Amazing list of lenses. I really miss a 200-600 type of lens. The 500 F4 would be probably close to $12000, i would rather buy a 500mm version II for half the price and excellent condition / refurbished.
Upvote
0
Andrew Weed of THCHD sued canon and placed an injunction on further shipments. All R5s shiped thereafter are actually bootleg models built by blackmagic x fujifilm x sigma.Nope, that’s still the first faulty R5 batch.
Canon clearly stopped shipping R5’s because of technical or production issues.
Canon has never put IBIS in a DSLR. It is whole lot more difficult due to mirror and smaller EF mount.1 series buyers are not ‘feature chasers’ and Canon have been quite happy to show they are content moving at their own pace so really don’t care what Sony are doing. Canon will not put IBIS into a 1 series R until they are very very sure it won’t cause any problems and pro buyers are demanding it. As the 1DX III proves they are not there yet.
Canon has never put IBIS in a DSLR. It is whole lot more difficult due to mirror and smaller EF mount.
I am sure the R1 will have IBIS.
Why a Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-7.1 IS USM if there is already a Canon RF 100-500mm f/5.6-7.1 IS USM
I stand corrected. Shows that i don't yet have an RF camera!EF mount is the same size as RF.
you can’t use grads either but that hasn’t stopped the EF-R adapter with filter being very popular.Drop-in filter, you can't use CPOL with that or add a CPOL on top of a ND filter.
There are strong indications they will, and there are strong indicators they won’t. I wouldn’t be surprised either way.Canon has never put IBIS in a DSLR. It is whole lot more difficult due to mirror and smaller EF mount.
I am sure the R1 will have IBIS.
It is one thing to have a patent, quite another to put it into production. Given that Canon was phasing out of DSLRs anyway, it probably didn't make economic sense to put IBIS in such a low volume camera.There are strong indications they will, and there are strong indicators they won’t. I wouldn’t be surprised either way.
As for the difficulty involved in putting it in a DSLR, seriously? Canon register more patents each year than almost anybody, if they wanted to do it they could but for the EF system they chose lens stabilization as their preferred method of stabilization. The big benefit for lens based stabilization for DSLR’s is the fact that you get a stabilized view through the viewfinder, you wouldn’t if it was sensor based stabilization.
A huge and impressive list of potential future lenses is released and still a good 50% of comments here are complaints
Fwiw I'd *love* to see what that 1200mm is about. Same front element diameter as a 600 f/4? Expensive but a relative bargain compared to the last 1200.
Ordered my R5 from B&H on Sept 15th, got it delivered this week. Just shot with it last night!Anybody have updates on the R5 shipping?
Pre-ordered in July, still no updates on when they're being released!
RIP 100-400. So sad.
IS on the 135mm would be very nice, but I guess I could live without it. I'd prefer with IS though.A 100-400mm with f/7.1 at the long end can't be right.
What, no IS on the RF 135mm???
24mm at 1.8 rather than 1.4, but 35mm goes to 1.2?
Might be a reliable source in general, but some of these specifics seem off
Could this be why 50% of marriages end in divorce?A huge and impressive list of potential future lenses is released and still a good 50% of comments here are complaints
Fwiw I'd *love* to see what that 1200mm is about. Same front element diameter as a 600 f/4? Expensive but a relative bargain compared to the last 1200.