Latest activity

Markov · Dec 24, 2025

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?

m4ndr4ke · Dec 24, 2025

neuroanatomist said:
I get the preference. But ‘better source material’ isn’t free, the cost is usually size, weight, and actual cost

…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.

P-visie · Dec 24, 2025

EricN said:
I think it's hard to scare a bird that looks like it's covered with blood! I wouldn't want it coming closer to me! Nightmare before Christmas?
I hope there was a monkey nearby to give her some poop for Christmas, but nobody is this lucky. Maybe, she'll get drunk at a holiday party, fall down and knock some sense into her head.

@ISv took appropriate action after “That women passed in front of my lens” so all the corrective measures you propose are no longer applicable.

P-visie · Dec 24, 2025

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

See: https://www.dpreview.com/news/1370528730/canon-shutting-down-zhuhai-factory-in-south-china
and

Why Canon Is Closing Its China Factory and What It Means for the Industry

Canon has announced the closure of its only camera factory in China. Here's what the news may mean for the camera industry as a whole.

petapixel.com

Richard CR · Dec 24, 2025

John Wilde said:
I thought Canon's camera assembly was so robotic/automated that labor costs weren't an issue.

I thought much of it was as well.

DocInfoSci · Dec 24, 2025

neuroanatomist said:
Small biotech in Boston.

Cool! Boston is where a lot of it is at!

neuroanatomist · Dec 24, 2025

DocInfoSci said:
Big pharma in Boston or Redwood?

Small biotech in Boston.

DocInfoSci · Dec 24, 2025

neuroanatomist said:
We don’t capture images in the lab with MILC lenses, we use microscope objectives. Our automated cell-based high-throughout screening system for small molecule libraries captures ~64,500 images per day. Each of those images has digital corrections applied before being processed by ML-driven algorithms to quantify the effects of the compounds on the cells.

Sounds like some of our work overlaps.

Agreed for many kinds of work, but not all work is this refined. Pathology takes into account other perspectives as well. Big pharma in Boston or Redwood? Sure, what you said. Some lab operations in Africa? Better work with “inferior tools” than you’d think.

But better source is better source, no matter the size of the lens and spectra’s of light or radio waves. My teams help out with some of those libraries and pipelines at various places, and not all hardware is the same grade. Another discussion for another forum.

Thanks for the insight into the RF 50mm!

Click · Dec 24, 2025

Lovely shot. Amazing details of the bird. Beautiful pose in a clear background. Nicely done, ISv.

EricN · Dec 23, 2025

ISv said:
"A small number of mushrooms are in the ‘edible and tasty’ category, and an even smaller number are in the ‘deadly if ingested’ category."
I agree with that but what is "tasty" for some is kind of "mediocre" or "not tasty" for others!
In most cases it actually deepens on how you prepare it: you don't make chicken, pork, beef e.t.c the same way, no?
Grifola frondosa (aka "hen-of-the-woods") has a flavor similar of some Amanitas (yes! there are edible Amanitas like the most known A. rubescens and even the highly prized A. cesarea) and some other mushrooms (like Leucopaxillus giganteus that is by far more meaty!) with the similar flavor. You may like or dislike it but it's just a different flavor!
I could be an exception but for example I don't like the flavor of any Truffles! Or may be I just haven't tried some prepared by a good chef?!
And a case from Sweden: I went out to look for Boletus edulis but instead found +/- 2 pounds of Cantharellis cibarius. Met a family with two small children and when they saw my basked they were like "where did you find these? We are looking for these!!!"
I gave them my C. cibarius because I'm not realy fan of it.
For my big surprize they gave me their collection of B. edulis!!! I asked few times "are you sure?!!!" but they were so happy with the Cantharelle!
It was more Boletus than I was expecting to find and lately gave half to a friend!

Because I can't resist going off topic, does anyone know the evolutionary advantages of various properties of mushrooms?

EricN · Dec 23, 2025

AlanF said:
Now you know how Franz Liebkind felt. We have a Maximilian posting (not Bialystsock, fortunately) and we need more of the cast.

"... this land is happy and gayyyy!"

neuroanatomist · Dec 23, 2025

DocInfoSci said:
Wait, are you saying that Canon’s digitally corrected lenses are already corrected in the raw file itself and digital optimizer isn’t needed? And therefore any third party editor gets the same benefit of Canon’s software corrections before their own third party corrections are applied? i.e., I could theoretically put the RF lens on a Nikon or Sony body with an adapter and get the same image for the same shooting situation like I could with an EF lens?

Answered by others already, I think. But I did enjoy watching The Nutcracker performed by the Boston Ballet while those answers were provided.

DocInfoSci said:
Is the RF performance equal or better without correction? Or did Canon just try harder with the software? Not being facetious, I don’t know the answer and you might.

