Messages

1

Pricewatch Deals / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS Preorders

« on: November 06, 2012, 01:10:27 PM »

plutonium10, we can only HOPE!  And FWIW, I think the 6D has great promise, esp if it was about $500 less.  That's its biggest fault.  Otherwise, the 6D may well work just fine.  For what I do and how I shoot, it may eventually replace my 5D3.  I'd love to still have what I need and get back ~$1000 some day.  No way to know until the 6d has been out for a while and can be truly compared to the other relevant bodies.  Heck, I barely know my 5D3 as of yet.  No big rush, life goes on....

Agreed, the 6D itself seems like a decent camera. It's a simple and straightforward FF body for the entry-level crowd, and a competent replacement for the 5D II, even if the AF system might be somewhat underwhelming for more advanced users. Only time and testing will tell how effective the 11-point system actually is. What I do take issue with is the price tag, which is hardly "entry-level".

2

Pricewatch Deals / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS Preorders

« on: November 06, 2012, 10:09:50 AM »

I think it's only a matter of time before there's a big shake-up in Canon management and things go back to what we consider "normal". Yes, this pricing is insane, but it can't last forever if they hope to stay competitive. One big flop will really open their eyes, and that may or may not be what the 6D turns out to be.

The reason I saw the new 24-70 as a logical and useful lens was its usefulness as a high quality, low cost kit lens to keep the price of the 6D kit reasonable. That isn't what we got.

3

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS

« on: November 05, 2012, 06:42:20 PM »

In all fairness, I'm pretty sure the guys at Canon don't sit down and say "Hey, let's NOT make a 14-24 or 100-400, let's just make a 24-70 f4 instead." The 24-70 f4 and 35 f2 are nearly ready for release, so Canon is announcing them. When other lenses are ready, they too will be announced. Certain lenses are bound to take longer to perfect than others.

4

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS

« on: November 05, 2012, 10:46:00 AM »

Am I the only one who is actually excited about this lens? The macro bit is what sold me. Provided this new lens has nice IQ and reasonable price (which by all means it should), It can effectively provide a small and light replacement for my 100L macro and 15-85. Paired with a 10-22 or 17-40, it seems like an excellent and versatile lens for travel photography and macro work.

5

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]

« on: November 02, 2012, 12:37:49 AM »

I would agree that the 17-40 has good optical quality, but perhaps not as excellent as the average L lens. Not good enough to be a worthwhile upgrade to my 15-85, except for the build quality and weather sealing. Now if there was a new 14-24 or 16-35 lens with f4 and excellent optical quality at a reasonable price I would sell my 15-85 and buy it as well as a 24-70 IS

6

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]

« on: November 01, 2012, 01:31:10 PM »

I somewhat doubt Canon will kill the 24-105 completely. Maybe they'll replace it with a 24-120 or something, while the 24-70 becomes the lens for more size- and weight-conscious shooters. When I travel, I take my 70-300L with me to capture wildlife photos, as well as a 15-85mm walk-around lens. If I had a full frame camera, I would gladly trade a 70-105mm overlap for lighter weight and smaller size to reduce the overall bulk of my backpack.

7

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]

« on: October 31, 2012, 08:26:16 AM »

So 450g and around 500$ street price?

I'm sure the price for the lens alone will be rather high - few people would buy it anyway to replace their existing standard zoom, and this way Canon will be able to market apparently incredible deals as a kit with the 6d :-p

I agree. Maybe closer to $1000 at first but a great deal in the 6D kit. Look at the EF-S 18-55 IS. It's actually great value for the price when it's in a kit, but who buys it by itself?

8

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]

« on: October 30, 2012, 10:21:56 PM »

Now what I would really, really LOVE to see would be a 15-70 F4L IS lens for APS-C. The biggest gripe I have with my 7D is not having a weather-sealed walk-around lens. If Canon will refuse to make an APS-C L lens, how about a 15-70mm lens that has full range on APS-C cameras and can be mechanically limited to 24mm on the wide end while mounted on a FF camera. Similar to the way Canon's 8-15 Fisheye has limiter switches for FF and APS-H. It wouldn't require much (if any) additional glass versus a normal 24-70, and could offer APS-C owners a future proof lens if they plan on going FF in the future.

9

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]

« on: October 30, 2012, 07:39:43 PM »

The 24-70 F4L IS makes good sense as a 6D kit lens. Better IS and image stabilization than the 24-105 at an affordable price sounds pretty reasonable to me, but the lack of telephoto range is unfortunate. It may well come with a release price of $1000+ but will likely be a steal when bundled with the 6D, leaving buyers with more spare cash to spend on a 70-200.

10

EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]

« on: September 27, 2012, 03:34:05 PM »

Possibly. I think it's fair to say that some design decisions these days are made with the intent of pleasing synthetic benchmarks rather than improving actual real-world results. With Exmor having such a strong DXO score, it's possible that Canon might want to use this tactic.

What are the real-world aspects that are sacrificed in order to excell at DXO ratings? In other words, can you recommend a fair side-by-side comparision where Canon sensors beats Sony sensors?

I think it is important to be critical about measurements such as DXO and their relevance to practical photography. At the same time, I am sceptical about dismissing repeatable objective tests based on physics and only going for subjective gut-feeling.

These are not rhetorical questions, I would really like to relate my anecdotal perceptions to fair subjective side-by-sides to measurements.

-h

Sorry, I should have made myself more clear. I'm not implying that real-world performance is sacrificed in order to get a good DXO score. I'm just saying that certain extra features (such as a 16-bit ADC) might be implemented for marketing and benchmarking purposes even if they will have a negligible positive impact on the quality of photos. Until I see details about the sensor, I won't even speculate as to whether or not a 16-bit ADC would have a large effect on the camera's DR.

11

EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]

« on: September 27, 2012, 02:00:03 PM »

If Canon goes to a 32 channel read out at 16 bit with their ADC, their DR will suddenly shoot up on the test scores (like DXO).  Ofcourse for 98% of images taken this will mean absolutely nothing, but it will stop people from complaining.

Possibly. I think it's fair to say that some design decisions these days are made with the intent of pleasing synthetic benchmarks rather than improving actual real-world results. With Exmor having such a strong DXO score, it's possible that Canon might want to use this tactic.

12

EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]

« on: September 27, 2012, 01:32:41 PM »

All I can say is that if Canon can one-up the Exmor sensor, I will have some serious respect for their engineers. The rumor of a new sensor actually sounds plausible to me. Canon CMOS technology in the last few years has shown relatively slow, evolutionary improvement without any radical design changes to improve performance. This points to the fact that they are quite likely concentrating most of their sensor R&D resources on an entirely new sensor tech while existing tech receives only moderate boosts in performance.

This could also be why Canon has been slow to introduce replacements for the 1Ds III and 7D. These are/were the flagship models of the full-frame and APS-C camera segments, respectively. This makes them ideal for introducing and showing off a brand new sensor technology in both sensor formats. Just my 2¢.

13

EOS Bodies / Re: Odds & Ends: 70D, 7D2, New Full Frame, D600 & Photoshop CS6

« on: June 16, 2012, 08:05:19 PM »

"a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response"

Anyone who says good things about Nikon. 

14

EOS Bodies / Re: Odds & Ends: 70D, 7D2, New Full Frame, D600 & Photoshop CS6

« on: June 16, 2012, 06:40:49 PM »

I seriously doubt Canon would just drop the XXD line.

Why not? They "just" "downgraded" it to a plastic body and lower FPS to not directly compete with the 7D. 

D

That's true, they did just that, but the XXD name is useful in itself from a marketing perspective because it allows a model to be placed somewhat below the greatness of xD bodies and somewhat above the xxxD consumer line. This is what leads me believe that the xxD line will survive, and it's also why I think a "budget" FF could fit the name well. I do admit the idea is somewhat unlikely but who knows?

15

EOS Bodies / Re: Odds & Ends: 70D, 7D2, New Full Frame, D600 & Photoshop CS6

« on: June 16, 2012, 05:30:44 PM »

I still believe the XXD line will be dropped and the 7DII will take it's place.

I seriously doubt Canon would just drop the XXD line. I agree that a 7D MK II (if the 7D/60D product lines are in fact merged) could successfully become the spiritual successor to both the 7D and 60D in many regards, but dropping the actual XXD moniker? No. In my mind, it could make sense for the rumored entry-level FF camera to use the XXD badge, which would further help distance it from the more advanced features of the 5D III / 7D II. Then again, if it does end up being more expensive than the 7D II, the 6D name might be a better fit.