Tannin

As pretty much everyone has said, the Mark 1 was a good workhorse of a lens, while the Mark II is simply outstanding. Very, very difficult to fault it in any way - and I say that as someone who ...

Sure is. Me too. 7D II and 5D IV on the two big wildlife lenses are my go-to units, with the leftovers (1D IV, 5D II or EOS R) for landscapes. A 100-400 and a 600/4: either way round, they make a ...

No, you should have been more polite when you answered.

In fact, they have already done this. The new model has more AF points, better noise performance, higher resolution, a bigger, brighter viewfinder, and a number of minor improvements too. It is a ...

No. This is standard behaviour with all Canon multi-card cameras, so far as I know. Your best bet is to simply delete from the card you are viewing on, and leave the other card alone. It's only a ...

I figured that the weight of the 500/4 and the 600/4 II was the same, and the length not too far different, so I upgraded from a 500/4 to a 600/4 II. I'd echo most of the comments above - ...

Every person in this forum knows exactly what that means. Pretending to be obtuse is not nice. Nor is it helpful.

Whether you want to buy an SLR is irrelevant. What matters is whether other people do, and whether there are enough of them to constitute a viable market segment.  The answer to both questions is a ...

I'm sticking with the 5D IV until Canon make something better. Thus far, they haven't even come close. (Some would regard the 1 Series models as "better" and in some respects, of course, they are, ...

Actually, no. The OP does sport. Sport works far better with an SLR. Also, an R5 is vastly more expensive than a 5D IV, while the lower-cost R6 has only two-thirds of the resolution. 5D IV is ...

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.