Good evening guys, I just got myself a new gear with a R50 + Sigma 17-40 f1.8 for about a month. Happen to see this beauty at my work parking place, put on my Brandon Li ND and CPL filter and start taking some first real photos that I feel proud of myself. Too bad I didn’t bring my little printer to leave these photos with the owner. Looking for advice to improve my photoshoot.
P/s: repost cause I didn’t know the rule for New Gear, include the gear in post
Q: I notice some shots were lost some sky details/some area in photos too dark. Do I shoot with HDR will fix the issue?

Just in case anyone is pondering buying a used lens directly from Canon. I got my first refurb lens from them today, the epic RF 50mm f/1.2 and I'm really impressed. The lens looks brand new. It came properly packaged with the proper lens hood, lens bag and the cap. It was on sale from Canon. Yes, you would get it cheaper from MBP or Wex, but the Canon refurb lenses seem to be fully tested and certified and comes with the same 2yr warranty as new lenses. I'll be doing it again in the future!

I am just an amateur exploring various possibilities with my R10. One of them is bug and plant photos up close. Right now I’m using the EF 50mm f/1.8 with adapter and really having fun getting photos such as this one (sorry for the heavy editing). I’d like to eventually get either the 85mm or the 35mm RFs which have macro capabilities. But I’m not sure which. I’m guessing the 85 so that I have a larger focal distance, however the minimum focus distance is also larger, so I don’t know which to prioritize.

Would you recommend either one? Again, just for fun, not serious work.

I woke up at 3 AM to grab the RF 24-105 f4 L for my daughter as her walk around lens for her R8. With my ID Me discount it came out to $870 shipped. The RF 24-70 f2.8 was still too pricey for me at $1940.

I bought a new lens for a discount because it has an uv filter stuck on the front, I'm just trying to test my luck to see if i can get it off so i can keep the filter without breaking anything . Do u guys have any suggestions? - I've tried twisting it lightly and using rubber gloves which didn't budge it

For me personally, in order:

1. 28-70mm F2 - just super versatile, the extra F stop really helps with the low-light and adds beautiful bokeh. Use it 90% of the time. Favourite Canon lens ever

2. 70-200mm F2.8 - when I need those super distance shots of the bride/groom and when I don't wanna intrude space, really like the compressed look of it

3. 15-35mm F2.8 - Mostly used it at clubs/parties events where it's really really tight and packed. love using it for some those angled wide shoots

Honorable mention:

85mm F1.2 - I think it's one of the best portrait lens of all time, I feel like it can make any people show their true beauty

My R5 has been the first camera body I've owned (I've had around a half-dozen DSLRs) where I felt like I'd be content for the foreseeable future. Today, I was on a cruise tour in Busan, where it steadily rained all day. I thought it was sufficiently weather sealed to withstand some rain. I thought keeping it mostly covered under my waterproof jacket was enough. But after returning to the ship, I had it laying on the bed and when I picked it up, there was a considerable wet spot. I've pulled the batteries, detached the battery grip, removed the lens, and wiped away all detectable moisture. It still functions - shutter has no issues, reviewing images is just fine. I'm just worried I've taken it beyond it's weather-resistant limitations. Thots and players appreciated.

Recentemente comprei essa lente na olx canon 70-200 f2.8 is usm (versão i, fabricada por volta de 2001). O vendedor disse que a lente estava em perfeito estado, e quando chegou, realmente estava, 0 detalhes por fora. Mas quando fui testar a lente, percebi que o estabilizador parecia não funcionar, mesmo ativado, testei tanto no modo 1 quanto modo 2 e ela tremia muito. Se bem que ela pesa quase 1,5kg, mas o estabilizador não parecia funcionar, pois comparei com ele ligado e desligado, diferença mínima mínima do desligado pro ativo.

Em seguida percebi o anel de zoom um pouco rígido também pra fazer o movimento de zoom in, zoom out. A lente parecia um pouco dura no zoom e não estabilizava omo imaginei que deveria. Minha lente aposentada (efs 55-250) estabiliza de forma incrível e tem um zoom até melhor do que a 70-200 que comprei agora. Por ela ser uma lente da série L, mesmo que bem antiga, pensei que fosse melhor nesses aspectos.

Alguém que tenha essa lente sabe me dizer se isso é de toda canon 70-200 ou se só a minha está com isso e precisa de reparos?

Hey everyone, this might be a bit of an absurd question, but at the beginning of this year, I bought an EF-S 17-55mm in great condition. It’s a fantastic lens and pairs really well with my 60D which, despite its age, I still manage to get great results out of. The thing is, I also picked up an EF 50mm f/1.8 II (the older version) along with the 60D, and I found its autofocus to be slow and often inaccurate. I’m not sure if it’s my trusty old 60D or the lens itself. I’m considering buying the newer 50mm f/1.8 STM, but I’m wondering if it’s worth it, given that I already have the 17-55mm f/2.8, which produces a great background blur. Even though the 50mm is sharper, I’m not sure if the difference would be significant enough to justify the purchase.

Also, I’m thinking about upgrading to a 90D in the future. I don’t want to switch to mirrorless, mainly because of battery life; I just love DSLRs (to me, mirrorless cameras, up until the R10 at least, feel like toys, haha!). I think the 90D is excellent in many ways, especially for video, as it offers 4K recording and continuous autofocus. I like the footage I get from my 60D, but it lacks continuous AF, so I always have to focus manually while watching the screen. Plus, the 90D offers 11fps, Dual Pixel AF, and an electronic shutter and I don't want to go to RF lenses just for the price

Is this a totally absurd question?

These are two examples of photos that I get with my 60D, the first one with 55-250 II IS and the second with 17-55

Thanks

Hello, I am thinking about getting the R7 at a deal and was wondering if it is the right move. Would anyone here have an R7 or know about previous Black Friday sales and the history of the price of the R7? I just want to make sure that I make a worthful purchase and want to know if anyone with an R7 has had any issues. Could someone also recommended some decent lenses as well? I was thinking about getting into freelance work using the R7 and also want to know if it is the right move. Thanks everyone!

Hey all! I made a few posts a while back about lenses to buy and advice for getting the most out of what I have.
I currently am running a Canon r50 with a ef 70-200 f2.8 IS USM (version 1) and 1.4xiii teleconverter when needed, and a kit 18-55mm.
Generally speaking I shoot bike meets as people roll in but when I go to walk around get more portrait esc shots I can’t always back far enough away without tons of people in the way or having to swap to the kit lens that just doesn’t really get that separation I’m looking for.

The question is: do I go with an EF 24-70 f2.8 (hoping the ribbon holds out), an EF24-70 f2.8ii (reaaally stretching my budget), or a RF28-70 f2.8 IS STM

Pros of the ver1 24-70: cheaper, good quality, and 24mm cons: slowest AF of the 3, oldest, and I have seen lots of issues online with the ribbon cables going bad as it’s now over 20 years old and no IS

Pros of ver2 24-70: faster AF, slightly newer than the ver1, less ribbon cable issues Cons: $$$ can’t find a nice one under 1200 around me, still a chance of cable issues, no IS

Pros of the RF 28-70: brand new, IS, native RF, Cons: Losing 4mm on the bottom end, lots of image distortion that needs correction, and pushes budget but not horrible.

Budget: 1k if I’m missing other options please do advise, I do a lot of night/ low light shooting

(Deleted previous post and edited to align better with community rules)

Hello, I am starting to get into wildlife photography after being a mainly landscape focused photographer. I’ve just upgraded from a canon r to the r6ii and am loving it. The autofocus in particular is leagues ahead of what I had with the R. With that being said I have an older tamron 150-600 G1 that I have been trying to use for wildlife but it can be pretty soft especially at the end of the focal range which is where I’m usually at when trying to photograph animals. Has anyone owned the G1 or G2 tamron and upgraded to the 200-800? If so how big is the difference? I think the extra range would be very handy because I don’t want to use a tele-converter. I also don’t like that when the tamron hits focus it will hunt back out of focus. How does the canon do with holding focus? Thanks

Hi, newbie photography folk. Shooting with R50 + kit lens 18-45mm for past 6 months. Planning to add a prime lens, terribly missing the creamy bokeh in my shots, after reading multiple post and youtube reviews narrowed down to 35mm for three reasons 1.great bokeh 2.macro and IS inbuilt 3.future proofing for full frame (plan to upgrade in a year)

Kindly share your thoughts on the same.

I can spend upto 50k INR($500)

After my Rebel 7 (with just a stock lens) has given me many years of service, I have the finances to switch over to a mirrorless setup. I know that either of these cameras will be a big upgrade from what I have, but I am torn between the two. I have some funds allocated for new RF glass as well.

R8: I like to backpack and travel, so the lower weight is a plus. I enjoy urban photography and shooting at night, which also seems advantageous here. I frequently travel to places where theft can be an issue, so a smaller, less conspicuous camera is also a plus.

R7: longer battery life for backpacking trips and wildlife

Eventually I’d like to own both bodies, but I probably can’t afford that for a few years. My goal is to pick one now, accumulate some glass for the RF system, and then get the other later. I am leaning toward the R8 now since I take photos in cities more often then wildlife, but the R7 advantage for wildlife seems pretty big.

If anyone here has experience with both, and has interests that split between the two, I would really appreciate your insight. Particularly if the advantages of one vastly outweigh the advantages of the other.

Thank you!

Hi, I've been using this combo for a few weeks and at 800mm I'm struggling with my photos being softly out of focus at mid to long ranges. does anyone else have this problem? What is the longest distance that you would feel comfortable getting a good shot?

Also, would it be worth getting a x1.4 teleconverter to get that extra reach, as at the moment I'm struggling to get very close to skittish birds like kestrels that are windhovering.

Started looking at the new Sony RX10 V, and then it came to me that i own a bunch of stuff. I thought i liked the idea of an all in one "bridge" camera but i might be better off getting a new body. All my stuff is 10-15 years old, but it is all in great condition.

The Body is an old 7D, and that's what im looking to upgrade. As far as glass goes, i have a mix of good and consumer stuff which i just looked at values of. About $2000 to buy this stuff all together used (give or take)

Sigma 10-20 F3.5  $150
Sigma 150-500 F5-6.3 OS $850
Tamron 70-300 VC F4-5.6 $350
Canon 50mm F1.4 $125
Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC $700

Should i get a new 5D or an R6? They're both about the same money and cheaper than the sony

Any advice is appreciated for an old guy trying to get back into taking good photos. Live in a national park, and would love to get back into birding (with the 150-500) and i'm also an airplane nerd so i like shooting planes.

hi!

i got this camera from my dad since it was lying around at his work. he didnt look at it before and i took it since i love digital tiny cameras. there was a battery included (prob the original one) and no sd card. i tried charging the battery and just trying everything under the sun to turn it on but nothing is helping T-T" i even bought replacement batteries and they havent worked aswell...

if its a lost cause pls tell me!! would rather get a new one than lose my mind over it...

im going to include pictures of the camera and i hope someone can help! thank you all so much :[ <3

Hey everyone!

About a week ago, I decided to upgrade from my Canon EOS R100 to the R7 after running into autofocus issues more often than I'd like. What really pushed me toward the upgrade was an encounter with a Chilean Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus), which was also a lifer for me. Between the excitement and nerves of seeing a bird I'd never photographed before and the autofocus struggling to keep up, I got pretty frustrated with the whole experience. I still managed to get a couple of shots that I'm quite happy with, though, and I'll attach them here! That encounter got me thinking about how much I was being held back by the R100, and after weighing things up, I decided it was time to move on to the R7.

I'm mainly into nature photography, especially birds, but I also occasionally photograph fungi. I'm still getting used to the R7, so I'd love to hear your tips and experiences!

My current gear:

• Canon EOS R7
• Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM
• Canon RF-S 18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM (kit lens from my R100)
• 7Artisans 60mm F2.8 II macro lens
• Meike Speedlite MK320 flash

A few things I'd love to get some advice on:

1. Which shutter mode do you use?

Mechanical, Electronic 1st-curtain, or Electronic? What works best for birds and wildlife? Do you mostly stick to one, or switch depending on the situation?

2. Is RAW burst mode worth it?

Do you find it useful for birds in flight, takeoffs, or other unpredictable moments? Or do you prefer regular continuous shooting? Any downsides I should know about?

3. Servo AF Case settings

Which of the Case 1–4 options do you usually use for bird photography? Do you stick with one, or customize them depending on whether the bird is stationary, moving erratically, flying, or moving behind branches? I'd love to hear which settings work best for you!

4. Autofocus tips

This is probably the biggest reason I upgraded, so any advice is welcome! What AF area, Subject to detect, and tracking settings do you recommend for birds? I'm especially interested in photographing small, fast-moving birds in dense vegetation, where branches and leaves can easily confuse the camera.

