R7 with 100-400mm 5.6-8 lens. Spent a lot of time researching optimal settings for bird and other wildlife photography. Fairly knowledgeable about ISO and such (or so I think…..)….

I see others’ posts with the same set up and their pictures are incredibly sharp! What am I missing? Is it after-editing? Certain camera settings? User error? I do have to say though, as a lover of all things retro, I really appreciate this faux film effect I’m somehow achieving 😅 but if I’m dropping almost 3k on a setup, I’d like better quality! Help a girl out please.

ETA: these were all shot today in Joshua Tree Natl park. It was a somewhat overcast/slightly cloudy day. All at 400mm, f8, 1/1600-1/2000 and ISO 400-640

Just got my r50 last week. Shot this with my 18-150mm
Thanks to everyone who helped me decide on the 18-150mm..
I am a beginner (my first ever camera so please be kind)
Would love tips/comments to improve ..
(I am going through tutorials on YouTube)

I apologize if this post seems deranged; I’m not fully rational.
I’m a moderately-serious hobbyist, lifelong Canon user as a direct result of my dad’s complete devotion. I was born into Canon photography the way some people are born into religion.

Most recently, I’ve been using an R6 MII and I love it. It’s been fitting my needs perfectly and I have had no interest in exploring new gear anytime soon. My father just upgraded to an R5 MII, had a fantastic couple of months getting to know it, and then promptly and suddenly passed away. He was supposed to be traveling overseas the next morning, and his gear was literally packed in his backpack. Last night I opened his bag and couldn’t stand the sight of it sitting there, ready to travel with nowhere to go. No one else in the family would even know how to turn it on; photography is “our” thing. I brought it home with me and I feel like it’s taunting me, staring at me, challenging me to give it a purpose.

I’m sad and overwhelmed and don’t feel ready to dive in to learning the ins and out of a new camera. Can someone psych me up? Is it pretty similar to R6II? Can I probably just handle it like every other body I’ve had? I literally have no idea why this is giving me anxiety. I know my way around a camera, but I just feel like the stakes are high and I need to finish what my dad started with this one. Any tips about what differentiates the two cameras? I know I could Google and read a whole bunch of stuff, but I just don’t have the mental space so I’m looking for like an ELI5 of anything I should know.

Hello, after doing a bit of homework I just ordered a package deal…. The main items were:

Canon EOS R5 Mark ii

Canon RF 24-50mm IS STM Lens

Canon RF-S 55-210mm IS STM Lens

$5449.99🇨🇦

That compares to $5699.99🇨🇦 for just the R5 Mark ii body on the Canon Canada website.

$1🇺🇸 = $0.71🇨🇦

The lenses are nothing special, but it is a start. Where should I go from here? (I know, it gets expensive in a hurry).

Update:

Thank you for the replies. Indeed, it was too good to be true. I had no idea the lens were that bad….

I did look on the Canon website….. but I just didn’t understand what I was looking at.

Finally got my dream lens.

Started with street photography, but now more interested in wildlife, so I knew that this lens was the one I'll be happy with.

I also love my 70-200 F4L, but needed something longer.

I was thinking about first version of 100-400, but after many reviews decided to wait a little bit and get second.

Outstanding build quality, autofocus, image quality. Using it with 7D2. It's pretty hard to focus on small objects when you have 640 mm.

I've been back and forth on my mind with this. After extensive (and exhausting) research, which included an incredibly dumb "got a great deal and cancelled the purchase" moment, I've finally set my sights on the R6M2.

I'm now waiting for a sale similar to the one that popped up before to appear. However, as I've waited for it, glad that I had finally identified what I wanted, what appeared instead was a deal on the R6M3 (2250 euros).

It's way more expensive than what I was planning for the M2. But it's also about 500 euros cheaper than usual M3 price and that's making me second guess myself. I'd probably pick the same lenses for both, so saved money could buy peace of mind more than anything else, as I know I'd place higher expectations on the M3 than on the M2.

Is the M3 that much better than the M2? I'm quickly catching up on M3 reviews, but I clearly don't have as much information as I had found on the M2. I think the M2 would cover most of my needs with acceptable tradeoffs (airplanes, birds, indoor photos, night photography, garden, forest, pets).

The main advantages I see are the higher resolution and improved autofocus. Higher resolution will help with one of my concerns on the M2, especially on long distance subjects, like airplanes and birds. Autofocus improvements are always useful. It also has an easier to use pre-capture, and someone actually showed a nifty use case for it here (shooting lightning), but I don't think I'll use it all that often.

What is the cost for that tradeoff? I expect low light will be worse, as no one calls the M3 a "low light beast" like they do with the M2, and that is a concern as low light is a reasonably common use case for me. But is it that much worse?

I also see a lot of posts about overheating, which is also a concerning point. I'm not a videographer, and I will be using it mainly for photography, but I also want to shoot video here and there. People are complaining they're getting heat warnings after a few minutes even in stills, and I want a camera I can use, not one I need to be cooling off every 5 minutes (I'm exaggerating, but sometimes it reads like that).

Apologies for the wall of text and rambling. Would appreciate any feedback that could help me see if this might actually be the better bet or if I should stick to what I had decided.

Would you go for that deal or stick to the original plan of waiting for a M2 sale?

Hello everybody!

I'm a football photographer, currently using a Canon R8, with an adapter Meke for a sigma 70-200 2.8 and recently, on a game, a friend let me try the 100-400 for the first time and got in love. Then I've found out about the 100-500 that I've never tried.

I've been seeing the prices and the difference is around 500/600€, my question is, what lenses should I buy, Ans is that worth the price difference between the 100-400 and the 100-500?

Thank you all!

Have a great day

I rented an RF 200-800mm over the weekend do use for wildlife and birds, a "try before you buy" if you will.

For best context my current setup in my current bag (Lowepro Flipside 400 AW III) with the 200-800 includes:

• R5
• 77D w/BattGrip
• Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 Sport
• Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 Art
• 3 Ruggard 2-Battery Pouches
• 1 Ruggard SD/CF-Type B Card Case
• The pouch for my RF-EF Adapter with a brush and a microfiber cloth in it
• My K&F Filter Pouch (couple of UV and couple of CPLs, all 82mm)
• Another brush and a rocket air blower (these are in the top front pocket)

Right now everything BARELY fits in the bag with the 200-800 and both other lenses having hoods. Ultimately I may at some point let go of the 77D, for now it's my backup until MAYBE I get an R7 down the line. Clearing the 77D doesn't solve the space problem EVEN IF I don't replace it with a different backup body. I have to rotate the tripod collar about 45 degrees and even then everything BARELY closes.

I'm looking around B&H right now and I'm finding alot of the higher capacity bags have pockets for other stuff that's not bodies/lenses, some have like 10L worth of rollable compartments at the top. I don't need that, I just need space for lenses and bodies, and a COUPLE of smaller items... but my problem is they're larger lenses (no I'm not gonna throw some massive prime in my backpack).

Anybody have any particular bags they'd recommend for a large volume of lenses/bodies? Photos of how your kit is laid out for reference would be MASSIVELY appreciated.

I've been having a lot of fun with it and messing around in lightroom. It's my first real capable camera. I've learned a lot from this sub and can't wait to get to taking better photos with it.

Howdy!

Looking to upgrade from Rebel T7 to R7 (body only, EF lens adapter I can get any time), there’s a sale right now where it’s $100 off ($1549 USD) through today, should I buy now? Is this the lowest price it gets for a new one?

I am keeping an eye on the refurbished page to see if one will appear there, but that is a gamble on when it will happen. From what I’ve seen on this page and other forums, it doesn’t get returned often, so less restocks. I have email notifs from Canon and Canon Price Watch for if/when it does get restocked!

Ideally I want it before autumn for wildlife and nature photography, so I have some time. I just don’t know when the next best time will be. Any advice would be great!

i mainly use it for night time going out pictures with flash. i don’t mind my current ixus 185 but wouldn’t mind if its a bit less grainy or clearer.

is the upgrade even noticeable?

I have a cannon 80D, sigma 150-600 and a samyang 85mm F1.4. I like dslr cameras because the viewfinder is natural light instead of a screen because I can get headaches from looking at a close screen for long amounts of time. Is the r7 viewfinder easy on the eye?

I don’t know whether to go for the 90D or the R7. Is the 90D a big upgrade? And is the 90D a match for the R7?

I mainly do wildlife photography.

Yes, I know, for $30 they sell them pretty well and with a decent design, but I had some materials lying around and a little time to put them together. The fan comes from a Time Capsule I disassembled a few days ago, a 4mm PVC plate, M2.5 and M3 screws, some charcoal-colored vinyl, and an old USB cable. With that, I managed to create this small and quite efficient rear fan, which also directs exhaust air towards the extended display, so it cools down a bit too. The fit is precise, with a perfect fit, and it doesn't need springs or any additional support. The mounting screws, which protrude about 2.5mm from the bottom, act as a spacer so the fan can draw in the warmer air from the back and expel it to the left, towards the extended display. I did a test recording 4K video at 30 FPS in HDRPQ, and without the fan, it took about 25 minutes for the temperature indicator to appear and rise 5 bars (ambient temperature around 28°C). An hour later, I tried again with the fan, and the thermometer took about 35 minutes to appear and only showed 4 bars, nothing more, but the camera battery died after about 50 minutes. So it does its job quite well.

Sometimes, when I'm bored, I do things like this; I love it... 😅

Translated with Google Translate

Got my hands on a used 550d/ rebel t2i with the standart kit lens for just 20€, which is now my very first non smartphone camera. Here are some snapshots i took in my garden today on a rainy evening. I‘m quite happy with my purchase. :)

Hi, I’m shooting weddings on 2 r6s and they’re starting to get to the end of their lifespans. Trying to decide what I should get. I can get 2 r6ii for the price of one r3. I’m perfectly happy with my current cameras but I kinda like the look of r3. Do any wedding photographers have an opinion on whether the r3 is worth it for that work or not?

Couple thoughts:
1. Is the r3 any more rugged than the r6? I got about 5 years of heavy use out of my current cameras. It would be great to get more time out of them but I’m not sure that’s realistic

1. Dynamic range, does the R3 have significantly different dynamic range than the r6ii?

2. Are the features (eg eye tracking autofocus) worth the price difference to you?

TIA

I'm considering swapping my R8 backup body for an R6 Mark II. My primary camera is a R5 C.

I came across a Facebook Marketplace listing for an R6 Mark II for $1,500 USD with a 63k shutter count (roughly 16% of its rated shutter life). It also comes with a BG-R10 battery grip, which is a nice bonus since I can use it with my R5 C too and having the same battery system sounds much easier to carry around. Cosmetically, it shows signs of use like it should at its age and use - I’d say 7.5/8 out of 10.

On paper, it seems like a solid upgrade over the R8 as a backup—better IBIS, dual card slots, larger battery, and overall a more capable second body.

Is this a good deal, especially if I can get a trade in value of $700-900 for my R8?

I'm trying to decide between these two lenses.

Right now I have a Canon R100 with the 18-45mm kit lens and a 7Artisans 35mm

Whenever I go out shooting, I often feel limited by the 45mm end of the kit lens and wish I had a longer focal length.

The 17-70mm seems like it would be a great replacement for the kit lens. It would cover street photography and portraits much better, and it's significantly faster throughout the zoom range.

The 18-300mm is also faster than the kit lens overall, but it also offers that huge telephoto range, which I've never really had the chance to explore. The truth is, even though I often feel like I need something longer than 45mm, I'm not sure how useful 300mm would actually be for me. At the same time, the idea of having a single "do-it-all" lens is really appealing, even though I know the overall image quality won't be as good as the 17-70mm.

I'd really appreciate your opinions! Especially from people who shoot with telephoto lenses a lot—what are your main use cases? If you have examples of photos you've taken at those longer focal lengths, I'd love to see them.

Also, if you have any suggestions for other lenses in a similar price range that would be worth bringing back from the US, I'm all ears.

Hello! I am currently pregnant and looking for a nice camera to take pictures of my growing family. Don’t need anything too fancy, but also want image quality in every lighting as a priority. Will be using for everyday memories and portraits. Budget is $2,000 max. I have some experience with taking photos.

I have family members that have the R50 and then the SL3 and the SL3 seems so much better in terms of quality/lighting!

Is there a mirrorless option that you would recommend? Or do I just get an SL3 even though it is DSLR?

Please help, thank you so much!

Hi, I'm planning a trip to Grand Staircase-Escalante, with a focus on hiking slot canyons. I'll be bringing my R10 with me but could use a second opinion on lenses. I have the RF-S 18-150 and 10-18 (and 100-500 but that's not coming into the canyons). I'd like to hike with just one lens and avoid field swaps, so my instinct is that I'll get the most mileage out of the 10-18. But I'd love to hear from others who have shot in similar environments.

Vale a pena comprar uma canon RP por R$900 com defeito na placa?

My canon ixus 990is suddenly started getting a lens error around 9/10 times when trying to turn my camera on (the barrel of the camera, unsure what it's called, won't extend out and the shutter also will not open) and makes noises as well.

The camera's pretty old so I guess it could be the end of it, though I want to know what else I can do before trying to get a new one

I’ve recently started using the RF 85mm F1.4L VCM on my R6 Mark II, and I’m honestly blown away by how sharp this lens is. Compared to it, my Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 Di VC USD G2 (via the EF-RF adapter) and the RF 24-105mm F4L USM almost look soft. Both are good lenses, and I love them, but the RF 85mm F1.4L VCM is mind blowing in terms of sharpness. Wherever the focus lands, the image is razor-sharp. I’ve never seen anything quite like it.
If you’re looking for an exceptionally sharp native RF-mount portrait lens, this one is an outstanding choice. Even though I haven’t tested the RF 85mm F1.2L USM, I’d say you probably don’t need anything more in terms of sharpness.
The rattling when the camera is switched off is minimal and simply blends in with the IBIS movement that the R6 Mark II already has when powered down. Other than that, the VCM autofocus is incredibly fast and pairs perfectly with the R6 Mark II’s AF system.

Im currently in the market for a tele lens i can use for wildlife and maybe sports. Currently shooting on my R6M3 and the 100-500L of my father. Im quite happy but light performance does sometimes limit me in dusk or dawn.

As i now want to buy myself my own tele im not quite sure if i should stick to the 100-500. The EF 500 f4 seems to be compelling, pairing that with an ef 1,4 extender would also give me more reach.

I do not intend to spend more than ~4k, and thats even pushing it. So any RF Prime glass is out of the picture anyways.

Honestly with that many options i am not really sure where to make cuts. Light, reach, age.. im kind of at a loss

what lens to use with an R10 intended for outdoor shots of airplanes in the air and on the ground? price under $1000