Latest activity

SnowMiku · May 27, 2026

The R8 II is going to be interesting, I'd actually prefer the older 24MP sensor over the new 32.5MP sensor, the lower the MP the faster the post processing, better low light performance and smaller file size. A few weeks ago the R6 II was around $700 AUD more then the R8. The R8 II is going to have to sit between them price wise or maybe they will discontinue the R6 II when the R8 II gets released? I think now is a good time to get an R6 II if you want one.

BlancRay · May 27, 2026

Canon Rumors said:
Canon’s latest announcements were the EOS R6 V and RF 20-50mm f/4L IS USM PZ. For the most part they have been well received by the reviewer world with the usual complaints about Canon stuff, but all in all, it’s nice to see positivity. We still have a while to wait before both begin shipping, […]

See full article...

Desperately no sign of a possible macro lens...

Eric84 · May 27, 2026

Hoping for 20-70 f2 IS VCM or a update on the 50/85 f1.2L lenses. Would also love to se the missing sibling, the unicorn itself => 35 f1.2L.

Exploreshootshare · May 27, 2026

I don’t believe in a real halo lens. I doubt Canon would tell people in advance, especially with three months to go. They would like to present such a lens with an absolute bang. Therefore, something modified but new comes to mind. RF 20-70mm F2.8 would fit the bill. I’m hoping for f2 Zooms, so 24-70mm would fit in that category. I have no idea how Canon could beat Sonys 50-150mm F2 in terms of „never seen before“.

Exploreshootshare · May 27, 2026

roby17269 said:
35 1.2 c'mon Canon!
Can it be called "never before seen"?

Make it F1 and „never seen before“ might apply.

@zajicekpavel · May 27, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
Thanks!

I’m honestly not sure what the roadblock is that prevents comprehension. I suspect there are several.

I think the comment from @zajicekpavel that he doesn’t get it but that his R7 takes great pictures is rather telling for him and some others – the fact that an APS-C sensor has more noise and less dynamic range than a FF sensor is seen as a negative, and people take it as criticism of their gear choices and/or photography when it’s just a statement of fact.

Similarly, some people read too much into the ‘extra reach’ from a crop sensor, and don’t want to hear that it’s not a free lunch.

Conversely, people who shoot FF often don’t want to hear that in good light and without a need for extremely shallow DoF, the extra money spent and extra effort to carry the larger/heavier bodies and wide/normal lenses usually doesn’t make a meaningful difference in the final image.

This is a mosaic on Saint Mark's Basilica in Venice, one of the images was shot with my R8 and RF 24-105/4L, the other was shot with the main camera of my iPhone 14 Pro. You might be able to make a good guess as to which is which, but the differences between the FF sensor and big chunks of glass vs. the 3.5x crop sensor with comparatively tiny lenses are far less than the discussions on the effects of a smaller sensor would suggest.

View attachment 229728

IMO, photography (like many things in life) is about compromise. There are plusses and minuses to various sized sensors, plusses and minuses to wider vs. narrower apertures, etc., in terms of capability, output, portability and cost.

Taking a step back, for someone (like me) who started photography when manual focus with a split prism viewfinder was the norm, frame rate was determined by how fast one could push the film advance lever with a thumb, and seeing the resulting image happened hours (at best) and often days or even weeks after pressing the shutter button...current MILCs and lenses are miraculous by comparison.

Nicely written, I finally agree, have a nice day and take pictures!

neuroanatomist · May 26, 2026

David - Sydney said:
@neuroanatomist Your patience to explain these concepts to people is admirable.

Thanks!

I’m honestly not sure what the roadblock is that prevents comprehension. I suspect there are several.

I think the comment from @zajicekpavel that he doesn’t get it but that his R7 takes great pictures is rather telling for him and some others – the fact that an APS-C sensor has more noise and less dynamic range than a FF sensor is seen as a negative, and people take it as criticism of their gear choices and/or photography when it’s just a statement of fact.

Similarly, some people read too much into the ‘extra reach’ from a crop sensor, and don’t want to hear that it’s not a free lunch.

Conversely, people who shoot FF often don’t want to hear that in good light and without a need for extremely shallow DoF, the extra money spent and extra effort to carry the larger/heavier bodies and wide/normal lenses usually doesn’t make a meaningful difference in the final image.

This is a mosaic on Saint Mark's Basilica in Venice, one of the images was shot with my R8 and RF 24-105/4L, the other was shot with the main camera of my iPhone 14 Pro. You might be able to make a good guess as to which is which, but the differences between the FF sensor and big chunks of glass vs. the 3.5x crop sensor with comparatively tiny lenses are far less than the discussions on the effects of a smaller sensor would suggest.

IMO, photography (like many things in life) is about compromise. There are plusses and minuses to various sized sensors, plusses and minuses to wider vs. narrower apertures, etc., in terms of capability, output, portability and cost.

Taking a step back, for someone (like me) who started photography when manual focus with a split prism viewfinder was the norm, frame rate was determined by how fast one could push the film advance lever with a thumb, and seeing the resulting image happened hours (at best) and often days or even weeks after pressing the shutter button...current MILCs and lenses are miraculous by comparison.

HeavyPiper · May 26, 2026

David - Sydney said:
@neuroanatomist Your patience to explain these concepts to people is admirable.

Agreed

SonicStudios · May 26, 2026

Interesting, maybe 200 - 500 f4 or 5.6? Oh heck I kinda wish the new 400 and 600 would be released.

SonicStudios · May 26, 2026

john1970 said:
Agree. I don't see Canon updating the 100-500 mm lens anytime soon and I think they are going to price something in the $4K to $6K range. See my previous posts for more hypothetical discussions.

SnowMiku · May 26, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
Personally, I have no skin in the 'high end APS-C' game, but the 7-series seems to have remained a lower priority for Canon since its inception, and I don't see that changing now when Canon's strategy seems to be pushing buyers to FF cameras (and lenses).

I feel this Canon FF strategy has worked on me, I recently upgraded to an R6 II. the RF system has many more entry level FF lens options then EF did (such as the 800mm F/11 and the 100-400mm F/8). Last time I checked in Australia you can get a new RP body only for just $100 AUD more then an R100 with a RF-S 18-45mm lens, or an RP with the entry level RF 24-50mm lens for just $400 AUD more. If I knew anyone who was just beginning today I'd be telling them to definitely go with the RP or R8!

john1970 · May 26, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
As a benchmark, the EF 100-400L II came out 16 years after the original. I would not expect a 100-500L II any time soon. I'm sure there will be a first MkII RF lens at some point, but that won't be the one.

Agree. I don't see Canon updating the 100-500 mm lens anytime soon and I think they are going to price something in the $4K to $6K range. See my previous posts for more hypothetical discussions.

David - Sydney · May 26, 2026

@neuroanatomist Your patience to explain these concepts to people is admirable.

TexPhoto · May 26, 2026

Some of my favorite Photos with the EF 70-200 f2.8 Mark III. A beast of a lens intend to shoot for the next 20+ years.

Jaysheldon · May 26, 2026

....or 18mm. Something really small and thin for an R50/R100/R10. So we can have a poor man's Fuji X100. I could get an RF16mm, but I'd like to go smaller and lighter for street photography/general walk around stuff.

Click · May 26, 2026

Beautiful scenery.

Hector1970 · May 26, 2026

A 14 or 15mm TS-E would be nice. Even better if it were a Zoom 14-24mm TS-E. I'm sure I'll be waiting.
I assume there will be more Роwеr Zооm Аdарtеrѕ compatible lens.
No good to a photographer unless shooting remotely.
Its leaves alot of little holes in the lens and contacts exposed to the elements. I assume its all well sealed but the lens looks more vulnerable.
I'm surprised they can't build it into the lens yet (I'm sure some day they will).
I'm ensure eventually I'll be able to send my Canon droid out to take photos with my Canon camera with a 14-300mm TS-E. It will select what photos to take autonomously.

john1970 · May 26, 2026

Dragon said:
Both the 800 f/11 and 600 f/11 use DO.

Thank you for the reminder. I forgot about those two lenses. Still I don't understand where the RF replacement for the 400 mm DO lens is?

john1970 · May 26, 2026

IF this statement is correct: "We are 100% confident that Canon is going to announce something that will sit between the RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM and the RF 100-300mm f/2.8L IS USM as far as price goes." I suspect that the front element size is going to be larger than 77 mm and smaller than 112 mm.

I would hypothesize a zoom lens with a 95 mm filter size because going larger than this size usually becomes more costly.

Assuming a 95 mm front filter size would mean that the long focal length of the lens would be either 400 mm f4.5 (likely the recently announced Sony), 500 mm f5.6 (like the Nikon PF lens), or 600 mm f6.3 (like the Sony lens). The only question that remains for me is what is the focal length on short end (likely 200 or 300 mm) and what is the weight.

foda · May 26, 2026

AlanF said:
Who cares! I'd prefer we had only one thread for birds.

I concur.

foda · May 26, 2026

Click said:
Beautifully photographed in its natural habitat. I love the bird's pose.

Thanks. Seeing it in the wild while out in the jungle was a real thrill, but photographing it was almost impossible. This particular one was photographed at a blind.

noname · May 26, 2026

Del Paso said:
RF 20-70 + 14 TS-E

Or 24-70mm f/1.8 + 28mm f/1.2

ashmadux · May 26, 2026

Uneternal said:
Porting the EF-M 22mm f/2 pancake to RF-S and making it f/1.8 would technically be a never-before-seen lens.

My old Canon heart breaks every time every time I think about how they refused to re-release this. What a slap in the face. I was hoping for a turnaround in attitude with canon crop.. . Boring bodies with ancient sensor iq .. no thank you.

My M gear is like gold to me.

ashmadux · May 26, 2026

homebodyMacro2 said:
I made a little tribute/showcase to the 70-200Z the other day in a separate thread: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/what’s-coming-next-from-canon.45141/page-6#post-1045676

Can't recommend it enough! Here's a sample of the images from the other thread. The quick zoom throw is great, the 0.6x magnification with a 2x extender is great, and all of these shots are with a 2x on:
View attachment 229671
View attachment 229672
View attachment 229673
View attachment 229674
View attachment 229675

Fantastic photos, good job mate!

ashmadux · May 26, 2026

The 2.8 v2 is my most beloved photographic tool treasure... it is simply wonderful and as long as it's compatible with current r series I see no reason to ever let it go. It just gets the job done it is has Wonderful rendering character and the autofocus is still bang on at least with an R5. I remember the day I bought it from adorama, and the cashier was just shaking his head when he saw the receipt. I worked super hard that year and I deserved it and so I got it. And it's been a trailer ever since. I don't get to use it much nowadays but no way I'm selling it off.

My2c

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics