Two somewhat different use cases.

1. For sports, the R3 will give you Olympics level capabilities as we saw in previous posts. It will be up to you to learn how to make the best of it. The limitation will be you for a while. The R5 and R6 may sufficient, depending the on the situation.
2. For family or other less demanding events, the R5 and R6 should handle them. You shouldn't find too many limitations in this case. The R3 might be overkill.

I find a R6m2 handles both pretty well for my current situation, coming from a 6Dm2/1DXm2 combo. I recently used an R6m2 w/ RF28-70 f2.8 and R8 w/ RF 85 f2 to shoot my granddaughter's middle school play. They were setup identically and were pretty much interchangeable for this purpose. I also shoot department events with this combo that get published in the university electronic and print media. My images consistently get some of the highest numbers of likes on social media. I used the R6m2 with EF 135 f2 or EF 70-200 f2.8 m2 to shoot her volleyball matches for the past few years with pretty good results, replacing my 1DXm2 for my current sports, bird, and wildlife shooting. I haven't tried an R5 yet.

JWest said:

I appreciate the info but I would now probably never need to stack any tele ext onto the EF 200-400/4 TC because I have longer better lenses to start from.

Click to expand...

Absolutely a fair point. The longer/better the starting point, the higher potential for final IQ.

Canon took home several honors at the 2025 TIPA World Awards, earning recognition across multiple photography segments. While the TIPA awards are often seen as lighthearted, they still highlight innovation and industry appreciation. It’s a nice nod to Canon’s continued impact in the photography world. Between lectures, assignments, and part-time work, I reached a point where I had no choice but to buy essay help. After checking out a few platforms, I landed on UKwritings at https://ukwritings.com/buy-essay The professionalism of their site and clarity of service impressed me. The essay I received was not only well-written but also customized exactly to my requirements. If you ever feel overwhelmed and decide to buy essay online, UKwritings should be your first stop.

The 21 pins on the hot shoe are critical, and if one appears bent or shorter, it could indicate potential damage, though it may not be from the EL-1. I'd suggest reaching out to support for a detailed inspection. In the meantime, others' feedback or photos would definitely help clarify if your pin looks unusual. When you struggle with writing, confidence can be a big hurdle. I turned to domypaper.com for help. DoMyPaper essay writing service provided expert assistance, helping me produce high-quality papers and boosting my confidence. Now, I feel more assured when tackling assignments.

Canon has never released a fast prime wider than 24mm (prior to the 20/1.4 VCM which is kind of meh), and has never released a truly excellent ultra-wide prime. It's always been a weak point. Will be interesting to see what they release and how it compares to the 14/1.8GM and 14/1.4DG.

plusnq said:

Guragear kiboko 30l +. R1 with 100-300 f2.8 with hood out and in. Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

Plusnq, thank you!!

As neuroanatomist provided me with the accurate dimensions, actually seeing the R1 with 100-300mm 2.8 in the GG 30l really helps. It’s almost as I imagined. Not a lot of room with the hood in place, which is ok. With the hood reversed, I should be able to put the rain cover at the end of the bag or one of the extenders.

Even though all my camera gear is insured, I really like the SmallRig plate with the AirTag.

deebatman316 said:

Canon usually didn’t refer to Micro Motor as DC Motor. But they are the same thing. This was also the 3rd AF motor they used in the EF Mount. They could’ve used the original EOS AF motor. The original EOS AF motor was Arc Form Drive “AFD”. But these lenses had a lot of limitations. The AF and aperture work differently. These lenses sequentially AF & stop down to the selected aperture. They cannot carry out both actions at the same time. Also these lenses had a max frame rate of 3-4 fps. Canon replaced this AF motor in 1992. Micro Motor solved a lot of the issues AFD had.

Click to expand...

They do now. The EF 75-300 III specifications list its motor as DC, as does the EF-S 18-55 II.

200-600mm 6.3 around 2kg's fits in a regular bag perfectly. 300-600 5.6 not so much? I welcome all future giant lenses, just make a standard issue 600mm 6.3 first. More reach and brighter than the 100-500L is where its at.

Friends. I want to sell my R5c, 85 1.2, 50 1.2 and 15-35. My sister is visiting me from Australia. Should I give them to her to sell there? I live in India and no one wants them here. Do you think I will fetch better price in Australia compared to the USA? Thxxx.

I Think my body R5 II body was made on Monday. After solving the battery problem, the AF does not work as it should, and each day, one or two times the switch off button does not react properly and the body freezes. Grey back display, grey viewfinder. Canon says: remove the battery and reinsert it.

Digging through Canon’s patent filings at the Japanese Patent Office has paid off once again. We’ve uncovered documentation showing Canon’s efforts to reduce the impact of high temperatures on lens elements.

Read The Full Article

Del Paso said:

Canon are doomed...
to be successful!

Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see what Nikon's quarterly financials look like. In a recent press release they mentioned "underperformance of sales compared to plan in the Imaging Products and Digital Manufacturing Businesses."

