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.
what about Zeiss 21mm?
http://diglloyd.com/ has a comparative review of all the Zeiss lenses. But the reviews are for paid subscribers only.
I would consider the much cheaper Voigtländer 28/2.8 but I can't find any review... for free at least 
The price point for both the 24-70 II and the 5D MK III does seem very high compared to the current price of previous iterations. However, apparently the 24-70 MK I was $2100 at launch. If these lenses reduce in price by such a large amount can we expect the new Canon to be around $1400 within the next year or two? Will it be viewed in a different light as a result?
I must admit I didn't think that sample variation in lenses was so large. For two reviewers to produce such differing results is an eye opener for me.
I was wondering, since we all know Nikon lenses can be mounted on Canon bodies but not viceversa, is it not smarter to buy manual-focus-only lenses always in Nikon mount and buy an adapter?As long as its a totally manual lens, you only have to deal with the somewhat klutzy adapters. If I were buying a new lens and it was available in Canon mount, thats the way to go.
That would minimize the inconveniences of side-grading, and would make expensive lenses such as Zeiss, Voigtländer and Schneider-Kreuznach a very safe investment.
Is there any disadvantage I'm neglecting? Any problem with aperture control?
However, in terms of being able to resell a manual lens, having one that could be adapted fit Most DSLR bodies might have the most value.
Not only can a Nikon F lens be adapted to Canon, but also to Sony/Minolta, and a few others. That increases the possible number of users who might want to buy it. Just watch out, many of those old Nikon lenses have odd protrusions or other gotchas.
Of course, buying vintage medium Format lenses with their very long flange distance would allow them to be adapted to almost any DSLR. The old Zeiss Hasselblad Distagon T* lenses are fairly good and low priced for a Zeiss lens. I've adapted one, and I love the smooooth manual focus.
Klaus is a tough grader and tells it like it is. I like his reviews!
However, Lens Rentals has the advantage of having several lenses to test, and Roger showed us what a average lens could do. Testing one or two lenses is a tough proposition, since sample variation is a real thing. A tested can only look for obvious defects and if there are none, then the lens should be typical--- except that it isn't.
One might be tempted to think the best time to review a product is before touching it, but not everyone adheres to the philosophy of Mr. Rockwell. (BTW, you need to Paypal me some money if you print this out!)
Auto-focus has been another area of concern, with many critics who have not used the camera contending that the camera’s autofocus is as bad as the D7000. This, of course, assumes that the D7000 has autofocus issues. I have not experienced any type of back focusing or hunting problems with my Nikon D7000, so I can’t speak to that. Overall, I’ve found that the D7000 focuses slightly slower than the D700, but I’ve never had any issues with focus accuracy.
As for the Nikon D600, its focus is fast and accurate. I have already put the auto-focus through its paces by using it in a number of different situations (shooting into the sun, in dim light, low contrast, etc.). There were occasions when the camera hunted for focus, but only in situations where the Nikon D700 would also hunt for focus, such as in dark rooms. In every normal shooting situation, it locked focus quickly and accurately. I have absolutely no complaints here, and I think the initial reviews on this camera will quickly put to bed any concerns about the auto-focus system Nikon chose to use for the D600.
The other aspect of the auto-focus that’s received a lot of attention is that there are only 39 auto-focus points. So far, this has been the biggest issue for me. Thanks to the glorious 100% viewfinder, there is a lot of the frame that isn’t covered by focus points. The focus points are reasonably spread out, but are still very much concentrated in the center of the frame. There will be some situations where you will have to focus/re-compose to ensure that you have accurate focus. I think this issue is another one that’s being overblown, but at this point after using the camera for a bit, I do see it as the biggest “problem” with the D600. With that said, it has probably actually affected only a handful of my shots so far. Depending upon how you shoot, your mileage may vary with this, and it could end up being a deal-breaker. To me, it’s definitely the biggest fault of the camera.
If you believe that, then they are APS-C cameras.1. Upgraders tend to stick to the same brand. This is a fact proven over and over.
2. Spec sheets only tell a small part of the story. They don't mention missing features, and don't tell you anything about how well the features actually work.
3. I just ignore reviews of performance based on spec sheets, they are not going to be of any real value.
Generally speaking you are right, but nothing in these cameras is really new, so I think it's not that crazy to compare how the same technology works in current models.
The D600 is basically a D7000, whereas the 6D is a... 600D.
From what I heard the EOS-M comes with a small flashgun as part of a package with the 18-55 or the 22mm
Why?
I would love to have good IQ in a compact package for when I travel or I just can't/won't bring a full sized DSLR with me. But still, mirrorless cameras are not quite pocketable.
There are mirrorless cameras that are targeted towards enthusiasts, but this isn't one of them. Canon are probably trying to figure out how to do it without cannibalising their DSLR sales. Whatever the reason for their late arrival in this market, they are a late comer to what is already a very crowded field -- Fuji, Sony, Olympus and Panasonic already have better cameras with better options for lenses.
Klauss isn't overly impressed for the price:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/773-canon2470f28mk2ff
The question of the day is, of course, whether this is "enough" compared to the impressive Tamron AF SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di USD VC ? Well, we have some doubts here. We'd say that among the primary criteria the Canon lens has an edge in terms of contrast (at max. aperture), build quality and it has a slightly better bokeh. However, the Tamron lens is as good in the lower zoom range and provides a much better border quality at 70mm. Additionally it has a unique selling point - an image stabilizer. So unless you're heading into a war zone (thus requiring max. equipment quality) a premium of one grand (EUR) over the Tamron lens seems a little excessive.
