February 28, 2015, 12:48:26 PM

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 - JonAustin

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 25
1
Canon General / Re: Spartans, What is your profession?
« on: Today at 10:36:58 AM »
Retired (since 2007) telecommunications executive, and now a telecom / IT  consultant. Since my work occasionally includes making and editing images (as well as video and audio), I expense all of my photographic gear to my business. It still comes out of my pocket, but "above the line," rather than "below the line."

2
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L Accepts Rear Gelatin Filter
« on: February 27, 2015, 06:53:13 PM »
I owned a 17-40 for 11 years, and never knew it had a rear filter slot. (Not that I would have ever used it.) But then, who reads lens manuals?  :-\

3
Lenses / Re: 16-35 f4 IS Lens hood question.
« on: February 24, 2015, 03:15:57 PM »
I can't explain it, either, and haven't used my 16-35/4 enough yet to assess its hood's effectiveness, but the hood on the 17-40 was so wide that I always had trouble finding a place for it in my backpack. Reversing it on the lens was fine for storing on the equipment shelf, but was a no-go in the bag.

4
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon EOS 5D Mark III $1999
« on: February 18, 2015, 08:22:27 AM »
At $1999, they're almost being given away.

Right ... they're giving them away to anyone willing to part with two thousand dollars. (sheesh) ::)

When this price becomes available from an authorized US dealer, I may pull the trigger and pick up a second one. (Then again, if the 5D4 doesn't bump up the resolution too much, and offers crop modes, I may wait to get one of those, instead.)


5
Lenses / Re: Review: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: February 15, 2015, 06:54:38 PM »
I have never used an extender and wonder if using one would make the Canon + extender a real pain in the butt. Since money is not my problem what do some of the forum members think on this subject?

Background: I sold my 1.x4 vII extender in June with my 70-200/2.8L IS vI. I sold the zoom because I was purchasing the vII model under a rebate offer, and the buyer wanted the extender, too, which I didn't use much.

I didn't have any issues with the extender's performance, I just didn't like the hassle of removing it and remounting it as the need arose. I usually only use focal lengths greater than 100mm when I'm hiking; therefore, out "in the wild," where any lens changes are opportunities to drop, damage or at least sully equipment.

I bought the 100-400 II in December, so I now have more reach with it than I did with the 70-200 + 1.4x. I'm not ruling out the possibility of someday picking up a 1.4x III, but won't do so unless I absolutely need it.

IMHO, your degree of satisfaction with using extenders (with the exception of the built-in one in the 200-400) depends largely upon how frequently you need / want to mount and unmount them.

6
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Teardown
« on: February 13, 2015, 09:09:06 AM »
I would never have the nerve to tear down one of my perfectly functioning lenses, but I watch Roger's work with morbid glee.

This report only reinforces my already high level of satisfaction with this lens. I usually wait for a rebate, sale or other deal when buying a new lens, but I had waited years for the 100-400 II to be announced and released, so I bought mine in December, after the initial round of positive reviews. Couldn't be more pleased with it, and I'm not missing the $200 bucks or so I might've saved by waiting for a deal.

7
EOS-M / Re: Poll: Would you have bought the M3? (North America)
« on: February 09, 2015, 04:27:23 PM »
I voted yes, but I would qualify that as follows:

1. if the improvements in AF, handling and image quality were to live up to expectations / promises.
2. if the street price were not more than $500.
3. if a decent-quality "standard range" zoom were available for it.
4. if I could pry her Canon Powershot S95 out of my wife's fingers.

(Those last two are most important! I would like to put a better P&S in her hands, but she isn't a lens-changer, so she'd need a good general-purpose zoom mounted to it. And I'd like for her to shoot with something that I wouldn't mind using on occasion, as well ... the S95 is just too small, no VF and I don't like the power zoom. I'd get the optional EVF for my own use; she'd be fine with the LCD.)

8
Canon General / Re: dpreview: Canon not listed in "Best product for 2014"
« on: February 07, 2015, 08:05:19 PM »
Nevertheless, to my mind Canon didn't announce anything major in the first three quarters of 2014 ...

I dunno, the 16-35/4L IS was released in June, and I think it's pretty major (so much so, I sold my 17-40 after 11 years of ownership, and bought the 16-35/4 as soon as it was offered with a rebate).

9
Lenses / Re: A New Nifty Fifty Coming [CR1]
« on: February 04, 2015, 10:01:23 AM »
Like most here, I was hoping for a 50/1.4 IS ring USM in line with the optical and build quality of the 24-, 28- and 35mm lenses introduced in 2012. I'm making do with the 50/2.5 compact macro, as I've read too many stories about the fragility of the 1.4's AF system.

I waited 10+ years for the 100-400 II to arrive, even though it was proclaimed a unicorn right up until the month prior to its official announcement. I'm keeping the faith that Canon will eventually produce the 50mm lens that so many of us are waiting for with our wallets open.

10
Lenses / Re: New 50mm & 70-300mm Coming Soon? [CR2]
« on: February 04, 2015, 12:02:37 AM »
Why is everyone insisting this is slower than f/1.4?

To try to keep from being disappointed, if the new 50 isn't as fast as they want / hope / expect / need ...

I've updated a lot of my lens lineup over the past 6 months, and the newer models are simply outstanding. Like Dustin Abbott, if the new 50 follows in the tradition of the 35 f/2 IS, I'm buying.

@ Marsu42: I don't think Canon uses the golden ring in their later lens designs any more, but I get what you're saying, and I concur with your post.

11
Lenses / Re: POLL: The new 50mm will be...
« on: February 03, 2015, 11:42:50 PM »
I am going for an 50mm f/2.0 IS, to match the other compact primes with IS. If it is good, and light, I could go for buying this.

Same here, to round out my little collection of primes (35/2 IS -- 50/2 IS -- 100/2.8L IS macro.

I wouldn't mind too much if it turned out to be a replacement for the 50/2.5 macro (which I own, and would replace), but that would probably be an f/2.8. I'd rather have the wider max aperture and skip the macro function, since I have the 100L (and might keep the 50/2.5 macro).

12
Lenses / Re: New 50mm & 70-300mm Coming Soon? [CR2]
« on: February 03, 2015, 10:43:08 AM »
I can't imagine a need for a retooled non-L 70-300 that isn't implemented in the L version.

I would imagine that the "need" is market demand for a higher quality model than the current version, in a less-expensive lens than the L. (That market segment being willing to forgo L-quality optics, build and features for a lower price.)

But I also wonder if Canon updates some of these older, lower-end lenses, to maintain a smaller set of common core components, to keep inventory / inventory management costs down.

13
Canon General / Re: New Gear Resolutions for 2015
« on: February 03, 2015, 10:31:18 AM »
I've already deviated from my plan, by picking up a 35/2 IS refurb (purchased last week; should be delivered today).

In November, I was among those of you here in the "Wait until a rebate / sale / price drop on the 100-400 II" crowd, but pulled the trigger on 12/31. No regrets; it's an excellent lens, and I get to expense this stuff against my business. I usually try to buy on sale just on principle, but saving a couple hundred bucks wasn't worth the wait to me, after waiting years for this vII to be released. Besides, not knowing the price in advance, I had budgeted $2500.

It'll be interesting to see when the 5D4 is released and what it offers. At this point, I'm still planning to buy a second 5D3 when its price drops. We'll see.

And the latest "new 50mm lens" rumor has me curious ...

14
EOS-M / Re: First Image of the Canon EOS M3
« on: February 03, 2015, 09:58:17 AM »
Looks like no EVF:(

I just got back from a cruise.  With the kids and wife I have no motivation to lug around my FF gear anymore.  I ended up using the EOS-M most of the time.  However I missed the EVF very much.  I was hoping the M3 would allow me to stick with Canon, but a hotshoe EVF is garbage. 

It really looks like after 15 years I'll be moving on.  How is it Canon is still missing the boat on mirrorless?  Every single time a company has sacrificed innovation to protect existing products they lose, and that's exactly what they're doing.  I can't ignore the IBIS + FF + size + video spec of the A7m2 and that ticks me off.  There's the added fact Canon has been charging us extra for IS lenses for years when they could have IBIS.  So frustrated...

Whether you stay or move on, I hope you come up with the solution that works for you.

Maybe I'm just a sucker for the marketing hype, but I tend to agree with Canon's assertion that in-lens IS -- optimized for each individual lens -- is a more effective solution than IBIS.

15
EOS-M / Re: First Image of the Canon EOS M3
« on: February 03, 2015, 09:54:40 AM »
Judging by the lens, they kept it similar in size to the original.  That's a good thing, an EVF would increase the size.  I expect it'll be compatible with Canon's hotshoe add-on EVF.  An extra dial means more control, also good.  The integrated grip is nice, glad they ditched their proprietary strap lug.


If Canon wants to compete it needs an EVF model. If this does not come with an EVF built in, then there isn't much hope for Canon to compete in a ruthless market segment.

I'm sure you're right.  After all, the EOS M was merely the second-best selling MILC in the largest geographical market for the segment, beating out models from Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic despite lacking an EVF.  Not competitive at all, right?   ::)

Look at the price it had to come down to in order to sell... They still need to make profit in order to be called competing. You could get one for $250 with a lens, when the original price was closer to an A6000, which spanks the noodles out of it.

You're talking about North America, where MILC sales are weak.  I was referring to Japan...there was no 'fire sale' on the EOS M there.
Got it! Thanks for the info.

I don't know a thing about the market for the EOS M or MILCs in general, in any geographical region or worldwide, but I just love the expression spanks the noodles out of it!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 25