1
Lenses / Re: A New EF 400 f/5.6L Before Photokina? [CR1]
« on: September 04, 2012, 03:49:21 AM »Stupid question maybe, but : why not a 400mm f/4 ??
The 300/4 IS already exists, so ...
So does the 400 f/4, it's the DO
May 25, 2013, 11:08:01 AM
Show Posts
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.
Pages: [1]
So does the 400 f/4, it's the DO
2
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Firmware officially announced
« on: June 28, 2012, 10:02:59 AM »
Same here, I have a 50D and am after a new 7D mkII or very similar. No way am I buying a 3 year old 7D
Over to you Canon.
You don't have to buy a 3 year old one, I am sure that you can find a new one in the stores.
Or do it like me. Pick up a year old 7D with only 2.500 clicks on it for half the price of a new one.
3
EOS Bodies / Re: Odds & Ends: 70D, 7D2, New Full Frame, D600 & Photoshop CS6
« on: June 19, 2012, 07:19:49 AM »
Who cares about Full Frame. Not me that is for sure.
I would like a camera 7D style APS-C with better AF and better noise control. The 7D itself is already a terrific body.
When going to FF it means that I will have to invest in glass as well. More mm to get the same VOF. Don't give me the crap of adding extenders because:
Example the 300 F4 on an APS-C wil give you 480mm F4. This lens costs USD 1,500
To get the same VOF and aperture, you will need the 500 F4. This lens is just USD 9,000
Just explain to me why an wildlife photographer shooting birds would want to go FF. Why?
I would like a camera 7D style APS-C with better AF and better noise control. The 7D itself is already a terrific body.
When going to FF it means that I will have to invest in glass as well. More mm to get the same VOF. Don't give me the crap of adding extenders because:
- A) Already using extenders
- B) With extenders you will loose a stop of light (or two), but more important, you will loose AF speed and accuracy
Example the 300 F4 on an APS-C wil give you 480mm F4. This lens costs USD 1,500
To get the same VOF and aperture, you will need the 500 F4. This lens is just USD 9,000
Just explain to me why an wildlife photographer shooting birds would want to go FF. Why?
4
Lenses / Re: Thinking of getting one of the older 20-35L or 17-35L
« on: June 07, 2012, 06:22:09 AM »My debate is over cost, availability, and the fact that the 5d3 does have a CA removal profile for the 17-35, but not the 20-35.
So you will be shooting WA, thus no fast moving target, potentially manual focussing etc.
Going for the obvious...Why do you want to spend $3500 on a body and save on a lens, rather then get the 5DII and the 16 -35 f/2.8 II?
For me glass is always more important then body.
5
Lenses / Re: List of rumored lenses
« on: May 29, 2012, 04:25:09 AM »
I would rather have a 10-600 f/2 perfectly alligned for an APS-C, weighing not more than 500 gram, which has perfect image quality, no vingetting or CA at all, fully sharp wide open, and is delivered as a kit lens.
Sold seperately for under $1000.
Likelyness it is going to happen? About the same as other suggestions made here
Sold seperately for under $1000.
Likelyness it is going to happen? About the same as other suggestions made here
6
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]
« on: May 23, 2012, 03:59:23 AM »
Funny to see that there are a whole lot of users, wanting that the 7D will go full frame. I don't think that that is going to happen, because the target market for the 7D is not full frame.
It is THE wildlife body for prosumers and there are thousands of them out there.
These users want a body which is capable of shooting fast in low light conditions, and is using a crop factor. It needs to have spot on AF system. The 7D was a huge improvement over the 40D.
What is left to wish for and what would justify a upgrade?
- New 18MP sensor (is more than enough for wildlife, look at 1D)
- Better noise peformance in low light as well as low ISO
- Magaloy body, fully weathersealed
- Metering on AF point
- 8-10 fps
- no popup flash but build in radio controller
Why not FF?
- to get the same amount of detail after cropping the image, you would need a 46MP FF sensor. Because the target market is wildlife, you would still need to have 8 fps. At that MP level, the camera would be more expensive than the 1Dx.
7DII will be the top of the line APS-C
1Dx: Best of two worlds! (if you can buy this body, the lenses to go with it is no problem either!)
5DIII: Prosumer Full Frame (Portrait, Studio, Landscape)
7DII: Prosumer APS-C (Sports, Wildlife)
xxD series, for the amateurs, but I do see the option that a entry FF would fit in here (16 MP 2.5 fps)
xxxD series, entry level
xxxxD, toy series. Will remain, to make money, and is always a mix of old components of other series.
It is THE wildlife body for prosumers and there are thousands of them out there.
These users want a body which is capable of shooting fast in low light conditions, and is using a crop factor. It needs to have spot on AF system. The 7D was a huge improvement over the 40D.
What is left to wish for and what would justify a upgrade?
- New 18MP sensor (is more than enough for wildlife, look at 1D)
- Better noise peformance in low light as well as low ISO
- Magaloy body, fully weathersealed
- Metering on AF point
- 8-10 fps
- no popup flash but build in radio controller
Why not FF?
- to get the same amount of detail after cropping the image, you would need a 46MP FF sensor. Because the target market is wildlife, you would still need to have 8 fps. At that MP level, the camera would be more expensive than the 1Dx.
7DII will be the top of the line APS-C
1Dx: Best of two worlds! (if you can buy this body, the lenses to go with it is no problem either!)
5DIII: Prosumer Full Frame (Portrait, Studio, Landscape)
7DII: Prosumer APS-C (Sports, Wildlife)
xxD series, for the amateurs, but I do see the option that a entry FF would fit in here (16 MP 2.5 fps)
xxxD series, entry level
xxxxD, toy series. Will remain, to make money, and is always a mix of old components of other series.
7
Lenses / Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« on: May 21, 2012, 07:04:30 AM »I would recommend the version II rather than the version III extender.
Why?
There is, in combination with the 300 f/4, no benefit in sharpness in the new 1.4x III version to the old 1.4 II version. AF is not any faster as well. It's just twice the amount of money.
8
Lenses / Re: 300 f4 w/1.4x or 400 f5.6
« on: May 21, 2012, 04:11:02 AM »
I have had both. The 300 f/4 is a fantastic lens, but adding a 1.4x extender to it, makes the AF really slow, too slow for wildlife. The minimum aperture of 5.6 is not workable, it is not sharp enough, thus you must stop it down, at leas 2/3 making it workable 420 f/7.1 lens.
The 400 is rasor sharp, even wide open, and it's AF is superfast. It is lacking IS, but the use of a tripod or beanbag overcomes this issue.
Conclusion: If you need 400, get the 400. If you need 300, and in less then 25% of the cases need a 400, get the 300 and add the extender. I would recommend the version II rather than the version III extender.
If you can afford: Get the 300 f/2.8, like I did as well. You then have the best lens in both 300 as well as 420 full open, and a very very good 600 lens.
The 400 is rasor sharp, even wide open, and it's AF is superfast. It is lacking IS, but the use of a tripod or beanbag overcomes this issue.
Conclusion: If you need 400, get the 400. If you need 300, and in less then 25% of the cases need a 400, get the 300 and add the extender. I would recommend the version II rather than the version III extender.
If you can afford: Get the 300 f/2.8, like I did as well. You then have the best lens in both 300 as well as 420 full open, and a very very good 600 lens.
9
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D Mark II Info? [CR2]
« on: May 15, 2012, 03:37:25 AM »
Keep the same 18MP, but make the DR better and improve both the low end noise as well as the high end noise.
For me personally a clean ISO 1600 would be perfect, comparable to the ISO 400 of the 40D.
The AF is working just fine for me! I recently picked up a 7D after coming from a 40D. The rumors that the 7D was not to be upgraded, and the price of the 5DIII, made me go for it. If a new 7D comes out, I will buy it in a heartbeat.
For me personally a clean ISO 1600 would be perfect, comparable to the ISO 400 of the 40D.
The AF is working just fine for me! I recently picked up a 7D after coming from a 40D. The rumors that the 7D was not to be upgraded, and the price of the 5DIII, made me go for it. If a new 7D comes out, I will buy it in a heartbeat.
10
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next? A General Breakdown
« on: March 08, 2012, 06:34:38 AM »QuoteJust add in at least once thing with the new 100-400mm design and I'll be a happy camper:
Weather-sealing!
This lens will be a best seller, with weather sealing, new optical formula, better IS, F/4 max aperture, inner zoom once its price will drop a little bit
So you want to have a lens which is 100 more in reach than the 200-400, and has the same max aperture of F4.
What do you think the price of such a lens would be, if the 200-400 is already USD11.000?
11
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III/X Information [CR1]
« on: February 15, 2012, 05:26:31 AM »Regarding the argument of 22MP not being enough to replace the 7D - because a 1.6x crop would not give enough pixels - Canon will probably argue that users should use a 1.4x TC to get the extra reach. - I am not saying this will get the results people are looking for - just that that is what I would expect Canon to argue.
Sorry don't agree with you:
7D + 400 MM F4 + 1.4x = 896 @ F5.6 (autofocused) (560 * 1.6)
5D (or 1D) + 400 mm F4 + 1.4x = 560 @ F5.6 (autofocused)
To add antother 1.4 behind it would be a 2x (1.4 * 1.4) resulting in:
5D (or 1D) + 400 mm F4 + 2x = 800 (still shorter) @ F8 (Manual focused)
12
EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II? [CR1]
« on: February 15, 2012, 04:03:43 AM »Conclusion: 3 consumer bodies (entry, standard, advanced) and 3 pro bodies (Action, Landscape, Photojournalist) from canon, this would be a nice and logic lineup.
Please bear in mind that in your setup the price of the Pro body for Actions is 3 times as high as the one for Photojournalist. That is strange if it is all the same Pro line.
This is how I see it:
1-series: Top of the Hill, best in everything. Pro
3-Series: High MP FF, low fps, Pro
5-Series: Mid MP FF, very good in high ISO, Pro
7-Series: Mid MP APS-C, high fps, Pro
Then the Advanced bodies in the xxD series, the Consumer bodies in the xxxD series and the entry level xxxxD series.
There is a market out there for Pro APS-C bodies, and if Canon don't realize that , then they ask people to first buy a body which is priced 3 times as high, and then combine it with long lenses which are double the price.
If the strategy of Canon is that they only want a selected croud being able to invest so much money, then indeed it was the last 7D out there, but also the last 5D and many other series as they will be killing their company.
The mass is paying for the R&D for the top Pro lines. BUT you need to keep the mass happy, and there is a mass out there for a Pro APS-C body!
13
EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II? [CR1]
« on: February 14, 2012, 10:21:04 AM »
And what if the "5DX" has 61pt AF and 6.9fps, as the rumors suggest?
It would mean a drop of 10 MP as a 22MP FF is 8.5 MP cropped.
What concerns me more is if the 7D line will be adopted by the xxD line again, what will happen to the micro adjustment? The only body in the xxD that had it was the 50D, to be dropped again with the 60D.
14
EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II? [CR1]
« on: February 14, 2012, 07:26:27 AM »
If they would make the 5Dx a:
The 7D resolution is to big for its sensor. If they would have made it 13.5 MPm it would have been the best. Better ISO, better IQ and more DLA.
- 30.8 MP FF (giving you a 12 MP crop)
- 8 fps
- decent ISO & DR
- It will still have a DLA of > F8, you could still shoot the 300 1:2.8 + 2x TC + 1 stopped down, without loosing quality, unlike now with the 7D.
The 7D resolution is to big for its sensor. If they would have made it 13.5 MPm it would have been the best. Better ISO, better IQ and more DLA.
Pages: [1]