The A-Team: I don't think this makes any sense as a kit with the 6D. That's a "budget full-frame" so it makes sense to pair it with a "budget" kit lens. Something like an improved 24-85 IS (non-L) would make more sense, or even just the 28-135mm IS. But still nice to see Canon keep releasing new lenses. But where is that new 50mm 1.4 that everyone is asking for? Put IS in it and you'll have a VERY popular lens.
Easy prediction because it would all be true, accurate and fair
Too friggen expensive. Period. Canon - why do you think you're losing money?
Gregm61: Looks, based on the name and guide number, more like a re-badged Olympus FL36R with the FL600R-type assist lights.
FL-=36R is a 2 battery flash. This is 4 batts, so it's a rebranded FL-600R
Kevin Fitzsimons: "Pretty inconsequential"??? Are you joking? The upgrading of the Hubble telescope was probably worth the whole program. I'm shocked that a photo person would say such a thing. Go to hubblesite.org/gallery/ and see if you don't change your mind. It is a very cool video. A lot of planning and time went into it.
Also note I said "whose reign in space travel is pretty inconsequential" There was context to "pretty inconsequential".
Yes, the use of "pretty inconsequential" is overstated, but relative to it's expense and length of it's run, did it achieve as much as you might have hoped? Yes, we all want this to be the precursor to Star Trek, but that is only because we assume we will actually be able to get off this rock. While fun science fiction, it is at this time mostly that - scifi. Even if we could, we would need breakthroughs from more affordable programs than this one.
IMO, the Shuttle soaked up a lot of money. I would rather have seen those funds put into more planetary exploration. This program was proved overly expensive quite some time ago, which is why it was never ratcheted up. I will not mourn that it is moth-balled, but rather look forward to what could be done next. To mourn an unworkable program is to be a hopeless romantic, which is what the music is conveying, and the point of my perhaps hastily-written post.
Coyote_Cody: The most wonderful thing about the USA is that ppl have opinions without any knowledge or facts to form that opinion, so saying the shuttle was inconsequential is a very uninformed immature, showing very little understanding of science, engineering or 'wonderment'.
To these here is their motto:
"I don't need no stinking science, facts or education of any sort, I have my opinions, founded upon nothing, pulled from my behind!"
Great time-lapse, likely its last trip! Sad!!
Is this program dead because of some ignorance, or rather because it is actually economically infeasible? The data says it's economically infeasible. Do you have any contrary data, or again just opinions from your rear?
WT21: The video shows the power of music. The space shuttle is a very large, very expensive piece of technology whose reign in space travel is pretty inconsequential. Very little happened, and the most memorable event about any of the shuttles, sadly, is the one that blew up.
I am sure they were utilitarian, but the music makes you feel like you are viewing some poignant significant moment, when the the shuttle era has really been quite boring. The Benny Hill theme song could have fit in nicely to the time lapse, and given the viewer a MUCH different emotional response. You can find the BH theme music on youtube such as http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK6TXMsvgQg. Try it out yourself, both ways. Mute the LA audio and turn up BH.
International Space Station was mentioned, which is a good one. Also, I forgot the Hubble. I don't remember if that was launched by the shuttle, but it was certainly serviced by the shuttle.
The video shows the power of music. The space shuttle is a very large, very expensive piece of technology whose reign in space travel is pretty inconsequential. Very little happened, and the most memorable event about any of the shuttles, sadly, is the one that blew up.
I want, but this is a bit silly in price. How about $60?
I'm going to use the trial, though. That would be huge if I could key stroke my way through quick levels adjustment.
Nope. Still lame.
One of the ugliest cameras I've ever seen.
Does the 6D have micro-adjust?
Interesting and pretty, but not for me. Hope they sell a boat load to the ladies and the men who like bling.
Baczek: what this video doesn't show is focus accuracy. i don't care how fast PDAF focuses if the picture comes out all soft. hybrid AF is MUCH more accurate with older lenses like the 50 1.8.
CDAF will still yield more accurate focusing than PDAF in low light IF it gets focus. CDAF is not prone to front or back focusing. But, CDAF can struggle in low light. Then again, Canon Rebels have been terrible in low light, and for years they didn't (and perhaps still don't?) come with a simple AF assist light!! When both use AF assist lights, CDAF will still be more accurate with center point focus. CAF is the only place where PDAF rules now.
Is this the first Canon WITHOUT a direct print button??
Koulang: Why there is no wide angle or tele lenses like 10mm, 200m or 300mm for mirroless camera?
You mean primes? Panasonic has a pretty nice 100-300mm tele, and I use it on my tiny EPM1.
Now if only it included a real phone!
This will be a major staple lens in three years for m43. There will be enough used lenses, and enough price drop, that even the budget conscious, when they need a portrait lens, will get one.
FINALLY, though I'm sure in true facebook style, they are sniffing your contacts and everything else on your smart phone at the same time.
Is it wrong that I'm enjoying the train wreck that is the FB IPO?