bergstrom said:

Did no one post any reviews of this. The price is just too much, would buy an EF one and adaptor.

Click to expand...

I'd say the price was correct for the launch, given that the lens is still on backorder in major shops.

As to the performance, the lens is great when/if you can use DPP; I'm still waiting for Adobe to add the lens profile to ACR. A minor annoyance is the placement of the zoom ring, poorly suited for people with big hands.

greyhoundrick said:

Yes John, that is a great point!

Hard to beat B&H with the generous returns and Payboo discounts!

Thanks for the info!

Rick

Click to expand...

Hi Rick,

I would read their return policy very carefully. The B&H return policy states that

• All returned or exchanged items must be in new condition, in their original box, and must include all packing material, blank warranty cards, manuals, and all accessories.

If you use a camera for 2-3 weeks taking hundreds of photos that is not "new condition", but used.

Hi kten,
We didn't have long to wait. Haven't we?
Sirui announced an Indiegogo campaign for FF 50mm x1.6 squeeze T2.9 lens in RF, L, Z, & E mounts. If history is prologue, we'll soon have a 35, 24 and 75mm affordable anamorphic FULL FRAME RF lenses from them in the next few much months.

LogicExtremist said:

Hi all, I'm new here but a regular reader on this site. From the graphs the RF 100-400 looks to have a bit less contrast and sharpness than the EF 100-400 and RF 100-500, looks quite promising despite f/8 aperture.

Surprisingly, one thing that nobody has mentioned is the PMo (plastic-molded) aspherical lens element.

We've also recently seen the use of a molded plastic aspherical lens element in the RF 50mm f/1.8.

This seems like a strange trend in new Canon RF lenses, considering that PMo aspherical lens element were reserved for cheap kit lenses in the past. The next level of lenses used molded glass aspherical elements, with ground glass aspherical lens elements being the mainstay in L-series glass from what I can figure.

Scouring the internet, I can only find the following Canon lenses which utilise pMo aspherical elements:

1. Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS - one PMo (precision molded) aspherical element
2. Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM - one PMo (precision molded) aspherical element
3. Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM - one PMo (precision molded) aspherical element
4. Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM - two aspherical lens elements, one is a high-precision large-diameter PMo (Plastic-Molded) lens.
5. Canon EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM - three aspherical elements, one is glass-molded and the other two are precision molded,
6. RF 50mm f/1.8 STM - one precision molded optic (PMO) aspherical element
7. Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM - one precision molded optic (PMO) aspherical element

This lens looks so much like a full frame version of the EF-S 55-250mm IS STM, (which provides the crop equivalent of 88-400mm @ F9). Even though Canon was so miserly as to not even put a metal lens mount on that lens, its optics were really good, and from what I can ascertain, this lens had no PMo elements. This lens also had no sealing, so it wasn't dust proof and drip proof either.

From the Canon Camera Museum - https://global.canon/en/c-museum/special/exhibition1.html

Plastic-molded (PMo) aspherical lens elements

PMo aspherical lens elements are formed by injecting resin into an aspherical surface mold. Highly suitable for mass production, they play a major role in improving the image quality of entry-level lenses, such as the EF-S10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM (released in 2014), which need to be kept relatively affordable. Resin is injected into a high-precision mold that takes the shape of an aspherical lens. After the lens element is separated from the mold, coatings are added to finish the lens.

Trying to find the life expectancy of optical resins proved frustrating. I've yet to hear of an optical plastic as durable as glass., and I suspect that all plastics degrade over time, and won't have the life expectancy of molded or ground glass elements. I've had a Canon EF-S 10-18mm for many years, and the optics are still good. Perhaps only time will tell if or when these resins decrease in optical clarity as they age.

I'm not sure what this trend indicates. Is it cost cutting to increase profits, or is Canon cutting back on its construction of 'budget' lenses, even more so than in the past?

Looking forward to seeing how the RF 100-400mm compares against the EF 100-400mm II, RF 100-500mm and even the EF-S 55-250mm. Then we'll know what kind of image quality, construction and durability we're getting for our money ($649 USD, £699, 730 €, $1,200 AUD).

Click to expand...

Interesting point. Photo-oxidation is the major source of degradation of plastics. So, an f/8 lens with an internal plastic element that is not in use 24/7 should last a good few years.

Pixel said:

My EF 400 2.8 L IS II doesn't get near the FPS in mechanical shutter as my RF 28-70 f2L and the 400 isn't all that old. If you think all of your old EF lenses are going to work perfectly on the R3 you're delusional because it's physically impossible due to the lack of electrical contacts compared to the RF's.

Click to expand...

I would expect the EF 400mm f2.8 lenses to perform to the same high standards as they would on EF bodies when put on RF bodies. On the RF body I would expect a RF 400mm f2.8 lens to perform even better because it is designed to take advantage of the improvements inherent to the RF body.
In summary, it all depends on what you are comparing.

Sporgon said:

I looked the price of the Hahnel batteries up here in the UK and I was surprised to see that they are pretty close to the genuine Canon ones in price. For my 'work' cameras I've always used genuine Canon batteries.

