Anyone know what those 4 little lights are under the screen to the left? It's like a cluster of 3 small dots and then a slightly larger oval shaped one...
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.
To summarize the last 25 pages of rumor on this body:
(akiskev's image, nicely done)
I would suggest that APS-C owners do care about the IQ of their images and sometimes the only way is through the L route
Well, that was certainly the case for me. I am very demanding as far as image quality goes (if I was going to spend the money on a DSLR, I wanted significantly better quality than my point-and-shoot and I wasn't really getting it with the stock lens). I was never really part of the "L or nothing crowd" but funny thing- 2 years later, only one of my lenses is not L (that's the 17-55 2.8 ) Although I did have the 85 1.8 for a short while before trading it in.
It could very well be a EOS Movie prototype. I'm sure they are out there.
As to pricing of the 5D MK III, Nikon Rumors has a price estimate of $3K for the D800, which is where the D700 started. I doubt that a 5D MK III will be far off this price.
Oh dear god, no. Not that stupid mode dial unlock button. To me, that's one of the most useless additions that Canon can put on a semi-pro body. I can see the reason for putting it on the 60D, but come on. Anyone using a 7D or higher should have some idea of what they're doing and in all my years of photography I've never heard of anyone accidentally switching the mode dial unintentionally. If the new 5D is in fact coming standard with the unlock button, I hope that one can "downgrade" and remove it. Even for a fee, I'd do it.
I'm also really digging the new grip.
Image quality (IQ) is what you make of it.
Seriously, it's the quality of an image delivered by the lens, and that's affected by several parameters. Many people equate IQ with sharpness, but it's important to recognize that sharpness is only one characteristic of IQ, and sharpness itself has multiple meanings. Other characteristics include contrast and color rendition. There are various distortions and aberrations that affect IQ - geometric distortion, spherical aberration, chromatic aberrations (lateral and axial), vignetting, flare, etc.
The recording medium also affects IQ - a lens does not function in isolation (although there are ways to test lenses in isolation, those are practically meaningless, since as a lens user, you need a camera to use the lens with). Higher MP sensors result in an increase in perceived sharpness, but also sometimes magnify the effects of aberrations.
Post-processing is another factor, involving yet more tradeoffs. Many of those aberrations listed above can be corrected by software (especially geometric distortion, lateral CA, and vignetting). However, some of those corrections result in a loss of sharpness in the corrected areas.
So...I guess what it boils down to is that a lens with great IQ takes pretty pictures.
I'd recommend not getting too hung up on lens sharpness - there are a lot of things you can do to increase the IQ of your images that don't depend directly on the lens. For example, if you're shooting static subjects, using a tripod helps enormously. Using a lens hood can increase contrast and color saturation in your images compared to the same lens without a hood. Etc.
Or, if you prefer, go buy yourself an ISO 12233-type chart that costs more than some L-series lenses, and go nuts... Heck, it works for me!
Is there any news about a replacement of the (very) old 50/1.4 ??
I wonder if the exclusion of f8 is in part to sell big lenses that have come out?
Could also mean that Canon might start looking at lower f stops on their lenses. Say f2.8 as a base, not f4 like is the current standard.
Call me cynical, but from everything that has been posted about the used, broken, refurb, and new prices of these lenses, as well as how the OP has described this all....I'm not a betting man, but if I was, my money is on the lenses being stolen. If it's too good to be true...
maybe the Zeiss ZE 21mm f2.8?
That's an awesome one, I'm having a tough time deciding between that and the 24L II. I really only used my 16-35mm for the wide end and with the 14mm it seems unnecessary, so I guess I'm going to sell it for the Zeiss 21 or 24L
if you thinking indeed about a 24mm -------take look at the TS-E. I did, and will not look back
Zeiss 21 is a great lens too, according to reviews...and then there is the other TS-E (17mm)
It is a big chunk of cash for a glass. But it really does perform. I think dollies and sliders are way too overpriced, but thats just me. Just think of it this way. You can get years of
goodgreat photos with this lens and then if you want, you can sell it without much loss. These lenses hold their value quite well.
So I just purchased the 85L ii a couple days ago from BH and it came out to a total of $1860. And while I'm anticipating it's arrival, I'm like... "man, that's really expensive." Could have bought a Philip Bloom Pocket Dolly, 85 1.8 and a 135L w/ that money. Theses stupid mind games big companies use against you.... I have an L addiction.
Actually, it's none of the above lol. He knows someone who works at canon. They are also used lenses, not new but in great condition
I got my 100mmL macro for double that price and I was happy. The 70-200mm f2.8L is a top lens, IQ wise it's awesome (though not as good as the IS version) and the price is decent.
The reviews on the mk1 70-200 f/2.8 IS all say the IQ is worse than the non IS - can you still buy the mk 1 in the US?