Canon Making Moves! | RF 600 with built in TC | Sony Still the BEST? | R1 is Here!

[@MrGeoflo]

My hope is they offer one of the RF 300-600mm F2.8-4.5L lenses! That would be my choice. Combine it with the rumored 1.4-2x extender and add the lightweight RF 70-200mm F2.8L (external zoom) and you have a great combo for general Wildlife shooting that shouldn‘t be too heavy for an average trip.

[@russellthorstrom6084]

Thank Jan for the updates!

[@stevewestonphotography]

RF 300-600mm F4L with built in 1.4x extender is what I would like to see and a lottery win to be able to afford it! Also, an R3 body with the R5 II 45 mega pixel sensor, autofocus etc and 2 x CF express type B card slots and a full size HDMI port, now we are talking.

[@Nature-was-my-first-love]

Oh Jan, what a bunch of good questions! I am using the Sigma 60-600 EF with the R5 since I am filming 95+% of the time. The Sigma has what a filmer needs (10x zoom), but it's not parfocal (SH*T1) and it's external (SH*T2). So no zoom effect in the clip is usable due to sharpness slippage and ruining the counter balance of a video rig. So my primary requirement towards new Canon glass is: Zoom, medium weight (f5.6-8.0), parfocal, internal, at least 600mm on the long end, the more zoom factor the better, builtin 2x extender AND ND filter drawer or even better revolver - just like the professional video lens setups. There is not much coverage with the shown patents, but hope dies at the latest...

[@briansilcox5720]

I have shot with EF 400 f4 DO for the last 20 yrs very successfully. Most of us cannot justify 12k for a 400f2.8, and this lens satisfied this issue. The 400 f4 is very lightweight, travel capable, and I anxiously await this choice in upgrading my ancient 1DX camera.

[@hstein27]

I think that now that the 200-800 zoom is here, it's time for an "affordable" 600mm or 500mm DO lens to compete with Nikon, in the $3-4k USD range. 600mm f/6.3 would be ideal! On the higher end, a zoom that goes to 600mm would be more desirable than one which maxes out at 500, if the size and weight can be kept in check.

[@grahamfloyd3451]

I'm thinking about just buying a Nikon Z8 and Z 600mm PF. I don't see Canon trying to compete with Nikon in this space at all.

[@alnwill]

Like you, I take a lot of small -bird shots, but I also take a lot of long -lens macro shots. I seldom use below 400mm, so for me a 400 -600 with close focus (

[@santhoshThangachan]

I too like a good zoom over prime lens - greater flexibility

[@Twobarpsi]

Excellent update Jan!!

[@MrGeoflo]

6:59 consider this: The RF 300-600mm F2.8-4.5L with a 1.4 extender will get you a RF 420-840mm F4.0-6.3L. That‘s basically the 4 Nikon (PF) prime lenses 400mm F4.5, 500mm F5.6 and 600/800mm F6.3 in one lens!

[@MrGeoflo]

@@codebunnies surely would cost more that the 100-300mm F2.8 but less than a 400-600mm F2.8-4.0. I don‘t know much about manufacturing these type of lenses but isn’t the f-Stop at the maximum focal lenght one of the major cost drivers? Meaning a RF 300-600mm F2.8- 5.6 would cost just a bit more (to manufacture) than the current RF 100-300 F2.8.

[@ian-nz-2000]

Thanks for the updates. I'm sure you will be impressed by the 800pf, especially for small birds!

[@KungPowEnterFist]

He reviewed the Z 800 PF and gave it a rather pedestrian rating. I mean, he didn't trash talk it or anything. But being that it is essentially a slightly less sharp, easily handholdable version of Baby Jesus (F 800 f5.6 FL ED VR) for a fraction of the price, yeah, he under rated that lens big time.

[@StephenShankland]

There's a lot to like about the older 70-200mm f2.8 internal focus design (I previously owned one in the EF era) but I changed jobs recently and now appreciate the current RF model's compact design - I travel more now. And I find the image quality good. I worry about weather and sucking in dust a bit, but it's worth it for me.

