July 30, 2014, 11:58:07 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 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 53
136
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

137
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

138
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

139
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

140
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

141
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

142
EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 16, 2014, 10:39:05 AM »
I think things change too.  As metering gets better and better, and more and more accurate, auto ISO, IMO, will become more popular.  The 1Dx's metering in all metering modes is super, super accurate whereas earlier models not so much.  So I think people's preferences may change as technology improves.

I think our favorite spot on the mode dial is a religious matter -- it often defines our first priority to the shot and everything else follows.  Mine is locked on Av unless (a) I deliberately want a specific shutter (< 1% of the time) or (b) I've got the flash on in really low light and I go to M.  It's not right, it's not wrong.  It's what I do.  Each of us has our own sensibilities to follow.

But ISO is different to me.  It's the part of the triangle I am most flexible on to get the rest of the settings where I want them.  I bounce all over the place on ISO, even using Auto ISO (gated to 1/(lens FL) shutter) in difficult / rapidly changing lighting or in spur-of-the-moment shooting environments.

- A

143

Just like the big brother 24-70 II, the new 16-35 f4 IS MTF charts look awesome.

My 16-35 II & 50L are on ebay.

I'll hold off until I see some actual reviews of the 16-35 F4 but I suspect I'll be joining you in putting my 16-35 II on ebay as well...  (Especially since I take alot of video with that lens too)

Why trade in the 16-35 f/2.8 for the f/4.0? Wouldn't you guys prefer the faster aperture?

Sharpness, sharpness, sharpness.  Every landscaper who isn't shooting MF Zeiss glass is drooling over the MTF charts for this lens.  This one, on paper, is a massive upgrade.

- A

144
EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 13, 2014, 11:16:07 AM »
The mention that this will be positioned as a Professional APS-C camera is what I hoped for.  I think the Pentax K-3 fits this niche as well.  If the price is attainable, I look forward to replacing my aged XS.

Pentax bodies are loaded full of tech but lack the stable of lenses Canon or Nikon offer.  So I see Pentax users limited to really nerdy brand enthusiasts and I can't blame them -- they make nice bodies.  (for perspective:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJ9MsmECULw)

Specifically, pro APS-C shooters are also not likely shooting standard focal lengths as much -- they choose APS-C for length:  sports, wildlife, etc.  So I'd imagine most pros shooting standard FL have made the jump to FF, but I am sure there's an exception or two out there.  But since Pentax lacks a lot of longer FL options, the pro-APS-C scale tips even further in my mind towards Canon / Nikon than Pentax (and Sony).

I'm honestly not being a fanboy here so much as stating a value proposition for shooters.  Canon and Nikon have much more glass to offer, so unless other companies offer mindblowingly better bodies, it's wiser to stay in the ecosystem with more lenses.

- A

145
EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 13, 2014, 11:02:20 AM »
So did anyone spot a 7D2 at the Brazil-Croatia game last night ?

I'm afraid for me it is going to retain its mythical status until I see hard evidence......

Did anyone spot any officiating at the Brazil-Croatia game last night?  That game was a farce.

146
Hello ~
I am a photographer from Taiwan
Can you help me test the star burst (sun star)

I'm sorry, I do not have this lens.  I was just telling everyone that someone does have the lens, and they posted some information about it.

As far as sun stars go, we do know one thing (quoted from http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-16-35mm-f-4-L-IS-USM-Lens.aspx):

"Known is that the 16-35 L IS has 9 rounded aperture blades which will create 18-point stars from specular highlights when very narrow apertures are used."


That's all I know.

- A

147
EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 12, 2014, 12:03:17 PM »
Quote
Quote from: vlim on Today at 08:06:06 AM
With the 70D, you really can make clean photo at 3200 iso so we can expect the same result at 6400 iso for the 7dII.

Right, and pigs can fly :-> ... well, at least if you apply heavy nr you'll have a clean image, though w/o details. Good for shooting doorknobs and brick walls though :-)

That's what I was thinking... but tolerance to grain is a virtue I guess.

I said this because i have pictures taken  with a 70d and 100 macro 2.8 L IS in relatively high iso (2500 - 3200) which are clean without any noise reduction post treatment ;) If not, I wouldn't have said that kind of statement... So yes i do expect a 7dII with clean photos at 6400 iso...

That's like when Kai from DRTV does his high ISO test in broad daylight and declares a m43 camera is still useable at ISO 12,800.   ::)

- A

148
EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 12, 2014, 12:00:10 PM »
If it ends up being an action-oriented crop version of the 5DIII, I might buy both of them.  However, if it has some innovative features that the 5DIII lacks (dual pixel, hybrid viewfinder, other video stuff), I might wait for those to move to the 5D series and buy both at that time.

I've said it before - I shoot with a 5D and a 20D, and I love that they are so similar in UI.

Given that the 7D and above are more workhorses than a show ponies, I'd imagine we would not see a hybrid viewfinder, tilty-swiveling screen or touchscreen in this market segment for some time.  I do not expect to see them on the 7D2.  I think all of those things are potential value-add for photogs, but Canon will certainly test out their value, appeal and reliability on lower trimlines like the XXD or Rebels first (rationale: fewer pros in this segment that might be alienated by a 'dud' of a feature).

Keep in mind, the current 7D and 5D3 already share a bit of 'feel' about them -- I have a 5D3 and my friend has a 7D, and they feel about the same in the hand, use the same batteries, etc.  And though my 5D3 has more AF points, the Servo AF tuning system in my 5D3 came straight from his 7D.

So I see the 7D and 5D lines helping each other along on ergonomics, menu system, etc.  In the lesser-discussed-things, one might expect the 7D2 to now get some 5D3 love in the following features:

  • LCD zoom button straight to 1:1 for pixel peeping for focus confirmation like with the 5D3*
  • Similar AF clusters and selection process (on LCD or through the VF) as the 5D3
  • Lockable mode dial (if there is one...)
  • 5D3's sockets for video/audio options

(Not owning a 7D, I don't know if current 7D users already got this in the massive firmware upgrade from some time ago.)

Dual-pixel and 'other video stuff', however, I would expect.  With it's reach and build quality, it could become the wildlife videographer's rig of choice.

- A

149
EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 12, 2014, 11:21:15 AM »
Given the potential customer base of those moving from other APS-C models I reckon
It will have

... the interesting question and imho more worth speculating about: What will it *not* have other than no ff sensor?

Knowing Canon, they will take great care not to deliver a "mini 1dx" at 1/3 of the price that even works better for wildlife in good light because of the gain in reach. Will they cripple the fw? Will the video have moire? Way less sealing? Will it have touch-amateur usability?

Your guess: (insert here)

They won't have to nerf it much as it is a different class of camera.  Compared to the 1DX, the 7D2 won't have:

  • As high a burst rate
  • As good low-light performance
  • As good build quailty and weather sealing
  • An integral grip
  • Spot metering at any AF point

Marsu, the first one is probably the only deliberate nerfing they will do, and the second is an APS-C reality that can't be too critical of.  The rest is par for the course for a non-1-series body -- and I don't think 7D users should have expected to get something 1DX-like for those items anyway.

But that's like comparing a Corvette to a Ferrari.  Both are pretty fun to drive, I'd wager.  The 7D2 should be a state of the art APS-C rig and offer the great new sensor that will be blown down the XXD and Rebel lines for the next few years. 

I think a crop 5D3 (or 'action-oriented' 5D3) is far more likely than a crop-sized 1DX.  Other than on the video side of things (which I never use), I'd expect the 7D2 and 5D3 size/build/menus/ergonomics/etc. to be very very very very very similar.  That's a great thing -- as a 5D3 owner, if I got more into shooting sports and wildlife, I'd pick up a 7D2 for more reach, framerate, etc. in a heartbeat if I had the confidence it was similarly well built and as intuitively designed as my 5D3.

- A

150
EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 11, 2014, 06:19:16 PM »
But, once cameras became digital, those grips no longer served their original purpose, but still serve as a signature of a "professional". That is why they are there, it is primarily for show and as a status symbol. And caters to the macho idea that for a real man, bigger is better. In a practical modern camera it serves no real function, it is just peacock feathers.

...to you, sir.  To you.

People who live in a high-speed theater of photography (wildlife, sports, etc.) are known to lean on their shutters, max out their buffers, etc.  These are the most discerning people this camera will be made for -- and I'm going to go out on a limb and say that they are fond of grips. 

I have a friend who shoots car racing on his 7D and he burns through solo batteries.  He'll rack up thousands of shots over a weekend shoot.  A grip (for him) means less interruptions to shooting, and his camera wouldn't leave his home without the grip attached.

The 7D2 will not have a grip integral to the design.  I am 100% confident of this for the reasons in my earlier message.  But many 7D2 users will want one, and it will be offered as an option.  That's a lock.

- A

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 53