July 29, 2014, 08:03:11 PM

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 - ahsanford

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 52
121
Even photozone's at it now; comparing against the EF 50mm f1.2 L II !

What the 50L does well doesn't have a metric that can be easily recorded.  That lens is about color, draw, bokeh, etc. and less about meat and potatoes forum fodder like sharpness, chromatic aberrations, distortion, etc.

However, the Sigma Art seems purpose-built to wow the forum crowd.  If you are a sharpness junkie (who needs AF), you've found your lens.

- A
Well said :)

Duh ! Now everyone's at it. When canon finally do bring out the 50 1.2L II they had better call it something else or no one will notice !


Oh.  Doh.  My bad.  Good catch.

- A

122
Even photozone's at it now; comparing against the EF 50mm f1.2 L II !

What the 50L does well doesn't have a metric that can be easily recorded.  That lens is about color, draw, bokeh, etc. and less about meat and potatoes forum fodder like sharpness, chromatic aberrations, distortion, etc.

However, the Sigma Art seems purpose-built to wow the forum crowd.  If you are a sharpness junkie (who needs AF), you've found your lens.

- A
Well said :)

Ironically, I want neither of the two.  The Canon 50 F/nooneknows IS is likely to be the Canon F/1.4 II I've always wanted -- an 8 or 9 out of 10 at everything -- without being the size of a pickle jar.

- A

123
Even photozone's at it now; comparing against the EF 50mm f1.2 L II !

What the 50L does well doesn't have a metric that can be easily recorded.  That lens is about color, draw, bokeh, etc. and less about meat and potatoes forum fodder like sharpness, chromatic aberrations, distortion, etc.

However, the Sigma Art seems purpose-built to wow the forum crowd.  If you are a sharpness junkie (who needs AF), you've found your lens.

- A

124
Lenses / Re: Any word on the 50mm with Image Stabilzation?
« on: June 19, 2014, 12:33:13 PM »
Is it pretty much everyone's opinion that a 50mm needs IS?

While I would never refuse IS, I never really thought that a decient 50 needed IS.  Especially these days when shooting four digit ISO is becoming more commonplace.

If Canon brings out a new very good 50 but for some reason it does not have IS, would that really affect your buying decision?

The short answer is that Canon would be fools not to offer IS.  You and many other photogs may not need it, but many folks would love it -- video folks, handholding low-light shooters, etc.

For me, yes -- it matters.  I am overwhelmingly a natural light shooter of things that don't move much.  Each stop of IS in poor light lets me (a) walk the ISO back down to earth or (b) walk the aperture down to a sharper regime with more working DOF. 

There are three reasons I am going to buy this thing: improved IQ over my Canon 50 F/1.4, Image Stabilization, and it being smaller and lighter than the Sigma 50 Art.  I'm a weirdo who thinks a walkaround prime shouldn't be as big/heavy as a pickle jar.

- A

125
EOS Bodies / Re: More EOS 7D Replacement Buzz Going Around [CR2]
« on: June 19, 2014, 12:04:44 PM »
More likely is they want people to buy into their more expensive FF cameras rather than keep using their abandonware cameras.

Respectfully disagree:

1) The 7D2 will cost more than the 6D.  That's a near certainty given how feature-laden the 7D2 will be and how precipitously the 6D price is dropping.  Crop and FF will therefore have some overlap in pricing.

2) Some people desperately need the 1.6x reach a crop brings.  It obviates the need to buy epic superteles for $10k+.  You get 90% as good IQ for half the cost and half the weight -- that single value proposition says that crop won't be abandonware for a very long time.

- A


126
Lenses / Re: Any word on the 50mm with Image Stabilzation?
« on: June 19, 2014, 11:58:14 AM »
So, I see three possible results of this.
1.  The 50mm f/1.8 II is discontinued, and the price of the 50mm f/1.4 is further lowered to $299 street to bridge the price gap somewhat.  The 40mm STM f/2.8 is positioned at $149 street to entice what would be former 50mm f/1.8 II buyers.
2.  The 50mm f/1.4 is discontinued, and the 50mm f/1.8 II remains as a cheap "gateway lens" to get people into the habit of buying lenses; remember though, the 40mm f/2.8 STM can already serve this same purpose, so this is not a necessity.
3.  The 50mm f/1.8 IS is added to the lineup and nothing is discontinued.  But wow, that is a lot of similar lenses.

[...]

Of course, all speculation, but that is the fun part! :)

Good thoughts.  Here are a few considerations that come from them:

  • The 40mm Pancake is not part of a '50 prime ecosystem' in my mind.  That's its own animal.  Throw the focal length out for a minute.  I just think the pancake is an odd duckbill platypus of a lens experiment -- will people use a focus-by-wire little guy with few common lens creature comforts?  I see it like a soft focus or a 1:2 Macro prime -- just a unique little creature.  I'd leave it out of a pricing tree discussion, personally.
  • You may be underestimating the Canon 50mm F/1.4 user base.  That is the sharpest 50 Canon sells.  By F/2.8  or so, it outclasses the L.  So the L is relegated to portraiture / art / small DOF work, and the 50 F/1.4 is the more-general-use lens that I see in pros hands at events, in photojournalists hands, etc. And I think this is the Canon userbase that is screaming for a better do-everything option in the 50mm segment. This group probably just wants a modern 50mm F/1.4 II more than they want a 50 IS, but if the new 50 IS gets them the IQ improvements, internal focusing, build quality, true USM focusing speed, etc. they will gladly pony up the money on day one.  This is the largest pent up demand segment in Canon's prime universe, I believe.
  • So my vote is to buck the trend of eliminating the Group 1 lenses in just this focal length.  Offer the new 50/(whatever) IS and replace the 20 year old 50 F/1.4 that many folks are stuck with as their best option.
  • I think it will be pricey at first as Canon snatches up all the pent up demand from the current 50 F/1.4 user base -- say $750.  But then it should walk down like all the other IS refreshes have.  $500-600 seems about right.

- A

127
Lenses / Re: Any word on the 50mm with Image Stabilzation?
« on: June 19, 2014, 11:38:37 AM »
Now we have comparatively insane ISO capabilities.  You don't need 1.8 to get a viewable picture.  The only reason to have 1.8 is the depth of field and bokeh.

Respectfully disagree -- there is one reason you forgot.  Low light with moving subjects requires fast glass -- IS doesn't do a thing for that.  Lenses for indoor events like sports and concerts need all the speed they can get.  I recognize the 50 F/1.8 is not a sports lens for a boatload of reasons, but you get my point.  What my brother (more on the novice end) can't capture at a school concert with his kids with his kit 18-55 crop zoom can be better pulled off with his nifty fifty.

And though we can use high ISOs on DSLRs these days, not everyone likes climbing up to ISO 3200, 6400, and beyond in poor light.  It's useable, but it's simply not as good as a shot at a lower ISO.

Seriously, this is Canon.  Do you really believe they want to keep offering us a great deal on a cheap lens, when they can offer us a good deal on an affordable lens (the 40) and a rebate/MAP deal on a second (one of the 50s)? 

I'm torn on this one.  Evil-Big-Corporation Canon (who punishes us often with new lens prices) would do exactly what you've said.  But Thoughtful-We-Are-The-World Canon seems to have protected two lenses as mass-produced, cheap, sharp plastic lenses -- the nifty fifty and the kit 18-55 (revised a good 5-6 times by now).  Both are marvelously sharp for the dollar.

I think Canon would rather make a III version of that EF 50 F/1.8 lens -- possibly with STM (no chance with IS) and keep it reasonably priced, say $150-175 -- than obsolete the nifty fifty altogether.  As much as we're sitting on a gear-obsessed forum, they need a reasonably priced low end to their lens offerings for novices and those on budget.  Canon isn't Leica, after all.

- A

128
Lenses / Re: Any word on new 16-35 F4
« on: June 19, 2014, 10:58:55 AM »
Update:  http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/06/canon-ef-16-35-f4l-is-hitting-retailers/

Thom Yorke, when questioned for comment, said: "This is really happening."

- A

129
Hey all,

PZ finally got to testing the Sigma 50 Art, but for some odd reason their first review is on APS-C and not FF.  I expect that to be remedied soon, but here are the crop results:

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/875-sigma50f14art_eosapsc?start=1

Shockingly, they found it to not suck to a very high degree.  Stellar resolution numbers on their test rig (a 50D, I believe).

They did flag a small focus shift when stopping down, though -- that's the first I've heard of this.

But FYI on another highly satisfied reviewer with the 50 Art.

- A

130
Lenses / Re: Any word on the 50mm with Image Stabilzation?
« on: June 18, 2014, 12:59:54 PM »
I would say a new 50mm would replace the 50mm 1.4.

They might replace it with a 50mm f/1.8 IS or a 50mm f/1.4 IS. I could see either happening. In the former, you lose 2/3 a stop at the expense of better build quality and IS. In the latter, you update the existing 1.4 and adds IS.

In either example... I don't think they ever obsolete the plastic fantastic. It's Canon's ultimate gateway drug. It's the first step in turning all those users T3's and XSi's with 18-55s they buy at Target, into people who post on gear forums and look at MTF charts all day. 50mm 1.8 was my first prime, I still use it to this day. It's a cheap and easy introduction into what you can do with a fast lens and how beautiful your shots can be.

+1 

That's spot on.  Many will say 2/3 of a stop is a big deal to give up, but hell, I'd buy that 50 IS even if it was F/2. 

- A

131
Lenses / Re: Any word on the 50mm with Image Stabilzation?
« on: June 18, 2014, 10:52:47 AM »
I think the consensus here is correct, but I will say this -- I am almost certain that it will be a 50mm 1.8 IS, that the current 50mm 1.8 II will be discontinued (with its entry-level fast prime status handed off to the 40mm), and the current 50mm 1.4 will stay for now (like the 28mm 1.8 alongside the 28mm 2.8 IS).

The 85mm (and higher) IS options are a bit more puzzling.  The 135mm 2.8 soft focus has basically been phased out, and that could be an excellent candidate for replacement with IS since it doesn't have USM and the only other 135mm is the non-IS L.  There are no similar options at 85 or 100.  Both of those non-L lenses are USM, seem to be popular.  I could see Canon adding an 85mm IS option at a price point between the USM and the L, maybe at f/2 or f/2.8.  I don't know about that for the 100mm, since that slot already has the fast 2 USM, the macro 2.8 USM, and the macro 2.8 IS USM L that is relatively affordable.

And I don't think anybody knows what Canon is going to do with their fast USM non-L primes (the "Group 2" in ahsanford's post above).

Everything you said makes perfect sense except for obsoleting that nifty fifty.  This new USM lens will be 4-5x the price of it, so I have to feel like it will pull the current 50 F/1.4 users much more strongly.

Just a gut feeling on my part, though -- you very well may be right.

- A

132
Lenses / Re: Any word on the 50mm with Image Stabilzation?
« on: June 18, 2014, 12:48:41 AM »
For the 87th time, Canon is working on an EF 50mm F/(no one knows) IS USM.  Going to happen. Done deal.

Prey, where is your source of Canon insight? Or is it just logic that also says that the 35L2 is a done deal after they updated the 24L1? Or that a 24-70L-IS is bound to happen sooner or later?

Disregard the CR ratings.  These lenses are 20 years old and they are slowly being refreshed.  First it was 24/28/35, and I expect the 50, 85 and 100 will get refreshed before too long. 

Ruined's point about the Group 1 lenses getting the refresh treatment only has me certain of the 50 getting the refresh/modernization/IS green light as there is a 50 prime in that group.  The 85 and 100 could use it but are not part of that uber cheapo group, and my confidence is lower on those.

But it's just my gut plus some patent listings plus the success of competitors in certain focal lengths.  It's about as accurate as reading tea leaves, I admit.

- A

133
Lenses / Re: Any word on the 50mm with Image Stabilzation?
« on: June 18, 2014, 12:07:24 AM »
(But if they do cough up a 50/1.8 or faster with IS, it might be the first item I've ever pre-ordered.)

They have to and they will.  The question is when, at what max aperture, and how much it will cost.

Personally, I'm also a little curious to see which 50 they are replacing with this IS marvel.  Before the refreshes started, there were roughly two prime price points below the L lenses:

Group 1:  Squeaky Cheapo Simple

EF 24 F/2.8 (non-USM)
EF 28 F/2.8 (non-USM)
EF 35 F/2    (non-USM)

EF 50 F/1.8 (non-USM) and there were a few versions of this one if memory serves

Group 2: Better But Not Best

EF 20mm F/2.8 USM
EF 28mm F/1.8 USM
EF 50mm F/1.4 USM (not modern USM, but still way better than the AF speed of Group 1)
EF 85mm F/1.8 USM
EF 100mm F/2 USM

Red text = what was obsoleted as a result of the non-L IS refreshes.

So, Ruined is right, now that I look at it:  F/1.8 is likely to be the aperture of the new 50mm IS lens if everything is held consistent with the other non-L IS refreshes.

But...

The nifty fifty for $125 has a valuable price point for the business, and most of the people screaming for this 50 IS lens want it as much for sharpness/AF/general improvement reasons as the IS crowd -- and it's logical to assume that those with this pent up demand have left the nifty fifty for either the Sigma F/1.4 or Canon F/1.4 a long time ago.  So the logical lens it should replace is the 20 year old 50mm F/1.4 USM from Group 2, right?

- A

134
Lenses / Re: Any word on the 50mm with Image Stabilzation?
« on: June 17, 2014, 10:20:25 PM »
For the 87th time, Canon is working on an EF 50mm F/(no one knows) IS USM.  Going to happen.  Done deal.  (An 85 as well, surely.)

It will be exactly like the other non-L IS refreshes that the 24/28/35mm focal lengths got in the last two years:

  • Far far sharper.  As good or better than Canon's large aperture L in the same FL.
  • Modern, fast USM
  • Size on par with the current 50 F/1.4 -- i.e. much much smaller and lighter than the L or the Sigma Art.
  • 3-4 stops of IS
  • Much better build quality: solid feel, higher quality plastics, etc.
  • Internal focusing

...and it will be worth every penny.  If you want a solid 50mm for all purposes including handholdability in low-light, video, etc., this will undoubtedly be it.  The Sigma Art is a stellar lens at a great value, but a one stop advantage of speed is obliterated by 3-4 stops of IS depending on what you shoot.  (For me, that's huge.)  And we all know what a fickle diva the 50 F/1.2L is -- stellar draw/bokeh/feel but soft as a noodle in the corners and somewhat finnicky AF at wider apertures.

The only unknowns remaining are the max aperture and the cost. 

All prior non-Ls that got this refresh treatment retained their prior max aperture (24 and 28 --> F/2.8, 35 --> F/2).  However, in this segment, an F/1.4 IS might be big and heavy and perhaps Canon doesn't want to do that, so some folks have posited that it will be a segment-shaker-upper and be an F/1.8 IS.  We shall see.

The cost will depend on a lot of things:

  • Is it replacing the Canon EF 50 F/1.4 USM or will it be sold alongside it?
  • Will the max aperture be F/1.4?  F/1.8?  F/2?
  • How sharp will it be?  If it outpunches the 50 F/1.2L considerably (which not a high bar at all), will Canon enjoy people paying (say) $600 instead of $1500 for sharper lens?  (Replace $600 with $949 and you can see why Sigma loves life right now.)

So my guess is that it will be 90% as sharp as the Sigma Art (at comparable apertures) and run high at first offering -- say $799 -- to gobble up every photog who has stuck with the Canon 50 F/1.4 because the L is lacking something that they need.  Over time, the price might settle down around $600 like the other non-L IS refreshes.

- A

135
Lenses / Re: Any word on new 16-35 F4
« on: June 17, 2014, 07:27:04 PM »
1) At least in the US, I don't think it's out yet.  I have a rental 16-35 F/4L IS on order from LensRentals (at first availability) and they keep pushing it out as stock has not yet arrived.

My planned rental comparison (as I lack any ultrawide right now) is to stack it up at 24mm and 35mm against my pretty damn sharp 24/70 F/4L IS at F/4, F/5.6, F/8, etc.  If the MTF charts are any indication, the new 16-35 should beat the 24-70 quite well in the corners at same apertures.

I also plan to see how wide I can shoot that 16-35 and not see vignetting with my Lee setup.  I'll run combinations of 2 slots + CPL ring + no polarizer, 2 slots + CPL ring + CPL in place, etc and see when I lose the corners due to obstruction.

If (a) it's as sharp as billed and (b) obstruction with the Lee setup only occurs wider than (say) 20mm, I will buy one straightaway. 

2) Some gentleman in Malaysia got his hands on a copy and made a video about it, see this other thread I posted:  http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21284.0

I also have a daily Google troll of 'canon 16 35 ("hands-on" or review)' with a date limiter of the past week.  Little to no activity other than forum discussions just like these.

- A

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 52