I don't remember Canon ever using phase detect autofocus on Sony sensors in Canon cameras. So, autofocus on such a camera would likely be subpar.A last choice would be to use a Sony 24m sensor, which will matches the "annoying a lot of fanboys" rumor. Seriously I think this does have a chance.
Canon showed with the 24-240 and 14-35 that the corrections are effective. But if they’re needed it means a loss of corner sharpness and increased noise at the edges of the frame. For a 10x superzoom or a $300 UWA prime, I think those are reasonable trade offs. For a $1700 L lens, I’m not sure that’s true.
They’ve done it already on the new RF 14-35/4.I would become very concerned if they started doing this sort of thing on L lenses. As far as I can recall, it's a characteristic of non-L lenses only. (It is kind of a turn off to me, so I've stuck to L lenses, so far...other peoples' mileage may vary of course.)
Thanks! Very informative.A gimbal and IBIS stabilize in completely different ways. There are movements on a gimbal such as rotation around a focal point, lifting the camera, maintaining completely level horizon lines and stabilizing footage when walking where a gimbal just can’t be matched. It’s highly customizable as well, so you can plan a movement and command the gimbal to behave the way that best fits that footage - and save those common movements to custom functions on some gimbals.
That said, IBIS is extremely valuable for simulating a monopod for locked footage and smoothing out handheld footage - two areas where a gimbal is either too combersome to warrant setting up or just annoying to use for something simple like that. IBIS also keeps more of that organic run/gun feel while a gimbal feels and looks robotic and pristine. So I use both for different shots.
I try not to over-analyze my lenses and certainly don't do any test chart comparisons, but I do own the Olympus 12-100mm f/4 lens and just recently bought the Nikon Z 14-30mm - both lenses use auto-correction to correct distortion. Perhaps if you are an extreme pixel peeper, you will notice the effects of the auto-correction, but in my experience (and many reviews I have read) the corner sharpness on the Olympus is very good, and the Nikon's corner sharpness was better than my Canon 16-35 f/4 L - used on the same camera (Nikon Z5, with adapter for the Canon lens.) So, at least in my experience with these "pro level" lenses, you aren't trading off anything. Again, that's my un-scientific experience and others experience may differ.Canon showed with the 24-240 and 14-35 that the corrections are effective. But if they’re needed it means a loss of corner sharpness and increased noise at the edges of the frame. For a 10x superzoom or a $300 UWA prime, I think those are reasonable trade offs. For a $1700 L lens, I’m not sure that’s true.
Except that the IBIS may not offer much improvement in the real world. Actual real world data on the IBIS performance with the RF 50 f/1.8 is scarce, and what there is doesn't seem all that great (about 2 stops). Perhaps a non-IS UWA will fare better (not holding my breath).
Nothing saying we won't...but that would have vastly less utility for most people than this lens will. Minus a 24mm (which is forthcoming, this will give Canon a solid range of affordable primes from 16 - 100mm on RF. I would like to see a 135mm and a 28mm too but I'm just speaking for what 99% of the world needs and wants.sniff.. instead of a 16mm, I wish we get a 10 or 11mm prime. Why does Canon leave this niche to Laowa, Samyang etc.?
I agree, it just seems like these lenses would pair well with smaller/lighter/more budget friendly bodies (ie, RP), and are a bit of an odd choice to release simultaneously with the biggest, heaviest mirrorless body released to-date.They were certainly short on cheaper RF lenses. This looks like a nice little lens. Compact and lightweight and will probably do the job.
Canon went very highend with the initial RF lens (which wasn't a bad strategy) but it needed to get cheaper and lighter lens out to go with the lighter cameras. This is a good start.
I wonder if Amazon did/will accidentally leak the R3 price?