Finally and replacement for the Sigma 12-24. A useful but deeply flawed lens.
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.
..but I think that that is just life with most exotic wide-open lenses.
Unless you get the Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4...
I'm torn between the Otus' hyper-expensive perfection with manual focus, and the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 II's very-expensive but still-nice imperfection. It's the chromatic aberation that really turns me off the Canon.
My hope is that Canon will bring out a Mark III lens next year that will correct the colour fringing issue. I feel I can wait. In any case, I need to hoard gold to get either of them.
I'm sure I'd be impressed with the Mark II but I'm yet to find a way to resell equipment without losing 50% value. I see this purchase as a long-term marriage that I need to get right first time.
Canon must be desperate to avoid using the name "3D" and "4D" if it will use "5Ds" instead.
It went from having (1D, 1Ds) -> 1DX to deal with market confusion.
Why does Canon believe going from 5D3 -> (5Ds, 5D4) won't create new market confusion?
Hasn't it learnt from the sins of the past?
2007 is old like a dinosaur in this digital era. I simply hope canon will, in a near future, answer the Otus 55.
If 2007 is a dinosaur, I guess 1996 is primordial ooze? Shhhh...don't tell the 135mm f/2L, it might stop being such an excellent lens.
High ISO noise or low ISO noise?
High ISO noise maybe 1/2 stop better
Low ISO noise has a lot of room for improvement. If we are luckly (not sure atm), it could be 3-4 stops better If not, then it's 0 stop, which means no improvement
Or if Canon can employ the on sensor, dual gain ADC, then it will be 5 stops better. One could dream...
However I've already given up on chasing the shadow pushing mania. Even if it's clean when pushed 5 stops, the tonal range is severely limited. Better learn how to properly bracket and merge. Unless someone uses 16-bit ADC (or more) and gamma mapped raw encoding, bracket is a better option.
Will 2015 be the year when we see remarkable changes from Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji and others?
I'm thinking revolutionary as manufacturers fight to differentiate themselves with bigger MP, greater DR, retro styling, form factor, medium format bridge cameras, cheaper higher quality lenses, mirrorless, compact but capable, and weather capable equipment.
Share your thoughts!
Again, if you just read your own posts while taking an outsiders perspective you'll see one glaring trend...Canon doesn't make one camera to rule them all. Each camera is for a market or for a level. I've recently become more vocal as evidenced in my new membership here because it's time to finally react like a market. At any point in time, Canon or Nikon could easily slay the entire industry if they would just create one killer camera that is untouchable and price it to slay all others. Canon is too risk averse.
Yep, my experience with the mkI was that it's weakest points were it's bokeh when compared to the 400 f5.6L prime and it's pedestrian AF speed in anything other than bright light. It's optical performance (with a good sample) was excellent. I didn't particularly like the tripod collar placement when on a tripod racked out to 400mm, which still looks to be the case with the new one...but at least the old issues have been more than rectified.I think apart from a rotating zoom (to which people seem to have mixed feelings) the usability with the TCs as confirmed by the MTFs, a reliable and more powerful IS, along with the much improved IQ is a sufficiently good reason for the widespread welcome this lens is getting.
Seems like the only thing missing is the much improved IQ. Roger's initial, cursory tests over at the rental place indicate it's only around 4% sharper on average. Of course there are other IQ considerations like flare, CA, distortion, contrast, color reproduction, etc., but 4% better sharpness isn't exactly a slam dunk.
To be clear, I'm looking forward to getting this guy and I want to love the heck out of every aspect of it. But 4% pales in comparison to the 40% improvement of the 400 DO II over its predecessor.
As I keep telling people, the old one was very good optically, but only under ideal conditions (IS off or stopped down a stop). The new one seems to be massively better under regular high stress conditions (wide oopen with the IS in, and in resisting flare and CA.
My 100-400 was very sharp. I think a key criterion for the MkII will be performance with the 1.4xIII, given the availability of f/8 AF on multiple bodies including the 7DII. The MkI didn't take a TC well. Given the 3rd party 150-600 options which are substantially larger and heavier, a lighter, more easily transportable 560mm f/8 would be a great option. Looking at the TDP crops, the 100-400 II takes a 1.4x quite well, and the resulting combo delivers better IQ than the Tamron 150-600 @ 600mm.
My wife and I are both into wildlife and bird photography. She keeps taking my EF400 f/5.6L and I and up using my EF 70-300L. I have been debating whether to buy another EF400 f/5.6 or the new 100-400 Zoom. I really like the EF400 f/5.6 however I was hesitant to buy a duplicate lens. Also the EF400 has a long minimum focus. Finally pulled the trigger on the new zoom this morning due to IS, shorter minimum focus and versatility. If it is as sharp as the 400 I will be a happy camper. Just hope that Adorama doesn't surprise me with a back order.
Confirmed: is not a complete clone of the Canon!
The bokeh on these shots is beautiful, but for some shots, a deeper dof might make sense :-> as the lens parts in the back cannot be recognized.Also, some bad news?
Welcome to the world of Yongnuo! After a very bad experience with my st-e3 rt "clone", I know they're selling products they know won't work as advertised - like the af assist beam on said transmitter. And I've not even started talking about qc...
Tried both a Sigma & Canon 1.4 converter with my Bigma 50-500mm and neither got the autofocus to work (the Canon didn't even fit the lens!), so has anyone tried a Kenko 1.4 converter with this lens/camera combo and got the autofocus to work ?
(the 7dii is meant to auto-focus at f8 and I know the Bigma is actually a 6.3 but pretends its a 5.6 to get the autofocus to work)
Oh snap. Ultrawiders who really want 14mm on a zoom might be happy to see this rumor...
...but I think someone will complain about not having f/2.8 before anyone can say woohoo to a 14-24 lens.
I am more interested in seeing the 135mm f/1.8 DG OS, 85mm f/1.4 DG and 24mm f/1.4 DG Art lenses. These will have an enormous impact on Canon (and also Nikon).
I had the curren Sigma 85mm f/1.4 and only sold it because I needed money and haven't purchased it again waiting to see if Sigma refresh it. Hopefully, the 135mm and 24mm will be priced well below Canon ones.
I love Sigma's Art lenses. I'm with you on these two, although I'd prefer seeing the 85/1.4 come out first simply because the very good Canon 135 is pretty inexpensive. I'd sell my Canon copy if the Sigma Art lens is good, however.
The only other amazing 85 is Canon's, and that's $2100. Unngh...
Its interesting to compare the lens at 400mm on the 7D MK II wide open at f/5.6 versus wide open on a 1Ds MK III with 1.4X TC. Note, the lens is better wide open than stopped down, and matches the FF in the corner, but not quite in the center when wide open.
The images are very carefully set up and manually focused to be the best the camera can do. The 7D MK II is a hair better than the 60D, since it has a few more MP, the improvement is proportional.
I wish he had included the 1D MK IV in those tests.
7D MK II at 400mm f/5.6 (center)
7D MK II at 400mm f/5.6 (corner)
1DS MK III with 1.4X TC wide open - f/8 (center)
1DS MK III with 1.4X TC wide open - f/8 (corner)
I have the old dustpump version I have been very happy with.
Do I REALLY need to upgrade? No.
Do I really really want to upgrade? Yes.
Before spring holidays...