It looks like September 14, 2021 is going to be a busy day. First, Apple announced it will be hosting a livestream event. Now, Canon has announced that it too will be hosting a livestreamed event on YouTube at 12pm CEST (+2 UTC).
Recent Videos
Canon doesn’t say what we can expect to see at the event, but the animated graphic in the teaser video shows an illustration of an RF camera mount. Make of that what you will.
You can click through on the video to set a reminder on YouTube to be notified when the event goes live.
The biggest threat to Canon has never been Sony, but the massive adoption of so called Smart Phone usages as, Good enough Cameras for photos and Videos devices. Apparently some folks haven't paid attention to Camera sales across all Brands an the massive falloff over the last decade. So this is really about the survival of the entire Camera Industry, not just Canon.
Apparently all the Major Brands are switching focus on mostly selling to higher end camera enthusiast and the Pro Markets. So on the 14th, we might get more direction on that front. I certainly hope so.
"The biggest threat to Canon has never been Sony, but the massive adoption of so called Smart Phone usages as, Good enough Cameras for photos and Videos devices."
You seem to see Canon only as a manufacturer of entry level and consumer cameras. They are much more than that.
Whilst some good camera phones may have eaten into the IXUS market share they have had zero effect on Canon's dedicated studio and sports cameras.
How many people do you think weigh up an iPhone 12 Pro with the R6, for example?
"You seem to see Canon only as a manufacturer of entry level and consumer cameras. They are much more than that."
Hardly. I am quite aware of both Canon and Sony products other than entry level an or consumer cameras. Nor am I saying so called Smart Phones are the better choice, only that so many folks these days really don't care. That's been the issue for all Camera Brands.
So Concerning Sony/Canon's dedicated studio and sports cameras, that was hardly the focus of my post. My post really has nothing to do with that segment. So how you could come to that premise is more than an bit strange.
What is ridiculous is that you still don't get it. So I won't waste anymore time trying to explain it.
"Japanese camera companies fight for survival in the ... - CNBChttps://www.cnbc.com › 2019/07/26 › japanese-camera... Jul 28, 2019 By 2018, the digital camera market had declined by roughly 80%, to 19 million. Of Japan's eight digital camera makers, the only one to log sales ..."
BTN's main point is indisputably correct: that the smartphone has basically taken away most of the camera market, and continues to do so.
I think what Rubber Dials is countering with is something different: that the top end equipment is not challenged by smartphones, at least not yet. And yes, because of that all camera companies are moving more upscale in their equipment.
So I think that the OP got it right with his point. RD is simply arguing a different point.
Because a couple of folks here persist in trying to label me as a "Sony troll" for daring to criticize some of the things Canon does, once again I need to set the record straight:
For many years I was a big Canon fan. I owned three different Rebel DSLRs and their Vixia R400 camcorder. I did however find the video quality of my 2013 Rebel SL1 to be disappointing - a pixel-binned fuzzy mess. When I went looking for a Canon ILC that did good video in 2014, I was very disappointed to find that Canon was reserving their good (non-pixel binned) video quality for their high-priced "Cinema" line and the $11,999 (later $7,999) EOS-1D C.
It was really frustrating to watch other brands such as Panasonic and Sony introduce innovations such as mirrorless ILCs, affordable 4K video, IBIS, etc. while Canon spent over half a decade stubbornly milking their aging DSLR line. I grew tired of waiting and finally sold my Canon gear and switched to Panasonic and Sony, which is where I am now.
So is Sony a perfect camera company ? Hardly. The first generation A7 cameras definitely had issues and the star-eater controversy has gone on for years, etc. etc. But what they don't seem to do is what Canon did with the R5 - introduce a camera that checks most of the boxes on modern features but promptly over-heats if you use them too much! For those who argue that this was just an accident - sorry, but Canon has over a decade of experience building high-end video cameras that don't overheat (the expensive Cinema line, which are all mirrorless ILCs) so the idea that they could not engineer the R5 to perform the same is not believable. They *chose* to let it overheat to protect the Cinema line - that is why I have a problem with how they do things.
When Canon introduces a consumer-priced non-crippled FF mirrorless ILC I will be the first to praise them.
So here is the truly sad part. If Canon had just done some things differently, Sony wouldn't even have a presence in this market. Back in the early 2000s it was Canon doing the innovating - they were first with an affordable digital SLR (the original Rebel) and they were first to introduce a full frame ILC that recorded video (the 5D Mark II). If they had just kept going the same way we would all own Canon cameras and Sony would be best known for their TVs.
However it didn't turn-out that way. Canon management saw the success of the 5D Mark II and decided to be like the Red Camera company and "go Hollywood". So the Cinema line was born with cameras and lenses priced like houses, leading to the present situation where Canon is perpetually having to cripple the video features in it's consumer cameras to protect the damn Cinema line.
Finally, they were far too slow to get on the FF ILC bandwagon, sitting around while Sony walked in and took the market almost by default.
Correction to my last post, final paragraph: I accidentally left out the word "mirrorless", here is the corrected version:
Finally, they were far too slow to get on the *mirrorless* FF ILC bandwagon, sitting around while Sony walked in and took the market almost by default.
@mikegt: thanks for sharing your story. I'm not going to debate some of your assertions, since that is your perception.
But honestly, all this does is explain your animosity towards Canon. You've in essence given us the reason why you do troll the Canon articles.
But you don't have to enter every discussion of Canon gear to it, in order to vent your frustrations based on your past history and perceptions of the brand.
You are like someone who got a divorce but can't move on from your ex and the bad feelings towards her.
Just let it go. And again, we don't need you to criticize every bit of Canon gear for the rest of your life. You're a big boy and need to get over your frustrations and not use that as an excuse to continually troll.
You'll feel better for it, and the rest of us can have a more constructive conversation about new Canon gear.
TRU: I'm not going to debate some of your assertions...
You can't since I spoke the truth. All you have to offer is your usual energetic deflecting and negative spin.
Winston Churchill said that those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.
Canon's history very much affects it's present, as the R5's problems demonstrate.
I will continue to speak up whenever I see Canon or indeed any company - even Sony - screwing-up or treating their customers poorly, no matter how much you would prefer I just go away.
@mikegt Firstly absolutely nobody is interested in your rambling self serving justifications. Secondarily there is no justification for trolling Canon products (‘as the R5’s problems demonstrate’ what problems apart from being sold out?) because you didn’t like a Canon camera you owned in the past. All a bit pointless I’m afraid……..🥱
"Canon has over a decade of experience building high-end video cameras that don't overheat (the expensive Cinema line, which are all mirrorless ILCs) so the idea that they could not engineer the R5 to perform the same is not believable."
All Canon's cinema line cameras contain internal fans - sometimes several. That is why they do not overheat. The R5 relies on passive cooling and does not have much of a heatsink.
If you look at the C70 - which is a DSLR-style body with a fan - you can see why Canon did not put a fan in the R5 - it would be twice the size.
"They *chose* to let it overheat to protect the Cinema line - that is why I have a problem with how they do things."
Canon does not make an 8K cinemaline camera, so that cannot be the case. I believe that Canon built the R5 as best they could.
"So here is the truly sad part. If Canon had just done some things differently, Sony wouldn't even have a presence in this market."
I don't think that's really true. Canon had never had a competitor like Sony before - innovative in its own right and as well or better resourced than they themselves. Even if they had acted early I don't think either Canon nor Nikon could have stopped or delayed Sony.
"Finally, they were far too slow to get on the FF ILC bandwagon, sitting around while Sony walked in and took the market almost by default."
Sony created the market and its success wasn't a given. Both Canon and Nikon needed to change their mounts to compete with Sony FF mirrorless so they procrastinated as long as possible.
@mikegt: LOL. Quoting Churchill as if this debate on cameras is so dramatically important. Please. We're talking cameras here, not international relations, political philosophy, etc.
Let's face reality: you troll products other than Sony, and you are just offering unacceptable justifications for it. I never expected you to stop but I will call you out on it. And now we realize that any criticism of yours is not in good faith but due to preconceived bias. So thanks for at least revealing that to us.
@mikegt How many times has your R5 overheated? How many times have you been using someone else's R5 and it overheated? Every person I know who has an R5 loves it and says it is by far the best camera they have ever owned.
The only people complaining about the R5 are those who expect $10,000+ cinema camera performance from a $3,900 stills camera. They're the same folks that want to buy a Porsche but pay a Volkswagen price, or buy a Ferrari but pay a Yugo price.
I have the R5 and it is indeed a fantastic camera. I'm never been one to do much video, but with the R5 I have been dabbling in it with short clips, and it works great. The results look super and I've never had any overheating.
As usual, the ones who criticize it are the ones who don't own it, never have used it, and are here to troll.
And with mikegt, we now know the reason why he feels so compelled to troll.
Okay so obviously there is an active Canon Troll Army, here are some off its members:
Thoughts ARen't Us: Over 9,000 comments bashing Sony and/or praising Canon.
Vexatious Kandidy: Over 3,000 comments mostly bashing anyone who is critical of Canon. Spews lots of emojis when he can't think of anything intelligent to say which is often the case.
MyDog Is Incharge (Because I'm Not): 300 comments in only 3 months mostly bashing Sony.
RubberDials: I'm sorry but you have a naive view of how big businesses operate. I once wrote a plug-in module for a publisher of accounting software; their marketing department asked me to write extra code to make the plug-in work less efficiently when used with their lower-priced product line! This is how many marketing people think.
> I believe that Canon built the R5 as best they could.
Sorry, not supported by the facts. Look up the teardowns done on the R5. The technicians discovered that Canon had failed to do even the basics they could of done to provide adequate passive cooling.
Here is the proof of what I am saying: The Sony A1 also does 8K, in a body that is actually smaller than the R5, but it does not suffer from the R5's over-heating problems. This is based upon long-term professional reviews of both cameras.
> Even if they had acted early I don't think either Canon > nor Nikon could have stopped or delayed Sony.
