Seems reasonableUnder 3kUSD for the perfect camera.
Under 3kUSD for the perfect 10-1000/f1.8 IS Quad nano USM Marco PZ Tilt-shift SA lens.
Less than 10kUSD to arm them up
That makes them the perfectly geared professional to do all the work they will make for whatsapp/FB/IG/tiktok compressed shxt quality stills/video that last less than 10sec.
Jokes aside. Sony priced a9iii 6k actually gives R3 a room to breathe. And R1 can justify to price 7k~8kUSD if MP is more than a9iii.
R5ii should be sub-4kUSD if non-stacked CMOS. And priced 4.5k for stacked 40~50MP.
Personally, I far prefer the zoom flexibility of the RF 100-300/2.8.Oh - and a 300mm f/2.8 on top - the most painful omission from the RF-lineup.
My truck can haul more weight is another common thing I've heard.Exactly!
For some, it's like "my car is faster than yours". Unfortunately, Sony fanboys aren't the only ones, as you too remembered the inept R3 criticism.
High frame rate is very useful for focus stacking.It will be interesting to see how Canon and Nikon respond. While some of the specs are a bit overkill for most users (ie, 120fps), […]
Yes. And also for bracketing (HDR, improving dynamic range)High frame rate is very useful for focus stacking.
I also prefer the zoom so I can leave my 70-200 mm at home.Personally, I far prefer the zoom flexibility of the RF 100-300/2.8.
So would I, but it's twice the price in the UK and twice the weight worldwide. The Sony extenders are very good so it makes a useful 300/2.8-420/4-600/5.6. However, it's not for me.Personally, I far prefer the zoom flexibility of the RF 100-300/2.8.
I agree with this prediction. Neither the R5Mk2 or R1 are likely to have a global shutter. I also already use the R3 and for my next body I also would like additional MP. I could see a R3Mk2 with a global shutter. Honestly, I generally shoot landscapes and wildlife and do not see a huge benefit of a global shutter vs. a very fast stacked rolling shutter.I'm sure Canon will not put global shutter into R1 nor R5mk2. Maybe R3 mk2. However technology limitation brings mpx down to around 24mpix. I already use R3 and for my next body I want more mpix. Waiting for R5mk2/R1... btw 1 sec buffer for continuous shooting in A9 is not sufficient. 3sec would be better. Why they didn't implement internal storage for it? Nvme drives are cheap (to insert at the bottom of camera body). Or cfexpress but gen4. Nonsense.
Much smaller, 50% cheaper, no overlap with the 70-200mm f/2.8 - I'd take the prime any day.Personally, I far prefer the zoom flexibility of the RF 100-300/2.8.
Choice is good!Much smaller, 50% cheaper, no overlap with the 70-200mm f/2.8 - I'd take the prime any day.
LolSony and Nikon have raised the bar for Canon however, whose current camera offerings are behind the curve in terms of the most current tech
Trust you are only trying to make a silly argument - like in an old Monty Python sketch? Everyone understands perfectly what was meant which is not a math skill but a social skill. Since its beyond you let me share that different prices are valid for different markets. In the UK its 11.500£ for the Canon zoom and 5.800£ for the SONY. So not only your math skills but also social skills and market understanding seems to need some improvement.Choice is good!
It's great that the Sony 300/2.8 is only $4750, I thought it was $6K...or maybe your math skills need some improvement. Of course, once you add in the cost of the FE 70-200/2.8 the total cost is only $600 less than the RF 100-300/2.8. Then, once you add in the cost of the second Sony body so you can get that range concurrently as you can with the zoom, the Sony setup is substantially more expensive. Sorry if that's too much math.
I agree with your points. I already use the R3 as well and on a recent trip to Alaska the two things that would be most useful to me in my next body would be: 1) a deeper buffer at 30 fps and 2) additional resolution so I could shoot a bit looser in the frame and still have enough pixels on the subject.I'm sure Canon will not put global shutter into R1 nor R5mk2. Maybe R3 mk2. However technology limitation brings mpx down to around 24mpix. I already use R3 and for my next body I want more mpix. Waiting for R5mk2/R1... btw 1 sec buffer for continuous shooting in A9 is not sufficient. 3sec would be better. Why they didn't implement internal storage for it? Nvme drives are cheap (to insert at the bottom of camera body). Or cfexpress but gen4. Nonsense.
How exactly is Canon behind? The R5 was the first FF Camera to shoot FF 8K RAW video (albeit with heating issues that were address through firmware). The Canon R3 was the first FF Camera to shoot at 30 fps with full 14-bit RAW files and frankly it still is until the Sony A9III becomes available in Q1 2024!It will be interesting to see how Canon and Nikon respond. While some of the specs are a bit overkill for most users (ie, 120fps), they could come in handy every once in a while and for some pros, more than that. Way too many images to go through for me! Amazing camera other than resolution, but I'm sure Sony is already working on a higher resolution global shutter camera. Sony and Nikon have raised the bar for Canon however, whose current camera offerings are behind the curve in terms of the most current tech--global shutter and stacked sensor high res bodies. I'm sure we will see great offerings from Canon, but imo they should hurry up!