« on: November 24, 2012, 10:24:11 AM »
a camera is not just a sensor, but other things like AF for example...5d mkiii willbe a way better camera than 6d
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.
I'm sure this has been covered a dozen times before but I'm really struggling to make a decision. I want to upgrade from my T2I but I still plan on using it extensively. I shoot mainly wildlife, old buildings, anything in nature. I currently own a canon 10-22, 24-70v1, 100-400L and 1 of my favorites, the 100 macro. I love the extended reach of having a crop sensor so I was leaning towards the 7D (although I do not shoot sports). I think all of these lenses minus the 24/70 tell me to go 7D. I think I would miss that extra reach if I went with the 5D2, but I do like the thought of better low light capabilities. I feel I'm a little limited on the crop sensor with my 24-70 but I can always back up. I was discussing my dilemma with a friend and he suggested a 5D2 with a 1.4 extender. Would that somewhat equal out the reach id be losing by switching to full frame? I would love any help on this.
My Rebels already sit in a drawer while I take my D5100s all over the place.
Apparently, Nikon sales is rising.
Do we have any figures on Canon's sales? I know Nikon market share is still below that of Canon but I hope Canon do something with it not only on the marketing side but also on the technology side.
I agree that the price is fantastic, but how many folks here are confident enough in terms of Sigma's AF speed and accuracy to purchase this pre-order? I ask this in all seriousness, I'm curious to see especially the responses of folks who own the newer Sigma lenses. I sold all of mine 3 years ago after not enjoying hit/miss rate very much.
You are both wrong.
Hybrid IS means it compensates for two types of camera/lens movement.
It is for angle shake and shift shake.
It is ideal for recording handheld video.
it is dubbed hybrid is just because the lens is almost a macro (0.7 macro factor...wow)
Agree agree agree. That's the only arrow in the quiver (along with better IQ, to be fair) that might justify this $1800 price from the translation.
I'm probably in the minority here that I'm more likely to bring my relatively small and light 100L macro over my 70-200 F/2.8L IS II on trips. So if this magnification is true, this could become an epic kill-two-birds-with-one-not-so-big-or-heavy-stone sort of lens for travel.
I don't know where the better high ISO performance argument comes from. Traditionally, Canon had the higher resolution while Nikon had better high ISO capabilities. The 3Ds is still the best performing low-light camera (with the 1Dx just catching up).
d800 ISO 8063 1/100 F/1.8 50mm. No post-processing (import to Lightroom, export to JPEG), High-ISO NR off.
EDIT - The above comment is true since the D3 of course.