Here is the output from DPP 4 showing the focus point is the left eye of the cat.
This is with the Canon R6 Mk2.

snapshot said:

i have access to the 4 cameras in my comparison. not sure how to proceed with a color test through. i suppose a picture taken in a clear sky with noonish sun shoot a raw through an ef 70-200 f/2.8 at 100 iso,, some same shutter speed and maybe f/4? may still have differences in exposure?

Click to expand...

The exact lighting condition doesn't really matter unless you want to do a scientific comparison; in that case I'd use studio light or a clear day.
Make sure you compare skin tones. The green hue is extremely visible in nature where you often have green bouncing light (like from foliage).

Richard CR said:

Canon is now around 800-900 days for each 10 million lenses.

They used to be around 400-450

I'll have more on this later.

Click to expand...

Well. While I don't applause Canon's closed mount policy, you cannot directly compare with historical numbers with focus on that only (if that will be the theme). The market of "system cameras" (DSLRs and mirrorless) is generally much smaller today.

CJaurelius said:

Many people want interal zooms for video. If you are using a gimbal the external zoom throws off the balance point. If it's internal you can zoom in and out with no issue.

I think its fair to say that the future of the industry will be more dependent on video than photos. Canon is catching up with the VCM lenses adding aperture control. They'll need to do the same for their zoom lenses as well.

Click to expand...

Did you ever see the zoom throw of the 15-35 f/2,8? Hardly a cm. Nothing really to put the gimbal off balance in my opinion (as a non-video user). Are gimbals so extremely sensitive?

Looking across the inner harbour, Victoria BC...

Del Paso said:

I wouldn't trade 15mm for f/2, how often are UWAs used fully open?
Yet, tastes are different. An RF 24-70 f/2: Anytime!

Click to expand...

I would like to have a single lens for landscape/astrophoto/wide portrait/streetphoto, that's why I would like a 15 or 16-35mm f2.0

This morning...

m4ndr4ke said:

What? That’s less than the 35mm!

Okay, I hate to say this, but I think it’s time to start lowering expectations…

I know we’ve had an early price leak, but originally I expected this kind of lens to be priced at something like 799€ to 1099€, which then we’d be able to purchase at 25 to 35% less in a good day, but this is completely different.


Sounds like you’re right.
Not really wider though, if the 48.5mm patent is confirmed, but it's understandable they'll avoid having two lenses named "RF 50mm f/1.2" in the market.

Click to expand...

They could call it the 48 f/1.2. I mean, Zeiss had that famous 21 mm prime that was so well liked back in the day.

Chig said:

I love my EF 50mm f/1.4 for the unique "look" and this RF 45mm f/1.2 should be a really fun lens tooView attachment 226554View attachment 226555View attachment 226556

Click to expand...

The 50/1.4 was my 50 for a good while. I've had the cheap 1.8 with the plastic mount, and I have the EF 50/1.2L now (and it works well on the R series, though it understandably is not as good as that RF 50/1.2L). Also have an RF 50/1.8 for some reason. Given that I rarely use any of my 50s, and when I do, it's the big ol' L, I have to wonder why I have it. I guess the inner gear head calls out every now and then.

I sold my 1.4 last year in an effort to thin down the herd of lenses in my collection. But it was a workhorse, warts and all.

Del Paso said:

15-35 internal zoom? No priority in my opinion, the current one is excellent. If you think of the so-called dust issue, please read Roger Cicala's comments on what seems to be a non-issue, based on a multitude of disassemblies...
Fully agree on the other lenses, I miss them too.

Click to expand...

Many people want interal zooms for video. If you are using a gimbal the external zoom throws off the balance point. If it's internal you can zoom in and out with no issue.

I think its fair to say that the future of the industry will be more dependent on video than photos. Canon is catching up with the VCM lenses adding aperture control. They'll need to do the same for their zoom lenses as well.

AlanF said:

The battery life of the R7 is good compared with the EOS R5 and R5ii - I get at least twice as many shots with it.

Click to expand...

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.

The cat photo is focused on the cat's chest. Indeed, the fence is sharper than the eyes and nose. Wide open the depth of field is narrow, but with relatively static photos like that, the eyes should be sharp. What camera and settings did you use?

Eloniel said:

Actually I secretly hope the 15-35 MK2 will instead be a 16-35 f2.0 with internal zoom

Click to expand...

I wouldn't trade 15mm for f/2, how often are UWAs used fully open?
Yet, tastes are different. An RF 24-70 f/2: Anytime!

Bob Howland said:

Before I bought my R7, I seriously considered buying an OM-1 and a trinity of lenses. One compelling calculation was that the R7 and OM-1 have pixels of about the same size, about the same size as an 83MP FF sensor. The R7 has more pixels than the OM-1 because it has a larger sensor, but I don't know of any FF camera with 83MP.

Click to expand...

That's maybe true for now but we will get to 100 mp Full Frame sensors, so if you invest in Full Frame lens at some point you will be able to get it on FF.

