Yes, mainly because you said I was in "denial" I simply provided evidence to back up my comments. I didn't badmouth you, I didn't get aggressive, I just pointed you to verifiable independent repeatable evidence.My original words that were quoted that started this discussion with Tron were about the 5D4, and I think it's been blown up further than it needed to be.
Well, if it's a choice between having a sensor that's not what I want it to be (charts be damned, I didn't like what I saw coming off the 5D4 from noise to the mushy AA filter) and having the best glass in the industry (which Canon does), I'll take the latter. But I think we can have both. I want both.Yes they can, but until they are pushed to by other manufacturers who actually pull out a noticeable difference they can, and will, spend their R&D budget in other places.
I wouldn't put too much faith in his prognostication record if I were you. When the new lenses were announced he kinda died inside, just a little.Just to jump in for a moment, I had thought that the other two big whites due for the refresh were the 300 f/2.8 and the 500 f/4. As per the rumors posted here, the 400 and the 600 would come out slightly earlier than the other two. But I believe you are right that there won't be ANY additional EF lenses coming. The existing ones are pretty great. If phototogs want the latest and greatest, they'll have to adopt the new system. Still, the existing lenses should continue to transmit light just as well as they did before the RF release
Good to see that it is recognized by someone While I see this lens as a great addition maybe to my 70-200 f/4 zoom I would like to see a big brother or sister: An RF 70mm 1.8 Macro with IS and if IS needs to go down to f/2 for reasonable pricing and size/weight I would take that too!I'm more interested in the 35 1.8m, I'd love to use that instead of the 1.4 (waight reasons).
I don't know what you mean by dead within 2 years. In two years, today's EF and DSLR equipment will be the same as it is now, and just as usable.Of course it does! People stuck in the past still believe that old technology is going to be better or the same as new one. One more reason to get rid of your old EF and DSLR equipment. It will be dead in 2 years.
If everyone upgrades to RF in the next two years there is one thing you should do.Of course it does! People stuck in the past still believe that old technology is going to be better or the same as new one. One more reason to get rid of your old EF and DSLR equipment. It will be dead in 2 years.
I've started my stopwatch. Waiting for the death throws of my current obsolete gear that can't take a decent photo since....I don't know what you mean by dead within 2 years. In two years, today's EF and DSLR equipment will be the same as it is now, and just as usable.
I agree, I had my rebel (6MP) camera working for over 8 years before I replaced it with the 7D which is now almost 8 years old. Some of the EF lenses I used on my Rebel-G are over 20 years old and work like new... to be true, using an adapter I use some of my father FD lenses (manually) still. So I won't be so easy to morn the "death" of my EF lenses as yet.I don't know what you mean by dead within 2 years. In two years, today's EF and DSLR equipment will be the same as it is now, and just as usable.
I don't think either of us were saying that RF lenses won't be better. I believe they will, especially if some of these first offerings are any indication. I think the other point was that the current line-up of EF L-series lenses are mostly stellar lenses. Especially the primes - the 24mm f1.4L II, 35mm f1.4L II(wowsers), and the 85mm f1.4L IS...You guys are probably wrong. Canon RF lenses will be better than EF lenses. It is for sure. The logic is very simple. The worse case for RF lenses is designed same as EF lenses and then push lenses away from sensor. Basically RF lenses can’t be worse than EF lenses. But the short flange distance may provide chances to improve image quality of the lenses. Make sense?
Three possible cases:
- Similar structure/size/weight, but improved image quality
- Same image quality, similar structure, but smaller size/weight
- Same image quality, similar size/weight, but simpler structure
Anything is a win.
TBH I think that when it comes to traditional portrait photography, so head & shoulders and tighter, the original 5D is one of the best cameras around. Also as at that FOV most (sensible) people want to be reasonably well stopped down the lack of AFMA isn't too much of an issue either.Pros were making fine images with the D60, Canon's second foray into Digital cameras. Just as people did with EOS 10D's, 5D "Classics", and so on and so forth.
Dead as in, Canon will devote few resources to EF camera development.Not confused at all. Not dead in a production sense for a very long time. Nope.