If the R5C had C-Log 2 and a full size HDMI port then it would be perfect!

MichelleVanTine said:

I'm happy you mentioned the R5M2 overheating because at my job last weekend it overheated and needed a complete shut down TWICE!

Click to expand...

Were you using the cooling grip?

rombe3jr said:

They are grumbling pretty hard over at Sony Rumors . The Canon R6 III is such a good camera that nobody expects the Sony A7V to actually compete with it.

Click to expand...

I do not think that Sony has fallen so far behind that they can't catch up, but they have fallen far enough behind that Sony fanboys have lost their superiority complex.

Why not wait until hands on the R6iii before giving a critique.

Regarding GPS, with the "intelligent" flash connection setup, they ought to be able to make a self-powered GPS module that is both small and unobtrusive, and fits on the flash shoe mount of all newer Canon bodies.

The R5/R5 II discussion in here is fascinating. I've had my R5 since the day it launched and it's never failed me. Only twice has it overheated and that was of my own doing (accidentally leaving 4k/120 on). The two issues I've seen mentioned the most as egregious is long-form recording causing an overheat. In which case I always feel buy a dedicated video cam. And then the second is overheating during stills shooting, which I still have yet to see evidence of. Anybody have video of an R5/II overheating from stills only? Shouldn't it be able to be recreated in circumstances where it happens?

Love this article. This type of content has me visiting the site more frequently. I'm in the same boat as you, Youtube discussions over camera releases or comparisons have become useless. Fro and PetaPixel are about all I watch now that feel remotely useful/informative. Rest of the videos are just content machines/advertisements.

McMacmac said:

Seriously: Why? I might be ignorant, but I have never needed to know where exactly a pic was taken. I usually know when I look at it. But maybe I am missing the point of GPS data in my files.

Click to expand...

Legal, forensic photography!

Any updates in the last 2 months on this one? @Canon Rumors

Honestly, I'm way more interested in this RF 300-600 f/4.0-5.6 L than in any of the other things going on right now lol

One off-topic question to the U.S. members of the forum.
Just a curiosity.

Here in Italy we will be able to buy this lens for 529 euro (Amazon.it). That's it.


In the US, I know that VAT has to be added, and it depends on where the lens is purchased.

But this lens is made in Malaysia, and there is a 25% tariff (if I remember well) on Malaysia's export to the US.

So my question is: will the U.S. customer pay 469 USD+ 25% tariff + VAT, or do the 469 USD already include the 25% tariff?

Thanks.

Can you explain the use case vs an exposition alert when an area of the image is burned ?

P-visie said:

You are not missing a thing, some people think their wants/ needs represent the entire user-base.

@CRguy explained in another thread why GPS is an issue for smaller camera bodies. See: Post in thread 'Canon Officially Announces the Canon EOS R6 Mark III'
https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...-the-canon-eos-r6-mark-iii.44848/post-1035009

Click to expand...

Thanks. Yes I get the point and reasoning about battery, space shielding etc.... But old cameras and specifically referring to bridge (which has EVF) Canon PowerShot and Nikon P900 etc has geo tagging. they have small batteries, small boddies, EVF etc and still a gps in there. I know Rx cameras are a bit more advanced and shielding would be good but come on a gps is no longer some big battery hunger device - they are always on in your phone.

mikev said:

Why would you say its pointless? Am I missing something that I always took for granted in taking outdoor pics in unknown areas and want to tag and id later? Not arguing - just want to understand why other people would not find it a necessity?

Click to expand...

You are not missing a thing, some people think their wants/ needs represent the entire user-base.

@CRguy explained in another thread why GPS is an issue for smaller camera bodies. See: Post in thread 'Canon Officially Announces the Canon EOS R6 Mark III'
https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...-the-canon-eos-r6-mark-iii.44848/post-1035009

d.o.k said:

Only available in video mode though IIRC.

Click to expand...

Yes, at this time. Whether this will be included in a firmware update remains to be seen. Perhaps there isn't enough demand to add it.

Only available in video mode though IIRC.

MkSprintz said:

With the exception of Geolocation/GPS which is unnecessary and pointless the rest of that list is realistic for what's needed in the R7ii.

Click to expand...

Why would you say its pointless? Am I missing something that I always took for granted in taking outdoor pics in unknown areas and want to tag and id later? Not arguing - just want to understand why other people would not find it a necessity?

mikev said:

I agree with most of the technical "wish list" items.
A simple feature that seems lacking in most of the lineup of Cannon is geolocation. Why can a camera of this level not have this basic modern feature?
Given the general consensus that the R7 is used for wildlife and if Canon want to make it a truly wildlife / outdoor camera they must include geolocation / GPS into the body.
So wildlife / outdoor features should include:
FAST APS C sensor to avoid rolling shutter. Electronic only is good if it is not subject to rolling shutter effect
APS C is great for giving that extra reach on lenses
Geo location is a must
A good low light performance would be great since artificial light with wildlife is not always possible. Again a good new sensor.
High burst rate 40 raw. high res video at high frame rate for slow-motion
Pre-capture
No blackout / blackout free EVF
Fast and smart advanced AF
at least 33MP - higher would be great to allow cropping
Good stabilization (IBS) because most shots are out of the hand
focus bracketing

Click to expand...

With the exception of Geolocation/GPS which is unnecessary and pointless the rest of that list is realistic for what's needed in the R7ii.

It is available in the Canon R6 Mark II

Canon Rumors said:

From B&H (Canon is notorious for screwing up or omitting things on their own web sites)

The claimed 15-16 stops of DR ..... It's also a completely new sensor.

Click to expand...

Not sure I quite buy that. Canon's C400 spec page highlights the BSI sensor, while the C50 page does the usual Canon FSI sensor thing of not saying what the sensor tech is. I've also read all the Japanese promo & spec pages and BSI is not mentioned anywhere. Maybe a teardown will show it one way or another but with Canon not trumpeting BSI, the most likely thing is FSI.

As for the claimed 15-16 stops of DR, I'll wait to see a CineD review to see how that turns out. All manufacturers make unrealistic claims about DR.

Snapster said:

Nikon 50mm 1.8S is the reference here.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure any Nikon gear is a reference here. Nikon is so desperate to sell they've been setting lower-than-average prices on some of their gear for years. Even Sigma's 50mm f/2 Contemporary ($719) is more expensive than Nikon's Z 50mm f/1.8S ($669). Nikon has just been doing that.

But if we ignore their strategy, the Z 50mm f/1.4 would be a more interesting comparison, as that is the offering they have that sacrifices something for aperture, for $599. The RF 45mm walks the same path, but it's significantly cheaper ($469) and goes further, to the extreme of f/1.2.

Anyway, if you're using a R5, in case you haven't noticed, there isn't a single R5 on Canon's showcasing of this lens, and that happens because the R5 user is not its target.
This will probably be acceptable on 20/24MP cameras. You paid the extra for the resolution, you better pair that with the best glass there is.

If you’re looking for a character lens, you’ll love this but, if you’re looking for optical performance on a R5, there’s a red ring for you. At 20MP I can get by with pretty much any lens but, at 45MP, you definitely can’t.

EDIT: I just realised that even Sigma’s 45mm f/2.8 costs almost as much ($619) as Nikon’s Z 50mm f/1.8 S ($669).

rombe3jr said:

They are grumbling pretty hard over at Sony Rumors . The Canon R6 III is such a good camera that nobody expects the Sony A7V to actually compete with it.

Click to expand...

Oh my God, that's true! They are indeed praising the R6 III (unlike some Canon forum members...)

Look also how much better the Nikon 24-50 is compared to Canon's version. Same price, same size, same aperture - much better optically.

Canon Rumors said:

7K FF Back-Illuminated CMOS Sensor

See full article...

Click to expand...

I don't think Canon has made any claims about this being a BSI sensor...? It seems to be a resolution-bumped version of the R6 II's 24mp FSI sensor.