« on: July 31, 2014, 05:13:39 PM »
Roger at LR carved up one for all to see:
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.
Canon made revolution few years ago. Currently it is a stagnant company, which still focuses significant aattention to dying P&S market. Product cycle for semi-pro and pro products is very long and shows that Canon does not sufficiently invest in R&D as other companies. Canon started loosing in the following areas:
1) Mirrorless market - they loose to Fuji, Olympus, Sony;
2) Sensor technology - loosing to Sony;
3) Lenses - starting to loose to Sigma and Tamron as these 2 companies started producing high quality lenses, which match or in some cases exceed qulity of Canon lenses (e.g. Sigma 50 mm 1.4 Art, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC) for affordable price.
sorry for stupid question but if i put a 10stop nd filter and a CPL i cant see anything what do you do to find out how much to turn the CPL for example to remove reflections in water?
You need to do is rotate your CPL until you achieve the desired result, then put your 10 stop ND filter in. A 10 stop ND filter is always last to go in after you have set up your composition and adjusted any needed filters as you can't see anything after it is in front of your lens.
I'm always lost with crop-mode on Nikon FX to DX. Unless you want to shave your RAW file size (cough D800 cough), why crop in-camera like that? Why not crop in post?
Did you not note that D800 goes from 4fps FF to 6fps crop mode??? Less pixels to push equals the same CPUs and all can drive more fps. And as well, did you notice how much less storage space an APS-C cropped D800 RAW takes than a FF D800 file? If you are shooting distant wildlife and such why do you need to store all that dumb wasted boundary pixel stuff?? It stuffs up HDs, makes backing up take longer, fills up CF cards faster, clogs up the camera's buffer more quickly and makes it flush less quickly.
saves you money and time and clutter of having more HD around
gives you better camera buffer performance
potentially gives you more fps
they all sound like excellent and legit reasons to me
Does Canon usually announce entry-level products at Photokina? I'm curious if they will be bringing out a more competitive Rebel to counter the recent entry-level Nikon refreshes.
I am excited about hearing what a new 7D II would bring.
I am excited too i want to see what they do with the 7D II and hopefully it is something revolutionary and gets pushed to the FF cameras like the 5d4.
Yes, but this doesn't preclude EF lenses being 'cropped'. Would be nice as a type of digital TC. However knowing Canon's marketing policies, it's almost definitely not going to happen.
The single most interesting thing is going to be the sensor in the new camera. I want to know if Canon is going to compete with Sony or keep putting lipstick on their current sensor technology. This will help me decide where my future camera dollars are going to be spent.
I hear you brother. No new sensor and I buy a Sony A7R
I'm looking forward to the 16-35 f/2.8 III and/or the 1x-24.
The reasonably high probability of a Canon 12/14-24L in the relatively near future is yet another reason I'll likely put the proceeds of selling my 16-35/2.8 II toward the TS-E 17/4L, rather than getting the 16-35/4L IS.
I forgot how useful it was to have AF in the ultrawide range for a walk-around lens until I swapped the 16-35 f/2.8 II for the f/4 IS. Now, I look for reasons to use it. I use the 24-35mm range on it for about 1/3 of the shots I keep. It may not be as good as the 24-70 II, but it is still excellent and saves on a lot of lens changes and renders in a similarly pleasing way. I'd rather have the f/2.8 over the IS, but for now, I like the 16-35 f/4 IS a lot.
The 12/14-24 will likely not accept screw in filters, but the thing I'd miss most from it is the range up to 35mm for shots with people in them. Given the life stage (young kids), I'm more likely to use a 16-35 than a 12/14-24, although I'd look at the 12/14-24 as a replacement for my 14.
It used to be that video people had to suffer through using our still lenses. Oh, how things have changed...Well, if they must have the best, they ought to pitch their autofocusing 70-200 F/2.8 IS II lenses as well:
Dustin, perhaps this is your next review?
The director of Zeiss for the Americas specifically mentioned the Otus 85 next along with a "few other lenses available after Photokina" in an email to me. This is likely one of them.
Well, if they must have the best, they ought to pitch their autofocusing 70-200 F/2.8 IS II lenses as well:. I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!. I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!
+1 -- Double
Two that must have the best. I guess the review was for you
if I'm honest with myself I'd be hard pressed to think of an image that I've shot with my 5DIII that I couldn't have shot a year ago with the 7D.I have issues with your comparison.7D iso over 6400 anyone? I don't get that noise until I hit 25k on the 5D3. to each their own but my 5D3 and 7D images are night and day.
That's the reason why I like the 40mm STM. It's just f2.8 which is sad for separating objects, but those f2.8 are just awesome and useable. A good lense is a lense you're willing to carry with you.
Another one with the 16-35... I was really happy with the corner sharpness on this one. Lots of detail in the trees.
I'm hoping the 50 IS will be a small compact f/1.4 gaussian design that slots between the existing f/1.4 and Sigma's 50A, and I'm hoping that the 50L II will be a retrofocus design that competes against the 50A and the Otus.
I see the 24 70 4 IS and the 16 35 4 IS as better options for the 24 105 & 17 40 users without killing 2 wildly popular high selling basic L lenses in the 24 105 & 17 40.
They have not had opportunity to tackle faster 2.8 & wider lenses without jamming the market with all of them at once.
Makes sense for them to wait until Sigma is done with their releases. Canon with the 35 & 50 mark II has a real opportunity to totally deflate Sigmas recent ascention which is based partly on nothing else new out there (OTIS is a higher realm of quality)
Let me clarify; Sigmas lenses are great, but real world comparisons don't show them to be cadillacs to kias that a few loud and wildly optimistic individuals are claiming