ozturert: So now I'm expecting a 300-600mm f8 VR lens from Nikon, or maybe a 500-1000 f11 VR?Note: Canon's 100-400mm is 1570 grams and it has 4,5-5,6 aperture. What does Nikon use in their lenses, concrete? Oh yes Nikon goes to 500mm but that 50% more weight?
Tamron 150-600 starts at 150mm f5 and ends at 600mm f6.3, and it's 1950 grams. I know that there may be glass elemen and electronics differences here and there but weight is extremely important in this class, I think.And 50% more weight compared to Canon is eye opening (Canon starts at 100mm f4.5 though is 100mm shorter).Otherwise I'm sure it's pretty sharp being a 2015-lens.
So now I'm expecting a 300-600mm f8 VR lens from Nikon, or maybe a 500-1000 f11 VR?Note: Canon's 100-400mm is 1570 grams and it has 4,5-5,6 aperture. What does Nikon use in their lenses, concrete? Oh yes Nikon goes to 500mm but that 50% more weight?
Bye bye Sony APSC users. Thanks for financing us...
Pantyhose Bandit: It sounds good but won't correct glare on the lens like a filter will
Do filters correct glare or cause them?
Canon says "Canon EF mount (Cinema Lock type)", I could not see EF-S lens compatibility on their page: http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about_canon/newsroom?pageKeyCode=pressreldetail&docId=0901e02480fb7db6
desaint: Oh my freaking g#d...a lot of people complaining here..10 dollar a month three beers less and you are there.I'ts a ver expensive product to make,you pay thousands of dollars on camera gear but you don't want to pay for your software??Normal you have to buy it once in the three years and now you pay monthly,i think at the end it's about the same...And for the illegal downloaders there is enough other software builders you can use for"free"and then can complain about it:)
Can you send me 10$/month? Just 3 beers, wouldn't impact your pocket I guess.Many photographers would not upgrade to new releases but would wait for the next one (two versions) to upgrade. Now Adobe forces people to pay for each version. My brother in law still uses CS5 because it works fine for him.
ozturert: Good. Very good. If you want a smaller camera go with GF7 or GM5, if you want a very strong camera go with GX8.
Haiiyaa, if you want a small strong camera, well good luck with it. Touch screen, 4K video, excellent EVF, NFC etc.. I had GM5 for 6 months. It's a very good tiny camera BUT it's TINY and not as capable as GX8.
Good. Very good. If you want a smaller camera go with GF7 or GM5, if you want a very strong camera go with GX8.
ozturert: If I don't lift shadows by 3-4 stops, is lower DR still a problem?AND: Finally a Canon that beats the excellent/incredible/perfect/splendid/impeccable DxO One Super RAW plus!
So it isn't a problem.But I agree that Canon's sensors are behind if you push them for more than 3-4 stops.
If I don't lift shadows by 3-4 stops, is lower DR still a problem?AND: Finally a Canon that beats the excellent/incredible/perfect/splendid/impeccable DxO One Super RAW plus!
In continuous AF, the Sony is perfectly focusing on nose :) In the first video 75% of shots ended up on his nose :)Well, it's still very impressive to autofocus with a Canon lens with a 3rd party adapter. Really impressive. Now we can use the excellent Canon glass with excellent Sony sensor using AF.
Picturenaut: Just a comment after using a 7DII for a while now. If the 5D's noise performance is about similar to the 7DII's, then no real photographer would go beyond ISO 12800 (or much less!). So I don't find Canon's decision to cap ISO sensitivity at ISO 6400/12800 in the 5D's "odd", as Barnaby Britton states here, but wise. Higher ISO's would be just a marketing gag, and that's not needed for a pro/prosumer market product. Nobody would invest in such extremely high resolving (studio/landscape) cameras to shoot them with ISO settings that kill all this resolution advantage.
If you always need ISO25600, then you need a different lighting setup or faster lenses or a different camera (and not 50MP).Yes, I'd love to have ISO409600 with clean 100MP too.
ozturert: Why do people spend so much to get weird bokeh and/or imaqe quality? Paying 1700$ for a 150$ lens (well, 50$ actually) makes you happy?
That's my point. 1700$ is simply funny. They should sell this lens with Hasselblad's Sony-copy cameras.
Why do people spend so much to get weird bokeh and/or imaqe quality? Paying 1700$ for a 150$ lens (well, 50$ actually) makes you happy?
nicolaiecostel: The 7D mk2 is an action camera. With 10 fps and class leading auto focus, the camera is forgiven for low DR and not that good high ISO performance.
In contrast, a camera like the D800E or D810 is a slow, high megapixel camera with great image quality made especially for applications where a great image with lots of detail is required.
What canon has done is it has made a D810 style camera with the upscaled 7Dmk2 sensor.
And this just doesn't make any sense.
This doesn't make sense for YOU.
No that was my point, kind of. Give it to lack of my English :)5Ds is for a specific target of customers. Above ISO6400 at low light (not talking about ISO6400 + f2.8 + 1/1000 shots), 99% of the time you cannot get big prints because the quality is so low, even with D4s. With 5Ds you have 50 million pixels to use, D4s has "only" 16 millions. On a print, you probably would not get worse results with 5Ds at ISO6400 or 12800 (except from MAYBE at dynamic range).Anyway, talk to 100 portrait/studio/scenery/architechture/fashion photograph professionals, 99 will tell that they don't use above ISO3200.Me, yes I use crazy ISO values like 12800, 25600 etc.., but then I don't print or share large anyway when I do.
For ISO12800 there is 5DMarkIII or 1Dx. Still at ISO12800 what you get from those is a joke usually.Canon makes 5Ds' target very clear. If not for you, you buy something else.
No real photographer goes beyond ISO12800 anyway.
Now is the time they introduce real 14-bit RAW.And update the 24-70mm f4 OSS.And introduce high quality pancake lenses with narrow aperture (like 18mm f4, 20mm f3.5, 85mm f2.8 etc..).
TriezeA72: If Canon was a bakery, their buns would be half baked!No evf in a 1k camera, is underdone!
Strange. Does G3x not have live preview of exposure? All Canon DSLRs have it, and as far as I know no entry-level Nikon DSLR has it. It'd be weird if G3x did not.