Zahnete said:

My solution to this problem was to switch to the Sony A1 II.

Click to expand...

7 posts in 2 years, each one complaining about Canon and your switching to Sony. Why do you bother to read a forum like this?

dwkdnvr said:

An L with PZ? I’d call that a bit unexpected (the L part, that is)

Click to expand...

Will that “L” mean a $1200+ price tag? I assume the “R6” moniker will come with a premium as well; I was hoping for a more S9/R8 class body price, hopefully it’s not much more than the ZR at least.

Might also work on the R5ii
Could assist with avoiding underwater particulate or scratches on dome etc

Canon Rumors said:

Small update. RF 20-50mm F4 L IS PZ

Click to expand...

An L with PZ? I’d call that a bit unexpected (the L part, that is)

A R6V is WAY more exciting than an R8V.

I would assume you'll lose the top handle/XLRs, timecode port (which would be a mistake), and some active cooling... But HOPEFULLY it has IBIS. I use my R6 III for video more than my C50 strictly because I like to handhold or SAKK hold my non-IS lenses (Zeiss Otus). But I don't love the R6 III for video because of the crappy button layout.

If this camera doesn't have IBIS, I don't really understand the point of its existence...

Maximilian said:

Same thought here!
The RP->R8 line is a great FF entry line from Canon.
I would call it hijack, if Canon would turn this line into a retro line.
Make an R8 Mk II as a real successor of the R8, use the guts of it as the internals for a retro RE-1.
And everybody could chose and everybody would be fine!

Click to expand...

Previous post suggested it would come in two versions, retro being optional.
I think that would make sense, let's hope it will be the case.

I was absolutely excited about the R8 V, now I'm even more excited!
Crying so much for a ff compact, I need to buy one even just for not being a pssy. I really hope the price will be good.

Now I want 28/1.8 or 28/2 non-L, good performing lens to couple with the R6 V. Yes, I know , there's the 28/2.8 pancake is great, I have it, but it's just not enough. I want at least f/2 and a bit better AF.
Then I need something like Sony's 50-150/2 or I could even do with 50-100/2 on R5m2. This 2cam setup would cover event, weddings, street, travel. Optionally I would also take the 100-500 or the coming 300-600.
If there was also a 150/2 macro....
All my dreams in a nutshell.

Although not for myself but I'm also excited about the R8m2. I'm happy for the R8 line in general, I find it important to have a really affordable ff option.
Many ppl are coming for advice, some new into photography, some are trying to upgrade from all kinds of cameras, even 40D.
I don't like to recommend aps-c stuff but the R6 is still pretty expensive and unnecessary for most.

ISv said:

My "explanations" are nothing more than suggestions: "explaining" birds by human behavior... I don't really know how to call it.

Click to expand...

No matter what you call it, you're really appreciated. Thank you, ISv.

SnowMiku said:

Aside from the retro look R8 II, what realistic upgrades would it have over the original without being too close to the R6 III? The R6 III sensor, maybe IBIS, higher res LCD and EVF, updated AF algorithm, a joystick would be nice since the R10 has one and I don't think that's asking too much. It would also be nice if the 4 way buttons at the back would have a shortcut to AF, Drive, WB, Metering like the entry level DSLRs.

Click to expand...

Some things the R6 will always have extra over the R8 that in my opinion is enough to separate the two:

- bigger body with different ergonomics.
- 2 card slots
- big wheel on the back
- bigger battery
- better heat management, longer recording times
- weather sealing (i hope the R8 will get it too one day)

Who needs R7ii when we have R100...

LCDVS00 said:

R6V means it will have IBIS？

Click to expand...

I'm not a video expert but IBIS in a video camera can make the video bounce around, even if it's not enabled. The preferred method is to use a gimbal or tripod. I prefer a tripod.

Canon Rumors said:

We’re Getting an EOS R6 V, not an EOS R8 V​

See full article...

Click to expand...

It feels like someone is yanking your chain. An R6 V makes even less sense than and R8 V.

Typical Canon Move hm?! We have a C50 and a R6III… there are some thinks Canon has not implemented now, which other have! Shutter Angle, tilting and flipping screen like Sony and Nikon… damn Canon! I Hope the R7II finally has it!

Not understandable move for me…

A real small full frame cinematic camera would be awesome! With a R3 sensor! (Smaller then the C50, more like a 50V)

Aside from the retro look R8 II, what realistic upgrades would it have over the original without being too close to the R6 III? The R6 III sensor, maybe IBIS, higher res LCD and EVF, updated AF algorithm, a joystick would be nice since the R10 has one and I don't think that's asking too much. It would also be nice if the 4 way buttons at the back would have a shortcut to AF, Drive, WB, Metering like the entry level DSLRs.

R6V means it will have IBIS？

dwkdnvr said:

Well, to be a bit fair to the reviewers the 18-40 wasn't available for the initial release and reviews, and if the only small lens

Click to expand...

It was not just a small lens.
It was a fixed aperture f/8 manual focus lens.
Plus, it overheated like crazy before firmware updates.
It is like Panasonic saw how well the R5 sold and thought that was the reason.

Click said:

It's like MMA. I really like your photos and explanations.

Click to expand...

My "explanations" are nothing more than suggestions: "explaining" birds by human behavior... I don't really know how to call it.

Cariboucoach said:

A quick shot in Biscayne National Park in Florida. I went with only a 24-70mm on my trip, not wanting to fly with multiple lenses. I may look into getting the 24-240mm for my next trip to Ireland so I won't have to crop as much.View attachment 228982View attachment 228983.

Click to expand...

Nice. I have found the 24-240 to be a very decent lens. It has quite a bit of CA in the periphery at 24 and 240, but very clean from around 35 to 200 and it has good detail over the whole range.

It's like MMA. I really like your photos and explanations.

Celts88 said:

The photo may give the impression they're on the sand but they were actually off the ground and going at it for nearly 1 minute.

Click to expand...

I saw that. The Gulls are feeding their young by regurgitating. And it's not always without some temper.
Never mind, what I was trying to say is that there is no fight on that beach: it's not like this topic in CR ! Ironically today I succeeded to take some photos of the Common Mynas fights - posted already in the "Birds portraits" - similarities are not intentional !

And #2: "Mynas wars" as it's called here on Hawaii. I missed the moment when more birds where engaged. Here are only 3 (plus a referee ). These fights are always spontaneous and finish as fast as they started. It appears they have some rules: no pocking in the eyes (feathers are fare game)!!! Moments later (when the bad mood/ego is over ) they use to feeds in close proximate without problems!

One bird overestimated it's capabilities and attacked...



That didn't went good but it still tried to fight...



I believe the bird on the left is the "referee" and in the last two shots it's saying "stop it, stop it it's over" !

I have to separate my photos from today in two posts. They are aimed at very different things...
#1: Blue-billed White-tern (Gygis candida) and Common Wax-bill.

eosuser1234 said:

I own the RF 28-70 F2L, EF 24-70 F4L, and RF 24-50mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM. Three different lenses, and 3 very different price points. One is certainly a entry level kit lens, one was a semi pro kit lens, and one is a muscle building beast that I think is best in class among all brands. They all have their use and place. Lets be honest, no one makes a good compact entry level kit zoom for full frame. Step up, or just accept it for what it is.

Click to expand...

That’s absolutely untrue. Both the Nikon Z 24-50mm and Sony FE 28-60mm are better than the Canon RF 24-50mm, and both are quite good. I have owned and used all three enough to form a grounded opinion on them. Canon’s RF 15-30mm is also compact and inexpensive, but it’s a very nice lens, unlike its standard sibling, and their RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 is the smallest and lightest lens of its class, while being pretty decent optically (and I so wish that Canon had kept it as the kit lens for the R8).

A quick shot in Biscayne National Park in Florida. I went with only a 24-70mm on my trip, not wanting to fly with multiple lenses. I may look into getting the 24-240mm for my next trip to Ireland so I won't have to crop as much..

Exploreshootshare said:

Uhhhhh, a TS lens for waterfall pics would be an absolute dream! But if I go down that road...I'll end up with 20 more (niche) lenses. Could've used a TS lens at the sveribach falls in the Black Forest.

Click to expand...

Go for it. There are worse things than having four TS-E lenses for photography that you don't do much any more.