Click to expand...

They were significantly cheaper than Canon ones when I bought them, but I've also changed to going Canon-only for batteries, so I haven't monitored the pricing.

Hobby said:

Want to buy the RF L for my RP, but always "sold-out" or "temporarily unavailable" in my store... and that is good for my wallet.
Perhaps one day, within one or two years or so, when I'll migrate to the R6. I have time. Waiting for some discounts...
(Lovely picture, by the way.)

Click to expand...

I bought my RF lens refurbished from the Canon store. $879.00 Have been amazed at how good the glass is for that price. Picked up the R6 on a promo from B&H for $2200.00 using PayBoo, so got the tax credited back.

entoman said:

Yes, *any* EF lens should work fine on RF mount cameras, using the Canon adaptor. At least, that’s the theory.

In practice, some will acquire focus as rapidly as Canon glass, but others will be slower and more hesitant, due to heavy elements and/or less efficient focus motors.

Tracking subjects across the frame, at a near-constant distance, should theoretically be as good as with Canon glass, as it is dependent on Canon’s tracking algorithms, rather than an ability to refocus. However, AF and tracking both utilise cross-talk between chips in the *lens* as well as the body, so third party lenses may not track quite as efficiently, especially when using eye-AF.

Click to expand...

that's always been the case.. likely due to reverse engineering.

however I use a sigma 150-600C just fine on the R5 for birding with the adapter.. and I use the sigma 30mm ART, 20mm ART, etc without any tracking issues. To be honest don't find it significantly slower than my RF 24-70 2.8L and that is one of the cringe worth prices.

I have been running a pretty long term timelapse on an EOS R that I have. It has been going for several months now, taking photos at 5min intervals. Here are a few things I've learned specific to such long term timelapses that might help other people doing long timelapses.

1) Don't rely on the camera's native timelapse feature for a few reasons.

I realized that when doing a really long timelapse, it's best to use an external intervalometer and join the photos into a timelapse after the fact with software. The internal feature is good for shorter timelapses, but there are some big drawbacks for long timelapses. First and most obvious, the number of frames is limited to 3600 in the camera. Second I have noticed that even though the camera has a feature where it can adjust exposure for each frame, I've realized that there seems to be a limit to how much the camera will adjust the exposure between each frame. It took me a while to realize this was causing my problems. If your frame rate is fairly quick, say every 45 seconds or so, this will not cause an issue with a transition from daytime to night if you are doing an outdoor scene. However, in my case, a frame rate of 1 frame every 5 minutes meant that the camera did not allow the exposure to adjust from daytime to nighttime smoothly. Obviously this isn't an issue when using an intervalometer since each and every frame will have the proper exposure adjustment. I'm not aware of any documentation that talks about this weird lag in timelapse mode to adjust the exposure from frame to frame, so it's worth noting.

Also, one set of fresh AAA batteries has been running my intervalometer timer for a few months now. I thought the intervalometer battery life might be an issue, but it hasn't been.

Using an intervalometer allows you to check settings and review photos between frames as well, which is nice for a very long term timelapse.

2) Turn off sensor cleaning completely.

Obviously I have been using the full electronic shutter so I don't put thousands of additional clicks on my camera, but one thing I learned is that you should probably turn off sensor cleaning as well. The only error I had when doing this timelapse was once when the camera suddenly popped up an error saying it could not complete sensor cleaning. I thought maybe the sensor cleaning mechanism was toast because it has been running every 5 minutes for months (each time the camera goes to sleep between frames) but actually it was just a one time fluke error. Once I powered the camera on and off, sensor cleaning started working again. But obviously the sensor cleaning routine is apparently a little bit of a weak spot for reliability since it errored out on me one time. I decided it's probably best just to disable sensor cleaning. Curiously, I discovered that you can't even set it to just clean the sensor at power off, because apparently the camera considers going to sleep as powering off, as it kept running the sensor cleaning when it went to sleep until I turned off the sensor cleaning completely.

3) Use a Canon genuine DR-E6 DC coupler to power the camera.

I learned this before, but third party knockoff DC couplers (dummy batteries) are recognized by the camera as a battery, not a true DC coupler, so eventually the camera will think it has depleted the "battery" and will shut off. The Canon genuine DR-E6 is recognized by the camera as a true hardwired power source, so the camera will run indefinitely on it as long as there is power. Do be aware though that you can run the DR-E6 from a third party AC to DC adapter, as long as it has the proper connector to plug into a DR-E6. And the DR-E6 uses a little bit of a weird connector, so not all third party AC adapters fit it.

Sporgon said:

Beautiful

Click to expand...

Thank you

I found a reply here:

joseph ferraro said:

Can I hope and hope that there might just be an updated RF 65mm lens like the MPE-65. From my handheld macro perspective IS isn't much of an issue or want, since at +1x or more I feel that it wouldn't have much effect. Anyone on here use the MPE-65 on a EOSr body?

Click to expand...

replying to myself for others. Using the mpe-65 on the r5 and absolutely love it.

