Latest activity

jamtra · Nov 4, 2025

Why does a camera body thread always get taken over by lens talk? Lol

Del Paso · Nov 4, 2025

Exploreshootshare said:
Thx for your reply. Sounds good so far.
I´m looking into them atm. I'll probably try with a lower priced lens first, then with a higher tier lens or camera. I need to make my own experience with them.

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.

Eloniel · Nov 4, 2025

DhlcadR6 said:
I have tried Sony a1 while I was using R6. Yes you get many options of lens selection, but in the end there's no more than five lenses that I love&will use with my Sony all the time. (FE 20mm f1.8G, Tamron 150-500, Sigma 18-50, FE 200-600G, FE 70-200GM2)
And these lenses are not that unique to E mount, there's equivalent in RF/EF. And Sony bodies in general is inferior to Canon (2025 and still no in-body focus stacking for Sony).

The only reason to go for Sony is if you desire to purchase many lenses for a small budget.

What about Tamron 35-150mm F2.0, Sigma 135mm f1.4 or Sony 50-150mm f2.0 ?

SorenS · Nov 4, 2025

SnowMiku said:
For non IS lenses I use a shutter speed double the focal length I'm using, so for a non IS 50mm I'd shoot at 1/100sec or faster, it works for me every time. If you can hold your camera more steady then me then you can try using 1/60sec for a 50mm lens.

That doesn't work shooting video

Stig Nygaard · Nov 4, 2025

Canon Rumors said:
I am, I've never used it once with the R1 (Pro basketball). Nikon has done just fine without one. I mean, there will always be Luddites... that's cool. Stick with a mechanical shutter, the rest of the world will move on. It's the same thing over and over.... when mirrorless happened... "OMG, I'll never use a camera without an OVF!"....... rinse and repeat. Sony proved everyone wrong, I was proven wrong.

I got dragged through the mud when I spent a year telling people EOS M was over...... I'm not patting myself on the back, but these are things that if you don't see it? .............

There are still a ton of professional 1D series shooters (I know 3 that shoot pro basketball) out there that haven't yet moved over. They want those people, so give them comfort and something that they trust, which is a different strategy than what Nikon went with. Nikon's market share loss was due to video and the younger demographic, not due to their legacy photography customers.

Some of them will come over and "dabble" with an affordable camera like a 6-series, some want to see what 45mp is all about..... This all simple, it's the natural progression that has gone on for decades in nearly every industry on earth (Old school distilleries and cigar makers haven't moved much, which is great).

Remember the film shooters that would never shoot digital? Those were fun times!

Now you are assuming I have opinions I don't have.

Take EOS M for example. Right from the start I saw the missing "forward compatibility" with any future full frame mount, and warned friends about investing in the system. It was to me obviously a temporary system to get some experience with mirrorless until Canon, Canon's users and the technology was ready for Canon to do the jump on there main (and professional) system.

I also don't believe - as many others do - that Canon and Nikon didn't believe in mirrorless until "Sony proved them wrong". Sony was in a completely differen't situation than Canon and Nikon. Sony went for the first-movers. People who were ready to buy new technology because they knew it was the road of the future, even if it not nescesarely was better cameras in practice yet. At least not in every way. Mirrorless offered some advantages, but also some disadvantages. But Sony could move first because they didn't have same big group of professional users who would be unhappy - probably very angry actually - to be "forced" to leave existing system (no support/development on old system) to change to a system that wasn't mature and with technology offering more advanteges than disadvantages for most users. Canon or Nikon had to mature their technology and prepare their move very thoroughly. And yes, when Canon introduced the EOS R body, it was probably not the camera they had dreamt of. But I'm sure they knew the technology they soon would have ready, and which became cameras like R6 and R5.

Personally I also never had doubt mirrorlress was they way forward. And if I was new to photography, mirrorless would have been the only right thing to invest in a couple of years before I actually made the move myself. Because it would be stupid to start building up a new DSLR system. But it wasn't until R5/R6 and there advanced animal eye AF that I saw the advantages of mirrorless becoming big enough that it started to be interesting to make the move from an existing DSLR system. And it wasn't until Canon released the APS-C R7 body, that they also made the camera I wanted. I was lucky it was Canon, so I could keep my existing lenses. I guess it could easily had been a Sony or Nikon camera instead at that point. But I never regret waiting to make the move, I saw no advantage in doing it before.

So don't pretend to say I'm a stuborn conservative photographer who don't want new technology. I love the technology developments. I'm a tech nerd following all the developments. But I'm also a photographer that just want the equipment that serves me best. And of course electronic shutters is the future. And I'm not saying that I don't want mechanical shutters to disappear. I just say I don't believe it happens so quick as you think. At least not for all. If Canon put a very fast stacked sensor in an R7 II, I might soon be one who soon solely use electronic shutter. But not every camera will be like that tomorrow.

derekf · Nov 4, 2025

Canon Rumors said:
The RF 45mm f/1.2 STM will retail for $469 / €499

Do we know know UK sterling pricing yet for this and the r63?

DSB · Nov 4, 2025

1ll said:
Tilt might be important for others, maybe one would be able to disable the tilt.

I'm thinking more along the lines of how to save money. Tilt mechanism doubles the complexity, so removing it from wide angle models might keep the price more reasonable.

For me personally, tilt is really only useful for product shots and I rarely shoot products with anything other than 90mm, so losing tilt on 17, 24 and 50 mm would make no difference to me.

P-visie · Nov 4, 2025

Canon Rumors said:
Nikon is only open to Tamron for FF... Tamron manufactures some of their lenses is probably why.

Viltrox has 21 Z-mount lenses, 9 are AF lenses for full frame, including their “premium” 135mm LAB lens.

Viltrox Z-mount lenses: https://viltrox.com/collections/z-mount?page=1&sort_by=manual

Exploreshootshare · Nov 4, 2025

Del Paso said:
What I know is:
- After the 3 years of Panamoz warranty, you can send the camera anywhere, including to CPS.
- Panamoz have local repair stations (often the same ones used by guess whom...) in most European countries. (France, Germany, Italy are a certainty).
I wouldn't worry at all, they are a very reliable company, even according to the internet "experts".
PS: Until now, I've saved at least Euro 3500 buying from them. (RF 100-500, R5 II, RF 15-35 f/2,8) No issues at all!

Thx for your reply. Sounds good so far.
I´m looking into them atm. I'll probably try with a lower priced lens first, then with a higher tier lens or camera. I need to make my own experience with them.

1ll · Nov 4, 2025

DSB said:
Yep, agreed. If it was TS and zoom, then AF would make more sense. I'm just worried how much would such a lens cost... Either way, my priority list for theoretical RF TS lenses is as follows:
1. Zoom
2. Lens collars
3. Better controls
4. Would gladly give up tilt functionality on all focal ranges, except 90 mm (need that for products)
5. AF
6. IS

Tilt might be important for others, maybe one would be able to disable the tilt.

1ll · Nov 4, 2025

DSB said:
Yep, agreed. If it was TS and zoom, then AF would make more sense. I'm just worried how much would such a lens cost... Either way, my priority list for theoretical RF TS lenses is as follows:
1. Zoom
2. Lens collars
3. Better controls
4. Would gladly give up tilt functionality on all focal ranges, except 90 mm (need that for products)
5. AF
6. IS

blackcoffee17 · Nov 4, 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.

I am enjoying my Canon lenses, thank you. No need for 15 different 85mm 1.8 variants.

1ll · Nov 4, 2025

Del Paso said:
Right!
I can imagine that shifting or tilting a bride wouldn't be very popular or good for business...

If the photographer were shooting the wedding in a church, say a Catholic church, and wanted to capture the surroundings, yes.

Click · Nov 4, 2025

Another very nice series. I especially like the 3rd one.

