John Wilde said:

"Canon is still selling a lot of DLSRs, having sold somewhere around 600,000 of them in 2025."

Where does that estimate come from? Canon doesn't report that in their financial documents.

Click to expand...

CIPA says there were 690,000 DSLRs shipped in 2025. In 2024, about 92% of DLSRs were sold by Canon (790,000 vs. Nikon’s 70,000).

"Canon is still selling a lot of DLSRs, having sold somewhere around 600,000 of them in 2025."

Where does that estimate come from? Canon doesn't report that in their financial documents.

Canon Rumors said:

It seems Canon make these claims through a “Canon Survey”. I have no idea how the survey works and Canon doesn't expand on exactly what the survey is. So take this claim with a grain of salt if you care. I do not, but it makes for good internet fodder.

Click to expand...

Canon reports their actual unit sales and an estimate of the overall market, and the latter aligns closely with what Nikon reports and well with CIPA (with differences due to manufacturers reporting units sold and CIPA reporting units produced and shipped). So whatever their survey methodology, I presume Canon can count how many cameras they sell and do some simple math.

Canon Rumors said:

Go check out the Sony comment sections…….

Click to expand...

Hard pass.

Canon Rumors said:

I expect Sony will soon announce that they are #1 as they did last year soon after Canon's 22nd year of being “number 1|”.

Click to expand...

Previously, Sony has claimed the #1 spot based on camera revenue, presumably because when they consider units sold they are clearly #2, and being #1 sounds better even if you need to define that in a way your competitors don’t.

TonyB_FL said:

Has Canon given up on the DO technology? An updated 400 f/4 for RF mount and a 600 and 800 would put them squarely on par with Nikon, and offer more affordable options over the current and rumored replacements. Some of us just can’t justify or afford those 5 figure big whites.

Click to expand...

Repeating previous replies to the same question, the RF 600/11 and 800/11 are DO lenses so no, Canon has not ‘given up on DO’.

Has Canon given up on the DO technology? An updated 400 f/4 for RF mount and a 600 and 800 would put them squarely on par with Nikon, and offer more affordable options over the current and rumored replacements. Some of us just can’t justify or afford those 5 figure big whites.

Canon makes us very easy to buy a second system or switch completely!

Nikon could be the best choice with adapting Sony, having nice Z Tele lenses AND more and more 3rd Party glas!!

stillviking said:

Agree but $6k doesn't really look a "mid price" to me (that's the Sigma 300-600 f4!). Around $4k would be more ok.

Click to expand...

As Neuro reminded us above, a 600 f/5.6 is essentially the same size as a 300 f/2.8, which can be a good guide - the MSRP of the last EF 300 f2.8 was over $6k. A zoom is likely to be more expensive than a prime. Add to that more than 15 years of inflation. Okay maybe this one won't be L quality but I think you're going to be disappointed, and not because Canon is greedy but because your desires are unrealistic. All you're really saying is you don't want to spend above $4k. Incidentally the Sigma price is irrelevant if it can't be used on RF bodies.

It's quite relevant what the RF mount (increasingly) doesn't get, so thanks for posting.

According to reviews it generally beats the Sony GM 35mm 1.4, which in turn beats the RF 35mm 1.4L VCM. At a significantly lower price point.

It's increasingly tough to justify buying more L lenses knowing lenses like this exist, even if it means having to shoot two systems, or switch entirely.

dolina said:

At the time of acquisition I was using 1,345g 1996 Sigma APO 170-500mm f/5-6.3 Aspherical RF that was 1st used with a 1995 EOS 50 film SLR. I had to have the Sigma re-chip when we got the 2003 EOS 10D that same year.

In 2026 the EF 800mm may come across as heavy metal but AF lens options available back then were

- 1999 Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS USM @ 5.36kg
- 2005 Sigma 800mm f/5.6 EX DG HSM @ 4.74kg
- 2005 Sigma 300-800mm f/5.6 EX DG HSM @ 5.88g
- 2007 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 600mm f/4G ED VR @ 5.06kg
- 2008 Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM @ 4.5kg

Click to expand...

