Latest activity

Click · Feb 21, 2026

Nice series, Noreaster.

Click · Feb 21, 2026

I really like the last one.

Noreaster · Feb 21, 2026

Noreaster · Feb 21, 2026

P-visie · Feb 21, 2026

AlanF said:
It's for studying the stars in phoggy nights.

Yes, it is remarkably like typing in complete darkness.

ultra8 · Feb 21, 2026

Leica do the same with the Q line: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/threads/q-in-camera-corrections.3863702/

neuroanatomist · Feb 21, 2026

zardoz said:
It would make sense from Canon's perspective, however, to invest in FF lenses if FF is growing, and if APS-C sensor users are more likely to stick to their supplied kit lenses.

This seems to be exactly what Canon is doing.

AlanF · Feb 21, 2026

P-visie said:
It is a special kind of astrophotography, without spellchecker.

It's for studying the stars in phoggy nights.

P-visie · Feb 21, 2026

mimbu said:
I guess my question is, what's "astrophography"?

It is a special kind of astrophotography, without spellchecker.

EricN · Feb 21, 2026

tron said:
Lol, you bought it to use it at 10-20 range I guess. Some focal lengths more some less. I do not believe you use it strictly at 10mm and nothing more. Of course 10mm is mostly impressive but I am sure you have made good use of the full focal range too.

Weren't you the person implying you only use it at 14mm?

Dragon · Feb 21, 2026

zamorano said:
but for the rest I don't think it is (show me a nice RF-S lens?) They could have brought over some EF-M lenses to the RF mount, as various EOS-Ms were number one sellers for years, but I'd say their priorities lie elsewhere.

It depends on what you consider "nice". With the possible exception of the RF-s 55-210, all the RF-s lenses reasonably support the resolution of the R7, whereas many of the EF-s lenses were looking long in the tooth on a 90D. I agree that bringing the EF-M 22mm and 32mm lenses over would be nice, but the RF 16mm pancake and RF 28mm f/2.8 are both excellent for RF-s use, and maybe the deal with Sigma is designed to let them have a chunk of that space. Remember, the overall market is much smaller than it was 10 years ago, so too much duplication is not cost-effective for manufacturers even if it seems attractive from a consumer perspective. It is notable that if fast is equivalent to "nice", then Sigma has that base pretty well covered https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/Mirrorless-Camera-Lenses/ci/17912/N/4196380428?filters=fct_brand_name:sigma:REGULAR,fct_lens-mount_3442:canon-rf:REGULAR and that may well be the plan given the limited overall market.

homebodyMacro2 · Feb 21, 2026

Honestly would love to see a 300-600 f/5.6 VCM L: https://www.canonrumors.com/what-we-expect-canon-to-announce-in-the-coming-months/

Mostly just hope something actually happens after all this time lol. I love my 24mm VCM, the focus is totally silent and instant. Would seemingly be an excellent pairing with a wildlife/sports supertelephoto. And yes, the $5000-7000 range is where it needs to be, Canon! As I've said in here repeatedly, echoed in the latest article (linked above), "Canon does not need another $10,000-$15,000 big white lens."

Seriously! Make it $6k (or less even) and it's a lock!

zardoz · Feb 21, 2026

BlancRay said:
Thanks for your comment, zardoz. On my side, I am very happy with the results I get with the MPE combined with my R5 and a diffused MT26EX-RT flash, without tripod (hand held), working at 3-4 magnification. I imagine what results could be obtained with a similar RF lens. I hesitate to buy an EF 180 macro, second hand, tu use it on the R5, because I still hope for a future RF 200 macro. If you want to have an idea of the results obtained with the MPE on the R5, have a look at my website https://www.lesjardinsmerveilleux.be/galerie.php?page=12 for example. The problem I see with Laowa macro lenses is the difficulty to use them with a good macro flash, like the MT-26. And as long as I see, the quality of the Canon MPE remains the best, even if this brave lens is quite old.

Honestly blown away with not just what that lens can do for you, but what you're doing with it! These are definitely shots that would be unachievable by anything else available on any camera system. I think it's time to sharpen my skills!

Interestingly enough, it's still actively supported by Canon but was only discontinued in 2022.

Exploreshootshare said:
This could be said about a few Canon lenses.

Uhhhhh, I on the other hand would love Canon to "cheat" and use digital correction: how about a 24-70mm F2 which is as light as Sonys offering. That'd be great!

I have to run the 28-70 f/2 uncorrected at high ISO or else I end up with a wavy moire pattern in the noise profile. Sony seem to get away with minimal distortion at 28 on their lighter lens, so surely Canon can pull it off.

scyrene · Feb 21, 2026

zardoz said:
I am genuinely wondering how your MP-E 65 works at the higher 4-5x magnification range; I have struggled to get sharp results that aren't loaded with CA and softness at these focal lengths, when tripodded, using lights and high shutter speeds. I even had Canon check it and they said everything was optically fine.

Could diffraction be partly to blame? The effective aperture at the highest magnification is pretty narrow; maybe you're seeing it more on a higher resolution sensor?

dolina · Feb 21, 2026

el peso said:
Of course, it will be much brighter than RF 135mm f/1.4L IS USM
I see sometimes they say "I want..." just for saying "I want..."

Canon has a patent for one

Sigma made one

justaCanonuser · Feb 21, 2026

BlancRay said:
Thanks for your comment, zardoz. On my side, I am very happy with the results I get with the MPE combined with my R5 and a diffused MT26EX-RT flash, without tripod (hand held), working at 3-4 magnification. I imagine what results could be obtained with a similar RF lens. I hesitate to buy an EF 180 macro, second hand, tu use it on the R5, because I still hope for a future RF 200 macro. If you want to have an idea of the results obtained with the MPE on the R5, have a look at my website https://www.lesjardinsmerveilleux.be/galerie.php?page=12 for example. The problem I see with Laowa macro lenses is the difficulty to use them with a good macro flash, like the MT-26. And as long as I see, the quality of the Canon MPE remains the best, even if this brave lens is quite old.

Beautiful damselfly portraits! I am impressed that you get such good results with the manually focusing MPE and hand held - respect!

justaCanonuser · Feb 21, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
The data show that ~63% of ILCs shipped last year were APS-C or m4/3. FF continues to increase, but it’s premature to say ‘the industry has moved on’ when the majority of cameras sold have crop sensors.

Interesting! Maybe that's the reason why Canon opened up their RF-S mount to 3rd party lens manufacturers. Canon still seems not to be a hurry to feed their native RF-S lens line quickly, so, they may feel forced to keep their crop camera segment as attractive as possible that way.

justaCanonuser · Feb 21, 2026

BlancRay said:
I am desperately waiting for a new macro lens, something to replace the beloved MPE-65 or at least a longer (200mm ?) macro lens... It seems that macro people have been forgotten in Canon strategy...

A MPE-65 replacement with an AF drive would be very attractive. I was thinking about purchasing such a lens for decades now, but my approach to macro photography (mostly freehand - spiders, insects in the wilderness) requires a good AF system. That's why I still stick with my old, trusted EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS USM lens, it works so well with the R7 and R5 II.

BlancRay · Feb 21, 2026

zardoz said:
I think the macro strategy across the three major brands is to ship a 100mm and call it a day. I suspect Canon's weird-and-wonderful lens category will be tilt-shift innovations, for the real-estate photography market.

I am genuinely wondering how your MP-E 65 works at the higher 4-5x magnification range; I have struggled to get sharp results that aren't loaded with CA and softness at these focal lengths, when tripodded, using lights and high shutter speeds. I even had Canon check it and they said everything was optically fine. It was a cool party trick some 15+ years ago on the 40D, though, and has become useful for scientific/technical reasons, eg, inspecting vinyl record cartridge stylus tips.

I get great results out of the 180 3.5 still, in fact so much so that I had to send my EF 100L macro in to CPS for the second time (since the AF motor failed and was replaced, things have never been quite the same). The IBIS combined with the 180 3.5 even on my R5 works better than some EF optical IS lenses when I did some side by side comparisons - it's a very underrated piece of glass!

The 100 2.8 RF will do 1.4x which is a handy compromise (I don't yet have one though) but honestly my biggest disappointment was that Canon didn't build compatibility with their RF extenders unlike the leading competitor's option where you can slap on a 2x extender for a cool 2.8x magnification, albeit at 200mm.

If you want to see real macro innovation, check out the Laowa probe lenses. A wide angle FOV for 1:1 macro work is a super cool perspective.

Thanks for your comment, zardoz. On my side, I am very happy with the results I get with the MPE combined with my R5 and a diffused MT26EX-RT flash, without tripod (hand held), working at 3-4 magnification. I imagine what results could be obtained with a similar RF lens. I hesitate to buy an EF 180 macro, second hand, tu use it on the R5, because I still hope for a future RF 200 macro. If you want to have an idea of the results obtained with the MPE on the R5, have a look at my website https://www.lesjardinsmerveilleux.be/galerie.php?page=12 for example. The problem I see with Laowa macro lenses is the difficulty to use them with a good macro flash, like the MT-26. And as long as I see, the quality of the Canon MPE remains the best, even if this brave lens is quite old.

justaCanonuser · Feb 21, 2026

I really look forward to what Canon will do on the "300-600mm" front. If they come up with an attractive L lens that is a good compromise between "fast enough" (= f/5.6) and weight, I'll definitely upgrade from my RF 200-800mm.

justaCanonuser · Feb 21, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
The lenses would still benefit from updated technologies for focus motors, updated designs, etc., and personally I'd preorder an RF 600/4 + 1.4x lens.

