I'll stick with the MX MASTER 2/2S, I had it and it broke, now I have the MX Master 3, everything is fine, but its rubber became sticky and the grip becomes disgusting
Great wishlist, though like some others here I also like the current wheel location. Faster sensor readout speed for the Mark II is a must IMO, as is higher framerates for video (not just 4K 120, but 1080 240+). As a wildlife fan, I'd love for "crop mode" for video to be a separate setting/button, and not just restricted to 4K60 like it is now. Also PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE Canon don't put the video switch on the left side of the camera like you have with R8, R6ii, and R5ii. My left hand is bracing a telephoto lens, it'll ruin shot compositions if I have to move it.
@@Postosuchus great info. On cameras like the canon r6 mk ii and canon r5, you can change the scroll wheel to be ISO and the ISO wheel to be aperture. So it’s still right by the thumb in a convenient place. Everything else you said I agree with. Especially the convenience of the video mode being just one click from the photo mode
3S has scrolling problem. This is a known issue to Logitech, but it sells this mouse anyway. It means if you for example zoom in/out in video/photo editing, it feels inaccurate. Like 2 steps in 3 steps out. 2S doesn't have this issue. Both of them are definitely not suitable for gaming because of lagging and moving accuracy. And because of that, i would say that they are largely overpriced and definitely not worth the money. If someone likes logitech software and needs an accurate, large mouse for work and gaming then go with the logitech G604. You get all mx master functions, better response time and accuracy and with half a price. edit: it seems like G604 is discontinued and not for sale anymore.
@@priit123 interesting. I’ve never experienced any issues with the 3S when it comes to video editing and zooming. The 3S is a hefty price point I agree
I totally agree with this sentiment. I find that the lack of contrast between subject and background really makes this lens frustrating to enjoy for photography. I'm purchasing a EF-S 17-55 mm in hopes it does better. This could be because of the R7 sensor being so demanding of it's lenses. Excited to see if Canon can make an RF 17-55 mm that works well
@CAMphotography_ I'm talking focal length your facial structure wil look the same if you take a headshot whit 50mm apsc and ff 50mm The crop factor is only the frame size
Here's another way. Jump on a trending topic. Why not do a video on how you feel about Adobe being sued by the Federal Trade Commission. They are also almost certainly using users images to train A.I. because we all agree to it in the terms of service. Then telling users to "skip the photoshoot." I am curious about your thoughts and it might make for an interesting video that brings in a lot of new eyes. Actually, I guess that is not really a 4th tip since it is basically stirring the pot. LOL!
@@CAMphotography_ Yeah, it is crazy! Adobe is really making some customers unhappy these days. And oddly enough they seem to be disrespecting photographers the worst and going full throttle pushing A.I.
@@bryantwalley on cameras like the r6 and r5 there’s a mode dial that control aperture right where the thumb is. So I guess that would have to be added if scroll wheel is moved. But the mode dial is even more convenient than the r7 scroll wheel IMO. I don’t hate the r7 placement just sometimes get a little awk for me
@@bryantwalley that’s where the backside illuminated sensor would come into place to improve lowlight. I didn’t mention battery grip in this video cause I personally don’t use one
I’m debating between R7 or R8.. please I need an advice.. this will be my first camera. I want it for videos, livestream and travel photography. Thanks.
@@shaulgovea6699 both great cameras for all the above. I would still recommend r7 for these reasons. 1. Bigger and longer lasting battery 2. Better ergonomics and a better in hand feel 3. Dual slot SD cards for redundancy in case one fails 4. 7k downsampled to 4k for sharper video 5. Crop sensor gives you a bit more reach which is great for travel photography 6. R7 has in body image stabilization. R8 does not 7. Never had an issue with canon r7 overheating. Even recording 4k in 95 degree weather
@@CAMphotography_ have you looked into something like the Loupedeck? I’ve had one for a couple years now and I couldn’t live without it now. Really helps speed up the editing workflow.
When You're a sports photographer, and you have taken between 200-500, or more photos during a game. When You're done, and you need to get them to print. Social Media, MLB, NFL, NHL, NBA, NASCAR..etc. You going to be sitting there for 20-30 minutes of uploading 200-500 , 45MP. 24MP. You're uploading in about 5 minutes. Conversion works on 24MP=48MB File. 45MP=90MB File. You want smaller file to upload faster. Sports Illustrated, and other sports magazine prefer 24MP. When you want to enlarge an image, it is going to fit on your phone, or laptop. 45MP gonna take up all of the pages, and have to zoom and drag. 24MP in sports is adequate enough because it is more about the athlete, and the sport. I can take a 24mp of Joel Embiid. People will know who he is....45mp going to be "Oh Joel has a zit."
@@jeffwilliams7669 yup. I agree and am aware. I’m a portrait photographer. I’m basing it off what I preferred in a flagship camera. I do understand file sizing and mp and all the above of what you just said. Truly I do. I didn’t expect my preference to come off as if I’m speaking objective fact. I mean the r5 mk ii is an amazing sports camera as well. 45 mp 🤷🏽♂️ I get you. All I was stating was a preference. Not a end all be all “it should’ve been this way”
@@CAMphotography_ Just don't be that one sports photographer that whipped out a Hasserbad 907c That Camera takes 100mp photos. His editor was there for hours.
@@likeris2 I know mp only really matter when it comes to cropping and blowing up prints. Sounds like you don’t like when people have preferences that differ from yours
@@likeris2 I am aware 24mp is more than you need for sports. Is that ok I want more in a flagship? Again just because I have preferences that don’t align with you doesn’t mean idk what I’m talking about
@@likeris2 worse* and again. My preferences don’t mean idk what I’m talking about. I know. You can stay here all day and keep asking me questions I already know or you can go enjoy your day. It’s 8 am
This year I shot 2 weddings, 2 cameras, 2 lenses (efs 24mm pancake and 50mm).. very happy .. now i sold them and bought sigma, but not rf-s, the ef 17-50.. so far so good quality, autofocus not as accurate as canon native glass.. i will try it next events.. enjoy ! Very nice review!
I agree the lens is definitely soft for the r7 but I also feel it’s from that sensor being so demanding could be wrong. Currently considering renting an r10 to see how it renders. None the less great video
Nice lighting! I'm in a tiny cramped room so I use panel lights. I actually started out with one of those DIY cake pan lights that I used for a couple of years. The pan probably cost me $35 so it didn't save me that much money in the end. LOL!
@@MarcusTim0thy thanks. I’m using canon r7 shooting 4k fine and 35mm 1.8. You can see the 18-50 video quality in this video ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-mcBNN70q2SI.htmlsi=psuQjfbGnQ9kD3_a
@@JamesMears76 try it for yourself. I still believe it’s ok for hobbyists. I’m looking from the perspective of wedding photography. It may work for you
@@CAMphotography_ Im a hobbyist, thanks for your explanations. Thinking in R7 + sigma 18-50 f2.8 + sigma 30 or 56 1.4 that will be released end year.. Cant find nothing better at this price range, for general use I might use the zoom, and if demanded to a portrait session I use the 1.4 one. What do you think? I pretend to buy the gear and lens by end year at about 2000$
@@JonesVitox I think that’s a good lineup for you being a hobbyist. I wanna try the primes at the end of the year also. 1.4 will be super creamy as long as it’s decently sharp. Definitely go with that. If it doesn’t work. Return it and try something else 🤷🏽♂️
@@mariaalbi1886 it’ll probably be similar quality tbh. I stand by what I said in the initial video that this lens is for hobbyists and beginners. But I’m looking at it from the view of a portrait and wedding photographer and it just doesn’t give me personally what I need for that
I just find it amusing that he is actually offended that no one wants to come. He probably should have sent out the invites before starting to spend. I have always thought it is better to use that kind of cash as a downpayment on a house instead of a party that will be over in 4 to 6 hours.
@@portersblackboard agreed. Even if he sent invites before starting to spend the guests would’ve probably backed out when they heard that $450 price tag
@@CAMphotography_ Actually I missed my brother's wedding because of the cost to attend years ago. He decided to have a wedding and gave very little notice so I had less than a week to book a flight from the Florida to the Midwest. I booked my flight on a budget airline and when I showed that Saturday morning ticket in hand, the airline had gone out of business that very day! The counters were completely empty, no notification at all (pre-texting). I wasn't about to drop $800-$1,000 for a same day flight on another airline. He wasn't happy but I wasn't ready to go in debt because of his impromptu marriage.
@@CAMphotography_ LOL! Yeah, I was also worried that I wouldn't get a refund from the original airline and he was planning to elope anyway so I figured is wasn't a big deal. LOL, I heard it was apparently was to him. 😬
Is it soft because of hardware or firmware? Newbie photog here so don't squash me for asking. Genuinely curious. Just wondering if a firmware update might fix this or is it a 'glass' or AF with Canon problem?
@@RobFike good question. I can’t confidently 100% say if it was one or the other. I assumed it was a glass quality issue. A few people have had that problem
@@CAMphotography_ I only ask because mine just came in, and I haven't run tests yet. If it isn't an 'across the board' problem then it would be a glass issue most likely, right?
@@RobFike most likely. Also I’m looking at it from the perspective of high quality wedding photography. I’ve seen a lot of hobbyist say they absolutely love it and see no wrong. With weddings I’m very particular on how an image looks SOOC and I just wasn’t getting that with this lens
@@CAMphotography_ I always think about renting but it always ends up being at least $100 and I feel like I may as well by it and sell it for about the same amount if I'd rented.
Wow! This is a shock to hear. I have had the Sony version glued onto my A6600 for the past couple of years. The Sony version is incredibly sharp - no, I am not exaggerating. Many reviews will corroborate this. This is disappointing. I am really very curious to know why the Canon version is even remotely soft. Hope it isn't a Canon factor.
@bl8550 I have an a6700 with the 18-50 and at wide open its sharp but I have noticed the sweet spot is f/4. I considered the Tamron 17-70 and even the FE 28-75 but the Sigma to be that small and that good at least on the E mount side is fantastic for APS-C users.
@@CAMphotography_ Same. I have a feeling the 16, 23 and 56 will be nice. I remember I used the 30mm sigma on my older Canon M50 ii and I liked the Canon EFM 32mm a LOT better. But the 16 and 56 were nice.
