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.
I didn't know the 15-85 was offered as a kit, although I agree with your point.
Perhaps not in every market globally, but definitely in some...
I think this would be a game changer IF it comes in under $2.5k.
It almost certainly will not be that cheap. I'd expect a camera that's billed as a 'mini 1D X' to be priced in the $3500-$4000 range.
That sounds about right on the price. Although it really depends on features. If it has new sensor tech that is very impressive, I could see it coming in over $4k. Rehash of the same sensor technology, but with 1DX AF system, great weather sealing, maybe 24 MP, then ~$3k.
From a structure standpoint it would put the 5DIII and the 7DII beneath the 1Dx at about the same price point with the 5DIII being FF aimed at event and portrait photographers and the 7DII being aimed at sport/wildlife photographers.
ยจYour logic clashes with the reality of facts being that this lens is going to replace the 24-105 as FF kit lens. And I can see why people react with a loud WTF.
Can I ask...what is the basis for your statement of 'fact' that the 24-105/4L IS will be replaced by the 24-70/4L IS as the FF kit lens, i.e. the 24-105L will be discontinued? Did I miss an announcement from Canon?
No, you didn't, but hopefully we can agree that everything points in that direction? The 5D2 wasn't discontinued the day the 5D3 became available, but we all knew it was going to happen. The 24-105 was due for a refresh, and the 24-70 is very much similar: standard L zoom, f/4, IS, etc. I also remember reading that it was going to be offered as a kit lens as well and I doubt there will be an overlapping.
Hopefully we can also agree that this new lens will not sell half as much as Canon would like as long as the more versatile, much cheaper 24-105 is around.
Time will tell. When the 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS was introduced in 2010, it was a commonly held belief that the 100mm f/2.8 Macro (non-L) lens, which was 10 years older and much cheaper, would soon be discontinued. Three years later, the non-L 100mm macro is still part of the current Canon USA lineup.
While prices of lenses have certainly gone up, I see a continued need for Canon to have a kit lens that's 'reasonably' priced. For example, the $700 EF-S 15-85mm lens is offered as a kit lens with the 7D, whereas the >$1000 EF-S 17-55mm lens is not.
I don't know about focus shift, but what supporters of this lens are terribly overlooking is that the 24-105 has a range and a price that leave room for compromise, whereas a 24-70 f/4 sold for 1600$ has to be epitome of optical perfection itself - and it's not.
On the other hand, I cannot imagine a situation where I set the aperture AFTER focusing, so I don't see a big issue here.
Unless you're shooting wide open or focusing manually with the DoF Preview button pressed, you're stopping down after focusing every time you shoot. AF is always performed with the lens wide open, regardless of the aperture selected. The lens stops down just before the shot, and that's when focus shift occurs.
Do you see a bigger issue now?
Not sure how this 24-70mm f4 can compete against a cheaper, longer lens that in many ways delivers equal or better performance.
The cheaper one is better? I don't think so. As I read the resolution numbers on Photozone, the new 24-70/4L is mostly better than the 24-105/4L. And it offers a much closer minimum focusing distance. And it's smaller and lighter. Except for the initial price, it would make a very attractive kit lens.
Any kind of definitive testing would involve 10-20 lenses from different batches. Its unfortunate but true, lenses vary significantly from unit to unit and batch to batch.
I like Photozone and read their reviews, but I also read other reviews, and sometimes they are drastically different. Klaus has to rely on owners or camera stores to lend him a lens, and if it has obvious decentering or other readily discovered fault, he gets another, but even then, there can be large differences.
So read and enjoy, but its just the results from one lens, a different lens will almost certainly be different.
When Roger Cicla of lens reviews tests 50 lenses out of his stock, the results are going to be more meaningful.
even the lower performance Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 USM L IS instead
I've read some "less than great" things about IQ on the old lens, and given Sigma's other recent products the I have high hopes for the new one. The new lenses should be compatible with the USB connector for user adjustability too, so getting the old one seems a little silly right now.
the sigma 30mm 1.4 exists a long time already (years?) and is quite good except it has focussing issues like too often.
Well...darn, now I need a 12mm extension tube...If it works the same, that means the 1.4xIII-EF12-2xIII combo behind a 600/4 will give me 1680mm that reports as f/8 and will AF on the 1D X.
Canon will have 20% off on their refurbs starting this Sunday, so thats another place to check. The Adorama deal may be better though.
How do you know in advance?
Another poster on CR who gets the info posted it. He has done this before.
Be sure to read all the posts
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=13096.msg235432#msg235432
Canon will have 20% off on their refurbs starting this Sunday, so thats another place to check. The Adorama deal may be better though.
Hey guys and gals,
I am one of those who doesn't really like the attention that my 70-200 2.8L IS II can bring. I got creative with some gaffer's tape and fixed my "problem"!
I know I may receive some flak from those who would see this as the equivalent of a putting bumper sticker on a Ferrari, but for me, I suits my needs quite well and I'm quite happy with how it turned out!
