April 19, 2014, 05:45:06 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 - Ricku

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 33
31
EOS Bodies / Re: A New Rebel for CP+? [CR1]
« on: January 14, 2014, 03:55:39 PM »
Meh.  :-\

But its ok if its a full frame rebel.  ;D

32
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Replacement Coming for CP+? [CR1]
« on: January 12, 2014, 04:27:14 AM »
Well as soon as Canon has some competition equalling DR then we'll stop rumouring over it  ;) lol
It'd be nice to get some bang-for-buck there for once.

I agree. I have this tiny little knot in the corner of my stomach, though, that tells me it will first arrive in a $5000+ package...so maybe not exactly more "bang for the buck", as the saying goes.
Canon's high DR high MP sensor will most definitely arrive in a big ass elephant camera with a premium price tag.

They'll market it with words like groundbreaking, revolutionary and amazing, even though SoNikon had their's since 3 years ago, at a much smaller price.

33
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« on: January 10, 2014, 05:56:55 AM »
I think Canon has planned this very carefully and from a marketing perspective it could be a scoop. Their current position with the 1DX (especially after FW 2.03) and 5DIII is not really threatened. As we know, the 800/800E did not boost NikonĀ“s market position and I agree with those who say that the D4s probably only makes those who already shoot Nikon stay with Nikon.

At the Winter Olympics we will see a number of numberless 1-series and perhaps also 7D-type bodies and hopefully some spectacular images coming out of it. That will create an enormous interest and may well cause Nikon shooters to consider jumping ship before the Soccer World Cup, when they will become available.

Looking in the mirror, from a business perspective, Canon have been quite successful with their timing, regardless of some of the most frustrated postings on CR. To release the next generation bodies, with sensors answering both resolution and DR in a year with both Winter Olympics and a Soccer World Cup ... Pretty much a marketing bulls eye in my opinion.
Do you own stock in Canon? ::) In what way is their conservative / boring innovation, but successful marketing exciting and fun for you as a photographer? Personally, I couldn't care less that Canon still holds the biggest market share.

But maybe their market position is why they aren't trying as hard as SoNikon and others? Why hurry up with new sensor tech, lenses (and even things like FF mirrorless) if you already have a huge customer base who always bends over backwards?

34
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: January 10, 2014, 02:18:32 AM »
^ Posting web sized pictures to justify your point of view is pretty silly, unless they are 100% crops. The poor corner sharpness of the 16-35L II (and 17-40L) has been proven over and over again.

They are mediocre when compared to other L zoom-lenses like the 70-200 2.8 IS II and 24-70L II, and they pale in comparison to the Nikon 14-24.

Time for an update! But the same thing can be said about a boat load of other lenses from Canon. :-\

35
Lenses / Re: The 10 Oldest Canon Lenses in Production
« on: January 10, 2014, 01:55:28 AM »
I'm hoping for a 16-35 III or 17-40 II with razor sharp corners.


36
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« on: January 10, 2014, 12:08:35 AM »
Canon should forget about answering the D800 and D4S.

Instead, they should use their upcoming sensor tech to answer the Sony A7R.  :P Now that would make me a happy canonite.

37
Just curious. Why would someone pick a 50mm f/1.8 with IS over a 50mm f/1.4 (no IS)? Or vice versa.


Many, many threads have weighed the answer to that question.   I'll take a crack at it here, but understand that the physics majors and the working pros on this thread probably see this argument quite differently.  :D

Why Slower with IS is better


With some exceptions, a narrower max aperture lens like a F/1.8 or F/2 should be smaller and lighter than a F/1.4 lens.  That absolutely will be the case with Canon's 50 F/whatever IS -- expect it to be about as big as the recently 35mm F/2 IS, as the non-L IS refreshes seem to be paired housing/size-wise.

