Latest activity

Michael Clark · Oct 30, 2025

m4ndr4ke said:
It still amazes me how some people keep buying the lens, even today, instead of the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art.

Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens Image Quality

View the image quality delivered by the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens using ISO 12233 Resolution Chart lab test results. Compare the image quality of this lens with other lenses.

www.the-digital-picture.com

Canon RF 50mm F1.8 STM Lens Image Quality

View the image quality delivered by the Canon RF 50mm F1.8 STM Lens using ISO 12233 Resolution Chart lab test results. Compare the image quality of this lens with other lenses.

www.the-digital-picture.com

Not everyone buys lenses to do flat document (i.e. test charts) reproduction. The idea that flat field correction is more important than smooth out of focus areas for an f/1.2 portrait prime is misguided at best.

If you want to be the best test chart shooter in the world, then the Art is the lens for you.

Michael Clark · Oct 30, 2025

David - Sydney said:
View attachment 226664

I guess I'm upside down. I tend to use year-month-day

Michael Clark · Oct 30, 2025

m4ndr4ke said:
The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art has always been better than the EF 50mm f/1.2, the only parameter where the 1.2 lens took the lead was pretty much bokeh.

That all depends upon what one means by "better". Flat field correction usually means less smooth bokeh, especially prior to the late 2010s.

Roger Cicala talked about this in one of his blogs a while back.

If you want to do document reproduction (or shoot the sharpest photos of flat test charts) you need a different type of lens than the EF 50mm f/1.2 L. It doesn't matter if the out of focus areas are harsh when your entire field is the same distance from the camera.

If you're shooting portraits in a 3D environment (i.e. not in a studio with a diffuse backdrop), though, smooth out of focus areas are far more important than the edges and corners being focused on exactly the same distance as the center of the field is focused.

Michael Clark · Oct 30, 2025

What it really means is there is the performance that can be wrung out of a lens if you really, really know your lens. Know where in the image it works best and where it works worst and plan your photographs accordingly. And that, my friends, is one of the things that separates great photographers from good ones. - Roger Cicala February 2020

P-visie · Oct 30, 2025

Ozarker said:
I keep struggling with why the VCM series is not real L? One commentor has called them blasphemous. I don't understand the hate. Is it the digital correctionns?

It is the belief that optically corrected lenses are better than digitally corrected lenses.

David - Sydney · Oct 30, 2025

John Wilde said:
So it's not going to be announced until June.
(Being silly. That's the way people in the USA read that date.)

Philnick · Oct 30, 2025

Michael Clark said:
Unicorn, huh? Who else used to use the same word to describe a potential R7? Didn't he get banned about the same time you joined?

Michael Clark said:
I notice that you joined Canon Rumors at almost the exact same time another very active member here was banned. I also noticed that you both like to use the same word to describe cameras which you think Canon should not/would not bring to market based on your own anecdotal experience.

I have no idea who you're referring to. I have never participated here under any name other than the one I currently use, and as you note, whoever he was, he was gone by the time I got here. (My real name is in the URL for my photo website which has been in my signature for a long time, by the way - I have nothing to hide. My username is my nickname since college, over half a century ago.)

I do not appreciate being the target of such scurrilous accusations, which are the last resort of someone who is losing an argument.

PS You still have not said which if any R series camera you own - your gear list is still unchanged and only lists DSLRs. Occasional use - if such there has been - does not give rise to muscle memory, so you appear to be going by reference to muscle memory from your DSLRs.

PPS You also have not responded to my suggestions of simply adding another control dial to an R7 II in the standard location next to the rear screen and letting it take a battery grip. You probably know that the menu system on EOS cameras makes it trivially easy to disable the dial around the joystick if it's such an annoyance. Oh, and in case you didn't know, the joystick is a bit of an anachronism now, since on the R series, you can use your thumb on the rear screen to move the AF focus point while looking through the viewfinder, which allows for more fine control than the joystick does. I'll occasionally push in on the joystick to center the AF point, but that's about all I use it for.

PPPS I do not use "unicorn" to say a camera should not or would not be brought to market, merely to refer to cameras that can't serve as a point of reference - because they don't exist.

