While a 5mm difference at that focal length is not like comparing 20 to 25, it might still be something some shooters care about. Personally as a lover of 40mm, I would be more interested in the Tammy 45 than a mediocre Canon 50.

mikekx102 said:

For the record I'm not so worried about vignetting. But sigma have made a 20mm f1.4, and canon's 35mm f1.4l II is awesome, so I do think its possible to come up with a 20-24 f1.4l prime with 35L II quality.

Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but the wider FL you go you may need a bulbous / not front filterable front element to combat vignetting. Astro folks may care about things when you are shooting ISO 6400 @ f/2.8 and then find out you need to push your corners 4+ stops like the 16-35 f/2.8L III.

I know these lenses are wider than 24mm, but compare two popular UWA zooms here:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?FLI=0&API=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&Lens=1073&Camera=979&LensComp=986

...my point being: they don't just put a bulbous front element on cameras to p--- off filter users. They do help for some things.

But can Canon make a fast 20 or 24 as good as the 35? Sure, it's possible. That's a high bar to be sure, but they could do it if they wanted to. My question is: will they dial it in for general use (which would imply front filterability) or would they dial it in for astro use (which might imply vignetting concerns drive a larger front element)?

- A

Anyone know if the Shutterboss II, or Wireless Shuttboss II (3-pin connectors) are compatible with the 6D MKii? Can't find it confirmed anywhere, but don't know why they wouldn't work?

ahsanford said:

glness said:

1) Since when is the 5DS the first choice for wildlifers?! It was billed as a tripod/studio/landscape/product workhorse, not a higher ISO + higher FPS instrument. I appreciate the opportunity for added detail or the option to crop, but there is no free lunch with a 50 MP rig. Even with dual DIGIC, the throughput can only be so high.

Click to expand...

I feel same as I said before for the D810 -- it was no wildlife camera. You might reel in great shots with it, but at 5 fps in FF, you will miss moments. But I'm seeing a trend here with both the D810 and D850 being referenced: it appears you value detail over FPS disproportionately to most wildlifers I've corresponded with. Most of them want detail of course, but value cleaner high ISO and higher FPS.

So your 'grass is greener' with the D850 comments make perfect sense for your needs. Thanks for clarifying.

- A

Click to expand...

There was a poll at Thom Hogan's blog regarding a new Nikon camera (before the D850 came out). How that transfers to Canon is an open question, but I could image the distribution is similar:
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/survey-says.html .

The percentage wanting a D5x-type body isn't that large (1.29%) compared to a D500-like body (16%). Canon certainly does similar polls and this will greatly influence the specs of the new body.

Mikehit said:

Orangutan said:

Don Haines said:

It’s a lot cheaper to just lower your standards.....

Click to expand...

I think you've gone too low, I can barely tell it's a cat.

Click to expand...

That's the problem - his camera is so high definition the the grid you see is the gaps between the pixels

Click to expand...

No aliasing in the grid means even higher resolution or a superb AA filter

slclick said:

The first? This camera has been dogged a hundred times before he chimed in. Myself? I kind of like it.

Click to expand...

I've no problem with him hurling disdain (or praise) on gear with ruthless accuracy I was just referring to the comment in which the only content was deriding another forum poster.

mb66energy said:

While the 9 pt AF isn't exactly top notch the sensor delivers just according to DxOmark especially in the DR territory and is between 80D and 5D mark iv in this discipline. While I do not believe that .2 or .4 matter / are exactly measurable with one body it shows that the possible IQ of the 200D / SL2 is up to current (Canon) standards. Nice to have that in a very affordable well designed package.

https://www.dxomark.com/best-canon-cameras-for-landscape-under-45200-dollars

Coming from EOS M and 5D classic it is a 2 stop improvement which helps a lot - not on paper but for the results.

Click to expand...

Now I know that DxOMark ratings are bizarre - the 200D gets a better landscape rating than the 5DS or 5DS R? Higher than any other Canon bodies other than the 5D IV and 1DX III? Nothing against the 200D / SL2, but that seems pretty crazy.

Thanks Click

DXO can confuse people who read their postings, and those who can understand what they are saying know its often a red herring.

Camera ISO settings are plenty accurate, no matter what brand. DXO is off into theory, and you have to read their fine print. A camera, even with manual settings can only set exposures to 1/3 stop, so adding in camera variation, a better than 1/2 stop accuracy is hopeful. Its the nature of the beast, nothing is perfectly accurate.

They are apparently unable to actually measure sensor full well electron count, but have devised a home brew method of attempting to measure it, and claim 1% accuracy. That's a pretty doubtful claim.

It has nothing to do with the camera giving a proper exposure, or at best its sort of related. Note that they never actually test a camera exposure, just a theoretical measurement that does not take into account any internal camera calibration of shutter speeds.

https://www.dxomark.com/dxomark-camera-sensor-testing-protocol-and-scores/

This caught my eye, I'm not nor ever will be a serious video or cinema photographer, but what is interesting is that DJI has expanded its photographic capabilities so quickly in the past 2 years. Buying a big chunk of Hasselblad may have allowed for technology expertise to start doing things they wanted.

