World Cup started - no sign of 100-400L Mk2

Sort by date Sort by votes
#41
I browsed to this thread with the naïve notion that reading it might yield some informative updates on the rumored 100-400 II, which I am potentially interested in buying. Silly me ...

So much flaming, sarcasm and back-biting here that my eyeballs hurt! I did enjoy Neuro's humor in Reply #2, however ...
 
Upvote 0
#42
neuroanatomist said:
Nope, nothing 'wrong'. The 100-400L just doesn't take a TC well. My 600 II and 70-200 II do just fine with TCs, and the bare 100-400 is quite sharp. Those conclusions are based on both real-world shooting and ISO 12233-type chart testing.
Click to expand...

What can I say? My real-world experience shows the 100-400 with 1.4 TC gives better results than cropping.

'Wrong' is thinking Canon will come out with a built-in TC in an update to a popular f/5.6 zoom. Sorry, that's incredibly unlikely.
Click to expand...

And I never said it was likely.
 
Upvote 0
#43
Steve said:
Do you think that canon engineers are literally wizards that just need to invoke the correct incantations to allow the tiny daemons that live in the mirror box to focus at f/8? You do understand that AF systems are hardware, right? And that the limitations are physical? Neuroanatomist wrote a pretty good breakdown of how AF systems actually work which I'm sure he'd be happy to link you to.
Click to expand...

And are you assuming that newer Canon bodies will not have newer hardware that will allow focusing at f8 that is on par with the 5D3?
 
Upvote 0
#44
canonrumorstony said:
Steve said:
Do you think that canon engineers are literally wizards that just need to invoke the correct incantations to allow the tiny daemons that live in the mirror box to focus at f/8? You do understand that AF systems are hardware, right? And that the limitations are physical? Neuroanatomist wrote a pretty good breakdown of how AF systems actually work which I'm sure he'd be happy to link you to.
Click to expand...

And are you assuming that newer Canon bodies will not have newer hardware that will allow focusing at f8 that is on par with the 5D3?
Click to expand...
One of the lessons time should be teaching us is that AF has been steadily improving over time. Note the DPAF of the 70D which we can expect in a 7D2.... and it is a very safe bet that the regular AF of the 7D2 will be more than the 7D's 19 points, both in number and capability, so f8 AF is a very real possibility.
 
Upvote 0
#46
canonrumorstony said:
And are you assuming that newer Canon bodies will not have newer hardware that will allow focusing at f8 that is on par with the 5D3?
Click to expand...

No. But canon will never make a 5.6 lens with a built in tc because thats a really bad idea. They don't even make f/6.3 lenses why would you think they would ever make an f/8 lens?
 
Upvote 0
#47
canonrumorstony said:
Steve said:
Do you think that canon engineers are literally wizards that just need to invoke the correct incantations to allow the tiny daemons that live in the mirror box to focus at f/8? You do understand that AF systems are hardware, right? And that the limitations are physical? Neuroanatomist wrote a pretty good breakdown of how AF systems actually work which I'm sure he'd be happy to link you to.
Click to expand...

And are you assuming that newer Canon bodies will not have newer hardware that will allow focusing at f8 that is on par with the 5D3?
Click to expand...

I need to find the article somewhere explaining why Canon limits most of their bodies to autofocusing with a max aperture of f/5.6. But if I can remember correctly, I think it comes down to the physics of the light gathering ability of the sensor. If we are talking about a 7D mkII (which will be APS-C) then it's very likely that the pixels are going to be physically smaller than on a full frame camera like the 5D mkIII or 1DX. While it would be cool to have a built in TC, I just don't think making one with a max aperture of f/8 is going to happen.
 
Upvote 0
#49
canonrumorstony said:
eml58 said:
Cant wait to see your 12th Post ???
Click to expand...

Oh, dear me, I guess you have posting seniority.

If you are worried about my number of postings:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1300265/0#12403599

::)
Click to expand...

Not at all, your arrogant statement regards the 2 previous posters views being "wrong" was the point of my own remark, how many Posts you've made wasn't the relevant point, but clearly my own Post didn't include enough small words to make myself clear.

And your subsequent comments on this thread tend to reinforce my original view.
 
