Click said:

Thanks for sharing.

Click to expand...

+ 1

I have this lens but have not used it much. It is a basic lens intended for vloggers.
But I like it, is wide, small and inexpensive.

neuroanatomist said:

View attachment 208416

Click to expand...

The reviews say that the Leica Monocrom has an extra stop of DR and noticeably better tonality than a mono-converted image, so presumably the same applies to the Pentax?

When I shoot mono, I just convert from colour in LR, but if I was a pure mono shooter, I'd consider a pure mono camera. Partly because of the apparently better tonality and DR, but also because psychologically it probably makes you "think in mono", in a way that you tend not to, when using a normal colour camera.

I actually admire Pentax in a way for sticking with DSLRs, just as I admire Leica for their rangefinder cameras, or Fujifilm for their retro-styled cameras (I also love old motorcycles, as much as modern superbikes). I think it's great that these old "formats" are kept alive, with their image quality and usability improved to modern standards.

So I say good luck to Pentax, and I think they have a good future, but they need to learn that if they are going to be a niche product, they also need to move more upmarket in terms of cosmetic finish (they look a bit to plasticky to me).

AlanF said:

It says there:
View attachment 208445

and as it weighs 3.25 kg/7.15 lb, I will certainly request assistance to carry and lift it.

Click to expand...

My Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 Sport weighs about the same.
On the other hand, it is lighter on the pocket.

If it is purely video, an m2 mac mini will handle any canon footage you throw at it. If you need to use things like denoising in davinci resolve, a pc is likely faster. But at a much higher price.

Am I the only one who can hear @ahsanford screaming that it costs $4800 and still doesn't have IS?

Matsaly said:

Thanks for your input. I'm working through the various "customization" settings. I have the AF-ON button set to "Eye Detection AF". Is this the same as what you call "SERVO eye AF"?

Click to expand...

Not quite, because that will still require you to toggle between AF Servo On or Off.

I don’t have my camera on me right now, but you have the ability to setup a button to a specific set of focus settings (not the first option of the list), then if you press (I think) INFO you can customise what specific settings, so I set it up to L Tracking with Servo AF

I leave my camera on one shot AF, and spot AF all the time, and my AF-ON button is working at its default settings, I just customised the * button to a specific set of autofocus parameters

I think @Aussie shooter did mostly the same, but he swapped left and right, so his * button is probably set to the first autofocus option of the list.

Then, on the Autofocus settings menu, you also have the ability to choose the autofocus point where the camera will start looking for faces and eyes, and I chose the location of the spot AF. That way, I can point my camera at a subject on spot AF, engage continuous eye AF for that subject, and then recompose while maintaining focus.

steen-ag said:

Save all you setting on the memorycard and then transfer the file til you PC. If you reset the camera yot can load the saved file to your camera.

Click to expand...

You can’t do that on a R6, unfortunately

Opticallimits is an excellent review site, making careful assessments based on measurement rather than histrionics. It seems it's a struggle to keep going financially, and so they now have a deal with Patreon whereby you pay a $ a month to become a patron to get earlier access to their reviews. Here is what they write (the problem is that they do only a review a fortnight on average, and it's ones that appeal to a more sophisticated audience):

"Operating a review website costs money. In the glorious days, advertising covered all needed, but the ad revenue has decreased by 80% since 2013. Today, opticallimts.com is more driven by passion rather than earning money. Yet this doesn't change the fact that there are costs for running the webservers, cameras, rental gear and required testing equipment. As we all know, some popular review websites went already under the bus - dpreview, imagine resources ... - so if you like to keep us alive and kicking, please consider joining our Patreon page. Since this can only be a side job, and the testing simply takes quite a while, we can't guarantee to entertain you every week. It is our goal to process about 20-30 lenses per year. We'll provide early access to review charts, and sample images."

I wish them success and might join to keep them going.

Sony Semiconductor has announced new CMOS image senors. There is a new rolling shutter 44 full-frame sensor, as well as a new 61mp full-frame sensor. Sony IMX366AJK Description The IMX366AJK is a diagonal 43.3 mm (Type 2.7) CMOS active pixel type image sensor with a square pixel array and 44.72 M effective pixels. This sensor

See full article...

I'm curious...but not curious enough to sign up.

There have been rumors, but no one knows for sure. Both the 300/2.8 and 500/4 are (over)due for a refresh.

HeavyPiper said:

I'm finding that all my EF lens seem sharper than what I experienced with my 6D Mark II. Those lens mounted on my R5 just blew me away the fist time viewing them in Lightroom.

Click to expand...

