Tannin

It's not about being closed-minded. Well, not on the part of the people who have tried out modern EVFs and found them seriously wanting - and I'll wager that practically everyone in this thread ...

Two good posts there. It is downright offensive the way some people constantly claim (without a shred of evidence) that SLR users are "afraid of change" and "stuck in the past". It is a palpably ...

There is no certainty that there will not be a 7D III. It would be a shame to buy into something else, only to discover that your preferred option is now available. That said, you do street, ...

So go over to the lens forum and start it. https://www.dpreview.com/forums/1029

All the more reason to release a product which will sell to people who otherwise would not buy anything. That is Business 101. When you discover a potential market, fill it. There are thousands and ...

Not for me. Where is the advantage? Not much longer than a 100-400, no faster, not going to be any easier to handle (insofar as the 100-400 is already plenty easy enough), not going to be usefully ...

The 5D IV is, in many respects, the best all-round camera Canon has ever made. But you would also consider a 5Ds if you need super-high resolution (at the cost of several other factors, but there ...

No idea what a 5D IV is like not using the mirror, but with it, it is a country mile ahead of the R. (I own both.)

Glass is king. First time, every time. Bare lens beats a teleconverter. Every time. Even when it is the excellent Canon converter. Nothing beats bare lens. This is why your best choice - best by ...

Yes. That last line did come across as very condescending, didn't it.

OK, but why would you buy one when the 16-35/4L doesn't cost all that much more and is a vastly superior performer? The IS alone is worth the price difference, never mind the optical superiority.

Bit less armchair theorising and a bit less pixel peeping and a bit more practical picture taking would be useful here.

Simple answer: learn to use the 7D properly. It is a vastly more capable tool than any telephone, but, like most capable tools, it requires some skill to use. (If, on the other hand, your subject ...

Nonsense. Look at the page you linked to. Pass the mouse over the image and watch how the arrow above it changes to indicate which lens you are seeing results from. You will see that: The centre is ...

Some good answers above. The summary is, yes, it works, and can work reasonably well - but it's a desperation measure to employ when you have run out of other options. Always, when the choice is ...

The point her is that Canon deliberately messes up the third party lenses (and millions of its own customers) by failing to take basic, simple steps - steps it does take with all of its own lenses, ...

Just things to make the camera work the way I like it to, and so far as possible, work the same as my other cameras. I run several bodies, so I try to set them all up the same way as best I can.

Nonsense. All Canon needs to do is have the firmware test to see if the attached lens is one of the ones on its list of known lenses (it does this anyway, so as not to apply the vignette ...

No, nothing specific to that lens. Just my normal customisations that I do on every camera and use with every lens. That one bug - really something Canon should have fixed long ago but choose not ...

Plenty of test shots under controlled conditions available on the web which show how much sharper the 100-400 is. The Digital Picture, for just one example. For best results, shoot bare lens ...