Nikon never had the resources and in fact relies on Sony to make it's sensors.
Canon certainly did have the resources and they make their own sensors, but they chose to divert their best engineering to the Cinema line. Then they literally sat on their butts for five years; Sony introduced its first FF mirrorless camera in 2013, Canon didn't get around to shipping their first FF mirrorless model until late 2018.
Sony introduced full-frame IBIS in 2014; it took Canon six years until they finally introduced it in 2020.
We are still waiting for Canon to ship a camera with pixel-shift capability, years after Panasonic, Olympus and Sony introduced this feature.
> In case you hadn’t noticed this is a Canon thread
So only Canon fans & trolls are allowed to post on the topic of Canon ? That sounds really boring, similar to Canon's employee meetings where everyone has to hold hands and sing songs praising Canon.
@mikegt: seriously, are you high on drugs? Your last round of posts makes one wonder.
Note: by definition, Canon fans cannot be trolls in a Canon discussion. If we were in a Sony forum blasting Sony, then we would be trolling. See how that works?
Imagine you go into a bar in Pittsburgh on NFL game day and start talking up the Steelers, and maybe even take some shots at their opponent. That's all cool. But imagine if instead, you start trash talking the Steelers and talk about how much better their opponent is. That's not so cool. That also would probably get you some serious injury, because those Steeler fans are big time for their team :)
As for the R5, professional reviewers have by and large loved it. It won multiple awards by reviewers and their sites, including here at DPR.
So, mikegt, again are you all right? You are showing touches of a manic episode with some detachment from reality.
> As for the R5, professional reviewers have by and large loved it.
You just can't stop lying can you ? Virtually every review has criticized the R5 for over-heating. Yes, even DPReview, which warned in its review conclusion that video users wanting the best video quality will be hampered by overheating.
> See how that works?
Amazing - you bash Sony on every article or review regarding a Sony product, then dare to lecture others about criticizing Canon? You bring new meaning to the word "hypocrite".
I must be really bothering you, since you insist on keeping this thread going and going...
@mikegt: Let's see, DPR gave the R5 the award for "Best high-end ILC." They also gave it their Gold rating.
I actually don't bash Sony on every article or review on Sony. Look at the articles on their most recent releases...those 3 slow prime lenses, that ZV blogger thing, etc. I said very nice things about the 14 1.8 lens, the 50 1.2 lens, etc.
Again, you seem to have a detachment from reality.
Oh dear - it’s typical of the most childish trolls that they never answer a serious point and are just abusive. Mikegt is obviously either a sandwich short of the full picnic, found a new line of chemical stimulants, or both. We should feel sympathy really….🤕🤕🤕🤕🤕🤕🤕🥴🥴🥴🥴🥴🥴🥴🥴😵💫😵💫😵💫😵💫😵💫😵💫😵💫😵💫😑😑😑😑😑😑😑😑😑😑🤣😂🤣
@mikegt: considering that you've been proven wrong in all of your previous assertions, and that you have a self admitted emotional bias against Canon, your comments don't have much credibility.
And thanks again for explaining in great detail your bias against Canon. I will keep this in mind for future discussions. I am sure you will be active trash talking the R3 after the announcement, and I will be sure to reference your self admitted bias.
Mike, you are just expecting more from Canon and gave Sony and others a lower bar to pass. Not saying you are wrong, but because of the high bar Canon has achieved over the years that make all of us wanting more
mikegt: Here is but one instance: "MGradyC: Every person I know who has an R5 loves it and says it is by far the best camera they have ever owned.
How come the long-term professional reviewers don't share your opinion ? Guess they must all be secret Canon haters, right ?"
I then cited how DPR gave the R5 their Gold award and named it the best high end ILC of 2020.
That's just one. You also claimed that I "bash Sony on every article or review regarding a Sony product." I listed discussions of recent Sony products where I either posted nothing or even complementary comments on Sony.
I could go on but no reason to...you've been proven wrong.
@mikegt See my reply earlier. Perhaps the emojis are a bit of a trigger for you - in which case look away now - 🤣🤣😂😂😂🤣🤣😂😂🤣🤣😂😂🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂🤣🤣😂😂😂🤣🤣 - NURSE………..😷
I work with Canon, flawlessly, since 9 years, I had Pentax before, that instead, let me down (professionally). I use the 5D line still today and now I have an R6 beside it for stabilized video. Canon never failed me once and has always delivered excellent quality and consistency in focus. Plus, its EF L primes are the state of the art. Mine are fact based on around 2 million of photos and hundreds of clips taken in 9 years. It's your amateur experience and spite towards a brand to be childish. I don't care what people use to craft photos, even if I dislike Sony ergonomics and colors I don't spend my time hating on a company like a loser. Feel free to hate Canon, I'm sure they're crying so much now. I'll drink your tears while I count all the $ I make using their gear
Wow. I've read some of the nasty things you have written to other people - really sick stuff, there is definitely something very wrong with you. You joined only 4 months ago, I've been here since 2003. How about you do us all a favor and just crawl back under whatever rock you oozed out of.
"You joined only 4 months ago, I've been here since 2003", so, beside having owned amateur cameras from Canon this is the only argument you have. Children trolls like you deserve to get nasty answers, that's it ;)
I don't spend my time hating on a company like a loser. Kisses
I in fact own dozens of cameras from a 1941 Kodak box brownie, several classic Minolta SLRs, the legendary Nizo S800, plus at least a dozen digital models the most recent being my Sony A7R II. I used to work as a professional photographer and also worked as a crew member on numerous Hollywood productions; I was also a member of the visual effects team for Star Trek: Deep Space Nine for several years.
You on the other hand appear to be nothing more than a wedding photographer that no one has heard of. What justifies your over-abundant arrogance ?
@mikegt You put it out there - you get it back - deservedly. There is no justification for your behaviour in your tedious rehashing of every camera you’ve ever owned and job you’ve ever had……👎
mikegt: given your amazing CV cleaning the floor at hollywood productions I wonder why you're wasting your time here talking about canon using as an argument amateur toys you owned years ago. You're a real joke. About me? I won international contests with my personal projects, and my clients love me, but is none of your concerns. You just get what you deserve. I use Canon gear to make money since 9 years, flawlessly, you, instead, used amateur Canon camera years ago and live like an internet Sony troll, period. Your argument is invalid as your celebrities' janitor CV
@kandid: I just don't understand spending time hating on a brand, a funny provocative comment once in a while is ok, it's part of the game, but this is like reading a child crying over a toy that he doesn't own but hates ahahah. I dislike Sony, and I used to dislike Fuji (lately I'm pretty intrigued...) for different reasons: clinical rendering lenses, colors and ergonomics for Sony. Sensor technology for Fuji. But I've never spent my time hating on a brand bashing users that prefer other manifacturers' solutions. Competitions is good for all of us and pushes all the brands to get better
mike: you're here since 2003 and you've never showed any picture of yours. What I read is just "blablablablah I had canon consumer cameras blablablah". Why don't you prove your points with facts, you little sony triggered troll with low self esteem, couch photographer, liar, and piece of celebrities' janitor? Go back in your sewers, back eating sony's bunghole
mike: hating in a thousand comments a camera you can't afford or neither you want to has to be a really intelligent thing to do, isn't it? You're a joke and you deserve to be laughed at
To everyone claiming that Canon has the lead in mirrorless camera sales - can anyone provide a link that proves this statement ? So far in my searching using Google, I have only found articles that say that in 2021 Sony was still ahead of Canon as far as mirrorless camera sales is concerned (for example https://petapixel.com/2021/03/03/nikon-only-has-7-5-share-of-the-mirrorless-market-report).
LOL. The Sony Army of Trolls (SAT) is out in full force. This time they are so worried about their precious brand, that they come into a discussion on Canon gear to try to soothe their insecurities, because, God forbid, someone somewhere in this discussion may have posted that Canon leads in mirrorless sales, and not just overall camera sales.
@RubberDials: LOL. There is nothing in this DPR article related to relative sales of mirrorless by brand. That just came out of nowhere by the OP.
Sure you referenced a link to another unrelated article on DPR. So what? So if I go to discussions on Sony products to troll, it’s OK as long as I link to content on DPR, like articles on Canon, Nikon , etc?
What an ugly & completely uninformative response by "Thoughtless R Us" to a perfectly legitimate question. He knows I was referring to the various comments here and elsewhere claiming Canon is in the lead. Here are some examples:
Tom Holly: Good to see Canon moving back into the clear lead. tjamp: They already took the lead in mirrorless sales last winter. BackToNature1: ...Canon to produce extremely cheap FF (mirrorless) cameras...having an clear led (lead)...
As I understand the situation, Canon does lead if all camera sales including cheap point & shoot models are included, but Sony still leads in the area most of us are talking about here, which is mirrorless interchangable lens cameras.
@mikegt: So if you were responding to a post in another discussion thread from way earlier, why not post it in that thread? LOL.
And it may surprise you, but you do not need to moderate discussions of Canon gear to protect Sony and make sure that the pro-Sony point of view is heard. Also, your cheap shot at Canon only proves your intention and that you are a member of the Sony Army of Trolls (SAT).
the OP's sales leadership question was trolling, plain and simple. It has nothing to do with the article and is just an attempt by a Sony fan to stir up Canon fans.
I am going to make some basic assumptions about the direction Canon is moving in. My first assumption is they can't wait to end the issue of making both mirrorless and DSLRs. That would allow them to use the benefits of cost scaling when they eventually make mirrorless only. So any talk about what's their flagship based on price is pure nonsense, IMO. DSLRs are an legacy product for Canon.
Their upcoming R3, the current R5 & R6 are well placed where neither really impedes on the sales of the other. IMO. Cost of scale of going only mirrorless sooner than later, that is expected to allow Canon to produce extremely cheap FF cameras for the masses on the low end. Just as they have done previously with DSLRs. So Canon having an clear led isn't simply based on Specs which 90% of most folks never use regardless of brand.
