Latest activity

Nathalietje86 · Jun 3, 2026

ctk said:
There are more than enough superzooms out there. Canon needs to go the other way. Something like a 20-70 equivalent with lots of speed in a small package would be great and unique.

Enough new super zooms? The only one i know that is the tz99 of last year of Panasonic...
Sony doesn't have super zooms anymore and all other super zooms are pretty old.

Michael Clark · Jun 3, 2026

Philnick said:
You do know that you can set any of the controls on an EOS camera to do whatever you want (or nothing) - right?

That's not entirely true, though. For some controls you are only allow a very limited number of things to be mapped to that control.

riker · Jun 3, 2026

justaCanonuser said:
Well, I just wrapped up our catastrophic experience with Nikon gear in my earlier post, but of course it depends on what you do with it. We shoot wildlife, and that's definitely sometimes harder for the gear than even most open air sports photography events (except shooting extremes such as the Paris-Dakar rally in the Sahara). We are no Eastwoods, we simply do what birders do, if they are a bit serious. But the number of failures we experienced with Nikon over two decades of digital photography can't be just bad luck, in particular because my wife is much more cautious with her gear than me.

Here's the lens I used most frequently in the past 15 years, an EF 500mm f/4.5 L USM made in 1995 (bought it used in 2011 for a good price). It crashed several times on the ground, against rocks, survived sand & salt water storms on shores (shooting seabirds), and it still works, more than 30 years old now (btw it performs quite well on e.g. my R7, even with a 2x TC III on it focuses surprisingly reliable and not too slowly). Only its mount is now so worn off that it has too much play, so I upgraded to an EF 600mm f/4.0 III past year. This I call quality

Yep, sounds valid.

Looking at this lens, I'm definitely not lending you gear!

I've been eyeing with the 600/4 III for some time, but now I'm just waiting for the rumored 300-600/5.6.

m4ndr4ke · Jun 3, 2026

ctk said:
Mk1 of this lens is fine. If there's any lens that needs an update, it's the 50 1.8. They need to bring it to the standard of the rest of the 1.8s.

No, they don't, the 50mm f/1.8 was never meant to do such a thing. On Canon, that is the cheap lens, and it is pretty decent for the price.

Now where's my damn 28mm f/1.8?

@zajicekpavel · Jun 3, 2026

Maximilian said:
… and freshly hatched, maybe just one or two days old.
It always surprises me, that the will turn Bbue when martured.
Beautiful photos

Thanks, maybe this photo came out best? I was surprised how hairy their girls are...

@zajicekpavel · Jun 3, 2026

Black redstar (young)

josephandrews222 · Jun 3, 2026

Mom was about thirty yards (meters?!

) away...

R5MkII & RF 200-800

Yana_a · Jun 2, 2026

Canon no need rush on updating current RF lens, it should focus on launch new focal length that current missing on RF.
Such as super zoom L 24-300, 50-400, 70-300, DO zoom, if 35mm maybe a pancake or RFS or L 1.2.

Dragon · Jun 2, 2026

danfaz said:
Here are some shots of Burney Falls (the reason I was driving down HWY 89).

View attachment 229927 View attachment 229928 View attachment 229929

There was still water in the creek. So cool when the creek is dry and the waterfall just happens right off the cliff. If you go upstream a bit, the creek just happens out of nowhere, too. Lava flows are cool.

neuroanatomist · Jun 2, 2026

I do not notice this with my RF 24-105/2.8 on my R1.

john1970 · Jun 2, 2026

justaCanonuser said:
Did you notice that you are slowly approaching the specs of the RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9.0? Just add a little bit of focal length and accept a bit of slowness, and there you are

A lens that would be a bit more differentiated could be a 150-600 mm f4.5 to f6.3. Could take a 95 mm filter on the front and be internal zoom with L grade quality.

ctk · Jun 2, 2026

Nathalietje86 said:
Canon just needs to make more super zoom or just good zoom around 400mm compact camera's with raw, travel buddies to take with you to everywhere there are already so much compact camera's with 2x or 3x zoom

There are more than enough superzooms out there. Canon needs to go the other way. Something like a 20-70 equivalent with lots of speed in a small package would be great and unique.

ctk · Jun 2, 2026

Mk1 of this lens is fine. If there's any lens that needs an update, it's the 50 1.8. They need to bring it to the standard of the rest of the 1.8s.

Copland · Jun 2, 2026

Somehow I can't shake the impression that the 24–105 Z, when used with any of my EOS camera bodies, tends to slightly overexpose.
Have any of you noticed the same thing with your copy?

For example, when I'm shooting reportage in consistent daylight conditions: Av mode, wide open aperture, Auto ISO, I only find the exposure to look neutral, when I dial in between -1/4 and -1/3 EV exposure compensation.

I can't observe this behavior with any of my other Canon lenses, they used to be natural at +/- 0 EV in 98% of the situations.
So I'm wondering: is this a general calibration characteristic of this lens, or could it be that only my particular copy is affected?

Old Man FL/FD · Jun 2, 2026

An OVF and hot shoe takes up considerable area at the top of compact cameras. Not having both on the G7X III is a plus for me regarding size for pocket ability.