I know, that kept me with my old 4.5/500. Btw I once had the opportunity to test the 300-800 "Sigmonster" on an exhibition, and I wasn't impressed, it's sharpness @ 800mm was underwhelming. It was a good lens for film photography, I guess, since wildlife required faster, more grainy films anyway, but it wasn't up to the resolution of DSLRs even back then (about 15 years ago).

dolina said:

The bag I used with the EF 800mm was initially the 2008 LowePro Lens Trekker 600 AW II then migrated to a 2012 Think Tank Airport Accelerator to comply 45 linear inch (56 x 36 x 23 cm) airline requirement. If I were to buy a bag for it today my choice would be the 2023 Think Tank FirstLight 46L.

Click to expand...

My vintage EF 500 f/4.5 was so slender that it fitted in my old Lowepro Trekker 300 AW back with a camera attached, hood reversed. So I could load a 2nd camera, a 1.4x TC, extension rings, a standard zoom or my Zeiss 3.5/18mm for landscape, and an EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS USM macro lens, or sometimes even an EF 300mm f/4.0 L IS USM (that I liked to use as a "distance" macro for more shy small animals). When I upgraded to an EF 600mm f/4.0 III past year, I got a Lowepro Lens Trekker 600 AW III with two additional (big) quivers attached. I like the very good carrying system of this backpack, I can carry it for hours w/o an aching back. The old Trekker 300 AW was less comfortable, when it was loaded with 10+ kg of glass and camera - it was a bit over top of its specs I guess, but load-wise perfectly flexible. I still have one for smaller gear.

dolina said:

I expect the TS-R lenses to come out about a decade after the last TS-E were released.

There are other higher volume focal lengths that have yet to come out on RF mount.

Click to expand...

Not so sure...
If it hadn't been for the TS-E 24 II and 17, I would have bought the Nikon DSLR and not the EOS 5D III in 2014, and never have entered the Canon ecosystem.
Such lenses matter for many photographers, especially pros!

dolina said:

The 2024 EOS R1 and 2024 EOS R5 Mark II do not use "Sensor Shift" (IBIS High Res) to create extra pixels. Instead they use a Neural Network Upscaling tool. This tool uses AI to predict and add pixels to a JPEG or HEIF file after it is taken. You are correct that this does not add "real" optical data. Instead it estimates detail based on deep-learning patterns.

Heat: Constant sensor movement for high-res shots creates heat which conflicts with the thermal demands of 6K/8K video and high-speed bursts.

Click to expand...

I don't think heat is an issue, given there's plenty of things that I can do on my R5 that generate a lot of heat; cooling is vastly improved on the R1 and R5 II and this feature is not used in rapid-fire scenarios; rather, it's used for landscapes and situations where images are carefully planned.

The AI upscaling is adding detail and artifacts that are not there. It's not the same, and lens artifacts can creep in and increase the margin of error. The goal is to capture more detail, not AP upscale a jpeg in-camera. I don't see any technical reason why this can't be added to the newer EOS IBIS-equipped bodies. AI slop is not the way.

One huge use case I have is for high resolution macro images, where this will get me far more detail. AI fabricated slop is not going to help me in this use case.

As with all these things, I am fascinated from a product management perspective as to why this feature wasn't made available on the R5 II at least. It's perhaps the one and only reason why I have kept my R5 and not replaced it with the R5 II.

dolina said:

The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG DN Art uses a large optical formula to correct distortion physically. The Canon RF 35mm f/1.4L VCM is designed to be a "Hybrid" lens. It prioritizes the Voice Coil Motor (VCM) for near-silent instant focus in video. To keep the lens small and the AF fast Canon uses digital correction to fix the extreme barrel distortion.

As you noted stretching these pixels in software causes a loss of raw detail in the corners.

On the 2022 EOS R7 this is less noticeable because the "crop" sensor ignores the lens corners. On the R1 or R5 II the "software stretch" is visible in large prints.

Click to expand...

It's not just the software stretch and loss of resolution, but the way this interacts with the noise pattern. Noise from sensor gain at high ISO should be uniform and consistent across the whole image, however once we change the geometry, we will be squeezing in and stretching out the noise, creating artifacts that look like a lattice, moire and so on. Furthermore, this conflicts with noise reduction principles that assume a consistent noise pattern across the image. This is further compounded b stronger vignetting on some of the RF lenses; I don't mind the vignetting look sometimes, but I don't often get to choose anymore due to these two features conflicting; that's around two stops on the RF 35mm f/1.4L VCM, so you've now got an image with ISO 51200 exposure in the corners of an ISO 12800 image, which in darker situations, results in near-unusable images if any corrections are made - and by my testing, the vignetting falloff occurs closer to the centre of the frame than it does on the EF variant. So whilst the t-stop is measured from the centre of the image in both cases, we ned up a lower potential average t-stop on the newer lenses (using this to account for transmission loss, which impacts low light performance at the same aperture).

Re: the Sigma - the new Sigma is shorter and lighter than the RF 35mm f/1.4L VCM. I don't believe that the optical formula is any larger on the mark II vs the RF 35L VCM. Furthermore, the testing and reviews so far don't seem to suggest any significant penalty for autofocus. The only aspect I don't understand is whether the VCM motor is physically larger and is taking up space that is forcing the optical elements to be of a smaller diameter. I appreciate that in video situations, the VCM lens distortion is less relevant, but still an issue for high gain/high ISO situations due to the aforementioned issues. There is no excuse to have a 35 with that much barrel distortion in 2026. This is a solved problem that has been un-solved.

It's a snowball effect. I was jumping for joy when the EF 35L II was announced, as optical distortion on the first-generation EF 35L was a bugbear of mine. I can only hope that this is swiftly addressed. I wouldn't be so frustrated about being left high-and-dry if third party RF lenses were available.

dolina said:

About 15 years ago I knew of someone who was shooting with your 1992 EF 500mm f/4.5L USM. I looked it up and was really impressed with the 3kg weight. The senior citizen hand holding it did so with ease.

Click to expand...

Shooting fast flying birds like puffins was quite easy with that lens - because of the lack of IS you hadn't remind yourself to switch it to the panning mode. I love gear that is as simple as possible so it doesn't distract from shooting when it gets to real action. Here's one example of thousands of puffin-in-flight shots with that old lens that accidentally happens to be just saved on the SSD of my MacBook (not the best BIF shot of a lying puffin with fishes I have but an okay one):



Footnote:
That vintage EF 500mm f/4.5 L USM lens also impressed me by its nearly non-destructible ruggedness (it still works, but its mount is quite worn off now). I had several massive accidents with it over the years, e.g. in Norway a storm kicked the tripod (I don't shoot always hand-held) over, when I just turned to my backpack to change the camera's battery. So this lens with the original 7D crashed on a stone, and I thought, that's it. But the camera had just a scar, and everything worked perfectly - the 500 was wrapped in a lenscoat anyway, and it was already a battered club when I bought it used. My wife's Sigma 500mm f/4.5 for Nikon, which weights 3 kg only, too, is comparatively new (bought in 2012 as a new lens), already needed a new AF drive. But that's more a problem of caused by the AF system of Nikon's DSLRs I guess. Focusing is always accompanied by a rattling pumping (be it a D300, 300s, 500, or D700 from my wife's collection), that also destroyed the AF drives of other tele lenses, twice the drive of a Nikkor 300mm f/4.0 (the old one, not the newer with which introduced their diffraction optics tech), and recently the AF drive of her much newer Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 VR lens.

Shooting both gears side by side for many years I only had one repair with my old 7D (thumb wheel had to be exchanged), with our Nikon gear we had a lot of repairs and drop-outs in the field. That kept me with Canon, besides Canon's ergonomics that I personally prefer. There is also a solid reason behind the fact that used Canon gear is more expensive that comparable Nikon gear, I just recently found out again.

Such significant lenses are absolutelly worth reporting. Thank you, and I hope we will see an opening of the RF mount at a certain point because this shizzle is annoying as hell.
I also hope that Sigma is considering to redo the 28mm as well; the size, weight and general mechanics of this look excellent.

Xpenelas said:

After the 17-40 f1.8, was spected they start renewing the 16 and 56 primes.

Click to expand...

EOSR7MkII said:

You have a point. Don't you reckon they refresh the 30mm f/1.4 first, since it released 2 years earlier than the 56 f/1.4? I have been eyeing that 56mm prime for a while as a cheap APS-C portrait lens with decent bokeh, but now I am unsure whether to get it or wait for a much improved MkII. My hope is that it releases before June...

Click to expand...

Richard CR said:

That was my beef with the 16mm. it was gigantic.

Click to expand...

Richard CR said:

The 30mm was decent, but it didn't reach the quality level of the Canon 32mm for the EF-M, so there's certainly room for improvement. It was also a very basic design, unlike what we've seen in more modern Sigma lenses. So it wouldn't surprise me if the 30mm is up before the 56mm, which was a stellar lens.

As far as the 56 itself? you really can't go wrong in getting that lens now. I had it for the EF-M mount, and absolutely loved it. A new lens would certainly have better corners, but that's not really as important for a portrait lens. When we were looking at doing some review stuff for CR, and I would be focusing on APS-C it was one of the first lenses I wanted to get again.

Click to expand...

I have the 16, 23, 30 and 56mm RF-S lenses. Actually, the only Sigma RF-S lens I didn't yet have was the 12mm. Now the 15mm F1.4.

The refresh of the 16mm is welcome. Like Richard, my main problem with the 16mm was its size. Otherwise I'm quite happy with it. The new 15mm looks very enticing for the size/weight improvement for portability. I might end up getting it.

I really like the 56mm F1.4 and don't feel a need for an update at all, honestly. I'd be more interested in updates to the 23mm and the 30mm. If canon were to release an RF-S 22mm F2, then I'd skip any 23mm update from Sigma .

Celts88 said:

I only the other month sold my EF 800mm f/5.6L as it was getting a bit big for me as I've arthritis in my wrist so was having a bit of hassle with it. I've a 100-500mm and 200-800mm so these will do me for the present (can't afford the 100-300mm f/2.8).

Click to expand...

The 200-800 is a real fun lens, much better than I expected when I bought it, but it needs a lot of light. The RF 100-300mm f/2.8 isn't a bargain, that's true. To me, it is also too short & heavy as a combo. I'd prefer a zoom with the double focal length natively that sits right in the middle between such a super fast tele zoom and the slow 200-800. When I need a fast supertele, I prefer the current generation of EF/RF 600mm f/4.0 III/I primes.

Celts88 said:

A 300 - 600m 5.6/L (or whatever it ends up being) would be a great zoom for a large majority of people.

Click to expand...

Yepp, I'm in your club! Could hand me over a 300-600 member card?

Agree but $6k doesn't really look a "mid price" to me (that's the Sigma 300-600 f4!). Around $4k would be more ok.

Bob Howland said:

I would have expected the 16mm to become a 17mm, to center it between the 12mm and the 23mm. Maybe Sigma is rethinking their whole APS-C prime lineup, emphasizing their use in video. Does the 23mm become a 20mm and a 25mm? I do think they need a 40mm APS-C prime.

Click to expand...

Sigma has the 17-40/1.8 so a bit more separation from that makes it more attractive to a wider range of people. Also while 16x1.5=24mm FOV on Sony, to get to 24mm FOV on Canon it, needs to be 15mm.

While the 12mm is still quite new (and is in their new design language) when it is eventually replaced in some years I would expect they'll make it a 10mm lens (or maybe 11mm) to get an even wider angle FOV on both 1.5x and 1.6x APS-C.

I love my EF 400 DO ii. Its plenty sharp wide open and with the EF 1.4x iii (slightly better if stopped down 1/3 stop), and fine with the EF 2x iii (better stopped down half a stop). Would love an RF version with a lighter chassis (maybe the weight of a Sony 300/2.8) and closer focus, and maybe faster AF (although that's not been a problem for me).

Malm said:

?? It is not my intention to blame Sigma as I mention the reason: "Canons 3rd party politics". We know were the problem is coming from!
I just raise the question why Sigma is not offering it's excellent - Art - lenses as MF or with an EF mount. But that's Sigmas decision and we don't know what Sigma has signed to get a permit for APS-C RF lenses.

Click to expand...

I’m not aware of the specific details, but newer lenses are designed for mirrorless systems and just could not work with an EF mount.

I agree that autofocused-disabled RF mount 14mm or 135mm 1.4 would have a market. It would be a pretty sad workaround, but sadder yet: it won’t ever happen!

justaCanonuser said:

The EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM was quite a tank gun of a lens. I only once have seen one in the wilderness.

Click to expand...

I only the other month sold my EF 800mm f/5.6L as it was getting a bit big for me as I've arthritis in my wrist so was having a bit of hassle with it. I've a 100-500mm and 200-800mm so these will do me for the present (can't afford the 100-300mm f/2.8).

A 300-600m 5.6/L (or whatever it ends up being) would be a great zoom for a large majority of people.

Sporgon said:

The G1Xiii. A superb, tiny APS-c sensor camera. Unloved by so many due to its ‘slow’ lens. Their loss !

Click to expand...

Just dug out my G5 X and put it back into use with a new battery. Was pleasantly surprised by its aperture range: f/1.8-2.8. No wonder I was able to get decent shots in low light with it! It'll fit into a pocket of my jacket, giving me an option in-between my phone's camera and my R7.

The G5 X's EVF was what motivated me to go mirrorless with the R7 and be freed to live in manual exposure.

As a fan of the R7 since it came out - and of the thumbwheel by the eyepiece - my wishlist for the R7 II is simple: a BSI sensor and a traditionally-placed third wheel in addition to the eyepiece thumbwheel, though changing it a horizontal thumbwheel near the eyepiece (like on the R6) would be fine. If they take out the mechanical shutter, I'd be fine with a "sensor shield" that closes when the camera is switched off while changing lenses.

No reason to bar the battery grip, though I'm not likely to get one - had one for the 70D/80D - which I never used.

Please let both card slots be the same type, either both UHD or both CF- what's the point of a backup card if it's a different type?

neuroanatomist said:

They both had/have expensive versions. Nikon thought what was missing was mid-range versions of 600mm and 800mm lenses still costing thousands of dollars, targeting the high end of the market. Canon thought what was missing was inexpensive versions of 600mm and 800mm lenses costing under a thousand dollars, targeting more the consumer side of the market.

Whose strategy is best? Canon had double-digit growth of camera revenue and profit last year, and a high single digit growth in unit volume. Nikon posted losses in camera revenue and profit (attributed to exchange rates and tariffs, but somehow those didn’t affect Canon?). They did have a high single digit growth in unit volume…which they said was mainly due to low cost units.

Click to expand...

Just wish-casting, I hope this 300-600L, if we get it, is not too much higher than the ballpark of $7k. Only have so much budget for it, and at least from this topic it seems like a number of people feel similarly.

Personally I think it makes more sense to have a longer L option that's not the 100-300L with a 2x teleconverter selling at ~$11k. A $7k-ish Canon 300-600 f/5.6 L VCM with internal zoom would probably be a great competitor to the huge $6600 Sigma 300-600 f/4. The Sigma seems to have made some waves, though I can't say I have the sales numbers. An ~$11k 300-600 f/5.6 would be a lot less appealing to me at least lol.

Del Paso said:

I fully agree on the 17mm TSE needing an overhaul, preferably as a 14mm TSE. When fully shifted, the sides and corners become a bit weak. A 14mm would also be ideal for very high edifices, like the many cathedrals we have in France. Norwegian stave churches often stand isolated in the landscape, cathedrals rarely...
So, I'm hoping for the rumor to take an actual physical shape, possibly at a still "human" price.

Click to expand...

I expect the TS-R lenses to come out about a decade after the last TS-E were released.

There are other higher volume focal lengths that have yet to come out on RF mount.

justaCanonuser said:

The EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM was quite a tank gun of a lens. I only once have seen one in the wilderness. Did you carry it in a packpack?

I used my vintage EF 500mm f/4.5 L USM from 1995 until early past year (its 30st year! still works...), mainly because for many years it was the lightest option for a relatively fast supertele lens. 3 kg was light enough for extended hand-held shooting, even with a TC attached, and I did not miss IS much, because on the other hand 3 kg gives enough inertia mass to keep such a lens steady enough even for longer exposure times. Only the more nervous OVF image needed a bit of a learning curve, and if video, not stills, would be my main work, I'd changed earlier to a lens with good IS (in fact, for video I used my old Tammy 150-600 G2, which had a very good IS).

Click to expand...

At the time of acquisition I was using 1,345g 1996 Sigma APO 170-500mm f/5-6.3 Aspherical RF that was 1st used with a 1995 EOS 50 film SLR. I had to have the Sigma re-chip when we got the 2003 EOS 10D that same year.

In 2026 the EF 800mm may come across as heavy metal but AF lens options available back then were

- 1999 Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS USM @ 5.36kg
- 2005 Sigma 800mm f/5.6 EX DG HSM @ 4.74kg
- 2005 Sigma 300-800mm f/5.6 EX DG HSM @ 5.88g
- 2007 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 600mm f/4G ED VR @ 5.06kg
- 2008 Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM @ 4.5kg

Before 2009 Canon was the 1st to drop a 600mm or 800mm to 4.5kg or lighter & had IS. 4.59kg Nikon's AF-S Nikkor 800mm f/5.6 didn't arrive until 2013. I would never have taken up bird photography if i had to put up with the nearly 6kg weight of the Sigmonster that had no form of IS. It came as a surprise to me that the Sigmonster also had no focus limiter switch. That time saving feature was present in my older 1999 EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM & 1999 EF 500mm f/4L IS USM. It baffles me that the Sigmonster had no weather sealing so it ends up gulping air & dust during zooming what more heavy rain or salt spray while outdoors? Optically speaking that Sigma struggled with flare & ghosting when shooting toward the light. It had more CA at 800mm compared to other high-end primes.

The bag I used with the EF 800mm was initially the 2008 LowePro Lens Trekker 600 AW II then migrated to a 2012 Think Tank Airport Accelerator to comply 45 linear inch (56 x 36 x 23 cm) airline requirement. If I were to buy a bag for it today my choice would be the 2023 Think Tank FirstLight 46L.

About 15 years ago I knew of someone who was shooting with your 1992 EF 500mm f/4.5L USM. I looked it up and was really impressed with the 3kg weight. The senior citizen hand holding it did so with ease. When a RF 500mm f/4L IS USM comes out I expect it to be ~2.5kg. Although if I was shooting on Z mount I'd likely go for the 2,385g 2022 Nikon NIKKOR Z 800mm f/6.3 VR S. Been updating myself on 600mm & 800mm lenses and that beauty raised to the top.