Adorama has a Seagate 2 Pack IronWolf 8TB 3.5″ Hard Drive, SATA 6GB/s, 7200RPM as their Deal of the Day for $369 (Reg $419)
Key Features
2 Pack 7200 RPM spindle speed
Full-track multiple-sector transfer capability without local processor intervention
High instantaneous (burst) data-transfer rates (up to 600MB per second)
Native Command Queuing with command ordering to increase performance in demanding applications
PowerChoice for selectable power savings
Perpendicular recording technology provides the drives with increased areal density
SeaTools diagnostic software performs a drive self-test that eliminates unnecessary drive returns
State-of-the-art cache and on-the-fly error-correction algorithms
Seagate 2 Pack IronWolf 8TB 3.5″ Hard Drive $369 (Reg $419)
Got it. Now planning how to escape my local lock downWell that decides the matter then. No worries!
1 year late
Price gouging
Compatibility with most common conferencing apps: Teams, WebEx, Zoom, etc. is still "good luck with that".
How is this not a $40 kit with compatibility assured across the top 5 videoconferencing platforms?
This was a massive lost opportunity for Canon.
If they REALLY wanted to do something special, they would have found a way to load those top 5 conferencing apps into a compact wifi dongle that directly attaches to the camera, and makes it a seamless solution, so that we could use the flippy screen as the video-conferencing monitor and be untethered from our cell phones and laptops for videoconferencing. That would have pushed a lot of cameras into peoples hands.
Using the 28-70 is like carrying another EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS III because their weights are similar. I'm more willing to lug that weight at the telephoto end because the other options have similar weights. I'm less willing to do that for the midrange zoom because there are several options that weigh and cost less. One option would be to bridge the 16-35 and 70-200 with a 50mm prime. Another would be a 24-70 or 24-105 zoom. The 28-70 also uses 95mm filters, so if you're already using 82mm filters for the EF 16-35 and EF 24-70, then they won't work with the RF 28-70.
I think of the 28-70 as a niche lens. It's great for events especially those at night. Balancing the exposure of the background with flash is easier when you cut the ISO in half. It's larger aperture also give a little more subject isolation than a f/2.8 zoom. The RF 24-70 is similar to the EF 24-70 II, except that it has IS and is native to the RF ecosystem and is a better general purpose lens than the RF 28-70.
I am also thinking about GFX 100S. To be honest pixel is not my primary concern but the dynamic range boost. But then I start to realize that with these MF camera you end up shooting with compromised lens. For cost and weight reasons they can never deliver the supposedly large aperture kind of experience. Their argument is that the exposure you lose can be made up by larger sensor. But then essentially it is not different from FF experience and you lose the great access to all the lens collections.Too late! GFX 100S is getting my money. Not that I don't have patience. My first digital camera was a casio 1/2 a megapixel, bought back in the 90's. I waited till 2010 to buy a 7d and a 5dII. It's been almost 10 years now and the 7d and 5dII have served me well but Canon is definitely not going to come up with a camera that will compete with the GFX 100S for landscape anytime soon.
I don't think this is a communications issue with the Godox flash and trigger as the results are good, see example: https://www.facebook.com/SinCityCameraGuy/posts/186774496462109 (Web view) My problem is that typically outdoors in Las Vegas, the sun is bright and there are typically few clouds in the sky (sorry people on the East coast). Especially when it is early or late in the day. The ambiance setting for the flash still does not stop the camera from taking over the natural lighting, which causes the background to be underexposed. Last weekend as I struggled with post-processing to deal with the images, it struck me that maybe I can put the flash in manual and hope the camera would ignore it. I thought about getting my Wein high voltage hot-shoe adapter out to see if that would make the camera ignore the flash but it seems that in initial testing and confirmed by Snappy604 that the camera seems to more or less ignore the Manual mode flash. As long as I ensure that I'm in sync mode inside the shutter speed range or in high-speed sync, I can manually dial in the flash power to fill in the shadows.Just to throw into the mix, there have been quite a few reported issues with the R5 communicating with the Godox triggers (X1Pro and X1) so you could be seeing a similar type of thing going on? For example, I used to use HSS with TTL on my 5D IV and Godox Speedlights and AD600s but it is pretty much unusable on my R5 - tends to way over expose so I have to set it all manually. You could be seeing some sort of similar thing going on maybe? even if you are using the speedling directly on the camera, I would imagine the control signals are the same as to a trigger. If you google "HSS Godox R5" you will see some similar experiences. Last I looked there hadn't been any firmware updates.
The photos in question were taken before daylight savings time and I noticed the issue today. So I suppose that could be an explanation. But then why does it only affect the jpeg image and not the RAW image? And, why when I look at both files via Properties/Details, the time stamp is identical? It also turns out that I lost about 100 photos via file corruption on a different card just 2 days ago. I have used about every pro camera Canon has made, every card reader, every card type and dozens of laptops over the past 20 years and I have never lost images to file corruption. Now these two things happen within the last 10 days. It could all be a coincidence I suppose. Maybe Covid is spreading to technical devices.Silly question but does the onset of Daylight Savings a week or so back correlate with the onset of this issue?
Indeed, whilst by modern standards the lens is comparatively modest the truth is lots of people used it for years with great results. Yes the new TS-E 50 is in another league for IQ and functionality, but the 45 is a bargain secondhand and for somebody on a budget looking to take standout images it is a good suggestion. As with all TS-E’s it has a learning curve, but that is the fun of photography surely!Your comments sent me to look at Keith’s review of the TS-e 45 at North Light Images and I can see that as long as you stay more or less in the sweet spot it will produce very good results.
Thank you so much for the profile editor! Excellent, it gives me quite a different profile, but I actually prefer the one from X-rite. Weird stuff this.
I'd expect an RF 100 f/2 macro first. See these rumors:The Rf 100 f2.8 Macro lens Is their been any news on it Coming out I...

And you will be censoredCanon is DOOOOOOOOooooomed!
Thanks.B&H has a comparison against their camcorders
![]()
Canon Introduces New 4K PTZ Cameras and an IP PTZ Controller
Announcement of Canon's new CR-N300 and CR-N500 PTZ cameras and the RP-IP100 PTZ camera controllerwww.bhphotovideo.com
I will sit down and try to see if this is workable over the weekend. As MacRunning said, it is a pain in the ass for fast paced work.The Eos R has a auto mode to update the custom settings. Maybe this mode would help you?
Same as the 300mm. It does make them slimmer though - so maybe a little weight saving to compensate.Are those dimensions without lens hood? I assume so. Which makes that RF 600mm F4 about 18mm *longer* than the EF II.
Well, as the old saying goes..."Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out...."Fair enough, it's your site not mine. I prefer other sites for generic photo news though.
Fortunately I found another website that just does Canon news, so I will be visiting that instead of this one.
It wouldn't be the first time that something was sold in some markets but not others. For example, some years ago Canon wasn't selling the M system cameras in the US but was selling them elsewhere, particularly Asia, presumably because at the time those cameras just weren't selling well in the US. That said, you may end up being correct about the 40mm f/2.8. It's still on the Canon Australia website, but I think it's still on the Canon USA website too. Time will tell.I'm not sure I follow your meaning.
If the lens is still manufactured (or plans are to keep manufacturing more batches), why would Canon discontinue it in specific markets?
Seems more plausible to me the lens is no longer manufactured, and Canon announces it is discontinued when local stock runs out.