Latest activity

danfaz · Dec 20, 2025

Click said:
Beautiful series. I really like the second one. Well done, danfaz.

Thank you, Click!

Ozarker · Dec 20, 2025

Maximilian said:
I think it is about the f/1.2 - of course. But also with great IQ, if not stellar. Nut we'll see - if it will be announced/released

Yes.

Click · Dec 20, 2025

Beautiful series. I really like the second one. Well done, danfaz.

Click · Dec 20, 2025

Very nice shot, danfaz. Excellent timing.

Bob Howland · Dec 20, 2025

Chunk said:
A 45 - 125 1.8. Good luck with that

I suspect that I very much disagree with your definition of "equivalence" in lenses. If you have to change the exposure to maintain field of view and depth of field, it isn't equivalent.

danfaz · Dec 20, 2025

Hi,
Was doing some more testing on my new cam and got this Northern Harrier on patrol.
R5ii + 100-500.

danfaz · Dec 20, 2025

Hi,
Was testing out my new camera and captured this Red-tailed Hawk making a landing on a post.
R5ii + 100-500.

EOSR7MkII · Dec 20, 2025

AlanF said:
The "damage" to your sensor appears to be a few "hot" or "stuck" pixels. Solar damage is usually a cluster of dead pixels. Are you sure the hot pixels weren't there before the exposure to the sun? I had meant to mention this earlier.

Great idea, thank you! I don't know why I didn't think of that myself so far. I found some older, very dark images taken earlier this year, which also feature these two spots. It appears that we can rule out the ~5-10 s accidental stationary exposure to the hazy afternoon sun (~20% of maximum intensity) at f/1.8 and 50 mm focal length as having caused them.

However, judging by the calculated values in Table 7, just 5-10x longer would likely have caused permanent damage (TBC), meaning anywhere from half a minute to 1.5 minutes even under those hazy conditions. After seeing how much of an effect stopping down just a little makes, I will definitely not be walking around with the aperture wide open anymore (especially with telephoto lenses), and for sure not accidentally place the camera on a stationary surface facing the sun when dropping something anymore...

Planterz · Dec 20, 2025

Chunk said:
A 45 - 125 1.8. Good luck with that

I said a 70-200mm equivalent f2.8 APS-C, not a 70-200mm f2.8 equivalent APS-C.

Chunk · Dec 20, 2025

Planterz said:
11 years old. I have no idea if the quality holds up to today's standards. Definitely overweight. Fuji doesn't seem to "refresh" their lenses particularly often.

If indeed the R7 II is more "entry-pro"/enthusiast level, a 70-200mm equivalent f2.8 APS-C makes a lot of sense to me. A high school's photography/journalism department or proud parent could feasibly get the camera and lens to shoot basketball or volleyball games for about the cost of the RF 70-200mm Z (no body).

A 45 - 125 1.8. Good luck with that

EricN · Dec 20, 2025

Del Paso said:
I won't even be able to afford a cardboard box, I'm already looking for a cozy cavern in a forest.

Perhaps you'll need something to catch the guano?

Planterz · Dec 20, 2025

Bob Howland said:
The Fuji 50-140, at 995g, is absurdly heavy but I think it's pretty old. I want something weighing 500g to 600g. And my credit card is ready..

11 years old. I have no idea if the quality holds up to today's standards. Definitely overweight. Fuji doesn't seem to "refresh" their lenses particularly often.

If indeed the R7 II is more "entry-pro"/enthusiast level, a 70-200mm equivalent f2.8 APS-C makes a lot of sense to me. A high school's photography/journalism department or proud parent could feasibly get the camera and lens to shoot basketball or volleyball games for about the cost of the RF 70-200mm Z (no body).

Chunk · Dec 20, 2025

Bob Howland said:
Based on my experience with a 7D vs 5D3 and R7 vs R6-2, I think it's been this way since about 2012. My maximum auto ISO for the APS-C cameras is 6400 and for the FF cameras, 12800.

Dynamic range has seen significant improvement since then.

Bob Howland · Dec 20, 2025

Planterz said:
Sony users have long lamented the lack of a ~45-135mm f2.8 APS-C lens to match the common 70-200m f2.8 telephoto zoom. I think once upon a time Sigma was rumored to be working on one, but clearly that never came to be. Fuji has a 50-140mm f2.8, but they're the only APS-C maker to do so. Now that there's potentially 4 mounts (X, E, Z, RF-S), maybe it'll finally make sense for Sigma or whomever to make one.

The Fuji 50-140, at 995g, is absurdly heavy but I think it's pretty old. I want something weighing 500g to 600g. And my credit card is ready..

Bob Howland · Dec 20, 2025

Chunk said:
The IQ at this point for the R7, or for most modern apsc cameras are not limited by needing "better pixels" (whatever that means). While there is a minimal amount of read noise, the vast majority is shot noise which is a purely physical limitation based on total light collecting area i.e. sensor size. The R7 is absurdly good, given that it is an apsc. Objectively as good as the neighboring fullframe cameras like the R6, R5 or R3 if adjusted for sensor size (1 stop).

Based on my experience with a 7D vs 5D3 and R7 vs R6-2, I think it's been this way since about 2012. My maximum auto ISO for the APS-C cameras is 6400 and for the FF cameras, 12800.

Del Paso · Dec 20, 2025

EricN said:
If this, the autofocus tiltshift lenses, and a high resolution sensor can come in '26, it will be the year for me to live in a cardboard box.

I won't even be able to afford a cardboard box, I'm already looking for a cozy cavern in a forest.

Sporgon · Dec 20, 2025

The mid range hybrid camera seems to be the model that gets updated most frequently by the big three manufacturers - four including the Fuji crop line, so I guess owners of these cameras are the most likely group to be ‘upgrading’ to something new. It does surprise me how Canon gear seems to command higher prices in this used strata compared with Sony and Nikon, and this must be demand led, resulting in Canon products depreciating less than their rivals.
I had an RP; the IQ was excellent at base ISO.
Saw an interview with David Bailey a few years back, he had an RP with adapted efs 24 pancake lens ! A photographer known for liking vignette in his pictures !

EricN · Dec 20, 2025

Del Paso said:
I definitely want this 35mm f/1,2!

If this, the autofocus tiltshift lenses, and a high resolution sensor can come in '26, it will be the year for me to live in a cardboard box.

EricN · Dec 20, 2025

They want to sell at a higher price and I don't think it's limited only to these cameras. If you get lucky, you'll find someone who wants to sell quickly. I would warn you the RP - practically af and viewfinder- is not better or much better than your 90D, but if you just want a fullframe for mostly static photos, it's not bad.

Richard CR · Dec 20, 2025

mimbu said:
Sony makes BSI sensors for almost the entire camera market, as well as for a significant portion of the phones that are sold. Yet Canon can't manage to make them for their own cameras? That doesn't seem reasonable. If they can't, then they aren't investing what they should be.

I'm not sure you realize just how hard it would be for Canon to change a fab over to a new process. It's incredibly expensive.

Absolutely, Sony has been doing it for years and at scale, but that makes it far easier to accomplish, while Canon is more of a boutique sensor fab.

Richard CR · Dec 20, 2025

Dragon said:
You are absolutely correct about yields being impacted by additional process steps. In the case of BSI, the BIG ONE is the back lapping of the wafer followed by the cutting and handling of a 300mm wafer of silicon now only a tiny fraction of the thickness of a human hair. There are no vias required because the lapped backside is actually the photosensitive surface and is already internally connected to the circuitry on the "front" side. The "front" side (now the back side) still needs to be connected to the outside world, and I have not seen any description of that process, but clearly, the circuitry needs to be electrically connected to and possibly through (that would involve vias in the substrate) the support substrate that that the thinned chip is attached to. All these processes are VERY proprietary and there is very little public data with regards to the details.

Absolutely, the flipping of the wafer and thinning the backside is the most challenging step, but if Canon has that step already done (in theory) for it's stacked sensors, then the process has already been moved in-house.

Alot of this is of course, congjecture becuase we have no idea how much of Canon's sensors are now manufacturered by Canon.

P-visie · Dec 20, 2025

ISv said:
Great siting! When did you take the photo - early this year or the bird is still on Textel (what be strange!)? Hard to believe you got twice such a (really!!!) "lost bird" in the same year.
Congratulations!

I took the photo yesterday, december 19 2025. According to the Dutch observation site (waarneming.nl) the spectacled eider was first seen on Texel on January 15 2025 and has been here since. This is my first sighting and my first pictures of the bird.

Richard CR · Dec 20, 2025

mimbu said:
Photons To Photos clearly shows in the chart (the triangles) that it is using NR on those low ISOs. When it changes to using circles, the NR is no longer there. You can see it's the low ISOs that use NR that "outperform" the R6 II which does not use NR on those same ISOs.

I realize that. But it doesn't necessarily mean it's truly NR. This is something I've discussed in prior PhotonsToPhotos analysis on CR, and Bill actually agrees. It's just assumed that it's why it's there, but we don't have actual, identifiable proof of it.

For all we know, it could have something to do with dual-pixel sensors in general, as Canon needs to do some processing as they are combining the results from two wells, and they have to include the possibility that only half of the A+B overflows, which will change both auto focus and also color accuracy.

Chunk · Dec 19, 2025

Maximilian said:
I am not directly in the market for an R7m2.
But if I was and knowing the IQ from a friends R7 I really hope for better pixels (s/n, high ISO performance) than for more pixels.
If Canon can deliver both at the same time, that'll be welcome, for sure.

The IQ at this point for the R7, or for most modern apsc cameras are not limited by needing "better pixels" (whatever that means). While there is a minimal amount of read noise, the vast majority is shot noise which is a purely physical limitation based on total light collecting area i.e. sensor size. The R7 is absurdly good, given that it is an apsc. Objectively as good as the neighboring fullframe cameras like the R6, R5 or R3 if adjusted for sensor size (1 stop).

So if you were interpreting some issue of image quality on an R7, it was because either you have unrealistic or uninformed expectations of what is possible for an apsc sensor, you werent at all accounting for obvious variables like light availability, slower or worse optics, or possibly the camera just wasnt in skilled hands.

Kiton · Dec 19, 2025

Buylongterm said:
Received mine on launch day. Thank you Adorama. Coming from a 5D Mark III, I have a lot to learn. I also got the RF 24-70 2.8L and the RF 100 2.8L as well. I am trying my best to hold off on the RF 70-200 2.8L Z!!!! Thank God the weather in Chicago is horrible. I want and need this lens. But I have to slow down. Bought my first Macbook Pro along with every other accessory. 1TB CFExpress B, 4tb Sandisk extreme pro external HD, cases, high speed cables, additional batteries, etc.... After being away from shooting for close to 5 years, I now remember how expensive and addicting this hobby is. Congrats to all R6 Mark III owners.

Cocaine is cheap! Photography is an expensive habit!

The 70-200 Z is an absolutely beautiful lens that is superbly well balanced in the hand.