DSB · Nov 4, 2025

Del Paso said:
Neither I, as a non-professional (!) see much advantages in AF for TS lenses, even though I use mine exclusively handheld in cities or forests (trees).
Like you, I'd really appreciate a TS 15-35 zoom, which would reduce my travel gear to a minimum (TS 15-35 instead of 15-35 zoom + TS-E 24 or 17).
Yet, in this particular case, AF would be nice, since I'd often use the TS 15-35 like a "normal" zoom.
Canon, please, hear our prayer!

Yep, agreed. If it was TS and zoom, then AF would make more sense. I'm just worried how much would such a lens cost... Either way, my priority list for theoretical RF TS lenses is as follows:
1. Zoom
2. Lens collars
3. Better controls
4. Would gladly give up tilt functionality on all focal ranges, except 90 mm (need that for products)
5. AF
6. IS

P-visie · Nov 4, 2025

There are multiple (recent) threads about using *** to geotag your photo’s.

See: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/***-issue.44271/#post-1018833

I use a Garmin *** device to create a tracklog and use the Map module in Lightroom to add the coordinates from the tracklog to the images. This works fine when the time on your camera is in sync with the time of the *** device. I use the Camera connect app to sync the time of my camera to that of my smartphone (after some time the camera clock needs re-sync to remove the usually 2-3 minutes difference).

Alastair Norcross · Nov 4, 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.

Thank you for sharing your opinion with us. I'm sure we all appreciate it.

Alastair Norcross · Nov 4, 2025

G650ER said:
Is this also hinting at a new RF 24-105 f/4L? If you zoom in you can see the 105mm end and the lens hood design looks new. I'd be super down for an improvement of this lens!

Why? What's wrong with the current version? Mine never fails to deliver. It's the best 24-105 F4 on the market.

Del Paso · Nov 4, 2025

DSB said:
It's not that I can't imagine uses for AF stabilized TS lenses, it's more down to what cost hike that would cause and would that price increase justify the new features, considering there are already so many AF prime lenses with IS, that work just fine and cost way less than what these super TS lenses might go for.

TS lenses have always been a super niche product, so my reasoning is how many users would actually need an AF+IS+TS lens and how many *new* users would such a lens attract. If you're a photographer who shoots architecture, it's highly likely you'll plonk your gear on a tripod, AF or no AF. It's hard enough to level everything out even with a geared head, let alone handheld...

If you're just looking for a prime lens for handheld work, video or general photography, well then you're way more likely to pick up some of the VC lenses, considering they'll inherently be much cheaper, faster and have way better aperture than the TS lenses.

Considering majority of my work is done on TS lenses, I would much prefer to have the theoretical zoom feature more than anything. And I'd be willing to pay for it big bucks. 10-20 TS? Or 15-35 TS? Or heck, 24-70 TS? Boy... Those would make my loins all warm!

If Canon is sticking to primes, then trust me - I would MUCH more prefer lens collars than say AF, or IS. I don't need AF for my work, let alone IS. If the lens had it, sure, I'd probably use AF from time to time. But I often switch to MF even on my AF lenses, simply to nail the focus exactly as I want it and make sure there are no changes from shot to shot, especially when doing stacks or panoramic shifts. I think vast majority of users for Canon's TS lineup are like me. And I don't see a bunch of wedding photographers picking up sets of autofocus TS lenses to shoot bridal sets. It just doesn't make sense.

Neither I, as a non-professional (!) see much advantages in AF for TS lenses, even though I use mine exclusively handheld in cities or forests (trees).
Like you, I'd really appreciate a TS 15-35 zoom, which would reduce my travel gear to a minimum (TS 15-35 instead of 15-35 zoom + TS-E 24 or 17).
Yet, in this particular case, AF would be nice, since I'd often use the TS 15-35 like a "normal" zoom.
Canon, please, hear our prayer!

P-visie · Nov 4, 2025

EricN said:
I'd pretend to be gay and seduce an ugly bank manager, international spy style, to learn some important thing to help you rob that bank.

