Canon Rumors Guy said:

I can see this being useful even on fairly standard portrait/studio lenses

Click to expand...

Me, too.
Seems to be coming first with the new WA primes, doesn't it?

Michael Clark said:

Well, 1/80,000 is considerably shorter than 1/4,000. It's only 5% as long.

Click to expand...

Sure, but I have yet to see decent photos at 1/8000 from it.

It wasn't bult in but there was a 90 degree viewfinder that canon offered during the slr years. I think there were two or maybe three versions. So, I can definitely see this being produced.

Oh, wow! There are a few around my house. Neighbors have a feeder, but I can't get a good view

AlanF said:

There are different rules for batteries inside equipment and sent accompanying, or separately.

Click to expand...

AlanF said:

Lithium-ion cells and batteries shipped by themselves must be shipped at a state of charge not exceeding 30% of their rated capacity."

Click to expand...

Thanks. I've only worked with Li-Ion batteries inside equipment, which is why I haven't come across this limit before.

For those that are interested in this subject, the "UN rules" that is offhandedly referred to is the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria, Part III, subsection 38.3 (be prepared for a very boring read). DAMHIK.

TTArtisan released an intriguing 10mm F2.0 for APS-C systems. It’s manual focus and manual aperture but it’s 10mm F2.0 so there’s that. Because there are no electronics, Canon ignores it as if it does not exist and so it’s available for the RF mount. Unfortunately, it has a fair amount of tangential astigmatism which makes

See full article...

neuroanatomist said:

February 30th?

Click to expand...

There's 30 Feb in Chinese calender....Which converts to 9 April 2024

From WEX this evening:

We want you to know we haven't forgotten about your order!

Unfortunately, we're still awaiting stock from our supplier of one or more of your items.

Items:

Tbh I was slightly disappointed to discover the 100-400 only locks at the wide end, although it doesn't really matter.

neuroanatomist said:

Are you familiar with UniWB?

Click to expand...

Nope. Looks interesting; thanks.

AlanF said:

2923 is predicting far into the future? Or was that a typo. Anyway, the R5 is stuck at number 1 and is not making headway.

Click to expand...

Xelaq, may be an advanced species with four dimensional capabilities?
Good eye! After three years R5 should be above number 1. Canon is d**med!!1!

mdmphoto said:

Brazilian, or Red-Crested Cardinal: have a habit of stopping down once, for sharpness; though with this lens the difference between F/8 and F/11 @ 400mm is negligible...

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply - I loved the bird. I have tested all my telephoto lenses fro IQ vs f-number and unless I need more dof I have never stopped down. You do see reports on some sites that the RF 100-400mm is significantly sharper at f/11. But, my pair are not and neither are those tested by opticallimits, which is slightly sharper at f/8, and ephotozine, which is slightly softer.

DhlcadR6 said:

TBH post-2010 there's not much newer standard zooms from EF. That lens is still good enough for modern use. It beats Sony's 24-70 GM1 and the Sigma 24-70 E/L mount.

Click to expand...

I think what you say is true.
However, @Walrus has been trying to say that there are no benefits with Canon's higher priced lenses in comparison to the third parties to support his insistence that Canon is wrong to not want third party autofocus lenses on the R mount. My point is, at best, it is biased to suggest there have been no improvements with Canon's designs over ten years. Even worse, the ef 80-200 L is from 1989. He wants the third party lenses available for Sony α mount and that is fine, but attempting to make points by comparing older designs with recent designs leads me to infer the opposite of what he wants:
As time goes by, it is natural for designs improve. Therefore, one can make the conjecture, if a manufacturer's old design is equal to another manufacturer's recent design, the first manufacturer's recent design is likely to be superior.
Of course, one should use all three designs for long enough to know each lenses attributes to make accurate comparisons.

Fascinating research, though I suspect the applications are more for robotics than consumer use. Nonetheless, such innovations can have tremendous impact.

AlanF said:

The RF 100-300mm is not really a lens for birders, it’s too short. The 200-500mm with TCs goes from 700-1000mm if so desired. The 100-300mm with a 2x TC at 600mm f/5.6 is not as sharp as the bare RF 100-500mm. Before the 400mm DO II became available, I used the 300mm f/2.8 II for a few years. Excellent Lens that is, the longer ones are better for birding.

Click to expand...

I agree, my standard focal length for birding is 700mm (500mm + 1.4x TC), mostly on a crop camera.

tangerine_sedge said:

Holy thread resurrection Batman!

I've just bought a refurbished version of the RF 50 1.2, and it exhibits exactly the same behaviour as the one in the Youtube video.

I have an R3 and an EF 50 1.2, so could compare performance side-by-side.

