September 21, 2014, 08:07:09 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 ... 52
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:

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

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:

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

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:

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.

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.

  • 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.

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

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)?

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

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:,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)

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)

Lenses / Re: Which wide-angle lens to hire?
« on: February 17, 2014, 09:46:21 AM »
If you're hiring it mostly for night-time wide angle work, than the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm is your choice. It's a go-to for astrophotography work.

The only other real considerations would be the Zeiss lenses (15mm and 21mm) but they have the same issue as the 16-35 and 14mm with your filters being too small. And the Canon 24mm f/1.4 would give you 2 extra stops and your filters would work...but, you'd likely want to be using it at f/2 or more to avoid coma and losing sharpness.

I think the 14mm from Rokinon is your best bet. Most bang for your buck and a great astro lens. Zeiss 21mm would be the next best option, just because of how strong a landscape lens it is

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 13, 2014, 11:12:55 PM »
Sad days when a we get more excited about 3rd party gear more than Canon.
I disagree; the more options the better. I own a Tokina super-wide, a Sigma kit lens, and the rest of my lenses are Canon. Other than brand loyalty, what does it matter who is making the best lens?

Imagine if Sigma was still the old Sigma, and Tamron was the old'd have poor AF lenses that break, weak warranties, and you'd basically only have expensive Canon gear as your option. You'd be stuck waiting for the Xmas rebates to get reasonable prices. Instead, the used market for gear has gotten much cheaper, and Canon has been forced to cut their prices a lot after release.

I also think people forget, all the lenses that Canon has released in the last 2-3 years have been almost universally praised. The 70-200 and 24-70 are the holy grail for most pros. The non-L IS primes are really sharp (and now reasonably priced). Even the 40mm pancake was good, if a little odd. Even their kit lenses keep getting better. They just have such a successful line that they arent forced to swing for the fences like Sigma/Tamron are

PowerShot / Re: Underwater Compact that shoots RAW?
« on: February 13, 2014, 01:08:03 PM »
You could rent the Nikon 1 AW1, its essentially a mirrorless waterproof camera. It'd be the closest thing to your DSLR.

Other options would be to rent something like a G1X or RX100 and an underwater housing for those.

Last resort, I think you can put CHDK on something like a D20; you'll at least get DNG files. But, you'll probably be disappointed with any true underwater camera, they all offer terrible IQ, and I imagine an uncorrected file looks pretty bad (tons of CA, distortion, etc):

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 52