[@Met.Photography]

Love your comparison vids. Please make a 24mp battle between the A9iii vs R1

[@SteveMorrisTCS]

Love your videos Jan but sit watching a dream world. Software, lenses and cameras all well out of my price range and probably a lot of viewers. This hobby is not a cheap one that’s for sure. Still keep them coming Jan I love to dream.

[@houserhythm]

Mate, it's never been easier to do this hobby on a (relative) budget. And I say relative, cause you still need a few thousand $. But the returns from a $4k setup to a $20k setup are certainly very diminishing.

[@bjrn-einarnilsen687]

Great video as always, Jan. Looks like we will have a very exiting time in front of us. Would love if Canon could come with some longer DO lenses. That would be great. Wishing you and yours a great weekend. Cheers, Bjoern

[@nicolasbrunicardi7248]

That 400-600 2.8/4 would be my dream lens. I'd wish Sony would keep up with the development in the lens department.

[@ian-nz-2000]

I wonder what such a beast would weigh?

[@DenyceDaRapkillah]

What do you mean? Sony GM lenses are all pretty much the best in their respective categories!? Compact, light, sharp etc. Especially the new 300/2.8 GM is amazing.

[@steveparent8788]

I would love to see a new 100-500 f/4.0-6.3 + TC 1.4. If Canon makes tuis lens with a price tag similar to the original 100-500 this would be a real homerun. What do you think of that Jan?

[@brucegraner5901]

I agree with you about the feel of the R3. I keep hoping Canon will put an improved APS-C 32-meg sensor in a copy of the R3 body. Teamed with a 100-500mm zoom it would be a fantastic light-weight wildlife kit. I recently rented the current R7 and 800mm f11 lens and, while I was very happy with the results (mostly, I had a few rolling shutter problems), I really didn't like the feel of the camera. I hope Canon is listening.

[@minusinfinity6974]

So by my tally Jan,you are looking at spending $80K+ on new Canon lenses. Good to see Canon has returned photography back to the realm of millionaires. All those superteles you mentioned other than the 400 DO would be well over $20K AUD and if a 400-600 f/2.8-4 came along probably $30K AU. The 400 DO would run $12K+ AU for sure.

[@chrzanik666]

So true, I always think from businesses side of things costs overheads development materials etc. And still costs of high end canon glass is eye-watering and humongously overpriced

[@ihatefluffypillows]

Fortunately for us average Joes, there is still the excellent EF L lenses available on the used market. In many cases, they are as good as any RF lens and perform flawlessly on mirrorless bodies.

[@cerealkiller4248]

​@@ihatefluffypillows That's me too, an R6 with an arsenal of EF lens. Canon, your prices are ridiculous 🙄

[@sylerpr]

I’d personally love to see a 400-600mm f2.8-f4 or a 400 2.8 with a 1.4 tc. And then maybe a DO 800mm f6.3 to compete with the Nikon lens lineup.

[@adinew8920]

Thanks.....

[@angelisone]

when will someone comes up with a white camera body to match with these white lenses?

[@Met.Photography]

Waiting for a review of the Sony A9iii with a Sony G 200-600 or a comparison between the a1

[@dave8052]

Good news, I really like my EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4X for wildlife, such a convenient design.

[@roland-heine]

thank you for your interesting and informative video. For me: I love my Z9 with the 600mm PF. My wishes from Nikon: Z9 II with RAW Precapture, 40-60 pictures/ sec, an APSC with a stacked sensor and a Z 200mm F2. Best wishes Roland

[@pentagramyt417]

nobody wants pre-capture in jpeg

[@SteveSSBB]

My batteries came through this week also (Canada). I would love to see that RF 400DO with TC. The 400DOII is my last EF lens. After I received it I sold the 500/4 and the 200-400TC because the 400DOII worked so well with TCs and was easy to hand hold all day long. With a built in TC there is also the possibility to stack on an external TC which would make for a very light and versatile package. Definitely keeping my fingers crossed for this one!