The RF was slower and noisier than the EF and occasionally failed to focus completely. Placing the RF into Manual Focus mode, and this ALSO occasionally failed to allow me to manually focus (I believe it's an electronic link and not manual). The RF was more consistent in better lighting conditions but was still slow and noisy to focus. My old EF 50 1.2 performed flawlessly in all lighting conditions.

I played with the 'stop focus' setting suggested above and this made no difference.

My assumption is that this lens was sent back to Canon due to the above 'fault' then sent straight back out the door as a 'refurbished' lens. This lens will be going back to the shop, and I'll wait until I can find a better copy.

Click to expand...

Because it's refurbished, maybe it's the same lens...

In the first glow of dawn

Del Paso said:

With or without SAC...

Click to expand...

This thread is about a special bokeh. So not a question.

For anyone looking for 3rd party RF lenses with AF. The glimpse of hope is down to Yongnuo again.

Earlier on this year they re-introduce the YN85mm F1.8R DF DSM onto their official website and Taobao(the domestic version of Aliexpress, and it's much better than Aliexpress but PRC only due to the payment methods). They named to mount as 多規格(Multi-spec) to get away from Canon China's legal action.

And now they introduce the mark ii with movable electrical contact points to evading Canon's legal team further... And other manufactures should consider this as Canon didn't patent the RF design in this way


Source: https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1pu4y137a8/



Sadly, the pricing outside of China is ridiculous, it's not competitive enough to get them instead of Canon's. Unless you have someone know how to buy it directly from Taobao or Yongnuo's official site.
And my personal advice is for RF users that doesn't have IBIS. it's not worth it to get it over native options.





Myself has the original batch of YN85 and YN35.

YN85 is perfect, no issue with the lens' performance and firmware updates.

YN35 is somewhat a letdown as the Servo AF with subject recognition on is not reliable enough. When using Human/Animal/vehicle recognition but no such subject in frame. It won't go back to normal servo AF and focus hunt everywhere across the frame. And the AF area is smaller(but bigger than f11 Duos). Forcing myself to switch it off or use Single shot AF only. No issues on video AF though.





Enough rant from myside. Praying Viltrox and other CN 3rd parties to do the same on the lens mount, so those APS-C primes can be available for RF-S as well. (16/50mm f1.8, 23/27/33/56/75mm)

btw Meike 85mm f1.4 RF when???? Was that just fake news?

Dragon said:

Probably safer to say that SA uses Sigma's interpretation of EF protocol. The fact that they have had to update many EF mount lenses over the years to keep up with new bodies from Canon suggests that they didn't have a complete grasp of the protocol. The addition of the USB dock for the newer lenses makes the upgrades far less painful, but the updates are still around and likely will be for the foreseeable future.

Click to expand...

The core electronic communication is the same which surprised me. Canon was also the first manufacturer to use Ring Type USM and electronic focus rings on their new AF lenses. When Canon initially released Ring Type USM lenses they hadn't come up with a clutch override system yet. So all Ring Type USM lenses implemented electronic focus override. The same way an STM lens works and allows Full Time Manual Focus. The EF 300mm F/2.8L USM lens was the first lens to use Ring Type USM and have an electronic focus ring in 1987. Other lenses would also use this same electronic focus ring such as the EF 50mm F/1.0L USM lens and the original EF 85mm F/1.2L USM lens. Which was based off the 50mm F/1.0's design and the 85mm F/1.2 Mark also was based off the same design as its predecessor. Both the 85mm F/1.2 original & Mark II both utilize Ring Type USM & electronic focus rings.

YuengLinger said:

Did you just delete a new thread??? I wrote a reply that had nowhere to go!

Sounded like a Windows 11 problem in the "phantom" thread.

Try running sfc /scannow, and if that fails, DISM, which you can read about on legit Windows forums online.

Also, Windows 11 occasionally has mysterious corruption issues within a folder, so you could try starting fresh with a new folder that is not within the existing, problematic folder.


Good luck!

Click to expand...

I haven't delete anything.
Thank you for your advice. will try

jam05 said:

Yes, RED has been doing this for over.a decade. Still camera manufacturers simply get away with prducing another entire body to sell.

Click to expand...

The C700 has had a swappable sensor since its inception but we are supposed to take it to Canon.
You really can do it yourself but you would void the warranty and I doubt the owners of that type of camera ever would.

tq0cr5i said:

The scheduled firmware upgrade for Canon EOS R5 is in March 2024, according to Canon Hongkong Company Limited’s official website. The upgrade will add the support for the Power Zoom Adapter PZ-E2/E2B. May be version 1.9.x or 2.0.x.

View attachment 213343

Click to expand...

Nice find! If the rumours of the R5II announcement are correct, that would mean the R5 gets that firmware update after the announcement of its successor.

EricN said:

I hope you can get back there again and use the tree the way you wanted. The shots you did get are nice though.

Click to expand...

Thanks mate. I've been there so many times haha might be due for another drive out there.