Thanks guys, your comments are appreciated!
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 clamoring for a successor to the 5D3 to be announced, so that the price of the 5D3 will drop. I'd like to pick up a 2nd 5D3 for around $2K, and retire my 5DC.
Check back around 2018. The 5DIII might drop to around $2K by then.
Thankfully, hopefully labeled 7DmII, I love my 7D
lets see a super high ISO which is workable, 15 frames a sec, lots of good stuff..
canon blow the industry away by giving us a new world class sensor tech which will blow all full frame away. Tuen up that tech in the ff and blow us away again...
hey a guy can wish can't he....
Sure. A guy can wish for all the stars in the heavens...and be disappointed. Just to be frank, and quite honest...if people didn't wind their hopes up so much for the absolutely unattainable, they might not be so disappointed when Canon releases something more, down to earth.
It really isn't that hard:
1. 22-24mp APS-C
3. Better AF system (repurpose 5D III's maybe?)
One might even get particularly hopeful, and wish for something not quite as likely, but still nevertheless more attainable than starstuff:
4. 180nm Cu Lightpipe sensor design (we know Canon has it, they already manufacture with it for smaller sensors)
Now, I might be a little dismayed when I don't get #4, but I'll still be entirely satisfied with 1-3. Might try a little realism sometime...and end up happy and satisfied, rather than devastated when your lofty hopes are all dashed to bits.
So what are you whinging about? LOL. 1D-X for action. Another 1D-type for high resolution. At least the choice is there unlike their crop space which is stuck sensor wise.
Funny how this rumour reads like Canon only releasing stuff to respond to the competition. So the sooner Nikon brings out a D300 replacement, the better for us 7DII-type camera wanters!
However, the delay of the 1DX past the spring of that year, had more to do with production issues than with development...as early units displayed at the previous fall launch were the same camera as those sold the next summer. If I am wrong, please help to clarify. There were indeed certain privileged pros who were able to purchase their 1DX's at the same time that the D4 became available (January or February?), but everyone else had to wait months later into, July wasn't it?
There were definitely AF unit issues with the 1D X. That was the primary reason for it's delay. We aren't talking about the f/8 stuff, there were apparently other AF issues that had to be delt with. As far as I understand, for the "early release" models, they were actually prototypes that were effectively loaned out to those privileged pros until the final production models were really ready...at which time the loaners had to be turned in. The 1D X released officially just a few weeks before the Olympics got rolling, IIRC, and those who had loaners and were already packed up and shipped out for the Olympics were allowed to keep those models until the Olympics were over. Similarly, there were quite a number of 200-400mm TC lenses loaned out for the Olympics as well.
There are already too many existing lenses on my wishlist to be too bothered about new releases, but if I were to vote for one, it would be an IS version of the 180mm f/3.5L Macro - as some have suggested elsewhere, maybe taking it to 200mm.
I'm normally excited by the widest apertures possible (there's probably a better way of phrasing that!), but for some reason the 35mm f/2 IS seems more interesting than the 35L. Not that I've used either, it must be said.
+1 with you for the 180mm macro. But what about that age old 50mm macro? that lens has been in Canon lineup since 1987. Canon is lagging behind Nikon in terms of lens releases as well now days.
Not really, not in terms of quality usable lenses, Nikon have caught up some, but as far as a good lens selection they were miles behind anyway. Funny how they are so far behind with the flash stuff now too, one brilliant release, the 600EX-RT, and they were leapfrogged.
Canon is behind in with the UW zooms. Nikons is superior in every way IMO.
How do you improve on the 135L?
I guess you do something like this :
The Zeiss from all accounts is an amazing lens, what we have come to expect from Zeiss, they make few poor Lenses, but.
For Canon & Nikon, this particular 135f/2, though sublime, lacks auto focus, so it's all manual, which is Ok as well, but the Canon 135L is a pretty hard act to follow considering it's maybe 98% as good as the Zeiss 135f/2, and has auto focus, on a Canon body.
I haven't actually used the Zeiss 135f/2, but I do own the Canon 135f/2, and it's pretty good.
I own the Sigma Art 35f/1.4 as well as the Canon 35f/1.4 L, and both are excellent Lenses, the Sigma may have the sharper image, but the Canon has the better Bokah, it's all subjective to the individuals taste & preference, and wallet.
I think also "distant stars" original "How do you improve on the 135L" didn't need to inspire the "Canon Fan Boy" tirade that followed, this is an open forum, people are allowed to post their views, and within normal reasonable bounds, shouldn't expect to be hammered for them.
I think you have misinterpreted the figures: the test for the 400mm f/2.8 shows that it is about as good as you can get. The 400mm f/5.6 is not as sharp.
Just outside of Southampton. 6D owner...debating whether to get the 16-35L II or the 24-70L II.
This what the difference in MTFs of the 400 f/2.8 II at f/2.8 (top) and the 400 f/5.6 at f/5.6 (bottom) mean in practice as measured by SLRgear's blur tests.
35 L II and the 50 f1.8 IS
Could also be update of 135L, but 35L is in more need IMO.
I think (hope) we will see the 100-400 IS replacement, the 17-40 L replacement, the 14-24 2.8 L, the 24-70 2.8 IS lens, the 50 mm 1.4 replacement and the Tilt-Shift replacements.
I'm with Mt Spokane on this one, and "well-known" to whom? I owned the 70-200 f4 IS and it was as sharp at 200mm as any other focal length and even with the 1.4x at 280mm, it's sharper than most other lenses. I think you definitely need to have your lens calibrated/repaired. Here are some results at 200mm from DxO, LensTip, and Photozone, all showing the lens to be extremely sharp. Now back to the 400mm 5.6...I'm a bit puzzled as to why your 70-200mmL f/4 IS has issues at 200mm. It is much sharper than the 400mm. Get it fixed, its one of the best lenses for the price.
It s pretty well known the 70-200 f4 IS perfoms poorly when at 200mm and at or close to MFD. I have it and this problem is noticable. Mine also suffers from the dredded slipping focus problem. Buyers beware to check for this issue if buying new or second hand. Sorry for going off topic. Otherwise its a very sharp lens.