That's about what I expected for the auto-focus. Maybe the STM lenses will be smoother, but, the sample in that video is just a slightly improved version of the Nikon auto-focus. It certainly doesn't replace or come close to video camera AF
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.
If the translucent mirror gives the A99 a frame rate approaching 10fps with 24mp at the rumored price of around $2500 - $2800, then the 5D Mark III becomes even harder to justify at $3499.Well, the whole EVF v optical viewfinder is still kind of a big deal. I still haven't seen an EVF that makes the camera worth it...both between killing the battery life and making it hard to see in less than ideal conditions (things that matter to full frame users).
For fast, wide and relatively cheap, the two contenders are Samyang 14mm f/2.8 and Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8. Other options are either above 17mm, slower than f/2.8 or much more expensiveYep, and both would work well for your purposes. The Tokina would give you more options, the Samyang would be cheaper. If those aren't fast enough, your only real Canon option is the 28mm f/1.8. Also, if the Tokina is too wide for your tastes, there is the older Canon 20-35mm f/2.8L that you can get for $4-500ish on Ebay, if not cheaper. But I think the 28mm f/1.8 would probably give you stronger image than that.
But it's not just about income. I made a disturbing realization that the more I was shooting for money, the more my hobby was dying. It has now been YEARS since I went out to take some pictures just for fun. It's not that I don't have time to do it - I just don't feel like it if you can believe that. And that thought saddens me, because I loved my hobby.I had this same thing happen with my video work; I work as a video editor AND I was producing videos all weekend, and I just got burned out so quickly. It just occurred to me that I haven't done a video in my free time in 4-5 months now basically...which used to be unthinkable. Thankfully I've kept photography from becoming that, and while I did just shoot a friends wedding, I know its not something I want to do consistently for income.
1, Do the 9 cross points have a big difference compare to 600d?It depends what you are shooting. What it will help do is lock focus faster, and its useful for shots where things are moving (people, cars, animals, etc), since it has more points to differentiate what is what.
But the D600 is potentially a game changer - a FF camera for not much more than the high-end APS-C which an entry-level APS-C consumer might consider as an upgrade.Yep, if the spec list for the D600 is even close to accurate (24mp, 39pt AF, 6fps...make 2 of those 3 correct and its crazy), and its priced at or below $2000, Canon will have to respond or lose a huge chunk of users. Because while I'd love full-frame, the 5dII lacks some of the things Id want for the occasional action/nature shooting I do. But, that's where my next body upgrade will be; into a full-frame with better AF, or into the 7dII with great specs...and the same is true for many other xxxD and xxD users. If the only option I have is to go up to a 5dIII, then I'd have to look elsewhere at some point
Couldn't Canon make a mirrorless camera with EF mount and a shorter flange distance?But why make it EF mount at all then, since an EF adapter is basically just an extension tube. I mean, look at the patent, it's an extension tube with electrical contacts
Lenses for the mirrorless camera would not focus on other cameras with EF mount, so some special designation like EF-ML would be required, but regular EF & EF-S lenses would mount using an extension tube with contacts.
Why not just get the new T4i?Cause you can get the 60D cheaper, and because part of taking pictures is holding the camera. If you've held a Rebel and the 60D, you'll feel a huge difference.
Thanks for the help everyone! I used to own an xsi but had to sell it. I still consider myself a newbie to dslr's though. Was contemplating the t4i but after a bit of research on the net and then playing with the 60d at best buy...the 60d just felt better compared to the rebels. That 50mm f1.8 lens is nice...I like it and will order it also. What other lens should I pick up? Was gonna get the kit with the 18-200mm lens but not anymore. Seems like the 18-135mm is a better choice so I might go with that. Or I'll just pick up the body only and get whatever lens you all recommend. I have about $1500 to start off with.My suggestion, go to the Canon Loyalty program. A refurbished 60D body is $640+tax...and they also let you take 20% off one of their refurb lenses (except L glass). You could use that on one of the 50mm lenses (f/1.8 or f/1.4), or the 100mm Macro if you'd want that. The 18-135 can be had for $250ish on Ebay or Craigslist, usually a decent amount of people selling them out of their kit. You could probably get the 60D, 18-135, 50 f/1,8 and the macro all for your $1500 price point.
Interesting points, Dilbert but it still feels to me like a lot of work and cost to Canon to fill an awkward gap in the line up that perhaps doesn't really need filling... or at least may disappear in a year or so when the 5D3 price starts to drop or the 7D2 comes up from the rear.Here's the thing...the cheaper the camera gets, the less the consumer will have researched little details, and the more they'll want the newest thing. They are also the lifeblood of companies, because hooking someone in at the entry level is how you get them upgrading and sticking with the company.
Although the 5D2 is getting on a bit the IQ does still fits between the 7D and 5D3. Just my thoughts anyway and you're of course entitled to your own. I do however think compatibility with the latest accessories is a valid reason to end the line... or at least push out a firmware update.
it may quickly turn into a losing strategy when next gen Nikons hammer Canon DSLRs also in video capabilities.Good luck getting that to happen...gonna be awful tough for Nikon to make those cameras without the Sony sensor. And I can't see Sony being pumped about Nikon releasing an affordable killer video DLSR that cuts into the profits on their video cameras.
As was mentioned, you wouldn't save money that way. Simple supply and demand really. If 25% of users want video, than the non-video DSLR either has to be 25% cheaper to make (its firmware already designed and a few hardware parts, so, not likely), or they have to charge 25% more for it to break even. And so on if the percentage is higher than 25%. Oh, and as an owner, it'd probably be harder to re-sell to upgrade since your market would be smaller as well.How about a FF entry with no Video, you know to keep the price down, something for the purist photographers for a change…. 650D is good enough for those wanting to do videothey can disable the features sure.. but that would not safe them a cent (*).
it would only make the video models more expensive but not the crippled ones cheaper.
(*) ok a few cents maybe, for the mics as an example.
What about a boring old replacement for the 1100D? Not very sexy, but certainly possible, especially if it's in Q4Probably too soon for that, the T3 is only a little over a year old. The XS went for nearly 3 years before getting replaced.
Over at Luminous Landscape, they went with the Tamron 70-300 VC and the Sigma 120-300/2.8.The Sigma I can believe...the Tamron 70-300? That I think would be a big mistake. It produced decent results on a crop camera (my 60D), but on a 36mp full-frame, I can't imagine it holding up. Especially not at the long end.