Latest activity

justaCanonuser · Saturday at 3:06 PM

AlanF said:
That's a general problem with YouTube, apart from its reliability. A few points are spread out and padded to make many minutes of entertainment that could be summed up in a couple of sentences or less.

The most useless and precious lifetime consuming youtube videos are those with guys sitting at their desks, presenting some cameras and/or lenses and talking blah blah (add n-times blah, n = 1, 2, 3, ....).

For birders, I can recommend the videos posted by Aussi photographer Duade Paton, because he goes out and presents the local wildlife, beautiful birds, and he talks only briefly about what you really need to know about a particular gear for wildlife photography. But this guy knows what he is doing, and he is the opposite of a know-it-all.

justaCanonuser · Saturday at 2:57 PM

AlanF said:
Maybe it is the combination of your EF 600mm with the R7 that is the problem. My wife was using the R7 with the RF 100-500mm last week and had no problems. Here are all of her shots. She is no expert BIF photgrapher - she just points in the right direction with settings programmed by me. There is one image by me from last summer - the Swallow in full flight, and they are very difficult to shoot. They are all very small crops, not reduced in size.

View attachment 229185

I like the swallow in particular, great shot, Alan. I know how hard it is to catch a swallow in flight. The other BiF images are more from the backside, so the AF already had a relatively long time to get the bird in focus. I personally prefer more images of birds approaching or passing exactly by, so the AF has not that much time to focus on. What definitely helps is switching off eye detection, maybe simply because the R7's processor has to process less data.

I am not sure whether my R7 in particular struggles with with the EF 600mm III, I had the same problems with my old EF 500mm f/4.5 - okay, that's a vintage lens - but also with my RF 200-800mm the R7 doesn't perform always well when I try to shoot against some skies. Interestingly, the Nikons of my wife display the same behavior in some special light conditions, we asked ourselves already if this could be caused by polarization effects (she is a physicist, too). I should start taking notes about these settings. But when I am shooting birds I don't want to distract myself. Well, when I want more reliability, I take my R5 II, like in the DSLR times, when I switched from my 7D's to my 5D3/4 to have a better AF performance.

AlanF · Saturday at 2:41 PM

So many insects to shoot. tipula Vernalis, ephemera Vulgata and tipula Lunata.

Del Paso · Saturday at 2:41 PM

DhlcadR6 said:
I still hope it's 1kUSD or slightly below

You just won the "Optimist of the Year" contest!

AlanF · Saturday at 2:30 PM

First Azure of the year.

dwkdnvr · Saturday at 1:54 PM

DhlcadR6 said:
I still hope it's 1kUSD or slightly below

I can't see this being less than the 14-35, particularly if the size suggests less reliance on software corrections.

I do hold out hope on the zoom action - the 'Ordinary Filmmaker' video certainly seemed to be saying that it wasn't just a rocker-in-the-shape-of-a-ring but was in fact a zoom ring with custom menu settings to control sensitivity etc.

If this is as large as the 24-105/4L then I'm probably less excited than I was originally, as that's a bit chunky to be an ideal walk around lens - I was hoping for something closer to the 14-35. Not too long to wait for confirmation, hopefully.

neuroanatomist · Saturday at 1:39 PM

DhlcadR6 said:
I still hope it's 1kUSD or slightly below

I hope to take pictures of unicorns and dragons with the lens.

DhlcadR6 · Saturday at 1:25 PM

I still hope it's 1kUSD or slightly below

Nemorino · Saturday at 12:20 PM

Laowa offers a 12-24mm shift zoom for APS-C cameras:

https://www.venuslens.net/product/laowa-12-24mm-f-5-6-zoom-shift-cf/

john1970 · Saturday at 12:04 PM

At first I had little interests in this lens, but the more I think about it it does make a nice all purpose lens covering 21, 28, 35 and 50 mm. Depending on its size I might trade in a couple of rarely used lenses towards this lens. It will depend on the weight a size of the lens.

Del Paso · Saturday at 11:44 AM

My hopes are, since the lens will belong to the "L" series, that the zoom-ring will mimic a mechanical one when zooming.
I am definitely highly interested in this zoom.

And if expensive means high IQ, I'm in!

P-visie · Saturday at 11:19 AM

Barn swallows (Hirundo rustica) collecting mud for their nest.

Taking off:

R5 Mk II + EF 600mm f4 II + 1.4 extender, cropped in post production.

P-visie · Saturday at 11:12 AM

Black-headed gull (Chroicocephalus ridibundus) jumps while taking a bath. As you can see, the English name is a misnomer since the colour of it's head is brown, not black

.

