Comments on: Niche Lens News [CR2]

By: Zmark

Zmark — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 02:12:38 +0000

also by better i mean better in term of image quality

By: Zmark

Zmark — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 02:10:40 +0000

i agree it is a very good lens and i want to get one if i could, but there are some(by a not small number) saying 14-24 zoom lens is better than a pro-grade prime lens like 14mmL II…which hearing a pro-grade zoom is better than a pro-grade prime is kind of annoying for me…

By: Alan

Alan — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 11:20:24 +0000

Was talking to a rep from Lee Filters at the recent Focus show. They have a giant filter unit for the Nikon 14-24mm zoom. An adapter ring fits around the front of the lens, the filter holder fits this and supports 150mm filters. Not completely new but they will have a different adapter ring for the forthcoming Canon equivalent.

By: RBR

RBR — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:37:59 +0000

The 14mm MarkII is one of Canon’s finest. There is no need for another prime lens in that range.

By: tinisoli

tinisoli — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 16:43:38 +0000

Mine conked out on me in Bali, about one month out of the box. Sent it back for repair to the aperture, then sold it. It’s a great lens but yeah, lots of QA issues. I think it performs better underwater; I barely used it on land.

By: zachwright

zachwright — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 21:03:17 +0000

rectiliner is “non-fisheye” you tool.

and the dude above wasent talking about EF he was talking about EF-S.

cause there are no ultra wide primes for crop sensor cameras

By: Mark

Mark — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 20:49:43 +0000

Except when the darn thing break when you are on vacation in Greece. Focus ring locked up on me, it was under warranty but still missed out. Lots of CA with the Tokina and it never really gets sharp. Canon can do much better.

By: Zmark

Zmark — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 18:51:02 +0000

i was hoping for a super wide primary lens like 14mmL markIII-so it could stop all the bragging about 14-24 i being hearing…so annoying

By: JustDreaming

JustDreaming — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 18:49:17 +0000

Couldn’t agree more with the the development of the normal/FF lenses.
400 5.6L IS & 50 1.4 MK2 urgently needed. A normal range zoom f/2.8L with IS would be a huge seller!

By: Ted

Ted — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:39:47 +0000

Canon’s 35mm f/2 has two things going for it that the Nikon 35mm f/2 does not: it is considerably cheaper and it can autofocus on any camera body. The Nikon lens price left more room to introduce a DX lens below it. The existing FX lens did not autofocus on the entry-level Nikon camera bodies. There just isn’t the same need for a Canon lens…unless it is spectacularly cheap, in which case it will be welcome.

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 11:44:20 +0000

It is an EF-S lens it will cost much less.

By: jb

jb — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 03:58:49 +0000

sigma 8-16 will have slightly less field of view than the fish eye. It is because fish eye lenses are designed with intentional distortion so to include massive field of view.

Try to compare the canon 14 mm 2.8 with the 15 mm fish eye… the fish eye seems wider. Check out the digital picture. com :p

By: Althalus

Althalus — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 02:07:41 +0000

That’s what I first thought when the 7D came out. Though there was mention by Canon, if I remember correctly, that it wasn’t a replacement for the 50D. Infact take a look at this link, at about the 0:49minute mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1p4DekaFMxI

7D is a new Line and not a direct replacement for any camera designed to sit between the 50D and the 5DmkII

But we’ll not really know until Canon release a new camera.

I think the 7D has the potential to become a full frame camera in the future due to the xD numbering system. At a lower price point than the 5D line. I was actually quite disappointed that the 7D wasn’t released with a SS sensor. And would already be owning one if it was.
What I’d like to see is Canon buying Sigma to gain Foveon’s X3 sensor technology and gain access to their lens patents. But I doubt that would happen. Though I would love to see Canon produce a FF X3 sensor. This is getting off topic though.

By: EF mount

EF mount — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:31:17 +0000

Nikon managed it quite well for a decent price. Canon lenses are usually even cheaper, so why not? :)