Wait a year, then pick it up at one of the big shows in the spring. I got my 5D2 from Focus on Imaging in UK with a 24-70 for around the same price as the 5D2 alone at launch.
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.
Hope that AA filter theory is wrong, on the other side the theory is convincing. I can belive I waited so long and the camera will produce soft images due to AA filter. After I bought canon gear and worked with it for several months I knew that I had made bad decision but I hoped that 5d3 will change a lot. I don't understand guys who say that presented official samples are sharp and ok. Samples are out of detail and very soft (not mentioning the price) We need to wait.
You do understand that the sensor significantly needs to "outresolve" the lens to get the most of the lens?
You will gain total resolution even with the worst available lenses by increasing the pixel density in the current pixel range FF sensors are at.
I am very keenly aware of this issue seeing as I've preformed real world testing to see it's effect and I've actually run the theoretical calculations on it aswell.
Due to the extremely low resolution of Nikon's lenses they stand to gain only 8% more resolution by going from 24 MP to 36 MP for their higher end lenses. Canon's lenses would stand to gain 25% more resolution by going from 21 to 36 MP on the higher end lenses. Theoretically speaking.snip
Can you explain to those of us less tech oriented - what you mean by saying a lens cannot "resolve 36 megapixels" ?? thanks
There are many ways to atempt to turn a resolution curve from a lens into a flat linear resolution. Two ways are to take the integral of the resolution curve and then average that over the area, or to take the resolution at the half way point of the area of the image and extrapolate it over the whole image. I use the latter because it's easier and the results are fairly representative result.snip
Would you care to clarify your argument? For example, are you referring to centre or edge of frame resolution? Where are you getting your resolution figures from? I hope that as an engineer you're calculating them from MTF charts and not using the LP/PH from Photozone, as this will change for each lens based upon the resolution of the sensor that the lens is tested with.
I am using the photozone data, BUT I am using the crop frame boarder (not extreme corner) resolution data and extrapolating it to the full frame data. This essentially mimics a 40 megapixel sensor at the half way point of the frame which is an extremely accurate way of measuring considering we're dealing with a 36 MP sensor. Most of Nikon's lenses are barley resolving two thirds the resolution at this point so it's safe to say that they wouldn't take advantage of 36 megapixels over the majority of the frame.
I could fly to the US, have a mini holiday in New York and pick up the 5DMKIII for the same price as buying it in the UK.
Question - Has anyone ever done this and how did they avoid customs?
Seems like a pretty tempting idea!
Will the new 5dmk3 be able to record more than 12min?
Probably not, has something to do with a weird european tax thingy and laws that state that a videocamera starts from 12 minutes continuous recording.
its a 30 minute limit...
How do you know?
Would that bring the 70D pricing up to where the 7D is now (and considerably higher at introduction of course)?
Why you need FF, if HD is just 1920Ã—1080 or approx 2,1MPx?
Because the camera probably won't record as 1920 x 1080. Take a look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8K_Video_Format
I doubt it. The 50/1.2L is not that old (released in 2007), and was itself an update of sorts, from the 50mm f/1.0L (released in 1989, and still shows up on the used market occasionally for $3-4K). The other two current 50mm standard primes are from the early 90's.
Why did you tell me about this lens...you just cost me an extra $3000. Thanks.
I did not know the f/1.0 existed, but for the night time pictures I take, it might be the right lens.
Thanks for the review Sarah.
I was unaware of this product, but after reading about the rotating shoe, I'm very interested. It seems like that alone would make this worthwhile for a 7D owner like myself (Use the built-in flash trigger under most circumstances, but have the Yongnuo available when the setup is wrong for the on-camera trigger).
always go with the biggest and best
you will be glad you did in the long run
If the next generation 1D is FF, then moving the 7DMk2 to APS-H almost makes sense.
If the next 1D isn't APS-H, then it makes even less sense. A one off sensor is an expensive luxury on a $5k camera, and a non-starter on a $1300 camera.
I wouldn't expect an upmarket APS-H 7DMk2 to cost $1300. $3000+ seems more realistic. Also, why is a "one off sensor" untenable? If the non-recurring design costs for the unique APS-H sensor are $1 million and the production run is 10,000 units, the cost per unit is only $100. I would expect that to be swamped by the additional recurring cost due to an APS-H sensor being larger than an APS-C sensor.
A 4x zoom at a fixed f2.8 would be record-setting if I have my facts straight:
1.45x = 11-16mm (tokina APS-C)
1.71x = 14-24mm (nikon)
1.75x = 16-35mm (tokina)
2.06x = 17-35mm
2.19x = 16-35mm
2.50x = 28-70mm, 80-200mm, 120-300mm (sigma), 200-500mm (sigma monster)
2.68x = 28-75mm (tamron)
2.77x = 90-250mm (olympus 4/3), 18-50mm (sigma)
2.85x = 70-200mm
2.92x = 24-70mm
2.94x = 17-50mm (tamron, sigma)
3.00x = 50-150mm (sigma APS-C)
3.13x = 16-50mm (tokina APS-C)
3.24x = 17-55mm
3.75x = 28-105mm (tamron adaptall MF)
In fact, I think it would be the second largest zoom range of any constant-aperture ever released (behind the 5x Nikkor 24-120mm f4). Anyone know of another lens I'm forgetting?