Are these the 7 RF lenses Canon will be announcing in 2020? [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
A prime lens less than 24mm and below f2 would be great for astro/milky way. 24mm is a little bit limiting for that but works ok for me (I've shot stars at 24mm f2.8 with my 24-70).
Depending on the price, I'd be very interested in a wide-angle wide-aperture prime. f1.2 would allow shooting at ISO ~400-800 instead of 1600-3200 which would be great.
Upvote
0
Then my camera must have something wrong, because i do only wildlife (from years ago) and im having always front or backfocusing problems. The camera confirms focus in servo or one-shot and its clearly off... For BirdsInFlight, stationary subjects like in my bird-hide... And im not talking about the speed wich is slower compared to my dslr's.. Im talking about a thing that a mirrorless camera is supposed to have not.. In fact i do microadjustments in my dslr cameras to nail the focus always, but in this sistem you can't. I've tried everything : configuration of all the af scenarios(locked speed etc) , isos, shutter speeds, apertures, focusing areas/metods and always the same isue.. Im waiting to test it with the Rf100-500 and give it the oportunity of being an ef-to-rf thing but probably it would be a waste of time and money...
Ps: im waiting for a pure wildlife canon mirrorless like the Sony A9, and some Rf 300 2.8, 400 2.8, 500 F4.... But probably it is better to sell everything of my Rf sistem and wait patiently with my old dslr
Upvote
0
Actually, the shutter lag ("time from fully pressing shutter button to image capture") is relatively long in R in mechanical shutter mode, because the shutter needs to close first, and only then to start opening again. The shutter lag in the electronic first curtain mode is slightly shorter than the shutter lag of 5D4.
Upvote
0
Very interesting thanks, I've never thought about these shutter challenges on mirrorless.
In terms of the EVF lag, I'm wondering why it becomes an issue. If EVF does 30fps, it's 33ms delay max which is 2 times lower than the shutter lag, and 3 times lower than human's reaction.
However, I haven't seen the R's EVF, but LV on DSLRs feels much more laggy than 33ms, I can tell by simply waiving my hand in front of the camera. I'd say there's maybe 100-200ms delay. The signal processing before the frame is rendered on the back screen clearly takes much longer.
Upvote
0
If I had the means to do both zooms and primes I would. But I'm not giving up my 1.4L primes. The zooms look incredible and it's VERY tempting (especially now that we will have IBIS moving forward) but I love my 1.4 too much. I'm far more tempted to get a 24-70 f2.8 IS. I need a quality all-arounder but I'm not gonna spend $3000 for one. For someone who is building a kit (no lens library yet) the f2 zooms make a LOT of sense. Buying a '35 and 50 is more than the f2 zoom (provided you are willing to sacrifice 1 stop on EF and 1.5 on RF)I know! Already own the 28-70 F2. Months ago, I sold almost all my EF mount primes to purchase that monster.... and I will never regret about that changebut I work as a wedding photographer. For the moment, the combination of 17-40 f4 + 28-70 f2 is more than enough for my work. But never knows, the future will tell
Upvote
0
It's a delay not from the time when the event happened, but from the time the photoelectrons that recorded the event have got scanned from the sensor, the whole scanned image has been processed and converted for packing into JPEG.
Also, the main problem this delay causes seems (to me) to be in the ability to do panning (of tightly framed scenes in particular). For dynamic scenes, human brain actually sees not what is shown on the EVF, but what would be expected to see on the EVF given the preceding frames, the innate delay of human vision (about 100 ms or so) and the brain's ability to predict what has been happening during that time. This ability was built upon training to follow the projection of a moving real world object without an EVF delay, both as:
1. the natural selection for human brains that can hunt better and
2. the particular training the photographers have already got with their OVFs.
How much it's the latter and not the former will determine how successful the photographers can be in retraining themselves to pan tightly framed scenes with EVFs.
Upvote
0
30 FPS would render an EVF unusable. Even LiveView is 60 FPS on the current DSLRs.
In another thread I described some of the issues that arise when using an EVF for fast subjects:
What’s next from Canon in 2020?
It's a very sexy-looking device. I'm not very fond of the more angular look of the R and RP, but this one brings back just enough "Canon curves" while still being recognizably its own thing. Yep! True! I really like this look, the R and RP ins not so beautiful. But this one..... Yaayy!! :love...
www.canonrumors.com
Upvote
0
What's your problem with STM? The RF lenses are all focus by wire anyway, is there really much of a difference between STM and other implementations if it is electronically coupled anyway?
Upvote
0
Yep. The thing is, all these operations should be taking less than one frame duration (on average), otherwise you don't get the desired FPS number for EVF or LiveView. If they're taking more than one frame persistently, you'll need to skip rendering persistently and the FPS drops. The calculations get more tricky if some parallel processing happens, still the processing time shouldn't be drastically different from the time period between the frames.
I haven't shot action with EVF yet but what you say may be very true. But if they bring the EVF lag down to 1/30 - 1/60s, it'll be much less than other factors.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 2 staff post(s)
