March 05, 2015, 10:03:11 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 - CanNotYet

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 11
Yes, I saw your answer that you posted while I was writing my post. I have to admit I did not know how the size of the front lens element was determined. You learn something new every day. :)

Now I understand why there is no EF-S telephoto lenses.

But I still would like a Canon EF-S 50-150 2.8 IS USM. :) (58mm filter size would do)
I have been thinking of getting the Sigma, but I want Canon colors.

Smell that?  It's sweet-and-sour scent of optical physics and lens design waking you from your dream...  :P

A telephoto lens design places the 'virtual' aperture at or near the front element.  So, a 300/2.8 lens is going to need at least a ~107mm diameter front element to fill that aperture with light. That front element is going to be big and heavy, and need a strong frame to support it.  A smaller image circle would mean a slight reduction in some of the internal elements, but won't really make the lens smaller (or cheaper). 

There's a reason we don't see EF-S telephoto lenses (except one zoom that actually starts in the normal range and has a variable aperture, meaning a different lens design) - there's just no real advantage to a smaller image circle at long focal lengths.

Well, I DO understand that 2.8 might be pushing it, but maybe a 4? Tamrons 70-300 is plastic built, for FF, and this would be a prime, needing less moving parts. (I think that kind of build would be at least OK)

Also, are you taking into account the size difference in sensors? 300/2.8 might be 107mm on FF, but it sure is not on the Panasonic FZ200. So, how big would it HAVE to be, if optimized for a 1.6x sensor?

Edit: Oh, I saw your answer.

I'd suggest that Canon is deliberately yielding the lower-cost long glass market to third parties that are  targeting  the xxD and xxxD owners who may not realize the high demands upon glass that come with such high density sensors. 

For the camp who predicts that the 7D2 will truly be a "mid-level" camera (meaning priced near the midpoint between a rebel and a 1DX), the expression  "Future of Pro APS-C will change" means that the 7D2  will be a serious sports/wildlife Body.   Such a camera could be evidence of a Canon strategy for serious/pro APS-C wildlifers to either rent or own the long L glass that meets the build quality, resolution,  and weather sealing requirements of such a use case, as the reach/cost advantage is already realized in the form of the crop sensor itself. 

The increased demands of the higher density sensor would be incentive enough, for those who are aware and who care, to use L glass, knowing that they are taking advantage of the best portion of the image circle as well. 

If the 7D2 really targets the pro or semi-pro wildlife segment, then in my opinion Canon may assume that the 7D2 owner has a FF body as well (such as a 6D), or aspires to one, in which case there is no incentive to invest in EF-S glass at all.  Moreover, accepting the wildlife specialized use case, the "single body" 7D2 owner may in fact be content with covering the WA and UWA ranges without L build quality and weather sealing, i.e. with the fine lenses available today such as the  10-22.

You might be quite correct in that. But there ought to be some room for a EF-S telephoto lens with the inherent advantages of weight reduction from the shortcuts the lensmakers can take when designing for a smaller image circle. I am almost certain there will be something like this coming for the M-mount, and I think a conversion to EF-S would be easy, as the glass is for the same sensor size, and the difference is in the mount and flange distance as I understand it.

Anyways, a 300mm f2.8 for EF-S, at the weight as the 300 f4 or less? They could get away with a weather sealed plastic build (something like the 17-55 2.8 ) if done properly, and the price is right. (Yes, dreaming now, but...)  :)

EOS-M / Re: EOS M Firmware Coming Soon
« on: February 11, 2013, 05:24:04 AM »
Well, this is welcome. Although it should probably have shipped with the "improved AF performance". At the current prices, and with an at least useable AF, it is starting to look competitive.

Lets hope Canon learns a lot from the EOS-M release and brings it's A game in the next M body.

Olympus TG1 or TG2. Fast lenses, and waterproof, shockproof, crushproof etc. That means drunk-proof :)
It can take pictures and video from inside your beerglass with beer in it! Only con is no RAW, but the pics usually look great anyways...

Spill beer on it? Not a prob. Drop it? No sweat.
Charge the batteries and have fun!

I agree on the high end EF-S lenses. The most blatant omission at the moment is in the telephoto range. A competitor to Sigmas 50-150 HSM OS springs to mind, or a telephoto prime in the 200-500 range with the weight reduction advantage of EF-S. (not as probable though)

Releasing one such lens would also reinforce the marketing of 7D2 as a sports/wildlife camera...

Mikael: Stop. Just stop. Feel free to start your own thread. This thread is about Canon EOS 70D and future Canon APS-C cameras.

A 2x crop sensor would have even more reach. I think it is more important what camera sensors can deliver "sufficient" quality for the applications that most customers care about, what camera systems can deliver the right lenses at the right price etc.

It might well be that well see m43 and FF, but APS-C will disappear. After all, it is a fairly recent format and there are not _that_ many good lenses designed especially for it (but many lenses that work for both crop and FF).

Yes. But Canon has shown their hand with the EOS-M, that they will stay with APS-C for a couple of generations of cameras. Why create the M-mount otherwise? It is made to optimize size for APS-C. Thats a LOT of intent going into a sensor size. The M-lenses will ALL be designed for the APS-C sensor.

Sure, they could adopt a 4/3 sensor. Or Nikons 2.7X. But they didn't.
And, being Canon, probably won't do it unless FORCED to. That is why I believe the APS-C sensor has many years left.

A small sensor does not inherently have "more reach". A sensor of dense sensels does have more reach. Often, smaller sensors have more sensel density than large sensors, but this is no rule written in stone. The D800 seems to point towards FF sensors using the same sensel tech as APS-C sensors.


Yes, I know. Sorry for leaving that out. I mean that it will always be cheaper to make a small high density (APS-C) sensor, than a large high density (FF) sensor, and, as a consequence, the APS-C sensors will be leading the way in this (ofc the compact camera sensors are already there and improving).

It is simply a matter of scale :) (pun intended)


To go off-topic a bit here, I really like the idea one of the commentators to article had: To put a Canon compact sensor into a smartphone. That would be really nice, and I guess Canon could earn aLOT of money that way.

Ok, back on topic. It is very true that a good product does not mena that you can sell said product. But, when looking at the profit Nikon will STILL have (4-500 millions?), I would not get too worried. Although the trend is not looking the best for entry DSLRs...

EOS Bodies / Re: Recommend Cheap Second Body
« on: February 08, 2013, 05:11:24 AM »
40D or 50D used? They have some weather sealing. Could come in handy when out camping... They are also Magnesium-alloy bodies, which I would take any day over a plastic one.

Ok, I think everyone needs a time out here.

Mikael, I am sure you mean well, and have excellent points to back up your claims, but please start your own thread discussing DR, banding, comparing sensors and such. It is NOT on-topic here.

The rest of you, don't bite. It turns into a flame war every time.

AND, I would ask you all to keep the tone polite. I know that it is hard when you get emotionally engaged, but for the rest of the forum's sake, please constrain yourselves. :)

Now, back on-topic: I think 70D and 7D2 will both be APS-C, as will all their successors. When the day comes and Canon goes 5 FF-models, they will no longer be successors of these lines, but rather something new. Like the 6D. (Canon could ofc reuse the names).

I think there will always be a place for pro "sub-FF" sensors, just because of the reach. Canon knows this, and for them, putting a APS-C sensor in the same body as a FF camera is a cost-effective way to create a new camera.

So, I would prepare for APS-C 7D2 and 7D3. I think it is only a question of what they improve every time, not change in sensor size.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon T4i or wait for T5i?
« on: February 07, 2013, 09:42:51 AM »
Like others have said, it depends on your current situation. Do you have a camera now? If not, then buy it now. There is always something better around the corner. Meanwhile, you are missing pictures.

If you DO have a camera now (with adequate IQ), do you really need to upgrade? And if you do, how soon?

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: TAMRON'S thinking about making FAST PRIMES
« on: February 07, 2013, 08:13:08 AM »
Yes! I really like Tamron, and with their VC and USD tech, they could probably compete in the 200-400 range with fast primes. Hopefully they introduce something not offered by anyone else, like a 200mm f/2.4 or a 350mm f/3.5. Available in black... :)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms 70D; Future of Semi-Pro DSLR is FF
« on: February 07, 2013, 05:17:23 AM »
In that respect, Canon does a better job making cameras for photographers, rather than refining technology for obsessive-compulsive minutia-entwined techno-babbling batS___-crazy should-be-out-photographing-something wackos like myself and so many others on this forum.  ;D

Oh, this deserves a HUGE +1. Touché, my friend. :D

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 11