It depends what you are comparing with. Like in @Sporgon's example above, comparing 1 shot at 1/1000s and iso 100 with 6 shots at 1/6000s and iso 600, the DR is the same for both provided the circuitry doesn't introduce noise. But, comparing 1 shot at 1/1000s and iso 100 with 6 shots at 1/1000s and iso 100, the multiple shots give better DR.
I don't see the phased discontinuation of EF glass as a problem, because there are quite literally *millions* of used EF lenses by Canon, Sigma, Tamron etc out there. There is very little risk involved in buying used lenses, and the sheer number of lenses on the market makes it very easy to find one in absolutely mint condition for a fraction of the new price. In the very unlikely case that a used lens proves to be faulty, in most countries you are legally entitled to return to the seller and get a refund within 14/28 days of purchase (assuming that you have bought it on line). And if you buy from a retailer, over-the-counter, you'll generally get a 3 or 6 month parts and labour warranty anyway.
| Lens Name | Elements | Aperture | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prime Lenses | ||||
| Canon RF 5.2mm f2.8L Dual Fisheye 3D | 12/10 | 7 | ||
| Canon RF 16mm f2.8 | 9/7 | 7R | ||
| Canon 24mm f1.8 Macro IS | 11/9 | 9R | ||
| Canon RF 35mm f1.8 IS Macro Review | 11/9 | 9R | ||
| Canon RF 50mm f1.2L USM | 15/9 | 10R | ||
| Canon RF 50mm f1.8 | 6/5 | 7R | ||
| Canon RF 85mm f2 Macro IS | 12/11 | 9R | ||
| Canon RF 85mm f1.2L USM | 13/9 | 9R | ||
| Canon RF 85mm f1.2L USM DS | 13/9 | 9R | ||
| Canon RF 100mm f2.8L IS Macro | 17/13 | 9 | ||
| Canon RF 600mm f11 IS | 10/7 | fixed | ||
| Canon RF 800mm f5.6L IS | 26/18 | 9R | ||
| Canon RF 800mm f11 IS | 11/8 | fixed | ||
| Canon RF 1200mm f8L IS | 26/18 | 9R | ||
| Zoom Lenses | ||||
| Canon RF 14-35mm f4L IS | 16/12 | 9R | ||
| Canon RF 15-35mm f2.8L IS | 16/12 | 9R | ||
| Canon RF 15-30mm f4.5-6.3 IS | 13/11 | 7 | ||
| Canon RF 24-70mm f2.8 L IS | 21/15 | 9R | ||
| Canon RF 24-105mm f4 L IS | 16/14 | 9R | ||
| Canon RF 24-105mm f4-f7.1 IS | 13/11 | 7R | ||
| Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS | 21/15 | 7R | ||
| Canon RF 28-70mm f2 L | 19/13 | 9R | ||
| Canon RF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS | 17/13 | 9R | ||
| Canon RF 70-200mm f4L IS | 16/11 | 9 | ||
| Canon RF 100-400 f5.6-f8 IS | 12/9 | 9R | ||
| Canon RF 100-500mm f4.5-7.1L IS | 20/14 | 7R | ||
| APS-C Zoom Lenses | ||||
| Canon RF-S 18-45mm f4.5-6.3 IS | 7/7 | 7R | ||
| Canon RF-S 18-150mm f3.5-6.3 IS | 17/13 | 7R | ||
| EF to RF Adapters | ||||
| EF to RF | -- | -- | ||
| EF to RF + Control Ring | -- | -- | ||
| EF to RF + Filter V ND | -- | -- | ||
| EF to RF + Filter Polarizer | -- | -- | ||
| Canon RF Extenders | ||||
| Canon Extender RF 2x | -- | -- | ||
| Canon Extender RF 1.4x | -- | -- |
IMO, it's unlikely to be based on R10 body. Assuming that the rumour has some truth in it, the camera would have a completely new form factor. I'd hazard a guess that it will be a rangefinder-styled body without a "hump". It could possibly have a pop-up EVF or an M6-style accessory EVF, but most likely just a tilt-and-swivel flippy screen, and/or a top-corner EVF as found in the Sony a7c.
Yeah, Canon probably made a fortune out of selling the ridiculously overpriced accessory EVF for the M6 (OK it was cheaper as part of the kit), so they might decide to repeat the trick... I do often wonder though, about how many of those accessory EVFs got lost or just ended up unused in the back of a cupboard.
You and me both. R50 sounds like it might be a decent option for travel if I pack the STM primes.
It's possible that the R50 might be a vlogging camera, in which case it probably won't have an EVF. But given the "R50" name, it seems more logical that it would be an M50-style camera, in which case it will have a built-in EVF. Always fun to speculate. We'll know the answer soon
I have migrated from 7D/5Diii/5Div and now to R5 (pre-order). In each case, I hit the limits for some aspect of them but I haven't with the R5 after 2.5 years and have confidence that it will be good for some time to come.
The evolution of quality manufacturing countries is fascinating to me. Post-war Germany then post-war Japan, then South Korea (chips/TVs/Hyundai/Kia etc) and Taiwan for chips. China are moving up from the low cost items but will be somewhat constrained by strategic limitations of technology transfers. Their massive middle class is self supporting though.
Beside the point of this discussion, why do you believe smaller sensor formats will benefit more/first from this? As it's computing, surely it's file size (ie resolution) that matters to the speed, not the physical sensor size?
Is @entoman referring to the "computational photography" abilities of phones? They have ample internal computing power (or offload to the cloud computing) where multiple shots can be taken quickly and merged for a "better" photo. Their ability for HDR shots that look reasonable for social media is impressive and ability to publish is unmatched. The main limitation is lenses and having 3 or 4 primes has helped but telephoto is still their achilles heel. I would not be surprised that vast improvements in this area come soon.
R1 release early means Sony a1ii have a clear target to have better paper spec
If I could get a R5 spec camera in a RP size but had to give up IBIS, dual cards and LP-E6 battery yet still pay full R5 price, I would do it in a second. Canon isn’t making cameras for either of us specifically but to cover the needs of the most customers.
