If you consider the fact the widest EF lenses (14mm, 15mm fisheye and 16-35mm) are all f/2.8, not 2.0, and I think you will find your answer.
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.
My doubts are like this...
> CANON 7D [1.035 eur]
> CANON EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM (â‚¬999)
> lighting, tripods, heads...
> CANON EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM (â‚¬1 250)
> CANON EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM (â‚¬1 199)
please, which could be your opinion
If possible I wish try and fit the Canon 10-22mm lens to my new Canon 5Dd markll,
i don"t have any wide lens for my new 5d mark ll, except 85mm1.8, 28-135,
2 days ago i preapered money for buy canon lens 17-40, on the last minute when i searched on the photography forums, i saw some people said this not great lens and have some issue on the edge, and something els,
now i just need one wide canon lens, thanks for any advice
Any experts who are able to explain what the potential differences may be? To me this looks like the same design Canon had for the last 40 years - which I think is great by the way.
What is the thing marked as "Ggi 1"? And could it be that the lens element in the back is bigger?
So, anyway - what ever they'll do I hope it'll be better mechanically.
I wonder, though, if the EF non-L primes sell enough these days for Canon to feel that a redesign and everything associated with a new product is warranted. In recent years there seems to have been a pattern of letting non-L primes wither.
QuoteMy feeling is that no new lens announcements will be made until they've sorted this mess out.
Generally, I'm not one to second-guess Canon (or Nikon). I can't argue with their success. But, I do admit this whole lens thing has me wondering.
I didn't pay much attention when these lenses were first announced because lenses that cost thousands of dollars aren't likely to show up in my camera bag anytime soon. I never really understood why they felt the need to upgrade these Big Whites and assumed it had more to do with market positioning than anything else.
But, as the months go by without the product actually being delivered, it sure does seem that it's got to be a little embarrassing. And, I agree that it's a little hard to announce and deliver other lenses while these announcements gather dust.
If the pixel count followed Morse's law (like storage does), the 5D3 would have been 80MP.
"Computers aren't the same as cameras. Comparing them is like apples and oranges."
1. I have to disagree with that statement. Essentially a digital camera IS a computer.
2. So why wouldn't it be logical to expect a camera's abilities to increase substantially every couple years? Note, I didn't say double every two years, but a substantial increase.
3. But knowing a DSLR is essentially a computer why do we have such outrageous prices for used models?
I'm trying to decide if I should buy Canon T2i, T3i or 60D. I think that the 60D is better than the others but; it comes with only one lens 18 - 135, is that a good enough lens for landscapes(sunsets)? or do you think that the other 2 are as good as the 60D?