Latest activity

EthenJ · Feb 15, 2026

Exploreshootshare said:
Well, that is exactly what might happen. A lot of people thought Canon combined the successor of the 90d and 7dii to the R7. Maybe, that didn't quite work out... I don´t know the sales numbers or the targeted sales numbers. Rumors point to the r7ii going upmarket and probably being what most people in the forums and wildlife/ birding community hoped the first version would have been. Therefore, it shouldn't be considered a combined spiritual successor of both the 90d and 7dii. Which leaves the r10ii as a successor for the 90d. Of course, the 90d had no IBIS, but none of the DSLR had. I could easily see Canon giving the R10ii an Ibis unit and moving it a bit further up in the line-up towards the R7 price segment. The original R10 will keep the lower price point for while giving Canon to evaluate whether they need a camera between the R50 and R10ii.

Interesting, so Canon should follow the lead of their competitiors. I always thought Canon really likes to take the lead instead of following it.

Personally, just more reasons to offer an ibis equipped R10ii.

If rumors are true for the R7ii, it doesn't need protection from an ibis equipped R10ii. They'll be in totally different segments.

So an R9 basically? Like a 90D. I buy that.

That sounds awesome. Yeah, I shouldn’t be so cynical about IBIS. But:

> Interesting, so Canon should follow the lead of their competitiors. I always thought Canon really likes to take the lead instead of following it.

Not necessarily on pricing, heh. And the cheapness of the R7I would still put it in a weird spot.

Exploreshootshare · Feb 15, 2026

EthenJ said:
With 32MP IBIS, it would basically be an R7 MKI.

Well, that is exactly what might happen. A lot of people thought Canon combined the successor of the 90d and 7dii to the R7. Maybe, that didn't quite work out... I don´t know the sales numbers or the targeted sales numbers. Rumors point to the r7ii going upmarket and probably being what most people in the forums and wildlife/ birding community hoped the first version would have been. Therefore, it shouldn't be considered a combined spiritual successor of both the 90d and 7dii. Which leaves the r10ii as a successor for the 90d. Of course, the 90d had no IBIS, but none of the DSLR had. I could easily see Canon giving the R10ii an Ibis unit and moving it a bit further up in the line-up towards the R7 price segment. The original R10 will keep the lower price point for while giving Canon to evaluate whether they need a camera between the R50 and R10ii.

EthenJ said:
While I would like such a thing, I don’t see an R10II going IBIS unless competitors make cheaper crop IBIS bodies, too.

Interesting, so Canon should follow the lead of their competitiors. I always thought Canon really likes to take the lead instead of following it.

EthenJ said:
Looking around, Fuji's X-E5, Sony's A6700 and the Lumix S9 are priced more like an R7I, Nikon has no aps-c IBIS, leaving M4/3 bodies as the only IBIS competitors around the R10.

Personally, just more reasons to offer an ibis equipped R10ii.

EthenJ said:
Hence I think Canon has more incentive to leave IBIS out and “protect” the R7 unless another maker puts pressure on them.

If rumors are true for the R7ii, it doesn't need protection from an ibis equipped R10ii. They'll be in totally different segments.

P-visie · Feb 15, 2026

CRFan said:
Thanks, seems to be some questions about focus points and lens profile corrections selected. Not sure why they used the RF 16 profile when a RF 14 correction profile exists.

Where did you get the information about the lens profile from?

Del Paso · Feb 15, 2026

CRFan said:
Thanks, seems to be some questions about focus points and lens profile corrections selected. Not sure why they used the RF 16 profile when a RF 14 correction profile exists.

How to damage a brand...
If indeed they used a wrong profile, they should at least apologise!

CRFan · Feb 15, 2026

P-visie said:
Petapixel has a review of the RF14mm f1.4 with a few astro pics. They complain about stars in the corner streaking towards the image center.

See: https://petapixel.com/2026/02/12/canon-14mm-f-1-4l-vcm-review-major-trade-offs-for-compactness/

Thanks, seems to be some questions about focus points and lens profile corrections selected. Not sure why they used the RF 16 profile when a RF 14 correction profile exists.

GirlsAreBeautiful · Feb 15, 2026

Photo quality of the pancake is nice, but I need an AF that works better than my 28mm EF so I'll have to skip...

Xpenelas · Feb 15, 2026

EthenJ said:
With 32MP IBIS, it would basically be an R7 MKI.

That's tricky to price, indeed.

While I would like such a thing, I don’t see an R10II going IBIS unless competitors make cheaper crop IBIS bodies, too. Or if it outright replaces the R7I.

Looking around, Fuji's X-E5, Sony's A6700 and the Lumix S9 are priced more like an R7I, Nikon has no aps-c IBIS, leaving M4/3 bodies as the only IBIS competitors around the R10. Hence I think Canon has more incentive to leave IBIS out and “protect” the R7 unless another maker puts pressure on them.

If they stay without IBIS, they need better IS RF-S lenses.

Xpenelas · Feb 15, 2026

SnowMiku said:
I hope the R10 II gets the LP-E6 battery, just like the xx DSLRs before it, make it a true 90D replacement.

R10 was 77D replacement and R7 the 90D replacement.

If R7 mkII goes upmarket the R10 mkII should too.

ISv · Feb 14, 2026

Click definitely (and all others around

!) has seen these birds hundreds of times but it's what I found...

ISv · Feb 14, 2026

Canon Rumors said:
I'll only post 2 from this trip. I still have another week to go.

View attachment 227988

Crowned Woodnymph
Farallones National Park, Colombia

EOS R1 • RF 600 F4 L IS USM
1/4000 • F6.3 • ISO 8000

Great shots! More than good reason to wait for the "...still have another week to go"

Tonydbroncs · Feb 14, 2026

Ive had this camera since it came out and have shot in the rain for over three hours and in a windstorm with beach sand blowing all over and with no problems what so ever. So as far as I am concerned its a professional camera and I also have an R1 and would take this camera with me anytime

ISv · Feb 14, 2026

Female Monarch butterfly always has more dark around the veins of the wings but this one is extra darker. Difficult to take a good shot because by some reasons these, darker females use to fly low in the plants (you usually don't have a clear view), never posing as the others sometimes do.
And few bees around basil flowers.

SnowMiku · Feb 14, 2026

EricN said:
If it stays non ibis, but wouldn't they want to move r10ii slightly up market?

Personally it doesn't matter to me if it includes Ibis or not, I'm just hoping for a true 90D replacement for the R10 II, and a true 7D II replacement for the R7 II.

neuroanatomist · Feb 14, 2026

EthenJ said:
I kinda left this thread, but I found EXACTLY what I'm looking for, and it should explain it better without us talking in circles.

This madman disassembled a Meike 0.71X speedbooster and stuck it in his RF 800mm F11! And it works!

That. That's it! That is precisely what I want from Canon, exactly that; a 570mm f8. And if this guy can literally glue it onto an 800mm F11, surely Canon can glue their own 0.71X speedbooster in the same spot and sell it without any extra engineering? Like the YouTuber suggests.

What you are looking for was entirely clear. The only 'talking in circles' is that you seem to believe that what you are looking for makes sense. Consider that you called the guy who made one a madman. Canon's engineers are not.

The YouTuber took a lens with 5 elements and merged it with a lens with 11 elements – 16 total. A properly designed 600/8 would have fewer elements, be shorter in length, be lighter, cost less to produce (= more profit for Canon)…and it would still work with a FF sensor. Sorry, I don’t understand why you believe the idea of a speedboosted 800/11 makes sense.

Click · Feb 14, 2026

Lovely composition. Well done, Sir!

EthenJ · Feb 14, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
Sorry, but I don't think you're getting the point here. An 800mm lens design is going to have an image circle larger than a FF sensor and thus larger than an APS-C sensor. A 500mm lens is still going to have an image circle larger than a FF sensor and thus larger than an APS-C sensor. You cannot 'design a smaller, brighter image circle' for a supertelephoto lens. The image circle is not limiting for FF, so it's not going to be limiting for APS-C.

Ok, I get that what you're suggesting is that Canon effectively design an 800mm lens with a speedbooster built into it. But that design would yield 500mm f/7.1 and would still cover a FF image circle, so what would be the point? A simple 500/7.1 would be a lot cheaper to build than a speedboosted 800/11, and it would be lighter, too (less glass).

There are no long telephoto lenses for APS-C. None. Even if the above point about the image circle not being limiting is not clear to you, you should think about why no one has made one – if it made any sort of sense, an OEM or 3rd party lens maker would have done it. Even with brands that only make crop sensors, like Oly/OM, their lenses that go beyond 300mm would actually work on a FF sensor. Because the image circle is not limiting.

The issue is that there is simply no point in making the lenses you are talking about. Not just from a cost perspective, but from an optical physics perspective.

This is also true, of course. It's likely why there are few high-end APS-C lenses from Canon and none for the RF mount, and why there has never been an L-series APS-C lens (though they do put them on fixed-lens camera with smaller sensors, like the PowerShot Pro1 and several camcorders). But that is irrelevant in this case.

I kinda left this thread, but I found EXACTLY what I'm looking for, and it should explain it better without us talking in circles.

This madman disassembled a Meike 0.71X speedbooster and stuck it in his RF 800mm F11! And it works!

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

That. That's it! That is precisely what I want from Canon, exactly that; a 570mm f8. And if this guy can literally glue it onto an 800mm F11, surely Canon can glue their own 0.71X speedbooster in the same spot and sell it without any extra engineering? Like the YouTuber suggests.

It would go *great* with that 39MP R7II.

Kiton · Feb 14, 2026

"Let's admit the obvious, as it is right now the Canon FLASH system is kind of dead in the water, and they know it themselves also"

I think you are correct, Canon knows that they over designed their control and screwed it up, and priced themselves out of the biggest sector of the market.
My camera shop laughed when I asked them to order 2x EL 5 flashes.
He said, he almost never sells branded flash gear today.

I was shooting a museum curator last week with one EL5 on a stand and a shoot thru umbrella and it lost sync in the middle of a 10 minute shoot!
I pop the battery and in connects again.

