Posts

eml58 · Jun 15, 2014

GMCPhotographics said:
Here's a recent 400 f2.8 LIS (mkI) with a 2x converter. One image over view and the other at 100% crop.
This is very nearly wide open:

It's a heavy lens but worth it. Not many lenses can come close to this level of quality

Lovely Image GMC, Nailed focus & beautiful background to complement the colours of the Puffin, well done.

It's a great lens as well, enjoyed mine when I had it, enjoyed the weight saving of the Mk II even more, but IQ was similar in both, brilliant.

fegari · Jun 15, 2014

Thanks Sama!

AvTvM · Jun 14, 2014

unfocused said:
Note: this is not what a "wish list" but rather a prediction based on the market, competition and Canon's existing lineup:

24 mp dual pixel APS-C sensor;
Sensor performs marginally better than 70D sensor;
Autofocus equal to or exceeding the 5DIII;
Dual card slots, one each SD and CF;
Weather sealing somewhere between 5DIII and 1DX;
Mode dial replaced by 1D-style button (After CR Guy surfaced this rumor, I started thinking about it and it makes sense);
Touch Screen;
Integrated Wi-Fi and/or GPS;
Accessory grip/battery holder with weather-sealing slightly superior to 5DIII grip;
Frame rate slightly better than current 7D (Maybe 1-1.5 fps faster);
Pop-up flash with optical trigger (same as 7D);
Same back controls (joystick, click wheel, etc.) as 5DIII;
Fixed back screen (not tilting);
Video enhancements that I don't understand and won't use.

That about covers it.

Totally agree. Exactly my expectation. It might have abuilt-in RT speedlite trigger as a surprise extra deature (that would sell an extra couple 1000 of 600EX-RT speedlites!) - in line with the 7D which was the first EOS with pop-up flash serving as optical speedlite trigger.

Marsu42 · Jun 14, 2014

bdunbar79 said:
Sorry, we went from the 5D3 auto ISO all the way to a full-blown 1Dx discussion.

Interesting to know in any case, unfortunately the metering cannot be fixed by Magic Lantern as they don't have access to the non-lv af or metering information (yet).

It was a bit disappointing to see this regression on my 6d, but then again I was expecting worse performance looking at the af specs anyway. I guess the old 9-pt metering/af system is very mature on my good ol' 60d while there hasn't been too much testing with the 6d 11pt metering/af.

Let's hope that Canon will integrate real rgb metering in all upcoming systems, after all Nikon shows how it can be done and still selling their most expensive model. Probably already with the 7d2?

Hannes · Jun 14, 2014

johnf3f said:
bdunbar79 said:

johnf3f said:

Hannes said:

Looking at UK prices you'd be able to get a used 1D4 and a 300/2.8 I for about the same money as a new 1DX

Click to expand...

Where? A good, used, Canon 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1 is 3K+ a decent 1D4 is 1800+. That adds up to a lot more than my 1DX cost!

Click to expand...

The cheapest 300 f/2.8L I IS lens right now is $4500. Cheapest 1D Mark IV I could find in decent shape was $3000. Assuming you could buy a used 1Dx for about $5400, you would still have $2k left.

Click to expand...

I should have said that those are UK prices. So a 300 F2.8 IS Mk1 + a used 1D4 would run around 4800 vs the 3600 that my 1DX cost new. The difference is about 1200 GBP/$2000 US so we are in the same ball park!

Where did you find a 1DX for £3600? Even digitalrev charges £4000 for one and the official UK dealers want £4845 at the moment

makismika · Jun 14, 2014

Yes, i'm same person that did hood for 40mm stm.
24-105 hood are for sale also! If you're interested send me some private message.

I'm happy that i cause some inspiration! Covering plastic hood with vinyl tape is some kind of cheating or what do you think?

DRR · Jun 14, 2014

pwp said:
There are all sorts of "prime-tyrants" out there...trolls, pixel peepers, insecure gear-nuts who follow the trends and of course the many genuinely brilliant photographers who undoubtedly produce their best work with primes.

With the exception of 300mm and longer, I'm a zooms guy with 16-35 f/2.8II, 24-70 f/2.8II and the awesome 70-200 f/2.8isII. They keep bag weight down and hugely reduce the need for lens changes in dusty locations. For me "content is king" and a zoom's innate flexibility helps to deliver the goods. I sold three primes when I bought the 24-70 f/2.8II. It's that good.

Why do they do it? Hell, I don't know. I suspect the the most dogmatic offenders are dreamers with too much time on their hands who may not even own a camera.

-pw

Personally, I like primes because it simplifies decisions for me. I'm generally a two-lens shooter - more than that tends to be overkill for my style (or, abilities, if you want to put it that way). I looked at EXIF on how I shot my 24-70 and 90% of the shots were at 30-40 range, or at 70. I figured with a little more discipline I could use primes and gain the ability to shoot with over 4x more light hitting the sensor over a fast zoom.

Needs and styles vary - that is why there is a range of equipment available. No two kits are alike because no two shooters are alike.

Hjalmarg1 · Jun 14, 2014

Khalai said:
wickidwombat said:

I'd take the sigma and 70-200 personally you won't miss the 35-70 gap but the extra 100mm on the long end will be nice
The sigma is plenty fast for low light

If you need wider than 18 mm shoot a pano in portrait and stitch
Nice combo if you ask me

Click to expand...

+1. Or take the 15-85 if you need a bit wider angle/less lens swapping. But I'd take S18-35 over C15-85 anyday personally.

+1, take the sigma and the macro 100L. It's a light combo and you won't miss much other lenses.

Hjalmarg1 · Jun 14, 2014

wsheldon said:
The dock lets you program AFMA values directly into the lens with the added benefit of setting corrections for multiple distances, unlike the AFMA settings in the body. So if your Sigma is good at minimum focus distance but is off at longer distances you can program in multiple AFMA corrections, unlike body-based AFMA where you have to split the difference or just optimize at one extreme or the other. If you use the dock to perform AFMA you would typically disable in-camera AFMA for that lens (set it to 0).

The big down-side is that you can't currently set AFMA corrections for different bodies (addressing the OP's question), so you would either need to use body-only AFMA or a combination of lens and body AFMA in that scenario.

The other annoyance is that to use the dock for AFMA you have to shoot, unmount the lens, attach the dock, make adustments, remount the lens, re-shoot, and repeat. Pretty fiddly compared to using tethered shooting with the EOS Utility or Focal.

That said, the dock also allows you to update the firmware in the lens to correct performance or compatibility issues that are identified after shipping. For example, there was a firmware update for the 35 Art last year to improve AF reliability and noise. That feature of the dock could be important long-term if Canon tweaks their EF communication specs in future cameras, since 3rd-party companies have to reverse engineer those specs and things could break. I bought the dock for my 35A even though it doesn't need AFMA on my 6D, and it's been nice for the firmware updates alone and as an insurance policy. It's not expensive, but it would be a great item to share around with friends or a photography club since it generally sits unused after you tweak your lenses.

Hope that helps. I have the dock and software, so let me know if you need any specifics and I'll check tonight.

Thanks for this explanation. I was in the same dilemma.

Aglet · Jun 13, 2014

Over the past vew pages the bunch of you have just had the most beat-around-the-bushes discussion of Signal to Noise Ratio I've ever seen.

Can't someone find or come up with a simpler explanation of how SNR affects image quality that you can all agree on?
I think 100 was closest in his last post and could simply add that, sensor technology (e.g. pixel size, read noise, dark noise, etc.) being about equal, when printing or scaling to any given size, the greater surface area of a FF sensor allows more noise averaging to occur than the same image, shot with the same field of view, from a smaller sensor.

sdsr · Jun 13, 2014

sagittariansrock said:
Radiating said:

As far as ultra wide angle lenses go there are only a hand full from any manufacturer that aren't terrible.

Click to expand...

You think the EF-S 10-22 is terrible? Not that the OP is looking for EF-S lenses, but I asked since you include them in your list.
I think it is actually pretty good, and I have used it for more than 2 years.

