neuroanatomist said:

Well, yes. Testing the RAW files clearly shows the R5II has more noise and thus less dynamic range.

View attachment 222949

View attachment 222950

Oh, wait. It’s the opposite. It seems you know your ABCs but not much else.

Troll on, mate.

Click to expand...

This matches the pictures, which I made.

@Askeladden
If you don’t have any Canon lenses, it simply depends what you prefer.

Reason’s for the R5m2: 28-70/2, 10-20/4, 24-105/2.8, 100-300/2.8, 100-500/4.5-7.1, 200-800/6.3-9. 70-200/2.8 (non Z)

Reasons for the Z8: 28-400/4-8, 400/2.8 TC, 600/4 TC, 400/4.5, 800/6.3, 600/6.3, 135/1.8 Plena, 58/0.95 Noct, 70-180/2.8. 35/1.2

DhlcadR6 said:

And tbh we all know once Canon finished their lineup, Sigma will get the green light so it'll be a win for everyone. (unless a GAS Sony fan ;p

Click to expand...

Canon haven't released a version 2 of any RF lens so far in the last ~7 years. I consider the Z lenses to be a completely different segment to the 24-105 or 70-200mm options ie non-L, L and Z lenses.
The range of f1.4 primes are filling out the mid-price market which is good to see though. Video features are taking on a greater significance.

The current "holes" in their lineup vs EF are niche areas now:
- fast /wide => 20/1.4 could be their only option or perhaps the start of a wider range. The EF14/2.8 was expensive and not great.
- zoom fisheye
- long macro to replace EF180mm
- RF200-500 in whatever form it eventually comes in
- "cheaper" big white primes eg 500/5.6
- TS-E replacements
- super-macro replacement to MP-E65 5x macro

Will they release new ones next or start improving existing ones is hard to say.
The other OEMs have shown improvements (cost/size/weight) to some of Canon's iconic RF lenses already.
In the EF days, there was a combination but this covers 1987-2019 ie ~30 years.

Thanks, I might have a look at B+W CPL, it's slim enough, maybe it would not give me any vignetting!.

@SHAMwow I think seperated filters are much better at controlling the darkening or the reflection.

Copland said:

I shoot outdoor
Dust, sometimes raindrops you swipe away, ...

View attachment 222934

Click to expand...

Yikes! What are you using to wipe the viewfinder?

My philosophy has always been: don’t clean it unless you absolutely have to.

On occasion, I have had to clean droplet spots off my viewfinders. When this happens, I use a rocket blower to gently blow away large particles. Then I breathe on the viewfinder to mist it slightly, and finally, while the humidity from my breath is fogging it up, I use a viewfinder lens pen to clean the offending spot. To be clear, I only clean the large spot, and don’t attempt to get the rest of the viewfinder pristine.

To your question about using plastic polish: DON’T! The viewfinders are glass and have coatings on them. Using an abrasive polish will make things much worse.

The only way to fix your issue is to have the viewfinder glass replaced by Canon. I’m not sure whether they can just replace the glass, or whether the electronic viewfinder is one piece and an entirely new one would need to be installed.

I received my Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM Z just two weeks ago and a few days ago had my first chance to test it with my R5 MKII. This combination gave excellent results, sharpness of this lens is absolutely unbelievable. Shots are again from juniors hockeygame. These shots are not anything special but since the hockey game is very fast moving I was also testing AF of R5II. I was pleased with results.

neuroanatomist said:

Choice is good! I do see the potential benefit of APS-C for a travel ILC kit, but for me the R50 doesn’t get there. The M6II does, particularly with the lenses factored in. ...

Click to expand...

I know that was your choice. I considered that back then, too. But I didn't make that move.
Maybe a yet to be announced R50V plus attachable EVF would hit both our ideas in about two weeks.
But still the OEM lenses would be missing. Thanks to Sigma, I'm fine now.
We'll see...

koenkooi said:

I’m only seeing this on my M6II, but that’s because the built-in battery that keeps the time has used up its juice over the years.

Your builtin battery might have a bit of wiggle
room or bad contact. Or you are running into a software issue…

Click to expand...

No idea, I have the latest firmware and am using the battery grip with 2 batteries. It was really strange as it did it two times in less than an hour. I cannot seem to reproduce the issue on demand.

OMFG I totally missed that

Thank you Click

Very nice series, docsmith.

AlanF said:

Not even Microsoft stoops that low with us - actually they are pretty reliable.

Click to expand...

We’re sadly a full MS shop as well, I dread the moment there is a dispute and MS cuts us off. Winning a lawsuit will not get the data back if that happens.

Mid-March and still nothing...

AlanF said:

Only 12 have bothered to vote so the don't cares may well be the majority.

Click to expand...

It could be interesting to know how old or young the people who don't care are.

Only Canon knows. There have been rumors of one, of course. Canon has data on how well the 5Ds/5DsR sold, and probably a good idea of the demand.

Have you looked at the Fuji GFX 100? If landscape was my primary use case, that's probably what I'd be using (especially since they now have TS lenses for their MF system).