We've all been waiting for the Chinese photography industry to take off and blow away the old high priced establishment. Its starting to look like DJI might be the current candidate to do it in the next five years.

They have not yet targeted conventional still or video cameras, but with the technology they have, its only packaging.

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/1675402765/dji-is-now-a-camera-company-and-we-should-probably-pay-attention

While most of those on the forum own a powerful personal computer, I think the connect station is more aimed at those who are not power users of computers.

photomachine said:

PavelR said:

Nice idea, but the forum is too contrasty and the links are pretty unreadable in my eyes...

Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback, you are right it really is too contrasty and hard on the eyes. I tried to improve on this, give it a try now. Just update it here: https://userstyles.org/styles/149152/canonrumors-dark

Click to expand...

It is much better now. Thank you. The only problem I can see now are links - as dark red small texts (especially visited links) on the dark backgound are hard to read...[Red color is not easy readable on any background...] And there is one thing I propose to think about: form buttons do not have any 3D visual effect and looks the same like edit box - it is not user friendly.

Pic I was referring to

Re: Updated Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark III Specifications

neuroanatomist said:

Proscribo said:

Canon Rumors said:

24-70mm f/2.8-5.6 (approximate 35mm equivalent) <em>Previously reported as 24-120mm</em>

Click to expand...

Maybe the aperture is 35mm equiv. too. ???

So it'd be 15-44mm f/1.8-3.5... I mean, otherwise it's a bit sad IMO. I'd rather go with M5 and a couple of lenses.

Click to expand...

Wishful thinking...

Click to expand...

Me ol' da had something to say about wishing..."Wish in one hand, sh!t in the other, and see which fills up first."

I'd love to go and shoot this event! I was watching a special on the Weather Channel this morning about the Albuquerque Box. It is pretty interesting how the weather plays a role in the flight patterns. Its worth looking up if you are not familiar.

I would not get the old EF 24mm f/2.8, especially if it is used. Refurbished, possibly, but I still think you have better options.

If you are cost-constrained, get the pancake. It's sharp but not much else. Note that lens is focus by wire, so manual focusing is possible but not nearly the same as with a mechanical focus ring -- that may affect your macro aspirations with this.

If you are not terribly cost-constrained, 100% get the EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM. It's a proper lens that can do much more than your other two options:

• Ring USM poops all over STM for focusing speed
• It's a proper lens feature-wise: solid hood and attachment mechanism, distance scale, standard front filter diameter, etc.
• IS is super useful
• Very well built. Other than the weather sealing difference, these lenses are 'sleeper L' lenses in terms of modern build quality. I honestly find the build quality on par with my ~ $1000 L lenses (not as nice as the pro f/2.8 zooms and f/1.4L primes, however)
• FTM mechanical focusing -- generally not a big need on a 24 prime, but if you want to dabble with tubes and macro, this lens would be better than the two you are considering.

If interested, here's the refurb link: https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/331227?WT.mc_id=C126149

It gets restocked periodically, and you can get alerts from Canonpricewatch.com for when there is a 10-15% sale.

- A

Jopa said:

Pippan said:

a sensor that arranges pixel sites on a triangular matrix like this:

R B G R B G R B G R B G
G R B G R B G R B G R
R B G R B G R B G R B G
G R B G R B G R B G R
R B G R B G R B G R B G
G R B G R B G R B G R

instead of the current square matrix with twice as many green pixel sites as red and blue. This triangular matrix would allow many more effective pixels to fit into a given area and wouldn't require whatever algorithm is used to halve the green values. I assume though that there is some technical reason it can't be done like this as it seems so obvious.

Click to expand...

It smells like X-Trans...

Click to expand...

Is that how X-Trans sensors are patterned?

SecureGSM said:

just in regards to back lit subject situation:
I use GODOX X1T-C transmitter AF Assist Beam to aid camera AF abilities in back light situations. it may help quite a bit unless you shoot in very low ambient with strong back light beaming from behind the subject.

AbsN said:

After testing two copies of the Sigma Art it was clear the used lens was very soft from mid frame compared to the new one and the corners were nowhere near as good.

I'm aware there have been many reports of auto focus issues with this lens. After a very quick and rough calibration I got the lens focusing really well. However I've noticed there is one problem: it really struggles if there is any kind of back lighting. In fact it's as though it just can't focus with a bright light source behind the subject. If you switch to live view it will focus on a back lit subject perfectly. Anyone else experienced such issues? I am starting to seriously consider the Canon 35ii now!

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I’ll second that. I use my Broncolor modelling light to help AF outside and it really makes a difference, and LV focus is another option, just wish they could make it continuous .

SecureGSM said:

A little experiment, should we?

See if you can manual focus while depressing the DoF preview button on your camera...
Let us know if you could

chrysoberyl said:

Just so I'm clear, 'Stopped down manual focusing in Live View will account for the change,' means that I can set the f/stop while in live view and I can manually focus at the set f/stop?