While I agree that I'd prefer Canon's RF mount to be more open, I think that most of the decline in lens manufacturing is due to the general decline of the camera market

Del Paso said:

15-35 internal zoom? No priority in my opinion, the current one is excellent. If you think of the so-called dust issue, please read Roger Cicala's comments on what seems to be a non-issue, based on a multitude of disassemblies...
Fully agree on the other lenses, I miss them too.

Click to expand...

Actually I secretly hope the 15-35 MK2 will instead be a 16-35 f2.0 with internal zoom

phils.pix said:

Why not get a used EF 300 f/2.8 L Mk. II? You can get them between 2.800 - 3.500€. It's still quite ligthweight and compact and works great with the 1.4x and 2.0x Extenders, without sacrificing much image quality. It works stellar on the R Cameras.

Click to expand...

I don’t know if I’d consider it particularly light weight or compact. Sony’s weighs a full kg less. I’m sure Canon could make something similar if they wanted.

AlanF said:

What I was getting at as I explained in my earlier reply and emphasized by others that a 1.6x crop factor doesn't automatically give 1.6x resolution, but just a 1.6x change in field of view. The change in resolution depends on the relative pixel densities of the FF and APS-C sensors. There is a load of misinformation provided by manufacturers by deception and others from ignorance. For example, Olympus will tell you that their 400mm lens is equivalent to 800mm on a full frame. But that maybe true for a 20 Mpx FF sensor, but it's equivalent to only 540mm for a 45 Mpx FF.

Click to expand...

Before I bought my R7, I seriously considered buying an OM-1 and a trinity of lenses. One compelling calculation was that the R7 and OM-1 have pixels of about the same size, about the same size as an 8381MP FF sensor. The R7 has more pixels than the OM-1 because it has a larger sensor, but I don't know of any FF camera with 8381MP.

Eloniel said:

On the high end too.
Where are the equivalent to 50-150 f2.0 with internal zoom, a lighter 28-70 f2.0 with internal zoom or extend it to 24mm, a 15-35mm f2.8 with internal zoom, the 35mm f1.2, tilt shift lenses, etc... And I'm not even talking about telephotos lenses.

They have a least 10-15 lenses to release to have an offer that could satisfy most people. Hopefully some of these needed lenses will be announced in November.

Click to expand...

15-35 internal zoom? No priority in my opinion, the current one is excellent. If you think of the so-called dust issue, please read Roger Cicala's comments on what seems to be a non-issue, based on a multitude of disassemblies...
Fully agree on the other lenses, I miss them too.

Did I miss something about the shipping date of the Canon C50? I tought it would be mid November?
I was hoping sooner than later, but now I read December?

Kharan said:

And that's the real issue for me. There's nothing in RF mount like the TTArtisan 40mm f/2 I recently got. I tried the RF 50mm f/1.8 and I hated it, I think it's shamefully poor for a 2020's lens. The Chinese lens is smaller, made out of metal, has an aperture ring, and while its bokeh is worse, it delivers more even resolution across the field... and also happens to be my favorite focal length. Mind you, the Sony 40mm f/2.5 was never an option either, considering how damned expensive it is for how mediocre the results are ("pixie dust" is the bare minimum I expect for $550!) That Sony also make the most interesting standard zoom on the market right now is a bonus (the 20-70mm f/4).

And then, I wanted to have AF and some EXIF for my vast collection of vintage glass, which was what originally sold me on E-mount, and the Sony + adapter have delivered that in spades

Click to expand...

While I absolutely like my second non-L Rf lens, the one you hate. From f/2,8, it is tack sharp. Of course mechanically speaking, it is not up to L standard, but what can you expect for the Euro 170 I paid for it?
Light, inexpensive, sharp, nice bokeh (mostly), and AF!
To be honest, I bought it to give it a try because it was so cheap - and kept it!

Sylvester said:

While entirely correct, and something I have certainly done with my R5ii, the key difference that that using the R5/R5ii in 1.6 crop mode results in an image with far less pixels on the subject that using the same lenses with an APS-C body with around 30M MP. For smaller subjects in the frame the APS-C option either gives you either more detail or additional ability to crop without loosing too many pixels in the final image vs a FF in 1.6 crop mode.

Click to expand...

What I was getting at as I explained in my earlier reply and emphasized by others that a 1.6x crop factor doesn't automatically give 1.6x resolution, but just a 1.6x change in field of view. The change in resolution depends on the relative pixel densities of the FF and APS-C sensors. There is a load of misinformation provided by manufacturers by deception and others from ignorance. For example, Olympus will tell you that their 400mm lens is equivalent to 800mm on a full frame. But that maybe true for a 20 Mpx FF sensor, but it's equivalent to only 540mm for a 45 Mpx FF.

Bob Howland said:

At B&H, the R5-2 sells for $4100 or $430550 more than the R6-2 and R7 combined ($22202100 + $1450)

Click to expand...

For this generation, for R6-3 + R7-2 you will probably be at least the price of the R5-2 if not more. Not fair to compare old generation camera 2-bodies scenario with one of the new generation.

Also I guess it depends if your main work is wildlife (2 bodies scenario) or portrait/landscape/event/action and higher end single body scenario.