Del Paso said:

Canon did implement it so well that I no longer care whether it is mechanical or motorised. And, as you wrote, if focal changes are done the same way, please Canon, accept my order!

Click to expand...

I guess there's a nuance there. Older USM lenses (EF except some of the last ones) had a manually-coupled focus ring that moved elements that could also be moved with the motor. RF lenses lack the mechanical coupling for focusing, turning the ring does nothing unless the lens is connected to the camera and the camera is powered on.

So I think there are three possibilities for the 20-50/4L PZ

1. Manually-coupled zoom ring where the zoom mechanism can also be driven by a motor (like old EF USM focus motors)
2. Zoom-by-wire with a freely-rotating zoom ring (like RF focus motors)
3. Zoom-by-wire with a ring-shaped rocker switch (like the current RF-S 14-30 PZ lens)

For me, option 1 is the preference, and option 3 is a non-starter. For option 2, I supposed I'd have to buy the lens and try it. As I mentioned previously (in one thread or another), my Vixia HF G60 camcorder has that option, and I'm not a fan – there's a noticeable lag between turning the ring and the zoom action. OTOH, it does open up some other possibilities. For example, on my PowerShot V1, the control ring around the lens can be set to 'step zoom', where turning the ring doesn't result in a continuous zoom (which is not an option at all, as far as I can tell) but rather sets the focal length (FF equivalent) incrementally to 16-20-24-28-35-50mm.

TSE zoom 17-24? Make it real, quick!
Too good to be true?
This would soon become my standard UWA. (No more need for an additional TS )

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

Cormorant

@Canonrumors: Is there a wrong image at the Canon TS-R 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L? It seams to be identical to the Canon TS-R 17-24mm f/4L drawing and general like a wilde angel lens.

Female Germain's Peacock-Pheasant seen while birding in Vietnam, March, 2026. It's not closely related to either pheasants or peafowl, but what else would you call it?

R5MkII RF200-800mm

neuroanatomist said:

That run is apparently continuing with the RF 20-50mm f/4L IS PZ. If the zoom ring is manual and motorized (like USM focus motors were for decades), then I'll quite likely order the 20-50/4L. However, if it's only zoom-by-wire then, to borrow your phrasing, IDGAF about it.

Click to expand...

Frankly, I first was skeptical about motorised focusing, till I bought my first lens with such a motorised system in manual focusing mode.
Canon did implement it so well that I no longer care whether it is mechanical or motorised. And, as you wrote, if focal changes are done the same way, please Canon, accept my order!

Very nice sequence. I really like the bird's pose in the last one.

Nicely done. I especially like the second one..

homebodyMacro2 said:

We've had quite a run of mostly wide/ultrawide stuff which I just dgaf about given I have the 24mm VCM and 50 f/1.2 L (and have no need for a 75-300 non-L).

Click to expand...

That run is apparently continuing with the RF 20-50mm f/4L IS PZ. If the zoom ring is manual and motorized (like USM focus motors were for decades), then I'll quite likely order the 20-50/4L. However, if it's only zoom-by-wire then, to borrow your phrasing, IDGAF about it.

"It's a pricepoint that both Nikon and Sony are playing in, while Canon has a big gap between $2500 and $10000. We think that unicorn lens that we've written about ad nauseam would fit in nicely"

I'm probably more in the camp of @neuroanatomist that the 300-600 f/5.6L unicorn aether lens is somewhat unlikely to be under $10k. If it is under $10k, that would be amazing.

In any case, I'm definitely selfish here, and perhaps a little impatient, but Canon really needs to get some supertelephoto entries in that middle zone (let's say $4-8k). The Nikon 400mm f/4.5, 600mm f/6.3, and 800mm f/6.3 lenses you mentioned in a recent article (https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-shows-off-rf-500mm-f5-6-l-is-in-latest-patent/) definitely piqued my impatience lol. IMO Canon needs multiple entries here.

We've had quite a run of mostly wide/ultrawide stuff which I just dgaf about given I have the 24mm VCM and 50 f/1.2 L (and have no need for a 75-300 non-L). The 85 VCM is the only one I've considered, though with the 50mm f/1.2 L I just don't have enough need for something fairly close by.

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.

Click to expand...

Seems like a solid use case for AI – generate a transcript then summarize that transcript, providing both to the user.

Simple sequence of an American Kestrel in hover mode.

Hare's lookin at ya!

David - Sydney said:

The A9iii had DR as its primary downside but it hasn't stopped sales of it.

Click to expand...

I do not see much evidence of it selling very well.
I know that it is popular with photojournalists, but DR is not so important for them.
I also see it at sporting events, but not nearly as much as the a1.

T&S in zooms is wild. The longer focal lengths are just there to cover the patent in case if someone becomes 'more innovative' than Canon. A T&S Marco zoom would be nice?

HMC11 said:

I watched a few of Ordinary Filmmaker's videos and get a strong feeling that most of them were just dressed up/recycled stuff from Canon Rumors (i.e. this site). There is no real new info, and it takes longer to watch the video than reading the succinct summaries here.

Click to expand...

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.

What would be a use case for a 200+ mm tilt shift?

just double charger for lp-e6 series batteries .

Note: I’ve been waiting for this since I bought my 5D Mark II in 2010. Thanks Canon

Canon also has a 135mm tilt shift.

Can't wait for new shift lenses in the 15-24mm range. I don't mind that their operation remains manual (and not motorised), but I think it is time for lighter modern designs for mirrorless.

Sony had already won this May fight!

We get „nothing“ from Canon… we have already the R6iii and C50! It’s best to have a R6V - BUT not necessary!? - I mean not yet right now… R7 II (and a R7V) would be more interesting in many ways!! For more user!


And the 100-400 should be really small for its f4.5? Like the 50-150 2.0? That’s nice!

I was looking for new tele and new wildlife crop camera… and we get a f4.0 video zoom with a video camera, where the most specs are already in two body’s!

Indeed. What if you clicked on a Sony video by accident ?
It would corrupt your YouTube feed for weeks !

oten68 said:

So this is exactly as the C50 with ibis? Im not seeing the difference except for ibis

Click to expand...

I think the R6 V is planned to be a good 2nd body to R6 cameras with similar user interface.
Another difference is "no handle" and "no XLR input"
Additional benefit: small, light for gimbal/drone use which might be a domain for hybrid shooters e.g. journalists.

If this one (R6 V) has S&F mode on steroids meaning recording frame rates from 1/10, 1/9, 1/8 fps to ~ 50 fps in single steps PLUS 360° angle for all fps it might be my choice but I think this is utopia!

Generally maybe a good triple choice of cameras:
→ R6 iii: Photo optimized hybrid with good video specs / PPPPPPVVV (P photo, V video)
→ R6 V: Video optimized hybrid, excellend for gimbal, drone (compact, IBIS) / PPPPVVVVV
→ C50: Video system with good 2nd body photo capabilities for well defined productions (tripod, XLR audio etc) / PPVVVVVVV