The legendary image editing software suite also introduces halation, glass textures, and chromatic shifts, as well as a host of workflow improvements that open up new artistic possibilities. Nik Collection 9 delivers the most ambitious update in the suite's history, combining powerful new Al-enhanced masking tools with a fresh approach to color grading and a […]

See full article...

A 20-70 (or even better 24-85) f2.8 VCM in the pricerange where the 35/85mm f1.4 VCM lays would be very interesting. Especially if it will have IS aswell

Chig said:

What a bargain ! Will it work with the new CINE-SERVO 50-1000mm T5.0-8.9 ?
For only just over $100K I'll be able to shoot video of kiwi and owls in the dark without any flash
I need to start buying those Powerball tickets

Click to expand...

In Canon's official video they pair it with the new 40-1200(?)! Your dreams can come true !

P-visie said:

The Sigma lens starts at 28mm, not 24mm.
See: https://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/a024_28_105_28/

Click to expand...

Thanks and that was also going to be my comment. For me, 24mm is a much more useful starting point than 28mm because I use my 'walkaround' lens indoors as well as outdoors.

I think we can look to the past to get an idea of what Canon might do with the R7 Mk II.

The Canon 7D Mark II features advanced, pro-level autofocus tracking with a dedicated 150,000-pixel RGB + IR metering sensor to aid focus, similar to the 1D X's Intelligent Tracking and Recognition (iTR) system. While not technically a separate "coprocessor" chip dedicated solely to focus calculations, the 7D II uses dual DIGIC 6 image processors to handle high-speed 10 fps shooting and advanced AF calculations simultaneously.

Jaysheldon said:

I should clarify: I'd like an RF-S pancake lens equivalent to a 24, 28 or 35mm FF.

Click to expand...

I know its not rf-s, but there is already a 25.6mm equivalent 16mm full frame pancake, in case that interests you. No worries if you are wanting an exact 24 or 28, but just thought Id mention it.

Noreaster said:

View attachment 228954View attachment 228955

Click to expand...

This is a happy dog!

Can I ask is it me? comparing he quick menu between the R5 II and the R6 II in the upper left corner is the Mode icon. But on the R5II that is been move Down one line down. is this Normal?

Mr. Warbucks said:

If the R7Ii gets an R6 body with cooling it will most probably grow weight. The birding set up requires low weight. The Rf100-400 is pretty light, but apenditure comprise at the long end.
If the price really would be around 2300$, would an OM1 mark II with their oly 100-400 lens not a better value proposition? Micro 4/3 gives crop factor 2. Is the lower MP an issue? The sensor is smaller, hence probably not? Probably same weight range, however a bit more expensive?

Click to expand...

I made exactly this evaluation when getting started in bird photography. The OM1 is a nice camera, but the M43 size advantage is undermined by the 100-400 lens being the same weight as the RF100-500. The R7 + RF 100-400 was substantially lighter *and* cheaper than the Olympus kit when I was comparing them - the Canon combo was only slightly more than the OM1 body and almost $1500 less when adding the lens. Furthermore, for birds pixel density is a better metric than crop factor since you're rarely 'filling the frame'. The OM1 and the R7 have basically identical pixel density, so in terms of 'pixels per duck' at equivalent focal length they're a wash. (that changes if you consider video though - crop factor will apply to video as it's typically full-width of the sensor)

The OM1 MkII does have better AF than the existing R7 (mostly in consistency rather than absolute capability). I think it's a working assumption that an R7II in line with these rumors will fix the AF weaknesses of the R7 and elevate it close to the R5II which is at least on par with the OM1. Of course, the rumored R7II seems like a mismatch with the RF 100-400 and pairing with the RF 100-500 will now likely end up being $1000-1500 more than the OM setup so the value question flips the other direction.