[@lachlangraham1062]

For me, 400-800 mm f8.😊

[@CNCTurboStep]

It's interesting that you've had to wait so long for your new LP-E6P batteries. I haven't checked for a while (I don't own the MkII) but now they're on stock at all our major distributors (Switzerland) with the exception of the Canon store!! When I bought my RF70-200 f/2.8 I was really not too happy about it being external focussing. However, several years on, I definitely would now want to swap for the new z version. It's almost 50% heavier, it's too long to stand vertically in my back pack - I'd have to lay it down, which takes up more space, and it's clearly more expensive. I don't require the added video features so I wouldn't appreciate having to pay extra for them. The internal focussing is a little stiff compared to my previous EF internal focussing lens but I've not had any issues with that in the years I've used it so far. I have the RF100-500 so I've never missed the converter on the 70-200 and I'm also very happy with the internal focussing on the 100-500. There was a time that I was envious of the internal focussing of the Sony 200-600 but those times have passed. Love the portability of both these Canon Zooms.

[@waynedettman6472]

The 32 megapixles are amazing for perched birds 😂

[@garymeredith2441]

Like what you stated here Jen , here I just watched and listened to you it's Nikon with their 400 PF and there 600 PF lenses they are very lightweight they're not too terribly expensive . I watched you using them ( in your other videos ) they were exceptionally good and focusing and considering how light they are that's the best way to go . Why Canon can't just watch your video and look at all these ultra expensive lenses that they ( Canon are coming up with ) and these NEW Lenses that they are comeing up with that cost as much as the NEW CAR , how many of us can afford that ??????

[@bryanhalloran7290]

600mm DO lens would be nice

[@AndiusTeijgeler]

The 200-500 F4 could be a go to lens for me, but if they would offer it in a 300-600 f2.8-4.5 version I might prefer that one. As I mainly photograph wildlife and as I like animal in the environment images, I practically use quite often the RF 100-500, but it is severely handicapped in low light. All in all it feels like the days we were enjoying a candy store. Lots of stuff we would like to have, but a major restriction will be the budget.

[@kstotlani]

The 300-600 sounds exciting but like you said would cost more than a Honda civic. How heavy would it be.

[@richardfink7666]

@@kstotlani 🤣

[@PatrickSmeaton]

If I were shooting Canon, I'd DEFINITELY be buying that 400mm f/4!

[@mikebrownhill4662]

I was very interested in your thoughts on any future direction for the R3. I've thought about this myself because, like you, the 24 megapixels is the only thing making me hold off on the current R3 and the R1. Having a high resolution stacked sensor (possibly the same sensor that's in the R5II) in an R3-style body was what I came up with as well. But when I thought about it some more, I started to struggle to find a reason why Canon would do this. Compared with the R5II, the only real difference would be the body format, (which can be largely solved by putting a grip on the R5II) the extra ruggedness and the extra battery power for those big primes. Don't get me wrong - I would buy one in a heartbeat! But I'm not convinced that Canon would do it because it would be a bit niche - basically only really attractive to a specific segment of wildlife photographers. Unless they throw in things like dual CFexpress and a feature or two from the R1? I really hope I'm wrong and we finally get the high-end Canon camera we've waited for 😁

[@JeffandLeslie]

My desire would be a light(er) weight tele zoom in the 100-600 kind of range. I could accept 6.3 or 7.1 maximum aperture. Noise with today's sensors isn't as big of a concern. As a nature photographer who spends most of his time on foot and frequently hikes 4-6 miles to a photo spot, weight savings is paramount to me. I would be fine with modern composites (egads, plastic@@@) for the barrel of the lens if the glass was high quality. The 200-800 is a great range, cut about 1/3 of the weight and it would be the perfect lens. Of course, there would be a 2 year waiting list but I would be on that list.

[@roninrtist560]

Good stuff Jan. Surprised Canon has not refreshed the 200-400 f/4 TC yet. An RF 200-500 f/4 TC would be a top tier lens. None of the manufacturers have a 500 f/4 anymore. The Sigma 500 f/5.6 and Nikon PF lenses are really great and light to carry around. I think the Canon 600 & 800 f/11 lenses are too soft and slow compared to the Nikon PF versions. A slightly larger aperature with a weight reduction on a prime is the way to go.

[@TheWildlifeGallery388]

I'm glad I watched this video this morning as I was set to order the 70-200 2.8 RF - I'll wait now to see if the announcement happens on the 30th and what the price might be for the new 2.8 version of the 70-200

[@ThatNorma]

Jan , don't remember if you ever mentioned in your videos , but what camera do you daily drive?

