# Industry News: Sony teases a major alpha mirrorless announcement



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 21, 2021)

> It looks like Sony is getting ready to announce its first 8K mirrorless camera on January 26, 2021. Most people seem to be expecting an Alpha a9 III/flagship mirrorless camera.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jan 21, 2021)

I think this is the rumored camera from Sony that was going to launch in Q1. Not the most ideal time for a camera launch or any launch right now given that at least in my territory, all the usual on site events are cancelled until what looks like the summer or later. I'm hoping it has 4K60 along with color profiles and if so would be a much better match for my A7S3. After using the new UI redesign, going back to the old cluttered Sony menu system on my other Sony cameras is painful.


----------



## Mark3794 (Jan 21, 2021)

" that new camera will shoot 8K30p, have a 50mp full-frame sensor and will be priced around $5000USD." 

Are we talking about the R5?


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 21, 2021)

Canon is *******! Isn't it? 

_Edit, Jan. 27th: 
This post is somehow modified and displays something else than I wrote. 
If jokes are no longer allowed, if a word like "d_o_o_m_e_d" is censored and changed to "the best" I really wonder what is going on in this forum. _


----------



## StevenA (Jan 21, 2021)

Mark3794 said:


> " that new camera will shoot 8K30p, have a 50mp full-frame sensor and will be priced around $5000USD."
> 
> Are we talking about the R5?



No. The R5 was a disaster camera with a disaster rollout. Just ask most Sony fanboys AND most youtube creators. The Sony release will be hailed as revolutionary, even though the feature set will be R5-like for more $.


----------



## dwarven (Jan 21, 2021)

I wonder if it will still have the 2005 dvd player menu system.


----------



## arbitrage (Jan 21, 2021)

dwarven said:


> I wonder if it will still have the 2005 dvd player menu system.


Huh? The menu layout is practically identical on my A9II compared to my R5....ie colour coded headers with lists of things under them and multiple pages per color coded headers. Really the only difference is the Sony has way more pages...guess why...because it can do way more things and has way more customization. I'll take longer menus over less features any day.
But we've already seen the new Sony menu system in the A7SIII so obviously if this is a flagship camera in either 7 or 9 lineup it will have the new XR processor and the new menu.


----------



## xps (Jan 21, 2021)

But one thing is clear: Canon will have to get a bit bump on resolution, if they want not to be third... This body has 30MP more than my owned 1DXIII.
And, be sure, it is as fast as its predecessor . With two ultrafast cards and an ultralong batterylifetime.
I am no Sony fan, despite I own a lot of their equipment (and some of my grand-grand-children work for them), it is hard no neglect their produc-niches (200-600 light and handy with 61MP) and their better lens pricing.

I am willed to pay 7000bugs for an R1 with an superfast and evolved AF at, let us say, 40-45MP


----------



## xps (Jan 21, 2021)

arbitrage said:


> Huh? The menu layout is practically identical on my A9II compared to my R5....ie colour coded headers with lists of things under them and multiple pages per color coded headers. Really the only difference is the Sony has way more pages...guess why...because it can do way more things and has way more customization. I'll take longer menus over less features any day.
> But we've already seen the new Sony menu system in the A7SIII so obviously if this is a flagship camera in either 7 or 9 lineup it will have the new XR processor and the new menu.


Yes, indeed you are right. Ways better. 
But interestingly some customers would like to see an more rounded font on the sony. Also an more rounded body - that would be an optical benefit.


----------



## cayenne (Jan 21, 2021)

Will it have a flippy screen you can see while vlogging?



cayenne


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 21, 2021)

arbitrage said:


> Huh? The menu layout is practically identical on my A9II compared to my R5....ie colour coded headers with lists of things under them and multiple pages per color coded headers. Really the only difference is the Sony has way more pages...guess why...because it can do way more things and has way more customization. I'll take longer menus over less features any day.
> But we've already seen the new Sony menu system in the A7SIII so obviously if this is a flagship camera in either 7 or 9 lineup it will have the new XR processor and the new menu.



I have to disagree. I rented the A7s III just for a review on SD cards, and it has the newer interface. I was able to compare it to the A9II, a copy of which I owned as my main shooter for quite a while. It was a fascinating experience, going back from the R5, back to old Sony interface, and then the new Sony interface. I found both pretty painful. I'm sure it has a lot to do with me losing familiarity with the old Sony interface over the past half year. But I'll say that grabbing a Panasonic S1R for this same project or when I first picked up my new R5 took no adjustment at all. Heck I rented a Nikon Z7 II for the same project, and it was my very first experience using a Nikon menu, and it was much easier than the Sony.

I say all this in the context of having a great love of the Sony cameras. They're fantastic in almost all ways.

The newer Sony interface is improved primarily because the increased resolution of the screen allows for another layer of organization. That was half the battle. The other half (putting things in random places with random names and avoiding grouping things that are related to each other) is almost as much a problem now.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jan 21, 2021)

It is interesting how different the interpretation of what a 'flagship' camera is depending on which company builds it. I cant see Canon doing a high mp camera for the R1.


----------



## bbasiaga (Jan 21, 2021)

xps said:


> But one thing is clear: Canon will have to get a bit bump on resolution, if they want not to be third... This body has 30MP more than my owned 1DXIII.
> And, be sure, it is as fast as its predecessor . With two ultrafast cards and an ultralong batterylifetime.
> I am no Sony fan, despite I own a lot of their equipment (and some of my grand-grand-children work for them), it is hard no neglect their produc-niches (200-600 light and handy with 61MP) and their better lens pricing.
> 
> I am willed to pay 7000bugs for an R1 with an superfast and evolved AF at, let us say, 40-45MP


You bring up a good point - this could be a mistake by Sony. Historically, as it has been reported anyway, the PJ/sports crowd that buys these cameras in bulk have asked for a lower MP count, in order to limit bandwidth usage at events or via cellular hot spotting where they need to transmit images back to home base in near real time. When hundreds of folks are doing this at the same time, it makes for a bogged down network. Particularly when the vast majority of images taken are shared only digitally the extra MP don't mean much. 

perhaps its really and R5 competitor in a pro body with the extra space used to help with heat dissipation. Or perhaps they'll have a second body with a more desirable mp count for the usual pro body audience. Or perhaps they just don't quite know the pro body game as well as Canon and Nikon, as they haven't fully played in that space before (not that they didn't have other capable cameras). 

Its fun to speculate. 

-Brian


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jan 21, 2021)

8K requires less than 50Mp, so will 8K be slightly cropped in this camera?


----------



## Kane Clements (Jan 21, 2021)

Sony are timing their announcement of this as a spoiler. Because the next day Fuji is introducing their new 100 MP Medium Format beast. In a body lighter than their 50 MP medium format cameras . IBIS, DSLR type body, PSAM dial etc etc. 

All for the same money as the Sony. 

I gather most Fuji 100 MP purchaser are coming from FF users from other brands.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Jan 21, 2021)

Quarkcharmed said:


> 8K requires less than 50Mp, so will 8K be slightly cropped in this camera?



More than slightly less, DCI 8K requires 42MP, UHD 8K requires 39MP. Sony doesn't do DCI formats so it would be UHD 8K and that would be mean more than a slight crop 1.13x crop. Of course we don't know the actual reasolution but given they have a very high performance stacked 48.9MP sensor the IMX313 I would assume that's the logical choice unless they are going to use a new undisclosed sensor.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jan 22, 2021)

Good to see Sony might start takin their pro bodies seriously. If it is indeed a proper gripped body, perhaps they feel threatened by the upcoming Z9 and R1. But I fear that the tiny mount is going to bit them when Canon and Nik will be rolling f/1.2 and better primes that are about as optically perfect as you can get.


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Jan 22, 2021)

4k evf!? overkill


----------



## DBounce (Jan 22, 2021)

Philip bloom is suggesting it might be a new 100MP 8K shooting Medium format camera. Perhaps a true Medium Format sized sensor... The first of a new series of Alpha cameras. The first of the new Alpha One series. All I can say is if this is true is holy $h!t!!!


----------



## masterpix (Jan 22, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


I still think that an OVF has more pixels than EVF (and has no lag), and that a stills camera should focus on stills rather than video.


----------



## djack41 (Jan 22, 2021)

DBounce said:


> Philip bloom is suggesting it might be a new 100MP 8K shooting Medium format camera. Perhaps a true Medium Format sized sensor... The first of a new series of Alpha cameras. The first of the new Alpha One series. All I can say is if this is true is holy $h!t!!!


If he is correct about medium format, the new Sony will require a new, larger mount and all new lenses. Sony's mount is much smaller than the R or Z.


----------



## masterpix (Jan 22, 2021)

arbitrage said:


> Huh? The menu layout is practically identical on my A9II compared to my R5....ie colour coded headers with lists of things under them and multiple pages per color coded headers. Really the only difference is the Sony has way more pages...guess why...because it can do way more things and has way more customization. I'll take longer menus over less features any day.
> But we've already seen the new Sony menu system in the A7SIII so obviously if this is a flagship camera in either 7 or 9 lineup it will have the new XR processor and the new menu.


All in all, how many features you use in your everyday photography? There is aparture, ISO, shutter speed, white balance (when shooting RAW you usualy do that with lightroom, photoshop or even with the basic editing program that comes with the camera), differnt focus points/ tracking and series shooting. What else do you really need? Stacking features you won't even use (reading those 1000 pages manuals and remember every bizzar option) is a..


----------



## masterpix (Jan 22, 2021)

xps said:


> But one thing is clear: Canon will have to get a bit bump on resolution, if they want not to be third... This body has 30MP more than my owned 1DXIII.
> And, be sure, it is as fast as its predecessor . With two ultrafast cards and an ultralong batterylifetime.
> I am no Sony fan, despite I own a lot of their equipment (and some of my grand-grand-children work for them), it is hard no neglect their produc-niches (200-600 light and handy with 61MP) and their better lens pricing.
> 
> I am willed to pay 7000bugs for an R1 with an superfast and evolved AF at, let us say, 40-45MP


The 1Dx and the R1 are aiming to people for whom, huge MP sensor is not the thign they need or want. As today, 20-30MP image suit their professional needs (I am sure both Canon, Nikon and everyone else did their market research and came to similar conclusion), for those photographers, they need something that can shoot in every light condition, have a very strong body and can shoot up to 100+ images in a burst. Those cameras are made to capture action, and in action, the number of pixels matters alot less. If you need one where HUGE MP is needed, than take the R5s that will have those (rumored) 100MP sensors. But then you "pay" in FPS, dynamic range etc. Over all, the camera should suit the need you buy it for, action is one things, journalism is one thing, fashion is another, architecture is another and so on. For each type the need there is a body that suits it best.


----------



## hachu21 (Jan 22, 2021)

masterpix said:


> The 1Dx and the R1 are aiming to people for whom, huge MP sensor is not the thign they need or want. As today, 20-30MP image suit their professional needs (I am sure both Canon, Nikon and everyone else did their market research and came to similar conclusion), for those photographers, they need something that can shoot in every light condition, have a very strong body and can shoot up to 100+ images in a burst. Those cameras are made to capture action, and in action, the number of pixels matters alot less. If you need one where HUGE MP is needed, than take the R5s that will have those (rumored) 100MP sensors. But then you "pay" in FPS, dynamic range etc. Over all, the camera should suit the need you buy it for, action is one things, journalism is one thing, fashion is another, architecture is another and so on. For each type the need there is a body that suits it best.


I think it's a wrong or old way of thinking. Until recently, i you wanted a real pro, action oriented camera, you had to stay with a "small" MP count. Not because you don't needed them, but because the tech wasn't there (5Dsr vs 1dxII or 5DIV vs 1dxIII).
But this has changed, and now, tech can give you higher speed AND the high resolution. (A9II, R5...)
I'm pretty sure a lot of action photogs will welcome high MP (given speed is still there).
They often use huge long lenses. They will be happy with the extra reach given by the new crop possibilities.
They don't need the MP or want ultra fast picture sharing? Just set the camera to a lower mp count.... The oversampled pictures is just icing on the cake.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jan 22, 2021)

hachu21 said:


> I think it's a wrong or old way of thinking. Until recently, i you wanted a real pro, action oriented camera, you had to stay with a "small" MP count. Not because you don't needed them, but because the tech wasn't there (5Dsr vs 1dxII or 5DIV vs 1dxIII).
> But this has changed, and now, tech can give you higher speed AND the high resolution. (A9II, R5...)
> I'm pretty sure a lot of action photogs will welcome high MP (given speed is still there).
> They often use huge long lenses. They will be happy with the extra reach given by the new crop possibilities.
> They don't need the MP or want ultra fast picture sharing? Just set the camera to a lower mp count.... The oversampled pictures is just icing on the cake.



Some potential R1/A9iii/Z9 users would likely want a higher MP body ([email protected]). The issue there comes when this camera is used in a stadium, you kinda need to upgrade to 2.5 Gbps ethernet to get the picture to the editor in the same time and now that editor needs more storage and a faster computer. It seems that it is this workflow that kills it. Or someone taking a press shot in some wart torn region and they need to get that to the BBC over a 2G network. For all other potential buyers.. we kinda shove the CF Express card into a relatively modern machine at the end of the work day.


----------



## hachu21 (Jan 22, 2021)

In this case, set your 45 mp camera to half the pixel count in jpeg and you're good to go! 
It's not an issue. 
Trying to crop 20mp 1dxIII pics, in the other hand....


----------



## degos (Jan 22, 2021)

bbasiaga said:


> Historically, as it has been reported anyway, the PJ/sports crowd that buys these cameras in bulk have asked for a lower MP count, in order to limit bandwidth usage at events or via cellular hot spotting where they need to transmit images back to home base in near real time.




Which is pretty much nonsense when it's the JPEGs they transmit, not the raw.

The reason so many pro shooters put up with mediocre MP in their daily cameras is ... because the OEMs don't offer a workhorse camera with higher MP. That's it.

Back when the 1Ds3 came out it was in high demand because it offered the highest MP of any Canon DSLR at the time. That was the last workhorse camera that was also the MP leader and yet it still sold like hotcakes despite its price.


----------



## masterpix (Jan 22, 2021)

hachu21 said:


> I think it's a wrong or old way of thinking. Until recently, i you wanted a real pro, action oriented camera, you had to stay with a "small" MP count. Not because you don't needed them, but because the tech wasn't there (5Dsr vs 1dxII or 5DIV vs 1dxIII).
> But this has changed, and now, tech can give you higher speed AND the high resolution. (A9II, R5...)
> I'm pretty sure a lot of action photogs will welcome high MP (given speed is still there).
> They often use huge long lenses. They will be happy with the extra reach given by the new crop possibilities.
> They don't need the MP or want ultra fast picture sharing? Just set the camera to a lower mp count.... The oversampled pictures is just icing on the cake.



It will always be a compromise. The amount of light, whatever you do, it limted. And that means that if you increase the size of the sensor, you have smller pixel size on the sensor, lower dynamic range, sensitivity, on teh other hand you also have higher amount of data to transfer to the card and so on, so eventyally you are limted buy a "limit". Technology allows to streach the upper limit, but it will always be there, and unfortunately you can't "have it all" (see the differnces between the 5D and the 5Ds as an example). The first 1D was.. 4MP? up to ISO 1600? technology now allowas it to be 20MP ISP up to 819200... the upper limit is streeached up, but eventually it is there, the sky is not the limit. 

In metaphore, you can't have a family off-road furmula 1 car. 

By the way, it goes back to the question "what is a PRO".. A PRO can be action, nature, social, artist, atchitecture, each needs diffferent camera, compromise on what the need more, what they can sacrifice in order to get what they want.


----------



## padam (Jan 22, 2021)

I mean, it's not like they won't still have the A9II for people who don't want as many megapixels.

This model is way better for video, really an all-in camera, but it comes with a substantial extra cost as well.


----------



## Del Paso (Jan 22, 2021)

The EVF (9,94 million dots) could be a game changer for me (in a Canon, of course!), it could even outperform, thanks to the loupe function, my beloved OVF...
Hoping for the EOS Rs to have a similar EVF. I've started saving.


----------



## Del Paso (Jan 22, 2021)

masterpix said:


> I still think that an OVF has more pixels than EVF (and has no lag), and that a stills camera should focus on stills rather than video.


Absolutely true, but the EVF offers a viewfinder "intergrated" loupe, very useful for macro, and usable in bright sunlight, unlike the rear screen.
PS: I too, prefer OVFs...


----------



## hachu21 (Jan 22, 2021)

masterpix said:


> It will always be a compromise. The amount of light, whatever you do, it limted. And that means that if you increase the size of the sensor, you have smller pixel size on the sensor, lower dynamic range, sensitivity, on teh other hand you also have higher amount of data to transfer to the card and so on, so eventyally you are limted buy a "limit". Technology allows to streach the upper limit, but it will always be there, and unfortunately you can't "have it all" (see the differnces between the 5D and the 5Ds as an example). The first 1D was.. 4MP? up to ISO 1600? technology now allowas it to be 20MP ISP up to 819200... the upper limit is streeached up, but eventually it is there, the sky is not the limit.
> 
> In metaphore, you can't have a family off-road furmula 1 car.
> 
> By the way, it goes back to the question "what is a PRO".. A PRO can be action, nature, social, artist, atchitecture, each needs diffferent camera, compromise on what the need more, what they can sacrifice in order to get what they want.


I totally get that, but the need of photog are also "limited". I mean, there always a moment where you reach the area of the diminishing returns. 
A 10fps body vs a 4 fps body is a huge difference in action photography. Once you reach 20 or 30 fps... Is there still need for improvement? You'll always find some wanting more, but they will be niche applications.
Same can be said for MP, even if we didn't reach the area yet (imho). Same for dynamic range, etc...
It means, one day, most photog won't have to compromise between speed, resolution or dynamic range.
It's already the case for some markets... Look at the M6 mkII : more pixels and speed than a casual user will (really) need.
And you'll soon find those bodies used for less than 500$.


----------



## Joules (Jan 22, 2021)

masterpix said:


> It will always be a compromise. The amount of light, whatever you do, it limted. And that means that if you increase the size of the sensor, you have smller pixel size on the sensor, lower dynamic range, sensitivity, on teh other hand you also have higher amount of data to transfer to the card and so on, so eventyally you are limted buy a "limit".


I can't quite follow you there. There is a limit to how little noise you can have in an image, because light itself is a noisy signal and so even a technologically perfect sensor would capture noisy images.

There are also certainly limits on how small you can manufacture pixels, especially economically. 

But you also seem to suggest that there is a practical trade off between resolution and dynamic range / low light quality / 'sensitivity'. If you compare the R6 and R5 for example, you'll see that's not really a factor in modern sensors.


----------



## hachu21 (Jan 22, 2021)

(Deleted)


----------



## hachu21 (Jan 22, 2021)

Lucas Tingley said:


> 4k evf!? overkill


Beware ok marketing terms : 9,44M DOTS = 3,14M Pixels (around 2048x1536 if it,s 4:3 ratio).
Still a great reso for an evf


----------



## DBounce (Jan 22, 2021)

djack41 said:


> If he is correct about medium format, the new Sony will require a new, larger mount and all new lenses. Sony's mount is much smaller than the R or Z.


Will it? I’m not so sure. What if it’s using a curved sensor? Would different lenses still be required?


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jan 22, 2021)

masterpix said:


> All in all, how many features you use in your everyday photography? There is aparture, ISO, shutter speed, white balance (when shooting RAW you usualy do that with lightroom, photoshop or even with the basic editing program that comes with the camera), differnt focus points/ tracking and series shooting. What else do you really need? Stacking features you won't even use (reading those 1000 pages manuals and remember every bizzar option) is a..



For everyday photography not so much, but not all of us are stills-only shooters. Many of us are hybrid shooters. I have different profiles setup for stills vs video for starters. I can't exactly "photoshop" my video and I'm not going to always have the time and budget for a raw workflow, so I understand and optimize the settings for each use case. Just because an option doesn't apply to you doesn't make it "bizarre." That being said, once it is setup I always prefer to load it on a dial setting or recallable memory bank. Fumbling with menu settings on a shoot greatly increases the chance of screwing up said shoot...


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jan 22, 2021)

Del Paso said:


> Absolutely true, but the EVF offers a viewfinder "intergrated" loupe, very useful for macro, and usable in bright sunlight, unlike the rear screen.
> PS: I too, prefer OVFs...



As time moves on and younger photogs come onto the scene replacing those retiring from the industry, they probably don't have any exposure to OVFs anymore. Personally, I was quite attached to my OVF and really struggled moving from OVFs to my first EVF, but that was during the m43 days when shutter lag was high and the EVFs ate batteries for lunch while being laggy and pixelated. I think it is a different experience today, and most people jumping into the business for the first time won't necessarily choose an OVF/SLR as their first choice anymore. I haven't touch an OVF camera in many years.

I know the argument for the visual experience will always be significantly different, but the power argument isn't quite the same anymore. If you look at the A7S3, it draws 4.3w in stills and 7.6w in movie. A Zendure X6 usb-c pd bank is about 99Wh so it would run the camera for 23hours in stills and 13hours in movie mode. The battery in the camera will still be at 100% at that point and you'll get another few hours in stills or video after that. 

It probably still won't be enough if you are on a long expedition away from the ability to recharge from mains, but I can't image that use case being that common for most.


----------



## padam (Jan 22, 2021)

Del Paso said:


> The EVF (9,94 million dots) could be a game changer for me (in a Canon, of course!), it could even outperform, thanks to the loupe function, my beloved OVF...
> Hoping for the EOS Rs to have a similar EVF. I've started saving.


I reckon it will have the same exact EVF as an R5.
The live feed may not be as sharp as the full resolution of the sensor is not being fed to the EVF in preview mode, so a 9.94M dot EVF provides no benefit, only in playback mode (where checking critical focus at 100% magnification is just a click away anyway).


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 22, 2021)

Codebunny said:


> Good to see Sony might start takin their pro bodies seriously. If it is indeed a proper gripped body, perhaps they feel threatened by the upcoming Z9 and R1. But I fear that the tiny mount is going to bit them when Canon and Nik will be rolling f/1.2 and better primes that are about as optically perfect as you can get.



MOUNT SIZE:
Sony may not be producing much in the way light-drinking lenses like the f/1.2s, but the best lens on Sony right now is the Sigma 35mm f/1.2. I shoot an R5 now, but I'd give two of my RF primes for that one Sigma. Yeah, I think it's more difficult to make that sort of thing with the e-mount, but it's certainly not impossible. If that system had a 35mm (which it does), a 50mm and an 85mm f/1.2, then I think the issue is a bit mute. 

I see the fact that Sigma and Tamron actually make lenses for Sony to be a bigger deal than the mount orifice radius being a quarter a centimeter shorter. 

Not to take anything away from Canon's amazing lens development spree. But we have to remember that they were the ones catching up.

GRIP:
My hope is that they don't permanently attach the grip. There is no need, provided they make the interface weatherproof (which has been an issue for Sony). It's tiresome. It would just be serving an irrational cultural perceived need. 

RESOLUTION:
On my other screen right now is a picture of a bobcat kitten and mom that I'm editing for a magazine - and from which I'm procrastinating. The 8.5x11 image - originally shot landscape - is cropped to almost 1:1 from a 45mp sensor. If I'd shot this on a 1DX I, II or III, I wouldn't be doing this at all, as it wouldn't be usable for the purpose. Back in the day, when desired FPS was limited by file sizes above 12 megapixels, it made sense to limit the resolution. If they do it now to satisfy some strange "pro photographer" cultural aversion, I will be very annoyed. I'm not likely to jump back to Sony, but I'm more likely to get the R1 I want if Sony doesn't nerf the mp.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jan 22, 2021)

[email protected] said:


> MOUNT SIZE:
> Sony may not be producing much in the way light-drinking lenses like the f/1.2s, but the best lens on Sony right now is the Sigma 35mm f/1.2. I shoot an R5 now, but I'd give two of my RF primes for that one Sigma. Yeah, I think it's more difficult to make that sort of thing with the e-mount, but it's certainly not impossible. If that system had a 35mm (which it does), a 50mm and an 85mm f/1.2, then I think the issue is a bit mute.



Just on the Sigma 35mm f/1.2, the Sony GM 35mm f/1.4 is sharper. There are Canon EF f/1.2 lenses, but these are rather rubbish on the sharpness and Canon had to make the newest EF 85mm f/1.4. Like the Nikon S f/1.8 lenses are all sharp, the Z 50 f/1.2 is sharp wide open, the RF 50 and 85's f/1.2's are all sharp and near optically perfect. I do think Sony can still make f/1.2 lenses, but I think they'll always have a compromise of some sort on the Sony side.


----------



## Andy Westwood (Jan 22, 2021)

Sony is doing a great job of keeping Canon on it's toes, good news for us Canon gear lovers as Sony force Canon to keep up with the very latest modern tech.

I don't think Canon would have been as quick to move forward with the R system if Sony were not taking up so much of the market.


----------



## jam05 (Jan 22, 2021)

StevenA said:


> No. The R5 was a disaster camera with a disaster rollout. Just ask most Sony fanboys AND most youtube creators. The Sony release will be hailed as revolutionary, even though the feature set will be R5-like for more $.


And comming last to the dance with no better 8k than my Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra


----------



## 12Broncos (Jan 22, 2021)

I'm looking for an honest answer here. I know part of the answer will be subjective, but I want to see if it's just me. I think the answer is Nikon, but I'm looking for new perspectives. Which camera produces better pictures straight out of the camera Sony or Nikon?


----------



## Lucas Tingley (Jan 22, 2021)

hachu21 said:


> Beware ok marketing terms : 9,44M DOTS = 3,14M Pixels (around 2048x1536 if it,s 4:3 ratio).
> Still a great reso for an evf


 2k exacly then ?


----------



## vignes (Jan 22, 2021)

Mark3794 said:


> " that new camera will shoot 8K30p, have a 50mp full-frame sensor and will be priced around $5000USD."
> 
> Are we talking about the R5?


No, it mentioned no overheating.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jan 22, 2021)

Lucas Tingley said:


> 2k exacly then ?



It would be 1536 so close to 1440. We only start measuring it the other way with 4k and 8k.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 23, 2021)

bbasiaga said:


> You bring up a good point - this could be a mistake by Sony. Historically, as it has been reported anyway, the PJ/sports crowd that buys these cameras in bulk have asked for a lower MP count, in order to limit bandwidth usage at events or via cellular hot spotting where they need to transmit images back to home base in near real time. When hundreds of folks are doing this at the same time, it makes for a bogged down network. Particularly when the vast majority of images taken are shared only digitally the extra MP don't mean much.
> 
> perhaps its really and R5 competitor in a pro body with the extra space used to help with heat dissipation. Or perhaps they'll have a second body with a more desirable mp count for the usual pro body audience. Or perhaps they just don't quite know the pro body game as well as Canon and Nikon, as they haven't fully played in that space before (not that they didn't have other capable cameras).
> 
> ...


Yes this came up when the 1DXIII that agency's were asked what they wanted and they wanted 20MP. I'd love to know roughly in the case of 1DXIII what % of total sales are agencies. It seems a very limiting limit. To me the 1DXIII processors are so fast it could have handled 30MP no problem. I'd have thought it would be better to have a camera that's 30MP but that you could have a format that sends files 20MP size without too much loss of detail. If you start with a 20MP sensor you are reducing your options immediately. I own a 1DXIII and after coming from a 5DSR and 5DIV you really notice this loss of MP. I've always thought 30MP would have been a better sweet point. The 1DXIII is a fine camera but it would have been a better birding camera if it had those 10 extra MP's.
It will be interesting what the Sony Camera brings. I think an R1 will be far more expensive.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 23, 2021)

Hector1970 said:


> Yes this came up when the 1DXIII that agency's were asked what they wanted and they wanted 20MP. I'd love to know roughly in the case of 1DXIII what % of total sales are agencies. It seems a very limiting limit. To me the 1DXIII processors are so fast it could have handled 30MP no problem. I'd have thought it would be better to have a camera that's 30MP but that you could have a format that sends files 20MP size without too much loss of detail. If you start with a 20MP sensor you are reducing your options immediately. I own a 1DXIII and after coming from a 5DSR and 5DIV you really notice this loss of MP. I've always thought 30MP would have been a better sweet point. The 1DXIII is a fine camera but it would have been a better birding camera if it had those 10 extra MP's.
> It will be interesting what the Sony Camera brings. I think an R1 will be far more expensive.


I know three 1DX III owners, as far as I know none of them have ever taken a picture of a bird.


----------



## HarryFilm (Jan 23, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> I know three 1DX III owners, as far as I know none of them have ever taken a picture of a bird.



------

"....We've got more than a few of the 1Dx3's (over 60 of the them!) and while the birds we take high speed flash photos of tend to be rather dead as part of frozen bird engine ingest and hull impact tests, they are still birds......"

-

The 1Dx3 is actually quite an excellent wildlife/action cam. I've taken one out to get images of hummingbirds and the odd eagle looking for salmon. I do must admit Canon sure has got it's colours correct MUCH BETTER than the Sony A92! 

Using ISO-1600 at 1/400th of a second shutter speed (You still want a BIT of motion blur so leave it at 1/400th of a second and NOT 1/1000th+ of a second!), you get some VERY NICE photos at 20 megapixels that have little noise and great colours. You can print the 1Dx3's images as large as 13x19 inches at 2400 dpi with error diffusion ON and STILL have great looking imagery suitable for sellable art-house prints.

As a DSLR, you can force the Canon 1Dx3 to keep its mirror UP in high speed mode, which makes it a VERY VERY CAPABLE 20 fps Burst Rate Mirrorless camera! When the R1 goes on sale, I can see that in about two years afterwards that prices on used 1dx3's will be such that I personally think it would be a VERY GOOD IDEA to pick one up on the used market for about $2200-to-3500 depending on shutter count! Just get Canon to replace the mirror assembly for about $500 as soon as you buy it along with some NEW batteries and you will have yourself a PRO-level mirrorless weather-resistant workhorse camera that will last you a full 5 to 10 years if you use Mirror-Up mode for the 20 fps burst rate modes!

AND if you don't already have Canon L-series glass, then I ALSO do suggest you buy on the used market, the SIGMA Art Series lenses such as the 14mm, the 20mm, the 24mm, the 28mm, the 35mm f/1.2 which is GREAT for Nocto/Astro-photography, the 50mm f/1.4, the 70mm f/2.8 MACRO, the 85 mm f/1.4, the 135mm f/1.8 and as your primary sports/action/wildlife zoom lens, the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens and the Sigma 2x Extender to turn it into a 1200mm zoom lens and your primes into double the focal length! The Sigma lenses are VERY VERY SHARP and are a LOT cheaper (30% or more!) than the Canon L-series lenses on the used market! 

For some artistic specialty lenses, I would also suggest the the Canon Tilt-Shift lens TS-E 90mm f/2.8L Macro and the Sigma 8mm f/3.5 EX DG Circular Canon EF for your fish-eye imagery and the Lomography Petzval 85mm for your swirly art-house looking outdoor portraiture bokeh!

For your night shots and super-surround-view panoramas, I also suggest getting a high-quality slider for super smooth camera movement such as a gently-used iFootage Carbon Fiber Shark Slider. That one offers the best bang-for-the-buck in terms of super-smooth camera movement and outdoor location carry-ability!

Bought on the used market, you can save BIG BUCKS with the above lenses and when those lenses are mated to a used 1Dx3, you will be SAILING into luxury sports/action/wildlife/portraiture photography heaven!

V


----------



## slclick (Jan 23, 2021)

Memory Cards are *******


----------



## slclick (Jan 23, 2021)

StevenA said:


> No. The R5 was a disaster camera with a disaster rollout. Just ask most Sony fanboys AND most youtube creators. The Sony release will be hailed as revolutionary, even though the feature set will be R5-like for more $.


Have you seen DPR lately? It's a Canon love fest. Well, until this new launch.


----------



## slclick (Jan 23, 2021)

12Broncos said:


> I'm looking for an honest answer here. I know part of the answer will be subjective, but I want to see if it's just me. I think the answer is Nikon, but I'm looking for new perspectives. Which camera produces better pictures straight out of the camera Sony or Nikon?


If it's about skintones, Sony color science always loses. So many variables affect your question.