AlanF said:

Just went out and tried the bare 100-500mm on the R5 and Saturn. Hand held at 1/250 and iso 3200. My first ever shot of Saturn.

View attachment 200358

Click to expand...

I have early access to an R3, so I mounted my bare RF 100-500 on it and took my own picture of Saturn.



That's what happens when you're stuck with a measly 24 MP.

Having mine fixed for €230. Yikes.

The in body dimension which affects focus is the flange to backplane dimension. I thought that mirrorless compensated for that. Of course, if the sensor is not parallel to the focal plane, there will always be a issue, and I'm not sure how a IBIS Unit affects focus but it definitely does.

Does your older notebook have a USB 2, 3, or 4) port? The older notebook may be USB 2 which accepts longer cables but slower speeds. The newer one might be USB 3.1 which is more sensitive to long cables but not as critical as the USB 3.2 or USB 4 version. Its very confusing. Those names like Superspeed confuse the issue. USB 3.2 and higher always use a USB C connector but now, USB 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1 can also have a USB C connector.

Typically (unless I shoot something that moves too fast, like BiF, or need precise manual focusing) I use tracking autofocus starting from preselected focus point. I move the focus point with joystick - or press the joystick to select the central AF point, then focus and recompose. As the AF is still tracking the selected object while I recompose, there is no problem with focal plane shift even at 14mm.

JohnC said:

Oh man. Lol. Don’t you just love autocorrect? Sorry.

Click to expand...

Autocorrect makes you say things you didn’t Nintendo.

landon said:

It's probably just concept.

Click to expand...

This is K8C camera，released on BIRTV2019 exhibition in china. contract order equiment.

docsmith said:

I am a hobbyist but understand there are those trying for or having to adhere to the highest standards. I also take any test trying to find a problem with a grain of salt. A quick panning motion, very long straight vertical line that over the entire frame is a torture test that may or may not affect your actual photography.

I am currently shooting the R5. I usually use some variation of a mechanical shutter, but here are two images shot the the electronic shutter only
537A5256 by kayaker72, on Flickr

537A8249 by kayaker72, on Flickr

So, even with the R5, electronic shutter is working for me. The R3 is even better. Until there is a global shutter, faster readouts only mean there are fewer instances where rolling shutter will be an issue. You'll have to judge when a camera has crossed the line for you.

Click to expand...

Yes I have had usable images in electronic mode also, but I can't trust it enough to capture the decisive moment without something looking unnatural (background or subject matter). When shooting sports you can't always predict when you might need to pan and follow an athlete - hence why I shoot all sports with the mechanical shutter.

If I were shooting just for myself it would be a different story.

Toglife_Anthony said:

I call BS on Canon's "the order have exceeded our expectations" nonsense. That was believable for the R5/R6 but this, it's marketing nonsense to get people to think the R3 is in crazy hot demand. Given everything else that's been blamed on the pandemic, to say the short supply is due to unexpected demand is laughable. And just to be clear in case it's not evident, this is just my opinion that I cannot back up with any hard data or facts. ;-)

Click to expand...

I would say you are half right. If demand for the R3 exceeded expectations, then Canon needs to take a serious look at whatever division is in charge of sales projections. If a multinational corporation like Canon can't accurately predict demand for new products, they are doing something wrong.

I would say you are wrong that "it's marketing nonsense to get people to think the R3 is in crazy hot demand."

Demand is likely to exceed supply because of pandemic related supply chain issues, but without Canon releasing more sales figures, we won't know what the demand actually is, but I suspect that the R3 is going to be in "crazy hot demand."

rontele7 said:

Sony gives users 1 stop faster, 100mm extra, for $1k less. Why can’t Canon compete?

Click to expand...

I suggest you not spend a penny. Instead, hire a tutor and learn the difference between 1/3 and 1. In the mean time, lock away the useless and uninformed snark.

One of the other YouTube videos that I’ve watched on the R3 they said that some where illuminated as well. I can’t remember who though, I’ve watched too many.

canonmike said:

Based on my past experience, as an EOS 3 film body user, where eye controlled focus worked great while wearing eyeglasses and, knowing the tech is surely better on the R3, I would bet it will work well for you and you will thoroughly enjoy the experience.

Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing your feedback.

shawn said:

Here's my thoughts on the EL-1 flash head. Yes it is very, very good. But 170 flashes in a row as the limit? It's not entirely beyond the realm of possibility to hit that, not at all. I find that limit to be semi-professional at best. So I have to agree with you on this flash, it is overpriced for what is on offer

Click to expand...

I actually took the plunge and bought one. Maybe in the future I'll be kicking myself for not waiting for price to go down, but I have to say the flash has so far impressed me in an event- shooting capacity. I can say without any exaggeration that it easily out performs the 430s and 600s as far as how long I can shoot, and how rapidly. It easily keeps up with 12 fps over and over again. I've had 430s and 600s stop flashing from rapid fire shooting numerous times, but this EL-1 just doesn't stop! Plus, only one battery charge for the entire evening and I was still showing 4 bars on the battery meter.