There’s a right way and a wrong way to clean your camera lens. Naturally, we’re going to show you the wrong way.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to get new episodes of DPReview TV every week.
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
CP+ might’ve been cancelled due to COVID-19 concerns, but Olympus has improvised and shared its presentation on YouTube instead. The 44-minute video covers a variety of topics, but two specific moments stand out.
 |
The first is a demonstration Olympus shared showing just how much zoom you can get out of the Olympus 150–400mm F4.5 lens. One demonstration, seen in the above screenshot from the video, shows a photograph captured with the sun setting over Mount Fuji, captured a ridiculous 67km (42 miles) away, at Olympus’ Ishikawa facility. To capture the shot, Olympus used the 1.25x converter inside the lens as well as the MC-20 2x converter to achieve a 2000mm (35mm equivalent) focal length.
 |
| A screenshot from the presentation contextualizing just how far away the photograph and timelapse images were captured from. |
The next demonstration with the lens was a hand-held shot of the moon, seen in the below screenshot from the video, captured with the exact same camera setup.
 |
In addition to both images, Olympus also shows a short timelapse video of the sunset over Mount Fuji (the section on the 150–400mm F4.5 lens starts at roughly 36:00).
 |
| The above captions in the image are auto-translated via YouTube. |
Olympus representatives also note later on in the video that more lenses are in development. However, no further information was given.
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
 |
The EOS R is Canon’s entry into the full-frame mirrorless camera market and, while it doesn’t look all that revolutionary at first glance, looks can be deceiving: this is a big step for the world’s largest camera manufacturer. The EOS R comes with a new mount, a new lens lineup, and some new functionality. Most crucially, it’s capable of capturing fantastic photographs.
But as we approach the completion of our full EOS R review, we wanted to address a few areas where we believe it could be improved (just like we did with Nikon’s Z7). These principally concern usability and, to a degree, ergonomics, too, but also include limitations of some of the features included the EOS R as well as limitations imposed on the user by features that have been left out.
While some of these issues have been a feature of Canon’s various lineups for some time, the EOS R – and the fresh start it represents – are a great opportunity for the company to take a fresh look at how it can make the camera more usable for more people.
So without further ado, here’s what we’d like to see Canon try to improve in the EOS R.
 |
This tongue-twister of a customization option is absent from the EOS R, but is something we’ve found incredibly useful on Canon’s existing cameras as well as competitive models. It allows the user to instantly adjust their choice of exposure settings, white balance, metering, and crucially, autofocus parameters and autofocus activation at the press of a button.
This option allows the user to instantly adjust autofocus parameters at the press of a button
We love having this option on Canon’s high-end DSLRs. It allows us to instantly swap from, say, a zone of AF points and Servo (continuous) focus, to a single, pinpoint AF point and Single focus. As an example, this makes it easy to quickly switch from photographing fast action to a portrait while ensuring the most accurate autofocus behavior for each situation.
 |
 |
Although this feature is usually reserved for Canon’s higher-end cameras, we think the midrange EOS R would really benefit from it. This is because even though the EOS R’s on-sensor autofocus system is very capable in Servo AF, the spookily accurate Pupil Detection option is only available in Single AF. Being able to rapidly switch between those two with a single button press would greatly speed up our shooting, and ensure our wide-aperture portraits are precisely focused.
 |
Among the EOS R’s headline features is its 5,655 AF points. While that makes for a great press release, it doesn’t necessarily make for a great user experience. This is because with all those points, it’s extremely slow to use the four-way controller to move your AF point around. Competing systems such as those from Fujifilm and Nikon allow the user to limit the amount of selectable points, effectively allowing you to quickly move your AF area around at the expense of some precision.
Those who prefer to use the four-way controller to move the AF area will find it’s simply too slow
To the EOS R’s credit, there are two other ways to move your AF area – you can use the touchscreen, or you can hit the AF Selection button and use the two control dials to move the point vertically or horizontally. But still, the latter strikes us as a little cumbersome, and the former isn’t an option if you happen to be using gloves (or if you’re just touchscreen averse). It would just be nice to have more control over how the four-way controller allows you to interact with your AF area.
 |
While the EOS R is a pretty customizable camera, there are – for whatever reason – some custom options available for some buttons, but not for others. It’s frustrating and makes the camera more difficult to set up for your style of shooting than it could be.
