February 26, 2015, 06:29:08 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 - iso79

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13
31
Canon General / Re: More Canon Store Information
« on: January 14, 2013, 01:14:01 PM »
What would be awesome would be to have service centers at each of these stores.

32
Lenses / Re: Going to get the 24-70 2.8 II. Want a 70-200 as well
« on: January 12, 2013, 02:05:34 PM »
Just pick up the non-IS version. It goes for $1200 right now. It's also arguably sharper than the II.

33
I'm glad Canon doesn't. I want all my lenses to work on all my bodies.

34
No thanks, I'll stick to my Olympus OMD E-M5.

35
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Cannot Keep Screwing It's Customers Over
« on: January 06, 2013, 09:25:14 AM »
Some of these comparisons and smart a$$ comments about depreciation are ridiculous.  I don't think the OP should have started an entire thread dedicated to this and been so dramatic about it, but I can sympathize with his feelings on the 5D3 and 5D3 only.  You all act like the drop is completely normal but name one other piece of Canon gear that dropped that much that fast?

Of course depreciation is to be expected, but I think the 5D3's drop was different.   The price of the 5D Mark II dropped maybe $200 the first 2 YEARS it was out.  And if the 5D3 price pattern is the norm then why is the 1DX not under $5k now?  It's the same price it was at it's release.

Not to mention there was a poll before the Mark III was shipped asking about when it would drop below $3000 and the earliest answers were around Xmas and even those people got laughed at.  Nowhere did anyone say that it would drop to $2500 in 7 months or anywhere close to that.  And why would they think that it would? 

I don't think anyone here is stupid enough to believe their electronics won't ever depreciate, but most aren't complaining about the depreciation itself, just how quickly it happened.  And I think a lot of the people being pricks about it are just trying to scorn the early adopters to make themselves feel better about waiting. 

I don't care either way, I paid almost $3800 for mine and still think it's a great camera.  But if you had told me I could save $1600 if I buy a refurb in 7 months, or $800 waiting 5 months, I would have considered waiting.  But now I know for the future, lesson learned.

You got ripped off by both Canon an Uncle Sam. A little shopping around at launch or waiting a few years would have helped you save some money  ;D

36
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS Exists as a Working Prototype [CR2]
« on: December 21, 2012, 01:06:56 PM »
Tamrons are junk. They're good starter lenses but that's about it.

37
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS Exists as a Working Prototype [CR2]
« on: December 20, 2012, 04:25:28 PM »
Looking forward to get the non-IS version when it drops in price when the IS version comes out. I've been shooting for 15 years and have never had a need for IS.

38
Canon General / Re: Canon L Lens Deals at B&H Photo
« on: December 18, 2012, 09:43:15 AM »
Anyone know how long these deals will last?

39
Lenses / Re: 50 1.4 on 5d3 anyone?
« on: December 11, 2012, 01:51:03 PM »
The 50mm 1.4 is a cheap crappy lens. Invest in the 35mm 1.4 L instead.

40
EOS Bodies / Re: New Pro Canon body tested by Steve McCurry???
« on: November 30, 2012, 04:11:23 PM »
Weird, I thought Steve always shot with Nikon. Sign of the times?

41
EOS Bodies / Re: The Camera Store's Canon EOS M Hands-On Field Test
« on: November 26, 2012, 04:08:18 PM »
Yep, they loved the 5D Mark III more than the Nikon D800  ;D

42
EOS Bodies / Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« on: November 26, 2012, 03:36:39 PM »
If you can't afford it, don't buy it. If you really want it, save up for it.

43
EOS Bodies / Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« on: November 12, 2012, 12:38:47 PM »
Yay, more doom & gloom from gearheads who don't actually take photos  ::)

44
It is a nice picture. But why, when you are spending all that money, would you rent that lens. It does not even have IS, so in a helicopter your shot has to be lucky that you get it at the right moment. True that applies to a lot of photography. But surely he could have taken something else!

Most professional photographers rarely use IS or even turn it on.

45
Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS
« on: November 05, 2012, 08:33:17 AM »
To this day I have never had a use for IS or found it useful so I will not buying either one.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13