Richard-CN said:

you aren't seriously comparing the EF 24mm f1.4 vs the RF 24mm f1.4 and completely ignoring the fact that the RF 24mm takes the EF version out to the woodshed in terms of image quality?


mechnical linking with no power on is a weird hill to die on when the entire view finder optical path for mirrorless.. requires power.

Click to expand...

I have yet to see the slaughter with my own eyes, but I'll compare when I get the chance to properly play with the RF 24 based on your comment! Not that I have ever — I mean ever — complained about my 24mm quality outside of astro. But I believe you when you suggest you have.

To be fair, I was comparing the EF 24mm 1.4 ii with the EF 24-70 4 IS and noting the effect on scene inclusion due to the digital corrections. I have assumed that the larger exit on the prime has much to do with this outcome. Physics being what it is, I assume the same issues in the RF line when optics are compared. I suspect that the RF "glass" performance is really more about other factors such as the shorter distance from exit to sensor, improved IS, etc. and had the EF lines continued the glass would otherwise have been as good anyhow. I mean, look at where the big whites landed, or the 11-24 — it seems "glass" of itself had been figured out.

By the way, have you compared the amount of scene included in the final images between the EF 24 and the RF 24? Just curious. Is the same amount of view captured after digital corrections, or is one getting shorted? If the EF is getting shorted then that would be astounding and say a lot about the progress of Canon's lens element engineering capabilities in a short period of time.

It also occurs to me that if Canon makes the exit optics in such a way that the projected image covers the sensor then the same effect as the larger glass in previous iterations is probably achieved. I don't recall anyone looking at and remarking the projected image size. I'm curious.

I think I was simply turned off to the RF way of MTF by the initial one-shot limited MTF, or the need for a switch, or the need for a menu config, or the fact that still not all RF lenses can yet MTF with servo on a whim. The power thing just makes it all the more obvious. MTF in my approach is important, and I really like servo. I'm aware from an earlier discussion that I need to rent / borrow some modern RF lenses and try again.

I do also like the tactile feel of the mechanical linking. As a person who sometimes has the luxury of enjoying the experience that includes focusing just right it's nice to have the slight resistance, give, etc. when focusing. My EF 40 STM just feels... disconnected... when focusing; the exact focus achieved doesn't totally line up with the human input. It's subtle, but it is there. So it has been thus for the earlier RF lenses that I tried. It's a meh feel. Cheap even, which is ironic. Perhaps Canon has made it much better? I just haven't been bothered to check lately.

I hope an R10 II comes soon after the R7 II.

dwkdnvr said:

I agree with this, which is why I continue to be surprised by the fact that 39MP seems to be *THE* one thing that has been consistent in the rumors. Of all the complaints about the R7 from a birding perspective resolution seems to be well down the list. Staying at 32MP would be perfectly fine as long as you have the readout speed and AF performance expected of an up-market birding-focused body. Heck, a fully stacked 26MP sensor as in the X-H2S might even be preferable to a 39MP one as it would offer faster frame rates and deeper buffers on the same hardware.

Click to expand...

For me, the 39MP aligns with 8k UHD. It hits a spec sheet tick box and people won't quibble the difference with DCI.

45MP (3:2) is needed for 8KDCI and the R5 hits that with internal raw recording and records UHD as well of course which is cropped. Overkill for most users.

My guess that if the sensor is stacked then the extra AF processor would be added meaning 3 bodies with it. Additional volume should decrease the unit cost and will have class leading performance but it will impact the price segmentation.

mimbu said:

I'd love to see Canon up their sensor game, but they don't seem to want to spend the money. They should just buy Sony sensors, but they never will.

Click to expand...

Canon has used Sony sensors in the past... for their point and shoot. Not for their DLSR/MILC though.

Dual pixel has been a core part of Canon's AF and first released it with the 70D in 2013!
Not sure when Sony actually caught up to Canon's AF but it is competitive now.
Canon's current sensors seem to be quite competitive with Sony despite the differences in manufacturing scale and are happy to fund new R&D for sensor development.
The R5's FSI sensor was still competitive against BSI Sony sensors.
We need to also accept that Canon has a good catalogue of sensors for industrial usage.

What is Canon missing out on by not using Sony?

Exploreshootshare said:

One more thing comes to mind:
With the R7ii getting a 39 mp stacked back-side illuminated sensor (with IBIS of course) and going (way?!) upmarket, I believe there is room for a IBIS equipped R10ii. If this happens, Canon would have one the most intriguing APS-C line-up, even though the native lens portfolio is nothing to brag about.

Click to expand...

First we hear that canon is doomed that they don't allow 3rd party lenses and now complaints that their native lens portfolio is not sufficient even though there are 3rd party options for RFs sensors.