Rear views of G15, G1X I and G7X III shown.

(The black bar at the top of the rear LCD displays is the reflection of the forward edge of my background paper)

danfaz · Jun 2, 2026

Here are some shots of Burney Falls (the reason I was driving down HWY 89).

MikeGalos · Jun 2, 2026

Planterz said:
It's because in real life we're not photographing test charts in controlled environments and viewing things at 200% on huge monitors.

Planterz said:
It's because in real life we're not photographing test charts in controlled environments and viewing things at 200% on huge monitors. We're shooting dynamic subjects and viewing them on smaller screens where supposed IQ loss isn't noticeable, especially since such photos won't have a 1:1 we can compare f8 to f14 with.

Where we first see diffraction is in acutance (visible as a loss in micro-contrast) rather than just straight resolution. It's precisely that it doesn't show up first in resolution charts that it is present but not easy to spot. It's not that a set of test lines blur. It's that the cutoff of their transitions becomes soft and that isn't what people "viewing things at 200% on huge monitors" look at.

In short, it's not the pixel peepers who catch it. It's that the image loses that crispness of fine detail not that the detail itself isn't visible.

If the smallest dot is as big as two photo sites then you are not getting the sharpness the sensor can produce. That's just physics and, yes, it shows up in real world images if you care to look for it.

justaCanonuser · Jun 2, 2026

blobmonster said:
Yes, I had a G9. The viewfinder was much less impressive than e.g. the old Owl /af2 film compacts which had an ovf similar in size/quality to my Leica 36mm ovf (which is to say, better than my 5D)

Ovfs are good with primes. Still l'd like to think Canon could improve the basic formula with the zooming ovf as per the g7- g12 series, but bigger. Or, much more likely, just use an evf with ovf sim tech....the only problem with the evfs is they are often protruding out the back and therefore ruin pocketability. If set forwards (protruding out the front slightly in the same width area as the smallest prime lens protrudes) it would be much better for pockets...

I am used to classic rangefinder and SLR viewfinders, and compared to them the OVFs of these compacts are dissappointing (the biggest and brightest OVF I know has my New Mamiya 6 rangefinder). But of course, they help when it is too bright for shooting with the screen display on the camera's back.

justaCanonuser · Jun 2, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
Thanks! The lion was in the Ngorongoro Crater, they are not shy and closely approach the safari vehicles.
View attachment 229925

Actually, my wife and I were very close to the mountain gorillas, too...
View attachment 229926

A close friend of mine visited the moutain gorillas there past year - well, another great destination we have on our list.

blobmonster · Jun 2, 2026

justaCanonuser said:
I had a G7, a nice little brick of a camera, unfortunately Canon omitted with that camera the possibility to shoot RAW. But this sort of OVF was just a sort of a peephole - no frame indicated, no rangefinder patch... I didn't like it.

Yes, I had a G9. The viewfinder was much less impressive than e.g. the old Owl /af2 film compacts which had an ovf similar in size/quality to my Leica 36mm ovf (which is to say, better than my 5D)

Ovfs are good with primes. Still l'd like to think Canon could improve the basic formula with the zooming ovf as per the g7- g12 series, but bigger. Or, much more likely, just use an evf with ovf sim tech....the only problem with the evfs is they are often protruding out the back and therefore ruin pocketability. If set forwards (protruding out the front slightly in the same width area as the smallest prime lens protrudes) it would be much better for pockets...

mb66energy · Jun 2, 2026

Eric84 said:
Yeah, I guess it depends on how you see it. CR referred to that the existing model extends aprox 17mm - so the difference in some cases isnt more than 20mm since the new are rumored to have an internal focus. But the existing model are a good lens anyway

All the designs are significantly longer than the current RF 35mm f/1.8 Macro IS STM. Removing the flange distance, the 34.80mm f/1.85 design would be about 100mm long. The current version is 62.8mm. Keep in mind that the current version of the lens extends about 17mm at its closest focusing distance, so that brings the lens to 80mm in length.

That's what I meant with "lens at infinity" which is the default after switching off the cam (according to my settings) to make things compact to throw a really great cam/lens combo into my job backpack ...

SHK1 · Jun 2, 2026

There are plenty of 3rd party repair options. I just had a V1 lens repaired a few weeks ago.

noname · Jun 2, 2026

1. The latest rumor is a never-seen-before prime and zoom.
2. A rumor from.last November is about a 300-600mm supertele and a 20/24-70mm f/2.8L Z.
3. My logic would suggest a 70-180mm f/2.8 IS STM and a "cheap" 400mm prime.
4. In the macro department a 50mm 1:1 and 180mm 1:1 are still.missing.
5. Among the first RF lenses the one to be replaced asap (imho) is the 28-70mm f/2 (and a 70-150mm to add to this series).

So I do not see a new 35mm macro to come in the foreseeable future.

neuroanatomist · Jun 2, 2026

justaCanonuser said:
beautiful - I like in particular the dreamy Gorilla. Looking at the lion, I personally would prefer to have a tele lens instead of a wide angle lens - a close-up might give you a too deep insight in the inwards of such a carnivore

Thanks! The lion was in the Ngorongoro Crater, they are not shy and closely approach the safari vehicles.