With the Sigma 17-40mm F1.8 DC | Art lens at his side, photographer and cinematographer Naoki Miyashita visits a Kyoto pottery workshop to find out just how well this modern evolution of a beloved APS-C zoom lens performs.
The post Hello, Again appeared first on SIGMA Blog.
The R5 Mark II has arrived! It is a good camera but very similar to the old R5 which came out in 2020. I’ve had the original R5 since it came out in October 2020 and the question I want answered is should I buy the new R5 Mark II?
In this post I will strive to answer this question with an honest comparison of these two great cameras.
Taken with the R5.
The old R5 has already been marked down by $1,000 on most websites. Previous generations always get reduced in price prior to the next gen camera’s but it still seems like a bit of a low price for a high quality camera like the R5. It looks like market demand for the R5 has tailed off substantially, and that is true for the R3 and R5C as well. That is why Canon is going for a relatively quick refresh of the R5 after almost exactly 4 years they’re upping the ante with a new R5, the R5 Mark II.
The main thing I want to know is this, is the old R5 at it’s reduced price a good purchase? Below are some stats to help you make sense of this puzzle.
Click Here to read my original review on the EOS R5.
Sensor Technology
Canon claims that the R5 Mark II is using a stacked sensor with Sony’s BSI technology. Stacked sensors are supposed to be able to “read out” the sensor much faster than the “old technology”. However, when it comes to video rolling shutter, the R5 Mark II performs exactly the same as the original R5. Perhaps the original R5 had a stacked sensor even though it wasn’t marketed as such? Or, maybe Sony’s sensor technology just isn’t that great.
Resolution
The R5 Mark II has the exact same resolution as the current R5.
Readout Speed / Rolling Shutter
The R5 Mark II has faster read out speed when using electronic shutter for still photos only. When using the fully electronic shutter for stills, the new R5 Mark II is more than twice as fast as the original R5 which makes the new R5 a lot better if you like to use electronic shutter… but it still isn’t anywhere close to as fast as a mechanical shutter.
The R5 Mark II’s readout speed remains the same as the R5 for video with a maximum speed around 13 milliseconds. However, the R5 Mark II now adds in 8k 60fps shooting at 13 milliseconds readout speed. This results in a similar readout performance to the original R5 which shot 4k 120fps at its maximum. 4k 120 is equal to 8k 60 in terms of readout performance as 4k 120 is done line skipped in the original R5. Reading half the lines at 120fps is obviously the same speed as reading them all out at 60fps. This type of readout is called “line skipped” readout. The new R5 Mark II, unfortunately, also does 4k 120fps as line skipped, limiting its maximum readout speed to the same as the original R5 for video purposes.
Video Improvements
The R5 Mark II now has 8k 60fps resolution which goes above the original R5’s 8k 30fps video resolution.
The R5 Mark II has also improved upon the dreaded overheating issues the original R5 had, even without the new external cooling battery grip available only for the R5 Mark II.
AF improvements
The R5 Mark II has the same AF system as the original R5 just with more firmware updates. There are no new features other than supposedly better tracking AF. Despite initial reports, I doubt the R5 Mark II will be as good as the R1 when it comes to subject tracking.
Faster CPU
There is no indication that the R5 Mark II has a different CPU when compared to the current R5.
Dynamic Range
According to online review sites, the new R5 Mark II has no dynamic range improvements in stills from 100 ISO to 6400 ISO. In fact, it appears to have slightly less dynamic range than the original R5. It is not known if the new R5 Mark II uses a dual gain sensor like the R5 used, but if it does use a dual gain sensor, it no longer switches to another gain circuit at 400 ISO, instead, this appears to be done at a much higher ISO past 1600.
The R5 has no problem picking up all the details in this scene of a white building with a gigantic white dome.
The 100% view crops below show that there are very few details missing in this shot taken in bright midday sun.
The basic point is, if the R5 isn’t adding more dynamic range then how is it going to make an image like this substantially better?
