Act444 said:

Expect at least 5-7 years before the RF line of lenses gets fully fleshed out.

Actually I’m somewhat impressed that a Canon is moving as quickly as they are on this. It’s showing a level of dedication that we don’t often see from them.

Click to expand...

I think they have been working on these designs for some time, ether that or they are just pro's at it by now. They do have the widest range of lenses out there, unless I am sorely mistaken.

I should say it's a lot better imo. The splatter is much smaller blobs, I'm happy with it, after all it's a mechanical device with moving parts, talking of moving parts they travel at such speed you are bound to get something, dust, fibres, oil and anything else that finds it's way into the mirror box and prism housing and so on. One of those things, I used my old OM10 last week, the viewfinder even has small mushrooms haha

bergstrom said:

the biggest complaint i heard from people about the 5div was that it was great etc, but the video files were unmanageable because of file size etc.. Now, if this eos r5 gets 8k, how is THAT going to be managed by the average joe with his 4-8g ram pc?

Click to expand...

8K is not for the average joe, period. But the R5 shoots h.265 4K which is way more lightweight than MJPEG.

mangobutter said:

Woo-wee

RF 50 1.8

• 
  
• Focal length 48.70
• F-number 1.85
• half angle (in degrees) 23.95
• Image height 21.64
• total lens length 58.55
• BF 19.38

and RF 14-28 F2

• Focal length 14.42 19.78 27.16
• F-number 2.06 2.06 2.06
• Half angle of view 56.32 47.56 38.54
• Image height 21.64 21.64 21.64
• Total lens length 164.32 150.29 146.47
• BF 16.13 16.13 16.13

Click to expand...

I've always dreamed of a zoom trinity that doesn't overlap: 14-28, 28-70, 70-135... WOW!

basketballfreak6 said:

Thanks everyone!



Such underrated combo with the M6II!

Click to expand...

I’m used to (spoiled by) the RF 50 f1.2 on the EOS R, and yet, the images I get with the 32mm f1.4 puts a smile on my face.

Far too expensive (the camera-bag is no Lowepro!).

Love me some jets.

I worked with a wide variety of military aircraft over the course of my 30 years in the Navy.

One thing I will say - their airfield needs some TLC... Looking really rough.

Great shots!

Labdoc said:

Why keep the megapixels secret when you already announced a long list of features?

Click to expand...

Gotta' keep the buzz going!

You know Uniqlo has a Brands Masterpiece collection and the EOS R is part of it. No Sony, no Nikon Z... EOS R!

Michael Clark said:

Facepalm. That seal was not on that box when it left the Canon factory. It was placed on the box at some point downstream from the last place Canon or one of its regional subsidiaries had control of that box.

Refurb lenses, which are not shipped in retail packaging, can be a different story. Some of Canon's refurb lenses, at least in the U.S., are shipped from third party logistics providers.

Click to expand...

You don't appear to want to listen, so I'm done.

slclick said:

Seems like a decent amount of differences.

Click to expand...

Yeah, actually a few more than I thought. Most of those are thanks to DIGIC 8.

Jethro said:

The 1DX III gets an extra DIGIC dedicated to AF, doesn't it?

Click to expand...

The wording makes it seem that extra DIGIC only processes the data from the external AF sensor, so it wouldn't be needed on mirrorless.

Something with 7.1

Like Spinal Tap, My Canon goes to 7.1
or
Canon, 7.1 on the Richter Scale
or
...never mind.

sanj said:

Perhaps we can predict what will be the differences/similarities between the 1dx3 and R5.
I guess:
1. 1dx3 will be much better build quality.
2. 1dx3 will be much better on battery life.
3. 1dx3 will have tripple the buffer.
4. 1dx3 will have shorter focus time (marginally so)
5. 4k video will be identical on both cameras.
6. 1dx3 will be a half stop better at high ISO.
7. The 'response time' will be better in 1dx3. (Much better)

What else?

Click to expand...

8. 1DX 3 will need micro AF adjustment, R5 won’t.
9. 1DX 3 won’t show you the photo you just took in the viewfinder, the R5 will.
10.1DX 3 won’t really give you much cropping capabilities, the R5 will.
11.1DX 3 will not be a half stop better than the R5 if you normalize the photos (compare apples to apples).

Jack Douglas said:

I used hockey as the example of getting a goal (shooting is required or you can't score) not shooting with the camera, so I had a good chuckle. I don't shoot sports so far, almost always it's little birdies, but not golf. Maybe someone shooting hockey does pre-focus on the net.

Jack

Click to expand...

From now on, you will be known as Slap Shot Jack, the Paul Newman of CR.

Viggo said:

I had a look at the 28-70 yesterday for the first time and I did not expect it to be that big, it made the 85 look like EF 50 L, lol.

Click to expand...

Yup. It is a monster.

I got the R kit back during a Black Friday offer (2400 euros). The RP was cheaper but I didn't care.
I wanted a sensor similar to my 5DIV, the closing of the shutter when turning the camera off, the top LCD and the same battery with my other cameras.

The reason is I wanted to add RF15-35 and RF24-70 to my kit although I do not know when I will really need them (I wish I had them back in September when I had visited Rome).

My testing didn't change anything from this uncontroversial initial observation. 80% of the benefit of CPS is in simply holding the product as one would at a retailer. The 2.8 is the winner, but I'm content to wait. For convenience and grabbability, the new 24-105 (F7.1!!!) for $399 (less when kit lenses are cast off) might really do the job because the RF35 f1.8 can handle low light. I'll CPS that one when it comes, and might just defer the investment in this one until then.

The f2 was so heavy it became an irritant I was glad to pack up and send away. The RF50 f1.2 is a far more appealing solution when low light performance is needed at middle lengths. (Along with the RF35 f1.8).

TinTin said:

The terms used tell all:

• GLIMPSE for the R5
• HANDS-ON for the 1DXiii

Click to expand...

They had similar language for the RF trinity, at the IBC show I could try the RF15-35 and RF24-70 on my camera no problem, but the RF70-200 didn't leave the display case.

Just read the EOS R5 is now going to debut at the Photography show in Birmingham UK 14th/17th March!

Sharlin said:

Interesting to see how the D6 sensor is going to fare.

Click to expand...

Exact same sensor as D5 so far as we know. Shouldn't see much if any difference.

I had a great copy of the ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, plus a 1.4x III. I thought that the combo was pretty poor at 200mm. The same tele worked fine on my 100-400mm, so I assumed it was just the combo. Now all of those have been sold..."Dust in the wind..."

All of that 'work' sounds as hard and long as some of Olympus' model naming schemes.

Dutch_Snapper said:

What I like about the EF-S and EF pancakes is that they offer f/2.8 as well as being compact. A lens cap with fairly decent optics included.
I cannot say I find the aperture range attractive on this supposed zoom. Sounds like a low end kit-lens. I will skip this breakfast.

Click to expand...

But there are exactly two of them. 24mm for EF-s and 40mm for EF, which is an almost perfect scaling of the 24 (also, the 22mm EF-M). That is about the optimum FL for making a pancake (practical from 35-45). I have a Minolta MD 45 f/2 that is almost a pancake and it is an awesome little razor sharp piece of glass. Works great on an M and now there are MD to R adapters, so should be pretty nice there as well. The lens in this post is actually a very useful range with the 20mm wide end. 20mm FF does not really fit into a pancake design. The EF 20mm has a pretty big chunk of glass at the front and it is not nearly as sharp wide open as the 24, 28, and 35 in the same family. If this new lens has IQ like the 11-22 M lens, it will be delightful.

BillB said:

Deja vu all over again.

Click to expand...

2K and 4K(8mp) do not deliver enough pixels in a frame for my use so I did not consider it, 8K does (33mp), so it finally has potential for very high resolution frames. For me, the discussions of 2K and 4K don't apply to 8K.