----------



## BirdDudeJosh (Jan 23, 2021)

HarryFilm said:


> ------
> 
> "....We've got more than a few of the 1Dx3's (over 60 of the them!) and while the birds we take high speed flash photos of tend to be rather dead as part of frozen bird engine ingest and hull impact tests, they are still birds......"
> 
> ...


You know most of this is BS? You can’t use TC’s on any of the Sigma lenses you mentioned other than the 150-600! Shooting BIF at 20 FPS with mirror locked up viewing the rear display holding the camera in front of your face does not make it a mirrorless camera and sounds awful. Buying a less sharp Sigma lens like the 150-600 to go along with the lowest resolution option possible for wildlife is not the way to go and no one is buying this garbage. Why do you think so many wildlife and specifically bird shooters are going with the R5? The answer is because it is better tool and 20MP isn’t enough. A few years from now shooting a camera for wildlife without animal eye AF and subject detection is not going to be sailing in luxury it’ll be rowing up a waterfall using a spoon as a paddle.


----------



## BirdDudeJosh (Jan 23, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> I know three 1DX III owners, as far as I know none of them have ever taken a picture of a bird.


I know 2 people with 1dX3s that shoot mostly birds. One of those 1dX3s is collecting dust cause the R5 is so good. I’m glad Canon and Sony understand the value of the wildlife shooters that you obviously don’t get. There must be a reason Sony and then can came out with animal eye AF. There are plenty of enthusiasts who will buy the last’s gear and spend many many thousands of dollars a year if it serves the purpose and they aren’t making money with it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 23, 2021)

BirdDudeJosh said:


> I know 2 people with 1dX3s that shoot mostly birds. One of those 1dX3s is collecting dust cause the R5 is so good. I’m glad Canon and Sony understand the value of the wildlife shooters that you obviously don’t get. There must be a reason Sony and then can came out with animal eye AF. There are plenty of enthusiasts who will buy the last’s gear and spend many many thousands of dollars a year if it serves the purpose and they aren’t making money with it.


Clearly you don’t get me.

My point wasn’t that there aren’t a lot of people who take pictures of birds, it was simply the 1DX III isn’t the best camera for that application, even amongst the ones Canon make.


----------



## BirdDudeJosh (Jan 23, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Clearly you don’t get me.
> 
> My point wasn’t that there aren’t a lot of people who take pictures of birds, it was simply the 1DX III isn’t the best camera for that application, even amongst the ones Canon make.


My bad


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 23, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> I know three 1DX III owners, as far as I know none of them have ever taken a picture of a bird.


They don’t know what they are missing. With its frame rate and tracking it is a good camera for birding but more MP would have made it more attractive to that segment. Birds and animals are quite a popular use for high end cameras and they really push the cameras to the limit. You’d probably be better off investing in an R5 for birding.


----------



## BeenThere (Jan 23, 2021)

DBounce said:


> Will it? I’m not so sure. What if it’s using a curved sensor? Would different lenses still be required?


Different lenses would be required for a curved sensor camera. Otherwise the focus plane would not be on the sensor.


----------



## HarryFilm (Jan 23, 2021)

BirdDudeJosh said:


> You know most of this is BS? You can’t use TC’s on any of the Sigma lenses you mentioned other than the 150-600! Shooting BIF at 20 FPS with mirror locked up viewing the rear display holding the camera in front of your face does not make it a mirrorless camera and sounds awful. Buying a less sharp Sigma lens like the 150-600 to go along with the lowest resolution option possible for wildlife is not the way to go and no one is buying this garbage. Why do you think so many wildlife and specifically bird shooters are going with the R5? The answer is because it is better tool and 20MP isn’t enough. A few years from now shooting a camera for wildlife without animal eye AF and subject detection is not going to be sailing in luxury it’ll be rowing up a waterfall using a spoon as a paddle.



---

I've used extenders on the SIGMA primes quite often when in a pinch. I did have our in-house engineers make a slight mount modification which is not a great solution on the primes BUT its workable to turn the 135 into a semi-equivalent of a 270mm! Just don't open your iris to full aperture -- simply stop down and up your ISO instead so vignetting is not an issue!

I should also note that I REALLY REALLY REALLY LIKE the 150 to 600mm Sports Zoom as it is the best-bang-for-the-buck zoom lens out there! See Jared Polin's review of the lower end "Contemporary" version of the Sports Zoom:






And since the 1Dx, 1Dx2 and 1Dx3 are actually very very very good with auto-focus, I have had no issues AT ALL with following wildlife (i.e. Eagles or humming birds) when I am shooting 1/400ths of a second shutter speed at ISO-1600 on fairly cloudy days. It's all about ANTICIPATING your subject matter on live-view modes and taking into account the one to 3 frames of lag you normally get on a 1dx3 live-view mode, so with 25+ years of experience of USUALLY all-manual shooting on Cinema, ENG and Still Photo camera gear, I think I've got that down pat! Since I also use a modded Zacuto viewfinder from the old 5D3 on the back of the 1Dx3 camera, YES it DOES make it a mirrorless-like camera. You ANTICIPATE your framing and let your subject come into then frame and then do a burst and at least 3 to 6 of your shots will be usable for mounting at 8x10 or 13x19!

For processing, I am doing my basic luminance band enhancements (shadows, midtones and highlights) plus some saturation addition and then a final UnSharp Mask so I would say my images are decent enough for wall mount.

Here is one older well-processed panorama that used BOTH a Sony xPeria Smartphone and a 1Dx2 -- which side is which?

(Note: On this day I had multiple smartphones, cameras for gear testing purposes so I have already shown this photo on this site multiple times BUT this specific version is taken as a composite of two different cameras so it is DIFFERENT than the ones shown earlier!)

The second photo is ALSO a processed image indicating that MULTIPLE cameras CAN be reasonably made to look at a decent enough quality level for display at whatever resolution you want. This version is the 2K resolution but normally it is a full 4K and 8K resolution image used for video testing purposes.

Sooooooo, don't say you cannot use extenders on primes and don't say you cannot use smartphones OR 1Dx-series cameras to take decent photos!


V


----------



## DBounce (Jan 23, 2021)

Mark3794 said:


> " that new camera will shoot 8K30p, have a 50mp full-frame sensor and will be priced around $5000USD."
> 
> Are we talking about the R5?


No, because they specifically noted that it WILL NOT OVERHEAT.


----------



## dflt (Jan 24, 2021)

In the not too distant future: Canonrumors gets renamed to MirrorRumors or DSLRumors etc. Yuck.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jan 24, 2021)

12Broncos said:


> I'm looking for an honest answer here. I know part of the answer will be subjective, but I want to see if it's just me. I think the answer is Nikon, but I'm looking for new perspectives. Which camera produces better pictures straight out of the camera Sony or Nikon?


As a RAW image? None of them. They have to be edited. As a Jpeg? It is subjective. Reality is they all produce amazing images so make your decision based on other more important factors like ergonomics. Of course that is my personal opinion only.


----------



## 12Broncos (Jan 24, 2021)

No longer interested in the Sony announcement.


----------



## 12Broncos (Jan 24, 2021)

Aussie shooter said:


> As a RAW image? None of them. They have to be edited. As a Jpeg? It is subjective. Reality is they all produce amazing images so make your decision based on other more important factors like ergonomics. Of course that is my personal opinion only.





12Broncos said:


> No longer interested in the Sony announcement.


Got wind that the announcement is for an RX camera. If that is the case, I'll pass. I hope it's wrong,


----------



## bbasiaga (Jan 25, 2021)

Hector1970 said:


> Yes this came up when the 1DXIII that agency's were asked what they wanted and they wanted 20MP. I'd love to know roughly in the case of 1DXIII what % of total sales are agencies. It seems a very limiting limit. To me the 1DXIII processors are so fast it could have handled 30MP no problem. I'd have thought it would be better to have a camera that's 30MP but that you could have a format that sends files 20MP size without too much loss of detail. If you start with a 20MP sensor you are reducing your options immediately. I own a 1DXIII and after coming from a 5DSR and 5DIV you really notice this loss of MP. I've always thought 30MP would have been a better sweet point. The 1DXIII is a fine camera but it would have been a better birding camera if it had those 10 extra MP's.
> It will be interesting what the Sony Camera brings. I think an R1 will be far more expensive.



I think many of those agencies or high level sports guys just aren't participating in the MP game. Because of their end use - a thumbnail or picture on an online article or a magazine sized spread. Even a two pager doesn't require more than 20MP. If they're doing an art gallery photo shoot and really plan to print big, its probably a controlled event and they'll use a different body. The 'limit' of 20mp seems to be a sentiment held by enthusiasts who make up the majority of these forums - we want one camera to do it all but don't have tons of money. That's why we're mad the R5 is so expensive! lol. But even then, the biggest print I have is 36x24 which looks great at 23mp from my 5DIII, and I have some 24x16s, at least one of which was taken with the 10mp 40d and is virtually indistinguishable from the ones next to it taken in later years with higher MP bodies. The 'limit' is sometimes actually psychological. 

Brian


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jan 25, 2021)

slclick said:


> If it's about skintones, Sony color science always loses. So many variables affect your question.



I think this perception is a bit outdated today or should at least be qualified to some extent. I agree that Sony's color science wasn't great up to the mk.2 bodies. The auto white balance also heavily leaned towards this yellow tint that I had to always fix in post. That really changed with the mk.3 bodies. That's more than 3 years ago. I probably would have left Sony by now if they hadn't addressed that. 

Bad perceptions tend to stick around for a very long time. The R5 and R6 firmware releases have really improved its overheating performance, but the defacto claim by Sony fanboys is that they overheat and are useless for any form of video work. That's not true either..


----------



## bergstrom (Jan 26, 2021)

Tony thinks it might have curved sensor.


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 27, 2021)

Maximilian said:


> Canon is the best! Isn't it?
> 
> _Edit, Jan. 27th:
> This post is somehow modified and displays something else than I wrote.
> If jokes are no longer allowed, if a word like "d_o_o_m_e_d" is censored and changed to "the best" I really wonder what is going on in this forum. _


I really wonder what is going on here. See above.


----------



## Mod_1 (Jan 27, 2021)

Maximilian said:


> Canon is the best! Isn't it?
> 
> _Edit, Jan. 27th:
> This post is somehow modified and displays something else than I wrote.
> If jokes are no longer allowed, if a word like "d_o_o_m_e_d" is censored and changed to "the best" I really wonder what is going on in this forum. _


I have gone through the history of your post and can find no alteration of it apart from your own edits. Maybe you had two versions of it and posted the wrong one. No one at this end has altered it.


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 27, 2021)

Mod_1 said:


> I have gone through the history of your post and can find no alteration of it apart from your own edits. Maybe you had two versions of it and posted the wrong one. No one at this end has altered it.


Thanks for your fast answer, Mod_1!

The post wasn't altered, and when I try to edit it, i still see the original text "*******" (d_o_o_m_e_d), but it seems that one of you stuff have made some fun out of it to make it display "*******" (d_o_o_m_e_d) as "the best". It is always replaced, also here in this post.

I have checked it with different browsers (firefox, chrome, safari) and from different computers and it is always replaced by "the best". Somehow not funny.


----------



## Mod_1 (Jan 27, 2021)

Maximilian said:


> Thanks for your fast answer, Mod_1!
> 
> The post wasn't altered, and when I try to edit it, i still see the original text "the best" (d_o_o_m_e_d), but it seems that one of you stuff have made some fun out of it to make it display "the best" (d_o_o_m_e_d) as "the best". It is always replaced, also here in this post.
> 
> I have checked it with different browsers (firefox, chrome, safari) and from different computers and it is always replaced by "the best". Somehow not funny.


I'll follow it up to find out what has happened. Actually, it is rather funny as it is so tedious to see "Canon is d-o-o-m-e-d"


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 27, 2021)

Mod_1 said:


> I'll follow it up to find out what has happened.


Thanks!


> Actually, it is rather funny as it is so tedious to see "Canon is d-o-o-m-e-d"


I understand! But I must admid that IMO there are more tedious things around than to repeat that running gag, and I always used it that way.


----------



## Joules (Jan 27, 2021)

Mod_1 said:


> I'll follow it up to find out what has happened. Actually, it is rather funny as it is so tedious to see "Canon is d-o-o-m-e-d"


Nothing funny about secretly censoring people's jokes / criticism into positivity in my opinion.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 27, 2021)

Maximilian said:


> Canon is the best! Isn't it?
> 
> _Edit, Jan. 27th:
> This post is somehow modified and displays something else than I wrote.
> If jokes are no longer allowed, if a word like "d_o_o_m_e_d" is censored and changed to "the best" I really wonder what is going on in this forum. _


In most forum software, there is a table that allows the administrator to substitute words. It can be used for censoring spam web sites or stores or words. 

This one is pretty funny if that is what happened. I'd give it 5 stars.


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 27, 2021)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> In most forum software, there is a table that allows the administrator to substitute words. It can be used for censoring spam web sites or stores or words.
> 
> This one is pretty funny if that is what happened. I'd give it 5 stars.


I know about such functions but didn‘t expect it for that


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 27, 2021)

the whole "canon is ................" is played out. It's time to move on. I applied the censor and will remove it one day once people have forgotten about it. As you can see, it takes over threads.

Trying to get creative by circumventing it will be frowned upon.

Thanks for your understanding,
Craig


----------



## Joules (Jan 27, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> the whole "canon is ................" is played out. It's time to move on. I applied the censor and will remove it one day once people have forgotten about it. As you can see, it takes over threads.
> 
> Trying to get creative by circumventing it will be frowned upon.
> 
> ...


Is there a link to a page with the black listed terms and what they are replaced with? Or a plan to at least also change the font style / coloring of altered content? 

I feel like having unmarked censorship undermines the integrity of the forum. I like to be able to discriminate between people actually writing odd stuff and it just being put into their mouths easily.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 27, 2021)

Joules said:


> Is there a link to a page with the black listed terms and what they are replaced with? Or a plan to at least also change the font style / coloring of altered content?
> 
> I feel like having unmarked censorship undermines the integrity of the forum. I like to be able to discriminate between people actually writing odd stuff and it just being put into their mouths easily.


It's hardly undermining the integrity of the forum mangling a repetitive, meaningless cliche, which had become irritating to some. At least it shows Craig has a sense of humour.


----------



## Joules (Jan 28, 2021)

AlanF said:


> It's hardly undermining the integrity of the forum mangling a repetitive, meaningless cliche, which had become irritating to some. At least it shows Craig has a sense of humour.


If I can't tell if the phrases 'the best' or 'the greatest' are used sincerely or they were meant to mean essentially the opposite and just got twisted, it diminishes my enjoyment of this site.

I'm not against parting with the d word for the near future. I would just appreciate some transparency.

How many other words on this forum do not say what they mean anymore? Nothing bad can come from providing insight into that.

I'm all for moderation and private service providers making their own rules. But there comes a responsibility with such administrative power to inform of alterations and reasoning for censorship in my opinion.


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 28, 2021)

AlanF said:


> It's hardly undermining the integrity of the forum mangling a repetitive, meaningless cliche, which had become irritating to some. At least it shows Craig has a sense of humour.


I see censorship very, very critical. 
There are many, many other things in the internet that should be taken with much more attention - but still very sensitive.
I would be interested if you would find this funny if you were the victim and your phrase as harmless as I see mine. 
But to me this case is cleared up and closed.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 28, 2021)

Maximilian said:


> I see censorship very, very critical.
> There are many, many other things in the internet that should be taken with much more attention - but still very sensitive.
> I would be interested if you would find this funny if you were the victim and your phrase as harmless as I see mine.
> But to me this case is cleared up and closed.


As you ask, yes I would find it amusing and I wouldn’t consider myself as a victim as I see the funny side of it. I can also see that others might not see that and be offended and feel frustrated. You are entitled to take it seriously. We are all different and find different things funny and also get offended differently.


----------



## Joules (Jan 28, 2021)

AlanF said:


> As you ask, yes I would find it amusing and I wouldn’t consider myself as a victim as I see the funny side of it. I can also see that others might not see that and be offended and feel frustrated. You are entitled to take it seriously. We are all different and find different things funny and also get offended differently.


What prevents me from finding it even remotely funny is simply the lack of transparency.

I feel like any action that furthers the distrust of written media and adds to confusion and misinformation in this day and age is playing with fire. There's often an angle from which it is justified, but to actually achieve the desired impact and change people's opinion and what they put forward into the world, I believe discussion and respect are more effective long term measures.

For example:



Surab said:


> But as long as the R1 can replicate or improve upon that (we all hope for a global shutter) then I would say that Canon is not the best.


Without context, the change makes this user look like they are writing none sense.

So now, each time 'the best', 'the greatest' and a potentially large number of other, as of now undisclosed, phrases is used in a sentence, it has to be substituted with the d word in order to determine if a poster made a valid statement (or joke), or if they are actually whacky.

Or in the case of Maximilian, making it so posters have to question their grip on words when proof reading their posts _after_ posting.

As I said, of course CR guy is in his right to do it. But it is a disservice to the forum members who contribute a lot to this place, making it one of the most enjoyable online communities I know.

And of course the precedent is not great. If even a simple meme is valid justification for secret censorship, it is just reasonable to be more distrustful and critical of interactions on this platform going forward, and that's a shame in my opinion.

That's my view and reason for not seeing the humor. No point in elaborating further, though of course it would be appreciated if there was more transparency going forward.


----------



## SteveC (Jan 28, 2021)

It's troublesome largely because you're replacing one thing (d-word) with something close to being opposite. It works when the person using the d-word is being sarcastic (as I invariably have been when I used it), but when they're using it straight (as in "Canon is not d-word" the reversal plays badly.

But even if the reversal weren't there, even "not d-word" doesn't mean exactly the same thing as "the best," they're just both positive things to say. So finer meaning could get lost, and it may not be apparent what's going on, someone's meaning could be altered in a way that doesn't make it obvious it was altered.


----------



## Joules (Jan 29, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> the whole "canon is ................" is played out. It's time to move on. I applied the censor and will remove it one day once people have forgotten about it. As you can see, it takes over threads.
> 
> Trying to get creative by circumventing it will be frowned upon.
> 
> ...


Thank you very much for changing the censorship so that ******* (the d-word) now appears as ******* (that's one star too many by the way), making it apparent to everybody that censorship is applied and therefore providing a much appreciated degree of transparancy. Still not a fan of the move, but I want to express thanks for listening to the feedback where it is due.


----------



## Sporgon (Jan 29, 2021)

Joules said:


> Thank you very much for changing the censorship so that ******* (the d-word) now appears as ******* (that's one star too many by the way), making it apparent to everybody that censorship is applied and therefore providing a much appreciated degree of transparancy. Still not a fan of the move, but I want to express thanks for listening to the feedback where it is due.


I thought the d-word stood for dynamic range ? Now I’m really confused......


----------



## Joules (Jan 29, 2021)

Sporgon said:


> I thought the d-word stood for dynamic range ? Now I’m really confused......


Can't tell what the new d-word it is, because circumventing the censorship is frowned upon now


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 13, 2021)

Joules said:


> Can't tell what the new d-word it is, because circumventing the censorship is frowned upon now


What happens if a DO lens is developed for the OM system ? Will we be allowed to discuss it ?


----------



## SteveC (Feb 13, 2021)

Sporgon said:


> What happens if a DO lens is developed for the OM system ? Will we be allowed to discuss it ?


 Yes, unless you also complain of having ED.


----------

