November 23, 2014, 07:42:58 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 - docsmith

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22
1
Canon General / Re: Does Canon really deserve this?
« on: Today at 07:23:50 AM »
I browse this website quite often since 2012. I have never seen so many negative comments about Canon these days in comparison with before.
Does Canon really not satisfying its customers lately or is it that there are new members in the forum who like to put down Canon in comparison with other companies?

I am a very satisfied customer.  I also think canon has set he pace and innovated in other ways besides the sensor.  I do hope to see sensor improvements in the next xD body, especially in low ISO read noise.  But, that said, my 5DIII is so amazingly good.  It is a better camera than I am a photographer.  Sure 3rd party lenses are getting better, but Canon is releasing some interesting lenses and I am happy to have competition.  But this year alone Canon has released 3 lenses I am considering adding.

I've been around CR since 2010.  I actually don't see the switch in the negativity you mention.  This site has always had a very healthy dose of criticism and negativity.  There have been a few more conflicts over the negativity as I believe certain people are getting fed up with it. Before, it was often unopposed.   And perhaps the negativity has manifested itself more specifically on the sensors (mostly) and mirrorless (lesser).  But the most positive response I can think of to a Canon dSLR from this site was the 7DII.  The 6D was absolutely shredded here.  Delays in the 1DX, Big White lenses, etc too.  The 5DIII, a complete disappointment and minor upgrade at best over the 5DII which would result in waves of defections to Nikon and the D800 if you were to read the original threads on CR. 

There is some very interesting content on this site.  But I guess I disagree with your premise.  To me, the interesting content is actually growing more frequent.

2
Viewfinder 98% coverage????

Flash sync 1/200???

Shutter rated for 150,000 cycles???

Canon currently calls the 5DIII viewfinder "approximately 100%"  Why would they backtrack?

The flash sync and shutter cycles are the same as the current 5DIII and less than the 7DII.  I would expect the 5DIV to have a better flash sync speed than the 7DII, if not at least the same.  Shutter life, perhaps you could make the argument that the size difference, but still, I'd expect the 5DIV to be the same or better than the 7DII.

Specs seem like bunk to me.

Just saw reference in another thread to a mixed response of 2 CF cards and then a few lines down, a reference to SD card.  This rumor is a poorly put together wishlist. 

3
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: New Sigma Lenses Coming Q1 of 2015 [CR1]
« on: November 17, 2014, 10:09:57 PM »
I would be very interested in what a 24A could deliver. No interest in a 14-24 f/4. I'd just get the canon 16-35 f4 IS. The 16-20 f/2 would also be interesting. As said above, minimal coma, vignetting, and sharp at f2-2.8, that would be an excellent nightscape lens.

4
I'll take a slightly different tact.

Why sell your 70-200 II, losing 20-30% of its value, and replace it with a 85 f/1.8 and 135 f/2?  Sure you gain a stop(+), but you lose range and IS.

I would consider having your kit be the 17-55 f/2.8 (I personally had the 15-85 and loved it), 70-200 II, 100-400 II.  Those are some great lenses covering a wide range. 

5
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54694447

OK, I know it's versus a Nikon, but even so: the Sigma 150-600 at 600mm easily beats the Nikon 300/2.8 + 2xTC!

Looking at the Sigma's superb MTFs measured by lenstip on a 5DIII, I can believe that. If only it wasn't so heavy, it seems a remarkable lens.

ps more detailed in http://nikonrumors.com/2014/11/09/sigma-150-600mm-f5-6-3-dg-os-hsm-sports-lens-review.aspx/

They also noticed some focus breathing...I am hoping at longer distances, this will not be much of an issue.  That is one item I am watching (I have not yet canceled my pre-order).

Also, I know it is heavy, but the way I look at it:
EF 300 f/2.8 plus 2x TC with hood: 100 oz
150-600S: 101 oz

Bottom line...to get to 600 mm, you will be carrying some weight. That does make the Tamron and, assuming here, the 150-600C, remarkable.

6
Lenses / Re: EF 35mm f/1.4L II to Finally Come as Well? [CR2]
« on: November 14, 2014, 01:00:44 PM »
Maybe when they said, Year of the lens, they meant a twelve month period and not specifically 2014.

So what was the first big lens announced... and how many more months are left in the twelve months of the lens.... It just does roll off the tongue.

Really, it has been a pretty good year....with 1.5 months to go:

EFS 10-18
EF 16-35 f/4 IS
EF 24-105 f/3.5-5.6
EFS 24 f/2.8
EF 100-400L II
EF 400 f/4 DO II
EFM 55-200

Did I miss any?  Best year in awhile for lens releases.  Granted, I have yet to buy one, but 2-3 are under consideration.

7
Lenses / Re: Critical View of 70-200 f/2.8 mkii+2xTC III
« on: November 14, 2014, 09:08:28 AM »
Am I wrong? Is the 70-200 f/2.8 Mark ii a match for the 100-400 and the 400 f/5.6?


I owned the 100-400L I for years before I got the 70-200 II.  But the 70-200 II + 2xTC has replaced the 100-400L when I travel.  In my opinion, it isn't quite as good, but it is very close to the 100-400L I @ 400 mm and I love the 70-200 II w/o the TC enough to make it worth putting up with the ergonomic issue and maybe a very slight, potentially unperceivable hit to IQ.  That said, when I am home and if I want 400 mm, I take the 100-400L, but that is mostly for the ergonomic issue, not IQ.

So, are you "wrong" meh....I wouldn't fault someone for going either way. 
 

8
Lenses / Re: Canon 100-400 mk ii (with/without 1.4 ext) vs sigma 150-600
« on: November 11, 2014, 08:20:29 AM »
Agreed that we won't know much until reviews and enough users have their hands on both lenses. But right now my assumption is that the 150-600S will be better from 400-600 mm. This is based on what I consider to be a moderate gain in the MTF chart comparing v1 to v2 of the 100-400L. And then comparing the 100-400l to the 150-600S on lenstip.com. I am not canceling my preorder of the 150-600S. The canon will have a great MFD, likely better AF, size/weight advantages, and 4 stop IS. But, for my kit, I need reach.

Granted, if my Siggy doesn't arrive soon (upcoming trip) I may cancel and wait for the dust to settle on reviews and early adopters.

10
Lenses / Re: Preorder: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 11, 2014, 06:19:45 AM »
I've pre-ordered from Adorama, I'm still waiting on information about TC's and if it accepts one.  The lens has the same type of focusing system as the 70-300mmL and might not work with a Canon TC.

They include MTF charts with the lens and extenders, at this point, I assume it accepts extenders.

11
I'll try and post some images when I get time to give it a through test.

Thanks and your continued impressions would be great.  I have the 150-600S preordered and am not, of course, wondering if the 100-400L II plus 1.4x tc would be better.  Right now I am going with the "native lens is always better than one with an extender" adage.

12
Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 07, 2014, 06:33:51 AM »
I quickly did a superimpose of the 70-300L over the 100-400LII. Size comparison is based on the size of the sealing gasket on the lens mount.

Looks like it won't fit 'standing up' in most lens bags, so the 70-300L still holds its value as a travel lens for that purpose.

I've attached the psd too if you'd like to play around some more with the image.

The current 100-400L is only 1.8" longer and 0.1" wider than the 70-300 L.  This comparison makes me think the II is about the same size. Maybe a bit wider. 

And I agree, I think the new photo showing it extended takes away the idea it is push pull.  Remove the lens hood and that looks very similar to the current 70-300L. 

13
Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 06, 2014, 08:17:20 PM »
I am trying to get my head wrapped around what appears to be the "zoom touch adjustment ring" on the image.

This is a bit out there, but maybe not impossible.  What if this lens is both push-pull and twist-zoom?  Could the forward ring be manual focus and the back ring be the twist zoom?  But you could also push pull the lens?

Not a completely original idea, I saw a video with the 150-600S where they were using it as a push-pull and twist zoom.  I wonder if this could be true here as well.  Otherwise, what is the point of the tension ring?

14
Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 06, 2014, 11:17:15 AM »
I'm not comparing the IQ. I'm saying that asking 1/4th the price for this lens that they ask for the F4/5.6 doesn't seem out of line by Canon's pricing strategy. Assuming the IQ, weight and AF are pretty good which I expect them to be. As you can tell by these threads there is a lot of demand for this lens. I certainly would not expect then to come in under the new Sigma S. If they asked me how much to charge that's what I'd tell them. Pick off the early adopters and then let the market dictate the price.


Of course, the fear would be that they cripple it in some way such as having rear elements such that it won't take a 1.4TC.  That would differentiate it further from the 200-400 and likely I keep my order of the Sigma.

15
Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 06, 2014, 10:40:46 AM »
This lens will be $1999ish or the same price as the 70-200 IS2 is now.

That is actually my guess as well.  I can see $1,800-$2,200 if the lens is as I expect.  If they do something unexpectedly good with the optics, I could see $3,000-$3,500.  The other thing that could drive up the price is the weight.  If it is surprisingly light, that could drive up the price as well.  But this is likely meant as a high end consumer lens.  My guess is optics and price will match.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22