Messages

391

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]

« on: January 28, 2013, 06:55:26 PM »

For those of you wishing for the return of APS-H in the 7D2:

APS-H was a stop-gap.

Remember the "frankenmonster" FD autofocus lens that Canon made before the arrival of EF bodies? See pic below. That was a stop-gap.

Just the same, APS-H was a stop-gap... till full frame sensors became more affordable. Now that FF has acheived more market penetration and come down in price since early years, the stop-gap will die.

So let's move on.
APS-H is dead.
Dead, dead, dead.

392

Lenses / Re: Sigma 35 1.4 or Canon 50 1.4 or Canon 24-70 2.8 II

« on: January 28, 2013, 06:34:26 PM »

50mm 1.4 is cheap as chips and is decent for the $$$. I'd recommend it for is neutral perspective.

+1

393

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]

« on: January 28, 2013, 04:23:50 PM »

Agreed dlleno...plus you got what I meant by 6D sensor....existing 6D-like "tech" with high ISO capabilities but obviously with more pixels.

394

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]

« on: January 28, 2013, 03:50:52 PM »

My 2 cents:

It will remain APS-C just to maximize reach for teles as 7D has evolved into a semi-pro range especially for wild-life and sports folks...one reason why I think Canon will not go APS-H as this will cut down on reach for these users and also APS-H will generate less sensor units sensor area for price.

As for what sensor tech:

Option 1: Canon may use the same sensor in the 7D2 as in the anticipated full frame high MP sensor (somewhere in the ~36 to 45 MP range, adjusted to APS-C size).  If true, this would likely auger a higher price for 7D2 as they can't low ball the price too much in this scenario.

Option 2: Alternatively, they may just use older sensor tech but with all the bells and whistles including superior AF system, build, wifi, gps, multiple card slots etc... or some combo of that. Using the existing sensor tech would probably help keep the price down a bit.

Given 7D branding under 6D, Canon may use the older sensor tech and use the price savings on more updated features and still debut 7D2 around the same price as intro 6D.

First option is more daring, second one is more safe as they have to keep pricing in mind.

Difficult to say which way Canon will go.

395

Lenses / Re: Lens Help - 17-40 & 70-200 f/4 or 24-70 f/4

« on: January 28, 2013, 03:04:51 PM »

I went back and looked at photos from the last few years and realized that on my 17-85 I took almost all of my photos at either the wide or zoom end.  Very few in the middle.

That quote is perhaps your most telling of your post... so option #1, 24-70 f4 IS is not going to cut it on the tele end as the 70mm on the full frame 6D would have the FOV of "middle" focal length of what you were used to on your crop body. You will be wishing for more reach constantly when you zoom out to 70mm.

Option #2 is ok, as the 70-200L f/4 IS is one of the best IQ zooms that is light to carry on top.

But I think you should have gotten the 24-105L as it is still f/4 and will give you more reach than 24-70mm.
Just look at some of the threads here on CR where people post their pics...this so called "kit" zoom can generate some awesome pictures. And you don't have to switch lenses to gain reach or to do good quality landscapes. It is a perfect walk-around lens and a good event and portrait lens.

I am sure you will hear voices that say "oh but f4 is too slow for indoors"... Remember, 6D is very good with low light.

Importantly, all the other options you list are also f/4 so by no means would this be a step down.

If you pick 24-105L around ~$800, you can now consider other faster lenses...perhaps even the excellent 135L and still come under your budget or instead the 70-300L and get a longer tele for a few more bucks.

You can't go wrong with 70-200L f/4, but frankly you will be gaining additional 100-200 f/4 if you opt for the 24-105L zoom and I don't think this is a great "first" combo. Nothing wrong with the 70-200 f/4 IS...I am a fan...just it won't add too much in this specific combo.

Once you build up your lens collection, depending on your apetite for weight and speed,  I think either the higly able, lighter 70-200 f/4 IS or the equally able, faster, heavier 2.8 IS II should be in the collection....but early in the game, not so much.

396

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]

« on: January 27, 2013, 09:44:03 PM »

On another note, does anyone think that one of the 4 lenses could be a 135mm f/1.8L?  That would really be the only lens I'd be interested in.

Hate to be the grinch, but there is no chance....the current 135L is the darling of the community and canon doesn't tinker with things that are doing well. They have other more pressing fish to fry...a long long list of fishes before they get to 135L.

397

EOS Bodies / Re: Expected reception of the 7DII / 70D

« on: January 27, 2013, 09:32:39 PM »

None of those poll options are mutually exclusive...
The most critical and damning of receptions would be indifference...which I am toward both those models.

398

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]

« on: January 27, 2013, 08:34:32 PM »

I think 2014 is going to be a HUGE year for Canon.  The big MP camera will be out of the gate first and a few months later, the 5D Mark IV with some tech of the big MP will be out.  Canon may have two cameras competing for yearly awards in 2014...

I lost you when you said 5D mark iv in 2014...

So they release 5D3 just in 2012 and you predict a mark 4 in just two years in 2014? Just don't visit Vegas without supervision 

399

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]

« on: January 27, 2013, 08:09:42 PM »

Predictions:

100-400mm f/4.0-5/6 IS L - same image quality at f/4.0 as the old 70-200mm f2.8 L  IS Classic (better than the current version but worse than the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS)

50mm f/1.8 IS

35mm 1.4 L II (Sigma beater)

14-24mm f/2.8 L

I can only see the 35L II coming true...the rest is La-La land delirium

Not at all. The new 50 IS is a hammerlock this-year lens. They are knocking those lenses out with regularity now.

The only question is what the max aperture will be -- 1.8 or 2.0.

- A

My comment was limited to 50mm 1.8 with IS he lists...which is still zero chance.   The f/2 50mm IS  has been long rumored and will not be a huge surprise.

400

Lenses / Re: 100-400L Version II ain't comin' either!

« on: January 27, 2013, 06:08:00 PM »

yeah because if you interested in a 1400 euro lens you could just buy the better 11000 euro lens.   

i guess a ton of potential 100-400mm buyer will just buy the 200-400mm instead... 

Actually, it would be the other way around. If the new 100-400L II zoom is upgraded in IQ significantly (considering it is already a good performer) you are easiliy in the zone of other primes in the focal length range...and the 200-400 zoom is not the only lens in question. Canon has kept several low priced older primes for more than a decade in this range, and while they are not sexy or new, given no new R&D or production line upgrades are needed for these as would be with a newer product, they are steady revenue generators. 

People who will foot the bill for higher priced primes (may be not the 11K zoom customer, I agree) but somewhere in the midrange will pause and consider the lower priced high IQ competitor with the versatility of a zoom vs the smidge of IQ or f/stop they may garner by paying 3 or 5K more.

If the IQ and IS improve with the new 100-400L II and they will have to, at least a tad, to justify a newer version, this is not such a far fetched notion.

401

Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?

« on: January 27, 2013, 05:50:38 PM »

I had no choice really. I am a thrid generation Canonite and there was always canon gear around. As a kid I was given an old hand-me-down A1 and a couple of FD's and that was it.

402

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]

« on: January 27, 2013, 05:43:57 PM »

It would be nice to have an update on the 50mm f/1.4 - at least I am curious about it.

That lens was updated. Strange though, Canon is stamping "Sigma" on the side 

Get your city water checked...they are putting something in it

403

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]

« on: January 27, 2013, 05:40:38 PM »

Predictions:

100-400mm f/4.0-5/6 IS L - same image quality at f/4.0 as the old 70-200mm f2.8 L  IS Classic (better than the current version but worse than the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS)

50mm f/1.8 IS

35mm 1.4 L II (Sigma beater)

14-24mm f/2.8 L

I can only see the 35L II coming true...the rest is La-La land delirium

404

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]

« on: January 27, 2013, 02:23:18 PM »

This may be  reliable source; even so, what has he/she really told us?  Specifically?  ...not much.   

That's why this is a rumor site. It gives us something to speculate about.

Also, us expecting a major EF lens release and dSLR body every second sunday is rather laughable.

Also, CR clearly did not consult those Japanese tourists from the earlier post... they clearly have more firmer answers 

405

Lenses / Re: 15mm/2.8 fish eye as normal wide angle

« on: January 27, 2013, 02:04:12 PM »

Rectilinear UWA lens designs are fundamentally different from the fisheye designs and include specific glass elements to render the focal plane more flat, reduce CA, and overcome a slew of other nifty optical challanges. 

The usual trade-off in super wide rectilinear lenses is "stretching out" especially at the corners and edges which shows up as corner/border "softness".

Some of this falls well beyond post processing fixes.