How about adding IS to a lens that really needs it. Take the 135L for example....
Or 85L III IS. That would enable me to sell my 50L, maybe even 35L.
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.
Adorama canceled my order for the $299 EOS M and 22mm lens (which was placed in early July and apparently couldn't be fulfilled).
My copy of 24-70 f/2.8 II needs -9 at wide end and 0 at tele end on my 5D III. My Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II needs 0 at either end, and my 100L also needs 0. Some of my fast primes including 35L, 50L, 85L II range between -1 and -3.
A brand new Canon 17-40 f/4L I just borrowed needed -6 at wide and 0 at tele.
-9 seems a tad too much for a $2100 lens, so I'm just wondering what 24-70 f/2.8 II owners have experienced with AFMA (and 5D III)? Is it worth sending in the lens to Canon while still under warranty for calibration?
Is my copy of 5D III partly at fault here, as the body seems to need Minus AFMA on lenses, never positive. The body is out of warranty, but should I send in both the 24-70 II and body to Canon for calibration together (does Canon even calibrate a specific lens+body combo?).
Any help would be appreciated.
As long as you can get it setup what does it matter. Some people seem to get so worked up about the number and dream up reasons to be unhappy.
Just what we need.....an eight hundred dollar 50mm f/1.8 lens. Oh boy!
I like this! Childish schmildish it is funny and informative...bravo.
I too considered buying EOS M before the price drop. I could not decide between it and NEX 5R. But then came the price drop and here we are. Why not get EOS M for S110 money.
- Not sure how the continuous AF tracking was set up for the 4th vid (or if it was even set up correctly at all), but it clearly showed that that particular L USM lens+body combo couldn't follow the hand as it moved backward & forward from the initial point of focus lock.