July 28, 2014, 10:55:01 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.

Messages - preppyak

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 50
Lenses / Re: Canon 24-105 vs canon 24-70 ii
« on: December 25, 2013, 07:22:46 PM »
If there is a 24-70 f2.8 II IS version in the making, it will probably cost in excess of 3500$ (my guess). So, there's no price drop here.
Likewise, not long after the 70-200 came out, they did similar rebates (got it down in the $1800 range), and then when Feb/March hit they went away. You had to wait a full year for those to come back. Waiting around for another $100 drop or so is likely gonna backfire. Cheapest prices are almost always Nov-Feb


EOS Bodies / Re: Change from T3i to 70d, or invest in a new lens?
« on: December 24, 2013, 12:08:13 PM »
Before anybody jumps into some sort of comparison you need to share what kind of pictures you take, what are you unable to take and why you are unable to take them with your current gear.
Yep, without this info, every response you've gotten so far won't be very useful. If you are shooting pictures of your kids and family you'd want a very different lens than if you were doing landscape work, or sports shooting.

Likewise, I can't tell if you'd benefit from a camera upgrade without knowing if you shoot action (frame rate and AF would be worth it), or if you shoot a lot of video (70D + STM lenses would be an upgrade).

Lenses / Re: Best lightweight crop lens for SL1 & hiking
« on: December 20, 2013, 05:59:48 PM »
Also, i highly recomend something like the capture camera clip (lots of other similar systems) for hiking with a DSLR. Clip it to your pack strap and your DSLR is always at the ready. If you take a lens that has wildlife reach (18-270), its the difference between getting that bear photo or not

Lenses / Re: Best lightweight crop lens for SL1 & hiking
« on: December 20, 2013, 05:58:19 PM »
Having been to Philmont, there are enough peaks/ridges where ultra-wide would be useful. 15-85 isn't the lightest lens, but it seems to cover the ranges the best.

My one lens I go to a lot is a Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 Macro. Gives me a decent range, and if I want wider I can shoot pano and stitch. Mine is an older version that does 1:2.1 macro, which is great for everything but small insects. And the IQ is just a little better than the kit lens.

If you've got the 10-22, then maybe take that and the 40mm. Gives you a good set of options for landscape stuff, and if you want people shots, the 40mm is a good focal length. But I might not be the best judge of low-weight, as I took a 100-400L with me on multi-days in Glacier.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Sigma 16-20 f/2 DG Art [CR1]
« on: December 19, 2013, 02:23:38 PM »
That's a narrow range.  f/2?  Really?  On an UWA?  Why?  I'd be happy with a 16-24/2.8.   Just my $.02
It's targeting people who work in really low-light (street/night) where the difference between f/2 and f/2.8 is whether the milky way shows up, or whether they get motion blur. Not really sure the point of a zoom, I think an 18mm f/2 would be a nice split. And obviously when you don't need to shoot at f/2, it would sharpen up nicely at f/5.6-8

But a 16-24 f/2.8 lens appeals to a different user base than 16-20 f/2. I can get primes in the f/2.8 range that wide for much cheaper than a 16-24 f/2.8 would cost. I cant get primes/zooms wider than 20mm that go <f/2, and I can't get a good prime/zoom wider than 24mm that goes below f/2.8. There's definitely a market there for it.

This could also technically be targeted at videographers, as it becomes a different focal length with all the video crop factors, and the depth of field is important. But I'm guessing that's not the main market for it.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Not Coming to North America
« on: December 03, 2013, 04:05:56 PM »
if they were going to announce it, say for instance after the new year, do you think they would tell you right now?
You'd think they would at least say "it will possibly come to the US".

But, the way Canon seems to do their leaks, they care a lot about making people think a product is coming to keep them from buying something else. The fact they just dropped this from nowhere and didnt mention a US presence makes me think it ain't coming to the US unless its a massive hit in Asia

(b) In USA and Europe, DSLRs outsell mirrorless cams by 9.5:1 and 8.5:1 respectively, so there's no point in shipping mirrorless cameras to these continents now.
I was gonna say, everywhere I've gone lately, I've seen a lot of D5200's and a lot of T4i/T5i's...cant name the last time I've seen someone rocking a mirrorless camera in public. And this is throughout the US; in Oregon and Washington, in DC, in WV, in the northeast, and even recently in the Everglades. EVERYONE in the Everglades had a DSLR, except for the one guy that had an SX50.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Specs Revealed?
« on: December 02, 2013, 12:04:16 PM »
There is no mention of new lenses for the system.
To me, this is the more important thing. The US system has 2 lenses right now; and if I'm gonna put an adapter on the thing, I might as well just buy an SL1 or T51 and get similar specs/pricing.

Honestly, it'd probably be smarter of them to just drop mirrorless until they are ready to commit fully. A new EOS-M that doesn't come with a tele, some more primes, etc...don't see the point

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Carl Zeiss Otus 1,4/55 gets DxO score
« on: November 21, 2013, 09:17:07 PM »
Matches what Roger found at LensRental...sounds like you can basically lock the Otus in at 55 f/2.8 and get the sharpest photos of any lens out there...even better than most primes at f/5.6


I'm not really sure there is a compelling reason either way. I mean, there's always the chance you switch to a brand that isn't Nikon (Sony/Pentax/etc), and then having gotten the Nikon mount is just as useless. And if you have a crappy adapter, it could have negative effects (infinity focus and/or mechanics of use). But, if those don't happen, it shouldn't have an effect.

Lenses / Re: More Mentions of 2014 Being the Year of the Lens [CR1]
« on: November 18, 2013, 12:26:24 PM »
Canon makes the 8-15mm already, so to be the widest, it must be really wide ...
That's a fisheye though

Lenses / Re: More Mentions of 2014 Being the Year of the Lens [CR1]
« on: November 18, 2013, 12:22:05 PM »
Widest FF zoom lens: 12-24 L f/2.8 USM
Except 12mm is already being done; they'd have to make it an 11-xx lens to be the widest.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Japan Teases a White Kiss
« on: November 11, 2013, 12:34:18 PM »


I really hope Canon' doesnt look like that. I'd actually want a fully white body, grip and all. If the grip is still black, it just looks awkward. Then again, so will all the black lenses

Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 10, 2013, 02:02:39 PM »
for EF-S
EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS Mk. III
EF-S 18-200/3.5-5.6 IS Mk. II
The 18-55 already got updated with STM.

for EF, Non-L
EF 58/1.4 IS @ USD/€ 1,190
EF 50/1.8 IS @ USD/€ 790
I could see the 50mm f/1.8 IS happening; not sure I see a 2nd 50mm update though. It does stand to reason that they may add IS to their 85mm or 135mm non-L lens.

They could also update the 70-300mm lens with STM.

EOS 70-200/4 L IS Mk. II @ USD/€ 1,790
Why that lens? Seems to me it's already one of their sharpest and most affordable L lenses. If anything, I could see them dropping the non-IS f/4 lens, to try and push sales toward other lenses.

35L and 135L are my guesses for L updates

And unless there is a startlingly clear mind blowing oh my god improvement in IQ, what pro/semipro/prosumer/enthusiast is going to commit to a path of selling off their $10,000 worth of glass in order to buy $15,000 worth of mirrorless glass? 

Again, if we can use our current lens line up with a mirrorless system, no adaptor needed, native mount, same quality...it has a chance... 
And to further back up this point, Sony has been selling E-mount cameras for 3.5 years; meaning they've been developing the system even longer. They STILL don't have a full pro lens lineup, and without Sigma and Zeiss, I'm not sure they'd even have a semi-pro set of options. If you aren't willing to manual focus, they certaintly don't have a range of lenses that can match the L system. Is there even a tele option beyond 200mm?

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 50