6 letters and a number:
FF a la a7
FF a la a7
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.
What's really missing is a kick-ass M3 with truly tracking-capable AF and top notch EVF and 500 shots battery charge. That would very quickly end the Fuji X-games as well as Sony ex-nex alpha stuff. Not to mention dwarf-sensored micro four-thirds. And it would drive a lot of 1 inch nails into the nikon 1 coffin. :-)A crop sensor mirrorless is not going to threaten the success of the Full Frame Sony a7.
Can't be that hard, Canon ... Just do it! ;-)
December 26th, 2011.... one of my first posts on this forum was me specifically asking for a replacement for the 17-40. One of the main reasons I sold my Canon gear was the 17-40 I used was crazy soft, and the 2.8 didn't get very good reviews.My 50mm f/1.8 has IQ equal to the 70-200II at f/8. So what? How about at f/5.6 or f/4? That's different totally.
You still lose some edges and most importantly, you can't see your composition while you compose. It doesn't work for me but if it works for you, good for you. I won't buy a fish eye anytime soon.
I meant at f/2.8. And I certainly can see my composition while I compose. It's in the viewfinder.
Great work! These four images and the accompanying explanation completely rationalize the statement "no one asked for the 16-35 f/4 IS".
Look at the number of people within this forum itself who have countered your statement. That is a testament to how many did ask for it.
Show me. I saw lots of people looking for a 14-24/2.8. I didn't see anyone looking for a 16-35 or a 10-18.
What about a 17-40L II? I want a wide walk around lens with a bit of zoom for my 5D. I am considering buying the 17-40 I, but they just don't seem to sharp and this is a very old lens. When's the refresh coming?
You sound like a broken record. We all know that Canon is the number one seller blah blah blah....It does not bother you a bit that (according to YOU) Canon has not updated 50mm for >20 years?Nope, but then 1) I have no interest in the 50/1.4 or 50/1.8 II, and 2) if I were to buy a 50mm lens it would be the 50/1.2L which was released 8 years ago, in 2006.
Having said that, the design age of the 50/1.8 II and 50/1.4 certainly don't seem to bother the buyers on Amazon.com, where the Canon 50/1.8 II is the #1 selling lens and the Canon 50/1.4 is the #3 selling lens. You need to go to #36 on their Top 100 list to find the first Sigma lens, and the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art isn't on the list at all.
So, you're a pro, and you just figured out that primes are better than zooms..... ok. got it!It is a good lens with IS and at a decent price, but nothing more than that.
It delivers consistently but it has absolutely nothing special about it.
What a load of cobblers, it is a fantastic lens. To answer the other questions and comments it has replaced a 24-70 2.8L v1 , and i dont have any issue changing lenses as i have two bodies one on my belt and one round my neck. Each to their own if you prefer the lower quality but higher convenience of a zoom then fine but don't go attempting to justify your laziness by saying primes are no good as all top photographers will tell you different.
There are some things you can never unsee. This phone is so ugly it's haunting my dreams already.Yeah, as per Facebook talk there, it looks like a Tag Heuer Race mobile phone. An awful design also, that I doubt Tag had anything to do with! http://www.goldsmiths.co.uk/TAG-Heuer-Racer-Sport-MP-Classic-Red-Mobile-Phone/p/39830054/
Ech, that Tag phone should be the april's fool's day joke. Couldn't look worse and it's price tag: £2,650.00.
Actor Headshots NYC | Gotham Family Photos | NY Wedding Photographer