July 29, 2014, 12:51:30 AM

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.


Messages - max

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
16
Lenses / Re: EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Hands-On Review
« on: February 05, 2013, 01:56:22 PM »
If this lens with a 2x tele competes with an 800mm prime super tele, then it has justified its price tag.  This lens with the 2x mark iii essentially would allow a photographer to replace a few, several thousand dollar lenses (along with their weight and bulk).  Hopefully, this will get some good super teles on the used market with lower prices so us regular folks can afford to pick up a super tele.  Not all of us are brain docs ... lookin' at you Neuroanatomist!  ;)
Yeah but a 400mm f/4 with a 2x multiplier becomes a 800mm f/8, and not many cameras focus at that aperture, or focus with at most 1 AF point. And to be fair, this would compare to 800mm with a 1.4TC (1120mm f/8)

17
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon may be expensive but...
« on: January 29, 2013, 09:08:57 AM »
WWOOOOOWWWWWWW!  :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
Did you guys see the MTF chart on the Nikon???

Nikon without TC:


Nikon with TC


Borderline perfection!!


Here's the Canon to compare:

18
Lenses / Re: EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Production to Begin in Q2
« on: January 10, 2013, 08:17:21 AM »
If that's the price for the tech with the TC, aren't we better off with a 200-400mm f/4 like nikon for 7 grand?

19
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Inside the Canon EOS-1D C
« on: January 09, 2013, 01:30:29 PM »
 :o :o

http://www.cinevate.com/blog/canon-1d-c-motion-image-photography
Amazing what they can extract from a video! 8MP images... imagine what can be done!
All those almost pics that you would get!

21
How do you reckon it will stack against a EF 70-200 mk.ii +1.4TC?

It is a stop slower, so hard to compare... It is definitely gonna be heavier (2.8kg vs 1,5kg)

22
Wow!
2012 and 2013 seems like it might be the Sigma era.
i hope it doesn't go over the actual price of 3 grand.

23
Lenses / Re: Soon to be Launched EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« on: January 03, 2013, 06:01:58 PM »
So lets see...
Nikon 200-400mm f/4 = 7 grand.
1.4x TC =300 bucks.

Seems a bit expensive if you ask me... 7-8 grand would be killer!! But it most probably will be 10-11

25
Lenses / Re: 2013 - The Year for 400mm Lenses? [CR1]
« on: December 16, 2012, 08:41:27 PM »
The only lens I would buy would be a 100-400mm right now... Or a 400mm f/4 below 3 grand.

26
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EOS 60D Body $799 at B&H
« on: November 23, 2012, 09:52:28 AM »
I think it has been at that price on amazon for some time.

27
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark III Body $2499
« on: November 23, 2012, 08:36:32 AM »
I just bought one! I went to my bank account to pay my credit card to buy a second one... and they are gone!

28
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]
« on: October 30, 2012, 05:33:18 PM »
Yes, It will be cheaper in production, Just like the 18-55mm kit lens. And just like that 18-55mm kit lens, You won't see many people actually going and Buying this lens for they're current cameras.  ::)

I've been looking for a replacement for my 18-55 and this lens seems somewhat ideal as it fits between the 10-22 and the 70-200 if you have a crop body. I do agree with you otherwise though, I can't see many other reasons for someone to consider this lens other than mine.

why not get a 24-105mm?

29
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]
« on: October 30, 2012, 04:37:18 PM »
This does seem silly, can't see why anyone would want this over the tamron f2.8 vc.

I imagine superior IQ would be the selling point for the f/4 IS but I cannot see that happening if Canon puts a price tag north of the Tammy  ???



70-200 F/4             $629  (<-- an absolute bargain like the 17-40L is)
70-200 F/4 IS         $1,099
70-200 F/2.8           $1,299
70-200 F/28 IS II    $2,099

Extrapolating this to the 24-70, this might look like:

24-70 F/4               $1,099?
24-70 F/4 IS           $1,999?
24-70 F/2.8 (II)      $2,299  (<--- this one exists for sale today)
24-70 F/2.8 IS        $3k+?  Rare stamps?  Left testicle? 


Was thinking exactly the same - if the current 70-200 pricing is a measure, the f/4 IS would cost way above the Tamron. Not sure what kind of IQ would make up for the smaller aperture + the price differrence... Interesting out of a marketing point of view though, we will see what Canon marketeers have thought this time  ;D

either this lens is like 800USD MSRP or its DOA.

30
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]
« on: October 30, 2012, 04:21:21 PM »
the 24-105mm f/4 IS has quite good resolution, its only 800 USD on kit packages.
The 24-70mm f/4 IS does the same thing but has less reach. I don't think many people will need this lens.

If they were the same price, and being the resolution of the 24-105mm IS enough for most people, I doubt this lens will sell decently well, unless it is cheaper.

This lens is just nonsense.

Its either a 24-70mm 2.8 IS, or upgrade the 24-105mm f/4 IS.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4