NEWS FLASH - Fuji will also announce a XT4 and and XT5! Timing is uncertain.

A week seems like a reasonable loan period but the shipping was expensive. I’m guessing that a lot of the shipping cost was insurance. Still, less than a rental.

mikekx102 said:

Is there any chance an EF 14mm F2L could be announced in September?

Click to expand...

None.

Don Haines said:

What we do know about the mirrorless release is that no matter what the specs are, that according to internet logic, it will be inferior to Sony..... and whatever the mount is, it will be the wrong one.....

And somehow, despite the complainers on this forum, it will sell well and people will take great pictures with it...... just like every single Canon release in the last ten years.....

And because of this camera, people will leave Canon in droves, yet somehow their market share improves....

Does anyone else see the disconnect between the trolls and reality?

Click to expand...

Wonder if the Dunning-Kruger effect has anything to do with it. The less you know the more it seems like magic is at work, magic that you can get out of a box.

3kramd5 said:

stevelee said:

All this is very theoretical to me, since I can't think of a reason I might be in the market for a new camera in the next five years or so. The exception would be a successor to my G7X II for travel, maybe even the III next year before a big trip. At present, neither the camera purchase nor the trip is planned, however.

Click to expand...

I have no plans to buy a new camera, but I rarely do and that’s never stopped me

Click to expand...

If I hadn't had some more responsibilities and commitments to come along for this summer, even though I hadn't planned a trip, I might be in Norway right now with my G7XII.

I had planned to buy a 16-35mm f/4 in early October for my birthday. A few weeks ago a high school classmate died suddenly and unexpectedly. On the way home from the funeral, I stopped by the Best Buy, and they had the lens in stock. Under the circumstances, I couldn't make waiting until fall to buy the lens make any sense, so I went ahead and bought it.

I certainly do impulse purchases, but I usually have some notion of something I am going to want, and right now nothing in terms of cameras or lenses occurs to me that I want or anticipate wanting.

OK, I did buy my first DSLR, a Rebel, as a complete impulse when I stopped at H. H. Gregg some years ago to look at TVs and washers and dryers. I'm sure I must have had some notion that I'd buy a DSLR some day. It wasn't a very good choice, but it was cheap and came with a couple not-so-great lenses, and it did let me know that I wanted to get a T3i when that came out. That camera served me well for many years.

I would be very surprised if the lens copy variation in a prime of the quality of that of the 400mm DO II would account for the poor performance in the TDP tests - Canon's quality control is generally very good for L lenses and the newer consumer ones. Evidence for sloppy testing comes from the comparison of the 400mm DO II and 100-400mm II both at 560mm on the 7DII https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=962&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=1&LensComp=972&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=1

Here, the 400mm DO II is much sharper than the 100-400mm II, opposite to that reported by TDP on the 5DSR.

I am surprised by the performance of the Nikkor at 550mm, and we need to see more analyses.

If you have a third party crop lens that does not intrude into the camera body, you can use them on a FF body.

NOTE: if you use a lens that protrudes into the body, you run the risk of your mirror hitting the back of the lens and damaging your camera. DO NOT USE SUCH LENSES!

The three shots here are:

1) with a sigma 30F1.4 crop lens.... note the severe amount of vignetting. You could crop this image to a slightly wider field of view as on a crop camera.

2) With a Tokina 11-16 F2.8 lens at 11mm. Also a severe amount of vignetting, you could crop this image to a slightly wider field of view than a crop camera.

3) With a Tokina 11-16 F2.lens at 16mm. A bit of vignetting at the corners, but the whole image is usable....

Mt Spokane Photography said:

The optical performance of the existing lens was so close to perfect, that even a little is a accomplishment. Looking at just center sharpness is like reading the specs on a Soiny camera. You need to look at everything. The lens had a substantial upgrade across the board, but I would not upgrade from thye old one unless it were my most used lens and my old one was wearing out.

Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly and would add I would only purchase if you currently did not own a 70-200 f/4 lens. Otherwise, I see no reason not to. Looks great.

ahsanford said:

Again, on the original topic of the mount, I am skeptical Canon will go for some transformer/telescoping mount. I'm also skeptical Canon will pursue the EF-X concept listed here as I honestly believe they will turn off the 'keep it small' crowd with that move.

Like it or not, pragmatism be damned, I think Canon is going thin mount and small with one of its first offerings to court the 'keep it small' crowd.

- A

Click to expand...

Agreed....if we go thin (flange distance less than 44 mm) then "EF-X" still is needed, as we will need a FF image circle coming from a lens with a shorter flange distance.
So, what I think will happen is that Canon will not want to limit their future camera body sizes to fit lenses designed for a mirror box that is no longer needed. I expect 3-4 "EF-x" lenses to be introduced with a FF mirrorless camera.


But...let me get your opinion on this as a "sexy" and "elegant" solution. The Canon FF mirrorless entry has a shorter flange distance, but has a built in lens element in the camera body that takes the EF image circle and broadens it to fit a FF image sensor in a distance of less than 44 mm.


So, say a 25-30 mm flange distance, so still more compact, but enough room for that lens element. We would no longer remove a lens and see the sensor, rather we'd remove the lens and see some glass.


Has this already been suggested? Thoughts? Could get odd when the focal point occurs within this new lens element, but maybe it is possible. Also that whole "physics," "science," and "reality" may be issues as the same element would need to work with light coming in at different angles. I do like how the listed focal lengths on the lenses would still be the equivalent focal lengths, even though they would technically be a little different, FOV would be the same. This only happens if you have a 44 mm flange distance either natively or with an adapter or if we are bending light with a lens element and a shorter flange distance, as suggested.

RickWagoner said:

One main advantage of mirrorless is the weight and size, but this does not work out in the real world on full frame mirrorless as the weight and size of lens itself is determined mostly by focal length, aperture and then a little by build quality. Of course you can (and some companies do) go a smaller body but then you have a weird unbalance with a fast zoom pro quality full frame lens.

Click to expand...

Only a minority of people use fast zooms , long teles or other big lenses most of the time or all the time.

Most frequently used foal length range 24-85mm can profit massively from shorter Flange Focal Distance on mirrorless cameras. A mirrorless FF setup of camera + 16-35/4 plus 24-70/4 plus 24/2.0 plus 35/1.8 plus 50/1.8 plus 85/2.0 can be made *sgfnificantly more compact and lighter* than a DSLR setup. Need for faster lenses is much lower today, now that any decent camera delivers excellent IQ even at ISO 6400 and on FF subject isolation at f/2.8 is more than sufficient for many subjects/styles. I want such a setup, and many others want it too. And for birders, wildlifers, sports photogs there will be chunkier mirrorless cameras to go well with bigger lenses. No problem. There will be multiple models and sizes available. Just like with DSLRs.

So no need to constantly try and obfuscate or "explain away" the very real size and weight advantages mirrorless systems allow for and will bring for the vast majority of use cases and customers.

On top of that come all other advantages of mirrorless cameras. WYSIWIG EVF, 100% silent, 100% vibration-free, 100% free of moving mech parts, 100% lubricant-free - as soon as we finally get global shutter sensors - all the way to significantly lower cost thanks to much simpler calibration and QC routines and fully automated production - which will *hopefully* also lead to lower prices for us, the paying customers. Provided, we keep asking for it and pushing Canon and competitors, rather than "showing pre-emptive, endless understanding for their oligopolist profit maximizing at our expense" - as seen so often in this forum.

All that comes to mind is The Damned song, 'Noise Noise Noise'

Mt Spokane Photography said:

I'd expect that the meter will soon be of little use, and you can adjust the settings from experience and be right on more than you are with the meter.

Click to expand...

...useful though when you're trying to quickly get ratios right with a multi flash setup. But reality is I do use the flash meter a lot less than I used to.

-pw

BeenThere said:

It’s now up on lenstip review. Stellar resolution, but AF seems to be an issue when off the center point.

