Latest activity

Del Paso · Oct 22, 2025

Kharan said:
Well, I for one got a Sony A7C and two Sony zooms (28-60mm and 20-70mm f/4 G), as well as two Chinese primes. And the awesome TTArtisan adapter that adds AF to old film-era glass. Had Sony closed their mount, I wouldn’t have bought a single thing from them.

This is the key part of their strategy: get the people who buy more than one lens (i.e. enthusiasts and pros) on board, and leave the low end of the market to Canon and OM System. Sony might be #2 in sales, but they outperform Canon in terms of income per unit, indicating that they sell more expensive cameras on average.

I think it’s funny that some people speak of Sony’s decision to open E-mount as some sort of desperate move. Sony love proprietary solutions more than almost any other global company besides Apple, and have become infamous for that. But back in the day they looked at the #1 seller in photography, and noticed that they had the strongest 3rd party support of anyone in the business, thanks to a “live and let live” approach. That company was Canon, of course, in the EF days. That’s why they also dropped the silly Minolta flash shoe, and embraced USB charging in camera before anyone else. Sony, as an outsider company, could see some things that the established players couldn’t, and one of those was how important third party products are for a photo system.

Long, long time ago I had a Sony A7*.
Sold it after 2 weeks, because I hated the ergonomics, in fact, the entire camera.
So it came that I bought a Canon 5D III, after hesitating between it and the corresponding Nikon. Meanwhile, I'm a very happy owner of R5 II + R5 II + 14 RF and EF lenses (mostly RF Ls) and, honestly, don't care at all about cheap Chinese or Japanese lenses. Never had in 14 Canon years one single repair (except when I dropped the 24 TSE II-ouch!), not ever after having used lenses and cameras under heavy rain.
But: That's only my point of view, many will certainly disagree, especially those who actually need (!!!) a lens not-not yet available in the RF system.

m4ndr4ke · Oct 22, 2025

GrunRad said:
According to patent 2024-050580 (upon which the RF 45mm/1.2 is presumably based upon, as implied by the post "Possible Canon RF 45mm f/1.2 STM Patent"), focusing from infinity to MFD is performed by moving the second lens group Lb (the one between the aperture blades and the image plane) away from the image plane. To my (layman's!) eyes this indicates a design where the front lens remains stationary in regard to the lens barrel.

That's very interesting to hear. Thanks. I don't know yet how to read these documents, to be honest

snapshot · Oct 22, 2025

ZiemJank said:
I'm only concerned with photo mode.

I now measured this myself in R62 and got the same number - 1/56s. I would appreciate improvement, but if R63 is not worse, that's good enough for me.

Thanks.

Still, I see no reason to I spend money on this body. Certainly not for 16% bump in resolution.

at 1/300 my evaluation of this camera would be quite different.

Michael Clark · Oct 22, 2025

bn5fg said:
Semi-macro is worth it, and if I need really fast autofocus, I go for VCM. Fast lens switching is also more convenient when the lenses don’t have weather sealing.

Calling the STM lineup 'crude', 'worst' or 'cheap' is a narrow-minded view.

How does a thin rubber O-ring embedded in the lens' flange surface necessitate a longer elapsed time to switch lenses?

keithcooper · Oct 22, 2025

Just testing this on the GFX100S, where it has enough coverage, but unlike the RF/Z mount versions has no ability to change the shift axis direction.
So either a showstopper or irrelevant.
Limited to ±8mm of shift, but that is impressive on a [small] MF sensor
Still need to see how it compares with my 2009 TS-E17

Uploaded quite a few [full res] examples to the MF forum at DPR
This gives a good feel for the coverage [hand held 3200 ISO ~f/6.7]

scyrene · Oct 22, 2025

Philnick said:
Anyone else notice the radio silence on the R7/II?

If they're preparing to release the R6III then that is bound to be the priority.

Philnick said:
Viola! Everyone should be happy

Oh my sweet summer child.

GrunRad · Oct 22, 2025

According to patent 2024-050580 (upon which the RF 45mm/1.2 is presumably based upon, as implied by the post "Possible Canon RF 45mm f/1.2 STM Patent"), focusing from infinity to MFD is performed by moving the second lens group Lb (the one between the aperture blades and the image plane) away from the image plane. To my (layman's!) eyes this indicates a design where the front lens remains stationary in regard to the lens barrel.

tomc · Oct 22, 2025

Take off.

m4ndr4ke · Oct 22, 2025

BFG9000 said:
If the rumor is correct and Canon ends up selling the rumored 45mm f/1.2 lens for 499€ might mean the lens is horribly flawed.
Something like a shamelessly optically uncorrected lens with >3,5EV vignetting open wi—OH, WAIT! That's the VCM L line!

Don’t underestimate the other STM lenses

If you’re looking for vignetting, they all definitely deliver, and some even get you fish-eye abilities…for free!

#jet2holiday

This will be just one more

ctk said:
In the case of chintzy RF STM glass the lens usually isn't the heaviest element. Plus if you know the lens doesn't have internal focus...... just have to be careful

I agree that external focus is needless cynical cost cutting......... but that kind of seems to be part of the design brief for the cheapest RF STM lenses.

Old habits die hard...I probably shoot over a hundred times more with internal focusing lenses, per year.

ZiemJank · Oct 22, 2025

padam said:
Stills mode:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r6-mark-ii-in-depth-review
"We checked both the rolling shutter rate and the impact on dynamic range of engaging the camera's high speed e-shutter modes. In terms of rolling shutter, we measured it as 18ms (1/56 sec). "

I'm only concerned with photo mode.

I now measured this myself in R62 and got the same number - 1/56s. I would appreciate improvement, but if R63 is not worse, that's good enough for me.

Thanks.

Still, I see no reason to spend money on this body. Certainly not for 16% bump in resolution.

