@AdamJ: Thank you for your reply!
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.
@AdamJ: and how is your Sigma doing so far. I do nightsky/nightscapes at ISOs 6400 or so. How does it behave? Would it work out well, as my exposures avoid stars from trailing? 25 sec ISO 6400 to 8000 on the 5DIII is that an okay value for enough light? I guess so, my 28 F/2.8 does well even wide open...So I'd like to hear some Sigma results...as the price of the Canon lens will be very high...Thanks!I can see it being $2499+ (hopefully Canon prepares it's 2.8 trinity of the 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 2.8 IS within the $2-2.5k mark), though I am personally prepared and set aside up to $3k for this lens!
Besides optics, I just hope they don't screw up the lens cap design with the protruding glass front with a cheap plastic cap cover that just comes right off in your bag like on the Canon 8-15mm fisheye, Nikon 14-24mm or like the the slide in caps on the Zeiss 15mm or Canon 14mm II that over time and use will show noticeable wear on the built in lens hood. Hopefully Canon can get it done right like the twist-on cap design on the 17mm ts-e!
My Sigma has a flock-lined metal slide-on cap that fits over the metal petal hood. I don't use it; instead I use a LensCoat Hoodie which is made of stretchy neoprene with a rigid disc in the base which abuts the petal hood and protects the front element. It fits very nicely with no chance of scuffing the hood, yet tightly enough not to come off accidentally. They come in lots of sizes.
The ones that were asking for a 14-24 in the 50 1.4 IS thread was another poster and me. And here I am, jumping up and down. ;-) See my former post.When I saw this on CR, I thought if this doesn't get a bunch of ecstatic posts, then the forum members are just plain weird.
I guess I'm weird.
My least used lens is my ultra wide rectilinear. I either use a 24-xxx rectilinear or my Sigma 15mm f/2.8 fisheye. That fish is every bit an L-prime, and I find a fisheye is a much more useful lens than an ultrawide rectilinear. I shot 18 times as many shots in 2012 with the fish as I did with my ultrawide rectilinear. That number appears to be going up over time, as it's only 3x over the last 6 years. I guess I'm getting more and more comfortable with the fish.
Oh, you're fine. An ultrawide zoom isn't what everyone wants.
But there are so many people here who have been posting repeatedly asking for the 14-24 and praising the Nikon, I wonder where they are hiding now. Even yesterday someone responded to the 50 1.4 IS post by saying where's the 14-24.
<div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><g:plusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=12256\"></g:plusone></div><div style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a href=\"https://twitter.com/share\" class=\"twitter-share-button\" data-count=\"vertical\" data-url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=12256\">Tweet</a></div>
<strong>A New Canon Ultrawide Zoom<br />
</strong>This lens comes up every now and then as something that will be added to the Canon lineup. A couple of patents that have referenced this optical formula are out there, which tells us it’s something that is on the minds of the R&D team at Canon.</p>
<p>I was told today that the lens is in the pipeline and will be coming in 2013 if there are no more delays with lens production. I was told to expect availability to be in late 2013, but the announcement date was unknown at this time. It makes perfect sense that this sort of lens would be announced with the imminent large megapixel camera that Canon will unveil in 2013.</p>
<p>There were a few lenses that were to be announced in 2012 that will be pushed into 2013. A lot had to do with production delays with the new supertelephotos as well as the <a href=\"http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/843008-USA/Canon_5175B002_EF_24_70mm_f_2_8L_II.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296\" target=\"_blank\">EF 24-70 f/2.8L II</a>.</p>
<p><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">c</span>r</strong></p>
Where's the 12-24?+1 here. No IS please. If not, we top the 3.5 k (?).
Without understanding too much of tech here, if that is the case with the 6D, a next 5D could be fully equipped with 180nm sensors. Which would yield more than an incremental upgrade, right?
Right. This should not prevent you from enjoying your (excellent) 5DIII, though .
Without understanding too much of tech here, if that is the case with the 6D, a next 5D could be fully equipped with 180nm sensors. Which would yield more than an incremental upgrade, right? So if the thesis is right, even the next 5D might be called a dream cam again. I am currently in my 5D3 learning curve and the cam is fantastic. First time in 30 years I am back to fullframe again, and it reall rocks!
Based on the available info, though, I'd say that the 6D will end up having better image quality than the 5DIII.
Note that the rumors floating around are saying that only parts of the 6D sensor are made on 180nm.
So, the 6D sensor is essentially a 180nm/500nm hybrid.
The question is, are the new APS-C sensors from Canon going to be fully made on 180nm?
If they are 180nm/500nm hybrids, performance might not be all that different from current sensors.
But if they are fully made on 180nm, they are certainly going to match/beat the current 16mp Sony sensors.
I have plenty of camera with my 5D3 purchased by the end of August. A 14-24 (2.0 ?) would be a great addition to it.
as for lenses
14-24 is long overdue, new 50 1.4 to fix the finicky af mechanism. I thought the 35L needed upgrading, but now that I own it, it's stellar as is. I'm not interested in a mirroless camera unless it's FF ILC with acceptable af performance. The first company to produce it will get my money. A 7DII for action and a compact FF mirrorless for everything else would be my perfect combo.
Mine has finally arrived at Dale Photographic in the UK and will be with me tomorrow. My misery is at an end! Bloody thing better be good, its cleared out my bank account. Luckily, i have separate bank account to my wife. Sneeky but a great way to hide your ill gotton gains. And shes no good at maths hasnt got a clue what lens's cost and doesnt know what i earn. Sweet!Is that a joke? I hope it is kind of bizarre humor. Although I never have the money for such a purchase, I guess I wouldn't do that to my wife. 10.000 bucks take me halfway round the world...WITH her. The other one I'm struggling with: I always thought marriage is based on trust and mutual respect.
I'm going to get this when they kit it with the next Rebel.good one!