What do you hope-for MOST from Canon in 2014
- Thread starter Etienne
- Start date
High resolution body - on par with the D810 in a 5D body so the price is below $4000
License Nikon's 14-24 lens - it is great, why create it. They can not do better.
mini 1Dx. 1Dx w/ APS-C or APS-H sensor. identical except for lower high ISO
License Nikon's 14-24 lens - it is great, why create it. They can not do better.
mini 1Dx. 1Dx w/ APS-C or APS-H sensor. identical except for lower high ISO
Upvote
0
RGF said:
In a magical universe of where cars run on unicorn farts, they'd do that and in exchange license the radio protocols for the RT flashes so that accessories would get interesting in a hurry...
In the meantime I look forward to at least trying the 16-35 f/4.Jim
Upvote
0
RGF said:
Is that a challenge?
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=949&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=615&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=2
At the same aperture and focal length the Canon has less distortion (barely) and less colour fringing. It is less sharp, but not by much, however take into consideration than with IS you use the sharper aperture setting in the same lighting, the new Canon 16-35 f4L IS will actually come out on top. The only exception being when you need to freeze motion. Then take into account that IS usually gives more than one stop worth of stabilization, and you've got superior light gathering.
Bottom line you have to say whether the shorter shutter speed (and the obvious extra 2mm wide focal length) is more important than light gathering, but at nearly half the price, one third less weight, and with the ability to use normal filters, I suspect the 16-35 f4L IS is a far more practical lens.
Yes, Nikon makes a stabilized 16-35 f4 as well, it's just got horrible IQ in the corners below 20mm.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
