August 31, 2014, 12:43:02 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 - brad-man

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 47
31
It compares pretty well to the 24L at 2.8 and wider. Not too shabby for a zoom!

32
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony RX100 MIII
« on: June 25, 2014, 12:02:12 AM »
I really like the looks of this one. I can wait for 7 or 8 months until Sony releases the Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 Vl so I can pick up the lll for $500. I wish they'd release one with a Canon hot shoe :)

Yes, that is the funny thing with Sony, you can guarantee that their next model will be along very quickly, sometimes too quickly.

May I ask though why you would want a hot shoe?

Although I greatly prefer to shoot with available light, I tried using flash with my eos m and quite liked it. The in-camera touchscreen flash controls where very convenient. Of course I was using an ST-E3 with off camera flash. I didn't much care for the setup when the 600 was on top. Though I've never used a Sony flash, I have read enough bad things about them to believe they would be a great disappointment after using Speedlites. So I want a Canon hot shoe on the Sony. Is that asking too much?

Not at all, I was just curious what you would use it for. Hot shoes are useful for all sorts of things, mics, gadgets etc. I just wonder how such a small and light camera would work with a big flash on it. It might be totally out of balance. It will be interesting to see reviews of the tiny on-board flash, and if that is no good then I guess you would have to operate the flash remotely. For me at least the whole beauty of this RX100 III is that it is so small and light I do not need to carry lenses, flashes etc. and can quite literally put it in my trouser pocket without it looking weird or having them fall down! When I need a camera with lenses, flashes etc I would take the main camera for that job, the Canon.

Absolutely agree. Excellent IQ in a pocketable package is the greatest feature. I just like options. Between you and me, I don't really expect Sony to put a Canon shoe on their products. Then nobody would buy Sony flashes! Actually, the truth is that when I got the eos m, the kit came with the 22 pancake, and I bought a white box 18-55 and the EF adapter as well as a small minimalist case for the m+22 and another for everything + one more lens. In reality, I only really use the 22. So to keep it thin I put an XS-Pro filter on the front and leave the lens cap off and just put the thing in a cargo pocket.

33
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony RX100 MIII
« on: June 24, 2014, 09:50:20 PM »
I really like the looks of this one. I can wait for 7 or 8 months until Sony releases the Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 Vl so I can pick up the lll for $500. I wish they'd release one with a Canon hot shoe :)

Yes, that is the funny thing with Sony, you can guarantee that their next model will be along very quickly, sometimes too quickly.

May I ask though why you would want a hot shoe?

Although I greatly prefer to shoot with available light, I tried using flash with my eos m and quite liked it. The in-camera touchscreen flash controls where very convenient. Of course I was using an ST-E3 with off camera flash. I didn't much care for the setup when the 600 was on top. Though I've never used a Sony flash, I have read enough bad things about them to believe they would be a great disappointment after using Speedlites. So I want a Canon hot shoe on the Sony. Is that asking too much?

34
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sony RX100 MIII
« on: June 24, 2014, 06:36:06 PM »
I really like the looks of this one. I can wait for 7 or 8 months until Sony releases the Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 Vl so I can pick up the lll for $500. I wish they'd release one with a Canon hot shoe :)

35
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Shipping This Week
« on: June 22, 2014, 09:17:36 PM »
Now I just have to decide whether to keep the 16-35/2.8L II or sell it and buy the 16-35/4L IS.

You already know that you must buy the new f/4L. It's just too sharp and convenient. The question is whether or not you also keep your f/2.8...

I do like convenience.   ;D

con·ve·nience noun \kən-ˈvēn-yən(t)s\
: a quality or situation that makes something easy or useful for someone by reducing the amount of work or time required to do something.

Sharper, smaller, lighter, and IS

36
Lenses / Re: 17-40 f/4L vs 16-35 F/4L
« on: June 22, 2014, 08:35:39 PM »
Quote
So nice to spend someone else's money.

 ;D exactly. I'm upgrading to the 70D because that's what's in by budget. But after reading everybody's passive/aggressive posts, I think that the 10-18 or 11-16 is the best route at the moment.

Thanks for the input everybody!

FYI: Canon Direct is having another sale of $125 off a refurb purchase of $500 or more until June 28. That puts the EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 at $395. They are out of stock right now, but you can put in a notification at canonpricewatch.com so they'll let you know when they're in stock again. You must add the lens to your cart to see the discount.

http://www.canonpricewatch.com/

37
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Shipping This Week
« on: June 22, 2014, 08:27:27 PM »
Now I just have to decide whether to keep the 16-35/2.8L II or sell it and buy the 16-35/4L IS.

You already know that you must buy the new f/4L. It's just too sharp and convenient. The question is whether or not you also keep your f/2.8...

38
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Shipping This Week
« on: June 22, 2014, 07:19:47 PM »
Good news:            Canon Direct shipped Friday by FedEx ground.
Bad news (for me): They were shipped from San Francisco and I live in S Florida, so mine won't arrive until Friday ::)

40
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 100 f/2.8L IS Macro
« on: June 22, 2014, 02:59:55 PM »
Discuss the review of the Canon EF 100 f/2.8L IS Macro
To Justin VanLeeuwen,
In your review, Canon EF 100 f/2.8L, there is an error in the second paragraph, "…The new lens complimented, rather than replaced…". It should read "…complemented…". Those two words have different meanings and usages.

Cordially,

Glass houses and all that. It's OK. We know what both of you meant...

41
Reviews / Re: Sigma 50mm F1.4 Art vs Tamron 24-70mm VC USD?
« on: June 22, 2014, 04:43:33 AM »
Humm. Well let's see. Do you want to be able to shoot at 50mm ridiculously well in any situation that's environmentally friendly, or do you want to shoot 24-70mm very very well in most situations with image stabilization and weather sealing?

42
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 F4 is shipping today
« on: June 20, 2014, 08:12:15 PM »
Mine is/was supposed to ship from Canon today. So far all I've gotten is an invoice (with an unscanned FedEx tracking number) for my free "100 Million EF Lens Gift Set" T-shirt along with a message that my order is "ready to ship". I am underwhelmed.

Patience.  For some reason Canon is shipping the gift set and lens separately.  I got the shipping number for the lens a few hours after the gift set.

Patience  ;D ;D ;D

Are you kidding? I've been waiting for a sharp ultrawide zoom from Canon for years! I'm afraid I won't rest easy until the package has been scanned so I know it"s really been shipped, and not just sitting on the loading dock. I also got the tracking # for the lens a few hours later.

43
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 F4 is shipping today
« on: June 20, 2014, 06:20:32 PM »
Mine is/was supposed to ship from Canon today. So far all I've gotten is an invoice (with an unscanned FedEx tracking number) for my free "100 Million EF Lens Gift Set" T-shirt along with a message that my order is "ready to ship". I am underwhelmed.

44
Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L vs. Canon 70-200 f/4 L IS
« on: June 20, 2014, 05:21:04 PM »
Agree with all responses. The sharpness of the f/4L IS vs 2.8 ll is pretty much a wash (I have both). It sounds like you have no need for speed/low light/depth of field and the f/4 is soooo much easier to carry, both in size and weight. It truly is a joy to use as well as very reasonably priced.

45
EOS Bodies / Re: New Sensor Tech in EOS 7D Mark II [CR2]
« on: June 19, 2014, 08:55:24 PM »
I think the new sensor will be a marked improvement simply because Canon probably feels like their reputation depends on it, and I think it does. I don't want to debate market share, profit margins or anything else of the sort. Canon needs to release a bad-ass sensor as a matter of pride and reputation, and I think they will. The 7Dll (or whatever they call it) needs to be a significant upgrade from the 70D (a fine camera in its own right). And not just in build quality, auto focus and frame rate, but Image Quality. As an aside, I have been waiting for the 5Dlll to come down to a price level that I'm comfortable with for quite some time. I shoot with a 6D and a 7D and would absolutely love the "all in one" beauty of the mark lll, but I'm just an enthusiast and follow the old adage of putting my money into the glass. Anyway, the 5Dlll is frequently available in the $2600 price range and this is approaching my price range, but I will absolutely wait to see if Canon's new generation of sensors are enough of an upgrade to pay what I consider to be a ridiculous price for. It's just a hobby, right? Well, thanks for listening to my subjective rant.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 47