The Best and Worst of 2025
- By EricN
- Industry News
- 170 Replies
I'm the patron saint of F-stop equivalence debating.I look at you in admiration, you are a saint!![]()
Upvote
0
I'm the patron saint of F-stop equivalence debating.I look at you in admiration, you are a saint!![]()
I look at you in admiration, you are a saint!Thailand and Malaysia were similar as far as cameras.
I am choosing to decline to comment on MILFs as I'm a newly wed and shouldn't even think about it.
OOOPSY...Thailand and Malaysia were similar as far as cameras.
I am choosing to decline to comment on MILFs as I'm a newly wed and shouldn't even think about it.
Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens French, i.e. French people wearing non reflecting glassesMILFs?
Thailand and Malaysia were similar as far as cameras.Yet I must confess that, during my 3 weeks in Japan, I only saw a tiny number of MILFs and DSLRs, and most of them were APS/C. Believe me or not, I only saw 5 or 6 FF, 1 Nikon DSLR, an EOS 5D III, a Sony A7, 2 R6, an R3. That's about all! One single day in Yellowstone: 50-60 FF and a huge amount of big whites.
But a lot of compacts in Japan! And masses of cellphones...
MILFs?Yet I must confess that, during my 3 weeks in Japan, I only saw a tiny number of MILFs and DSLRs, and most of them were APS/C. Believe me or not, I only saw 5 or 6 FF, 1 Nikon DSLR, an EOS 5D III, a Sony A7, 2 R6, an R3. That's about all! One single day in Yellowstone: 50-60 FF and a huge amount of big whites.
But a lot of compacts in Japan! And masses of cellphones...
Yet I must confess that, during my 3 weeks in Japan, I only saw a tiny number of MILCs and DSLRs, and most of them were APS/C. Believe me or not, I only saw 5 or 6 FF, 1 Nikon DSLR, an EOS 5D III, a Sony A7, 2 R6, an R3. That's about all! One single day in Yellowstone: 50-60 FF and a huge amount of big whites.For a while, it seemed like a threshold could be reached where almost everyone exclusively used a phone camera and the only people buying photography equipment would be professionals and fanatical hobbyists both types capable of being tempted to spend shameful amounts on niche items. In this way, Canon may have been less likely to do STM and 1.4 lensesthey'd have no recourse but to proved you with a
35mm 1.2 L or FASTER!!!
I already do 2-3 trips home -> car and car -> shoot location when I have all the lights. But that's for very specific shooting. I would still need and want a setup I can carry around for other purposes. And I consider the RF 85 1.2 as something I can easily carry around...It might look like a large format setup, but I look at it this way: If you're already using more equipment such as lighting than you'd carry around on foot solo, a heavier setup would be more expensive, but you already either take multiple trips to move everything or you have assistants.
I think that is correct. Some people have been clamoring for Canon and Nikon to enter the MF fray, but they haven't, because it is too niche for themIt could be they don't believe they could make a profit.
It might look like a large format setup, but I look at it this way: If you're already using more equipment such as lighting than you'd carry around on foot solo, a heavier setup would be more expensive, but you already either take multiple trips to move everything or you have assistants. It could be they don't believe they could make a profit.While I do enjoy my MF lenses a lot (HC mount), they are already big and heavy even if the primes are 2.8 or slower. MF primes faster than f/2 are quite rare and there are no 1.4, let alone 1.2 ones. Just saying that FF users’ expectations would need to be adjusted…![]()
Thanks, Click!Very nice shots, dantaz.
I complain bitterly about the stupid little things Canon gets wrong, that they should not.That it is! LOL. I broke down (no will power) and bought it! I got it for 2900.00, so I convinced myself it was a deal that I couldn't refuse.
I got this lens a few month ago. Till now i haven't had the time to try it out at night. No tracking/stacking and very little experience in nightscape images.
View attachment 227252
EOS R6 Mark II, RF 20 f/1.4 VCM, 30s, f/1.4, ISO 200
While I do enjoy my MF lenses a lot (HC mount), they are already big and heavy even if the primes are 2.8 or slower. MF primes faster than f/2 are quite rare and there are no 1.4, let alone 1.2 ones. Just saying that FF users’ expectations would need to be adjusted…I'm no scientist at all.
But wouldn't it be an easier way to get rid of all these geometric correction issues to "simply" design MF lenses and use them on FF (like TS lenses)?
Thus, they could make use of the best portion of a lens' projection circle. Could it be the recipe behind the RF 1,2 50 & 85 in order to also get sharp corners at f/1,2?
OK, cost would significantly go up...
But, as I wrote, I'm no scientist., and still hoping for a 35mm f/1,2...