« on: November 22, 2012, 12:05:48 PM »
It matters to stills to! It's the difference between working to remove noise or remove lesser noise.
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.
How are you liking the 40 Dolina? I haven't had any recent work or time with the lens but from my simple tests, it looks amazing and the focus on the 5dm3 is without flaw. That said its not as fast as an L but then i expected that. I didn't buy it for fast focus.It is good enough for me to forget the 35.
The 1D4 never went below $5,000 on BH through the life of the product.
Every time a higher megapixel camera is introduced, we see forum posts about the silliness of the "megapixel war" and how camera makers should really be focusing on improving other things, not "just" giving us more megapixels. There are often comments about how megapixels are driven by marketing, not by photographers' demands. A few years back, many photographers said that 8, 10 or 12mp was plenty for their work. I remember a few photographers objecting the the original 12mp 5D as having "too many megapixels". I know some who always shoot their 5D2 and 5D3 at the medium (10mp) raw file size. No doubt Canon has listened to some of that; for example, they substantially upgraded the 5D2 to create the 5D3 without adding more megapixels. The resulting 5D3 is for many photographers the dream version of the 5D2.lol yeah new technology for canon, ancient for other brands..
Can you please enlighten us as to what might be ancient technology for you? Are you talking about medium format or Nikon's D800? If yes, what's your point? Canon has been told not to push the megapixels for years. Nikon has been told to do the exact opposite. Both vendors reacted to the demands of their customer base.
Canon pushed the APS to 18Mp years ago, they can expose a 18x24 cmos surface in one piece to an reasonable price=APS APS H
No, they have not the sensor tech and the know how to make a 24x36mm sensor with high resolution and with a modern lay out and to a competing low price.
"Both vendors reacted to the demands of their customer base"
What you base this statement on? People are asking after higher resolution from Canon and a 24x36mm sensor.
About the only thing I would like to see added to the "roadmap" is a new, improved 50mm f/1.4, sharper wide open and with more reliable AF. I don't need more megapixels or a new sensor, at least not for my current work. No doubt some Canon photographers do want more megapixels. So I won't be surprised if Canon does introduce a high mp body to meet their needs.
Even though I shoot a lot of sports, I won't get the lens either. Admittedly I already own the 200 f/2, 300 f/2.8 and 400 f/2.8, but I shoot wider than f/4 a ton and this isn't very useful for me. In fact, for indoor volleyball and basketball I set aperture range from f/2 to f/4 with ISO safety shift on (or if I'm using the 70-200 lens, f/2.8 to f/4). I prefer the faster shutter speed in exchange for opening up wider.
However, I can definitely see the utility in this lens, and if I didn't already have the 300 and 400, I probably would use it for football and soccer, as long as they were day games or well-lit venues. My problem is that my night stuff is NOT well-lit, so to keep a fast shutter I need wider than f/4 probably.
I think this lens would be great for well-lit sports, and wildlife photography, and it'll add a ton of convenience over the longer primes.