Michael Clark · Oct 30, 2025

Walrus said:
Ok so it's bad wide open; my 40 Art is going to stay, I guess

Meh. The EF 50mm f/1.2 L was never intended to be a test chart reproduction lens. It was designed to be a portrait lens.

It left some field curvature uncorrected to keep the bokeh smooth. If refocused so that the edges are at their sharpest, it does better than most expect. But that is a different focus distance than when the lens is focused for the center to be at its sharpest.

Michael Clark · Oct 30, 2025

Canon Rumors said:
Correction (I read the communication incorrectly). Optical quality on par with the EF 50 f/1.2L USM.

Ooooh. That's VERY different. Never mind.

Michael Clark · Oct 30, 2025

m4ndr4ke said:
No, that's not what I'm calling externally focusing lenses. I'm calling externally focusing lenses to those that extend beyond its original dimensions.
There's no need for a stationary element in the front, just look at the RF 50mm f/1.2, for instance. That lens has no protective front element, yet it focuses inside its housing, never extending beyond its length. Canon just needed to add more plastic, enough to cover the movement.

If you know, you know, right?

A guy I used to work for had one that all of the employees of his diesel repair shop (I worked for another of his businesses) used when running errands for the boss. I dropped off/or picked up mechanics in the Peugeot a few times when they would pick up or return vehicles to/from customers.

Michael Clark · Oct 29, 2025

Tom R5R7 said:
Anybody coming from a DSLR will not like the battery life of a mirrorless. She's been known, especially in migration season, to head out in the morning with the camera and shoot all day. A battery grip would have gone a long way to helping her enjoy her R7. That and a little more substantial 'heft' for the inevitable times that it gets banged around off trees and branches.

She just ordered a used EF-S 18-135 USM lens, and an adapter, thinking that the heavier lens would give a better feel. I think, really, that that 18-150 lens is such a lightweight thing that it feels incredibly cheap. Like a toy. A rather expensive toy, given what it costs new. That lens might have been what made her feel like it was less of a camera than her 2 Nikon DSLR bodies. Her 7200 died, but way over 200k shots on it, so it served her well for a long time.

As for me, I always carry an extra battery or two when I go out to photograph birds, or just about anything else really. I did the Cleveland air show Labor Day weekend, and swapped out the battery about 3/4 of the way through the show, just before the Thunderbirds showed up, so that I wouldn't have to deal with a dead battery at the wrong time. It still had around 10% on it, but definitely better to have a fresh one in there.

Lack of any possible battery grip is one reason why I would never buy an R7. My right shoulder and its limited range of motion is to the point I can't hold the camera steady enough to shoot portrait orientation without vertical controls.

Michael Clark · Oct 29, 2025

Philnick said:
My definition of a unicorn is a creature or camera that exists only in someone's imagination. As it did really exist, the 7D Mark II was not a unicorn. Your hoped for "mirrorless 7D Mark II" or "APS-C R5" will be unicorns unless and until they're actually put on the market.

Unicorn, huh? Who else used to use the same word to describe a potential R7? Didn't he get banned about the same time you joined?

Michael Clark · Oct 29, 2025

Philnick said:
I notice from the gear list in your signature that you don't actually have any mirrorless camera at all, just DSLRs.

I suggest that you get some actual experience with a Canon mirrorless camera before you start telling those of us using them that it would be great for Canon to change the next model of the camera we're used to to make it more like some old DSLR you're used to.

If you look at the back panel of the R5 and R6 series cameras, you'll see their joysticks are in essentially the same position as the nested dial and joystick of the R7. Only on your 5D and 7D series DSLRs is the joystick lower down on the back. (And on the oversized R1 and R3 models that have permanent battery grips - so it can be reached when the camera is held in portrait orientation.)

So if you intend to use the joystick on any of the Canon mirrorless bodies that don't have a permanent battery grip you'll be reaching your thumb to the same place as the R7 combo.

I have no objection to Canon putting a third control dial in the traditional location onto an R7/II - just leave the one by the viewfinder alone. You do know that you can set any of the controls on an EOS camera to do whatever you want (or nothing) - right?

I notice that you joined Canon Rumors at almost the exact same time another very active member here was banned. I also noticed that you both like to use the same word to describe cameras which you think Canon should not/would not bring to market based on your own anecdotal experience.

