tls said:

You didn't mention it, but I consider that almost Moiré-like noise pattern as more distracting and image damaging than that greenish color cast. For this the culrprit is Lightroom's Lens Correction or more precisely it's Distortion Slider. I doubt this will also affect your color cast, but it's worth a try.

Have you tried the White Balance Tint Slider to at least weaken the greenish hue?

Click to expand...

OK, I will look at the base CR3 without lens correction for any difference in noise when I disable lens correction in my LR import. I have set that as default...

Thanks.

jeffa4444 said:

Sigma is rounding out its f1.4 Art lenses with a 14mm f1.4 the worlds fastest 14mm. Canon has so far not produced any RF f1.4L lenses unlike the EF series and we are denied lenses like the Sigma Art series. A huge hole still in Canon RF line up that after six years of RF glass is unacceptable.

Click to expand...

RF mount was announced in September 2018, so almost 5 years ago, not 6. And there is only a hole in the RF lineup if one chooses to ignore that EF lenses with f/1.4 apertures are for sale today that will work perfectly well on the RF mount.

In Manual

Gloads said:

I want the best combination of image quality, fo, especially when considering a high res version of the R5 on the horizon.

Click to expand...

I know what you meant but I can't help but chuckle at this (for some of us, the R5 is high res!).

I am still waiting patiently for this rumer to come true.
I am using basically three lenses on my R5: RF 24-105 mm, RF 15-35 mm, and RF 100-500. The 24-105 stays on my camera body most of the time. I recently dropped the camera with the 24-105 attached at the front, the result was not a totally disaster, the lens is still working but I can feel the lens needs serious repair job. My options will be (1) use my EF to RF adapter and my old EF 24-105, or, (2) get a new RF 24-105. So if the f/2.8L is coming out, I will like to get make my option #3.

neuroanatomist said:

The hood for the RF 28/2.8? I almost always buy the hood for non-L lenses, the exceptions are lenses like the EF 40/2.8 and M22/2. I skip the clear filter for those lenses as well. The flat, screw-on hoods do not seem like they'd be very effective at reducing flare and they don't offer significant protection, either. What the clear filter and/or hood do accomplish is to increase the thickness of what is supposed to be a thin lens. I will be ordering the RF 28/2.8 at some point, but I don't plan on getting the hood. I didn't preorder because I'll be away when it starts shipping, and for this lens I don't think there will be a backorder situation after it launches.

Click to expand...

Pretty much the same here, I don’t plan on getting the hood, I never use one on the 22/2.

shadowsports said:

Had you experienced the "freezing behavior" reported by some users? Does 1.8.2 appear to resolve it?

Click to expand...

I don't think I have, I haven't experienced freezings since...1.5.2, I think. It's been a long time.

InchMetric said:

Happy ending: After a second call, Canon agreed to reimburse for the repair and has refunded.

Click to expand...

It still amazes me that companies want to have it both ways: have the customer to the upgrade and charge to clean up after their product shits itself. If your product can self-destruct, don't let customers perform that action or void the warranty. Not some limbo in between where they prey on the timid.

Well so far so good. Crappy weather here so not a lot of usage but I really like it so far.

SwissFrank said:

What's DLA?

Click to expand...

Sorry for the late reply!
DLA = diffraction limited aperture

To support Neuros EF protocol theory: It is with the current firmware impossible to use the focus ring for anything else than to focus. Had hoped that the lens behaves simmilar to Canons RF lenses but sadly no..

I have the Laowa 58 and 90mm macros and they are quite nice. I would like this 28mm f/1.2 for astro, but the Argus lenses have so far been very soft wide open and also show coma. I'll await independent testing, with low expectations.

Since this was necrothreaded, I’ll point out that the EXIF is accurate.

Click to expand...

You are right I'm wrong, I was living in my own Micro Cosmos where the crop factor of the R7 worked for my mind as the equalizer back to 200mm but of course that does not affect EXIF

Nay

puffo25 said:

In conclusion, which option do you think is better for me?

Click to expand...

As @Michael Clark says, only you can decide what’s better for you. There’s very little to distinguish among L-series lenses and even many non-L lenses in terms of image quality at typical outputs today. If you share digital images or print smaller than A2 (~16x24”) then the lens-based IQ is likely irrelevant. For example, at 24mm, you’d be hard-pressed to see a difference between the RF 24-70/2.8L, RF 24-105/4L and RF 24/1.8 STM.

Given that, I’d suggest that you base decisions on lens parameters other than IQ, which mainly leaves zoom range and max aperture. There are certainly times when one stop matters, such as indoor events. That’s why I just bought a 100-300/2.8. But personally, I don’t typically run into that while traveling.

For example, on my upcoming summer family trip, my walkaround kit will be the R8, RF 14-35/4L, RF 24-105/4L, and RF 24/1.8 (the fast prime for inside museums, because whereas 1 stop doesn’t really matter, 3 stops does). I’ll also bring the TS-E 17/4 and probably the RF 100-400 non-L along with a tripod, for going out solo at golden/blue hour.

The Shure VP83F LensHopper merges all the functionality of the VP83 camera-mount shotgun mic with a self-contained recorder and a dedicated headphone jack. $299

Hey cheers for the reply Sporgon
Tbh I’ve never really used it, always dismissed it as a point and shoot and not worthy of carrying thus opting for the more serious stuff….AKA aps-c/ff DSLR’s!!

However I took another look at it recently and WOW!! totally surprised me. I’m actually using it like a 80’s film compact with the rear lcd switched off and opting for the very (very) basic OVF to compose…all I have is a green light to say the camera has focused on something just like the 80’s!!
I quite like not knowing what I’m getting tbh and being pleasantly surprised at the outcome. Yes, some shots are totally off the mark, but by and large the little G16 is great.
For some reason I’ve become jaded recently by the whole “everything must be perfect” photography mindset - I’m liking this mystery carefree approach….particularly shooting from the hip at 28mm
I’ve got some fabulous candids of friends and family that I otherwise would never get.
I might just take this on holiday and leave to chance what the G16 captures.
The upside is that the battery seems to last forever without the rear screen on.

They just dropped the price on the R6. Cheap. I know you didnt list this camera, but I bet that you will be shocked. These cameras are just pretty damn impressive all the way around. At the price, you are not going to go wrong. The systems are different and going to take you a bit to get used to, so having the camera and learning it will help you when the R5-2 is released.

ata bora said:

https://canon.jp/support/software/os/select/cdc/eosr7-v131-win working,

Click to expand...

Thanks for the link, I tend to avoid the main Japanese site and instead download from Canon Singapore (I find the English translation is better) if I want to be on the cutting edge of the release window.

We are spoiled for choice on where to download Canon's files.

I simply found it amusing that I got an email notification to download a new firmware that is not yet posted on the Canada site.

Cheers

Chiphadzuwa said:

It would be lovely to see an R3 II with a 45 MB sensor, wouldn't it?

Click to expand...

I predict it will be closer to 30 MP.
The Z 8 kind of makes it look like it was a bad idea for Canon to not release a camera in the 45 MP range with a stacked sensor ahead of the R1.
I do not see Canon having a 45 MP camera in the $4K USD price range that also has a stacked sensor for quite some time.
Sony could always drop the price of the a1.
I do not think they will though with the a9 III coming.
I also predict that the a9 III will be 33 MP and around $4,500-$5K USD.

Generally speaking, i hope dat Canon will release (or allow from third parties) lenses with a better quality than the current consumer lenses. I have read tests about these RF lenses and they present good pictures after post processing in body or computer software. Some recent third party lenses are good en require less post work on a computer. There are, of course, the L lenses. But, you need deep pockets to buy them. So, affordable, good quality lenses please for RF as well as RFs in between the consumer class and the L class.

[email protected] said:

BUT the resale value of those isn't going to go down as much

Click to expand...

I also got mine at Adorama's half-price sale. I can't remember the exact figures but it might have been US$549 even though it was normally $1100 or something. In Tokyo it was I think around US$900 or something.

My copy doesn't seem to be super-sharp but it does seem to have zero coma. My old EF35/1.4 MkI had coma from hell, and as I had just gotten a Leica M6 I got the 35/1.4ASPH and sold the Canon. Looking at this old photo--what camera did I take it with, must have been the EOS-3?? I'm surprised to see the rub marks on the EF35. I must have used it more than I recall. (Or maybe I bought it used?? but within a few months of going on sale??)

[email protected] said:

My wife edits a wildlife magazine, and usually travels with the 100-500 along with the 100 L macro (ef). Over time, she's pretty much stopped taking out the macro, except when she needs actual 1:1 reproduction ratio. The big zoom really does it all. Coupled with the R5, she can crop most times to get effectively macro shots. She notices no image quality issues between the two, except for less control over subject movement for things like flowers in light wind, where she can hold the stem while using the 100.

For my part, I just find it delicious that she's wandering around with multiple lenses. She used to make fun of me for that.

I use the RF 100 macro, and the additional reproduction ratio can be useful on the smallest of subjects, but is difficult to achieve reliable focus and focus stack sets while running and gunning at those extreme magnifications. I have to use artificial light to freeze things, and that's a step too far for her. Like her, I usually just take the 100-500 and take advantage of the opportunities presented with later cropping.

Click to expand...

I got the RF 100-500mm for use on the R5 as soon as it came out and for insects and birds. As far as I am concerned for my purposes, it does everything I want, and I grab that combo or the R7/RF 100-400, apart from BIF where the R5 is much better. The versatility of that that lens is such a plus combined with its sharpness and speedy AF, it made my 400mm DO II (and Nikon 500mm f/5.6 PF) redundant.

neuroanatomist said:

Odd. I’ve been using the Canon RT system for over a decade, never had any issues with the link dropping. I have four 600 flashes, started with the ST-E3 and now use the ST-E10 though I frequently trigger with an 600 on-camera.

Indoors, outdoors, home and public venues, never an issue. In terms of interference, my home Wi-Fi network has dozens of devices on it, with many on the 2.4 GHz band including streaming security cameras.

I wonder if these issues represent a hardware problem.

Click to expand...

In other forums, many photographers have reported the same problem. Some have apparently sent their trigger/flashes to Canon for "repair" but only to continue to have the same problem, so a "hardware problem" seems unlikely.

kaihp said:

I pulled out the R3 and compared it to the image. There are several minor details on the body in the image that doesn't look like the R3. The "pentaprism box" is flatter, the shadow around the vertical grip, and that small rectangular "box" on the top side near the shutter button.

Click to expand...

C…90?