Drive mode, for example, can be included in the Dial Func options shown above, but cannot itself be assigned to a button press. Exposure compensation can be assigned to the AF Selection button, but not to the AE Lock button. The ‘LOCK’ button on the top of the camera cannot be customized to do anything but lock various control points. You can assign a number of buttons to allow you to enter the main menus, but in what must be a sort of safety feature, you can’t then assign the menu button to another function. So you just end up with two ways to enter the menus.
The bigger point here, is this: if a manufacturer is going to provide for controls to be customized, we think that in a $ 2000+ product, they should just go all in and allow users to set up the camera as they see fit.
 |
Like many other cameras, the EOS R includes a proximity sensor near its viewfinder (in this case, just beneath it, as shown above) to allow the camera to automatically switch from the viewfinder display to the rear screen, depending on whether or not the camera is held up to your eye. The problem is that you cannot customize the sensor’s sensitivity, and the camera cannot detect when its screen is folded out to the side.
Accidentally tripping the eye sensor can cause you to miss a shot
This means that if you have the screen flipped out to shoot from the hip, you’ll find yourself accidentally tripping the eye sensor if the camera moves too close to your body. In other words, you can easily miss a shot as the screen goes blank at the crucial moment.
And yes, you can assign one of the function buttons to manually switch between the two, but we’d love to at least be able to customize the sensitivity of the sensor. In the end, it remains best practice is to simply disable it when the screen is flipped out. After all, how likely are you to have the screen at an odd angle and use the viewfinder at the same time?
 |
We mentioned this earlier, but the EOS R’s Q menu cannot be customized. This would not only be nice for the sake of adding frequently-accessed settings, but it’d be great to be able to remove rarely-used options. For example, by default, ‘Flicker Reduction’ is an option in the Q menu. This is really handy if you regularly shoot indoor sports, but a lot of photographers will never need it.
We’d like to see Canon institute the AF ‘cases’ on its mid-range cameras like the EOS R. Even though the EOS R has options to customize its ‘Tracking sensitivity,’ ‘Accel./Decel. tracking’ and ‘AF pt auto switching,’ there’s an awful lot of possible permutations of those three parameters. But oddly the more advanced Canon cameras adjust these three parameters in a series of ‘AF Cases,’ with clear descriptions of when you should use each one. Having this sort of organization would arguably be more beneficial to less advanced users.
 |
The cases offered by the EOS 5D IV offer users a more accessible way to manipulate the AF system than manually adjusting the parameters. |
Lastly, we’ve already said that we find the M.Fn bar to be of limited use. But aside from that general point, we’ve also noticed that it doesn’t offer a consistent experience. Sometimes, it will ignore your inputs, or respond to them too rapidly. If Canon can smooth out the touch bar’s operation, that would go some way toward encouraging people to experiment with it and perhaps incorporate it into their manner of shooting.
Oh and the EOS R is yet another Canon camera that omits an intervalometer, for time-lapse shooting. This would be permissible if we could at least gain this function through the Canon Camera Connect app, but the app has no provision for it either. Why, Canon? Why?
 |
While at a passing glance the EOS R looks rather like some of the company’s DSLRs, the controls are a pretty radical departure for Canon. While this means there’s bound to be a bit of a learning curve, even for existing Canon users, it’s also not surprising that there are a few hiccups in the camera’s operation.
To be sure, there’s a lot that the EOS R gets right, and the future looks bright for the RF system (the lenses, in particular, look stunning). Canon has promised regular firmware updates to the EOS R to improve functionality, too, which is good to hear – and that’s one reason why we’re writing this article in the first place.
We’re not saying that Canon needs to redesign the EOS R to make it useable, but a firmware update or two to smooth over the operation would be very welcome.
We’ll be putting the finishing touches on our full EOS R review in the near future, but in the meantime, what do you think? Are there any other changes you’d like to see in the EOS R? What do you want to see in the next camera for the system? Let us know in the comments.
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
 |
The Nikon Z7 is the company’s first full frame mirrorless camera and its first mirrorless ILC to be aimed at high-end enthusiast and professional photographers. There’s a lot to like: it combines many of the strengths of the D850 with some of the advantages unique to mirrorless cameras, such as seamless video shooting, a silent shutter option, and phase-detection autofocus array that covers almost the entire frame.
But as our review has progressed, we’ve found some areas where we believe the Z7 could use some improvement. Here’s what we’d like to see fixed…
 |
Put simply, the Z7’s autofocus algorithms just aren’t on par with those of Nikon DSLRs. Focus isn’t as decisive, with the camera sometimes hunting in the wrong direction long enough that you’re better off simply re-initiating AF.
Meanwhile, Auto Area AF with face detection doesn’t always select the right subject: it often mistakes non-human objects as faces, everything from balloons to chair legs and UPS labels. Quite frequently ‘Auto’ doesn’t prioritize nearer objects over distant ones, which is the opposite behavior of nearly every DSLR we’ve tested. The lack of Eye AF is increasingly egregious: Sony Eye AF is nearly infallible and even allows you to target desired faces on-the-fly. Less sophisticated but capable continuous eye detection is also available on Olympus, Panasonic and Fujifilm cameras so you can maintain focus on brides walking down the aisle or running toddlers.
Subject tracking isn’t as reliable as Nikon’s industry leading ‘3D Tracking’ mode
Lack of Eye AF might be forgivable if subject tracking – the ability of the camera to maintain focus on your subject no matter where it moves in the frame – worked as well as Nikon DSLRs’ industry leading ‘3D Tracking’ mode. A D850 is capable of sticking to the eye of a subject as long as you initiated focus on it. But on the Z7 subject tracking is unreliable and imprecise, with a subject recognition area so large that quite often you can’t target your specific subject precisely.
 |
Another issue we’ve encountered is how quickly the Z7’s AF system begins to struggle in low light. In our shooting we’ve found it to be considerably lacking compared to immediate mirrorless peers. In fact from our testing, the Z7 begins hunting in light levels two to four stops brighter than comparable cameras from Sony and Canon. The ‘Low Light AF’ mode barely improves things. It only activates in extremely low light levels and slows down focus so much as to be impractical unless you’re taking tripod-mounted shots of static subjects.
We’d love to see Nikon create a proper flashgun-based AF assist system
There might not be much that Nikon can do about this in the current-generation Z7, but we’d love to see the company create a proper flashgun-based AF assist system. This might require a new set of flashes and radio transmitters that project an appropriately colored grid pattern for the Z7’s on-sensor PDAF system to lock on to in dim situations. This would be of particular benefit for wedding and event photography, where fast low-light focus acquisition is critical.
 |
It’s not just low light situations where the Z7 AF system struggles. If you try to shoot a severely backlit portrait, particularly where your subject isn’t well-lit, the Z7 often hunts and never achieves focus. This is compared to Nikon’s recent DSLRs with cross-type AF points across the frame, which usually nail focus even in the most challenging conditions (as do Sony’s current-generation a9 and a7-series ILCs).
The Z7 isn’t alone here – the Dual Pixel AF system in Canon’s EOS R also struggles with backlighting, but it’s a shame that a pro-grade camera like the Z7 is unable to acquire focus in situations where even some pocket compacts can achieve focus instantly.
 |
In addition to autofocus performance improvements, we’d love to see some changes to the way that the Z7’s autofocus modes operate. At present, the camera’s subject tracking mode is ‘tacked on’ to Auto area AF, with the result that it’s slower to select and activate than if it were its own area mode.
Ideally, the Z7’s subject tracking mode would work exactly like the industry-leading ‘3D tracking’ mode on Nikon DSLRs, at least from a usability standpoint. That is, initiate tracking of the subject under the AF point with a simple press of AF-On (or shutter button), then reset to the original AF point when the button is released. This makes it easy to then quickly place the AF point over a new subject to initiate tracking, compared to the Z7’s method of first pressing ‘OK’ or tapping on a new subject on the LCD screen to switch subjects.
We’d love to see every one of Nikon’s DSLR AF modes replicated on the Z-series
More generally, we’d love to see every one of Nikon’s DSLR AF modes replicated on the Z-series – from expanded ‘dynamic’ area modes to Group AF. These modes have been added, refined and perfected over years of feedback from pros. And they work: Nikon’s DSLR AF is the envy of many systems. The end result might not be an AF system that is quite as good as that in the D850 or D5, but it would at least operate in a more sensible, more familiar way.
 |
Improving the Z7’s autofocus performance to the point where it’s on a level with Nikon’s DSLRs is a big ask, but matching the level of customization should be a simpler fix.
In our view, given its price and market position, the Z7’s customization should be at least as good as on Nikon’s DSLRs. Instead, it actually omits some useful features. For example, you can no longer assign custom buttons to instantly override the current AF mode to try something else when your typical way of working fails. This is something we’ve found useful time and again on the D5, D850, D500, and we’re sad to see it missing on the Z7.
Ultimately, we’d really like to see D5-level button customization on the Z-series. This means not just the ability to assign any button to any AF mode, but also to completely override camera settings with the press of a button (shutter speed, ISO settings, etc.). Sony’s mirrorless ILCs offer this in their ‘Recall Custom Hold’ button functions, as do Canon DSLRs. We’d also like to see Nikon bring back the useful Two-Button-Reset and Quick Format actions on the Z-series.
 |
We’ve listed five ways in which we’d like to see the Z7 improved, and as you’ve probably noticed they primarily relate to autofocus. That’s because with almost all of our testing complete, it’s AF where we’ve seen the most serious issues with performance. Unexpectedly, the native Z lenses we’ve tried appear to focus more slowly and less predictably than adapted F-mount lenses too (though to their credit they are silent to focus in video).
In most other respects the Z7 is an impressive camera. We’re optimistic that where we have concerns, Nikon can address some of them via firmware, and others via new dedicated flash accessories. Our other concerns? Perhaps we’ll just have to wait for a Z8.
Since focus is performed from the sensor, there are circumstances in which the Z7 will be more precise than Nikon’s DSLRs
Even so, we’re not saying that the Z7 with current firmware is flat-out bad at autofocus. In fact for a lot of photography, it’ll be perfectly fine. And since focus is performed from the sensor, there are circumstances in which it’ll be more precise than Nikon’s DSLRs, particularly with fast primes shot wide open where DSLRs struggle and often require microadjustment. But when it comes to continuous autofocus performance and usability, it’s simply not nearly as capable as its nearest mirrorless peer the Sony a7R III, nor (in some respects) as good as Nikon’s own mid-range and high-end DSLRs, including the similarly capable and priced D850.
For a complete overview of every aspect of the Z7’s performance, look out for our full review in the next few days.
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
 |
The Nikon Z6 and Sony a7 III are two cameras with much in common including 24MP full-frame sensors. If you’re looking to sink your teeth into the world of full-frame mirrorless, these two represent the most-affordable current models on the market, with body-only MSRPs of around $ 2000.
But the Z6 is a first-generation product for Nikon, while the a7 III is Sony’s third go at a ‘budget’ full-frame offering. How much does this matter? Let’s dig in!
Note: Our impressions on the Z6 are largely based on limited experience of using (but not shooting with) a pre-production model, plus significant time spent shooting with pre-production samples of the higher-resolution but operationally very similar Z7.
 |
Both of these cameras make use of 24MP full-frame sensors. The Sony a7 III’s sensor offers excellent low-light image quality, excellent dynamic range and best-in-class JPEG noise reduction. Our full review also notes improvements to color – specifically skin tones – over past Sony full-frame cameras.
We’ve yet to test the Z6’s sensor, but if past Nikon 24MP full-frame sensors are any indication, we also expect excellent image quality. Generally speaking we prefer Nikon colors to Sony colors but the Sony may have an advantage when it comes to retaining detail while reducing noise at high ISOs. Still, it’s too soon to tell which camera will end up with the upper hand, so for now, it’s a toss up in the IQ department.
 |
Neither of these cameras is a slouch when it comes to video. In fact, the two have more in common than not, including: over-sampled 4K/24p video using full sensor readout, useful tools such as focus peaking, microphone and headphone jacks, in-body stabilization for hand-held shooting and a 1080/120p mode for slow motion work.
For more experienced filmmakers, there are some important differences though: The Z6 can output 10-bit log over HDMI, while the a7 III cannot. On the other hand the a7 III can record 8-bit HLG and S-Log2 in-camera, while the Z6 cannot.
Another area where the two cameras might vary is AF tracking in video. As noted in our a7 III review, the tap-to-track function uses Sony’s old Center Lock-on AF algorithm, which is somewhat unreliable and requires a combination of unintuitive button presses to engage. Conversely, based on our impressions shooting video with the Z7, Nikon’s tap-to-track is both easy to use and very reliable. Whether that proves true in use (bearing in mind that the Z6 features a slightly different AF system to the Z7) is something we’ll establish once we receive a reviewable camera.
