johnvanr wrote: crisdesign wrote:
Apart from the high price, there’s nothing industry leading about canon superteles.
AmbientMike wrote:
Amazing watching people turn Canon's industry leading supertele lens lineup and R5 II into a negative. And a reason for leaving. Pretty amazing thread
R5II should be a reason to celebrate! 1st Canon high resolution stacked sensor. Of course, it's FM, so Canon is bad, even if they're the best
That may well be. I don’t know. But my cars aren’t industry leading either, but they both do their jobs very well and to my satisfaction. If I could and would buy a Ferrari, it may be industry-leading in some aspects, but suck in others. Same for the Range Rover or any other car.
Yes, It really depends on how demanding one is relative to a wide set of priorities and experiences.
When I started airplane photography 35 years ago with an
East German Praktika and screw type Asahi 200mm manual focus f4 and Kodak Gold I was just amazed to see a vaguely sharp F16 with afterburner on occupying about 1cm on a 10x15cm print. That really made my day.
I don’t do much plane photography anymore these days but the last time I tried a few months ago on Japanese F15s. I was in a much better location thanks to a Japanese friend of worldclass plane photographer Benoit Denet. I was shooting with the Z9 and 400mm f2.8 S TC and I was disappointed when all the rivets were not 100% sharp. And they were in 80+% of images even with the x2 TC. 🤣
I am of course not saying that the RF 400mm f2.8 is a poor lens, it’s most definitely within the top 1%, but the decision to stop pursuing further improvements is indeed just that, a highly constrained personal decision.
johnvanr wrote: crisdesign wrote:
Apart from the high price, there’s nothing industry leading about canon superteles.
AmbientMike wrote:
Amazing watching people turn Canon's industry leading supertele lens lineup and R5 II into a negative. And a reason for leaving. Pretty amazing thread
R5II should be a reason to celebrate! 1st Canon high resolution stacked sensor. Of course, it's FM, so Canon is bad, even if they're the best
That may well be. I don’t know. But my cars aren’t industry leading either, but they both do their jobs very well and to my satisfaction. If I could and would buy a Ferrari, it may be industry-leading in some aspects, but suck in others. Same for the Range Rover or any other car.
Yes, It really depends on how demanding one is relative to a wide set of priorities and experiences.
When I started airplane photography 35 years ago with an
East German Praktika and screw type Asahi 200mm manual focus f4 and Kodak Gold I was just amazed to see a vaguely sharp F16 with afterburner on occupying about 1cm on a 10x15cm print. That really made my day.
I don’t do much plane photography anymore these days but the last time I tried a few months ago on Japanese F15s. I was in a much better location thanks to a Japanese friend of world top air plane photographer Benoit Denet. I was shooting with the Z9 and 400mm f2.8 S TC and I was disappointed when all the rivets were not 100% sharp. And they were in 80+% of images even with the x2 TC. 🤣
I am of course not saying that the RF 400mm f2.8 is a poor lens, it’s most definitely within the top 1%, but the decision to stop pursuing further improvements is indeed just that, a highly constrained personal decision.
johnvanr wrote: crisdesign wrote:
Apart from the high price, there’s nothing industry leading about canon superteles.
AmbientMike wrote:
Amazing watching people turn Canon's industry leading supertele lens lineup and R5 II into a negative. And a reason for leaving. Pretty amazing thread
R5II should be a reason to celebrate! 1st Canon high resolution stacked sensor. Of course, it's FM, so Canon is bad, even if they're the best
That may well be. I don’t know. But my cars aren’t industry leading either, but they both do their jobs very well and to my satisfaction. If I could and would buy a Ferrari, it may be industry-leading in some aspects, but suck in others. Same for the Range Rover or any other car.
Yes, It really depends on how demanding one is relative to a wide set of priorities and experiences.
When I started airplane photography 35 years ago with an
East German Praktika and screw type Asahi 200mm manual focus f4 and Kodak Gold I was just amazed to see a vaguely sharp F16 with afterburner on occupying about 1cm on a 10x15cm print. That really made my day.
I don’t do much plane photography anymore these days but the last time I tried a few months ago on Japanese F15s. I was in a much better location thanks to a Japanese friend of world top air plane photographer Benoit Denet. I was shooting with the Z9 and 400mm f2.8 S TC and I was disappointed when all the rivets were not 100% sharp. And they were in 80+% of images even with the x2 TC. 🤣
I am of course not saying that the RF 400mm f2.8 is a poor lens, it’s most definitely within the top 1%, but the decision to stop pursuing further improvements is indeed just that, a personal decision.
johnvanr wrote: crisdesign wrote:
Apart from the high price, there’s nothing industry leading about canon superteles.
AmbientMike wrote:
Amazing watching people turn Canon's industry leading supertele lens lineup and R5 II into a negative. And a reason for leaving. Pretty amazing thread
R5II should be a reason to celebrate! 1st Canon high resolution stacked sensor. Of course, it's FM, so Canon is bad, even if they're the best
That may well be. I don’t know. But my cars aren’t industry leading either, but they both do their jobs very well and to my satisfaction. If I could and would buy a Ferrari, it may be industry-leading in some aspects, but suck in others. Same for the Range Rover or any other car.
Yes, It really depends on how demanding one is relative to a wide set of priorities and experiences.
When I started airplane photography 35 years ago with an
East German Praktika and screw type Asahi 200mm manual focus f4 and Kodak Gold I was just amazed to see a vaguely sharp F16 with afterburner on occupying about 1cm on a 10x15cm print. That really made my day.
I don’t do much plane photography anymore these days but the last time I tried a few months ago on Japanese F15s. I was in a much better location thanks to a Japanese friend of world top air plane photographer Benoit Denet. I was shooting with the Z9 and 400mm f2.8 S TC and I was disappointed when all the rivets were not 100% sharp. And they were in 80+% of images even with the x2 TC. 🤣
I am of course not saying that the RF 400mm f2.8 is a poor lens, but the decision to stop pursuing further improvements is just that, a personal decision.
johnvanr wrote: crisdesign wrote:
Apart from the high price, there’s nothing industry leading about canon superteles.
AmbientMike wrote:
Amazing watching people turn Canon's industry leading supertele lens lineup and R5 II into a negative. And a reason for leaving. Pretty amazing thread
R5II should be a reason to celebrate! 1st Canon high resolution stacked sensor. Of course, it's FM, so Canon is bad, even if they're the best
That may well be. I don’t know. But my cars aren’t industry leading either, but they both do their jobs very well and to my satisfaction. If I could and would buy a Ferrari, it may be industry-leading in some aspects, but suck in others. Same for the Range Rover or any other car.
It really depends on how demanding one is.
When I started airplane photography 35 years ago with an
East German Praktika and screw type Asahi 200mm manual focus f4 and Kodak Gold I was just amazed to see a vaguely sharp F16 with afterburner on occupying about 1cm on a 10x15cm print. That really made my day.
I don’t do much plane photography anymore these days but the last time I tried a few months ago on Japanese F15s. I was in a much better location thanks to a Japanese friend of world top air plane photographer Benoit Denet. I was shooting with the Z9 and 400mm f2.8 S TC and I was disappointed when all the rivets were not 100% sharp. And they were in 80+% of images even with the x2 TC. 🤣
I am of course not saying that the RF 400mm f2.8 is a poor lens, but the decision to stop pursuing further improvements is just that, a personal decision.
johnvanr wrote: crisdesign wrote:
Apart from the high price, there’s nothing industry leading about canon superteles.
AmbientMike wrote:
Amazing watching people turn Canon's industry leading supertele lens lineup and R5 II into a negative. And a reason for leaving. Pretty amazing thread
R5II should be a reason to celebrate! 1st Canon high resolution stacked sensor. Of course, it's FM, so Canon is bad, even if they're the best
That may well be. I don’t know. But my cars aren’t industry leading either, but they both do their jobs very well and to my satisfaction. If I could and would buy a Ferrari, it may be industry-leading in some aspects, but suck in others. Same for the Range Rover or any other car.
It really depends on how demanding one is.
When I started airplane photography 35 years ago with an
East German Praktika and screw type Asahi 200mm manual focus f4 and Kodak Gold I was just amazed to see a vaguely sharp F16 with afterburner on occupying about 1cm on a 10x15cm print. That really made my day.
I don’t do much plane photography anymore these days but the last time I tried a few months ago on Japanese F15s. I was in a much better location thanks to a Japanese friend of world top air plane photographer Benoit Denet. I was shooting with the Z9 and 400mm f2.8 S TC and I was disappointed when all the rivets were not 100% sharp. And they were in 80+% of images even with the x2 TC. 🤣