Click to expand...

yes ... I saw that.. not so with 135..for me and others..
odd..
well now I feel good about my choice.. 135 f1.8
the 105 sharpness seemed 'NEARLY' as good as the 135..
but for me I chose the 135 because of
....reach
... size/weight
....the edge in sharpness.. it seems coma was there for the 135 too.. I could not see that... of course
..
I mean we are splitting hairs..
but I still have my hair ...mostly..

but the dang thing crowded out my other cameras and lenses..
rude...
so......the bokeh is the best now.. I swear..past 85L f1.2 mk ii ....
my little trials .. made me a believer..

and 135 is just fine...
as a bokeh runner-up

I want to say my 135 snaps to exact focus.. on 1dx2...
a stream of license plates cars passing....bike riders flying by...
yup!.... in various light... it is so dead-on...
and at f2 it is 10 clicks above the Canon 85L f1.4.. re: lens tip
I usually want I.S. at these distances.. I love I.S.
but this thing is so solid..I swear

I miss the 105 a bit...
squishy blobs....
haha... bokeh nuts... me too

sigh

I dont want to carry an apartment fridge when I go for a walk..

this forum is so good... I learned so much.. each week...
TOM

jeffa4444 said:

robotfist said:

Canon definitely needs to get on the ball and release some new lenses. Where is the 24-70 IS?? Where is the new 50mm?? One look at the DXO charts and you can see how far they are falling behind Sony and Nikon in both lenses and cameras. Canon doesn't have one lens in the top 25. Not one. Their 35mm II shows up in the 28 slot. I know tests aren't everything, but they aren't nothing either. They do tell a lot about lens sharpness, chromatic aberrations, etc. And while Canon still owns the best color science and menu operations for their camera bodies, they can't ride on those things forever, because the competition is hard at work in the lab, chipping away at Canon every day. Sony was a blip on the chart 10 years ago, and look how far they've come? Well it's clear that they aren't stopping. If Canon keeps going at the pace they're going, I foresee a big upset happening in 5-10 years.

Click to expand...

Please don't quote DXO the most arcane testing procedure. We test cameras & lenses everyday for high end cinematography. Lenses are tested on the MTF bench, on and off axis, on a F stop (T stop) machine, and projected by specially made projectors set-up precisely in a dedicated room with various aspect ratios projected to see to what format the lenses can cover and to what degree they have fall-off or abberations. We test the cameras in a number of ways and then finally test the lenses on the camera.

You maybe surprised how many Canon lenses have been used on images that will be projected onto 53 feet diagonal screens or larger both in a still image (for assessing real life images rather than charts) or moving images.

In our industry DXO are seen as amateurs.

Click to expand...

My suspicions about DXO:

They started out collecting data for the purposes of building profiles for their raw converter. As such, it requires camera+lens. Then someone got a “big data” idea and decided to publish it. Things got out of hands when they came up with scoring to drive traffic, because that opens the can of dependent variables worms.

If one uses the data selectively, it’s very valuable. It is just unfortunate that DXO has decided to stylize itself as a testing lab.

Ridiculous.
The John Holmes of compact cameras.

You know, there's a CR3 thread?

Cory said:

brad-man said:

Let me get this straight. You've been happily shooting with a DSLR for (presumably) many years now, but on a whim you bought some kind of mirrorless camera and used it for a whole day to do something, and you're "not feelin' it"? What kind of "thing" is "everyone" saying mirrorless is? Thank you Captain Vague.

Click to expand...

Pretty much.
I could really use a 2nd camera for video and everyone says how great the M50 is so it seemed like a no-brainer.
Had a major fail interviewing a triple amputee Veteran that was 100% my fault, but maybe wouldn't have happened otherwise. I nearly threw up.
Then, when I went to download some stuff to the computer I couldn't find a USB cable to fit nor instructions anywhere how to download. Probably 2 stupid reasons, but immediately said "I'm ****** out." and discovered, too, that I just like my DSLR's.
So now I just posted for affirmations, but I did first look in the mirror saying that I'm good enough and people like me; even if both are untrue.

Click to expand...

You’re using a camera rumors forum to solidify your self esteem? Good luck with that.

Mphotostyle said:

It makes sense for EF 24-70 f/2.8L III USM to be released, as the version II has been around for a few years and it's lacking the IS, which stopped me from buying it last month, when canon dropped the price by $710. The sale ended 2 days ago and Canon still gives $610 off the price now. The lens will stay black, so unlike the EF 70-200 f/2.8L III IS USM which seen just a minor improvement, I think the EF 24-70 f/2.8L III USM will be a compatible match and the price of the new lens will be $300 over the base price of the current version (compare EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM & EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM) price = $300 difference

Click to expand...

One of those 100mm Macros is an L lens, the other is not. And both have been around for quite a while, since 2000 (non-L) and 2009 (L IS) respectively, so the price has settled a bit from when they were new. Like many non-L lenses that have not been refreshed since the 1990s (400/5.6, 300/4, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 100/2, etc.), I doubt we'll see another 100mm non-L macro.

The EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II is an L lens, and it has only been six years since it was introduced in 2012. Eight to ten or more years is the normal "refresh" cycle for L glass, not six. Any upcoming EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS (if it has IS it won't be a III, it will be the first EF 24-70/2.8 L IS) will also be an L. But if it is as good optically as the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II, I would expect it to debut at about the same price (in yen) as the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II was introduced. The difference in the exchange rate between 2012 and 2018 means that the number of yen that bought $2,300 USD in 2012 will only buy about $1,900 USD in 2018.

The reason for the "fire sale" prices at $1,600 USD may well be to clear out existing inventories if an EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS is introduced this Fall. We saw a similar drop in the price of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II a few weeks before the announcement of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS III, and that is not near the upgrade that a 24-70/2.8 with IS would be.

I saw a guy today with a point and shoot and a big white slung over his shoulder taking side line shots, who cares what is used as long as it brings in the bacon ;D

Cryve said:

CanonFanBoy said:

Not sure if it considered low light, but I shot a couple of high school football games at night with my 70D (when I had it) and I thought if focused very well and quickly with an EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. Noise wasn't bad either. Surely the 80D is better than the 70D. (Blame the poor color on my having the workspace setti9ngs wrong in PS at the time.)

Click to expand...

I had problems with it nailing focus down to the milimeter. sometimes it was off by just a few milimeters which was annoying because i had to take many shots just to get one really sharp one. Apparently that was also a problem with many of the 7d ii cameras at release.

As for lowlight it had problems nailing focus on low contrast black birds, the head isnt in focus. Of course this is just one example of a lot i had over the months.

Click to expand...

Well, looks a little back focused to me.

I don't generally like kit lenses, but f/2 at 15mm on an EF-M camera does sound interesting .... if they can do it well.

Adelino said:

If Canon release FF mirrorless that is not EF compatible (I hope it is compatible), what will be the first lenses out and what will be the time frame for releasing lenses? What are your gueses and hopes?

Click to expand...

My hope would be 24-80/4 integrated into the body (no mount for interchangeable lenses needed).

Then I may even buy one or two.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

ahsanford said:

Mt Spokane Photography said:

Prices of Mirrorless cameras are way too high. The cameras cost less to make, and should be more reliable due to fewer moving parts. Eventually prices will drop, but for now, manufacturers are raking in profits.

Click to expand...

They are high because they can be. Unless what you are shooting something that demands an OVF*, one could argue an FF mirrorless setup does the same job as an FF SLR in a smaller footprint. That has value that manufacturers can ask more for.

*I prefer an OVF myself, mind you.

- A

Click to expand...

Its about competition and product availability. Once we have multiple competing products, prices will drop. Canon usually drives the prices down. They engineer a product to have the lowest possible price, not a penny goes into making one that has not been carefully though out. They can cut prices below the competition and still make a nice profit. But ... They will not cut prices unless they see a advantage, like gaining market share.

Click to expand...

Canon are the sharks of the industry but I prefer shooting with my blue-fin tuna.