[@kuau714]

Jan I am, primarily a Z9 shooter and own both the Z400/2.8 TC and the Z600/4TC After shooting theses lenses for 2 years now for my case use using the 600/4 with he TC engaged making it a 840/5.6 sounds great yet at this focal length atmospheric disturbance is such a problem for me I rarely use it now. So with the potential release of the Canon RF 600/4 TC it will have the same problem IMHO. What excites me about the new RF 600/4 TC is it will be a completely new design and not like the current RF600/4 which is basically a EF600/4 lll with the adaptor permanently attached

[@stevedavis2050]

Hi Jan - it’s definitely interesting to see Canon visiting the wildlife sector in their possible lens proposals…. For me the cost and weight mean I would be holding out for a 600mm f5.6/6.3 at some point. If they added a built in teleconverter to it, then I could be in heaven (depending on the price 😉)

[@saracorlis3890]

Great video as always Jan. Congratulations your batteries came through. I have been waiting silence August and was told this week that I have a one to two month wait still to go!I am so disappointed in Canon’s ability to supply LP-E6P batteries in Australia.

[@jan_wegener]

Yes it’s a shocker!!

[@artofwomenphotography]

i finally got my R5 MK II batteries a couple day's ago

[@breadandcircuses5644]

I would love to see a 200-500 f4 or even a 200-400 f4 for e-mount. With or without tc compatibility. From Sony, Tamron or Sigma, I don't mind, as long as it doesn't cost an arm and a leg and fits into my backpack for carry-on luggage.

[@defom2735]

Welcome to sunny ☀️ Melbourne 😎 Grate videos mate... I've recently started focusing on bird photography. If you don't mind sharing, are those falcons in the video photographed near Melbourne/GOR? Cheers Danijel

[@janwilhelm6589]

A 600 mm DO lens would be interesting. But I really hope for more macro lenses...

[@WernerBirdNature]

Hi Jan, some amendments on your R3 speculation: you'll certainly agree your 2nd option has to come with dual CFxB ;-) As for the first option, based upon another patent recently mentioned by CR it may not have a global sensor, but rather an organic shutter which seems to provide a silent and vibration-less shutter potentially faster than MS, while allowing to actual sensor to avoid the DR penalties as seen with the a9iii. This could combine a9iii speeds with R1/R3 DR and high iso performance .. If I were a Canon designer, I'd make a 300-700/2.8-5.6L having about the same weight as the 200-800 😛 The a1 has an excellent sensor, but costs around Z8 and R5ii combined, and it hardly received firmware updates .. Sony fanboys deserve the a1ii to be more than just a firmware update ;-)

[@neelsfer]

100-600mm canon f 6.3

[@irbis8801]

Hi Jan, thx for video. Why you didn’t do review on 800 mm pf? It will be vary interesting to know your opinion about this lens.

[@germanshepherdmom5411]

The 800mm pf is a gorgeous lens! I traded it towards buying the 600mm f4. Don’t get me wrong, I love my 600 but that 800 is not far off image quality wise, it was very impressive!

[@irbis8801]

@@germanshepherdmom5411 thx , I also think like you. I had one , and use it for snow leopard , owls photography .

[@danwhitton7966]

I wouldn't want to sacrifice the dynamic range of the R3 for an R5 sensor, but would love more MP

[@rachelpayne1995]

I love my RF 100-500. But it would be perfect if it was an f2.8 and an internal zoom. I would love to see Canon come out with an internal zoom.

[@Chris_Wolfgram]

When it comes to lenses, the 200-800 is so close to the Holy grail for me, that I just don't think about lenses much anymore... or should I say, I can't see Canon coming out with anything better for my purposes, anytime in the near future. Oh sure, if I were dreaming, I'd ask for a 200-800 that were a little faster, but I don't want to go a lot heavier. Also, a focus limiter would have been nice. I dream more of a "very upgraded" R7 Mk II.... but again, If I'm dreaming, I'd say, just skip all the small upgrades in between, and come out with a straight up "Pro level APS-C" !!! Come on Jan, don't you know of a Pro or two who would love to use a Pro level APS-C ;) I know this would step my photography up to a whole new level..... But can't even imagine what you would do with it !

[@wellingtoncrescent2480]

With sophisticated digital corrections now available in-camera or in post, the importance of "optical perfection" in lens manufacturing may be a thing of the past. Ditto the impact of modern sensors and de-noising software on low-light performance. As a result, even low-budget gear now offers amazing quality. As photographers, I think we're still coming to terms with these consequences, and I appreciate your emphasis on performance of zoom lens and other gear we would once have rejected. Thanks.

[@sSaikat_photographer]

I want 500mm with builtin tc 1.4x + 2x

[@georgefourlaris7948]

Still hoping for the Variable TC.

[@jamesseward9263]

For me while a 400 f2.8-600 f4 sounds wonderful I would be a little concerned about the weight being a little more that the 609mm f4 prime as being able handhold it adds to being flexible in the field with out a support system like a tripod or monopod. Also I had the 200-400f4 and wasn’t quite happy with the performance with a 2x TC over my prime 600mm f4. The sharpness did drop off too much. With that said I bought the Canon RF 400mm f2.8 in hopes of them coming out with the RF 1.4-2x variable TC preferring that over a zoom lens providing similar focal lengths and aperture’s. A lightweight 600mm f 5.6 L lens would definitely interest me though. 😊

[@SlabsOnSlabs-oh1oq]

7:20 IS THAT MOFFAT BEACH HEADLAND?

[@jan_wegener]

Think so

[@goyomora100]

We want the review of the R1 right now!!!!

[@34Media]

i dont thnk they should change sensor in R3, they need to offer different body types in each range so r5 will come in photo body (r3,R1) video bodies normal to drop weight and easier to fit on gimbals its a solution that works for all then.

[@jkp123ism]

800 of 1000mm do lens or 600 to 1000mm

[@LuckyOne-n5x]

My dream lens is a travel wildlife lens that is faster than my Canon 100-500 f/4.5 to f/7.1 with a bit more reach but not much heavier. It would obviously be much more expensive. Something like a 200-600 f/4 to f/5.6 DO lens built to L standards would be ideal for me. I have no idea what it would cost but my initial guess is at least double, and possibly triple, the cost of the Nikon 180-600 f/5.6 to f/6.3 lens.

[@jan_wegener]

that would be nice

[@SliverCreations]

If they ever make a 400 to 600 f2.8 to f4. That would make me really happy.

[@jan_wegener]

You me and many more 😆

[@barrytakespictures8947]

Give us an r3C

[@edmundsdemonds8309]

I'm personally still dissapointed we don't have some more budget orientated zoom lenses from canon, especially for people shooting on APSC like an R7. Its one of my main hesitations about upgrading to RF, cause I use a canon 90D right now which shares the R7's sensor, and I know i'de really struggle to get decent shots with their f8 or f9 lenses in anything but perfect light, given the way the 90D is. I don't understand why they won't just give us a 200-600 f6.3 or let sigma release one of their equivalents on RF. I guess i'll just keep waiting for a better lens option on canon or for sony to release an a7 variant that can shoot at more than 7 FPS

[@MarvinBoydCo]

Sony needs to ditch the CFexpress type A cards. I don't think anyone enjoys paying twice as much for almost 3X less speed than a cheaper and faster CFexpress Type B

[@RiverMountainPhoto]

I’d like to see a video from someone showing how the average Joe who takes great wildlife photos can go from being the average Joe to the obviously highly paid Jan so they too can afford the sums of money we’re talking about to actually buy the lenses and cameras! $20k for a lens is bonkers for most people

[@adamrubinstein1479]

There are a few problems with this. First, you mentioned a bunch of possible lenses, though the reality is none of them are on the horizon yet. Also, if any of them come to fruition, they would likely cost an arm and leg. That’s why I’m (unfortunately) using Nikon.

[@christophercarlimages9003]

As much as having the 300mm f2.8 as a zoom, I think it's awful that Canon doesn't offer an RF 300 f2.8 prime. The EF version was one of the best lenses ever made by Canon and having to now buy a heavier zoom at $3400 dollars more is not something I would ever do. Neither would I want to buy a 200-500 f4 over a 500 prime for probably another 4-5 K more. Some new DO lenses would be nice but I don't have ten years to wait around for that possibility.

[@stubones]

Canon's priority is getting the image in the first instance, not high MP when it comes to a flagship. Sports, photojournalists etc, which are their target market, do not value high mp, they value getting the shot. Once you have the shot, as Jan says, using Gigapixel for eg becomes an option for upscaling should you wish. I've used v.7 for month and I'm blown away by the results.

[@Matt90541]

What's Canon going to try to sell it for, 30K?

[@jan_wegener]

Probably haha

[@nimuil]

Wait for your R1 review in the field. R5 II is R5 I should be IMO and I’m not eager to have one more R5 series in my hand. But I want a second camera for my wildlife (hobby only) photography. R1 is very irritating. The physically impressive AF on R1 (with a cross type DPAF) is the only attraction point to me. 8 years ago their 20MP was already too low for wildlife photography, 8 years later, everyone improved, Canon still stands where it is. This is the reason why they says R1 is for professional sports photography. I suspect they know it can not do anything else, maybe. I really want to shift to Sony for A1 II, look at fredmiranda, so many pages of A1 photos, mainly are birds. look at R3, so pity, it’s nothing compared with A1. The only reason I can tell is the 24MP is too low for wildlife photography and nobody uses it or simply gave it up. This can be reflected from R3 image thread, 45 pages, last updated: July 7. A pet dog occupied a lot of seats. In contrast, the A1 thread has 324 pages and was updated just yesterday. This difference highlights the A1's appeal for wildlife photography. The problem is that I had invested on Canon lense. it is not easy to switch to Sony. It’s really very sad Canon keeps their customers in this way that they are cornered. Waiting for your review on R1. May decide later upon it.

[@nimuil]

If i want speed, unless my brain damaged, why don’t I go to A9 III? Global shutter @ 120fps RAW with the same resolution?

[@nordic5490]

My R5ii has best in biz af atm. Try it before jumping to another brand.

[@stevep927]

I stopped the video when I heard 24 mp . The Sony A1 II will be out by January and with 50 mp will have a global shutter. Canon was late to the EVF party and has not caught up yet

[@skyscraperfan]

I am still waiting for a high end camera from Canon that focuses on image quality instead of action. The R3 has really low noise, but it could be even better if the sensor was not stacked and had a lower frame rate. If you take photos of still subjects like architecture or landscape, you do not need fast autofocus or a fast frame rate. Is there no market for cameras that have the lowest noise and highest dynamic range possible? Please give us such a camera! The names "R4" and "R2" are still available.

[@martingibbons8021]

There never seems to be the perfect lens the canon 200-800 could be but no coating and f9 ? Id like a 50-600 fixed f2.8 zoom weatherproof with all L series lens coatings - not too much to ask lol

[@KungPowEnterFist]

Lots and lots of wishful thinking on the mid-range (price) primes and zooms. It took Sigma 5.5 years to release a competitor to the Nikon F 500 PF, the F 500 PF is better despite being much older with and without TC's, and Nikon has 3 other amazing PF's that continue to go unmatched. It's not like Sony and Canon want to leave that space uncontended. It's that it is really hard to make those lenses and be light, be exceptionally sharp wide open or maybe just stopped down a little, be small, be fast AF, be great VR, be great with TC's, fully weather sealed, and for a price that is appealing and profitable. Internal TC's only make sense if the lens is still exceptionally sharp with the TC engaged and the additional weight/size is minimal. Ex., the Z 400 f2.8 TC and Z 600 f4 TC, which are widely considered the tip of the spear of modern lens engineering. Being that Sony and Canon have yet to make even one decent mid-range lens to the level of the PF's (or the Z 400 f4.5), its a pipe dream to think they'll just quantum leap ahead and deliver PF like lenses with internal TC's (and zooms, mind you) that perform like the Z 400/600 TC lenses in many ways for a fraction of the price. As for Sony and Canon's pro level 400/600 lenses, they need more than an internal TC to get up to Nikon level. I am not saying those are terrible lenses. I am saying Nikon is just that far ahead in every regard on those two lenses. Also, I would not be surprised for Nikon to release a Z 300 f2.8, Z 100-300 f2.8, Z 500 f4, and/or Z 180-400 f4 TC, in the next 2-3 years, and each of those will be class leading as well. Unfortunately, there is no one magic silver bullet lens that puts Canon or Sony back in the conversation with Nikon as to who has the best super tele lineup. Sony tried that with the E 300 f2.8GM and, well, the needle did not move even one single width of an atom.

[@Kellysher]

I would like a faster zoom in the 200-600 range that prices under $5,000. I think Canon has forgotten the serious amateur nature photographers. There is no $10,000 lens in my future! Maybe this is not technically possible. But my dream is to have a full frame 45 MP camera that has a crop mode to a 24-30 MP image. Basically An R5 that functions like an R7 in crop mode. Now that, I would sell a kidney for! Cheers!

[@andreaskentis565]

Sony a7V! Where are youuuuu??!!!

[@TheEastbelfast]

Canon RF 400mm 2.8 is Canons best Lens by far, The rendering from this lens surpasses the RF600mm

[@CZOV]

Giving you 45mp R3 means they will cripple the R5. I would rather have 33mp sensor in the R3.

[@waynedettman6472]

For us birdies,how about the r7 sensor in the r3 body,don't laugh.

[@nordic5490]

The R7 sensor has a glacial slow 30ms readout, and hence pretty bad rolling shutter. Why would you want one that sensor ?

[@waynedettman6472]

@@nordic5490 r7 great for perched birds mate. 🤣

[@waynedettman6472]

@nordic5490 can't afford 600f4,so have to use apsc r7 with 100-400 for small birds,it's a real shame,but for most of us hobbyists that's the reality.😂

[@Jawad.1]

24MP is a BIG BIG NO!!!! 45MP is the acceptable bare minimum. Full frame should be 90MP. If 90MP can't happen on Full Frame, then Canon/Nikon/Sony should resort to Medium Format to enable 90MP on their flagship cameras.

[@EugeneMaynard]

👍🏾🙏🏾 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇸🇪🇹🇹

[@Jawad.1]

Y'all know why Canon is being so desperately creative with their upcoming lenses? *Because: With the release of Sony A9iii, Canon already knows that it cannot compete with Sony in terms of camera bodies and sensor technology (evident with the release of their DOA R1, a Pseudoflagship). And the only place where it can outpace Sony and stay competitive in the near future is with their upcoming unique lenses that no other company manufactures...!!!*

[@planetfun85]

You want specs from Nikon or Sony, but you don't buy any. Yet, you buy 2x Canon R5IIs. I guess you're a die-hard Canon fanboy.

[@nordic5490]

Why mention the otherr bands ? This is a Canon lens discsussion. You must be a Sony or Nikon fanboi. Cameras are just tools mate. Use the best tool for the job. Eg, my R5ii has the best AF for wildlife atm. If another brand was substantially better, I would swap brands. Dont be such an obvious fanboi.

[@planetfun85]

@@nordic5490 ,you just canr rely on one thing who is also marginally better. Canon is apple of cameras.

[@jan_wegener]

I buy what suits my needs the most. Like I said in the video, no brand is perfect and it comes down to what ticks the most boxes. For instance Sony is extremely good for photos, but is behind in terms of IS and some other features, on the video side, which is a major factor for me. On Nikon I love the lenses, but don’t love the camera button layout and no raw pre capture. On Canon I’d love to see a better sensor in the R5 II, but alot of the rest is great. I am sure I will have other brands over the next few years as well, but likely alongside my Canon gear. But you’re right that it’s easier for me to buy more canon gear, because if I bought a Sony or Nikon camera I’d also have to spend 20k+ on a new big prime lens, which makes it not as easy of a move and the camera body would have to be a real standout.

[@Kinadnuf]

“Canon making moves” ? I wish they’d move my order for R5 II (6 weeks now in UK). Now been told could be another 4 to 6 months. Unacceptable. Regretting my choice now. So regards them all cheering for more new gear, they can’t fulfill orders already made.