Glass, glass, glass
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.
More than 10 years have passed since the Canon introduced a DO lens. They should be able to make DO lenses with enough contrast by now...I second that. Canon should get the engineering staff to start again working on great ideas.
It seems to me it's not about ideas, but about laws of physics - the innovative 200-400L is heavy for a reason, the same reason why they left IS out of the 24-70L2. And they are innovative with IS primes and hybrid af on the 24-70/4, while your request for just "updating" the traditional 35L with better iq contradicts the great ideas you seem to want.
One real innovation though will be the new line of DO lenses, there have been lots of patents on CR, but who knows when these will be released - probably only when they sold a non-DO prime to everyone so people have a reason to upgrade :-p
If Canon released a new line of DO lenses, I bet you would see a lot of people in forums like this, complaining that they don't have enough contrast...and wishing they would make a counterpart that did not use diffractive optics. There's no shortage of people who like to complain.
I love primes too...Note: I challenge you all not to have any more discussions about push/pull vs rotary zoom!!!Oh, how much I like rotary zooms...
Oh, how much I love primes....
We are going back to HK to visit family this November, our annual visit, and one of our destination will be :Very interesting! (Please remove the coma from the url to make it work though).
http://www.globalgeopark.org/aboutggn/list/china/6616.htm, lower right photo shows what I'm interest at.
Hope you can see that too, sometime.
Note: I challenge you all not to have any more discussions about push/pull vs rotary zoom!!!Oh, how much I like rotary zooms...
Note: I challenge you all not to have any more discussions about push/pull vs rotary zoom!!!Oh, how much I like push/pull zooms...
Is this an artifact from a focused LED headlamp hitting the sensor in a weird way?No way! Have you also shot in raw? Is the result the same? Do you see this on your camera's screen?
Sorry , I meant to write macro extender!
You know, sometimes, when one is tired...
Sorry , I meant to write macro extender!When I told this story to a friend he told me that once he had taken an extender with him thinking he was taking a teleconverter!
What's the difference?
There were 2 circumstances where I would get better results with less equipment due to the ability to carry it a few hundred meters. This would make a difference. But in many other cases it was the opposite. In the specific case you mention didn't you look thru the viewfinder to see that half of the picture was darker? OK maybe it was a soft grad but still...It seems like the DSLR is like a stick of dynamite. It will get a lot done if it is set up right, but that's difficult to do and is just as likely to blow up.
I don't find mine difficult to set up. Have you tried reading your manual?
What I mean by this comment is that with the DSLR, lenses, filters, tripod, color correction, flashes, modifiers, etc I'll usually go to great lengths to get mediocre pictures. And oftentimes using that specialized stuff leads to mistakes, like the time I had the reverse GND on for taking sunset pictures, then forgot it when a perfect picture of the family presented itself. Interesting to see their light legs and dark upper bodies - bang! If I just kept it simple and not tried to get a perfect shot of a sunset (which has been done a billion times before) then I could have some nice landscape shots and family shots (sure before you say it I can try and massage the shot in PS, but in that case in those circumstances I think the picture is probably lost).
Or messing with flashes, instead of just keeping it simple and using ambient, with maybe a little fill light I'll fiddle with three flashes, modifiers and ... often get worse lighting with odd shadows I'm struggling to control - bang!
Or I'll go out and about with one of my extreme lenses, like a UWA or a telephoto, and have a lens completely wrong for something else I'd like to take a shot of (like a family shot and all I've got is a UWA) - bang! Or I'll go out with just the 50 (which is still heavier than the EOS M and two lenses) and miss shots at the other extremes - bang!
Sure, before you all tell me how you can carry 60 lbs of equipment on your back and always get just the right setup, in time, for the circumstances you want to get the shot because you anticipated it 10 minutes before, that's great and good for you. Hey maybe I'll get there too someday, I'd like to think so and it gives me a goal, as I'm certainly not selling my gear.
Blaming your gear for your own mistakes? That explains a lot .