December 22, 2014, 01:02:49 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.


Messages - dadgummit

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
1
Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 07, 2014, 01:36:44 PM »
Still waiting for the most important spec ...

... the $ spec

I hope you are sitting down!! Just kidding, I am expecting a $3000 MSRP settling to a street price of about $25-2700 with discounts and rebates.

2
Lenses / Re: Another EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Mention
« on: November 05, 2014, 02:28:32 PM »
The 70-300L is stupid in multiple ways - the separate tripod collar and incompatibility with TCs are two of them, and if they are repeated here, I would say that would reduce the attractiveness of the new 100-400L quite substantially.  I know that, for me, the lack of TC compatibility is a total and complete non-starter, and one reason I never seriously considered the 70-300L, nor will I ever consider it.

It's odd how some people seem to think that anything that doesn't suit exactly what they want is "stupid".

I have the 70-300L, it's my most used lens.  I've never needed or wanted to use a tripod collar, the two other people I know with them are the same in that regard.  For us it's great that the collar is not included, it would just be a piece of junk around the house and the lens would have been more expensive.  So for us, it's  good news.

TC compatibility would be good but I suspect again it would increase the cost or they would have done it.

So, in summary, my favourite lens is in no way stupid, it's my favourite lens because it suits exactly what I want at a price I could accept.  It doesn't suit others and that's fine but I bet Canon market research know more about the user demographics than all of us combined.

Agreed^

Also the Tokina 1.4 TC works great on this lens.

3
Lenses / Re: Another EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Mention
« on: November 05, 2014, 11:15:27 AM »
I am wondering if this is going to be too little too late.

The 70-300L is a great lens and 400 is just a slight crop away from 300.  If the 100-400 is much more than the 70-300 I think many will pass, it is just not different enough. 

Combine this with the 3 different 150-600's from Tamron and Sigma and anyone who wants more reach over the canon versions will go this route. 

I think if this lens is expensive there will be very few sold except for the normal early adopters. 

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Modular DSLR Coming from Canon? [CR2]
« on: October 29, 2014, 02:19:05 PM »
I am guessing this will be priced to match the $70,000 cinema 50-1000 lens.  Or in other words, not for us mere mortals. 

5
Honestly, the 5D3 is everything I need and much more.  I have captured many wodnderful memories and I do not think they would be any better with more megapixels or more dynamic range.  It has an excellent af system and I am very happy with the low light noise. 

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 With a Liquid Element
« on: October 20, 2014, 02:41:21 PM »
What advantage would there be to have a liquid element in a sealed camera lens?  Does light pass through clear liquids in a differnet way than solids?
You can alter the shape of the lens, thus varying how the light's path is refracted by the lens.

that is kind of cool.   the lens equivlent of a CVT transmission in a car.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 With a Liquid Element
« on: October 20, 2014, 12:11:20 PM »
What advantage would there be to have a liquid element in a sealed camera lens?  Does light pass through clear liquids in a differnet way than solids?

8
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 11:23:01 AM »
Typical Canon response:

Person 1: We are not making enough money

Person 2: Well then raise the price.

Fixed that for you.


The Economic LAW of supply and demand says when the price goes up the quantity demanded goes down...   ;D

9
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 11:19:17 AM »
Typical Canon response:

Person 1: We are not selling enough. 

Person 2: Well then raise the price.




10
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 07, 2014, 02:49:55 PM »
So, if I read this correctly, Canon have given up trying to compete with other manufacturers technology, and instead are going to focus on stories about how their customers "use" the products they make as a sales pitch?

Great. So we can expect smoke and mirrors but no substance.

It is like a fashion house deciding to focus not on being the cutting edge of fashion, but rather on how their customers were their garments in everyday use.

I hate to admit but this is how I read it as well. 

11
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon EOS 5D Mark III w/24-105 f/4L IS $2899
« on: October 06, 2014, 05:36:37 PM »
That is a great price but looking at resellerratings.com I would think twice about that seller.

Do you believe everything you read online? Big Value has a 99.2% feedback rating after over 74,000 sales on ebay. You don't get marks like that by screwing your customers ::)

LOL  If you are reading the 99.2% online ratings then you too are believing what you read online. 

Just playing  ;D

12
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon EOS 5D Mark III w/24-105 f/4L IS $2899
« on: October 06, 2014, 03:20:44 PM »
That is a great price but looking at resellerratings.com I would think twice about that seller.

13
My biggest issue with much higher MP is if you take the current crop sensor at 20mp and multiply it by 1.6 squared (20 x 1.6 x 1.6) you get 51mp sensor.  This means a 46 + mp sensor will have a similar pixel density to their current crop. 

Would this sensor have the same noise that all of the FF owners are complaining about when they see the 7D2 samples?

14
I wonder if this is going to be in a pro body for $6000+ or if it will be a direct (but late) response to the d800 series and come in at the 5d3 pricing.

15
hmmmmm
10mm would fill the frame on a crop or it would be close to circular on a full frame. 

I am wondering if it will really be a fisheye. 

You can read the patent, it says Fisheye.  This is not a rumor, just reporting on a patent.  There is a diagram straight out of the patent in the article, it also says Fisheye.
 
I've never seen the 14mm Samyang sold as a fisheye.  It merely distorts the image horribly.
 
Tokina has a history of decent wide angle lenses sold for a low price.  I have a old 17mm f.3,5 and its very good.

I can't read japanese so I will have to take your word that it says Fisheye and not another ambiguous word that the Google translator displayed as fisheye as a mistake. 

here is one link for the 14mm f2.8 fisheye that is not a fisheye
http://www.amazon.com/Bower-SLY1428C-Ultra-Wide-Angle-Fisheye/dp/B003VWDVLO

I completely agree about the Tokina,  I have the 10-17 and it is great!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9