Richard-CN said:

The Canon EOS 5D series has been at the core of innovation in digital photography for two decades, with each successive model in the lineup raising the bar for innovation in photography equipment, starting with the original EOS 5D in 2005, which was a game-changer in photography, being the first full-frame DSLR that provided unparalleled […]

See full article...

Click to expand...

https://personal.canon.jp/product/camera/eos/
Still shows the 5Div in the list of current products
Interestingly, when you try to add the 5Div to the cart, it then shows the "end-of-sale".

https://personal.canon.jp/product/camera/eos/old-products
doesn't show the 5Div in it (yet).
The 1DXiii now appears in the discontinued list.

mclaren777 said:

Nothing will ever make me sell mine. They are still my go-to wedding cameras and I'm pissed that the pandemic killed any chance of getting a 5DV.

Click to expand...

What makes you feel that a 5Dv would have come out if the pandemic hadn't occurred?
The pandemic broke out early 2020 and the R5/R6 was released July 2020 and the 1DXiii in Feb-2020.
The pandemic may have delayed the R5/6 release as Canon teased for ~6 months before hand.
The R/RP reused 5Div/6Dii sensors and sensors take ages to develop and bring to market.
Do you think that a 5Dv would have used the R5 sensor?

Michael T said:

Canon really needs a 14-50mm f2.8 for their APC. Nikon has brought one out.

Click to expand...

The Sigma 17-40 f/1.8 is a nice option. Interesting that it is not available in Nikon mount. That could be that Nikon doesn't want competition for their 14-50 or maybe Sigma is actually making the 14-50 for them. Licensing deals involve bilateral back scratching, and Canon has clearly given Sigma considerable space in the RF-s realm.

neuroanatomist said:

In fact, it is known at least through 2024. Nikkei publishes the global market share data annually (in late summer) based on reporting from industry groups (Camera & Imaging Products Association aka CIPA, and Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association aka JEITA). Canon led the MILC market in 2022, 2023 and 2024, and given their ~8% lead in 2024 it is almost certain they led it last year, as well.


According to the industry groups (to which both Canon and Sony belong), in 2024 Canon shipped 2.05M MILCs and Sony shipped 1.63M. That year, Canon also shipped 790K DSLRs, which was about 80% of the global market.

As a reality check, the link I posted to the FujiRumors article summarizing the Nikkei report (in the other thread in which @mimbu made the same false claim) lists Canon's ILC shipments for 2024 as 2.84M units, a number that exactly matches that in Canon's FY2024 presentation.

Click to expand...

If you do the math, it comes to one ILC every six seconds!!! (49 work weeks, 6 working days a week, two shifts a day,...) Of course, it is coming from multiple locations but still. By the time you read my blurb Canon made three cameras - and not a single R7Mk2 that we can see. ULD shipping containers are scarce beginning of June

Noreaster said:

Hooded Merganser

Click to expand...

Very nice series. I especially like the 3rd shot. Well done.

InternalRevenue said:

For those thinking an R10ii would go up-market, how would you expect it to substantially differentiate itself from a reduced-price R7 (due to the R7ii)? Stickier autofocus and faster (but not stacked) sensor? The size would likely increase as well with the inclusion of IBIS.

Click to expand...

It would be one or the other. *Either* they keep the existing R7 *or* they shift the R10MkII up-market to (partially) fill the gap

For those thinking an R10ii would go up-market, how would you expect it to substantially differentiate itself from a reduced-price R7 (due to the R7ii)? Stickier autofocus and faster (but not stacked) sensor? The size would likely increase as well with the inclusion of IBIS.

Canon really needs a 14-50mm f2.8 for their APC. Nikon has brought one out.

dwkdnvr said:

I agree with this, which is why I continue to be surprised by the fact that 39MP seems to be *THE* one thing that has been consistent in the rumors. Of all the complaints about the R7 from a birding perspective resolution seems to be well down the list. Staying at 32MP would be perfectly fine as long as you have the readout speed and AF performance expected of an up-market birding-focused body. Heck, a fully stacked 26MP sensor as in the X-H2S might even be preferable to a 39MP one as it would offer faster frame rates and deeper buffers on the same hardware.

I'm expecting an R10II to move up and get IBIS to fill that niche, but it's a similar outcome - the R7II expands the range/footprint and leaves a gap in the lineup right where the existing R7 fits.

Click to expand...

Could be, but moving the R10 upmarket leaves a hole between it an the R50 and that is a bigger market space due to the lower price. for the xxD customer, the R7 I is still a very nice camera. The ones wanting more want quite a bit more and likely are willing to pay for that, but in spite of the popularity of the 7D II with enthusiasts, I suspect Canon sold a lot more 70D's than 7D II's. Putting IBIS in the r10 would also fatten it up and part of the beauty of the R10 (and R8) is small size and light weight. Notably, Canon doesn't make any RFs lenses without IS (other than the dual fisheye VR lens), so for the bulk of the APS-c market, IBIS is possibly somewhat redundant.

dcm said:

According to AI, this simplifies to finding the same object in both images (x fl and 105 fl) and measuring the pixel height in both images. Then you can determine your focal length by:

x = 105 x ( hx / h105)

Click to expand...

I don’t understand this. I have a specific frame that I want to identify at what zoom (somewhere between 24mm and 105mm) it was taken. I read both your responses and the info from the link and I don’t understand it.

AlanF said:

First time I've got shots of otters. This pair was quite amorous (R5ii + RF 200-800mm).

Click to expand...

I really like your series. Especially the first one. Well done, Alan.

Nothing will ever make me sell mine. They are still my go-to wedding cameras and I'm pissed that the pandemic killed any chance of getting a 5DV.

Del Paso said:

FOX News have some vacancies, interested?

Click to expand...

Since we're apparently all expected to believe lies that people say, Google's AI reports that, "Based on available search results, there is no specific, currently listed Japan-based correspondent for Fox News." That suggests there's an opportunity there for @mimbu. As I previously suggested, s/he seems to think only the BCN Award data matter and that those data represent the entire world (instead what they actually represent – about half of the retail sales in Japan). I can picture him/her sitting behind the anchor desk, wearing glasses to try and look smart, but needing Coke-bottle lenses in them to try and correct for a pathologically myopic world view.

01Spino94 said:

If the rumor is correct and the R7 Mark II heads for true 7D territory, there will be room for the R10 Mark II to move into the XXD space. The R50 is already pretty much in DRebel territory, and the R100 can continue to be awful so people have something to complain about on internet fora.

Click to expand...

I actually think the R100 has a good place as the camera you buy to be abused. The one you are happy to leave at a camera trap for days, dangle in precious positions or modify for Astro or infrared etc.

Very interesting news. Backside-illuminated stacked might be a good indication for faster readout which is - for me - welcome for video. And when they have some 240 or 360 fps mode (latter in 1280x720) that would be welcome.
Hopefulle they will keep the auto leveling by sensor rotation and add S&F mode (I think so because R6 iii got it).
Most interesting minor point is: Where goes the thumb wheel? R7 position is comfortable but incompatible with the R6 e.g.
Most interesting larger ergomics point: Does the R7 get a third wheel? Would be really convenient.

Exploreshootshare said:

Well, you got me here I´m definitely lot not a marketing expert
Hm, if stacked sensor with 39 mp and R5/ r6 like ergonomics are true, I´d believe somewhere around 2.200 € rrp. It leaves enough room towards the R6iii and for cash back rebates. In the long run, I´d guess it'll settle in at around 1.700-1.800 €. Notice: Just a guess an enthusiastic Canon user.

Click to expand...

The only fully-stacked APS-C body on the market currently is the Fuji X-H2S which is 26MP and lists for $2800USD (2500 € from what I can tell). (List price was $2499 when introduced). The OM System OM-1 is a fully stacked 20MP M/43 sensor and lists for (I think) 2199 €. Obviously they don't necessarily sell for these prices now as they've been on the market for a while, but I think list prices definitely 'set the expectation' on pricing.

I think 2200€ is optimistic for a 39MP fully stacked sensor as it would represent unprecedented value in the market and that generally isn't what Canon does. Unfortunately, this is why the apparent 'accuracy' of the 39MP number is concerning - to me it likely means either a partially-stacked sensor and the compromises that go with it OR a much higher price than I was hoping for.

mimbu said:

Sure, that's why Canon specifically mentions in their press release that they lead the market for combined MILC+DSLR sales, but says nothing at all about MILC sales alone:

Canon Celebrates 23^rd Consecutive Year of No. 1 Share of Global Interchangeable-lens Digital Camera Market

Canon Inc. announced today that the company’s interchangeable-lens digital cameras (digital SLR and mirrorless cameras) have maintained the No. 1 share of the global ...

asia.canon

Sony still sells more MILCs than Canon does. It's gotten pretty close and will likely remain very close. There's a decent chance Canon will overtake Sony if Sony doesn't wake up and start selling some more lower end APS-C cameras. The ZV-E10II has done extremely well, but it's not enough on its own.

Click to expand...

FOX News have some vacancies, interested?

Interesting development. The R7 II with 100-500 mm lens would be a lightweight wildlife camera. Also great for semi-macro work.

Bob Howland said:

How much more do you think an R7-2 would/should cost than an R7?

Click to expand...

Well, you got me here I´m definitely lot not a marketing expert
Hm, if stacked sensor with 39 mp and R5/ r6 like ergonomics are true, I´d believe somewhere around 2.200 € rrp. It leaves enough room towards the R6iii and for cash back rebates. In the long run, I´d guess it'll settle in at around 1.700-1.800 €. Notice: Just a guess an enthusiastic Canon user.