Rumors Boring Year

[RickyRed]

Not a lot going on with new-updated cameras or lens. The R8 is a yawn. The RF 100-500 needs an update. Maby a 150-600 with max 6.3? And this is all across camera brands. If no new cameras. Canon, please put some software updates out. The R5 could use an AF update and a fix for communication glitches between body and lens. So what are you waiting and hoping Canons next move will be?

 

[Dean Wilson]

Some people are asking Canon: "Zebras for Stills - How Hard Can It Be?"

 

[SwampGrizz]

I don’t understand the R8mk2. On its face, it seems like a nice update to the R8, but it’s priced very close to the R6mk2, which from all I’ve heard is a great camera with more features. Why wouldn’t you pay a few extra bucks and get the R6mk2? I’m sure they will be phasing the R6mk2 out in the future, but there will be a good many still for sale on the used market at presumably lower cost. From all the reviews I’ve read, the R8mk2 is not a bad camera, and the worst thing I’ve read is that it looks like a Sony. I don’t care what the camera looks like, I care what the pictures look like. Somebody help me here.

 

[THXGEEK]

I'm still waiting for Canon to allow back-button pre-continuous activation on the R5II (like the Nikon Z8 & Sony A1II). I would think it would be a simple firmware update, but what do I know?

 

[Only RF]

That is kind of odd. I can map pre-continuous on my R6III to a BB. Currently it's mapped to DOF. I'd like the ability to map Shutter Mode to a button. Maybe other bodies can but not the R6III. I doubt we'll ever see it but an RF 500 or 600 5.6 would be enticing. Doesn't look like I'll get a crack at the R7II before mid January.

 

[Only RF]

Not a lot going on with new-updated cameras or lens. The R8 is a yawn. The RF 100-500 needs an update. Maby a 150-600 with max 6.3? And this is all across camera brands. If no new cameras. Canon, please put some software updates out. The R5 could use an AF update and a fix for communication glitches between body and lens. So what are you waiting and hoping Canons next move will be?

Just curious what would you do to update the 100-500? 150-600 would be nice but it would be heavy and not as easy to travel with. For me anyway.

 

[Only RF]

Something I have found irritating for as long as I can remember. IS switch. Sometimes it takes multiple tries on my 100-500 to get it to Mode 2. I see the RF 200-800 has no mode switch and I have read it adapts IS to the situation. I see the higher end RF lenses still have mode switches so I guess the 200-800 is experimental? It sure wood be nice of Canon made it easier to switch modes.

 

[Only RF]

Just thought of another one. R6III. Not sure why ES is limited to 40 and 20 fps. I’d like to set it at 10 fps. Even at 20 culling gets tedious.

 

[chipman]

Between taco tariffs and chip shortages I'm surprised to see anything new hit the market.

 

[RickyRed]

Just curious what would you do to update the 100-500? 150-600 would be nice but it would be heavy and not as easy to travel with. For me anyway.

I think the reason the 100-500 is compact relative for its reach. is its non ability to use extenders. A 150-600 with a variable aperture maxed to 6.3 would not be much larger. This Lens Should be kept affordable for the masses and build on the greatness of the 100-500 Keep the price around the same.

 

[RickyRed]

Saturday I was out on the Skagit Flats with the R5 and 100-500.Rain and low light conditions. Battling with AF hunting all day. Its my only reason to go with a R5II. With a slightly newer AF the R7 handles this much better. I think the AF software for the R7 was from the R3. As a side note. Canons lack of support for bird photography for the masses' semi affordable. I see out in the wild. Sony taking over this segment and with a few Canons And Nikon with DLSR.Ie D850 and D500.

 

[Only RF]

I think the reason the 100-500 is compact relative for its reach. is its non ability to use extenders. A 150-600 with a variable aperture maxed to 6.3 would not be much larger. This Lens Should be kept affordable for the masses and build on the greatness of the 100-500 Keep the price around the same.

Can you describe the 100-500 lens non ability to use extenders because I use one with that lens most of the time.

 

[Dean Wilson]

Can you describe the 100-500 lens non ability to use extenders because I use one with that lens most of the time.

Possibly because you can't use the 100-300mm range... just guessing. But isn't that range WHY you use a teleconverter in the first place, as that rance can "basically" achieved without a TC and loss of light?

I can't imagine the logic of engineering a TC for a nifty-fifty.

 

[Only RF]

Possibly because you can't use the 100-300mm range... just guessing. But isn't that range WHY you use a teleconverter in the first place, as that rance can "basically" achieved without a TC and loss of light?

I can't imagine the logic of engineering a TC for a nifty-fifty.

That was my thought but it does not make it unusable. It's just limiting which does make it non-appealing for some people which I understand. When I have the 1.4 TC on that lens I rarely shoot less than 500mm. I just asked because the way it was worded someone may think it is completely incompatible as some lenses are when it comes to extenders.

I'm pretty happy with that combo.

• Join to view EXIF data.