Posts

ajfotofilmagem · Feb 23, 2019

This lens was released without making fanfare.
Yongnuo 35mm F1.4 costing US$400.

tron · Feb 23, 2019

16-35 2.8L III is excellent already. So the only difference is the IS. Not enough reason to switch to mirrorless but if someone starts from scratch that is a totally diffferent matter.

jedy · Feb 23, 2019

slclick said:
Might not even be for Canon mounts. Still, they could be the 1st 3rd party to decode and release RF glass or more likely, they are hitting focal lengths with apertures not on the current market for EF.

Can’t say I’m looking forward to inferior reverse engineered third party autofocus lenses. This is one area Sony have the advantage as they share their autofoucus technology with other lens companies. This could very well be a huge advantage for Sony in the long run.

Flamingtree · Feb 23, 2019

I

blackcoffee17 said:
If you don't need the 300-400mm focal lengths, the 70-300 is so much smaller and lighter. Even worth getting both and only take the heavier 100-400 when you really need it

I agree. The 70-300L is great for taking on a trip etc. then something (not obscenely) expensive that gives you 400 to 600 for wildlife would be kind of cool.

3kramd5 · Feb 23, 2019

Larsskv said:
Which obviously was my point.

I don’t think it was obvious, but I’ll agree with the sentiment.

Mt Spokane Photography · Feb 22, 2019

Beta version, it will be updated to RF as soon as it comes out

DanThePhotoMan · Feb 22, 2019

I've been seeing a lot of rumors lately addressing a CX00 version camera being announced with an RF mount. From my understanding, all RF mount lenses are focus by wire. That, at least to me, kills any hope it would have of working on a larger budget set. Suer dpaf, or whatever the next iteration of it is may be incredible, but unless my 1st AC can hit the marks over and over again, I don't see how it will be implemented.

What are the thoughts around that? How could this be worked around for RF lenses? Am I totally wrong with them all being focus by wire?

magarity · Feb 22, 2019

As the owner of a perfectly good still working XTi, that video really makes me cringe. What did that thing do to deserve such treatment?

If one travels to southeast Asia the Canon service centers charge next to nothing for cleaning camera interiors and they do a good job. (watch out for imitation service centers)

csibra · Feb 22, 2019

C4... it'll be a plastic lens instead of glass?

karishmab · Feb 22, 2019

Nice shot. The waves effect showing vulnerable. The clarity of the image is awesome.

Freddell · Feb 21, 2019

I now bought and tried the SpyderX pro.
I used a laptop with a B156HAN04.5 panel. Originlly I could not find any review of this monitor on Notebokcheck, hence would like to have it calibrated.
Did three runs with spyderX:
1. Too yellow (new configuration)
2. Too blue (new configuration)
3. A little better (recalibration from 2)

Then I found the Notebookcheck icm file here (x-rite):
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Asus-ROG-GU501GM-i7-8750H-GTX-1060-Laptop-Review.307584.0.html

The notebookcheck icm file is the clear better choice.

So it seems datacolor spyderX software and the new puck is nowhere near x-rite.
displayCAL also is not yet compatible with spyderX.

Cannot recommend this one unless someone can help me understand if I calibrated on top of an existing icm hence the very varying results.

AlanF · Feb 21, 2019

Don Haines said:
Unfortunately for us, most sensors in the 80 to 90 percent efficiency range and there are very little gains to be made there. About the only real improvement that I can imagine is if you could somehow get each photocell to count photons and that way avoid having an A/D circuit.

The figure of 80-90% is for a narrow band of wavelengths around lambda(max), ie at the wavelength at the peak of the curve, and is not the real overall efficiency, which depends on integrating the area under the curve of QE vs lambda plus other factors. So, what is important is the effective quantum efficiency, which is much lower - explained here: http://www.strollswithmydog.com/the-difference-between-peak-and-effective-quantum-efficiency/ and very nice discussion here: https://www.strollswithmydog.com/effective-quantum-efficiency-of-sensor/

Whopper · Feb 21, 2019

HikeBike said:
Yeah, I guess that will largely depend on the quality of the EVF as well. I haven't gotten the RP in my hands to see how good the EVF really is, but I did read it isn't as good as the R. I will say, the R's EVF is nothing short of amazing. You can barely tell it's not optical.

Hmm,.. the R's EVF might be the best there is at the moment but I tried it and didn't like it that much. Although I like the specs and especially with the 28-70/2.0

- but it's ~5000,-€uro here ....

Tom Raymond · Feb 21, 2019

This is great news that will propel the SL2 into production. Hopefully there will be several ergonomic changes to the camera as well.
Most interesting will be the EV range of this new chip as compared to the Sony AR7III and others.

Flamingtree · Feb 21, 2019

dslrdummy said:
Even goes well on my Fuji. This one will be a fair bit heavier.

I’m sure it does. When I use it, it makes my 5d4 seem “normal” rather than it’s real scale...

Ivan Muller · Feb 20, 2019

I have had the Eos R for a couple of months since its release and have done mostly commercial work with it and i couldn't wait to try it out for my personal work. In December I went to Lesotho for a week and stayed in a little village called Malealea...all these street portraits were made there using a Tamron SP 35mm F1.8 and a EF 50mm F1.8.

Many more of my Lesotho street portraits can be viewed here:

http://thelazytravelphotographer.blogspot.com/

tron · Feb 20, 2019

docsmith said:
Quickly....APS-C and "2/3rds" are different sensor sizes.

But, agreed with overall point, I would expect the replacements to the 7DII, 80D, M5/6, Rebels to continue to be APS-C sized sensors.

As for the MP race. I hope that Canon continues to provide the market with cameras in the 20-30 MP range. It would be a shame if that was no longer an option as I agree, I think that is a great MP count for many applications.

But, I like options and am glad to see high MP sensors out there as an option. This forum has several examples of people using the 5Ds(R), but one that I find interesting is a friend (seriously, not me) that has the 1DxII, 5DIV and 5DsR. He is primarily a birder and feels each excels in different instances.

Options are good.

They do! I have 5DIV and 5DsR (and a 7DII I do not use much now). The 5DsR is the very good for distant birds and at the same time makes targeting BIF easier due to being FF. I have not used the 5DIV for birding a lot but it is a fantastic landscape camera (with a big DR) and a superb low light one (Milky way, night shots, internal spaces like churches and museums). I would rather see them updated to the next generation versions rather than seeing mirrorless ones.

Dark_Angel85 · Feb 20, 2019

These are with a 50mm STM

Michael Clark · Feb 19, 2019

Don Haines said:
My comparisons are with the 5D2, 6D2, and 7D2.

I find the 7D2 AF system beats the 5D2 in every way. I find that the 7D2 beats the 6D2, except in live view, where the 6D2 beats the 7D2.

I assume that any replacement to the 7D2 will put it back on top for both.

Any of the current three digit Rebels (Txi/xx0D) beat the AF of the 5D Mark II. It's the weakest thing about the 5DII.

The 5D Mark III has a 1D X level AF system that is noticeably better than the 7D Mark II, both in terms of accuracy and consistency from shot-to-shot.

The 6D Mark II has a PDAF system very close to the 80D PDAF system, but is is a step below the 7D Mark II for sure.

justaCanonuser · Feb 19, 2019

milliggg said:
Why make these mirrorless cameras smaller? Why can't they stay the same size as the DSLR? That would leave room for another card slot!!! I'm far from sold on these cameras!!!!

In fact, Sony seems to be on the path to make ML cameras in the future even fatter than DSLRs

And Leica's SL isn't small. I think Canon is quite wise to offer both a bigger form factor with the "R" and a smaller one with the "RP".

Once, tiny cameras were really sexy , and all of them could only load one film cartridge

:

Minox_Riga_with_Minostigmat_3,5_F=15_lens.jpg

3kramd5 · Feb 19, 2019

BurningPlatform said:
Quite substantial development in digital stabilization would be needed, though. The current digital IS systems stabilize movement only between subsequent video frames. You just can not digitally eliminate motion blur during a single exposure. You just can't. The only way to do this would be to divide the exposure to multiple sub-exposures, and to those sub-images use automatic alignment, perspective correction and stacking.

That’s not the only way. You could run deconvolve algorithms. However they’d be no better, and probably quite a bit worse, than if done on a dedicated computer.

But I agree, the ability to keep a subject roughly in the same part of the frame from one shot to the next is completely different than stabilizing an individual frame. The digital IS canon uses won’t reduce blue induced by camera shake in a given frame.

andrei1989 · Feb 19, 2019

here's a cool rumor for you

https://www.canonwatch.com/tamron-s...4-vc-usd-and-35mm-f-1-4-usd-lenses-very-soon/

Mark D5 TEAM II · Feb 18, 2019

Aww, darn, the A9 is still not at $1299...

chik0240 · Feb 18, 2019

padam said:
I do somewhat agree on the EVF, but really don't see any difference in noise if I use the 6DII in Live-View of full-DSLR mode, so I guess the latter is not significant maybe because for view mode, not all of the pixels are utilized unlike with a long exposure which collects information from the whole sensor so there is a definite increase of noise there.

I am just thinking about heat noise/ hotpixels, as using mirrorless always makes the camera hot or at least warm at extended use, I am thinking though no my significant it will result in more noise.

But frankly speaking the new RF lens potential is attractive, it becomes a hard choice between better RF lens which cost an arm and a leg for a complete new set of lens plus the new camera or just upgrade to the next dslr model. I still prefer ovf so if use adapter with the R seems counter intuitive to me

DTibor · Feb 17, 2019

FramerMCB said:
It does not support 1080 at ~24FPS only at ~30FPS - according to a just released hand-on preview by Jared Polin at Froknowsphoto.com (search it on youtube). He makes it clear that (even though it's a 30 minute video) the video is not a review of the camera but a preview only. He is disappointed by Canon's continued designed-constraints in their video capabilities in their EOS DSLR and SLR (mirrorless) cameras. But his impression of the feel, use, and stills capabilities of the camera are very good. With video capability more designed for the "mom & pop shooters capturing the kiddos" (my paraphrase) rather than as a second ("B", or even "C") body for serious video shooters.

Jared and many other youtubers just does not know how Canon cameras work. If you switch over to PAL you get 25 and 50 fps, see at 6:44

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics