Quad Pixel Autofocus is ready for production [CR1]

[GMCPhotographics]

I have my doubts about this.
Canon mostly sells cheap cameras and cheap lenses.
I have no doubt that they make most of their money on lenses.
However, the EF mount was used by a lot of camera vendors while the RF is only Canon and RED.
Sigma is pushing for the L mount to become the standard mount for full-frame mirrorless video.

According to Digital Rev, Canon's biggest selling cameras are the R6 and R6ii. Hardly cheap.
Canon are selling more lenses for higher profit margins than ever before. Again according to their site, the best selling RF lenses are the RF 24-70mm f2.8 LIS and the RF 70-200mm f2.8 LIS. Neither are particularly cheap.

RF lenses are selling in higher volumes than EF lenses.

Does anyone actually use an L mount alliance lens? No wonder Sigma are pushing it...no one wants to use it.

 

[Loswr]

According to Digital Rev, Canon's biggest selling cameras are the R6 and R6ii. Hardly cheap.
Canon are selling more lenses for higher profit margins than ever before. Again according to their site, the best selling RF lenses are the RF 24-70mm f2.8 LIS and the RF 70-200mm f2.8 LIS.

Does Kai provide a source for those statements? Because frankly, that sounds like bullsh!t. I suspect what was meant is that those are the Digital Rev Store's best-selling Canon bodies and lenses. That means absolutely nothing as far as global sales are concerned.

In Japan last month, the best-selling Canon cameras (according to BCN) were the R10 (#2) and R50 (#3 and #5), with the M50 II (#7) and 250D (#9) also in the top 10. The best-selling Canon FF body was the RP at #18, with the R8 at #40 and the R6II at #48.

 

[3kramd5]

A greyscale histogram of the raw information before gamma correction has been applied would be a huge lump all the way to the left of every properly exposed shot.

What I'd like is an indication of whether highlights are clipped in any channel in the raw data, rather than in a rastered 8-bit container.

 

[Loswr]

What I'd like is an indication of whether highlights are clipped in any channel in the raw data, rather than in a rastered 8-bit container.

Are you familiar with UniWB?

 

[Del Paso]

I have my doubts about this.
Canon mostly sells cheap cameras and cheap lenses.
I have no doubt that they make most of their money on lenses.
However, the EF mount was used by a lot of camera vendors while the RF is only Canon and RED.
Sigma is pushing for the L mount to become the standard mount for full-frame mirrorless video.

And I have strong doubts as to the future of the L mount.
Panasonic is in trouble selling cameras, the Leica SL2 is far from being a huge success, revelatory signs are discounts, quite uncommon for Leica, and the Sigma cameras don't sell too well. And Sigma's lens range is too limited.
The L mount, in my opinion, is still a long way from becoming a standard in video.

 

[Dragon]

I have my doubts about this.
Canon mostly sells cheap cameras and cheap lenses.
I have no doubt that they make most of their money on lenses.
However, the EF mount was used by a lot of camera vendors while the RF is only Canon and RED.
Sigma is pushing for the L mount to become the standard mount for full-frame mirrorless video.

Curious to see your list of a "lot" of camera vendors that used EF mount. Black Magic has some video cameras and there is an Arri adapter to EF that only supports a tiny bit of the protocol, but I can't think of any still cameras other than Canon. Both L-mount and RF mount will take time for inclusion into cinema because the short flange distance severely limits the room for ND filters. Canon working with Red was brilliant, given Red's tendency to push technology forward.

 

[Michael Clark]

Does Kai provide a source for those statements? Because frankly, that sounds like bullsh!t. I suspect what was meant is that those are the Digital Rev Store's best-selling Canon bodies and lenses. That means absolutely nothing as far as global sales are concerned.

In Japan last month, the best-selling Canon cameras (according to BCN) were the R10 (#2) and R50 (#3 and #5), with the M50 II (#7) and 250D (#9) also in the top 10. The best-selling Canon FF body was the RP at #18, with the R8 at #40 and the R6II at #48.

Is Kai back at Digital Rev? Didn't he leave them several years ago?

 

[Loswr]

Is Kai back at Digital Rev? Didn't he leave them several years ago?

Apparently not. That shows how long ago I last paid attention to them. My mistake on the name, but that aside I don’t believe whoever said the R6/R6II are Canon’s best-selling cameras.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Curious to see your list of a "lot" of camera vendors that used EF mount. Black Magic has some video cameras and there is an Arri adapter to EF that only supports a tiny bit of the protocol, but I can't think of any still cameras other than Canon. Both L-mount and RF mount will take time for inclusion into cinema because the short flange distance severely limits the room for ND filters. Canon working with Red was brilliant, given Red's tendency to push technology forward.

I specifically mentioned video.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

And I have strong doubts as to the future of the L mount.
Panasonic is in trouble selling cameras, the Leica SL2 is far from being a huge success, revelatory signs are discounts, quite uncommon for Leica, and the Sigma cameras don't sell too well. And Sigma's lens range is too limited.
The L mount, in my opinion, is still a long way from becoming a standard in video.

Leica does not need to sell in high volume to stick around.
Panasonic should do better now that they switched to PDAF.
They do need a more advanced camera than the S5 II.
I am curious what will come next but the G9 II is a good sign.
I do agree that Sigma needs to step up their game.

 

[Del Paso]

"Leica does not need to sell in high volume to stick around."
This is only true for the M, with the S and SL series, which face competition, things are quite different.
Why is Leica obliged to use some Panasonic or Sigma lens designs? Because they would be unable to amortize R&D and production cost, therefore using foreign designs mechanically rebuilt as "Leica" lenses. Even according to official Leica salespeople, the SL costs are hardly covered by the more than modest sales figures. Whoever has seen an SL2 in the "wild"? I haven't. Yet, the genuine Leica SL lenses are fantastic!

 

[Dragon]

I specifically mentioned video.

So you did, right at the end. I missed the connection to the previous content. It is worth noting that cinema lenses typically do not have autofocus or IS, so the only electronic connection needed is aperture. EF is a rugged mount and has a 10mm shorter flange distance than PL, so a bit easier to design lenses for, but cinema camera vendors using the mount with one function activated is not the same as using EF mount in depth (i.e. using the protocol). As I said above, the short flange distance of all the mirrorless mounts is an obstacle to easy acceptance in the cinema world due to the need for space for ND filters. Clever design could make the short flange distance work, but it won't happen quickly. It is good to remember that there is a lot of superstition in Hollywood. I know of a sound stage that stayed in operation long after it should have been torn down because the sound track for a great and successful movie was made there and many others wanted to make their sound tracks there as well for good luck. Similar superstition surrounds specific Panavision lenses (and I mean specific by serial number). Clearly, the broader market is not weighed down by superstition, but the glitterati still do tend to set the pace for change.

 

[3kramd5]

Are you familiar with UniWB?

Nope. Looks interesting; thanks.