July 25, 2014, 05:28:28 PM

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 - EchoLocation

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 20
196
Pricewatch Deals / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS Preorders
« on: November 06, 2012, 06:41:07 AM »
WTF 1500 bucks?!?

Me: "WTF?"

Canon: "...a maximum magnification of 0.7x – reducing the need for photographers to carry a dedicated macro lens.  So, what you short-sighted complainers fail to understand is that while you may think this lens seems expensive, if you add up the cost of the 24-105L and 100L Macro, this lens is significantly cheaper, and thus it's a real bargain!"

Me: "WTM-F'nF?!?"
Neuro, I have a lot of respect for you, but this lens is ridiculously overpriced. Maybe some people expect to pay $1500 for an f4 lens, but I think that's absurd.
The Canon 24-70 2.8 II should have been $1800 or less, and this F4 lens should be no more than $1200 starting price.
This Macro thing should be a perk for people paying 1000 dollars for a lens, not a reason to double the price of the current 24-105(which was on sale for $750 just a few weeks ago.) I don't believe this lens takes the place of the 100L.

197
Pricewatch Deals / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS Preorders
« on: November 06, 2012, 12:57:36 AM »
6D + 24-70 f4 IS = good combo for crop shooters to jump into FF world with low budget.

Thats $3600! I can't say that its a low budget camera+lens combo.
This... Thats not low budget at all, especially when Nikon is offering a Camera Kit that is very competitive for around $2500 dollars(or less.) I'd say the 24-70 should be better than the Nikon 24-85, but the D600 has better specs than the 6D....and the Nikon kit is $1000 dollars less than Canon!
The recent pricing of Canon items has been a major kick in the balls to their customers.

198
Lenses / Re: Canon Announces New Lens Caps!
« on: November 06, 2012, 12:46:43 AM »
Wow!

Sorry but looks like a Nikon cap... only ugly  :(

What the hell is Canon thinking?!  :-\

That pinch caps are largely viewed as functionally superior?  They could have been thinking that... ;-)

I couldn't care less how they look. A more secure cap that I can use with a hood on?  I think I'll be purchasing a few of these.

Functionally, I see why this is a good design. Visually though, I think Canon could have afforded to distinguish their lens caps just a tad better since it is sort of an image for the company.
I agree. It's cool they made a more functional design, but they could have done something to make them a little more unique and special. For all the trouble and talk this will cause, you'd think they'd make it a bit more interesting looking. They look exactly like Nikon caps now.

199
Lenses / Re: Canon Makes the EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS Official
« on: November 06, 2012, 12:43:31 AM »
This is typical for Canon. Two good lenses(that could/should be better) at insanely increased prices.
Yes, i'm happy for an update to the 24-105, my copy was good but not great. I'm thrilled at the smaller size and sad about the loss in reach.
However, I'm blown away by the price, $1500 for an f4? I think not. I'd much rather buy the Nikon 24-70 2.8 for something like $1650-1800.
35 f2? This should be a 400 dollar lens. I wouldn't consider this as I wouldn't want a prime that's not at least f1.8, especially at $850.
I have the Sigma 50mm F1.4 and it's pretty awesome(at $450), why would I spend double that for an f2?
I feel bad for die hard Canon fans these days.

200
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS
« on: November 05, 2012, 10:46:34 PM »
In the rumor a couple days ago, admin said it would be $849, and It just sounded awesome... A small, lightweight L zoom in a useful focal range with the awesome new IS, along with a cool near macro option!
Now, today we're talking $1700ish(converted from Yen, which I believe would make the price more like 1300-1500 in the US) and at this price it loses a lot of appeal for me.
$1300 isn't outrageous if the IQ is amazing, but $1500 is just way too much for f4 lens IMO.
People who spend $1500 would rather just spend $2000ish and buy the 2.8 version. Pairing a $1500 lens with the 6D makes a $3500 kit, this does not bode well against Nikon's $2700 D600 kit.
Additionally, Canon should look at making their products more competitive to Nikon's. If this price is really upwards of $1500 dollars it will be very similarly priced to Nikon's 24-70 2.8, which is an outstanding lens.
I really hope that that admin's original price of $849 happens, although following Canon's recent pricing trends I think the $1400 US price is more likely.
This streak of minimal upgrades with dramatic price increases is exactly why I just sold my 5D for D700 and 24-70(which after 2 months I am thrilled about.)

201
The 5D classic is a pretty solid camera. I had one for a year and a half and just upgraded to the d700. I think it was a great camera, especially for a first time FF user.
It will make your 24-105 way better than it will ever be on a APS-C body(i hated my 24-105 on my 550d and loved it on my 5d.)
The camera is very basic, which i think was really cool as it was almost like using a film camera... center point AF, no fancy anything, simple everything... I just capped the ISO at 1600 and it was pretty decent. Nothing amazing for low light, but for playing around, and using for general fun, it was totally worth the 800 dollars I spent on it in 2010.  I sold it for 650 and don't regret it for a second.
When I first saw your post i thought you should just buy the 5DII, but if you want other lenses, etc, just sell your T3i for $400-500 on craigslist, and pay 100 bucks to upgrade. Unless you really care about the video, i would say you don't really lose anything except maybe a couple hundred bucks. If it was possible, i'd try to get a used 5DII, but tbh, I never really liked the 5DII all that much for the price.

202
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS
« on: November 05, 2012, 07:01:13 AM »
i like the size of the 24-70 and the price isn't too bad. I hope the focal length is actually a little longer as admin has stated is a possibility.
The 24-105 I had was good, but not amazing, and it definitely wasn't too small. I think this lens might actually make some sense if it turns out to be sharper and have better colors than the 105.
However, for me personally, the reason i bought a DSLR was mainly because I wanted better low light performance..... Thus I recently sold my 24-105 and bought a 24-70.
I don't understand primes that aren't in the 1.4 or at least 1.8 range. Why would i want a $700 prime that is only f2? Can someone explain this to me? i'm still baffled by the 24 and 28mm 2.8's.... Why would I want one of these instead of something faster or a zoom? If they were under 400 dollars I wouldn't ask this question.

203
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]
« on: October 31, 2012, 01:22:55 AM »
This lens will be, to all intents and purposes, the 24-105mm II. It will be a better performer than the 24-105mm, but Canon decided that achieving their IQ goal in the final 35mm of its range was too much of a stretch so they decided to peg it back to 24-70mm, in which range its IQ will be consistently high. They probably felt that this was not too much of a compromise, given that most users will also have a telezoom starting at 70mm.

I'm expecting it to be considerably more expensive than the 24-105mm. The 24-105mm will remain as the FF kit lens.
This is what they're most likely thinking. I think they have oversaturated the market with 24-105's lately after all the 5DII,5DIII,6D kit sales. This new lens will give a decent upgrade(with loss of focal range) to 24-105 owners who want the newest, best toys(who don't have $2300 for the 24-70 2.8II), probably at around $1250-1500. The price of this lens and the oversaturation of the 24-105 will combine to heighten the perceived value of the 24-70 2.8.
I'd imagine they will try to eventually faze out the 24-105 and make this the new kit lens when the 5D IV(5DX, whatever comes out.) The newness of the kit lens will be intriguing for people upgrading from 7D's,5D's, etc. And, att 1500ish dollars this will give Canon an even more expensive kit lens to increase future profits, and while being sharper, will also be less useful compared to the 24-105(smaller focal length,) thus forcing even more lens sales as people buy 70-200's.
This lens is definitely a little baffling, so i'm thinking there must be some sort of strategic value in introducing it as most buyers don't really seem to care that much for it.
I hope I'm wrong and it ends up being a super small 18-55 size(dream) and a light weight for $600!

204
EOS Bodies / Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« on: October 11, 2012, 12:47:14 PM »


Indeed - I've got €5000 lying around waiting to be spent on Canon equipment, but the current €3000 5d3 + €2500 24-70 (excluding equipment like cf cards yadayada) simply don't seem like a very sweet offer to me.