R5 Mk II + RF200-800mm

Bob Howland · Saturday at 11:04 AM

Is it actually an "L" lens? That says "expensive" to me.

gdanmitchell · Saturday at 10:57 AM

“We also have some zoom tilt-shift lens designs. I think this would be a great direction for Canon to go with their future RF tilt-shift lenses. I imagine having a zoom function in various situations on a tripod would be a welcomed feature.”

I don’t have to imagine this!

I’ve been putting a Pentax MF zoom lens on Mirex Tilt/Shift Adapter in my 5DsR. It works great — aside from the loss of any automation of focus or aperture.

spartan · Saturday at 8:31 AM

Hi dear,

I like it (f4) but accept F5.6 but no fressnel or DO.. I need best L optic with perfect bokeh.. Otherwise it is useless to have prime,

Del Paso · Saturday at 4:24 AM

Bob Howland said:
I have the 17, 24 Gen 2 and 45 and 90 gen 1. I bought the 24, 45 and 90 after 20 years of looking for an excuse to buy them. The 45 and 90 are extremely useful for tabletop product photography using tilt more than shift. The 24 has taken lots of waterfall photographs using shift more than tilt. I haven't used the 17 at all, mostly because I haven't done any photography of tall buildings on narrow, crowded streets. I'm kind of embarrassed that I bought it. I agree that autofocusing is not necessary for any of them.

I often found 24mm to be a bit too long for many cascades, cathedrals, even in some forests.
The 24mm TS is very much at ease in cities (not in New York), so the ideal would indeed be a TS zoom from 24 to 17 mm.
24 to 14mm could be optically far too challenging to design in high quality.

P-visie · Saturday at 2:25 AM

Noreaster said:
Super happy with the American Bittern. It is so hard to get close to these things.

Beautiful, I can imagine that you are super happy. You had good light to capture the bittern in it’s habitat.

saq · Friday at 6:08 PM

tattwah said:
Speaking about Ordinary Filmaker, unfortunately i cannnot bring myself to like that channel due to the constant clickbait title and putting his face front and center on all the thumbnails of his videos and aso making multiple videos on a single rumors.

Not hating about him as a person tho, just not a fan of his channel.

Bob Howland · Friday at 5:15 PM

Hector1970 said:
I love tilt shift lens. I’ve the Canon 17,24,50 and 90mm. I’ve not had much use for tilt. The miniature effect went out of fashion. It’s not graduated enough to finely control. I just use shift. I’d love a RF 15mm TS-E for skyscrapers. Autofocus not required. The 24mm TS-E II is still an excellent lens. 17mm is fine but not as good. At least nowadays I can put a filter behind it.

I have the 17, 24 Gen 2 and 45 and 90 gen 1. I bought the 24, 45 and 90 after 20 years of looking for an excuse to buy them. The 45 and 90 are extremely useful for tabletop product photography using tilt more than shift. The 24 has taken lots of waterfall photographs using shift more than tilt. I haven't used the 17 at all, mostly because I haven't done any photography of tall buildings on narrow, crowded streets. I'm kind of embarrassed that I bought it. I agree that autofocusing is not necessary for any of them.

Hector1970 · Friday at 4:30 PM

I love tilt shift lens. I’ve the Canon 17,24,50 and 90mm. I’ve not had much use for tilt. The miniature effect went out of fashion. It’s not graduated enough to finely control. I just use shift. I’d love a RF 15mm TS-E for skyscrapers. Autofocus not required. The 24mm TS-E II is still an excellent lens. 17mm is fine but not as good. At least nowadays I can put a filter behind it.

TinTin · Friday at 3:45 PM

Surely, an autofocus Tilt-Shift lens will get a "TS-RF" designation? The earlier lenses were "TS-E" (with no F) because they used manual focus.

mangobutter · Friday at 3:37 PM

It always bugged me that Canon (and other makes) have 100 variants of the 70-200, but no 70mm prime. would love an internally focusing compact 70mm f/2.8 prime.

Fuji offer a 50mm f/2 prime, which is very compact for what it is. very premium, internally focusing, beautiful and polished aesthetics -- all metal. I wish Canon made something like that.

would also be nice to see a macro lens with lights, such as the ef-s 35 2.8 which i've owned a while now. i adapt it to my Canons and Fujis with beautiful results. i'd like to see a bit of a longer one, maybe a 100 f/2.8 IS macro (non-L) to keep the costs down. wouldn't even mind a 100mm f/4 macro as i tend to stop down anyway.