m4ndr4ke said:

[...]It’s funny that you mention the joystick, because i only use it on my R6 to reset the focus point to the center. I drag it with the rear screen and reset with the joystick.
On the RP, I drag the focus point with the rear screen and reset with delete button.[...]

Click to expand...

Now that glove season has started here again, I'm starting to appreciate having a joystick (or R1/R3 style optical button).

Skux said:

Joystick and touchscreen to select a focus point is way too slow, I set my R6II to start tracking from the centre focus point and just aim the camera.

Click to expand...

That's what I do most of the time, but...backlit subjects and, most of all, disco lights are a struggle for continuous autofocus.
Sometimes I just want the focus point to be on the upper third, to photograph moving subjects using One Shot AF without recomposing, or to the side.

Joystick and touchscreen to select a focus point is way too slow, I set my R6II to start tracking from the centre focus point and just aim the camera.

Del Paso said:

I'm still hoping for some interesting "L" lenses, like TS, 24-70 II, 180 macro, 70-150, 400, 35 f/1,2 etc...
The last ones were (for me) a bit boring, except the 70-200 Z and 100-300.
Nothing against cheaper lenses, but it's time for some new halo lenses, not only for Sony and Sigma ones.

Click to expand...

Well, maybe the "special one" will accommodate your wishes. I´d like to the TS at some point just because we've been talking about it forever on this forum. For my personal use, I´d wish for a 70-135/xxx F2 to be released and/ or a 28-70mm F2 on a diet. Sony is about to release its third f2 zoom, so Canon should really up their game.

As I´ve stated several times: I believe the 35mm F1.2 will come, but it will be built differently compared to 50/ 85mm F1.2. I´m guessing it'll use Vcm motors and will be built lighter, have better focus breathing and maybe even an aperture ring. It'll pave the way for 50/85mm F1.2 mkii´s.

Walrus said:

Yeah, I know it's R6 II in RP body, but still, too expensive, I can buy from 1.5 to 2 used R6's for the price of a used R8, so it doesn't cut for me.

Click to expand...

Where the hell do you buy your cameras? Used R6s in Germany still maintain prices of 800-1000 € on eBay, often even 1.200-1.300 €. Trusted camera stores will charge you at least 1.200 € for a decent copy. A new R8 cost you 1.299 €, used copies from retailers about 1.000 - 1.100 € and used copies are at around 900 €. No way on earth I could "1.5 to 2" used R6s for those prices.

I´d really like to know because it seems impossible here.

Walrus said:

Yeah, I know it's R6 II in RP body, but still, too expensive, I can buy from 1.5 to 2 used R6's for the price of a used R8, so it doesn't cut for me.

Click to expand...

Not really...the R8 is often at 1100€, and I bought brand new it for less than 1000€ this month, about the same price as a second hand R6, with a smaller form factor, better autofocus and better sensor, and new. I don't like buying second hand sensors.

Walrus said:

Being unable to set ISO on top dial on RP yes, that's annoying because it would at least match the R6 scheme, and aperture would go, old-style, on the control ring on the lens/adapter; instead on RP I have the ISO on the control ring, to retain at least a three-dials setup for the exposure triangle, even if different from the R6 setup.

Click to expand...

Right? Yes, the R8 allows that.
We can set aperture to the top dial of the R6 though, to have the RP and R6 matching controls, but I change ISO a lot more often, and having that parameter next to my back focus buttons is much more comfortable.

Walrus said:

touch interface doesn't cut it in fast environments like weddings.

Click to expand...

That's exactly where I use it the most: weddings. The touchscreen method for AF position allows faster adjustments than the joystick, it's significantly more responsive. I enable that on my screens for the right half.

Dragon said:

Fun with an old lens. R7 + Nikon 1000mm mirror lens. A lot of junk images, and DOF is paper thin, but if you nail focus the lens is remarkably sharp. Not as good as the 200-800, but certainly usable with enough patience.



View attachment 226620View attachment 226621

Click to expand...

As it is an experiment for fun, I hope you don't mind my commenting. It has a certain sharpness about it in terms of lines on feathers, but there is an overall softness and some artefacts at he pixel peeking leve.

m4ndr4ke said:

It’s most of the R6 Mark II in a RP body, with pretty much all the same settings and customisation available.
The R8 allows ISO on the top dial, two back button focus, etc.

