I hope that one of them will be FF with dual pixel AF .
Now, that sounds "promosing" for Canon in term of mirrorless. Many Canon shooters are way too deep into the EF L lenses. To attract current DSLR users, just add an EF adapter to it.
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.
I hope that one of them will be FF with dual pixel AF .
The 2 models will be split into entry level and prosumer.
Who cares? Just give us ONE camera that is on par with the FUJIFILM X-E2, Olympus E-P5, Sony A6000 and Panasonic GX7 ... as a minimum. Then add weather-sealing as the trump card.
added the new 56mm 1.2 to the X-T1 today. super sharp and super bokeh.
Interesting theories regarding the price drop. I believe there has to be some truth in the fact that these lenses were originally intended to be quite high market and fill the gap between Ls which have not yet come out ( 35 1.4L II , 50 1.2 II L ) etc and sit above the entry level primes. It seems owning both the 24 and 35 IS that the 35 is ahead of the game glass wise. I have also owned the new 40 2.8 which i did not click with and ended up selling a month or two after getting it. Did not have the sharpness or unique quality that the 35 IS has.
Someone mentioned wondering why i posted two shots that werent at F2 , well simply because a large majority of shots at a wedding are not F2 as its just too shallow at close range. however the abililty to use the F2 when i want to artistically produces better results than the 24-70 2.8 and the added benefit of the IS makes it a great low light lens during church ceremonies and for detailed shots without flash. There is also the added bonus of its great close up ability and its light weight along with its very good build quality and fast af.
Someone else mentioned they were surprised I have just noticed primes. Thats not really the case i have a house full of old cameras with primes and adapters to fit them to my DSLR i have played with for years. It was the leap from the safety of a zoom to the primes which require a little more thought which was always the hurdle. For years i told myself that the 24-70 2.8L was the best lens for weddings ever - probably following the flock a little ! I cannot comment on the new 24-70 2.8II L though as i have not used it so whether that can get close to the prime someone else will need to answer.
This is a list of the lenses /Cameras I have used extensively from which i am using to judge this 5d3+35 IS combo from when i started with digital around 2004
Pentax k100, k200, k10, k20
Tokina RMC 17mm - amazing lens for its age
Sigma 10-20 - staple diet wide angle for many years
Sigma 105 macro - noisy but good if it didnt scare your subject away or squash it
Sigma 70-300 - absolutely diabolical
Sigma 50mm 1.4 old one - poor back focussing issues
Pentax 16-55 - really good expensive lens
Pentax 18-55 - noisy and cheap but did the job
Canon 17-40L great lens but took a wack and fell to bits !
Canon 24-70 2.8L mk1 - fab lens used it for years just a bit on the heavy side and could be sharper
Canon 24-105 F4L still own this one - very sharp and very versatile just struggles in low light , used in the second photographers kit
Canon 50 1.2L never really got on with this one wasn't a range i liked but the glass was good
Canon 50 1.4 still have this as a back up as its not really worth selling , used in the second photographers kit
Canon 40mm 2.8 STM impulse purchase which i ended up sellling again , pretty average on all counts
Canon 85mm 1.8 part of current kit really like this lens lovely bokeh fast focus
Canon 70-200 F4 still have this in our kit good for longer distance work very fast light and sharp
Canon 200mm 2.8L owned this ahead of its time when i just started out and didnt really understand primes that well , wish now i had never sold it as it was a lovely lens and will probably buy another !
Canon 35mm F2 IS - current main lens absolutely love it sharp fast low light and close ups quality equal to Ls
Canon 24mm 2.8IS good landscaper and for wider interiors , glass not as good as the best L stuff but still good
That hopefull demonstrates where i am coming from with the judgement on the 35 f2 IS
Bokeh of the 35 f2 IS is very good , i am not sure i would say it is the best - to be honest i have a Super Takumar from the late 1960s 55 1.8 which has the creamiest bokeh i have ever seen in a lens - if it was AF i would use it all the time ! I would not be suprised if the sigma 35 and 50 art have slightly better bokeh but then i would be looking more for 85 135 or 200 anyway if bokeh was the main concern. For me the main concern was being able to shoot in low light, and thats what this lens is the master of - 35mm F2 with four stop IS , not sure if that will be better any time soon ?
Andrew...after looking through your list of lenses used, I would suggest that you're missing two of Canon's best...24-70ii and 70-200ii.
These two lenses truly are "prime eliminators"....unless you need the extra light below 2.8.
I have both and a 70-200 2.8 II and use them all quite a bit. To me the extra stop of light (f/2) of the 135L sets it apart from the zoom and Macro. Here is what I use each for:
100L Macro - Macro, limited portraits and occasionally as a longer compliment to my 24-70 2.8 II
135L - Portraits and light weight tele option to go with my 24-70 2.8 II. Terrific sports lens and I use to shoot my sons high school wresting and golf meets.
70-200 - Great all purpose lens for outdoor activities with the kids in conjunction with a wider lens (35-50mm or EOS M and 22/2). I also use it for portraits when I want something longer than 135mm
I really enjoy the 85-200mm focal ranges, so for me having these three lenses works out well. I have a friend who thinks I'm crazy for having all three, but he prefers and takes most of his pictures from 17-85mm, so he has 7 primes in that range. So, depends on what you shoot and your personal preferences.
I've got the 100mm L and I'm very pleased with the IQ.
I've seen very nice pictures made with the 135mm L, not only portraits, but also flowers etc.
Do you think the 135mm L will be used if I already got the 100mm L.
Or will a buy be a waste of money.
The 70-200 mm will be another target in the nearby future by the way.
Would the price come down a bit if I wait for a few months?
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=16342"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=16342">Tweet</a></div>
<p>A patent which appears to be for the EF-M mount has appeared. In APS-C, this lens would be a 35-75mm f/3.5-5.6.</p>
<p>Canon has stated that more lenses are coming for EOS M, and that could potentially mean the North American and European markets are still on Canon’s radar for the EOS M system. My bet is we’ll see an EOS M3 to re-introduce the product line to a global market.</p>
<p><strong>Patent Publication No. 2014-63025 (Google Translation)</strong></p>
<li>Publication date 2014.4.10</li>
<li>Filing date 2012.9.21</li>
<li>Zoom ratio 2.09</li>
<li>Focal length f = 22.10-34.22-45.19mm</li>
<li>Half angle ω = 31.72-21.76-16.48 °</li>
<li>Image height 13.66mm</li>
<li>65.76-62.07-64.72mm lens length</li>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2014-04-12" target="_blank">EG</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
Not quite in flight yet, but doing his best
Great Crested Grebe.
1DX, 600mm f4L IS II + 1.4xIII extender, 1/500s, f5.6, ISO2000, handheld.
Full bottle of tequila and you'll be pawing at the wife.I think you're being too cynical. Time will tell, but most consumers (not CR forum members) chose what works best for them.
I am hoping I get the Amazon lightning deal for this one (or be blessed with whatever luck JD is blessed...). Although I have to say, CanonPriceWatch is the best thing to have happened (or the worst, depending on your PoV).
I personally prefer how people just gravitate towards the Canon name brand. It keeps my gear at a higher resale value... But the conclusion I've come to... is that Canon may cost more, but more often than not, it is well worth it. There are some Canon lenses I don't like, but they tend to be all entry level and old... like the 28-135, or the 17-85... and that's not really fair.
As for Amazon lightening... I don't think I can hold out that long. I have that buy it now itch... and it feels like chiken pox... Must... wait... must be patient.
I know the feeling....I'm itching for Canon 600mm f4 IS II. I already have this lens in my BH account, including accessories etc...All I have to do is push the purchase button.
Half a bottle of Tequila and that button will be pushed in no time at all!