Latest activity

roby17269 · Nov 5, 2025

Numbering aside, I'd still argue that the R6 (I/II/III) is not the spiritual successor of the 6D (I/II).
The RP and then the R8 fit the bill more, IMHO

blackcoffee17 · Nov 5, 2025

scyrene said:
Technical improvements include: autofocus down to f/22, freedom to design smaller/lighter lenses at certain focal lengths, faster lens-body communication allowing for snappier autofocus(?). But they could of course have kept EF, and being able to shut out third parties probably influenced the decision to make a new mount.

They could have not kept EF, because of different flange distance. Otherwise the mirrorless cameras would be quite bulky and ugly.

Toni · Nov 5, 2025

P-visie said:
You assumed that third party FF AF lenses would be available for the RF mount. You made a wrong assumption and you did not evaluate alternatives should your assumption be wrong.
So who is to blame for that? (Hint: it’s not Canon).

You're right. I should never have stayed with Canon.

Chig · Nov 5, 2025

Toni said:
I thought R mount was a technical move because that's what Canon touted when they released the R mount.

Canon's EF mount was open. Why does the RF mount have to be closed? It makes no sense.

Who says the EF mount was ever open?

P-visie · Nov 5, 2025

Toni said:
I switched from a Canon APS-C DSLR to a Canon full-frame mirrorless camera. If I had known that today the RF full-frame mount would still be blocked for other manufacturers, I would have switched to another brand. It's that simple.

You assumed that third party FF AF lenses would be available for the RF mount. You made a wrong assumption and you did not evaluate alternatives should your assumption be wrong.
So who is to blame for that? (Hint: it’s not Canon).

scyrene · Nov 5, 2025

Toni said:
Years ago, I thinked that R mount was a technical move; now I think it was only a piece of marketing.
Canon R mount is still closed, so best move is buy a Sony camera (or other brand) and enjoy lenses from others manufacturers.
In 2025 there is no way in a thing SO CLOSED as R mount.

Technical improvements include: autofocus down to f/22, freedom to design smaller/lighter lenses at certain focal lengths, faster lens-body communication allowing for snappier autofocus(?). But they could of course have kept EF, and being able to shut out third parties probably influenced the decision to make a new mount.

candyman · Nov 5, 2025

Toni said:
Because locking the R mount seems like a rip-off to me.

Maybe a rip-off to you but a Canon business strategy. One can only guess why this strategy was chosen, but in a shrinking market, Canon would still want to maximize profits. They do this by making money from both cameras AND lenses, thus leaving a limited lens market share to others.

scyrene · Nov 5, 2025

Dirt McGirt said:
There are two things I am excited about: low light capability and the bump in auto focus. I'm strictly a hobbyist and I'm currently shooting a 6Dm2. Perhaps the r6m2 would be a big enough jump in both of those areas. Particularly the low light.

Image level raw low light capability hasn't changed much in a while.

Toni · Nov 5, 2025

Tom R5R7 said:
It was true initially - that third party makers brought generally cheap, low-quality lenses to the EF mount. But Sigma brought some really nice lenses to the party a little later on, with the ART series. And their 150-600 lens was really never met head-on by Canon. Nikon has/had something of that range and price, but Canon didn't counter it, basically ceding the lower-cost birding market to Sigma (and Tamron). Now, we DO have reasonably-priced super-telephoto zooms like the 200-800 (which I have sitting about 20 feet from me, having just bought one).

I think Canon actually invited Sigma and others to play with at least the APS-C lenses, which is maybe why Canon has not really brought out much in that format other than very cheap, light "kit" type lenses. Although the 18-150 is pretty good optically, for such a wide-ranging zoom, they have no f/2.8 glass and no 15 or 16-xx lenses that would mimic the full frame 24-xx "normal" lenses.

Canon has left the APS-C RF market to other manufacturers because it's clearly not in their interest.
But that makes it clear that if those other manufacturers aren't releasing full-frame RF lenses, it's because Canon is blocking them.

I switched from a Canon APS-C DSLR to a Canon full-frame mirrorless camera. If I had known that today the RF full-frame mount would still be blocked for other manufacturers, I would have switched to another brand. It's that simple.
In fact, if it weren't for the expense I've made on the Canon equipment, I would switch brands right now. Because locking the R mount seems like a rip-off to me.

Toni · Nov 5, 2025

blackcoffee17 said:
EF mount was never open, it was reverse engineered by the likes of Sigma and Tamron. It's a much simpler protocol than RF.
And back then the third party manufacturers only made low quality and cheap lenses that often could not focus properly. So they were not really a threat for Canon. Today Sigma and Tamron make amazing quality lenses and Chinese manufacturers getting better and better.

I think Sony might be in the situation soon to be able to sell only camera bodies and professional Sony lenses to people will lots of $$$. Everyone else will just use Sigma, Tamron or Chinese lenses.

Excuse me, but if Tamron or Sigma produce RF lenses for APS-C, they're capable of doing the same for full-frame RF.
So, it's Canon that's blocking them.

And I don't think anyone makes better lenses than Sony. It's just that there are different needs to be met.

HeavyPiper · Nov 5, 2025

ctk said:
6D2 was kind of a low point for Canon

Agreed, I was so dissapointed after my purchase.

ctk · Nov 5, 2025

6D2 was kind of a low point for Canon as A7III launched around the same time for the same money. The 1-2 punch of the A7R2 and A7III was when I knew the DSLRs days were numbered. OG 6D was important as it was among the first legit affordable FF bodies, but D600/610 still had a slight edge. R6 was the first time 6 series really met its potential. Im glad Canon is being aggressive with bodies again.... Id argue their current FF body lineup is the best, especially in the $2-4K price range.

m4ndr4ke · Nov 5, 2025

Thanks! Craig mentioned a few days ago this could lead to an article, but I didn't expect it this soon, nice work!

