Posts

Ozarker · Jun 1, 2018

melgross said:
Durf said:

Talys said:

transpo1 said:

What this tells me is, although Canon and Nikon still rule among professional photographers, they are seeing steep competition from Sony, with the A7III being the #1 Top Seller at B&H. The video competition from the GH5/s line must be taking a toll as well.

Click to expand...

Could that possibly be attributed to the A73 being the latest release? :

By the way Sony A7R3 and A73 were discounted very shortly after release too; it was just a disguised discount. You had to bring something to trade in. My friend took a very old -- and very broken, as in cracked -- EFS kit lens and got $300 off of his A7R3 a couple months after launch; a similar offer was made a month or two after A73 (any ILC body or lens), with increasing rebates for A73, A7R3, A9.

Click to expand...

Personally I don't believe that a discount automatically means the camera is not selling well, it could actually be that they want them to sell even better and to get as many in to peoples hands as possible. What better way is there to get more customers using a product and to prepare them for possibly wanting to upgrade to the next "better features and improved version"?

In my opinion the M50 is just a baby and a teaser to what's coming and that most people buying it will happily pay a little more for a better version (M60) or even a way more expensive FF mirror-less down the road.

Click to expand...

It’s a good indicator. And the bigger the discount, the worse sales are.

Marketing: "Let's arbitrarily set the MSRP (Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price) at $3,600. The gearheads will jump all over it for a couple of months. Then as initial excitement calms, we can offer a rebate so the consumer feels like he was smart for waiting. Then after the excitement calms a little more, we can allow the retailers to cut the price a little AND we can offer rebates. By then people will feel real smart about waiting. In this way we can grab a little money beyond our projected profit margin."

"And let's remove the rebates now and then so that the rebate seems like something special."

There never really was a discount. It's marketing to different segments of the market. It's feel good marketing.

Years ago (30+), everytime Sears ran a sale in Jackson, Tennessee the store staff would spend the night changing price tags. They'd mark up the price and then you'd get the "10% discount" off that marked up price when you came in for the "sale" the next day.

There never was a sale.

MartinF. · Jun 1, 2018

ahsanford said:
Famateur said:

I really like my 70-200 F4 L. It'll be interesting to see what they have in mind to improve upon it with the Mark II. Quieter IS motor is about the only thing I can think of...

Can't wait to see some reviews!

Click to expand...

For both, one might expect:

Lighter
Sharper
New CPL cutout in the hood
Slightly better IS
Maybe a new tripod ring design?

But as virtually everyone has said thus far: both of these lenses are still outstanding today. Canon will need to pull a rabbit out of the hat to get folks to upgrade.

- A

I Guess the Rabbit will be related to the other post of a new communicationsprotocol, that again is linked to maybe a mirrorless. The quess in another thread is, that the nws protocol will give faster communication between lens and new (mirrorless?) cameras. Mounted on older EOS cameras the protocol will be the same as the one currently in use.

Kit. · Jun 1, 2018

juan said:
I'll give you an example. Recently, I was at a roof top bar with some visiting business partners. It was a dark night and there was a great skyline. We wanted to get a nice group shot with the skyline behind us. Photos taken with phone cameras using flash either made us too bright or made the skyline too dark, without the flash, we were too dark. With my camera, I was able to get a shot in RAW without using a flash that would be perfect with a few seconds of quick edits but I had no quick and convenient way to get a RAW to my phone. The JPEG didn't have enough depth to work with. When I got home, I was right, the RAW shot turned out great. But it was kind of a moot point. Folks had shared their shots hours ago when we were there.

G7 X has both slow sync mode and flash exposure compensation. Wasn't it enough to get the desired image straight from the sensor?

symmar22 · Jun 1, 2018

As an interior and architecture photographer, my experience differs, I simply couldn't live without my TS-E collection. Every time I try to use my 16-35 instead (especially indoors) I am stuck with either too much floor or ceiling, the shift is useful as well to adjust the composition in relation with the elements in the frame. Sometimes I need a focal in between 17 and 24 and the zoom does it, but the TS-Es make my life much easier.

Optically speaking, both 17 an 24 are excellent. With the 17mm, be careful with flare when you face the light (that's my main complain about it) but it can be really annoying, the 24 is a bit sharper but to it doesn't really matter in real life, it main drawback IMO is the yellow / blue color fringing that can be difficult to remove completely in post.

