RLight

Works as a IT
Has a website at gnerd.net
Joined on Feb 14, 2019
About me:

Technology and camera enthusiast. I have a preference for Canon and Apple products, for the moment.
Flickr Gallery:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/130836605@N07/

Comments

Total: 124, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon EOS R3 studio scene published (258 comments in total)
In reply to:

RLight: I noted the 85mm f/1.2L is used instead of the former 50mm f/1.2; it maintains a 1/2-full stop of transmission edge. The R3 could be accused of "cheating" vs the R5/R6. R6 is still winning interestingly enough despite the "handicap".

Second note, the R5 and R3 appear to render colors/WB more similarly than the R6. This is from Canon's own DPP4, so I can't attribute it to Adobe conversion differences.

It would be interesting if we could see the R3 vs R6 with the RF50, just for curiosity to see how much of a difference we're talking. However it doesn't matter I suppose as the "winner" is established for low light - the R6 which I wouldn't have expected with it being non-BSI.

Edit:

Reviewing them both directly in DPP4, without correction of brightness, actually I take it back, I'm not so sure. There may be something going on with how the brightness correction is applied. We may have a false positive. Fascinating. This is where switching lenses does come back to bite with exposure.

@jnd

I actually think the R6 is showing most “healthy” skin tones.

After reviewing external websites studio comparisons, the R3 appears to have a healthy lead in ISO performance over the R6 though.

Shame, studio scene is designed to be a true apples to apples. Not this round. Switching that lens did it in. In all fairness 85mm is their standard, but it makes for comparing the R6 useless, and R/RP for that matter. That RF85L is going to outresolve the 50.

Edit: perhaps DPR can update the studio for the other RF bodies? Be a heck of a update though for my silly complaint.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2021 at 21:16 UTC
On article Canon EOS R3 studio scene published (258 comments in total)

I noted the 85mm f/1.2L is used instead of the former 50mm f/1.2; it maintains a 1/2-full stop of transmission edge. The R3 could be accused of "cheating" vs the R5/R6. R6 is still winning interestingly enough despite the "handicap".

Second note, the R5 and R3 appear to render colors/WB more similarly than the R6. This is from Canon's own DPP4, so I can't attribute it to Adobe conversion differences.

It would be interesting if we could see the R3 vs R6 with the RF50, just for curiosity to see how much of a difference we're talking. However it doesn't matter I suppose as the "winner" is established for low light - the R6 which I wouldn't have expected with it being non-BSI.

Edit:

Reviewing them both directly in DPP4, without correction of brightness, actually I take it back, I'm not so sure. There may be something going on with how the brightness correction is applied. We may have a false positive. Fascinating. This is where switching lenses does come back to bite with exposure.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2021 at 11:12 UTC as 23rd comment | 3 replies
On article DPReview TV: Canon EOS R3 final review (761 comments in total)
In reply to:

Larawanista: If Canon thinks its most loyal user base (looking for a mirrorless alternative to their mammoth flagship DSLR) is going to be happy with 24mp, so be it. And maybe for that reason, the R3 serves its purpose. However, I must agree with Chris: With competing models such as the Z9 offering 8k and 45mp, it will be a tough sell on the basis of specs alone. As a Canon user, I think the more pronounced differentiation on the highest-end mirrorless cameras will be 3-5 years down the road. For now and into the very near future, their similarities seem larger than their differences in terms of influencing purchase decisions. It means brand loyalty will still be the driving factor somehow, for the most part.

No Internal ProRes RAW, no 8K/60, no oversampled 4K from 8K. And oh, no fully articulating screen, which although not a cripple, for video folks, it's a bah-hum-bug.

Sony is free to fix all of the above, except the screen articulation via firmware update. However like Canon in the past, they have a very healthy pro-video division they don't want to cannibalize.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2021 at 12:21 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Canon EOS R3 final review (761 comments in total)
In reply to:

Larawanista: If Canon thinks its most loyal user base (looking for a mirrorless alternative to their mammoth flagship DSLR) is going to be happy with 24mp, so be it. And maybe for that reason, the R3 serves its purpose. However, I must agree with Chris: With competing models such as the Z9 offering 8k and 45mp, it will be a tough sell on the basis of specs alone. As a Canon user, I think the more pronounced differentiation on the highest-end mirrorless cameras will be 3-5 years down the road. For now and into the very near future, their similarities seem larger than their differences in terms of influencing purchase decisions. It means brand loyalty will still be the driving factor somehow, for the most part.

