... and I think Sigma would do well to spec a 135 mm prime at f/1.8
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.
... FF cameras produce better images/video and have more/better glass options.
i'm not entirely sure if there's any strategic value in releasing the 1ds4 before the 5d3.
Anyone in the market who would drop 10k on a camera would most likely wait the extra month or two to see what the 5d3 offers.
thx the comparison.
Only one thing. I have read several articles about the Sigma 8-16 and some links mentioned that there are "big" differences between Sigma 8-16 due to manufacturing tolerances or quality check.
Is it serious (or basic Sigma issues)?
Since making lenses for smaller sensors is supposed to be 1. cheaper and 2. easier than making lenses for large sensors
Given Canon's obsession for pixel count over sensitivity, the potential stop gained by f/2.8 compared to f/4 zooms would seem to be countered by the extra ISO step needed for the same noise level compared to a FF unit.
Exactly. Few people get this - especially those who make statements like, "I'm not upgrading to FF until they make a FF equivalent of the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS," in reference to the magical unicorn also known as a 24-70mm f/2.8L IS. In fact, the 24-105mm f/4L IS when used on FF specs out better than the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS on a crop body. The FF-equivalent of the latter is 27-88mm f/4.5 IS, meaning the 24-105mm is wider, longer, and faster. It's true that f/2.8 still yields a faster shutter speed than f/4, since the crop factor doesn't affect exposure (apparent effect is on DoF only), but as you point out - FF has a 1.3-stop advantage in ISO noise, meaning you can bump the shutter speed up a stop by using a higher ISO on FF to match the shutter speed you'd get with f/2.8 on a crop body.
EF-S 50-135/2.8 IS ring-USM
If it's an equivalent build and optical quality to the 17-55/2.8, and a retail price of under $1800, it would sell like crazy.
I just realized I've been desensitized by recent "L" pricing. $1400 would be much more appropriate pricing.
Well, I think this is one of lens with the highest Cost/performance value among Canon's lineup. While it lacks the flexibility of the 100-400 and the IS, in exchange you get the advantages of prime over zooms - faster focus and sharper images.Yes indeed, the prime is sharper. Also bokeh is far, far better with the prime. Plus it has that color/contrast thing you only get from a prime.