neuroanatomist said:

So we’re playing ‘mine is bigger than yours’?

Ok, I’ll see your Zeiss 1700mm f/4 and raise you a Canon 5200mm f/14.

View attachment 228818

It’s a great lens, as long as your subject is further away than the minimum focus distance…

Click to expand...

Yepp, I know, there is also a youtube video about this crazy catadioptric lens Canon once made - but for 35mm format, if I remember correctly, not for medium format like the Zeiss monster. I guess you really run into trouble with such a huge focal length in many settings because of atmospheric blur. If Canon ever will come up with a modern version I'd highly recommend them to include an adaptive optics system to compensate for the distortion of incoming light wave fronts, like in astronomical telescopes (I edit a German physics magazine so I deal frequently with in-depth reviews of such technologies). That, of course, would only get haze caused by temperature gradients in the air better controlled, not dusty and/or misty or smog conditions.

AlanF said:

Canon recognises and locks on to birds faster than Sony or even more so than Nikon. However, they are meant to have stickier tracking. (Faster AF acquisition is more important for me). Recently, I was shooting Peregrines and Kestrels side-by-side with my R5ii +RF 200-800mm and someone with the Sony A1ii and the 300mm f/2.8 + 2xTC against a tricky background. I was much more successful at catching them. It's probably a software thing and they should be able to catch up.

Click to expand...

The symptoms with the Z8 and the Z 600/6.3 are: the camera focuses fast (with no TC attached) and gets in particular very close to in-focus images with the first frame(s), but then starts to struggle with following frames, and the AF sort of micro-pumps around the precise focus position. First we thought it's a problem with object detection but switching off "birds" or switching it completely off doesn't really help (3D tracking activated). So the problem might be sitting deeper in the system, maybe I have to wipe dust off my old lenscal tool and check the system with it. Nikon's menus of the Z cameras allow for AF calibration, I have briefly seen at least for the Z6 III and 7 on the internet. I always thought that AFMA isn't needed anymore with modern ML cameras, but with Nikon you never know...

As expected from the observed moon flare, sun flare is pretty noticeable with RF 14/1.4. If the sun is in the sky, with the 14mm FoV there's a good chance it will be in the frame.

"Mount Auburn Sphinx"

EOS R1, RF 14mm f/1.4L VCM, 1/3200 s, f/1.4, ISO 100

Another advantage to the wide FoV, as long as you're willing to crop away half your image, is that you can avoid the keystone effect in architecture shots by keeping the camera level and still get the whole building in the (top half of the) frame.

"Mount Auburn Cemetery Chapel"

EOS R1, RF 14mm f/1.4L VCM, 1/800 s, f/4.5, ISO 100

Bob Howland said:

Neuro, once again you prove that you're an obnoxious bully.

Click to expand...

You might want to try learning something, instead of just resorting to personal attacks when your blatantly false statements are challenged with facts.

Or keep making foolish statements…it’s really your choice.

neuroanatomist said:

So the circle of confusion is another concept that you find useless? Lol. You are welcome to your own opinions, but not to your own facts. The fact is that the size of the sensor affects the circle of confusion, and the circle of confusion is one of the factors that determines DoF*.

Next, I suppose you’ll attempt some ridiculous reply about your how your personal definition of DoF doesn’t depend on the circle of confusion, or how you mean the ‘lens DoF’ as if DoF were an intrinsic property of a lens (it isn’t), or some other nonsense.

You really should avoid engaging in discussion of the technical aspects of photography. Frankly, your attempts at it are embarrassing.

Spoiler: *There is more than one ‘DoF’

Depth of field requires an image to exist, and thus requires a sensor (or other imaging medium), and the size of the sensor matters. However, the other ‘DoF’ —depth of focus— is independent of sensor size. Depth of focus is the image space counterpart to depth of field, and it’s measured in μm at the image plane. It has little relevance to general photography discussions…at least, little relevance for current cameras.

For DSLRs with dedicated phase detect AF sensors, depth of focus was the underlying basis for the specification of some AF points as ‘high precision’, requiring wider lens apertures (typically f/2.8) to achieve focus accuracy within 1/3 of the depth of focus, instead of one depth of focus for ‘standard’ (typically f/5.6) AF points.

Click to expand...

Neuro, once again you prove that you're an obnoxious bully.

GirlsAreBeautiful said:

Pretty clearly. Lenses prices are outrageous and building a camera seems like hell in comparison.

Click to expand...

To be fair they are pretty different processes: cameras are mostly an assembly of electronic parts, while lenses, especially high end ones, require a lot of time and effort to mold / polish the glass elements

scyrene said:

Canon has light and affordable tele primes, the 600 and 800 f/11.

Click to expand...

And they also have DO (PF in Nikon parlance) elements.

But apparently those don’t count as ‘innovative’ lenses…at least, not in the minds of those who think Canon must make the lens(es) they personally want, or else. Or else, what? Yeah.

justaCanonuser said:

Well, Canon's 1200mm f/5.6 was still pocketable compared to the medium format 1700mm f/4.0 tele lens that Zeiss designed especially for a rich Sheikh and his Hasselblad(s). I guess this guy hasn't to carry that lens by himself .

Massive 1700mm Carl Zeiss Lens

If you thought Nikon's 6mm Fisheye lens from a week ago was crazy, get a load of this Carl Zeiss telephoto lens announced at Photokina back in 2006. The

petapixel.com

View attachment 228817

Click to expand...

So we’re playing ‘mine is bigger than yours’?

Ok, I’ll see your Zeiss 1700mm f/4 and raise you a Canon 5200mm f/14.



It’s a great lens, as long as your subject is further away than the minimum focus distance…

Bob Howland said:

Update: My point is that the DOF of a lens is entirely independent of the size of the sensor which receives its image.

Click to expand...

So the circle of confusion is another concept that you find useless? Lol. You are welcome to your own opinions, but not to your own facts. The fact is that the size of the sensor affects the circle of confusion, and the circle of confusion is one of the factors that determines DoF*.

Next, I suppose you’ll attempt some ridiculous reply about your how your personal definition of DoF doesn’t depend on the circle of confusion, or how you mean the ‘lens DoF’ as if DoF were an intrinsic property of a lens (it isn’t), or some other nonsense.

You really should avoid engaging in discussion of the technical aspects of photography. Frankly, your attempts at it are embarrassing.

blackcoffee17 said:

Nikon [...] made a whole series of light and affordable tele primes.

Click to expand...

Canon has light and affordable tele primes, the 600 and 800 f/11.

It says in the linked Petapixel article: They will be testing the camera, as the Z9 will be the backbone of the next-generation Handheld Universal Lunar Camera (HULC) used on future Artemis missions, including Artemis III, when humans will step foot on the Moon for the first time since 1972.

Thanks for the additional information on the background.

AlanF said:

The crew is using the D5 as proven technology and introducing the Z9 for future standard use.

Click to expand...

Not so much "introducing the Nikon Z 9 for future standard use" but testing it for deep space use. It's already certified for Low Earth Orbit use and is the standard camera for use on the International Space Station. Additionally, last year Nikon and NASA entered into an agreement for Nikon to produce modified Nikon Z 9 bodies for lunar surface use including glove-friendly controls and dust shielding. That program is called Handheld Universal Lunar Camera (HULC).

roby17269 said:

Better than nothing! But we've been told many times that for manufacturers there is more money in the lenses than in the cameras

Click to expand...

Pretty clearly. Lenses prices are outrageous and building a camera seems like hell in comparison.

AlanF said:

Canon recognises and locks on to birds faster than Sony or even more so than Nikon. However, they are meant to have stickier tracking. (Faster AF acquisition is more important for me). Recently, I was shooting Peregrines and Kestrels side-by-side with my R5ii +RF 200-800mm and someone with the Sony A1ii and the 300mm f/2.8 + 2xTC against a tricky background. I was much more successful at catching them. It's probably a software thing and they should be able to catch up.

Click to expand...

DPAF offers a great deal more focus information than Nikon or Sony have to work with. So long as Canon has that advantage, they are only limited by processing power to stay in the lead with AF. The price, of course, is continually processing twice as many pixels, so the processors are power hungry.

Canon Rumors said:

Yes, there will be a light mode. It's almost ready to test out.

Click to expand...

Cool.

DocInfoSci said:

My kiddo was the topic of interest for far-flung parents, but a cooperative model she was not! But the face pics do reflect an honesty of the moment.

Click to expand...

My daughter goes thru phases... sometimes she wants me taking photos of her, sometimes she loathes it.
Most kids are not models and don't know how to pose / emote.
That's why I much prefer taking photos from a distance when she is playing with friends (like at a bday party): you get the best happy / intense expressions and I've taken a lot of great portraits of her that way. All natural light, no flashes and no photoshop.
It's very very different from fashion / beauty photography... but I cannot deny that having learnt how to take photos of people for fashion has helped me taking photos of kids

DocInfoSci said:

Makes sense. To the chagrin of many would-be employees we interview as much for soft skills as we do technical.

Click to expand...

I interview quite a bit of candidates for the bank and so true it's difficult to find people that have both sides

DocInfoSci said:

Will do! We have a client with a branch in the region, so when it comes time I’ll shout out.

Click to expand...

justaCanonuser said:

If Nikons Z8/9 perform with that lens AF wise like with the Z 600mm f/6.3 PF + 1.4,x extender (latest one from Nikon), I'd really prefer my Canon gear. Shooting side by side with comparable settings, my R5 II + EF 600mm f/4.0 and Canon's 1.4x TC III combo focuses much more reliably than the Nikon gear. I am really disappointed, since I made that 10 k€ gift to my wife as an upgrade of their DSLR F mount gear and hoped it will bring a boost in performance. The opposite is currently the case, and my wife is an experience photographer + she uses exactly the settings recommended by Nikon and Nikon reviewers for birding. Nikon really needs to improve their underwhelming Z AF system.

Click to expand...

Canon recognises and locks on to birds faster than Sony or even more so than Nikon. However, they are meant to have stickier tracking. (Faster AF acquisition is more important for me). Recently, I was shooting Peregrines and Kestrels side-by-side with my R5ii +RF 200-800mm and someone with the Sony A1ii and the 300mm f/2.8 + 2xTC against a tricky background. I was much more successful at catching them. It's probably a software thing and they should be able to catch up.

Canis Lupus said:

Not two TC, but Nikkor Z 600mm f/4 TC VR S is something Canon should have made long ago.

NIKKOR Z 600mm f/4 TC VR S | Z mount Lenses | Nikon Consumer

Click to expand...

If Nikons Z8/9 perform with that lens AF wise like with the Z 600mm f/6.3 PF + 1.4,x extender (latest one from Nikon), I'd really prefer my Canon gear. Shooting side by side with comparable settings, my R5 II + EF 600mm f/4.0 and Canon's 1.4x TC III combo focuses much more reliably than the Nikon gear. I am really disappointed, since I made that 10 k€ gift to my wife as an upgrade of their DSLR F mount gear and hoped it will bring a boost in performance. The opposite is currently the case, and my wife is an experience photographer + she uses exactly the settings recommended by Nikon and Nikon reviewers for birding. Nikon really needs to improve their underwhelming Z AF system.

Exploreshootshare said:

omg, how heavy was this lens? According to google AI, it was 16,8 kg. Instead of a tripod one should have probably used a golf cart Useful for a safari, for sure. But for which sport would one use a lens like this?

Click to expand...

Well, Canon's 1200mm f/5.6 was still pocketable compared to the medium format 1700mm f/4.0 tele lens that Zeiss designed especially for a rich Sheikh and his Hasselblad(s). I guess this guy hasn't to carry that lens by himself .

roby17269 said:

It's quite nuanced in fashion photography... a lot depends on the quality of the team (models, stylists etc.): it's very much a team effort, while other types of photography tend to be much more individual - I've found that access to better models (say) is more important than many other factors.

Click to expand...

My kiddo was the topic of interest for far-flung parents, but a cooperative model she was not! But the face pics do reflect an honesty of the moment.

roby17269 said:

Also other types of toys (lights and modifiers) can be more important than cameras and lenses.

Click to expand...

Very true!

roby17269 said:

I am not saying that the photographer's skills / artistic vision do not matter, they do. A lot. But networking and other "soft" skills count almost as much.

Click to expand...

Makes sense. To the chagrin of many would-be employees we interview as much for soft skills as we do technical.

roby17269 said:

Let me know if you happen to pass by Jersey City / NYC

Click to expand...

Will do! We have a client with a branch in the region, so when it comes time I’ll shout out.

phree_ed said:

How I would have liked a replacement to the 15-85 for my R7 but sorry Canon - too late. I got tired of waiting and just three days ago picked up a Sigma 17-40 f1.8.

Yeah I know it's only 40mm at the long end but I've got it and I won't be stuffing around selling it and purchasing another lens.

But never say never I guess

Click to expand...

I've been using the Sigma 17-40 on my R7 for months. I won't be switching.

P-visie said:

A 600mm f4 with a built in 1.4 extender would leave only a long RF macrolens on my RF lens wishlist.

Click to expand...

I think we can expect a built-in 1.4 extender, because Nikon's current Z 600mm f/4.0 has one. I guess the old rivalry will drive Canon to come up with such a solution.

neuroanatomist said:

Canon has filed patent applications for a switchable 1.4x-2x TC, essentially a 1.4x with a second 1.4x that flips out. Not sure it will become a product, but Canon is certainly thinking about such an optic.

View attachment 228790

Click to expand...

Ah, thanks for sharing! Looks quite complex...

Maximilian said:

I finally managed to go outside again to get some fresh air.
The winter damselflies are already out again and busy reproducing.
R6m2+100-500+2xExt.@1000mm (yeah, got that one new), almost no cropping.
f/16, 1/1000, ISO1600, focus on her eyes, parallel alignment with room for improvement
But I now can declare the 2026 Franconian d&d season open

View attachment 228812

Click to expand...

About time you got the 2x! It works surprisingly well with the 100-500.