It’s the lens optics. The EF 50/1.2 is the standard double Gauss design that’s been around almost as long as lenses, the RF 50/1.2 is a modern design that delivers much better performance.

The RF version has 15 elements (including 3 aspherical lenses and a UD lens) vs. 8 in the EF (with just one aspherical lens), and as a result the former is 400 g heavier and 40 mm longer…but optically far superior before the (almost unnecessary) digital corrections.

Screenshot 2025-12-23 at 11.45.47 PM.png

DocInfoSci said:
Uh, huh — I didn’t say that I don’t use corrective software, the opposite. I just prefer to start with better source material and apply software as an option and not a necessity for missing corner data, etc.

I get the preference. But ‘better source material’ isn’t free, the cost is usually size, weight, and actual cost (for example, the RF 50/1.2 lists for over $1000 more than the EF).

OTOH, the 10-20/4 is optically as good (after correction) as the EF 11-24/4, and the former is smaller, lighter and much cheaper…and it goes past 11 (RIP, Rob

).

DocInfoSci said:
For personal work I’m OK with optional correction that I tend to do all the time anyhow. For lab image capture and processing by AI pipelines I’ll hope the labs stick with EF or third party for now.

We don’t capture images in the lab with MILC lenses, we use microscope objectives. Our automated cell-based high-throughout screening system for small molecule libraries captures ~64,500 images per day. Each of those images has digital corrections applied before being processed by ML-driven algorithms to quantify the effects of the compounds on the cells.

EricN · Dec 23, 2025

ISv said:
Only this from today! And for this one I was scolded: "you got so close to the bird!" - you scared it!!! Well, I was actually "zooming" back because the bird was coming closer and closer to me! That women passed in front of my lens and the bird was still there!!!
Some people are ignorant or just a morons?! Any way, only the bird from today...

I think it's hard to scare a bird that looks like it's covered with blood! I wouldn't want it coming closer to me! Nightmare before Christmas?
I hope there was a monkey nearby to give her some poop for Christmas, but nobody is this lucky. Maybe, she'll get drunk at a holiday party, fall down and knock some sense into her head.

ISv · Dec 23, 2025

Today's catch!

ISv · Dec 23, 2025

Only this from today! And for this one I was scolded: "you got so close to the bird!" - you scared it!!! Well, I was actually "zooming" back because the bird was coming closer and closer to me! That women passed in front of my lens and the bird was still there!!!
Some people are ignorant or just a morons?! Any way, only the bird from today...

ISv · Dec 23, 2025

neuroanatomist said:
No idea about the specific mushroom, but the overwhelming majority of mushrooms fall into the category of ‘edible but not tasty and will probably cause some GI discomfort’. A small number of mushrooms are in the ‘edible and tasty’ category, and an even smaller number are in the ‘deadly if ingested’ category.

The hen-of-the-woods falls into the large edible but not tasty group.

View attachment 227204

"A small number of mushrooms are in the ‘edible and tasty’ category, and an even smaller number are in the ‘deadly if ingested’ category."
I agree with that but what is "tasty" for some is kind of "mediocre" or "not tasty" for others!
In most cases it actually deepens on how you prepare it: you don't make chicken, pork, beef e.t.c the same way, no?
Grifola frondosa (aka "hen-of-the-woods") has a flavor similar of some Amanitas (yes! there are edible Amanitas like the most known A. rubescens and even the highly prized A. cesarea) and some other mushrooms (like Leucopaxillus giganteus that is by far more meaty!) with the similar flavor. You may like or dislike it but it's just a different flavor!
I could be an exception but for example I don't like the flavor of any Truffles! Or may be I just haven't tried some prepared by a good chef?!
And a case from Sweden: I went out to look for Boletus edulis but instead found +/- 2 pounds of Cantharellis cibarius. Met a family with two small children and when they saw my basked they were like "where did you find these? We are looking for these!!!"
I gave them my C. cibarius because I'm not realy fan of it.
For my big surprize they gave me their collection of B. edulis!!! I asked few times "are you sure?!!!" but they were so happy with the Cantharelle!
It was more Boletus than I was expecting to find and lately gave half to a friend!

ISv · Dec 23, 2025

Click said:
This is the first time I've seen this mushroom. They're very pretty with their white stripes. Are they edible?