For comparison's sake, the new Sigma F/1.4's dimensions are very close to the Canon 24-70 F/4 zoom when closed/at 24mm:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Product-Images.aspx?Lens=823&LensComp2=0&LensComp=824
(mouseover the 'Select View' below the pictures and you can make the hoods disappear for a truer read on size.)

Probably more important for the shooters on this forum, presuming (for the sake of example) it's a 4-stop IS system, provided the subject is not moving, you have a lens that is 3-ish stops better for handholding in low light.  That advantage can be used a few different ways:

  • For a given shot that the non-IS lens would make (assuming it's not right at F/1.4), you can get the same shot while still moving your ISO back down to a more reasonable level, and minimize noise.
  • Or, you can stop down the lens to gain sharper image and/or more working DOF.  Keep in mind that an F/1.4 non-IS lens in a dimly lit room may have to be slammed fully open to net a low-light shot without cranking the ISO too high, and that can be a fairly limiting DOF to work with, plus no lens is anywhere near being sharp corner to corner at F/1.4.

I shoot a fair amount in low-light, handheld, and without a flash.  So IS is a big help for me.

Why Faster without IS is better


You can generate a smaller DOF, which is awesome in some compositions.

If you have quickly moving subjects (and you aren't gunning for a blurry one), the upside of IS effectively lost.  IS helps with longer shutters and unsteady hands, but it can't freeze (for example) a five year old with happy feet.  So if your subject is moving, take the aperture over the IS.

Some folks really rave about the color and draw of the really big F/1.4, F/1.2 and F/1.0 lenses.  Quite simply, you are letting more of the light in and it shows.  Folks often claim such large aperture work has a 'magical' feel or tone to it.  On my F/1.4, when I shoot it wide open, I note richer colors + healthy vignetting on my FF rig that simply looks more memorable at first glance.  You can't/shouldn't shoot wide open all the time, but it's a killer look for some shots.

So there are two schools on this.  There are a good (I'd guess) half the people in this forum that would take the speed of the F/1.4 without IS at this focal length.  For what I shoot, I wouldn't -- I'd probably take the IS.

- A

Thanks for the answer. It all makes sense! :)

38
Just curious. Why would someone pick a 50mm f/1.8 with IS over a 50mm f/1.4 (no IS)? Or vice versa.

39
Canon General / Re: Canon PowerShot ELPH 340 HS Official
« on: January 06, 2014, 09:55:37 PM »
"Year of the lens!"

So where are the lenses?

At least Sigma brought something interesting to the table. :)

40
EOS Bodies / Re: Announcement Talk Begins
« on: January 03, 2014, 09:35:41 PM »
Just give us a sharp UWA-zoom already. 14-24 or 16-35 III.

Come on Canon, I know you are reading these boards. :P

41
Lenses / Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« on: December 20, 2013, 12:32:38 PM »
I don't care if they release five new 24-70mm, as long as they give us a sharp UWA-zoom first.


42
EOS Bodies / Re: A 2014 Roadmap Part 1: The 7D Mark II is Coming [CR2]
« on: December 19, 2013, 02:48:15 PM »
So. Year of the lens and year of the camera.

But will it also be year of the sensor?

Canon has not had one of those years since the 5D2. ::)

43
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Rumor: Sigma 16-20 f/2 DG Art [CR1]
« on: December 19, 2013, 09:25:38 AM »
Awesome if it is sharp across the frame!

Canon still doesn't have any tack sharp UWA-zoom lenses.  :P

44
Lenses / Re: Two Lenses Coming for CP+? [CR2]
« on: December 15, 2013, 10:11:02 AM »
35 L II and the 50 f1.8 IS  8)

+1

Could also be update of 135L, but 35L is in more need IMO.
No need. Sigma took care of that.

I've owned both. The Siggy really is the 35L II.

45
Lenses / Re: Two Lenses Coming for CP+? [CR2]
« on: December 15, 2013, 09:53:22 AM »
I think Im going to puke if one of those lenses aren't a tack sharp UWA-zoom lens.

16-35L III or 14-24L

Bring it.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 33