I’ve found the same thing, though I only have the RP compared with my 5DS cameras. Assuming your lenses are precisely AFMAed I find it’s the mechanical shutter of the dslr, not inaccuracies in focus.
When I get a new lens the first thing I do is set up on a studio tripod, shoot a test in LV, then shoot using PDAF. But I have to first let the camera focus, then switch AF off on the lens, then go into LV and take the shot. This is to get a genuine comparison between LV and PDAF. If I just go ahead and shoot having focused through the viewfinder (PDAF) the image is always softer than LV, which can then make me think the focus is off, when in fact it isn’t, it’s just the shutter action.
Using this method has really enabled me to nail AFMA and I’m happy to the point I’m not really driven to mirrorless for the better AF.

Sounds like the missing guy was not photographed.

dolina said:

I have some news for you Jan.

Today BHPhoto has sold its last Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM & declared it as discontinued.

Prior to this they have declared these other 28-300mm as "No Longer Available"

- Nikon
- Sigma
- Tamron

Sony's 12yo E mount that has the largest mirrorlless lens lineup does not have that lens. The closest being the 24-240mm just like Canon.

Before 2030 I am certain that Canon will create a RF L lens equivalent of it.

Click to expand...

Dolina,
I hope that you are right.
Currently I mostly use the 24-240 RF. One failed after a year and Canon replaced it under warranty.
Sorry for my very delayed response. I never received notification of your reply. I just stumbled upon it now.
Jan

PinholeR5 said:

So how do you like the 100-500mm? I have that lens, and it is fantastic. Light and a great focal length range. Sharpness, AF speed and MFD are exceptional. The aperture range... not so much, but these days you can manage the smaller aperture and higher ISOs.

I love mine! Lately, I've been using it quite a bit with the R7.

All that said, constant f/4 for 200-500mm with built-in 1.4x TC??? Yeah, that is in a totally different league!

Click to expand...

@PinholeR5,
Very sorry for missing your reply. I love it. The 100~500mm is so sharp. My initial reluctance was only being able to use it with a TC at 300-500mm, but the lens itself is awesome. Its so much lighter than my Sigma 150-600c.

I think I'm set. RF100-400 for lightweight travel, and the 100-500 when nothing but the best will do.

I have been an R6 user ever since it was realeased. Before that I used a 1D-X. Although I have been mostly satisfied with the R6 in terms of image quality, I noticed immediately right after the switch that R6 handles color noise just differently. It is hard to describe, but I have the notion that it produces much more color noise, especially at higher isos. I'm a wildlife photographer and I tend to see a lot of weird purple colors, sometimes greens in the out-of-focus, otherwise diffuse background, which is really bothering me until this day. I never had anything like this with the 1D-X.

Anyone else noticed this?
Thanks for your input.

Regards,
Adam

Doormat said:

The fact canon has refused other manufacturers the license to build compatible R lenses thus denying every R user the option of seeking (sometimes better) alternatives says much.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure this has been pointed out to you already, but Canon has done no such thing as far as ANYONE KNOWS. So, you don't know. From the latest comments from Canon, they are and will look at 3rd party opportunities on a case by case basis. Hasn't happened yet - Yup. All that has actually happened is that Canon stopped those infringing on their AF patents. We know nothing about licensing negotiations. We don't know anything about anyone who may try to reverse engineer. In the end, you may end up being absolutely correct. In the end Canon may refuse to negotiate license agreements. But right now, all you are doing is spreading misinformation. And you're right, it does say much. About how people will bend the facts to suit their agenda. Your agenda is obvious, What is not so obvious is, if you are so against Canon, why not switch brands? Nikon makes excellent cameras and lenses and has negotiated agreements with Tamron and apparently also Sigma for their Z mount. I tried NIkon a couple years ago and was very impressed. I highly recommend their new Z cameras and lenses.

These type of manufacturers pop up everywhere. In additional to cost, performance and reliability, the important question is will they be here tomorrow? If they are readily available to you, give them a try. I am all for supporting the underdog as long as I won't be left without recourse if things do not work out.

I looked at their warranty policy. It states coverage during the "warranty period", but it doesn't state what that period is? Amazon states 3 yr.

Write speed is slightly less than AngelBird, ProGrade and SanDisk. Varied based on where I looked. But this won't matter for a stills shooter.

Looks like 20 yrs in business. 4 subsidiaries, an HQ and 1 factory world wide.

There US office is about 30 min from San Francisco.



Its certainly got a low price.

Michael Clark said:

The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS was the only constant aperture EF-S zoom lens. All of the rest were fairly slow variable aperture zoom lenses.

The EF-S 60mm Macro and EF-S 24mm pancake were two of the only three EF-S prime lenses. The EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS was the other.