And the new EFS 10-18 should surely be on the list - reviews say it's better than the 10-22 and it's half the price (I'm happy with mine, anyway, for all that I prefer FF).

mackguyver · Jun 13, 2014

Michelle, welcome to CR and thanks for posting the link. Grant is known the drop by here from time-to-time - here's his profile:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=370328

mackguyver · Jun 13, 2014

Diko said:
When are all those tests taking place?

A lot of these tests are done as component tests (i.e. unit tests in the S/W world). As soon as the tooling is done, they start running the tests on those items, but remember that many of the components are off-the-shelf (OTS) as in existing components from other camera models. The testing of the final, completed camera body would begin as soon as the first fully-assembled body rolls off the line. Some would go out for field testing (World Cup?), others would go into the automated testing with robots pushing the shutter 100,000+ times, weather simulation rooms, impact tests, etc. The automated testing takes much less time that you'd think with the robotics and specialized testing labs.

AlanF · Jun 13, 2014

I got the clear mulit-coated glass protective filter from Marumi, not the UV, "Marumi 95mm DHG Super Lens Protect Filter ".

One thing in favour of the Melitta filter is that it is 100% guaranteed to remove all vignetting.

Regarding the CPL, doesn't it make the lens rather slow at 600mm with the light loss?

mackguyver · Jun 13, 2014

rs said:
And Canon previously released the EF-M 11-22 IS STM

Don't I feel stupid, I had no idea the 11-22 had IS. I guess I just ignored it because it's not available in the US, but I hear it's a really sharp lens.

FTb-n · Jun 13, 2014

LOLID said:
This is the third review I read from Dustin Abbott. Great review once again. Very honest.

I was seriously considering the reviewed lens but got caught up by the announcement of the Sigma 50 1.4 Art (not sure I want to buy a 35mm AND a 50mm). Anyway I might end up just buying the 40mm instead, so here comes my

question: how does the 35mm f/2 IS compare to the 40mm f/2.8?

I understand the max aperture small difference, the 300$ price tag gap, and the former being a tad wider, but what in terms of:
- sharpness (@ 2v2.8 and 2.8v2.8)
- distortion
- bokeh rendering
- Dustin's "WOW" effect

Thanks in advance.
O.

I own both. The 40, which I bought on sale for $150, was a splurge purchase. I bought it for the fun factor and justified the purchase because it is an incredibly sharp lens. I use it mainly as a grab shot, travel light lens and as a backup to my 70-200. On many occasions I'll shoot indoor sports and only expect to use the longer zoom. But, just in case I get in tight situation, I throw the 40 in a pocket and it has come in handy.

The 35 IS is my low light speed demon. Very sharp, great close up, fast focus, very bright, and very fast. With less glass, I think it lets in about a third stop more light at 2.8 than my 70-200 does at 2.8.

I have the 24-70 2.8 II, which covers most of my short focal length needs. But, if low light is a concern (such as a wedding reception) I grab the 35. What I have yet to do is explore the thin DOF more...definately on my todo list.

For what it's worth, I'm waiting for a new EF 50 IS at 2.0 or faster and plan to add it as a complement to the 35 for better low light coverage.

I got the 40 before the 35 was introduced. If I had neither, the 35 IS would be my first purchase.

Sabaki · Jun 12, 2014

You guys are incredible!

It's amazing to be able to tap into such knowledge and just learn!

Thanks everybody, I really appreciate the knowledge share

Diko · Jun 12, 2014

Hi everyone,

is there anyone recording the World Cup in HD? I am seeing tons of players' closeups. There are many Canon bodies (hard to miss with the white lenses and logo).

I bet at least one of those bodies are the next 1Dx. For 5/7Ds it would be hard to see, but who knows... :

Canon Rumors · Jun 12, 2014

HTML:

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/06/canon-adds-rc-v100-remote-controller-support-with-firmware-updates-for-eos-c100-c500-cinema-cameras/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/06/canon-adds-rc-v100-remote-controller-support-with-firmware-updates-for-eos-c100-c500-cinema-cameras/">Tweet</a></div>
<span style="font-style: italic; color: #222222;">Firmware Version 1.0.5.1.00 for EOS C500 incorporates the following improvements and fixes.</span><br style="color: #222222;" /><span style="color: #222222;"> </span><br style="color: #222222;" /><strong><span style="color: #222222;">For EOS C500</span></strong></p>
<ol>
<li>Compatibility with the Canon RC-V100 Remote Controller (expected to be available in June 2014) has been added.</li>
<li>Peripheral illumination correction data has been added for the [CN-E35mm T1.5 L F] EF Cinema lens and the [EF-S55-250mm f4-5.6 IS STM] EF lens.</li>
<li>Fixes a phenomenon in which the EF Cinema lens’ F number was incorrectly displayed.</li>
</ol>
<p class="NewsPost" style="color: #222222;"><strong>For EOS C500 PL</strong></p>
<ol>
<li>Compatibility with the Canon RC-V100 Remote Controller (expected to be available in June 2014) has been added.</li>
</ol>
<p>Download links after the break.</p>
<p><!--more--></p>
<p class="NewsPost" style="color: #222222;"><b>Support</b>

<a style="font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer?pageKeyCode=prdAdvDetail&docId=0901e02480c261ed" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Download Firmware Version 1.0.5.1.00 for the EOS C500 / C500 PL.</a></p>
<p><span style="font-style: italic;">Firmware Version 1.0.4.1.00 for the EOS C100 incorporates the following improvements and fixes.</span></p>
<ol>
<li>Compatibility with the Canon RC-V100 Remote Controller (expected to be available in June 2014) has been added.</li>
<li>Peripheral illumination correction data has been added for the [CN-E35mm T1.5 L F] EF Cinema lens and the [EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 IS STM] EF lens.</li>
<li>Fixes a phenomenon in which the EF Cinema lens’ F number was incorrectly displayed.</li>
</ol>
<p class="NewsPost" style="color: #222222;"><b>Note:</b> Firmware Version 1.0.4.1.00 is only for EOS C100 cameras without the Dual Pixel CMOS AF Feature Upgrade. If the EOS C100 camera has had the DAF Feature Upgrade applied, please download <a style="font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/professional/professional_cameras/cinema_eos_cameras/eos_c100#DriversAndSoftware" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Firmware Version 2.0.4.1.00</a>.</p>
<p><b>Support</b>

<a style="font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/professional/professional_cameras/cinema_eos_cameras/eos_c100#BrochuresAndManuals" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Download the new version of the Instruction Manual for the EOS C100</a> which provides more information on the new features and benefits available in this firmware update.</p>
<p><a style="font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/professional/professional_cameras/cinema_eos_cameras/eos_c100#DriversAndSoftware" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Download Firmware Version 1.0.4.1.00 for the EOS C100.</a></p>
<p><span style="font-style: italic;">Firmware Version 2.0.4.1.00 for the EOS C100 incorporates the following improvements and fixes.</span></p>
<ol>
<li>Compatibility with the Canon RC-V100 Remote Controller (expected to be available in June 2014) has been added.</li>
<li>Peripheral illumination correction data has been added for the [CN-E35mm T1.5 L F] EF Cinema lens and the [EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 IS STM] EF lens.</li>
<li>Fixes a phenomenon in which the EF Cinema lens’ F number was incorrectly displayed.</li>
</ol>
<p class="NewsPost" style="color: #222222;"><b>Note:</b> Firmware Version 2.0.4.1.00 is only for EOS C100 cameras with the Dual Pixel CMOS AF Feature Upgrade applied. If the EOS C100 camera does not have DAF Feature Upgrade applied, please download<a style="font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/professional/professional_cameras/cinema_eos_cameras/eos_c100#DriversAndSoftware" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> Firmware Version 1.0.4.1.00</a>.</p>
<p><b>Support</b>

<a style="font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/professional/professional_cameras/cinema_eos_cameras/eos_c100#BrochuresAndManuals" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Download the new version of the Instruction Manual for the EOS C100</a> which provides more information on the new features and benefits available in this firmware update.</p>
<p><a style="font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/professional/professional_cameras/cinema_eos_cameras/eos_c100#DriversAndSoftware" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Download Firmware Version 2.0.4.1.00 for the EOS C100.</a></p>
<p class="NewsPost" style="color: #222222;"><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

drjlo · Jun 12, 2014

Very nice..