I was hoping it would be an upgrade of the entry level full frame 'RP' a higher resolution EVF and higher 4K video frame rates. IBIS would be nice but that's a complete chassis redesign that drives the entry level price up too high. The lens IS will do. A bigger battery would be nice but for me the existing capacity is fine as a very casual shooter.
I hope for these new cameras DPR updates their auto focus testing. Maybe adding more type of subjects like at a local zoo, and using faster subjects.
One photographer at the Olympus reported about the A1, "I had two Alpha 1 of my own, and borrow a few to use with remotes. They don't AF each of 30 frames. Maybe a future GS revision will I hope." So even though the camera is fast it at the moment is unable to adjectives AF for each frame. I hope the R3 does better.
Nokishita's 6099€ quote might be before each country adds their own VAT, which can vary from one country to another within the European Union. Add 20% to 6099€ and you're at 7,320€. For EU members that only have a 15% VAT, it would be 7,015€.
They already took the lead ion mirrorless sales last winter according to Techno Systems Research who publishes the data. Canon is the only company who saw increased mirrorless slaes the past several years while other companies saw mirrorless unit sales drop up to 40%
@whitelens: LOL. @whitelens is part of the Sony Troll Army.
They criticize Canon when they bring out a premium L lens that is an optical masterpiece for costing too much. When Canon brings out a lower priced lens they criticize it for being "cheap."
Of course Sony has nothing like that upcoming Canon lens and so they are worried.
Methinks they will simply find a way to criticize any brand other than Sony, and are not dealing in good faith.
@TRU: I do not criticize Canon. I am just trying to bring Canon fans back to reality when they are lollygagging! Now please excuse me I have to go and take some photos. You should try the same sometime. I am sure Canon can survive without your protection for a couple of hours. Canon is a lot stronger than you think.
@whitelens: I actually just finished taking some photos with the fantastic RF 100 Macro...pretty cool lens. That 1.4X magnification is sure a neat feature.
You do realize that what you write about me could also be said to apply to you: that Sony doesn't need your help.
Look at mirrorless sales figures from 2018 to the most recent. A 40% drop vs. a 30% increase. One needs help and the other does not. The number of comments here has no affect.
@KZ7: You have to read my whole statement again. Example: If people claim that the Canon R5 is a great camera, I will agree with them. It is a great camera. However, if people claim that it is better than Sony A1, I will tell them they are dreaming. So I am not criticizing Canon, just overly excited Canon fans. Big difference.
@whitelens You have a history of critisizing Canon. Why so defensive, its hardly news to regular readers of the comments sections.
"Nothing screams clear lead like a cheap 100-400 zoom lens."
I think Canon releasing lenses like this is a good thing. It gives a cheap option for RF users, expands the number of lenses in the system and I suspect will sell very well. With this and the 16mm f2.8 they could almost have been marketing directly to me. Better more expensive options are available and I think they will eventually have something in between as they do with their EF line-up. Or do you think they should only cater to the well heeled enthusiast market? Didn't they get critisised for not having this type of low cost option when they launched the RF system?
Too bad Sony A1 has that godawful Sony interface/menu. You’d think a company striving to be taken seriously as professional Camera system would have sorted out that mess by now…
@whitelens well the A1 didn't catch up in AF with the R5/R6 (animal eye af), Sonys best high end still has to play catch up with the lower to mid range tiers. Meanwhile fanboys got more toxic, I smell some fear, the fear of competition pushing technology faster than they might be able to catch up learning new things as well as their "god" lacking behind every now and then.
First, the fact that so many compare the $3900 R5 to the $6500 A1 is a tribute to the R5.
Second, the R5 is far easier to operate with better grip and ergonomics. It has the flip out screen. And even the way the battery door and the card slot door open is better on the Canon. It's obvious that Canon has decades of experience refining the experience of using a camera.
Third, the R5 bird/animal AF is a bit better than the A1, and course works in video mode, where for some reason the bird/animal AF on the A1 doesn't work in video mode? if that were Canon, the Sony fans would call that a "cripple" on the device.
But regardless, it is not up to @whitelens to moderate every discussion of Canon gear to try to defend Sony, and certainly not criticize Canon. That is the definition of a troll. And that makes him part of the Sony Army of Trolls (SAT).
@Kandid:I am sorry, but posting 10 smiles in a row is only considered a good point if you live in kindergarten. And yes, I do take photos. Some of them are actually quite good. You should give it a try.
I Think you guys convinced me not to waste my money on an expensive Sony when I could get a way better Canon for a lot less money. I hope I can trade in my Sony 100-400 G Master for one of these new 100-400 Canons.
@whitelens you rather should consider the 100-400 II then as it works native with an adapter. Look how many options in different price ranges you have, RF 100-400, EF 100-400 II, RF 100-500. Are you really criticising an additional budget option?
@whitelens Comparing a lens that will sell for less than USD700 with one that sells for USD2,400. Do I really need to explain the difference to you or was that just another sad attempt at trolling? You could of course trade in for the RF 100-500 for a little bit more than the G-master and get the benefit of that extra reach, or get the EF 100-400 ii for the same price as the G Master. Myself, I'm just a poor deluded fool with an RP looking to retire my ancient EF 75-300. What could possibly be interesting about a budget RF 100-400 to someone like me? Silly of Canon to make a lens that I might buy as well as the choice of better more expensive models, what were they thinking?
@KZ7: I am pretty sure that this new $699 Canon lens will be a good lens. But I do not think that it will "move Canon back into the clear lead" as the original poster (Tom Holley) claimed.
@whitelens This upcoming Canon announcement is primarily about the R3 - in case you have forgotten it was you who introduced the topic of the new 100-400 - not the OP. At least try to have the courage of your questionable convictions….🙄
@Kandid: My bad. So you think a 24 MP Canon with stacked sensor will blow the doors of Sony's best? To my knowledge Sony had this technology and introduced it successfully in 2017. They called it A9. BTW i hope you are feeling OK. There was only one emoji.
I liked how when the Nikon Z7 came out Lens Rentals did a tear down and named it the best built FF mirrorless camera even though it was Nikons first try. Later the R5 was named the most solidly built.
Then when Canon put IBIS in to a camera it too was named better than all other FF mirrorless cameras.
The R5 has also been named best AF overall, especially for video. And the R3 should be better.
Almost forgot, Nikon was named having the best IQ of any mirrorless with the Z7ii.
So it’s amazing how Canon and Nikon jump to the lead on their 1st or 2nd try.
Lens rentals had done a great job busting the myths about good weather sealing and build quality. After about a dozen FF mirrorless cameras Lens Rentals made it point to point out the Nikon Z7 was superior to all of them. What’s strange is that other brand seems to deliberately not seal their cameras completely. Lenses Rentals found some part of their bodies have excellent sealing and on a few the majority of the camera does, but then in whole sections there is no seal whatsoever.
@whitelens Canon built a position of dominance in the camera industry by doing a number of things very well. 1. Making rugged proffesional cameras with high quality lenses for those who needed it. 2. Making good quality, low cost, user friendly, cameras and lenses for the mass market. 3. Making mid-tier cameras with most of the features of their high end companions but at a lower price point. The upcoming R3 and the high end lenses released to date look to be addressing point 1. The R5&6 address point 3 and the RP and these new lenses address point 2. They need to build out the mid-tier lens line-up, but this strategy, as shown in their increasing share of the mirrorless market, appears to be working. Of course if you don't like Canon, there are plenty of other options so no need to get upset about these things.
Oh yes, I heard that all before. Canon and Nikon are so well built that you could use them to drive nails into a wall. I have a hammer for that purpose. I use my Sony only for photography.
@whitelens Getting back to the OPs post. Canon is well positioned to take the lead in mirrorless cameras (they have been the leading camera manufacturer overall for 20+ years). In a little over 2 years, despite the on-going disruption of a global pandemic, Canon has gone from having no FF mirrorless options to having: RP, R, R6, R5 & R3 bodies, covering everything from the cheapest digital FF camera ever released up to an enhanced mirrorless 1DX style camera. A series of budget friendly lenses including the 16 f2.8, 35 f1.8 macro, 50 f1.8, 85 f2 macro, 24-105 f4-7.1, 24-240 f4-6.3 and the 600 & 800 f11's. High end zoom lenses including the f2.8 holy trinity, f4 holy trinity & 100-500 f4.5-7.1 and the unique 28-70 f2 High end primes including the 50 f1.2, 85 f1.2 (2 variations), 100 f 2.8 macro, 400 f2.8 & 600 f4. Add to this all of the fantastic EF glass that can seamlessly be adapted to the RF bodies and thats a pretty compelling line-up in a short time.
Opps, I missed from my list the the budget 100-400 due to be realeased next week, which nicely rounds out the budget lens line up and the excellent 24-105 F4L IS that I own.
So sad to see how many Dpreview treats are filled with negativity and so called trolls. After nearly 15 years as reader and user on Dpreview it’s time to find another place to share my passion for photography and gear. And yes I know this comment will possibly not get the most positive attention!
It's all so dull isn't it. You can predict the comments before you look.
Brand X announcements will be full of Brand Y fans telling us why Brand X is soooo bad compared to Brand Y, especailly if Brand Y is Sony for some reason. Comments on news reports like this one are the best becasue no-one even knows what it is they are arguing about!
Adobe announcements will be full of comments from people that no longer use Adobe becasue of the terrible subscription system (which I think is great)
I know a lot of photographers and we discuss the merits of our various systems at times. However there is one thing that is always true. When we are looking at each others images it is impossible to know which camera it was taken on or which software was used to edit it.
I still look at this site because the news section is usually up to date and I like the forums. Less brand bashing on the forums because brand X lovers don't usually go on brand Y forums.