Michael Clark · Oct 29, 2025

Philnick said:
I notice from the gear list in your signature that you don't actually have any mirrorless camera at all, just DSLRs.

I suggest that you get some actual experience with a Canon mirrorless camera before you start telling those of us using them that it would be great for Canon to change the next model of the camera we're used to to make it more like some old DSLR you're used to.

If you look at the back panel of the R5 and R6 series cameras, you'll see their joysticks are in essentially the same position as the nested dial and joystick of the R7. Only on your 5D and 7D series DSLRs is the joystick lower down on the back. (And on the oversized R1 and R3 models that have permanent battery grips - so it can be reached when the camera is held in portrait orientation.)

So if you intend to use the joystick on any of the Canon mirrorless bodies that don't have a permanent battery grip you'll be reaching your thumb to the same place as the R7 combo.

I have no objection to Canon putting a third control dial in the traditional location onto an R7/II - just leave the one by the viewfinder alone. You do know that you can set any of the controls on an EOS camera to do whatever you want (or nothing) - right?

When is the last time I've updated the gear signature for my account? I have no idea how long it's been. Not to mention that just because I don't own certain cameras does not mean I have not shot with them. Some more than once. However, I'm not free to publicly post or share most of what I've done with cameras I do not own.

As to your assertion that the Joystick & Quick Control Dial on the R5 and R6 is in the same position as the abomination on the R7: That is categorically untrue. The joystick may be in a similar location, but the dial around it on the R7 means the thumb must curve over the dial to get to the joystick, instead of lying flat on the diagonal area of the rubber (?) material below right of the joystick. The Quick Control Dial is, of course, in a totally different position also much more accessible with one's thumb, and closer to the left edge so that arching the thumb a bit to not press the Set button when undesired is not a problem.

The EOS R5 Mark II and R6 Mark II

The EOS R7

Michael Clark · Oct 29, 2025

Maximilian said:
Call it Double-Gauss design BASED, if that makes you feel better.
And about the propper notation:
Start complaining at wikipedia first:

Double-Gauss lens - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You'll find there:
Double-Gauss
Double Gauss
double Gauss

And you'll find there numerous lens designs all claimed to be Double-Gauss (or Double Gauss, or double Gauss).
So if you'd ask me about consideration, this RF 45 could be closer to a Taylor&Hobson.
And "your" reference of the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM has two elements more than than the "classic Double-Gauss" (or Double Gauss, or double Gauss).
So it's an evolution as well, closer to a "Zeiss Planar" design.

In the end:
If you'd use German it would have been even better and more precise:

Gaußsches Doppelobjektiv

Gaußsches Doppelobjektiv – Wikipedia

de.wikipedia.org

as for the meaning of a symmetrical mirroring of a basic Gauß lens.
(as this German person Carl Friedrich Gauß is correctly spelled with a German "ß", called "Eszett" or "scharfes S", but in the past as well with an "ss", so welcome to maximum confusion).

Enough "know-it-all"?

And in the end th inventor of the Double-Gauss design (or Double Gauss, or double Gauss) was Alvan Clark, acording to wikipedia. Is he a relative of yours?

Since when is Wikipedia an authoritative source for anything? It's crowd sourced. It's not peer reviewed.

ISv · Oct 29, 2025

I'm sure you guys have already full mouth of this leucistic House sparrow but at 70+ I have no idea when I will see something like it again (if at all - huh, most probably not!). So, I'm going there once of a week and take what I can... On other hand there are not much birds around that I have no photos of (right now may be two but on a places that you shoot to document, not for really good photo...).
BTW: sometimes I really want to grab and clean little bit the bird but you know....

Ozarker · Oct 29, 2025

Tirmite said:
"I was totally impressed with the Canon RF 85mm f/1.4L VCM when I DIVED into ..." ‍

Cameras may be your area of expertise. English apparently is NOT.

Dived? How about "..when I dove into..." ?

Feel better? Do you have a worldwide grip on the English language now? You don't understand regional variations?

I get it. You were a hall monitor in school. Right? You can stop now. We've graduated. Grading is through.

Ozarker · Oct 29, 2025

P-visie said:
Doing the same things as the other manufacturers is not a very sound business strategy in the long term.

