Comments on: What do YOU Think is Coming at PMA?

By: ho

ho — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 14:14:29 +0000

Sure … but I sent it back to Amazon. The AF is useless especially after being used to a 40D.

By: ho

ho — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 14:11:37 +0000

I’m waiting for the 5d2′s replacemt with an AF that works.

By: macshark

macshark — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:02:40 +0000

Have you ever used the 400mm f/4 DO IS? It is overpriced, but it is an excellent lens.

I do agree that if a 500mm f/5.6 DO IS is introduced, the price would be in the $5K range. However, given that the DO lenses appear to be mostly targeted at professionals who are willing to pay $$$$, a 600mm f/4.0 DO IS at $10K price point is the more likely DO lens Canon would introduce.

By: Craig

Craig — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:06:05 +0000

NOT a 24-105 f/4 MkII! Why on earth would Canon replace such a superb lens after only three years. I’ve seen this lens, with a older 5D and a 30×40 and it is amazingly sharp! People are getting silly in this technology age thinking everything is junk after a few years!

By: maxs

maxs — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 13:10:37 +0000

500/5.6 DO lens around 2k? everytime they throw DO in they arguably screw up IQ (compared to traditional L) and more importantly skyrocket the price… that lens will be at least mid 4ks…. I hope they stop with the DO stuff already and just make some nice, normal (IS) lenses.

By: Freeze_XJ

Freeze_XJ — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 12:26:31 +0000

Ok, let’s give it a go (any prizes for best guess?)

- 1D4 with some 16 MP, full-frame (1.3 is a weird cropfactor imho), no video.
- 20mm f/2 L (the low-mm primes are neglected too long now)
- 100-400L II f/4-f/5.6 IS (well, the old one still sells, but it’s getting old. IQ can use a bit of a boost, but might conflict with 400f/5.6 sales)
- 50L f/1.2 II to compete with the new Sigma and Nikon alternatives. f/1.4 just lacks power.
- perhaps, just a guess : 500L DO IS f/5.6 (DO has its problems, and lacks IQ, but still helps on long lenses with a higher f-number. Price some >2K or so, but still a useful light-weight birdspotting lens)

No IS on <100mm primes? Nope. Why would they? Just because it sounds cool? It stabilizes your hand-movements, not the thing in the picture, and you can always rely on a nice n sturdy tripod if you really want to.

By: me

me — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 11:15:54 +0000

yes they can. simply because the people who can afford a 1ds mkIII know the difference between iq and resolution. i’m pretty sure canon sees at the moment that nikon is having quite some sales with half the resolution. why? because those 13mp produce way better iq than a 21mp chip from canon. besides the difference between a prosumer and a pro body are also the extended functions and no playing around with “almost” usable video gimmicks. Canon should start working on their iq and high iso noise instead.

By: Perneta

Perneta — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:43:55 +0000

I see Canon delivering a 500D with video and Digic IV processor.

A lot of the DIGIC IV potential will be waisted because the 500D will be a unfinished product done in a hurry.

By: Martyn

Martyn — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 09:56:20 +0000

I tell you what is amazing, that Canon didn’t sing any changes to the auto focus system, I wanted to but the mk2 but the literature canon supplied to me said it was the same. I dont think you can blame non mk2 owning consumers for saying it has poor auto focus… you can blame canon though

By: Bill

Bill — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 08:16:13 +0000

Which is why I’m guessing Nikon, Oly & Panny will offer a better show since they’re all going to try to steal as much Canon users as possible before Canon get’s off it’s lazy arse and give’s people the products/updates they want.

By: te

te — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 06:47:34 +0000

efs 10,5 f/2,8 fisheye

By: jl

jl — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 06:16:58 +0000

100-400 II with weathersealing and a normal zoomring, not push pull.

By: maxxevv

maxxevv — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 05:05:11 +0000

I think the EF-R is not too far fetched an idea in the lens line up. But the body size of the G10 doesn’t cut it though. If you measure the mount of the EF mount ( since it should be backward compatible, its probably too big for a G10 body. But it might be plausible that its smaller than the EF mount, but big enough to accomodate all the M mount Leica’s and Minolta’s of old with a suitable adaptor.

The EF-R mount possibly being a step up adaptor.

However, there lies in the problem. A 2x crop factor isn’t very attractive to most rangefinder fans. A FF or a 1.3 crop might be acceptable. So to make a lens small enough, the register distance would have to be very close indeed. Possibly under 25mm or even less!

But if Canon pulls of something like that, it practically kills of the mystique of the Leica M8 altogether!! Something which I think to Canon pursue if the market study works out. It represents a new market for them in this aspect.

I would be interested in a 1.3 crop or FF rangefinder EF-R camera definitely!!

By: Gusto

Gusto — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 05:04:36 +0000

More compact cameras