Latest activity

roby17269 · Mar 29, 2026

blackcoffee17 said:
Maybe Canon just set the license fee so high that it makes no sense for Sigma to release full frame RF lenses. So they can say the technically allow it.

I do not believe that... the reality is that we do not know, but if that was the case, how would that be materially different from Canon simply saying "no 3rd party AF FF lenses allowed"?

blackcoffee17 · Mar 29, 2026

roby17269 said:
And I don't believe for a second that Sigma would not sell their FF lenses to RF customers if they could. If it was a case of costs they could simply pass them to the customers. And if it was a question of capacity they could simply produce less crop lenses and favor the more profitable FF ones

Maybe Canon just set the license fee so high that it makes no sense for Sigma to release full frame RF lenses. So they can say the technically allow it.

ISv · Mar 29, 2026

AlanF said:
Interestingly, I got yesterday a shot of a Eurasian Teal, which has a horizontal white stripe, compared with your America Teal that has a vertical shoulder stripe. Here it is plus a Shoveller and a very small Little Egret that came very close. I wish we had your Wood Ducks and Hooded Mergansers.

View attachment 228629 View attachment 228630 View attachment 228631

For the American Ornithological Society (AOS) the Eurasian and the American Teals are two subspecies of the same species. For most other ornithologists they are two closely related species. The mitochondrial DNA data are showing deep difference between the two taxa but the genome DNA data are showing (from conservative regions of DNA) high similarity (but still with differences!). The hybrids between thees two species (they hybridize in the Bering See at higher rate) have both, vertical and horizontal white strips!

Noreaster · Mar 29, 2026

Carolina Wren is my first pic. We are on the edge of their range
Some should have been in the birds in flight thread

neuroanatomist · Mar 29, 2026

GirlsAreBeautiful said:
I don't think a new 28mm is a priority for the simple reason that it is the default cellphone focal lenght, so manufacturers are focusing about things that feel "different".

Which smartphones? For several years the main camera on iPhones has been 26mm(equivalent) for the non-Pro and 24mm for the Pro models.

Mar 29, 2026

m4ndr4ke said:
The RF 28mm f/2.8 is good, but I'm not bringing it out for low light situations, and I'm not very fond of pancake lenses. The lens vignettes heavily at f/2.8, an aperture that would be stopping down with most prime lenses, but it is not with this one.
I'm mostly okay with software corrections, that's not my point, but I'd prefer having that level of vignette at f/1.8 or wider, and being able to stop down to f/2.8 for a cleaner image, like many lenses allow us to.

A regular 28mm, with a proper lens hood, would do. I wouldn't necessarily want f/1.4, I'd be glad with a RF 28mm f/1.8 STM, but the 45mm is setting a precedent for extremely wide apertures, so I guess one can dream. Also, it could make an amazing standard lens for APS-C users, since a RF-S 32mm f/1.4 is nowhere to be found, so I think there may be a market for a budget, but fast, 28mm, specially with a price and form factor similar to that of the 45.

As for a L-series 28mm...yeah, at this point, I doubt it.

I don't think a new 28mm is a priority for the simple reason that it is the default cellphone focal lenght, so manufacturers are focusing about things that feel "different".

blackcoffee17 · Mar 29, 2026

Hugin said:
An RF 20-70/4L IS, as light as possible, would be nice.
Though there are already so many lenses covering the standard zoom range so I don’t have to much hope.

Extending the 14-35 to 14-50 would be even more amazing.

roby17269 · Mar 29, 2026

EOS 4 Life said:
Says who?
We have no idea when they decided to kill it.

hmmmm.... logic and reality?!?
Or are you saying that Canon was truly supporting the M mount till one day when they suddenly weren't anymore?

Exploreshootshare · Mar 29, 2026

This Kestrel showed up frequently during our walks last year. So, I took my RF 100-500mm out, put a 2x TC on it and went at it

R5 + RF 100-500mm + 2x TC
600mm
F11

danfaz · Mar 29, 2026

Michael Clark said:
In return for selling at a lower price to places such as KEH one can have confidence they are dealing with someone who will not rip them off and claim they never received the item, then file a complaint on eBay or whatever other platform and get their money back from you without returning the camera you "sold" them for what ended up being $0.00. Selling to KEH or the like is no hassle and practically risk free, unlike selling via eBay, Craigslist, FB Marketplace, etc. where there are 99 scammers on those platforms for every 1 legit potential buyer.

This is exactly why I rarely sell on ebay these days. KEH, Adorama (on occasion) or MPB for me.

Click · Mar 29, 2026

So cute! Nicely done, P-visie.

Click · Mar 29, 2026

Lovely!

Click · Mar 29, 2026

Noreaster said:
I had a hard time uploading the files yesterday here is more

I really like the 5th one. Great shot!

P-visie · Mar 29, 2026

Red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris) drinking and eating a nut. Taken from a photo hide.

R5 Mk II + EF 200-400mm (top) and EF 600mm f4 II + 1.4 Extender (bottom)

P-visie · Mar 29, 2026

dolina said:
6 years after the launch of the 2018 RF mount, from the top of my head these are the lenses Canon will likely launch

- Tilt-Shift "TS-R" Lenses (15mm / 17mm / 18mm / 20mm / 24mm / 35mm / 50mm / 55mm / 85mm / 90mm / 100mm)
- RF 200-500mm (ideally f/4L IS with 1.4x as the 500mm f/4L IS prime is missing)
- RF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS
- RF 300mm f/2.0L IS as the 100-300mm f/2.8L IS zoom is available
- RF 200mm f/1.8L IS as there are numerous 200mm f/2.0 with & without IS on dSLR & mirrorless mounts at present & in the past
- RF 180mm f/3.5L Macro
- RF-S pancake
- Super-Telephoto Zoom (200-600mm / 180-600mm / 400-800mm)
- RF 35mm f/1.2L
- RF 50–140m f/2.8 equiv

Add the RF 400mm f2.8 and RF 600mm f4 with built in extender.

1ll · Mar 29, 2026

Link spot metering and partial metering to the af point.

AlanF · Mar 29, 2026

Noreaster said:
I had a hard time uploading the files yesterday here is more

View attachment 228623 View attachment 228624 View attachment 228625 View attachment 228626 View attachment 228627 View attachment 228628

Interestingly, I got yesterday a shot of a Eurasian Teal, which has a horizontal white stripe, compared with your America Teal that has a vertical shoulder stripe. Here it is plus a Shoveller and a very small Little Egret that came very close. I wish we had your Wood Ducks and Hooded Mergansers.

m4ndr4ke · Mar 29, 2026

Del Paso said:
I am more than happy with the optically outstanding RF 28mm f/2,8. OK, it's not an f/1,4, but certainly better than a low-cost f/1,4 would be.
AND!!!!! I'm still hoping for an L version!

The RF 28mm f/2.8 is good, but I'm not bringing it out for low light situations, and I'm not very fond of pancake lenses. The lens vignettes heavily at f/2.8, an aperture that would be stopping down with most prime lenses, but it is not with this one.
I'm mostly okay with software corrections, that's not my point, but I'd prefer having that level of vignette at f/1.8 or wider, and being able to stop down to f/2.8 for a cleaner image, like many lenses allow us to.

A regular 28mm, with a proper lens hood, would do. I wouldn't necessarily want f/1.4, I'd be glad with a RF 28mm f/1.8 STM, but the 45mm is setting a precedent for extremely wide apertures, so I guess one can dream. Also, it could make an amazing standard lens for APS-C users, since a RF-S 32mm f/1.4 is nowhere to be found, so I think there may be a market for a budget, but fast, 28mm, specially with a price and form factor similar to that of the 45.

As for a L-series 28mm...yeah, at this point, I doubt it.

Bob Howland · Mar 29, 2026

EOS 4 Life said:
Says who?
We have no idea when they decided to kill it.

Point made. The assumption is that, since Canon reduced investment in the line years before they announced its death, they had made the decision earlier. Since they didn't want people to stop buying a very popular cash cow, they didn't warn those people that they were buying into a dead system.

Noreaster · Mar 29, 2026

I had a hard time uploading the files yesterday here is more

Del Paso · Mar 29, 2026

dolina said:
6 years after the launch of the 2018 RF mount, from the top of my head these are the lenses Canon will likely launch

- Tilt-Shift "TS-R" Lenses (15mm / 17mm / 18mm / 20mm / 24mm / 35mm / 50mm / 55mm / 85mm / 90mm / 100mm)
- RF 200-500mm (ideally f/4L IS with 1.4x as the 500mm f/4L IS prime is missing)
- RF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS
- RF 300mm f/2.0L IS as the 100-300mm f/2.8L IS zoom is available
- RF 200mm f/1.8L IS as there are numerous 200mm f/2.0 with & without IS on dSLR & mirrorless mounts at present & in the past
- RF 180mm f/3.5L Macro
- RF-S pancake
- Super-Telephoto Zoom (200-600mm / 180-600mm / 400-800mm)
- RF 35mm f/1.2L
- RF 50–140m f/2.8 equiv

Nice list, hoping for it to become a physical and "buyable" reality!

Del Paso · Mar 29, 2026

m4ndr4ke said:
Me too, the lens is okay. I don’t shoot wide open that often, so not having to carry around the corresponding weight is great. I only resort to f/2 or wider when I intend to.

There’s room for everyone to make their wishes However, if they made such lens, I guess it’d be faster, as the 45 has set the precedent of having an extremely wide aperture.

I would welcome that too, but I’m not holding my hopes up for such lens, at this point.
A cheap and fast 28 would be an easy decision to me, if it came.
Canon could make a series of “less common focal lengths” (less common for Canon, that is) with fast and affordable lenses. Let’s say, for instance, a 21mm, a 28, the 45, a 75 or a 90, a 105 — lenses that could be sold in parallel with the existing L options, without repeating focal lengths and/or apertures.

I am more than happy with the optically outstanding RF 28mm f/2,8. OK, it's not an f/1,4, but certainly better than a low-cost f/1,4 would be.
AND!!!!! I'm still hoping for an L version!

m4ndr4ke · Mar 29, 2026

Gino_FOTO said:
Personally, for the purposes for which fast primes are made, I am okay with the RF 45mm's performance.

Me too, the lens is okay. I don’t shoot wide open that often, so not having to carry around the corresponding weight is great. I only resort to f/2 or wider when I intend to.

Gino_FOTO said:
For me, though, 45mm is not the focal length I prefer. I would be happy to see something three times longer; just as the 45mm is a 'reimagined' EF 50mm f/1.2L, an RF 135mm f/2 STM would be sweet as a modernization of the EF 135mm f/2L.

There’s room for everyone to make their wishes

However, if they made such lens, I guess it’d be faster, as the 45 has set the precedent of having an extremely wide aperture.

Del Paso said:
And I very happily welcome a non-budget 28mm f/1,4 or f/1,2 L !!!

I would welcome that too, but I’m not holding my hopes up for such lens, at this point.
A cheap and fast 28 would be an easy decision to me, if it came.
Canon could make a series of “less common focal lengths” (less common for Canon, that is) with fast and affordable lenses. Let’s say, for instance, a 21mm, a 28, the 45, a 75 or a 90, a 105 — lenses that could be sold in parallel with the existing L options, without repeating focal lengths and/or apertures.