Will Canon bring back in camera HDR to the R5 II?
I used it a lot in my R5.

EOS 4 Life said:

What do you consider a "normal" camera?
Canon's cameras with SPAD sensors are probably the best cameras in low light but they are not very useful in normal light.

Click to expand...

"normal" = cameras comparable to EOS R, consumer, semi pro or pro grade, etc.; not surveillance, not astro, not science, etc.

Thanks for your reply, by the way.

Last time I attended, which was 2019 or so, you could try out announced-but-unreleased lenses, like the 24-270L, but not the RF70-200L So bring an RF body!

neuroanatomist said:

The people who are irrelevantly ‘debating’ its status as a flagship are not the target market anyway.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

I can't imagine any serious professional photographer coming from 1DXIII to R1 being bothered with this nonsense.

I just want to thank @Richard CR again. He posted a hot deal in July. I got a Befree Carbon for a steal. I just took it to Europe for 14 days. I really enjoyed using it.

Due to the small lens mount, Sony cannot produce an 85mm 1.2.

neuroanatomist said:

When I want a strap, I use a Blackrapid shoulder strap. I use that even with a 600/4 II (the left-handed strap, in that case) without issue. Similarly for handholding, I use a hand strap on the camera that means I can support the weight without relying on my fingers gripping it. Everyone is different, but with a neck strap and without the hand strap, I know I'd feel it after a day of shooting. But with the BR strap and E-1 hand strap, I can shoot with a 1-series/R3 body and a heavy lens all day without issues.

Click to expand...

I use Peak Design Slide Lites and, throughout the day, I change between crossbody and neck as I see fit but, when I'm shooting more often, I shorten the length of the strap and go with a neck arrangement. Depending on that, I may feel discomfort on my neck and/or my forearms. The fact that, currently, my heaviest lens is the RF 70-200mm f/2.8 does help a lot, and I can shoot longer with it but, when I was using the EF 70-200 f/2.8, after say, one and a half hour of usage, I would definitely get tired. I like to bring the camera close to me when I'm actively shooting.

Considering the 28-70 and the 24-105 f/2.8 weight pretty much the same as an EF 70-200 2.8, while my hands may feel more comfortable, due to the better balance between the camera and the lens (and good ergonomics on the 28-70), I know the rest of my body will have to sustain aproximately the same weight. When I tested the 28-70, the feeling on the neck and forearms was very "familiar"

That said, I will probably buy it anyway, someday. That lens is just too tempting

Nemorino said:

No, only Tv and M

Click to expand...

Typically, there are certain values that Canon will only allow you to select manually. IIRC, an analogous restriction applies to the higher ISO values.

I would definitely give the ball tracking a try. Depending on your positioning relative to the action, that could really get some interesting results, especially with precapture.

dpockett said:

I have a pre-production R1 for a few days, shot a soccer game last night at 10,000 ISO, noticeable improvements over the R3 in all aspects. Focus is significantly better, using the soccer mode really worked, it grabs faster and holds focus better - impressive how it locks on people with foreground traffic really well. I sold my R3 and R5 a few months ago as I was prepared to jump ship for Nikon or Sony, but have to say after having a trial of the R5ii a few weeks ago and now R1 they have finally nailed these cameras.

Nikon Z9 and Sony A1/A93 are stops behind the R1 with high ISO from what I can tell. I spent about 6 weeks with a Sony kit and almost 2 months with a Nikon kit.

Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing your impressions!

So I’ve logged out and then back in again……

AlanF said:

If you are reach limited and you are going to crop in post then there is an advantage in using crop mode on your FF: smaller file size, larger image in vf, maybe better AF etc.

Click to expand...

The other advantage seems to be faster readout speed in crop mode if the flash sync speeds are anything to go by.

So many people still don't know that the Otus lenses were made by Cosina. They have some advanced cost effective ways to make high end lenses.

They could compete with M lenses, but Leica people wouldn't buy them at the price point required.

As a big Leica fan and what they do.... The rebranded Sigma's are sad and the M series is going to change a lot with the next iteration. If the next S camera is still insanely priced, cropped MF for $20k? C'mon. Hasselblad and Fuji are doing it right. Even if they don't make much money doing it. DJI doesn't care and Instax pays for it for Fuji.

I got my R5 ii last week, and I definitely hear something loose in there when it's off and I move the camera around - I asumed it was the IBIS module moving around when unpowered. I also hear the hum which sounds a lot like a fan (though I know that's not what it is) coming from the LCD housing area. I assumed all of that was how it was supposed to function! The two hot pixels visible in the EVF, however, I did not think were supposed to be there.

P-visie said:

The EF 200-400mm zoom has a similar diagram: https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/ef428.html

I would gladly add 300-400 gram to the weight of the lens and have a lens with a built in extender since extending the focal length by flipping a switch is so much easier and faster than adding a teleconverter. And no risk of dust, rain or snow entering the camera or back of the lens.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the link.

I agree that adding a bit of weight for the extender could be a good compromise, especially since the weight is close to the body of the shooter. However, from the asobinet diagram, the extender seems to be located further into the lens than the 200-400 extender (I'm purely going on the visual separation of the elements). That might be the reason why the source are indicating that the 200-500 won't have a built-in extender like the EF 200-400.

