1
Lenses / Re: Poll: Most Wanted New Lenses of 2013.
« on: May 14, 2013, 03:55:42 PM »
14-24mm with 100-400 in second place.
The 200-400 is just too dear at £12000.
The 200-400 is just too dear at £12000.
May 19, 2013, 04:35:35 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.
2
Lenses / Re: EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Announcement Tonight
« on: May 14, 2013, 03:43:52 PM »Fantastic lens but the cost is a lot. USA £7800, UK£ 12000. Over a third more expensive. Ouch!
Couldn't agree more.
3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D as a Compliment to 5DMkiii
« on: April 04, 2013, 03:30:08 PM »
You may find the 6D a disappointment unless budgetary considerations rule out a second 5d3.
IMHO backup should be a 5d3 or possibly a 1dx
IMHO backup should be a 5d3 or possibly a 1dx
4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Does Canon really have a Flagship Stills Camera?
« on: April 04, 2013, 03:18:15 PM »
There can only be one flagship in a fleet and it's the 1DX
5
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D L Announced, Shipping in May
« on: April 01, 2013, 03:08:18 PM »
Are Sandisc and Lexar releasing CF L versions to fit?
6
EOS Bodies / Re: A New DSLR Line from Canon? [CR1]
« on: March 12, 2013, 04:09:35 PM »To all those stating that Canon couldn't possibly make the "Rebel" series any smaller:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/omd-em5/omd-em5A.HTM
[scroll down to "Olympus E-M5 versus OM-1" heading]
That would be a "full-frame" 35mm film camera with an enormous pentaprism viewfinder and all the film transport gubbins (albeit, without the need for an LCD screen).
Now compare:
http://camerasize.com/compare/#333,289
You're all trying to tell me that it's not possible to make a DSLR smaller than a Rebel? Pardon me if I don't believe you.
[P.S. OM mount flange back distance = 46mm; EF mount flange back distance = 44mm]
The OM-D is micro4/3. With dedicated lenses. I don't think Canon will go micro 4/3 in a DSLR for now.
Nobody's trying to tell it's not possible to make a DSLR smaller than a Rebel, in fact this thread is about a new Canon DSLR smaller than a Rebel. On a side note, the original Rebel/300D from a decade ago was roughly as large as the current FF 6D... For sentimental reasons I still have the 300D, the "black limited edition", which was offered with the grip in bundle. It was my first digital reflex camera.
Did you take a look at the OM-1? I think you'll find that it isn't micro-4/3rds, yet it isn't a whole lot bigger than the OM-D EM5. My point was, if you can make a 35mm film SLR similar in size to the OM-D EM5, you can certainly make an APS-C DSLR smaller than the Rebel. Furthermore, it should be possible to make it without crippling the viewfinder or the handling (the OM-1 was no slouch in either regard).
I said the OM-D is micro 4/3.
I've owned an OM 2n since 1980, then I added an OM 1n and an OM 3, many many Zuiko lenses and, over time, an insane number of accessories for the Olympus system. I've been shooting with them for 30+ years. I went for the Olympus system primarily because of the size and weight. I still have all of them, all in perfect order, I occasionally use them (actually the OM 2n, my preferred one), and I think I know them quite well. Still, I think you can't squeeze all the stuff needed for digital in an OM-sized body currently. Just as an example, an LP-E6 batt alone is about as thick as the OM 1 body itself. But, again, for sure I agree that you can certainly make an APS-C DSLR smaller than today's Rebel, though not as small as the OM 1 or the OM-D.
I still have OM 1,2 and 3 bodies and winders and a few Zuiko lenses. With a few mods it could be possible to
reconfigure the winder to a battery pack and incorporate a sensor FF or APSC.
Zuiko 50 1.4 is still in use with an EOS adaptor
7
Lenses / Re: your goto everyday lens and why?
« on: March 04, 2013, 02:51:42 PM »
24-105 f4L covers most situations.
I usually travel with more than 1 body and quite a few other L series lenses
I usually travel with more than 1 body and quite a few other L series lenses
8
EOS Bodies / Re: need an upgrade from 40d, can't decide: 5D 3, 70D (when available), 7D?
« on: February 18, 2013, 03:40:10 PM »
If finances stretch go for the 5DIII
9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Upgrade from 40D
« on: February 08, 2013, 06:47:19 PM »
Went from 40D to 5DII and have just upgraded to 5DIII.
If you need APS-C get a 7D, For FF a 6D will disappoint, so go for a 5DIII (grey) if your budget stretches.
If you need APS-C get a 7D, For FF a 6D will disappoint, so go for a 5DIII (grey) if your budget stretches.
10
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What camera for walking/staggering in a St. Pat's Parade?
« on: February 08, 2013, 06:34:47 PM »
Any EOS Digital camera lens combo that you have microadjusted to your enebriated state or a few 12 exposure disposable kodak/fuji cameras
11
Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II "Fix"
« on: February 08, 2013, 06:18:04 PM »Auric Goldfinger had his painted in 24 carat gold
It wasn't lenses he painted in 24 carat gold but beautiful bodies
12
Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II "Fix"
« on: February 08, 2013, 02:47:31 PM »You forgot to stencil "AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II" on your black lens.
If anybody asks say its a prototype and I've signed an NDA
13
EOS Bodies / Re: Recommend Cheap Second Body
« on: February 08, 2013, 01:32:05 PM »
a used 40d for crop or 5d for FF
14
Lenses / Re: 70-200 is ii vs non is
« on: February 08, 2013, 01:23:39 PM »
I have non IS and it is sharper than IS mark1. If you want it get it soon as being discontinued.
When I got mine the stellar mark2 IS was not yet announced.
It's all down to personal preference.
When I got mine the stellar mark2 IS was not yet announced.
It's all down to personal preference.
15
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Likely Price Trend
« on: February 07, 2013, 02:07:50 PM »£1500 UK or £1289 DigRev (UK)
$2356 US or $2025 US
same ol' same ol'
It's only been available for 3 months max.
Supply exceeds demand.
Its going to drop further