OpticalLimits reviewed it, too. I am intrigued.

andrei1989 said:

are you sure you're waiting long enough for the image to be processed? a 30sec exposeure also takes ~20sec to process...

Click to expand...

What? If you have long exposure noise compensation enabled, maybe it takes twice as long as the shutter speed to get done taking a picture (because you're actually taking 2 images). But processing speed does not depend on exposure time in my 600D or 80D. Why would it?

Act444 said:

sorry, that's what I meant. "On-Camera Flash" = Flash mounted onto hot shoe.

Click to expand...

You would want to bounce it if you are shooting anywhere near 28mm. I really don't use flash much with this lens, since it is such a light canon, but I did do some shots with it of a still subject that required a flash and you do see the shadow if not bounced.

Ramage said:

I have shot a lot in heavy rain (Live in Vancouver BC area) using both the R and the RP and have not had any issues. That said I am more cautious with the RP then I am with the R and both never really get rained on for extended time as I use an umbrella when it really down pours.

Silly side note I was standing in a field on Saturday night holding my remote attached to the R trying to capture lightning (we get lots of rain but lightning is rare). When I looked around and realized I was the tallest thing in the field and I was holding a metal umbrella. I decided to pack up right after that

Click to expand...

Haha, I’ve done that also, my 1d4 and I with a tripod and umbrella and the top of an arched bridge remember I called it a day when all the lights on the bridge and the traffic lights went out. As I walked down water flowed 10cm high and drowned my shoes.

Thanks. I checked it and got the same error. 26th it is then.

SteveC said:

It appears to me that ILC sales (in red) are pretty steady the last few years, although it did peak back in 2012. It's point-and-shoot cameras that are suffering, to the point where the ILC is now the majority of the market instead of being a mere niche.

This makes a lot of sense to me...there's just no point in a $100 point and shoot any more. Of course that leaves us with very high priced point-and-shoots, which strike many (including me, to an extent) viscerally as pointless. (I bought a Point and Shoot recently, but it has ridiculous optical zoom and barely fits in my pocket, so it fills a couple of niches.)

Click to expand...

ILC's are also dropping, only Mirrorless seems sort of stable, but DSLR sales don't look good.

Sporgon said:

I see he sensibly used an old 5D2, to have used a 5D4 would be rather decadent ! Surprised about the views on mirror lock up - apart from using mirror pre release on the 5DS, whenever I want full mirror lock up now I'm on a tripod and in live view anyway.

Click to expand...

Yeah, the Live View button is a mirror lockup button that still allows you to focus, meter, and see through the lens even with the mirror up!

Maximilian said:

Same opinion here, plus really nice dark framing and highlight spot in the upper middle from the trees giving a great 3D effect.
Did I get the exposure data right from the EXIF that this was shot wide open (f/1.4, 1/1000)?
Would have bet on any other value than that

Click to expand...

Yes, you got it right. I tend to add a lot of vignette sometimes and it was also cloudy. Removed three people from the photo.

The M6 and the 22mm are in my bag almost every day. Not sure if I should upgrade to the mark 2, or get a EOS R





More pictures can be seen here (all taken on my way to the office)

Sporgon said:

Really, focus peaking ? I've found the magnification function is the only sure way, and then it's so awkward through the viewfinder I don't see it as much more practical than magnification of the rear screen on a dslr.

Click to expand...

Agreement here! I certainly do not get highly accurate AF using focus peaking on my R, manual focus with the lcd is best, followed by autofocus when available.

koenkooi said:

I rented an R a while ago and it came with 3rd party batteries and it wouldn't charge with 1.1 nor would it charge after updating to 1.2.

Click to expand...

Ok thanks. Confirmed then. Only OEM packs will charge via a computers usb-c port

Sundew near the Blue Ridge Parkway in North Carolina.

Sharlin said:

Now, will we see these improvements also on the 90D and the M6II?

Click to expand...

They are sold with the improved firmware

melgross said:

those extra features are coming at a very high cost, considering that apples is also 6k

Click to expand...

If you just look at the pixel count, sure. If you look at the workflow the two monitor enable, you can see the difference. The Apple monitor is a computer monitor - it's quite useless without a computer attached. The Canon does not need a computer and can process multiple input signals on the fly - so users can compare and adjust whatever they need and monitor *while* shooting or broadcasting. Think about broadcaster, who need to ensure a show look good enough on different receiving devices, from 4K HDR ones to older SD ones...

Did you look at the color space supported by both monitors?

About the price, why a 1DX costs $6000 or more, and not $1200 like an entry level FF? Same pixel count, or even lower, sometimes. Or why L lenses cost much more than their non-L counterparts? Why my 24/3.5 TS costs a lot more than the 24/2.8? The latter is faster!!! Why a video camera costs a lot more than a DSLR/ML with video capabilities?

Sure, you can always do an "Harry Film" and buy a consumer TV or PC monitor and hope to achieve the same result at a fraction of the price building some kind of Goldberg machine - you won't, while the system will be much more clumsier and unpredictable to work with.

Apple to oranges comparisons are useless. Apple is not interested in industry-specific devices, just like it doesn't make servers, you aren't going to compare the new MacPro with a Dell heavy duty server - and the latter can even cost more, even when it comes with just a Matrox G200 video card. Still you won't buy the latter unless you really need it. Specific systems for High Frequency Trading can be even crazier and more expensive, and will usually last a few months only. The gains usually offset any cost.

Maximilian said:

Resources are limited! R&D resources, too.

For ... how many years? ... (some) people complained about DSLR being a dead horse and Canon should do like Sony does.
Now, as Canon does, the DSLR people (I am one of those wanting a 5D5) come and tell the other way around. And they have said that in the past, too.

As stated above by Valvebounce Canon is not making decisions based on a gear head forum like this but on market researches.
And if Canon is making a move like we see throughout the last year (EOS R/RP, RF) I think it is not likely to believe that what you've demanded above will ever come.

But Nikon is turning into the same direction - with presumably even less resources.
And even it you mention the D6 it is also said here that a 1DX3 is around the corner, so...
Nikon has some better Nikkors here Canon some better EF there, but I don't see both them with big old lens system releases in the near future - if ever again.

So where do you think you should turn to, if Canon is not reacting immediately on your post here?

And much more important:
Where is the current gear available really limiting you that much, that you need, that you urge to change brand if Canon is not delivering exactly that one peace of equipment that fulfills your individual requirement specification?

Or is this yet another
and "the grass is always greener..." rant?

Click to expand...

Mummy, I want everything at once.
If I don't get it in a minute, I'll cry ! (and jump ship...)

unfocused said:

Craig, any news on when we might see the firmware update?

Click to expand...

I believe that Canon has said late September, so we have 3 weeks or so.

SecureGSM said:

Please refer to the photo in the link. Note how the extensible part of the lens when collapsed is:

1. Is much smaller in diameter than it’s mount (39mm) diameter.
2. Protrudes extensively inside the camera
3. Narrow enough to push past the frame of a FF camera body.
4: would damage (scratch) frame potentially

Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

What is the diameter of the barrel? The frame surrounding the shutter is about 22mm high, so the barrel would need to be less than 22mm dia to extend thru the rectangular hole. I don't know if the part is metal or plastic. I know the lens takes a 19mm filter, so its likely a few mm larger than 19. Close!

It might damage the frame in front of the shutter, but if thats cosmetic, that beats going into the shutter or sensor.

unfocused said:

I actually like the lighting on these. It's warm and flattering and it doesn't bother me a bit that they vary a little. Not everything has to have the light perfectly balanced -- boring in my view.

Click to expand...

I was very fortunate to shoot her. She turned 18 just a week before and that always makes it easy in post. A pimple here and there to heal, other than that, perfect skin. I'll be doing a formal wear shoot with her next Sunday.

Michael Clark said:

That it does. But it also magnifies what flaws and resolution limits are in the center of the lens' light circle.

To display an APS-C image at the same size as a FF image, the enlargement ratio has to be 1.6X more for the APS-C camera. That means to get the same number of lines per millimeter on the finished image, the lens used for the APS-C camera needs to be 1.6X sharper than the lens used on the FF camera. If a lens used on a FF body has a resolving capacity of 850 lpmm (measured on the sensor), one would need a lens with 1,360 lpmm to get the same amount of resolution at the final display size.

Click to expand...

Thank you; an excellent way of explaining it.

koenkooi said:

If they continue with portrait style lenses, a 105/1.4 or 135/1.8 would make sense, but Sony/Sigma/Nikon already have those. The lenses on their own might be 'wow', but not a first. Canon could fill in the wide end with a 24/1.2 and 35/1.2.

What I'm dreaming of (and won't be able to afford) is Canon announcing the high MP version of the R and going "Oh, btw, here's an RF50/1.0 with working autofocus to go with it. Enjoy!"

Click to expand...

As nice as that would be, I sincerely doubt it based on the cost of the RF 50 f1.2 and how much work it clearly took to develop.

On the flip side, I've noticed that prices for used EF 50mm f1.0s have been dropping like a rock recently, probably because the new RF 50 makes it look like an even softer lens than the EF 50 f1.2 did.

I will still probably never get rid of my EF 50 f1.0 because of what it is, but it sets in its case more and more ever since I got the RF 50.

Click said:

WOW Great portrait. Well done, CFB.

Click to expand...

Thank you, sir.

PCM-madison said:

I will get back to you on the F6.3 focal length tomorrow. I have an M5 but not the EF-M 18-150 so I can't address your question about the relative IQ. However, for me the RP is a much more satisfying and useful camera than the M5. I own an original EOS M which I found lacking as an all around camera. I converted it to IR, and have found it perfect for that niche. I own an M5 which I find lacking in several respects. I still own it and have used it as a travel camera for trips where photography was not the primary goal, but all before I had an EOS RP. Going forward, my RP+RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM will likely be my travel kit for most trips.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply. I'm willing to accept the compromises of the M6/18-150 combo mainly because of the incredibly compact size. I can still squeeze it into a small belt bag which would be impossible to do with a FF setup. That, coupled with the convenience of a wide zoom range and relatively good IQ on the wide half make it a great bridge camera (between phone and FF DSLR). Still, for serious travel I find I want something better. The 5D4/24-70 f4 I like for local/regional sightseeing.

koenkooi said:

A post on the DPReview forum says it slows down to f/6.3 at 105mm.

Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing. Yikes, f5.6 already by 70mm. I have to say the RF 24-105 is looking like the better of the two kits at this point. Yes, one gives up some reach but at least you have decent IQ and a constant f4 throughout a wide range. That 1.3 stop brightness difference at 105mm can make a huge difference...

CanonFanBoy said:

You mean pointless and uninformed like this one from you below? I can fully understand speculation, however, your statement doesn't come off as such. Keep polishing that ball. Just be careful not to rub it raw. You only have one.

Click to expand...

Glad I live in a country where what a guy does with his crystal ball in the privacy of his own home is nobody else's business.

That lens is bound for the military, amirite?

That said...its gonna cost like 100k

I bet these will be fantastic lenses...but I'm gonna have to go with the value buy to complete my trinity. EF 16-35 f/4L IS is in my future.