April 17, 2014, 07:01:05 PM

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 - Plainsman

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
Reviews / Re: Review: Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 VC USD
« on: July 27, 2013, 03:49:43 AM »
Good review - thanks.

Now Tamron could we please have a 400/5.6 VC because it appears that neither Canon or Nikon are interested and you would have the market to yourself.

Lenses / Re: Dxo tests canon/nikon/sony 500mm's
« on: July 15, 2013, 09:19:18 AM »
In defence of Dxo - at least they publish test info like MTF-50 sharpness graphs for you read and interpret as you want.

Nothing I dislike more than wishy washy "reviews" with nothing to justify the claims of the reviewer - like juzaphoto stating that the Canon 70-200/2.8 II is "pretty poor with teleconverters"! At least try another lens before you make a statement like that juza.

BTW Nikon will not like Dxo's tests which show that their expensive new 80-400 appears to be inferior to Sony's cheaper latest 70-400 offering certainly at the top end.

Anybody investing in an expensive new lens needs as much info as possible - so carry on Dxo.

Sony 500/4 more expensive than Canon 500/4 II. Ridiculous - won't tempt many pros over to their system.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Announced
« on: July 02, 2013, 02:39:04 AM »
AFMA not mentioned in CR specs!

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D Spec List [CR3]
« on: June 30, 2013, 02:25:03 PM »
It was rather stupid of Canon not to give AFMA to the 60D.

I hope this facility returns in the 70D to make it a serious camera.

Lenses / Re: Why Does the 100-400L Sell So Well Still ?
« on: June 06, 2013, 07:42:28 AM »
It sells well because it is a sharp robust design.

Robust because the front optics slide along single rigid tube.

If the new one is like the latest offerings from Sony (70-400) and Nikon (80-400) with the flimsy extending tube - prone to damaged alignment from the slightest  knock - I will not be buying it.

One more reason for keeping this lens is that you actually get 400mm at the top end for distant objects - not 375/380mm or whatever from the new Sony and Nikon breathers. I have checked this myself with the 100-400 against the 400/5.6 side by side with the same body - both exactly the same image size at "infinity".

I wish Canon would keep the current design layout, upgrade the optics with IS 2 - that's all that is necessary.

The Japanese Yen has fallen considerably in value in recent months. Japanese exports should therefore be much cheaper now for buyers, so why are Canon prices remaining so high? I'd love a new Canon 5D mk III but current MAP limitations are keeping prices high and stopping me from buying.

Answer= Cartel.

The Japanese (or South Koreans/Chinese) do not abide by the same competition rules as the West whether it is cameras or shipbuilding!

I am not saying prices will not fall but they might fall at a time to suit the Japanese camera companies - certainly not the Western consumer.

In any case the Japanese who have not experienced monetary loosening on the same scale as US/UK etc - until now - have had to suffer sky high yen which was damaging exports.

Unfortunately it does not look like their will be any real competition to Canon Nikon Sony etc from S Korea or China so the Japanese rule the roost for a very long time to come. No competition obviously from the West either as preference is given to the financial sector ie money churning rather than industry (Germany excepted).

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
« on: May 15, 2013, 02:46:19 PM »
The review states.... "4 stops (IS) brings 1/300th rating down to 1/50 th sec...."

.......1 stop would be 1/150th
.......2 stops would be 1/75th
.......3 stops would be 1/38th
and  4 stops would be 1/20th approx surely!

Canon General / Re: Announcement: Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« on: May 14, 2013, 03:03:25 PM »
...25 lens elements!

The effective fstop on this lens won't be f4 for sure - more like closer to f4.5

Third Party Manufacturers / Sony 400/4 telephoto on the way....
« on: May 03, 2013, 08:30:20 AM »
..details from SonyAlpha rumours.

Said to be "affordable for amateurs".

Absolutely no sign of a new 400/4 coming from Canon ie a scaled up version of the superlative 300/2.8 II would be just fine - very little R&D required!. With slightly smaller aperture it would be slightly lighter and approx same price.

A very sharp 400/4 weighing at about 2.5Kg would be a best seller for Canon IMO.

Funny why Nikon haven't thought of making one for their new high res cameras.

Yes, lets make every camera have identical MP and identical features.  That way, no one will have a choice, and 24mp is so much better than 22 mp.
The idea that 2mp more or less makes a camera company better is not unique, but its not right either.

Well, no need to be so dramatic... sensors are not everything that define the characteristics of an image :)

BTW Pentax is a smaller company than Canikon, it's hard for them to keep the pace in the R&D division.

Small it maybe but didn't Pentax bring out the first commercial 35mm AF lenses.

I also like the Pentax idea of fitting the IS inside the camera rather than having it fitted to every IS lens you might have in your possession! Fewer things to wrong.

Lenses / Re: EF 100-400 Replacement in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 01, 2013, 05:54:42 AM »
Personally I would be happy to retain the push/pull design.
It would keep costs down for a Mk II.
All I want is IS2 and a super ED lens element to improve the optics.
It will never happen like this of course...reinvent the wheel etc
So there will be a brand new design at $3k instead of $2k for a new push/pull.
Serious competition for it from the new Nikon which from early reports is a very good zoom particularly when allied to the high res 24Mp DXs.

Lenses / Re: EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Release Date [CR1]
« on: April 29, 2013, 12:50:36 PM »
There will be a difficult choice for people buying this lens.

That is whether to buy the new 100-400L (allegedly coming along fast on the outside lane) as well.

The current 100-400L is a damn handy optic to have. The new one will be even sharper and will have IS II BUT will come in at half the weight of the 200-400.

Hand holding the 200-400 for long periods will not be a comforting experience for the older folk depending on individual circumstances of course.

So some clever marketing from Canon could see rich folk buying both!

Lenses / Re: EF 100-400 Replacement in 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 29, 2013, 09:03:03 AM »
I just can't see this lens coming out before the hugely delayed 200-400/560.

based on what?

why should they delay one lens only because they have problems with another?

the 100-400mm will sure be sold more often then the 200-400mm.
the 100-400mm is a more attractive lens (money wise) for many photographer.

i see no reason, except in case they share the same production problems, that canon will not just release the lens when it is ready.

...could be a marketing nightmare selling expensive zooms coming out at the same time (approx) with overlapping focal lengths..

Lenses / Re: EF 100-400 Replacement in 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 29, 2013, 08:12:26 AM »
I just can't see this lens coming out before the hugely delayed 200-400/560.

By all accounts the new Nikon 80-400 is a very good lens sharp right through to 400 and the current high price will surely drop soon. Would be a good alternative available now - particularly if used with one of the currently available 24Mp DX bodies.

Lenses / Re: Lens sharpness and distance from subject
« on: April 28, 2013, 01:16:18 PM »
I was wondering whether and how much the distance from the subject affects sharpness of the image taken by different lenses (on same sensor). Is there any website or source where such information may be available for Canon lenses?

The lens designer has to have a reference point when designing his lens eg 50xfocal length.

The big telephoto lenses are really birder lenses and as such have max sharpness at relatively close range ie if you want really sharp shots of the moon you need a reflector telescope.

Read Thom Hogan's Nikon long lens reviews where he points out the lenses which aren't "distance" lenses like the 200-400/4 or even the 400/2.8. The same is very likely true for the Canon equivalents.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5