Hector1970 said:

It’s interesting, it seems very unexciting. Nothing in that list really grabs my attention. I’ve just offloaded a lot of Ef gear to semi fund an R5 II and an RF 70-200 2.8. I was waiting for an R3 II or a new high MP R5. I think it will be a long wait. I have an R5 already and it’s a great camera. I’ll be interested to see if the R5 II is much of an improvement. This will be all camera companies dilemmas from now on. What is there to improve? The wow factor of 2000-2020 will be long gone. It’s hard to even imagine how a lens can be improved from now on.
My only wish is a 15mm TS-E . It doesn’t need autofocus, it doesn’t even need tilt.
That and a 100MP Full Frame (surely not too much to ask )

Click to expand...

I suppose the "coming" 14/15mm TS-E will be internally shifting, and this new feature could simplify AF implementation.
Like you, I don't need AF or the tilt-function. But many pros and serious users want and need shift AND tilt.
Sadly, it has grown silent about the 100 MP EOS. Yet, good surprises cannot be excluded...
Not too much to ask for ?

It’s interesting, it seems very unexciting. Nothing in that list really grabs my attention. I’ve just offloaded a lot of Ef gear to semi fund an R5 II and an RF 70-200 2.8. I was waiting for an R3 II or a new high MP R5. I think it will be a long wait. I have an R5 already and it’s a great camera. I’ll be interested to see if the R5 II is much of an improvement. This will be all camera companies dilemmas from now on. What is there to improve? The wow factor of 2000-2020 will be long gone. It’s hard to even imagine how a lens can be improved from now on.
My only wish is a 15mm TS-E . It doesn’t need autofocus, it doesn’t even need tilt.
That and a 100MP Full Frame (surely not too much to ask )

I’d be happy if they keep the R6ii sensor (they need to cripple something) but ad IBIS.

That seems logical to me.

MkSprintz said:

A fixed F/5.6 300-600 would slot in around $5000-$7000 roughly.

Click to expand...

Consider that 600mm f/5.6 requires the same front element size as 300mm f/2.8, meaning a 300-600/5.6 is going to be very similar to a hypothetical 150-300/2.8 (the 300-600/5.6 would be a little heavier and a bit longer). That hypothetical 150-300/2.8 sounds very much like the real RF 100-300/2.8L, which is priced at $10,600.

Why do you believe Canon would charge $3000-5000 less than the 100-300/2.8 for a lens that will be physically and optically very similar?

Chig said:

Me too but I can't see it being cheaper than the very similar RF 100-300mm f/2.8L IS USM if it's an L lens I would expect it to be at least 10% more expensive.
If Canon made a non L 300-600mm f/5.6 as they did with the RF 200-800 using cheaper elements and coatings and consumer grade materials then it should be a bit cheaper than the RF 100-300mm f/2.8L IS USM but personally I'd rather they made it a full on L lens and hopefully get the weight down and add a built in 1.4 extender for 420-840mm f/8 with it engaged. I'd be happy to save up for this even if it's USD $12,000

Click to expand...

A fixed F/5.6 300-600 would slot in around $5000-$7000 roughly. At F/4 I could see such a beast being $12000 but F/5.6 at $12,000 isn't happening.

I'd like to see the R3 guts and possibly EVF move downmarket into the R6iv, now that the lower ISO / dirtier images / higher pixel count video stuff has a home in the R6V. This, in my mind, feels much more like the thrust of the R6i and R6ii and would give the R3 a clean place to be put to bed. It's not that the R6iii isn't a good product, it just felt mis-aligned to me in the R6 body given the history. Now if more pixels can be had with the same clean high-ISO of the R6ii or R3, then by all means throw the cherry on top.

I want a Canon M6 style camera with a full frame sensor. Basically an R6V lite, stripped down, for photo, and a tilt up screen. I don't care if it shares a low end 24mp sensor recycled from the R8. Give us a super compact RF mount brick style, screen-only camera w/ option for an EVF attachment. Basically M6 style era days with a new 40mm pancake. i hate that there's still no small options like Lumix S9. Canon used to do small very well with the M6 era. then they stopped. No M/M3/M6 replacement, not even for APS-C. what happened? did technology regress? that was 10+ years ago!!

john1970 said:

The Canon 300-600 mm f5.6 is likely to be the last telephoto lens I buy from Canon.

The Sony 100-400 mm f4.5 lens is a brilliant lens from Sony and is reasonably light weight at 4 lbs. with a 1.4x TC you get a 140 mm to 560 mm f6.3 lens.

Click to expand...

Me too but I can't see it being cheaper than the very similar RF 100-300mm f/2.8L IS USM if it's an L lens I would expect it to be at least 10% more expensive.
If Canon made a non L 300-600mm f/5.6 as they did with the RF 200-800 using cheaper elements and coatings and consumer grade materials then it should be a bit cheaper than the RF 100-300mm f/2.8L IS USM but personally I'd rather they made it a full on L lens and hopefully get the weight down and add a built in 1.4 extender for 420-840mm f/8 with it engaged. I'd be happy to save up for this even if it's USD $12,000

I'd still like a higher resolution option than the R5 ii. There are thousands if not hundreds of us!

Flyingskiguy said:

There is still one (or two?) 6GHz wifi camera certifications floating around, implying the existence of higher end bodies on the way.

Also very curious about cinema eos. Would've been really happy with the R5II sensor in a C400 body...

Click to expand...

There was a 5GHz WiFi camera certification that was classified until Mid-June which is the R6 V, the other certification was a 4Ghz which lines up with the R8 MKii retro camera.

No 6Ghz registrations that are known for Canon.

Still hoping they come soon with new compact camera's

There is still one (or two?) 6GHz wifi camera certifications floating around, implying the existence of higher end bodies on the way.

Also very curious about cinema eos. Would've been really happy with the R5II sensor in a C400 body...

Still curious what's happening in the EOS Cinema world.

I think R8II will be same sensor as R6III with rest of the features mainly moved forward. I would assume that this will streamline sensor production and simplify the system.

I would love to see 24-70 2.8 and 24-105 f4 revised. I would prefer size and weight reduction over range extension.

Hope they keep the existing body style. Looking forward to see what Canon gives us in the R8 Mark II.

scyrene said:

??

If online chatter is to be believed, everything Canon releases is a PR disaster.

Click to expand...

Yeah it was 1 am and I couldn’t get back to sleep, so I was awake, but in a bit of mental fog and linked dynamic range and sensor noise a little more than I should have. Was also getting at AF and an improved basement, maybe an EV of -6 or -7, things that make a legitimate difference, not just numbers. Better handling at a higher ISO is easier than rewriting the physics of optics.

neuroanatomist said:

I had an email exchange with B&H customer service when I requested that my order for 10 caps be cancelled, and I told them that I ordered from another vendor because I needed more than 10 caps. Soon after that, the preorder dropdown changed from the 1-10 that it was when I placed the order to 1-10+, enabling you to enter a larger quantity.

Click to expand...

I see. So they did change it!

I didn't specify the quantity in the page with the item description before adding it to the cart. I added it to the cart with a quantity of 1, then later I went to the cart and changed the quantity. At that point it isn't a drop-down but rather a box where you can input a number and I simply typed the number 30.

I hadn't even realized there is a 1-10 vs 1-10+, I think this is the first time I buy more than 10 of anything on B&H .

I did just check (using the R6V as an example) and when the drop-down says 1-10, you can't input a number larger than 10 in the quantity box in the cart. It flags an error and sets it to 10.

So indeed, my order went through because it happened after your exchange with them rather than because of a "UI loophole".

EOS 4 Life said:

How was it zooming in and out using the zoom ring?

Click to expand...

You mean zooming manually? It responds very well.

Basically, there's two modes, you either use the W-T area, or you use the focal lengths.
When you're in the W-T area, the default position is the middle, like in this photograph. There's a spring mechanism that sets it back to the middle. You can go left to the W, or right to the T, the ring doesn't turn past those letters (hard stops). You can adjust how fast you zoom with your movement, by rotating more or less. Maximum speed was decent, not crazy fast, but I think it can be further adjusted on RV cameras (I didn't bother trying the R6V, I was using my original R6).



The switch PZ/MZ on the side of the lens (seen on many other pictures) lets you go the other zone of the ring, on the right. You hold the switch, rotate to the focal lengths, and then release it.
The manual zoom is operated electrically with two nano USM motors, so it responds very well, in general use there's no lag at all; you can provoke lag if you turn the ring like a jerk, on purpose, however it's minor.
There's hard stops at 20 and 50, but there's no resistance on rotation (is "dampening" the proper word? I'm not sure), the ring turns as easily as the lightest electronic focus ring you can imagine.

roby17269 said:

Quick question: I cannot find a detail about this lens: does it cover the FF image circle at every focal length or does it require stretching?

Thanks

Click to expand...

neuroanatomist said:

Unknown at this point, I believe. There was no patent published for this specific lens (there was a patent that included the design that became the RF-S 14-30 PZ, and a design for a 20-50mm f/4-5.6 lens; that patent did not list image heights).

If I had to guess, I would suspect some correction is required at the wide end. At least, I would not be surprised by that.

Click to expand...

It does not cover the entire full-frame sensor at 20mm, I have completely black corners on my RAW files. I just can't share them because I was photographing people.



There's no profile loaded here.
EDIT: Oh, I forgot to mention, there's barrel distortion from 20 all the way to 50.

The white thing you see on the left is not supposed to be straight, so don't judge distortion at 20mm by that. However, the glass doors are straight, obviously.

roby17269 said:

Quick question: I cannot find a detail about this lens: does it cover the FF image circle at every focal length or does it require stretching?

Click to expand...

Unknown at this point, I believe. There was no patent published for this specific lens (there was a patent that included the design that became the RF-S 14-30 PZ, and a design for a 20-50mm f/4-5.6 lens; that patent did not list image heights).

If I had to guess, I would suspect some correction is required at the wide end. At least, I would not be surprised by that.

Quick question: I cannot find a detail about this lens: does it cover the FF image circle at every focal length or does it require stretching?

Thanks

PinholeR5 said:

Interesting, I ordered 30 of the new caps from B & H. They confirmed the order, just pending on delivery. IMHO, this is an update that only makes sense if you go wholesale. Perhaps it is because I didn't order immediately after the preorder button was available and hence didn't have the "first batch" constraint.

Click to expand...

I had an email exchange with B&H customer service when I requested that my order for 10 caps be cancelled, and I told them that I ordered from another vendor because I needed more than 10 caps. Soon after that, the preorder dropdown changed from the 1-10 that it was when I placed the order to 1-10+, enabling you to enter a larger quantity.

I could see just a minor boost to 34.6 MP, not having to be class leading at 40.2, to maintain a pixel size that allows for more light capture & better noise. But you have to market it, and a stacked sensor, even partially stacked, BSI new sensor @ 34.6 MP is a huge deal for your marketing team.

From a practical standpoint, 15/30 fps is enough, but improved buffer (> 42 RAW). A blackout free better EVF than the current 2.36, a better monitor than the current 1.62 monitor. Again these can be relatively small incremental gains, but no change and you get accused of standing still, or worse yet, the marketing department’s worst nightmare, the Canon “Cripple Hammer!”

Look at Apple, they will resort to comparing a M5 or M4 with the M1 chip to make it seem more impressive as we are talking ms’s and the M4 compared to the M3 just doesn’t sell as well from an advertising perspective, even with people that have an 8-second attention span. What I care able is how fast I can process a large file in Lightroom or how quickly I can edit and process a video in Final Cut Pro.

Again AF is a key metric to the market segment, so it being able to handle BIF in low light is what you care about and makes a person’s dream sheet.

m4ndr4ke said:

I tried the lens yesterday, what do you want to know?

Click to expand...

How was it zooming in and out using the zoom ring?

Uneternal said:

And why can't we have both in one product?

Click to expand...

R5 C