« on: May 22, 2014, 10:44:19 PM »
Good it's about time!!!! Bring it on!!!
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.
+1Concerning the bulbous front element:
At least Zeiss is able to build an excellent 15/2,8 lens without a bulbous front element. Well, but it's a prime lens and not a zoom lense.
ok, yes a couple of things:
1) prime as you stated so totally different
2) not bulbous but requires 95mm filter - 16-35 II 82mm
3) no autofocus
I know for an event photographer likely all three of these compromises would be a deal killer. Canon's last improvement to the 16-35 included increasing the front element so that it required 82mm filters instead of 77mm. While further improvements could be made likely by going beyond 82mm, question is do people want this for event photography/reportage as some already complain the current 82mm is too big.
might make more sense to focus on landscape who would probably prefer wider than 16mm and wouldn't care about front element size/shape.
Wondering if it is the outrageous initial price of the 24-70 f/4 IS that makes this 16-35 f/4 IS seem "reasonable." After all, it sports quite a premium over the 17-40. Not to say that it won't be worth it because it probably will be once the reviews are in, but just an observation...Random that's a great point which I can't deny...hummmmmm!!!!
Finger crossed here. Canon adding the IS is a great idea and the price is good.I had my heart to set on a Canon version of the Nikon 14-24mm but I'm willing to take a crack at this one!! I'll wait for the reviews.I'm with you, but I took the leap and pre-ordered this morning. I'm going to sell of my 16-35 II and hope that the new lens is as good in person as it looks on paper
I am not a good MTF reader
Can someone explain to me the IQ difference between the 16-35 f/2.8II and the 16-35 f/4 IS based on the MTF's?
I put them here (upper images are the 16-35 f/2.8II)
Simple, more contrast (bold lines) and more sharpness in the corners (thin lines), from left to right = center to extreme borders, the higher the lines on the graph, the more transmission of contrast (bold) and sharpness (thin), usually, black lines are for wide open aperture whilst blue lines are for f/8. At least, if Canon did not change its MTF legend
EDIT: after more observation of those MTF from 16-35/4L, damn, that will be bitingly sharp at f/8. Landscapers rejoice
Just make sure it works with current EF L
Two comments, once you 1D X there's no going back, so watch your credit cards. I just paid mine off but my photo budget is blown for the year. No regrets whatsoever, though, and if you need 12FPS and/or a bulletproof camera, there is no substitute.Hello Mack... yes that 1DX is a game changer I really like the 5D Mark III but I love the 1 DX in my hands @ B&H photo and I didn't want to let it go!!! What a beast!!!
Also, Canon is known to cancel orders paid with non-US payments, so that may be what happened, if you're outside of the US or using a foreign payment source. If not, just call them, they have great customer service in my experience.
Cute....Well there you go! The reason the 7D2 has been delayed so long is that it will be a full frame mirrorless
dual pixelquad pixel fovenon big megapixel camera with a 1DX build in an EOS-M package.... that will shoot at ISO 819,200 and take 8K video.....
…and cost $1399.
Is it April Fool's Day? No!+1000000
But I almost feel like, reading this rumor.
Too much contradictions in it.
Especially the FF mirrorless.
Foveon like technology and cheaper? Hard to believe.
And just making the sensor cheaper means increasing Canons profit because this will not show in sales price.
So I am about to carry my bucket of salt back home.