With super wides, it is difficult to compose an interesting image; showing everything is not what I call a composition, so I would start to rent the 24mm for a try period.

Finally think as TS-Es as "tripod" lenses. Yes they can be used handheld, but critical focusing (specially with the 17mm) is difficult and better achieved on a steady image with live view. If used for architecture, you'll need time to "study your frame" and adjust the levels perfectly, and be able to use smaller F-stops and slow speeds.

Personally, I never take them for traveling, unless I am ready to carry also at least my small tripod.

Finally do not forget the golden rule with architecture photography : use a lens as long as you CAN and as short a you NEED.

Have fun with your experiments.

Mt Spokane Photography · May 31, 2018

It came with my 5D MK IV, but I never used it. It expires soon.

ajfotofilmagem · May 30, 2018

Lets see if it worth US$200...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fld5_x-Yk0o

Mt Spokane Photography · May 29, 2018

Canon has more patents for long telephoto lenses than Sony by far, so if its a race to have more patents, then Canon has already won. A tiny fraction of patents actually become products, its a sucker bet to if you bet on a patent to become a product.

Patlezinc · May 29, 2018

I had the 70-200 2.8 II IS and I sold it. Too heavy to carry it often. Even if it is a great lense. Now I plan to buy the f4 version, hoping it is good enough (i mainly have primes and like their IQ).

Talys · May 29, 2018

RobbieHat said:
Talys said:

Meanwhile, in the real world, the $750 M50 has a better way, way better EVF than Sony's last-generation flagship, the A7RII. It's almost as good as Sony's A7III EVF (which is a step down from A9/A7R3), in a body that's nearly a third the price of that.

But hey, if the blurry zoom-up image says its better and it has more micro-nano-milli-pixels, Sony must be innovative... RIGHT??

I will continue to chuckle at all sentences that start with, "Given how far and fast EVFs are progressing..." when an EVF can fool me into thinking that it's an OVF, because after all, the gold standard to recreating what you should see is what you actually see

Click to expand...

If I could cherry pick all the best features of all the Canon bodies into one then I would agree with your argument. Problem is, Sony is combining more of these features into more of their bodies at the same time. EVF, focusing (coverage and eye auto), DR, noise handling, speed, video, etc., etc. Canon would need to combine the features of 3-4 bodies (1dMII, 5DSR, M50, 5DMIV) to make a compelling and differentiated camera at this point. I don't see that happening, but maybe I will be surprised!

I don't see that happening in the short term, either, but then again, I don't really want a Canon A7R3.

I hear you about cherry picking the Canon features to build a super-camera, but to be fair, you want an enthusiast mirrorless, and Canon hasn't ever built an enthusiast/semi-pro/pro mirrorless -- a mirrorless equivalent targeted to at least 80D equivalency. It just doesn't exist.

When it does, one would expect it to have at least all of the features of the M5/M50 (duh), and most of the features of the 5DMark IV, with comparable autofocus speeds of a 5DMark IV in live view mode. I think that's a reasonable expectation.

There are some things I think will be better than Sony. For example, Eye AF on the Canon M50 is way better than Eye AF on the Sony A7R3. On the M50, it just magically works if you have it enabled; on the A7R3, you must press a second "detect the eye" button to engage it. And, obvoiusly, dual pixel autofocus is the gold standard for autofocus without a AF sensor. I suspect ergonomics, particularly for larger lenses, will be better.

There are some things I expect to be worse than Sony. For example, I would be genuinely surprised if there were more dynamic range. The video capabilities on the Sony may remain superior from a casual-use 4k perspective. The Sony will probably be a smaller camera and still be a superior full frame travel camera, as Canon will leave that for its APSC offerings. I would be (pleasantly) surprised if Canon embraced a dual slot UHS-II/UHS-I.

Talys · May 29, 2018

Vorlon technology at last!

YuengLinger · May 28, 2018

Viggo said:
vscd said:

"The advantages of the new 85mm lens such as IS, faster AF, better built quality, and lighter weight were just too much for me to overlook."

I don't know what could be better in built quality. The 85L 1.2is built like a tank with beautiful haptics.