Click · Oct 22, 2025

Nice series, dpc.

Click · Oct 22, 2025

Beautiful colours. Nicely done, dpc.

ctk · Oct 22, 2025

m4ndr4ke said:
I usually rest my cameras on the heavier element. My most used lenses weight two to three times the weight of the cameras.

This is the best way to put them down, big lenses have diameters wide enough for the cameras not to stay still if you rest them in different positions.

In the case of chintzy RF STM glass the lens usually isn't the heaviest element. Plus if you know the lens doesn't have internal focus...... just have to be careful

I agree that external focus is needless cynical cost cutting......... but that kind of seems to be part of the design brief for the cheapest RF STM lenses.

BFG9000 · Oct 22, 2025

Canon Rumors said:
The RF 45mm f/1.2 STM may actually launch at €499. At least the contradiction is in the right direction.

If the rumor is correct and Canon ends up selling the rumored 45mm f/1.2 lens for 499€ might mean the lens is horribly flawed.
Something like a shamelessly optically uncorrected lens with >3,5EV vignetting open wi—OH, WAIT! That's the VCM L line!

candyman · Oct 22, 2025

GMCPhotographics said:
The spec for the new R6iii is a bit meh...and underwhelming. I think like everybody esle, I was expecting Canon to push Stacked sensors across the upper range of cameras.

Well maybe Canon considers the R6.x the mid range of cameras....

m4ndr4ke · Oct 22, 2025

ctk said:
Im not trying to be a jerk when I say this...... but maybe don't rest your camera on the lens lol. There are 5 sides much better suited for that.

I usually rest my cameras on the heavier element. My most used lenses weight two to three times the weight of the cameras.

This is the best way to put them down, big lenses have diameters wide enough for the cameras not to stay still if you rest them in different positions.

roby17269 · Oct 22, 2025

Cico said:
Enough with the megapixel madness.

When did photography become a megapixel race instead of a quest for beauty, light, and emotion?

Today we see cameras that cost $3,000–$4,000… yet the moment you raise the ISO, the image looks like it came from a $500 camera.

Noise everywhere. Plastic skin tones. Oversharpened details that kill the soul of the photo.

Meanwhile, look at cameras like the Canon R3 or the Sony FX3 — “only” 12 or 24 megapixels, but absolute monsters in low light.

Clean shadows, incredible dynamic range, natural color, and pure image texture that feels cinematic even straight out of camera.

They prove what really matters: less noise, not more pixels.

And now, rumors say the Canon R6 Mark III might arrive next year.

If Canon keeps the R3-style sensor — that would make sense. That’s evolution.

But if they jump on the “more megapixels” hype again… well, they can keep it.

Because I don’t need 45MP of noise — I need 24MP of perfection.

Photography is not about counting pixels. It’s about capturing feelings.

And feelings don’t need 60 megapixels to shine.

Enough with people telling other people how any quality of a camera (megapixels, AF, speed, etc.) is enough.

You like 24mp? Great! Canon offers you 4 current FF cameras (R1 R3 R6 II R8).
People that want more mp? so far only 1 FF current camera (R5 II), till we get the R6 III.
Canon will survive you not buying a R6 III, like they survived me not buying a R5 II or a R1 because they did not increase the sensor resolution.

I've never heard of "sharpness killing the soul of a photo" - Between 2 versions of the same photo, one sharp and one soft, I know which one I prefer.
And having higher resolution is not something antithetical to feelings, you know? I can get images I love with 80mp or 45mp - they would not be better with 24mp. Just less versatile.
Not to mention that higher resolution means higher noise only at pixel level... which someone interested in feelings should not care about.

Again, you're free to like and prefer whatever you want, but do not impose your views on me.

dpc · Oct 22, 2025

Ogden Point, Victoria, British Columbia...

_DSF1482Texture 2-topaz-sharpen_Radiant copy-topaz-upscale-2.7x-sharpen.jpg

dpc · Oct 22, 2025

Dry dock, Victoria, British Columbia...

dpc · Oct 22, 2025

scyrene · Oct 22, 2025

Cico said:
When did photography become a megapixel race instead of a quest for beauty, light, and emotion?
Clean shadows, incredible dynamic range, natural color, and pure image texture that feels cinematic even straight out of camera.
They prove what really matters: less noise, not more pixels.
Photography is not about counting pixels. It’s about capturing feelings.

So... dynamic range and low noise = emotions, but not resolution? Gotcha

scyrene · Oct 22, 2025

mimbu said:
I will never return to a brand with a locked down mount. It's anti-consumer and I do not understand why anyone accepts it.

Speaking for myself, it's irrelevant. I don't buy lenses any more, but if I did there are adequate options already available. So it doesn't matter to me what third party options there are (or aren't, in this case). Given how few consumers buy multiple lenses at all, I suspect it's not as big a deal for many people as for a few here.

roby17269 · Oct 22, 2025

Michael Clark said:
My point is in your initial post you blamed needing NR on the ISO setting, when the real culprit was the poor lighting conditions which you only acknowledged in your follow up post in reply to another comment. You can get photos with virtually no noise at high ISO if you are willing to let small specular highlights blow out and use long enough exposure times to allow enough light into the camera.

"blame"? "culprit"? I may blame the bad lightning of a venue but I do not resent physics or technology.
And long exposures + running kids are not a great combo unless you like photos of smeared ghosts.
In any case I am not sure where this discussion is going? If I use high ISO it's usually because the conditions are not ideal. If there is enough light or long exposure is viable then I will tend to use low ISO.

fox40phil · Oct 22, 2025

Thats why I stopped buying new Canon stuff.... the high priced development bores me hard. (R5 II is way to pricy and those downs in DR for a 4,7k€ camera!? noope!)

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics