The water droplets on the flowers add a beautiful touch. Nicely done, ISv.

Nemorino said:

The LP-E6P is afaik the 4th version, has the LP-E17 been updated? Or would some improvements be possible?

Click to expand...

I don´t think it has been updated. Usually, Canon adds a letter if a battery is updated. Such as LP-E6/ LP-E6N/ LP-E6NH/ LP-E6P

Exploreshootshare said:

The LP-E17 is "significantly" lighter and smaller than the LP-E6NH

Click to expand...

The LP-E6P is afaik the 4th version, has the LP-E17 been updated? Or would some improvements be possible?

Maximilian said:

Hi Adam!
Thanks for pointing that out. Could be an issue to me. Could be an issue.
Here's the chart for others to find:

Read Noise in DNs versus ISO Setting

@Richard CR:
Maybe this should be included in the article.

Click to expand...

They all have the same DR above iso 800, which is the important consideration. For noise charts, photonstophotos explicitly states under the plot "These raw values are not appropriate for comparing camera models because they are not adjusted for gain or area." So, ignore them!

Traveler said:

The R also had bigger battery. But I don't know how much weight IBIS ads. I guess the main weight difference comes from how much metal the body contains. I'd be totally fine with modern plastic, doesn't need to be full of magnesium alloy (even thought it sounds good in marketing materials).

BTW I'm also surprised how little weight difference there is between the R6 and R5 but it feels really a lot.

Click to expand...

The LP-E17 is "significantly" lighter and smaller than the LP-E6NH. If my google search is correct, there is a 30 gr difference which is a lot for such a small component. The more important part is that the smaller and more compact battery allows Canon to design the camera as compact as possible. Of course, one could wish the R8 would use the LP-E6 serious (oh that battery life) but it would the camera bigger and heavier and therefore miss the point of the R8.

Maximilian said:

Thanks for sharing.

Thanks, Richard, for sharing and the interpretation.
So we see that in base/low ISO the BSI sensors are noticeably better, while above that zigzag at about ISO800 everybody looks quite the same, with the A7 V slightly leading.
As I mostly shoot my wildlife at ISO 1600 and above, the R6m3 could be a useful tool instead of my R6m2, delivering same DR at higher MP count and faster readout.
Right now, I see no need to move

Click to expand...

On the other hand, high ISO of the R6 III got worse than the R6II and now is much closer to the original R5 than R6 II or R6 OG according to the noise chart of photons-to-photos. Its up to you to decide whether worse low light capabilities of the R6 III can effect your work or not. Seemingly, increasing the MP count from 24 to 32 MP has some price.

Canon Rumors said:

I hope it doesn't get stuck! It was only €5950.... budget Leica.

Click to expand...

There's a workaround if it does: Using the rear LCD to change ISOs. How I love Canon's additional lens-ring to quickly change ISOs!

Ugh, over the next year we gonna hear nothing else from the Sony fanboys but "Well my Sony has 1 stop more DynAmIc RaNgE. Canon lags 20 years behind."

We're back to 2018 again. If only Canon would use the dual data they already get with the dual pixel sensor. Cause each pixel captures a slightly different exposure. And there's software that can read both exposures and calculate a picture with higher dynamic range. Why this is not done in-camera is a mystery to me.

Traveler said:

Sure there is no camera for all and everyone has different requirements. My complaint was that people who like bigger cameras get more features. But we who like smaller cameras don't.
Again, I'm aware that not all features can be put in a small body due to physical limitations.

Click to expand...

I fully understand your complaint, but isn't it logical that those who bitterly suffer more under a heavier load also get the benefit of more cute little features?

Exploreshootshare said:

I do get what you mean and I agree with. I wish there was a line between R8 (481 gr) and R5 (738 gr) with the great tech and gimmicks in a body that weighs less. The R6ii is way closer to the R5 (I believe it comes in somewhere around 690-700gr). If the mkiii would hit 650gr, it would be awesome. I wish for a 600gr pro body as well, but it won't happen. The caveat of the 481 gr R8 is the smaller battery, but I can absolutely live with it

Click to expand...

The R also had bigger battery. But I don't know how much weight IBIS ads. I guess the main weight difference comes from how much metal the body contains. I'd be totally fine with modern plastic, doesn't need to be full of magnesium alloy (even thought it sounds good in marketing materials).

BTW I'm also surprised how little weight difference there is between the R6 and R5 but it feels really a lot.

Del Paso said:

The one camera for all doesn't exist. Just like hand-sizes and preferences can never be standardised, fortunately.
Where I'd like to contradict you is about the relationship between camera size and lens size. While it's obvious that an R1 and a 400mm tele are a much better match than the 400mm on an R8, I still dislike the tiny 28mm f/2,8 on an R or R8. But enjoy it on the R5 II.
It's all a matter of preferences, this is why there are so many different cameras.
To conclude: I once bought the Leica M 240, although it got criticised by most for being too "fat". And this is what I liked about it, and disliked when the slimmer M 10 was released...

Click to expand...

Sure there is no camera for all and everyone has different requirements. My complaint was that people who like bigger cameras get more features. But we who like smaller cameras don't.
Again, I'm aware that not all features can be put in a small body due to physical limitations.

AlanF said:

You do give the caveat that the measurements are affected by the conditions, including temperature. Bear in mind that the measurements are made by new purchasers who send them in and we don’t know whether they are done in an unheated outhouse in the arctic winter or in an Australian summer. I also hate seeing numbers without error bars or the means and standard errors from repeat runs. The low iso results are those that are most affected by environmental conditions as the high iso are dependent basically on photon flux.

Click to expand...

absolutely 100%

how long the camera was turned on for, how many shots were taken before the test shots, ambient temperture, and even slight changes in sensor and camera performance. Also I didn't really allude to it, but I would imagine that canon sensors having to process twice the amount of photodiodes, probably have a disadvantage in terms of needing to run warmer.

Considering Canon pulls this all off with front side illumination, I think is pretty good - now the question is, why and when are they going to move to BSI? they obviously have it. "in theory".

Richard CR said:

PhotonsToPhotos is back, and this time, they have finished up their analysis of the Canon EOS R6 Mark III sensor, so we have some actual numbers to quantify here with the sensor and how it measures up against the earlier versions of the Canon EOS R6 lineup and its competition. If we compare all the […]

See full article...

Click to expand...

You do give the caveat that the measurements are affected by the conditions, including temperature. Bear in mind that the measurements are made by new purchasers who send them in and we don’t know whether they are done in an unheated outhouse in the arctic winter or in an Australian summer. I also hate seeing numbers without error bars or the means and standard errors from repeat runs. The low iso results are those that are most affected by environmental conditions as the high iso are dependent basically on photon flux.

I received the Laowa 180 Macro AF as EF version two weeks ago. Some first impressions here:

Why EF version?
→ AF (now for closeup/macro too, see below)
→ compatible to M50, makes a tiny tele setup (280eq 4.5 macro 1.5:1 !!!)
→ Allows filters in adapter
→ Owning mostly EF lenses

AF now with firmware 1.0.4 can be done at all distances with some restrictions:
→ There is an update from Laowa which I transferred to the lens via USB (creates a flash drive, put the .bin firmware into that drive, WAIT TILL remount, ready!)
→ This update ALLOWS AF FOR THE WHOLE RANGE _but_ with one restriction: This is activated by a long press on the lens button (3sec +) and can be deactivated. You have to set the focus to a reasonable value, then the AF can manage SOME RANGE. Maybe you have to refocus manually after changing the distance to the object at a larger scale.
Focus helpers work, the viewfinder shows if the setting is changed. Servo is supported too: Great to see that because now slight movements by me/the subject (flower in wind) can be corrected by AF!
→ AUTO STACKING works, but I have never used it before and I think you have to manage the manual prefocus, stacking interval and number of photos carefully within the limit of the AF range.

Size, weight etc:
→ The EF version is ~110 mm long (not 89mm as stated in "the internet")
→ It is thin, short, feels solid/heavy but mounted on the camera not looking at it the thing is leightweight!
→ Hood is there, can be focused with hood in retro position (if you need fast access): Great.
→ focusing is smooth, somewhere in between FD and good EF/RF lenses but free of play and direct
(There are some hints that the lens can do AF with a lens group for oo → 1.5m and limited ranges in macro AF mode, so manual is done mechanically the old way and AF is the icing on the cake).
→ Markings for distance are contrasty but small, marking for alignment with camera and hood are ... RF standard: poorly visible under slightly dimmer conditions.
→ Activating AF by turning the lens to infinity + 5mm or pressing the button for 3 seconds (close range AF) is different but the different overall feel of the lens helps to connect it to this special tool.

Optics (last but not least):
→ Overall image quality looks pretty good after first steps to get some experience with the lens. It is sharp, contrasty but doesn't produce clinical sharpness - it just renders textures so you can feel them by looking at the image. (RP, 28MP, FF & R50 V, 24MP, APS-C equiv to ~60 MP on FF)
→ Bokeh is good at infinity to close ranges. Near 1:1 it looks a little bit more shaped for highlights but it is no problem.
→ There seems to be a slight portion of lateral chromatic aberrations but longitudinal aberrations seem very well corrected.
→ Sharpness at close focus/macro is really great and natural. The good LOCA correction shows metallic (Fe, Al - Au is too expensive ...) surfaces under white light as black and white - no color rims or so.
→ All lens aberrations are corrected well in the lens - so no reliance on correction firmware/code for cameras/software

A good technical test of this lens is available at OpticalLimits:
https://opticallimits.com/nikon/nikon-z/laowa-af-180mm-f-4-5-apo-ultra-macro/

becceric said:

Well, I do try to delete my clumsy photographic mistakes.
And in general, I lament versus cry.
Did I accidentally post this morning's mistake? Please let me know, for I haven't lamented much today.

Click to expand...

I had to laugh about the comment to which I reacted with an attempt to humor. You did not post a mistake, you spotted a subject that a lot of people would have overlooked. I like the brown leaf against the white background and the pattern of white hairs on the leaf. I just wonder if it was possible to give the leaf a bit more “breathing space” on the right side of the picture.

Interesting results, makes me confident that I do not need to upgrade from R6 ii → iii .
Interesting future: What happens if Canon puts the learnings from great front side illuminated sensors into a new generation of back side illuminated sensors with some stacking!

R100 mark ii probably is R50 with DIGIC 8.....

No chance for frozen leafs here (may be on high altitude on the Big Island!). Just light rain that is drying when the sun appears behind of the clouds. Tomorrow will start more rain with some thunderstorms (according the forecast!) and after Monday it's getting to the normal again (but cooler!!!! - I like it!!!!).

P-visie said:

Is that an example of the “clumsy photgraphic mistakes since 1980”? Or a cry for help? Or both?

Click to expand...

He is just complaining about the season! I think the photo is interesting idea (not sure if it's new idea but it's still interesting!).

Several times I have seen "Mynas wars"- in the local slang (I would say "Mynas brawls"!) but always distant or I was not prepared. There is no way to be "prepared": the event stops as suddenly as it starts. I think they have some negative energy that they need to get out!
I was sitting on a bench checking out my photos of flowers (botanical garden) when it started right (and close!!!) in front of me. The only time that I had was to close the aperture for DOF and started shooting at "group AF". The losers are pretending "dead", but wen the dust gets down they are walking together with the winners like nothing happened ! Everything in 5-10 seconds.
Sorry for the blurred photos but the light was not enough and changing with the movement of the canopy above... On other hand you are getting sense of the dynamic of the event?

AlanF said:

I haven't seen the Little Owl since February 2024 but he was back on a woodpile this afternoon. He's in the middle of a fenced farmer's field and the closest I get is about 80-100mm. The 1.4xTC on the RF 200-800mm is very useful at this distance and the image is pretty sharp for hand held and the owl only 570 pixels tall.

View attachment 227109

Click to expand...

Looks pretty intimidating!

Click said:

My cat does the same thing. He even goes behind the TV to see if the bird is there.

Click to expand...

In this case there is no behind: the TV is on the wall....

Chig said:

"Portable" 500mm f/2.8 , I'd like to see this one but if anyone ever makes one it'll be very large, expensive and not very portable

Click to expand...

If comes with a dolly, dude. Portable.

EOS 4 Life said:

True, but it is not so easy to address.
See Olympus.

Click to expand...

Leica found their profitable niche with low volume/market share but you are right that other OEMs with good products don’t have good market share. Being profitable is the only long term solution.
Canon still dominates and makes their own ff sensors but there is the argument that losing market share would push them harder on price and features