Helmi2010 said:

Hello everyone

Over the last few years, I’ve mostly taken macro shots with an Olympus – it’s lighter to carry – but I still have lots of photos taken with a Canon on my hard drive.
A newly hatched Emperor dragonfly.

Best regards

Helmut

Anax imperator by Helmut Gloor, auf Flickr

Click to expand...

Excellent shot. Well done, Helmut.

Malm said:

Sorry, but that isn't a new lens! That is just a known lens with a different label!
I saw it first as a Pergear 14/2.8 lens, afterwards as 7Artisan 14/2.8 (with a different desgin of the lens barrel) and now as Brightin Star 14/2.8. The optical construction - 13 elemenst in 9 groups - and the special glass elements are always the same. I have the Pergear 14/2.8 and the 7Artisan 14/2.8 (for astro photography) and don't see any difference. The optical quality is good (low coma for astro!), but the vignette is a little bit high. There is a more in-depth review of the Pergear 14/2.8 by phillipreeve.
It would be interesting to understand the structure behind these 'different' brands! Is it just one company which is just moving the lenses around from A to B to C or what??

Click to expand...

Typical chinese, right!!!

This is a standard practice in the budget Chinese lens market. A core optical design originates from one or a small group of factories and design houses in China. Various marketing outfits and brands then slap their name on it. They adjust the barrel cosmetics, tweak the focus ring feel, or add minor changes such as aperture de-clicking. After that they push the product through their own sales channels.

Pergear released an early version around 2022-2023, followed by a Mark II. 7Artisans brought out their take later, near 2025, with different barrel styling but matching optics. Brightin Star, operating as Shenzhen Yinyao Technology, now sells it alongside other rebadges like Cheecar.

These companies position themselves as designers or assemblers with factory capabilities. Yet the identical MTF curves, element arrangements, and field performance across the lineup make it clear they share the same underlying product. It is not a single firm simply moving stock. Instead it forms a tight network of manufacturers and marketers that spreads distribution as wide as possible. The system holds costs down and reaches more customers. At the same time it muddies the water for buyers and weakens any real brand distinction. Quality control can differ from batch to batch. Overall it stays in line with the rest of the low-cost manual lens segment.

For Canon RF users chasing astro or landscape work these ultra-wides offer basic value at entry prices around $240. Edge-to-edge sharpness wide open will not rival premium optics, and vignetting remains noticeable. Stopped down they deliver acceptable results for the outlay. If existing copies already perform adequately, another version brings no meaningful optical gain, only fresh cosmetics and marketing.


Budget ultra-wides put accessibility first and perfection a distant second. The whole approach reflects how these Chinese operations routinely operate.

Those were the days – taking photos of flying dragonflies with the 70D and a macro lens. No subject recognition, no AI, just a relatively simple camera and, by today’s standards, a slow autofocus.

Aeshna cyanea by Helmut Gloor, auf Flickr

Almost like they listened to our comments a few days ago
I would have liked a 28-85/2 more but hey, this is great news anyway.

I'm not an expert but I got the feeling IS is more effective than IBIS and I loved the original idea of IBIS+IS working together and providing the best result. I know officially IBIS provides 6-7-whatever stops but I'm skeptical.

Well, anyway, just make it as light as possible while maintaining IQ on a level which makes sense to use it on a 45MP body.

For second lens I don't want the 50-150/2, rather something more lightweight, like 105-135/2 or 120-150/2 with some macro capabilities. I don't need overlapping lenses, I don't even mind some gap.

Screw the 24-70. RF Tilt shift please. Please please.

Click said:

Beautiful series, shire guy.

Click to expand...

Thank you Click

dcm said:

In general, shutter speed is your first choice to prevent blur, both for the camera and the subject. IBIS can help with camera motion, particularly when you cannot use a faster shutter speed. It also helps us older photographers with hands that aren't as steady as they used to be.

Forum member @drmikeinpdx has some experience in the boudoir realm. He may be able to offer some recommendations here. Check out his prior forum posts and work at https://www.beyondboudoirphoto.com/.

Depending on your situation, you may find a single 50mm lens somewhat limiting. I've taken portraits in a variety of situations for family and organizations that I'm involved with. I started with an FD 35-105 back in my film days, then transitioned to the EF 24-105 f/4 L before moving to the faster EF/RF lenses. Depending on the location, lighting, and background/bokeh I want to achieve, I use a fast 85, 135, 24-70, or 70-200 these days - shorter lenses indoors, longer lenses outdoors. I never had the need for a fast 50 in my shooting - I almost always had enough room to step back and use the 85. It really depends on the perspective you are trying to achieve.

