August 30, 2014, 12:32:43 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 - kubelik

Pages: 1 ... 51 52 [53]
781
Lenses / Re: Canon Announces 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS
« on: August 27, 2010, 10:58:51 AM »
ELK, I know the rumor you are talking about.  at the time I think everyone sort of gave a nervous laugh and shrugged it off.  what muteteh and I are thinking now is that rumor was actual solid info ... it's an interesting way for canon to develop its market segmentation, and actually I don't know that I mind it so much.

I do hope they replace some of the cheaper wide angle primes with "budget" L glass, stuff that sits below the $1000 mark.  shouldn't be hard, the 135 f/2 L and 200 f/2.8 L both are around that price point, and I wouldn't mind paying $700-800 or so for, say, a 28 f/2 L or a 24 f/2.8 L if the image quality is there.

782
Lenses / Re: Canon Announces 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS
« on: August 26, 2010, 03:25:11 PM »
rrc, good points all around (btw when I mentioned 70-200 f/2.8 I was talking about the first version, not the II, so that price point isn't incorrect)

I'm pretty sure that these were the same reasons that Canon had when they decided to develop and produce this lens.  it definitely has a place in the market and its own niche; my point is that that telephoto range is getting highly competitive even within canon's own ranks, and it is fulfilling a pretty small niche at this point.  an updated 100-400 would have been useful for a much larger segment of the market

783
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announces EOS 60D
« on: August 26, 2010, 03:17:09 PM »
canon seems to be betting that photographers are more well off than ever before and over the next few years will be moving everything one tier up the market ladder.

I don't want to be a pessimist (although I think I share everyone's feelings about the downshifted 60D and the 25% to 50% price increase in next generation lenses, which is far from happy) so I'm trying to figure out where Canon is going with all this...

it seems like Canon is trying to shrink the "semi-pro" level as small as possible, and is moving away from a continuous-tiered system to a two-class structure: consumers vs. professionals, with a wide chasm in between.  it seems the former rumor regarding this same setup for canon's lens lineup may not have been so far off the mark after all; the lens releases also seem to be morphing into either EF-S or L-series, with nothing in between.  I thought it was unbelievable at the time, but after seeing a fisheye L, and a 70-300 variable aperture L, I'm really not so sure the EF-S/L dichotomy isn't the new hierarchy within Canon.


is surrendering the "middle class" section of the market good?  is Canon hoping that by moving its whole professional lineup further upstream it can establish a Leica-like reputation and following?  what do you think?

784
Lenses / Re: Canon Announces 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS
« on: August 26, 2010, 02:53:46 PM »
flake, I think you answered your own question.  the thing that is not to love about the lens is precisely its price.

1.5K is not much for a semi-pro to drop on a lens.

but, when you can get the 100-400L for that much ... or the 300 f/4 for less ... or the 70-200 f/4 L IS for less ... or the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS for just $400 more ... what is there to love about it?

if it came in at $1200 that would be one thing, but taking it into the $1500 range put it up against some fierce competition from its older brothers.

that's what's not to love.

785
Lenses / Re: Canon Announces 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS
« on: August 26, 2010, 08:51:50 AM »
as much as I was dubious about Canon putting out a 100-300 f/4, in comparison to this it would have made far more sense.  the overlapping zoom range with the 70-200s, the variable aperture (what!) ... I guess they felt if they made it 70-300 f/4 it would cannibalize the 70-200 f/4-5.6 but as it stands it's just going to cannabalize itself.

bought a sigma 100-300 f/4 this past week but I'm still sorry to see that Canon isn't putting out either a 100-300 f/4 or a 100-400 replacement.

the good news is this means a 100-400 range replacement could still be coming (some years later) as there is no way that this is a replacement for the dust pump

786
Canon General / Re: Canon's 120mp APS-H Sensor
« on: August 24, 2010, 03:08:56 PM »
pierlux, I think scalesusa was referring to my question about DLA; like I said, I don't fully understand it and would not be averse to some schooling in light physics.

I like where you're taking this train of thought with the pixel binning down to a 30 MP sensor, and I think chrome_dude has some interesting thoughts in terms of pixels with different ranges of sensitivity even in the same color channel.  it makes this bit of news seems a lot less like canon losing its marbles and more like an earnest scientific (and economic) endeavor.

I am amazed that they're calculating 9.5 fps with that number of pixels; is the pixel binning occurring on-sensor to allow this kind of throughput?

787
Canon General / Re: Canon's 120mp APS-H Sensor
« on: August 24, 2010, 07:36:29 AM »
I know I'm not nearly good enough with the physics to know this for sure, but wouldn't a 120 MP APS-H have a ridiculously low bar for lens diffraction?  I mean, given that diffraction is setting in now for 17 MP APS-C sensors at about f/5.6, what would it be for this?  f/1.4 before diffraction?  is there some way around the diffraction problem?

788
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 60D Availability
« on: August 20, 2010, 04:40:59 PM »
xyzzy, J's point is valid:  christmas is a huge time for sales and is exactly what a late summer announcement + fall release is aimed at.

whether or not you personally would consider buying a $1100 camera as a christmas present is largely irrelevant to whether or not there are lots of other people out there who would consider buying a $1100 camera as a christmas present (and believe me, they're out there).  also, post-christmas sales are big from people who get gift cards or cash and use that to finally get the camera they've been waiting for all along

ever see car commercials during the holidays?  where the wife wakes up to a mercedes on the driveway with a big red ribbon?  makes buying a christmas camera seem a lot less ludicrous

789
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 60D Coming August 26 [CR3]
« on: August 20, 2010, 04:36:20 PM »
unfocused (and dmadden), I'm going to third that opinion.  for example, I know that the 5D Mark II's AF setup and speed is nothing to write home about, but at the same time, I rarely run across any situation where it lets me down and denies me a shot I could have snagged otherwise (and I shoot everything from low light to daylight, landscapes to BIF).

I do think it's worth noting the 'why don't I switch' sentiment has some merit for a novice who maybe has a single, older Rebel body and kit or middling EF-S glass.  there's no reason not to ditch that and move to Nikon if they feel the grass is really greener.  I personally think it would be bizarre to see someone ditching 10K worth of canon glass to move to nikon, but if you are that person, please let me know.

what I think the more long-time shooters here know (especially guys who have shot both Canon and Nikon systems before) is that there really isn't a huge difference between the systems at this point, the difference is in the photog

790
Lenses / Re: *UPDATE* The Big White Lenses [CR2.5]
« on: August 19, 2010, 02:44:39 PM »
muteteh, what about a 200-400 f/4-5.6?  would that push it past the 77mm thread size?

I guess a 100-300 f/4 with a 1.4x converter could serve as well on the long end, but the loss in AF speed would be a shame

791
PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon PowerShot G12 Leaked By CNET
« on: August 19, 2010, 10:43:55 AM »
madbutcher's absolutely right; a 24-105 would be fantastic on the G series.

the more canon fails to really differentiate the G series from the S9x series, the less reason there is to go for the G.  it's bulkier, uglier, heavier, has a slower lens, roughly the same frame rate, and exactly the same sensor.  what's the point?  I have a G9 as my backup cam that I love but if I were to update today I would go for the S95

792
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 60D Coming August 26 [CR3]
« on: August 19, 2010, 10:05:43 AM »
I'm really dubious about the G12 emerging as shown in the earlier rumor (plus the supposed "press release" was just a G11 press release with the names exchanged).  it might be heading in the right direction (yes larger sensor please) but I doubt that's the exact form factor.

that sd4500 is kind of ugly, not sure whats going on with the two-tone colors and the weird angular sculpting taken a step too far ...

good to see non-handicapped movie mode in the new S95

793
Lenses / Re: Lenses Lenses Lenses
« on: August 18, 2010, 02:42:05 PM »
I agree with muteteh and Justin's sentiments about a 100-300 f/4; namely, it doesn't really do much for you that canon's current lineup doesn't already do.  I hate comparing against nikon but I do think they had the right idea in going to a 200-400 f/4. 

I'd love to see the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS replaced by a 200-400mm f/4-5.6 IS that uses a conventional zoom ring, weathersealing, and newer IS.  would I pay a 25% markup from the Dust Buster's price for a lens like that?  a resounding heck yes. 

16-50 f/4 would be a great landscape walkaround lens to replace the 17-40, the extra bit of range on both ends makes a lot of sense.  agree with CR guy that replacing the 16-35 II makes little sense for canon at the moment

794
EOS Bodies / Re: 1Ds Mark IV Specs [CR1]
« on: August 17, 2010, 03:54:08 PM »
I think the dead giveaway in this one is where it claims the backlit sensor will double its sensitivity (also, the pixel count, when do the manufacturers ever use such even numbers of pixels)

using a backlit sensor to supposedly dramatically increase the sensitivity of sensels is a bogus statement that gets brought up over and over by rumormongers.  ever since the backlit CMOS came out a number of people familiar with the science stated that it was more effective in the tiny sensors used in compact cameras rather than the larger sensors and sensels used in DSLRs.  well, if it's supposed to be more powerful in compact cameras ... I've seen the images taken at ISO 800 and 1600 from the newest compacts, and it's nothing to write home about.

I'd love a magic recipe for increased sensitivity just as anyone would, but I  really don't think backlighting makes a hoot of difference

795
Software & Accessories / Re: Canon Radio Flash Trigger Patent?
« on: August 17, 2010, 03:27:41 PM »
is this talking about having the radio triggering system directly built into the flash unit itself?  that would be so much easier than having to have the additional radio-popper attached to the flash unit, and would make a lot of strobist-type setups that much easier (like the ezybox and foursquare)

the linedrawing for the model cracks me up, it's like straight out of my first-grade notebook

Pages: 1 ... 51 52 [53]