More Product Confirmations for CP+

[keithcooper]

I'm loving this 'Year of the Lens' so far

Do you believe every ... yearly CR thread regarding 35mm 1.4L II, 100-400 L II etc? I don't. They are so obviously nonsense... Sorry CR 99.9% of your site rocks but some specific "new lens" threads of yours belong to the other 0.1% (they are so NL level... )

Tron, I seriously would consider laughing now and then, maybe at least a smile. Helps.

Not for nothing do I put serious health warnings on most of the 'NL stuff' - people have been sending info for the last 10 years or so, and still I rarely ever see stuff of much accuracy beyond a few weeks before any announcement.

From the top of the main Canon page: "Please do use your common sense when reading these pages, and remember that they are here for entertainment as much as anything else."

 

[tron]

I'm loving this 'Year of the Lens' so far

Do you believe every ... yearly CR thread regarding 35mm 1.4L II, 100-400 L II etc? I don't. They are so obviously nonsense... Sorry CR 99.9% of your site rocks but some specific "new lens" threads of yours belong to the other 0.1% (they are so NL level... )

Tron, I seriously would consider laughing now and then, maybe at least a smile. Helps.

Ahhh OK then 8) YES I can agree to that ;D

 

[slclick]

I'm loving this 'Year of the Lens' so far

Do you believe every ... yearly CR thread regarding 35mm 1.4L II, 100-400 L II etc? I don't. They are so obviously nonsense... Sorry CR 99.9% of your site rocks but some specific "new lens" threads of yours belong to the other 0.1% (they are so NL level... )

Tron, I seriously would consider laughing now and then, maybe at least a smile. Helps.

Ahhh OK then 8) YES I can agree to that ;D

awesome, no seriously I am realistic about the lenses and I am more than aware that this is a consumer show. Plus if there are a bunch of new lenses, L lenses to be specific, my GAS may be the end of me.

 

[tron]

I'm loving this 'Year of the Lens' so far

Do you believe every ... yearly CR thread regarding 35mm 1.4L II, 100-400 L II etc? I don't. They are so obviously nonsense... Sorry CR 99.9% of your site rocks but some specific "new lens" threads of yours belong to the other 0.1% (they are so NL level... )

Tron, I seriously would consider laughing now and then, maybe at least a smile. Helps.

Ahhh OK then 8) YES I can agree to that ;D

awesome, no seriously I am realistic about the lenses and I am more than aware that this is a consumer show. Plus if there are a bunch of new lenses, L lenses to be specific, my GAS may be the end of me.

I understand. I recently got the 24-70 2.8 II and since I sold my 5D2 yesterday a second 5D3 is imminent. More than enough for now...

 

[racebit]

no sx50 replacement??

No, basically it is just garbage. No sign of the cameras everyone is waiting, SX60 and 7D, which promise to be a significant boost. Maybe that is the reason, it is easy to lunch something that is almost equal to the predecessor, but takes a lot of time to launch significant changes. Maybe the delay is a good sign...

 

[dstppy]

I understand. I recently got the 24-70 2.8 II and since I sold my 5D2 yesterday a second 5D3 is imminent. More than enough for now...

How much did you get for the 5Dmk2?

 

[slclick]

Nothing can be as bad as the Nissan naming schemes but Canon sure is running out of them if they want to avoid superstitions and have old and new coming full circle

 

[tron]

I understand. I recently got the 24-70 2.8 II and since I sold my 5D2 yesterday a second 5D3 is imminent. More than enough for now...

How much did you get for the 5Dmk2?

I asked 1100 euro and dropped it to 1000. It had 19200 clicks and it was in an excellent condition. So maybe it was on the cheap side (the buyer admitted that he would have to buy it even if I didn't drop the price but we had agreed and a deal is a deal, plus he was a student). But it was sold quickly and I am free to order a 5D3...

 

[powershot2012]

PowerShot S200 f/2-3

What is the PowerShot S200 f/2-3?

 

[preppyak]

Re: PowerShot S200 f/2-3

What is the PowerShot S200 f/2-3?

Well, the previous powershots were all f/2ish to f/5ish, so, maybe it indicates that the aperture on the tele end will be brighter

 

[jebrady03]

I'm loving this 'Year of the Lens' so far

C'mon...

24-2000 f/3.7-8.0

A 24-2000 f/3.7-8.0

How can you NOT get excited about THAT?! lol
: : : ;D

 

[EdB]

"Powershot G1 X II" -could naming get any worse? I guessing it won't be called that.

How about the PowerShot G1 Y?

Or better, Powershot GFY.

 

[powershot2012]

Re: PowerShot S200 f/2-3

S120 successor or a bigger sensor?

What is the PowerShot S200 f/2-3?

Well, the previous powershots were all f/2ish to f/5ish, so, maybe it indicates that the aperture on the tele end will be brighter

 

[Don Haines]

24-2000 f/3.7-8.0

A 24-2000 f/3.7-8.0

How can you NOT get excited about THAT?! lol
: : : ;D

The SX-50 with 24-1200 is easily hand-holdable.... and with the digital zoom on is 24-4800 and hand-holdable... So I can easily see 24-2000. Throw in dual-pixel AF and it would be awesome!

 

[FTb-n]

So, the replacement for the SX50 is the SX70? Why not the SX60?

SX70 was the last, premier line of Polaroids. If Canon is going to skip an SXnn number, it would make more sense to skip SX70.

 

[Lee Jay]

We might also see an announcement for the PowerShot SX70 IS. It’ll come with a crazy zoom lens whenever it does arrive. 24-2000 f/3.7-8.0

f/8? Hang on a second, let me do some math.

Let's guess that it has the 16MP 1/2.3" sensor. That sensor has 1.33 micron pixels.

The spacial cutoff for f/8 for green light is 1/( 0.00055 * 8 ) = 227lp/mm. Assuming we need 3 pixels per line pair, that turns into 1.47 microns per pixel. So, this thing at f/8 would have an MTF of zero at the pixel level at the long end of the lens.

That's actually a good thing - it has enough focal length that the sensor isn't undersampling the optics. Of course, it also means you're getting everything out of the optics that can be extracted, and that's assuming the optics have no aberrations. If they do, you don't need this much focal length (or this many pixels) to get all the resolving power available.

 

[slclick]

I'm loving this 'Year of the Lens' so far

C'mon...

Where we going? Lens shopping?

24-2000 f/3.7-8.0

A 24-2000 f/3.7-8.0

How can you NOT get excited about THAT?! lol
: : : ;D

 

[Lee Jay]

The SX50 is 215mm at f/6.5. That's 215/6.5 = 33mm of aperture.

This specs for the SX70, assuming the same sensor size, are about 358mm at f/8, which is 358/8 = 44.8mm of aperture.

That's a pretty big increase in real, optical aperture. I wonder if the lens and camera are even bigger yet.

 

[PHYSICA]

I'm loving this 'Year of the Lens' so far

Do you believe every ... yearly CR thread regarding 35mm 1.4L II, 100-400 L II etc? I don't. They are so obviously nonsense... Sorry CR 99.9% of your site rocks but some specific "new lens" threads of yours belong to the other 0.1% (they are so NL level... )

Well.... this is a rumor site.... if everything is true, then why not change the name as CANON NEWS?

No serious to rumor, just read and think.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

24-2000mm ... with image stabilization ... WOW! ... now that is some serious zoom range. It could be a decent option for guided wildlife trips, when you may not want to carry big lenses ... coupled with image stabilization and some good post processing, I think it could make for a decent wildlife camera.