October 01, 2014, 10:23:41 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 ... 53
61
For all those who have been asking for a UWA prime lens specifically designed for APSC, here it is ... but the price is not competitive for a manual lens, I guess it might come down in a few months.
Assuming optically the prime is very good, I still don't understand why anyone would pick up the RokiBowYang, even at a discounted street price of say $350.
Yep, the Tokina 11-16mm is also f/2.8 and can be had for the same price. And for that I get auto-focus, auto-aperture, existing lens profiles, and a great, proven lens. Oh, and I can use filters.

This thing is gonna have to go <$300 to sell well.

62
Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm F/1.4 Art listed in Belarus for $790
« on: March 20, 2014, 07:51:47 PM »
Where are you going with this? Are you implying Sigma is going to under-price the 50/1.4 Art because they are filled with the milk of human kindness and don't care for profit?
Companies can engage in loss leaders.  What better way to introduce sigma to a new demographic and re introduce themselves to a demographic that has since moved on from sigma die to their past issues.
I think Sigma sold the 35mm as a loss-leader, or close to it, because they wanted the good press of being 60-70% the price of the Canon and Nikon lenses while being sharper, etc. Kind of the same way Tamron priced their 150-600 pretty low relative to what they could have charged.


But remember, Sigma doesnt have a massive point and shoot segment that they put a lot of R&D into that is now hemorrhaging sales. They don't have a mirrorless market that they put R&D into and then abandoned. And as far as I know, they weren't set back a whole year in lens production by the floods. Canon was on all those fronts. So Canon has to recoup money to maintain profitability, and they do it by jacking up lens prices, cause they know the lenses will sell. Sigma doesnt have to do that, they can charge a price they think will sustain for 2-3yrs, unlike Canon who has charged a 30-50% premium and then dropped it off in 6 months

63
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Plans For NAB 2014 Next Month [CR1]
« on: March 20, 2014, 06:41:59 PM »
If they put 4K video on it, NAB would be a great place to announce it.
True, but I don't see that happening. For one, there would have been a lot more rumor leaks that it would have 4k, especially since there have been so many other cameras adding 4k.

A firmware update for the 1D-C, and new EOS cine body that actually does 4k that does cheaper than the C500 would be what to expect from Canon

64
Interesting, looks like it's for crop sensors only though.
Yeah, they technically announced the lens a year and a half ago, but they clearly had issues with production: http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/09/photokina-2012-samyang-10mm-f2-8-for-aps-c/

The 10mm will be a nice competitor with the Tokina at that focal length and f-stop. If it comes in below $400 US, it'd be a strong option. Also makes a good compliment with the 16mm f/2 they have for APS-C. The 50mm will be the interesting one. It has to be cheaper than the $300 that the Canon/Nikon 50mm cost, and yet it still has to be really good, because Sigma is about to drop a really great 50mm apparently (though obviously at a higher price).

I think the AF lens is a mistake for them. They probably do really good business with their cine lenses, they should stick with being a cheaper Zeiss-style brand

65
My guess the mystery lens will be a 50mm f1.4, this will be a popular focal length in the mass sales market.
And theyve said before that they are working on one. Thing is, manual focus 50mm f/1.4 lenses are a dime a dozen out there with adapters, so, Im not sure how successful they'll be with that. Unless its very cheap.

The 10mm lens is one Ive been waiting for a while, price dependent. Looks like its been confirmed: http://www.ukdigital.co.uk/catalogsearch/result/?q=samyang+10mm

66
EOS Bodies / Re: Calumet Photo Files Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
« on: March 14, 2014, 10:46:11 PM »
Well, and Calumet also made the mistake of buying up the Penn Camera stores in DC. I think they did other similar things in other markets; which means they had a lot of stores to cover, and some in areas where they werent needed. Buying up a failed business and not making it work certainly didnt slow their end

67
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L IS
« on: March 12, 2014, 10:03:21 AM »
These look like zooms based on the focal lengths and the zoom ratios listed.   I don't know much about how these patents work but I thought that primes usually only have one focal length listed.   Am I reading these wrong?
Yeah, I dont really get that either. I know there is an effect of the lens being shorter at min focus distance vs focusing at infinity, but that wouldnt explain the 300-150 zoom. And also, previous macro patents listed as one focal length: http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/10/new-65-f2-8-180-f3-5-macro-patents/

68
Any suggestions to remove them? I did order clips but they have not come.
Pulling the background tight is option #1, using a garment steamer is option #2 if option 1 doesnt work. Or if you've got time, gravity works too.

