Still waiting for high MP canon while Nikon is coming out with new 800
- Thread starter Jglaser757
- Start date
Chuck Alaimo said:
Exactly why I wanted Canon to make EF-S L-primes.
Chuck Alaimo said:
Not everybody aspires to "full-frame" ... in fact, I'd say that the majority of Canon users don't really care for "full-frame", as indicated by sales.
Upvote
0
Orangutan said:
Not anymore.
Orangutan said:
No choice ... had to do it.
Orangutan said:
Basic economic principle at work ... when the exec's at Canon ask why a certain highly-lucrative niche market isn't using/buying their (Canon's) products, that's the answer.
Upvote
0
Chuck Alaimo said:
Again, not everyone aspires to "full-frame". Fact is that beyond a certain point, "full-frame" offers no real advantage over "crop-frame".
Chuck Alaimo said:
Which is exactly why, for people who have no desire towards "full-frame", "full-frame" lenses are bad economy. You have to pay for quality in areas where you can't even use it ... money that could rather have been spent on perhaps another lens?
Upvote
0
It's will be a very brilliant idea of having this Crop factor controlled b/w say a 1.6 and Full Frame Types. if they can control this with the help of a S/W driving the view finder and the mirror behaviour, it will be the most versatile camera ever.. i think. !! I think its technically too complex to mimic the behaviour of a Full frame and a crop frame in 1 single body.
Upvote
0
Canon makes excellent lenses for APS-C DSLRs.
17-55, 10-22, 15-85, 60/2.8 Macro ... all good and optically fully "L-worthy". Price is right too, if purchased using cash-back/special offers. The 17-55 IS is on of the main reasons I never switched to Nikon in the past.
10-18, 55-250 STM, 18-55 STM ... very good and very decently priced (if not "dirt cheap"). Rella good IQ, excellent price/value.
Primes? yes ... 40/2.8 pancake. Dirt cheap, and optically fully "L-worthy". Oh, it can even do FF? The better!
Something mising? Not really. Tele lenses are same size irrespective of APS-C or FF image circle ... only dependent on focal length and f-stop, so no point to make or purchase APS-C tele lenses.
Other than that .. I would buy an optically great & very compact 16mm/4.0 pancake for landscape.
The last thing I would ever buy would be EF-S "L" primes ... say something like a Fujinon 56/1.2 @ 1000 USD/Euro ... never ever. I don't spend a grand on FF prime lenses. Once the Sigma 50 ARt comes down to 500 Euro I might consider it.
17-55, 10-22, 15-85, 60/2.8 Macro ... all good and optically fully "L-worthy". Price is right too, if purchased using cash-back/special offers. The 17-55 IS is on of the main reasons I never switched to Nikon in the past.
10-18, 55-250 STM, 18-55 STM ... very good and very decently priced (if not "dirt cheap"). Rella good IQ, excellent price/value.
Primes? yes ... 40/2.8 pancake. Dirt cheap, and optically fully "L-worthy". Oh, it can even do FF? The better!
Something mising? Not really. Tele lenses are same size irrespective of APS-C or FF image circle ... only dependent on focal length and f-stop, so no point to make or purchase APS-C tele lenses.
Other than that .. I would buy an optically great & very compact 16mm/4.0 pancake for landscape.
The last thing I would ever buy would be EF-S "L" primes ... say something like a Fujinon 56/1.2 @ 1000 USD/Euro ... never ever. I don't spend a grand on FF prime lenses. Once the Sigma 50 ARt comes down to 500 Euro I might consider it.
Upvote
0
AvTvM said:
Yes, those are all excellent lenses ... but apart from the macro, all of them are also zoom lenses with rotten apertures.
AvTvM said:
Semi-true ... the 40mm flapjack lens isn't really very suited on a "crop-frame" camera for the same job it would have shined at on a "full-frame" camera if the latter cameras weren't so darned big, i.e. discretion.
AvTvM said:
An EF-S 35mm f/1.8 lens that actually takes advantage of the ability to be deeply recessed into the camera.
AvTvM said:
True.
AvTvM said:
You can't, because Canon doesn't make it.
AvTvM said:
That FUJIFILM 56mm is the next lens on my purchase list. To me, spending a "grand" on something that I'll use for the next eight to twelve years is good economy.
Upvote
0
Wow this thread keeps on giving.
Couple of thoughts from this thread. I would highly doubt that Canon would rely on the marketing department for risk analysis, that would typically be done by the risk or legal departments. My dealing with Japanese businesses is they are traditionally conservative particularly the legal departments.
At first I thought the car analogy was silly but it's actually pretty good at demonstrating how different features matter to different people, ie to me a mini will never compare to a 5 series bmw as one fits 5 adults the other fits two with a rear seat that is better served as a parcel shelf.
I have never understood the demand for more ef-s lenses. There is a good current range and plenty of non L glass to supplement the gap. And wide angles are just not for aps-c as FF gets wider just buy it's sensor size.
Couple of thoughts from this thread. I would highly doubt that Canon would rely on the marketing department for risk analysis, that would typically be done by the risk or legal departments. My dealing with Japanese businesses is they are traditionally conservative particularly the legal departments.
At first I thought the car analogy was silly but it's actually pretty good at demonstrating how different features matter to different people, ie to me a mini will never compare to a 5 series bmw as one fits 5 adults the other fits two with a rear seat that is better served as a parcel shelf.
