Search results

So long as Canon stays committed to professionals, it seems to me they would do well to flesh out that niche. I personally can't afford to keep two systems (sensor formats) up to date. I've got to have an R5 for my work, and any backup body also has to be full-frame — so my lenses do what...

You gotta be kidding me.

I really like that floppy screen and wish Canon would adopt one like it. It'd be nice to be able to use it like a waist level finder. Sure you can approximate such a thing with Canon's, but not so much with an L-bracket attached...

Yep - I do the shift-stitch thing, but almost always it's a vertical shift. Not always a horror mess - sometimes I'm just adding sky. The time does indeed add up! And I can't make myself buy and use one of those clamp-the-lens contraptions. If Canon would only put a shoe on the lens like I...

Yeah Canon has some holes to fill. I'd love to see a collection of L type f/1.4 lenses, including a 28......

I've wondered about using a 11-24 instead of a T+S lens, leveling the thing and then cropping out what I don't need. Then I'd have a more utilitarian lens than the 17. BUT I've got the 17, not the 11-24......

I'm not OPPOSED to AF or tilt..... Not anti-AF, anti-tilt.

Ha - yeah, maybe that's a Mac thing?

Dump the Sony stuff—problem solved!

Autofocus is a thing I don\'t need for architectural and don\'t want to pay for. Buildings don\'t move much. I don\'t use \'tilt\' either, but I understand they can\'t go so small-niche as to make manual focus shift-only lenses cost effectively. I\'ll prolly just buck up and and go along...

Talk of a rangefinder style body always goes with talk of another APS-C body. I wish Canon would recognize the value of a full-frame 'rangefinder' like the Sony a7C. WITH a viewfinder and a flip out screen so it can be used like an old Hasselblad or TLR at waist level. And resolution like an...

Not that I know of—they did a /2.8 and a /1.8......

A 28 f/1.4!!! I hate to get too excited, but that's a perfect lens for what I want to do...

Respectfully disagree. 35mm is really a workhorse lens: journalism, events, street photography. Second only to 50mm, I personally would guess...

Yeah, put me down for a 28mm f/1.4. I've never been comfortable with 35mm. I've had three over the years and sold two of them for lack of use. Hanging on to the RF f/1.8 only for lack of a 28. I've never much liked 24 for a walking around lens, either—too wide.

A little off-topic, but I like the R8 or R9 idea. Though I'm thinking rangefinder style with a viewfinder built in, and full frame. Same internals as an R5 so it could be my travel camera AND a backup to the R5. I hate having to have two identical bodies; one sitting around gathering dust...

Why not? Use the same physical mount. And I can imagine picking up a standard zoom and using it on my R5 set in crop mode. That could be a great travel camera without having to commit to a dedicated APS-C body.

Looks like a wonderful camera, no doubt. But at the risk of sounding like a fanby, what makes the Z9 "...above Canon’s upcoming EOS R3 in the marketplace..." a '9' instead of a '3'?

That 16mm would be a great focal length for dance floor photos or all kinds of in-your-face group shots......

Good to see this one coming! No idea if I'll ever have reason to get one, but I hope so. And when that time comes I hope to be able to justify the 2.8 instead--we'll see.