As a home storage solution, I have no desire for a Pelican as my gear is in a modified/divided metal DVD storage cabinet (see prior link from my post above). It's way too heavy to quickly steal en masse in the event of a break in, and it's expandable for my growing gear collection. It also gives me a good task height top work surface to pack my bag with one drawer open / service my gear on top, something you can't do with a Pelican.

<weirdgearprojectdaydream>

That said, I have had a desire to get the great landscape gear solution. Could be a bag or a hard case, but uniquely for this application I'd want to get my gear solely from the top like it were a tacklebox, old clamshell doctor's bag, etc. and it would ideally impervious to the elements on the opposite side of the opening. Most bags don't fit that form factor / top opening requirement, and generally require putting one side down on the ground in the muck and sand and moisture, which then has me bring a small tarp (actually a single person camping tent 'floor') to protect it. So I've been wondering if a hard case just for landscape work would do, but then I wonder about portage to the shooting location (wheels won't exactly cut it on a wet beach).

I may just be insane to want a single 'go bag' for all landscape work when I should simply use different bags for different types of landscape jobs. I could get hard case for car camping and city landscapes, use my GuraGear Kiboko if a decent walk or lighter hike is required, or use my LowePro Flipside Sport if it's a proper taxing hike.

But it would be sweet to have just one tacklebox dialed in for landscape sized items that always force me to do rearrange my bag dividers (my 4x6 / 4x4 filters and holder in particular, but also my Gitzo Traveler, which could fit inside a case if properly sized).

</weirdgearprojectdaydream>

- A

I’ve used it mainly for Astro and Landscape.
For Astro it’s been manual focus. I’m really happy with it. Very impressive results. I have a Samyang 14mm 2.8.
I used it as well for landscape and it autofocussed perfectly and is very sharp. It would have been stopped down a bit.
I don’t use it for anything else. 14mm is wide I wouldn’t have thought of using it for a concert.
I’d highly recommend it. Not being able to use front filters is a negative and it’s expensive.
It was brilliant for shooting Aurora. It had the stars and the Aurora.

The market data is a lagging indicator.
DP reviews galleries may not be a great leading indicator but it is interesting that no Canon camera or lens is in the top 10.
Canon is under no great current threat but market leadership can ebb away if the don’t keep producing good camera and lens. Canon seems to do incremental improvements in a low risk manner. The basic quality is excellent.
The problem I see for Canon is how they convince their current owners to keep buying new kit.
It’s not been compelling on the camera front.
Past sales are nice as they give you a customer base. It’s future sales Canon has to get to survive.
They need to do a good job on their first full frame mirrorless.
It offers the best hope for higher frame rate.

The article is about still cameras that can be used for video, don't read something into it that's not there.

If someone wants a daily camera with
1. APS-C sensor
2. Weather sealing
3. Articulating display
4. Zoom lens with IS
5. USB charging
6. Not willing to carry multiple lenses
7. As small and light as possible

G1X III seems like the best option available.

I'm not sure why some people keep asking why would anyone get G1X III over M5/M6.
It's all about personal preference. I'd rather pay extra $ for less weight, less size, weather sealing, usb charging, fully articulating screen.
If you want to save money and don't mind extra weight/space, and always carry a camera bag for the 2nd lens, sure, M5/M6 is a better choice.

M5+15-45mm : bigger, heavier, no weather sealing, not fully articulating screen, no usb charging
M5+22mm : bigger, heavier, no zoom, no IS, no weather sealing, not fully articulating screen, no usb charging
M5+15-45mm+22mm : much heaver, bigger, have to carry extra lens, no weather sealing, not fully articulating screen, no usb charging

More options are always good for consumers. You just need to pick a camera that suits your needs and wants.

I would also not be a happy customer. Perhaps you will need to go up the ladder. Good luck.

Jack

jolyonralph said:

This is a great move. Illuminated buttons would be a huge help. Not everyone uses their camera so much that their muscle memory instinctively knows where every button is - especially the ones that are used less frequently. In the dark I'm always stumbling around trying to find buttons.

Click to expand...

And then there are those of us who have multiple cameras, none of which have the buttons in the same place.....

photonius said:

Well, you get more shelf-space when you have more cameras. But it can also backfire; when Apple was in dire straights with their Macs, many different models nobody could keep straight anymore - and competing against clones. When Steve Jobs came back, he killed all that.

Click to expand...

Well Apple has still variation. There are 16 versions of iPhone for example - not counting color variations.

I've been pleased with Battery life on my SL2. I keep GPS Turned off, and there is a Wi-Fi file transfer button on top that I use when I want to transfer files to tablet or phone. I just returned from a week in California visiting relatives and spending a day touring San Francisco. I used Wi-Fi to transfer lots of raw photos to my iPhone where I did minor editing with Adobe LRCC, and uploaded them to the cloud as a backup. I haven't bothered to recharge the battery, its still half a charge.

I use live view almost 100% of the time which makes the battery life even more amazing.

Zeidora said:

You can use your camera as a card reader. Just plug in the the USB cable in camera and computer, and that's it. Works like a charm for me on a 5DsR.

Click to expand...

If your camera is just USB2, previewing, selecting, downloading a lot of images will be far slower. Many internal readers are faster, and USB3 ones can be quite compact today, even for CF cards.

Valvebounce said:

Hi Dave.
You had me with the Phantom shot, love that shape, it looks so powerful and threatening.
I did "cluck" on the link and you have loads of great shots, particularly the cone and the fireball is quite spectacular.

Cheers, Graham.

Click to expand...

Do you think Dave is originally from New Zealund? Excellent shots Dave

This is an incredible camera for low light surveillance..... if you need it, it is worth the price!

If you have a specialized need that is important enough, you will get one.... or several.... security and surveillance are a very lucrative market to be in, and the Canon reputation of “it just plain works as expected” coupled with their reputation for service makes them a very comfortable purchase for government and large industries. (And yes, I have mounted surveillance cameras that make this one look inexpensive)

knoxone said:

Yea, it was crazy neat from my pov.... like ur timelapse video, pretty cool!

Click to expand...

Thanks. It was a lot of work, and I often wondered whether it was worth the effort until I was done.

"Made in Taiwan" is not the same as "Made in China" ;D

(I live in Taipei...)

15% off all Lee Filters at Wex Photographic.

https://www.wexphotovideo.com/lee-filters-lens-filters/

TAF said:

I was visiting a local camera shop, and got to look at the C200. Bingo. They already have a body that is close enough to make modifying it fairly easy.

Click to expand...

Just, look at how those cameras are usually rigged for shooting - not so often they are used almost "naked" with just a simple handle. Those bodies are designed for rigging - for shoulder or tripod use.

Anyway, even Hasselblad with its X1D retained the squared design when seen from the front, but made it a lot thinner.

I am wondering if the 90D may not happen, but a mirrorless version might replace it. Of course, it is not likely, but Canon may be piling resources into mirrorless.

New Rebel versions are on the way for early next year, so that frees up a development team to work on the next new model. What will it be? Mirrorless or DSLR?

LDS said:

niels123 said:

Nevertheless, the option to have off-camera HSS with my Speedlites (compared to 1/160 limit with my current Cactus V5 triggers) is a big improvement I think. It gives me the option to use flash for portraits in brighter conditions outside without half your image completely overexposed. What do you think?

Click to expand...

HSS is really useful outdoor (or indoor with a lot of ambient light) when you need shutter speed faster than X-sync. As an alternative indoor to obtain faster exposures to freeze motions, faster than some monolights allow (i.e. my Elinchrom RX4 has a flash duration of 1/800 at full power) it may not work for all subjects, you may need very short flash duration anyway.

If the speedlites work for you the better, whenever you feel the need of HSS with more powerful units better to rely on one designed for it, or you may end in an expensive "hit-and-miss" situation, especially if you do it for a living.

Click to expand...

I don't do it for a living, model shooting with off-camera flash is just hobby. I do shoot paid assignment though, but I rely on ambient light and fast primes 99+% of the time then. If I would get paid a decent amount for shoots with off-camera flash, I would for sure invest in a high-end monolight.

It'll be interesting to see if/when this comes out.
I'm curious to see if Canon will put out a flash of it's own kind for mirrorless, or just update one of the already implemented flash lineups.

Busted Knuckles said:

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:

Random Orbits said:

I appreciate how Sigma upped the ante in the IQ race, but I'm wondering if always shooting for the largest aperture is a good thing. The 35A and 50A were bigger than their competitors (with the same aperture) when they came out but those focal lengths tend to result in the smaller lenses compared to the focal lengths that Sigma is targeting now. The 85A is larger and heavier than the new 85L IS, the 12-24A is large and heavy (albeit 0.5 oz lighter than the Canon 11-24, but the Canon has a wider field of view and is still large and heavy), the 24-105A is larger and heavier than the 24-105L II, and those examples are where Sigma has matched Canon's max aperture. Sigma has pushed into larger apertures with the 20A and others, and now with the 14A and the weight increase is even larger. At some point, photographers won't want to bring a bagful of lenses because they are so heavy. By making them so heavy and by charging higher prices, I'm wondering if they are shrinking their target market because these lenses become niche products. Would it have made more sense to have a 14mm f/2 and shave off half a pound or more? How many people would be willing to tote a 14A in addition to a 16-35/12-24, 24-70 and 70-x00 zoom? Or if you prime, a 14A, 20A, 35A, 50A, 85A, etc.? The one thing I liked about the 14L II when I had it was its compact size. I could easily find space for a smaller lens, but these larger lens make planning for trips harder because most packs are optimized for such large diameter lenses.

Click to expand...

I'm with you. I reviewed the Voigtlander 20mm f/3.5 at the same time as the Sigma 20mm f/1.4 ART. The Sigma is WAY sharper, but I ended up buying a copy of the little Voigtlander after my review. Why? It's super compact, and I can bring along a wide angle of view lens without much bag space.

It's a similar argument for why I purchased the Tamron 45 and 85 VC lenses over the ART counterparts (focus issues were another). They are nearly as sharp as the ART lenses, but trade a little smaller maximum aperture for a much smaller/more compact build. They are just more practical to me.

I own three Sigma lenses - but they are all small, mirrorless lenses. (19mm f/2.8, 30mm f/1.4, and 60mm f/2.8). Size matters

Click to expand...

You beg an interesting question. How many would Sigma sell of a 1 or 1.5 fstop smaller lens - just as sharp, just with 1/2 the glass, etc.

Click to expand...

Considering the lackluster sales of the Tamron primes, I would say that Sigma has figured out the marketing aspect just fine. I also believe (from the anecdotal evidence that I receive) that the return rate and resell rate of the Sigma primes is unusually high. I'm a little more informed than the average photographer, however, so I'm less impressed by the easily marketable features and more interested in the complete package for my own kit.

For me, Budget is always first, otherwise, I'd have one custom designed and made just to my requirements, even if it cost $100 million.

Its hard to conceive most of us not having a budget in first place.

Then, there is the question of what I need,

focal length
aperture
Image quality
zoom or prime
AF or MF
IS or not

Quality is a tricky one, it may be higher or lower depending on the usage I intend, and there are different quality attributes that are more or less important depending on the intended usage, so there is no simple canned preference.

ITT a load of people who don't understand how DxO works, what DxO intends, or have even bothered to attempt to read DxO's explanations of their measurements.

DxO's measurements for the 16-35 mk III line up with my experience using seven different copies of that lens, on three different bodies. Seven across three is a pretty decent sample size in my book—far more than the average consumer will get through—and when that experience matches up with DxO's numbers (which, contrary to what some eejits in this thread have insinuated, DxO do explain), I see little reason to doubt them or give it a second thought.

As for why the 16-35 and 24-70 test so differently, you'll find that is the nature of all wider angles when pitched against longer focal lengths. Longer lenses inherently have finer resolving power as details are larger and not all smashed into a smaller pixel count. Hence all the lenses rated toward the top end of sharpness are >50mm and very few wide-angle lenses manage to resolve detail matching more than about two thirds of any given sensor's pixel count. (With a few scattered exceptions.)

When you zoom in, details get bigger and more easily-defined. Who ever would have thought?

Hector1970 said:

People seem to be saying that a 135mm TS-E would have limited uses.
What would those limited uses typically be.
Would it be an unusual portrait lens.

Click to expand...

There’s a lot of talk that it will make for a great product photography lens. Considering the .5x this is what I think most pros will buy it for.

I don’t think it would make a bad portrait lens, and you can be selective with the focus plane to get a little shallower DoF which I think will look unique. I doubt it’s going to replace the 135 f/2 or equivalent because of the lack of autofocus.

Its been long enough ago that the comments may be hard to find on Google.

ajfotofilmagem said:

Chaitanya said:

Photozone/Opticallimits posted their review of Sigma 14mm f/1.8 ART
http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1025-sigma14f18art?_ga=2.29428159.1225674489.1511278361-458414963.1501483286

Click to expand...

After several years, has the site "photozone.de" changed its name?
It's quite true that I was often directed to a porn site when I forgot to type ".de"
Now I need remember de name "opticallimits"...

Click to expand...

Yes, there was a recent discussion