None of the options apply to me so I cannot vote ... I'm saving for the 600mm f/4 II. Based on my usage, I don't see where this lens fits my requirements.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
The OP has titled the thread "SL1 sensor a step back?" ... clearly he is comparing the sensors here.
He is only comparing them in the title
What the heck? I hope this is not the 70D sensor.
If the 3rd party lens did not work as advertised then it would be a simple matter to return it to the place that you bought it from.Sure. Check the TDP review ... that's exactly what Bryan did, THRICE ...
Not quite. He bought a copy retail (as usual), it was bad, and he exchanged it for a second retail copy, which was decentered. He sent that copy in for service, it came back worse than it went in (how's that for quality service?). He sent it back a second time, and the 'repaired' lens had a new serial number. Anyone want to bet that Tamron didn't hand pick and pre-test that replacement lens?
If the 3rd party lens did not work as advertised then it would be a simple matter to return it to the place that you bought it from.
Amusingly all Canon DSLR product shots (photos of the camera unit) is usually taken on digital medium format.
learningcameras.com ... who's learning here? the reviewer or the audience?yes, they are only subjective. biased by subjective impressions and interrests.
Jokes apart, the sensor is the same 18mp that is available pretty much across the board for all Canon crop bodies so theoretically at least, there should not be any difference in the sensor performance.
I'm not too sure the tests are entirely scientific so I'd take this guy's advice with a rather bigger pinch of salt.
But as many mentioned: The whole system is responsible for the IQ.
And maybe the fineadjusting of the sensor, the AF is a little bit different, the picture will look different.
Similarly, the problem they reported at lensrentals was announced via a special blog entry, but it took a rather obscure response to a specific comment to report that subsequent copies of the lens are just fine and have no new problems.
3rd party manufacturers like Tamron are at the disadvantage because they have to fight a bad reputation, esp. if releasing a quality lens like the 24-70/2.8. If a Tamron breaks, surely the cheap quality is to be blamed, if a Canon breaks it's really, really bad luck and could happen to anyone.
Ok, got my scans done and a few bits of editing, mostly just removing dust and specks from the scan. Here ya go whoever wants to see them https://plus.google.com/photos/102378497314145496618/albums/5876055902888292097
This puppy damn well better perform like a sun of a gun (and, according to Andy Rouse, it DOES) for that price. I'm still going to hold out for a 600mm f/4 L IS II. Its only $1200 more, for 2.25x more subject magnification.
12k for this?
Stop with the smaller DSLRs with the 18mp sensors and make a FF that can match the D800 at a price point the 7D crowd can get into. You will not regret it.
For profissionals the 12k isn't a problem. but me... i won't get it ever.
I bought a good working used Kodak DCS 460 for $100. Its original price was $35,500 in 1995. Prices do come down, so in 50 years or so, you might be able to afford one.
I do wonder about Digital Picture reviews when it comes to third party lenses, bcoz they somehow always seem to get bad copies of their first few third party lenses
On an aside though, in Europe the lens is selling for EUR 12,999.
Depends on where in Europe you live.. :-(
In Sweden the price is set at €14050 or $18450 including our lovely 25% VAT..
That so steep it's ridiculous, meaning that us amateurs will never ever afford it..
Not even used..
Available from 29th May.
Where did you spot this ??