I have exactly the same problem ;)
me 3... i had a 5DC and 24-105 and had about 3000 dollars to upgrade my gear. I really wanted the 24-70, but the new price was just too high... I really wanted the 5DIII, but same story(and the D800 price and reviews weren't exactly making the 5DIII seem any sweeter.)
Anyways, I'm living in China, so some things aren't so easy... but, I ended up trading my 5DC and 24-105 for a mint 24-70 Nikon, then i bought a D700 with a shutter count of 3000 for $1500(with an extra battery.)
I just spent 2 weeks shooting everyday in Japan..... and I could not be happier. The D700 dominates all Canons outside of the 5DIII and 1 series on AF. The image quality is just as good or better. The AF alone has increased my keeper rate from 40% to over 60 or 70%. Me and my wife would never consider switching to anything but the 5DIII, but I'd be pretty bummed about losing the pop up flash, which I actually love.
At 3000 dollars for a used D700 and 24-70, there is absolutely no need to spend over 5000 dollars on a 5DIII and 24-70 II(unless you need video, or MP.)
I had been waiting for over a year to make a purchase, begging Canon to make a FF 7D.... but alas, the 6D was just wayyy too little and too late. I liked the D600, but I couldn't justify spending 800 dollars more(I'm in China) for a camera that I wasn't sure had better AF than the D700(AF was my biggest gripe with Canon.)
Anyways, in a year or so I might consider the D800, or maybe even the RX1, but for the moment, I am thrilled with my switch to Nikon and the D700.

205
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 650D Results on DxOMark
« on: October 08, 2012, 10:20:17 PM »
Oh no someone has pointed out the consumer grade canon camera is just that...that's it I'm selling my gear and going to Nikon  :P
Did you notice that the Nikon D3200 scored an 81(the same as a 5DIII at roughly 4x times it's cost)?
650D scored a 62, in the realm of Samsung, Lumix, etc
While I don't take these sensor tests as the end all be all, I do think they give a decent idea of DR, ISO range, and overall sensor performance.
If Canon fans choose to say things like "our sensors are good enough" or "DXO is BS", that's fine... but at some point people should open their eyes to the fact that Nikon has basically dominated Canon for the past few releases.
I recently sold my 5DC and 24-105 and bought a D700 and 24-70. The image quality is significantly better, the bokeh better, low light is 3x better, and the AF is literally night and day, not to mention the overall user experience(after becoming accustomed to the change,) is much better, it is absolutely incomparable. The AF alone has tripled my keeper rate, and i've switched from center focus, recompose to 3D 51pt AF.
I hesitated and waited and waited, wanting Canon to give me a reason not to change. But after switching, I can clearly see that the D700 is an insanely good camera, way better than the 5DC(i'd guess the 5DII as well) and with an AF that outperforms almost any camera one can buy today.
If you're happy with Canon that's great, but for the rest of the world, it's pretty obvious Nikon is killing them.

206
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-M Begins Shipping
« on: October 04, 2012, 09:34:09 PM »
i was just in japan and used this camera a little. i didn't realize it wasn't out yet in the US or I would've played with it more. Image quality seems on par with my 550D, very nice. First thing I noticed though was that it was verrrrrrrrrrrry slow to focus. Immediately killed it for me.

