Yohan Pamudji

That's covered in Part 3: the trade-offs of sensor size (link above). In short, that's one of the trade-offs of larger sensors, so no, you're not alone.

Tamron are one of the most interesting FF lens manufacturers for my money. They have very reasonably sized lenses (67mm diameter for f/2.8 zooms) in traditional focal ranges with some minor tweaks...

Not even in the same price bracket as the new Canon. Not remotely the same target audience.

I'm not sure where the actual line is separating wide from ultra-wide, but 17mm is ultra-wide on FF (see Canon 17-40mm for instance), so if 18mm isn't ultra-wide, surely it's quibbling to complain...

@MILC man: Isn't the problem at the low frequency end instead of high frequency? If the LEDs flicker at high frequency there shouldn't be any banding up to that shutter speed, whereas low...

"Pro level camera" has been shorthand for a very specific feature set for a long time, not an indication of whether or not a camera can be used by a professional photographer.

@Vince P: Because more bodies sell more lenses, and the per-body markup that you lose from a lost Z9 sale can be more than made up by volume markup of lower end bodies.

Nikon might have the "best" camera (insofar as it's possible to declare a universal best camera), but their lens lineup is still playing catch up. Ferrari engine, mass market tires :)

C1 runs way faster than LR for me, and I don't have to pay a subscription fee. I can live with one or two missing features for that.