None of those primes had apertures wider than f/2.8.

The number of constant aperture EF-S zoom lenses and EF-S prime lenses can be counted on one hand, and you don't even have to use your thumb to do it.

There were ZERO EF-S lenses with an aperture larger than f/2.8. None. Nada, Zilch.

Click to expand...

I don't even need a 2.8 zoom in RF-S. Just give me a sharp 15-50 F4 IS with a bit better build quality. And a 22mm pancake prime + a wideangle zoom. The rest can be covered by the RF/EF lenses. But i think i will go Fuji for a small travel APS-C system instead.

scottkinfw said:

OK. So I have read comments regarding the new EOS R5 Firmware Update, Version 1.7.0 [macOS] and the firmware for the R5. I downloaded it. I don't see any real. benefit, at least for me.

Anyone and e everyone who has downloaded the update, please share with all of us your experience with the download. Is it significant/worth it? Pls. share your thoughts as well as your pics. Or is this just a meh update?

Thanks.
Scott

Click to expand...

That's not the new update for the R5.

1.7.0 was released in November 2022.

The new update is 1.8.1

I just did my last free cleaning service on my 5D4.
CPS Germany was as reliable as ever:

• Sat I brought the package to UPS
• Mo morning I received the first note that the 5D4 had arrived
• Tue morning I got the note that cleaning was done
• A moment ago, UPS delivered the parcel

All without "priority" label. And shipping was included.

I will miss CPS service.

neuroanatomist said:

JPGs can turn out fine, but RAW gives more flexibility in adjusting exposure, reducing noise, and changing white balance. Those are simple facts.

Everyone has different standards and different uses for photos. White balance is a good example. Modern cameras do a pretty good job with AWB, but some scenes aren't handled well. Some people don't care all that much about WB, because the human brain does a good job of seeing something that should be white as being white.

Yes, sports shooters shoot JPG, but that's due to the urgency of getting the images posted. Many sports photos are not technically great – there is high noise, highlights are blown, green grass isn't very green, player's feet are cut off, etc. Those 'problems' are secondary to the content, so they are tolerated. A portrait or landscape image that is noisy, with blown highlights, off colors and bad cropping would not be tolerated.

Click to expand...

OK people, I never said anything that implies that RAW does not give more flexibility. Not a word. But I guess talking JPG strikes a nerve with the photo "experts." Yes, you can do MORE adjustments on a RAW file, yes the RAW files are more flexible. But that does not mean you can't adjust exposure on a non-RAW file. You can reduce noise almost completely with Topaz denoise - on non-RAW files (my version of Topaze denoise works far betterr on non-RAW files) white balance, yes can adjust on non-RAW files. People are saying that these 400 MP files are essentially unusable BECAUSE they are JPGs. My opinion is that is silly because you can edit non-RAW files considerably. Not as much as RAW. But certainly you can edit JPGs well enough to create sellable, publishable photos.

WARNING for everyone out there. Do not use 1.4x or 2x Canon extenders with the Dandelion chip. The extra two pins drop over the edge of the chip and lock the lens and extender together. There is no way of separating them without damage. I know, to my cost! I have now overcome the problem by gluing a piece of plastic on for the extra pins to sit on. The Chinese Pixco type chips do not have this issue. 1st image shows the damaged chip. 2nd image shows the piece of plastic fitted.

neuroanatomist said:

Let's see... Today is April 3rd. A couple of days ago would be, hmmmm, think, think, think...what's 3 minus 2? Hmmm. I've got it – one! That would make a couple of days ago, wait for it...waaiiiiittttt for it......... April 1st.

If you're in the market for new headwear, here are some options to consider:

View attachment 208267

Click to expand...

yep.. thought it odd.. realized shortly after what it was. Post that day it really should have an upfront warning. oh well

woodman411 said:

I had the Sigma 50 f/1.4 Art and didn't like the bokeh, which is why paid up for the Canon 50 f/1.2 RF, to each their own since this is subjective, but yes, hard to find good bokeh especially with foliage background. My favorite was the Zeiss Milvus 50 f/1.4 (made by Cosina Japan), loved almost everything about it including the bokeh, but couldn't live with the manual focus.

Click to expand...

[Sorry for the Off Topic].
You're certainly right.
But my previous 50mm were the EF 50mm 1.8 STM and the RF 50mm 1.8 STM, and I consider the bokeh from the Sigma much better.
Of course there's room for improvement, but my budget is limited.
My 2023 improvement has been the replacement of the EF 100-400 II with the RF 100-500.
My 2024 improvement could be the upgrade from the nice RF 16mm 2.8 STM to the RF 14-35mm IS L.