April 18, 2014, 12:00:46 AM

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 - dolina

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 52
EOS Bodies / Re: A Brief 2013 Canon Roadmap [CR1]
« on: November 13, 2012, 02:20:34 PM »
When the 1DX came out I knew the camera wasn't a 1D4 replacement to me. It was a full frame body but did not increase or at least maintain the pixel density. It also lacked f/8 lens autofocus at the time as well.

This made the 5D3 look very competitive to me. But I have grown fond of 1-Series bodies so I kept to what I had.

I am looking towards Canon advancing from the 0.5 ┬Ám generation CIS wafer fab process so better bodies can be made.

But I encourage people to upgrade for the sake of upgrading. ;)

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.
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.

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.

Lenses / Re: Why The EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Delay?
« on: November 13, 2012, 01:15:42 PM »
I agree with all your points. Only thing I like about this lens is the built-in Extender that makes using it risk-free.

Separate extenders sell for $500~ and integrating one should be cheaper.

Now, where are those 135 and 400/5.6 updates?

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.

Lenses / Re: Why The EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Delay?
« on: November 13, 2012, 08:45:25 AM »
They must not like "bulge" jokes.  ;D

EOS Bodies / Re: A Brief 2013 Canon Roadmap [CR1]
« on: November 13, 2012, 08:29:28 AM »
I hope the big megapixel camera will have built-in wifi-based features found in the CamRanger and TetherFly.

Canon General / Re: How do you display your pictures?
« on: November 13, 2012, 01:16:52 AM »
27-inch Dell U2711
- 2560x1440

Lenses / Re: Hold out for EF 35/2 IS or jump in with classic 35 1.4L
« on: November 12, 2012, 11:05:21 PM »
I'd wait for 35/1.4 II but I have the 40/2.8 pancake already.

Sports / 2012 Alaska (Philippines) Football Cup
« on: November 12, 2012, 06:14:21 PM »
Morning folks!

The Alaska Cup is the largest non-pro football competition in the Philippines. These are some outtakes from this year's shoot.

2012 Alaska Cup by alabang, on Flickr

Lenses / Re: do image stabilisers decrease image quality?
« on: November 11, 2012, 07:09:40 PM »
Yes they do! That's why they sell them at a higher price than lenses that do not have the feature.

Lenses / Re: Will canon make an 85f2 IS?
« on: November 11, 2012, 03:52:21 PM »
Remember, updated lenses will ALWAYS cost more. Do not expect a price cut on currently sold old lenses.

Interesting... for some reason, I was convinced that the 28 2.8 IS is a replacement for the 1.8 ...

When the 28 2.8 IS was announced the 28 2.8 from the 80s was removed from the lineup.

A lot of the lenses from the 80s were derived from FD lenses and are starting to show their age with high MP bodies. Sticking to them will make your photos have a "period" look most notably the 70s and 80s minus the aesthetics of film.

Annually Canon has a habit of announcing 4-5 new EF & EF-S lenses. They have accomplished that this year.

For 2013 I expect the same. Two L primes, two non-L EF primes an EFS lens and the rest EF-M lenses.

Lenses / Re: Will canon make an 85f2 IS?
« on: November 09, 2012, 09:09:05 PM »
That is the trend for non-L EF lenses. Just add IS at the same f-number and focal length.

I noticed that the non-"L" category seems to be getting all the love.  I think the 135MM f/2 L would be a cool lens to get the IS treatment, although the price would likely get a little crazy.

The non-L EF primes with IS are not cheap either. :) Canon will either continue selling the ancient lens or discontinue them all together.

symmar22 180mm Macro is an L prime. I am not that interested as I do not shoot macros all that often.

Lenses / Re: Will canon make an 85f2 IS?
« on: November 09, 2012, 05:16:58 PM »
I would not be surprised if Canon were to make an EF 85mm f/1.8 USM with IS. A f/2 is unlikely.

I would also expect them to make an IS version for the following

EF 20mm f/2.8 USM
EF 28 f/1.8 USM
EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
EF 50mm f/1.8 II
EF 100mm f/2 USM
EF 135mm f/2.8 with Softfocus
EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro

That is the trend for non-L EF lenses. Just add IS at the same f-number and focal length.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 Available for Preorder
« on: November 07, 2012, 11:39:36 AM »
I hope 3rd party products like this moderates how Canon prices future lenses like the 35/1.4 II.

IIRC Sigma was reported to be in the process of improving QC of their products. The price increase may be the result of quality improvement.

Canon General / Re: EOS-M kicking butt in Japan
« on: November 06, 2012, 06:13:23 AM »
The camera is aimed at women, and lots of women in Japan are enthusiastic photographers, so I'd expect it to be doing well in Japan.  Its about time that a high end camera was created that takes into account features that women want.
Not necessarily. Even us men want a smaller camera. I just wish it was full frame and had a range finder feel.

Lenses / Re: Waiting for 100~400mm f/4~5.6 IS II.
« on: November 05, 2012, 01:23:36 PM »
The current lens came out in 1998. Relatively young to most EF lenses.

A 400/5.6 is much much older and could use a IS injection.

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS
« on: November 05, 2012, 12:56:37 PM »
The great thing is none of these lenses are what I want.

Ergo, no spending.  ;D

What I want is a an updated 135mm (pref at 1.8 aperture) with IS and a 400/5.6 with IS.

I semi-want an updated 35/1.4 and 180/3.5 Macro with IS.

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 52