The Z9 is a disruptor in specs, and price. Both the Canon R3 and Sony A9s look silly next to it, as does the A1 with its crippled video specs and higher price point.

DPRTV is right to say that the R3 will be compared against both the A1 and Z9 for the target audience and price point, IMO.

And oh by the way, for someone about to drop 6K in a few days, my finger came off the button. No rush here. Target audience is folks on this site that are actually going to buy it. That was me, past tense.

Pros? What's a pro? If you ask Canon Professional Services, it's someone who will buy their stuff. I'm a "Pro" as far as CPS is concerned. That's all that matters to Canon at the end of the day.

I'll be having a hard look at the Z9. Hopefully Nikon can get them out fast enough.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2021 at 11:43 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Canon EOS R3 final review (761 comments in total)
In reply to:

Larawanista: If Canon thinks its most loyal user base (looking for a mirrorless alternative to their mammoth flagship DSLR) is going to be happy with 24mp, so be it. And maybe for that reason, the R3 serves its purpose. However, I must agree with Chris: With competing models such as the Z9 offering 8k and 45mp, it will be a tough sell on the basis of specs alone. As a Canon user, I think the more pronounced differentiation on the highest-end mirrorless cameras will be 3-5 years down the road. For now and into the very near future, their similarities seem larger than their differences in terms of influencing purchase decisions. It means brand loyalty will still be the driving factor somehow, for the most part.

To add, a presently loyal Canon shooter.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2021 at 03:42 UTC
On article DPReview TV: Canon EOS R3 final review (761 comments in total)
In reply to:

Larawanista: If Canon thinks its most loyal user base (looking for a mirrorless alternative to their mammoth flagship DSLR) is going to be happy with 24mp, so be it. And maybe for that reason, the R3 serves its purpose. However, I must agree with Chris: With competing models such as the Z9 offering 8k and 45mp, it will be a tough sell on the basis of specs alone. As a Canon user, I think the more pronounced differentiation on the highest-end mirrorless cameras will be 3-5 years down the road. For now and into the very near future, their similarities seem larger than their differences in terms of influencing purchase decisions. It means brand loyalty will still be the driving factor somehow, for the most part.

At first, I took some of his critiques as not fair as Canon's AF is already class leading and then the R3 takes it higher, the eye-controlled AF having quirks, the ISO performance being comparable to the R6... He's right. For the price tag, the eye-controlled AF needs to be perfect, that AF needs to be above class leading, bullet-proof in Auto, and silly things like exposure monitoring during video need to be fixed.

Why?

What are we paying for, then? Nikon (Z9) and Sony (A1) give more resolution for same readout and less price, better IQ. Nikon can match Canon's colors and handling. There is no excuse left, and the use case for the R3 is rightly put, video is all that's left. The trouble there, The Z9 now exists with 8K and class leading readout speed in combination with Nikon colors.

I see the R3 price falling in 2-6 months, Canon passing down R3 firmware (oh, they just announced it) and the R1 needs to be PERFECT, fixing all the complaints in this review, and, 45MP or more.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2021 at 03:40 UTC
In reply to:

RLight: Those M1 processors are “it” for some time. Apple can make processors with more firestorm cores, but, I doubt faster clock speeds.

Look forward to the full review. I suspect from my own recent testing the M1s leave competition in the dust. Even on non native apps, my fathers MacBook Air (M1) bests my maxed out coffee lake MacBook in DPP4. Embarrassing, and it does it without a fan, without an AC connection, vs the full throttle fans of my coffee lake…

Any way you guys can also include M1 non-pro benchmarks for comparison? Curious if clock speed is different on the pro/max vs the M1 standard. Probably, but probably not a lot.

@Joo

Maybe, but the M1 / pro / max all run @ 3.2 now in turbo equivalent. Most we can expect is 4.5 in a dedicated enclosure. Apple may or may not choose to push more volts / cooling.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2021 at 21:07 UTC

Those M1 processors are “it” for some time. Apple can make processors with more firestorm cores, but, I doubt faster clock speeds.

