ah, good to hear from you Michael! Late to the discussion and pedantic as usual
@neuoro shared his empirical data to support his personal experience. Is that an anecdote? Still a dataset of 1 of course.
I'm not the only one with heat issues I believe.
The apertures of the 100-500 that you mentioned are basically the same as the EF 100-400, you just get 100mm on the long end where it goes to f/7.1 - ie there's no meaningful drawback in aperture with the new lens, as you imply.
Absolutely right. The RF 100-500mm has the same size front element (entrance pupil) as the EF 100-400mm. So, it lets in exactly the same amount of light. You get the same number of photons per duck with both, with one at 500mm f/7.1 and the other at 400mm f/5.6. So, even though you are using 2/3rds stop more iso at f/7.1, the larger size of the duck means you have the same signal to noise in the image.
The apertures of the 100-500 that you mentioned are basically the same as the EF 100-400, you just get 100mm on the long end where it goes to f/7.1 - ie there's no meaningful drawback in aperture with the new lens, as you imply.
I love that we all somehow persevere in the belief that facts will change some people's opinions.
There are enough people who like to learn new things that it makes the effort to explain worthwhile.
Just to add that one of the benefits of mirrorless is the almost 100% sensor AF point coverage with narrow apertures.
ah, good to hear from you Michael! Late to the discussion and pedantic as usual
">1/100s" where ">" means "faster than".
It is a reasonable conclusion in the context that I wrote it.
This is one of my life's mysteries.
I'll never understand how one can use the rear LCD for focusing, picture composition, exposure setting in M...
I'm just unable to use it other than for setting basic adjustments. For me, the rear LCD is useless for taking pictures.
I have a little Olympus Cilc-Clic camera without EVF, but cannot use it without an accessory EVF.
So, I'm always surprised when quite many forum members are wishing for a camera without EVF...
PS: I once tried to use the LCD for macros. Please, don't ask for the results...
Yes, I fully agree that many use and need the rear LCD!Sometimes you gotta' do what you gotta' do.
View attachment 224485
Back in the days before pro bodies had any kind of moveable screen, it took a lot of practice to be able to hold the camera over one's head and accurately aim it at the subject, especially when in the middle of a scrum in a fast moving scene.
I still shoot over the head If I go out into the middle of the crowd on the floor while shooting concerts. Sometimes I even get a usable frame out of it!
I set mine to show camera settings, or flip it over if I am shooting motorsports, where flying debris is often an issue.Yes, I fully agree that many use and need the rear LCD!
I'm just not one of them!
Same here, I use it exclusively for the camera settings. I find it easier to use the rear LCD to change settings this way, and not to do so using the EVF.
Since we were talking about the R5C specifically, you totally miss the point.
No, you are specifically talking about the R5C, but that was you replying to my response to a feature request for the R5III (namely, IR remote sensors on both front and back). Since the BR-E1 can be used to start and stop video recording on the R5 and R5II, there is no significant reason to believe Canon will arbitrarily remove that capability on the R5III, and in any case the ability to start/stop recording was not specifically mentioned.
