Alastair Norcross

Well, he's wrong about that. I had and used the 35 F2 IS for about eight years, so I know exactly how good it is (very good). I've had and used the RF 35 F1.8 for over two years, so I also know ...

I think the smallest resolution increase is 2X linear, which means you turn a 24MP image into a 96MP image. You have to then reduce it to match the 50MP of the 5Ds. That's also how it works with ...

Thanks for letting us know. Now we can sleep easy.

Given your desire for minimal weight and cost, the obvious choices are the RF 16 and RF 50 F1.8. They are both very small and light, and work perfectly with the R7. The 50 is a pretty decent ...

https://pbase.com/image/173359512

I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by the RF 35. But a pancake is also attractive. I love my EF-M 22 on my M6II. A pancake for the new R8, if that turns out to be a really small camera, would ...

I use e-shutter whenever I can. That's the vast majority of the time with my R and M6II. I would use it more on my R7, if there were an 8fps option. For a lot of sports, I find 15fps to be ...

What do I win? :)

That could be a good thing. I love the M6II, with the detachable EVF. I carry the EVF a lot, but hardly ever use it. But that's OK, because it's so small and light. I suspect it will have an EVF, ...

From my usage, the F1.8 is it! Never experienced that. No, it really doesn't. I liked that one too. I'm not sure whether I'd get one for RF. Maybe if it was $200 or less (I paid $179 for my EF ...

Exactly. It's really amazing that some people seem to take Canon releasing lenses they don't want as a personal affront. It's also amazing how reluctant people can be to even try to see things ...

What?! 16 F2.8, 24 F1.8, 35 F1.8, 50 F1.8, 85 F2. None of those lenses is slow. I own four of them, none of which is mediocre, either. There is also a trio of F4 L zooms, to go along with the ...

This is true, but very misleading (intentionally?). No adapter will be made that mounts the RF lenses to RF-S cameras (that is, R cameras with crop sensors), because they don't need one. All RF ...

Seems a bit pricy to mount something small like an M6II with 22. I think that mount is more for a camera with long lens.

I'm not sure what you think this shows. You've taken screen shots of JPEG comparisons at pixel view. Neither has much if anything to do with the noise handling of the sensors. First, you need to ...

Only on charts. Not really perceptible in actual results. Not really. Again, any softening is visible only to chart shooters, and not actual photographers.

28-70? Is that a slow kit zoom? What apertures?

That’s not even close to true. I had the 7DII for six years. It had the best high ISO performance for a crop camera of its time (matched by the D500), but the R7 (and M6II, which I also have) is ...

Really? A lot of people love the 100-500, which tops out at F7.1. I’d love one too, but can’t justify the expense. I do love the 100-400, which tops out at F8. Given the laws of physics, that lens ...

Why instead? A lot of that is coming. Patience is pretty much nonexistent among most dpr posters. :)