Now that Covid is not so prevalent I have been able to return to shooting basketball games at the local college. I have noticed that IQ has dropped slightly. The photos aren't bad, by my standards anyway, but when brought up to 100% they have a distinct blurriness that hadn't occurred previously. Aside from a different camera, an R5 instead of an R, I have been experimenting with different lenses. Still, with my usual lens, an RF 85mm F/1.2 L, and usual settings the results have been distinctly different then before. The one big difference has been the use of the High setting for noise reduction. I selected that at the first game when I was using an f/4 lens because of the higher ISO required and never set it back. I shoot the games in JPEG, BTW. I give all the photos to the athletic dept, after deleting a large (huge) percentage of them, so JPEG works fine. I became suspicious of the High setting so when my nephew, a former pro photographer stopped in yesterday to show me his latest $10,000 Nikon lens I mentioned it to him. He laughed and said "Blurs it, doesn't it?". So there you have it. I wasn't aware of that aspect of noise reduction. Has anyone else run into this issue?
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-759347-1.html

Excellent examples! The blurred wheels and background convey motion while the cars are perfectly frozen!

Impressive! Where can I get one?

Apparently anyone not using a Sigma Foveon X3 is using a "synthetic" camera. Whatever that is. A digital camera is nothing more then a computer that interprets data input from a source. In this case, a sensor. An algorithm is nothing more then a set of instructions telling the computer how to perform a given function. Your Sigma uses algorithms. Just like a phone camera. You seem to love the word "synthetic", using it to imply that your personal choice in cameras is superior. Exactly what does that mean, "synthetic"? That you have only to press the shutter release and you have produced a perfect photo? I really doubt that. Your camera is no big deal. No more so then any other high end camera and without ever seeing an image from your Sigma I highly doubt that the finished product is superior. If your relatives buy cheap phone cameras or don't know how to use what they have, perhaps you should explain to them how to do better because phone cameras can take outstanding photos. Given the physical constraints of a phone those cameras are truely amazing and are most definitely "real" cameras. BTW, I am no big fan of phone cameras. I have an iPhone 12 but rarely use the camera. I rarely use the phone even. Retired. Don't call me, I'll call you, etc, etc. I believe in giving credit where credit is due and phone cameras deserve a lot of credit. I also dislike people who smugly look down on others just because they do things differently.

So, exactly what makes a phone camera any less of a "real" camera then, for example, a mirrorless or DSLR? BTW, every digital camera uses algorithms.

SOOC is just what it says: Straight Out Of Camera. It does not, in any way whatsoever, mean unprocessed, even though there are many who use it in that fashion apparently to prove (to themselves mostly) that they are superior photographers. Any image coming out of a camera, film or digital, is processed.

Shooting basketball with an R5 I have tried 3 lenses: An RF 50mm f/1.2 L, a RF 85mm f/1.2 L and an RF 24-105 f/4 L. All three have worked well for me, but, I prefer the 85mm. It has given me the best overall results.
I shoot from the sidelines and can move around the court. Shooting from the stands might be a different story, plus, the 45mp R5 allows me to crop the longer shots for good close up images. The camera you are using is as important as the lens, if not more so. These images are all cropped:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-759347-1.html

No. Doing so does free up space used by the update file. Otherwise, having the file on the card does no harm, but, it is no longer of any use so why keep it?

There are a variety of types of lithium ion batteries. Different construction. Different chemicals and materials. Lithium Cobalt Oxide is a type common in cameras. Lithium Iron Phosphate is common in electric cars. Those are just two types. There are a number of other types also in common use, especially it seems in cars where battery technology is constantly evolving.

Many batteries will leak without noticeable power loss. The problem is the corrosion caused by the leaking chemicals.

I was looking at a litium battery when I stated that the negative ends are formed and can't leak. Could very well be that alkalines, or even different brand lithium are constructed differently and will leak from either end.

You got 'em! Just PM me.

Probably, but, how is that going to help his focus issue?

I have noticed one thing about alkalines, such as Duracel. Not that I have done a study, but, they seem to only leak when in a device, not when removed. The positive end of the battery uses a crimp seal and that seems to be where they leak. When in a device there is spring tension against the ends of the battery. The negative end is a formed end that can't leak. I wonder if the pressure, although slight, is just enough to "unseat" that crimp seal slightiy and allow leakage. Anyway, I no longer use alkalines and I have never had a lithium of any kind leak.

I've used Energizer Ultimate Lithium for years. Never a problem. Never leak, last forever, and have a shelf life of 15 yrs, last time I checked. Throw a pack in my gear bag and forget about them. I stopped using Duracel because if left in a device they seem to always leak eventually. I've tried rechargables but, to me, they are just a nuisance.