Look forward to the full review. I suspect from my own recent testing the M1s leave competition in the dust. Even on non native apps, my fathers MacBook Air (M1) bests my maxed out coffee lake MacBook in DPP4. Embarrassing, and it does it without a fan, without an AC connection, vs the full throttle fans of my coffee lake…

Any way you guys can also include M1 non-pro benchmarks for comparison? Curious if clock speed is different on the pro/max vs the M1 standard. Probably, but probably not a lot.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2021 at 19:46 UTC as 50th comment | 3 replies

Both DPP4 and Adobe now support the R3, as of yesterday.

Is there an embargo on RAW release this side of the production?

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2021 at 01:55 UTC as 1st comment

Price point is great.

Are the samples production, or pre-production?

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2021 at 12:22 UTC as 465th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

henrikbengtsson: Allright, let's get aaaall the upcoming comments out of the way first.

1) Those images are not sharp
2) Do you call this a preview gallery? My fish can take better pictures
3) Ugly colors. Canon has lost it
4) Only 24 Mpix...who is this camera for?

There!

@Magnar

The other DPR gallery doesn’t reassure me SOOC colors are “traditional”, quite the contrary.

I agree with you on OOC colors and pros which have to submit SOOC JPG. Hopefully it’s a teething problem with AWB and Auto profiles which auto on newer Canons even though close to standard, isn’t. I can say the R3 is looking like a sort of 5DIV; a less popular OOC color response.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2021 at 16:42 UTC
In reply to:

henrikbengtsson: Allright, let's get aaaall the upcoming comments out of the way first.

1) Those images are not sharp
2) Do you call this a preview gallery? My fish can take better pictures
3) Ugly colors. Canon has lost it
4) Only 24 Mpix...who is this camera for?

There!

@henrikbengtsson

I agree, something is going on here. Now it could be that the change in fact isn't a "bad" change, much as the M6 Mark II was. However comma, the colors from the samples are clearly more subdued which the R5 and R6 were a return to more traditional Canon colors, appears Canon is testing a different CFA, however without a studio scene, that's a guess. But I'm willing to bet lunch the studio scene will show from the RAW data as much.

Edit: It's also possible that the new sensor handles different lighting just enough different for WB shifts to be a factor. Again, till we have RAWs, this is speculation. Something is going on here though.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2021 at 10:53 UTC
In reply to:

henrikbengtsson: Allright, let's get aaaall the upcoming comments out of the way first.

1) Those images are not sharp
2) Do you call this a preview gallery? My fish can take better pictures
3) Ugly colors. Canon has lost it
4) Only 24 Mpix...who is this camera for?

There!

Good tip Mike.

DPP4 shows “Auto” was used; appears from sharpness strength that standard was chosen by the camera, which is typical of Canons for standard to be chosen most of the time.

It doesn’t say e-shutter or not though, that’s disappointing.

Should be noted, fine detail really helps the R5 and R6 in my book. Be interesting to play with RAWs when they emerge.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2021 at 22:55 UTC
In reply to:

henrikbengtsson: Allright, let's get aaaall the upcoming comments out of the way first.

1) Those images are not sharp
2) Do you call this a preview gallery? My fish can take better pictures
3) Ugly colors. Canon has lost it
4) Only 24 Mpix...who is this camera for?

There!

@DPR

Are you guys able to share or tag which images are e-shutter vs mechanical? The dynamic range on some makes me question if they are hindered by e-shutter readout.

@henrik

Agreed on the colors. Of note, we don’t know if DPR used “neutral”, “standard” etc, or, if picture profiles were even available on the pre-prod model. With the micro lens and possibly CFA changes of the new sensor, color matching may be a pre-production hiccup. May explain the lack of samples which in previous launches were plentiful.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2021 at 13:52 UTC
On article Updated: Canon EF-M 32mm F1.4 STM sample gallery (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dragonrider: Just a reminder that the original M6 (and also the M5) make very nice pictures. My portable kit includes an M5 and I love it. Given all the "M is dead" punditry that has been circulating, this extensive gallery causes one to wonder what future announcements the DPR staff are privy to 😎.

Extremely expensive indeed.

I gather Canon does understand target audiences other than the rich, however, I also gather they plan to accomplish this through the RF mount, which won’t quite be as cheap, or light as the M. That’s a shame. I do think the fan boy disruption on January, is an APS-C RF body. Makes sense with that cheap glass coming out next week. Add a 16-45 “slow” RF lens to said body in January? Makes perfect sense.

The 32mm is a feat of engineering, but it may be the last of the M lenses…

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2021 at 12:42 UTC
On article Updated: Canon EF-M 32mm F1.4 STM sample gallery (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dragonrider: Just a reminder that the original M6 (and also the M5) make very nice pictures. My portable kit includes an M5 and I love it. Given all the "M is dead" punditry that has been circulating, this extensive gallery causes one to wonder what future announcements the DPR staff are privy to 😎.

Should Canon actually release a M5 Mark II with IBIS, and, a 15-45 f/1.8-3.5 lens? I'd think about it. I REALLY doubt that's going to happen. And, it'd need to be now as anything launched now, ships before Christmas. Anything launched after now? Nope. Any hope for new M's rides on this announcement, but, less than 7 days till announcement and news about new EF-M gear hasn't broke? Highly unlikely. Pricing is starting to leak on the new gear so clearly retailers have already loaded up their SKUs. The fact nobody with access to those has confirmed a M release? That stinks is all I'm going to say.

Link | Posted on Sep 8, 2021 at 01:40 UTC
On article Updated: Canon EF-M 32mm F1.4 STM sample gallery (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dragonrider: Just a reminder that the original M6 (and also the M5) make very nice pictures. My portable kit includes an M5 and I love it. Given all the "M is dead" punditry that has been circulating, this extensive gallery causes one to wonder what future announcements the DPR staff are privy to 😎.

Whenever I see re-reviews like this from DPR particularly from the M platform, it has preceded an M product launch, true.

However, I think they're just seeing if the new Fuji 33mm f/1.4 unseated the Canon 32mm f/1.4 as "king" of APS-C.

Personal opinion; I don't think the $799 Fuji unseated the $499 Canon. Now part of that may be the 32MP advantage of the M6 II and some bias on my behalf, but I don't think so. They both have good bokeh rendering, but, the Canon exhibits less "cats-eye" in my viewing and is sharper, but, that's a hard one to say considering the Canon is bolted to a 32MP sensor vs the Fuji is bolted to a 26MP sensor. However, in viewing things in context, a lens is only as good as a body and vice-versa.

I'd say Canon wins this round in terms of lens. But, it sure would be nice if Canon did an IBIS-equipped M body to go with it. Fuji wins that round, however, IBIS + the 32mm isn't as needed as you'd think. The 22 pancake and video work is where IBIS on the M is lacking.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2021 at 01:35 UTC
On article There can be only one: why isn't the EOS R3 an EOS R1? (584 comments in total)

Mr Butler,

Appreciate your speculation / interpretation as always.

However comma, I feel the answer here is much like misplaced car-keys (the answer is right under one's nose); never underestimate the power of the (Canon) ego:

The R1 is a response to the Z9. Canon will not market the R3 as a competitor to something it is not.

This does however suggest a high-pixel, high-speed R1 offering to truly compete with the Z9 is on the way, and, that the R3 itself will not be said offering.

This may also suggest a return to the 1D/s era before the 1DX unified both offerings where the R3 and R1 exist concurrently, perhaps for just this moment in time. Maybe not. Time will tell.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2021 at 11:10 UTC as 67th comment | 1 reply
On article There can be only one: why isn't the EOS R3 an EOS R1? (584 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tony Northrup: My theory is a variation on #2. Canon planned this camera to be the R1, but Sony surprised Canon by launching the a1 with 50 megapixels and 8k. Rather than let Sony's flagship beat Canon's in those important metrics, Canon decided to push the R3 down-market to leave room for a future R1 that matches or surpasses the a1.

Tony,

I really do enjoy your content.

A thought: perhaps your theory needs updating; Canon historically only cares about one rival: Nikon. The reason the R3 isn't an R1 isn't the A1, it's the Z9. Now, by extension, the Z9 is a variant of the A1 I gather. So you're partially correct.

Canon needs a high pixel high speed counterpart, which the R3 only truly does the latter, not the former I gather.

Folks will quote market share this and reviewer that (regarding Sony), but it's the age old rivalry between the former king (Nikon) that Canon regards. Canon didn't care when the A7, A7II, A7III came out. They sure cared when the Z came out though (and launched the nascent R to counter it).

There is nothing new under the sun. The R3 isn't an R1 because the R3 can't match the Z9's spec, which happens to be the A1s...

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2021 at 10:27 UTC
On article Sony a1 sample gallery (457 comments in total)

Reds and skin tones look good.

Be curious when you guys complete the studio scene if it’s a CFA or JPEG shift.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2021 at 16:12 UTC as 74th comment
Total: 124, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »