451
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
« on: January 15, 2013, 06:48:02 PM »
Good review Justin. Excellent lens; the only gripe I have with this lens is it is heavy... but life is full of compromises.
May 26, 2013, 02:14:23 AM
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.
452
EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR & Lens Coming on January 15, 2013? [CR1]
« on: January 14, 2013, 07:42:24 PM »
It is a CR1 rumor to keep you clicking. Why is this even a surprise that nothing major will come of this rumor... It is aterall a rumor site...not a "fact" site.
Tomorrow, we will have a new headline "DSLR & lenses REALLY coming Feb 2...no no, we mean it this time" and you will be on the hook checking back.
Tomorrow, we will have a new headline "DSLR & lenses REALLY coming Feb 2...no no, we mean it this time" and you will be on the hook checking back.
453
Lenses / Re: Reasons why 14-24L zoom will not be coming soon
« on: January 14, 2013, 01:39:02 PM »hate to say it, but maybe the 14-24 will be a F/4 instead of 2.8.
That would be indeed more in line of replacing the 17-40, and sort of leaving the 16-35 mk2 and other primes in "peace"; and along the way, the f/4 could be sharper to start with, and aiming towards landscapers.
After all, even f/4 is seldon used, unless you are into night shots or low light situations that iso can't really solve.
This is not that far fetched actually.
Hell, if they went f/4, they can even leave the 17-40L around for the budget minded and the 16-35II for the slightly higher price and still ask $1600 for the new 14-24L f/4. The f/4 will also make the new zoom more affordable and target more buyers than coming up with an expensive superduper f/2.8 that only a few can buy at upward of $2500.
Should such a hypothetical zoom show up in the Canon UWA lineup, one would be still forced to choose between the 16-35II with faster f/2.8 but less wide and the new zoom with slower f/4 but starting wider at 14mm. And Canon can still keep the prime 14L II f/2.8 in its place for the really IQ minded with more $$$'s.
Canon is not dumb enough to offer a *single* lens that does it ALL and well...including best IQ, speed, IS, build, focal range etc ..their strategy is to split the features and gain more revenue... so f/4 makes sense, but I am still not convinced this is a near term thing.
454
Lenses / Re: Your favorite lens is?
« on: January 14, 2013, 01:20:24 PM »
It is like asking what song you like best... depends on the mood and the occation.
I can probably pick three if there is no context and we are being pedantic: 135L, 35L, and 24-105L .
In a pinch, I always grab the 24-105L Zoom and 35L prime. They compliment eachother very well.
I fall in and out of love with the 35L....it does limit you in someways being in reality a wider angle than normal ....but I use it as a faux standard for a bit of punch. Right now I am going through the love phase with the ageing 35L.
I can probably pick three if there is no context and we are being pedantic: 135L, 35L, and 24-105L .
In a pinch, I always grab the 24-105L Zoom and 35L prime. They compliment eachother very well.
I fall in and out of love with the 35L....it does limit you in someways being in reality a wider angle than normal ....but I use it as a faux standard for a bit of punch. Right now I am going through the love phase with the ageing 35L.
455
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 50 f/1.2L
« on: January 13, 2013, 01:56:40 PM »Justin...for all of the hits you are taking here, about this review, I just want to say to you how GREAT and REFRESHING your reviews are!
You give us "real-world" reviews off the cuff AND you back up your take on whatever you are reviewing with SOLID photography...(many reviewers do not have that ability!).
The thing is...when you give us your input, I listen to what you have to say because your images give you credibility...so I listen when you talk. If people want a super-analytical, technical review from some dweeb who can't shoot...let them go elsewhere. Your discussions are relaxed, intelligent and informative.
Just keep doing what you are doing...You have brought new life to this website and I for one am enjoying your presentations here.
Thank you! You just made my morning
Yes, keep the reviews coming.
And as an aside, with this particular lens you have to at least be "seen" as being even-handed in your review, which you clearly were.
If you hadn't, the 50L cult would have run you over with their trophy Hummers getting 3 miles per gallon. So, really smart call.
456
Lenses / Re: Reasons why 14-24L zoom will not be coming soon
« on: January 13, 2013, 01:23:44 PM ».
It's just a patent, and the field is already overcrowded. As for patent, they probably have a patent for a lens that dispenses toilet paper in nice origami shapes. As for overcrowded it's plain to me a 14-24 would replace the older 17-40.
LOL on the toilet paper patents, but come on now, the japanese use those fancy bidet things...
The 14-24L is likely to be an "up-market" product probably skirting $2500 to $3000 at introduction... so if anything the highly affordable 17-40L will not be a direct competition...the 16-35 II, though also not exactly a direct competition, could be at somewhat more danger given importantly its ~$1400 price point.
.
I think you're mostly right that Canon doesn't feel compelled to compete directly with Nikon. But as I've often said I believe as far as marketing, the Nikon influence on Canon is greatly overestimated.
I concur, Canon will not feel compelled to match "lens-for-lens" or "focal length-for-focal length" on the EF mount. If there is a big gaping hole, may be...currently I don't see that in the UWA range.
As for starring into the Sun and Canon's marketing... we have all been there.
457
Lenses / Re: Reasons why 14-24L zoom will not be coming soon
« on: January 13, 2013, 01:00:20 PM »
While I agree that the 14-24 may take some time to materialize, your first and second argument are contradictory. As per your own argument the 14-24 will be a compromise of sorts so the IQ of the primes will be better. Prime shooters will still go for the primes regardless of the existence of the 14-24.
I partly agree... I think the 24L II is safe... it is a faster f1.4 and is safe from internal price poaching.
But the two f2.8 lenses (16-35II and the 14L II), I am not so sure: 16-35L II at f/2.8 though not a direct competition, is a reliable revenue generator for Canon and I think they will try to keep it even if this hypothetical zooom is planned ; but there will be some residual predation there as at least some who are currently forced to choose 16-35 II even though they have the money, will opt for the overlapping wider UWA.
Now the 14L II currently costs about $2300 and bears the usual crosses that UWA's bear (still agreat lens) may not be so safe at f/2.8. The hypothetical 14-24L zoom, even if it has a smidge less IQ, will tempt some, it will tempt me.
If this were the case, the 24-70 II would cannibalize the sales of the 24, 35 and 50 Ls. Don't see that happening.
This, I don't agree with. All three primes you list are faster at f1.4 or f1.2... with stellar reputation for the first two lenses and a controversial cult following for the 50L. not even a close comparison to the 24-70II at f/2.8. If you want faster, you will choose the L primes.
Now will one do the same with the $2300 14L II f2.8 prime if the f/2.8 zoom existed... I don't really know.
458
Lenses / Re: Reasons why 14-24L zoom will not be coming soon
« on: January 13, 2013, 12:12:49 PM »Neuro, surely it is unfair to suggest that this post makes me a "nikonophile."
As a kid I thought if I touched a Nikon I'd get Cooties and as an adult I break out in rashes when I see a friend use one.
No, I wasn't speaking of you, specifically. But I hear there's a cream for that rash...
Yes, i recently got the cream, it's called 1DX.
459
Lenses / Re: Reasons why 14-24L zoom will not be coming soon
« on: January 13, 2013, 11:45:00 AM »
Neuro, surely it is unfair to suggest that this post makes me a "nikonophile." 
As a kid I thought if I touched a Nikon I'd get Cooties and as an adult I break out in rashes when I see a friend use one.
As a kid I thought if I touched a Nikon I'd get Cooties and as an adult I break out in rashes when I see a friend use one.
460
Lenses / Reasons why 14-24L zoom will not be coming soon
« on: January 13, 2013, 01:58:11 AM »
Canon may not be in any rush to introduce 14-24mm quickly in spite of all the hype in the rumor circuit...if it comes at all, it would be a pleasant surprise for those who are waiting....and not an expected obligatory move from Canon. In fact, some sober thought would suggest the wait is likely to be longer.
Why?
1) A minor issue is that there is no such thing as a "perfect" UWA zoom; the UWA designs are typically a jumble of compromises... and there *will be* no such perfection in the new Canon designs over and above the current UWA offerings. They may get it to be marginally better but they will face the same corner issues and will have to make compromises on distortion and vignetting and perhaps curved focal planes. So they won't be in a hurry to introduce yet another UWA zoom that comes up short…as it invariably will be given the high expectations.
2) Second problem is Canon's current line up on the WA and UWA end and its marketing strategy. The existence of a patent does not mean a product will be forthcoming soon. They introduced relatively in quick succession (not including the 17 TSE, and the 17-40L), the 16-35 II, and 14L II, and 24L II...and note all these are version II “updates”! A high quality 14-24 zoom that goes across all these will be an issue. Especially with the 17-40 and relatively young 16-35II already in the lineup.
3) And above all, the worst assumption is that Canon will "have" to somehow match and compete with Nikon lenses on the EF mount! On camera bodies, yes, as Nikon can pull away new comers not attached to a brand by providing cheaper, better bodies. But on the high end EF lenses ...not so much.
Once you are in the lens kennel tied to the EF mount with multiple lenses in your collection, you are like fish in a barrel for Canon. And let’s face it, for a high priced UWA zoom, we are talking well-heeled folks who are unlikely to be newbies to the Canon Brand.
As the dominant dog in the kennel with a lens branding that is highly regarded ...Canon has less incentive to "match" anything that Nikon does. Regardless of how stellar they are, the Nikon mount lenses do NOT compete directly with the Canon EF mount.
Yes, the whimpering from the impotent Canonites that they will switch to Nikon if Canon doesn't introduce this that or the other will continue...switch due to what? A single UWA lens while giving up the whole Canon platform? Laughable! And Canon knows this well. They can drag this out for long and still keep you guessing.
So yeah... sorry to rain on the parade, but I am just not convinced that 14-24 zoom is coming anytime soon. If it does, I will genuinely be happy for ya.
Why?
1) A minor issue is that there is no such thing as a "perfect" UWA zoom; the UWA designs are typically a jumble of compromises... and there *will be* no such perfection in the new Canon designs over and above the current UWA offerings. They may get it to be marginally better but they will face the same corner issues and will have to make compromises on distortion and vignetting and perhaps curved focal planes. So they won't be in a hurry to introduce yet another UWA zoom that comes up short…as it invariably will be given the high expectations.
2) Second problem is Canon's current line up on the WA and UWA end and its marketing strategy. The existence of a patent does not mean a product will be forthcoming soon. They introduced relatively in quick succession (not including the 17 TSE, and the 17-40L), the 16-35 II, and 14L II, and 24L II...and note all these are version II “updates”! A high quality 14-24 zoom that goes across all these will be an issue. Especially with the 17-40 and relatively young 16-35II already in the lineup.
3) And above all, the worst assumption is that Canon will "have" to somehow match and compete with Nikon lenses on the EF mount! On camera bodies, yes, as Nikon can pull away new comers not attached to a brand by providing cheaper, better bodies. But on the high end EF lenses ...not so much.
Once you are in the lens kennel tied to the EF mount with multiple lenses in your collection, you are like fish in a barrel for Canon. And let’s face it, for a high priced UWA zoom, we are talking well-heeled folks who are unlikely to be newbies to the Canon Brand.
As the dominant dog in the kennel with a lens branding that is highly regarded ...Canon has less incentive to "match" anything that Nikon does. Regardless of how stellar they are, the Nikon mount lenses do NOT compete directly with the Canon EF mount.
Yes, the whimpering from the impotent Canonites that they will switch to Nikon if Canon doesn't introduce this that or the other will continue...switch due to what? A single UWA lens while giving up the whole Canon platform? Laughable! And Canon knows this well. They can drag this out for long and still keep you guessing.
So yeah... sorry to rain on the parade, but I am just not convinced that 14-24 zoom is coming anytime soon. If it does, I will genuinely be happy for ya.
461
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 50 f/1.2L
« on: January 12, 2013, 10:52:19 PM »"you are jealous" if you can't afford one, is childish. I use a lens to make pictures and I can assure you there are a lot of lenses out there for small budget but with great specs. There is no need to pay hundreds of dollars for the red rings just because of fluorit glasses or metal case if you can't see the results.
It's like everything, f.e. like a sportscar: you can pay 20000$ in extra for the 10 Horsepower S-Edition...
+1
I said the same thing about the comment that those who have issues with this lens do so because they "can't afford it".
Though my 50L made some great shots, it was not something that hit the mark reliably...when I needed certainty, I was falling back on the simple f1.4... I eventually bit the bullet and sold it. I will not say it has no merit at all...it does. But, it is like dating a beautiful, but rather tempremental girl who has PMS at random times. If it works for you, awesome.
I disagree I can afford the 50 f1.2 and the 85 f1.2 however i chose the sigma 85 f1.4 because on 5D bodies there is a significant AF speed difference and its a stunning lens
You are misreading what I said...partly because of my phrasing...we agree (I think) that it is not the price that is the deciding factor. My point was that it is childish to claim that the critics of 50L are the ones that can't afford it (an earlier poster's comment, not mine). Price does not always dictate quality and it is lame to link them.
462
EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR & Lens Coming on January 15, 2013? [CR1]
« on: January 12, 2013, 09:52:12 PM »I have new info! The new camera to be released is a mirror less camera with wifi and a touchscreen..... See attached photos of prototype
Didn't you get the memo. Humor is out, seriousness is in.
Besides, your obviously photoshopped image isn't fooling anyone...
Watch it!
Mt. Spokane Photography is keeping tabs and sarcasm could go on your permanent record.
463
EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR & Lens Coming on January 15, 2013? [CR1]
« on: January 12, 2013, 09:48:10 PM »I have new info! The new camera to be released is a mirror less camera with wifi and a touchscreen..... See attached photos of prototype
You have pictures! So this must be at least CR2+
464
EOS Bodies / Re: DSLR & Lens Coming on January 15, 2013? [CR1]
« on: January 12, 2013, 09:41:44 PM »
Bwahaha! Love it!!!