I guess this new RF 600/4 will also be a tad sharper, since the current RF 600mm f/4.0 (optically identical with the EF 600mm Mk III as we know) is said (!) to be a little bit less sharp than the old EF 600mm f/4 II and Sony's current 600mm f/4.0 (btw I can't complain about my EF III, based on real life experience). Not sure if this is true, I did not yet stumble over any trusted lab review that compares these lenses, only MTF charts, but I am sure Canon will strive to take over the lead again anyway in this class of pro lenses. An integrated 1.4x TC like in Nikon's current 600/4 would be great, indeed, like Nikon's lens I guess it would be about 200 g heavier than a version w/o integrated TC, but many users (like me) carry a set of external TC's anyway frequently in their backpack.

Exploreshootshare · Feb 21, 2026

zardoz said:
Get the weight down, and I might be tempted.

This could be said about a few Canon lenses.

zardoz said:
The 28-70 f/2L is what I see a lot of serious shooters using, and my three complaints with that lens are weight (c'mon, Sony are crushing it with their 28-70 GM weight which is around 500g lighter than the Canon), flare/glare when shot at wider apertures, and that 28mm just isn't wide enough. Knowing Canon, if they cheat and use digital correction, then I'm out, though.

Uhhhhh, I on the other hand would love Canon to "cheat" and use digital correction: how about a 24-70mm F2 which is as light as Sonys offering. That'd be great!

zardoz · Feb 21, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
The data show that ~63% of ILCs shipped last year were APS-C or m4/3. FF continues to increase, but it’s premature to say ‘the industry has moved on’ when the majority of cameras sold have crop sensors.

Apologies if I've missed the data source in the thread somewhere - I've had a look at the CIPA figures which indeed confirms this - thanks for the correction.

It could be regional - and it could be that I tend to pay attention to photographers in more professional settings. For video and creators, I'm still seeing a decent amount of APS-C Sony on their vlogging rigs at events, and the occasional R10, and that's probably where some of those numbers are coming from.

It would make sense from Canon's perspective, however, to invest in FF lenses if FF is growing, and if APS-C sensor users are more likely to stick to their supplied kit lenses.

zardoz · Feb 21, 2026

BlancRay said:
I am desperately waiting for a new macro lens, something to replace the beloved MPE-65 or at least a longer (200mm ?) macro lens... It seems that macro people have been forgotten in Canon strategy...

I think the macro strategy across the three major brands is to ship a 100mm and call it a day. I suspect Canon's weird-and-wonderful lens category will be tilt-shift innovations, for the real-estate photography market.

I am genuinely wondering how your MP-E 65 works at the higher 4-5x magnification range; I have struggled to get sharp results that aren't loaded with CA and softness at these focal lengths, when tripodded, using lights and high shutter speeds. I even had Canon check it and they said everything was optically fine. It was a cool party trick some 15+ years ago on the 40D, though, and has become useful for scientific/technical reasons, eg, inspecting vinyl record cartridge stylus tips.

I get great results out of the 180 3.5 still, in fact so much so that I had to send my EF 100L macro in to CPS for the second time (since the AF motor failed and was replaced, things have never been quite the same). The IBIS combined with the 180 3.5 even on my R5 works better than some EF optical IS lenses when I did some side by side comparisons - it's a very underrated piece of glass!

The 100 2.8 RF will do 1.4x which is a handy compromise (I don't yet have one though) but honestly my biggest disappointment was that Canon didn't build compatibility with their RF extenders unlike the leading competitor's option where you can slap on a 2x extender for a cool 2.8x magnification, albeit at 200mm.

If you want to see real macro innovation, check out the Laowa probe lenses. A wide angle FOV for 1:1 macro work is a super cool perspective.

neuroanatomist · Feb 21, 2026

zardoz said:
I'm curious which bread-and-butter customers were using APS-C/EF-S bodies. The industry has moved on, with low cost full frame, enabling much better low light capabilities…

The data show that ~63% of ILCs shipped last year were APS-C or m4/3. FF continues to increase, but it’s premature to say ‘the industry has moved on’ when the majority of cameras sold have crop sensors.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics