GMCPhotographics said:

Yes, you've reminded me that I really should send my EF 70-200mm f2.8 II L off to Canon for a service. Mine is a bit battered too and I've recenently noticed that the center moves when I zoom. It's not the IS, it looks like some of the internals are de-centered slightly. It still gives amazing and sharp images...but zoom bursts look a bit off center to to the optical alignment.

Click to expand...

That could be the IS. IS works by intentionally tilting the IS group.

If one of the plastic tabs that hold the IS stationary when not needed is broken, it might show up in the way you describe. Roger Cicala talked about those tabs a bit in several blog entries back in the day. He emphasized that IS should be turned OFF while the camera is powered on before storing and transporting it. Lensrentals had several of those lenses returned with broken tabs, and every one of them had the IS left on and not centered/parked when it was removed from the body. (The lensrentals blog appears to be offline currently or I'd include a link.)

MkSprintz said:

Pushing the R7ii the other direction and downmarket with the ideas you presented would dramatically reduce potential sales of the unit, especially when it's not what the target market for said camera wants. It would push more wildlife and sports photographers towards the R6ii, R6iii, R5ii, and R1 thus reducing any chance of recovery or growth for the APS-C segment as a whole.

Click to expand...

Canon makes more profit per unit on the R6, R5, and R1 series than on APS-C models. Why would Canon not want that?

But that's a fantasy world in which competition from Sony, Nikon, Fuji, and others does not exist. A More R10 type of R7 Mark II would push most potential buyers to another manufacturer that offers more what those buyers want.

scottburgess said:

While these vaguely-reported half-rumors about the R7ii suggest it might lean toward a more premium market, I think there's too little specificity and reliability to give these rumors any weight. We're in nothing-burger territory here.

Click to expand...

Everything Canon has done since 2018 points towards a more premium market. They even state it in their annual reports.

Example: The best AF used to be reserved for the top models. Even when two bodies shared the same PDAF part number (1D X Mark II, 5D Mark IV), the higher body had AF setting options the lower body did not. More importantly, even when both were set to identical settings the 1D X Mark II was slightly more consistent from shot to shot than the 5D Mark IV.

Oumenos said:

6D First DSLR including a GPS and then 5DmkIV. After R5 family, R6 serie always no GPS on board…

Click to expand...

It's a shame but it could be because of battery drain.

P-visie said:

The R7 has the same sensor as the EOS 90D and the EOS M6 Mk II. Re-using that sensor reduced development time and costs. The sensor performance may be the reason why the R7 went “downmarket” compared to the 7D Mk II.

Click to expand...

There's more to a camera than the sensor. At least there is for someone who actually uses cameras to take pictures with them.

6D First DSLR including a GPS and then 5DmkIV. After R5 family, R6 serie always no GPS on board…

blackcoffee17 said:

This still looks much better than the existing 35mm and other lenses because can "seal" the lens with a filter.

Click to expand...

Exactly! I always hope for at least designs like this! It's poor man's internal focus, but at least it can be shut, so there's no water or dust going directly to the lens barrel.

I'd easily sacrifice the macro abilities on the 24 and 35, and take few millimetres extra on every other lens (16, 28, 50, etc) if they were designed like this.

m4ndr4ke said:

View attachment 226766
Do you mean red? That would move the lens hood as well, but this is not a lens hood that attaches to the filter thread, like they usually do on pancake lenses.

I mean green. I think the elements may move, but such movement would be limited by the position of the filter, much like the RF 50mm f/1.2

View attachment 226767


Anyway, we'll certainly know within a few hours

Click to expand...

This still looks much better than the existing 35mm and other lenses because can "seal" the lens with a filter.

mxwphoto said:

It does not look like internal focusing. Filter thread and lens hood attach on same barrel, but see the gap after hood bayonet between inner and outer barrel typically denotes the inner barrel will move outward when focusing.

Click to expand...

Do you mean red? That would move the lens hood as well, but this is not a lens hood that attaches to the filter thread, like they usually do on pancake lenses.

I mean green. I think the elements may move, but such movement would be limited by the position of the filter, much like the RF 50mm f/1.2




Anyway, we'll certainly know within a few hours

Very happy to see that they are still around despite the late season. Nice pictures, Maximilian.

One year ago, while owning 2 R6II, I had excitement for the III, with rumors claiming it had the R3 stacked sensor and so much more. I shoot high school football, track & field, IMSA sports cars and any animals I can find. So my goal was 2 of the same camera. I questioned when, what will it have and do, the price and so on. December 27 I got a notice, Canon R3 refurb for $2999. Without any hestitation, I bought 2 and got what I wanted NOW. I sold all my old stuff to KEH and did not look back.

