April 19, 2014, 12:25:42 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 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 35
46
Lenses / Hands-On Video with the new Sigma 50mm F/1.4 Art
« on: February 21, 2014, 01:41:27 PM »

Just spotted this hands-on video with the new Sigma 50 at CP+ here:

Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | ART Small | Large


Not too much going on, but he has a host of side-by-side comparisons for diameter and length.

No news on pricing.   ::)

- A

47
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 05:25:28 PM »
What's keeping Canon from producing a hybrid STM-USM?

No idea, but as a still shooter, STM is kind of the devil to me.  If they ever offered such a lens, I trust it would have a switch to move between STM and USM.

That focus switch would be called "Still" or "Movie".   :P

- A

48
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 03:03:46 PM »
OK, been thinking ... if Canon made this rascal weather-sealed ... oh, boy!

Is there a single EF-S weather-sealed lens?  I don't believe there is...

Surely, they'd save the first weather-sealed EF-S lens for use with a sealed body like the 7D (or 7D2), so I'd think it would be saved for a super high quality EF-S zoom, like a 17-55 F/2.8 IS Mark II if they ever made one.

If pancakes are coming to EF-S, we should keep our feet on the ground.  Don't expect IS, massive apertures, or weather-sealing.  Small size has a cost.  :P

Again, if pancakes are coming, I'll use Canon's last two pancakes as a read of things to come.  They will be small and sharp.  USM would be the most we could hope for, I think (and that would be awesome).

- A

49
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 01:02:37 PM »
Something like this would only make sense if it's f/2 or faster.  17-55 f/2.8 IS covers the range and has IS.  Yes, it's more expensive, but it's focal length range is useful.

I disagree for form factor reasons.  If it's a pancake lens, there's your value proposition.  It might not be for you, but many folks would love to turn their APS-C rigs into inconspicuous + easier-to-bring-with-them-everywhere 35mm FF equivalent walkaround setups. 

So I think that a fairly quick (say F/2) wider prime in a pancake format would be very well received I think.

- A

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but what if it was a f/2.8 lens without IS like the EF 40?  I see little value in that.  A person bringing both the 24 and 40 and possibly something else might be better served by the 17-55.  Either that or pick up the M with the 22 f/2, which is still less inconspicuous than an APS-C body.

This gets to the specificity of shooters' needs:

If you want a tiny camera/lens size + an AF prime in the 24-50mm FF-equivalent focal length + APS-C sensor --> EOS-M + 22mm pancake (plus a lot of Fuji options)

But if you want all that with a proper optical viewfinder, you are out of luck.  Some would say that's too picky a combination.  Give up one of your requirements:  you could opt for an MF lens on an adapter, a large 20mm or 24mm prime with an EF mount, or use the 40mm pancake with an effective FL of 64mm.

Others might get a P&S for that need. 

And others would celebrate more pancakes from Canon.  I imagine that I'm not the only one.

- A

50
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 12:07:22 PM »
Something like this would only make sense if it's f/2 or faster.  17-55 f/2.8 IS covers the range and has IS.  Yes, it's more expensive, but it's focal length range is useful.

I disagree for form factor reasons.  If it's a pancake lens, there's your value proposition.  It might not be for you, but many folks would love to turn their APS-C rigs into inconspicuous + easier-to-bring-with-them-everywhere 35mm FF equivalent walkaround setups. 

So I think that a fairly quick (say F/2) wider prime in a pancake format would be very well received I think.

- A

51
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 12:04:23 PM »
Is there a particular reason that makes EF-S cameras need (dedicated) 24mm lenses?

Can't think of one, unless it's f/2 or faster.

What EF-s really needs is a better-built, 15-60/2.8 IS.

Absolutely.  It could use a pancake in the 22mm range like the EOS-M has.  A small 35mm-equivalent walkaround, perhaps F/2, would be stellar on my backup body as a small walkaround setup.  The currently offered 40mm pancake is a great little lens, but on a crop rig, it's a fairly useless walkaround as a 64mm FF equivalent.

This rumor doesn't make much sense for crop, though.  If it's EF-S, it should have its FL scaled down to correct for crop.  That's why EF-S zooms start at 15mm, 17mm, 18mm instead of something longer.  So a 24mm EF-S prime seems a bit nutty.  22mm makes a lot more sense to make a 35mm FF equivalent.

- A

52
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 11:54:23 AM »
We’re also told that a new USM motor will also be introduced some time this year, and it will be called “C-USM”, which stands for Compact Ultrasonic Motor. This technology is likely to first appear in a new 50mm lens.

No no no no no!!!  It is a compact USM motor that made the last 50mm f1.4 a piece of unreliable garbage.  Why would you do this again when you already have a reliable usm motor that is small enough to fit in the new 24, 28, 35 mm IS lenses?

+1

So many people still carry the 50 F/1.4 because the F/1.2L is (for various reasons) not for them.  These folks are clamoring for a new 50 with a modern/fast/accurate AF system.  Or, put another way:  many people still use the 50 F/1.4 with it's 20+ year old clunky-not-quite-ring-USM as the best AF 50mm lens for their needs. 

Canon designers:  needs don't get more unmet than this.

Please don't shoot for the stars with new tech on a bread and butter lens;  save that for a new 180L macro or a cool new pancake lens.  But for 50mm, give us what we know you can -- an impeccably well put together "IS refresh" in the 50mm focal length -- so many of your users will be happy if you did.

And please no STM here -- I want minimum time-to-target, not a smooth focusing lens for video.

If they pooch the USM on the new 50 IS, they'd be handing this focal length to Sigma.

- A

53
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: February 14, 2014, 02:19:03 PM »
A weather-sealed 16-50mm f/4 IS sounds wonderful.  As does the 14-24mm f/2.8 - but what'll she cost? $3K?
As a 16-35mm f/2.8 L III ...

with 77mm filter threads and IS please...

+1  to me a "16-50ish"  F/4 IS with 77mm threads and IS would be very attractive, and would fit nicely into the current lineup without tromping on the 16-35 f/2.8 II which appears is here to stay.  Sure f/2.8 would be nice but thats the job for a 16-35 III, imho.    If such a lens really materializes with that long of a maximum FL, IS will be important even for candids, not to mention narrow aperture landscapes in a pinch where you don't have a tripod.  I've even obtained some resonable results with handheld HDR -- with 6fps and a fast enough minimum shutter speed.

I see IS going on everything eventually.  It's useful at any FL in low-light handheld conditions and videographers always seem to want it.  Plus it's a chance for Canon to refresh and upcharge an existing lens design.

Further, it's so much easier (and lighter!) than making lenses a stop faster.  One might imagine standard lenses of the future all being F/4 or F/2.8 with 6-7 stops of IS.  :-P

- A


54
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: February 14, 2014, 02:13:42 PM »
with 77mm filter threads and IS please...

The 16-35 II is already 82mm.  Why on earth would they make it smaller when 82mm is turning into the new standard for the zooms?  The 24-70 II is 82mm, and surely the 70-200 III (if ever made) would avail itself of that added surface area.

Eventually, I think 77mm filters will be relegated to 'one-step-down-from-priciest' L lenses, like the 17-40, 24-105, 24-70 F/4, etc.

I hope not. The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM is already a big lens, I hope Canon wouldn't make it any larger.

As far as I understand, the wide lenses got a larger wide element to help reduce vignetting, which is redundant on long lenses.

Fair, but why on earth are the front elements of the white superteles so big?  It's not just because they are rear-filtered.  Surely, being able to pull in more light must contribute to the IQ in a positive way, right?  Otherwise, why would they do it?

- A

55
PowerShot / Re: Underwater Compact that shoots RAW?
« on: February 14, 2014, 02:09:50 PM »

Please report back what you think about the AW1. I'm considering that as a possible backup camera.

J

Glad to, but keep your fingers crossed on my compositions.  I am never underwater, so I expect to gather crystal clear shots of my flippers more than any local wildlife.  :-P

- A

56
PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 14, 2014, 02:08:08 PM »
The iPhone only works with gloves off which was only an option for a few minutes at best.
My daughter bought me Thinsulate iPhone gloves - they work perfectly on the 70D touchscreen as well.

+1

I have a pair of REI technical gloves that have conductive fibers in the thumb and first finger, they work with my iPhone and other touch screens.  I also have a pair of windblocking fleece gloves with the integrated mitten cover for the fingers and separate thumb cover.  When it's really cold, I wear the fleece glove-mittens over the tech gloves, so only my fingertips are 'exposed' and even then they're covered.

For phones, those gloves are great.  But for SLRs, I am not ready for touchscreens yet.

I'm so glad my 5D3 arrived before Canon got into touchscreens.  Since I made the jump from crop to FF, I'm so used to buttons / wheels / joystick that I'd feel frustrated with the lack of precision and speed in the myriad little changes I make in aperture, ISO, etc.  Menu navigation (though less frequent) would take a hit in speed for me as well.

My wariness of touchscreens with an SLR will die over time.  I liken SLRs going to touchscreens to video game consoles going to motion capture.  The Wii (as innovative as it was at the time) had to have its entire interface relatively dumbed-down to support the new controller motion interface.  I found it infuriatingly slow and imprecise.  But over time, that tech will improve to where it legitimately is easier/faster to use than standard controllers.  Touchscreens on cameras will eventually get there as well, and I'll thank all the Rebel users who fueled those improvements when I make my 5D4k purchase in a few years.   :D

- A

57
PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 14, 2014, 01:00:52 PM »
Canon seem to be playing Blackberry to Sony/Fuji's iPhone in the compact camera space.

I think you're either pocketable (RX100), rangefinderesque (X100) or interchangeable (NEX or whatever they're calling them now). But you're not big and ugly and fixed-lens like the G1X. It's a very forgettable camera and will be lost in the clutter of these other models.

All the more reason Canon gets (a) an EOS-M viewfinder and (b) more lenses, USM lenses, high quality lenses in the native EF-M format for the EOS M platform.  No one is taking EOS-M seriously because it is lacking a ton of creature comforts for enthusiast shooters.  That could be rectified if Canon saw it as an opportunity and not a threat to its SLR business.

- A

58
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: February 14, 2014, 12:58:02 PM »
A weather-sealed 16-50mm f/4 IS sounds wonderful.  As does the 14-24mm f/2.8 - but what'll she cost? $3K?
As a 16-35mm f/2.8 L III ...

with 77mm filter threads and IS please...

The 16-35 II is already 82mm.  Why on earth would they make it smaller when 82mm is turning into the new standard for the zooms?  The 24-70 II is 82mm, and surely the 70-200 III (if ever made) would avail itself of that added surface area.

Eventually, I think 77mm filters will be relegated to 'one-step-down-from-priciest' L lenses, like the 17-40, 24-105, 24-70 F/4, etc.

59
PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G1 X II Final Specifications
« on: February 14, 2014, 11:54:12 AM »
When will Canon provide a camera that people like me would want as a secondary/travel camera? Something that has at least APS-C, a fast lens with manual focus option, easy access to shutter speed, aperture and ISO, and a good optical viewfinder?

Canon EOS 100D with EF 35mm f/2 IS USM lens ... but only because you want an optical viewfinder.

Great minds think alike.  8)

I would state to you, 7enderbender, that the optical VF is the most limiting feature as far as body options go.

Effectively, an optical VF means you are down to Leica, Fuji, or an SLR.  (And no, I don't count a hotshoe optical VF like the RX1 offering as a legit VF.  Framing must be dubious with that.)

In other words, unless there's a mirror, optical VFs are becoming somewhat extinct.  That could be the number one reason why I still prefer an SLR to mirrorless.

- A

60
Sony becomes more and more aggressive. It'll also release the a99 successor in few months. The market may be flooded with lots of Canon L lenses in a great condition and at a reasonable price  ;)

Sony is a "horsepower company" -- in their classes, they often have the most pixels, the fastest burst, the thinnest bodies, etc.  And their prices aren't ridiculous like others are.

But unlike (say) a Sigma with lenses, where they have been fighting to show that their latest glass has truly put their prior questionable quality reputation behind them, Sony has a different reputation to fight -- they always seem to put the tech first and the user experience second.

They have offered compelling horsepower per dollar rigs for ages, but how many are truly great to use?  The RX1 was a landmark FF rig, as are (on paper) the new A7 and A7r.  But how many folks are raving about what it's like to shoot with them?  Not many.  For all the talk of stellar sensors, you get folks complaining about things you shouldn't see in > $1000 bodies: AF issues, having to drill down through their menus to tweak things, lossy RAW files, etc.

Make fun of Canon or Nikon's crusty attitude about innovation, but what they market fundamentally works for photographers.  We can make fun of green LCDs, sensor dust, etc. but largely Canon and Nikon don't put out poor products.  They just take forever to improve upon them and offer new glass.  :-)

No alarms and no surprises = Canon will keep my money (at least on the body front) for the foreseeable future.

- A

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 35