Your Canon Photos No. 32: 10th to 16th December 2023

Subject: Red Car

What type of car is this? I saw this today. Is it a Volvo?

Model - Canon EOS RP
ExposureTime - 1/60 seconds
FNumber - 9
ISOSpeedRatings - 2500
ExposureBiasValue - 0
FocalLength - 65 mm
Lens Model - RF24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM

Here's the same car on the left side, later that evening.

Model - Canon EOS RP
ExposureTime - 1/40 seconds
FNumber - 4
ISOSpeedRatings - 8000
ExposureBiasValue - -1
FocalLength - 24 mm
Lens Model - RF24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM

Love those older Volvo cars. Nice find 👍 and nice to see you do enjoy the RP that much😃@Digirame
It's a Volvo PV544 because it has the single windscreen as far I can see in the photo
The older PV444 has a split windscreen

Yeah, the main disadvantage of that being you couldn't use an external on-camera flash.

I've read quite a few debates on that. Most people seem to say the EF-M mount has better lower-budget options than EF-R, at present.

Photobygms,

Thanks for commenting on the red car and confirming that it was a Volvo. Later I saw it driving on the roadway, but forgot to take another photo again. Maybe some day I'll see it again. There's very few old Volvo cars like that where I live.

Dunlin,

That's correct. A person cannot use the add-on viewfinder and an external flash at the same time on the Canon M6 Mark II. If Canon decided to continue with the M series, then maybe a viewfinder would have been built in the body on something like the Mark III (or whatever they would call it). The Canon RP has a viewfinder but if I want a flash I have to add it on. I have other cameras with built in flash, so that wasn't a concern for me, plus I always had thought of buying an external flash anyway.

Yes, generally, I think the RF lenses are more expensive. That's why I took advantage of Canon's generous Black Friday special price of only $129 (USD) for the refurbished Canon RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 lens. The regular price is at or about $399 (USD). Canon also offers a Canon RF 100-400mm lens for $599 (USD) or thereabouts. That's costly but not crazy expensive. I think it's within reach of a lot of people if they save up for it. The last time I checked Canon now offers the refurbished Canon RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 lens for $309.99 (USD).

Dunlin,

Another option to review is that the older EF and EF-S lenses can be used on the Canon R series cameras with an adapter. The adapter is rather inexpensive, being less than $80 (USD).

Oh, by the way, when I was checking the Canon website just now, the refurbished Canon RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 lens went up by another $10 to $319.99 (USD). Maybe they will have some after-Christmas specials. I know I should stop spending money as I have enough toys, but if they have some crazy good sale prices, it would be tempting to get something else.

Subject: Day-time "Blue" Buildings

Here's the same "blue" buildings (on the right side), but I took these during the day time. The first photo is the non-HDR photo that I had to brighten up in post. The second is an in-camera HDR photo. I was amazed at what this camera can do.

Photo No. 1 - This is not a HDR image. It was a little dark straight out of the camera, so I brightened it up on the computer. Then I resized it with IrfanView.

Model - Canon EOS RP
ExposureTime - 1/160 seconds
FNumber - 7.10
ISOSpeedRatings - 320
ExposureBiasValue - 0
FocalLength - 35 mm
Lens Model - RF24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM

Photo No. 2 - This is the in-camera HDR image, that was not modified at all in post processing other than standard resizing (including options) with IrfanView software. I had to wait until there were no cars or people moving, since three images were taken and merged together. It was taken hand-held.

Model - Canon EOS RP
ExposureTime - 1/160 seconds
FNumber - 7.10
ISOSpeedRatings - 400
ExposureBiasValue - 0
FocalLength - 35 mm
Lens Model - RF24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM

David,

Thanks. These were taken at 24mm FL (at the smallest focal length of the lens), so that's wide angle distortion. I'll take a look at it. I don't think straightening this out will solve it, which I often do. It's rare that I display a photo with crooked horizons for example. Secondly, whether a photo looks over exposed or under exposed often depends on the monitors we have. The pictures look fine to me, from what I'm seeing on my monitor.

For me, taking these high ISO photos at night, are some of my early experimentation of the new camera. I was less concerned about leveling and I can't control what other people see on their monitors. Thanks for taking the time to review this. I'll look for the level that can be superimposed over the RP screen.

Also, let me add...if you go to the middle of each image and draw a line, you'll see that they are vertical or nearly that way. So, what would you do differently? Did you want the buildings to lean more to the left or to the right and why? One more edit: The histograms that I saw do not show these as over-exposed. If I darkened these images any more, it would be hard to see the buildings...at least on my monitor.

One more comment: 😀 Jpegs are not irremediable. They are not as remediable as RAW, but there is the ability to make some small changes.

David,

I'm really curious why you thought those two "blue building" photos were over-exposed. I found they were slightly under exposed and so did my software, when I used it to brighten them both up a little (for photo numbers 3 and 4). Also check the ExposureBiasValue of negative 0.33 that I described as what was used at the time the photos were taken by the camera. I found with monitors that sometimes what they show can vary, even with the angle we view them at. Have you checked your or other people's images on someone else's computer or at one that might be available at a public library?

Dunlin,

I was reading more about the Canon R7. That has a Digic X processor. It's a lot more expensive than the Canon RP, especially at the discounted price I paid for it, but it's an amazing camera

To add some more.... I was watching a YouTube video that reviewed the Canon R10, R7 and RP. Because the R7 has newer technology and good specs, that person felt the Canon R7 was the winner of all three of them. Apparently because the R7 and R10 have a newer DIGIC processor they do pretty good in low light too, even though both of them have crop sensors. Oh boy...more money to spend chasing the latest dream. 😀 And I keep hearing about the importance of having good glass, which costs more money too. 😀

And what about the RP 2.0 😂 aka the Eos R8
That's the "new" RP with full frame sensor, Digic X and many R6-II and R7 specs combined in the same RP package.
www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-R8.aspx

My partner loves her RP but if her 6D-II or RP fails the R8 will be likely the replacement.
(might even be a replacement for my own R is it fails)

Photobygms,

Yes, the Canon R8 is phenomenal. There's a lot of good reviews concerning that camera. I would consider both the Canon R7 and R8, if I were to upgrade any further.

@Digirame Canon's AI AF in the latest R series cameras sounds simply amazing (for action), not to mention the R3 eye-controlled AF. Obviously such a camera is only for the most serious sports/wildlife photographer, or a hobbyist with too much money, but normal people like myself can always discuss the like.

Dunln,

Yes, for me too; it's not something I want to spend money on, but it's fun looking at them. The R3 is amazing but the cost with good RF glass is about $7000 (USD) more or less depending on the lens chosen.

When the technology gets about four years old or older (as with the RP) we can find the prices are a lot less expensive, especially when discounts are offered. Next I think the Canon R7 and R8 are the next ones to watch, to see if they drop enough in price in the next couple of years.

deleted

deleted
Steve Thomas