I was just thinking the same. I was excited to read comments about the R3 and instead, this thread was just adult bullying at it’s finest. I look forward to this update every week. @dpreview, if you are following along, the comments are getting progressively worse and clearly not moderated. It is getting so obnoxious and it is sad that even within this community, there is little escape from people with nothing better to do than put others down.
R5 single pt AF is not as good as DSLR (Cross). Most of the time I use Zone or Eye AF with full sensor. Zone size is a bit too big for some cases. Hope Canon implementing smaller zone (4 pixels to simulate cross AF pt)) or I will wait for QUARD AF R1 or future Rs. Unless you can master with your finger on the torch screen to follow and lock your subject before tracking. Or the Eye Control AF is really effective.
Thoughts R Us: You calling someone else a troll is just hilarious. Your blind hatred of Sony is evident to anyone who has read your 9,000+ comments praising Canon and/or bashing Sony.
I'm starting to think that besides getting paid by Canon to post here, there are multiple people using "Thoughts R Us". This would explain why you claim to own or have used every camera ever made and how you or your group is able to post thousands of comments 24 x 7.
@mikegt: LOL. You are in a discussion about a Canon product and you are the one criticizing it with lame jokes...that makes you the troll by definition.
But yes, I am like Dr. Who or James Bond...many iterations of me exist...I am timeless :) LOL again.
@ TRU Yet when you are in a Sony forum / article and you are bashing it at every opportunity.. that's fine with you, and that you are not a troll? You are the very epitome of double standard, as many here have attested.
Mostly Sony users attesting to what TRU an or whom anyone else is or isn't holds very little weight. What it does shows, the volume of users from an Given Brand. Period.
@Potoughto: As my mother used to say, two wrongs don't make a right.
I'll make a deal with you and all of the other Sony trolls: I won't comment on Sony articles if you don't on Canon or other competitor articles.
And I've been quite respectful lately. For instance, when those Sony trio of slowish prime lenses came out and there were articles on them, I didn't criticize them, even like many Sony users. But when DPR posted the article on the Canon RF 28-70 and now on the 14-35, we saw the usual Sony Troll Army.
And it's on other websites as well, and so you can't blame me. Everyone notices the trolling of the Sony fans. It's a thing.
TRU, the real name is SDF (defense force). It started back in the Playstation days and got worse when the first xbox came out. As the Internet grew they got worse and spread to any and all things made by the company. Phones, cameras, playstations, etc. Funny thing most do not own the electronic gadgets they discuss, nor do they actually care. Its like a someone from NY who knows nothing about baseball but hates the Red Sox and loves the Yankees.
The biggest thing "TRU" misses on purpose of course is that it is not trolling to tell the truth.
Canon does cripple their consumer cameras to protect their professional ones. Sony is sometimes guilty of this as well (such as being slow to upgrade to 10-bit video), but IMHO Canon just seems to be more aggressive in this department.
Canon did remove features from the Canon SL3 compared to the SL2. This is rarely a good thing.
Canon built the R5 with cooling issues. They wanted to make sure the camera did not compete with their pricey Cinema Line but they went a little too far. The R5 could of been a truly great camera but Canon just could not help themselves, they had to hit it with the cripple stick.
Mr. "TRU", you can scream and yell about how we are all supposedly anti-Canon trolls, but the truth is that Canon doesn't always treat it's customers right and folks here deserve to know the truth no matter how much you don't like it.
Yes Sony/Canon absolutely cripple cameras to protect professional ones
Look at how badly Sony crippled A mount. Look at how badly Sony still cripples video on all their cameras under $3400. (8 bit, 4:2:0, etc.) Canon did limit the R5 video, but I think that more of poor programming. They mostly fixed the overheating problems that were due to a timer. AND they now support 8K RAW (10 bit) externally that is unlimited. You won't see any type of 8K RAW from Sony for years.
So the point is most of the things we read about Canon from Sony people are often worse on the Sony side. Canon embraced video and video AF, but Sony has crippled both. Canon embraced IBIS, but Sony limits theirs. Canon has $2500 camera that shoots 20 FPS, and all of Sony's are limited to 10 FPS at that price. Canon let's 3rd party lenses shoot at 20FPS if they are capable. Sony limits them to 15 FPS and 10 FPS. Canon does have an issue with battery power, but I don't think its intentional.
@mikegt: LOL. You screed makes you sound like a crazy person trying to convince the world that the sky is falling.
You don't have a clue as to what the "truth" is WRT Canon and their product planning. Everything you say is your assumption.
And of course your assumption always goes against Canon, and for Sony. You sure do give Sony the benefit of the doubt, even when you want to be seen as criticizing them.
So yes what you do is pure trolling. It's even more arrogant to try to cast it as something noble, when in reality you don't care about the readers of this forum, you don't care a bit about them. So you are an arrogant troll.
Not only are you a member of the SAT...Sony Army of Trolls...you are part of the SAAT...Sony Army of Arrogant Trolls.
So we don't need you to explain your "truth" to us.
"TRU": Wow, I must have really touched a nerve....!
Kandid: Very sad to hear the truth about Canon puts you in a state of vexation. 😭
> Be happy with your Sony gear
I am really happy with my Sony A7R II. 42 Megapixels, 4K video, IBIS and the other modern goodies and it only cost me $1,300 brand new. When I think about the folks who spent three times as much for the same capabilities, it makes me even more happy!
@mikegt So happy with it that you trawl Canon articles looking for some elusive and meaningless self affirmation? Your ‘points’: 1. This is called product positioning. It’s a marketing concept which all producers utilise (well or badly) 2. Don’t be childish - see answer to one 3. Obviously vexatious as the R5 has sold extremely well 😊…. So hardly the ‘truth’ - just more schlock from the glop hopper…
Vexatious Kandidy: How do you know how well the R5 has sold ? Do you work for Canon ?
It's not "product positioning", it's called ripping off the customer and anyone who defends such immoral behavior is as bad as the folks who commit it.
First, Canon has introduced only one camera at $2,500 that can do 20 fps, the R6. Unfortunately the R6 is a bit crippled otherwise being capable of only 20 megapixel stills. One can reasonably expect the next Sony A7 to support 20 fps.
Second, the R5 overheating is NOT fixed, the long-term reviews all complain about it still overheating.
Third, Sony does AF in both movies and stills, they were first to market with full-frame IBIS, Canon dragged their feet in that area for years and in fact Sony beat them to market with full-frame mirrorless five full years before Canon finally shipped something in that market.
@mikegt How do I know it sells well - I guess because I can read EVERY report on the camera industry including from retailers - are you saying you know it hasn’t sold well…..❓- didn’t think so…. Of course it’s product positioning - if companies get this wrong products don’t sell as consumers feel they are ‘being ripped off’. Canon get this right enough overall to maintain a massive market share lead in the camera industry……😁. Sorry to drive this point home as I know the relative failure of your beloved brand 👅💦👅💦👅💦 to dominate upsets you…..😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂
@mikegt Obviously you missed the part where I pointed out that you don’t understand product positioning. Product positioning is not a moral centred activity - it’s a commercial process which is either successful (product sells) or not (product doesn’t sell) Please explain (if you can) what this specifically has to do with ‘morals’….❓❓
The 100-400 is really small. It won't matter if its not sharp though. If it is sharp at 400mm then it will be a good lens for Canon. Its to early to criticize it.
Pff unless you get a defective copy it will be sharp enough for any real world photography you would use such a lens for. Even if you make 60" gallery quality prints. Just like even the kit lenses that came on Rebels or D3xxx cameras or any lens made by one of the major players in the last 10 years.
The 100-400 and the 16mm f2.8 that leaked as well, are of more interest to me than the R3. The R3 is only of academic interest to me, to see what Canon can do, but I could very well end up buying the lenses. I need to replace my very old EF 70-300 and a wide angle prime at the price its being touted at would fit nicely with what I have now as well.
Sony is getting more positive remarks here than Canon. And this is a Canon announcement. Every time Canon launches a new product Sony makes a fortune. Amazing.
I would like to see the 100-400 for FujiFilm. It looks small and compact. I just bought a 100-400 but it cost me twice as much used and weighs a lot.
I ignore the Sony comments. Its the same 1 or 2 guys responding negatively to every positive comment. 300+ comments so far and 100 are from one bitter person with no interest in the announcement.
Funny how so many Sony users like to hangout on most comment sections centered on Canon products. That still doesn't change the fact that by far, Canon sell far more Cameras than Sony or anyone else. Period.
Canon's most exciting announcement of the year, for me, would be if they announced that they were joining micro four thirds, announced some new MFT cameras and lenses, and ended their EF-M mount range which they seem to have treated so half-heartedly
@CJAM, Canon will shutdown and go out of business before they join MFT. They take quite some pride in designing and manufacturing their own hardware and won't join in on joint project like MFT. Read the past interviews with their executives, they develop their own systems to differentiate themselves from the other manufacturers. This is especially true now that so many manufacturers are buying Sony sensors.
A slow but hopefully sharp 100-400 and a cheap but small 16mm. The prices are certainly reasonable. You could be cynical and say the camera companies are the source of the "leaks." If not, they have a real problem with information about products they want to sell, reaching cutomers too quickly.
Unlikely - with 45megapixels compared to a rumoured 24megapixels - also the R6 has recently had a £200 price drop here in the UK and with 20 mpix is more comparable image quality-wise. Maybe this bodes well for the price of the R3! ;-) (I have my doubts....)
On the latest LensRentals podcast, Roger Cicala speculated that we would see the price of the R5 drop over the next couple months. Maybe I was reading too much into his comment but it seemed like it was more than a guess.
Just saw the 100-400 zoom is likely to sell for $699 or less. It is rather small too. Pair that with R6 with has class leading AF or even an RP, and you've got quite a kit.
Hmmm, I don't know of a single Sony lens that has as much coverage as all but two RF lenses. I don't know of any 800mm lens under $2000 that has autofocus near as good as the Canon, and the Canon is $900. Speaking of price, $649 vs $2400. Not to mention size. And that Industry leading AF on the R6/5/3.
