Ken Katz

I have nothing against the M or EF system (of which I am was a long time former user of both film and digital EOS cameras), but those folks waiting for 7D Mk III had better stop waiting since its really not going to arrive. With respect the M system, IMHO, Canon made a significant error by not either configuring the M with an RF sized mount (knowing fully that they will need to go FF mirrorless at some point), or designing the M mount with a shorter flange focal length, allowing it to use RF adapted lenses. The M isn't dead yet, but a future introduction of a M50 type camera with an RF mount would likely be the coup de grace.

The R7 and R10 have been announced and you can look at the specs and initial reviews at your favorite camera equipment sites. I think this unofficially indicates that Canon will likely let the M system wither on the vine, as they seem to be doing with the EF system. While there are only 2 relatively slow kit RF lenses announced, the cameras seem to make sense to me. The 24mp R10 cost under $1k with the slow kit lens, and inherits some of the R3 AF DNA, which should make it a fun little camera for tracking kids (or pets) at a birthday party. The 32mp R7 with the same AF system and Canon's really good IBIS, has about 2x the pixel density of an R5 at less than 40% of the cost. An R7 plus the RF 100-400 should make a good, lightweight, and inexpensive wildlife/bird combination. Converting some of the better M mount lenses to the RF mount should not require a lot of engineering resources.

Seeing the brighter background and light colored clothing worn by the subject (in the OP's image), I would have added some exposure to help maintain detail in the subject's face knowing that I would inevitably need to lift the shadows in post processing. With mirrorless I would have added exposure until I saw the highlight clipping indications in my EVF and then backed off the EV comp dial. Same could be done with a DSLR with a test image. In this case, I would expect that any modern FF sensor would have enough DR to manage that image without blowing out the highlights. It would been fine even using my M43 camera with its much smaller Sony sensor.

Bronx Crocodile - Iphone 12

Canon Elan 7 or Elan II. Modern AF SLRs with good AF performance, reliable meters, and uses currently available batteries. Mostly priced under $100 (with the Elan II lower than that). Uses any Canon EF lens ever made, without any function restrictions.

How much does 2 NAS drives cost and how much technical expertise do you need in order to acquire, setup and maintain. Do duel NAS drives make sense if you don't readily have a remote location for one of them? This is relevant to me since I need to implement a backup solution quite soon and so practicality, cost, and minimizing brain damage are my main decision factors. Security is also a factor, but since I don't have any nuclear launch codes (just personal tax returns), I don't think I would be a specific target for hacking. Right now I am leaning towards BB, especially to minimize brain damage on my part.

"What's wrong with very inexpensive 2nd hand DSLRs? Learn the fundamentals first!" For people interested in photography, then absolutely (as I described at the end of my posting). For those who simply want photos of their kids playing youth soccer or baseball, or desire longer reach for vacation photos, the complexity of a DSLR and lenses is likely to be overkill, and much harder to use than their Iphone 13. Besides, a Sony RX100 (or similar from Panasonic or Canon) is a whole lot smaller than a DSLR, and with the later models, seems to have AF tracking that sticks to subjects quite well. Would work out well capturing an 18 month old running around the house.

"And if Canon stops making M lenses, your only option for lenses, is to put an EF lens on with an EF to M adapter" Minor correction, you can also mount EF-S lenses on your M camera with the adaptor. It is unclear to me that the market for smaller than FF camera systems is big enough and profitable enough to entice the big 3 FF players to continue to seek out that market. For those that want smaller systems, Fuji and M43 both have extensive lens and camera options that I doubt the big 3 will try to match-up with future APS-C offerings. As far as entry level, most casual photographers and video takers are perfectly happy with the results from late model smartphones for images of friends, families, events, babies, and travel. If an upgrade is needed for youth sports or travel, I would likely recommend one of the long zoom P&S cameras using the 1" Sony sensor instead of recommending an MILC. There is still plenty of used ILC equipment out there for serious photographers with a small budget, so I would not worry about them yet.

Having grown up in the 35mm film world and experienced the impact of focal length to field of view, DOF, and perspective from that standard for decades, it is still how I approach lens section for my 2x crop factor M43 cameras. When using a 12mm focal length, I am thinking 24mm FF in terms of how I approach an image, even though I have not picked up an FF camera for over 2 years. I still use 35mm as the standard of how wide is wide, and how long is long, because it is a standard I am most familiar with over decades of use. Perhaps today folks newly introduced to interchangeable lens cameras will think that 26mm (FF Equivalent) is a normal view, and anything wider is a wide angle lens and anything longer is a telephoto, since that is how Apple defines it on their phones.

"but I understood the same adapter will do for EF-S and EF lenses" Assuming you are mounting an EF or EF-S lens on a Canon "M" mirrorless, the answer is yes. https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/mount-adapter-ef-eos-m?gclsrc=aw.ds&gclid=CjwKCAjw9qiTBhBbEiwAp-GE0dpK-H_Fg0I_K3GQQs5l-dDUsuiUvLK8IrFy-Wf04wnrP59CoToC_hoCBBYQAvD_BwE "EF-S lenses can't be mounted on a full frame body. The flang distance is too short" Both EF and EF-S have the same 44mm flange focal distance (lens mount to sensor), but some EF-S lenses may have a protruding rear element which may interfere with the mirror operation of an FF camera, so Canon decided that those lenses could not mount on FF cameras (or my ancient Canon D60). I believe only Canon had such restrictions with their APS-C lenses, while you could mount a Nikon APS-C lens on a FF camera and live with the vignetting.

Katonah NY Cow - Olympus E-PL2 / 17mm F1.8

If there is a more material difference, I would expect to see it at F1.8, and in corner resolution. Stopped down to f2.8 and beyond, the differences should be very small. The EF f1.8 mk II has rather unflattering OOF highlights when shooting at f1.8 close up. I believe the STM and RF versions have been improved. Mostly out of the EF system, but still have a working EF f1.8mk II and a few devices that it will mount on.

Cactus at Joshua Tree National Park - Olympus EM5-III / 12-40mm Pro

Joshua Tree National Park - Olympus EM-5 III / 12-40mm Pro

Not sure why, or if Canon ever discussed this in a public forum, but my Elan IIe certainly had a really good AF assist lamp which projected a red grid line for AF assist and was effective in total darkness (within its limited range). I believe the EOS 5 had a similar system and the film Rebels I have used had a white AF assist light, or otherwise known as the "white light of hell" which was completely distracting and needed to be shut off. I don't believe the EOS 3 or 5D had an assist light, and without doing extensive research, the Nikon D5, D850, and Z7 do not have AF assist lights. Even a good AF assist light has a limited effective range of about 10-15 feet, is designed to cover a limited field of view, and not terribly useful with long lenses or moving subjects. I have only used mono-lights with modeling lights on, which made it quite easy to focus even with a lowly 5D mk I.

The FD 85 f1.8 would be great, but they seem to be selling for $350 or more. The FD 100 f2 seems to be selling for outrageous amounts on eBay (like $1,500+). I Owned the FD 100 F2.8 for many years and thought it was a sharp lens, and they are also available for a more reasonable amount.

I think the camera offers a unique but rather expensive (compared with other Fuji X cameras with similar specs) alternative to those who want a rangefinder like experience in a modern MILC, but it is not really compatible with many users needs (zoom lenses, super WA, telephoto, macro, ect). The EVF in my lowly Olympus EM-5 III is more than adequate for me, but far below state of the art EVF specifications (like in the latest MILCs from Nikon, Canon, and even OM), so I don't see others going this direction.

You shot the images from the left side of the books, so they were absolutely not parallel to the film plane. The left edge was materially closer to you than the center and the right edge of the books was materially further away.

It would appear to me that the book title at the extreme corners were further away from the film plane than the center of the book title, so the corners were out of focus. At F8, there was enough DOF to get the title corners to appear sharp.

Olympus EM-10 mk II with a 14-42mm and 40-150mm should be available within the $500 budget. That plus an Oly or Panny 25mm f1.8 and you would have a very lightweight and capable kit. There will likely be piles of DSLRs and applicable lenses available for those who want them, or want to maximize image quality per $. Personally, I look to maximize image quality per gram of weight, and are willing to pay more for that tradeoff.

Thanks Andrew. The pricing and other attributes look really good. I am also considering getting a 2Tb small portable hard drive for under $100. It won't have the quite the security of a professionally managed cloud backup, but will likely do the job as intended.

I am also looking for storage / backup options for my new computer. The review does not seem to outline what types of files Amazon Drive defines as "photo" files (are RAW files considered photos or data?).

Not much difference at the level of magnification available. Did not really make sense shooting 2 different formats, so a test using a 5Diii vs an R5 would have been more interesting and maybe more informative. They also could have used the same lens,

I am glad that PN is getting some attention from the new site owners, and realize that there will need to be changes in order to improve functionality, operating costs, and revenue generation. As a member since 1998 (when Philip Greenspun owned and ran PN), I really only have one request. That is to maintain the basic functionality of the Forums. PN forum structure, IMHO, is very readable and easy to follow and contribute. I find that forum structures, such as the one employed at DP Review to be exceedingly difficult to navigate and follow. Also, if the new owners decide to keep the paid membership structure, it would really help to make it clear that such membership will not be automatically renewed. I was a paid member of PN until site changes made it likely that such renewal would be automatic. I would be willing to again become a paid member if you can clearly opt out of automatic renewal.

Sorry, I should have added a smiley or winking emoji to indicate a jovial response. Fact is that those 2 cameras are nice to hold and look at but unfortunately I don’t use. They do have sentimental value to me