SereneSpeed said:

I’m not sure… (I’ve wondered that myself).

The R-single-digit cameras are all unique in some way and stand-out in some way.

R1 - Flagship
R3 - First with eye detect/First integrated-grip RF mount/Technology development (a bit different than the rest)
R5 - Highest resolution
R6 - Best balance of cost and performance
R7 - Best APSC
R8 - Entry level FF

Without something like an integrated grip, I’m not sure if Canon would create a new name for the flagship APSC?

Click to expand...

R5 best balance of cost and performance.

Del Paso said:

I don't mind, as long as the high-end cameras (R5 II, R 1 & R 100) stay in Japan.

Click to expand...

Don't you, at least want to use them in France?

DocInfoSci said:

I've simply enjoyed having the chance to learn from and debate with a number of people whose remarks on this forum have proved interesting and useful to me over the years before I created an account.

My specialities are in large compute systems (distributed/parallel), data analysis (think spectra), complex information presentation/exploration, and knowledge systems (especially the psychology of technologies). I know a bunch of smart people, have hired a bunch of smart people, and I have a little bit of personal experience — but there's a lot I don't know in a pulled-the-lever-myself kind of way. My perspective does change as people comment back on my thoughts, questions, and posits.

And regrets for any confusion or consternation when I post casually betwixt ongoings and gloss over swaths of detailed info that gets implied within my own brain for a few quips of text. I'm more often in agreement with people here than what my posts probably indicate. It's a rumours forum, so I'm at peace with that.

In that spirit, thank you. I wish every fellow camera nerd here a peaceful, pleasant, and hope-filled transition to 2026.

Click to expand...

There are lots of us here who enjoy the science and technology of photography in addition to taking photos, and it can be useful in choosing our gear and knowing its limitations and advantage in advance. You can take great photos without much of such knowledge, but then experience and practice are all important to polish the creativity.

DocInfoSci said:

Makes me think of cringy imputed gene expression values for mediocre slides.

Click to expand...

I’m fine with imputed variant calling, but imputed gene expression analysis…cringy, indeed.

Chig said:

Yes, the SA can be nice for a dreamy look or a rather harsh look (with the 3rd shot at neutral setting) like these shots of my neighbour's magnoliaView attachment 227213View attachment 227214View attachment 227215

Click to expand...

I like them too!

I've simply enjoyed having the chance to learn from and debate with a number of people whose remarks on this forum have proved interesting and useful to me over the years before I created an account.

My specialities are in large compute systems (distributed/parallel), data analysis (think spectra), complex information presentation/exploration, and knowledge systems (especially the psychology of technologies). I know a bunch of smart people, have hired a bunch of smart people, and I have a little bit of personal experience — but there's a lot I don't know in a pulled-the-lever-myself kind of way. My perspective does change as people comment back on my thoughts, questions, and posits.

And regrets for any confusion or consternation when I post casually betwixt ongoings and gloss over swaths of detailed info that gets implied within my own brain for a few quips of text. I'm more often in agreement with people here than what my posts probably indicate. It's a rumours forum, so I'm at peace with that.

In that spirit, thank you. I wish every fellow camera nerd here a peaceful, pleasant, and hope-filled transition to 2026.

Yes, the SA can be nice for a dreamy look or a rather harsh look (with the 3rd shot at neutral setting) like these shots of my neighbour's magnolia

roby17269 said:

I’m no scientist but I do indeed see one.
But this discussion has been had multiple times in the past and I am on the Alps with an iPad so I’m not retyping all of that

Click to expand...

What scientist do you see?

No hurry , spring is not in any hurry either.

Speedfinder said:

I am also interested in Texel as a place to go. How do you get around out there ?

Click to expand...

I’ll pm some information to you. It might take a bit to gather the information.

P-visie said:

In 2022 Canon shutdown it’s Zhuhai factory in China where it manufactured compact camera’s. With hindsight …..

Click to expand...

If memory serves, some companies have moved from China to Vietnam because labor costs are even lower there.

AlanF said:

I'm also a bit of a scientist

Click to expand...

Yeah, just a bit.

Markov said:

Does anybody know what the R2 and R4 are supposed to be at some time in the future? Is my suggestion to make one of those a flagship APS-C camera ridiculous or would there be some benefit in that?

Click to expand...

I’m not sure… (I’ve wondered that myself).

The R-single-digit cameras are all unique in some way and stand-out in some way.

R1 - Flagship
R3 - First with eye detect/First integrated-grip RF mount/Technology development (a bit different than the rest)
R5 - Highest resolution
R6 - Best balance of cost and performance
R7 - Best APSC
R8 - Entry level FF

Without something like an integrated grip, I’m not sure if Canon would create a new name for the flagship APSC?

AlanF said:

I'm also a bit of a scientist, and I see no scientific objections to correcting via digital rather than by analogue methods.

Click to expand...

I’m no scientist but I do indeed see one.
But this discussion has been had multiple times in the past and I am on the Alps with an iPad so I’m not retyping all of that

justaCanonuser said:

Overall, the Z5 II is a nice camera with a big, very bright viewfinder given its price, but I wouldn't really recommend it for wildlife/birding, in particular for BIF.

