Ah, I didn't see CR had posted about this... sorry, can't delete this thread anymore...

A wide angle(zoom or prime), a standard zoom(24-70 or 24-105) and a short tele zoom(70-200). After that everything else becomes a specific tool(essential to a certain photographer and job but not an essential allrounder). there is a good reason the holy trinity is the holy trinity

SteveC said:

Perhaps I should nab one of their water-resistant point-and-shoots soon.

Click to expand...

You should - they got it right with TG5 and 6.

I believe there’s always conversations between Canon and photographers to understand what market needs and want. Or else there won’t be so many fantastic products from Canon.

Guys, I´m new here. There is any news about a new C200? I´m thinking about buying one, but It´s a camera that has been released a few years ago...

Because the topic is similar I repeat here , what I wrote in this thread:

Maximilian said:

xps said:

...
So, believe in [...] score - or not.
...

Click to expand...

I believe in a tool, that I have in my hand and that I can use.
I believe in the output, that results in my skills to use this tool and in creativity.

If you take a closer look at such numerical "scores" you might find that they differ by less than 5%. Sometimes maybe more.
If you then compare this with your own eyes, you might be not able to see this 5% in test chart comparisons.
If you then think about how much % is left in your skills, creativity and patience to improve your output, maybe you come to the same conclusion as I did:
"It's me! It's me that can improve the image quality much more than some new gear."
And:
"Even if that piece of gear is 5 to 10% better, I still have to have the ability to squeeze that out of that better tool!"


So forget about charts and scores, go out enjoy the gear that you have and the pics you take with it, and if you feel limited by it and have the money, spend it...

Click to expand...

xps said:

...
So, believe in [...] score - or not.
...

Click to expand...

I believe in a tool, that I have in my hand and that I can use.
I believe in the output, that results in my skills to use this tool and in creativity.

If you take a closer look at such numerical "scores" you might find that they differ by less than 5%. Sometimes maybe more.
If you then compare this with your own eyes, you might be not able to see this 5% in test chart comparisons.
If you then think about how much % is left in your skills, creativity and patience to improve your output, maybe you come to the same conclusion as I did:
"It's me! It's me that can improve the image quality much more than some new gear."
And:
"Even if that piece of gear is 5 to 10% better, I still have to have the ability to squeeze that out of that better tool!"


So forget about charts and scores, go out enjoy the gear that you have and the pics you take with it, and if you feel limited by it and have the money, spend it...

Architect1776 said:

Interesting, this has to be oriented to cameras like the R5 with 8K video I am guessing.
I generally download my photos after a shooting session (Walk in the yard, short day trip or the beach etc.) I just would not trust keeping a months worth of photos and more on the card and something get screwed up on my part, the camera or the card and lose it all.
In fact on vacations I carry several cards and sometimes change them out more than once in a day as I visit several sites for the same reason then download at night.
Might seem silly to some but mistakes happen.

Click to expand...

Not silly at all! I just do something different. I take backups in portable devices daily and continue keeping the photos on the card. So on my vacation I have 2 copies. When I come back I copy them again to disk(s) and then I am free to format the card(s).

I know that this is comparing the RF 28-70/2 vs 24-70/2.8, but I find 70mm to be often too short for my photography with a mid-range zoom. Fully one third of the photos taken with my EF 24-105/4 were at focal lengths greater than 70mm. Even for my event work, I would rather have the longer reach than the wider aperture.

jolyonralph said:

I can get a Lexar 128GB SDHX card UHS-II 250MB/s for £41GBP - yes slower than the Extreme Pro, but vastly more affordable than the CF Express card.

Click to expand...

I'll only compare like for like on the same brand. And 250MB/s is less than 300MB/s and a lot less than 1700MB/s.

the question for me is whether to buy cards for the R5 in advance as they are on special until the end of June in Australia (end of financial year).
The list of qualified cards for the R5 is clearly not available yet but it seems unlikely that the USH-II cards with 300mb/s will not be included ie Sandisk extreme pro and Sony tough. They seem to be the fastest available anyway.
Any thoughts? I am on the right track?

For CFe, it is much less certain as there is a small list of approved cards for the 1DXiii and they "only" deal with 5.5k raw. I am unlikely to use 8k often in the near future or maybe at all. 4k120 is more likely at times but only for short clips. Still, if I am going to invest this much then I should get something that works if/when needed. From what I can see, the write speeds vary hugely. I am guessing that a CFe card/reader will be part of a R5 bundle.

The Canon Website indicates that for RAW movie 5.5k60p Recording four CFExpress Cards are supported:
ProGrade Cobalt 325GB;
SanDisk Extreme Pro 512GB; and
Lexar 256 and 128 GB cards.

progradedigital dot com/products/cfexpress/
Max speed, size, avg speed
600MB/s Gold 120GB => Avg 145MB/s
1000MB/s Gold 256GB => 350MB/s
1000MB/s Gold 512GB-1T => 500MB/s
1400MB/s Cobalt 325GB => 1300MB/s
The avg to max speed difference is huge from 25% to 50% for gold but cobalt is pretty close to max.

Sandisk write speeds with no mention of sustained/average speed! link is:
shop dot westerndigital dot com/products/memory-cards/sandisk-extreme-pro-cfexpress-type-b#SDCFE-064G-ANCIN
64GB 800 MB/s
128/256GB 1200 MB/s
521GB 1400 MB/s

Lexar. I can't find a datasheet for them... only 64GB — 512GB Up to 1750MB/s read, up to 1000MB/s write.
If Lexar 128/256GB cards are okay for the 1DXiii (assumed) 1000MB/s then why aren't the Sandisk 128/256GB included?

Sony tough
128/256GB up to 1480MB/s

GoldWing said:

You guys just won't admit that the 1DXMKIII is "Nothing Burger". Same for the D6. But Canon opting to go for Video, they even admit it, was a poor decision. No Pro Sports Videographer or Broadcaster is or will be running out to get an MKIII.

Click to expand...

I admit I think you're a troll. How's that?

The Fat Fish said:

Yes, in comparison to the 6D it was yes, but was it a good value at the time? Not really, no. I'm not saying it's a bad camera - it's a very good camera but I don't think the features justified the price.

Click to expand...

I would say otherwise but then again I have always rated ergonomics, reliability and access to the best range of native lenses above the cool but ultimately unnecessary features like IBIS, and extra half stop of the mythological DR. And resolution has to do with the way the camera is used. Not its price

Interesting. That is one of the more positive reviews of the Sigma that I've come across. I've been considering selling a couple of lenses to fund a 24-70 f/2.8 of some sort as my photography needs/wants are changing a little, but I'm struggling to get that enthusiastic about any of them once you factor in price.

One criticism of both the Sigma and Tamron options that I've read is that they don't do well tracking moving subjects. That points me to the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II, as AF performance is more important to me than IS (although I've really appreciated the IS on my 24-70 f/4L IS when travelling, not to mention it's relatively light weight) ... but the Canon is still A$2600 and more where I am, which I find hard to swallow for 2.8 lens covering that focal range. Decisions.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

We already have a photograph of it alongside the R5, EOS R, and Rp. You can see its narrower than the R5 but still a fairly large camera. I'd guess about the same as the 6D. It might be slightly larger than the R, but that is hard to eyeball. The R is a nice size.

Click to expand...

Thats right. I remember now. It did look close to the R5. A pretty good size. It really is looking like my next camera as the R5 will just be too expensive

SwissFrank said:

Thanks to these factors, the very sharpest lenses made today (Canon RF 50/1.2, Otus 50/1.4, Leica APO-Summicron 50/2) simply couldn't have been made a decade or two ago. The RF 50/1.2 is about 10x sharper than the EF 50/1.2 it replaces. You can see it's 30 lp/mm lines are higher than the old lens' 10 lp/mm lines; >3x sharper linearly is >9x sharper by area. If they could have done that 10 years ago they would have!

Click to expand...

On the other hand, you seem to forget that you said no one could make a lens like the RF 50/1.2 a decade ago and then criticize a lens designed more than a decade ago for not meeting a standard you just claimed couldn't be matched at that time.

Adorama has the SmallHD 701 Lite 7″ HDMI On-Camera Monitor as their Deal of the Day for only $349 (Reg $699).
Key Features


1200 x 800 display resolution
450nit brightness
7-inch screen diagonal
HDMI in/out
Scopes, Focus Assist, Pixel Zoom
Monitor Resolution: 1200 x 800
Monitor Type: LCD Video Monitor
Mount Type: Camcorder Mount


SmallHD 701 Lite 7″ HDMI On-Camera Monitor $349 (Reg $699)

Click to expand...

Continue reading...

chong67 said:

I been waiting for RF 14-24mm. Where is it?

Click to expand...

In the future... where? No one knows where exactly

In the mean time there are options you can adopt.

Sorry for the sarcasm. But no one should buy into a brand new system and expect their preferred lens is around the corder. I have been waiting for a good RF 50, and other f1.8 primes. Others have probably been waiting for f4 zooms. They can't simply release them all at once. Though that would be sweet.

Where is this lens? I been waiting forever and ever. Not 2020?

Great pics, especially the third one !

Michael Clark said:

Interesting. When I hook up my 5D Mark IV body to EOS Utility to load lens profiles, it tells me I do not need to load the profile for any current EF lens, including the EF 600 IS III and EF 400 IS III. Apparently all of that info is included in the 5D Mark IV's firmware, and updating the firmware recently must have included the lens info for the new Super Telephotos. Neither of those lenses has ever been attached to my 5D Mark IV.

Click to expand...

As I understand it, non-DLO correction data could already be provided by the lens itself, Sigma is doing that for their recent lenses.
RF added lens provided DLO to that.

That doesn’t preclude Canon from baking in data for lenses into the firmware as well.

pj1974 said:

Your post doesn't seem to fit in this thread... still I'll give you a quick reply.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply. That's something I've been wondering about during all the discussions here where people are bringing up fps as something of great importance, while it is mostly irrelevant to me. Something in the thread must have made me think of the issue, off-topic though it may be.

In my experience, there are some USM lenses that perform pretty admirably when it comes to autofocus sound performance in video. The new RF 24-105 is using a hybrid USM system, if I recall correctly. This lens is entirely silent for me, so I would say that this hybrid system is working pretty nicely.

It's tough. I have had no work for over three months(in my real job, not my photography side hustle which also has made no money). I am very lucky that my partner has remained employed however and now it seems that as we open up a bit I am getting some interest in the photography side of things.

If there is a new Canon 28-300mm, it will be an RF lens and probably 24-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM