August 31, 2014, 02:53:03 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 - TexPhoto

Pages: 1 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 60
631
FF EOS film SLR's came long before crop DSLR's, and when DSLR's came along, they used FF lenses from the film Era.  The first DSLR's were APS-H. Their were no special "digital" FF lenses that were not interchangable on film bodies, anf still aren't!

However, it was very difficult and expensive to build high quality FF lenses at 10mm.  It is possible, however to design lenses that sit closer to the film plane and have a smaller image circle for a lower cost.  Some of the lens elements might hit a FF mirror, however. 

Thats why the EF-S lenses were designed to be incompatible with FF, in 2002, there were still lots of FF film cameras in use and Canon did not want people damaging their camera.

Early Canon Crop cameras, D30, D60, 10D only had FF lenses to use, and this caused a lot of complaints from users wanting very wide angle lenses.

Lens technology has evolved, and it is now practical to make wide angle lenses that work with crop bodies, but it would be very confusing to create a third Canon EF lens type.

Canon made Film SLRs before they made DSLRs!!?  How has this been kept a secret? -Just Yankin your chain.  Yes, i understand that Canon's First DSLR was APS-H.  But what about the The Canon EOS DCS 3?  It was a 1.7X crop and came out in 1995, six years before the EOD 1D.  I wonder what kind of lenses it used?

And maybe it's just me, but looking at Canon's naming conventions of 1D-1Ds, Mark this or that,5D, 50D, 500D... I can't imagine they care about confusing people.  What is the plural of 1Ds ?  Imagine standing at the Canon drive through and trying to order; Yea, give me 5 1Ds, 5 1Ds-es  and 2 5D Mark IIs.... What? Um Yea, and one EOS Kiss Digital X. (A  japanease 400D)

632
The really weird thing is that Sigma's and other 3rd party Lens maker's "crop" lenses work fine on Canon FF.

Now Canon did have the 10-22 way before there were Superwide Nikon's or Sigma or anything equivalent...

Honestly i wonder if way back in the day when crop DSLRs were the 1st and ONLY DSLRs available, did Canon think there were never going to be FF DSLRs?

633
Canon General / Re: Canon footage in Nikon promo
« on: February 19, 2012, 06:40:29 PM »
Reminds me of the Intell 3D ads back in the 90s that were made on Macs (with Motorola chips in them)

Really seems like something you'd check into....

634
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Eneloop batteries for my flash
« on: February 18, 2012, 11:50:28 PM »
I use Energizer NiMH rechargeable and sadly, they are not as cool as Eneloops.  Cheaper, more flashes, and faster cycling though, so I stick with them.

Here is a good page about Eneloops: http://www.stefanv.com/electronics/sanyo_eneloop.html
Basicly it says you should be fine with your charger.


635
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Clean Your Camera With Water Hose ?
« on: February 17, 2012, 11:49:50 PM »
Is he crazy?  That 300mm f4 IS does not have a seal on the lens mount!

636
Lenses / Re: Just how important is IS?
« on: February 17, 2012, 12:16:01 AM »
IS is awesome. That said, the lens you own is going to outshoot the lens you can't afford all day.  Seriously, there is always going to be more expensive equipment available.

637
Lenses / Re: hum...what's this lens ?
« on: February 16, 2012, 11:24:24 PM »
Wow, looks all shiny and new.  Good catch DL.

638
Lenses / Re: hum...what's this lens ?
« on: February 16, 2012, 10:21:25 PM »
Cool!  Definitely looks like a version II IS super tele, but does not appear to be a 300,400,500 or 600.  That just leaves the 800, and i have not seen a photo of that one.  it looks smaller than an 800 though.  I'd guess 500mm f4 by it's apparent size.

639
Lenses / Re: 24-70 too short for full frame?
« on: February 16, 2012, 10:10:13 PM »
Nikon users call their 3 big pro lenses the "holly trinity".  14-24, 24-70, and 70-200.  I have read more than one Nikon user say they have the 14-24 and 70-200, and a 50mm f1.4.  They see no reason for the middle ground 24-70.

Me on the other hand, I love my 24-105mm f4 IS. 

640
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: High MP Full Frame "Crop"
« on: February 16, 2012, 01:07:27 PM »

But if that's what it does, can it use the crop only lenses with a smaller image circle?  Or is that a problem for nikon as it would be a problem with ef-s lenses?

Yes, Nikon FF cameras can take their DX lenses and then default to "DX" mode.  The 12MP camera then take a 5.5MP or so photo.  Or when using FF lens, you can choose the DX mode for faster frames.

Canon has not done this and indeed EF-S lenses canon be used on FF cameras.

641
Lenses / Re: Recommendation: Tele lens for 60D
« on: February 15, 2012, 08:01:12 PM »
70-200mm f/4L IS would be my first choice to be honest.  But all of this really comes down to money.  The 70-200 2.8 IS II, is obviously the best, it's just a question of do you want to pay for it, and then do you want to carry it.  It's big and heavy, but awesome.


642
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Guinea Pig
« on: February 14, 2012, 05:59:41 PM »
Obviously, the 5D was purposefully limited in some areas just to keep from cutting too many 1Ds sales.  AF was one of them.  I mean -2 to +2 on the exposure compensation instead or 3?  That's software for $@#$%#$ sake.

On the other hand, it is/was one hell of a camera for the money.

643
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon Fisheye EF 8-15mm f/4L USM
« on: February 14, 2012, 09:15:15 AM »
Abandoned stadium. Naranjito Puerto Rico

IMG_2143_1_2_tonemapped by TexPhoto, on Flickr

644
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: DOF FF vs Crop...
« on: February 13, 2012, 10:10:33 PM »
But wait!, is light particles or waves?

Yup, FF menas shallower DOF vs cropped.  Yup.

And I go with Wave–particle duality btw.

645
Lenses / Re: What will the new mk. IV Canon Extenders have
« on: February 12, 2012, 04:27:32 PM »
The rear element need not float to mean you cannot use a teleconverter.  It basically just has to be in the way.  Plenty of Canon lenses have the rear element in the way, but not floating.

Nikon and Canon make their teleconverters this way, and 3rd party manufactures do not seem to.  I would asume Canon/Nikon do t for IQ reasons and 3rd party goes their way for cost/compatibility reasons.  But I don't see this changing.

Pages: 1 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 60