Latest activity

Etnaphele · Dec 30, 2025

el peso said:
Don’t be silly — light gathering isn’t the issue on APS-C. No one recalculates f-numbers to full frame because of light gathering. It’s about how poor the bokeh looks on APS-C.

I’m not sure I understand your comment (which I perceive as rude), but you’re just formulating the same concept with other words. Exposure values are calculated with physical lens aperture, resulting DOF is dependent on sensor size and as a consequence bokeh is affected. I wanted to point it out as another commenter asked about aperture equivalence.

Moritz_RD02 · Dec 30, 2025

Quack said:
It seems as if virtually all the actual tests from many sources and various charts from Photons to photos show that there is little or no difference between Sony and Canon sensors. So, I'm curious as to what info you might have that Canon sensor tech is such a weakness in comparison to Sony. Or are you just about 7 or 8 years behind the times?

If sensor quality of ANY major brand from the past ten years - be it ISO performance or resolution - are of concern and hinders the way of working with the gear: it's you, not the myriad of available products.

Apart from that: I still fondly look back at the 1Ds Mark III, a dream from my past, very broke student me. Paired with the EF 50 L that behemoth was the stuff of my dreams. And now that I've got the RF 50 L Canon could make my wish come true with a mirrorless version of it ;-)

And that's the thing: I don't see Canon releasing another speed-orientated "1" style body that somewhat cannibalizes the still pretty new R1. My best guess would be a trailblazer product, something with a global shutter and or high megapixel count above the R5 line or (even though highly unlikely) some Foveon-like sensor.

Anything else I'd consider odd, but that was also kind of the motto of the original R3.

Surab · Dec 30, 2025

Maybe the R3 will become to R5 what the R6II is to the R8. Same imaging platform but more advanced hardware features.

My main doubt with this hypothesis is that Canon would decrease, albeit only slightly, the sensor read-out speed for the R3 line if they did this step.

EricN · Dec 30, 2025

Quack said:
It seems as if virtually all the actual tests from many sources and various charts from Photons to photos show that there is little or no difference between Sony and Canon sensors. So, I'm curious as to what info you might have that Canon sensor tech is such a weakness in comparison to Sony. Or are you just about 7 or 8 years behind the times?

Sony does have a higher resolution sensor and the global shutter. I don't think it's a huge difference for most people, but I am interested to see what will happen, nonetheless.
I don't think it will happen from Canon but Leica has a monochrome sensor.
There was also a rumor about Canon adding an IR channel. Of course they have done a handful of bodies optimized for astrophotogravy.

EricN · Dec 30, 2025

Del Paso said:
The best of 2026?
R3 II & RF 14mm TSE & RF 35mm f/1,2

RF ~180mm macro

ISv · Dec 29, 2025

And some Yellow-fronted Canary from today. First one stretching, the other two feeding. Note the second one from the "feeding": it has bare skin around it's eyes and much shorter yellow "brow" (supercilium).
Edited: the photos of the first one are taken at direct sunlight. The other two are in shadow.

ISv · Dec 29, 2025

Somehow this Carpenter bee looks to me as a Darth Vader with wings...

Ozarker · Dec 29, 2025

jamtra said:
I just did a wrestling meet and shot over 7500 pictures in 2 hours with r6 mark3. Used just about half of one battery. No flash.

Can you tell me what percentage half a battery is? It's fkg difficult to figger out.

Does half empty vs half full vary the percentage? And is that percentage remaining? Or percentage gone?

(Not poking fun at you, my friend. Not at all. Bars vs. percentage confuse some. Congratulations on a wonderful camera, cripple hammer free.)

The strap! That's the cripple hammer.

fox40phil · Dec 29, 2025

Lets hope Canon brings also a 50-150 f2.0.... and update their 28-70 f2.0 with less weight.

Really good overview! @CR! <3

Click · Dec 29, 2025

I really like the pose. Well done, Norman.

neuroanatomist · Dec 29, 2025

Quack said:
It seems as if virtually all the actual tests from many sources and various charts from Photons to photos show that there is little or no difference between Sony and Canon sensors. So, I'm curious as to what info you might have that Canon sensor tech is such a weakness in comparison to Sony. Or are you just about 7 or 8 years behind the times?

That's the mantra. Repeat it often enough, it becomes true. Or not. For example, from two years ago:

downhill on water said:
I suspect Sony will continue to have an advantage in sensor technology, but in 1H24 Canon needs to minimize its impact and supersede Sony sensors that have been on the market 1-3 years.

I guess Canon didn't do what they needed to do, at least in the personal opinion of @downhill on water. We've all seen the effect on market share that Canon's failure to launch 'better' sensors in 1H24, 2H24, 1H25 and 2H25 has had...none whatsoever.

foda · Dec 29, 2025

Female Fawn-breasted Brilliant seen while birding at La Florida, Bosque de Las Aves, at km 18, Colombia, November, 2025.

