Search results

Exactly. Look at any rectilinear ultrawide photo (optically corrected) and things do appear stretched in the corners. It's the nature of rectilinear projection. It's a similar problem to map projections which tend to distort by their very nature. So when we take a barrel-distorted image and...

I wonder if the 14-20/2 design requires a bulging front element, or if it'll be flat like the RF 14-35.

Indeed. Chances are that these patents are meant to block competitors from making lenses with these designs.

900 USD for an all manual 75 mm f/1.5? No thanks. For not much more money you can get a Sigma 85 1.4 in EF mount.

I'd bring the 24-105, and the 16/2.8. I'd leave the fisheye at home. If you want fisheye, just shoot the 16/2.8 and don't apply corrections ;>) I wouldn't bring the 100-500 unless you have specific wildlife in mind. The 100-400 is ideal for travel and for general purpose telephoto shooting...

Subscription? That'll be as popular as charging for use of the bathroom on an airplane. If Canon is looking for a revenue stream like this then maybe they should reconsider licensing their RF mount to third-party manufacturers.

Looks like a very interesting lens for astro applications.

I think the 28 mm will be a RF 28/1.4 L, a pro lens. On the consumer side, there already is a RF 24/1.8 IS (4 mm wider) and a RF 28/2.8 (1 1/3 stop slower than f/1.8). It would seem silly to add another consumer wideangle with a 28/1.8 I think the big surprise here is that we're talking 28 mm...

Maybe the mirrorless data aren't so clear after all. https://petapixel.com/2024/02/12/sony-disputes-canons-number-one-mirrorless-brand-in-2023-claim/ Anyways, the whole thing is pointless chest-thumping. There are two leading brands with Nikon a solid third. Choice is good.

Now now, no reason to get sassy. I read the article (with my reading glasses on) and I didn't see anything about interchangeable lenses. The reality is is that most folks use a cellphone to capture the moment.

"The Mirrorless Data is Clear: Canon is #1" We're talking interchangeable lens cameras, right? I would have thought Apple or Samsung are #1. So just what are Canon #1 in? Bodies sold? Lenses sold? Value of interchangeable lens gear?

Funny. But it did get me thinking whether it's a signal that R3 and R5 replacements are on the way, or whether it's a response to competitor pricing.

https://petapixel.com/2024/02/01/the-canon-r3-and-r5-are-getting-permanent-price-reductions/

There is a belief that large companies act rationally, their decisions backed by data and careful analysis. It's a position that Neuro often takes. I worked for years for a large multinational company, and I can tell you that the decision-making was anything but a rational process. Egos and...

... or they could leave it to Sigma and Tamron, charging them a licensing fee for each RF-S lens sold. Maybe this would give the platform momentum and Canon could maybe sell more APSC camera bodies. My guess is that this would eat into the market share of other manufacturers APSC gear more so...

Yes. Now suppose Ford starts filing patents for tyres with thread designs that they have no intention of making, just to spite third-party tire manufacturers.

Until recently, Canon did very well with their M series gear. It was a non-upgradable hole. Technically yes, but few people shoot their FF gear in crop mode. Basically, RF-S is a non-upgradable hole. I'd argue that RF is also a non-upgradable hole. There is no way to move to medium format...

Hate capitalism? That's a bit of a stretch... Canon's tactics are like this: This is my sandbox. I'll play in my sandbox if I want, and if I don't want to play then you can't play either.

What boils my blood is Canon (not Sigma) patents of lenses they never intend on building. Canon files these patents to protect themselves from the likes of Sigma. But Canon has shut off the competition with their proprietary mount. So those sexy RF-S lens patents will never see the light of...

Yes, exactly. And high dynamic range scenes are likely to occur given the R1 target audience of photojournalists, sports shooters, events shooters, and wedding 'togs. These types of subjects aren't typically lit with studio lights, or lend themselves to leisurely exposure bracketing. For...