The solution then is to find a way to store the backdrop without wrinkling it after its wrinkle free.

69
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 16-35 f/4L, 17-40 f/4L and Others
« on: March 10, 2014, 11:46:07 AM »
Is size, cost, and weight the reasons someone would go with a 16-35 f/4 over the 16-35 f/2.8?
Cost alone is the reason a lot of people go for the 17-40 vs the 16-35 right now; unless you really need the f/2.8, then it isnt worth the extra money. I'd say size and weight are lower priorities, though they certainly add up for landscapers who take long hikes, etc.


70
  • Two of the three subscores consider only ISO 100, but not everyone shoots at ISO 100 all the time
  • Their 'Sports Score' is a total misnomer - low noise at high ISO coupled with poor AF or a slow frame rate is not good for Sports
I'll actually disagree, not with it being misnamed, but with it being irrelevant. Again, they are measuring only the sensor, so its probably quite true that in a body with a fast frame rate and good AF, the D800 sensor would be superior. That body just happens to not exist from Nikon, which is irrelevant for what DxO concerns itself with.

But you are right about "sports" being the wrong name. If they just called it their low-light score, then people would just be complaining about what type of noise they prefer. Especially Street or photojournalism would be more applicable than sports.

Because obviously a camera with that DR, decent ISO handling, shooting RAW, and the ability to shoot 60 fps at resolutions higher than what Canon and Nikons top end cameras do, is WAY better for sports in the theoretical.

71
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Lens Discounts at B&H Photo
« on: February 21, 2014, 08:30:03 AM »
Yeah, they aren't gonna go back down until another rebate program comes out; which is usually early summer at the earliest. So, if that $30 savings is that important, wait, if not, you get it now vs waiting til they drop

72
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon DSLR Announcement in March? [CR1]
« on: February 19, 2014, 08:36:09 PM »
Where are the lenses in a so-called Year of the Lens for Canon? Sigh
Yeah, its gonna into March of "the year of the lens" before we even have a shot at a new lens. Which probably means no possible availability until April or May.

Is Canon really going to go a year and a half between announcing lenses (200-400 not withstanding)?

73
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 01:41:30 PM »
And others would celebrate more pancakes from Canon.  I imagine that I'm not the only one.
Bingo. I was against the 40mm when it was released...didnt think it made sense with the 50mm already out there. But I get it now.

A combo of pancakes or smaller EF-S lenses would be great. 24mm is fine, though like others I'd obviously also like a 15-16mm EF-S prime and a longer prime (something in the 60-85 range).

Cause to date, the best mirrorless cameras dont quite measure up to what I need. If Canon can beat them there, giving me a useable combo with a DSLR instead, I'd gladly stay with them as a lineup

74
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 01:36:41 PM »
I see little value in that.  A person bringing both the 24 and 40 and possibly something else might be better served by the 17-55.  Either that or pick up the M with the 22 f/2, which is still less inconspicuous than an APS-C body.
This is why: http://camerasize.com/compact/#448.303,448.345,ha,t

For me, I do adventure sports, which either involves long treks, or being put into a small case in the back of my boat. That weight makes a very big difference over miles, and it effects how the camera handles.  The EOS M can't AF, which makes it of limited use for multi-frame bursts. It's the same issue with basically all the mirrorless cameras; I need portability AND the ability to shoot action.

Moreover, if the new lens ends up being about the size of the 22 STM, I can own it and the 40mm pancake and still have $400+ and 1lb of weight saved. If it ends up being f/2 instead of f/2.8, then its even better off than the 17-55 (IS is of no use to me in action shooting)

75
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 11:27:51 AM »
EF-S really does have a gap, especially now with the new primes being so highly priced. If I'm an average consumer getting into the XXXD line, I've got the kit lens and other zooms, the 50mm, the 40mm pancake, and then everything else is $400+.

In the same way that Nikon makes what is essentially an EF-S 35mm f/1.8 for $200, I think Canon could do the same. Even an EF-S 24mm f/2.8 that's as good as the pancake would be a strong product at $150-200. I think an EF-S 24mm f/2 would probably be more in line with the other primes ($400ish)

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 53