I have never understood the demand for more ef-s lenses. There is a good current range and plenty of non L glass to supplement the gap. And wide angles are just not for aps-c as FF gets wider just buy it's sensor size.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Sella174 said:
You might want to look up the definition of the word "aspiration." Many people aspire to own a better car, a bigger house, or even a newer tractor. The fact that they do not buy them does not indicate a lack of aspiration, but rather insufficient means.
Is it your contention that the 'majority of Canon users' who do not buy an expensive full frame camera would constitute the target market for an expensive L-series APS-C prime lens? (Actually, it's a moot point since we've already established that you don't have a clue about the desires of the majority of Canon users.)
Sella174 said:
What point is that? Fact is that beyond a certain point "crop-frame" offers no real advantage over a cell phone camera. You should skip all this talk about dSLRs this and mirrorless that, and just use your phone.
Upvote
0
Sella ! Since selling most of your Canon gear and saying 'bye' you're spending more time posting on CR !
A 6D is only a few clicks away. Return that Fuji XT500 and get into a thoroughly modern FF camera. You won't be disappointed.
A 6D is only a few clicks away. Return that Fuji XT500 and get into a thoroughly modern FF camera. You won't be disappointed.
Upvote
0
Chuck Alaimo said:
Of course, when you upgrade to FF, you'll likely want to move to longer focal lengths, so you'll probably replace at least some of your glass anyway, even if you don't own any EF-S glass.
Besides, the reason that they make EF-S glass is precisely because the crop factor results in EF lenses (particularly zoom lenses) being less than ideal choices in terms of having to swap lenses constantly. The 24mm end of a 24–105 or 24–70 lens represents a decent wide angle view. The 15mm end of a 15–85 represents the equivalent on crop. Stick a 24–105 on a crop body, though, and your widest shot is approximately equivalent to sticking a shorty 40 on a full-frame. That's just not very wide. I can't imagine trying to shoot like that.
I realize primes are something of a different story, but the lack of an ultra-wide EF-S prime means that on EF-S, you're pretty much stuck with the 10–22 for ultrawide, whereas FF folks have a lot more options.
hemanthforcanonrumors said:
Not too complex, although Canon's decision to allow the rear elements of EF-S lenses to stick farther back past the flange does make it harder than, for example, the Nikon design.
To do this with the Canon system would require a lens that pivots at the midpoint after sliding. You'd do this by having a track along both sides of the mirror, but only for the last few millimeters, with a shallower track for the rotation pin that extends the entire height of the mirror. Use one solenoid to pulls the lens down that track until the pin hits the end of the track, at which point the midpoint of the mirror is at the top of the viewfinder, and the bottom of the mirror has cleared the edge guides. Use a spring to rotate the mirror.
At the pivot point, add a curved piece and an appropriate guide on the body so that the mirror cannot slide back until it has rotated back to a position where the mirror would slide into its track. Then, to return the mirror to the normal position, just release the solenoid that pulled the lens down the track and use a second solenoid to push/pull the mirror back into the 45 degree position. When it reaches that position, it slides back down the track and into the edge guides. Be sure that the end of the edge guides slopes outwards a little bit so that if the slide preventing piece at the pivot wears down and the solenoid gets weak and doesn't quite slam the mirror back quickly enough, the mirror won't jam halfway through its slide.
Mechanically, it is certainly more complex than a flip mirror, but if it is simple enough that I can crudely design it in my head in thirty seconds, I'm sure Canon could do it precisely without too much effort.
Upvote
0
Sella174 said:
Out of curiosity, what do you expect to get from an EF-S L prime that you can't get from an EF prime? Lighter? Probably. Maybe it will be cheaper to manufacture, but if they brand it as Luxury it's anyone's guess how much if any of that savings will be passed to the consumer.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:
So the majority buy "crop-frame" xxx(x)D/Rebel cameras with the aspiration of later buying a "full-frame", yet they also never purchase a second lens. Mmmmmm ... huh?
neuroanatomist said:
You are one of the minority who bought lenses beyond the kit jobbie, including L-primes. This means it is A-OK for Canon to cater to YOUR desires, but not to mine. Again ... huh?
neuroanatomist said:
My phone doesn't have a camera. The point, however, is that "full-frame" is not the all and everything; with decent lenses "crop-frame" is on par with it.
Upvote
0
Sporgon said:
I said "bye" to Canon as my primary camera gear. And also, CR is fun.
Sporgon said:
I had a look at the 6D before purchasing the X-T1 ... the mediocre AF-system of the 6D killed it for me; which means if Canon had put a decent AF-system in that camera (perhaps that of the 7D) and offered it at the same price, I would have bought it. (Now before anyone jumps on THAT, let me just say that Canon could simply have kept the frame-rate of the 6D rather low - something like 4 fps - and it would not have competed with either the 5DIII or the 1DX ... and I still would have bought it.)
Upvote
0
Sella174 said:
Quick business lesson for you:
Total profit = (profit per unit) * (number of units sold)
At the extreme ends of profitability, we have:
Mass market: (profit per unit) is small, and (number of units sold) is large
Niche: (profit per unit) is large, and (number of units sold) is small
Key point: The manufacturer gets to decide where in that range is "A-OK" for their business goals and capabilities.
Upvote
0
3kramd5 said:
I have found that L-lenses generally have better colour and more pleasing image rendition than non-L-lenses (made by Canon). But I suspect you don't view lenses in this light.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
