April 17, 2014, 11:59:57 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 ... 49
61
Any guesses on pricing? Their current 200-500 is $950 and thats without VC and their 70-200 2.8 w/ VC is $1500.
Well, the retail price of the 200-500 at launch was $1999; obviously its come way down off that price and its street price is half that. And the Sigma 50-500 with similar apertures is $1700ish retail. So, it's hard to say.

The amount of extra glass compared to the 200-500, and their new warranty/repair policy would lead me to think you're looking at $2500-3000 easy. But, to be competitive with other 3rd party super tele-zooms, it'd have to either be $2000ish, or nearly as sharp as primes.

62
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 150-500mm f/5-6.3 VC on Thursday
« on: November 05, 2013, 09:04:18 PM »
Tamron's problem is that what made the 200-500 an option (cheap, light) might be lost with the addition of 50mm and VC. The 200-500 retailed at $1995 (though it obviously now sells for <$1000), and if this doesnt come in around that price point, what differentiates it from the various Sigma's, the 100-400L (and its possible update), etc?

I can get 150-500 and 120-400 for about $1000 from Sigma...I can get 50-500 for $1500. The Tamron is gonna have to be really sharp or really light

63
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Off Brand: Nikon Announces the Df
« on: November 05, 2013, 08:36:44 AM »
Oh, can we also put to bed the "take away video and make the camera cheaper!" arguments for good now. Here's a stills camera aimed at photographers at the expense of videographers, and its 50% more expensive than their more mass-market D600/D610. It's gonna double the street price of the 6D, which is the same size and has video.

No video makes it more niche, which makes it more expensive

64
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Off Brand: Nikon Announces the Df
« on: November 05, 2013, 08:25:24 AM »
Use a good quality and low resolution sensor is the dream of some (few people) and costs less than D4. Honestly, if canon makes a retro camera (beautiful) with the same 1DX sensor, and sells cheaper, I'd love to.
Yeah, for Canon it would make sense, as the 1DX sensor does even better in low light than the 5dIII/6D sensors, both by DXO numbers and field tests. The D4 on the other hand is fairly similar to the D600 sensor; by the numbers its identical to it. Not sure you can charge a premium for that.

Its definitely really hard when the A7R comes in with an equally strong sensor at 2/3rd's the price

65
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Off Brand: Nikon Announces the Df
« on: November 05, 2013, 08:19:56 AM »
Nikon DF - 5.6 x 4.3 x 2.6" :: 710g for camera body
Canon 6D - 5.7 x 4.4 x 2.8"  :: 770g for camera body

BTW, I think they've gone overboard on the pricing - the DF is more likely to be a fashion accessory than a primary shooting tool.
Yeah, selling it as slim and light is an odd choice; it's barely smaller than their D600, the same size as a 6D, and double the size of the Sony offerings.

66
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Nikon Digital FM2 - Retro look
« on: November 04, 2013, 05:22:30 PM »
This camera, at this price, is just an EPIC FAIL.

Someone at Sony's opened a good bottle tonight.
Agreed. Hell, you can almost get two Sony's for that kit price.

Unless it's got something truly magical, I don't see the reasoning behind this for Nikon. It's not really noticeably smaller than a D610, and yet it costs 40% more? Especially after updating the D600 with the "basically just a price increase" D610, its a series of odd moves from them.

If Sony can fill out a lens lineup in the next year or two, they are golden

67
Yep, whoever said the 200-500 w/ VC is probably correct. Here's the current one overlaid; there's basically an extra inch or two on the new lens, with a big hump near the mount.



Considering Tamron's lineup, I imagine they would consider a $1500-2000 lens pretty serious

68
Pretty pricey for a kit..
MSRP for the 5dIII w/ 24-105 is $3999...so, this is right in line with the expected pricing. It'll drop fast.

What this really means is we'll be seeing the 24-70 f/4 for <$1000 un-kitted relatively soon

69
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Gets its Price
« on: October 25, 2013, 09:54:50 AM »
2) Kit lenses differ from standalone lenses only in the printing (or lack thereof) on the packaging.  I'm sure there are some willing to pay several hundred dollars for a few microliters of ink sprayed onto the cardboard box, but let's compare lens prices, shall we?  I'm sure we'll see the street price of the Sigma drop pretty soon.
Well, technically Canon could do an about face on policy tomorrow, stop honoring repairs on lenses not bought from authorized dealers (like Nikon), and you'd be screwed. Or, they could stop honoring warranties on items not purchased via authorized channels. That's unlikely, but, there is more than just ink that makes the difference. I wouldnt pay hundreds more for that difference. But, Amazon was just selling the authorized version for $699, so I'd go that route and pay the extra $60 no doubt. Especially for the risk you get a lens that is misaligned or has something DOA.

So, price is definitely not the major separating factor right now. If anything, this guarantees that Canons version never goes back above $800 in real-street price. Now it's just a matter of seeing how it performs. If its sharper/has less distortion/etc, then the prices are close enough that people would go Sigma

70
Not releasing anything interesting except the 70D could have something to do with it.
Yep. When your competitors are experimenting with new models and new lines, and all you're doing is giving minor updates to your existing stuff, you lose market share. Ask Apple.

71
Or, if you want something like the Sigma, grab an older 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 Macro. That's the one I have, and it does nearly 1:2 macro, focuses pretty well, and is generally shop. Some field curvature, but that's true of all the nicer kit-level zooms. And its pretty cheap, usually can get it in the $200 range. I'll also second the 17-50 f/2.8 from Tamron suggestions, non-VC of course. They can be had in the $250 range I believe.

 If you really want stabilization, then the 15-85 is probably the lens to go with. By the time you pay $4-500 for the Tamron and Sigma versions with VS/OS, you might as well get the Canon.

72
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Let's get ready to rumble...
« on: October 22, 2013, 10:48:58 AM »
What will be really fascinating is that it apparently won't have video recording...I'll be curious to see how Nikon is pricing this. In some ways, it feels like an extremely niche product that would be expensive; on the other hand, the specs seem to indicate they are gonna price it low.

73
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Nikon Digital FM2 - Retro look
« on: October 21, 2013, 10:42:42 AM »
This new Nikon is rumored to be 765g, or about the same weight as a 6D.  It will be interesting to see if Nikon has been able to shrink the body size to something like the original FM/FE.  That would be a nice size. 
Actually, size wise, this camera is rumored to be the exact size of a 6D.

Rumored Camera: 765g, 143.5 x 110 x 66.5mm
6D: 755g, 144.5 x 110.5 x 71.2 millimeters.

For comparison, the Sony A7 is: 474g, 127 x 94 x 48 mm

edit: Ah, I see it doesnt appear to be mirrorless. That makes it a really odd camera, as the ergonomics of a lot of the old cameras are awful compared to modern ones. Maybe they are trying to pump this out cheaply to compete with the A7?

74
Lenses / Re: 2013 EF / EF-S Lenses ... Canon, where are you?
« on: October 19, 2013, 11:14:35 PM »
A bit more balanced response would be noting the Sony DT 18-55mm & Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm are both "another kit lens" only w/o STM, compare 800mm lenses (how long did it take Nikon to come up with one that had VR?), 70-200mm lenses (Sony came with one this year? Canon came with an excellent one 3-4 years ago), etc.
Yeah, Sony HAS to announce a dozen lenses because they barely have half a lens lineup as it is. Too busy announcing new cameras they won't support with a full lens line to actually complete their alpha lineup.

75
Lenses / Re: Wide Angle Lens Recommendations? Canon 60D user
« on: October 19, 2013, 11:12:12 PM »
The answer is pretty simple, assuming by "wide angle" you mean wider than the traditional 17mm or 18mm starting point for standard zooms.

Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 is the option if you'll be shooting in low light, doing night photography, or shooting any video. Canon 10-22 is the option otherwise, if you'd just be doing landscape work under normal conditions. No real reason to go with the other options when these two are so proven.

The other consideration would be the 15-85 to replace a standard zoom; but the difference between 10/11mm and 15mm is big.

Personally I use the Tokina on my 60D, and I love it. Super sharp where I commonly use it from f/5.6-f/11, but also still good for night photography at f/2.8

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 49