Upvote 0
#50
canonrumorstony said:
privatebydesign said:
canonrumorstony said:
What if the extra was $399?
Click to expand...

What if we could all come to your house and smoke what you are smoking? A regular 1.4 TC is $499, the benchmark the 200-400 set for a built in one is for a substantial premium over that, for instance the Nikon 200-400 f4 costs $6,599, the Canon version with built in TC costs $11,799.

So bearing in mind the current 100-400 costs $1,699, and all MkII's have added at least a $1,000 to MkI prices, now put in a TC and you could easily be looking at $3,500-$4,500. The Nikon 80-400 sells for $2,695 with no TC.
Click to expand...

You seem to make pretty inane assumptions without smoking anything. You are pretty good at exaggerating and comparing apples to oranges also. The 1.4x III is $449, and the 100-400 is $1500 right now at B&H. So there you are exaggerating by $250. You have no idea what the Canon 200-400 would have listed for without the built-in TC. Comparing to the Nikon is hardly relevant. More assumptions by you.
Click to expand...
I like to argue with PDB as much as anybody :P

But I'm afraid you hold the title for the highest number of inane posts in this thread and probably the forum at the moment.

To me PBD's analysis of likely price is spot on and how can you say that comparing the nikon is hardly relevent? Seriously WTF? its the most relevant comparison for this lens there is.

Seriously man you need to calm down a bit not come in here acting like a troll.
 
Upvote 0
#51
Don Haines said:
One of the lessons time should be teaching us is that AF has been steadily improving over time. Note the DPAF of the 70D which we can expect in a 7D2.... and it is a very safe bet that the regular AF of the 7D2 will be more than the 7D's 19 points, both in number and capability, so f8 AF is a very real possibility.
Click to expand...

Glad someone else grasps that concept.
 
Upvote 0
#53
Steve said:
No. But canon will never make a 5.6 lens with a built in tc because thats a really bad idea. They don't even make f/6.3 lenses why would you think they would ever make an f/8 lens?
Click to expand...

How about because it wouldn't be an f/8 lens. It would be an f/5.6 lens that would have the option of being an f/8 lens, without having to remove the lens to put on a TC. Perhaps you underestimate how many people are already using 1.4x TC's on the 100-400 & 400 f/5.6.
 
Upvote 0
#55
Bit of trivia...Canon has produced an f/5.6 lens with a built-in TC, so the lens was f/8 with the TC engaged. That was the FD 1200/5.6+1.4x, and when Canon converted them to manual focus to the EF mount, they removed the TCs.
 
Upvote 0
#56
eml58 said:
Not at all, your arrogant statement regards the 2 previous posters views being "wrong" was the point of my own remark, how many Posts you've made wasn't the relevant point, but clearly my own Post didn't include enough small words to make myself clear.
Click to expand...

You mean like your rude and arrogant statement of, "Can't wait to see your 12th post."?

It seemed pretty clear to me regardless of how small your words were.
 
Upvote 0
#57
neuroanatomist said:
Bit of trivia...Canon has produced an f/5.6 lens with a built-in TC, so the lens was f/8 with the TC engaged. That was the FD 1200/5.6+1.4x, and when Canon converted them to manual focus to the EF mount, they removed the TCs.
Click to expand...

Do you know what the price was and how long it was on the market? That had to be absolutely super expensive!
 
Upvote 0
#59
bdunbar79 said:
neuroanatomist said:
Bit of trivia...Canon has produced an f/5.6 lens with a built-in TC, so the lens was f/8 with the TC engaged. That was the FD 1200/5.6+1.4x, and when Canon converted them to manual focus to the EF mount, they removed the TCs.
Click to expand...

Do you know what the price was and how long it was on the market? That had to be absolutely super expensive!
Click to expand...

The FD 1200 with built in 1.4 TC were never sold, all the ones made, and best estimates put it at 20-30, were owned by Canon, and that is why they were all converted to the EF 1200's, which was sold, they ranged from $80,000 to well over $100,000 and they grew the flourite elements to order.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
Canon Very Large Sensor Media Format Mirrorless 1Dx2 style Camera Seen in Wild
Replies
115
Views
61K
Don Haines
Don Haines
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu