I chose the wrong horse. Wtf Canon, I've given you fuckers tens of thousands of dollars over the years and you artificially restrict functionality to nickle and dime me?
Guess I'll sell my lenses and switch to Sony or Nikon then. Sucks to suck!
this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2025
143 points (100.0% liked)
Photography
4765 readers
23 users here now
A community to post about photography:
We allow a wide range of topics here including; your own images, technical questions, gear talk, photography blogs etc. Please be respectful and don't spam.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The until-very-recently closed off RF mount was another indicator. Their first party glass is great, but it's not cheap.
Yeah, on my old Canon 7D and 1Dmk2, my favorite lens was actually a Tamron (pretty wide zoom, super sharp, and aperture got down to 2)
I've been using Tamron's 150-500: for a lot of sports and have been really happy with it. Also have two Sigma primes that are also both great.
Huge lens, but a lot of bang for your buck. I've got one of those too lol
I've been very pleased with it. It renders really nicely, the focus is snappy/reliable and tracks well, it seems well built, etc. My only complaint is that I haven't figured out how to attach a lanyard to it without the tripod foot.
There aren't really any smaller options for a FF sensor if you want that kind of reach, or at-least I didn't find any.
You could try printing or molding a lanyard ring that uses the tripod mount's ring as a model, but why not just use the tripod mount itself? It's solidly made and would retain the ability to mount the lens on whatever.
I had considered printing something, but the total weight of the camera + lens combined with the fairly small lanyard pass throughs have been deterring me. I'm sure a print would take the weight statically, but I'm worried about transitory loads from putting the camera down and walking.
The collar has a non-removeable foot and I use the lens hand held. The whole thing weighs 155g/5.5 oz, which isn't horrible, but the foot gets in the way. I keep it pointing up, which works, but is somewhat clunky.
What do you mean mold a lanyard ring?
Yeah, I'd recommend running some sort of sturdy cordage (amsteel or dyneema perhaps) or otherwise reinforcing a printed part in case it cracks.
I don't mind the foot myself and have used it to hook onto my belt or tool loops on my pants, but you could definitely make something lighter with just a loop.
By mold, I mean there are various plastics (and other materials) you can mold either by hand or by printing/forming a mold and then injecting it. They're stronger than something printed in FDM PLA and if you make a mold you can make multiples. There are also other materials you could try to FDM print with like nylon or PETG, but they still wouldn't match the strength of the stock ring.
I have a OP/TECH USA Super Classic connected to the collar loops and usually carry the lens/body combo cross torso with the lens pointing down when I walk. It's pretty comfortable. I do occasionally use the foot as a handle if I haven't put the strap on yet, but this isn't very frequent.
My printer is enclosed, so ASA and nylon aren't really a problem to print. Designing the part with something non-printed running through it as a safety is a great idea.
Molding sounds like more work than it's worth for a one-off. There might be an opportunity for someone with the motivation to set up a really specialized shop making/selling these replacement collars, but I don't have the time to sink into anything I would want to charge $$ for.
You could also try salt baking your prints to make them stronger but it can mess with the dimensions.
For what it's worth, my Sony connects as a webcam no problems at all
Yeah, I'd seriously considered getting an nicer Alpha but I shot Canon for decades so I stuck with them.
Damn, first time I read about that I understood it as 5$ for the app and done, nit 5$ A MONTH.
I'll remember not to buy or recomend Canon then.
The blockade of third party glass is the only reason I didn't give them a look when I was looking for a mirrorless camera. Granted, this was a few years ago and things have slightly improved since then. They still can't touch e-mount glass availability though.
Same thing here. I went with Sony because of how expansive the E-mount lineup was, including 3rd parties (even the lesser known ones like Samyang and Viltrox).
At the time, Canon's first party lineup was pretty lackluster if you weren't looking for the L-series professional lenses. It's gotten better since then, but in terms of value it's very hard to compete with Sony since third parties are much cheaper, and used availability is much better due to the age of the system.
I was wilIing to give z-mount a shot after spending 10 years shooting a D40 and D5300. I didn't really like the Z6II and I'm glad I hopped to e-mount. I've picked up some truly great third party glass.
Probably because the software team is under a different cost center than the hardware/camera team, and they weren't generating revenue. So the idiot assholes at the top of the SW side said "we can monetize our webcam software" and a bunch of people agreed so they could look relevant and keep their jobs. Capitalism!
I've worked in corporate America long enough to know this is exactly what happens. Companies will look at departments by revenue and just consider everything else expenses. They don't consider that people won't buy your hardware without good software support.
I stopped by HP long before their hardware went to shit because their drivers went to complete crap. I know I'm not alone on this. So what did HP do when their sales went down? Did they reinvest in good drivers and firmware? Nope, they just loaded their drivers with adware and made things even worse. When they didn't work they started using cheaper parts in their printers. The LaserJet printers dominated the corporate landscape 20 years ago. Then they all got slowly replaced by Brother because Brother invested in good drivers and firmware.
They saw all the other subscription services and thought, me too!
Greed
Because people pay it
Is there really a demand for webcams nowadays (especially in the pro market and their expensive cameras), or is it Canon trying to mimick phone subscriptions? I'm asking this because I'm not a photographer, but the webcam fad seems to have died decades ago and I'm confused by this.
Every professional or amateur streamer or Youtuber is a potential client.
It came back during Covid, I have a box of webcams now.
They’re much more targeting workers nowadays.
For those of us who are dedicated amateurs, work from home has added the need to attend meetings by video
And if you've got a good camera, some studio lights, and a nice portrait lens, you can absolutely outclass all the other people using laptop or phone cameras
So it really is critical to webcamify your digital SLR or mirrorless
Streamers