 |  |  |
| JUVENTUDE by mnegrao from In The Style Of GRACIELA ITURBIDE | Bee on Flower by Birdman50 from Macro - Insects | Milky Way Rise over Ancient Bristlecone Pine by ed rader from My Best Photo of the Fortnight |
| | |
| JUVENTUDE by mnegrao from In The Style Of GRACIELA ITURBIDE | Bee on Flower by Birdman50 from Macro - Insects | Milky Way Rise over Ancient Bristlecone Pine by ed rader from My Best Photo of the Fortnight |
tvstaff: @genaricname The EVF does not give as accurate of a rendition as an OVF. EVF's distort color, contrast and has lag and for a sports photographer who shoots into the sun. The EVF is a disaster. For.nigbt shooting there are issues too.
I put food.on the table shooting sports and I've not seen an EVF yet that equals my OVF for shooting the types of sports I do.
Better hold on to that bridge.... you're going to need it
to sell to someone else.
You really hate Mirrorless, despite all the advantages, don't you?
Herp Photos: I've never wanted a Canon lens before this one.
Edit: Rishi pointed out the SA control ring does have a lock in slide 2. However, unlike the other toggles it's not marked to tell the user what its for.
So I really need to decide if I want to ditch my Nikon z7 for macro and dive into this system because of this lens. Nikon sure isn't in a hurry to deliver a macro for the Z mount.
Next time I get tempted to buy the Trioplan 100mm I will have to think about this more feature packed option again.
It will certainly be interesting to see what people create with this lens.
I lost braincells reading your comments @alam12. Thank you.
Greg OH: Between this and the 85/1.2 with Defocus Smoothing, Canon's playing hard for the portraiture market.
@bloodyreyna Another person who can't afford something stating things are overpriced, they're clearly not aimed at you. Move on.
Imagine having the nerve to call this or any of the RF lineup lenses 'junk', absolutely sad.
Delete_account: Really disappointed with all this R system equipment that Canon is releasing. Not only everything is ridiculously expensive but I’m finding a lot of features puzzling.
As a nature macro user, I couldn’t care less about the SA control. Background blurring on the EF version is fine. But this lens’ working distance is significantly shorter, even at 1:1. That is a problem. This lens is absolutely not better than the old EF version and it’s just a vanity project more than a functional product.
Another thing I hate in the new RF lenses is that Canon ditched the small red ball to align the lens when mounting that they had for decades. I used to feel it with my finger without looking. Now it’s just a small paint mark which is harder to find. And insanely more expensive.
Nobody said you have to buy the best equipment available on the market for the consumer space, go buy something more within your price bracket instead of disliking products and leaving comments on them just because you think they're bad because you personally can't afford them.
puffo25: Hi, compared to the RF 85mm f/1,2, for mainly portraits and getting most bokeh effect I am wondering if in principle this RF 100mm might achieve similar results than the 85? In that case I will buy this 100mm lens as it cost around half than the 85mm and I can get (in theory) similar bokeh for portraits...
RF 85 1.2 will obviously have better bokeh than this lens.
Funny Valentine: What about the limitations ? bit depth ? battery charge ? I'm sorry but since the R5 and R6 debacle I'm having trust issues.
R5 and R6 drop to 12bit (e-shutter) or 13bit (mech and EFCS) in continuous burst shooting.
Also the full fps in burst drops when not fully charged.
If the R3 can shoot 30 fps 14-bit RAW files with low battery, then it will deserve all the praises. But there's going to be an R1, so the R3 must have strict limitations to protect future sales for the R1.
The clowns are the people who own a 1DX MK3 and call it the best camera in the world and say it's significantly better than the R3, despite never using one just because they're stuck in their DSLR mindset and cannot fathom using anything else, like Mark.
Funny Valentine: What about the limitations ? bit depth ? battery charge ? I'm sorry but since the R5 and R6 debacle I'm having trust issues.
R5 and R6 drop to 12bit (e-shutter) or 13bit (mech and EFCS) in continuous burst shooting.
Also the full fps in burst drops when not fully charged.
If the R3 can shoot 30 fps 14-bit RAW files with low battery, then it will deserve all the praises. But there's going to be an R1, so the R3 must have strict limitations to protect future sales for the R1.
