January 25, 2015, 07:30:19 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 - dilbert

Pages: 1 ... 105 106 [107] 108 109 ... 228
1591
EOS Bodies / Re: From NL: Big Product launch invitations
« on: June 26, 2013, 07:20:15 PM »
From NL, ...

My first thought: Why in Netherlands? Is there some big Canon design center?

EU tax reasons.

Same as almost every company in the USA is registered in Delaware.

1592
Lenses / Re: The real reason to buy a "Big White" Canon lens
« on: June 24, 2013, 04:38:27 AM »
I'm bemused as to why there's a tripod made for video with a stills camera zoom lens holder on it.

Or rather a $20 tripod is being used to hold a $2000 lens (or close enough - you get the idea.)

1593
Lenses / Re: If You Could Have One 1 Lens...
« on: June 24, 2013, 02:36:24 AM »
Only one lens?

Hmmm.

15-150/f1.4

Oh, you want it to be from TODAY's lineup...

None of them.

1594
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: June 21, 2013, 04:45:27 AM »
The rumor for the 16-50 first appeared in 2010:

http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/new-f4l-ef-zoom-cr1/

Here it is mentioned as "16-50 f/4 H-IS".

1595
I typically have 640x480 (or sometimes 800x600) set for the export size of JPEGs that are destined for the WWW. This is to discourage others from making meaningful use of them.

For printing, I export full size TIFFs.

1596
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: June 19, 2013, 06:23:53 PM »
The other will be a replacement to both the 16-35 f/2.8L II and the 17-40 f/4L. We’re told one of the configurations in test is an EF 16-50 f/4L IS.

This lens is sorely needed but only so long as it fixes the problems of the existing lenses - soft corners, high field curvature at the wide end.

If it doesn't fix both of those then it may as well not exist.

1597
EOS Bodies / Re: Is This the EOS 3D?
« on: June 18, 2013, 09:43:40 PM »
while people are pointing out that "why would he openly wear the strap of an unannounced camera", note that he is wearing the strap "upside down", with the lettering turned in. it is only because it is half twisted in this side on view that we can see it.

i.e the strap is being very deliberately worn in a non-traditional manner.

I guess the question is why would Canon make a custom strap for a camera that is not available in the market?

That too! They would most definitely design and build a new strap to be paired with a new camera.

1598
EOS Bodies / Re: Is This the EOS 3D?
« on: June 18, 2013, 10:42:00 AM »
while people are pointing out that "why would he openly wear the strap of an unannounced camera", note that he is wearing the strap "upside down", with the lettering turned in. it is only because it is half twisted in this side on view that we can see it.

i.e the strap is being very deliberately worn in a non-traditional manner.

1599
EOS Bodies / Re: Is This the EOS 3D?
« on: June 17, 2013, 09:48:06 PM »
this was taken from his microblog. He then deleted it and seems someone from his company filed a complaint about what he posted. This looks promising!

yeah, you don't hide/take-down stuff if it is innocent/fake.

1600
EOS Bodies / Re: Is This the EOS 3D?
« on: June 17, 2013, 07:16:37 PM »
but what size body is it?

is it 1-size?
5d-size?
inbetweener?

1601
EOS Bodies / Re: Patents: New 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Lenses
« on: June 16, 2013, 01:51:37 AM »
The mechanics are interesting.

The 50/1.4 is 37mm longer than the current 50/1.4.
The 85/1.8 is 45mm longer than the current 85/1.8.

That'll change how well they fit in various people's camera bags but I suppose this is what's required to add image stabilisation to each of these lenses.

1602
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS
« on: June 16, 2013, 01:15:46 AM »
Interesting about 70-300.  The current 70-300 is a great lens; light weight and reasonable sharp.  Wonder what the Canon-gods have in store for us.

This is all due to the same reason: The future high mp ff bodies need sharper lenses, and these will be more costly to produce plus Canon will take a hefty premium.

The current 70-300L/100-400L might be the last sub-€2000 telezooms we have seen, so in the future dslr tele photography might be well out of reach of the average joe.

I'm not convinced this is to replace the 70-300L.

Why?

Because it is f/4.5-5.6.

So I think that this design is to replace the 70-300 IS USM (non-L)

And that this lens will come in at around the $700-$800 (maybe more) mark, similar to the change in price from the 28/1.8 to the 28/2.8 IS.

The catch however is that it needs to be at least as good as, if not better than, the optical performance of the 70-300L. Otherwise it will be a non-event and not worth buying due to the Tamron 70-300VC being about similar in terms of optics but much cheaper.

1603
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 DC Available for Preorder
« on: June 15, 2013, 08:18:36 AM »
Now Sigma need to do a 18-35 or 16-35 or 17-35 or 17-40 or whatever version for full frame. Don't care if it is 2.8 or 4.0 or variable, it just needs to be sharp in the corners and not suffer from field curvature like the Canon lenses do in that range.

1604
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS
« on: June 13, 2013, 10:03:29 PM »
Both of the current 70-300 lenses are f/4-5.6:
70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM
70-300L f/4-5.6 IS USM

Why then would they want to build a f/4.5-5.6 70-300?

1605
EOS Bodies / Re: A Big Megapixel Discussion
« on: June 13, 2013, 12:08:34 AM »
I am really hoping they opt for the 5D series body. I think that would make more sense because the 1D series cameras are built for people who shoot high volume work. High megapixel shooters tend to do low more low volume work.

What is considered to be "high megapixel" changes over time.

In 1 or 2 years time, maybe 30MP will be considered "normal".

Pages: 1 ... 105 106 [107] 108 109 ... 228