Canon to announce the EOS R100 and RF 28mm f/2.8 STM

Jul 21, 2010
31,204
13,073
I tried few 3rd party radio triggers(Pocket wizard and Godox(apparently X2 might be better in that aspect but havent tried it)) and for short distances it would fail quite often,
I had a PocketWizard setup (Mini TT1, some Flex TT5s and an MC-2 for my monolight). My experience with PWs was that they would fail quite often at any distance. They had to be powered on in a certain order, when (not if) the connection dropped getting it back was a real PITA. They worked well on Tuesdays and when Mercury was in retrograde. Ok, I jest...but they were just plain unreliable.

The Canon RT system is very reliable. It just works, at least it always has for me. The ST-E10 is no exception.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
I'm surprised to see Canon hit the lower end so heavy lately. Didn't think we'd see that addressed in the mirrorless system.
I don't know why you would think that, considering what their top selling camera models have been for the last half of a decade or more. If the intent is to shift more fully into the R series, focusing on replacements for the wildly popular M series and the very marketable Rebel series are all obvious first choices.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Upvote 0

roby17269

R5, H5X + IQ1-80, DJI Mini & Mavic 3 Pro, GoPro 10
Feb 26, 2014
454
563
New York
rdmfashionphoto.com
I tried few 3rd party radio triggers(Pocket wizard and Godox(apparently X2 might be better in that aspect but havent tried it)) and for short distances it would fail quite often, so these days I rely on built in optical trigger of my body(in case of multiple lights) or just use a off shoe cable for single light. Those radio triggers were very useful while shooting some shy wildlife(foxes and owls) from a distance at night.
Which Pocket Wizards? I use PocketWizard Plus IIIe Transceivers regularly in studio or in location and they are super reliable even at significant distances.
Those are "dumb" transceivers in that they only send the triggering sync signal, no exposure data at all, but on the plus side they work pretty much with every camera and strobe / flashgun I can think of
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

SwissFrank

1N 3 1V 1Ds I II III R R5
Dec 9, 2018
526
361
It's not a translation error: in the original post (from the guy who used to run Nokishita Camera) the Japanese text オフカメラシューコード is the phonetic equivalent of off-camera shoe cord ("Ofukamerashūkōdo"). Clearly the Japanese guy had access to an US product listing and translated it literally
A lot of Japanese terminology is based on English words. I don't think this was transliterated from a US product listing, as the term appears on Canon Japan's website, on Japan Amazon, and so on. It's very plausibly what Canon Japan chose to call this product, and the person who translated the product name to English found it was a very direct translation.

Note that's often NOT the case: many Japanese terms happen to be phonetically the same as English terms but aren't the same thing. コンセント (konsento) is exactly how you would transliterate the word "consent" but in fact it means electric outlet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

SwissFrank

1N 3 1V 1Ds I II III R R5
Dec 9, 2018
526
361
  • The off-camera shoe cord OC-E3 was introduced along with the EOS-1D Mark III and the Speedlite 580EX II flash. It has been discontinued.
  • $180 is a bit outrageous: IIRC OC-E3 was introduced slightly below $100.
But haven't canon sales fallen off a cliff since then? What year was that, 2007 or so? I think that's when I got the EOS-1Ds MkIII so I assume the 1D MkIII was around the same time? Camera sales were like 5-10x higher then, weren't they? Also if that cable now carries digital signals it may need to be significantly more complicated and/or better shielded?
 
Upvote 0

SwissFrank

1N 3 1V 1Ds I II III R R5
Dec 9, 2018
526
361
If Canon releases a FF RF 28mm f/2.8, to me that seems like the 28mm f/1.4 L that is rumoured is further out than the 24mm L and 35mm L.

Doesn't surprise to be honest, as far as I can recall historically only Nikon & Leica have offered fast 28mm lenses.
Well, and Sigma :p It's the only non-native RF lens I use. On the SLRs, my 35/1.4 was unused as "too normal" while the 24/1.4 was unused because "too wide."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

ashmadux

Art Director, Visual Artist, Freelance Photography
Jul 28, 2011
583
146
New Yawk
photography.ashworld.com
Just seems...bizarre to release this now.

So this will be the (bigger!) m100- without the evf, which i dont have a problem with - but it seems like now there's too many cameras and not enough lenses.

Where is the aspc lenses? A tradgedy to sell those bodies to consumers and leave them hanging. So glad i didnt buy one.

And STILL no 50mm 1.4 update, wtf.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

SwissFrank

1N 3 1V 1Ds I II III R R5
Dec 9, 2018
526
361
I'm surprised to see Canon hit the lower end so heavy lately. Didn't think we'd see that addressed in the mirrorless system.
It obviously wasn't their first interest, but now that they've got really a fairly substantial (if still incomplete) high-end lineup, I think they need actually a range of things at the lower end. A person with limited budget but a drive to get into RF is going to want to see more than like, two lenses in their price range...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

SwissFrank

1N 3 1V 1Ds I II III R R5
Dec 9, 2018
526
361
That would also support my suspicion that Canon is going to try to push RF APS-C users into buying FF lenses in lieu of providing a significant number of RF-S lenses, especially primes.
Basically, the two criteria I think are price and size. It's pretty easy to believe at today's lower sales volumes that Canon can sell a single wide-image-circle 16/2.8 to all customers more cheaply than they could make both wide-image and small-image variations. That might be true for a big range of focal lengths, actually. So then size is the next question: as you get more telephoto I think APS-C-only lenses could be substantially smaller than ones with a FF image circle. But for wide-angles there may be no notable difference. The 16/2.8 is mostly autofocus motor and control ring anyway, there's hardly any actual optics in it! :-D Even if the optics shrank to nothing the lens wouldn't be appreciably smaller I think.

So it might be that for some lenses Canon will expect the APS-C buyer to be happy with the FF lens. In some cases, maybe less than happy with size or maybe price, but still buy it. What they want to avoid is people not buying the FF lens at ALL, or worse yet, not even buying a Canon due to the APS-C lenses being too large or too expensive or both, so in cases like that they'd try to make an APS-C-only lens. That's just my guess from sitting through a fair number of product-planning meetings in Japanese tech firms...
 
Upvote 0