Don't purposefully mispell my name and disrespect me @johans81, I said nothing to vex or purposefully upset you, you don't even have a spec list on your account for starters, do you own a camera? Probably not. And yet you troll others on these forums with these ridiculous replies, try again to insult me based on my stating I've met alot of 1DX people who don't live in reality and act like clowns and I'll completely block you. I don't need to deal with you.
Funny Valentine: What about the limitations ? bit depth ? battery charge ? I'm sorry but since the R5 and R6 debacle I'm having trust issues.
R5 and R6 drop to 12bit (e-shutter) or 13bit (mech and EFCS) in continuous burst shooting.
Also the full fps in burst drops when not fully charged.
If the R3 can shoot 30 fps 14-bit RAW files with low battery, then it will deserve all the praises. But there's going to be an R1, so the R3 must have strict limitations to protect future sales for the R1.
Haha, don't tell me who I know and don't. Who even are you to say that?
Funny Valentine: What about the limitations ? bit depth ? battery charge ? I'm sorry but since the R5 and R6 debacle I'm having trust issues.
R5 and R6 drop to 12bit (e-shutter) or 13bit (mech and EFCS) in continuous burst shooting.
Also the full fps in burst drops when not fully charged.
If the R3 can shoot 30 fps 14-bit RAW files with low battery, then it will deserve all the praises. But there's going to be an R1, so the R3 must have strict limitations to protect future sales for the R1.
I know alot of clowns who own 1DX MK3's...
Funny Valentine: What about the limitations ? bit depth ? battery charge ? I'm sorry but since the R5 and R6 debacle I'm having trust issues.
R5 and R6 drop to 12bit (e-shutter) or 13bit (mech and EFCS) in continuous burst shooting.
Also the full fps in burst drops when not fully charged.
If the R3 can shoot 30 fps 14-bit RAW files with low battery, then it will deserve all the praises. But there's going to be an R1, so the R3 must have strict limitations to protect future sales for the R1.
You ok there? Seem to forget that the perfect camera doesn't exist.
BlueRay2: good, now i don't have to worry about 24mp R3. i'll stick to my fat canon 5DsR and enjoy its high rez files.
Even the R6 is better than your 5DSR, it's not all about 'ma rez'.
bernie r: My R9 5950X disagrees with this video.
Sorry, did I ask for your opinion kid?
bernie r: My R9 5950X disagrees with this video.
About £9.5K
bernie r: My R9 5950X disagrees with this video.
'alot louder'
Sir, I have a custom loop with a MO-RA3 420, it's quiet as hell and if you want to talk about power consumption, the 10980XE uses about three times as much as the 5950X...
$2100 for an 8 core with a trash GPU and only 16gb ram? It's 2021 people. Seriously.
My R9 5950X disagrees with this video.
Picmad: I think I'm about to give up trying to find a tripod for my 300mmf2.8, there is no way to immobilise a 2.5kg lens
+1kg camera ,other than a cradle in metal or wood with 4 legs .it's just nonsense to tyy to do it with a ball head
Oh how wrong you are, I've used 600's and 500 f4's with my GT4543LS + Fluid head with absolutely no issues and it doesn't move, a 300 2.8 is small in comparison. What you need to do is stop using cheap, unreliable tripods.
JonB1975: £1249.99??!!! Well done Canon for making the Profoto A1x and A10 flashes appear reasonably priced....
Well, the Profoto isn't as good as this for performance and certainly doesn't have the same build quality of the EL-1.
Boss of Sony: Looks like a good lens, but holy crap 1.7kg to get to 750mm on APS-C? My Olympus 75-300 only weighs 423g, and gets me to equivalent of 600mm on my MFT camera.
There's a reason it's only sub 500g...
peter1957: I'm with mailman88
I am 59 years old and also carry this lens all day.
I don't worry about such a small issue, I am out there
having a great time .Shooting with one of the best lens around .
Go to the gym and grow some muscles, or even better get out and take photos
with this amazing lens .
You will have so much fun you will forget about the weight issue, if there really
is one
Happy shooting to all.
Lol, people bitching about the weight of this and haven't even used a Sigma 150-600mm sport.