EF_M 15-45 already has the back element goes outside of the mount. It is a good thing that Canon is having additional protection sticks out of the mount to protect the rear element
Upvote
0
Thanks for correcting my error.
If that’s the case, I really wonder why Canon opted to make the RF-S 18-45mm, instead of the ‘classic’ 18-55mm APS-C kit zoom or a 15-45mm design like the updated M kit lens (which IMO is a more useful walkaround range on APS-C)?
The answer that comes to mind is to encourage crop R kit lens owners to buy more lenses to expand that limited focal range. That sounds Canon-like…
Interesting stats at https://www.bankmycell.com/blog/how-many-phones-are-in-the-world
- 91% (7.3B) of people globally have a phone. 83% (6.7B) have a smartphone but not everyone can afford the latest iPhone 14 from USD800-1600! Second hand / recycled phones are actively being sold into other markets.
- Developed countries (~1.6B people) are most likely to buy more expensive phones. That leaves 6.3B left in developing countries.
- Critically, 75% of people in the top 10 developing countries don’t have a smartphone so there is still a lot of users to get a smart phone.
- 14% of the population cannot own a phone as they don't have access to electricity to charge it.
I wonder how much room there practically is, the C70 and R5C have builtin ND filters in that space. It could mean that the C variants are declared incompatible with RF-S if such a lens appears.[..]
But a difference between 18mm and 20mm registration distance isn't that significant when the sensor/image circle is the same size. The real difference between the requirements for an RF vs. EF-M lens design is the 61% larger required diameter of the image circle, not a 2mm difference in flange distance. As long as the rear element is smaller than the throat diameter restriction of the larger RF-S mount, they could let the rear element protrude 2mm further and use the same design for an EF-M and RF-S design. The need to accommodate sensor movement requiring a larger image circle for APS-C RF bodies with IBIS, such as the R7, might also have come into play.
I initially thought they meant "phones" to include landlines, but the article is only about wireless phones. I guess they are subtly implying we're at 105% occupancy rate already here on earth?91% of people globally have a phone, but 14% can't own one because they have no way to charge it?
I wonder how much room there practically is, the C70 and R5C have builtin ND filters in that space. It could mean that the C variants are declared incompatible with RF-S if such a lens appears.
on the surface that does seem strange but the stats were referenced from different sources. I was copied the headline stats for simplicity.91% of people globally have a phone, but 14% can't own one because they have no way to charge it?
on the surface that does seem strange but the stats were referenced from different sources. I was copied the headline stats for simplicity.
https://www.bankmycell.com/blog/how-many-phones-are-in-the-world
Feel free to dive deeper on their website and go to their listed sources.
from the source....I'm guessing the 14% figure is for the population of those less developed countries, but was hoping you could enlighten us in that respect.
Fwiw I noticed after reading past announcements after Fall, new releases are in 1st quarter like February.So, with the R6II now being old news, any educated guesses on when Canon might announce the R100?
Other rumour sites have been saying Q1 2023 with their first mentions of the R100 at the start of this year. In the vein of '2 wrongs can make a right', do 2 rumours make a fact?Fwiw I noticed after reading past announcements after Fall, new releases are in 1st quarter like February.
Sure, why not given enough rumors combined and they become fact. lol. Just like perception is stronger than evidence to some. hahaha.Other rumour sites have been saying Q1 2023 with their first mentions of the R100 at the start of this year. In the vein of '2 wrongs can make a right', do 2 rumours make a fact?