I prefer the second one. Nicely done.

Stig Nygaard said:

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.

Click to expand...

Are there there any other features you're looking forward to in the R7 Mark II in addition to a fast, stacked sensor?

jamtra said:

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

Click to expand...

Because you date your camera and marry your lenses

Voice coil movements usually have fixed permanent magnet formed field and a moving coil inside this field. Variable voltage applied to moving coil moves it inside this field until force equilibrium is reached. Drive magnets do not move, see the back of your loudspeaker - that is where"voice coil" term originates
Thanks on a really nice article!

It's a fascinating read, but did anybody proofread it before it was published? If yes, me thinks you need better proofreaders!

Noreaster said:

What is it?

Click to expand...

Weed infested water at the edge of a reservoir. I obviously added the swirly effect.

Canon Rumors said:

Ahh sweet, thanks for the correction. I've never used an R52. I wonder why that was in my head. It won't be now.

If the R63 readout is as fast as the R52, that's still a good thing.

Click to expand...

I really can’t see the readout being that fast if they didnt go stacked. My guess would be it just has the same mechanical shutter mechanism as the r5ii (hence the matching sync speed), but won’t be able to sync at all in E shutter due to the slower sensor readout speed.

The E-shutter only C50 doesn’t support flash sync at all

DSB said:

So, bottom line - do those two very specific use-case scenarios justify what would surely be a huge price? And is there a market for such a niche within niche to demand the lenses to be made in the first place?

Like I said... A zoom TS? Absolutely. No doubt that current TS-E users would jump on that like flies on poo. I'm just not convinced that adding AF and IS (and the cost increase involved) would make as much sense as a manual

Click to expand...

In the end, we have to wait for Canon.

Are there any rumors on the screen movement - is it going to flip vertically, to the side, or both?

I much prefer the resolution on the R6ii due to its fantastic noise, dynamic range, and bit depth. The best thing about the R6iii is that it will make the R6ii even cheaper. 24mp is a real sweet spot, and as an owner of an R5, 90% of shots don't benefit from all those pixels.

Fabulous images. I chatted to Arctic Wildlife about going on the M/S Kvitungen but couldn’t make the date. I wished I had!!

EricN said:

You can avoid converging lines in a way you can't with the currently available rf 24mm lenses. You can create the effect of a line in a different distances being in focus. That is assuming you have the physical strength to hold the camera and lens steady. Autofocus would reduce the time and thus allow people with less strength to produce the images

Click to expand...

So, bottom line - do those two very specific use-case scenarios justify what would surely be a huge price? And is there a market for such a niche within niche to demand the lenses to be made in the first place?

Like I said... A zoom TS? Absolutely. No doubt that current TS-E users would jump on that like flies on poo. I'm just not convinced that adding AF and IS (and the cost increase involved) would make as much sense as a manual but zoom TS.

DSB said:

What would you get from a hand held 24mm RF AF IS TS lens that you can't get from an RF 24 VCM?

Click to expand...

You can avoid converging lines in a way you can't with the currently available rf 24mm lenses. You can create the effect of a line in a different distances being in focus. That is assuming you have the physical strength to hold the camera and lens steady. Autofocus would reduce the time and thus allow people with less strength to produce the images

Canon Rumors said:

Ya, me too. That hyped me up.

Click to expand...

I could see a caveat here… This is the R5 mark II’s speed with sync speed priority enabled. And that mode works only with Canon speedlites… https://cam.start.canon/en/C017/manual/html/UG-03_Shooting-1_0100.html

Got the grandfather of the 45 1.2 today.. the 55 1.2 FL. Probably the cheapest first party ultra fast fifty available which adjusted for inflation had a price of close to $1000 back in 1968. Today they are easy to find for less than $200. Having fiddled with a handful of old F1.2s it is rather interesting to see the progression and stagnation with those types of lenses. The FL shows an extreme amount of flaring due to the bad coatings used to the point of it taking over the entire frame whereas the later FD's don't show anywhere near as much. In terms of chromatic aberration they perform similar and from what I have seen even modern lenses with the same optical design costing ten times as much don't really improve upon it.. one example purely subjective of course shows worse chromatic aberration wide open, but has better center sharpness etc. So you gain in one field, lose in another (especially financially).
There is a lot of lore and hype around fast glass. Thankfully a lot of it has cooled down the last couple of years increasing accessibility for those who want to try fast glass on the cheap. 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?

Del Paso said:

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

Click to expand...

If it was done properly and in good taste must would create very unique and memorable images, but also be too time consuming and in this modern age maybe only a professional model could have the patience for posing a full set with a standard manual lens.

If done in bad taste, I would hire a tilt shift wedding photographer. Too bad I already had my wedding

dpc said:

View attachment 226750

Click to expand...

What is it?

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

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

Click to expand...

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

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.

Click to expand...

That doesn't work shooting video

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!

Click to expand...

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.

Canon Rumors said:

The RF 45mm f/1.2 STM will retail for $469 / €499

Click to expand...

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

1ll said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

Canon Rumors said:

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

Click to expand...

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