Rumors > Lenses
Canon EF 50mm f1.4
Tcapp:
--- Quote from: Marsu42 on April 23, 2012, 03:33:18 AM ---
--- Quote from: Tcapp on April 23, 2012, 03:21:54 AM ---I know. HAHA. I was being totally sarcastic.
--- End quote ---
I really didn't get that - because I don't think that (apart from the efv) Sony is that bad at all, they even got expensive pro bodies I'd exchange for my 60d this very moment. If Sony would run magic lantern. Which it doesn't. So watch out - sooner or later, Sony might have the last laugh on you :-p
--- End quote ---
Maybe. I dont think the translucent mirror thing is a good way to go for pro bodies though. you looks like a third stop of your light right there (or am i wrong?). It has been a while since I had used the sony and was disappointed. Its strange though, cause they make the BEST tvs, great gaming systems, they invented blu-ray, and more. They are a great company and I do expect great things from them eventually.
Marsu42:
--- Quote from: Tcapp on April 23, 2012, 03:53:27 AM ---Maybe. I dont think the translucent mirror thing is a good way to go for pro bodies though. you looks like a third stop of your light right there (or am i wrong?).
--- End quote ---
It's two thirds: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_RT ... however, with a good sensor and a fast lens it doesn't make a difference in ok light. The thing is: I once owned an non-digital Canon RT with a fixed mirror and it was the greatest camera I ever had! With a fixed, translucent mirror, you can actually see what you shoot (no blackout) and this makes tracking *much* easier, and the response time was stellar. I only needed to lightly touch the button and it had already made the picture before I knew it - with my current 60d, there is a considerable lag between "butterfly sits on flower" and "camera makes picture of flower without butterfly". A 7d2 with a translucent mirror would be the killer for wildlife shots.
Tcapp:
--- Quote from: Marsu42 on April 23, 2012, 04:16:21 AM ---
--- Quote from: Tcapp on April 23, 2012, 03:53:27 AM ---Maybe. I dont think the translucent mirror thing is a good way to go for pro bodies though. you looks like a third stop of your light right there (or am i wrong?).
--- End quote ---
It's two thirds: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_RT ... however, with a good sensor and a fast lens it doesn't make a difference in ok light. The thing is: I once owned an non-digital Canon RT with a fixed mirror and it was the greatest camera I ever had! With a fixed, translucent mirror, you can actually see what you shoot (no blackout) and this makes tracking *much* easier, and the response time was stellar. I only needed to lightly touch the button and it had already made the picture before I knew it - with my current 60d, there is a considerable lag between "butterfly sits on flower" and "camera makes picture of flower without butterfly". A 7d2 with a translucent mirror would be the killer for wildlife shots.
--- End quote ---
Great point. Would be good for certain things i guess. But for my low light work, i would hate to have a two third stop handicap. Thats almost the difference between shooting at 6400 iso and 12.8k iso.
davidbellissima:
When I was in the market for a 50mm F1.4 I did a lot of research and finally settled on the Sigma 50mm F1.4. By most accounts it gets better reviews and in my experience it is brilliant! Highly recommended.
preppyak:
--- Quote from: Tcapp on April 22, 2012, 08:22:43 PM ---Which begs the question, are the new 24 and 28 IS lenses for video specifically? I don't see them being useful for stills...
--- End quote ---
Yes, that's pretty much the only excuse for making them so slow. Also, 50mm is one of the primes that is in a normal cinematographers bag, so, I'd be you'll see a 50mm IS prime at some point. 35mm and 85mm would be the others.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version