I have found neither perform in a solid manner

It makes me want to go back to a Vivitar 285 and a quantum battery pack!

"they were trying to engineer the competition out of the system, instead they engineered a new ERROR potential that somehow always bricks the camera at the most critical moments.
Maybe nobody was buying those EL5's but buying GODOX instead, so they found a nice interesting way to sabotage that"

you mean, the Canon cripple hammer, again?

neuroanatomist · Feb 14, 2026

EthenJ said:
There's the RF 28mm pancake.

That is a great little lens!

https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/rf-28mm-f-2-8-stm.42484/

EthenJ · Feb 14, 2026

GirlsAreBeautiful said:
To be honest the only lens that I want is 28mm. I don't even need it to be perfect. Sadly, nobody seems to want to do them because they are not cool enough and smartphones already default to that focal. But I hope that Yongnuo will start to produce so many designs that eventually they'll stumble into it.

There's the RF 28mm pancake.

I have an EF-S Sigma 30mm 1.4 myself! While not quite a pancake:

It's fantastic.. But too narrow for me on APS-C. It turns out I mostly shoot >24mm or <70mm, and its autofocus is too noisy for video. Hence I got the Yongnuo to replace it, and intend to sell this Sigma 30.

There's also a couple of EF 28mms (like the full-frame Sigma 28mm),the manual focus Thypoch Simeria 28mm 1.4, and the 28mm Laowa Argus 1.2.

GirlsAreBeautiful · Feb 14, 2026

EthenJ said:
Yeah. The XS is only 23cm from the front glass, so that video is a “torture test” from macro to distance. Not bad for $220.

If you want 56mm as a portrait lens, their 85mm is full-frame and said to be near perfect optically. But it is a bit older than the aps-c 1.4s and 1.8s.

…I do wish that 11mm came in RF mount.

To be honest the only lens that I want is 28mm. I don't even need it to be perfect. Sadly, nobody seems to want to do them because they are not cool enough and smartphones already default to that focal. But I hope that Yongnuo will start to produce so many designs that eventually they'll stumble into it.

bloblom · Feb 14, 2026

A better sensor architecture is all the R7 needs to solve its rolling shutter and read noise problems:

- Dual Conversion Gain to help with high ISO read noise
- More column parallel ADCs to increase readout speed without hurting read noise (or just clock the existing ones higher and increase noise)

That shouldn't raise the costs too much nowadays and you don't even need BSI for that.
Really, it all depends on the direction taken for the R7 MkII and the desired optimization for the sensor.

The dream would be stacked BSI and low-noise circuitry but that would put it on par with FF flagships. One should obviously expect the cripple hammer to strike regardless, Canon are too conservative with product segmentation.

EthenJ · Feb 14, 2026

GirlsAreBeautiful said:
Speed looks decent enough, especially because it is changing focus from far to close. I can't wait for them to fill their lineup. I already want to buy the 50mm just to test it.

Yeah. The XS is only 23cm from the front glass, so that video is a “torture test” from macro to distance. Not bad for $220.

If you want 56mm as a portrait lens, their 85mm is full-frame and said to be near perfect optically. But it is a bit older than the aps-c 1.4s and 1.8s.

…I do wish that 11mm came in RF mount.

neuroanatomist · Feb 14, 2026

HMC11 said:
Thanks for sharing this. I asked the wrong question. What I hope to learn is the reason for this statement: "There is marginal benefit with pixel sizes of <3 µm and meaningful benefit with pixel sizes of <2 µm." I am guessing that above 3µm, the light gathering ability of FSI and BSI sensors does not have a significant difference, and that this difference becomes 'meaningful' below 2µm. If so, what are the main reason(s) for this dependence on pixel size?

There’s a finite minimum amount of space taken up by the photodiode circuitry, so as the pixel gets smaller that circuitry takes up a greater fraction of the pixel area, meaning more light lost when that circuitry is in front. The 3 and 2 µm sizes aren’t specific cutoffs, the benefit with decreasing pixel size is continuous.

As an example, compare the Sony RX100 vs the RX100 II, where they introduced BSI to the line. The cameras were 10 months apart and otherwise very similar (they added a tilt screen and WiFi, I think). The pixels are the same 2.4 µm size, and BSI gives about a 1/3-stop benefit on noise. That and similar comparisons of larger and smaller pixels are the basis for my statement. I’d call 1/3-stop marginal benefit, anything less isn’t really meaningful, IMO.

HMC11 · Feb 14, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
What is a BSI Sensor (Back Side-Illuminated Sensor)? - 42West

Digital photography took a digital step forward in reducing digital noise and improving image quality with the first BSI Sensor.

www.adorama.com

Thanks for sharing this. I asked the wrong question. What I hope to learn is the reason for this statement: "There is marginal benefit with pixel sizes of <3 µm and meaningful benefit with pixel sizes of <2 µm." I am guessing that above 3µm, the light gathering ability of FSI and BSI sensors does not have a significant difference, and that this difference becomes 'meaningful' below 2µm. If so, what are the main reason(s) for this dependence on pixel size?