I don't think the edibility is known but judging by some other features they should be in section Xanthodermatei. It means they should be +/- mildly to moderate toxic (as all others from that section of the genus). In the literature you may find that "some people can eat" specifically A. xanthodermus. I don't think it's about the person who eats it. I had an experience in Bulgaria when one of my colleagues came with a jar of marinated A. xanthodermus. She was insisting that "many people" of that place are collecting the mushrooms without ill effects. We (5-6 people) tried it and nothing happen (symptoms are coming rather fast with that kind of toxins). I think it's a case of where you are collecting such a mushrooms!
The bottom line: I wouldn't eat Agaricus of that section even in survival mode (huh - especially in that mode!)!!!!
And BTW that mushrooms were with metallic taste. No reason to collect them even if you know they are not toxic!

slclickr8 · Dec 23, 2025

The M5 with the 22 was a great 2nd camera for me for a few years. It rarely gets a mention but I was impressed from the first look and feel. Even for larger hands it just worked.

ashmadux · Dec 23, 2025

Canons lazy, 'were not trying' direction with RFS is super unfortunate. My m5/m62 + 22f2 and 11-20 is still in service, and was hoping to replace them. both lenses simply DELIVER. So I agree with everything in this writeup. Somebody high up at canon really came to hate the M series, IMHO.

To this day I'm still amazed at the output from the 22f2 especially. The 22 is not super wide, but f2 flexibility, great build, and no hood needed. Superb iq. The 11-22 was used for my widescapes any chance i got. Too convinent, and 32p, sharp corners on the m62. Pure win.

The m1 served me well for years -I bought the m50 in 2019 and didn't like it much. But the build is phenomenal..compact, angular, solid. It went back in the box for 2 years. I bought the m62 to replace that (FOUR versions from canon refurb, 2 was DOA) , and learned about the shutter shock phenomenon that pretty much all reviewers skipped over. Totally random AF misses. And the bad internal battery issue, that the con tech told me they dont fix. The m50 came back otu of the box, and history was made

.

That said, the s9 has otherwise ended my crop camera career. Don't need an evf, Im well trained on the original m1 bac screen only use case. It's small compared to the r5. It's fantastic.

I waiting for canon...and I'm glad thats over. Cheers to the EFM - good stuff.

John Wilde · Dec 23, 2025

I thought Canon's camera assembly was so robotic/automated that labor costs weren't an issue.

slclickr8 · Dec 23, 2025

LDS said:
Meanwhile, Fujy sells a lot of compatcs with buttons and dials. And probably those looking again for compact cameras and using old models are not exactly looing for touch screens, Since a camera unlike a smartphone is designed for a single task, it's bette driven by a specific interface. Sure, the smartphone crowd has to learn something new - if this is a real barrier... mankind is doomed.

I just returned to Canon after 25+ years with EOS and a switch to Fuji for the past 4. I thought the switchback through carefully and slept on it for the past year.
Since I liked the Fuji color science, 40MP crop friendly + IBIS it really came down to ergonomics and my constant fight with the unintuitive menu system (BSNYC would kill me for that term). I was bumping dials and buttons left and right...it's a pretty crowded machine.
My macro suffered, there was too much to toy with and the subpar AF after being spoiled by Canon 3, 5 & 6 series bodies from the EOS 3 to the R6 was really the final straw.
I had no flow.

Canon in hand, flow returned

becceric · Dec 23, 2025

Contrasty fellows! I particularly like the congregation in the first photo.

DocInfoSci · Dec 23, 2025

AlanF said:
Please explain the 2nd sentence. I do have a little background in molecular biology but the meaning escapes me.

Sure - it’s when missing data is guessed.

When reading in chemistry data like which genes were active in a cell in a tissue slice it’s common to have no value read. Could be for all sorts of reasons.

To get around that some people will fill in the blanks with (educated) guesses. It could be that many similar tissue slices are scanned and averages are made for each approximate cell location, or perhaps neighboring cells with values are used to determine what likely was going on.

But a guess is a guess, no matter how good. It’s still invented.

If everyone knows that and is appropriately cautious then all is well. If not, or the software using the data is unaware, then overall errors can be made. Not unlike the use or abuse of rounding, which is handy but can compound into an error.

m4ndr4ke · Dec 23, 2025

DocInfoSci said:
OMG. Uh, yeah… DPP or the camera applies the DLO data. Let me extract the rake from my face. And then get more coffee…

Yeah, it's probably just one line in Exif data, that DPP reads and applies accordingly, but the RAW image data is not really modified.

DocInfoSci said:
Interesting! Maybe they’re sharing now, at least partially!

Actually, I have to correct myself: the files from the R5 II do the same, but those from my original R6 do not.
Also, I updated Adobe Camera RAW today, and now it has profile for the 45mm, but I can still show the difference:

R5 II on the left, my original R6 on the right. Both photographs are corrected for vignetting and distortion.
Canon is including lens profiles in the RAW file now or, at least, Adobe is able to read that information for newer cameras.

Prior to this update, the photographs from my R6 with the 45mm had no correction at all on ACR, while with the other cameras they had since day one.

I much prefer this approach, since Adobe profiles tend to overcorrect.