Your creative plan will not succeed: bank managers only have one love: money. The concept of human love is completely alien to them.

DSB · Nov 4, 2025

1ll said:
With all this, is Canon still manufacturing TS-E lenses? If the TS-E lenses were sold-out tomorrow, would Canon manufacture and assemble more? With new technology, a tilt-shift lens could be handheld. Kind of frees one to do more with a TS lens without having to use a tripod.

Canon is not manufacturing any EF lenses period, so I'm pretty sure they're not manufacturing TS-E lenses either. There are however plenty brand new ones for purchase. As far as I know, none are sold out - another indicator that confirms the niche status for these lenses.

You can handheld the current TS-E lenses just fine. People use manual lenses all the time. It's more a matter of why would you? What would you get from a hand held 24mm RF AF IS TS lens that you can't get from an RF 24 VCM? The only thing is going for those shallow depth miniature effects using the tilt function, but I have serious doubts about how much use would that get and how soon would the novelty wear off. Again, it's not like you can't do it with current lenses, yet it's not that sought out effect. Shifting hand held is the second option and here I see even less use cases. If one want's to keep their verticals straight and avoid the pain of correcting in post, then you'll most likely use a tripod. So, that's all for the photo work.

On to the video, when I think about it, such a lens could actually be quite useful for video work, seeing as AF and IS would be very beneficial in that use scenario. Also, there is an actual market for that, considering there is ever growing demand for real estate videos. The only problem is that such a lens would have to be small and light, so one could use it on a gimbal. And small + light + TS + AF + IS isn't very likely.

Del Paso · Nov 4, 2025

EricN said:
Wedding photographers are only slightly more interested in creating something special than the person who takes school portraits. Generally, it's almost purely business of providing generic images to please the masses at a competitive price. I would say very few business will want new technologies until there is sufficient evidence to show it profitable for their specific case.

So, yes, we won't see the average Wedding photographer using tiltshift lenses and I know of one here that has an attitude that expensive lenses are only for ego, and that's fine with me and apparently fine with Canon, but that doesn't mean nobody will be willing to sell crack to pay for it [exaggeration]. I'm sure Canon is weighing all the important factors in regards to cost and marketability including halo status to increase brand reputation.

Right!
I can imagine that shifting or tilting a bride wouldn't be very popular or good for business...

Dragon · Nov 4, 2025

Yet another mirror. This time a Nikon 500mm f/8 HN-27. This is a much smaller and lighter lens than the older Nikon 500mm (which I also have a copy of), but the key difference is that the HN-27 focuses down to 5ft. and the older one is 13 ft. Both are reasonably sharp. Still a dark day, so R8 at ISO 5000 and 10000, but fat pixels are much quieter

.

Dima135 · Nov 4, 2025

I doubt there will be any synchronization with the electronic shutter. In Nikon Z6III it is 1/60. In the R6 Mark II, the electronic curtian speed is very similar to both C50/R6III and Z6III, but there is no synchro. Usually, even if the shutter is fast enough, synchronization appears when the sensor is "stacked" or "partially stacked".
"This is the last generation of full-frame cameras that will have mechanical shutters" - No, not the last. Maybe second-to-last, but I doubt the next generation will have fast enough sensors for that. In the $3,500-$4,000 class, yes, no problem, that's already there, at least for Nikon and Canon. But in the $1,500-$2,500 class, I don't think so. Also Canon still has an image quality penalty for its electronic shutter, even in their fastest cameras like R5II, R1 and R3. They need to solve this issue. That Sony sensor that S1II and Z6III use, also has some penalty. I think a sync speed of at least 1/180 is needed to get rid of the mechanical shutter. I doubt they'll triple that 1/60 in a single generation. I also doubt they'll just give top-end stacked sensors to $2000 class. To do this, they need to come up with something cool for the $3,500-$4,000 segment, and I doubt they have anything.
In fact, I would be happy if in the next generation they slowed down a bit in their rush to make sensors faster and tried to restore the image quality that they sacrificed in this race.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics