Camera Gear Review News (Page 3)

The a9 series targets sports and action, and the a9 III is Sony's latest model in that series. This camera was introduced earlier in the same year as the R1, and includes some outstanding features.

Check out the R1 vs. a9 III specification comparison along with the visual comparison of these cameras.

What are the differences between the Canon EOS R1 and the a9 III? Here are the R1 advantages:

• ISO 100-102400 expandable to 50 and 409600 vs. 250–25600 and 125 to 51200 (notably, the a9 III omits the lowest noise settings)
• Eye Control AF vs. no (dramatically faster AF point or area positioning)
• AF working range of EV -7.5 to 21 vs. EV -5 – 20 (the Canon camera focuses in darker environments)
• 6144-zone metering vs. 1200-zone (more areas evaluated yields potential improvement in auto exposure results)
• 230 image RAW buffer vs. 106
• Has 6K RAW
• 802.11ax Wi-Fi 6 GHz vs. 802.11ac (5 GHz)
• Has a top LCD panel
• Dual CFexpress Type B slots vs. dual multi slot for SD, SDHC, SDXC (UHS-I/II)/CFexpress Type A (Type B cards are faster and less expensive than A cards, but A cards are smaller and SD cards are less expensive)
• Higher capacity battery rated for 1330 LCD and 700 EVF vs. 530 and 400 (the a9 III's battery grip doubles these numbers, closing much of the gap)
• Neural Network upscaling (2x larger in both dimensions to 179 megapixels) and noise reduction processing in camera (both with JPG output only)
• 8.5-stop IBIS vs. 8

The a9 III's advantages are:

• Global shutter, 0 ms imaging sensor readout speed vs. 2.7 ms (While this difference seems small, the global shutter can eliminate some issues, such as LED signage flicker)
• 120 fps continuous shooting vs. 40 (while 40 fps is sufficient for most needs, the 120 fps difference is noticeable)
• Metering range of EV -5 – 17 compared to EV -3 – 20
• +/- 5.0 EV exposure compensation vs. +/- 3
• 1/80000 shutter vs. 1/64000 (likely few us us will care about this difference)
• Flash sync to 1/80000 vs. 1/400
• 0.64" (16mm) EVF vs. 0.50" (12.7mm)
• 240 fps EVF refresh rate vs. 120 fps
• 4-axis multi-angle touchscreen LCD vs. vari-angle
• Considerably smaller and lighter: 26.0 vs. 39.3 oz (737 vs. 1115 g) (but the a9 III's grip adds 10.23 oz (290 g) and considerable size, closing the gap)
• Slightly less expensive

Again, comparing across brands is significantly challenged by the differing interface and ergonomics, and these two cameras are vastly different. Those advantages are a personal preference.

If you have not already done so, order the R1 immediately if you have even a remote interest in it.

More Information

Canon EOS R1

Sony Alpha 9 III

Let's compare a pair of outstanding Sony cameras, starting with the flagship Sony Alpha 1. Check out the R1 vs. Alpha 1 specification comparison along with the visual comparison of these cameras.

What are the differences between the Canon EOS R1 and the a1? Here are the R1 advantages:

• 40 fps for 230 RAW images vs. 30 fps for 238 (96 frame using the comparable lossless compression) (having faster continuous shooting available is an advantage, but 30 fps is really fast)
• 12 fps with mechanical shutter vs. 10 (only matters if you use it)
• More framerate options – 40, 30, 20, 15, 12, 10, 7.5, 5, 3, 2, and 1 compared to 30, 20, 15, and 5 (with electronic shutter, but the mechanical shutter adds 10, 8, 6, and 3)
• 2.7 ms imaging sensor readout speed vs. 3.8 (while technically a win for the R1, you won't likely notice the difference, and the Sony is reading 50 megapixels at that speed)
• AF working range of EV -7.5 to 21 vs. EV -4 – 20 (the Canon camera focuses in considerably darker environments)
• ISO 100-102400 expandable to 50 and 409600 vs. 100–32000 and 50 to 102400 (the R1 will show less noise at the pixel level, but the two should nearly equalize if the a1 image is down sampled to 24 megapixels — and you won't want to use the highest ISO settings)
• 1/64000 vs. 1/32000 (crazy fast holds a small niche advantage over extremely fast)
• Eye Control AF vs. no (dramatically faster AF point or area positioning)
• Pre-continuous shooting (hindsight is far clearer than foresight, and recording an image of an action in the near past is game-changing)
• 6144-zone metering vs. 1200-zone (more areas evaluated yields potential improvement in auto exposure results)
• Electronic shutter flash sync up to 1/400 sec. (some sources say 1/320) vs. 1/200
• 2.1 million dot vari-angle LCD vs. 1.44 million tilt
• Has a top LCD panel
• Dual CFexpress Type B slots vs. dual multi slot for SD, SDHC, SDXC (UHS-I/II)/CFexpress Type A (Type B cards are faster and less expensive than A cards, but A cards are smaller and SD cards are less expensive)
• Neural Network upscaling (2x larger in both dimensions to 179 megapixels) and noise reduction processing in camera (both with JPG output only)
• 8.5-stop IBIS vs. 5.5
• High-Frequency Anti-Flicker shooting (evaluates the scene and precisely adjusts the shutter speed to avoid banding and flicker, including from LED signage)
• 802.11ax Wi-Fi 6 GHz vs. 802.11ac (5 GHz)
• 4-Channel 24-Bit LPCM Audio vs. 2-Channel 16-Bit
• Higher capacity battery rated for 1330 LCD and 700 EVF vs. 530 and 430 (the a1's battery grip doubles these numbers, closing much of the gap)
• Slightly less expensive

Despite being introduced 3 years earlier, the a1 still holds advantages:

• 50 megapixel vs. 24 (a big difference, but not everyone finds the higher resolution worth the increased storage size and processing time)
• Touch and drag AF area slection vs. not available
• +/- 5 stops exposure compensation vs. 3
• 240 fps EVF vs. 120
• 8K 30p vs. 6K 60p movies
• Pixel Shift Multi Shooting (provides dramatically higher resolution after post processing, but everything in the frame must be still)
• 0.64" (16mm) EVF vs. 0.50" (12.7mm)
• Considerably smaller and lighter: 26.0 vs. 39.3 oz (737 vs. 1115 g) (but the a1's grip adds 10.23 oz (290 g) and considerable size, closing the gap)

Comparing across brands is significantly challenged by the differing interface and ergonomics, and these two cameras are vastly different in those regards. Advantages will often be determined by personal preference.

If you have not already done so, order the R1 immediately if you have even a remote interest in it.

More Information

Canon EOS R1

Sony Alpha 1

The Canon EOS R3 seemed like the mirrorless entrant to the 1 series, but Canon assured us that it was not. However, it was the former performance leader of Canon's MILC lineup.

The R1 now shadows the R3's performance.

Check out the R1 vs. R3 specification comparison along with the visual comparison of these cameras. What are the differences between the Canon EOS R1 and the R3? Here are the R1's advantages:

• 40 fps for 230 RAW frames vs. 30 fps for 150 (having faster continuous shooting available is an advantage, but 30 fps is really fast, and 150 is a lot)
• Custom high-speed continuous shooting supports higher frame rates
• 2.7 ms imaging sensor readout speed vs. 4.8 (faster is better, but this difference will seldom be noticeable)
• ISO expansion up to 409600 vs. 102400 (you will not want to use these settings)
• Cross-type AF points (holds the potential for higher AF precision)
• 6144-zone metering vs. 384-zone (more areas evaluated yields potential improvement in auto exposure results)
• Smart Controllers with half-press sensitivity for additional control
• 9.44 million dots, 0.90x EVF vs. 5.76 and 0.76x (bigger and better)
• Dual CFexpress type B memory card slots vs. CFexpress type B and SD (though some may prefer having an SD slot available)
• M.Fn3, WB, and second Info buttons
• Pre-continuous shooting (hindsight is far clearer than foresight, and recording an image of an action in the near past is game-changing)
• DIGIC X plus DIGIC Accelerator processors for exceptionally fast and intelligent AF and AE calculations
• IBIS provides up to 8.5 stops of shake correction vs 8 (while 8.5 is better than 8, the difference seems modest)
• Improved Eye Control AF (potentially a big deal if the R3's Eye Control was not compatible with your eye)
• Adjustable frame rates (30, 20, 15, 12, 10, 7.5, 5, 3, 2, and 1 fps)
• Full HD at 240p vs. 120p
• Pre-recording (3 or 5 seconds) (hindsight is far clearer than foresight)
• HDMI Type-A vs. Type-D
• Neural Network upscaling (2x larger in both dimensions to 179 megapixels) and noise reduction processing in camera
• 802.11ax Wi-Fi 6 GHz vs. 802.11ac (5 GHz)
• Longer battery life rating (1330 LCD and 700 EVF vs. 860 and 620)

Here are the R3's advantages:

• 4.15 million dot LCD vs. 2.1 million
• modestly smaller and lighter
• Lower price

If that last bullet did not exist, the easy choice would be the R1. The last bullet is supported, and the R3 provides significant performance for its cost. Still, the most demanding professionals will want the R1.

The R5 II and R1 now shadow the EOS R3, the former performance leader of the MILC lineup.

Check out the R5 II vs. R3 specification comparison along with the visual comparison of these cameras. What are the differences between the Canon EOS R5 Mark II and the R3? Here are the R5 II's advantages:

• 45-megapixel imaging sensor vs. 24 (the difference is big, but not everyone wants the higher resolution)
• Pre-continuous shooting (hindsight is far clearer than foresight, and recording an image of an action in the near past is game-changing)
• DIGIC X plus DIGIC Accelerator processors for exceptionally fast and intelligent AF and AE calculations
• IBIS provides up to 8.5 stops of shake correction vs 8 (while 8.5 is better than 8, the difference seems modest)
• Improved Eye Control AF (potentially a big deal if the R3's Eye Control was not compatible with your eye)
• Adjustable frame rates (30, 20, 15, 12, 10, 7.5, 5, 3, 2, and 1 fps)
• 6144-zone metering vs. 384-zone (more areas evaluated yields potential improvement in auto exposure results)
• 8k vs. 6K (higher resolution is better if you use 8k)
• Pre-recording (3 or 5 seconds) (hindsight is far clearer than foresight)
• HDMI Type-A vs. Type-D
• Neural Network upscaling (2x larger in both dimensions to 179 megapixels) and noise reduction processing in camera
• 802.11ax Wi-Fi 6 GHz vs. 802.11ac (5 GHz)
• Holds 4260 mAh of power in the vertical grip vs. 2750 mAh
• Considerably smaller and lighter (without vertical grip)
• Lower price (though R3 promotions are equalizing this advantage)

Here are the R3's advantages:

• Supports high-speed continuous shooting for 150 RAW images vs. 93
• Custom high-speed continuous shooting supports higher frame rates
• Up to 1/64000 shutter speed vs. 1/32000 (crazy fast vs. extremely fast)
• Smart Controllers (powerful controls after some acclimation)
• 4.15 million dot LCD vs. 2.1 million
• Integrated vertical grip, LAN port, and GPS (outstanding grip ergonomics, the grip, port, and GPS are available accessories for the R5 II)
• Superior dust and weather resistance (with both bodies significantly sealed, will we notice the difference?)
• More controls and buttons (these make the camera faster and easier to use. And, more complicated?)
• More powerful 2750 mAh LP-E19 battery pack vs. 2130 mAh (but the R5 II holds 4260 mAh in the vertical grip)

While most photographers will find the R5 II better suited for their needs, a niche group of photographers will find the R3's advantages important.

If you have not already done so, order the R5 II immediately if you have even a remote interest in it.

More Information

Canon EOS R5 Mark II

Canon EOS R3

Let's compare the Canon EOS R5 Mark II to the Canon EOS R6 Mark II.

Check out the R5 II vs. R6 II specification comparison along with the visual comparison of these cameras. What are the differences between the Canon EOS R5 Mark II and the R6 II? Here are the R5 II's advantages:

• 45-megapixel backside illuminated (BSI) imaging sensor vs. 24 non-BSI (the difference is big, but not everyone needs the higher resolution)
• 6.3 ms electronic shutter imaging sensor readout speed vs. 14.5 (the faster readout speed is most advantageous for fast movement)
• DIGIC X plus DIGIC Accelerator vs. DIGIC X
• 6144-zone metering vs. 384-zone (more areas evaluated yields potential improvement in auto exposure results)
• Up to 1/32000 shutter speed vs. 1/16000 (extremely fast vs. really fast)
• Individual files are rapidly saved during pre-continuous shooting vs. a consolidated file written after the capture ends (the individual files create a significantly faster workflow in-camera and during post-processing)
• Upgraded AF system, including improved subject detection (especially for photographing subjects in motion)
• Eye Control AF vs. no (dramatically faster AF point or area positioning)
• AF at EV -7.5 vs. -6.5 (darker is better, but EV -6.5 is extremely dark)
• 5.76 million Dot EVF vs. 3.69 for improved viewing experience
• Blackout-free EVF vs. no (tracking a moving subject while continuously shooting is considerably easier)
• 14-bit with electronic shutter vs. 12
• Adjustable frame rates (30, 20, 15, 12, 10, 7.5, 5, 3, 2, and 1 fps)
• 2.1 million dot LCD vs. 1.62 million
• In-body image stabilizer provides up to 8.5 stops of shake correction vs 8 (while 8.5 is better than 8, the difference seems modest)
• Up to 8k DCI 60p RAW, 4k DCI 60p SRAW, 4k DCI 120p MP4, 2k DCI 240p vs. 6K 60fps, 4K UHD 60 fps, FHD 180 fps
• Full-size HDMI Type-A port vs. micro type D
• Tally lamp vs. no (informs subject that movie is being recorded)
• 802.11ax Wi-Fi 6E and 6 (6, 5, and 2.4 GHz) vs. 2.4 GHz
• CFexpress Type B plus SD vs. dual SD (CFexpress Type B is considerably faster but larger and more expensive)
• Neural Network upscaling (2x larger in both dimensions to 179 megapixels) and noise reduction processing in camera
• Includes a top LCD panel
• Speedlite shooting with electronic shutter supported
• Slightly raised Magnify, Info, and Q buttons
• New LP-E6P battery pack

That is a solid list.

Here are the R6 II's advantages:

• Up to ISO 102400 and 204800 vs. 51200 and 102400 (at the same ISO settings, the R6 II will have less noise when viewed at the pixel level. However, the R5 II image properly downsampled to 24 MP should appear similarly clean. The highest ISO settings are unusable)
• 40 fps vs. 30 (having faster continuous shooting available is an advantage, but 30 fps is really fast)
• 6K 60p ProRes RAW available (external recording only, with in-camera FHD proxy, 10-bit)
• Lower price

While few would choose the R6 II over the R5 II for features and capabilities, that last bullet, the lower price, makes this camera a great value and a top seller.

If you have not already done so, order the R5 II immediately if you have even a remote interest in it.

More Information

Canon EOS R5 Mark II

Canon EOS R6 Mark II

Is upgrading to the Canon EOS R5 Mark II from the EOS R5 worth the upgrade cost?