Just a short info for users of EF version of the current 600mm f/4 (Mk III in EF mount): if you want to update the firmware of that lens (currently 1.1.3), better use a current R system camera + adapter. Updating worked flawlessly with my R7.

Problem with a 5D4, and this may happen with other older (or all?) EF mount DSLRs: I tried to update the lens firmware with my 5D4 several times. Every time when I clicked on the lens firmware shown in the menu, its display immediately went black, top screen showed "err" and it needed a reset by removing the battery (fortunately the firmware updating of the lens did not start yet). I did follow exactly Canon's update manual, to prepare it I re-formatted a card in the camera before I copied the new lens firmware on it on my MacBook, and my 5D4 has the latest firmware (1.4.0) installed.

ahsanford said:

Hey all, one of the items I need to replace as I migrate to the R5 Mark II is my L-plate. I've shot my landscapes with an Arca Z1 monoball for ages and have relied on the RRS L-plates to do that job for me. They're a bit pricey, but they've ticked all my boxes so far.

My requirements list isn't revolutionary:

• Stills usage only (no need for the top handle, a cage, etc.)
• Not gripped
• Horizontal or vertical shooting position option
• Generally not fond of modular L-Plates with separate bottom / side pieces that require assembly, could come loose, etc.
• Doesn't dramatically increase the size of the camera if I quickly want to pack the body away with the L-Plate still attached
• Must retain access to all ports, priority on cable shutter attachment not being a pain
• No need for dedicated power, a gimbal, video use, etc.
• In rare tripod + handheld walking/hiking days, having another 1/4-20 hole to directly attach my blackrapid strap to it is a nice feature. (I'm fine not using a camera strap for most landscape sessions, but sometimes I park my setup, detach my camera and go on a walkabout looking for a new shooting position.)

While I wait for those RRS plates to come out for the R5 Mark II (still listed as 'coming soon'), are their others I should have a look at?

Thx,
A

Click to expand...

I have a similar requirements list, except that I also want to retain use of my Canon E2 hand strap. At the moment, I have an Arca Swiss plate mounted below it. This is messy and the plate rubs against my leg/trousers when I’m walking with camera on hand.



There are suitable attaching points on the Small Rig L bracket. Its inexpensive and reviewers say its well-made. What makes the RRS bracket so much better to use that it justifies four-times the price?

Hey, mine finally shipped from B&H yesterday, so that's exciting!

Was waiting for someone to comment on the lens hood. Very ugly way to mount it. I usualy transport the lens with reversed hood, That means to rip the thing off, punch it in place and than repeat. All my other lenses mount the hood through a quarter twist and might even have a small button to lock them in place, but the Sigma is just horrible.

I was looking for a comparison of the sharpness of the RF 200-800mm vs Sony 400-800mm at 800mm and came across this in a short youtube by Tony N. He describes it as being a close tie, but considering that the Sony is on an A1 that has more Mpx than the R5 and doesn't have an AA-filter, the 200-800mm is probably sharper. Here the screenshot from:


with the Canon on the left and Sony on the right.

Nice panning!

emmmile said:

Did anybody compare the FOV of this lens at 15mm vs the 14-35 at 14mm?

Click to expand...

Haven't looked at this lens, but the RF 14-35/4 after correction gives an FoV of around 13.5mm (based on comparison to the EF 11-24mm).

Frodo said:

I generally agree, which is this thread about one man's opinion (Klaus). One person's opinion that I do value is Roger Cicala's, especially when he tests multiple copies, such as this ten-year-old review of 24-70 mm lenses. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/07/24-70-f2-8-zoom-mtf-and-variation . Interestingly he noted "there’s more variation at 70mm for all three lenses" (Nikkor, Tamron, Canon EF).

Click to expand...

TDP also noticed serious variations when he re-tested an RF 14-35...
That's why we all miss Roger's MTF testing several lenses.

Canon recently announced that its products won at the annual iF awards for the year 2025. Canon won both design awards and a gold award. This is the 31st consecutive year that Canon has won these awards. While the camera gear that won was interesting, it was not that surprising; what I found interesting was the semiconductor equipment winning the gold award.

Hickup said:

Comparison was done with printouts on A4 paper, looked like inkjet. Certainly not fine art print, it was not even special printer paper or very high DPI. One page showed full picture, one page cropped in to better illustrate contrast and sharpness which was considered the differentiator for the Zeiss.

Difference in sharpness and contrast was clearly visible with both prints, the Otus was clearly superior by some good margin. I was actually quite surprised by how much.

Not what I consider pixel peeping.

Click to expand...

But does it matter to anyone who is not a photo nerd? Would anybody in the real world see it, or care?
Just because there is some discernible difference when scrutinized at close proximity by someone who was looking for differences does not answer the question…
Would someone in a gallery, for example, *who is looking at the subject, not some out of focus corner thing*, like one over the other, and why?

Diko said:

As given in this topic many answers could be found here. A few months after my question in Canon Auto-Focus explained 2025

Where the following video has been mentioned:

- YouTube

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

www.youtube.com

Click to expand...

Thanks for the link