Overall, both the a7 III and Z6 offer compelling video packages, but provisionally, we’re going to give the Nikon the nod for what’s likely to be more usable video AF.
 |
Both the Nikon and Sony offer impressive on-sensor autofocus point coverage. The Z6 has 273 PDAF points covering 81% of its sensor, the Sony has 693 PDAF points covering 93% of the frame. In terms of usability, both have AF joysticks making point selection painless. But the Nikon AF points are illuminated in red, making them substantially easier to see than that of the Sony’s (which only illuminate slightly when focus is confirmed).
Face detection modes are offered in both cameras, but only the Sony offers Eye AF which locks focus on a subject’s eye with incredible precision. For stills mode, we also prefer the Sony’s through-the-viewfinder subject tracking, which is easy to use and very reliable. The Z6 on the other hand does not inherit Nikon’s excellent 3D Tracking. Tracking through the EVF is clunkier than it is on Nikon DSLRs and requires pressing the OK button to reset and switch subjects – this is annoying and can cost you shots.
We’re calling it in favor of Sony when it comes to autofocus through the EVF. If Nikon manages to squeeze 3D Tracking into the Z6 via firmware, we’ll reconsider. Until then, the Sony’s seamless tracking, excellent Eye AF and more precise AF point spread give it the advantage.
 |
We realize that a camera’s usability or lack thereof depends on the photographer operating it and their needs. But there are some notable UI differences between the Z6 and a7 III.
The a7 III has Sony’s latest menus, which have been cleaned up over previous versions, but we still find them a bit confusing and redundant. The camera offers a good level of customization, but requires a decent amount of time spent setting it up to really get the most out of it. The touchscreen is a disappointment: it has limited use when it comes to changing camera settings/navigating the menu and is overall, unresponsive.
The Z6 inherits its (also pretty complex and often confusing) menus from Nikon DSLRs and largely functions like a Nikon DSLR except for its AF modes, which are inherited from the Coolpix line. Like the a7 III, it also offers a good level of customization, but in our opinion it’s an easier camera to simply pick up and shoot with. The Z6 also offers a top plate info panel – the a7 III does not. And unlike the Sony, its touchscreen can be used to change camera settings and navigate the menus.
Overall, both cameras are very usable, but the Nikon’s better touch operation makes it the winner.
 |
The Nikon Z6 and Sony a7 III are remarkably similar in terms of size and weight – the Sony is 25g lighter, 7mm narrower, 5mm shorter and 6mm thicker. And while both cameras are weather-sealed, the Sony lacks proper sealing on its bottom battery door (the Nikon battery door is well-sealed) which is something to consider if you shoot in wet conditions.
Grip preference is obviously very subjective, but as a staff, we prefer the Z-series grip to that of the a7 III. However, the Sony offers dual SD card slots, (only one is rated for faster UHS-II memory cards), while the Nikon offers a single XQD slot (but will support CFexpress media in a future firmware update). Does this matter? That depends on how and what you shoot. Judging by the comments on our Z7 launch content, for a lot of you it’s a deal-breaker.
Overall, we really like Sony’s dual slots, but appreciate the Nikon’s comfier grip, top plate info panel and more robust sealing. Still, we’re calling this one a toss up.
 |
At launch, the Nikon Z6 will have three available native lenses, shown above.
Nikon’s new Z mount is larger than Sony’s E mount by a good margin (55mm vs 46.1mm) and has a shorter flange distance (16mm vs 18mm). So what does this actually mean? Well, in theory it means that Nikon will be able to put out faster glass because their lenses will be less constrained by the limitations that the E-mount’s comparatively narrow throat imposes. This also means the Nikon Z might become the most adaptable camera ever, since it has the shortest flange distance we’ve ever seen.
On the other hand, right now there are only three native Z lenses available for the Nikon Z6 whereas the a7 III can make use of 25+ native Sony lenses as well as an ever growing list of third party lenses. Then again, thanks to the $ 250 FTZ adapter ($ 150 for a limited time if bought with a Z camera) the Z6 will work with most F mount lenses, autofocus and all.
Again, though, this one is also a toss up. The Nikon clearly has the more versatile lens mount for those looking to invest in a system today – the Sony has more native glass to offer, sans adapter.
 |
The Nikon Z6 has a a 3.68M dot electronic viewfinder with 0.8x magnification, compared to the Sony a7 III’s 2.36M dot EVF with 0.78x magnification. That difference in EVF resolution gives the Nikon a crisp and clear advantage. It’s also worth noting the Nikon doesn’t appear drop its EVF resolution when in shooting mode, while the Sony does.
And while both cameras have tilting LCDs, the Nikon has a larger, higher-res screen: 3.2″ and 2.1M dots compared to 3″ and 922k dots. Overall, Nikon is the winner when it comes to EVF and LCD.
 |
In terms of speed, both cameras offer solid burst rates for anyone wishing to capture sports or action. The Sony a7 III can shoot up to 10 fps with AF compared to 12 fps on the the Nikon Z6. But the Sony has the Nikon beat when it comes to battery life, pumping out 710 shots per charge (CIPA rated) compared to a measly 330 shots per charge (CIPA rated) on the Nikon. We assume that like the Z7, the Z6 will be able to shoot for a great many more photos than that on a single charge for most people’s normal use, but so does the a7 III.
Due to the better battery life Sony gets the nod in the performance department.
 |
It’s almost as if Nikon developed the Z6 intending to match the a7 III spec for spec. Of course, we know this isn’t true since the Z system has been in development for years. Still both cameras make a compelling case for your cash – such a compelling case, in fact, that picking a winner is far too difficult until we’ve fully tested the Z6. Until then, here’s a quick recap of how they stack up:
Both cameras should be capable of excellent image and video quality. But the Nikon Z6 has a better EVF, more responsive/high-res touchscreen, probably better video AF and a more versatile lens mount, including excellent near-native support for legacy F-mount lenses. On the other hand the Sony a7 III appears to offer a better autofocus experience for stills shooters, better battery life and obviously far more native lenses at launch.
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
A patent filed by Apple suggests it could include a camera on a future version of the Apple Watch. Patent application number 14774642, filed in 2013, covers a range of ideas, including a camera for selfies or scanning QR codes, and the possibility of fixed focal length and zoom lenses.
The key phrase to note in the patent is: ‘Zero, one, or more cameras can be provided, depending on implementation,’ making clear that the company is casting its net as widely as possible, to allow it to include all, some or none of these ideas in future watches.
 |
| The block diagram from the patent clearly shows that Apple has considered including a camera as part of the watch’s user interface. The patent suggests cameras could be included along the sides or on the front of the watch’s face. |
The patent covers the idea of a camera mounted on the side or top edge of the device for taking photographs or scanning QR codes. Another implementation suggests a camera that faces towards the user, allowing the shooting of selfies (or, though it’s not mentioned, streaming video for Facetime communication).
The patent is careful to include both the idea of having a fixed focal length lens and of including a zoom lens with autofocus. As always with patents, none of this means Apple will include a camera in the next or future generations of watches, just that they want to protect the idea of doing so and want to protect all the possible implementations it has thought of.
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
 |
Rumors suggest Sigma is getting ready to launch a 50-100mm F1.8 lens for APS-C cameras. Full specifications and convincing images of the lens have been leaked, suggesting the lens will be part of the company’s impressive ‘Art’ range. Such a lens would offer a fast partner to the company’s 18-35mm F1.8 Art lens, giving the same angle-of-view, depth-of-field and total light gathering capability as a ~75-150mm F2.8 lens on full-frame.
Specifications reported on Digicame-info.com seem plausible, so we’re looking forward to next week’s CP+ show in Yokohama, Japan, to see if the rumors are true. We’ll be reporting from the show, so stay tuned for all the details.
| Lens construction (elements/groups) | 21/15 |
|---|---|
| Filter size | 82 |
| Minimum focus distance | 95cm |
| Aperture blades | 9 |
| Length | 170.7mm (mount not specified) |
| Diameter | 93.5mm |
| Weight | 1490g |
The site suggests a price of ¥167,400 (~$ 1500) and a launch date of April 22nd.
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
Rumors have been flying around the Internet in the last week about a pair of new Canon lenses. The first rumored lens is an EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM model, which could be a cheaper version of the existing F2.8 lens, or a replacement for the 17-40 F4L. The other speculated lens is an EF-S 10-18mm F4.5-5.6 IS STM which, according to the rumor mill, should be fairly inexpensive. The word on the street is that these lenses will be announced soon, so we’ll keep our fingers on the keyboard just in case.
News: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)