November 26, 2014, 11:47:46 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 - Zv

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 88
436
Slight off topic thinking out loud.

Names we'll prob never see from Canon -

2D - can you imagine a 2D2? Sounds too much like a star wars character.
3D - do we need special glasses or what? Also too close to nintendo 3DS.
4D - four also reads as death in Japanese.
8D - 2 x 4 = 8 still a multiple of four. Superstition may keep this name at bay! Also sounds like you're saying 80.
10D - we already had it. Could make a comeback though.

You can see why they chose 1, 5, 6 and 7 now. Maybe they're runnin out of numbers?

I really hope they don't use random made up words instead!


437
Could we see the 7D line become 8D or 9D instead? Maybe Canon want to push the APS-C models further down the chain?

Maybe if they made a 7D2 it might confuse some people as to which is "better" the 6D or 7D2. The numbers are a bit close and some already have the notion that the 7D is full frame.

But none of that makes sense because the 7D would still exist. They can't erase it completely!

We should start a petition to keep the 7D name alive!

438
Lenses / Re: Two Lenses Coming for CP+? [CR2]
« on: December 18, 2013, 12:41:03 PM »
I don't get how the 135L can be so cheap and the 35L so expensive?

It is the difference in designs. A 35mm lens on a 44mm flange distance is a retrofocus design, that is it has to bend the light multiple times to get it to focus on the sensor, telephoto lenses, in contrast, are very simple lenses to design and build, it is a straight shot through to the sensor and additional elements are just for correcting aberrations.

The TS-E 17mm was the lens that made me realise all Canon lenses are exactly as designed, and the compromises in them are there for specific reasons, cost, quality tradeoffs, etc. Look at the 70-200 f2.8 IS MkII compared to the MkI, sports shooters love it because it is sharper and focuses faster, meanwhile portrait shooters are not so keen because of the slightly harsher bokeh, all trade offs, but all built in at the design stage. Anybody that can make a 17 mm lens with zero distortion is very clever, anybody that can make a 17mm lens to work on a 44mm registry distance is comfortably smarter than that, but to then drive home the total dominance of lens design and build capability by making it a tilt shift lens is, quite simple, showing off.

Canon make the lenses they do for marketing reasons, they come with the limitations and characteristics they do to meet the brief for that lens. It seems the brief can be top quality at any cost and we will sell them for what we can get, the prestige thing, like the 17TS-E and the 200 f1.8, it was said that Canon made a loss on every 200 f1.8 they sold; or the brief can be how cheap can we make it to get people into a system, the 50 f1.8 and many kit zooms spring to mind.

Another consideration is that the needs of film and digital sensors is quite different, most of these lenses core layouts were designed long before digital and the need for perpendicular, or as close as possible, light rays, another major consideration for wide angle and retrofcus designs. Certainly any new wide angle designs will take that into consideration.

Ah I didn't realize the 35 was a retrofocus design. I guess that makes sense now. Thanks!

439
Lenses / Re: Two Lenses Coming for CP+? [CR2]
« on: December 18, 2013, 12:38:09 PM »
These days it may seem anathema, but I have been so unimpressed with the Sigma's bokeh (a pretty huge deal in a wide aperture prime) that I went with the Canon 35mm f/2 IS instead, despite a slight sharpness downgrade from the Sigma.  I certainly think that Canon can improve on the Sigma design by offering a properly weather sealed prime that has both great sharpness, much more accurate AF, and smoother bokeh transition.

Where Canon has a problem is the price department.  If they aren't a bit more competitive with the pricing it will be very hard to market an only marginally better lens at a price point that could easily be more than double that of the Sigma.  I saw a sale on the Siggy yesterday for $699, so the price is certainly already dropping.  That's a tough sell for Canon.

The 24-70II is optically fantastic, but its very steep MSRP has meant that a LOT of people have opted for the almost as good but much cheaper + VC Tamron.  This a trend that Canon can't afford to keep repeating.

It would be nice if the 35L was dropped in price too! It's one that I want but damn that thing is still going for $1500 or more these days. Seems to have gone up in price! I don't get how the 135L can be so cheap and the 35L so expensive? If the drop the price to $1000 even I'd buy it over the Sigma. And then Canon could release the 35LII at the same price as the 35L is now?

Same with the 50L. I'd value that at $900. At that price I'd buy it. You can't seriously charge people $1500 for that when the 24-70L II is $1699 with rebate! I mean I'd rather fork out the extra and say screw the 24L, 35L and 50L!

But even then I still want a prime. I feel like I'm done with zooms.

Check this one then:

https://foto.no/cgi-bin/bruktmarked/visAnnonse.cgi?id=210639

6000,- nok is 984 usd. It's a 2007 model..

Does it include shipping to Japan?? Why is it more expensive in the country it's made in??

440
Article on stolen camera gear.....

http://petapixel.com/2013/12/17/lenstag-infographic-breaks-gear-stolen-gear-gets-stolen/

And by the way, Christmas is the peak for stealing things from vehicles....

I didnt know about lenstag. Need to check that out. Thanks for sharing this!

441
Lenses / Re: DXOMark: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Reviewed
« on: December 18, 2013, 12:20:02 PM »
The t-stop of 5.1 for the Canon 24-105 is a bit of a shocker to me.  tsk tsk Canon!

So basically the Sigma is about the same price and about the same sharpness, but half a stop brighter.

Not surprising since it has a bigger front end! Why is that a shocker?

An f/4 zoom lens is not one you'd expect to have optimal light transmission anyway. It has IS that easily makes up for it. Good for Sigma though for improving on the design. However that seems to have come at a price - added bulk.

Separate note. Even though I buy in yen I always write prices in USD here on this forum because that's what most people understand. It doesn't bother me. Keeps things standardized. But the point is when we convert we all get funky numbers. I think when quoting a street price we should just use amazon.com or something.

442
Lenses / Re: Two Lenses Coming for CP+? [CR2]
« on: December 18, 2013, 09:57:11 AM »
These days it may seem anathema, but I have been so unimpressed with the Sigma's bokeh (a pretty huge deal in a wide aperture prime) that I went with the Canon 35mm f/2 IS instead, despite a slight sharpness downgrade from the Sigma.  I certainly think that Canon can improve on the Sigma design by offering a properly weather sealed prime that has both great sharpness, much more accurate AF, and smoother bokeh transition.

Where Canon has a problem is the price department.  If they aren't a bit more competitive with the pricing it will be very hard to market an only marginally better lens at a price point that could easily be more than double that of the Sigma.  I saw a sale on the Siggy yesterday for $699, so the price is certainly already dropping.  That's a tough sell for Canon.

The 24-70II is optically fantastic, but its very steep MSRP has meant that a LOT of people have opted for the almost as good but much cheaper + VC Tamron.  This a trend that Canon can't afford to keep repeating.

It would be nice if the 35L was dropped in price too! It's one that I want but damn that thing is still going for $1500 or more these days. Seems to have gone up in price! I don't get how the 135L can be so cheap and the 35L so expensive? If the drop the price to $1000 even I'd buy it over the Sigma. And then Canon could release the 35LII at the same price as the 35L is now?

Same with the 50L. I'd value that at $900. At that price I'd buy it. You can't seriously charge people $1500 for that when the 24-70L II is $1699 with rebate! I mean I'd rather fork out the extra and say screw the 24L, 35L and 50L!

But even then I still want a prime. I feel like I'm done with zooms.

443
Lenses / Re: DXOMark: Sigma 24-105 f/4 DG OS Reviewed
« on: December 18, 2013, 09:43:51 AM »
I wonder if this lens is really aimed at Nikon users.

As others have said, for Canon users this may be a nice lens, but it's not an "must have." The street price of the 24-105 "L" is less. Just about every full frame Canon user who would want this lens already has the Canon version. There are currently more than 500 in stock on the Canon refurbished store (selling for more than the street price of a new "white box" version).

Basically, the market is flooded already, so I wonder if Sigma may have made a mistake with this lens unless they are just targeting Nikon users.

I admire what Sigma has been doing lately and I appreciate the competition from third party manufacturers, but I'm scratching my head over this one. It runs contrary to most other recent releases from Sigma, Tamron and Tokina – where they have either been focusing on giving consumers choices that Canon and Nikon don't offer or they've been undercutting Canon and Nikon on price with staples like the 70-200 f2.8.

Big +1.  As soon as this lens was announced, I felt that the only way that it would be a success is if it destroyed the 24-105L optically.  It didn't seem to offer any other compelling reason to purchase:  focal length the same.  IS/OS.  Same maximum aperture. 

Downsides included:  Heavier and larger front element.  Not weather sealed.  Sigma's reputation for sometimes inconsistent AF accuracy.  Third party lens with potential downsides that come with that.

I think the consensus out there is that in SOME ways the Sigma is better optically, but it certainly doesn't blow the 24-105L out of the water.  That is going to make it a hard sell.  Just out of curiosity:  a lot of you own the 24-105L - are you planning on selling it to get the Sigma? 

I don't own the 24-105L right now.  I've owned two copies in the past and liked them considerably.  I own let my last copy go when I got the Tamron 24-70 VC and found that I wasn't using the Canon anymore.  But if I owned the 24-105L right I certainly wouldn't be selling it to get this lens.

I bought my EF 24-105L second hand. Got it fairly cheap too. I knew fine well going in that it was not going to a lens that had amazing IQ and that was fine because I just needed something to work with in the general focal range. For that it performs well, especially from 35mm onwards I'm seeing really quite sharp images. 24mm performance could be better but I can live without since I have the 17-40L and now the Samyang 14mm (on my 7D it gives an almost 24mm look). The weather sealing has came in handy when on vacation / at te beach etc. the lens isn't light by any means but a decent amount that I can handle.

Will I change for the Sigma? Nope. The Sigma's bigger and heavier and not sealed. Don't give a damn about a tiny bit extra sharpness at the wide end.

I think for those who don't need the extra range the 24-70 f/4 IS beats both the Sigma and 24-105L and provides a nice third option. If I was to change I'd prob go for that one, just wish it was a little cheaper though.

444
Lenses / Re: Two Lenses Coming for CP+? [CR2]
« on: December 16, 2013, 08:03:29 AM »
Oh PLEASE dear Canon, give me something wide. Like 15mm f2.8 fisheye / 17-40L IS  :-\

BTW hello to all you wonderful camera friends. I've been here and sneak peeked in many months and now my first post  8) Have a awesome day


Roham From Oslo/Norway

Welcome to CR RohamR! There are a lot of people here wanting some wide angle action next year! Me included! I really hope we see that rumored 16-50 f/4 IS. That would be perfect!

445
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What happened to A-DEP?
« on: December 16, 2013, 07:37:56 AM »
Unless I'm mistaken, it has disappeared off of Canon bodies...?

I don't think I ever used it when I had my T2i. Seemed to be very much like P mode. And on a crop camera that most people will be using with slow aperture kit lenses there isn't much shallow dof to control. Everything looks the same unless you are really close to your subject. Plus creative auto lets you control the background blur and is easier to use.

I'm glad they got rid of it. It doesn't really help newbies understand the relationship between aperture and dof IMO. 

447
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: A 40mm f/0.85 for Your EOS-M?
« on: December 16, 2013, 07:06:02 AM »
"If you know of any other extremely fast lenses, please share it with us.
Kind regards,
Rob.


Here:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_speed

I also wrote an article about fast lenses about two weeks ago. Maybe I should update it with this Germanese lens?

http://zeebytes.blogspot.jp/2013/12/rare-and-exclusive-lenses-to-drool-over.html?m=0

448
Lenses / Re: Two Lenses Coming for CP+? [CR2]
« on: December 15, 2013, 09:53:47 AM »
And 7DII!! :D

449
+1 ... it is the cheapest full frame camera with a kit lens anywhere in the world.
As a bundle, yes.  But here in the USA at least, the 6D + 24-105/4L IS kit is only $84 more than the a7 + 28-70/3.5-5.6 OSS, and you're getting a more versatile body and a lens with a broader zoom range on both ends, constant aperture, and one stop faster at the long end. 
... snip ...

yes, 24-105 is a better lens.
but: http://camerasize.com/compact/#380.21,488.396,ha,t
oops! :-)

Yeah OK it does look a bit bigger but you are getting a longer zoom range. I wonder how it would compare to the 6D + 24-70 f/4L IS combo? Obviously it would cost more.

This link is for the 24-70 f/4 comparison.

http://j.mp/HYCNKd

This one is with both cameras with a 50 1.8

http://j.mp/1bNP78T


450
EOS-M / Re: Eos M vs Fujifilm X100
« on: December 14, 2013, 07:33:07 PM »

Eos M advantages -

1. No need to learn a new menu system.
2. Ability to use your existing Canon lenses via adapter.
3. A Canon hotshoe, no need for additional triggers for off camera flash.
4. Pocketable (with 22 f/2 lens and large jacket pockets!)
5. Magic Lantern
6. Higher resolution
7. Larger screen with anti smudge coating that actually works (and it's touchscreen but this could also be a disadvantage)
8. Works with Canon RC-1, 5 and 6.
9. Has Touch shutter feature that allows you to select a focus point, AF and take a picture by tapping the screen. (Still not found a good use for this though!)

#9 Have you used the touch shutter?  In candid situations I can be sitting around with a friend and point to the back of the camera - choose the subject and the camera will focus and take the pictures.  As long as you don't hold the camera up at eye level it appears that you are simply showing your friend some pictures you've taken and are pointing out something in some picture of the camera.  In a tight crowd or even when taking family pictures (works with kids really well), you can get some candid's that you simply could not get by holding your camera up to your eye.  Even with point and shoots without the touch shutter, people are aware whenever you have your finger on the shutter button and the camera is pointed toward them.  With touch shutter, you never touch the shutter button -- after all you are just showing a friend an already captured photo - right.....

By the way, #2 trumps All other EVF cameras currently if you are heavily invested in Canon glass.  Unless you are heavily invested in some other APS-C line of lenses, #2 is TRUMP over all other considerations although you forgot to mention the $300 price for body and a really decent lens.  What APS-C with 18 MP or more for $300 is there? (I know B&H is now $350).  I have a few of these for different purposes and many of my friends are buying them up when they can.

I have to give it a try again. Last time it kept taking pictures while it was hanging round my neck! I wonder if I was sat down like you said with the beep off, maybe it could work. I agree with finger on the trigger people take notice!

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 88