My portraiture has improved more through technique and practice than specific lenses. I shot both handheld and with a tripod. I often use a remote shutter release with the tripod so the subject looks at me. I found that it can give a more natural expression than looking at the camera.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the input
The 50 mmF1.2L isnt going to be the only lens, but im thinking that getting a good lens that you use 80% of the time. Then of cource some other options on the side. Maybe the 35mm F1.8 IS and 85mm F2 IS. Most portraitshoots will be inside my appartment, with a room or a part of my livingroom with a backdrop and studioflash. The boudoir in a bedroom with size 3 meters x 4 meters, so im thinking 35 or 50 would work best there. Good low light performance and sharpness would be beneficial.

The R6Ii is the more balanced combination with the RF 50mm F1.2L USM and has IBIS.

The RF 45mm 1.2 STM would be my choice for the light and smaller R8. Or the RF 28-70mm 2.8 IS STM

Hello everyone

Over the last few years, I’ve mostly taken macro shots with an Olympus – it’s lighter to carry – but I still have lots of photos taken with a Canon on my hard drive.
A newly hatched Emperor dragonfly.

Best regards

Helmut

Anax imperator by Helmut Gloor, auf Flickr

Very nice photos!

Canon should update the old FD 50-300 f/4.5 L. Add a wider aperture, fancy new lens elements, some autofocus. Make it the price of a kidney on the black market… lol. I’d be interested though.

Marbled White butterfly. (RF 200-800 + R5ii).

Maximilian said:

A really, really tiny Mononychus punctumalbum, just 4 mm.
In German "Schwertlilienrüssler". I couln't find an English name.

View attachment 230190

Click to expand...

Iris weevil

Noreaster said:

Silvio O. Conte NWR--Peanut Dam Road

Click to expand...

Thanks! Thats only one state away!

People, don't invest in China, thanks.

ctk said:

If $100 more for a lens makes it too expensive I doubt those folks are buying the $x,xxx camera bodies to mount it to. They could also keep the price the same and just make a better new version.

Click to expand...

You would be surprised how many people are buying the R100 because the R50 is too expensive for them.

Beautiful! I especially like the second one. Well done, Alan.

A couple of shots from today using the 2xTC on the RF 100-500mm and R5ii at 1000mm f/14. A Corn Bunting, that was hiding at the top of a tree in strong winds that for a couple of shots parted the leaves so I could see it, and a Grey Wagtail on lotus leaves. The good thing for me this time of year with this combo is I can use the RF 100-500mm for shots of dragonflies, and put the TC on both for that and distant small birds. For comparison, which is of interest to @Maximilian as he is testing his lenses, there are shots of a Grey Wagtail in the distance (18m) at 500mm and 1000mm from today with the third being from the 200-800mm a week ago, a little closer.

scyrene said:

I can go from 16mm to 1600mm, what do I win?

Click to expand...

My deepest respect and a one year subscription to MAGA Daily News.

scyrene said:

I can go from 16mm to 1600mm, what do I win?

Click to expand...

Well, until Neuro posted, you would have won bragging rights!

Dragon said:

No argument re the best being a good image to start with. I find with Topaz that I have to experiment with the different modes and the slider level to get the best result with the least artifacts. Note that they do update the models almost weekly (so you do need a wideband connection to keep up) and some of the models are getting pretty good. AI will (almost by definition) add detail (i.e. artifacts) that were not in the original image exactly as presented. That is also the virtual case when a human eye looks at a noisy picture and interpolates a better result. For most work, I think the AI programs will be able to produce much improved images from noisy originals that meet the test of a critical eye, but they are clearly going to be a challenge for legal images in court cases (where exacting detail is critical). I also dislike the subscription model, but It seems that all software is eventually going to go that way. Kind of like phone companies charging a flat fee every month instead of billing by the call. They want to know what their revenue is going to be. The model I really dislike is the one where the processing (and backup) is in the "cloud". Topaz at least gives you the choice of not processing in the cloud (i.e. on their computers). Apple and Microsoft are really bad about that.

Click to expand...

My experience is that if the soft image does not have much detail, then the AI models do a reasonable and sometimes excellent job improving acutance. But if there is blurred detail, they hallucinate to deconvolute that detail.