All lenses released so far in 2014:

- 16-35/4
- 10-18/4.5-5.6
- 55-200/4.5-6.3
- 400/4
- 24-105/3.5-5.6
- 24/2.8
- 100-400/4.5-5.6

What will most likely come this year is the 11-24/4.
That makes a total of 8 lenses (the 2 Cinema lenses not included)...
Now who says CR is not reliable? Didn't they mention 8 new lenses for 2014?

And if you can't call that a year of the lens, I don't know what a year of the lens is for you...

Again, the ISO performance looks stunning!
The ISO 1600 shot looks better than my 7D @800...

Thanks for sharing!

Synkka said:

Again thanks everyone for the suggestions, Canon just announced the cash back deals, so $150 off 700d is making it the choice of body, just got to work out the best lens

Click to expand...

As the price over at B&H is (with the rebate) 700$, I think it is a little difficult to find a decent lens for 100$...
How about spending a few hundred bucks more for e.g. the Sigma 2.8-4/17-70?

"Is it possible the RAW converter is complicating things?"

Of course it is, but it could as easily be an intrinsic capture issue, but the point is moot, this isn't an isolated set of images and more than one RAW convertor does the same thing. Besides the output is purely academic until you put it through a RAW convertor, and the number of images most of us shoot means it needs to be one of a small handful of those.

Like I said, it isn't a huge issue for people with above average expectations and post processing skills.

Big thanks everyone! Turns out, I spoke with the guy on the phone for quite a while. He owns several photography related businesses here locally including

http://www.lenzbuddy.com/

I think he decided to just sell his lens but I think I made a friend in the process so it's still a win.

Again, I appreciate the advice on the 100-400 and I'll keep it in mind if/when I evaluate one of them sometime.

Believe me, I sympathize... My own approach is to try, try, try to describe the problem as accurately and exactly as possible, and then let them fix it... My mother always told me, "Johnny, don't tell a surgeon how to operate."
And I also learned that it really IS possible to take out one's own appendix; but it is less painful and messy to hire a surgeon to do it for you.
I myself have had very good luck with California's CPS, though in truth I have never sent them complex problems. ...
Again, I sympathize...

Sabaki said:

Canon's latest zooms are a strong indication that the engineering process has become highly refined and that the next primes should truly shine.

Click to expand...

It looks many overlook that a lens is not IQ only - there are other factors to take into account when selecting one - prime or a zoom, for example weight, dimensions, maximum aperture, ease of use.

Sure, the 70-200/2.8 is an excellent lens, but it's also heavy - even if it could become a macro one I would not use something so heavy for "walkaround macro" compared to the much lighter 100/2.8 macro.
Street photographers often prefers primes because are smaller. lighter and faster to use - no temptation to change the focal to "optimize framing" and maybe missing a shot. When shooting portrait also, some bigger lenses may be somewhat intimidating for non-professional subjects.
And when there's a need to work quickly in low-light situation - or really need very shallow DOF, max aperture counts, and it's something you can't achieve with IS alone. Sometimes, it is the difference between returning with a photo, albeit not one with an astounding IQ, or getting no photo at all. "Strangely", there are some kind of photos you can easy sell even if the IQ will not DXOmark people scream....

Did you just discover this?


http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/09/sigma-at-photokina-2014/

You might also do some checking and find that no one actually knows when they might ship, or many other details. It does not exist except on paper.

If you look for a weight of the lens, it is tbd. You can't weigh the paper and come up with anything meaningful. I'm sure they know within a few ounces, they just don't have a finished lens to weigh. All the photos are of prototypes, and might not even be functional.

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/new/new_topic.php?id=453

LovePhotography said:

zim said:

LovePhotography said:

Will Canon 6D best resolution jpegs or RAW photos display better on a new UHD 4K monitor than a regular 1080P monitor? I don't watch TV (haven't for >20 years) but I have a 55 inch fast refresh rate 1080p TV for my computer monitor, which I love. But, sitting close you can see the pixels. So, I'd love to spend the dough for a similar 4K monitor, but, since website stuff if so compressed and will look crappy on a 4k monitor (still), one of the main joys of getting it would be if my Canon 6D pictures looked better. Thanks.

Click to expand...

WOOOOWWW...... sorry to take this off topic but you haven't watched telly for over 20 years, really ?

Click to expand...

Nope. Don't have cable. Don't have an antenna. Have never seen an episode of Friends, Desperate Housewives or any Survivor-type show. Only miss it 2-3 times a year. If it's really, really important, the highlights are on Youtube. But, no, I haven't watched TV for decades, and don't miss it a lick.

Click to expand...

respect!