Check out the R5 II vs. R5 specification comparison along with the visual comparison of these cameras. What are the differences between the Canon EOS R5 Mark II and the R5? Here are the R5 II's advantages:

• 45-megapixel backside illuminated (BSI) imaging sensor vs. non-BSI
• 30 fps full-bit depth (14) RAW frames per second vs. 20 fps 12-bit (30 is considerably faster than 20, which is also fast. Remember that focus bracketing uses the electronic shutter, which drops the bit depth to 12 on the R5)
• 6.3 ms electronic shutter imaging sensor readout speed vs. 16.3 (the R5 II is better suited for rendering fast action, such as a bird taking flight)
• Pre-continuous shooting (hindsight is far clearer than foresight, and recording an image of an action in the near past is game-changing)
• DIGIC X plus DIGIC Accelerator vs. older DIGIC X (enables processing performance improvements)
• Up to 1/32000 shutter speed vs. 1/8000 (extremely fast compared to what was historically the fastest)
• Significantly upgraded AF system, including improved subject detection (vast improvement, especially for photographing subjects in motion)
• Eye Control AF vs. no (dramatically faster AF point or area positioning)
• AF at EV -7.5 vs. -6 (darker is better, but EV -6 is already extremely dark)
• 6144-zone metering vs. 384-zone (more areas evaluated yields potential improvement in auto exposure results)
• Brighter and blackout-free EVF vs. no (tracking a moving subject while continuously shooting is considerably easier)
• In-body image stabilizer provides up to 8.5 stops of shake correction vs 8 (while 8.5 is better than 8, the difference seems modest)
• Adjustable frame rates (30, 20, 15, 12, 10, 7.5, 5, 3, 2, and 1 fps)
• Up to 8k DCI 60p RAW, 4k DCI 60p SRAW, 4k DCI 120p MP4, 2k DCI 240p vs. 8K 30p RAW, 4K DCI to 120 fps (the video capabilities are noticeably improved)
• Canon Log 2, Log 3 vs. Canon Log
• Simultaneous proxy recording at 8K 30p MP4 with Full HD MP4 proxy
• Pre-recording (3 or 5 seconds) (hindsight is far clearer than foresight)
• Waveform monitor, false color, and tally lamp vs. no
• Full-size HDMI Type-A port vs. micro type D
• Longer record times before overheating, with cooling vents and the CF-R20EP cooling fan grip is available
• Integrated workflow with Cinema EOS, RAW/MP4
• Anti-flicker along with High-Frequency Anti-Flicker that evaluates the scene and precisely adjusts the shutter speed to avoid banding and flicker, including from LED signage
• Speedlite shooting with electronic shutter supported
• Next-generation multi-function shoe capable of data communication and power delivery supporting new accessories
• Neural Network upscaling (2x larger in both dimensions to 179 megapixels) and noise reduction processing in camera (with JPG output only)
• SuperSpeed Plus USB 3.2 Gen 2 USB Type-C vs. 3.1 Gen 2
• 6, 5, and 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi vs. 5 and 2.4 GHz
• Power switch was moved to right side, a stills and video switch replaces the former power switch (the switch capability is a big upgrade, but the shape and position will drive R5 users crazy)
• Slightly raised Magnify, Info, and Q buttons (the raised buttons are easier to locate, especially in the dark)
• New LP-E6P battery pack
• Slightly lighter

What are the Canon EOS R5 advantages over the R5 II?

• Now discounted for a lower cost

The R5 II has the overwhelming advantage in all regards aside from price. Especially if your subjects moves, the R5 II is worth the upgrade cost.

However, the R5 is an outstanding camera, and the release of the R5 II does not change that. Especially with the R5 substantially discounted (while it lasts), those with less demanding needs may find that the R5, having the same resolution, is sufficient and that the R5 II is not worth the additional cost.

Landscape photographers must weigh the R5 II's advantages more carefully than wildlife and sports photographers. Videographers will prefer the R5 II.

If you have not already done so, order the R5 II immediately if you have even a remote interest in it.

More Information

Canon EOS R5 Mark II

Canon EOS R5

It is surprising how similar the performance and feature set of the Canon EOS R5 Mark II are to those of the flagship EOS R1 announced at the same time.

Check out the R5 II vs. R1 specification comparison along with the visual comparison of these cameras. What are the differences between the Canon EOS R5 Mark II and the R1? Here is a summary of the R1's advantages:

• 40 fps for 230 frames vs. 30 fps for 93 (having faster continuous shooting available is an advantage, but 30 fps is really fast)
• 2.7 ms imaging sensor readout speed vs. 6.3 (faster is better, but 6.3 ms is sufficient for most needs)
• Up to ISO 102400 and 409600 vs. 51200 and 102400 (at the same ISO settings, the R1 will have less noise when viewed at the pixel level. However, the R5 II image properly downsampled to 24 MP should appear similarly clean. The highest ISO settings are unusable)
• Up to 1/64000 shutter speed vs. 1/32000 (crazy fast holds a small niche advantage over extremely fast)
• Cross-type AF points (holds the potential for higher AF precision)
• Smart Controllers (powerful controls after some acclimation)
• 9.44 million dots, 0.90x EVF vs. 5.76 and 0.76x (bigger and better)
• Dual CFexpress type B memory card slots vs. CFexpress type B and SD (though some may prefer having an SD slot available)
• Integrated vertical grip, LAN port, and GPS (outstanding grip ergonomics, the grip, port, and GPS are available accessories for the R5 II)
• Superior dust and weather resistance (with both bodies significantly sealed, will we notice the difference?)
• More controls and buttons (these make the camera faster and easier to use. And, more complicated?)
• More powerful 2750 mAh LP-E19 battery pack vs. 2130 mAh (but the R5 II holds 4260 mAh in the vertical grip)

The R5 II's advantages are:

• 45-megapixel imaging sensor vs. 24 (a big difference, but not everyone finds the higher resolution worth the increased storage size and processing time)
• 8k vs. 6K (higher resolution is better if you use 8k)
• Waveform monitor (why doesn't the R1 have this?)
• Has an SD card slot available (accommodates less expensive, but slower, memory cards)
• Holds 4260 mAh of power in the vertical grip vs. 2750 mAh
• Considerably smaller size and lighter weight (without a vertical grip)
• Has a cooling fan available
• Considerably less expensive (always a solid advantage)

While the most demanding professionals will want the R1, the R5 II's performance is sufficient for a high percentage of needs and some of its advantages are significant.

Let me know if I missed a meaningful difference.

If you have not already done so, order these cameras immediately if you have even a remote interest in them.

More Information

Canon EOS R5 Mark II

Canon EOS R1

Before we dig into the details, I strongly advise preordering these cameras immediately if you have even a remote interest in them. They are in extremely high demand, and I expect preorders to long consume supply. Orders are easy to cancel, but lines are not easy to get to the front of.

Important: Using the links on this site, including below, to place your order provides important support. Thanks in advance for that!

Extensive Hands-On Information:   Canon EOS R5 Mark II     Canon EOS R1

If you are short on time, browse the feature summaries near the top of each page. Note the comparisons between the R5 II and the R5, R6 II, R3, and R1 included on the Canon EOS R5 Mark II page.

Preorders

Canon EOS R5 Mark II: B&H | Adorama | Canon USA | Amazon (all available countries) | WEX | Camera Canada

Canon EOS R1: B&H | Adorama | Canon USA | Amazon (all available countries) | WEX | Camera Canada

Get extra Canon LP-E6P Batteries: B&H | Adorama | Canon USA | WEX

Canon BG-R20 Battery Grip: B&H | Adorama | Canon USA | WEX | Camera Canada

Canon BG-R20EP LAN Port Grip: B&H | Adorama | Canon USA | WEX | Camera Canada

Canon CF-R20EP Cooling Fan Grip: B&H | Adorama | Canon USA | WEX | Camera Canada

Just posted: Canon RF 35mm F1.4 L VCM Lens Review.