http://www.cnet.com/products/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz1000/

infared · Jun 11, 2014

scottburgess said:
infared said:

Personally I cannot wait to purchase mine. I will when there is no backlog...no hurry.
Gee.. I have 30 days to return it at B&H for full refund. I am sure it will be a great lens tho.
One thing you can bet. I am not going to over measurebate it and spend the rest of my life here complaining about it...I will be out creating images!!!!! ;D 8)
...but hey...I loved my original Sigma 50mm f/1.4. Had a GREAT copy...just sold it for $500! LOL...$100 more than I paid for it.as they have been backorder for a while and I had a colleague who loved the lens and wanted my copy!!!!..Hated to see it go...but I cannot justify owning that and the new one....WHAH!!!!!

I would also like to read Justin's review before purchase, as I know that that should be coming soon!

Click to expand...

Oh, then you're gonna love this: Popular Photography apparently did a test on the new lens and concluded it was not as good as the last 50mm f/1.4. I nearly coughed up breakfast when I read about that!

LOL! Scott ...THAT is pretty funny! The old Sigma 50mm "Edged it out"???? (In what parameter?? Size? Price?) Guess they got a lot of hits on their site?
What is even funnier is that Pop Photography included the old Sigma DG f/1.4 in the same sentence with the prized and worshiped (hear angels sing), Otus. quite amusing.
The old one is a cool "little" lens compared to these newer, pricier entries....apparently Sigma is going to keep producing it...the lens has gone up in price and the Canon version is quite scare lately....

Halfrack · Jun 11, 2014

Seconds are like half the price.... http://www.expoimaging.com/index2.php?cPath=21

The Rogue's are great for speedlights, I prefer them over the Fong's.

wickidwombat · Jun 11, 2014

they should celebrate by releasing a 1Dx model without the integrated grip. like the great old 1V.
ah a guy can dream cant he?

i think it would be a big seller

Ruined · Jun 11, 2014

Re: Canon Camera Museum Posts Technical Reports for EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM.

My point, though, is a perfect quality 16-35 III is still not a 14-24. With Canon already having an excellent quality f/2.8 16-35 II, and the great new 16-35 f/4 IS (plus the old 17-40) - I would think it would be more profitable to cover a focal length that they do not have yet in a rectilinear zoom, as it could win back some Nikon 14-24 users. Canon also filed a patent for an 11-24 but I believe it was an f/4 lens.

Also, aside from the doubt cast by the fact that the Zeiss is a manual prime and not an autofocus zoom, I am not sure a lens with a 95mm filter element will be acceptable to the target market of the 16-35 f/2.8L II. Wedding/event photographers already often truck around the 70-200 f/2.8L out of necessity (again for f/2.8 and flexibility), I doubt adding another monster lens in place of the 16-35 II would be appealing just for a little more corner sharpness that really is not needed for that type of photography.

Thus, increasing the size/weight of the 16-35 f/2.8L II may not be fully compatible with the market for this lens. I would be in favor of a 16-35 f/2.8L III, but frankly 82mm is already big enough and I don't think I would upgrade if it meant 95mm - there are other things that can be done to improve quality, although again it would probably just be an incremental upgrade and not a game changer. Another instance where a lot of people would probably just hang onto their 16-35 II.

Hence, I think this is why a 14-24 or something like that would be a smarter move. It opens up a new focal length for Canon and attacks a different market (those who want the sharpest, fastest f/2.8 regardless of size, weight, etc) than the 16-35 II which is really a wedding/event/pj lens.

There are a lot of much older lenses that are in more need of update than the 16-35 II anyway...

AlanF · Jun 11, 2014

I could not help but notice and wonder about a 500mm being listed on eBay UK: "First of all please note that there is fungal growth within the elements which is quite common with Canon 500mm lenses." Is it really true that fungus makes a bee line for a 500?

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics