April 23, 2014, 04:14:44 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 - Random Orbits

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 76
61
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 19, 2014, 03:52:11 PM »
Picked up my 28 f/2.8 IS for 350 during the last holiday season's sales from one of the NYC superstores.  It's a nice lens, but not very popular.
Wow, you paid a good price for 28mm IS. It is a shame that other countries outside the USA there is no discount on prices of lenses. However, I actually prefer the focal length 24mm APS-C. Actually, I'm very envious of EF-M 22mm F2.

The 24 is more useful than the 28, but the 28 was on sale and the 24 was not.  I think the 24 and 28 f/2.8 IS are more suited to FF because there are so many zooms that have IS for APS-C in the range.  IS can be useful, but I don't use it much because most of my pics have people in them and I typically need a faster shutter speed anyway.

Agreed, the EF-M 22 f/2 is a gem.  The smaller and noisier the sensors, the more "necessary" faster lenses are...

62
EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: February 18, 2014, 09:59:00 PM »
I'm keep hearing people say: "I bought EOS-M as a backup camera".

Let be honest here guys, many of us(including myself) bought the M due to half price reduction.

If this EOS-m still selling @ $700-$800, I wonder how many of us would consider the M as backup camera?

From 5D III owner POV, it doesn't make any senses to have EOS-M as a backup - from slow AF, unbalance, IQ.

Let say you go out and shoot BIF or action event. Your 5D III or 1D X is not working, would you rather have rebel, 60d, 40d etc as a backup?

My 2cents: current EOS-M is death and Canon has no interest bringing this system up to date in US market yet.

I got the EF/EF-S adapter and have used it only twice because my 5D III has not failed.  Price was a key factor for me buying into the M system, but if it was worthless then I wouldn't have bought into it.  It took the role of a small portable camera that the S90/HS230 had, and delivers better IQ.  Cheaper than a rebel too.  My wife uses it because she prefers the small form factor compared to a DSLR, so it serves multiple purposes.  Would I prefer having a A7R and an adapter instead?  Yes, but I'm not willing to spend 2k+ for something that will not be used as much as the 5D III.

63
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 05:45:22 PM »
Sometimes I get jealous of my friends who shoot with Nikon. :( One of them bought Nikon 35mm F1.8 DX lens, and that's great. ::) When I see the flash SB700 (medium model) also serving as master wireless, am ashamed of the 430 EXII not do the same. >:( When I complain of the lack of APS-C primes (here in CR) tell me that I can buy Sigma 30mm F1.4, or Canon 28mm F2.8 IS. :-[ Seriously, Sigma costing $500 without image stabilizer, and Canon  costing $550 for only F2.8? :-X APS-C allows a lens 24mm (or 22mm) F2 very compact and below $300. Come on, Canon! I'm waiting.

Picked up my 28 f/2.8 IS for 350 during the last holiday season's sales from one of the NYC superstores.  It's a nice lens, but not very popular.

64
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 05:39:16 PM »
I see little value in that.  A person bringing both the 24 and 40 and possibly something else might be better served by the 17-55.  Either that or pick up the M with the 22 f/2, which is still less inconspicuous than an APS-C body.

This is why: http://camerasize.com/compact/#448.303,448.345,ha,t

For me, I do adventure sports, which either involves long treks, or being put into a small case in the back of my boat. That weight makes a very big difference over miles, and it effects how the camera handles.  The EOS M can't AF, which makes it of limited use for multi-frame bursts. It's the same issue with basically all the mirrorless cameras; I need portability AND the ability to shoot action.

Moreover, if the new lens ends up being about the size of the 22 STM, I can own it and the 40mm pancake and still have $400+ and 1lb of weight saved. If it ends up being f/2 instead of f/2.8, then its even better off than the 17-55 (IS is of no use to me in action shooting)


That's a great size comparison except if you need to bring other lenses for other focal lengths anyway...

I hope you're right about the new lens being the same size as aperture as the 22 f/2, but I'm guessing it'll closer to 28 f/2.8 in size rather than the 22 f/2.

65
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 12:41:19 PM »
Something like this would only make sense if it's f/2 or faster.  17-55 f/2.8 IS covers the range and has IS.  Yes, it's more expensive, but it's focal length range is useful.

I disagree for form factor reasons.  If it's a pancake lens, there's your value proposition.  It might not be for you, but many folks would love to turn their APS-C rigs into inconspicuous + easier-to-bring-with-them-everywhere 35mm FF equivalent walkaround setups. 

So I think that a fairly quick (say F/2) wider prime in a pancake format would be very well received I think.

- A

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but what if it was a f/2.8 lens without IS like the EF 40?  I see little value in that.  A person bringing both the 24 and 40 and possibly something else might be better served by the 17-55.  Either that or pick up the M with the 22 f/2, which is still less inconspicuous than an APS-C body.

66
Canon General / Re: Canon lack of innovation
« on: February 18, 2014, 12:00:37 PM »
It should be no surprise to anyone that they pay employees who secure patents. I would be very surprised to find a large high tech company that didnĀ“t and I would also be surprised if they only paid 2k$.

I wish my company gave out money for patents.  Alas, it doesn't...

67
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 11:49:10 AM »
Something like this would only make sense if it's f/2 or faster.  17-55 f/2.8 IS covers the range and has IS.  Yes, it's more expensive, but it's focal length range is useful.

68
Lenses / Re: Good Non-Sports Mix - 10-22 + 35 2.0 IS?
« on: February 17, 2014, 10:00:03 PM »
My vote is for the 10-22.  24mm is somewhat limiting on crop -- it is much better suited for FF.

69
Lenses / Re: Need Help Choosing Lenses for Walt Disney World & Cruise..
« on: February 17, 2014, 07:11:26 PM »
I brought a 70-200 II to WDW.  It was useful for the shows and parades, but that was about it.  A fast prime is nice at night. 

70
Lenses / Re: Which wide-angle lens to hire?
« on: February 17, 2014, 10:04:03 AM »
Agree with yorgasor that most of the Canon lenses are not well suited for astrophotography.  Most of the f/2.8 lenses (14, 16-35) have significant coma (the 24-70 II is an exception).  Stopping down reduces/eliminates coma, but then you lose the advantage of the larger aperture.

I know you said that you were planning on renting a UWA.  Unfortunately the UWA primes are much better than the zooms, so it comes down to which one.  If you had the funds to upgrade your 24-70 to version II, then I'd suggest looking at the Rokinon 14, Zeiss 15 or TS-E 17 (you lose a stop here, but its movements make it more versatile creatively).  That would give you a very good 24mm and UWA option.  If you don't have the funds, then yorgasor has a good recommendation to rent the Zeiss 21.  The 21-24mm focal lengths are easier to compose well and will be used more often than a 14-17mm prime.

71
EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: February 15, 2014, 02:56:03 PM »
I agree with surapon and privatebydesign.

With an 18-55, 22 and 11-22 what lenses you really need for a portable system?  If you want to extend the capabilities, then the adapter lets you use the wide range EF lenses available.  I bought it to replace a Canon P&S, and it works well.  I got the camera during the firesale, and for that price, it couldn't be beat.  I have the 18-55 and 22, and I might get the 11-22 in the future (via Canada).  It also backs up my 5D III.

72
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony FE 70-200 f/4 G OSS lens
« on: February 13, 2014, 11:31:36 AM »
Doesn't make sense... unless servo AF is dramatically improved.  And given that it's not much cheaper than the 70-200 II, then you're relying on Sony to remain with this mount/technology for how long?  It weighs as much as the 70-200L f/4 IS.  I can see the advantage of the A7R for landscape applications; for this... not so much.

73
Lenses / Re: Advice on Primes
« on: February 13, 2014, 12:10:54 AM »
Start with what you know you'll use and save the rest of the money for later.  Is there a penalty for waiting?  The more you shoot, the more you'll know where you want to spend more on equipment.

For TCs, go with the IIIs.  The 2x III is visibly better than the II.

74
Especially because I bet the photogs get pretty far from wireless access points at times....

Well, I'd think they would have the place covered, especially since all current professional cameras are WiFi enabled.

The linked article states that the photogs covering the ski races (i.e. cross country) don't have access because they set up along the course to get the shots of the athletes along the route, and that they try to dump the images at access points a few times a day.

75
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 24-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS
« on: February 09, 2014, 09:27:38 PM »
Agree on the need of a consumer zoom.  FF prices will fall, and as it does, there will be a market for consumer FF zooms. 

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 76