New Lenses Coming [CR3]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
- Status
C
Canon 14-24
Guest
kubelik said:
Yes silliness aside, I can see it'd be hard for some to justify a price for such a lens over $2500 like the launch of the 17mm ts-e (I believe $2499), however if Canon for example wants to throw in some new IS version or some unnecessary video additions in the design for this lens and charge another $500+, hopefully my budget of an excess $500 can cover it
Upvote
0
Canon 14-24 said:kubelik said:
Yes silliness aside, I can see it'd be hard for some to justify a price for such a lens over $2500 like the launch of the 17mm ts-e (I believe $2499), however if Canon for example wants to throw in some new IS version or some unnecessary video additions in the design for this lens and charge another $500+, hopefully my budget of an excess $500 can cover it
if they couldn't/wouldn't work IS into the 24-70 Mark II, I doubt they'd insert it into the 14-24.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:
I have the 300 f/4 and a separate 1.4x. If they would update the 300 f/4 to add in the TC, it should be a lot cheaper and just as good. Even if they put the built in 2x TC into the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS, it would be a better choice for the price.
Unless they figured out how to make the 280mm-560mm still at f/4, it isn't worth close to that much. I would get the 600mm f/4 for that price...
Upvote
0
C
Canon 14-24
Guest
kubelik said:Canon 14-24 said:kubelik said:
Yes silliness aside, I can see it'd be hard for some to justify a price for such a lens over $2500 like the launch of the 17mm ts-e (I believe $2499), however if Canon for example wants to throw in some new IS version or some unnecessary video additions in the design for this lens and charge another $500+, hopefully my budget of an excess $500 can cover it
if they couldn't/wouldn't work IS into the 24-70 Mark II, I doubt they'd insert it into the 14-24.
I do have my fingers crossed they don't, but seeing how they were able to add IS on some wide angle focal lengths (even though they are primes), I am prepping myself for the worst!
Upvote
0
EYEONE said:
Didn't you see "Pulitzer Prize winning News Photos" A PJs work isn't gauged by Creamy Bokeh, but by how his work connects with the audience. Would Nick Ut's Pulitzer winning Burning Girl photo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Ut been improved by Paper-Thin-DOF ???
Me, I shoot advertising at f/5.6 to f/16. Sometimes I need a Tilt-and-Shift lens to INCREASE my DOF. I once shot an ad with a EF-S 10-22mm lens at f/16. So, yes I'd buy a 24mm f/2.8. YMMV
Architecture Photographers use Wide Angle Tilt-and-Shift lenses for increased DOF, because that's what their clients want/need.
What about Landscape Photographers ???
Yes, there are many photographers who don't give a Flying Eff about shallow DOF.
Upvote
0
c.d.embrey said:
Ok, but see buddy, you could have said "With the work I do, I shoot at higher F values so I don't really care about the f2.8" Instead of coming off rude, arrogant and insulting. The fact is if, you buy a f2.8 lens you can still do the work you need to do with it. My work becomes much for difficult at high F values. Do I need f1.8 or 2.8? Yes, actually, I do.
So your comment to Ricku was completely out of line and he had a valid counter to what you said.
I'm so happy you don't want a shallow depth of field. But I do.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:
Terry Richardson and Juergen Teller built their Fashion Photography reputations with P&S Film cameras. Juergen Teller is still shooting Ads and Fashion Editorial with his Film P&S Contax G2.
The problem with Digital P&S cameras is you push-the-button and several seconds later the camera fires.
Upvote
0
My compact with an unremarkable 5.6x crop factor sensor is f/4 actual at 40mm full frame equivalent. So that's f/22 equivalent. Want to compare to APS-C? At 64mm full frame equivalent it's f/4.5 actual for f/16 equivalent.neuroanatomist said:
So while a 40mm f/2.8 isn't going to set blur potential records, it still offers a lot more potential relative to compact cameras.
Elsewhere: if the 200-400 price is remotely true, I feel a Sigma 120-300 purchase coming on!
Upvote
0
M
mkln
Guest
why 40? that's 40 on FF and 65 on crop. huh?
and what are you going to use it on? consumer DSLRs have that ugly prism/flash thing protruding from the body and a pancake would look real ugly on them
a 5D or 1D is so large that a 50/1.8 already looks like a pancake (i.e. no advantage using an even smaller lens)
why 2.8? I understand the 24 and 28, they have IS, they are wide angle. but 40 is in the "normal" range, f/2 would help. even if not the best quality, who cares.
I hope that this is going to be cheap at least.
Unless they are actually planning a EOS-mount mirrorless camera like the new pentax thing. (uhhgly) so a pancake would make sense. still, 30/35 would have been better.
and what are you going to use it on? consumer DSLRs have that ugly prism/flash thing protruding from the body and a pancake would look real ugly on them
a 5D or 1D is so large that a 50/1.8 already looks like a pancake (i.e. no advantage using an even smaller lens)
why 2.8? I understand the 24 and 28, they have IS, they are wide angle. but 40 is in the "normal" range, f/2 would help. even if not the best quality, who cares.
I hope that this is going to be cheap at least.
Unless they are actually planning a EOS-mount mirrorless camera like the new pentax thing. (uhhgly) so a pancake would make sense. still, 30/35 would have been better.
Upvote
0
J
jwong
Guest
The only thing I can think where a 40mm f/2.8 pancake would make sense is on an EVIL camera. Is this the precursor of Canon's answer to the Sony NEX and Nikon One lines? I can see where people would be pretty happy using the 24 IS or 28 IS with the 40 pancake for a fairly light kit that would still produce decent video.
Upvote
0
EYEONE said:
Here's the original post from Ricku.
Ricku said:
Why is he attacking my Original post ??? Did I say that there was anything wrong with people who like Shallow DOF ??? No I just said for many people f/2.8 would work fine. Canon seems to think so too, because they are releasing many NEW f/2.8 lenses. So "Looks like f/2.8 is the NEW f/1.8 for Canon." is a true statement. What has bokeh got to do with it ???
Upvote
0
P
p-ivo
Guest
...
hope that f2.8 is a typo.
if not, 'think cosina makes something better for some time now.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/voigtlander/40mm-f2.htm
hope that f2.8 is a typo.
if not, 'think cosina makes something better for some time now.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/voigtlander/40mm-f2.htm
Upvote
0
Caps18 said:
These are my thoughts as well...haering their price tag of $11K means that they came in at literally twice what I was expecting it to be, and takes it out of consideration.
Buying a {400mm DO IS f/4 + 1.4x + 7D body} instead clearly isn't the same feature set, but it is ~30% less costly while also being an entirely redundant standalone kit that would suppliment one's 70-200L setup for shorter focal length shots, etc.
-hh
Upvote
0
smirkypants said:
well when you move over to the nameless system I would be interested in buying your 1D4
Upvote
0
S
smirkypants
Guest
No chance. I live in Argentina half the year and their are huge tariffs on imported camera equipment. I can sell my used gear down here and make a profitwickidwombat said:well when you move over to the nameless system I would be interested in buying your 1D4
That being said, I won't do anything rash... I'm still thinking about the company whose name begins with an S and makes a 120-300/2.8, that with a 1.4 extender is f4 and beats the pants off the 100-400 in terms of IQ. I shall rent it and see.
My ass is twitching.
Upvote
0
P
photophreek
Guest
smirkypants wrote"
If the Canon offereing with TC is as sharp(probably sharper) than the lens from the dark side, then this lens will be outstanding and could put a dent in Canon's other supertele sales.
I remember when this lens was first discussed, the $10K + number was thrown around. This won't sell like kit lenses. but many of these lenses will sell world wide when available.
If the Canon offereing with TC is as sharp(probably sharper) than the lens from the dark side, then this lens will be outstanding and could put a dent in Canon's other supertele sales.
I remember when this lens was first discussed, the $10K + number was thrown around. This won't sell like kit lenses. but many of these lenses will sell world wide when available.
Upvote
0
- Status
