September 18, 2014, 08:14:42 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 - sagittariansrock

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 92
1
EOS Bodies / Re: LP-E6N in 5DMK III
« on: September 17, 2014, 11:46:48 PM »
We need someone who has used the new battery for 1D X (LP-E4N) in a 1DsIII, 1DIII or 1DIV and can tell if it had a longer life compared to the LP-E4.

That wouldn't be a directly useful comparison: the LP-E4N is advertised as having an additional 150 mA·h capacity over the LP-E4, while the capacity for the LP-E6 and E6N is advertised at 1800 mA·h.

Jim

You're right, and it practically makes this thread irrelevant. It seems the only difference in LP-E6 and LP-E6N is in charging setup as per regulation changes. I wonder where this titbit came from?
                                                    ii
                                                    V

Haven't seen this discussed yet, but wondering if the 5D MK III will be able to take the LP-E6N.  Seems the only difference is the LP-E6N has 200mA more juice, and I am suspecting Canon looks at the battery in firmware, but wondering if in the future with a firmware upgrade, the 5DMK III will be able to take advantage of stronger and likely longer lasting batteries from the 7D MK II

2
Lenses / Re: EF11-24mm F4L listed on a Japanese site
« on: September 17, 2014, 11:39:49 PM »
Good news if true.  I wonder why f/4 if there's no IS?  Just to make it lighter I suppose?

IS isn't nearly as necessary at ultra wide focal lengths as it is at longer focal lengths. Even stopped down fairly far, any camera shake is going to produce sub-pixel movements, which don't really affect IQ. The use case for this lens is primarily going to be landscape, maybe architectural. I think for the most part, at really narrow apertures, the assumption is that it's probably going to be on a tripod.

I hate it when people generalise like that, IS might not be useful for you at wide focal lengths, I would find it useful in any focal length. Low light environmental portraits can always push shutter speeds, I have many 16-35 shots that would have benefited from IS.

+1. RLPhoto has a video on Youtube where he handheld the 16-35/4 IS for a second with perfectly acceptable image (@16mm)! Imagine the possibilities if you are shooting in a church and don't have a tripod. I can relate an example from life- I was at the top of the tower in Hotel Paris, Las Vegas where they don't allow tripods, and taking long-ish exposures to shoot the Belaggio fountains. It was very useful to have IS (it wasn't this lens, FYI). Plus 16-35 is very versatile, not just landscape and not to forget, video.

3
EOS Bodies / Re: LP-E6N in 5DMK III
« on: September 17, 2014, 11:31:33 PM »
We need someone who has used the new battery for 1D X (LP-E4N) in a 1DsIII, 1DIII or 1DIV and can tell if it had a longer life compared to the LP-E4.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7DII - Did you preorder?
« on: September 17, 2014, 11:30:25 PM »
Ok, I pre-ordered via Canon Canada, being bitten by the Canon Price Watch bug again  :'(
They have an excellent deal, FYI- a 7DII plus 24-70 f/4 IS comes up to US$ 2100.

5
Lenses / Re: Lenses that you want Canon to release next
« on: September 17, 2014, 09:06:31 PM »
A version of the 70-300 IS USM lens that isn't rubbish and doesn't cost over $1000.

And I'd like some low calorie ribeye steak, too.

It is far from out of the question. A full frame 70-300 STM has been rumoured (I think I remember a patent), and would be a logical follow up to the 24-105 STM.If it has a non rotating filter and good IQ (as recent STM lenses for EF-S), it will only lack the USM, external appearance and high price of the 70-300L.

Logic says that it will come, but only if willing to sacrifice USM for the silent but slower STM. I would have settled for that instead of stretching to the wonderful L, if the existing non-L USM had not been so dissapointing in so many ways.

I had waited for that lens for a long time following logic, and still am. But I am less than hopeful. Canon has tiered it such that people are forced to buy the more expensive lens if they want quality or go bust. The non-L has so many issues- ergonomics, no true ring USM, few aperture blades, rotating front element. It was just a difficult lens to love.
...
Your idea about an STM makes sense. But having used STM lenses, I don't think I'd want one if I am shooting birds or sports- it's just too slow. So even if it comes out, I'd not benefit from it.

The Tamron 70-300 is easier to love than the Canon and roughly the same price.

Maybe Tamron or Sigma will produce a competitor to the 70-300L that's < $1000 and has equivalent or better IQ.

Agree with both statements.
I had the 70-300 Tammy and it was a lot better than the Canon in handling (non-rotating FE, manual focus override, better build), was about 20% cheaper, and about the same in IQ.
But considering the fact that Canon is around 1.1K with discounts and street prices, I think the market will be tough for a third party lens, especially given the L zoom's reputation.

6
Lenses / Re: Lenses that you want Canon to release next
« on: September 17, 2014, 09:03:13 PM »
Some long lists, but the question is how many of these will you buy. At least within a year of release?
Let's have some realistic lists.
Which lenses you want Canon to produce and you will pre-order if they do?
I'll start:
85/1.4
135 IS
20/1.8
(Not if they are all released simultaneously, I won't have the dough for that  :o )

7
Lenses / Re: Lenses that you want Canon to release next
« on: September 17, 2014, 08:58:23 PM »
Hail Mary, But Canon aren't that dense I think, who would buy a Canon Lens between 15 & 135 ?? if the Zeiss Lenses AF on a Canon Body, exception being the TSE lenses.

Hmmmm, just a thought here, but maybe people who don't have unlimited amounts of disposable income?  People who can't afford to drop $4-6k on every single lens?

LOL, was going to say the exact same thing.

8
Lenses / Re: Is This a Canon EF 11-24 f/4L?
« on: September 17, 2014, 08:56:53 PM »
11-24/4 vs 14-24/2.8?
Interesting dilemma. A good one to have to ponder over ;)

9
who ever wants to have a NX1 over the 7D2 should get their eyes checked. the thing looks worse than a bucket of smashed vaginas.

what is this, 1990's?
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/samsung-nx1/5

I don't know if 7DII and the NX1 are really head-to-head competitors. The NX1 looks good on paper for its specific segment, though. Samsung is an ambitious company- it remains to be seen what they do next.

10
You're kidding me!!!  :o
Why not in the US?  :'(

Dunno... we're closer to Santa Claus?..

I'm thinking I get to test drive a 7d2 and 24-70/4 L lens then sell it off for a profit on eBay. :}

The 24-70 will be cheaper than their new standard zoom  :o
AND I get to keep the jacket!  ;)

Don't tell me you're not planning on putting those amazing skins on all your iPhones and iPads.
But seriously, great deal...

11
Lenses / Re: Choose your Weapon: Ultra Wide Zooms for Canon
« on: September 17, 2014, 03:35:18 PM »
My current UWA lens is the Samyang/Rokinon 14 f/2.8.  Great lens.  But, I am considering adding either the EF 16-35 f/4 IS or the TS-E 17 mm or just holding steady....

Do both! Do both!
Holding steady? Do you mean your wallet or the lens???

12
Lenses / Re: Lenses that you want Canon to release next
« on: September 17, 2014, 03:33:38 PM »
A version of the 70-300 IS USM lens that isn't rubbish and doesn't cost over $1000.

And I'd like some low calorie ribeye steak, too.

It's called eye fillet steak (very low fat.)

Interesting. One learns something every day.
It also seems you're from Australia. Right guess?

13
Lenses / Re: Lenses that you want Canon to release next
« on: September 17, 2014, 03:28:13 PM »
A version of the 70-300 IS USM lens that isn't rubbish and doesn't cost over $1000.

And I'd like some low calorie ribeye steak, too.

It is far from out of the question. A full frame 70-300 STM has been rumoured (I think I remember a patent), and would be a logical follow up to the 24-105 STM.If it has a non rotating filter and good IQ (as recent STM lenses for EF-S), it will only lack the USM, external appearance and high price of the 70-300L.

Logic says that it will come, but only if willing to sacrifice USM for the silent but slower STM. I would have settled for that instead of stretching to the wonderful L, if the existing non-L USM had not been so dissapointing in so many ways.

I had waited for that lens for a long time following logic, and still am. But I am less than hopeful. Canon has tiered it such that people are forced to buy the more expensive lens if they want quality or go bust. The non-L has so many issues- ergonomics, no true ring USM, few aperture blades, rotating front element. It was just a difficult lens to love. But then I have had the same feeling about the 50/1.4 and that seems to go on without replacement for ages.
Your idea about an STM makes sense. But having used STM lenses, I don't think I'd want one if I am shooting birds or sports- it's just too slow. So even if it comes out, I'd not benefit from it.

14
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Accessory question
« on: September 17, 2014, 03:19:44 PM »
I think I will hold off the EF-EF-M adapter.
Amazon had it for $60 a few weeks back and I ordered but later canceled it.  I can't ever see myself using the adapter - the whole idea (for me) of the M is that it's tiny.  Adding the adapter and my L glass would make it ridiculous.  I carry a 5DIII (or 1D X depending on the shoot) as a back up body, but for those who carry the M for that purpose, I could see the purpose of the adapter.

Ok, that's exactly what I was thinking. I do carry a 5Dc as a back up when needed, so I still couldn't visualize using the M for that purpose.
I mean, when is an APS-C camera useful as a back up to a FF?
1. When extending reach. And I remember both during a concert and a friend's graduation ceremony I was bummed by the distance. So I could have used the lenses (the 135L and the 70-200 II) with the M instead. But I could have used them with the 1.4x III as well, and I have that piece of equipment already. I suppose I could use both however, which brings me back to an advantage in getting the adapter...
2. If I forget a back up body. Unlikely. If I need a back up, I will carry a back up.
3. If I want telephoto video... now that is another possibility. I hardly if ever use my 5DIII for video and the M is quite a nice video camera. Ok... now I am inclining towards getting the adapter... :-\

15
You're kidding me!!!  :o
Why not in the US?  :'(

Dunno... we're closer to Santa Claus?..

I'm thinking I get to test drive a 7d2 and 24-70/4 L lens then sell it off for a profit on eBay. :}

The 24-70 will be cheaper than their new standard zoom  :o

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 92