Well, he beat out Starbucks and Annheiser-Busch, but I noticed that Volkswagen came in at 20 and even Jeff Bezos made it in the top 100, despite abusing his employees.

Why is Canon faster than the competition?

Simple - they produce the 1DX!
Tried the opposition and I was not that impressed, unfortunately the owners of the "opposition" were using my 1DX while I tried they gear - they were quite unhappy. Pity as they are good photographers and friends so I felt for them. I won't get into long lenses as they were even more unhappy here.
P.S. On my last visit to the Alps the cyclists were MUCH faster downhill than I dared go - they are nutters!

I tried to resist the urge to buy this but ended up pulling the trigger, and all I can say is WOW so far. The build quality is amazing, better than any lens I own. It's a bit deceptively heavy due to the metal, but it feels very balanced on my 6D. Seems extremely sharp, even wide open (not sure about the edges, but really, how often do you shoot at 1.8 and need tack sharp edges?). It's also the first lens I've ever bought that focused dead on without any microadjustment. The thing I really noticed though is that 45mm seems like a great focal length for street photography - I've kind of been on the fence about whether 35 or 50 is better for that, and I've mainly stuck with the 35 F2 IS because the IS is so useful for night shooting. 45mm seems slightly more general purpose than 50mm, and I think it's gonna be the perfect compliment to my 16-35mm F4 IS in my travel kit.

The 2 downsides I noticed are the same ones everybody has pointed out - 1) chromatic aberration is a bit high, esp at 1.8. Should be correctable once DXO/Lightroom release plugins, but it is an issue. 2) AF speed is definitely on the slow side. If I had to pick between accuracy and speed, I'd choose accuracy, but it's definitely noticeably slower than my 35mm F2 IS.

Overall the lens is amazing, it's what I've been waiting for as far as a great general purpose normal prime (wake up, Canon). With a fast normal image stabilized zoom, I think I can finally sell my 24-70 VC, since there are few remaining situations I can imagine wanting to carry it around.

Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L & EOS M3 Honored with Design for Asia Awards

The M3 is hardly an award winning camera, whilst a worthwhile improvement over the previous models, it's not outstanding.

FF please, or don't bother at all, Canon.

Do you really believe that a company, which never cared to make any competitive EF-S primes (for 15 years now), will make your dreams come true? Well, I hope so . In fact, their crippled and overpriced M bodies will keep the DSLR system safe (from progress), kinda ;D.

I expected a better coma performance since well.....its meant for astro, but still its tempting at 20mm and $1k, though the 35mm f/1.4 II tempts me more, waiting for lenstip's review of it, but even if it's not better, it will get higher usage.

Is it possible to use Surface Pro + LR and PS without the keyboard? How is Ctrl, Alt and Shift + pen handled without keyboard? I'm using Wacom Intuos Pro with desktop PC and it still have few buttons on the tablet mapped to these keys.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

martti said:

Ken Rockwell reviews all kinds of things on his site, let's not forget him 8)
Maybe the lens craze is subsiding when people start noticing that nobody interesting really is interested in what kind of lense was used to take the picture of the computer keyboards of the duck in the local park or the round-eyed toddler of the family...

Click to expand...

Eventually, his growing family will grow into adults. What will he do then? Maybe adopt some young kids

Click to expand...

His kids might grow into adults but Ken himself...not likely!

Some lenses are designed to let you change the mount. Zeiss CP lenses are set up to do that, and some high end Canon cinema lenses (North of $40K). I doubt if Sony lets you change to a EF mount.

If its a savings to you, you might get a different lens and sell the Sony.

http://blog.abelcine.com/2013/11/13/changing-zeiss-cp-2-lenses-from-ef-to-pl-mount/

There are pl to ef adapters for a limited number of lenses. Some buyers indicate that the adapter worked on their Sony pl mount lens, but I expect that not all will work.

This is from one of the comments on the B&H web site:

"It should work with any PL lens, but I can say from personal experience that it works with my RED 50-150 zoom, RED 300 prime, and Sony PL primes, Zeiss PL zooms, and many others.

• DOUGLAS J on Sep 7, 2015"

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/995147-REG/fotodiox_ar_pl_eos_p_pro_canon_eos_adapter.html

Stu_bert said:

You lose 2/3 of light when it hits the CFA before getting to the sensor. Wow, that's a lot...

What they dont say is how much computational work is required to calculate the colours, but I'm sure they will be reaching out to Sony to see if they want to license the tech...

Thanks for sharing...

Click to expand...

This is a major reason I hope mirrorless cameras quickly acquire a 3-sensor design: no filtering. Losses should be much less through a trichroic prism than through a CFA.

I've seen a few comparisons done between these bodies but for those of you who prefer the inconsistencies of real-world comparison shooting to lab data here's a bonanza of studio and outdoor test shots using some of the best glass available. (in progress)

http://www.mobile01.com/newsdetail.php?id=17551

I SEE U DONT KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT SMH
you were at the photoplus expo too say what needed too be done

tomscott said:

so u saying the 7D mark too isnt that good at high end portraits?? hmm

well i guess this isnt high end portraits

Click to expand...

I didn't say it wasn't suitable, I said it would save people money unless they are looking for a high end portraiture, specific look.

In your images above I would say a FF camera would have been more suitable as there is a lot of DOF to the point where the bg is distracting in both images, especially in the first image with the black curtain not sure whats in the bottom right corner but at a wider aperture would have looked much more aesthetic.

At F5 your effectively shooting the equivalent of F8 at 85mm against a flat background with a lot of texture, close range not leaving much room for a clean background. If it had been shot full frame you could have got a nicer creamier background but at the distance the subject is to the curtain it may not have made much difference unless you shot a much larger aperture. It would have also added a better bokeh effect in the second, but again he's so close to the lights it would be difficult. Changing the perspective moving the model further forward would have given a creamier look. But depends on your intended look.

But if your shooting in a studio with controlled lighting a FF camera is a no brainer.

Click to expand...

DXO needs to get a tester like the one Lens Rentals has. Then they also should test coma and some of the other attributes.

Astigmatism, coma, etc. But, coming up with a value for sharpness is difficult. Most testers give a value for the center, but measuring falloff of sharpness towards the edge and giving it a value that means anything is impossible. Some testers have tried to average it, but that's no good, so showing the colored graph seems to be a good way for depicting the performance of the lens from edge to edge.

I'm not a fan of testing lenses on a camera simply because so many other variables come into play. There is no such thing as a perfectly aligned camera, the mount is always off, the angle of light striking photo sites is different from camera to camera, the accuracy of the sensor alignment varies by individual camera, I've read that the built-in correction for light fall off at the outer pixels is done according to a internal data table for each lens in the camera firmware, there are just too many variables. Comparing from brand to brand is even worse.

I always wonder when I see dye based ink that is supposed to last for 300 years! What happens if a drop of water or coffee falls on it? Can it be wiped away or blotted up without smearing the ink? My 3880 with pigment based ink is reasonably resistant to a drop of water, but not great.

Laser is the only type of print I've seen that does not smear. I've made lots of laser printed photobooks with my Xerox Phaser and after 10 years, they are still bright and have no smears. They are not really photo quality, but close enough and I give them away to the high school actors for $5 which is a small fraction of the cost to print and bind 34-40 pages.

MickDK said:

Using the A7R2 with a grip - both the EF 24-70mm F2.8L II and EF 70-200mm F2.8L II handles just fine. I'd love to see native versions though (me FE 55mm F1.8 focuses *very* fast!).

Dylan: +1 for a FE 135 F2

Click to expand...

I have been using the 70-200II and tamron 24-70 VC on the a7r2 without a grip and it is fine. I might not want to operate all day that way on a regular basis. But I feel like there is a lot of exaggeration about how bad the ergo is. How many of us in here are actually shooting regularly all day with a large tele? Sure, some of us might have to do that here and there. But it is not that serious for many of of us and should not be a generalization that gets thrown around so quickly to be used as a huge negative for trying out a mirrorless body.

For reference, I am only a serious hobbyist/enthusiast but shoot with a variety of rigs almost everyday. The 70-200 only gets pulled out about once or twice a week for a few hours here and there. Hasn't been an issue for me yet.

Please "gojuu" f1.4L IS USM

Canon Rumors said:

<p>A very solid source let us know that the EOS-1D X Mark II will be in our hands no later than April 2016, but that Canon has yet to finalize an announcement date. So there’s no need to worry that this is going to be a Photokina 2016 product.</p>

Click to expand...

