December 21, 2014, 10:27:49 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 - Random Orbits

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 94
Lenses / Re: Lenses that you want Canon to release next
« on: September 18, 2014, 08:42:45 PM »
I want a work over of the normal to short telephoto lenses with is, like the 24, 28, and 30 is.

Maybe I get you wrong (or incompletely) but what is missing for you from the 16-35 f/4?


I think he's saying that he would like to see lenses like the 50 and 85 get the same makeover/upgrade as the 24 f/2.8 IS, 28 f/2.8 IS and 35 f/2 IS.

Lenses / Re: Lenses that you want Canon to release next
« on: September 18, 2014, 06:06:16 PM »
I can't argue with any of that.  My only real point was that if this lens is real, Canon will continue to have no fast and sharp (compared to the new 16-35 f/4) ultra wide zoom, which is a shame.

And before this year, Canon had nothing that was sharp wide open in the ultrazoom category at all.  Now we have the 16-35 f/4 IS and, if the rumor is true, a 11-24 f/4 might appear soon.  Perhaps Canon can't figure out a way to design a good 14-24 f/2.8 w/o infringing on Nikon's patents, or maybe it did market research and found that people would rather have a 11-24 f/4 rather than a 14-24 f/2.8.  I'd prefer that Canon update the 16-35 f/2.8 II rather than a 14-24 f/2.8 anyway.  The extra FL on the long end saves on a lot of lens-changes and makes the 16-35 much more versatile (and easily filterable).

Lenses / Re: Lenses that you want Canon to release next
« on: September 18, 2014, 10:47:02 AM »
2.  EF 14-24/2.8L USM.  A competitor to Nikon's version.  But I believe Canon will not offer f/2.8 in this focal length range.

I personally feel  should Canon not offer f/2.8, it's not really a true competitor.  The rumor was that this new wider zoom would cost $2800, so without at least f/2.8, Canon would be asking that we pay significantly more than the excellent Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 for a slower Canon version.

I very much hope you're wrong.  If Canon wants to offer an f/4 or so, then I'd prefer to see two offerings by Canon just like Nikon's f/4 12-24 and f/2.8 14-24.

If the rumored Canon zoom starts at 11mm, then it is a different league than what Nikon has no matter the aperture.  Nikon's 12-24mm f/4 is for APS-C only, so the angle of view isn't as wide 11mm, and there is a big difference between 11mm and 24mm.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5diii to 7dii?
« on: September 16, 2014, 08:03:29 PM »
Relax.  Wait for the reviews and comparisons to come out, try it out in a store, and then decide.

Lenses / Re: EF11-24mm F4L listed on a Japanese site
« on: September 16, 2014, 12:17:07 PM »
Fake.  F/4 makes no sense.

Makes perfectly sense... People photogs (the only ones that need 2.8) would never use 11mm, because it distorts the image too much. For them, a new 16-35/2.8 is much better, which this lens would leave space for. Then Canon would have three wide angles to choose from, but to have all FL's and apertures covered, you gotta at least buy two of them... ;)
Besides, I don't think you could do 11mm/2.8 that easy. But looks like a nice supplement for the already great lens lineup! :D

Hmm...Reasonable. I was thinking too little differentiation after release of newest 16-35 f4, and Nikon has done so well with its 14-24mm...And you know Canon wants another $2500 L in the lineup.

I still say the image is a fake.  Too ugly.

Plus the website OP says this is "listed" on looks like a shady electronics dumping ground.

How large do you think a 11-24 f/2.8 would be?  The Nikon 13mm f/5.6 weighs 2.5 lb.  The Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 weighs close to 1.5 lb and is soft in the corners/edges.  A high IQ f/2.8 version that goes 1 mm wider would be a beast!

Lenses / Re: Which Tilt/Shift lens to choose?
« on: September 16, 2014, 10:50:06 AM »

Since noone have objected to my statement about 17mm & 24mm = architecture and 90mm = product shots, I presume this is right. I guess the addition is now "45mm = The Dog, avoid it at all cost" ;D

It really comes down to what you want to use it for.  The TS-Es can be used in many types of photography, so it is up to the user to decide which one(s) work for him.  Tilting to minimize the focal zone can by done handheld, but tilting to maximize the focal zone is usually done on a tripod and checking mutiple spots in the frame with liveview.  Shift can done handheld as well.

As others have noted, the TS-E 24 is a good one for landscapes, and you can add a 1.4x TC in a pinch and not degrade the quality too much.  Many use tripods for landscape and architectural photography anyway, so the added complexity of tilting and shifting is not much of an additional burden.  Same thing with macro and product shots.  The 45 is interesting because it is not one that fits in one of those categories.  And it falls into the "normal" range where people tend to be prominent subjects.  You can imagine tilting for a group shot where the people are not in the same "normal" image plane or tilting to partially correct or stress shots from below/above.

So I guess my recommendation is to choose one that fits with how you intend to use it the most.  Getting that right will increase your satifisfaction with using TS-Es.

Lenses / Re: Which Tilt/Shift lens to choose?
« on: September 15, 2014, 10:27:12 PM »
The 17 and 24 TS-Es have two rotations, so the shift and tilt directions can be decoupled, which is really nice.  The 45 and 90s don't have this.

Lenses / Re: Official: Canon EF 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
« on: September 15, 2014, 10:30:37 AM »
Why do they bother with lenses like this?

Towards the edges at the wide end, it is just rubbish.

Also it would appear to offer close to the same IQ as the 24-105/f4L, if not better. Be interesting to see what photozone, etc, have to say.

However it will perform very nicely on APS-C cameras.

Hmm... I don't know.  Maybe to push down prices and compete in the marketplace?  With a MSRP of 600 or about half of the 24-105/24-70 f/4, this is probably designed to be sold with a body for 100-200.  Looks like Canon expects prices to fall in the future and is readying less expensive options.  Digital is getting less expensive, and with that the cheaper, consumer lenses will be coming back. 

Lenses / Re: The New Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM Pancake
« on: September 14, 2014, 07:58:18 PM »
Dear friends. Let's imagine three different lenses:

EF 22mm F2 (hypothetical would weigh 500 grams)
EF-S 22mm F2 (hypothetical would weigh 250 grams)
EF-M 22mm F2 (actually exists and weighs 105 grams)

The only lens that actually exists today is the EF-M, which has great picture quality and low price.
You do not miss prime lens fast and lighter, and less price that Canon 24mm F1.4L, to accompany the camera 7D and 70D?
If there EF-S 22mm F2, or 24mm F1.8 costing $ 400 would you buy?

I'd be interested in an EF 24 f/1.8, but there is no way that it would cost 400.  The 28 f/1.8 costs 500+, and the 24 f/2.8 IS and 35 f/2 IS are 600.  600-700 is more likely with an initial price higher than 800.

Lenses / Re: What New Lens are You Most Excited About?
« on: September 12, 2014, 03:50:39 PM »
None, which is not a bad thing because I can use the money for so many other things right now.  The 16-35 f/4 IS fixed the 2014 itch... now onto 2015!

How can they not have the weight for the C version?  If the design is mature enough for a press release, surely they'd know the weight, right?

Lenses / Re: The New Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM Pancake
« on: September 12, 2014, 10:27:10 AM »
If you reread my posts, you'll notice that I never asked for a pancake EF-S. I used the example of the EF-M 22mm F2 to prove that there is demand for fast EF-S primes. After that I quoted Nikon DX 35mm F1.8 and 30mm F1.4 Sigma DC.

I say again that I am not against Canon release lenses that do not meet my desire. The sad part is that the launch of an EF-S 24mm F2.8 means that Canon will never launch an EF-S 22mm F2. :-[ :'(

OK, I understand now.  It is just that this IS a pancake thread, and the first lens you cite as an example IS a pancake.

Lenses / Re: The New Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM Pancake
« on: September 11, 2014, 09:13:57 PM »

Why is it that the EOS M, a Hello Kitty camera, gets a 22mm f/2 lens and the Semi-Pro EOS 7D get an inferior 24mm f/2.8 lens ??? What message is Canon sending to the Pros who use APS-C cameras ???

Just curious... what brand has a pancake 22 f/2 in a DSLR form factor that you're trying to compare it to?

When did I ever say I wanted a 22mm f/2 PANCAKE lens ??? I DO NOT WANT a PANCAKE lens, just an ordinary EF-S 22mm f/2 lens.

BTW Pentax makes the HD PENTAX-DA 21mmF3.2AL Limited (a pancake) for their crop cameras. The problem with pancake lenses is you have to make sacrifices to get the small size. Pentax chose IQ over lens speed.

Me, I prefer normal lenses which have both good IQ and a reasonable f/stop.

OK, my bad, I conflated your and ajfotofilmagem's posts.  I assumed you wanted a pancake 22 f/2 because this is a pancake ef-s thread and you were referring to the M pancake.

Maybe Canon will surprise us with more EF-S prime lenses...  After all, how many were clamoring for a 24 f/2.8 pancake?

EOS Bodies / Re: How does the reveal of the final 7D2 specs make you feel?
« on: September 11, 2014, 07:31:34 PM »
it makes me feel ... "i told you so".
Another fairly minimal iteration of a mirrorslapper. So little progress after 5 years. Not even WiFi built in.  ::)

You call that "Another fairly minimal iteration of a mirrorslapper" ?

I wonder what kinda camera you shooting with?

I think he's still using the 7D and M.

Lenses / Re: The New Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM Pancake
« on: September 11, 2014, 06:57:48 PM »
Just curious... what brand has a pancake 22 f/2 in a DSLR form factor that you're trying to compare it to?
Beyond the Canon EF-M 22mm F2 (does not work on 70D), there is APS-C lens Nikon 35mm F1.8 and Sigma 30mm F1.4 also.
Why not EF-S 22mm F2 ?

Nikon's 35 f/1.8 and Sigma's 30 f/1.4 aren't pancakes.  The geometry (flange distance) for the M is different, so the focal length for a pancake is different as well.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 94