Find out how the new lighter, smaller, and more affordable 35 L lens performs. Additional sample photos are coming.

Support this site by ordering the Canon RF 35mm F1.4 L VCM Lens from B&H | Adorama | Canon USA | WEX | Amazon (all available countries) | Camera Canada

One power adapter to replace them all. The Xcellon PDG-4200B 4-Port 200W GaN USB Charger is on sale for half price today ($59.99) at B&H.

We have an ever increasing number of USB charged and powered devices, and often, each has its own power adapter, often vying for receptical space in the same location. Taking all those chargers traveling is another complication.

What if a single charger could cover of all your needs? And, what if that charger had more power than all your other chargers combined? This might be that one.

B&H recently sent me the high-quality, ultra-useful, Xcellon PDG-4200B GaN (Gallium Nitride, remains cooler than silicon) charger, featuring 4 ports with up to 200W total power output. Increasing our productivity (and feeding our impatience) is this charger's support of PD 3.0, PPS (Programmable Power Supply), QC4+, and Samsung Super Fast fast charging. Short circuit, overcurrent, overvoltage, and overtemperature preventions are provided.

The individual port ratings add up to more than the 200w this charger is capable of, and thus, limits are imposed. Here are the possible power distribution combinations:

USB-C (Port 1 or 2): 100W
USB-C (Port 3): 65W
USB-A: 60W
USB-C (Port 1 and 2): 100W + 100W
USB-C (Port 1 or 2 and 3): 100W + 65W
USB-C (Port 1 or 2) and USB-A: 100W + 60W
USB-C (Port 3) and USB-A: 12W + 12W
USB-C (Port 1 & 2) and USB-C (Port 3) or USB-A: 100W + 65W + 30W
USB-C (Port 1 or 2), USB-C (Port 3), and USB-A: 100W + 12W + 12W
USB-C (All 3 Ports) and USB-A: 100W + 65W + 12W + 12W

The 3' (0.9m) power cable moves the snarl and space competition away from recepticals.

The simple charger is compact, measuring only 3.5 x 2.5 x 1.4" (89.2 x 64.7 x 36.3 mm), with the 11.7 oz (331 g) weight being its primary con. The weight feels substantial compared to the small size, but it aids in the solid feel.

With various devices connected to the same charger, it seems that hub capabilities would have been an easy feature to include, but this device is dedicated to providing power.

Consider pairing this charger with Pearstone USB4 Type-C 240W Power Delivery Cables (up to 40 Gb/s, 48V/5A, Thunderbolt 3 & 4) to power laptops, cameras, etc.

Get the Xcellon PDG-4200B 4-Port 200W GaN USB Charger for half price today at B&H.

Image quality, vignetting, and distortion test results are now available on the Canon RF 35mm F1.4 L VCM Lens page.

Here are some comparisons to get you started:

Compared to the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Lens

Compared to the Sony FE 35mm F1.4 GM Lens

Compared to the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG DN Art Lens

Compared to the Tamron 35mm f/1.4 Di USD Lens

Please share!

Support the site by ordering the Canon RF 35mm F1.4 L VCM Lens from B&H | Adorama | Canon USA | WEX | Amazon (all available countries) | Camera Canada

Rent the Canon RF 35mm F1.4 L VCM Lens from Lensrentals.

Just posted: Tamron 50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Lens Review.

An attractive addition to Tamron's lineup.

Support this site by ordering the Tamron 50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Lens (or anything else) from B&H | Adorama | WEX

Please share!

Image quality test results are now available on the Tamron 50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Lens page.

Interesting addition to Tamron's lineup.

Compared to the Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Lens

Support this site by ordering the Tamron 50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Lens (or anything else) from B&H | Adorama | WEX

Please share!

Just posted: Sony FE 16-25mm F2.8 G Lens Review.

Great lens.

Please share!

Support this site by ordering the Sony FE 16-25mm F2.8 G Lens (or anything else) from B&H | Sony | Adorama | Amazon (all available countries) | WEX | Camera Canada

Rent the Sony FE 16-25mm F2.8 G Lens from Lensrentals.

The Canon RF 35mm F1.4 L VCM Lens page is loaded with information and expectations.

Expect to learn something new from this information.

Get the Canon RF 35mm F1.4 L VCM Lens from B&H | Adorama | Canon USA | WEX | Amazon (all available countries) | Camera Canada

If you have reasonable interest in this lens and have not already preordered it, do so immediately. This long overdue lens will be in high demand. It is easy to cancel an order, but getting back to the front of this line could take a long time.

Find more information about the RF 35 F1.4, including the specifications and MTF charts, on the Canon RF 35mm F1.4 L VCM Lens page (more information coming soon).

While an RF 35mm f/1.4 lens was expected long before this one arrived, Canon had another high-performing option in their easily adaptable EF lineup, the Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Lens

The MTF charts indicate the RF lens is optically improved from the EF II.

The Canon RF 35mm F1.4 L VCM vs. EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM Lens comparison shows the RF lens an impressive 7.4 oz (210g) lighter and modestly smaller.

Also smaller are the RF lens's filter threads, 67mm vs. 72mm. The RF lens has a removable rear filter holder.

The RF lens has 11 aperture blades vs. 9 to keep stopped down out-of-focus highlights round and maintain overall smooth bokeh. It also has an aperture ring, control ring, and lens function button to its advantage. The RF lens has VCM and USM AF motors (far better for video) vs. Ring USM, but the EF lens has a slightly higher maximum magnification of 0.21x vs. 0.18x. Making the decision easy is the RF lens's much lower price.

Get the Canon RF 35mm F1.4 L VCM Lens from B&H | Adorama | Canon USA | WEX | Amazon (all available countries) | Camera Canada

Get the Canon Speedlite EL-10 from B&H | Adorama

Just posted: Sigma 28-45mm F1.8 DG DN Art Lens Review.

You need to read this one.

Support this site by ordering the Sigma 28-45mm F1.8 DG DN Art Lens (or anything else) from B&H | Adorama | WEX

Please share!

Just posted: Sony FE 24-50mm F2.8 G Lens Review.

There is a lot to gain by giving up 20mm.

Support this site by ordering the Sony FE 24-50mm F2.8 G Lens (or anything else) from B&H | Sony | Adorama | Amazon (all available countries) | WEX | Camera Canada

Rent the Sony FE 24-50mm F2.8 G Lens from Lensrentals.

Please share!

Just posted: Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN II Art Lens Review

Destined to be the next best-seller.

Please share!

Support this site by ordering the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN II Art Lens (or anything else) from B&H | Amazon (all available countries) | WEX | Camera Canada

Rent the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN II Art Lens from Lensrentals.

Image quality, vignetting, flare, and distortion test results are now available on the Sony FE 16-25mm F2.8 G Lens page.

This is a compact, lightweight, sharp lens. Here are some comparisons.

Compared to the Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 GM II Lens

Compared to the Sony FE PZ 16-35mm F4 G Lens

Compared to the Sony FE 12-24mm F2.8 GM Lens

Compared to the Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DG DN Contemporary Lens

Compared to the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN Art Lens

Compared to the Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD Lens

Support this site by ordering the Sony FE 16-25mm F2.8 G Lens (or anything else) from B&H | Sony | Adorama | Amazon (all available countries) | WEX | Camera Canada

Rent the Sony FE 16-25mm F2.8 G Lens from Lensrentals.

Please share!