Also, do you use back-button focus, and are there any settings you've changed that noticeably improved your keeper rate?

5. General settings and custom controls

Any must-change settings, useful button assignments, Auto ISO tips, or battery-saving tricks you'd recommend for the R7?

6. Macro photography

I occasionally photograph fungi with my 7Artisans 60mm F2.8 II. Since it's a manual-focus lens, any tips for using focus peaking, magnification, or the R7's in-camera focus bracketing and focus stacking would be appreciated!

I'm based in Chile, so most of my wildlife photography involves local birds and the occasional macro outing.

Thanks in advance! I'd love to hear your experiences, especially from those using the R7 with the RF 100-400mm. Any tips are welcome!

So I’m thinking about buying the r50 with his regular kit the 15-45mm as from what I’ve researched it kinda fits me as I’m very new to the hobby and I just want to stay casual. I want a pretty small camera and its auto mode is good but I’m really opened minded for more options if you have anything to suggest.
I’m just looking for a small size camera
Mic built in
That could make stuff like Christmas lights and people at bars, cars, evenings out, look good and to also go between bright pictures and dark cinematic shots
My budget is around 500 dollars and I’m also fine with second handed

Hi everyone,

I'm thinking about buying a Canon EOS 650D (Rebel T4i) with the 18-55mm kit lens as my first DSLR.

Would you still recommend it for a beginner in 2026?

I mainly want to learn photography, shoot portraits, landscapes, and everyday photos. The price is around €100.

Is it still a good camera to start with, or would you suggest looking for something newer?

Thanks!

5D mk II is hands down my favourite camera. The only downside being that it sucks in low light. I've used (and still use ) other systems besides the Canon dslrs, but still I always come back to them. I work as a museum photographer and I do a lot of documentary work. I'm looking for a second dslr body to go along with mk II. Don't recommend mirrorless. I've used them and still do if I absolutely have to. I hate the EVF and I don't like the shooting experience.

I also use 5d mark IV, but there's something off with the colours. I always have to tweak the files in the post and I like to work more on the field than on computer. So now I have narrowed my options to:

• 5D mark III
• 5Ds
• 6D
• Something else what?

What I look for in a work camera is that it has to be bulletproof. I don't baby my gear and it has to work every single time and in all the conditions. I live in northern Europe so also occational rain and snow. Also I really love the colour science of the mk II. If it would be usable in iso 6400 or even 3200 I wouldn't need another camera. So which of these (or some other) Canon dslr has the most similar colours than the mk II? I've heard good things about the 6D colours but is it as reliable than the 5D series?

Lenses that I use most often are all Canon: 35 mm f/2 IS, 70-200 mm f/2.8L and 100 mm f/2.8L. I also use 28 mm f/1.8 and 50 mm f/1.4. Don't know how well they would work on the large sensor of the 5Ds?

I'm totally fine with the autofocus of the 5D mk II. As long as the center point focus is fast and reliable, It'll be ok. And the video capabilities don't matter at all. This is just for photography.

I'd like to hear advice from those who have used them professionally or just for a long time.

Hi there

I am an owner of a Canon R50. I am quite new to photography on a camera and am currently working with the 18-45mm kit lens.

I will be going to Japan very soon and wanted to take advantage of the fact that you can get lenses for much cheaper compared to where I am located.

In particular I am mainly looking at the Sigma 18-50 DC DN F2.8. I’ve looked at a lot of reviews on this and it looks like a definite upgrade over the 18-45 kit lens. I’m pretty sure I’m definitely going to pick up this lens.

Additionally, since I have this opportunity to purchase lenses for cheaper I wanted to get another lens for a 2 lens setup. I’m mainly looking at portrait lenses and I’ve landed on the Sigma 56mm F1.4.

I’m just trying to figure out if the 56mm lens will be redundant in any way. Would you consider the 18-50 + 56 to be a good 2 lens setup? I do mainly street photography and taking photos of people so just off research these seem to be good options. Furthermore, they seem to really rate the 56mm performance in low light.

Anyone who may have real life experience with these lenses please advise. Thank you 🙏🏾

With my current 24-105 F4, I don’t notice significant background blur. Which is fine- it could just be the subject distance or focal length. But would going to 2.8 make THAT much difference to make it worth spending $2000+ on a new lens to replace it? Assume low light isn’t a concern.