Apart from that I think the T-stop-difference is maybe larger because of the fewer glass used. I would bet full of half a stop difference... maybe DXO will clear this up.

Click to expand...

Regarding build quality ; first off it’s weather sealed, it also has the same bumper/shock absorber at the front as the 35 L II, much better protected rear element. USM, instead of the old wire focus. Plus more adjustments and better internals etc.

And, if memory serves, the average repair cost of the 1.2 II is now about $1000, so I saw liability, not value, in keeping both.

fullstop · May 26, 2018

you don't have to guess or believe. The responsible Canon execs said it publicly in the interview i linked to. Unless you believe, they were not telling the truth.

Sony E-mount and Canon EF-M mount are very well chosen for APS-C. Sony mount was forced into FF service. Canon head designer for EF-M hints in the interview, that EF-M could possibly also be forced into FF servcie, but goes on to state that Canpon has no intention whatsoever and that it would be a very borderline ["crazy" in google translation of interview in Japanese

] and heavily compromised thing to do.

Already with EF mount Canon consciously chose a much wider throat width (open diameter) than what would be required "as minimum" for FF image circle. I think, they did just the same again for EF-M relative to APS-C image circle (1.6x crop). I have not seen a similar interview/answers from Sony execs, but BELIEVE, their E-Mount was designed for very compact APS-C cameras [NEX back then, later on A#### models] and was really put into "forced FF labor" as an afterthought and under marketing pressure/internet howling re. Sony introducing "all sorts of new lens mounts and abandoning good ole A-mount".

Based on these observations I also EXPECT/THINK/GUESS/BELIEVE/SPECULATE/CONJECTURE

that Canon will bring a new FF mirrorless mount that will be very generously sized - relative to minimum for FF image circle and perfectly matched to the FFD they choose.

Mount and lens design is one thing Canon has repeatedly demonstrated that they really know how to get things "really right".

stevelee · May 26, 2018

Talys said:
unfocused said:

jolyonralph said:

My biggest questions is: what are they going to call the model that eventually replaces the 90D. They've already used 100D.

Click to expand...

Mk II.

Click to expand...

It would never be 100D anyhow, because the series is xxD.

Assuming the next model is 90D (as opposed to something Feng Shui-clever like 88D), canon still has 91-99D for radical design changes or parallel series, and Marks for iterations. Thy hould be good for, like, another humdred years

Before I decided to wait for the 6D2, I thought about getting the 80D, but wondered whether I would need ritalin.

Ozarker · May 26, 2018

Don Haines said:
ahsanford said:

Canoneer said:

Given the pricing and availability of the ART 85/1.4 and ART 135/1.8, I'm a little perplexed by the existence of this lens. Don't get me wrong, I think it's an incredible optic at an incredible price. And it could very well be my first purchase of an ultra-fast portrait lens.

But is the 105mm designed to be an alternative to the 85mm and 135mm, or a complementary lens to those focal lengths? Typically in portraiture, you have 50mm, 85mm, and 135mm; those give you excellent options for full-length shots, 2/3 - 1/2 length shots, and head shots, respectively. Is the 105mm f/1.4 an option for photographers looking to consolidate the 85 and 135? I really can't see 105mm offering enough uniqueness to warrant lugging it around with an 85 and 135 during a photoshoot (apart from muscle toning, that is).

Click to expand...

Highly doubt folks will carrying this 105 with those other two, agree.

But Sigma's not in the 'collect 'em all' sort of market space. Some folks want something different, and they've never shot a 105. "Yes, we have one" is more their mantra these days, and this 105 fleshes out the line a bit more.

Sigma Art Primes are now: 14 / 20 / 24 / 35 / 50 / 70 1:1 Macro / 85 / 105 / 135

Short of a 28 1.4 for street/reportage, a long (180-ish) macro prime, a monstrous 200 f/2, I don't see any missing pieces. It's a hell of a line. They just need to put the latest AF mojo into their 35 and 50 Arts and they can switch their focus to making zooms as good as their primes.

- A

Click to expand...

I was wondering if they were going to go after some of the big whites next... 200mm? 300mm?

They certainly have set themselves up as third party lens maker extraordinaire... and the dock makes future compatibility worries fade away.....

Let's imagine that AF is equal in performance (Don't know what reality is), would either of you consider this over a new 135mm @ f/2? I'm wondering how the 30mm difference would affect the bokeh rendering difference between those two apertures.

I guess, though, that 105 vs 135 inside a house could make a difference between using one over the other. I only know this because I have found that my 105mm is much more useful than 135mm indoors, in a small apartment.

brad-man · May 26, 2018

If that's not an argument against using lens hoods, I don't know what is...

May 25, 2018

In a year this will be laying in a box (or the recycle bin) next to your Fong gear and all the rest of the "trinkets" that people sell to photography newbies.

andrei1989 · May 25, 2018

as if the ZEISS name wasn't premium/supreme enough...

ERHP · May 24, 2018

I would have to say the 600 and now the 600 II have made me more of a stationary shooter, though it is amusing sometimes to try handheld tracking when I just cannot shift the gimbal/tripod combination any further. I still carry the camera/lens/tripod on my shoulder and usually have a full pack(5DSR w/several lenses) for the other shots. The one thing I would love to see on the 600 is the selectable 1.4TC like the 200-400. When you are setup in a blind or literally sitting/laying in the mud, movement is a huge deal, and being to either add or subtract that much focal length with the flick of switch would go a long ways towards avoid potential disturbance of whatever is being observed. Also a closer MFD would be a nice touch, as while the use of an extension tube can get you closer, the loss of distance focusing makes it a bit of a bear to constantly swap out, just like the 1.4. Take my money?

/Fantasyland on a rumors site, lol, we can dream, right?

Ozarker · May 24, 2018

ecqns said:
So if you want to use focus peaking on a FF body with Canon lenses - why haven't you bought a Sony a7III or a7rIII yet? Add the metabones adapter and you're all set. As you move the focus plane around with the TS-E yes you can see the focus peaking indicating color move too. I think there's 3 different color choices and 3 different peaking strengths as well.

If you are shooting portraits - then with a native lens you have the eye control AF which I hear works really well.

Yuck. Why would I buy a Sony hand hurter to throw adapted L glass on?

Seriously, I'm not in the market for another FF camera at the moment. I can wait on Canon. I'd rather have my lenses native to the body (Exception: Legacy glass). That's how a fanboy rolls.

Talys · May 24, 2018

neuroanatomist said:
Talys said:

If you don't know the answers to these types of questions, you should probably stop talking about this, because speaking without the basis of facts is unhelpful and does not make you sound knowledgeable about anything.

Click to expand...

That ship sailed along time ago.

In any case, this discussion is irrelevant from a practical standpoint. Unless, of course, you assume that a lower cost to produce a MILC means a lower sales price...and that's the sort of assumption that makes you look like an ass.

I'm pretty sure most of those who have conjectured that full frame mirrorless cameras are cheaper to make also leap to the conclusion that eventually, they'll get really spectacular full frame mirrorless cameras for less money, too.

But anyways, back to reality. You're absolutely right: practically, I can't see the cameras that everyone wants in these forums -- higher end, enthusiast and professional models -- getting cheaper any time soon.

stevelee · May 24, 2018

"budget-conscious" maybe?

Canon Rumors · May 24, 2018

HTML:

We continue to see new patent applications for diffractive optics technology. We’re all still waiting to see if the EF 600mm f/4 DO IS will become an actual consumer product, or if Canon is going to take things in a different direction.</p>
<p><strong>From <a href="https://www.canonnews.com/canon-patent-application-diffractive-optical-element-improvements">Canon News</a>:</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>Canon describes how to manufacturer a diffractive optical element with a refractive resin component attached to it to further reduce chromatic aberrations.</p></blockquote>
<p><strong>From US Patent Application <a href="http://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?PageNum=0&docid=20180143350">20180143350</a>:</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>in a refractive optical system using the refraction of light, lenses formed from glass materials having different dispersion characteristics are used together in combination to reduce the chromatic aberration. For example, in the case of an object lens of a telescope or the like, a glass material having low dispersion and a glass material having high dispersion are used in combination as a positive lens and a negative lens, respectively, to correct the chromatic aberration which appears on the axis.</p></blockquote>
<p>The goal of diffractive optics lenses is to reduce the physical size of the lenses. This could help in a couple of areas such as smaller and lighter supertelephoto lenses and to reduce the size of longer fast lenses for full frame mirrorless applications.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

Ah-Keong · May 24, 2018

Grant Atkinson said:
Hi Ah Keong
I dont have any plans right now to include the 1DX Mark 2 in such a comparison although i probably should. If had to try sum up very roughly,though, the 1DX Mark 2 compared to the 5D Mark 4, we find that viewfinder autofocus is quite similar on both (though the 1DX Mark 2 is much better if you use EF Extenders), and without extenders the 1DX Mark 2 may focus a tiny bit faster. The !DX Mark 2 has its autofocus system illuminate in red in the viewfinder which can be an advantage if you shoot in the dark. Where a big difference exists is the frame rate, as 7 fps is only just fast enough for action whereas the 1DX Mark 2 is about as fast as will likely ever need. The shorter shutter lag, shorter viewfinder blackout on the 1DX Mark 2 also makes for a faster response, and then the other big difference for action photography is the buffer capacity. On the 1DX Mark 2 we never even get close to filling the buffer, even using a CF card, whereas the 5D Mark4 has a decent buffer but if there is continuous action happening, we do need to keep one eye on the buffer to try avoid filling it at a critical time. When it comes to image quality, if you view or use the images at the same output size, by printing them at the same physical size, or by viewing them on the same size screen, without cropping, then we find that the 1DX Mark 2 images are only incrementally better when it comes to noise at high iso. Perhaps a third of stop. But they are so close in image quality that we dont consider that a big differentiator. If one needs to crop heavily then the 5D Mark 4 holds an advantage. DPAF function is about the same in both cameras for stills, but for video the fully functional touch screen of the 5D Mark 4 may be better than the limited function touch screen of the 1DX Mark 2. The 1DX Mark 2 has superior video frame rate and resolution choices. When it comes to ergonomics the 1DX Mark 2 is larger and can be even more deeply configured. Hope something there helps..
Cheers
Grant

Thanks for the great summary , Sir! ;D
I really like the AF squares lighting in RED. Hope they would add it in the "7D Mark III"

AlanF · May 23, 2018

ahsanford said:
AlanF said:

Read further on in the report - they found it weak in the field with the D500: "That weaker performance can be noticed not only in photos of our testing charts or measurements but also in our sample shots. With the lens and the D3x set, where you deal with a full frame 24 Mpix sensor, the photos taken at 550 mm and examined in the 1:1 scale might seem to be still of good quality but if you shot them with a much more densely packed sensor of the Nikon D500 you can feel unsatisfied. "

Click to expand...

Sure, in that comparison, that's like -- at least pixel density-wise -- hearing 5D3 people would be fine with it but 5DS people wouldn't. That's not a surprising find at all.

- A

Well, my 400mm DO II is tack sharp with both a 1.4xTC and a 2xTC on a 5DSR and there are 7DII birders in this group who are very happy with the 1.4xTC and 400mm DO as well as 500 and 600mm so I find it surprising.

To add more from Lenstip:
“To be honest when I took the tested lens attached to the Nikon D500 for an outdoor session I spent a lot of time trying to calibrate the autofocus at the 550 mm focal length in many different ways. The photos I got simply seemed so fuzzy to me that I suspected some front- or back-focus problems. There were no such problems after all and the impression of fuzziness was created by the huge contrast between the performance at 400 mm, excellent indeed, and quite average results you get when you employ the teleconverter. ”

Aussie shooter · May 23, 2018

Thanks for the replys. To clarify my kit will be the 7d2. 24-70 2.8. Sigma 10-20 3.5 and either the 70-2-- with 2x(mk111) or the 100-400mk2 with 1.4km3. will also have a 700d as backup (most likely with the sigma attatched) My concern is the 100-400 with 1.4 is reduced to centre point AF and at f8 AF will undoubtedly be slower and my thought is that when I return having the 70-200 2.8 is very handy. I do shoot a fair bit of wildlife but am getting into some pet photography to earn a bit of money on the side. Both lenses would actually be very good for that but I am leaning toward the 70-200 as the more useful. The Sigma was a great lens(for the price it is stunning really) but Focusing speed required a lot of skill to work with as it is 6.3 at the long end as well as being a 3rd party lens with 3rd party communication issues. Just how much am I giving up in IQ with the 2x tele on the 70-200?

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics