October 25, 2014, 08:01:29 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.

Messages - sagittariansrock

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 97
Time has passed this lens by - it is two years to late.

The 150-600 zoom is the new kid on the block...

Indeed, and like much of America's youth, the 'new kids' are big and overweight.  The retracted 100-400L is the size of a 70-200/2.8, a very convenient size for a 400mm lens.  Considering the optical improvements going from original to MkII of the 70-200/2.8 IS, a new 100-400 should be excellent.  Mount a 1.4x TC behind it, you'll have a 140-560mm f/8 lens that will AF on recent higher-end bodies, deliver great IQ, and be a heck of a lot more portable than those "I'm not fat, I'm big-boned" new kids.  ;)

The only problem will be the price. Canon will ask for an arm and a leg for it, and that makes it really difficult to balance a telephoto lens, IS or no IS.

I actually drove from Eugene, OR to Houston, TX about 2.5 years back and plan to go the opposite route in about 6 months.
It takes about 3 days straight to drive from El Paso, TX to Portland, OR. going via Denver, or Salt Lake City or Reno, NV or Sacramento, CA. I am excluding the route via LA because the South-North part isn't that scenic. So you have about 7 days worth of sightseeing- not bad at all.
Things to see in Oregon:
1. Crater Lake will be mostly closed in November, but they might have the Snowshoeing trips on. It is quite nice, actually, and I liked it more than Crater Lake in summer bustling with people. But check on the entry routes. I believe one of the entrances is closed in Winter, and if it is the South one, then it will be too much of going around to make it worthwhile for you. So, check with the Park authorities.
2. I would recommend hitting the coast early around the Redwoods, then go North up to Coos Bay. The coast will be much cooler North of that. Then cross over East via 42 and then 62 to Crater Lake. Then from there you can go North to visit Bend, and then Columbia River Gorge and Portland.
I am not very familiar with vistas in North Cali, but I am sure you've got a lot of ideas re that already.
Happy driving!

To be clear to all, when I asked if it was DO, I wasn't hoping that it's DO.  To be honest, I don't care one way or another AS LONG AS THE IQ IS THERE.

I was merely remembering the announcement from September 17 of this year that more DO lenses are coming - and in the same announcement talking about the 100-400 replacement.... and then in the same announcement also mentioning that Canon has a patent on a 100-400 DO zoom.

Canon Rumors link here: Canon Confirms Replacement of 100-400 Coming, More DO & EF-M Lenses

CNET Source link here: Canon Reveals Details For Future Telephoto Lens Line
A new 400mm supertele is just the beginning. Canon also says it plans a replacement for its 100-400mm zoom and new compact models using diffractive optics.

Well, you will note that the 100-400 and the DO lenses are mentioned as separate matters.

The 100-400mm zoom is a good example. Canon introduced it in 1998 with its first-generation image stablization technology, which counteracts some camera shake, and still sells it for $1,700. But a new model is in the works, said Canon technical advisor Chuck Westfall in an interview here at the Photokina show Monday. "It's definitely on the boards for replacement," he said, though declining to say when.

In addition, Canon is working to spread a technology called diffractive optics, or DO, into more lenses, he added -- maybe even cheaper lenses.

CR mentioned these as separate matters, but then added the information about the patent anecdotally- which confused some and started a couple of threads. I would have said I don't think the 100-400 II will be a DO, but then I am not sure there is a 100-400 II to begin with!

[In any case, just because Chuck Westfall mentioned a 100-400 replacement, do not start planning a bank robbery. He specifically mentioned (without being asked) how they were working on AF illumination in the 5DIII, which never materialized. So Canon USA has little idea about what Canon Inc. does.]

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: How Strong is a Sony Lens Mount
« on: October 24, 2014, 04:52:33 PM »
But yeah anything can happen especially when you try to lift that sony a7+ Metabones adapter + Sigma 200-500 f2.8 combination by the camera grip so better get that tough e-mount to be safe.

Except, I'd prefer a broken mount than the front of my camera being wrenched out if I were to do something as silly as that.

Portrait / Re: Post Your Self Portraits Here
« on: October 24, 2014, 04:48:49 PM »
FYI, there's already a long-running thread on this topic.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: How Strong is a Sony Lens Mount
« on: October 23, 2014, 02:29:00 AM »
I'll agree with tcmatthews. The NEX/A7 cameras are tiny. If you use a small enough lens, the plastic mount is strong enough for that. If you use a big lens, and the camera literally hangs on to the lens, the mount is sufficient for that too. If anything untoward happens, you don't wrench the front of your tiny camera out, you only have a plastic lens mount to replace.
Canon dSLRs are much tougher built, and designed to support heavier lenses.
I think this is just an instance when a demand is 'created' in order to sell a product. It might be okay to get the Tough mount, but better not get a false sense of security that you can hang a 200/2 off an A7 all day and everything will be hunky dory. Just my 2 cents.

Lenses / Re: Zoom or 135 in Place of 100 and 200?
« on: October 20, 2014, 11:49:57 PM »
I am curious why conspicuousness might be an issue in indoor/outdoor sports, especially as every fifth person I see nowadays near a sporting event (not a pro) carries a white zoom.
Would using a lenscoat/gaffer's tape wrap solve that issue?
Clearly, what would serve you best is the 70-200 II.
I think I have to come to grips with that and not fight it.  I just like small and compact, but I think it's time.  I  have some more winners to post, but my latest round of favorites (with the 100 and 200) are at the top of www.flickr.com/photos/corysteiner/ if you'd like to see.

Beautiful images, thanks for sharing. You clearly know what you are doing :)
I hear you- I almost never take my 70-200 for travel, and my 135L is always with me. Consequently, it sees a lot of use. However, when I absolutely need to take a shot and have no guarantee that the 135 will be wide enough, I don't think twice before taking my 70-200 instead. Also, even if the prime works fine, it is better IMO to have a bit of flexibility in terms of composition. For example, in IMG_7364, you would have the flexibility to include the faces of the team mates as your daughter (I am guessing) bumps the ball.

Lenses / Re: Zoom or 135 in Place of 100 and 200?
« on: October 20, 2014, 05:44:39 PM »
I am curious why conspicuousness might be an issue in indoor/outdoor sports, especially as every fifth person I see nowadays near a sporting event (not a pro) carries a white zoom.
Would using a lenscoat/gaffer's tape wrap solve that issue?
Clearly, what would serve you best is the 70-200 II.

Landscape / Re: Fall colours
« on: October 20, 2014, 01:12:24 AM »
Love Corvallis.  Went to school there!
Is that Walnut Blvd?

Fall 2012, Corvallis OR.
7D + 10-22mm@22mm

This is one of the winding lanes running north off Walnut Blvd. Can't remember exactly which one. It is a very nice little town, I loved it too. My wife went to school there.

Camera Body Gallery / Re: Anything shot with the EOS-M
« on: October 19, 2014, 02:40:08 AM »
Very impressed with the continuous burst and the AF keeping up with it (this was an occasion I was unprepared for, and fortunately my M+22 which had stayed in the car helped me out).

Landscape / Re: Fall colours
« on: October 17, 2014, 01:48:48 AM »
Fall 2012, Corvallis OR.
7D + 10-22mm@22mm

Landscape / Re: Fall colours
« on: October 17, 2014, 01:48:22 AM »
Fall 2012, Corvallis OR.
7D + 10-22mm@22mm

Landscape / Re: Fall colours
« on: October 17, 2014, 01:45:59 AM »
Fall 2012, Corvallis OR.
7D + 10-22mm@22mm

Lenses / Re: Selling my Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS II
« on: October 16, 2014, 08:07:49 PM »
My plan was to sell the 70-200mm f2.8 IS II, after 200mm f2 IS arrived. Posted it on ebay last night, however, I ended my auction today. Just couldn’t do it guys.

Dam you L lenses

Ok, I started reading this thread with some trepidation, but all is well. Good!
Congrats on the 200/2! Please post pics as soon as convenient. Cheers!

And why would they feel the need to announce to the world that they change brand if the don't get paid? Hello, I switched to Sony I feel it is so important that you know it so I am having this press conference!

I don't know about Bob Krist's specific example, but if I switched from iPhone that I have been using for over three years to Android, and felt it was a significant upgrade, and I had a blog- I won't write about it. Because I would be excited about it. People express their feelings. It's natural.
Once again, can't comment on what Bob Krist's incentive might have been. But he did seem excited...

I think you have identified the problem. 

There are some members of this forum who treat the publishing/linking of an opinion as a provocation. That's what I don't understand. There are many many opinions I don't agree with, but I never consider them a provocation.

If the members really did not agree with the opinions in the video, would not the best action be not to respond to the thread?  After a few hours/days of no action, the thread would die away.   ;)

I think it might be a combination of two things- firstly, buying a certain item causes the buyer to identify his/her intelligence, judgment, knowledge etc. with that product. So if that item is vilified, the buyer considers those attributes of his to be questioned. If you think this is too much, you should see the Apple forums. Secondly, there is something about anonymous internet forums, where people feel it is okay to vent their frustration and anger to a nameless, faceless audience or towards another person, being nameless and faceless himself.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 97