16
Lenses / Re: Pre CES Announcements
« on: December 20, 2011, 03:28:40 PM »The EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x could also be officially announced.
One can dream
May 20, 2013, 11:05:57 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.
One can dream
17
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Rebel 1000D Lost at Sea
« on: November 27, 2011, 10:18:25 PM »
Wow, simply Wow. Also glad they were able to get the camera and images back to the firefighter...
18
Lenses / Re: New Lens on December 6, 2011? [CR1]
« on: November 27, 2011, 10:17:27 PM »
200-400 please 
19
Lenses / Re: EF 500 f/4L IS II & EF 600 f/4L IS II Shipping Delayed Into 2012
« on: November 17, 2011, 10:30:54 AM »Bummer
Expect the EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x, which hasn’t been officially announced yet to be delayed well into 2012.
Bummer indeed. Still hoping for this lens
20
Lenses / Re: New Lenses Imminent? [CR1]
« on: November 03, 2011, 01:13:20 PM »Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM
- Needs IS and new optics.
Canon EF 100-400mm f/3.5-5.6L IS II USM
- Needs new optics and IS update.
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L II USM
- Needs new optics.
Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L II (or IS) USM
- Needs new optics and possibly IS.
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 II (or IS) USM
- Needs new optics and possibly IS.
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L II USM
- Needs the new optics from the updated IS version.
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L II USM
- Needs the new optics from the IS version.
Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L IS USM
- Needs IS and new optics.
you forgot, 200-400mm f4 w/ x1.4 converter
this just needs to come out
21
EOS Bodies / Re: The 1DX is announced -- What will October 26th bring?
« on: October 18, 2011, 05:11:35 PM »I hope it's either the 5D Mark III (or equivalent) or the EF 200-400 f/4
I vote for the 200-400 f/4
22
Canon General / Re: Patent - Touchscreen & Wifi Rebel?
« on: October 17, 2011, 10:57:32 AM »
just hope there is nothing sensitive that my nose will hit. For I don't know about others, when shooting horizontal, my nose is pressed on that screen. Can they put the format button there?? that would be priceless!!
23
EOS Bodies / Re: The New EOS [CR3]
« on: October 14, 2011, 01:45:14 PM »
Looks good, like to know the flash sync speed. Hopefully higher then 1/250th
24
Lenses / Canon 200-400 f4 with 1.4x Converter - my spec ideas
« on: October 01, 2011, 10:27:29 AM »
Ok, First off, I have no clue of a release date or even seen this lens. Just after reading the post about wither to get a 300 2.8 or wait for the 200-400 to come out. It made me think and I wanted to crunch some numbers of lenses that are already out there.
With all that being said, here is what I came up with.
The Weight:
Let's compare
Nikon 300 2.8 - 6.3lbs
Nikon 200-400 - 7.3lbs
Nikon 400 2.8 - 10.2lbs
Canon 300 2.8 II - 5.18lbs
Canon 400 2.8 II - 8.5lbs
1.4 converter - .5lbs
difference between 300-400
Nikon 300 is 62% the size of the 400
Canon 300 is 61% the size of the 400
so we have a close enough comparison.
so Nikon's 200-400 is 116% bigger then Nikon's 300
So we would get a Canon version of the 200-400 being around 6lbs adding .5 lbs for the converter you get:
Canon 200-400 with 1.4x - 6.5lbs
Now going onto Price*:
*based on current prices on their websites
Nikon 400 2.8 - $9550
Nikon 300 2.8 - $5900
Nikon 200-400 4 - $7000
Canon 400 2.8 - $11500
Canon 300 2.8 - $7300
Canon 1.4x converter - $500
Nikon 300 is 62% of the price of the Nikon 400
Canon 300 is 63% of the price of the Canon 400
so we have a close enough comparison.
Nikon 200-400 is 118% the price of the Nikon 300
so if we take 118% of the Canon 300, we would get around $8600
adding $500 for a converter
a Canon 200-400 f/4 with 1.4x converter - $9100
curious what others think. I tried to do this as logically as possible.
With all that being said, here is what I came up with.
The Weight:
Let's compare
Nikon 300 2.8 - 6.3lbs
Nikon 200-400 - 7.3lbs
Nikon 400 2.8 - 10.2lbs
Canon 300 2.8 II - 5.18lbs
Canon 400 2.8 II - 8.5lbs
1.4 converter - .5lbs
difference between 300-400
Nikon 300 is 62% the size of the 400
Canon 300 is 61% the size of the 400
so we have a close enough comparison.
so Nikon's 200-400 is 116% bigger then Nikon's 300
So we would get a Canon version of the 200-400 being around 6lbs adding .5 lbs for the converter you get:
Canon 200-400 with 1.4x - 6.5lbs
Now going onto Price*:
*based on current prices on their websites
Nikon 400 2.8 - $9550
Nikon 300 2.8 - $5900
Nikon 200-400 4 - $7000
Canon 400 2.8 - $11500
Canon 300 2.8 - $7300
Canon 1.4x converter - $500
Nikon 300 is 62% of the price of the Nikon 400
Canon 300 is 63% of the price of the Canon 400
so we have a close enough comparison.
Nikon 200-400 is 118% the price of the Nikon 300
so if we take 118% of the Canon 300, we would get around $8600
adding $500 for a converter
a Canon 200-400 f/4 with 1.4x converter - $9100
curious what others think. I tried to do this as logically as possible.
25
Lenses / Re: 300mm f2.8 II vs 200-400mm f4.0 TC1.4 your opinion
« on: September 30, 2011, 08:26:50 PM »
Ok, let's talk weigh
now this isn't an exact science but let's compare
Nikon 300 2.8 - 6.3lbs
Nikon 200-400 - 7.3lbs
Canon 300 2.8 II - 5.18lbs
1.4 converter - .5lbs
taking the difference between Nikons two lenses, you would get a Canon version of 200-400 @ 6lbs with adding an extra .5 lbs for the converter, for a total possible weight of
Canon 200-400 with 1.4x - 6.5lbs
Now the main question is what are you shooting and what quality are you expecting from your lens.
I have used the Sigmoster - 300-800mm nice but isn't the sharpest lens,
hope this helps
** I just wanted to crunch a little math as the Rain falls in the Bronx. I compared the weight of the Nikon 400 to the 300 and as well as Canon. the weight difference between the 400 to 300 is about 3% difference between Nikon and Canon, so I stick by my math comparison and will take my guess that the Canon 200-400 will be around 6.5lbs...
*** Ok, I am nuts and bored. Using the same math, I thought I look at the price, I come to a calculation of $8964 without the converter, so add the $500, you get around $9500. This is just my guess looking at the math, it is scary how the price difference between the Canon 400 to 300 is 63% and the Nikon difference is 62%. Now that's scary..
now this isn't an exact science but let's compare
Nikon 300 2.8 - 6.3lbs
Nikon 200-400 - 7.3lbs
Canon 300 2.8 II - 5.18lbs
1.4 converter - .5lbs
taking the difference between Nikons two lenses, you would get a Canon version of 200-400 @ 6lbs with adding an extra .5 lbs for the converter, for a total possible weight of
Canon 200-400 with 1.4x - 6.5lbs
Now the main question is what are you shooting and what quality are you expecting from your lens.
I have used the Sigmoster - 300-800mm nice but isn't the sharpest lens,
hope this helps
** I just wanted to crunch a little math as the Rain falls in the Bronx. I compared the weight of the Nikon 400 to the 300 and as well as Canon. the weight difference between the 400 to 300 is about 3% difference between Nikon and Canon, so I stick by my math comparison and will take my guess that the Canon 200-400 will be around 6.5lbs...
*** Ok, I am nuts and bored. Using the same math, I thought I look at the price, I come to a calculation of $8964 without the converter, so add the $500, you get around $9500. This is just my guess looking at the math, it is scary how the price difference between the Canon 400 to 300 is 63% and the Nikon difference is 62%. Now that's scary..
26
Lenses / Re: 300mm f2.8 II vs 200-400mm f4.0 TC1.4 your opinion
« on: September 30, 2011, 05:08:36 PM »
Personally, I am looking forward for the release of the 200-400mm lens. Currently have a 400 F2/8 IS. Which is a completely wonderful lens. But for some of the items I shoot, it can get real tight. and I am unable to back up.
If this was back in the day when ISO 1250 was the best you can get, then I would stick with a prime 2.8. But I know a far amount of Nikon shooters who love their 200-400 ever since the D3 first came out. If you need a lens now, then go get the 300mm, if you can wait like me, I would wait til the 200-400 comes out.
Best of luck...
If this was back in the day when ISO 1250 was the best you can get, then I would stick with a prime 2.8. But I know a far amount of Nikon shooters who love their 200-400 ever since the D3 first came out. If you need a lens now, then go get the 300mm, if you can wait like me, I would wait til the 200-400 comes out.
Best of luck...
27
Canon General / Re: This & That - What Others are Saying
« on: September 28, 2011, 01:01:16 PM »
Sorry for the Dumb question, but what is considered the Quarter #2. April-June?
28
EOS Bodies / Re: Your wishlist for your next body...
« on: September 27, 2011, 10:31:08 PM »
A little out of the box.
Full frame 35mm Square
12-14MB
8-9 fps
Sync speed - 1/500 or 1/1000
High ISO quality, Mark IV is great and wouldn't complain, but a slight improve on 4000-5000
oh the way out there wish- in camera facial id - a huge dream!!!
so when I photograph players on the field when they have no numbers, I can know who they are
sure I am forgetting something
Full frame 35mm Square
12-14MB
8-9 fps
Sync speed - 1/500 or 1/1000
High ISO quality, Mark IV is great and wouldn't complain, but a slight improve on 4000-5000
oh the way out there wish- in camera facial id - a huge dream!!!
so when I photograph players on the field when they have no numbers, I can know who they are
sure I am forgetting something
29
EOS Bodies / Re: All I Want For Christmas is a 5D Mk III...
« on: September 27, 2011, 09:45:54 AM »
Canon 200-400mm f/4 with 1.4X converter. that's all I want to Columbus Day, sorry I can't wait til Christmas
30
Lenses / Re: Hey Rumor Guy: What about any LENS rumors?
« on: September 26, 2011, 05:23:26 PM »I'm also curious about likely release timing for the new EF 200-400 L IS lens.
I'll second that one. I check every day looking for something about this lens.
I would like to second this as well. I know CR Guy doesn't make things up on a whim, but it is a lens I have been waiting for and hope will be coming soon..
PS i shoot with a 400mm 2/8 lens on a monopod with no ball head. and I feel fine