Canon EOS R6 Mark III & RF 45 F1.2 STM November 6

[David - Sydney]

I don't understand why people defend Canon cutting corners instead of demanding better from them. You pay good money for your glass, it shouldn't come with budget AF. When the competition is putting a magnetic linear motor into a $100 kit lens, Canon should be able to put high performance AF motors into every lens too.

At the risk of wading into your diatribes and doubling down etc.....
Users will look for the end result - for them - for auto focus speed and accuracy and vote with their dollars/pounds/euro.

If you want to demand something from Canon then the best place is to send them your message via their support pages.

 

[David - Sydney]

no comments allowed for the "TTArtisans Announces the TS 17mm F4 ASPH"?

One of the big advantages of the EF tilt-shift in my opinion (I want it but haven't justified getting it yet) is the ability for rear filters via the adapter rather than dinner plate sized and costed front filters.
For architecture, I would like to have smoothed clouds for contrast needing a 10 stop filter. For waterfalls, a 3 stop and CPL would be ideal or at least CPL to reduce reflections. Options like combining a Kolari clip-in filter + adapter drop-in filter would achieve this.

Gels are ok but a pain in general. Does the TTArtisans lens support gels?

 

[john1970]

Which is shameful. No one should be selling lenses at that price point with mechanical stepping motors in them.

I own this lenses and it focuses quietly and quickly using a STM design. Moreover which such a wide-angle design how much focusing does one really need to do.

 

[Askeladden]

A first party, ultra fast and cheap mirrorless lens is unheard of regardless of whatever flaws it should have and would mean a radical departure from the trend where it has always been expensive. Lately there has been a lot of interesting new lenses from all manufacturers trading blows with each other and this lens if true is probably a part of this ongoing battle.

 

[DhlcadR6]

The kit lens that Sony sells for $100 with an APS-C camera has magnetic linear drive AF. There is absolutely no excuse for Canon (or Nikon) to still be putting STM into lenses today.

Canon kit zooms are lead-crew type STM, aka linear&quiet. So what's your point.

 

[Traveler]

Slicker, right? What I can see is extremly boring rounded Canon camera design, we've seen for thousand times already. I like more sharp / boxy designs. Still waiting for some "retro" M6 II / V50 like designs with possibly external EVF.

I don't think that the design is about the look. It is just practical. Holding my R6 in my had the whole day is no issue and feels comfortable. Using a Sony A7iv made bruises on my hand after just few hours.

 

[Traveler]

Am I missing the Digit accelerator in the R6m3?

Looks like the strategy of the R5 and R6 being almost equal (except for the resolution and top LCD) is over. Would be nice to see the R6iii having a 24Mpix sensor from the R3. Instead, they choose to copy Sony and go with higher megapixel count therefore they're gonna introduce some other limitations. I understand that the R5 and R6 can't be too close to each other. And higher MP is probably an easier selling point.

 

[JohanCruyff]

I think it's in the same market segment of the recent Nikon Z 50mm 1.4, which costs 1/3 or 1/4 of the top 50mm 1.4 lenses.
The Nikon "fast and cheap" Nikon Z lenses have noticeable vignetting and need to be used at F2 or F2.8 to get the best sharpness, they say.

But, for some portraits, extreme sharpness is not necessary).

If you mean the new supposedly 45 f1.2 yes, that might be.

If your talking about the Sigma 40 1.4 Art, the thing is as sharp, if not sharper, then the RF 50 f1.2 L, is basically the best std lens ever built considering the price (around 800€ new), and by a wide margin, see for yourself

Yes, I was referring to the new 45mm 1.2.
I've read great reviews about the Sigma 40mm Art, but... sharpness and value for money are not everything, so it's not on my wishlist.

Off Topic
I think I will replace my last EF Mount lens sooner or later. It's a 50mm Sigma Art, and the shortlist for its replacement includes basically only the RF 50mm 1.2.
I don't think the RF 50mm 1.4 is worth a 1.200 eur upgrade, but I hope that the RF 45mm 1.2 will be a surprise.
We'll see.
End of OT

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Looks like the strategy of the R5 and R6 being almost equal (except for the resolution and top LCD) is over. Would be nice to see the R6iii having a 24Mpix sensor from the R3. Instead, they choose to copy Sony and go with higher megapixel count therefore they're gonna introduce some other limitations. I understand that the R5 and R6 can't be too close to each other. And higher MP is probably an easier selling point.

I think Canon is re-aligning their camera branding tiers. The R1, R3 and R5 range now seems to be their own thing. The R5 and R6 were origianlly co-developed and can be considered to be similar cameras except for the sensor (resolution and it's associated fps). They were certainly developed in the same generation of each other. Many 5D3/4 users who wanted to cross over ot the RF mount found the R5 to be too expensive and a bit too much compared to their DSLR cameras and the answer was the R6. "It's basically the same camera, but less resolution (and a fwe other bits liek the EVF and top LCD).
The R6ii was an oddball in that it seems to be developed alongside the R3. For a season, the R6ii out performed the R5's AF by quite some margin, as well as ES top FPS. Many claimed the R6ii to be the baby R3, leading many to assume the R1 would be the pro version of the R5 with 45mp.
This new R6iii seems to be co-developed alongside the R50v and the R7ii. It seems the upmarket direction of the R7 is affecting the R6iii's developement. I suspect the increase of the R6iii's resolution is to align with the R7's resolution and will probably be marketed as "these are effectively the same cameras except for the crop factor". If you want a better camera, get a R1, R3 or R5ii.
From my perspective, the rumoured R6iii specs are dissapointing and leaving me even more happy with my existing R6ii. If the R7ii has a stacked sensor (which I doubt) then I'll buy one. However, if neither the R6iii or R7ii have stacked sensor then I can't see myslef dropping this amount of coin for a very minimal return in value. I'm not sure a R5ii is on my buy list either, currently it's still rediculously over priced.
Then again, it also highlights to me what an excellent camera the R6ii is / was. I might just have to get another and be happy for another round of upgrades / sidegrades. I'd rahter run witha pair of R6ii's than a sing;e R5ii.
It seems that Canon are dragging their developement / tech drop in this wave of camera relases. It reminds me of the 5Dii and 40D/50D days where Canon dragged their feet with each release and pushed out luke warm cameras.

 

[blackcoffee17]

Looks like the strategy of the R5 and R6 being almost equal (except for the resolution and top LCD) is over. Would be nice to see the R6iii having a 24Mpix sensor from the R3. Instead, they choose to copy Sony and go with higher megapixel count therefore they're gonna introduce some other limitations. I understand that the R5 and R6 can't be too close to each other. And higher MP is probably an easier selling point.

In my opinion moving the resolution closer to R5 will make less people choose the R5. Many want higher resolution than 24mp but very few need fancy features like stacked sensor or 8K.

 

[Eloniel]

In my opinion moving the resolution closer to R5 will make less people choose the R5. Many want higher resolution than 24mp but very few need fancy features like stacked sensor or 8K.

There some truth and that's why I think they didn't include the top lcd in the R6 line with it there would be not so much to blame the R6 MK3. Maybe the EVF depending of if it's the same as R6 MK2 or replaced, anyone can see the difference with a better EVF.
I feel like I will buy the R6 MK3 and want the R5 MK3 when it will be released just for the tiny little details that will be still missing from the R6 line.

We're closer and closer to "end game" camera, once global shutter and no viewfinder blackout will be implemented in R5 lines I don't see a lot of improvement possible (except computer photography)

 

[candyman]

We're closer and closer to "end game" camera, once global shutter and no viewfinder blackout will be implemented in R5 lines I don't see a lot of improvement possible (except computer photography)

I still see room for improvement. Specifically, the optimization of exposure metering. It's far from optimal now. There are lighting conditions where the camera, for example, goes to 6400 ISO with evaluative metering, even though the lighting conditions are perfectly fine for lower ISO values (see the attached photo. 6400 ISO is, of course, a huge overkill in this lighting situation). Yes, you can use software noise reduction. Software noise reduction has its limitations. I don't use it above 6400. I find that too much detail is lost. Cross-type AF points, like those on the R1, help with AF performance, but certainly also with determining the correct exposure. So, in my opinion, there's still room for improvement in the area of accurate light metering.

 

[blackcoffee17]

I still see room for improvement. Specifically, the optimization of exposure metering. It's far from optimal now. There are lighting conditions where the camera, for example, goes to 6400 ISO with evaluative metering, even though the lighting conditions are perfectly fine for lower ISO values (see the attached photo. 6400 ISO is, of course, a huge overkill in this lighting situation). Yes, you can use software noise reduction. Software noise reduction has its limitations. I don't use it above 6400. I find that too much detail is lost. Cross-type AF points, like those on the R1, help with AF performance, but certainly also with determining the correct exposure. So, in my opinion, there's still room for improvement in the area of accurate light metering.


View attachment 226496

Or the ability to control exposure at pixel level. No more multiple exposures for HDR.

 

[Eloniel]

Or the ability to control exposure at pixel level. No more multiple exposures for HDR.

That could come from "Counting photon sensors" that would be another major improvement like global shutter as it would improve considerably dynamic range and noise but this one seems far far away, I don't see it for at the very least a decade if it's ever come to photography camera.

 

[Del Paso]

The kit lens that Sony sells for $100 with an APS-C camera has magnetic linear drive AF. There is absolutely no excuse for Canon (or Nikon) to still be putting STM into lenses today.

There is no excuse for you to keep posting your whining.
Why don't you join the Sony forum and praise their wonderful accomplishments and be happy?

 

[David_B]

Looks like the strategy of the R5 and R6 being almost equal (except for the resolution and top LCD) is over. Would be nice to see the R6iii having a 24Mpix sensor from the R3. Instead, they choose to copy Sony and go with higher megapixel count therefore they're gonna introduce some other limitations. I understand that the R5 and R6 can't be too close to each other. And higher MP is probably an easier selling point.

You're making the wrong comparisons. The R8 is the threat to the R6. The 32MP is to make it more different to the R8.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

In my opinion moving the resolution closer to R5 will make less people choose the R5. Many want higher resolution than 24mp but very few need fancy features like stacked sensor or 8K.

Canon are certainly changing strategy with the R6iii, previously it was a lower resolution R5. Now the R5ii and R3 have a stacked sensors, Canon are making the R6iii distinct in that it doesn't have a stacked sensor...so instead they are adding a bit more resolution. As I said earlier, the hainv the R7ii going more upmarket has caused Canon t re-think the R6iii's direction.

 

[SHAMwow]

You're making the wrong comparisons. The R8 is the threat to the R6. The 32MP is to make it more different to the R8.

What in the world are you talking about? Do you guys shoot with these cameras? The R8 isn't anywhere close to encroaching upon the R6.

 

[P-visie]

I think the camera companies do have some tricks up their sleeves to get our money. There's definitely room for new sensor designs such as SPAD sensors or the sensor that can see colors in the dark.

I recently read about a technique which is beeing developed for in camera use:
Image you shoot a pic at ISO 25.600 or above. Noise level is extremely through the roof. Now, since noise isn't always placed exactly the same, you could take 100 images at 25.600 an then let the camera subtract the noise from each individual pixel and you end up with a practical noise or low noise image without using noise in post and with preserving much more detail. Sounds absolutely lovely. Once the technology is fully developed, it could even work with handheld pics (probably not 100 images). That would a huge improvement for low-light/ nighttime pics (of course not moving objects).

Google Pixel smartphones also use this technique (since the Pixel 2), see https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/google-pixel-2/3

That technique is also used for astrophotography where multiple images are stacked in post processing to reduce noise. See: https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/...processing-remove-noise-from-planetary-images

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Google Pixel smartphones also use this technique (since the Pixel 2), see https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/google-pixel-2/3

I should've been more clear. Cameras should be able to do with hundreds of exposure and put them together in-camera. Kind like what google does with 9 exposures as stated in your article.

But yeah, that was just one thing of the top of my head. I don´t even know how long ago I read the article and how up to date it is. I'll go look for it.