207
Canon General / Re: Loving Canon right now.
« on: September 18, 2012, 04:03:31 AM »
This car analogy is not a good one OP. Cars are completely different.
First of all, we aren't comparing a BMW  to VW, we are comparing Honda to Toyota, or BMW to Mercedes.... of course it would be unfair to compare prices of a BMW(Canon 1D/5D series) to a VW(7D/Rebel)
Two cameras at the same price point are being compared, the 6D and the D600, or 5DIII and D800. The 6D's specs just don't look any better to me than the 5DII's. In fact, i'd probably rather have a 5DII than a 6D. The only problem is, is that the 5DII has been out for 4 years, and I have never really wanted it. I want a FF camera with better, more expansive AF. If I had wanted the 5DII I would of bought it over a year ago new when it was selling for 2000 or less, or refurbished from Canon's CLP. So, to me, Canon isn't offering as good or as exciting of products as Nikon is at this point..... add to this a $2300 new 24-70(the lens I want the most) and i'm overall unhappy with my choices in Canon. I'm buying a D600 and 24-70 2.8 for around 3800 dollars, instead of a 5DIII(I wouldn't consider the 6D) and 24-70 II for $5200.
While Canon is a great company I'm not sure that
Second, cameras are part of an overall system. When you choose to buy Canon or Nikon bodies or glass you are stating your loyalty to these companies by investing in an overall system of lenses and bodies. This is nothing like choosing to buy a car.

208
very funny,
they definitely deserve this for using such a ridiculous place as "lake success" to base their HQ...
and to people who are upset about the trolls(i feel some people may think I am one,) please lighten up and accept the fact that many people are unhappy with Canon's recent releases and pricing.
I was thrilled to buy my first 550D, 24-105 and eventually a 5D Classic. I genuinely liked my Canon cameras and lenses. But as I am not too deep in the system, and have many friends who are on the dark side, it's very easy for me to consider the other side.
I will/have been rooting for Canon to release awesome products at competitive prices, however it has been nothing but disappointment for me for the past year at least.
I thought the 5DIII was a great camera, but I thought it should have been priced around 2800 dollars, and definitely not 500 dollars more than the D800, which many reviews said was better.
I had held off switching to Nikons D700 since the 5DIII/D800 releases(I always thought it was better for my needs than a 5DII) waiting for Photokina and the 6D/D600 release.
I sincerely wanted the 6D to be amazing, but alas it isn't, and it aint cheap either. I can accept over priced lenses, with cheaper cameras, or overpriced cameras, with cheaper lenses, but at this point, I see the lenses being extremely expensive, and the bodies extremely expensive too.
I really hope Canon can release some amazing things soon, but at this point, i'm ordering the D600 later today. Please don't think of people who are upset as simply "trolls"
I do not come on here to upset people, incite arguments, but simply to talk about new products and express my feelings.
I understand people want to be positive and just talk about phototgraphy/photos, but there are plenty of forums for that.... I like to think this is a good place to talk about gear and technology, along with photos.


209
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Review
« on: September 17, 2012, 01:28:56 PM »
Wow. If this is to be believed, he has had the camera since March. Pretty amazing.
yeah, i was about to mention that, his sample photo is from march, wth?
I'm guessing changing from endorsing the D800 to the 5DIII was a pretty shrewd business move for mr. rockwell.

210
Here are 100% crops taken with both the Nikon D600 and Canon 6D using 135mm & 85mm portrait lenses @ f3.2
Hmm, Nikon looks crisper and cleaner to my eye between these two images

It's definitely sharper, but a tad less flattering too - just look at the tiny blonde hairs at the bridge of the nose and above the upper lip too, sort of reminiscent of initial criticisms of the D800

Different tastes, I guess.  I prefer seeing those tiny hairs rather than the smudgy look of the Canon image because when doing macro work, I want to see those tiny hairs on an insect.  I can always smooth out skin in PP, but for when I want the detail it needs to be there first place since I can't manufacture it in PP.  Actually the Canon images looks like a rather amateurish PP job like I used to do when first learning photoshop  ;) Just my $.02
i agree. it's pretty sad on here when people are praising a camera for having less resolution and clarity in the images(is that all we can say good about this camera?)
There is no doubt the Nikon sample is much cleaner and crisper than the Canon which is not nearly as sharp and definitely a little smudgy. I am in China so it's a little more difficult for me than in the US, but tomorrow I will be ordering a D600 and 24-70.
I really wanted to like the 5DIII and 6D, but alas, both are overpriced and less of what i'm looking for than the Nikon offerings. I will probably sell my 550D, 5DC, 24-105 and Sigma 50mm soon(most sad about saying goodbye to the Sigma, the thing has amazing bokah!)

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 20