You want to use the lens for astrophotography, so you probably want it to be optically corrected, rather than rely on digital corrections. That means it will be big, heavy and expensive (optimistic guess between 3500 and 4500 USD/ €) and is not likely to sell in huge numbers. I.e. it would not have a significant impact on Canon’s marketshare, revenue and profit. Even if a few customers leave Canon for greener pastures elsewhere.

The list of lenses that Canon MUST make to avoid imminent doom, according to some users of this forum, is a very long list: tilt shift lenses, the (rumored) Sony f2 trinity, a light 300mm f2.8, Nikon’s “affordable” PF telelenses, “real” RF big white 400, 600, 800 and 1200mm lenses, “real” L-lenses instead of the VCM primes, RF big whites with built in converters, a whole list of Sigma and Tamron lenses, and I’ve probably missed a few.

How Canon should make these lenses and remain in business in a market that was shrinking until a few years ago and since then has not been growing very much, is usually lacking in these “Canon must make my dreamlens or they are doomed” posts.

Edit: Leaving aside why these posters think their knowledge of the camera market is better than that of the company that has been the market leader for a long time. A company still doing well after the collapse of the camera market and managing the transition from the EF and EF-M mount to the RF mount.

I keep struggling with why the VCM series is not real L? One commentor has called them blasphemous. I don't understand the hate. Is it the digital correctionns?

Ozarker · Oct 29, 2025

Eloniel said:
If Sony release one they will have to do it.

Nope

Ozarker · Oct 29, 2025

camedia said:
to launch a 14f2 over 8 years after Sigma launched its 14 1.8 would be pretty disappointing. it would also be many years after Sony launched their 14 1.8 which is quite small. So it has to at least match or else it is shameful and adds more evidence to why a closed system restricts photographers from innovation (even pretty old innovation that's already been around for years!)

I do aurora and I hate how limited the options for UWA fast are compared to Sony. Canon should do better!

Does f/1.8 make any difference at all vs f/2? At 14mm? If it does, can it be seen? How much longer or shorter are the exposures vs each other?

John Wilde · Oct 29, 2025

Klendothir said:
Canon Europe just started sending out “Mark the date : 06.11.2025 07:00 - CET” emails…

So it's not going to be announced until June.

(Being silly. That's the way people in the USA read that date.)

David - Sydney · Oct 29, 2025

DocInfoSci said:
And I keep hearing that Canon doesn’t review forums like this, but I simply can’t imagine that they aren’t keeping an eye on it in an unofficial way. Imagine one of the few big ticket rumor sites focused on their products covering the pending release of the next generation for one of their most popular camera lines—and not a single Canon engineer or product owner trolling to note the temperature. There are a lot of things that my company doesn’t officially do, but I guarantee you that we quietly keep an eye on things so that we can remain competitive in our industry. Prior customers matter, especially when they’re likely to purchase again.

The Canon lawyers and marketing may troll somewhat to minimise leaks under NDA!

I would like to believe that their engineers read the forum but we can't assume it or that they would act on it. We tend to be civil and write considered comments though. There is also DPR and Petapixel when they want fanboi criticisms and reviewers of course. Canon would have a much better understanding of their customer's needs that we would have.

Canon did react quickly for the R5's perceived overheating storm-in-a-teacup in 3 video modes even though 8k raw internal had never been done before in a hybrid body and still isn't available from any other hybrid body (not A1 or Z8/Z9). It may have also created the need for the R5c.

For us to ruminate on patents and potential feature sets is great but Canon has locked in their R&D and manufacturing resources a long time before we get a chance to comment or guess why they have some strange strategies.

They killed off the M line when it still seemed profitable but didn't repackage all the decent M lenses to RF for some unknown reason. I get that they went all-in for R mount but they brought back a largely unchanged powershot elph and they still have no issues selling lower end DLSRs.

