Latest activity

neuroanatomist · Mar 12, 2026

DocInfoSci said:
Apparently they cost less, too, given the price of a 24mm EF prime and a 24mm VCM prime:

EF 24mm f/1.4 II USM at BH Photo - $1,549
RF 24mm f/1.4 VCM - $1,649

The EF 24/1.4 II launched at $1700 in 2008. The RF 24 launched at $1500, before the tariff increases.

DocInfoSci · Mar 12, 2026

erader said:
VCM lenses are very good for photographers unless you want faster, heavier, more expensive lenses?

I'd go for mechanically linked focus with full time manual override and an external distance / depth of field gauge. Everything else can remain the same that would be compatible with those requirements.

Larger optics on the exit would also be nice. If you take the 24mm f/1.4 ii USM lens and compare it to, say, the EF 24-70 f/4 IS USM lens you'll notice something interesting at 24mm for each when digital corrections are applied: more scene is displayed in the final TIFF or JPEG with the prime than with the zoom. The pixel dimensions are the same, but more scene is presented. If you turn off corrections the scene is the same. The correction for zoom requires some crop, apparently, to gets things right — but the prime, with its huge exit optics, gets by with less adjustment. I suspect that for the VCMs either Canon has oversized the intake glass or made the real mm count a tag shorter (23 vs 24, 13 vs 14) to compensate for the small exit glass or there truly is less scene captured with the VCM for the stated length and with a lack of good comparisons no one is the wiser — and hey, "good enough" is "good enough."

Now I'm not saying people shouldn't buy the VCM lenses — I think they're a great idea and serve multiple audiences at once. I have no doubt that a collection of VCMs will make someone smile for years to come.

But mechanically linked focus (no power required) and external aids (no need to chimp in the EVF or back screen) with big exit optics covering the sensor are worth something. Apparently they cost less, too, given the price of a 24mm EF prime and a 24mm VCM prime:

EF 24mm f/1.4 II USM at BH Photo - $1,549 regular price

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/590449-USA/Canon_2750B002_EF_24mm_f_1_4L_II.html

RF 24mm f/1.4 VCM - $1,649 regular price

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1859145-REG/canon_6907c002_rf_24mm_f_1_4_l.html

So I don't think it's in the realm of crazy for Canon to do the best of both for many people at a reasonable price. Canon's made "big glass and fast" for years before RF with world winning results.

Not that I think Canon is under any pressure to do so at this time. The EF lens stock for the most recent generation of quality EF glass remains large, as is the installed base. Canon has the luxury at this time of pushing as hard in innovation as they can on the RF mount without insulting too many people in this regard, and later they can bring forward some classic elements or let a third party do so. Right now solutions like VCM make good sense, with small optics and digital corrections achieving size and weight reductions; as do sports lenses that can auto-AF track with superman like ability — even if at the cost of no-mechanical linking, power-on-only, etc.

erader · Mar 12, 2026

Malm said:
And when will Canon start again to make proper lenses for photographers?
To be honest; I'm sick of these hyped VCM lenses for videographers - so called 'creators'. All I need are just excellent optical lenses without much 'digital correction' and also without this strict size and weight limits as for VCM lenses.
Canon already has an extended line of these light and good video lenses, so what about the very good lenses for photographers?

VCM lenses are very good for photographers unless you want faster, heavier, more expensive lenses?

josephandrews222 · Mar 12, 2026

Canon Rumors said:
Last week I asked the Facebook world what their favorite Canon EF mount lenses were, including third-party manufacturers. I like doing this sort of thing to learn what shooters outside of my own personal bubble loved to shoot with and in a lot of cases, they still use these great EF lenses to this day. […]

See full article...

From the piece:

"The EF-S 10-22 was my first wide-angle lens for my EOS 40D. It blew me away by how wide the world could be, and the combination of the 40D and 10-22 really moved me forward as a photographer. “The Gear Doesn’t Matter” sometimes does. It doesn’t matter what gear it is, but if it’s the right combination at the right time, it sticks with you."

Starting with the M2, I can say the same thing about the EF-M 11-22mm lens...so much so that oft-times when traveling, I have the M6MkII + EF-M 11-22mm combination packed away in a just-fits-right bag connected via belt...with full-frame gear in a backpack or around my neck.

So the 11-22 lens is my "it sticks with you" lens.

Canis Lupus · Mar 12, 2026

Get the photo - video switch on the right side, not the wrong, as on R5ii

Click · Mar 12, 2026

Lovely series, Alan. I especially like the first and last picture.

AlanF · Mar 12, 2026

Female and male Siskin, Female and male Chaffinch. (R5ii + RF 200-800mm).

Salamander · Mar 12, 2026

I shot and downloaded a video some time ago using an R6ii with the 24-105 f4-7.1 lenses. Some of it was at 105mm, but not all of it. Is there a way in software to identify the focal length of a specific video frame?

Steve_FR · Mar 12, 2026

Malm said:
And when will Canon start again to make proper lenses for photographers?
To be honest; I'm sick of these hyped VCM lenses for videographers - so called 'creators'. All I need are just excellent optical lenses without much 'digital correction' and also without this strict size and weight limits as for VCM lenses.
Canon already has an extended line of these light and good video lenses, so what about the very good lenses for photographers?

There’s way more to the VCM lenses than obnoxious creators. Having a set of similar size/weight lenses benefits gimbal balancing, as well as weight and size restricted travel. I’m honestly sick of hearing people complan about the 35mm f/1.4 vcm. Different strokes for different folks. I love the lens. It optically outperforms the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4 II in every possible way except “digital correction” - so does it really matter? You get less weight, less fringing, better contrast, better resolution, better autofocus, and it’s a few bucks cheaper.

The VCM autofocus is dead silent, if you shoot in quiet venues this matters a lot. It’s also the best autofocus of any lens I’ve ever used. Less weight and size - fantastic. Any birders here who have spent a 10 hour day slugging around the Sigma 150-600 or similar huge lenses will agree less weight is a good thing. I’d disagree that this lens is “only for creators”. I’d love to of course see Canon make more lenses - but I’m pretty damn happy with the ones they have been making. The 35mm f/1.4 vcm has never let me down for stills photography, ever.

DhlcadR6 · Mar 12, 2026

2 years ago I was complaining the lack of L primes.... Now there's more than I need&afford.....

Tbh it will be interesting to use a 18mm fast prime, I think I will like it more than 14mm as I found 14mm too wide for my use.

DocInfoSci · Mar 12, 2026

chrysoberyl said:
'Move a few steps back for 18mm?' Markedly ineffective when photographing the Milky Way Core.

Haha — I was just thinking that this morning in the shower.

Building on what you said...

While acknowledging that lenses can be used in many ways, let's look at this from the concept of matched perspective:

Let's say I have a 45mm or 50mm lens equivalent and I find my friend standing.

First, I decide to plant my tripod, mount my camera, and then take a 2/3rds body photo that nicely captures my friend, with a very minimal hint of where they are or what they are up to. I then swap my 50mm for a 100mm and, without moving the tripod, take a tight shot of their face: great eyes, nice hair, good looking person all-around. I then, again without moving my tripod, place my 24mm lens and take another photo — now we see they're at a park with trees and path. I repeat with my 20mm to emphasize the context a little more. I've now told a small story about my friend. Interestingly, because I didn't move at all, my lenses simply served to crop the scene to focus on one aspect or the other; the relative position of everything remains the same as they come into the picture. If I digitally crop my 20mm to be like the 24, or the 24 to be like the 50 then the placement of trees relative to the person and any other object remains generally the same but the amount of scene included does change. My perspective never changed from where my tripod was planted relative to the person — I simply showed more less of the world relative to that person.

Second, I instead decide to zoom with my feet and whether the 24mm or 50mm or 100mm I frame my friend to fill the sensor approximately the same: how the person looked and how objects around them appeared in relative position would change significantly. Trees would seem very close or very far away, as an example, regardless of how I might digitally crop the photos later.

So for people who shoot with primes the options matter if they are attempting to tell a story with the same perspective but different amounts of the world included in the scene. And approximately doubling the mm's from one prime to the next allows for meaningful jumps in scene crop factor to allow for different meaningful reflections on the subject without distorting the scene or subject from one photo to the next.

The Milky Way is a great extreme example because no matter where you walk to on your chosen continent your relative position to the galactic core is effectively the same: choose a 14mm, 20mm, 24mm, 35mm, etc. and you can digitally crop from wider to longer and achieve the same relative content with less scene.

You can reproduce this example with a zoom, such as 16-35 or 24-105: plant a tripod, choose a subject, take photos at different lengths, and then crop the widest to match something tighter and observe that the relative position of objects in the scene does not change.

chrysoberyl · Mar 12, 2026

Zadak said:
Why have 18mm when you have 20mm?

Why have 28mm when you have 24mm?

Like these are so close to eachother, just crop in a 24mm shot to be 28mm?

Move a few steps back for 18mm?

What is the use-case other than pure video and a slight difference in what they produce?

'Move a few steps back for 18mm?' Markedly ineffective when photographing the Milky Way Core.

neuroanatomist · Mar 12, 2026

Richard CR said:
to be fair Canon could create a bar of and call it a camera, and it would be in the top 10 on amazon.

That doesn't really sound fair. They've certainly had some sales flops in the past. The original EOS M was one in the US market, which I didn't mind because I got one at the fire sale price. The R100 is not a flop, despite your personal loathing of that model. Should it have a touch screen? Arguably, yes. Would that have pushed the cost up to the point where it would impact the popularity? Arguably, that's a factor in why it doesn't have one.

Richard CR said:
The R100 doesn't sell that well anywhere else - and it's one of those - it should. The lowest priced DSLR's always sold well in multiple regions, including Japan, not so much these days with the R50 carrying the load.

The R100 doesn't sell that well anywhere else? The Americas are 22% of the market (much of that is the US) and the R100 sells well in the US. Europe is 21% of the global market, and the R100 seems to sell very well there.

I'd say being the best-selling Canon MILC in France and the UK and the second-best in Germany, and being in the top 5 overall MILC sales in all three of those European markets means it's selling very, very well. You're correct that the R100 doesn't sell well in Japan, but that's only 7% of the global MILC market.

mimbu · Mar 12, 2026

Malm said:
And when will Canon start again to make proper lenses for photographers?
To be honest; I'm sick of these hyped VCM lenses for videographers - so called 'creators'. All I need are just excellent optical lenses without much 'digital correction' and also without this strict size and weight limits as for VCM lenses.
Canon already has an extended line of these light and good video lenses, so what about the very good lenses for photographers?

You might be happier on Z mount. Nikon is still very firmly in the photography world when it comes to lens design. More so than any other mount.

EricN · Mar 12, 2026

Canon Rumors said:
One must respect something to be respectful.

Considering it's only 356 grams and can be bought for less than $500, it's quite good for a child's first camera or an "I'm in a dangerous place where it could easily be stolen."

neuroanatomist · Mar 12, 2026

Malm said:
If you mean the wide selection of different lenses as in the 'EF-era' I agree. But I strongly disagree with any narrowing of the discussion to video OR photography. What we have is a video AND photography! What I see is that new lenses are a little bit heavy-sided for video at the moment.

I agree that the market is both. What makes you say the lenses are more video-sided recently?

The VCM prime lenses seem to fit squarely in the hybrid camp. There are also the two Z f/2.8 zooms that Canon classifies as 'hybrid' (those do not have VCM-driven AF). The voice coil motor is fast, quiet and able to move a heavier focusing group than a nano USM (neither are as powerful as ring USM, which is one reason many recent lenses have two separate focusing groups with dedicated motors, two nano USM, two VCM or one of each). The need for digital correction is a mirrorless lens 'feature', not unique to video.

I don't shoot video with my ILCs, personally I see a lot that I like for stills with the VCM primes and Z zooms.

Distinctly Average · Mar 12, 2026

Steve Balcombe said:
I agree - and another tip is to shoot the males in the autumn, as they are completely docile.

View attachment 228337

A fine shot sir. Great details.

Distinctly Average · Mar 12, 2026

You can justify it because you deserve it Steve.

Seriously though, it (the Laowa Probe) also a challenge of a lens. The length makes keeping the end steady hard. I’ve not had enough sessions with it yet to say whether it is good for me or not.

Malm · Mar 12, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
Should Canon also eliminate the video features from their cameras? The market reality is that ‘content creation’ is the fastest-growing segment.

Sounds like what you want are EF lenses. They remain widely available.

If you mean the wide selection of different lenses as in the 'EF-era' I agree. But I strongly disagree with any narrowing of the discussion to video OR photography. What we have is a video AND photography! What I see is that new lenses are a little bit heavy-sided for video at the moment.

Concerning the lens market: Canon knows that much better than us. I can only speak for myself.

Steve Balcombe · Mar 12, 2026

Distinctly Average said:
People get quite nervous around hornets too but they are another species here that I find are approachable if you take care and heed their warnings.

I agree - and another tip is to shoot the males in the autumn, as they are completely docile.

Hornet Vespa crabro m (Shapwick Heath) (focus stack) (tighter crop).jpg

Steve Balcombe · Mar 12, 2026

Distinctly Average said:
Interesting thought. With the EF-S 60 I often use BBF to get rough focus the the good old rocking to nail the critical spot. The MP-E is as you say a bit of a different case. Magnification does come with experience but still challenging to get a good composition. When I get it right the results can be superb. But success rate is certainly lower than the 60.

I always found the MP-E difficult to use, so when I was having a clear out a while ago it went to MPB.

Distinctly Average said:
I’ve recently added the Laowa probe lens to my kit. I’ve only shot amphibians with it so far but looking forward to using it on butterflies and dragons later this year.

Yeah, that's a lens I've had a hankering for, but it's not pocket money price and I haven't managed to 'justify' the outlay so far.

fox40phil · Mar 12, 2026

I m hugly dissapointed that Canon hasn't shown or realeased any new lens or even the R7II on this fair!

there is still a huge amount of non existing RF lenses from the EF system!!

What I wished they would even show or announced on CP+:

new long tele lens (like the "cheap" Nikon primes!!)
300-600
RF TS-E
new macro with TC compatibility!
new 28-70 2.0
50-150 2.0

I hardly thinking about to get a Sony or Nikon to adapt my EF lenses...and have the option for their nice lens choices!

fox40phil · Mar 12, 2026

You forgott the 300mm 2.8 L (II) from the "survey"

!

I love the 135 2.0 - but its very slow.
I also love my 300 2.8 L II - I still wish there would be a lightweight RF one... damn.

Most of my lenses (13-14) are still EF...

m4ndr4ke · Mar 12, 2026

Canon Rumors said:
I think it's a typo, it must be 28 F1.4

Is definitely is.

It must be.

I think it is.

I hope it is.

I wish it was.

fudge, no it's not.

Zadak said:
Why have 28mm when you have 24mm?

Like these are so close to eachother, just crop in a 24mm shot to be 28mm?

Why make 35 at all? Like 28 and 35 are so close to each other, why not just crop in a 28mm shot to match 35mm?

See what I did there?

And before you say 28 and 35 are completely different, these are the fields of view for 24, 28, 35 and 50mm: