cams offer far more possibilities now).
 
Reading it all again, I really cannot see any serious "twisting" in my post you accuse me of, I can just see your a bit agressive brand fanatism.