LSXPhotog said:

It's important to note that the "FCC Covered List" restricts DJI as a company from getting approval to register ANY new electronic device within the country. The products we've seen hit the market from DJI in the past 4 months were previously registered and approved before product launch. So the Pocket 4 will not be coming to the United States.

Click to expand...

I was wondering that. I haven't been paying close attention to the issues with DJI and the USA. What you're saying definitely makes sense.

I'll update the post, with credit.

To me this is a philosophical game changer - If quality and durability and user friendliness go with it, as GoPro seemed to be veering off. GoPro just revived the MFT lens market, if the market responds.

I am going to put this on my R100 (that I do not own, to spite Richard) and take BIF pictures with it. That is like equivalent of 2,880mm of focal length using the built-in 1.5 Tx. Easily I can zoom to a hummingbird in the next county while sitting in my living room drinking vodka, getting dialysis after selling my kidneys for it. Don't burst my bubble as to why it will be insane or impossible!

Canon Rumors said:

Ultima 25-600mm T4 S35 Broadcast Zoom

See full article...

Click to expand...

Whoa. Laowa is such an interesting company. To get 600mm T4 the front element of that lens is probably 165mm in diameter or maybe even bigger. That is a seriously large piece of glass and an interesting indication of where Laowa is going with lens design. I wonder how long before we see them add more fast supertele hybrid/mirrorless lenses to the 200/2 they released not so long ago!

ronbyram said:

Hello gang, first I know canon has these white lenses hoods designed for the RF 100-500 and 70-200 lens. But I dislike these larger white hoods.
But my question is can an older Black EF hood be used instead? Has anyone done this?

Click to expand...

I use the lenshood of the RF 50 1.2 on the 100-500. Perfect.
And a JJC copy of the 24-105Z hood on 70-200Z. Just physical protection.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Hz8YBHDKsc

300mm f/2.0 Nikkor

USM was THE technology which tilted the majority of professional photographers shooting 135 format to switch from Nikon to Canon in the early 1990s.

Prior to the autofocus revolution in the late 1980s and early 1990s over 75% of pros (outside the Soviet Bloc) working in the 135 format shot Nikon. The rest were split between Canon, Minolta, Pentax, Leica, Contax, Konica, and a host of others. Keep in mind that much commercial and fashion work was being done with Medium and Large Format systems. But PJs and sports/action shooters were using Nikon 135 format film cameras in droves.

When Canon "abandoned" the old FD mount in 1987 and introduced the all electronic EF mount, Canon lost many of the few professional shooters they had. There was a lot of bitterness from those heavily invested in professional FD lenses that they would not be getting any improved bodies going forward. For the most part, the pro sector wasn't that excited about AF. They viewed it as a crutch for less skilled posers and amateurs. A good shooter could outperform the earliest AF systems.

Then along came the EF 300mm f/2.8 L USM in November of 1987 and the EOS 1 in 1989. With that combination, suddenly the potential of all electronic communication between camera and lens became apparent. USM was fast, accurate, and quiet. Did I mention it was fast and accurate? For the first time AF systems could outperform a seasoned pro focusing the lens shooting athletes moving erratically. And it could do it at 1.5-2 frames per second! Even faster with external Motor Drives.

Within 5 years of the introduction of the EOS 1, Canon had a majority of professional photographers working in the 135 format and then held that lead for the next three decades.

It's going to be sad to say goodbye to USM.

By God, Woodrow, It's been one hell of a party! - Augustus McCrae

Sing it Willie: ♫♪ Nothing lasts forever but old Fords and a natural stone ♪♫

Bob Howland said:

Neuro, once again you prove that you're an obnoxious bully.

Click to expand...

That he is, but on this point he is also correct.

AJ said:

Thanks! I'll give DLO a try on some of my old files.

Click to expand...

Sure thing! With my R6 and my general subjects I usually just keep in-camera DLO to max, and for serious editing on something special I run the image through DPP to get a DLO-ified TIFF that I then play with elsewhere.

Canon's DLO optimizes for the most interesting things, even with EF lenses. It will often correct lenses for fuzziness caused by weird stuff like field curvature. The primary reason the 20mm f.28 USM is "soft" is because its focal plane is very curved, and the likely reason people find f/8 or f/11 to be "sharp" is that at those settings on an UWA lens the DOF includes much of the area affected by the curve (the curve and DOF start to overlap relative to the focal point). You can actually test this for yourself by setting the lens to f/2.8 and shooting a scene with an arc of something — plastic cups, for an example — and adjust their relative arc until most are in focus; or alternatively place them in a line and keep bumping the f-stop. There are other factors, like how Canon struggled with corners for years, and so forth. Anyhow, Canon's DLO as of the R series knows of this fact and makes seemingly progressive sharpness adjustments to the image to better placate modern taste with a few tricks of illusion. DLO also deals with other shortcomings, such as the vignetting, coma to a degree, etc.

Playing in this manner also teaches one a lot about how Canon can / is using DLO as a sophisticated crutch for hybrid lenses like the VCM series, which by design make use of distortion correction as needed to keep barrels the same size across the series for consistent use with video equipment.

Again, this isn't a top-shelf L lens and never will be — DLO works with what it has — but with DLO I find it's a very pleasant personal interest lens for when the mood strikes.

Ah, thank you for that! I'll be on Vancouver Island in early June, and this makes me looking forward to it even more. If you happen to know some good spots, feel free to share

Chig said:

Yes from what I've seen in reviews, Jan Wegener (who's highly regarded in the bird photography world and one of my favourite You Tubers) has tested it and said it's very good with 2x https://youtu.be/DYBNX16zIhw?si=yTqtOfKQ3DbILnkC

Click to expand...

Jan Wegener is one of the few reviewers I can take seriously.

candyman said:

EDIT: I am reading "The IS unit is able to lock and unlock the shifting lens cell depending on the IS switch position on the lens barrel. Mechanically locking the compensation optics prevents the lens from unintentional shifts when stabilization is turned off."

Click to expand...

That's in reference to EF lenses. RF lenses don't do that. No point in switching off IS for transport of an RF lens.

Anon said:

What a blast from the past! I really loved my 5D II, and with the small 40mm pancake it was surprisingly portable.

Click to expand...

Me too! I’m team Canon but the 5D II was so great! I didn’t think I would ever upgrade. I kept it until the R5 and don’t think I will ever buy another camera until it can’t be fixed! 5D IV is my backup.

GirlsAreBeautiful said:

I mean, you have to build those electronic parts as well. And the design part especially looks very very complex.

Click to expand...

Some... but Canon, e.g., builds sensors but buys DIGIC CPUs and other chips. In any case, building chips is relatively quick once the facilities are in place, while growing / polishing / preparing the big glass elements for big whites takes up to 1 year or so in certain cases and it's therefore much less scalable

Very nice shots, antonn.

I know this is a Canon enthusiast forum and likely nearly everyone here has R as their only OR primary system, but just wondering if anyone has another branded system as their primary, and the R system (any EOS R body) as their secondary system?

And why? Just out of curiosity and fun discussion.

I've shot Canon large sensor digital since '05. Been a Canon shooter since. In 2015 I started to migrate over to Fujifilm for its smaller size and to basically get into mirrorless. Also shot EOS M for a long while too.

Today my X-T5 is my primary system. I use Canon EF glass (for fun) on it and it shoots near natively in operation. But I thought why not also shoot a Canon R body for even additional options. However its still large, with EF glass especially. So it's just really a secondary/hipster case. I'm not saying one is better than the other, in fact I prefer Canon in many ways, I just overall like using a smaller system and love the Fujifilm dials and overall results. If canon made a highly polished compact APS-C system with dedicated high end APS-C primes--both with high aesthetics/materials quality/metal build, I'd go for it. But no such thing exists.