Re: Canon Technologies Contribute to Production of Primary Mirror Used in TMT Extremely Large Telesc

Bah, we all know the quality of those slow mirror tele lenses, I'm waiting for the big white refractor version. f/15 is way too slow for AF. Good with IS though.

Omni Images said:

I was speaking to a local "birder" here perhaps two weeks ago about the old 100-400, as he uses one.
He mentioned he dropped into a friends place the week before who has in his words "three of them in his cupboard" .. I said tell him I'll give him 50 bucks for one.....made me wonder why someone would have 3 copies of the same lens.
But reading all the posts on here how much variation of IQ this lens had, .... maybe it also took him 3 before he found a good one ...

Click to expand...

Begs the question about why he kept the other two though . . .

DWM said:

expatinasia said:

Personally, not only do I think they are both aimed at quite different markets,

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you are considering different markets because everybody I know with either camera or even the original 7d use them for exactly the same thing. Which is primarily sports/wildlife. What separates the two cameras market is mainly price and not how they are used. Therefore in my opinion a comparison between the two is very important. Even if the 1d Mk iv is no longer in production there is a lot of them available on the used market.

Click to expand...

I agree that a comparison is important, if only from a curiosity point of view.

What I meant by different markets is that the 1D IV when compared to the 7D ii is aimed more at the pro sports photographer rather than the semi-pro and consumer market (I do not do wildlife much at all and only for leisure when I do so I can't comment on that).

At the sporting events I shoot, the photographers using Canon either have a two 1D X combo, or a 1D X and 1D Mark IV, or one of the 1D X or IV and a 5D Mark III. I do not think I have ever seen a 7D.

The Hasselblad- Version of a Sony NEX, 5 times so expensive with absolutely no benefit.
And to ice the cake: ugly as hell.

FEBS said:

Nice photos Glenn.

Costa Rica is on my short list for visiting right now. Within 2 years as I see now.

Did you use your 600/4 lens for these pictures on the 7D2 ?

Would you think that I could take good pictures with combo 7D2 and 200-400 1.4x? Or do I really need 600/4 on Costa Rica?

Click to expand...

I did indeed use my 600 for these. A 200-400 would be great in a lot of situations and for bigger birds. But in general I think a 500 or 600mm is ideal for birds.

GraFax said:

The only other slot I can think of which is designed for inserting the long side is a toaster. The toaster is probably the most dangerous household item ever invented. If you invented and tried to market the toaster today they would probably hold you over for psychiatric evaluation. Just sayin

Click to expand...

Kinda pathetic really, people are so dumb we have to worry about them using a toaster, I give up................

With my experience with two owned and four tried total of the 35 Art I would rather have no lens. And considering the number of 35 L's I have owned ( lost count) and they were all equally great.

A 35 L II is at the absolute top of my wish list and has been for so many years. It will be epic! The AF will be the fastest and most accurate of any 1.4 lens made for Canon.

fragilesi said:

DominoDude said:

Maui5150 said:

Nice job. One of my fav bands too!

Click to expand...

Thanks, Maui5150!
I hadn't heard them before. Enjoyed the show immensely. Ritzy was a bundle of fun, and despite running around on stage, like an energizer bunny, she gave me loads of opportunities to get good shots with plenty of eye contact.

Click to expand...

Good shots, and that's quite a pair of eyes she has too!

Click to expand...

Thanks, Fragilesi!
As long as I managed to portray some of the bands energy, then I'm happy. I was no "official" photographer or anything like that during the festival/concert, but she did deliver loads of opportunities no matter where I was standing. This is taken from a set of stairs slightly beside the stage, and I could better manage to get at proper eye level with the performers, and I didn't have to shoot the necks of the crowd.

Paper is skewing as it goes thru the feeder, a common issue. The better scanners have skew detectors, etc. But they also start at $1000.

Best to return it or exchange it, something is likely out of kilter.

Fujitsu makes the best ADF, IMHO, but their good ones are pricey.

For photo work, don't use a ADF.

Random Orbits said:

Mitch.Conner said:

Random Orbits said:

Maybe because Canon can't get around Nikon's patent to produce a competitive 14-24. Nikon's 14-24 decreased the demand for its own 14 f/2.8.

Click to expand...

Very unlikely IMO.

Click to expand...

Then why hasn't Canon done so, IYO?

Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to say that I know why - just that I don't think that Canon is unable to get around Nikon's patent(s) related to their 14-24 f/2.8.

I didn't mean to quote the other reason you cited.

Congratulations, Mr. Surapon. Thanks you for posting all the shots of the beautiful women.

Phil L said:

http://phillanoue.com/2014/11/07/high-speed-chase/

Click to expand...