I wish there was like an 11 - 135mm APS-C zoom, which would give ultrawide to telephoto coverage. 300mm (450mm equivalent) is cool but way less useful than the wide end for me.

DhlcadR6 said:

Unpopular opinion here, with modern AF and lightweight telephoto lenses, there's no need for a "pro" build APS-C camera from Canon. R6-series should be the upgrade 7Dii guys are looking for. R7 being prosumer/semi-pro are fine.

As for the battery grip. I just want Canon to make all battery door detachable so we can either use dummy battery or install 1st/3rd party grips.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily an unpopular opinion – although one I don’t agree with. I think it all comes down to individual use cases. While accepting that mine may not be that large a market segment for Canon.

The 5Diii / 7Dii has been the ideal combination, pretty much exactly the same body, control layout and capabilities, with the 7Dii being a bit further ahead and faster FPS.

Having two bodies that are seamless to switch between and importantly have the same memory card configurations was ideal.

Shooting a lot of aviation and motor sport being able to have a FF body with a shorter telephoto (24-105 or 70-200) and an APC-C with 100-400 and quickly switch is invaluable.

At a push they also with some angle of view compromises provide a good backup body combination and limit having to swap lenses in less than ideal conditions.

For me a return to the 7Dii build and capabilities in the R series would not cannibalise R5 sales, as I’d be unlikely to put two of those in my bag. And although I have though about using the R5 in crop mode, it would still be short of an R series APS-C by about 10M pixels.

However the lack of a proper R series successor for the 7Dii has held me back from making he leap from my current combo. So at least in my case it’s actually delayed sales of two bodies and probably a few native RF lenses.

I was quit excited about the initial R7 announcement but combination of body style layout – memory card configuration and rolling shutter, pushed a decision to await and hope for the next generation.

Again I recognise that my use case is more limited than many peoples but across both Canon and Nikon the lack of direct replacements for the 7Dii and D500 to pair with a 5Diii D850 type body has been sadly missed by many in the Aviation community.

I think it is remarkable a remarkable optic - as is. However, thre is always room for improvement. A 24-70/f2.0 or even a 24-85mm f2.0 would take this lens several steps furher in terms of creative use and vesatility. Heck...a 24-70/f2.0 would propbably nudge me into purchasing one of these! but a 24-85mm f2.0...i think I would probably pass out with excitement.
I think a 24-70/f2.0 coupled with a 70-135mm f2.0 would be a perfect 2 lens combo for low light and creative natural light portraiture. it's a combo that i would seriously consider. I love my primes but I don't like the constant pounding of my lens mounts even with carrying a pair of camera bodies.

Raindropdroptop said:

Sounds like an issue with that copy. I don’t notice an IQ hit at all in my copy when activating the 1.4x.

I know some IQ degradation happens, such is the case with any TC, but it’s not noticeable or worth worrying about with 45MP and typical post processing.

Click to expand...

Nikon adjusted it and it came back a bit better but still not as good as a bare 400 with 1.4x. It was more like the Canon 200-400 1.4x, and long term I'd be nervous if it can lose IQ and need servicing.

In my hands since yesterday. I bought it online in the official European Canon online store, using the internal Easter promotion (a few hundred PLN less than the official price in Poland). My copy was produced in mid-January 2025.

I think I got a very good copy and at both extreme focal lengths there is a slight difference in favor of this lens model compared to my RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM (also purchased online in the official European Canon online store a few years ago), which I also consider a very good copy in terms of image quality. The biggest difference between both lens models is of course in the nominal aperture values. The f/2.8 aperture allows for a more interesting bokeh effect at close distances, and in combination with the lens stabilization to go down from ISO when taking photos with limited access to natural light.

Taking advantage of the beautiful weather I was able to take some comparative photos (CRAW + JPG) with the RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM and RF 28mm F2.8 STM lenses. Focal length 28mm at f/2.8 (photo mode Av) and at the aperture selected by the camera (photo mode P) and focal length 70mm at f/2.8 (photo mode Av) and at the aperture selected by the camera (photo mode P). JPG files were recorded using Picture Style Fine Detail. All lenses were attached to the R5 Mark II. All photos were taken handheld from the same position.

Download or view comparison photos:


It's 2025 and if someone asked me now what to choose for their first universal walking zoom, whether the RF 28-70mm F2.8 IS STM or maybe the RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM, I would definitely recommend buying the RF 28-70mm F2.8 IS STM, even despite its unusual lens locking mechanism.

I bought a JJC LH-73D lens hood for the lens, a replacement for the original Canon EW-73D. Knowing me, I'll probably never use it, but it's better to have it than not, because you never know when it might come in handy.

Del Paso said:

Some people just keep repeating the same nonsense...

Click to expand...

Most of the time, it's politicians

John Wilde said:

Off Topic: It's paywalled, but there is a NewsDay editorial with the title "Suffolk IDA should claw back funds from Canon [USA] tax breaks"

Click to expand...

It's a biased opinion piece, maybe by someone with a Sony camera and an Epson printer. It's said because Canon laid off employees, they should give back tax credits. The writer doesn't appear to comprehend that not laying off the employees could cause more people to be laid off later.

