Show your Bird Portraits
- By SteelLynx
- Animal Kingdom
- 33192 Replies
Looks like not only cats just sit where they want.
Attachments
Upvote
0
That wouldn’t stop many buyers. The 28-70mm f/2 cost about 3600 to 3900€ at launchAn RF 24-50/1.8L may easily cost 4000€. Who will spend so much money?
@SirIssacNewton thank you, kindly!Wax wing looks amazing, wish we had them in North Carolina! Last one is spectacular! Well done
Give it another 20-30 years. We are heading in that direction.I can't wait for RF 10-1200mm f0.95L IS VCM Macro x1.4 Extender.....

Looking at Richards table with all the different zoom ranges from the patent, I´d personally say 28-55mm F1.4 sounds the most intriguing. I´d also love 35-70mm and I´d consider buying one of these lenses if the prices allows it. An UWA f1.4 zoom such as 16-24mm F1.4 wouldn't interest me at all. But that's just me![]()
Wax wing looks amazing, wish we had them in North Carolina! Last one is spectacular! Well doneHi guys, a few portraits (and one tiny BIF) from the last weekend.
We have a Cedar Waxwing, Say's Phoebe, Bewick's Wren and a Red-winged Blackbird.
View attachment 228252View attachment 228253View attachment 228254View attachment 228255
I really enjoyed using the Sigma 24-35 f/2 for a few years. Like 3 primes.24-45: For me, a very interesting focal range, to complement a 70-200 and a 14mm TS-E.
Even if it were no f/1,4, but an f/2,8.
70-135 f/1.4... stop trying to seduce me.70-135 f/1,4 would be very nice and useful for many.
I do not expect this zoom to cover an extreme range, f/1,4 will be already difficult to design.
But Canon have already used us to spectacular lens developments in the past, so, who knows?
Good news, it already came out in Sept 2014.7D Mark II in May/June this year?![]()
Agree. I don't think so, at least not for high end lenses with short focal lengths.Is IS necessary when IBIS works so well with it?
It's rather complicated to understand, a least for me. The HM element (HM = Holographic Mirror) acts like a catadioptric lens. The centre of the front allows transmission but directs light to peripheral areas of the back surface that reflect it back to reflective regions of the front surface that then reflect it to transmissive regions of the back surface. So the light is folded as in the patent for one round trip. It requires incredible accuracy of engineering at the nanometer level to work.How would the light know only bounce one round-trip?
When I tore down my G15 and G1X Mk I after they were ‘crippled,’ I was so excited to get to the sensor core, that I forgot to check out any dust protection design.
Is IS necessary when IBIS works so well with it?In this case, I'd be happy if Canon just did what others and finally brought us 28-70/2 II, this time with IS and considerably less wright.