LogicExtremist said:

So an ad-hominem attack is the best you can do? That's also a type of logical fallacy where you attack the person with a personal slur when you can't make a logical argument. Ironically, this is from one of the guys on this forum who believes Canon can never make mistakes, and should never be criticized lol! And that's not an ad-hominem argument, but an observation of your post history

I'm not emotionally reacting like you, nice projection there. I'm just calmly and logically deconstructing shi**y arguments and attitudes that are generally unhelpful towards open, informative discussion..

Since you brought up therapy, maybe we should discuss the psychology of fanboyism? Self-reflect and see if you recognize your behavior in here, self-awareness is really helpful in life.

Fanboyism of this kind is often rooted in a mix of psychological needs: the desire for identity, certainty, and social belonging. When someone ties their ego to a product or brand, the brand becomes an extension of the self, so criticism feels threatening not because of the product itself but because it challenges the person’s sense of competence and judgment. This can lead to rigid, simplified worldviews where “my brand is good and all others are bad,” because nuance would introduce uncomfortable ambiguity.

In online forums, this mindset often expresses itself as seeking validation rather than truth - people repeatedly defend their purchases not out of confidence but because their underlying doubts feel too risky to confront openly. As a result, forums become echo chambers where dissent is treated as hostility, because acknowledging flaws would mean reassessing one’s own choices and the identity built around them. This behavior is ultimately self-limiting, because it substitutes emotional reassurance for genuine learning or honest engagement.

Additionally, since you wanted to raise the matter of childishness, this defensive, identity-fused kind of fanboy mindset is generally understood psychologically as a sign of emotional immaturity, not in the sense of age but in the sense of underdeveloped self-regulation and self-concept. When someone cannot tolerate critical information without feeling personally attacked, it suggests that their sense of self is fragile enough that external opinions must be tightly controlled to maintain emotional comfort. Mature psychological functioning allows a person to separate their identity from their possessions, to handle disagreement without defensiveness, and to adjust beliefs when presented with better information. In contrast, this kind of fanboyism reflects a need for certainty, validation, and ego protection that overrides curiosity and rational evaluation.

Happy to discuss it further, but maybe forum members would instead like to discuss this new lens, its positives and negatives, without having self-appointed gatekeepers come down on them and try to shut them down when they mention the negatives because their fragile egos can't handle facts that challenge their illusory worldviews built to psychologically comfort them. You mentioned consulting a specialist to deal with emotional issues. Perhaps I might be such a specialist that can help people overcome their irrational fanboy mindset and liberate them from such a terrible malady lol!

Click to expand...

Del Paso said:

Childish, just childish!
If you're on this forum to vent your ange5r or frustration, why not consult a specialist?

Click to expand...

LogicExtremist said:

ha ha ha, look who came to bite! I thought there was a high probability you would respond, call it predictability of character. Did some of the factual comments hit too close to home??? Are you an irrational fanboy prone to emotive reactions when a false worldview of brand loyalty idealism is challenged by a reality dictated by physical limitations and engineering compromises?

Is anything I said incorrect? A colorful description perhaps, but accurate, no?

Now what you have just stated is an error in reasoning known as a category mistake combined with a false equivalence. Calling out logical fallacies addresses the validity of someone’s arguments, not their personal worth. When you claim that identifying fallacies is the same as insulting a person, you are equating critique of reasoning with a personal attack, which is a false equivalence fallacy. If you're trying to use that claim to deflect from the substance of the critique (because you cant prove any part of it wrong), then your statement is also functions as a red herring fallacy - shifting attention away from whether the argument is faulty and toward how the person feels about being corrected.

Are you really trying to tell me that when a person made a series of illogical statements unkindly with the intention of suppressing the expression of differing opinions by other forum members, and I called them out, it may have upset their feelings? Why is this an issue? Are you one of those people that tries to shut down people who express facts or opinions you dislike? Hmmm, maybe it may be interesting to check your post history lol!

In case there is some cognitive dissonance, a friendly reminder to those who need it, An online forum exists to enable open, good-faith exchange of diverse ideas so that participants can learn from one another rather than silence differing viewpoints. Imagine that!

Fanboy product loyalty becomes toxic when it prevents people from engaging with information objectively, shuts down healthy dialogue, and ties their identity so tightly to a brand that any criticism feels like a personal attack. This behavior narrows perspective, fuels defensiveness, and can damage meaningful exchanges by turning normal discussions into hostility or tribalism. It also inhibits informed decision-making, because rejecting all negative feedback - whether technical, experiential, or expert-derived - leads to poorer choices and stagnation rather than growth. And it's definitely not a way for mature-aged men (the primary demographic of this forum) to behave. But if you want to behave like children, don't let me stop you!

Click to expand...

Del Paso said:

Thanks for insulting forum members. This is sooo mature!
Next time, please, keep your garbage to yourself.

Click to expand...

LogicExtremist said:

And you sound like a butthurt little fanboy that is trying to suppress any opinions that dare criticize Canon. Childish much? How old are you, 12?

The reviews published plainly list all the flaws of this crappy lens, what's your problem? Can't you read a report, and process the facts, or is it a case of confirmation bias overriding your reasoning? Remember, criticism of Canon is not a criticism of you, it's not that hard.

Additionally, your logic is flawed, you make no valid arguments.

• "You still seem to desperately search for flaws without even giving it a try." - this is the Appeal to Experience fallacy: dismissing criticism by claiming someone can’t judge something unless they’ve personally tried it. It avoids addressing the argument and instead denies the critic’s right to comment. It’s related to ad hominem circumstantial style fallacies (suggesting the critic’s circumstances disqualify their argument) and gatekeeping-style fallacies (claiming only certain people are “allowed” to comment). A person can evaluate claims, logic, or evidence about something without having personally done it—just as one can evaluate the safety of skydiving without jumping out of a plane. They can also read a review of a poor lens and recognize it as such.
• "And When you think it‘s overpriced, just don’t buy it." - this fallacy is a Red Herring (which shifts away from the argument about pricing) combined with a Dismissive Non-argument (treats the criticism as irrelevant rather than addressing it). Your statement dodges the actual critique (the price or value of the product) and instead places the focus on the critic’s choice to purchase. It avoids engaging with whether the product is overpriced.
• "But to think, Canon will offer you an L prime below $1k MRSP is as far from reality as it was the last few years or even decades" - is a typical Straw Man fallacy. It misrepresents the critic’s actual point (“this budget lens has flaws”) as if they were demanding a professional L-series lens for under $1k, which they never claimed. By attacking this exaggerated version, the responder avoids engaging with the real critique.

It's emotional responses like the one you made and self-appointed gatekeeping like you tried to engage in that ruins forums and poisons the contribution of valuable information and questions that people may have.

We previously had a fanboy circle-jerk group of cashed-up talentless retirees here a while back that literally believed the idiotic fallacy that "Canon could do no wrong" and got really upset when anybody criticized anything Canon did, and fervently defended Canon whenever they did anything to screw over the consumer, like they had shares in the company - are you trying to continue in that tradition? Ask yourself, who appointed you the spokesman and defender of the Canon faith?

Please try to use more reasoned responses next time, it reduces the noise component of the signal to noise ratio of online forums, which pollutes the AI learning data. Have a nice day!

Click to expand...

Zadak said:

I still don't understand why the f Canon still sells bodies with kits such as 24-105 f4. The total price is the same as if I bought them separately.

Click to expand...

snapshot said:

but there are readers for them, and it might be a bunch quicker to download the files to our computers

Click to expand...

Zadak said:

I still don't understand why the f Canon still sells bodies with kits such as 24-105 f4. The total price is the same as if I bought them separately.

Click to expand...

snapshot said:

i haven't bought any cfe v4 cards, but there are readers for them, and it might be a bunch quicker to download the files to our computers. currently with pre-capture adn 12 FPS, i can get 13K RAWS per shoot and that takes several hours to transfer.

Click to expand...

Maximilian said:

Did you read my discussion with Snapster until the end?
I think, then you realize that we've settled that.
So best would be not to start again.

Click to expand...

Alastair Norcross said:

What I hope for and expect with any lens, especially L lenses, is for the actual images they produce, using whatever corrections they are designed for (optical, digital, or both) to be really good. Since the images from the VCM lenses are not just really good, but actually outstanding, I also think they are a remarkable accomplishment. I own and use four of them (24, 35, 50, 85), so I actually know what I'm talking about (unlike people who tiresomely scream "but digital corrections, but digital corrections" over and over and over, without actually owning and using the lenses). When I bought my 50 F1.4, I thought I might hang onto my RF 50 F1.2, which is a truly wonderful lens. However, I just didn't find myself using it. The results from the VCM version are just as good, no-one notices the 1/3 stop difference between F1.2 and F1.4, and the VCM version is so much smaller and lighter. So I've just sold my F1.2. The latest, which is the 85 F1.4, is my favorite 85 ever. It's just superb. You can, of course, stick your head in the mud, ignore the fact that designing lenses for digital corrections (which the VCM lenses employ to a greater or lesser extent, depending on which lens we're talking about--the 85 probably the least) makes possible not just particular body designs but also the kinds of optical performance that would be hard, if not impossible, to achieve with optical corrections only, and thereby miss out on some fabulous lenses. Your choice.

Click to expand...

justaCanonuser said:

I recommend Bryan Carnathan's in-depth review:

Canon RF 50mm F1.4 L VCM Lens Review

Is the Canon RF 50mm F1.4 L VCM Lens right for you? Learn all you need to know in The-Digital-Picture.com's review!

www.the-digital-picture.com

The only downside of this lens is that it is prone to strong color blur in out-of-focus areas. Personally, I don't mind that because I am used to such issues caused by undercorrected fast lenses. I either don't use such lenses in settings with a lot of contrast in the background when I don't want to see such effects in the image or I accept them as part of the composition.

Click to expand...

Maximilian said:

You still seem to desperately search for flaws without even giving it a try.
And When you think it‘s overpriced, just don’t buy it.
But to think, Canon will offer you an L prime below $1k MRSP is as far from reality as it was the last few years or even decades.

Click to expand...

• "You still seem to desperately search for flaws without even giving it a try." - this is the Appeal to Experience fallacy: dismissing criticism by claiming someone can’t judge something unless they’ve personally tried it. It avoids addressing the argument and instead denies the critic’s right to comment. It’s related to ad hominem circumstantial style fallacies (suggesting the critic’s circumstances disqualify their argument) and gatekeeping-style fallacies (claiming only certain people are “allowed” to comment). A person can evaluate claims, logic, or evidence about something without having personally done it—just as one can evaluate the safety of skydiving without jumping out of a plane. They can also read a review of a poor lens and recognize it as such.
• "And When you think it‘s overpriced, just don’t buy it." - this fallacy is a Red Herring (which shifts away from the argument about pricing) combined with a Dismissive Non-argument (treats the criticism as irrelevant rather than addressing it). Your statement dodges the actual critique (the price or value of the product) and instead places the focus on the critic’s choice to purchase. It avoids engaging with whether the product is overpriced.
• "But to think, Canon will offer you an L prime below $1k MRSP is as far from reality as it was the last few years or even decades" - is a typical Straw Man fallacy. It misrepresents the critic’s actual point (“this budget lens has flaws”) as if they were demanding a professional L-series lens for under $1k, which they never claimed. By attacking this exaggerated version, the responder avoids engaging with the real critique.

stillviking said:

@homebodyMacro2 we are on same boat. Would you mind to tell us or share some samples if new 70-200 2.8 L Z + 2x teleconverter stills sharp corner-to-corner in the 400mm?

Click to expand...