On FW 1.0.3.
Sometimes, not always, after switching R52 the camera off - it shuts down, flashes the red LED on backside, and makes the "shutdown noise" as it should - I guess it is the dust removal etc.
But then it keeps doing this over and over again in a loop.
This happens with various RF lenses mounted, so I do not think it is a lens that confuses the R52.

Removing battery in and out is the only thing that stops this.

I cannot recall that this was an issue earlier.

Smiling Eddie said:

I did well out of the sales: body, batteries and 4 lenses. No tariffs here.

Click to expand...

No effect of tariffs on Canon pricing in the US…yet. The sales are pretty good, but there’s nothing that really interests me that I don’t already have (except the 20/1.4 VCM that I preordered).

Del Paso said:

I hate to say it, but imagine the excitement if this lens were from Canon. OK, it's obviously a bit on the heavy side, but the range is very interesting and useful.
Well done, S..y.
I'm afraid a 35-135 f/2 could be very difficult to develop in "L" quality...

Click to expand...

The choice of a 50-150mm f2.0 is very interesting. Although this lens can’t take a 1.4x tc, if it could, it would make a 70-210 f2.8….lol. I also don't understand why S**Y needed to use a 95mm filter thread. Surely a 75mm front diameter objective element would have sufficed? So a 77mm thread wold have been adequate., especially consdering how much digital correction is employed on these days. Even an 82mm would have been over kill.

So no I don’t think a 35-135/f2.0 is particularly difficult for Canon to design and build. Especially considering Tamron was able to design and build a F2-2.8 version of this 3 years ago. The problem is that Canon are trying to limit some of their focal zoom options to sell a trinity of f2.0. Canon’s patents show a 70-150mm. A 35-135mm f2.0 would raid the new sales of the 135mm f1.8 and 28-70/2.0. However, most people have already bought these lenses and would love to combine a pair of £2K lenses with a new "all in one" £4K lens. Canon needs to move their thinking of trying to sell three lenses to cover a desired focal range, especially if this singular lens is in the £4k cost category.

I really like the idea of a EF 24-85mm f2.8. It covers most of the street and portrait shooting focal points from 24,35,50,85. It makes a lot of sence!

whomst said:

Imo the r3 doesn't really make sense in the lineup especially with the r6iii getting the same sensor, maybe the r3ii could have the r5ii sensor but the r5ii is already so good that it would be hard to create any seperation between the two

Click to expand...

Yea but the R5 body has a bunch of drawbacks that professionals aren’t happy with that the R3/1 has. Better ergonomics / V-grip, better battery (especially important in mirrorless because of how much the EVF drains the battery), internal ***, the IR button (dual because of v-grip).

The 5 is just not a pro camera anymore (IMO) because of these limitations. It’s the reason I bought an R3 instead. So there’s plenty of reason the R3 II (or S) could be a high resolution version. It doesn’t make sense that it’s the same resolution as the R1. But I do hope it continues. The $4,000 pricepoint was the sweet spot for me. But if it’s $6,000 like the R1 but has 48mp (or whatever) I’d still buy it.

I’ve made some prints lately and I’m just not happy with the 24mp. It’s just short of the resolution needed for competitive prints compared to all the galleries now filled with images from medium format Fuji GFX (and the like). Heck Leica has a 60mp camera. The least they can do for us is give us this pro body high rez, and the R5 is not it.

koenkooi said:

And people still praise OM systems for creating a ‘crop’ supertelephoto! So such a lens might have value, if purely for marketing.

Click to expand...

Nobody praises OM's 150-600 for creating a crop super telephoto as everyone understands that it is the build and optical formula of Sigma's FF lens. OM gets hammered and criticized for it. Unjustly so, in my opinion, as supertelephotos's size is mostly based on the entrance pupil size, so when it comes to supertelephoto lenses, only the last optical elements can have a smaller diameter, thus reducing size and weight only minimally. If one compares the Olympus 150-400 lens with the 150-600, you will notice the only size reduction is in the last few inches of the lens. The advantage of an MFT crop sensor is obviously the fact that it gives you approximately a 2x reach advantage compared to a similar focal length lens and a similar MP sensor. For many, this is the BIG advantage of a crop sensor camera.

And when it comes to non-supertelephotos, then the lenses can be smaller in diameter, making the whole kit smaller and more manageable. From left to right: Canon 14-35 f4, OM 8-25 f4, Canon 24-105 f4, OM 12-100 f4, and the incredibly compact OM 70-300.

I understand the sophisticated camera users on forums and YouTube love to trash the Micro Four Thirds System and crop cameras in general, as they obviously want to preach the superiority of FF, and that only an ignorant fool would choose otherwise. And yet, despte their great intelligence, they are too stupid to understand that the constant negative publicity on social media - where most people today get their information - only hurts, and possibly will put, OM Systems out of business. It will make many happy, but if your system went out of business because of all the negative publicity, with thousands of dollars invested in it, wouldn't you rather people just shut up?