It looks quite compact, guess many video shooters will be renting the lens knowing the price of ownership.

What about Canon EF 35 mm f/1.4L II USM, its great for astro, landscape, and environmental portraits.

the 135mm f2L and the 70-200mm f2.8 IS II are both amazing, used both many times, although the 135mm is still new in my kit (replaced the 70-200) but I am amazed at the photos taken with both, portraits, still life, and landscape.

I have the Rokinon 14mm f2.8, its a great lens, but the distortion is a problem and its too wide sometimes, still its very cheap so I don't think I will ever sell it.

bsbeamer said:

FYI, this will be a crop lens only.

Click to expand...

With the exceptions of the CN-E primes, all of their Cine zooms are only designed to cover s35.

bsbeamer said:

Jacen said:

Here's a first look from B&H:

https://youtu.be/GAZzvk7Cj9o

Click to expand...

"Designed around Super 35 sensor" around the 1:32 mark.

Does this mean it's a crop lens only? Compatible with C100/C300/C700 and NOT a 5D/1D? The 18-80 "Covers Super 35 & APS-C Formats" only.

Click to expand...

I have the Canon 17-120(designed to cover s35) and have a swappable mount system on it so that I can change from PL to EF if necessary. Just for the hell of it after I had the mount system done, I put it on my 5Dmkiv, which we know is FF. Of course it didn't cover the full sensor-I knew it wouldn't, BUT it did in the 4K crop mode that the 5 runs in. Pic is kind of ridiculous, but that was part of the fun.

...when will the 30Mp crop camera arrive?
...who will be the first Nikon or Canon?

Zeidora said:

Attached an image of the teeth (radula) of a 1 mm snail. Width is around 50 µm, so less than the width of an average human hair. No coffee when you prep. it because the tungsten needles shake too much under the stereomicroscope. So a focusing screen is a walk in the park ;-)

Click to expand...

Wow...macro on a level I rarely see. You do have fun!

And the question is: will it blend split in half as the rest of e-mount white lenses?

https://www.dpreview.com/news/1308959313/the-sony-a9-is-a-24mp-sports-shooting-powerhouse

so now ... who's the April fool ? ;D

Canon Rumors said:

We’re hearing reports from a solid source that a truck carrying all of Sony’s NAB gear was stolen on the way to Las Vegas for the show, which takes place next week. Additionally, we’re told Sony had some third party manufacturers gear on the truck which was to be used alongside Sony’s gear in their booth.</p>
<p>We have reached out to Sony for comment, but haven’t heard back as of yet.</p>
<p><em>More to come as we hear more…</em></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

Click to expand...

alternate news flash. Upon opening the truck, the perpetrators saw it was SONY equipment and ran the truck off the road and abandoned it.

Sony officials state that the truck was recovered with all contents accounted for.

I'm sure everyone has different needs and expectations.

Count me in the group that is looking for improved image quality. I really do appreciate the top LCD screen and the rear focus button, but I need a bit more than that to justify the purchase. My purpose is to use the 77 D as a vacation and walk around camera when I don't want to carry my 5D3. It needs to have good enough image quality that I don't feel bad that I left my 5D3 behind when I look at the images in Lightroom. Obviously that's extremely subjective! ;D

I would also like to use it as a backup to the 5D3 when doing paid photoshoots.

The complicating factor is that I currently have a T5i that has fairly good image quality by my standards, so in order to justify a new APS-C camera, I need to see some improved image quality beyond what the T5i provides. Mostly I am interested in having a bit more dynamic range, like the sensor in the 80D is supposed to provide.

So far, I haven't been able to confirm that I can expect much improvement, so I am going to wait for more reviews.

Pretty much the same weight as the old Canon 100-400

Award for Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence

SteveM said:

Just a little curious here, how does the 5D MklV not qualify as a professional camera given the number of professional photographers using one - especially wedding photographers....

Click to expand...

Ah, you make a basic category error in assuming that the 'categories' have some inherent meaning, beyond their advertising and promotional ones.

These 'awards' are more like an "Annual Montgomery Burns Award for Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nxgkb_lYJJE

Beautiful pictures, Tony. Keep posting.

As I understand it, it is because the AF is much more unreliable.
The AF is done with the aperture wide open and at f8 the amount of light hitting the sensors is greatly reduced. Effective AF needs contrast and with lower light comes lower contrast.

But also note that Canon teleconverters report the effective aperture to the camera and it is the tc/camera programming that actively blocks AF. I have used both Kenko tc and Tamron tc and these do not report the effective aperture to the camera so AF works....well,it tries to AF but the performance is very, very poor in comparison.

I think the reason that Canon do this is that they believe they would rather have AF not work at all, and the client know exactly where they stand, than to have customers complain about erratic AF if they do not understand how it works.

AE-1Burnham said:

Hi all. Why couldn't they just put OS in this and sell it for more?!

Click to expand...

Because lens design isn't just "putting things in" as if it were some sort of a checklist where all that matters is "protecting" other products in the lineup? That sort of thinking is pretty insulting to the engineers involved.

OS means there has to be a stabilization group somewhere. That will complicate the design and potentially require compromising optical quality. With the huge elements in this beast of a lens, the electromagnets to drive the stabilizer would have to be beefy. The lens is already huge, what would it look like with OS? And how much more would it cost? Are you sure it would sell more at the increased price point, especially considering that the primary target audience of this lens has little need for stabilization and would have to pay extra for a useless feature?

Yes, Helen to the rescue more than once ... have a great birthday, and many more of them.

SteveM said:

Has anyone found this update a necessary cure for a particular problem in everyday use?

Click to expand...

Yes, I had it. It was driving me to despair!

ahsanford said:

Seems like the DPR staff laid an egg on the obvious question: "You may develop everything in-house, but your sensor division and imaging division are now separate businesses -- please tell me why that's a good thing for photographers."

This opens a can of worms regarding potentially conflicting priorities between the different business units. The Sensor division could rack up a lot of money to serve its own business unit bottom line by licensing/supplying their best tech to Nikon or Canon for top dollar. But it's clearly in the Imaging division's best bottom line outcome that the Sensor division shuts off supply of sensors to those two.

- A

Click to expand...

IIRC, Sony did not license out to Nikon but made sensors to Nikon's specifications - this is not an unusual business model from confectioners to engineering. But I always thought it odd that Nikon cameras managed to get more out of the sensor than Sony cameras even though they were (presumably) using the same basic architecture.

Nirmala, love that second shot

I was wondering the same thing and after much research and pondering, I went with the Canon Pro 10. Being completely new to (self-)printing, there was a small learning curve involved to get the best output (and I still feel there is a little trial and error involved for certain shots)...the end result is excellent though. First 12x18 was a wonder to hold! Definitely can recommend it (or the Pro 100 if print longevity isn't as critical to you as it was to me).

It would have been nice to get a 17" Pro 1000 to do 16x24s, but the ownership cost was increasing exponentially to the point where it became unjustifiable...especially when the vast majority of my desired prints are 4x6 and 8x12 - and the reviews that were critical of its ink usage on smaller prints.

jeffa4444 said:

Watch this space for C700 at NAB!

Click to expand...

I wonder if C700 with it's replaceable sensor unit, will be the unit that in the future, gets an 8K unit? you'd think if it tops out at 4k 60p it doesn't have the horses to do 8k at 30p. i guess that would depend on the Digic units and if they can handle the incoming sensor data.

I guess a C800 for 8K would also make sense too.. lol.

Thanks Sporgon,

I use Epson Premium Lustre 260, mainly for historical reasons, it is a carry over from when I used Epson printers. I really like the finish for general printing but the truth is it isn't heavy enough for the bigger prints, it creases far too easily once you go over 20"-24"

I asked Kieth at North Light to make me a profile for the Canon printer and Epson paper when he had a test Pro-2000, very generously he did and will forward that custom profile to anyone who emails him.

Lighting is simple, Caribbean sun under exposed several stops and three 600-EX-RT's ganged to light the horses, they are actually rescue Paso Fino's at an amazing center in the British Virgin Islands.

youngjediboy said:

Not that I'm expecting 4K from a Canon consumer camera (because it's still missing or unusable in their DSLRs) in 2017... but why even bother? If you're going to crank out a new model, you better make sure it at least has better specs than a current smartphone (pretty much all of them can shoot 4K video now)

Stop being stupid Canon!

Click to expand...

Yeah : 4k on Smartphones is mostly a marketing gag. Look at the poor bitrates and DR and then compare it to a real 4k video device (which currently costs you a fortune). Worlds of difference.

A good high-quality FHD solution is better than a crappy 4k-wannabe device. I think Canon did a good job here.

To be honest, though, I do want this lens!