« on: April 17, 2014, 03:19:16 AM »
Don't drop it into a snow drift.
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.
Why can't the 7D2 be a pro-level APS-C camera?
The 7D was pro-level... Why not the 7D2?
and please don't say "because it's not FF", Pro-level is a whole lot more than sensor....
I'd really hoped for the 16-50/4 IS ...
I will love to have a 16-50 f/4 IS too. But I don't think that's coming. It is probably a figment of someone's imagination. Sigh
While I can understand the desire on a 1.6x crop. I really can'y see any benefit of an IS unit on a full frame 16mm lens. If you need stability....then use a tripod. Should anyone really be hand holding less than 1/15th sec? If the shot is that important....put it on a pod, end of story.
I'm looking for a lens to do some landscape photography while hiking. I need something very lightweight since I'll use it during hikes of more than 7 days.
My gear currently :
- Canon 6D
- Canon 50mm 1.8
- Canon 24-105L
No, your original point in response to my offhanded remark was an analogy comparing the improvements in DR and resolution of the D800 to the development of camera autofocus systems and digital image sensors. In other words, you compared modest, incremental improvements to transformative changes in technology. That is a completely fallacious analogy.
Now, if you're referring to your second point, about downplaying technological improvements due to brand loyalty, I'll ask you to refrain from ascribing motives to my statements, that's presumptuous. I'm downplaying them because they're modest, incremental improvements. Are they beneficial? In some situations, certainly. Do they benefit the vast majority of photographers and the vast majority of shots they take, as is the case for AF and digital sensors? No.
If they update it with more DR, I couldn't care less. I have no use for it and it would make NO impact or difference in my shots.
Are alll improvememts of equal significance?
Can you honestly say you believe that going from 11 to 13 stops of DR or adding MP that many lenses cannot fully take advantage of rise to the level of importance to and impact upon the field of photography as autofocus or the shift from film to digital? If not, then your response to my sarcasm was absolutely 'reactionary, with little footing in logic or science.'