Ocellated Turkey seen while birding at La Milpa Archaeological Site in Belize, April, 2026.

R5MkII RF200-800mm

P-visie said:

My understanding is that the body in the image is a mockup, maybe AI generated. Maybe the new remote supports zooming the PZ lens.

Click to expand...

Yep. The W and T labels on the control in the image are such that the subject in front of the camera can read them, and they would be upside-down for the person holding the camera, which doesn't make sense.

Del Paso said:

If see it right, it's the R6 V that will have the switch to change focal length. Maybe the RF 20-50 will keep a normal ring for manual focal changes and integrate a camera-controlled motor? I guess many of us would prefer this option over a switch on the lens.

Click to expand...

My understanding is that the body in the image is a mockup, maybe AI generated. Maybe the new remote supports zooming the PZ lens.

A couple from around the house.

"White-throated Sparrow"

EOS R1, RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM + RF 1.4x @ 700mm, 1/800 s, f/10, ISO 3200

"Hopping Titmouse"

EOS R1, RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM + RF 1.4x @ 700mm, 1/800 s, f/10, ISO 20000

neuroanatomist said:

I use M with Auto ISO very frequently. [...]

Click to expand...

Awesome — thanks for the detailed reply! That all makes sense to me. I'll have to give it a go myself when I land and have a minute. Usually if I'm in M I'm running strobes and even with ambient mixes I like to lock it all down. Always fun to try new approaches, though.

Del Paso said:

If see it right, it's the R6 V that will have the switch to change focal length. Maybe the RF 20-50 will keep a normal ring for manual focal changes and integrate a camera-controlled motor? I guess many of us would prefer this option over a switch on the lens.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I think that's unlikely based on the rumored lens name, since there is already a PZ lens (RF-S 14-30 PZ) where the focal length is controlled by the 'zoom ring' (i.e., ring-shaped rocker switch) on the lens. But having a control on the camera would also make sense, so I can see having that in addition to the one on the lens.

Edit: to clarify, I meant unlikely that the RF 20-50 PZ will have a 'normal' zoom ring. The R50 V has a zoom control around the shutter button like the mockup in the main page post, so it seems very likely that an R6 V would have the same control.

DocInfoSci said:

This is interesting. I agree that I find M just fine, but I tend to not use it in auto ISO mode. For that I have Fv.

Click to expand...

I use M with Auto ISO very frequently. Typically at performances where I need to independently vary from a wide aperture for a single subject to a narrower aperture for several subjects and faster shutter speed when people are moving vs. a slower one when they are still. M with Auto ISO lets me quickly vary one or both of those settings while letting the camera set the ISO. Fv mode would allow that, also, but I find it easier and faster to have each setting on a separate control dial. Most of these are in relatively poorly lit venues, so the idea is to select the widest aperture and slowest shutter speed feasible based on the subject(s) and movement to minimize the auto-selected ISO.

DocInfoSci said:

What I would expect (my camera is packed for a trip or I'd test) is that in auto ISO mode M would target a balanced image -- i.e., an exposure of +/- 0, to put it in a crude way. Which is probably why Canon doesn't bother in M mode — either the image is balanced, or you're being "creative."

Click to expand...

Yes, in M mode with Auto ISO you set the aperture and shutter speed and the camera sets the ISO based on the metered exposure.

The point is that Canon does enable use of EC in M mode. I have no idea why @Noise seems to think it doesn't work.

In some scenarios, applying EC in the above use cases is helpful. For example, if a performer is spot-lit then I can dial in a bit of negative EC to avoid blowing out the highlights on the subject, where the exposure would otherwise be weighted to include some of the dark background.

On my 1D X, there was the option for spot metering linked to the AF point, which meant much less need for EC in that scenario. I have no idea why that feature was dropped with Canon's MILCs. They kept it restricted to 1-series DSLRs, and I presumed —incorrectly— that even though the R3 lacked the feature, the R1 would have it. I can't see a technical reason for it, if anything it would be easier to implement with both AF and metering coming from the image sensor, rather than two other independent non-image sensors as was the case on a DSLR.

DocInfoSci said:

Let's assume that's how it works for a second — the balanced image of 0 is the target.

Click to expand...

No need to assume, that's how it works with all Auto exposure settings. The aim is to achieve the metered (what you call balanced or 0) exposure.

DocInfoSci said:

If I had auto ISO on but the shutter and aperture were set in such a way that auto ISO cannot achieve a balanced image (e.g., my lens cap is on because it's a really slow coffee morning) would the idea be that an EC metric showed that 0 could not be achieved? i.e., -3 or worse.

Click to expand...

No, the EC setting just shows where it's set...0, or however much positive or negative compensation you've applied. The metered exposure is shown by the exposure meter, and if the camera cannot achieve the metered exposure with the available ISO settings, then the exposure meter shows that. If it's beyond the range of the meter such as if you left the lens cap on, then the meter shows an arrow at the end of the range.

For example, here's my R1 with the 100-500 + 1.4x mounted, M mode with EC set to +1, but the lens cap is on so the max allowed ISO of 51200 is still >3 stops underexposed, indicated by the little down-arrow at the bottom of the exposure meter on the right side of the LCD.



Here, with the lens cap off (and the shutter speed lowered a bit to get the ISO into the usable range), you can see with the +1 EC setting applied the exposure meter reflects an exposure that's one stop over the metered exposure (which would be ISO 6400).

If see it right, it's the R6 V that will have the switch to change focal length. Maybe the RF 20-50 will keep a normal ring for manual focal changes and integrate a camera-controlled motor? I guess many of us would prefer this option over a switch on the lens.

neuroanatomist said:

Huh? What doesn’t work about it?

EC applies to Auto ISO in M mode…for example in M at 1/100, f/2.8 if the camera meters ISO 3200 and I apply +1 EC, then the camera meters ISO 6400.

I don’t have a R5II or R6III that are also slated for the rumored update, but that what happens on my R1. It’s the same on my R8 and even on my PowerShot V1 and M6.

Are you expecting something different?

Click to expand...

This is interesting. I agree that I find M just fine, but I tend to not use it in auto ISO mode. For that I have Fv.

What I would expect (my camera is packed for a trip or I'd test) is that in auto ISO mode M would target a balanced image -- i.e., an exposure of +/- 0, to put it in a crude way. Which is probably why Canon doesn't bother in M mode — either the image is balanced, or you're being "creative."

Let's assume that's how it works for a second — the balanced image of 0 is the target. If I had auto ISO on but the shutter and aperture were set in such a way that auto ISO cannot achieve a balanced image (e.g., my lens cap is on because it's a really slow coffee morning) would the idea be that an EC metric showed that 0 could not be achieved? i.e., -3 or worse.

But even if, wouldn't a histogram achieve such? To such a degree of the JPEG conversion, at any rate.

@Noise — what is the effect and use that you're trying to achieve?

DocInfoSci said:

Patch notes promise much,
Blank screen, no Hall of Souls found,
Toggle button waits.

Click to expand...

Canon’s hidden joy
Toggle button waits unused—
Firmware dreams of eggs

I hope the new remote has a servo rocker with the option to be plugged in. It would be nice to have a "somewhat parfocal," less expensive, baby CN-30 40-1200mm too!

EOS 4 Life said:

I want Canon to make a camera with 80+ MP

Click to expand...

A lot of people expected the A7R VI would be exactly that. An 80mp+ BSI sensor with similar performance characteristics to the existing 61mp sensor. It seems Sony has opted to take a different path, and I'm pretty excited to see what they bring.

EOS 4 Life said:

I am not convinced that it is likely.
I will believe it when I see it.

Click to expand...

I can understand the skepticism because it would be a highly disruptive camera. A 67mp camera that can shoot FF images at 60fps? And 30mp 1.5x APS-C images at probably even higher frame rates? Combined with Sony's latest dual-readout system to increase DR? It's the dream camera for a lot people who do landscape or wildlife, or both. Or almost anything really. May 13 is going to be a very interesting day.

While this is indeed compatible with the Canon R5m2, I wish there was an affordable 3rd party cooling fan that actually worked like the Canon CF-R20EP. The R5m2 was specifically designed to have a vent in it so that a fan could blast air through it!

It seems like the TEC is simply a Peltier cooler.

Add internal NDs and I would be sold.

mimbu said:

The gap from 45mp to 61mp was only about a 16% increase in linear resolution. It's not nothing, but it's not huge.

Click to expand...

I want Canon to make a camera with 80+ MP

mimbu said:

The A7R VI is likely to get the 67mp fully stacked sensor

Click to expand...

I am not convinced that it is likely.
I will believe it when I see it.

Uneternal said:

Personally, I think Sony pushing for more and more megapixels is as silly as Fujifilm's 40MP.
At 67MP, the diffraction limit already sets in at f/5.6.

Click to expand...

At 45mp it's around f6.5, at 61mp it's around f5.6, and at 67mp it's around f5.4.

Yet we already know that on 45mp and 61mp cameras, image sharpness often increases until around f8.0, depending on the lens. So I think this gets a bit tricky because there are two different things being mixed together.

Diffraction can be measurable at the pixel level before it becomes the dominant thing limiting the image. A lens can still improve when stopped down because aberrations, field curvature, and corner performance may improve more than diffraction hurts. That is why f8 can still be the sharpest aperture overall, even if diffraction technically started to matter before then.

So saying diffraction "sets in" at f5.6 is true in a narrow pixel-level sense, but it does not mean f5.6 is the sharpness limit, or that higher resolution is pointless past that. It just means the returns might get smaller.

MSH411 said:

As is this site but that doesn't appear to bother you.

Click to expand...

Posts and links on this site have a title and/or a description. Notice how you know where a click will take you? That's the difference between a courteously posted link and anonymous slop.

MSH411 said:

Since the title of this post is The Canon EOS R6 V and RF 20-50mm f/4L IS USM PZ are Coming May 13 anyone with a degree of common sense would understand that it is a response to information on the R6 V.

Click to expand...

Anyone with a modicum of common sense who has spent any amount of time on the Internet knows that there are always random, tangential and irrelevant links being posted in forum threads. There was nothing to distinguish yours from such slop, quite the opposite – typically when irrelevant (or worse) links are posted, the poster will actively try to anonymize or mask the destination of the click.

Anyone with a degree of common sense would not click on an anonymous link. Apparently you think it's fine to post something like click this cool link I found. Good luck with that.

davidespinosa said:

It's a new video from Ordinary Filmmaker titled "Canon Shocks by giving video shooters key features they demanded".

Click to expand...

I watched a few of Ordinary Filmmaker's videos and get a strong feeling that most of them were just dressed up/recycled stuff from Canon Rumors (i.e. this site). There is no real new info, and it takes longer to watch the video than reading the succinct summaries here.

Even if they both announce on the same day, both cameras don't really compete. Sony aims for high-end photography professionals, and Canon targets the advanced video maker crowd (Gen Z TikTok kiddies).

Personally, I think Sony pushing for more and more megapixels is as silly as Fujifilm's 40MP.
At 67MP, the diffraction limit already sets in at f/5.6.

So cute!

Very dynamic shot. Nicely done, Alan.

I really like your series. Well done, Noreaster.