R5MkII RF200-800mm

Quack · Dec 29, 2025

masterpix said:
If there is R3 with 50MP sensor, than the R5III will have to have something much bigger than that so it will contonue to be "different" from it...

All the R5 series needs to be "different" from the R3 with a 50mp sensor is the price.

Quack · Dec 29, 2025

downhill on water said:
If true, the most interesting bit of this rumor is that the camera would be based upon a brand new Canon sensor. Sensor technology is Canon's principle weakness today v/v Sony. As someone who's planning to sit on the market sidelines in 2026, anything that can be learned about their direction and current capabilities in sensor technology will be helpful.

It seems as if virtually all the actual tests from many sources and various charts from Photons to photos show that there is little or no difference between Sony and Canon sensors. So, I'm curious as to what info you might have that Canon sensor tech is such a weakness in comparison to Sony. Or are you just about 7 or 8 years behind the times?

downhill on water · Dec 29, 2025

If true, the most interesting bit of this rumor is that the camera would be based upon a brand new Canon sensor. Sensor technology is Canon's principle weakness today v/v Sony. As someone who's planning to sit on the market sidelines in 2026, anything that can be learned about their direction and current capabilities in sensor technology will be helpful.

vrpanorama.ca · Dec 29, 2025

Typically a new camera is released at the time of the Olympic for photographer at the Olympic location (Italy). It might be a new r3 for that?

neuroanatomist · Dec 29, 2025

Not the first post on the subject (though a link to a LensRentals blog post that was provided by @AlanF going on 9 years ago is still relevant), but just a reminder of why I use protective filters on almost all of my lenses.

I started to clean front of my RF 24-105/2.8 Z, and noticed this on the B+W 82mm UV filter that I had on it:

I'm sure replacing the front element would have been much more costly than the $100 for a new B+W 82mm clear filter to replace the one above.

Incidentally, a couple of years ago I wrote a long post about B+W's 'new' filter mounts (Basic, Master and T-Pro) and packaging (leather pouches announced for their 75th anniversary). That post seems to have disappeared. I'm sticking with the Master line. It has the same spec as the prior XS-Pro while the T-Pro mount is very slightly thinner, but I find the XS-Pro to be more than thin enough, and I'll pass on the titanium-colored coating instead of the black coating on the same brass; I also prefer the knurling on the Master over the smooth T-Pro edges.

Despite their announcement in 2022 that, "From now on, all B+W filters will be delivered in high-quality cases made of genuine leather," they've changed the packaging inside the box yet again. For those keeping track, it was a plastic box with a foam insert for many years, then a brief flirtation with a fabric bag before the switch to a leather pouch in 2022, and now they are using a lightweight metal alloy box (aluminum-looking but a magnet sticks) with a foam insert.

rombe3jr · Dec 29, 2025

Barparildar figured out how to remove the Canon corner wobble from the R6 III using Gyroflo. Game changer for hand held video. It requires turning off IBIS but the C50 also records the gyro data and I suppose the same issue can be resolved in that as well. Here is the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uRclDI4fmE

roby17269 · Dec 29, 2025

StaffordPrVa said:
This is exciting news... it'll be interesting to see where Canon goes with the R3 II.

I'll hold-off on my Hasselblad 2Dx II purchase... would prefer a high resolution (100MP is preferred) Canon with a built-in grip! Yes, I currently have a R5 II and have added a grip.

The R5 can occupy the under 100MP range, while the R3 occupies the 100MP and up range.

No nope, The hassy will be mine

Different beasts, one would not be used for the same use cases than the other

Michael Clark · Dec 29, 2025

Kiton said:
So far, I think battery power will be the achille's heel of this camera. And with the camera not giving a percent pf battery remaining read out, I bet there will be a lot of batteries crashing out at a bad time. I love the files with the camera.....but! Time will tell.

Give it a few weeks. The 3rd party quality battery makers will have cracked the code and be selling batteries that the camera will "see" as genuine Canon OEM. I'm not talking about crappy $5 batteries on eBay (where "genuine" Canon batteries are more likely to be counterfeit than genuine). I'm talking about the better ones sold by places like B&H that are still only 1/3 to 1/2 the price of Canon batteries.

Michael Clark · Dec 29, 2025

jimim said:
Hey guys. I noticed my battery went down pretty fast but I was really digging with menus and settings. I think I’m going to have to buy a new flash. My old flash is just too hot and miss on the shoe.

I chickened out with the lens again. I just have in the back of my head my trailer for the boat needed some work in spring. They don’t make axles like they used to. My wrangler is going on 6 years now and 100k so I got to do spark plugs, belt and all the fluids in a month or so. I’m a hobbiest so I’m still gun shy. May latest cause my daughter will be back outside training 6 days a week for tennis. We are inside for winter and hot and miss outside of lessons and I don’t like to bother them during her lessons.

Bla bla bla. I know.

All I know is having updated auto focus and this whole sticking to your focus point is nuts. I sound like I’m 100years old and just saw my first cell phone. lol

What kind of flash is your old one? You may just need the Multi-Function Shoe Adapter AD-E1. It allows you to fit older style hot shoe accessories onto the new Multi-Function hot shoe.

Michael Clark · Dec 29, 2025

Kiton said:
Jim, make sure you have some spare batteries, this camera seems to be a power pig. Or the 6P is the lessor brother of the 6H, or a little of both.

I shot a red carpet with the 6m2, 1200 images over 3 hours with the flash trigger and had 20% left with a single battery.
Shot 150 frames with the 6m3 and it used most of 2 batteries in the grip just being powered on for the 3 hours of the event.

2 days ago I shot a concert and at 6400 iso, the 6m3 performed very, very well.
Shooting NHL next week, that will be the first real test of the auto focus if I get a downstairs window, upstairs is a useless gauge of AF.

It's been my experience that some new Li-Ion batteries need to go through 2-3 charging cycles before they reach actual full capacity. Even though they say they are fully charged, after the first charge they're not actually up to rated capacity after sitting dormant for a while. Where you shooting with brand new batteries? What is the date stamped on them?

Or older batteries? The capacities also go down with time and an increasing number of recharge cycles. Batteries that I got 2,000+ frames out of when new do good to get 1,000 frames 4-5 years later.

AlanF · Dec 29, 2025

Michael Clark said:
Yes, I understood what you were saying about using the same Av and Tv. But that's not how many people shoot. Especially if they need or want JPEGs straight out of camera. They set the ISO that high so they can get "medium" exposure at 1/1000 and f/2.8 under the stadium lights at night.

As someone who did shoot raw and culled up to 2,500-3,000 images from each game and halftime show before processing/editing/publishing 250-300 of them, that's a time investment that many folks do not have. They shoot to JPEG, cull the obvious misses, and upload the rest without any editing. They got their images up by Saturday morning after a Friday night game. I was lucky to get mine up before the game the following week. But mine were the ones that wound up in the yearbook and other places after it was all said and done.

Far and by far the majority of photos are taken in jpeg - there are billions of phone photographers who are very happy, which is a good thing, and straight out of camera jpegs are very successful. But, we agree that if you wish to squeeze the best out of your gear under demanding conditions, then you have to work at it.

Michael Clark · Dec 29, 2025

Well, let's see.

Back in ancient times, such as most of the 20th Century, the quadrennial Winter and Summer Games were held in the same years only about six months apart.

Then the Olympic organization decided to offset the Winter games by a couple of years. This first occurred in 1994 with the Lillehammer, Norway games just two years after the 1992 Winter and 1992 Summer Olympiads.

Canon, upon learning of this development by the IOC, considered the possibility of creating two different types of "flagship" cameras with integrated grip bodies so they could also alternate introducing one at each Olympiad, Winter and Summer, while refreshing each model on a four year cycle.

Being a conservative organization, Canon carefully considered and discussed all options at great length. Canon finally came to a decision regarding the question raised in 1994 when they decided to create the EOS R3 series in concert with the Winter Games in 2022 while continuing to refresh the R1 series every four years timed to coincide with the Summer Olympiad.

Michael Clark · Dec 29, 2025

AlanF said:
What I was saying, if you are shooting at your example of ISO 100 and 1/8, it makes no difference to the total amount of light let in if you shoot at ISO 100, 1000 or 10,000 all at ISO 100 and 1/8. The ISO just puts a ceiling on the amount of saturation. If you shoot in RAW and 10,000 is the highest that doesn't bleach highlights, then you can shoot in RAW at 5000, 2,500 etc and push through 1 or 2 stops etc in post with a modern iso invariant sensor and not decrease the S/N. It makes "exposure to the right" unnecessary. When I shoot birds that are white against a dark background or have highly reflective feathers etc or catching a fish, I usually deliberately underexpose to save the highlights.

I am pleased to see you quoting Poisson distributions.

Yes, I understood what you were saying about using the same Av and Tv. But that's not how many people shoot. Especially if they need or want JPEGs straight out of camera. They set the ISO that high so they can get "medium" exposure at 1/1000 and f/2.8 under the stadium lights at night.

As someone who did shoot raw and culled up to 2,500-3,000 images from each game and halftime show before processing/editing/publishing 250-300 of them, that's a time investment that many folks do not have. They shoot to JPEG, cull the obvious misses, and upload the rest without any editing. They got their images up by Saturday morning after a Friday night game. I was lucky to get mine up before the game the following week. But mine were the ones that wound up in the yearbook and other places after it was all said and done.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics