Messages

121

EOS Bodies / Re: A Brief 2013 Canon Roadmap [CR1]

« on: November 13, 2012, 10:59:26 PM »

135 F/1.8L IS USM <----- I Really wants one.

135 f/1.4L IS USM

That would put it in relative aperture size and MSRP to the 200 f/2.0L IS USM ....   

There exists a Vivitar 135 F/1.5 from times past, and creates interesting imagery, but it's huge and not very light weight, something that the 135L has that is nice is it's good size, weight and sharpness. If the bokeh is great, creamy and without much CA then that's better than simply going shallower IMO (it can "feel" shallower too). It would be nice to shoot faster for those definite low light shoots, but ISO performance is getting better and better, so what compromises do we mind or don't for going for a faster 135L? It'll be cool though

122

EOS Bodies / Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?

« on: November 12, 2012, 09:14:30 PM »

Ahh yes, OP is complaining that Canon has been pathetically behind since the D300, a now 5 year old camera. Why haven't you switched five years ago then? Obviously smart enough to see that Canon was behind and would remain behind and useless because you can't figure out how to set your bloody ISO!!... oh wait... troll bait....?
If only I could lavish in those L glass and 1D bodies... well then the tech will be better than what I am capable of I'll admit that, I'm happy with the more-than-capable 5DII and my Siggy lenses, the direction of manufacturers based on their top-speced gear matters to the few that will actually be able to make such an investment, so by the time (if ever, of course) Canon can meet or exceed Sonikon then I might be able to actually purchase good tech, and in the mean time it's time take more pictures.

123

Lenses / Re: 50mm

« on: November 09, 2012, 06:20:25 AM »

I just moved to FF, and my canon 50mm 1.4 isn't so grand anymore, it's still sharp where it needs to be, but the bokeh really could be a lot better. On crop the lens performs nicely wide open, the center sharpness and what bokeh you get is smooth, but with the whole image circle I don't like the harsh background, also need 8+ afma. My Sigma 70-200 OS is beautiful in comparison, and convinces again that the Sigma 50 would be nice, sharpness is important, but I would rather have creamy bokeh than the best sharpness when I'm already shooting wide open. Since, if I'm going to be stopping down so often then why not get a zoom lens, one gets a fast prime to shoot fast right?

124

Lenses / Re: 35mm lenses vs 24-70

« on: November 07, 2012, 07:27:56 PM »

*Sigh* so little love for Sigma, go ahead and break the bank for outdated Canon equivalents but the AF issues with Sigma haven't come up much at all with the upper end lenses in recent times, most issues are AFMA-able anyways, and my Sigma 70-200 OS needed less AFMA adjustment then my Canon 50 1.4 while all I see anywhere is how the Sigma 50 is superior to the Canon shot wide open. While the Sigma 85 is sharp and produces great bokeh for half of what the 85L goes for. SO, judging by recent trends I'm looking at the new 35, the bokeh could be smoother than the 35L and probably be as sharp or better in the center wide open. We will see, the 35 f2 IS is in the same league for price, and for video use that lens would be great for general shooting...

125

Lenses / Re: Canon Announces New Lens Caps!

« on: November 06, 2012, 01:27:01 AM »

Still no solution to caps just getting in my way and remaining as just another part of a kit that needs to be looked out for

126

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS

« on: November 05, 2012, 06:51:11 AM »

The 24-70 better be cheaper than Tamron's 2.8 VC equivalent, although I feel the Canon would be better weather sealed and the macro option is good. It just comes down to price, this thing will either be way over what anyone expects it to be at (canon mentality of "half" of 24-70 2.8?), or it will be so cheap people will buy it just because, like the pancake!

127

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon Sales Rising

« on: November 05, 2012, 06:32:37 AM »

Nikon has been targeting newer markets, where Canon stays where they've always sold. Nikon practically took over India with Canon barely on the sales ranking. Nikon at the top and I think Sony right after for DSLRs. As an emerging economy with lots of people in this age of social media Nikon jumped in for the opportunity and are scoring.

128

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS

« on: November 05, 2012, 06:21:29 AM »

Ah, finally an "affordable" 35 that will replace the previous affordable one that's not too great? Nope, Sigma beat them with their 35mm 1.4 which would be coming out this month some time? Or not, maybe these two will be priced around the same seeing how the new IS wide primes are, and how Siggy primes aren't "that" cheap, only in comparison to L.
But it is funny how third party lens manufacturers are beating the big companies to the punch with lenses

129

Canon General / Re: I have more money than I do needs... so what should be my next step?

« on: November 05, 2012, 12:22:42 AM »

More money than you need? Hmm, that's simple, consider charity?

130

Lenses / Re: New 50 Finally on the Way? [CR1]

« on: November 04, 2012, 10:20:00 AM »

Let's look back at the FD times, canon had the f1.2 f1.4 f1.8 AND f2.0 standard 50mm lenses, then there's the macro but very little chance of an upgrade for that. An F2.0 with IS ? Ok, but isn't it easy enough to produce to an f1.4 as 50mm lenses have always been?

131

Canon General / Re: EOS-M kicking butt in Japan

« on: November 04, 2012, 10:11:25 AM »

Here in Japan, I visited a photo gallery, and one of the gentlemen who's work was at the exhibition was toying with his M, attached to it was a massive (or with the small body looked that much larger) telephoto. He was taking pictures of me and a few others with it having some fun. For people with a wealth of EF lenses it would be tempting, but man, it doesn't stand out any less, is now awkwardly front heavy, and less controls + no VF would mean slower operation anyways... yeah basically what everyone's been saying, but I saw it happening in the wild!

132

Lenses / Re: 35mm f1.4 -vs- 50mm 1.2

« on: November 02, 2012, 11:13:51 AM »

But there's so much more than sharpness, what about the bokeh!

133

Canon General / Re: Canon's MAP Pricing Goes Into Full Effect Today

« on: November 01, 2012, 11:16:53 PM »

If I get this right, I might delay the replacement of my 5Dm2 and some lenses like the 24-70L.
These were scheduled for this quarter, but perhaps I should "focus" on something else for a while.
The 5Dm2 is certainly good for another year.

That's what I plan to do too.

Me too.

Same here

134

PowerShot / Re: Down to the RX100 or G15...

« on: November 01, 2012, 05:56:57 AM »

Got the G15 for my dad as he had interest (As well as me) in how the lens was much faster. I find the ISO noise to have a somewhat more grainy feel which I like, and I feel comfortable shooting ISO 2000, and combined with being able to go F1.8 has gotten some good shots for dark street candids. I was shooting from day 1 of release with no raw support so was JPG only and I don't like the JPGs even with NR turned off, but overall focusing, controls and possible DOF control are great for what the camera is. That little viewfinder is quite hopeless, but at least it has one, and when there's bright light it helped. I do miss that there's no tilt screen though, would have aided in some more accurate hip shooting.

135

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon Mitsubishi & Sony

« on: November 01, 2012, 02:50:15 AM »

You should read up on how just about every car manufacturer has a relation with one another, who owns who, and which cars and parts are sold under who's name, it's insane!