Click to expand...

TL;DR: the Z5 II is a great camera unless you use it for a use case it was not made for.
WOW. Somehow I think I could say the same for most cameras….

EricN said:

I thought it was Roby NOT approving it. They do the opposite of everything he wants.

Click to expand...

Eh what?
I am neutral about that feature, mostly because I do not use the RF 100 MACRO a lot (I do have it). But I do agree that extender compatibility would be more important, at least until Canon releases a RF MP-E equivalent.

But if you are right by chance…. Canon listen well to me: "Never EVER make a RF 35 1.2!"

m4ndr4ke said:

…and, potentially, peak sharpness.

Click to expand...

Oh, just so I make myself clear: I didn't mean to refer to the loss of detail due to image stretching that occurs on software-corrected lenses, as that is obvious.
I actually meant the opposite: the more optical corrections a lens includes, via the addition of extra elements, the more detail is prone to be lost.

Software vignetting corrections sometimes bother me, specially as Adobe tends to over-correct them, but they're not new and were present on EF lenses already.

A few examples for vignetting:



As for software distortion corrections....I'm currently at the point where as long as I don't notice image degradation, I'll look the other way, because in my line of work real usefulness is having a lens that delivers results, not one that takes a perfect image of the wrong composition.
Of course, such thinking may not be suitable for all genres of photography.

P-visie said:

Yes, Texel is a bird photographers paradise during the breading season, with lots of birds and accessible locations. And are there dragonflies as well. Let me know if you need more information.

Click to expand...

I am also interested in Texel as a place to go. How do you get around out there ?

m4ndr4ke said:

…and, potentially, peak sharpness.

Personally, I don’t have a definitive preference but, this method has been giving us some very useful and innovative lenses designs.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I think so.

I found this by Nando Harmsen, which seems relevant to the software-as-a-lens-component discussion:


I think that in the context of the “best of 2025” theme, neuroanatomist’s point about the expense of optically ideal lenses is a very valid measure.

I also think that your point stands in the same context. I don’t think they’re taking an OG innovative approach, but the effort to help people buy into the game is good for the rest of the community.

I also don’t think an emphasis on software over physical design is a thing to be celebrated as a trend, but I do think that bringing a competent overall solution at a tolerable price point merits a best of the year consideration.

In fact, really I have kept much of my EF L stable (and 20mm USM) because physically they are good (not the best, but corner to corner full of data and identifiable detail that can be made sharp/er with f-stop use) and the DLO application by camera or computer makes the camera-exiting image great — and in some cases stunning. More than acceptable enough (to me) to save $1k per lens by not upgrading the glass for hobby work (ignoring other issues like lack of full-time override).

Canon is simply now milking this approach to the nth-degree with their modern VCM, 10-24mm, etc. work. So I recognize that I’m accepting / doing conceptually the same practice —but with what I feel is better overall raw source data for the software part of the chain. No black corners or need for imputed data given the image that hits the sensor with my lenses; I could use the raw photo imprint pre-DLO in all cases.

I think it would be nice to see some of those EF L designs be re-introduced for the mid-tier lens market with the same modern RF computational assist via DLO or like mechanism. This would help keep cost down, wow factor up for typical image review use cases, and not leave people with multi-thousand dollar corners with inflated noise or imputed data. The 75-300 RF edition surely deserves its worst of laugh. But I think the idea of classic L designs being used in this recycling of glass manner is the right way to go for many cases.

Failing that, and coming back to the reality of today, I think the awarded lens is a valid proposal. But in the context of EF on an RF mount using DLO to save some serious bucks for a solid final output before artistic editing takes place kind of way. Put another way, it might as well have been an EF lens with a splash of DLO.

Richard CR said:

I thought much of it was as well.

Click to expand...

I guess that labor costs still matter, highly skilled machine operators and maintenance staff are well paid.
Besides, logistics, packaging, testing cannot be fully automated.

I don't mind, as long as the production of high-end cameras (R5 II, R 1 & R 100) stays in Japan.

P-visie said:

The thread is still active: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/is-a-canon-rf-35mm-f-1-2l-usm-on-the-horizon.44909/page-3

Maybe you couldn’t stand it any longer and clicked the “Ignore” button .

Click to expand...

Is there also a "I want this lens quick" button?

roby17269 said:

What happened to the latest 35 1.2 thread?
I am traveling so I haven’t logged in for a few days

Click to expand...

The thread is still active: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/is-a-canon-rf-35mm-f-1-2l-usm-on-the-horizon.44909/page-3

Maybe you couldn’t stand it any longer and clicked the “Ignore” button .

Asobinet has posted patent applications for a 70-200mm F2.8-4 lens and a 70-200mm F3.5 lens. The objective: “To provide a zoom lens that is small and lightweight, capable of focusing, has little aberration fluctuation during zooming, and provides high optical performance over the entire object distance range”.

Google translated link.