As I said to Mandrake, you both are right, last time I saw R8 prices were around 1300/1400€ used, it dropped a lot since last time I look.Where the hell do you buy your cameras? Used R6s in Germany still maintain prices of 800-1000 € on eBay, often even 1.200-1.300 €. Trusted camera stores will charge you at least 1.200 € for a decent copy. A new R8 cost you 1.299 €, used copies from retailers about 1.000 - 1.100 € and used copies are at around 900 €. No way on earth I could "1.5 to 2" used R6s for those prices.
I´d really like to know because it seems impossible here.
You're right, I just took a look at eBay, I wasn't really following R8 prices, last time I saw them they were around 1300/1400€ for an used one, with R6 being available fro 800€ to 1000€, it had dropped considerably, I see them around 1000€ used, that's good.Not really...the R8 is often at 1100€, and I bought brand new it for less than 1000€ this month, about the same price as a second hand R6, with a smaller form factor, better autofocus and better sensor, and new. I don't like buying second hand sensors.
Only the n53 5G band overlands with the 2.4GHz band Canon uses, and only one company operates on that, in a very limited capacity. I'd be more worried about microwaves, consumer wifi access points and poorly shielded monitors.I would like to know if folks are testing this outside under "real" photographic conditions especially in areas of 5G influence?
Now that glove season has started here again, I'm starting to appreciate having a joystick (or R1/R3 style optical button).[...]It’s funny that you mention the joystick, because i only use it on my R6 to reset the focus point to the center. I drag it with the rear screen and reset with the joystick.
On the RP, I drag the focus point with the rear screen and reset with delete button.[...]
That's what I do most of the time, but...backlit subjects and, most of all, disco lights are a struggle for continuous autofocus.Joystick and touchscreen to select a focus point is way too slow, I set my R6II to start tracking from the centre focus point and just aim the camera.
Well, maybe the "special one" will accommodate your wishes. I´d like to the TS at some point just because we've been talking about it forever on this forum. For my personal use, I´d wish for a 70-135/xxx F2 to be released and/ or a 28-70mm F2 on a diet. Sony is about to release its third f2 zoom, so Canon should really up their game.I'm still hoping for some interesting "L" lenses, like TS, 24-70 II, 180 macro, 70-150, 400, 35 f/1,2 etc...
The last ones were (for me) a bit boring, except the 70-200 Z and 100-300.
Nothing against cheaper lenses, but it's time for some new halo lenses, not only for Sony and Sigma ones.
Where the hell do you buy your cameras? Used R6s in Germany still maintain prices of 800-1000 € on eBay, often even 1.200-1.300 €. Trusted camera stores will charge you at least 1.200 € for a decent copy. A new R8 cost you 1.299 €, used copies from retailers about 1.000 - 1.100 € and used copies are at around 900 €. No way on earth I could "1.5 to 2" used R6s for those prices.Yeah, I know it's R6 II in RP body, but still, too expensive, I can buy from 1.5 to 2 used R6's for the price of a used R8, so it doesn't cut for me.
Not really...the R8 is often at 1100€, and I bought brand new it for less than 1000€ this month, about the same price as a second hand R6, with a smaller form factor, better autofocus and better sensor, and new. I don't like buying second hand sensors.Yeah, I know it's R6 II in RP body, but still, too expensive, I can buy from 1.5 to 2 used R6's for the price of a used R8, so it doesn't cut for me.
Right?Being unable to set ISO on top dial on RP yes, that's annoying because it would at least match the R6 scheme, and aperture would go, old-style, on the control ring on the lens/adapter; instead on RP I have the ISO on the control ring, to retain at least a three-dials setup for the exposure triangle, even if different from the R6 setup.
That's exactly where I use it the most: weddings. The touchscreen method for AF position allows faster adjustments than the joystick, it's significantly more responsive. I enable that on my screens for the right half.touch interface doesn't cut it in fast environments like weddings.
As it is an experiment for fun, I hope you don't mind my commenting. It has a certain sharpness about it in terms of lines on feathers, but there is an overall softness and some artefacts at he pixel peeking leve.Fun with an old lens. R7 + Nikon 1000mm mirror lens. A lot of junk images, and DOF is paper thin, but if you nail focus the lens is remarkably sharp. Not as good as the 200-800, but certainly usable with enough patience.
View attachment 226620View attachment 226621
Yeah, I know it's R6 II in RP body, but still, too expensive, I can buy from 1.5 to 2 used R6's for the price of a used R8, so it doesn't cut for me.It’s most of the R6 Mark II in a RP body, with pretty much all the same settings and customisation available.
The R8 allows ISO on the top dial, two back button focus, etc.
Actually, the R8 has a few extra customisation options, when compared to the original R6, and I’m tempted to keep it specifically for the customisation. I use two back button focus, I like ISO on the top dial (where the RP adjusts aperture and doesn’t allow ISO). The R8 could give me an almost seamless experience. It doesn’t have rear dial but, honestly, it’s not that often that I need to adjust aperture.
It’s funny that you mention the joystick, because i only use it on my R6 to reset the focus point to the center. I drag it with the rear screen and reset with the joystick.
On the RP, I drag the focus point with the rear screen and reset with delete button.
If you screengrab the picture and lighten it, the lugs for the camera strap are black, indicating a full frame camera. Canon's APSC strap lugs are metal (stainless steel?). The rubber covers on the left of the camera look identical to the existing R6 MkII.So the reasoning behind it not being a R7mkii is because while it does look like a R7 evf it looks a little bigger(which is one of the rumored updates to the R7mkii you guys reported) so it must be a R6mkiii because maybe it just looks like that because of the angle?
It’s most of the R6 Mark II in a RP body, with pretty much all the same settings and customisation available.I don't know how R8 works, never laid a hand on it; too expensive for a backup camera, too "poor" (no joystick, no double slot, small battery, no proper battery grip, no three dials on the body) for a main camera.
My new equipment when travelling/hiking: R5 II + 15-35 ,second R5 II + RF 70-200f/4. Each camera on a Capture Peak clip mounted on the left and right backpack straps.This covers more than 95% of all situations.That's something I have been considering as well, I should try my EF70-400 non-IS more since I'm encountering more an more situations where the 24-105 isn't long enough and the 100-500 is too dark. Having said that, none of the RF 70-200 options are realistically in the budget, even used ones
And it's a toadWe have a collection of juveniles and adults visiting each day, but usually in hard to photograph spots, this one ventured out into a spot where it could be easily walked around!
The whole point of a three option sales pitch is that the middle choice is the best option. The one with the best return on your investment. However, brand often make the middle choice the weakest and most confused option. For example, Porsche suffer from this in their range. Everyone wants a 911, the cheap option is the Boxer. However, the middle option is confusing. The Cayman’s performance is precisely the difference between the 911 and boxer. But it doesn’t excel in any area, but was specifically engineered to sit between the two cars and yet it is the master of nothing. The 911 is an amazing track car or a GT, the boxer is an amazing roaster. The Caymen is defined by the difference between the other two cars. It doesn’t excel at anything other than that it was engineered to be the forgettable middle child.Canon has done this before. Except for a few minor differences (X-sync 1/180 vs 1/200, minimum exposure time of 1/4000 vs 1/8000, 26.2 MP vs 22.3 MP, etc.) the 2017 6D Mark II was the virtual equal of the 2012 5D Mark III on the spec sheet. Of course the 5D Mark III had more robust construction and weather resistance than the 6D Mark II. But in terms of the spec sheet there was very little difference.
The EF 50mm f1.2 L was a mixed bag in my opinion. I had several copies, my initial copy was always a bit soft compared to all my other L primes (I had them all from the 24mm f1.4 IIL through to the 135mm f2.0). The lens needed to be stopped down to f2.0 before it matched the other lenses in sharpness. However, the contrast, colour rendition and built quality were exceptional. The AF was slower and less accurate than my EF 85mm f1.2 II L. In low light the AF was hopeless. In addition, the lens didn’t have any floating optics. There was a heavy aperture related focus shift on any close target at f2.8.OUCH! Hahahaha. Vaseline coated optical elements lmao.....
The 50mm refresh gave us a few upgrades compared to its earlier incarnations:Actually genius, if it's a re-shuffled double gauss like they did with the EF 50 STM to RF 50 STM conversion--they simply jiggled things for the flange distance and retained the same optics having roughly identical optical performance. I wonder if something similar is going on here where they're taking the already-mature optics of the EF 50 1.2 and repacking for flange distance, with some optimization to keep the size down--or even none.[...]
The EF 50/1.2 has one of the best rendering and color on any 50mm lens ever. I hope the new one retain the same coating and produce the same color. When checking the canon website it says the coating on the EF 50/1.2 is using Super Pectra Costing which is used on non L lens now, However Non-L lens does not use ASC coating which produce many L lens look. Hopefully the RF 45/1.2 will look as good as the EF 50/1.2 which i am fond of. Will purchase if it produce result like EF 50/1.2Actually genius, if it's a re-shuffled double gauss like they did with the EF 50 STM to RF 50 STM conversion--they simply jiggled things for the flange distance and retained the same optics having roughly identical optical performance. I wonder if something similar is going on here where they're taking the already-mature optics of the EF 50 1.2 and repacking for flange distance, with some optimization to keep the size down--or even none. I would welcome it. Yes the RF 50 1.2 is spectacular but i always thought it was too perfect. I want something that has field curvature at large apertures and that has a slight swirl. i hope this RF 45 1.2 delivers especially at this price. instant order. long-time user of Canon digital large sensor glass--film glass used on canon digital sensors--(25 years) and since ive been on the RF mount, i've mostly stuck to EF glass for the reasons above (though i have dabbled in several RF lenses but sold them off since)
The RF 35 1.8 is probably my favorite RF lens.
That's something I have been considering as well, I should try my EF70-400 non-IS more since I'm encountering more an more situations where the 24-105 isn't long enough and the 100-500 is too dark. Having said that, none of the RF 70-200 options are realistically in the budget, even used onesAnd I'm slowly but surely replacing with the ultra compact 70-200 f/4. But I'll keep the 85 f/2, a lens I really like!
PS: I like your frog picture!