Well, for video at least, the R5 Mark II is going to add a couple features that some people will want to buy. It appears to have slightly more accurate colors out of camera which is great for people who want a faster workflow. I think the R5’s colors are close enough most of the time but it does require some color grading to look normal.
The R5 Mark II is also supposed to have a lot more dynamic range in video mode when shooting in LOG formats. Camera’s like the R5 C have a lot of dynamic range in LOG getting all the way up to 14 stops, but, the R5 Mark II is supposed to have 16+ stops when shooting LOG. That puts the R5 Mark II less than a stop below the latest and greatest cinema cameras… I know a lot of video people will be interested in that capability.
Ergonomics Updates
The R5 Mark II has slightly changed ergonomics and physical design. The power switch has been moved to the right side of the camera and there is now a fan included in the battery grip which modestly increases recording times for video. There is also a new flash hot shoe which allows the camera to work with Canon’s new lineup of super high-performance flashes.
The new R5 Mark II is a great camera, which makes sense, since it is nearly the same as the original R5, but now with a few performance updates. Because of all the updates it is now $4,299. And at this price the fully electronic shutter is now competitive with the Nikon Z9, the Canon R3, and the Canon R1. In stills mode the electronic shutter can readout in about 6.3 milliseconds, whereas the original R5 is set to read out in about 16.8 milliseconds for a still photo. Unfortunately, the video readout speeds are just about the same between the two cameras. Because the new R5 Mark II still has overheating as an issue when shooting high resolution video, the sensor is intentionally slowed down to about the same speed as the original R5 to help increase shooting times. On a brighter note, the new R5 Mark II has 16+ stops of dynamic range when shooting in video LOG formats. Since there is no log format for stills, the dynamic range there is just about identical to the original R5. But, getting 16+ stops of dynamic range for 8k 60fps video means the R5 Mark II can definitely deliver some high quality video if called upon to do so.
If you shoot video the new R5 Mark II appears to be an upgrade over the original. However, if you shoot stills, the original R5 doesn’t give up a whole lot compared to the new one. True, you can shoot with the new electronic shutter, but, the good old mechanical shutter is still superior to every camera’s electronic shutter. Yes, the MECHANICAL SHUTTER IS STILL #1. Basically, there’s no point to an electronic shutter just yet, even though random dip shits will say ITS SOOO IMPORTANT. Well, it really isn’t GOOD ENOUGH. If electronic isn’t better than the mechanical shutter then it really isn’t a replacement for the mechanical shutter, is it?
If you really need maximum electronic shutter performance, the R5 Mark II still isn’t good enough in my opinion. It reads out in 6.3 milliseconds which is still quite slow. While it’s not exactly the same, it’s still only as fast to scan as a 1/160th shutter speed. And that means it’s more than 3 times slower than the R1 which reads out in 2 milliseconds. That disparity is partially explained by the lower resolution sensor (24mp vs 45mp), but it isn’t entirely explained by that. All things being equal the R5 should be able to read out in about 3-4 milliseconds.
Ok, the bottom line is this, the new R5 Mark II is a solid camera, but it’s more of a video-oriented camera. If you shoot video, it appears to be better than the original R5, but not really better than the R5 C which doesn’t overheat. For video, the R5 Mark II kind of makes sense if you want 8k 60fps right now, but it overheats even with the fancy battery grip. However, if you don’t need the highest resolution settings, you can enjoy 16+ stops of DR when shooting in LOG. Previously, the only Canon camera with that amount of dynamic range was the C300 Mark III.
For stills shooters the R5 and R5 Mark II are a little close for comfort. Aside from the electronic shutter being improved and the supposed AF improvements, there’s not a lot to get excited about. With the R5 now being about $1,500 cheaper it seems like the better option if you’re a landscape photographer or the like. It remains to be seen how much the R5 Mark II can really improve on its predecessor.
Click Here to read my original review on the EOS R5.
Taken with the R5.
The reality of the world is that images are almost always cropped from what they were in camera no matter how we share them. This is largely due to the constraints of mobile phones where wide aspect ratio images can be hard to view on phones when the phone is held in portrait mode.
The weird thing is that every website or app is a little bit different. Some sites force your images into their own highly restricted crop such as Instagram, and some sites like Flickr don’t care what crop is used. The main concern for using either of those services is how people are most likely to view your images which as far as I know is still a mobile device.
To help photographers deal with this, did you knot that most (if not all) full frame 35mm digital cameras have built in “crop modes” which apply a digital crop to your image in camera?
For example, my camera will shoot in 4 different crop modes (also called aspect ratios). It will shoot in a 4:3 aspect ratio which is the old TV standard for HD television. It will shoot in 1:1 format which is a square format used as we all know on Instagram. It will shoot in 16:9 which is the modern standard for television screens, computer monitors, and many TV shows. Take a look at the comparisons below to get more of an idea of how these different formats relate to each other.
When using these alternate aspect ratios the RAW image remains unaffected. After opening the RAW files in Lightroom a crop will be automatically applied to the image but you can just remove the crop and voila, you’re back to having a full frame image again. If shooting JPG the final image is cropped and the 35mm full frame image can’t be recovered.
Since the RAW file retains the 35mm full frame image a different aspect ratio can be used as a bit of a cheat to help avoid framing mistakes. Say you’re the type who tends to shoot with a tilt or off to the right all the time, or maybe you tend to shoot with the subject low or high and cut off people’s feet. If you’re one of those types then using one of these alternate aspect ratios can force you to frame your images better.
For instance, if you want to make sure you always have room on the sides of your images, you can use the 4:3 crop to force yourself to frame a little wider on your subject. This might be especially useful if you’re shooting fast action such as sports and you want to make sure that there is room in the image to get a nice frame around your subject for publication.
For instance, if I was shooting baseball or basketball where there is usually a focus on what a single player is doing, I might choose to shoot in RAW with the 1:1 crop active. This would force me to put the player close to the center of the frame at all times.
Think of it as a way of making a repetive job a little easier on yourself and you might start to see the benefits of using different crop ratios when you’re taking pictures.
It would be really cool if the camera allowed me to create a couple custom crop ratios for all the different websites out there as well, but, I haven’t heard of a camera that can do that yet.
The R5 can also shoot with a full APS-C crop. Below is a comparison of the full frame area vs the APS-C area.
If you’re far away from the subject, say a bird or other kind of wildlife, then shooting with an APS-C crop not only saves some file size but it can help the photographer get better framing for their final images. It also allows the R5 to work a little more seamlessly with other APS-C cameras if other people happen to be using those.
Despite all this, many if not most photographers will immediately ask why anyone would throw out all those pixels that they paid so much money for in a full frame camera. Well, they honestly have a good point and it’s why I rarely to never use APS-C crop on my camera. For one, while the APS-C crop does offer some logic, it’s really better to use a longer focal length to achieve precise framing. On the R5 a full APS-C crop is still 17.2 megapixels which isn’t too far off from actual crop sensor cameras that are often around 24 megapixels. But it is a far cry from the 45 megapixels of the R5’s full frame sensor. Bottom line: going to APS-C on the R5 throws out more than half the resolution and that would be true with any FF camera that offers the ability to shoot in crop mode.
17
June 2025 : Tuesday
Jun 2025 : Tuesday
Everyone reading this post should know that I love Peak Design products. Obviously a while back we had a great time working together on the Everyday Messenger bags but that didn’t require me to stick with their products *checks calendar*… *faints*… *gets up off the floor* 10 years later! How did a decade happen????
Anyway, one of the more recent bits of kit that I use from them is the Travel Tripod. It’s been allll over the place with me since launch, from the most southern tip of New Zealand to the north coast of Scotland and loads of places in between and has never let me down. In this relationship, unlike others in my life, I’m far more likely to be the one to cause issues, that’s for sure. Back to my original point. Today Peak Design are launching the Pro Tripod line with enhanced features such as increased strength and stability to carry heavier cameras and lenses, improved ball head functionality and accessories for full fluid pan/tilt video capture. It looks like they’ve also refined the design and further enhanced build quality too. Nice stuff all round!