Wow, Mr. Phil Exceptional. Well done, but the mk II also looks like being worth every cent.

ahsanford said:

AcutancePhotography said:

What I don't understand are people who don't like or don't agree with his videos making threads calling attention to his videos. If you don't like his videos, ignore his videos. Simple.

Click to expand...

To my knowledge, no one else is parsing this down into simple terms for the masses to soak in (except for odd, one-off efforts I've seen on YouTube).

Click to expand...

I actually spend a good deal of my time doing camera reviews on Youtube and I try very hard to publish as accurate and as fair information as possible. (you can see my latest epic shootout between the 5D3 and the D750 here: http://youtu.be/EsZtUZvoeO0

From the side of the Youtuber, it is a lot of ridiculously hard work to create a Youtube channel. If you say one little thing wrong, even accidentally, you won't hear the end of it. Trust me I know first hand, and this is the risk we assume when we put information out there.

I have only watched a handful of Tonys videos, and I think he is making a good & sincere effort, on the other hand I have to agree that when anyone on youtube seeds incorrect information, it can be quite harmful. I have had many, many comments of my channel who repeat things they saw on other channels and I am left to correct this commenter because they believe something they heard, even if it was a simple misunderstanding. It feels endless. I can't tell you how many times I have had to correct someone who actually believes the concentration of light photons is greater on full frame cameras because tony said they "let in more light". I realize he was talking about surface area and greater sampling accuracy, but his audience hears "full frames let in more light", and interpret as they will.

The biggest problem with you tubers in general is imprecision in both comments and testing- it distracts from otherwise good content. Occasional careless personal statements thrown off the cuff like the 5D3 being good for Facebook comments do not help either. Once or twice, ok. Consistently? Not good for the long run.

I am also against any Youtube reviewer who gives advice or recommendations on cameras they haven't actually used in a real shooting situation. I understand the "preview" thing, but how in the world can they know about a camera's performance without actually using it?

Tony must work very hard so I can have no ill will towards him. I get it. He (as well as many others) do however need to be more careful and precise with what they are sharing. I have seen him in the past post corrections for errors, so that is definitely a good thing to see and at least lets me know he is trying to be sincere.

Ivan Muller said:

I didnt watch his video...but the typical 'switch' scenario seems to be: " Sheesch, my new little camera is just so much smaller than that big badass 5d3 with the 24-70zoom and that huge 70-200f2.8! My new sony/leica/nikon/pentax/samsung is just so small and compact. I hardly notice its there'...which of course is all true...me I just swap my big ugly zooms for a little pancake and the my 6D is almost just as small and compact as the best out there, and all it cost me was the price of a 'meal'...

Click to expand...

Where the hell do you eat. I'm all for the occasional nice meal, but did you ask for extra bacon on the super sized meal?

Mt Spokane Photography said:

Here are some crops of images downloaded from Imaging Resource. We all see things a little differently, I looked at the dark red fabric to see detail.

Click to expand...

I will wait for RAW files.

Jon_D said:

Maximilian said:

Jon_D said:

i am glad that i decided to buy the Sony RX100 III.

Click to expand...

And I hope that you will never get into any service issue with it.
Have fun.

Click to expand...

i have sony gear for years. TV and hifi... never had any issues.
so i am pretty confident in sony gear.

but in 15 years i had 2 canon bodys die after the warranty periode.
canon was not a big help either in these cases.

Click to expand...

My experience is the complete opposite. And the my experience with the Sony service was indescribable. :
Especially long term repair during warranty and not willing to add this repair time at the end of warranty when the next failure appeared. I had to threaten them with my lawyer. Otherwise they would have charged me.
And I had issues not with only one part. And I got insight how they put pimped products to HiFi magazines to get better tests. Products that didn't match the series. Really nice guys, aren't they.
So now I can understand you and you hopefully me.

Chisox2335 said:

cervantes said:

I got the 500L II about a year ago. Needless to say it blew my mind. What I got since then are an awful lot of fantastic images (see some examples with and without TCs here: http://www.focrates.com/gear/gear.html - just scroll down to the bottom of the page), and suprisingly my GAS was cured... If you already have the best of the best what is there left to excite you?

Get it if you have the money AND are prepared to spend A LOT of time and effort!
Greetings!

Click to expand...

Nice website. I found it fun to read and informative.

I would have a hard time justifying the price tag to the new wife on the mkii. I probably could on a used mki.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the compliments!

Well I think when you look at the difference between sale and resale price the gap between V1 and V2 gets much smaller. At least give the V2 a try via renting or in the shop - you can make a much more informed desicion then.

Best wishes!