You choose to deflect but it’s a reasonable question. That 100% AF coverage is reduced to 24% on those f/11 lenses. And one of the primary target markets for those f/11 lenses is the same target market that wants full frame AF coverage.
Will this budget 100-400 with a TC be crippled like the f11 primes are?
Mike, those lenses are not crippled because of their incredibly low price. Everyone understands that that is the trade-off you make for such a low price. But those are breakthrough lenses at those prices.
And they can produce very good results. There are plenty of examples of people getting really great results using those lenses. Many of those users would otherwise have been shut out entirely of long telephoto photography.
But you know what? Because Sony doesn’t offer any lenses that are even close to being comparable for that price point, they in essence offer 0% coverage. That’s the worst. To have zero product to fit the same need.
How strange, in the link provided it looks like one camera lifts AF to only about 80% of the width and yet another camera is 100% for all but two lenses.
I'll take the 100% for all but 2 lenses over the 80% width only for every lens.
But the real question is will this lens support 20 FPS? One system only has 5 or 6 FF lenses 150mm and over that can do that, and none of them are under $1900. This one is 400mm and $649.
@MikeRan said "So like I said. Will this low cost 100-400 have some limitation like these f/11 lenses do?"
duh? no. the rumored minimum aperture of the 100-400 is a lot brighter than the budget 600 and 800 lenses you are referring to. Those 600 and 800 lenses let in a lot less light wide open than the rumored 100-400. This limited light is the limiting factor on the AF not some imaginary cripple.
If the the rumored 100-400 isn't and "L" lens, it will still be a high quality lens competitive in its price range.
Mike, all lenses and products have limitations by definition.
But this low priced Canon 100-400 lens has less limitations than the Sony, because Sony doesn’t make such a lens, and thus has the ultimate limitation.
What’s funny is that when Canon releases a premium L lens, then the Sony guys complain that it cost too much. Never mind that premium lenses do tend to cost a lot, including those by Sony. But when Canon introduces a lower priced lens, then the Sony guys complain that it naturally has some limitations versus the premium lenses.
So maybe the Sony guys are not dealing so much from a position of good faith, but rather seeking just to criticize a competitor brand.
> But this low priced Canon 100-400 lens has less limitations than the Sony, > because Sony doesn’t make such a lens, and thus has the ultimate limitation
You are ignoring the third-party lenses made for Sony cameras. Sigma makes an 100-400mm f/5-6.3 lens for Sony which costs only $949.
The zoom range is a little less but for only $499 one can get the Tamron 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3 zoom.
Go up in price a little and you can get the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 for $1,499.
Maybe you shouldn't be bashing Sony on the subject of lenses, when there are approximately four times as many available for the Sony E full-frame mount versus the Canon RF mount.
Canon makes 4 or 5 times as many lenses that work on RF mount than Sony makes that work on E mount. Add in 3rd parties and Canon still has an enormous lead.
But maybe you want to discuss limitations. 3rd party E mount lenses have restrictions. All are limited to 15 FPS or less.
@mikegt: LOL. I guess you conveniently forgot about all of the Canon EF glass that works perfectly on R bodies with Canon adaptor. In fact these work better than the third party lenses work on Sony.
In the discussions of premium RF glass, the Sony guys criticize the RF lenses by saying that it's a better deal to use EF glass with adaptor. So for sure the Sony guys know that EF + adaptor works great on R bodies.
So in reality the R bodies have the largest selection of glass out there.
But we know that the Sony Troll Army doesn't argue from good faith, just from a desire to criticize the competition.
They say: “This incredible sensitivity to light also lets the EOS R5 focus with maximum apertures as small as f/22, allowing teleconverters to be used with relatively slow-aperture lenses, and very-compact super telephoto lenses, such as the RF 600mm F11 IS STM and RF 800mm F11 IS STM.”
No footnote..
How would anyone know that the full frame coverage which is at the top doesn’t apply to the F11 lenses?
This is typical canon marketing.
As i said. The 100-400/5.6 with a 2x TC (800mm f/11) is reported to work to the frame edge. But the 800 f/11 prime doesn’t. So either he is wrong. Or canon crippled the AF. You guys just don’t want to admit canon continues to play these games.
@MikeRan, nowhere in your link does it ever claim to work 100% edge to edge.
You then refer to someone saying a rumored lens can do it, all in an attempt to put down Canon for crippling their budget 600 and 800 lenses. LOL, get a life.
BTW can Sony do edge to edge 100% on any lens in any body?
The A1 autofocuses PDAF to f/22 with full 94% coverage. I have tested this myself. To my knowledge Sony doesn’t cripple any specific lens like canon seems to be doing on the 600/800 primes.
Initially I thought there was a legitimate technical reason why the cameras cannot focus to the edge at f/11 but I was corrected by someone who said their EF 100-400/5.6 with 2x extender can do it. F/11 is f11 regardless of the mount.
Well, Mike 94% isn't 100% is it? So thank you for playing.
As for "crippling"...please...you are talking about a 600 prime costing $699 and an 800 costing $899. LOL.
And your conjecture involving an EF lens is just really foolish, as you don't know anything about the engineering of the RF lenses, the RF AF system, etc.
But speaking of crippling, how come the Sony A1 cannot do animal or bird AF in video? That's either a major cripple or a major technical limitation to a camera that's supposed to be "the one." And that's their $6500 flagship. HaHa.
Correct. 94% is not 100%. So yes. When all you have is a bird beak in the frame maybe just maybe your R5 still has an AF point on the bird. Anyway you guys pivot when you’re wrong.
And f/11 is f/11. If you look at the physics the angles involved are exactly the same whether the lens is an RF mount or the lens is an EF mount.
And are you actually trying to say the R5 can AF better with EF lenses than it can with RF lenses?
@MikeRan: no one is "pivoting" ...that's your favorite word for now, I see...you just don't want to admit that there's no cripple in 600/800 lenses costing under $1000.
As for your amateur engineering, it really doesn't matter what you think. Call me when you are an optical engineer with access to full Canon data on the lenses and cameras. A big problem today is everyone thinks they are an expert at everything without the training. Knowing a little is not the same as knowing what you need to know.
And finally, talk about "pivoting"...why don't you answer my question regarding the "crippling" of the very expensive Sony A1? Why didn't they allow animal/bird AF in video? Or is the camera somehow less capable in video mode?
I simply think Sony didn’t develop the capability. If you haven’t developed the capability it’s not crippling. Crippling is having the capability and defeating it on purpose with not added benefit (cost or otherwise). Like having the capability to PDAF to the edges of the frame at f/11 and disabling the capability on your cheapest lenses to the central 24% for no reason.
I know you think I’m an amateur but I have developed optical systems to test semiconductor lasers. Anyway. I may be wrong about that. And if I am it’s even more puzzling the the RF lenses don’t work down to f/11 to the frame edges and the EF ones do.
And yeah. Canon marketing claims f22 to the edges of the frame as I linked before.
The only thing I can thing of Sony explicitly crippling (canon style) is the limited AutoISO implementation on the lowest end APS-C bodies,
@MikeRan: Wow...you really change the terms to fit your purpose.
So when Sony fails to provide a useful capability on its camera that it is capable of providing, but just doesn't bother to engineer it, that's not crippling? That is withholding a feature that they are capable of. It doesn't matter if it's developed and not included, or if the company chooses to not develop it in the first place.
The end user doesn't care.. Either way Sony left out a feature that it could have included. That to most is the definition of crippling.
And if they somehow couldn't include it, then that is a technical limitation of their most advanced camera.
Sure. All cameras have technical limitations. I never used the "cripple hammer" in reference to the R5 overheating (I know many others did, but I don't agree with them.) Canon simply didn't have the technology. I never called their electronic shutter crippled because they didn't have a stacked sensor. They hadn't developed the technology...
As I said, crippling is having the capability, and choosing not to implement it with no cost saving benefit, usually to protect higher margin business.
@MikeRan: Sony does have animal/bird AF developed, and they use it in their stills mode on the A1. They choose not to put it in their video mode.
So yes they have the capability. Unless there is something about the way Sony implements video that forces a tech limitation on them. But then that means the A1 is behind the R5/R6 and this new R3 in its technology in that area. The Canon's all do animal/bird AF in video as they do in stills.
So I guess you maintain that Sony is behind Canon in their video tech as it relates to using machine learning algorithms.
Yes. Sony is behind in certain areas and ahead in others. Perhaps they don’t implement animal/bird EyeAF in video because it would burn too much power and cause the camera to overheat.
Just speculation on my part.
Congratulations. The R5 video AF wins if you need bird/animal AF in video. Canon did it. Sony didn’t.
@Mikeran Why on earth would you think that a USD699 lens is crippled because it isn't as capable as a USD2,700 lens thats much larger and much heavier? Any chance I can get some of what you're smoking? I'm sure that Canon could add all sorts of features and capabilities to their lower end products if they chose to, but that would kind of defeat the purpose. Low price, less features, high price, more features. I hope thats not to complicated to understand.
You just can’t accept that you were wrong about canon claiming full frame AF coverage down to f22.
And nowhere in the marketing for the f11 primes does it say the AF area is reduced by 75%. No doubt some buyers were surprised when they bought this lens, and saw it doesn’t AF outside the central region. Then they look in the manual and find the reality.
@MikeRan: The people who buy those tremendously inexpensive F11 super tele primes are generally very happy with them and marvel that they get such a lens at such a low price. They are not looking for ways to criticize Canon like you are.
As Kona Mike said, your logic is summed up by this: "Canon "cripples" their products, while Sony "didn't implement" for valid reasons."
And it also bears repeating: you are criticizing super tele lenses that are priced under $1000 US. People understand that there are some trade offs at that price vs the $12,000 super tele lenses.
Yet you defend the omission of a feature on a Sony $6500 camera. It seems that that camera needs to be held to a higher standard due to its very high price. And we know that part of that high price is not going into having a super rugged pro body, and that it has pretty much the same body as the $3500 A7SIII.
"I wonder if they’ll cripple the AF on that lens also like they did on the f/11 primes to make people buy the big brother 100-500 instead."
I can't tell if you were serious with this comment or not. Canon has been guilty of using that cripple hammer many times but the AF limitations are a result of the dark f11 aperture getting even darker toward the edges, not an artificial cripple. Despite this, it's a completely unique lens at an attractive price point. Nothing to really criticize except for maybe that gaudy silver plastic control ring. Otherwise, it's great for what it is.
Ive seen the 70-200 F4 in person and it is tiny. I would love to own that lens. If the 100-400 is smaller than traditional 100-400 lenses than it too will be in high demand.
I think the point of the 100-400 will be smaller size and price. So there are trade offs.
As to the 50 f1.8, that's actually a nice performing lens for the price. It's only $199 and is very small and light. And again, it delivers for what it intends to be.
So if the 16/2.8 is a good performing lens at a very affordable price and small size, that will be a nice addition to the RF lineup.
Yes it all depends on the price. But interesting thing about the 100-400 is Nokishita says it will be able to use the TC's which I don't think the 100-500 can? And that's something more commonly associated with higher end lenses.
I wonder about readout speed during video. Sony hasn't been able to get their stacked sensors to readout any faster than other cameras while shooting video. The A1 is no faster than the R5 for example.
I also want to see if the R3 can automatically switch between people and animals with eye detect without have to deep dive in the menus to change a settings. And if the new AF features are also covered under the 'no priority' mode, just as they are with the R5 and R6. Other cameras make you deep dive to change settings for them all to work,
"Sony hasn't been able to get their stacked sensors to readout any faster than other cameras while shooting video. The A1 is no faster than the R5 for example."
False.
The A1 readout in video is faster than the r5 readout in every mode:
CineD measured The A1 "at 8K full-frame 25 frames per second, a very good rolling shutter of 16.6ms" And the "Canon EOS R5 in full frame DCI mode (17:9) in high quality readout mode (that is 8K RAW, 8K H265 all-I and 4K DCI) has a rolling shutter of 15.5ms" So the Canon was over 1ms faster in their tests.
That's why I said the R5 was faster. But remember, Sony 8K is 13% fewer pixels than Canon's and not 8000 pixels wide (the definition of 8K - K meaning thousand).
Even if we go by your numbers, Sony outputs 33 million pixels in 15.2ms while the Canon outputs over 35 million pixels in 15.4ms. I'd agree the Canon is faster even with though numbers,
The A1 suffers from rolling shutter in video mode. They do not take full advantage of the sensor read speed.
Also A1 has no animal/bird AF in video mode.
And yes, on A1 for stills you have to switch in the settings between animal, bird, and people AF. On the Canon, you do not need to do that. It is intelligent enough to switch between those automatically.
"The A1 suffers from rolling shutter in video mode."
You don't know much about video, do you? 15.2ms for 8K/30 is excellent. DPreview said; "The readout rates of the a1 when shooting video are impressive, as you might expect given the sensor's design. These figures mean that there's essentially no rolling shutter to speak of, it needn't be a concern regardless of which video mode you utilize." https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a1-review/7
As for your other point, the A1 has no animal-eye AF in video, not no animal AF. it still tracks animals, and their eyes - it just doesn't find the eye. This is not really much of a gotcha when you consider that the R5 has to switch to stills mode and take a picture to set a custom white balance, cannot dual or chain record and has a 30 limit recording for example, aside from any heat issues.
My dog you forgot the A1 is oversampling the full sensor width. So it’s actually reading out substantially more pixels than the R5 in 8k mode. Though it’s true the R5 outputs DCI and the A1 doesn’t.
The A1 8K video has 13% less resolution. That is a fact everyone can understand. Its only 4:2:0 color which is 50% less color that 4:2:2 and nowhere near as good as RAW. The R5 8K look. far more detailed in the Studio test scene. Maybe due to sharpening maybe do to better processing. It is more detailed which is what matters. The Only Sony cameras I know of that output DCI 4K are there more expensive pro cameras and their smartphones. Their mobile division figured out how popular wider aspect ratios are. Heck they even output 4:2:2 video, lol!
All kidding aside, R5 8K is sharper and more more detailed. R5 DCI 8K video has 13% more pixels. R5 can output 4:2:2 color 8K. R5 can output 8K RAW. And as MikeRan pointed out some of the A1 AF modes do not work with video, such as Animal eye AF and Bird eye AF.
And if you go by CineD, the R5 has slightly less rolling shutter (though DPR found them almost equal).
"The A1 8K video has 13% less resolution. That is a fact everyone can understand."
Except it's not true. The difference between UHD 8K and DCI 8K is 512 pixels, which is 6.6%. It's also not 'less resolution' - both standards have the same resolution - 8K, they just have different aspect ratios - 16:9 versus 17:9.
The same with your point about chroma compression. 4:2:0 is standard across the industry, because the compression difference is next to invisible and it has hardware support. Sony knows what they're doing, they make video that you can actually edit and output without having to resort to proxies. The video from the A1 meets UHD-TV standards, which is a much more likely destination for its output.
Canon tried to market their camera as cinema production tool but it remains essentially useless for that environment and will only ever see high-end use connected to an external recorder. The A1, A7sIII and the S1H are fully viable stand-alone video cameras.
Almost forgot about eye controlled AF. IBIS and AF were already class leading on the R5. This camera should have even better AF and will have a professional body.
Finally the first professional body on a mirorless camera, complete with a large usable LCD that tilts in portrait mode. And a top LCD for easy use even when the camera is off. All those professional features missing in other cameras.
Should be great for video too. 4K overt sampled for best quality. Another feature the competition lacks. Add that to the class leading IBIS and AF (some competing AF is crippled during video - no animal eye detect, etc.) and you have a great video camera
Yes, Canon says that the R3 will have even better AF than the R5:
"The EOS R5 and R6 were only the beginning. Using Deep Learning technology, the upcoming EOS R3 will offer enhanced AF performance and tracking capabilities, with even better face-, eye-, head- and body-detection. And now, the EOS R3 will add vehicle subject recognition and tracking, for cars and motorcycles, especially in motorsports environments."
Canon seems to be leading when it comes to using machine learning in AF.
I was surprised to learn the A7Siii which is a video camera doesn't have the different eye detect options during video. I don't think any Sony camera does.
Its like the readout speed of Sony stacked sensors, It doesn't work during video for some reason. I wonder if Canon figured this out and has done away with rolling shutter during video. I guess we'll know next week.
So far it is mostly just statements, so Canon seems to be leading in statements so far. Hopefully these all statements are met and exceeded - this will be great for the market.
Canon as the largest consumer camera maker ready for action to increase their market share. It was just a question of time before they challenged Sony in the full-frame market. Nikon in the same fast-lane with their Z lineup; at last.
BTW this R3 is, as one guy described it, a very futuristic camera. The eye control AF, the machine learning AF, now extending to cars and motorcycles for motorsports.
They probably have the best machine learning for AF, as seen in the R5/R6 and this will be even better.
Say what you will, but Canon can no longer be accused of being stuck in the past; they are very forward looking now.
Mike, LOL. I do agree that the stacked sensor is great and do give kudos to Sony for being there first.
But the machine learning is still a forward looking feature, regardless of who uses it. And so far it seems that Canon is doing it better than anyone.
As to the eye controlled AF...that too is very futuristic. The fact that they first tried it in the 90's doesn't change that...it only means they were really ahead of their time.
Mention that feature to anyone in an unbiased way and they will think it's something out of sci fi. I know...I've told some people about it and they are all wowed by the idea.
Reminds me a bit of the way Apple released the Newton in the 90s but it was in 2007 that the tech caught up with the vision in the iPhone.
But of course now we have over 20 years of extra tech advancement and so this implementation should be far better.
Yup. I hope they have improved it from the 90’s implementation. I had it on an ES6000 and it was a gimmick. I have said on other articles i expect it to be much improved. How effective it is we will soon find out. I’m excited to see how well it works. And I definitely see potential. It could be fantastic. I wonder what their overall implementation strategy is with it.
It will be interesting to see how the eye af works. How difficult will it be to calibrate? Will it work for people wearing glasses or contact lenses? I'm guessing that for some this will be a great feature and for others not so much. I like that Canon included the multifunction controller like on the 1DXiii. More people may end up using that than eye af.
I like how you’re careful not to praise the stacked sensor or 30fps, because, well we All know what that would mean. Btw, I hope you do realize that those are the headline features of the R3.
As for eye AF, anyone who’s followed what I’ve been saying for the last few years knows that I shoot with the LCD; I have since my canon days with the 5D4. Eye AF is a vf only function
Praise or otherwise for the stacked sensor will come after we see how it performs. Not much can be said about it until then other than that this is Canon's first attempt at one.
AFAIK none of these cameras do ANY kind of machine learning. Eye control AF needs to be seen whether it is useful or another Touch Bar. But mostly gimmicks like this are either game changers or disappear pretty quickly.
Nothing else in this camera screams forward thinking.
You are right...the stacked sensor and 30 fps is incredibly cutting edge...I didn't mention it in the post since they are the leading features and I just assume it's been discussed already very much and will be discussed very much in the future.
As for the eye AF...I am eager to see how it works as well. Like someone else mentioned, I think some will love it and some will leave it.
As for it not being futuristic because we've seen this feature before in the past...that still doesn't negate it being futuristic. It was seen only in some previous Canon cameras, and now is implemented with newer technology.
You could say it's not futuristic if in the past everyone had figured it out and it was perfected and put on every camera. Obviously that wasn't the case.
I liken it to early attempts at PDA's like the Apple Newton or Palm Pilot, where things like touch screens and handwriting recognition were attempted, and how that foreshadowed modern day smartphones.
As for motorsports AF, sure that's a niche but a good niche. And we aren't just talking F1 photographers.
There's a whole culture around things like drifting and other street car hobbyists, and of course motorcycles...and so this could be an important point for many.
In some sense the entire dedicated camera market has become a niche, or perhaps more accurately a collection of niches. For instance, you have your BIF photogs, and now those who like to photograph and video motor vehicles. There is a market there.
As I said locking on a car is a piece of cake. If you need neural network subject identification to help you lock onto a car, you need serious help.
I have shot drifting and street car events before. This is probably the easiest genre of sports to achieve good focus on. Of course the trick is good panning but that’s another story.
Hey if you want to upgrade whatever mysterious canon camera you have to an R3 to help you focus on cars, have at it.
Mike, you will downplay the car/motorcycle AF until Sony adds it and then you will all of sudden discover its miraculous uses and sing its praises.
And given that Canon and soon Nikon will have it, I bet it's not long until Sony adds it as well. Unless Sony wants to cede that market to Canon and Nikon and I bet they don't.
No. That’s what you guys did with animal EyeAF. Y’all made cat jokes. Remember?
Anyway I will maintain car AF is not a big deal. As I said. It doesn’t get much easier in sports. (I’m talking focus tracking. Not other aspects of Motorsport photography.)
Funny thing, and Gannon can back this up (who by the way is real professional sports photog with a pretty awesome portfolio), 24MP is going to be a big selling point. As he and working pros said, 95% don’t want more MP. Need more proof? Sony is giving 12 MP and 24MP to the latest agency they have under contract not higher MP cameras.
95% of the sports photographers shoot JPEG, and guess what? You can have the A1 resize the FF jpeg to 21MP, so if they really want low MP, they can without any issue. As a bonus, they can engage the APS-C mode and have a 1.5x range and still 21MP, which you can't do on a 24MP camera, as you would get 9.375MP with a 1.6x crop.
I do think it's funny how the Sony-written press release, dated August of this year, well after the A1 release, on the PA using Sony equipment, mentioned two cameras: a 12MP one and a 24 MP one. Not a single mention of the A1.
Apparently, the 12/24 MP isn't so bad or deficient, as some would lead you to believe. Even Sony was bragging about it.
The price is the only thing left to announce lol. My prediction is $5500. I don’t see how they could possibly ask for more than that when there’s similar specs with double the mp and 8k available for $6500 already.
I think what really limits the price of the R3 is the price of the 1DXIII. With Canon still calling that their flagship camera, then really the price of the R3 cannot be at or above the 1DXIII, or in my mind even within a few hundred dollars.
That’s true too. I think canon has a very slight problem between the price for the 1DXIII and the exceptional price/performance of the R5, they’ve kind of painted themselves into a real corner. They really have to hope that paying pros will be willing to pay for the larger body, stacked sensor, and eye af while at the same time accepting 24mp and no 8k.
So may features not found on the $6500 camera though. Start with over sampled 4K. RAW internal video. No $500 extra grip necessary. Full width AF coverage. A large usable LCD that flips for portraits. And more than 6 lenses longer than 150mm work at 20 FPS. That alone is a big one. Even some Sigmas will work at 20FPS.
Mike, I agree that the R3 will outperform the 1DXIII in every way, but the fact remains that Canon is still calling the 1DXIII their flagship and stating publicly that the R3 will be positioned below it in the lineup.
For pricing this matters. I don't see how Canon can say the R3 is below the 1DXIII but then price it higher.
I guess canon’s definition of flagship is different than mine.
And why a marketing department would want a mirror clacking DSLR flagship when they have a more capable mirrorless camera. When the whole world (except Pentax) is moving to Mirrorless.
Mike, I agree that Canon marketing got themselves into a bit of a pickle with their product segmentation vis a vis the R3 and 1DXIII...but it is what it is.
I still think it limits what they can charge for the R3 which is good for consumers.
I agree. I think the pricing for the A1 and the eventual pricing for the R1 have to figure into where they position the R3. F1.4 says 5500 and I think he’s right. Maybe 4999. But I’d say between 4999 and 5499.
I don't think it can be $6000 or more because then people would start looking elsewhere (A1), but if it's $5500 or less, then the same hesitating people could be convinced to stay. I guess $4999 would be the magic number.
Probably they'll announce the R3 officially after beta testing at the Tokyo OG 2021. And an R3 is more a camera of this era, unlike the 1DXIII with lacks RF lens compatibility for a $6000 price.
Maybe. I guess if they price it at $6000 or $6500 then it means the R1 is going to be priced at $8000. Or it means the R1 (whatever that ends up being) is still years away.
Yeah that's a fair point - I forgot about a possible R1 and what it would be priced at.
I was mostly just comparing it to the A1 - with grip it's $6900. This should be a little under that due to lower resolution but I don't see it being $1500 or more less. R3 does have some advantages over the A1 with the built in grip etc.
No way will it be as popular as the R5 and R6 which have consistently are the 2 top cameras over the past year. The R5 is a juggernaut. I’ve never seen a camera over $2000 sell as well (except R6), let alone over $3000 or $3500. Maybe the first month or week, but this won’t be a top selling camera like R5/6.
I am looking forward to Z9. A different camera with a different audience.
24MP backside illuminated image sensor Multi-Controller & Smart Controller Vari-Angle Touch Screen NEW accessory shoe Wifi 5GHz High speed 30fps electronic shutter with AF/AE tracking + RAW shooting at this speed AF down to -7.0 EV 8 Stops Coordinated Control IS with Optical IS and In-Body IS 4K Canon Log3 Oversampling 4K Internal RAW video Inclusion of cars and motorbikes in AF tracking technology RAW internal movie recording Speedlite shooting with electronic shutter The same weather sealing as the EOS-1D series LP-E19 Battery Dual card slot SD & CFExpress
It has 100% frame coverage for AF, and importantly 100% width of the frame. Others have 90% coverage but only about 80% of the width, so subjects moving to edge of the frame or briefly out of frame are lost by their AF.
Let’s see if canon cripples the sensors outside the center of the frame like they do on the R5. (Only the center region autofocuses with apertures above something like f8. Canon marketing talks f/22, but they leave out the fine print. Probably some footnote in a manual somewhere.)
Don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story. Oh and by the way all of those points work down to f16 on the A9/A9II and f22 on the A1. All of them.
AF points at the very edge are useful in 1 case: when you're losing the subject and it's disappearing but still has some pixels inside the frame, and you want the camera to keep tracking it, so when you bring back the subject more inside the frame it still remains in focus. It's completely useless for the shot itself as you said, because if you take that shot, it will just be a very bad shot, one that shows how bad a photographer you are :)
Yeah subject in focus at the very edge aren't aesthetic. Rule of 3rds exist for a reason, its not a hard and fast rule but half a bird at the very edge don't make for a good photo, anyone who has shot birds or motorsport would get it. Not saying 100% is bad but its really not that big of a deal vs the coverage your average mirrorless has today
Put a 2x TC on any long lens (400mm) less than $10,000 and your R5 AF will be limited to the center region.
Ask any of the birder types if they do this. Ironically those are exactly the people who want coverage to the frame edge when they’re trying to track a bird at 800mm.
Perhaps not surprising. But disappointing. I wonder if that limitation is listed in the specs for those primes. I did search the R5 manual and aside from it listing a bunch of conditions that make AF difficult it doesn’t list minimum apertures at all. (By the way I realize all manuals for all cameras lost conditions that make AF difficult. I’m not knocking Canon for that.)
Edit. Yep. It’s buried in the lens manuals. 40% horizontal and 60% vertical coverage. So your 100% coverage drops to 24% depending on the lens.
"Designed to capture objects moving at high speed and built to meet the exacting demands of professional shooters, with ultra-responsiveness, high sensitivity, reliability and durability."
Canon and Apple will announce a collaboration: 1. All images and videos from Canon cameras can be sent wirelessly via Airdrop in a split second to your computer. 2. Canon cameras can now be charged wirelessly via Magsafe 3. The iPhone will get access to interchangeable L lenses. (Micro RF mount) 4. The R5 will be available in white, space grey and rose gold. 5. R3 will be made of stainless steel and glas 6. R5 and R6 will get the M1 processor which prevents overheating 7. They will remove the headphone jack, and all other ports 8. AF will focus on Apple products 9. prices will go up by 40%
Apple is supposed to open up the airdrop protocol. This would be totally badass. Especially if the phone could automatically accept images (without having to click.)
It would literally be as easy as pushing a button on the camera.
The R3 will have a fixed battery, for which Apple have shared their remote "battery user experience protection" (crippling) technology, to be introduced when the R3 MkIII is released.
The R3 and iPhone have different target markets, so having the announcements on the same day doesn't make any difference. How many professional photographers used iPhones to capture fast Olympics action? :-)
LOL. The R5 is at least 90-95% of what the A1 is at 60% of the cost. The A1 makes the R5 look like a bargain. And in some ways the R5 is better...better IBIS, can do animal/bird AF in video, etc.
As for the R3, it will do 30 fps vs 20 fps A9II, have far longer battery life, and a true pro body with proper weather sealing and a great grip for long lenses. It will for sure have better video specs. And we will see what else it brings.
In some ways it will compare favorably against the A1. For instance, the automobile tracking feature is very handy for motorsports, drifting, etc. It too will do animal/bird AF in video, which even the A1 cannot do.
Haha. There is no A9III. Those rumors are even considered far fetched by SAR. As to multiple rumors, they are all ghosts of each other. There's been rumors of the Sony A7000 for even longer and it's still a unicorn.
Sony had to stop making the A7SIII due to the chip shortage. They are losing out on sales because of that. They still have a hard time keeping the A1 in stock. Their next probably announcement will be the a7IV. So Sony really doesn't have the resources to put out an a9III right now or in the near future.
Why put out an a9III when the A1 is still hard to get? That's bad business.
And it's very possible the a9III is the A1, but Sony called it a different model number to allow for a massive price increase, and for marketing purposes. There may not even be an a9III. The a9 lineup could very well be replaced by the A1 lineup.
LOL...Yes even Sony people on these forums have admitted that Sony rumors are more inaccurate than the others. Funny how they seize upon whatever they can when it suits their case.
The A9III is like the A7000...vaporware.
And in reality, the A1 was the update to the A9II...really the A9III. But Sony wanted to blast the price into the $6500 category, and so called it A1. Smart marketing on their part.
By Thoughts’ own logic, apparently the R5 will be 90-95% of of what the R3 will do, but at a much cheaper price…and will even do many things better lol
Mike, yes, the popularity of the A1 shows that Sony will in no way divert chips for an A9III anytime the near future. And I don't blame Sony for asking a high price when they can get it.
f1.4blahblah: As to the R5 vs the R3: I do expect the R5 to remain the best selling Canon due to lower price and as you suggest, that for many users it's all they need and then some. For most the R5 will be a better value than an A1 or an R3.
The R3 is going to be like all Canon pro bodies: a very high end tool for those that need it and want it. But just like the 5D series always outsold the 1D series, I expect it to remain that way with the R5.
That being said, before the big world mess, the 1DXIII was very hard to get, always sold out. So I do expect the R3 to sell very well for what it is and its price.
Userblahblah: Sony may have an eventual a9III but it will not be anytime soon.
As noted it doesn't make good business sense. They'd have to divert chips from the more expensive a1, which they still sell out of. And then there's the A7 IV, likely to be a much higher volume item.
If Sony did release an a9III, ironically that would validate Canon's decision to use "only" 24MP in the R3 if that's the case, because it would mean that there is a pro market for that.
We don't know what you knew about the R3 and R6. And everyone expects an R1 and many an R7, so your prediction isn't really very bold either.
I don't know why you feel an a9III is needed for the Winter Olympics next year for Sony. They have their a9II, which they touted in the press release for the PA deal, and of course their A1, which saw usage the Summer Olympics.
As noted by f1.2, Sony doesn't release cameras so people can argue about them on forums as to which is better. There has to be a business case.
@Thoughtsblahblah: I’m just saying, all of the logic that you’ve used for the last few months making the case for the R5 over the A1 while being significantly less expensive and ignoring the stacked sensor also now apply to the R5 vs R3, except that the R5 actually does beat the R3 in all of those key specs except that stacked sensor and 30fps. In other words, I expect you to completely ignore the Stacked sensor and 30fps now that canon has it, otherwise, also acknowledge that Sony set that bar and they are important features
Anybody thinking there won’t be a a9III announced before year end is living in fantasy land.
The a9III will most probably do up to 60fps at 24mp and is very likely to feature a read out speed of 1/400s, which is identical to a mechanical shutter… it will therefore lack one. I bet Sony will price it lower than the R3.
I am not a Sony user anymore but I don’t see how this would not happen.
The a9II shared the sensor of the a9. Sony has therefore had 5 years to design its successor.
Why do some people claim that the R5 is 90-95% of what the A1 is?
The readout speed for the R5 is 1/50 in FF mode, vs 1/250 for the A1, that's one FIFTH, or 20%, how is that close to 90-95%? It's a huge deal. If we talk burst rate, it's 20fps vs 30fps, so that's 66%, again nothing like 90-95%.
Even battery life is more like 60% of the A1. The only thing that is 90% is the resolution and video specs... although it overheats, so even that part is questionable.
To summarize, no, it's nowhere near 90-95%, more like 60%.
Murdered? Stupid hyperbole. But if we are playing that game, Canon and Nikon’s pro mirrorless bodies will murder the ergonomic nightmares that are Sony bodies. That R3 looks comfortable and useable just in the photo. The Sonys are hard edged little cubes in comparison.
I know I spend a lot of time holding my camera at the top while trying to take photos. As such the square top edges of Sony are just not ergonomic to me
Yes. Unless canon made some substantial improvements the large battery in the integrated grip on the R3 will last about as long as the small battery in the A9II. And a gripped A9II with two batteries installed is in a different league among mirrorless cameras.
I'm just going to say it; the A1 is basically everything that the R5 plus R3 are and more, all rolled into one small but powerhouse package. Anyone who is still trying to make the case that the A1 is overpriced or not the top of the food chain is just ignoring fact for brand bias.
Sony always has the specs but underperforms. The A1 has a great EVF...I've tried it...but it doesn't strike you as good as the numbers would suggest.
But that's Sony. Have the paper specs but never quite as good as the numbers would suggest. That's why the Sony trolls always cite specs but never real world usage. That's why so few talk about how much they enjoy using Sony.
I do agree..the Nikon Z EVF performs above its specs. But that's also because an EVF is more than just the resolution in dots, it's also the optics involved.
@DarnGoodPhotos, the direct viewers of the launches matters less than the media coverage. There's a big multiplier between people who watch these events, and those that read the reports from the events.
Having said that, there's plenty of online column space for both to be reported.
Lomography's LomoChrome '92 is designed to mimic the look of classic drugstore film that used to fill family photo albums. As we discovered, to shoot with it is to embrace the unexpected, from strange color shifts to odd textures and oversized grain.
The LowePro PhotoSport Outdoor is a camera pack for photographers who also need a well-designed daypack for hiking and other outdoor use. If that sounds like you, the PhotoSport Outdoor may be a great choice, but as with any hybrid product, there are a few tradeoffs.
The Sony a7C II refreshes the compact full-frame with a 33MP sensor, the addition of a front control dial, a dedicated 'AI' processor, 10-bit 4K/60p video and more. It's a definite improvement, but it helps if you value its compact form.
Why is the Peak Design Everyday Backpack so widely used? A snazzy design? Exceptional utility? A combination of both? After testing one, it's clear why this bag deserves every accolade it's received.
The new Wacom One 12 pen display, now in its second generation, offers photographers an affordable option to the mouse or trackpad, making processing images easy and efficient by editing directly on the screen.
If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.
What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.
Lomography's LomoChrome '92 is designed to mimic the look of classic drugstore film that used to fill family photo albums. As we discovered, to shoot with it is to embrace the unexpected, from strange color shifts to odd textures and oversized grain.
Sony's gridline update adds up to four customizable grids to which users can add color codes and apply transparency masks. It also raises questions about the future of cameras and what it means for feature updates.
At last, people who don’t want to pay a premium for Apple’s Pro models can capture high-resolution 24MP and 48MP photos using the iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Plus. Is the lack of a dedicated telephoto lens or the ability to capture Raw images worth the savings for photographers?
Kodak's Super 8 Camera is a hybrid of old and new: it shoots movies using Super 8 motion picture film but incorporates digital elements like a flip-out LCD screen and audio capture. Eight years after we first saw the camera at CES 2016, Kodak is finally bringing it to market.
In this supplement to his recently completed 10-part series on landscape photography, photographer Erez Marom explores how the compositional skills developed for capturing landscapes can be extended to other areas of photography.
If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.
Sony, the Associated Press and 'Photo Mechanic' maker Camera Bits have run a month-long field-test to evaluate capture authentication and a subsequent workflow.
A color-accurate monitor is an essential piece of the digital creator's toolkit. In this guide, we'll go over everything you need to know about how color calibration actually works so you can understand the process and improve your workflow.
What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.
It's that time of year again: When people get up way too early to rush out to big box stores and climb over each other to buy $99 TVs. We've saved you the trip, highlighting the best photo-related deals that can be ordered from the comfort of your own home.
The LowePro PhotoSport Outdoor is a camera pack for photographers who also need a well-designed daypack for hiking and other outdoor use. If that sounds like you, the PhotoSport Outdoor may be a great choice, but as with any hybrid product, there are a few tradeoffs.
Sigma's latest 70-200mm F2.8 offering promises to blend solid build, reasonably light weight and impressive image quality into a relatively affordable package. See how it stacks up in our initial impressions.
The Sony a9 III is heralded as a revolutionary camera, but is all the hype warranted? DPReview's Richard Butler and Dale Baskin break down what's actually new and worth paying attention to.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.
DJI's Air 3 and Mini 4 Pro are two of the most popular drones on the market, but there are important differences between the two. In this article, we'll help figure out which of these two popular drones is right for you.
The Sony a7C II refreshes the compact full-frame with a 33MP sensor, the addition of a front control dial, a dedicated 'AI' processor, 10-bit 4K/60p video and more. It's a definite improvement, but it helps if you value its compact form.
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.
The iPhone 15 Pro allows users to capture 48MP photos in HEIF or JPEG format in addition to Raw files, while new lens coatings claim to cut down lens flare. How do the cameras in Apple's latest flagship look in everyday circumstances? Check out our gallery to find out.
Global shutters, that can read all their pixels at exactly the same moment have been the valued by videographers for some time, but this approach has benefits for photographers, too.
We had an opportunity to shoot a pre-production a9 III camera with global shutter following Sony's announcement this week. This gallery includes images captured with the new 300mm F2.8 GM OSS telephoto lens and some high-speed flash photos.
The Sony a9 III is a ground-breaking full-frame mirrorless camera that brings global shutter to deliver unforeseen high-speed capture, flash sync and capabilities not seen before. We delve a little further into the a9III to find out what makes it tick.
The "Big Four" Fashion Weeks – New York, London, Milan and Paris - have wrapped for 2023 but it's never too early to start planning for next season. If shooting Fashion Week is on your bucket list, read on. We'll tell you what opportunities are available for photographers and provide some tips to get you started.
Sony has announced the a9 III: the first full-frame camera to use a global shutter sensor. This gives it the ability to shoot at up to 120 fps with flash sync up to 1/80,000 sec and zero rolling shutter.
What’s the best camera for around $1500? These midrange cameras should have capable autofocus systems, lots of direct controls and the latest sensors offering great image quality. We recommend our favorite options.
Comments