Aussie shooter said:

It definitely varies depending on the lens. With my 70-200 2.8(ef) it is top to bottom but not quite all the way from side to side. With my sigma 150-600 5.6-6.3 it is less in both directions. I would assume you get 100% with a 1.2 lens or something like it.

Click to expand...

I guess so. Before the forum was reset, jprusa hat a quote from Canon here that said only select RF and EF lenses had 100 % coverage.

I guess that means the OP's 24-105 4.0L is not one of those select ones either.

4K resolutiion/8MP or 4MP version would be awesome as a surveillance camera.

I really liked your photo, well done! But the grass is too bright, the colors of green seem a little unreal. What camera did you use? I'm just interested

[email protected] said:

Thank you. I will try that. That is what I think is going on, but will test and compare. Thanks again.

Click to expand...

Yup. You were right. All I need to do, if outdoors, is turn on the camera 30-60 seconds before shooting, and it learns where it is. Thanks again.

privatebydesign said:

The 14-24 f2.8 and 15-35 f2.8 are both unltra-wide zooms, you said there weren’t any new fast ultra-wide zooms, that is factually incorrect. That 14mm might not be wide enough for you wasn’t a comment I was replying to, you even mentioned the Sigma 14-24 f2.8!

Click to expand...

Oh, I didn't bother repeating the "wider than 14mm", like the one this thread is about, yet again? Sorry...

All better than I can do.

Great shots

Joules said:

Good to see them communicating and expressing a sentiment of empathy and taken the issue seriously.

Though it comes as another entry in a lasting series of unfortunate events that weigh on the spirit.

I wonder whether all of it will amount to Canon not just delaying products but eventually compromise them to adjust to the new world.

Click to expand...

The situation is just so sad and upsetting. In addition to the tragic debilitation of physical health and even death, peoples livelihoods have been destroyed and there are terrible problems of mental health. Some of us here who are retired or can work from home are lucky that we have an interesting hobby to keep us occupied and sane.

privatebydesign said:

Like joules says, maybe I am wrong. 100% Thunderbolt (which your computer has) supports HDMI into the laptop, but if that allows your laptop screen to effectively become a dumb screen I couldn’t say.

Click to expand...

Thunderbolt 1-3 allow DisplayPort data on the bus, not HDMI. USB-C has an 'HDMI alt-mode', which allows HDMI data on the bus. If you have thunderbolt 3 ports, you can get both DP and HDMI alt-modes. As for supporting either of those into a Mac, that was only supported on iMacs and stopped being supported after apple moved to Thunderbolt2 on those machines (somewhere before 2015). Since my work laptop is faster than my personal iMac, I was a bit miffed to discover I couldn't use the iMac in screen mode, which my old one did support.

Back to the OPs question: I'm using a 'Camlink 4k' from Elgata/Corsair, which works quite well for capturing the HDMI output of the camera. Since it shows up as a proper video input, it "just works". You could alsp use the Canon Webcam thing or EOS Utility if you don't need it to be a proper video input.

Canon Rumors Guy said:

Continue reading...

Click to expand...

My primary concerns are IQ, DR, Focus and color.
Could care less about Video.
Convince me an EVF can equal an OVF for pro and Olympic Sports.
Fuji and Hasselblad have superior color Canon needs to step it up.
It has to be at least 45MP's.
Dual same media.
Have bags of batteries and cards, Think of those who own 1DX 1DXII and 1DXIII.
If current kits are EF glass consisting of 35 50 24-70 70-200 300 400 200-400 and 3 Bodies. If Canon can't meet the specs we asked for, then we are not replacing the above mentioned kits.

Happy to spend budget that makes our agency better positioned.

Try it, see if the AF is affected. From what I read, it should be OK. They are certainly not common any longer. I may have a few for my old manual focus film cameras. I've dozens of old filters.

This is 400mm @ 1/500 and f/5.6. Yes, I know it could be better. Working on it. Probably should of went down to 6.3.

I think I focused wide open on the 1" mark, so the nearest point in the picture is not at the closest focusing distance. When you get in that range, the focusing ring changes magnification more than anything else. That's the reason you want to use a rail for focus stacking rather than changing the focus ring.

EOS 4 Life said:

Blurr can be beautiful if you adjust your shutter speed.

Click to expand...

I am watching NHL highlights now on YT. It's still 60fps "only" but it really looks promising.

I mean if i hold down a button on my camera, the flash keep flashing short strobes of light, so i can use this to position my flash more ease when using a grid.

Czardoom said:

Considering the vast majority of mirrorless cameras have no sensor screen, and the dust removal systems are there and seem to work well, maybe you shouldn't worry. Now, it is true that Dustin Abbot and others have mentioned that they need to clean their Sony sensors of dust frequently, but I haven't heard many (if any) complaints from Canon RP or M system users that dust on their sensors is an issue. That's just my opinion, of course. If you are having dust issues, then that's another matter. [..]

Click to expand...

Since I do mostly macro, I'm usually at f/11 which makes dirt very visible both due to the small aperture as well as the smooth backgrounds. I had a lot of dirt on my RP sensor in the first few weeks of using it. The spots went almost completely away after I started using the filter EF-RF adapter with a clear or polarizing filter. The remaining 'dust' that showed up after that didn't go away with a brush, I now suspect it's something like oil spatter from the shutter mechanism.

My R5 sensor is still suspiciously clean after almost 5 months or use, which is good, since I really don't want to touch it myself, I have no idea how much wet cleaning the IBIS cradle can endure.

LOL...well, those "kooky" Californians are pretty much the outliers on most any measurable metric....

They're certainly not the litmus test for any normal behaviors or trends across the USA.


cayenne
[/QUOTE]
sounds a little political there. If so, it's a shame they're not the "normal" behavior.

300mm f/2.8 - I simply cannot believe its not in their planned lineup. Also maybe a great 400mm L f/5.6. The old was was quite good, but it started showing its age.

Canon has had issues with the refurb store taking backorders for refurbished products. They ignore those items, it was created in error and their store has no process to ever fill them. You can call Canon and confirm that, I did after months of waiting for a back ordered EF-RF refurb adapter.

If that happened to me i would die inside

Half macro using the RF 35mm f/1.8. I was playing around in DPP4 and found the brush tool. Had some fun with an image I took this summer while strawberry picking (over 40 lbs, with some still in the freezer). It’s a dated trend, but I had never tried it before.

tron said:

Canon is doomed

Click to expand...

Of course it's doomed, just like F=ma, PV=nRT, and you can't bust the speed of light in a vacuum!

The S10e is the last Samsung Galaxy S I've bought.

Main problem is their screens are too big. I want a phone that fits in my shirt pocket, and that means under 5.5". The phones are also too thin for a 3.5mm audio jack, but they'll make a hump for the cameras.

Then there's an annoying feature game. Every model has several sub-models with varying features, e.g. the S20's support of 5G varies from none to all bands, and FM radio is available in US models only.

If anyone can recommend a smartphone with 5" screen and 5G support, I'm game.

Lenstip got an early version and have just posted a rave review. It's a spectacular lens.

He doesn't mention it in the review, but the RF version has considerably more contrast to my eye.

"Possibility" of making RF lenses, but our manufacturing and R&D is already at capacity ... To me, that doesn't sound encouraging for Sigma lenses for the RF mount any time too soon. Disappointing.