Upvote
0





I did notice the change but didn't know there is a change of the hardware...Your getting the R5ii and RF 200-800mm has definitely paid off as your recent shots have shown.
Yes, I have an HF G60. I bought it after the G70 launched, and picked the older version for the larger sensor. I suspect Canon stopped using that in the Vixia line because it was 'too close' to the XA professional cameras. To me, it seems like the G60 is most of an XA camcorder except the XLR handle. The other reason is that I was replacing a Vixia HF M41 for which I had the mini-hotshoe shotgun mic, and for some reason Canon dropped the mini-hotshoe from the G70 (even though all the G-series camcorders before had it).In defense of rocker zoom switches, among my excess of equipment, I own a Canon Vixia HFG60 camcorder. (I think Neuro owns one also.) The zoom is controlled by an onboard rocker switch that is extremely difficult to use well. That problem disappeared when I started using a Manfrotto LANC Controller with it's own superb rocker switch. The controller also has a dial which controls the speed of the zoom throughout the rocker switch's range. With that controller it is possible to have reliably controlled zooms from glacially slow to lightning fast.
The C50 and C80 have a LANC input. The R50 V has a 2.5mm jack but it's for the E3 remote trigger and I doubt it would work with a LANC controller.This raises a few questions. Do any MILC hybrid cameras have a LANC input? Does it seem likely that any will have one? Does anybody care whether they do or not?
If the R8ii sticks with the current form factor and hence a LP-E17 battery, I would struggle to see how they can implement IBIS. As it is, the R8 already has a relatively low CIPA rating of 150-220 (standard to power-saving modes using EVF). Adding IBIS would reduce that further, let alone having overheating occuring (much) earlier. These might make the camera potentially rather frustrating to use.It’s fair to say then that the R8II is likely to also share the same 32.5mp sensor with IBIS
It was a fraction of the price, so for kids and bird curious folk it was a palatable entry. Canon had long since clawed back the R&D costs and it didn't kill them to keep this one on tap as a gateway drug to more serious L products.There was still a cult of the EF 400 f/5.6 L when the EF 100-400 II came out. I suppose the built-in lens hood and kudos of owning a prime. made up for the 3.5m close focus, lack of IS and being less sharp even on Canon's own MTF charts.
But it took the version II to beat it, as I recall. And that came out years later, right? So for the era, it was top notch for amateurs.Even the EF 100-400 II was better than the prime. Sharper at 400mm and much more flexible. I owned both.
The Sigma L and E 500mm 5.6 lists for $4,400 CAD and is often on sale for $3,999 CAD. Canon would probably add a premium if the lens were an L, but if the lens is a silver ring like the 200-800 I think they could be very competitive.Honestly, if the 300-600 f/5.6 L is either never happening or $12,000 USD, I would be happy to have this lens instead. Does anyone have an expected price? I'd imagine at least $5-6k, but that's a lot more forgiving than $11k+
So true! Once I stopped being a grad student I first built out my zoom trinity, and then worked on my people prime trinity, and then some esoteric stuff; plus there's a few things I inherited. But even in the mid-range there's always something else to narrow in on a case. (I don't have a 35mm, but I want one...)It's a slippery slope. [...]

Thanks. I found a handy chart that further explains it. It’s going to take me some time and practice to get handy at this.The sunny 16 rule is that at iso 100 you need 1/100s at f/16. So, at f/11 you need 1/200s. f/8 1/400s etc etc to 1/3200s at f/2.8. (Not 1/6400s).
Thanks, Click!Great shots! Well done, danfaz.
The sunny 16 rule is that at iso 100 you need 1/100s at f/16. So, at f/11 you need 1/200s. f/8 1/400s etc etc to 1/3200s at f/2.8. (Not 1/6400s).I thought I understood the sunny 16 rule, but apparently not. My understanding is if the ISO is 100 then the shutter speed should be 1/100, not 1/6,400. I’m new to this, so I need more help understanding this.
May/June is based on the assumption that the DS126933 FCC filing refers to the R7 Mark II. It's safe to assume now that it does not. All the "leaks" (glorified rumors) from the past few months are crumbling in front of your eyes.I believe the R7ii is slated for late May/early June though I still feel a November release is more likely.


I´m struggling with that assumption. As posted in a different thread:It’s fair to say then that the R8II is likely to also share the same 32.5mp sensor with IBIS


OOOPS, I was mistaken...The 24-105/2.8L and newer 70-200/2.8L are Z lenses, not PZ lenses. AFAIK, there is only one Canon PZ lens to date (not counting the Cine Servo zoom lenses). The 'Z' lenses require the PZ-E2 accessory for motorized zoom, otherwise they are regular zoom lenses with a regular, mechanical zoom ring. As you might expect from the '2' there was a PZ-E1 that provided power zoom capability specifically for the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens.
Have a look at the only other PZ lens, the RF-S 14-30mm F4-6.3 IS STM PZ. PZ means the zoom motor is inside the lens, not in a separate accessory. The zoom ring has no manual function. Turning it one way or the other just activates the built-in zoom motor (in a force-sensitive way so the zoom can be driven at different speeds). Personally, I would not want a zoom lens with only a motorized zoom function for photography. YMMV.
View attachment 229041