EOS R6 Mark III
The highly anticipated R6 III takes the awesome R6 II to new heights, with incremental but significant improvements:
- 33MP
- Faster readout speed than R6 II (faster in 12-bit than the semi-stacked Sony sensor in the Nikon Z6 III in 14-bit)
- (Slightly?) improved autofocus
- Better pre-capture
- CFexpress Type B + SD UHS-II cards
- 1/320s flash sync (edit: only in APS-C crop mode)
Video capabilities very similar to the C50:
- Full-size HDMI
- Open gate 7K30p
- Canon Log 2
- Waveform
- Tally lamp
Reviews: The Digital Picture, Petapixel
RF 45mm 1.2 STM
This lens is really compelling: super bright nifty-tifty (it’s called 45mm just to differentiate it from the 50mm 1.2 USM, the field of view seems to be almost the same) for under 500€, with big compromises with regards to image quality.
Main characteristics:
- 1.2 aperture (with significant falloff of 4 stops in the corners…)
- Low price <500€ (compared to nearest neighbors: 200€ for 50mm 1.8, >1500€ for 50 1.4)
- Acceptable autofocus
- No stabilization
- Compact and light
- Old school uncorrected optical aberrations (yes, every kind of them)
- High barrel distortion needing digital correction
- 70€ for the lens hood!?
An accessible 1.2 lens with autofocus, with the tradeoff of sharpness and performance, is a very interesting offering!
Reviews: The Digital Picture
Both will be available on 20/11/2025.
You must log in or # to comment.
Neat. Maybe I’ll be finally be able to pick up an R6 MKII for a bit cheaper now when the rich kids inevitably all stampede to the new hotness and dump their previous models on eBay.
An accessible 1.2 lens with autofocus, with the tradeoff of sharpness and performance, is a very interesting offering!
I read the review on this and woof. It’s awful. That’s not a tradeoff, it’s an outright deal with the devil.
I think I’ll be sticking to my RF 35mm ƒ/1.8, thanks. I’ve never encountered any scenario where its speed was any kind of issue, and it seems you need to stop this thing down to around ƒ/4 in order to achieve any kind of reasonable sharpness which really rather defeats the purpose.
This is a hipster lens. It’s a bauble, pure pandering to the knit beanie crowd who watch too much Youtube and hyperventillate over Bokeh like it’s the only thing that matters. Pro or even semipro photographers won’t buy this; they wouldn’t put up with its nightmare optics for even 1/8000 of a second. 45/50mm is too tight for selfie video and probably even most vlogging studios and it’ll be even worse on any of the crop sensor models (although I guess that may also crop off some of the nastiness around the edges), it’s fringy, it’s distorted, and if for some reason I need my foreground as well as my background to be blended down into mashed potatoes I can apply Vaseline to the front of an existing lens for free.
If you want to deliberately take awful photos for artistic purposes, fine. But there are much cheaper ways to do that, most of which will also confer more street cred amongst the greater community of hemp-clothed poseurs.
Also.
The optical design of this lens, including ???, is illustrated above Confirming there is NO special coating, meaning there is no ASC or SWC, just “super spectra coating” which is the more generic coating- which is fairly standard at this price point – > This lens produces great sunstars, nicely avoids flare, and shows little lateral CA. However, most of this lens’s other optical tests do not impress.
[Sic] on all of the above. (This is from the linked lens review.) I see the sterling quality of modern day professional copy editing remains untarnished.
Large aperture has other uses apart from thin depth of field, on which I agree that 1.2 is so thin it becomes barely usable in some situations. But many people dig it: it is a “vintage” design, pretty on par with the EF 50 1.2 (which costs around the same used). I think it is a good addition to the lineup and I’m personally considering it for low light indoor situations.
Sometimes getting enough light on the sensor with subpar optical quality wins over having to shoot up the ISO too much with a more modern but slower lens (f/1.2 means more than double the light than f/1.8, so indoors this could mean ISO 3200 instead of 6400. It’s pretty significant!)
