Lapwings
R5m2 + RF 200-800 + 1.4 TC

Since it is duck season

Ian K said:

The crop ratio on the APS-C is 1.6x

Click to expand...

Alan compares a 45mpx FF to the 32mpx APS-C

AlanF said:

in terms of pixels, not pov

Click to expand...

Of cause he knows the crop ratio FF/APS-C.

AlanF said:

Congratulations on excellent shots! Were you tracking them or could you use pre-capture?

Click to expand...

Thank You, Alan! I used tracking.

SteelLynx said:

German bird names are often very, very weird.

Click to expand...

My favorite is Flußseeschwalbe
(river-sea-swollow)

ISv said:

So it's "Regen river Plover"

Click to expand...

No! The German name of the familiy Charadriidae is "Regenpfeifer" .
In German Lapwings are also Regenpfeifer.
Sames gear:

The crop ratio on the APS-C is 1.6x, but I'll grant you do lose in many other ways with the current R7. Hopefully, the Mark II will solve all those issues. If the rumours are to be believed, extra resolution, AF improvements along with read speed improvements. It should be a killer.

MikeGalos said:

Remember that Nikon has over half a century's experience in space. They've been providing NASA with space cameras since 1971 during the Apollo program and have been the standard cameras on Apollo (Command Module, not Lunar Module), Apollo/Soyuz, the Shuttle, Skylab and the International Space Station. It's rumored that all the major vendors do submit proposals every time a new camera is called for but fifty years' experience gives Nikon an edge in knowing what is needed and how to build and deliver it.

However, the embarrassing one was that some Sony fans released a fake press release that Sony had been chosen as the new Artemis camera complete with photos of executives, fake quotes and a photo of a Sony camera on a lunar-like background as an April Fools post. It actually got believed by some news sources.

Click to expand...

So many lies, boasting and exaggerations by Sony's fanboyz make it hard to recognize an April fools post.
I fully agree on the reasons you mentioned why NASA chose Nikon. Their huge experience with similar projects.
For former missions, the NASA was mostly using gear by Nikon, Hasselblad, Zeiss, Angenieux.

R52 + RF600/4, Apus apus

Will R. said:

I feel like I missed the boat with canon by going to its mirrorless system . I've been a loyal Canon customer for years and feel like canon is holding me hostage by not allowing third party full frame autofocus lenses like every other manufacture of cameras has done and regretting not purchase and now feel like I should have gone to Nikon when I upgraded to mirrorless and would never again recommend canon to any new photographer now getting started or someone who's looking to upgrade I sold my mirrorless system camera and lenses and that was the time I should have made the move because although I've shown my brand loyalty to canon they have not done the same to its customer loyalty is a two way street canon should have opened up its lenses to third party for its full frame sytem including allowing them to make lens with autofocus but instead looked at it loyal customers as cash cows and not returned the same loyalty to us instead they are beating us up with high prices and no other options and the reason why I recommend other brands now other than Canon particularly Nikon which gives its customers the option of third party and why after years of showing Canon my support and loyalty I'm thinking of making the switch and will never recommend Canon again

Click to expand...

Sorry, but that was painful to read with the massive run-on sentence and no paragraphs.

ISv said:

To make the things little bit more complicated

Click to expand...

I hate you now. Thanks for sharing, ISv.

Will R. said:

I feel like I missed the boat with canon by going to its mirrorless system . I've been a loyal Canon customer for years and feel like canon is holding me hostage by not allowing third party full frame autofocus lenses like every other manufacture of cameras has done and regretting not purchase and now feel like I should have gone to Nikon when I upgraded to mirrorless and would never again recommend canon to any new photographer now getting started or someone who's looking to upgrade I sold my mirrorless system camera and lenses and that was the time I should have made the move because although I've shown my brand loyalty to canon they have not done the same to its customer loyalty is a two way street canon should have opened up its lenses to third party for its full frame sytem including allowing them to make lens with autofocus but instead looked at it loyal customers as cash cows and not returned the same loyalty to us instead they are beating us up with high prices and no other options and the reason why I recommend other brands now other than Canon particularly Nikon which gives its customers the option of third party and why after years of showing Canon my support and loyalty I'm thinking of making the switch and will never recommend Canon again

Click to expand...

You are not the first coming to this forum and in the first post express disappointment about no third party lenses on Canon FF R-system. Just switch.

This has been the most used lens in all BBC, National Geographic, etc, natural history documentaries for years.

The CN20x50 was announced in October 2014 not January 2019.

I have used the hood from the 70-200 f/4. I know it's still white, but it's a good deal smaller.

I feel like I missed the boat with canon by going to its mirrorless system . I've been a loyal Canon customer for years and feel like canon is holding me hostage by not allowing third party full frame autofocus lenses like every other manufacture of cameras has done and regretting not purchase and now feel like I should have gone to Nikon when I upgraded to mirrorless and would never again recommend canon to any new photographer now getting started or someone who's looking to upgrade I sold my mirrorless system camera and lenses and that was the time I should have made the move because although I've shown my brand loyalty to canon they have not done the same to its customer loyalty is a two way street canon should have opened up its lenses to third party for its full frame sytem including allowing them to make lens with autofocus but instead looked at it loyal customers as cash cows and not returned the same loyalty to us instead they are beating us up with high prices and no other options and the reason why I recommend other brands now other than Canon particularly Nikon which gives its customers the option of third party and why after years of showing Canon my support and loyalty I'm thinking of making the switch and will never recommend Canon again

Ian K said:

I've been using the RF 100-500 on an R7 body. The crop factor of the R7 provided an equivalent POV to the 800mm, at 500mm. but is able to also provide 160mm and faster and better resolving.

Click to expand...

That's not why I find with our lenses and bodies. My wife takes the R7 and RF 100-500mm and I take the R5ii and the RF 200-800mm out birding so we frequently compare shots. The R5ii combo resolves at least as well - in terms of pixels, not pov, the R7 is only 1.4x not 1.6x. Both are very satisfactory. She finds it more difficult to focus in tricky conditions. I also use the R7+ RF 100-500mm frequently and find the AF is not as good as as the R5ii combination, especially closer. Here are two typical extreme crops from this week at the limits of resolution where you do expect to see differences. The Wheatear is only 490 px high from the R5ii (bottom inage) and 430 px from the R7 (top image). There's little between them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Hz8YBHDKsc

300mm f/2.0 Nikkor

This rumoured RF 20-70/2.8 L would easily tip me into swapping our my current EF 24-70/2.8 II L as my main / general lens. The extra wide angle of view would be a seriously more versatile lens. I would mate this with the RF 10-20mm f4 L for a super versatile pairing. Mostly for any situaton where I won't need filtration. The EF lenses with the drop in adpater as such a great solution for me. The question is with this RF 20-70/2.8 L, what to pair with it at the long end. The RF 70-200/2.8 LIS Z is a stunning optic, but it's expensive and large. Maybe see what comes from the VCM range, there are rumours of a petite and light RF 70-180mm f2.8 VCM non L.

Thanks, with prices going up and low supply due to demands, I was just researching and making plans. I had called Canon support and asked they said no, so Didn't know if it was a total won't work and or like the Chevy Trucks that are 8 cyl and they cut 4 cyl off on the highway for fuel efficiency.

Michael Clark said:

No it isn't!

Click to expand...

This isn't an argument!

Most of my shots when birding are with the RF 200-800mm at 800mm, with occasional zooming out. I found it outresolves the 100-300 + 2xTC when set to 800mm and is at least as sharp at 600mm f/8. So, I will stick with that and to complement it I think I will definitely get an RF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM Z as it much smaller than the 100-300 and a covers a more useful range at f/2.8 for me. For urban and indoor use, I prefer black, but for nature with the extender white. What a dilemma!

Click to expand...

I've been using the RF 100-500 on an R7 body. The crop factor of the R7 provided an equivalent POV to the 800mm, at 500mm. but is able to also provide 160mm and faster and better resolving.

USM was THE technology which tilted the majority of professional photographers shooting 135 format to switch from Nikon to Canon in the early 1990s.

Prior to the autofocus revolution in the late 1980s and early 1990s over 75% of pros (outside the Soviet Bloc) working in the 135 format shot Nikon. The rest were split between Canon, Minolta, Pentax, Leica, Contax, Konica, and a host of others. Keep in mind that much commercial and fashion work was being done with Medium and Large Format systems. But PJs and sports/action shooters were using Nikon 135 format film cameras in droves.

When Canon "abandoned" the old FD mount in 1987 and introduced the all electronic EF mount, Canon lost many of the few professional shooters they had. There was a lot of bitterness from those heavily invested in professional FD lenses that they would not be getting any improved bodies going forward. For the most part, the pro sector wasn't that excited about AF. They viewed it as a crutch for less skilled posers and amateurs. A good shooter could outperform the earliest AF systems.

Then along came the EF 300mm f/2.8 L USM in November of 1987 and the EOS 1 in 1989. With that combination, suddenly the potential of all electronic communication between camera and lens became apparent. USM was fast, accurate, and quiet. Did I mention it was fast and accurate? For the first time AF systems could outperform a seasoned pro focusing the lens shooting athletes moving erratically. And it could do it at 1.5-2 frames per second! Even faster with external Motor Drives.

Within 5 years of the introduction of the EOS 1, Canon had a majority of professional photographers working in the 135 format and then held that lead for the next three decades.

It's going to be sad to say goodbye to USM.

By God, Woodrow, It's been one hell of a party! - Augustus McCrae

Sing it Willie: ♫♪ Nothing lasts forever but old Fords and a natural stone ♪♫

dolina said:

When I attach the R1 to a 2001 EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS Series I it had difficulty locking onto focus for more than 20% of the action shots.

Click to expand...

It'd be interesting to see if the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II and III would do better in this regard, considering Roger Cicala's claim that the latter lenses measure and report the position of the focus group more precisely to the camera body than lenses before around 2010 did.

dolina said:

I doubt any RF lens will get a Series II before 2028 or 2030. Based on EF L refresh cycle's typically every decade, dozen years or 2 decades.

Click to expand...

Meh, the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II was introduced in 2010, the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS III came in 2018. Granted it was a minimal "refresh", but it was a refresh and got a new Mark number. For that matter, the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS was only offered from 2001-2010.

Maybe the 70-200/2.8 lenses were such workhorses that many shooters were wearing them out in less than a decade? I've had mine 16 years, but it's been to CPS three times. Twice as a result of misalignment after a hard impact (the first time I didn't adequately document the problem and they didn't fix anything, the second time I sent example images demonstrating the severe tilt and it got fixed) and the last time in 2021 because the IS motor went crazy and started vibrating for no reason when the lens was pointed at certain angles with respect to gravity.

Canon Rumors said:

We won't talk about the DC motor in the RF 75-300 f/4.5-5.6, as no other lens uses it and no other lens ever will.

See full article...

Click to expand...

Well, except for the the RF 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 II, then III, which will be identical to the RF 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 other than with different external cosmetics, which they'll roll out every few years.