If the availability is almost certain for April, this means that pretty much they have final specifications (and not like some people suggest still trying different options), is that so Craig?
Also what would be your estimation for an announcement date, if it will be available in April, not based on sources but just your thoughts
Thanks

Ah. If the gear is going to "think" it should voice its concerns, "Where is my preflash, sir, please?"

THANK YOU for the explanation.

This is my fault because I hadn't ever tested this use case and tried it on a shoot. Yes, the manual (a single sheet with controls very simply labeled) could have called this out but hey, that's why we get paid the big bucks.

I bought some 580EX2's just to have speedlights equipped with the PC connection -- so I could use them my preferred way: little manual location strobes for when the Einstein kit isn't appropriate. Since Canon didn't want to provide the 580EX2 with a built-in I'll always take a bunch of little ones of my own.

Again, much thanks.

Don Haines said:

jrista said:

Don Haines said:

takesome1 said:

Probably more interst than obsession.

Shooting off the LCDis not a bad thing. I think of many reasons it could be a benefit in the future.

IMO mirrors are a holdover from the non-digital days. It's a dinosaur that hasn't meet it's time yet.
We might be fans of the conventional view finder and mirror because were set in our way. But change will eventually come and it will be at a slow pace.

It will be a while. Problems will have to be solved like overheating, AF efficiency and speed and other. Plus once it arrives they will have to convert the masses who love dinosaurs.

Click to expand...

+1
Canon moves slowly. Some interpret that as resistant to change, others as "make sure it works before you sell it"... Once the bugs are out and the overall performance of mirror less exceeds mirrored cameras, you can expect the switch....

I expect that one day, the 5D? and 1D? will be released as mirror less....

Click to expand...

This is a bit of a misnomer. Canon cannot directly benefit from other companies such as Sony "working out the bugs" and then suddenly switch without having any problems. The things that currently limit mirrorless cameras and the things companies that sell mirrorless cameras are fixing and resolving are the same things Canon is going to have to deal with if and when they finally decide to take the plunge. However, because they have delayed, they aren't going to be ahead of the curve...they will be behind it.

Unless Canon is cranking away on some unknown technology in a box somewhere, hiding it from the world, not even filing any patents on it, it seems doubtful Canon will just race out the gate on a mirrorless winner that trounces all the competition. DPAF is their SOLE mirrorless-benefitting technology at the moment (one which they hardly even use for mirrorless...or have they even used it at all??)...and there are several companies (Sony does NOT appear to be one of them) out there now working on the same thing (and some of the patents filed over the last year seem technologically superior to Canon's approach.) Canon will not hold this theoretically superior technological advantage with DPAF for long, especially if they refuse to implement it broadly in the cameras that can best benefit from it.

Click to expand...

And yet they have the EOS-M, proof that they are working on Mirrorless......

Click to expand...

Proof that they are piddling half-heartedly with mirrorless, at best, and that really has nothing to do with solving key technological issues to make mirrorless head-to-head competitive against top of the line DSLRs. If Canon was serious about Mirrorless, they would take it, and their biggest mirrorless competitor, head on and deliver a highly compelling product. They have been through generations now, and it still hasn't gained a foothold in what is potentially one of the largest markets for it.

Canon has put the bare bones minimal effort possible into their mirrorless offerings so far (which, I guess, is their M.O. really.) That isn't going to get them over the technological hurdles very fast, and it will leave their mirrorless offerings trailing both the competition, and their own DSLR options, for a long time. Canon's SOLE compelling mirrorless technology is DPAF, and I don't think it's been put in an actual mirrorless camera yet! By the time they finally get around to doing that, someone else will have the same kind of technology, and will likely already have it in a commercial product.

I'm sure Canon will do fine whenever they get around to doing anything (how could they not, with the kind if undying fanbase they have?), but they nor their products deliver much to excite me these days. It's just endless small evolutions on previous technology, and the one thing I really want still hasn't been delivered. But, that's just me, apparently. I'm biding my time for a 5D IV...it'll be the only Canon camera I buy for years once it comes out, assuming I don't find something else capable of driving my 600mm lens at full speed before it finally gets here.

leoyuho said:

fantastic review as always. Thanks

Click to expand...

You're welcome!

Plainsman said:

With a ground breaking sharp lens like this one it surprises me that Canon have not offered at least a 1.4X TC precisely tuned to the DO II optics e.g. as Nikon has done with its special 1.25XTC for its latest 800/5.6.

Yes of course it would be expensive but this lens I am sure has the potential of giving a very sharp 560/5.6 for perhaps 25% extra price.

Click to expand...

i don't think a special tc just for the lens is needed. it's fantastic with the existing 1.4xiii.

Don Haines said:

StudentOfLight said:

jasny said:

StudentOfLight said:

jasny said:

dilbert said:

jasny said:

sigh said:

I think people are forgetting one of the main benefits of Canon not using Sony sensors, especially for videographers, namely DPAF. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I understood sensors had to be manufactured in a certain way for DPAF to work. Sony sensors aren't manufactured with this feature and can't be unless Canon licence their patents to them. This is never going to happen.

Personally I'd be against Canon using a third party sensor, like the Sony, if it meant losing DPAF.

Click to expand...

DPAF is more than 2 years on the market, but we still even don't know if Canon plans to use it on FF sensors at all...

Click to expand...

The C100, C300 and C300 MkII have DPAF.

Click to expand...

Those are low Mpix Super-35 sensors for video, not high Mpix FF sensors for stills...

Click to expand...

IIRC, STM is a complimentary technology to DPAF. So why did Canon start making full frame STM lenses like the 24-105 IS STM?

Click to expand...

And 40/2.8 is either STM for FF. And available almost for 3 years... And still no DPAF FF...

BTW: I use my STM lenses without DPAF and I'm quite happy with them

Click to expand...

Canon doesn't release full frame bodies every couple of months. The 6D was probably too late in it's development to include DPAF. Since then, the only new full frame is the 5Ds/R line, which Canon decided was not gonna be video oriented (no headphone-jack, no clean HDMI-out)

Click to expand...

Agreed!

We are talking about LONG development cycles on Camera bodies.... The 5D4 project probably started before the 5D3 was released....

Click to expand...

I wonder what the real turn around time is for Canon to go from concept to production models shipping? Probably differs depending on how drastic the new model deviates from the previous model, such as the 5D3 vs 5Ds.

DLD said:

rfdesigner said:

DLD said:

I am currently using Canon (came from Nikon) the digital picture is far off on a lot of Nikon lenses... their results favor Canon heavily... so I don't think they are any better than dxo mark in regard to favoring brands..

Click to expand...

interesting, when you say "far off on a lot of Nikon Lenses" do you mean the reviews or are you talking about the "lens image quality" tool?

Click to expand...

The lens image comparisons.

Photozone.de has the most accurate results I have found... however there's limited testing done there as far as lens flare and other issues like contrast which can also improve lens performance... But given how biased or even doctored thedigitalpicture seems to me I take anything they say with a grain of salt... Those image comparisons are just not what I'm seeing, or reading elsewhere...

Click to expand...

The magenta hue in the blacks is due to longitudinal Chromatic Aberration. Which is also identified in the photozone review:


I believe that with resolution testing the methodology is to focus bracket and choose the sharpest image. Now pixel peeping at that photozone shot. It looks like with 3 increments of backfocus you actually produce marginally sharper detail than if there is no LoCA. Maybe this is why TDP chose the purplish shot as the highest resolving one out of the set of bracketed shots.

Also, with field curvature you if you don't see it in the centre of frame then you will definitely see it in the corners. From the TDP crops the corners look very good with no LoCA. In real world shooting however, with 3D subjects, the LoCA will affect your wide-open, shallow-depth-of-field shots whether you like it or not.

What I gather from the TDP crops (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=106&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=791&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0) is that the resolution of fine-detail on the Nikkor 85mm looks very good from centre to corner and it thoroughly trounces the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 in mid-frame and the corners when shooting wide open. Do you have another example that shows TDP's "bias" towards Canon?

Iphone. Am serious.

Which is why in order to have any viable discussion, an agreement on terms and definitions needs to be made.

Different people have different definitions of journalism and reporting.

It is my opinion that any journalist that does not recognize their own bias is not a very good journalist.