Actually, the R8 has a few extra customisation options, when compared to the original R6, and I’m tempted to keep it specifically for the customisation. I use two back button focus, I like ISO on the top dial (where the RP adjusts aperture and doesn’t allow ISO). The R8 could give me an almost seamless experience. It doesn’t have rear dial but, honestly, it’s not that often that I need to adjust aperture.

It’s funny that you mention the joystick, because i only use it on my R6 to reset the focus point to the center. I drag it with the rear screen and reset with the joystick.
On the RP, I drag the focus point with the rear screen and reset with delete button.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I know it's R6 II in RP body, but still, too expensive, I can buy from 1.5 to 2 used R6's for the price of a used R8, so it doesn't cut for me.

Being unable to set ISO on top dial on RP yes, that's annoying because it would at least match the R6 scheme, and aperture would go, old-style, on the control ring on the lens/adapter; instead on RP I have the ISO on the control ring, to retain at least a three-dials setup for the exposure triangle, even if different from the R6 setup.

First thing I do out of the box is disabling touch screen entirely from any camera, I don't like finger prints on the display, and I like my cameras to be controllable exclusively with mech dials and buttons by muscle memory, touch interface doesn't cut it in fast environments like weddings.
I know you don't detach camera from the eye to drag on the screen to move the AF point, but there's the joystick to cover for that (or the 4 way controller on the RP/R8), and any other touch operation would mean removing camera from the eye, and that's not acceptable for me, so touch goes off as soon as I unbox the camera because is utterly useless for the way I shoot, and if left active can only lead to unwanted operations.
I re-enable it only for video (that I rarely shoot, btw), because I'm not looking thru EVF, and so using the touch screen to pull the focus brings less shaking then using the joystick, especially with a stationary camera on a tripod head.

I'm still hoping for some interesting "L" lenses, like TS, 24-70 II, 180 macro, 70-150, 400, 35 f/1,2 etc...
The last ones were (for me) a bit boring, except the 70-200 Z and 100-300.
Nothing against cheaper lenses, but it's time for some new halo lenses, not only for Sony and Sigma ones.

That would make 7 lenses released this year, not too bad. The 45mm is only the 4th.

neffels said:

So the reasoning behind it not being a R7mkii is because while it does look like a R7 evf it looks a little bigger(which is one of the rumored updates to the R7mkii you guys reported) so it must be a R6mkiii because maybe it just looks like that because of the angle?

Click to expand...

If you screengrab the picture and lighten it, the lugs for the camera strap are black, indicating a full frame camera. Canon's APSC strap lugs are metal (stainless steel?). The rubber covers on the left of the camera look identical to the existing R6 MkII.

John

Walrus said:

I don't know how R8 works, never laid a hand on it; too expensive for a backup camera, too "poor" (no joystick, no double slot, small battery, no proper battery grip, no three dials on the body) for a main camera.

Click to expand...

It’s most of the R6 Mark II in a RP body, with pretty much all the same settings and customisation available.
The R8 allows ISO on the top dial, two back button focus, etc.

Actually, the R8 has a few extra customisation options, when compared to the original R6, and I’m tempted to keep it specifically for the customisation. I use two back button focus, I like ISO on the top dial (where the RP adjusts aperture and doesn’t allow ISO). The R8 could give me an almost seamless experience. It doesn’t have rear dial but, honestly, it’s not that often that I need to adjust aperture.

It’s funny that you mention the joystick, because i only use it on my R6 to reset the focus point to the center. I drag it with the rear screen and reset with the joystick.
On the RP, I drag the focus point with the rear screen and reset with delete button.

@Canon Rumors Canon USA yesterday scheduled a YouTube stream, but it looks like they’ve deleted it in the meantime.

koenkooi said:

That's something I have been considering as well, I should try my EF70-400 non-IS more since I'm encountering more an more situations where the 24-105 isn't long enough and the 100-500 is too dark. Having said that, none of the RF 70-200 options are realistically in the budget, even used ones

And it's a toad We have a collection of juveniles and adults visiting each day, but usually in hard to photograph spots, this one ventured out into a spot where it could be easily walked around!

Click to expand...

My new equipment when travelling/hiking: R5 II + 15-35 ,second R5 II + RF 70-200f/4. Each camera on a Capture Peak clip mounted on the left and right backpack straps.This covers more than 95% of all situations.
In the bag, easily accessible: 100-500, 60 Leica R macro (sometimes) and, for cities, 24 TSE.

Michael Clark said:

Canon has done this before. Except for a few minor differences (X-sync 1/180 vs 1/200, minimum exposure time of 1/4000 vs 1/8000, 26.2 MP vs 22.3 MP, etc.) the 2017 6D Mark II was the virtual equal of the 2012 5D Mark III on the spec sheet. Of course the 5D Mark III had more robust construction and weather resistance than the 6D Mark II. But in terms of the spec sheet there was very little difference.

Click to expand...

The whole point of a three option sales pitch is that the middle choice is the best option. The one with the best return on your investment. However, brand often make the middle choice the weakest and most confused option. For example, Porsche suffer from this in their range. Everyone wants a 911, the cheap option is the Boxer. However, the middle option is confusing. The Cayman’s performance is precisely the difference between the 911 and boxer. But it doesn’t excel in any area, but was specifically engineered to sit between the two cars and yet it is the master of nothing. The 911 is an amazing track car or a GT, the boxer is an amazing roaster. The Caymen is defined by the difference between the other two cars. It doesn’t excel at anything other than that it was engineered to be the forgettable middle child.

ctk said:

OUCH! Hahahaha. Vaseline coated optical elements lmao.....

Click to expand...

The EF 50mm f1.2 L was a mixed bag in my opinion. I had several copies, my initial copy was always a bit soft compared to all my other L primes (I had them all from the 24mm f1.4 IIL through to the 135mm f2.0). The lens needed to be stopped down to f2.0 before it matched the other lenses in sharpness. However, the contrast, colour rendition and built quality were exceptional. The AF was slower and less accurate than my EF 85mm f1.2 II L. In low light the AF was hopeless. In addition, the lens didn’t have any floating optics. There was a heavy aperture related focus shift on any close target at f2.8.
It was a very frustrating lens to use, but it had a beautiful rendering and could (when it actually focussed properly) it could produce really nice imagery.
My 2nd copy was a tad sharper wide open, but it was never what I would call “sharp”. It was ok, but not amazing. If I stopped down to bump the sharpness, that’s when the focus shift would occur.
The build quality of this lens verses the 50mm f1.4 was like night and day. Built tough and solid. But the 50mm f1.4 was actually a bit sharper wide open, but its contrast and colours sucked and needed a lot of post prod. The files out of the f1.2L were way better.
I don’t know what to expect with this new RF 45mm f1.2 lens. I hope it’s not the same bag of conflicting issues that the EF 50mm f1.2 L lens was.

mangobutter said:

Actually genius, if it's a re-shuffled double gauss like they did with the EF 50 STM to RF 50 STM conversion--they simply jiggled things for the flange distance and retained the same optics having roughly identical optical performance. I wonder if something similar is going on here where they're taking the already-mature optics of the EF 50 1.2 and repacking for flange distance, with some optimization to keep the size down--or even none.[...]

Click to expand...

The 50mm refresh gave us a few upgrades compared to its earlier incarnations:

1. Updated coatings, so much better contrast in backlit situations
2. Automated assembly, very little to no copy-to-copy variation

I'm hoping that something similar is the case for this RF45, but Canon has been segmenting their coatings "lately", so I don't have high hopes.

mangobutter said:

Actually genius, if it's a re-shuffled double gauss like they did with the EF 50 STM to RF 50 STM conversion--they simply jiggled things for the flange distance and retained the same optics having roughly identical optical performance. I wonder if something similar is going on here where they're taking the already-mature optics of the EF 50 1.2 and repacking for flange distance, with some optimization to keep the size down--or even none. I would welcome it. Yes the RF 50 1.2 is spectacular but i always thought it was too perfect. I want something that has field curvature at large apertures and that has a slight swirl. i hope this RF 45 1.2 delivers especially at this price. instant order. long-time user of Canon digital large sensor glass--film glass used on canon digital sensors--(25 years) and since ive been on the RF mount, i've mostly stuck to EF glass for the reasons above (though i have dabbled in several RF lenses but sold them off since)

The RF 35 1.8 is probably my favorite RF lens.

Click to expand...

The EF 50/1.2 has one of the best rendering and color on any 50mm lens ever. I hope the new one retain the same coating and produce the same color. When checking the canon website it says the coating on the EF 50/1.2 is using Super Pectra Costing which is used on non L lens now, However Non-L lens does not use ASC coating which produce many L lens look. Hopefully the RF 45/1.2 will look as good as the EF 50/1.2 which i am fond of. Will purchase if it produce result like EF 50/1.2

Del Paso said:

And I'm slowly but surely replacing with the ultra compact 70-200 f/4. But I'll keep the 85 f/2, a lens I really like!
PS: I like your frog picture!

Click to expand...

That's something I have been considering as well, I should try my EF70-400 non-IS more since I'm encountering more an more situations where the 24-105 isn't long enough and the 100-500 is too dark. Having said that, none of the RF 70-200 options are realistically in the budget, even used ones

And it's a toad We have a collection of juveniles and adults visiting each day, but usually in hard to photograph spots, this one ventured out into a spot where it could be easily walked around!

Interesting... Very interesting combo!
"...but certainly usable with enough patience." - I think you mean the birds must have "enough patience"?
And yes: I like these photos because of the framing, background and mostly your ability to take (some !) photos of birds with that kind of lens: even some wind (if the bird has the patience to stay motionless until you are focusing) will make this very difficult exercise!
And "Not as good as the 200-800" made me really laughing !I think the word "Fun" that you used explains everything!

How much of the overheating issue in the R1 could be due to the card itself? It seems that some CFExpress Type B cards run hotter or cooler than others? I had the same issue with overheating with relatively minimal use indoors, with still shots.
Here's a link comparing card temperatures: https://bcgforums.com/threads/cf-express-card-heat-test-yourself.27180/

. Nicely done, Dragon.

The resulting cropped files are rather large so I downsized them to 1000 px wide again.

Del Paso said:

Did you ever see the zoom throw of the 15-35 f/2,8? Hardly a cm. Nothing really to put the gimbal off balance in my opinion (as a non-video user). Are gimbals so extremely sensitive?

Click to expand...

Its a combination of things. The larger gimbals have more tolerance than the smaller ones. But its not just the weight, it's the placement of that weight. The 15-35 is a heavy lens. So you have a lot of wieight outside the center balance point which is harder to stablizie. So you're going to have to go with a gimbal with a much higher weight limit.

Is it a deal breaker in and of itself, no. But then you add in no aperture control, no zoom rocker and as a package its just not for video. Sony's 16-35 does have aperature but is also not an internal zoom and is also big and heavy. That's why they also make the 16-35 f4. It has interal zoom, aperture control, zoom rocker and is relatively light weight.

I think Canon has the older more professional photography customer secured. But Sony has the younger video Youtube crowd. It will be interesting to see how their respective strategies play out.

m4ndr4ke said:

Ok, I got it now, but that’s two different settings.
On the R6, there’s Image Review and then Viewfinder Review as a sub option, which means you can choose to have Image Review only on the rear display.
The RP does not feature the second, only the first, which means it always displays on both screens.

Anyway, you don’t need a R6 for that, the R8 has both options as well.

Honestly, most settings have been available on every full-frame models since the R6/R5, the RP and R were just left behind. People shouldn’t take the R and RP as reference for anything.

But I can clearly see the difference in quality of the two EVFs. Resolution, higher framerate (I always have my cameras set to the highest framerate), larger size and better color accuracy on the R6. The EVF on my RP is green/yellow tinted (lacks magenta), and that camera doesn’t allow adjustments on that regard.
The R8 I suppose features the same EVF (I still have it in my possession), but allows color adjustments.

Click to expand...

Yes, unfortunately RP doesn't allow, but it's ok, it's a 400€ used FF ML camera, for that price I'm already happy that it turns on at all! :-D It's the backup camera, I can shoot with image review always off, and use the play button when needed, not a big deal.
I don't know how R8 works, never laid a hand on it; too expensive for a backup camera, too "poor" (no joystick, no double slot, small battery, no proper battery grip, no three dials on the body) for a main camera.
I have all cameras at lowest EVF framerate to save on battery, so maybe that's why I don't see a tangible difference among R6 and RP; the color cast, may very well be, but frankly I don't really notice, camera is 99% of the time in auto-wb in ambient light (and with strobe, the moment I install the trigger, the wb switches automatically to flash, so I rarely move it from auto), so the colours I see in the EVF are very random, with digital I don't really care about native wb of a raw picture, let alone the cast on the display/evf unless is REALLY bad.