SecureGSM said:

I mentioned the caveat. What I didn't notice during this shoot was focus shift. As this lens is stopped down, the plane of sharp focus shifts farther away. Because Canon cameras focus with a wide open aperture, this change is not accounted for during either viewfinder or Live View-based focusing (AF or MF). Stopped down manual focusing in Live View will account for the change, but ... this is not how we typically focus...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I shoot Sony - would the focus wide open then focus shift issue still apply?

Admin > there might be a mistake here:

Canon Rumors said:

This all feels related to Canon’s upcoming full frame mirrorless camera(s).

Click to expand...

Clearly the patent about automated AFMA is for a DSLR. The figures clearly show the mirror.

BTW, it's AFMA per AF point, i.e. you can have -5 for one focus point and -1 for another for instance. I haven't read all of it, but the menu screenshots went on showing a "near" and "far" position. So, it's still limited to 2 focal lengths for zoom lenses (unlike Sigma dock which allows to configure 4 distances). And no mention of different focus distances. But again this is based on pictures, the detailed text may say otherwise.

Too bad though, this is definitely something we wanted to have in the 5D4.

Thanks everyone. I appreciate. I had never even heard the term full time manual before. So thanks for the education. I had always just done that with this lens, as it never seemed like I was forcing it. So I figured it was okay.

Thanks again for the info!
-Dustin

JohanCruyff said:

Canon Rumors said:

For the second time in the last couple of months, we’re being told that a new DSLR series will be announced some time in 2018.
Neither source could name the series, only that it appeared as a “new DSLR series” in a presentation.
If we’re thinking out loud, I think these would be the obvious candidates.
EOS Cinema DSLR - A cinema DSLR camera to replace the discontinued EOS-1D C. This has been talked about numerous times over the years.
EOS-1D Xs - A high megapixel pro series body. Since the amalgamation of the 1D line back in 2009, we’ve always wondered if we’d get a camera like this to truly replace the EOS-1Ds Mark III.
EOS APS-C Cinema DSLR - A cheaper 4K cinema alternative that would “protect” the Cinema EOS lineup of cameras.
Hopefully this will bring a bit more information to the surface. For the moment, this is a [CR1] rumor, so please treat it as such.

Click to expand...

...and maybe a Full Frame Mirrorless.

Some think that the EOS numbering has recently become stable ad predictable even for the M series.

No complete overlap between DSLRs and Mirrorless, but it could sound like:
100D/200D in Europe (SL1/2 in other Countries) and EOS M100: basic and small models
6D and M6: enthusiast models
5D and M5: more advanced models
Therefore, I expect to see a M1 (full frame mirrorless) as ambitious as a 1D(x).
We'll see.

Click to expand...

Except that a M6 does not equal a 6D. An M5 does not equal a 5D.

lion rock said:

dolina,
Your photos of creatures in Southeast Asia are truly phenomenal! Your descriptions of these creatures are wonderful. I learn from your detail exposé and what I miss in this world. Always happy to see your images. Keep shooting and showing.
-r

Click to expand...

thanks -r that means a lot.

SecureGSM said:

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Nikon%20D850

bit less than 1.2 stops of DR difference at the base ISO. more like a 0.8 of a stop and only at ISO 65

High ISO performance of 5D IV is noticeably better though.
In addition, DPAF performance of the Canon in comparison to Nikon is simply "off the chart"
Aha!

Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Maximum PDR: 10.83 EV Low Light ISO: 5011 Low Light EV: 10.65
Nikon D850 Maximum PDR : 11.63 Low Light ISO: 4115 Low Light EV: 10.36


if

ahsanford said:

If DXO data is accepted:

• The D850 has more dynamic range (at base ISO) and greater color depth. The differences, in fairness, are not very large. For instance, 1.2 stops of base ISO DR will not let you leave the ND grads at home / abandon the practice of compositing multiple shots for tripod landscape work. Further, the gap between Canon and Nikon has been dramatically reduced here -- the D800/D800E/D810 models were a wowzer-like 2.5-3 stops better than the 5D3 on this front.
  
  
• Though the D850's high ISO score isn't quite up to the 5D4's, it's not far off. I haven't seen a 45 MP file downsampled to the 30 MP of the 5D4 for comparison yet -- it's possible at downsampled D850 file might be cleaner than a 5D4 file.

So it's a little better depending on how you look at it:

Detail: Considerably better
Base ISO DR: Slightly better
General DR away from Base ISO: Similar
High ISO noise: Slightly worse (45 MP) to perhaps equivalent (30 MP downsample)

But there's nothing in the sensor data that I've seen thus far that the D850 will be an overall better camera in real world use. The D850 sensor captures more detail and conditionally outperforms the 5D4 in a few areas, but that drives right past AF, handling, LiveView/video use (where DPAF is a nontrivial consideration), etc.

As I said before, the D850 (like the D500 before it) is a spec sheet juggernaut, but it needs to work well in real use and reviews are needed to get into that. That said, I have much more faith in Nikon than Sony to deliver the potential of that spec sheet.

- A

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Dude, those 0.8 is what makes your images stand out, it's a winning ticket to Pulitzer and every single photo contest, don't you know? All images taken with the cameras having less DR are shame of photography, and must be consigned to oblivion. I'm pretty sure DpR would approve this message.