Search results

Wow...I did not think the cost would be feasible for manufacturers to apply such wide aperture but I guess I was wrong. I wonder if this would change how people look at the 24-70 f/2.8 lens when you gain additional focal length. For once, I\'m honestly excited for a new Canon lens. Price tag I...

It's annoying. It wouldn't be so annoying if they produced enough lenses to justify cornering their "RF" mount market if you want to call it that. And look what happens when companies don't allow such innovation and restricting it. They don't, in my opinion, never go anywhere other than people...

I hear complaints all the time but those people never had to pay the single license, $600+ per software like Photoshop CS back in the days. Now for $60/month I get to use PS, Lightroom, Audition, Premiere, etc all for that price. Personally, that's a bargain. Sure, it can be buggy like any...

What I want to really see is the Animal Eye-AF they implemented on the R5 & R6 to these lineups including the current EOS R. One thing I miss with Sony when I had it for a short period. It was insane how good it was and for taking animal photos, even better as I do a lot of photos for a...

I knew "12-24" was too good to be true. I mean if they had it at f/2.8, the lens even from Sigma would be $3,000+ or more at least I would assume. Although 14-24 f/2.8 is still amazing, reminds me of when I used to drool at Nikon's forever.

Nah let's go for something simpler, walkaround 12mm-600mm f/2.8-f/5.6 so everyone including astrophotographers and sports shooters will all be happy. Except macro shooters. We don't care about them sorry.

I still have and love the original Tamron 17-35...spec wise it doesn't look much different with the old one being 14 elements in 11 groups versus the 15 elements in 10 groups with the new. It would be interested either way to see how much they improved. The only thing of course about the 35mm...

Yep. I was telling my g/f last night how much I enjoy reading everyone complaining about what they want for so much less. Just I didn't confuse her with all the camera lingo, I told her it's like reading reviews of people that bought a brand new Camry and they're whining because their...

I mean it is still considered an entry-level full frame body no? And seems like a decent spec for astrophotographers especially that tilt screen which I wish my old 6D MKI had. Another slow but strong body...the added AF point is a big bonus. Of course we'll never hear the end of people that...

Ya but the manufacturing cost of f/1.8 for this size lens with 13 elements vs 8 elements in the Canon 135 f/2 makes sense as far as the increase in price. Honestly I was expecting $1799 or something ridiculous...if the f/1.8 version is hint better than Canon I can see people justifying the...

Miss my 6D. Better/more AF, dual card slot and definitely the articulating screen would be a bonus doing astro when manually focusing with the live view. 60D was great for that (minus the noise...).

Not that I'll be buying the IV any time soon glad to have read this since I do love my Sigma lenses. I mean aside from innovation I'm sure Canon knew for so long of the popularity of the 3rd party lenses not to mention both Tamron & Sigma have been upping their game hard. It only makes sense...

Oh man...I've been laying low with photography but I may need to pick this up. Do you guys think 9 blades will make any major difference compared to Canon's 8-blade design? I'm assuming by not much... And 12-24 constant f/4. Yum.