@@gekalskip because it’s got more features and most people are used to it 🤷♂️ Lightroom CC is the fast-and-easy tool, but Classic is the comprehensive and extensive tool
@@kaspergaram alright i didnt know, the non-classic is whta you standard get offered on the adobe website, its always curious to see that super old user interface of lightroom classic and think that THAT is the better version of the two, but apparently so. A shame that they cant make a single version that is both easy to use and comprehesive
@@gekalskip yeah i 100% get you. I personally very much prefer the UI of CC over Classic. If they’d have all of the features of Classic, but with the looks of CC, that would be perfect. And CC does the job for most people, so that’s why Adobe sells it as the first product.
I use this on my R8 and it is an ideal match. Performance surpassing the cost on both. I don't get the complaints on STM's focusing. I do not shoot video (am a photographer, not a videographer) and have never had an issue with STM. For the record I have an R8 and an R10 (mainly for wildlife/sports although I enjoy using the R8 for that as well). So my kit is 16mm 2.8 STM, 28mm 2.8 STM, 35mm 1.8 STM, EF 50mm 1.8 (w/adapter), 85mm 2.0 STM, 24-105 7.1 STM, 55-250mm STM (w/adapter) and, lastly, the renegade RF100-400 USM. I have simply not encountered focus issues with my STM lenses. (In case anyone is wondering I have that 55-250 STM (a throwback from my DSLR days) to match with the R10 when I need a lightweight combo for sports/wildlife etc. I am in my 70s, have had multiple[le hand surgeries from repetitive motion (playing music - not what you may be thinking! LOL). I actually started with the R7 but honestly it just proved too heavy with the 100-400 F8 USM so went with the R10. Am very happy with it and the R8. Sorry for this being so long but the pinot noir kicked in but every word and sentiment is truth!
@@thatpovguy thanks for the comment! Must have been a good bottle of pinot noir 😂👌 when it comes to the STM, for photos it’s perfectly fine, but if you’ve used USM lenses, it’s a whole lot worse. But with these lenses, you’re really comparing something very good to something even better. Always have to complain if there’s a better option available 😂
@@kaspergaram Well the pinot has worn off (only had a couple of glasses anyway.) I started serious photography around 1968 using systems ranging from 35mm SLR and rangefinder to medium format TLRs and SLRs to 4x5 view cameras and finally hitting digital (happy to be away from a darkroom!) I have used a lot of various camera focus mechanisms ranging from my hands (aka manual) to "9 point autofocus to Dual Pixel CMOS AF II. And corresponding lenses including my current suite of STMs and my sole USM. I have run the gamut and honestly I don't understand what kind of photography you do to say STM is "a whole lot worse" than USM. Can you not get proper exposure and sharpness with an STM lens? Can you not achieve correct focus with an STM lens? I know my RF100-400 USM performs wonderfully for wildlife with either the R10 or the R8. But the 55-250 STM does keep up on the R10 (and is delightfully light!) What exactly is "a whole lot worse" about these STM lenses? I am genuinely curious. Thanks! 👌
@@thatpovguy ah, i’m not talking about photography. For photos is perfectly fine. Never had any issues with STM while taking photos. For videos, it’s a different story. Once again, it is definitely not bad in videos either. It’s just not as fast, not as quiet, not as reliable as USM. It falls behind in every aspect you can think of, and if you need super clean audio from close to the lens, you will hear the STM motors but you won’t hear the USM motors.
@@kaspergaram Ahh - But I DID say in my initial post " I do not shoot video (am a photographer, not a videographer) and have never had an issue with STM." Have some pinot! :)
@@kaspergaramThanks for your prompt answer. I saw in your video samples that there were no vignetting, but I wanted to hear/confirmation from the author (not from my assumption). Even I have 85mm 1.2, I was sold on those video samples. This 35mm is amazing. It creates (litterally) visuals bigger than life. Cheers.
I bought the Canon R8 three weeks ago, I used to shoot with cameras like Sony a7III and Canon R6 until I decided to stop doing paid commission. I spent an year watching and reading reviews about the R8 to understand if could be the right camera for me. Since I moved back on be just a casual shooter I'm so very happy with my purchase, it covers all the type of photography i do ( pet, macro, portraits and some street). Beautiful Canon colors science, great AF and love the small body.
Instead of a dedicated camera sling, I'm using a small protective insert. It's basically the same as what's inside any camera bag, except that you can put it in any bag. They are cheap, effective, come in many sizes, and allow you to avoid this "photographer" look that all camera bags have. Very handy when you need to change bags to size up or down: just move the insert
I don't mind digital corrections. The lens is actually wider than 14mm and after corrected and "cropped", the final image is 14mm. I think what really matters is the final image quality, not how it is achieved.
Shame they messed up the focusing by using a cheap motor. In my opinion it was intentional. A good optics and fast AF motor would have made the lens too good versus the 1.2 version.
I'm thinking of getting this lens in prime day sale today... can't afford an L series. I want a wider lens and will hopefully get the chance to do some astrophotography on holiday if weather allows. but will also be good for general travelling.
Bought this and regret it... also it has to be mentioned that the amaran 60D on 40% has the same light output as the Ulanzi at 100% (I have both). Wattage is not light output! fan noise is terrible, if you can rather avoid it, the amaran is amazing. BTW Ulanzi has the 40W light (I also bought) and that's same powerful as the 60W one and less noisy, also it comes with built in battery which last an hour aaaaaand is cheaper. (still would avoid it also tho)
@@NKSCONTENT oh is the Amaran that much brighter? That’s wild! I know wattage isn’t equal to light output, but it’s usually pretty close. Also, 40% setting doesn’t necessarily mean 40% light output, sometimes it can be closer to 80% depending on the light output curve. For me this Ulanzi light has definitely been worth the price, worth every penny for sure. Just hate the fan noise. In my experience, all Ulanzi products have been very good. Should test the 40W too
@@kaspergaram yeah I was also very surprised, in this case 40% means literally 40% as I checked visually and made a linear curve on the 60D. I was shocked too.. yeah check the 40W, build quality is lower but bang for buck/versatility is much better.
@@jeremyosei many companies tell the brightness of the light output in Lux or Lumen at specific distances from the light, but that’s usually with the included reflector attached and that may also change the brightness, so even that isn’t 100% reliable, as you won’t use the reflector with a softbox. You could use a light meter yourself and measure the output without any attachments
OK, I can see that this model has limitations. Cameras at this price point will have some things that aren't perfect. Maybe a camera twice as much or more could satisfy your needs. BTW while talking about features, I have a R50. Can I hook up wireless mic system to it to capture all of the audio coming off a mixing board without having to go through an adapter?
@@dalemettee1147 yes, you are absolutely correct. I have an R6ii which is perfect for me right now. I am sorry but I am not sure. I would think if the R50 takes a mic (receiver) and the mixing board has a mic output to the transmitter, then it should work
@@MansoorAli-zo9dk yeah but you see, the whole point of this cliphamp method is that Premiere has a very limited selection of languages. For example, Finnish is not there
Thanks for the video. Can I keep one extra battery or keep a battery pack? I take agricultural videos , farmers , crops. Insects in the fields. Two batteries are enough for 2 hrs video I suppose. Or need a power bank ! Pl
I you are serious about filming long content the R8 is not the camera for you anyway. I have the R8 alongside my R62 and for general use(photography) I actually enjoy the R8 more than the R62. Size and weight matters. Even if the R62 is a "pro" body and the R8 is not. For video I mainly use the R62 since it has more buttons and its easier to customize. Never had any card issues.
Yup, very much true. I do still prefer a slightly larger camera body even for photography, but that's purely personal preference and I absolutely get it that people prefer a smaller body
@@kaspergaram I use it in dance floor every other weekend and it's sharp, fast and accurate and weighs nothing. There's no other 16mm like this in any brand .
@@samarianosans hmm, glad to hear! My experience hasn’t been quite as good. I still do use it a lot, but I don’t really like to use it. I guess different needs and preferences for each. It for sure is sharp and light though!
So nice shots from Budapest where I grew up and where I still live. 😍 I am an amateur and just ordered an RP with this lens, going for a general purpose camera that is a nice image quality upgrade over my old 7D which served me very well but it's way too bulky for what I want from a camera. 🙂
It’s perfect for budget top down game review shooter like me. Cheap, lightweight (using weak tripod with horizontal bar) and 16mm 2.8 (no fancy light) auto focus
Well, they don’t seem to be officially Canon approved so far for their AF, so that may cause some issues. Sigma is a very reputable and high-quality brand
@@kaspergaram those viltrox 23mm, 35mm, 56mm way better then what sigma has for those focal ranges. Viltrox was previously selling a 85mm RF af RF mount lens that was not authorized but worked perfectly.