By the way, I never imagined the size difference between gear type STM and lead-screw to be that big, that explains a lot!

GrunRad · Nov 5, 2025

Askeladden said:
Even the EF 50 1.2 when compared to the RF 1.2 makes it seem like a piece of doodoo so this new mirrorless budget 1.2 is a big deal. Anyone know if it will have aspherical elements?

Tried to glean this information from the (48mm/1.28) patent - in the description it seems to indicate an aspherical lens (as the first element behind the aperture mechanism). We'll know in 16 hours.

Tom R5R7 · Nov 5, 2025

blackcoffee17 said:
EF mount was never open, it was reverse engineered by the likes of Sigma and Tamron. It's a much simpler protocol than RF.
And back then the third party manufacturers only made low quality and cheap lenses that often could not focus properly. So they were not really a threat for Canon. Today Sigma and Tamron make amazing quality lenses and Chinese manufacturers getting better and better.

I think Sony might be in the situation soon to be able to sell only camera bodies and professional Sony lenses to people will lots of $$$. Everyone else will just use Sigma, Tamron or Chinese lenses.

It was true initially - that third party makers brought generally cheap, low-quality lenses to the EF mount. But Sigma brought some really nice lenses to the party a little later on, with the ART series. And their 150-600 lens was really never met head-on by Canon. Nikon has/had something of that range and price, but Canon didn't counter it, basically ceding the lower-cost birding market to Sigma (and Tamron). Now, we DO have reasonably-priced super-telephoto zooms like the 200-800 (which I have sitting about 20 feet from me, having just bought one).

I think Canon actually invited Sigma and others to play with at least the APS-C lenses, which is maybe why Canon has not really brought out much in that format other than very cheap, light "kit" type lenses. Although the 18-150 is pretty good optically, for such a wide-ranging zoom, they have no f/2.8 glass and no 15 or 16-xx lenses that would mimic the full frame 24-xx "normal" lenses.

McMacmac · Nov 5, 2025

I went and bought the RF 200-800 today, now I have to wait until Christmas to use it. Yup, the burden of being married and a father ... Thanks for all the input here. The body will be taken care of next year. Oops, that sounds like my New Year's resolution of the past five years.

candyman · Nov 5, 2025

Del Paso said:
Pay attention to prices!
Some lenses, I don't know why, can cost much more than sold by conventional stores. The RF 50mm f/1,8 costs Euro 402 at Panamoz! Twice as much as what you'd pay to conventional online seller. Usually, you can save a lot on the more expensive items, not so on basic ones.

The non-L lenses do not really have competitive prices but the L-lenses do.

blackcoffee17 · Nov 5, 2025

Del Paso said:
Pay attention to prices!
Some lenses, I don't know why, can cost much more than sold by conventional stores. The RF 50mm f/1,8 costs Euro 402 at Panamoz! Twice as much as what you'd pay to conventional online seller. Usually, you can save a lot on the more expensive items, not so on basic ones.

Panamoz never had good prices on lenses, not sure why.

ritaC · Nov 5, 2025

blackcoffee17 said:
blackcoffee17 said:

When i see an amazing portrait or a beautiful landscape photo, i never think that: oh, the corners should have been sharper

Click to expand...

When i see an amazing portrait or a beautiful landscape photo, i never think that: oh, the corners should have been sharper

A portrait no, but a beautiful landscape I look to see that the corners are sharp it matters to me

blackcoffee17 · Nov 5, 2025

DhlcadR6 said:
Sometimes absolute sharpness makes a photo boring...

When i see an amazing portrait or a beautiful landscape photo, i never think that: oh, the corners should have been sharper

DhlcadR6 · Nov 5, 2025

Traveler said:
They say “on par with the EF 50/1.2”. It may be a disappointment for many.
I’d be probably happy with it. Light weight is more important than sharpness to me.

Sometimes absolute sharpness makes a photo boring...

blackcoffee17 · Nov 5, 2025

Toni said:
I thought R mount was a technical move because that's what Canon touted when they released the R mount.

Canon's EF mount was open. Why does the RF mount have to be closed? It makes no sense.

EF mount was never open, it was reverse engineered by the likes of Sigma and Tamron. It's a much simpler protocol than RF.
And back then the third party manufacturers only made low quality and cheap lenses that often could not focus properly. So they were not really a threat for Canon. Today Sigma and Tamron make amazing quality lenses and Chinese manufacturers getting better and better.

I think Sony might be in the situation soon to be able to sell only camera bodies and professional Sony lenses to people will lots of $$$. Everyone else will just use Sigma, Tamron or Chinese lenses.

01Spino94 · Nov 5, 2025

Traveler said:
Some people still prefer the R3. I tried it at a Canon even and there’s something to the integrated vertical grip. Feels much better than a smaller camera with an ad on grip. And the R3 is much lighter than the R1

I got the R5 Mark II and 99.9% love it, but the R3 is just a great feeling and handling camera. It’s one of the cameras that when you use it, it’s fun because everything is right where it needs to be.

Richard CR · Nov 5, 2025

m4ndr4ke said:
Nice work!

Just one thing: both the R6 and R6 Mark II have the same EVF and rear LCD, there was no improvement AFAIK.

The EOS RP has magnesium in its contruction as well, which is a nice touch for the lower price point.

Dammit! I even had craig check the document to see if I slipped up anywhere. Thanks for the proof reading catches. After a while at looking at the document in wordpress my eyes start to go cross eyed.