September 22, 2014, 12:37:06 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 - CANONisOK

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
1
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: SIGMA 150-600!!
« on: September 05, 2014, 09:53:01 AM »
The big question is: which way will the zoom go? The "correct" Canon way?  :)  Or the "reverse" Nikon way?  >:(

Unfortunately, I'm sure it's the latter.  :P
After looking at the link, it appears this one zooms the "correct" Canon way!  ;D

I know it's probably not a big deal to most people, but for me it's a major PITA to switch lenses and have to quickly reprogram my brain to react the opposite way when trying to catch fast shots.

2
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: SIGMA 150-600!!
« on: September 05, 2014, 09:45:32 AM »
The big question is: which way will the zoom go? The "correct" Canon way?  :)  Or the "reverse" Nikon way?  >:(

Unfortunately, I'm sure it's the latter.  :P

3
EOS Bodies / Re: A Rundown of Canon at Photokina
« on: September 03, 2014, 02:38:38 PM »
I would love for that to be the reason for the delay in the 100-400mm update. Despite the Tamron's obvious flaws I would think they've carved quite a little corner in the not-insanely expensive supertelezoom market.
Do I think that is the actual reason? Unfortunately no. I think Canon is just content with the offering they have so far and have yet to feel the pinch/need to respond yet.

Canon's lens development cycles (except for maybe their 18-55 crop kit lenses) are long and carefully planned out.  I'd be stunned if they'd go back to the drawing board on a lens that was pretty far along just based on one competitive offering.

I suppose it might happen if Nikon really hit it out of the park on a pro staple lens like a 24-70 or 70-200, but redirecting / setting new goals on a lens is a massive disruption to many people, materials and dollars that already have momentum in one direction.  I really doubt Canon does this very often unless it's very early in the development effort.
I think we're in agreement here. The response I'm talking about is their response to slowing sales of their current offering. Not necessarily from a Sigma, Tammy, or other 3rd party lens offering.

However, it would be sweet to see what Canon could do with a somewhat similar zoom range as the Tammy (something like 200-500mm, for example) that doesn't cost $12k.  Maybe that's one we can look forward to seeing at Photokina 2020. :)

4
EOS Bodies / Re: A Rundown of Canon at Photokina
« on: September 03, 2014, 02:09:07 PM »
I'm wondering if Canon took a long hard look at the Tokina 150-600 and decided that they had to go back to the drawing board to come up with something competitive.
I would love for that to be the reason for the delay in the 100-400mm update. Despite the Tamron's obvious flaws I would think they've carved quite a little corner in the not-insanely expensive supertelezoom market.
Do I think that is the actual reason? Unfortunately no. I think Canon is just content with the offering they have so far and have yet to feel the pinch/need to respond yet.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: A Rundown of Canon at Photokina
« on: September 03, 2014, 11:31:15 AM »
This has previously been beaten up at length:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=22337.msg428522#msg428522

Both lenses are sharp, have the same focal length and have the same max aperture.  Other than, they are quite different.  A pancake is a sharp & small photography tool that is stripped down of many features.  The non-L IS refresh lenses are basically sleeper L lenses minus the weathersealing and the red ring.  One is not better than the other -- it just depends on what you need. 

What's more important is the rumour update that the new pancake may be an EF-S mount.  As a FF user, that's disappointing to hear, but now each of Canon's mounts would have a 35-40mm FF equivalent pancake to call on.
Wow, I missed that thread somehow. I guess the part that I forget is that the 24mm pancake will be a good "gateway lens" for those strictly using APS-C bodies.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: A Rundown of Canon at Photokina
« on: September 03, 2014, 11:25:51 AM »
A bit confused by the 24mm f/2.8 EF-S pancake prime. I use the 24mm f/2.8 IS on my SL1 and it is tiny.

I guess if you're really interested in saving a minute amount of weight & size, a little bit of money, and trade IS for STM it might be worth it. But I can't see it myself.
I can understand your arguments, but ...
thinking about an 24mm f/2.8 EF-S pancake at the price and performance of the 40mm pancake I think the 24mm f/2.8 IS it a totally different league and nothing to compare. your thoughts?
(of course if you already have the 24mm f/2.8 IS the 24mm pancake is not interesting)
I see what you're saying also. But I don't think the 40mm has a huge image quality advantage over the new 24mm IS (very marginally sharper in the corners than the 24mm IS) - they were released at the same time after all. And I'd take IS over STM any day of the week, especially when there is no speed difference. And the 24mm IS can be used on full frame cameras as well. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose!

7
EOS Bodies / Re: A Rundown of Canon at Photokina
« on: September 03, 2014, 10:37:24 AM »
A bit confused by the 24mm f/2.8 EF-S pancake prime. I use the 24mm f/2.8 IS on my SL1 and it is tiny.

I guess if you're really interested in saving a minute amount of weight & size, a little bit of money, and trade IS for STM it might be worth it. But I can't see it myself.

8
Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: July 31, 2014, 12:29:09 PM »
Easy answer for me. My EF 8-15mm f/4 L Fisheye USM. I got it for a very good price, and it's a great lens. There just aren't that many occasions that necessitate its use.

But it is a cool lens and fun to use, so I don't see getting rid of it anytime soon.

9
Canon General / Re: What do you Cheap Out On?
« on: July 29, 2014, 01:07:58 PM »
* Yongnuo YN-E3-RT: $100 cheaper than the Canon original, has AF assist lamp Canon doesn't, but functions identically. No problems using extensively since launch.
* Some 3rd-party batteries: For long days & trips where I don't have charger access I've got a handful of legit LP-E6 batteries and several more Wasabi Power clones for backup. I never put the batteries inside the 5D3, but use them in the grip in case of the overheating/swelling issue should arise. Of course, if I was smarter I'd be using a clone grip instead of the BG-E11 for those situations.  :P

10
Lenses / Re: New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)
« on: July 28, 2014, 01:43:04 PM »
I'm assuming this has zero bearing on the (rumored) upcoming 100-400mm ii... I'd feel more confident if there reports of the current 100-400mm being discontinued like the 7D.

11
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 150-600mm availability
« on: July 23, 2014, 12:02:49 PM »
Pre-ordered from B&H on Jan 20. Shipped on Feb 6.

12
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 22, 2014, 12:06:08 AM »
To answer the question more seriously: I've owned all 3 of the current Canon 50mm lenses. The f/1.8 was great for the price. I liked the f/1.4 quite a bit more than the nifty fifty. The f/1.2 produced the pictures I liked the best. So, that's the one I kept.

I sincerely hope that meets with everyone's approval... I'd hate to be judged harshly for spending my money in such a foolish manner.  ;)


13
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 21, 2014, 05:46:09 PM »
Two words: weather sealing:P

14
Legendary, unfocused. Legendary.

15
Lenses / Re: Tamron SP 150-600 f/5-6.3 VC Availability
« on: July 02, 2014, 12:49:28 PM »
And to make this reply on-topic, I've been thinking about selling my 150-600mm that I got back in early February. I really like the range and it's a great lens for the price, but it has really made me even more tempted to spend my money on at least one Canon supertelephoto.


Funny you say that...Been thinking the same thing...I got the Bigron in Feb...While it's a good lens, I'm not gonna say great.  My 400L 5.6 is sharper and if I crop a shot to 600mm equivalent, it's probably better than if I used 150-600...
I have since picked up the 300mm 2.8 ii. As one should expect for the price difference, it's a much better lens in almost every way, shape and form. The quality and AF of the 300mm 2.8 ii with 2x iii is ridiculous. Tamron wins hands down on the size and versatility of the zoom... but I feel is severly lacking in contrast, color, sharpness, bokeh, AF performance, etc...

Don't get me wrong. The Tamron is a great value. But there will be many compromises. Having shot both at a recent sporting event, the versatility and compactness of the Tamron hardly makes up for the IQ hit. If there is any way to swing a more expensive lens, you will obviously notice the difference. I've not had experience with the Canon 400mm f/5.6, but it sounds like it also compares favorably to the Tamron.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9