In that case, I can post some Palestine Sunbirds instead of hummers (R5/100-500mm).

Loswr said:

I wonder what Aaron at LensRentals has seen, and if he’ll do a teardown at some point.

Click to expand...

Obvious design flaw... Canon loves thin plastic lately.
Non L is not excuse, they charge pretty pennies for it.

foda said:

There's a recent paper presenting "A biogeographic comparison of two convergent bird families" at: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0335195 which characterizes and compares the global scale biogeography of two nectar-feeding bird families: the New World hummingbirds and the Old World sunbirds.

Click to expand...

The paper has hummingbirds going back as far as 42 million years ago. Even 30 million years ago, the old ball looked much different than it does today and the little guys wouldn't have had that much ocean to cross to get from one continent to another as Pangea was still in the breakup stage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panga...raphic_Map_of_Earth,_30_Ma_(Rupelian_Age).png And needless to say, the picture is only a scientific wild-assed guess of what the planet really looked like. Given how tiny and fragile hummers are, It is kind of surprising that any fossils have been found and not at all surprising that the fossil record is very incomplete.

Click said:

They are not easy to approach. Nice shots, danfaz.

Click to expand...

Thanks, Click. Difficult, indeed!

foda said:

There's a recent paper presenting "A biogeographic comparison of two convergent bird families" at: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0335195 which characterizes and compares the global scale biogeography of two nectar-feeding bird families: the New World hummingbirds and the Old World sunbirds.

Click to expand...

Yes - convergent evolution can explain the huge time-gap between the fossils in Europe and the New World. And actually, with the fossils absent so far for that gap it seems to be kind of reasonable hypotheses.
On other hand the similarity of the fossils of the Hummingbirds with the bones of the nova days Hummingbirds (not the Sunbirds!) is hard to ignore.
So far the Hummingbirds are considered Swivst. The Sunbirds are more close to the Crows and I would believe to the DNA/RNA evidence more than the pretty speculative "environmental" evidence.

ISv said:

"Why don't we have hummingbirds in Europe, it's most unfair!?"
It's actually even more unfair than you probably think (?): the oldest fossils of hummingbirds are from Europe, much older than the fossils from Americas...
https://www.audubon.org/news/the-origins-hummingbirds-are-still-major-mystery

Click to expand...

There's a recent paper presenting "A biogeographic comparison of two convergent bird families" at: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0335195 which characterizes and compares the global scale biogeography of two nectar-feeding bird families: the New World hummingbirds and the Old World sunbirds.

These from today. From sunny to drizzling. Never mind: I just started the 2026 !

Click said:

ISv, Dragon and dcm,

Beautiful shots, guys. Keep posting.

Happy New Year!

Click to expand...

Happy New Year Click!

AlanF said:

Nice shot! I did a lot of testing some years back of various extenders on the EF 100-400mm ii and RF 100-500mm ii. My experience was that the 1.4x gave a better improvement on the EF vs RF but that the 2x is better on the RF. At 1000mm, it outreseloves the RF 800mm f/11. Why don't we have hummingbirds in Europe, it's most unfair!?

Click to expand...

"Why don't we have hummingbirds in Europe, it's most unfair!?"
It's actually even more unfair than you probably think (?): the oldest fossils of hummingbirds are from Europe, much older than the fossils from Americas...
https://www.audubon.org/news/the-origins-hummingbirds-are-still-major-mystery

They are not easy to approach. Nice shots, danfaz.

This morning I managed to get some "mid" pics of a Belted Kingfisher. She was so far away, I had to crop extensively. One of these days I'll try a hide technique to see if I can get one to get closer to me.

SkynetTX said:

I'd prefer to see an updated version of the 2000D with a newer sensor, let's say Digic 7 and a bit more focus points (maybe 25 or 30) than an R5 mark IV or whatever as I don't really need the capabilities of the mirrorless cameras and some of the (telephoto) lenses are just too dark.

Click to expand...

A high-density AF array would require an LCD focusing screen overlay; too much investment for the target market.
What's wrong with the 850D; aren't they cheap enough by now?

Just dont see a need. If you beef up the R3 with higher megapixels and a faster readout then you are diluting the R1 and especially what the future R1ii could be. The readout and pixel count of the R5ii would also mean that an increased R3 would only take away from that line. Even the R6iii would be in the realms of competing with an R3ii.
Canon have made a bit of a mess of the lineup really. Build quality and performance is so good in the current generation of cameras that the differentiation between models is difficult to discern, for enthusiasts let alone those just starting photography.

C300 mk2 is no longer serviceable ? big problem since the SDI and HDMI ports are directly mounted and driven from circuitry on the camera's main board. its like a $1200-$1400 repair when I had it done about 2 years ago when the HDMI port quit working. Maybe its a call and see if they have parts for the problem situation. I had no problem with service and they turned it around quickly only being with them a few days.

C300 mk3 for 2030 is interesting. Its one of the best C series they've made so only another 4 years of known service isn't great. I guess it will be a we'll see situation.

neuroanatomist said:

It mainly reflects the fact that the Fuji sensor is 12% larger than the Canon sensor.

Click to expand...

And, it is no better for DR than the smaller Canon R7 sensor for DR, which should be lower on an area basis.

SkynetTX said:

This list surely must be a joke. There are no cameras like the 2000D / Rebel T7 on it so they are no longer supported, but the end of support of the EF-S18-55 3.5-5.6 IS II and similar lenses still undecided.

Click to expand...

The T7 is still supported. It’s still a ‘current’ camera being sold directly by Canon.

bloblom said:

Indeed it's not fully accurate, but it still gives you a good indication if a camera has higher or lower read noise than another one.

Click to expand...

It mainly reflects the fact that the Fuji sensor is 12% larger than the Canon sensor.

Stunning photos!

Nicely done, ISv. I really like the composition of the first one.

Great shots, Glenn. Happy New Year.

More action on my lanai: one of the Papilio xuthus hatched. It's strange because at the temperatures here they need at least two weeks for that. Probably that one was already pupa and I didn't spot it (they look somewhat as a folded lemon leafs). These are made with Sigma 105mm macro lens.

fox40phil said:

Lets hope Canon brings also a 50-150 f2.0.... and update their 28-70 f2.0 with less weight.

Really good overview! @CR! <3

Click to expand...

I could also imagine (wish!) an RF 50-200 f/2,8 or even f/4, as compact as the collapsible 70-200.
It would perfectly well complement my 15-35.

bloblom said:

Indeed it's not fully accurate, but it still gives you a good indication if a camera has higher or lower read noise than another one. You can check with other tools such as dpreview's image comparison, the X-T5 is less noisy than the R7 at similar ISO.

Click to expand...

The dpreview comparison doesn't give read noise, just overall noise, if that means anything. The photonstophotos shows the XT5 and R7 are very similar for DR, which is an indirect measure of overall noise.

AlanF said:

Read the Notes under the plots. The comparison is inappropriate.

View attachment 227310

Click to expand...

Indeed it's not fully accurate, but it still gives you a good indication if a camera has higher or lower read noise than another one. You can check with other tools such as dpreview's image comparison, the X-T5 is less noisy than the R7 at similar ISO.