Now, a whole season of football, indoor and outdoor Track & field, a whole season of IMSA sports cars behind us, now it's here, pre-sale, wait, yadda yadda.

The R6III is not what I want. The 32MP is of zero importance, I have 8 20TB hard drives, I do NOT need bigger files, more data. I am sorry to whom my disagree, but this too little, too late without the bump in performance to justify any value to "ME".

I have been with Canon since 1976 with 2 AE-1's, I value the ecosystem and have never strayed. The support when needed, which has been maybe 10 times in 50 years, has been without equal. So thank you for another new camera and lens, but I am set with what I have.

$469 for the 45mm is fantastic, I might just try it for fun

m4ndr4ke said:

Do I see an internal focusing lens?

The filter thread seems to be the same piece where the lens hood attaches

Click to expand...

It does not look like internal focusing. Filter thread and lens hood attach on same barrel, but see the gap after hood bayonet between inner and outer barrel typically denotes the inner barrel will move outward when focusing.

Walrus said:

The 50 STM is almost half the size of the 35 STM, so I would say this 45 is almost three times as big as the 50

Click to expand...

35 stm - 74,4 x 62,8 mm
50 stm - 69,2 x 40,5 mm

Walrus said:

The 50 STM is almost half the size of the 35 STM

Click to expand...

I doubt that; https://www.the-digital-picture.com...ages.aspx?Lens=1528&LensComp2=0&LensComp=1224

candyman said:

The RF 45 looks like almost double the size of the RF 50mm f/1.8 STM. But still quite limited in size. And also good for streetphotography.

Click to expand...

The 50 STM is almost half the size of the 35 STM, so I would say this 45 is almost three times as big as the 50

blackcoffee17 said:

Actually i hope the R8 II will keep the current sensor that is amazing and will add some features from the R6, like IBIS or joystick or wheel.

Click to expand...

There's already a R8 with all those features...it's called R6II Canon has always been surgical in keeping market segmentation, the famous "cripple hammer"; R8 has already exact same file quality and AF readiness of the R6's, the other limitations are there for a reason, otherwise we wouldn't have a R8 to start with

scyrene said:

It's not a line until and unless they release a mark 2.

Click to expand...

True, otherwise we would have the RP and the R line

Tmjc.wolf said:

I did a rough size comparison of the 45mm 1.2 to the rf 35mm 1.8:
View attachment 226765

Click to expand...

And now we know roughly what size the 35mm could have been if they ditched the macro abilities and gave it basic internal focusing, like the RF 50mm f/1.2 has.
The patent for the 45mm shows a lens body about 3mm longer than the 35mm.

I'll wait for reviews on image quality, but this lens looks very good to me.

Canon Rumors said:

You can actually read these

Click to expand...

I see no mention of 12 bit RAW. Will we finally have a 14 bit electronic shutter on a R6? Judging by the specs list, I'd say so

Battery life is slightly inferior to that of the R6 Mark II, that sensor must be more power hungry.

EDIT: no, it’s still 12 bit A/D conversion. I’m editing this after the announcement

Tmjc.wolf said:

I did a rough size comparison of the 45mm 1.2 to the rf 35mm 1.8:
View attachment 226765

Click to expand...

The RF 45 looks like almost double the size of the RF 50mm f/1.8 STM. But still quite limited in size. And also good for streetphotography.

Maximilian said:

You're repeating yourself.
It's not "blocking". Nobody if forced to give up patents or open up their eco system to others completely.
I am sure you have been complaining about Apple having a closed eco system as well throughout the lats twenty years, haven't you?
That's just free market economy.

Click to expand...

Using the legal system and DRM to block the use is still blocking. Something they didn't do with the EF mount even though they could have.

Exploreshootshare said:

The only real question to me is: what will happen to the R3 line?

Click to expand...

It's not a line until and unless they release a mark 2.

I did a rough size comparison of the 45mm 1.2 to the rf 35mm 1.8:

ritaC said:

A portrait no, but a beautiful landscape I look to see that the corners are sharp it matters to me

Click to expand...

Sure, but not every lens can or should be a landscape lens.

blackcoffee17 said:

Actually i hope the R8 II will keep the current sensor that is amazing and will add some features from the R6, like IBIS or joystick or wheel.

Click to expand...

IBIS and the wheel are the only things holding me back from the R8.