Presumably the rumour is meant to be "announcement" in the Fall not 'release'.
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.
I spoke to someone who said that their brother's mother's cousin's ex-boyfriend's lover said that it would come in pink.
Pink? What's the point of that? At least white would lean towards arctic camouflage
Pink would provide camouflage among the herd of unicorns where the 7DII is found.
Follow up to this post, as my trip approaches...Having done the safari this time last year (Botswana/Zambia), my advice is to remember to enjoy the moment, not just the photography. You can go to a Zoo to photograph animals up close, but it's being with them in the wild that makes it so special. Breath it in. Post some pics when you get back.
The tour company sent me a packet with more info. We will be doing some touring in Range Rovers, but will also be walking a few miles a day over uneven terrain. We will sometimes be traveling in small planes, so there are strict weight limits. 44 lbs. for the provided duffel bag, and 15 lbs. for the carry-on. I plan to put all my camera gear in the carry-on.
They said point and shoot cameras don't have enough range for wildlife. They recommend a superzoom camera, or a DSLR with a mid-range zoom (up to 300mm) and a fast prime for low-light shooting.
Based on the comments in this thread, I am going to try to bring two bodies. Both so I have a backup, and so I don't have to switch lenses in the field. I have a 5D Mark II. I was going to convert it to IR, but I think I'll hold off until after the trip. I plan to buy a 5D Mark III, and will bring that, too. Electricity will be unreliable, so they recommend bringing extra batteries.
I'm still deciding on lenses. The lens I bring when I bring only one lens is the 24-105. But I'm thinking I might want to go longer and wider. Maybe my 16-35mm F/2.8 instead of a fast prime, and my 70-200 f/4 plus 1.4 extender. Not as fast as the f/2.8, but so much lighter.
I usually use prime lenses when I need reach, so the 70-200 the longest zoom I have. Well, I have a Sigma 150-500mm, but it's too bulky for this trip. I am considering buying a zoom lens for the trip.
I think the 28-300mm will be too heavy. The 70-300mm and the 100-400mm are possibilities. The 100-400mm might also be too heavy, though it has the advantage of being compatible with the Canon extenders.
I am planning to buy the Pocket Rocket card holders as Vivid Color recommended, and the B&W filters (once I nail down what lenses I'm bringing). And I'm stocking up on memory cards.
Still considering what other cameras I'll bring. I have a point and shoot Lumix I use as a backup and when I don't want to bring all my gear. (I'm planning to leave my smartphone at home.) And a SX50 HS. The superzoom might come in handy, though I am generally not thrilled with the image quality. I also have a point and shoot Lumix that's been converted to infrared. I love IR photography, but I doubt I'll have time on this trip for the long exposures needed when using an IR filter on a regular camera.
Check out his website - he bought his two 1Dx's.A once die-hard Nikon fan, Andy Rouse, tried out the 1D X not long after it's release. Andy is a world renown, well respected wildlife photographer, and he really is phenomenally good. The guy loved the 1D X over the D4 SO MUCH that he whole heartedly ditched his Nikon gear, bought a PAIR of 1D X cameras,
I trust you know Andy was paid to switch. Some thing all major camera brands do as part of their advertising strategy. I doubt he has bought any Canon gear at all (just assuming here as I do not know the specifics on how these deals work);
"I was recently appointed a ‘Canon Explorer’ ... I’m an ambassador for the brand..."
Maybe the 7Dii has a built-in grip and has dropped the flash, which means it could superficially at least resemble a new (although likely smaller) 1D.the colour accuracy of a file when viewed on a laptop screen is highly dependent on the ability of the screen to represent colour itself and without being able to use the images on a calibrated screen, the colours seen on some random laptop mean nothing.
I'd be almost prepared to call this rumor a hoax.
Would be interesting to know what laptop was used, which model and make of screen it had and what was used to calibrate it etc.
There are a few ways they can improve the 1D X but I do not think we will see a new one for a quite a while yet.
Maybe it is the 7D II and the body is just to throw everyone, I mean they could hide a 7D Mark II in a 1D X but you could never hide a 1D X in a 7D!
And before that the 5D, the first "affordable" full frame dslr.I've waited a long time for Nikon to recapture the lead on Nikon and their 36 mp camera. And now I read that Nikon will introduce an upgrade to the 800e in June. Why am I not jumping ship? I do have a lot of canon glass and have been a local customer. I own the mk III and 6d and I love the images .BUTT, COME ON ALREADY cCanon. Get your stuff together!
the D800 update is marginal.. so what?
if you complainers really need more MP and more details.. buy MF... i have.
I wish I could afford MF,,I should of done it years ago..But I their is economics and loyalty involved here,,,especially when I have 5 canon lens, a 5dmk III and a 6d ,not to mention other canon accessories.
And when you want to print to 40x60, its an issue..36 Mp would give that edge i needed. I should have jumped to nikon when the 800e came out,,but I didn't because I was convinced Canon would not sit idly bye trying to figure out how to recapture the glory days of the 5D Mk II.. That was a great camera at the time!!
So do we have an approximate date that these will be available? I know "June", but I'm leaving on a trip June 28th and would love to have the 16-35 with me.DigitalRev in HK often have new products before the main outlets, so worth keeping an eye on them. I bought a teleconverter for my X100s and had it delivered while Amazon and others were still taking pre-orders. Have bought a lot of gear from DigitalRev over the years and never had a problem. Good luck with it.
That's very helpful, many thanks for taking the time.
As you point out, the only people who have to wait are brand loyalists. Obviously some people have to be, but those who don't might as well do what some of us have done and supplement our Canon bodies with an A7r. I love mine, both with its superb native primes and my Canon EF lenses (plus a few old manual focus lenses) - so much so that I'm not sure which is my second camera....
I'm not necessarily a brand loyalist but the economic reality is that I have invested in Canon and to change to a completely incompatible brand now isn't feasible for me. I have looked closely at the A7r for that reason but there seem to be three big question marks - light leak, AF performance and IQ when using an EF adaptor. You clearly love your A7r but what is your experience with these issues if you don't mind me asking?
I don't mind at all.
1. It's not a "completely incompatible" system; they overlap. Whether they overlap enough for your purposes I can't say, of course. I would also say that for many people a complete switch to Sony wouldn't be sensible or desirable, and that I have no intention of doing so. For me it's a marvelous adjunct which, in some situations, would be my go-to camera - at least until Canon comes up with a close substitute (high resolution, mirrorless, no loss of EF performance, etc. - preferably with IBIS...).
2. The light leak applies under very limited circumstances, apparently (very long exposures in near-total darkness but with a bright light hitting part of the lens mount), and doesn't only apply to Sony cameras. Check out Roger Cicala's blog post on the subject at lensrentals. I never shoot in such conditions, so it's simply not an issue for me (or, I suspect, for 99.9% of people 99.9% of the time). The shutter-shock problem is far more real (see below).
3. AF performance with EF lenses is unquestionably inferior in terms of speed - it's not *that* slow, but if you're used to the near-instantaneous focusing you get with the best Canon lens/body combinations it will seem slow (rather comical too - it ambles towards the subject, pauses, goes a bit beyond and then comes back); and it's slow compared to native FE lenses, of course. But it's probably not inferior in terms of accuracy; in some respects it's superior: one benefit of a mirrorless body is that with on-sensor focusing there's no need to worry about back/front focusing. If you plan to use it to photograph things that don't move, it's not an issue. But don't even consider it if you want to photograph sports, children running around, herons-catching-fish, etc. and rely on AF to do so.
4. As for IQ, I've used these EF lenses: 24-105L, 28mm 2.8 IS, 40mm, 85mm 1.8, 100 L (no AF with this, but the other electronic connections work) and 70-200 f4 IS. I haven't performed anything resembling a scientific comparison of these lenses on the A7R vs 5DIII or 6D, but I feel confident in saying that not only is the image quality not inferior on the Sony body it's probably superior (I was shocked by the superb image quality I was able to get from the 85mm 1.8 when I first attached it).
At the time I decided to buy an A7R I had used one exclusively with Canon lenses - it was because the results were so good that I wanted one, and it was not until I had owned it for a while that I bought the two native FE primes; they're superb too, especially the remarkable 55mm 1.8.
Having said all that, there may well be Canon lenses that don't work as well on the two Sony A7s - I have no first hand knowledge one way or another - but based on what I've read the main problems are with wide angle Leica lenses due to a design that simply doesn't apply to Canon lenses. I would also add that if you want to use old Canon MF lenses, it's far easier to manually focus on a mirrorless camera (thanks to magnification and focus peaking) than it is on any dslr, especially if you use wide apertures; and Sony's focus peaking and magnification work at least as well as anyone else's.
5. One flaw you didn't mention is the much-discussed shutter-shock. This is real, and, in my experience, shows up if your shutter speed is 1/100-1/125, regardless of the lens (apparently it's worse if you use a tripod, but I don't and thus can't comment). It doesn't seem to be a problem at other speeds, including slower speeds (though you may encounter the usual too-slow-shutter problems if you're not using a lens with IS; IS has no effect on shutter-shock, of course); I've taken plenty of sharp photos at 1/60 (a speed these cameras seem inordinately fond of if you let them decide the shutter speed). If you avoid 1/100-1/125 you'll be fine.
I hope some of this helps. Far more competent/savvy/knowledgeable people than I have written about all of this, though, so don't rely too much on what I've written!