Clearly Canon's strategy is for hybrid lenses now with a strong focus on Z zooms and VCM primes vs a missing RF35/1.2 or version 2 of existing RF lenses after 7 years or replacement EF niches. Locking out Sigma and Tamron from full frame RF lenses is the current topic du jour with imminent doom for Canon

rombe3jr · Oct 29, 2025

Walrus said:
I take one of your considerations, and expand it; I see, in general, too much concern of what's considered "pro" and what's not.
I have an R6 and fast glass because I mainly shoot weddings in dark environments, so I need good high iso performance and bright lenses.
But I also occasionally do corporate headshots, this is an example of my work:

View attachment 226648

If my main and only job was doing volume studio headshots like that, my setup would simply be R100 and RF-S 18-150, the cheapest possible with eye-AF, because I would be shooting iso 100 and f8/f11 all the time, and so no other extra bells and whistles would be needed to achieve the quality I need, and certainly I wouldn't feel any less "pro" then a sport professional working with two or three R1's and tens of thousands of dollars in L glass.
It's not the camera, the DR, the ISO, the widest f-stop, the red ring, that makes you "pro"; what makes you pro is getting money from photography, regardless of what you carry in your photo bag.

So I wouldn't focus on "what is R6 III giving to us non-pro photographer", but simply "what is R6 III giving to me, for what I need to do", and if you feel it doesn't give you what you expect, just don't buy it, look other Canon bodies that fullfill your needs, or look to other manufacturers if they offer you better gear for your passion

I wish that

guy was my boss

DocInfoSci · Oct 29, 2025

David - Sydney said:
Many (including myself) on the forum aren't "pro" by your definition but a lot are prosumers. Whether we are good or not is in the eye of the beholder but you are welcome to look at my flickr page in my signature.

My choice was the R5 because I do a lot of heavy cropping at times as I can't change lenses underwater.
I haven't upgraded to the R5ii because:
- Extra USD1100 cost to modify my underwater housing as well as the incremental cost of the new body
- R5 is working fine although I have found some issues like 12 bit stills when using electronic shutter vs 14 bit for mechanical and inability to modify between 1 and 20fps for ES.
- Slight DR decrease could be an issue as I do milky way and underwater stuff in poor conditions even if I don't go above ISO6400.

14 bit stills, adjustable ES speeds, ES triggering strobes, eye controlled AF (if it works for me), better AF tracking including priority subject would still be an improvement for stills for me sometimes.

Have you considered upgrading from R6 to R5

There has been no evidence that I am aware of that Canon reads the comments in this forum.
Feedback should be sent to Canon via their formal support pages

I’m starting to think that the R5 or an R3 class is starting to be more my style. I try to balance being pragmatic as I have other life interests as well, but maybe this is also the excuse I’ve been looking forward to justify.

And I keep hearing that Canon doesn’t review forums like this, but I simply can’t imagine that they aren’t keeping an eye on it in an unofficial way. Imagine one of the few big ticket rumor sites focused on their products covering the pending release of the next generation for one of their most popular camera lines—and not a single Canon engineer or product owner trolling to note the temperature. There are a lot of things that my company doesn’t officially do, but I guarantee you that we quietly keep an eye on things so that we can remain competitive in our industry. Prior customers matter, especially when they’re likely to purchase again.

DocInfoSci · Oct 29, 2025

David - Sydney said:
There are a bunch of advantages for stills from AF performance to rolling shutter (for stills like panning fast subjects) to EVF to flash sync using ES etc. "Paper losses" don't necessarily equate to real life issues.
Hybrid video is essential for all new releases even if users don't use it eg me for my R5.
Video features follow stills performance anyway eg if full sensor speed with stills then video at the same speed is the same (slightly cropped from 3:2)
Only a few users will notice the 2/3 stop difference. Those will be critical of this change but Canon believes that the other improvements outweigh that decrease.
Sensor tech hasn't fundamentally changed for some time now - probably since gapless pixel lenses (microlenses) were implemented.
Backside has change from FSI to BSI to stacked so complexity/cost has increased. The next iteration will be to maximise the well size on the front with all additional circuitry on the back.

Canon can release darker lenses due to full sensor AF and much better high ISO performance vs EF/DLSR days.
I think that Canon has done a great job for low end RF glass. RF100-400 as well as the lenses you mention for teles.
Canon is missing some mid level teles like 300/4 500/5.6 which Sony, Nikon and Sigma seem to have good options
Canon has the pointy end well covered except for a RF200-500/4 or 500mm prime.
Canon is missing niche lenses that were in EF eg fisheye zoom, long macro, tilt/shift etc and we can point to gaps that Sony/Sigma have like UWA primes eg 14mm.

All very good points. I’ll chew on this.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics