« on: November 20, 2012, 08:45:07 PM »
I have enjoyed my purchase from LR (85mm f/1.8 USM in 7.0/10 condition). Better condition than any body or lens I've ever purchased through Craigslist or eBay.
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.
Here is a picture of two of the now extinct FD 1200's with TC at the 1984 LA Olympics.
What are those two odd-looking black lenses in the picture?
1993 EF 1200mm f/5.6L USMThat lens has been out of production well over a decade, and the number of units in likely in the 10's. Not a good example of the point you are trying to make, but I do agree with you that there are many other lenses badly in need of replacement. The 50mm macro and 135mm SF are prime examples, however, I can't see Canon actually producing a new softfocus, as photography styles have shifted away from that since the 1980's and the effect can easily be replicated in post. My money would be on 35L, 50 1.4, 300 4, 400 5.6, 800L, 45 TS-E, and 90 TS-E replacements next year. That's a pretty full year right there. Unfortunately, the cheapest lenses will be the 50 1.4 and I'm guessing an MSRP around $700-800.
Maybe a bit off topic but can somebody please explain how a f/2.0 lens becomes f/3.5 on 1.6 crop. I understand a focal lenght 'change' but never heard of an aperture change. Thank you.
24-70 f4 and 6D is available at Camera Canada with January delivery for $3299.00.
I am very happy with my Energizer NiMH batteries and compact chargers. The batteries hold a charge very well. My first rechargeable batteries and charger were from PowerEx... the charger is good, but the batteries were the worst. I still have the charger but the batteries are no longer in my bag.
"rumored" canon 14-24 l 2.8 + 24-70 2.8 ii + 70-200 2.8 is ii - this is the pro setup.I think the f/2.8 wide angle will be 14-24mm, but I think the f/4 will be 16-35 IS to directly compete in all aspects with the Nikon lens. That will make it wider than the current f/4, sharper (as pretty much all lenses have been over their predecessors) and likely more expensive. Hopefully, Canon will come out with cheaper variable aperture [or non-IS] UWA to replace the long-extinct 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM for the lower end of the budget (~$500), as well. Think about this (as a beginner):
Some f4 wide angle (ex. 12-24 f4) + 24-70 f4 is + canon 70-200 f4 is -enthusiast setup
Comparing a D30 with a 1DX is as silly as comparing Velveeta with Cojack.
Actually, when you take noise into effect, you also have to decrease the effective aperture to get a valid comparison with a larger format. I can't do the math, but it's also roughly a stop.So the noise from a EOS D30 (2001) is one stop behind the 1D X? I don't think so. Everyone understands noise is in constant flux throughout models, formats, etc. So I think it is fair to leave noise out of the equation as it is not a constant like shutter speed and aperture. Given two models of camera it is fair to make a comparison on the level of noise and how many stops of advantage one has over another, but to make a blanket statement is not fair.
That is, f/1.3 @ ISO 100 on APS-C really is comparable to f/2.0 @ ISO 200 on full frame. And f/1.3 @ ISO 100 on full frame would be comparable to f/1.0 @ ISO 50 on APS-C. (Roughly, with rounding, etc., etc., etc.)