So, if the original wasn’t “pro” enough for you maybe the new one will be. You can find our more here where they’ve spent countless hours crafting a useful info and sales page. If you grab one, have fun! And if you don’t well, um, enjoy knowing that you made a terrible life decision. 😉
Photographer Etsuko Aimu captures images of her children with the Sigma 17-40mm F1.8 DC | Art lens mounted on a Canon EOS R7 mirrorless camera. This APS-C format combination produces beautiful photos for memories that last a lifetime, and beyond.
The post Photography as a Connection appeared first on SIGMA Blog.
Nauticam has unveiled its latest housing, the NA-CV1, designed to accommodate Canon’s new point-and-shoot, the PowerShot V1, released in February 2025. The compact (aka vlogging) camera features a 22.3-megapixel 1.4-inch sensor (which is similar in size to Micro four Thirds, but with a 3:2 aspect ratio), a DIGIC X image processor, and a fixed zoom lens with a focal length range equivalent to 16–50mm f/2.8–4.5. Boasting Canon’s Dual Pixel AF II autofocus system, the PowerShot V1 can record uncropped 4K/30p video oversampled from 5.7K and achieves 15fps burst shooting with its mechanical shutter.
For the NA-CV1, Nauticam has opted to use their N50 port system but ship the housing with the N50 3.5-inch acrylic dome port, which allows the full 16–50mm zoom range out of the box. Switching to their N50 Short Port 25 gives users the opportunity to mount various Nauticam water-contact optics, such as the WWL-C (FOV: 130°–71°), WWL-1B (FOV: 130–80º) and SMC/CMC (via Nauticam’s bayonet mount adaptor). Like Nauticam’s other housings for compact cameras, users have the option of adding a tray and handles, an LCD magnifier, and a vacuum valve (via the housing’s M16 port)—the vacuum monitoring and leak detection system is pre-installed.
The NA-CV1 housing is priced at $2,000 and is available now from retailers such as Backscatter.
When purchasing underwater photography equipment like the products mentioned in this article, please support DPG by supporting our retail partner—Backscatter.com.
PRODUCT INFORMATION
INTRODUCING NA-CV1 FOR CANON POWERSHOT V1 DIGITAL CAMERA
The Canon PowerShot V1 Camera
Key Camera Specifications
The Nauticam NA-CV1 Housing
NA-CV1 is the latest iteration in a lineup of advanced housings for very capable compact cameras supported by Nauticam. Many features found on professional DSLR systems have been integrated into this system, and the result is an underwater housing that allows the user to harness the full potential of this advanced compact camera in the water.
The basic functions and ergonomic enhancements that Nauticam users have grown to know and love are incorporated in NA-CV1. The housing is machined from a solid block of aluminum, then hard anodized to seal out corrosive salt water. It is closed via a simple, yet secure locking rotary latch. The right side of the housing is sculpted to fit the palm of the user’s hand, and Nauticam’s two-stage shutter release lever provides clear differentiation between the half press and full press shutter release positions. All functions are clearly labeled.
The Nauticam leak alarm and vacuum monitoring system is installed as standard equipment. This system provides an audible and visual alert to any water entry in the housing, and when combined with an optional accessory M16 Vacuum Valve II (25625) the watertight integrity of the system can be tested before ever entering the water and monitored during every dive.
Expert product design, modern manufacturing techniques, top quality materials backed by a two-year warranty, and a critical focus on the user experience combine to produce the premier system for Canon Powershot V1.
The N50 Port System
The NA-CV1 ships with the N50 3.5″ Acrylic Dome Port that allows the full 16–50mm zoom range, but other ports are available from the N50 system. When combined with the 38703 N50 Short Port 25, you can add on the 83203 WWL-C for a converted FOV of 130 degrees to 71 degrees.
What’s in the Box?
Recommended Accessories
N50 Port Chart
1. N50 3.5” acrylic dome port, Zoom Range 16–50mm (*The minimun focus distance at Wide 16mm is 25mm, and at Tele 50mm is 530mm)
2. 38703 N50 Short Port 25 + 83203 WWL-C, Lens FOV 84–46º, Converted FOV 130–71º, Zoom Range 24–50mm (*Slight vignetting at 24mm)
3. 38703 N50 Short Port 25 + 83202 WWL-1B, Lens FOV 75–46º, Converted FOV 130–80º, Zoom Range 28–50mm
4. 38703 + 83214 Bayonet Mount Adaptor for SMC/CMC with MFO-1, CMC-2/1
| *Test at focal range 50mm | Smallest Subject Size | Working Distance |
| without diopter | 105 x 70 mm | 175–∞ |
| with 81501 MFO-1 | 89 x 59.3 mm | 116–1150 mm |
| with 81302 CMC-2 | 48 x 32 mm | 55–125 mm |
| with 81301 CMC-1 | 38 x 25.4 mm | 37–74 mm |
Technical Specifications
Every photograph I’ve ever made has been a lucky shot. The light was just right; without it, there’d be no mood in the image. The weather cooperated, or it didn’t, but in the end, the resulting rain or fog made for a much more visceral photograph. The elephants lined up just so, and I was lucky. That I even get to be in the extraordinary places I make my photographs is so, so lucky. Of course, I’m referring to the final images that get edited out from the sketches, developed, and printed. Many among the sketches are very unlucky, and still far more fail for reasons for which I have only myself to blame.
Luck is underappreciated in conversations about creativity. As a younger man, admitting that luck played a role in what I had made felt like giving away the credit; I had worked hard to get where I was, I had learned to use my gear, and I had anticipated the shot, so if someone implied that it was a “lucky shot” I was both offended and defensive. It has taken me some years to change that response to gratitude and to think differently about luck.
As a photographer, artist, or human being, being creative is about responding to circumstance or luck. You’ve probably heard some version of “the more I practice, the luckier I get.” As aphorisms go, it certainly has a ring of truth to it, but it still feels a little disingenuous—like it’s not so much acknowledging the role of luck but claiming the credit. “I wasn’t lucky,” we say, “I was prepared.” Perhaps, but it wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world if we let happenstance have a moment in the spotlight.
I’ve long been a proponent of being intentional in art-making and in life. In my early writing, I talked a lot about vision, which, depending on how you use the word, could probably be swapped out for “intent.” There’s great value in planning and forethought. Still, especially after making an unexpected shift into photographing wildlife, it’s been harder to kid myself about the serendipity on which I’ve been relying. It turns out being intentional in my work isn’t exclusive of sheer dumb luck.
So, luck being what it is, why talk about it at all if we have no control over it? Acknowledging luck probably keeps us humble, and there’s value in that where being perceptive is concerned. But there’s more value in being truly awake to luck—even looking and waiting for it.
The more practiced you are, the more intuitive your craft will be for you, and the easier you’ll settle on a pleasing composition, dial in an exposure that’s not merely correct but truly expressive, and anticipate the strongest moments. Making a photograph might be a dance with luck, but it’s still up to you to follow that lead and be responsive to it. The more comfortable and practiced you are, the smoother that dance will be, and the better you’ll be able to improvise when your dance partner changes things up and your luck and circumstances go in a direction you didn’t expect, as things tend to do.
But there’s something else—the blind spot that occurs when you get too self-assured and stop being aware of luck and the magic you can find if you’re awake and looking for it. Almost every photograph I’ve ever made has a backstory that begins with my expectations and hopes—and ends somewhere else entirely, usually somewhere better and completely unexpected. I owe the credit to an openness to luck—and those crazy random happenstances. In most cases, I was looking or hoping for something else. Perhaps not something wildly different (though in some cases, that is certainly true), but very seldom does what I see in my mind’s eye match what I eventually see in my final picture, for which I am grateful. The best of my work has always been unexpected and is a creative response to that.
If this is true for you, it pays to be careful what you look for and to be mindful of your expectations. Expectations focus us; they narrow our gaze and give us the patience to wait for the moments we anticipate. But they can also make us unobservant of everything else that is going on, stopping us from seeing what would be very lucky indeed if only we were open to it.
I have found it helpful to breathe. To loosen up a little. To put the camera down and look around. To sit back and watch what’s going on. To be aware of my thoughts and be present. How many times have I invested time and attention in one scene, waiting for the moment, waiting for things to pop, only to realize the real opportunity was in an entirely different direction? That the stronger photograph was begging me to pivot and reimagine things? It happens so often that I’ve become suspicious of my first instincts; second-guessing my expectations has become my (rather counterintuitive) modus operandi. You’ve got to trust your gut, but that doesn’t mean you can’t ask it to consider all of its options.
You can’t photograph what you’re not open to seeing in the first place. I never thought I’d say this, but our very specific vision as photographers can be our greatest liability as much as it can be our greatest asset, and sometimes more so if what we’re looking for (or expecting to see) blinds us to the unexpected.
Years ago, in the Great Bear Rainforest in British Columbia, we had been photographing a Kermode (or “spirit”) bear, an American black bear with a recessive gene that makes it white. We had waited for hours to photograph this bear, so we were thrilled when it briefly appeared. But then it was gone just as quickly as it had arrived, and with it went my hopes for the kind of photograph I’d worked so hard to make: a spirit bear fishing in the creek. Dejected, I sat on a rock and waited for the bear to return, feeling the muscles in my shoulders and neck tightening, fearful I had missed my chance and was wasting my time. The rain was only making things worse. And then I heard my guide, Tom, whispering my name. I was annoyed; he knew I was looking for a bear and didn’t want to divert my gaze. As I reluctantly turned to look at him, he made a gesture—a subtle upward glance with his eyes and a tilt of his head. And there, just a few feet above him, was our bear, sitting with its head on a log, watching me from high on the river bank. The resulting photograph pleases me immensely, never mind the magic of that unforgettable moment.
I was looking so damn hard I wasn’t seeing. Being awake to luck isn’t the only thing; you’ve got to be there. If the strongest photographs happen at the most unexpected intersections of light, space, and time, then the longer you spend awaiting (and remaining open to seeing) those intersections, the better the chance you’ll be there when it happens.
You must be there long enough for things to happen, for the light to change, for you yourself to become more aware of these changes, and to develop interesting ideas about what you see. The more time you give it, the luckier you will be, but that time will also give you more chances to do something unexpected and to think differently about how you turn that luck into a photograph. At the risk of abusing the metaphor, it’s more time on the dance floor.
I don’t pretend to have the creative process figured out; it remains mysterious, and I like the wonder that that instills in me. Yet, with each passing year, it’s a little less unpredictable, a little less scary. What I do know is that any creative effort, like making a meaningful photograph, happens in the liminal space between what we can and cannot control. There is such freedom in this.
Are You Good or Just Lucky was originally published as In Praise of Luck and is an excerpt from my latest book,Light, Space & Time. You can find it here on Amazon or from your favourite bookstore.
For the Love of the Photograph,
David
Entry-level strobe offers 50Ws of power, a 140-degree beam when using diffusers, and comes in both fiber-optic and electrical versions
Source link
One from a semi recent trip around the NZ fjords…
The post Exploring the Fjords appeared first on Stuck in Customs.
Monochrome images can be captured by looking around in our day to day scenes, architectural structures, landscapes at certain times of the day, or even by making use of coloured lights to bring in a monochromatic colour to the scene. If you have not shot monochrome images other than black and white, these images here will inspire you to observe your surroundings and capture more monochrome images.
The post 20 Monochrome Photographs For Creative Photography Ideas appeared first on Light Stalking.