In terms of weight distributions, the 200-400 have four 100mm element at the far end group, whereas the 200-500 diagram only shows two 125mm elements in the B1 (far end) group. There are more lenses in the second (B2) group - 7 vs 5 - and appear to be located closer to the first group.
It's going to be tricky to say if and how much weight the could save. With new material choices, less than the EF 200-400 should be possible (yes, please!).

With the EF's length of 366mm, the optical length of 410mm of the RF 200-500 seem to say that it's only a bit longer (I need to subtract the flange-sensor distance from the 410mm / add it to the EF lens length, right?)

chik0240 said:

I don't have an issue on doing extra digital correction to make it perfrect, but not so for the 24-105 F2.8Z, that one basically do not do optical correction and rely on digital distortion correction, it will be a pain to edit the files in third party raw editors, same goes for 14-35

Click to expand...

Why would that be a problem? Are you using a deprecated RAW converter or one that doesn’t offer lens profiles? DxO PhotoLab automatically corrects the distortion for my RF 24-105/2.8 and RF 14-35/4, as does Adobe Camera RAW.

hmm, jerky rides. Might be ideal for the family to skip breakfast that morning. Eat after.

P-visie said:

Question: How did you get these functions assigned to the AF-ON and * buttons?

The AF section of manual for Custom control buttons does not show these functions as available AF functions. See: https://cam.start.canon/en/C017/manual/html/UG-08_Customize_0030.html

Click to expand...

Select regular metering and AF start and then use ‘INFO’ to open the sub menu:

That also has a separate toggle for tracking.

RF 24-105/2.8 in fact is awesome, but it's just too big to be my all-around lens. Same with RF 28-70/2.0, another magic piece of glass but too big to be an all-around lens.

tiberiade said:

I don’t see how that answers my question…

Click to expand...

The EF II is still being sold as new. I don’t believe Canon has even suggested a plan or a timeframe for a differently designed 35mm L-series prime. I do believe if anybody had good info otherwise, they would share it if allowed.

Perhaps you would like to speak to a manager?

DPS said:

...instead of DSLRs or mirrorless?

Canon has a fine line of XA pro-camcorders and Cinema video cameras?

Some of those are compatible with EF lenses.

Aren't the Canon videography equipment better than a DSLR/mirrorless?

Click to expand...

I just closed a deal on a used C70, and I know any long-term review of the camera ends the same way. "You can take it from my cold dead hands". We'll see how it goes. Canon kind of tripped over itself for a long while with the Cinema EOS lineup, and I still don't think it has a clear focus.

ILC video products are exponentially more expensive. Not just the cameras, but also cinema lenses and accessories. Sony has owned the market below ARRI a-cameras for a long time and have been in professional video products a lot longer. If people want that sort of camera, they're off to Sony a majority of the time. That also affects camcorder sales, as customers in that segment like some brand consistency.

The Cinema EOS C400 looks like a winner, and the C70 Mark II will be as well. The rest of the lineup? It's still a bit of a mess with segmentation and competitiveness with Sony. Getting the Sony video customer to move to Cinema EOS? That's a tall order.

It's the same as Sony trying to take the prosumer/professional EOS shooter from Canon (ignore the clickbait system switching articles and videos). Sony can't give entire kits away forever, so their target is probably just going to be new shooters. Canon could definitely do better in that regard, and it could start with compelling and maybe a more affordable Cinema EOS product. The C100 and C200 were great.... and the EOS R5 C did very well, but I think it was still too close to a stills camera and there were a lot of compromises in usability. Just do a C50 with an RF mount and great EF adapter.

after a little more time with the R5M2 I have to definitely modify my statement about the eye control. It is really bad when I have my glasses on. I am unsure if it is the lens coating causing it but my prescription is very light. When shooting in portrait it is very bad, it does not track my eye very well and jumps around erratically.

axtstern said:

View attachment 219349

Click to expand...

Now able to preorder in Germany

https://www.kamera-express.de/sigma...aJpYNDYjY5Jcf35Am7Z3rKUeCi8iNAoxoCDjYQAvD_BwE

EricN said:

It's a nice article, but I couldn't find the how many grams or any exact measurements. Did I miss something?

Click to expand...

No you did not, there is someone asking about the weight. Most search results come back to this post.

docsmith said:

• R1: $6,299
• R5II: $4,299
• R6II: $1,999
• R8: $1,299

Click to expand...

Removing the bodies that are old stock left in the channel but obviously not part of the lineup (RP, R5, R3) there are two big gaps.

The gap between the "$4,000 camera" and the "$6,000 flagship" makes sense because flagships typically have a halo tax. The gap between the "$2,000 camera" and the "$4,000 camera" is just weird especially since it is a price point that other vendors target. It's not like Canon to leave a major market niche with nothing filling it.

It is worth noting that it could be that the "$3,000 camera" is a real split in the industry, though. Note that when Nikon updated their "$2,000 camera" (the Z 6II to Z 6III) a couple of months ago they didn't update their "$3,000 camera" (the Z 7II) despite the 6 and 7 series bodies having been released together in the first two generations.

We haven't seen a Sony product line level update recently to see whether this is a real gap in customers and the $3,000 level just doesn't have a market or whether it's just a temporary quirk by two vendors in one niche at about the same time which could be something as simple as both having something innovative in that market and not wanting to be in the shadow of the other's announcement.