T3

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jul 1, 2003

Comments

Total: 2427, showing: 861 – 880
« First‹ Previous4243444546Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Lab D: F/4.5-F/6.3
awesome.

@EvokeEmotion - "Oh by the way, now I know why people with poor math skills go for m43."

Ahahahaha. Yeah, it couldn't possibly be because m4/3 offers such a broad selection of mirrorless bodies and lenses to choose from! And it couldn't possibly be because m4/3 offers in-body image stabilization so that any lens you put on an IBIS body is stabilized. And it couldn't possibly be because m4/3 offers a system that can be quite compact compared to APS-C mirrorless systems. No, it's merely because 2X is easy to multiply than 1.5/1.6X! Yeah, sure, pal.Frankly, the only "math" that really matters is that Canon still only offers four lenses in the entire EF-M system, two of which aren't even available in the US, leaving the few existing US users with a whopping two-lens EOS M mirrorless system.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 05:25 UTC
In reply to:

Lab D: F/4.5-F/6.3
awesome.

"At least you don't have to times two to arrive at the effective aperture. Unlike what you're shooting with."

At least these "times two" systems offer a much broader lens selection to choose from, including lenses with much faster apertures. That's why these "times two" systems are being used to serious users. Because it's an actual serious system that you can take seriously and use seriously. That's a much stronger and more significant "at least" than what you've been able to come up with. Here's a wedding photographer who went from Nikon FF to m4/3:

http://weddingphotographybest.wordpress.com/

I don't think anyone is going to be switching to EOS M for their wedding photography any time soon.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 15:43 UTC
In reply to:

Donnie G: I think that any new or updated EOS M body that Canon decides to sell in the U.S. will be offered in several different body + lens and body + lens + EVF kits. A typical 2 lens kit might consist of a prime lens + a convenience wide to telephoto zoom + body + camera bag for under $1000. I doubt that there will be a body only option. I believe the cameras will be P&S simple, with few external controls, but with excellent image quality and very easy to use video capture. Body and lenses will likely continue to be housed in handsome metal exteriors. This new EF-M 55-200mm lens would be a perfect fit for a compact kit like that. I also think that these kits will be sold mostly through the Canon direct sales website. It just makes sense.

"I also think that these kits will be sold mostly through the Canon direct sales website. It just makes sense."

Wishful thinking. Canon doesn't even sell EOS M kits on their direct sales website right now. Besides, only a very small fraction of sales are ever done through manufacturers direct sales website. It's very optimistic to predict that "these kits will be sold *mostly* through the Canon direct sales website." So it doesn't make much sense, if they were really serious about selling EOS M. What would make sense would be to stick these kits in every Costco in the world. That kind of visibility, combined with the Canon name, would sell kits. But I just don't think Canon is really that interested in selling mirrorless at all. EOS M is like the b@stard stepchild of the Canon family. They don't seem very enthusiastic about it. Just listen to what Canon execs say when they talk about it. It's as if they are only selling it begrudgingly.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 15:17 UTC

Other sites have reported that this lens will have a plastic lens mount. I'm okay with shorter lenses having plastic lens mounts, because those lenses don't stick out as much. But I don't think it's a good idea for a long, narrow telephoto lens to have a plastic lens mount. A long, narrow cylinder sticking out from your camera needs something more re-assuring than a plastic lens mount.

It really seems like Canon is only doing the bare minimum to keep the EOS M system going. I think it's time to sell my EOS M gear.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 06:38 UTC as 23rd comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: Canon should replace the EOS M disaster with a newer body model instead on newer lenses.

New lenses, no matter how brilliant they are, are just bricks when mounted on the quagmire designed EOS M.

Come out with an upgrade for EOS M, then maybe consumers will call on the deal.

It is also your responsibility, Canon, to issue relevant and important FIRMWARE UPDATES to those who have been suckered into buying the EOS M incomplete camera. They deserve your support.

.

@Q67gtonr - "Except the M2 is smaller, has a better sensor, focuses faster and has wifi!"

Except no one asked for a *smaller* EOS M. And the sensor is only "better" because the initial sensor wasn't exactly cutting edge. Plus, saying that the M2 "focuses faster" isn't exactly high praise considering the bar was set pretty low from the beginning. As for wifi, I really wish Canon's implementation was as good as their mirrorless competitors. Just compare it to, say, Fuji's implementation of wifi and you'll quickly see how weak Canon's is. I think the M2 really should have been the M1 to begin with. Then maybe we'd have an even better M by now.

*Sigh*, I miss the days when Canon was actually a leading, innovative company.

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 05:59 UTC
In reply to:

Dr111968: I wonder why mirrorless camera body should be small while the lenses are huge! what is the point!

@tkbslc - but you're forgetting that the X-T1 is the largest mirrorless body Fuji makes. When Fuji's *largest* body is the same size as the *smallest* DSLRs, that's still saying something about the size advantage of mirrorless. But the 20mm reduction in mount depth counts for a lot, especially in real world usage. Visually, a mirrorless body, even a "big" mirrorless body like the X-T1, produces a very slim visual footprint when you're out and about with it. It makes even small DSLRs look downright fat. Plus, the slim profile of mirrorless bodies means they take up very little room in a camera bag. You can slip a mirrorless body into a side pocket of a camera bag that a DSLR body-- even a small DSLR body-- would never fit into. Even better if you carry two bodies. And even better still if the second body is one of Fuji's smaller mirrorless bodies.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 22:00 UTC
In reply to:

Jorginho: For Fuji users probably good news. A nice addition to already very nice lens setup. Fuji is not letting their users down!

To me personally it also demonstrates why i do not want a APS-c sensor for a mirrorless cam. Because it is a large and heavy lens. Just compare it to the panasonic 14-140. To me, for such bodies, such a lens makes more sense.

@bluevellet - I'm pretty sure Jogger was using "APS-C" as shorthand for all APS-C mirrorless systems, given the context of this discussion.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 21:50 UTC
In reply to:

limlh: With four aspherical lenses and two ED glass lenses, this zoom has some serious stuff inside its barrel. Together with 5 stops OIS and weather resistant, Fujifilm is downright serious about this.

"It's for the easy shots that literally any lens could take and the only concern is framing it right."

You mean "any lens", as long as it's somewhere between 18mm and 135mm? LOL. That's the point of having such zoom range: it covers focal lengths from 18mm to 135mm, without having to swap lenses! And if it can do it while being weather sealed, delivering excellent image stabilization, and delivering good IQ, all the better! At least that's how I see it. And yes, if a lens can deliver all these things, then it should be able to command a higher price.

Lenses are neither inherently boring nor exciting. It's all about what you do with them. One man's "boring" lens is another man's "exciting" lens; it just depends on what you're doing with them. If you don't have the capacity, creativity, or vision to do anything interesting with them, any lens is going to be "boring". So maybe the person behind the lens that is boring.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 21:46 UTC
In reply to:

limlh: With four aspherical lenses and two ED glass lenses, this zoom has some serious stuff inside its barrel. Together with 5 stops OIS and weather resistant, Fujifilm is downright serious about this.

Far too many people here sit around griping about specs, sitting around waiting for the "perfect" lens or body, rather than seeing the potential of existing lenses and bodies, and going out to shoot with them. Yes, fast primes or shorter zooms with constant apertures are great. But they are just one tool in your tool box. A lens like this weather sealed image stabilized 18-135 (with, hopefully, very good IQ) is another tool in your tool box. And given its range, weather sealing, and stabilization, I think it should be a far more versatile tool than most narrow-minded specs-whiners realize.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 20:00 UTC
In reply to:

limlh: With four aspherical lenses and two ED glass lenses, this zoom has some serious stuff inside its barrel. Together with 5 stops OIS and weather resistant, Fujifilm is downright serious about this.

@tkbslc - it's not a boring lens. Maybe you're just a boring photographer! LOL. Seriously though, would you consider a 35/1.4 non-stabilized lens a boring lens because it's not very wide, not very long, has no stabilization, and has zero range? Like I said, maybe it's you who is boring. Yeah, sure, you can load up on a bunch of fast primes, or shorter zooms with constant apertures. But there is absolutely a usefulness to having a lens that you can keep on your body, without having to constantly swap lenses. In some conditions, swapping lenses means missing shots. Furthermore, in some dusty, windy conditions, it's best not to change your lens at all because doing so would easily introduce dust into the body! Even worse if it's rainy and wet! Yes, many of us shoot in those conditions! So having a weather sealed 18-135 zoom is a huge benefit to us! Maybe you don't realize this, because you just shoot in more "boring" conditions! LOL.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 19:56 UTC
In reply to:

Jorginho: For Fuji users probably good news. A nice addition to already very nice lens setup. Fuji is not letting their users down!

To me personally it also demonstrates why i do not want a APS-c sensor for a mirrorless cam. Because it is a large and heavy lens. Just compare it to the panasonic 14-140. To me, for such bodies, such a lens makes more sense.

A lot of APS-C mirrorless users have the intent of using APS-C mirrorless as a replacement for APS-C DSLRs. If that's the intent, "such bodies" and "such a lens" makes perfect sense. Because when combined with an entire kit in your bag, it results in a noticeable reduction in size, weight, bulk in your camera bag compared to a comparable DSLR gear collection.

I use m4/3. But I still have a preference for APS-C. I'm torn between the compactness of m4/3, and the larger sensor size of APS-C. However, both are a significantly lesser load compared to lugging around DSLR gear.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 19:48 UTC
In reply to:

ZoranHR: Fuji (and other mirorless too) make some really small and nice looking cameras,but all accompanied with big lens. (I know the reason for that) ;-)
No matter how much I like camera body, I just I don't see the point.
Why I should have a camera with body sized almost as a smartphone with lens size of half-used roll of toilet paper?!

How it would look like if they produce lens for wildlife? (since most mirorless already have a weather sealed version)

They should make a body wich gives a comfort while you hold a lens like this.

@ZoranHR - maybe you're the kind of guy who holds his camera by having both hands on each side of the camera body, like you're holding a small book in front of your face. LOL. Yeah, if that's your handholding technique, then lens size will be an issue! Nothing but the smallest lenses will be comfortable to hold if you're using that method. But with proper holding technique, any camera + lens combo can be comfortable to hold. With *your* holding technique, only the smallest, shortest, lightest lenses will be comfortable to use.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 19:43 UTC
In reply to:

ZoranHR: Fuji (and other mirorless too) make some really small and nice looking cameras,but all accompanied with big lens. (I know the reason for that) ;-)
No matter how much I like camera body, I just I don't see the point.
Why I should have a camera with body sized almost as a smartphone with lens size of half-used roll of toilet paper?!

How it would look like if they produce lens for wildlife? (since most mirorless already have a weather sealed version)

They should make a body wich gives a comfort while you hold a lens like this.

@ZoranHR - you need to learn how to hold a lens! We DSLR users regularly hold MUCH larger lenses for very long periods of time (Canon 24-70/2.8L, Canon 70-200/2.8L, Canon 100-400L, etc). And we don't do it by supporting these very front-heavy lenses with the camera bodies they are mounted on! We do it by supporting these very large and heavy lenses with our left hand sitting below the lens. I've shot these big lenses on small Rebel bodies with no problems. Again, it's merely a matter of proper hand-holding technique. It's a misconception that the best way to hold a large and heavy lens is to add a large and heavy camera body. That just adds to the overall size and weight you have to support with your body! And. no, that's not more comfortable!!!

With this Fuji 18-135 zoom lens on any of Fuji's mirrorless body, I would simple use proper handholding technique: support the lens with your left hand. No big deal.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 19:39 UTC
In reply to:

Dr111968: I wonder why mirrorless camera body should be small while the lenses are huge! what is the point!

No, mirrorless lenses aren't "huge". I think people should reserve their judgment regarding the size of these lenses until they actually have one of these lenses in their hands. Meanwhile, DSLR users don't seem to mind using lenses that are just as proportionally large on their DSLR bodies as this lens is on a mirrorless body! And a lot of DSLR lenses are TRULY HUGE. Not to mention the fact that all DSLR bodies, even the small ones, are bigger compared to mirrorless bodies. Which results in body + lens combos that dwarf any mirrorless body + lens combo! It's total hypocrisy.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 19:30 UTC
In reply to:

limlh: With four aspherical lenses and two ED glass lenses, this zoom has some serious stuff inside its barrel. Together with 5 stops OIS and weather resistant, Fujifilm is downright serious about this.

@ tkbslc - I don't know what's "boring" about an 18-135 zoom range. That zoom range covers a lot of ground, and it's a lens that you could keep on your body quite a lot. Not everyone needs faster apertures all the time. Sometimes you just want a good zoom range, and good IQ across that range. The Fuji 18-135 seems like it has the potential to do that. And with excellent image stabilization and weather sealing to boot! Not everything is about aperture, aperture, aperture.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 19:26 UTC
In reply to:

forpetessake: Fuji is moving swiftly to become the most respected lens manufacturer in the world: a combination of high quality, affordable price, and compact designs is hard to beat.

@bluevellet - I think it's rather short-sighted to be so dismissive of this lens just because it has slower variable aperture specs. Hasselblad makes some slow variable aperture zooms for their medium format H-system. It doesn't mean these lenses are cheap kit lenses! Not everyone needs fast apertures on all lenses. Sometimes, you just want the zoom range, but you still want good optical performance.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 19:21 UTC
In reply to:

peevee1: $900 for 18-135/3.5-5.6! Fuji is not exactly shy.
For comparison
Canon's new 18-135 IS STM costs $550 (Canon's old $500),
Sony's $500 ,
Nikon's new 18-140 is also $500,
Pentax 18-135WR also $500 - hell, you can buy whole WR k-50 with 18-135 for $900!
And it is harder (more expensive) to reach 18mm on a DSLR!

Among mirrorless, more versatile (longer reach)
Panasonic HD 14-140 is $400 (new 14-140 $630),
Olympus 14-150 $600;
Samsung 18-200 (again much longer reach) $700.

You have to keep in mind that the volume of production can have a significant impact on unit pricing. DSLRs are far more numerous, and their lenses are going to be produced in much, much greater volumes, thus reducing their prices. Fuji is not a high volume manufacturer on the level of a Canon or Nikon or any DSLR manufacturer, for that matter. And, of course, whether sealing adds cost, too.

In the automobile world, people accept that there are large variations in pricing from one brand to the next, even from fairly similar types of cars. No one freaks out about that. Same with watches. Same with a lot of industries. And yet, when there are pricing differences in the photographer world, people freak out! Get over it. The photo equipment world is no different from any other industry. There can be differences in pricing from one brand to the next. Get over it.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 15:19 UTC
In reply to:

ZoranHR: Fuji (and other mirorless too) make some really small and nice looking cameras,but all accompanied with big lens. (I know the reason for that) ;-)
No matter how much I like camera body, I just I don't see the point.
Why I should have a camera with body sized almost as a smartphone with lens size of half-used roll of toilet paper?!

How it would look like if they produce lens for wildlife? (since most mirorless already have a weather sealed version)

They should make a body wich gives a comfort while you hold a lens like this.

In the DSLR world, we regularly use very large lenses that are easily as proportionally larger than our DSLR bodies as this lens is on an a Fuji body. And yet, you never hear of DSLR users complaining "I don't see the point!"

The "point" is that even if some lenses are large, you still get an *overall* reduction in size when you consider the overall collection of mirrorless equipment you have in your bag. An overall reduction in size and weight is still an overall reduction in size and weight. Less to lug around, less in your carry-on bag at the airport, etc.

Furthermore, if you are supporting the size and weight of a lens solely from the camera body (and thus, your desire to have "a body that gives a comfort while you hold a lens like this") then you're not using proper holding technique. With larger lenses, you support the lens with your left hand. If you do that, it really doesn't matter how big or heavy the lens is, your camera body can handle it.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 15:13 UTC
In reply to:

Jogger: At $900 for a slow kit zoom, Fuji thinks that they are the new Leica.

Slower variable apertures do not indicate a typical "kit" zoom. That's just plain idiotic prejudice and bigotry, making a judgement merely on the most superficial of observations. I'll bet you do a lot of that in your life with other things too.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 15:07 UTC
In reply to:

abortabort: Woot? This is a kit zoom tartied up to be a premium lens by putting lipstick on a pig. Wow its got a million stops of IS so I can marvel at how good it is taking pictures of figurines on my desk and explaining to forums how great it is. But let's not forget the weather sealing! How great will it be to use an overpriced kit zoom in the rain, amazeballs! There is a reason lenses like this don't usually get the pig in lipstick treatment...

"Pig in lipstick" typically refers to things that merely get superficial treatments to make them appear better than they are. But I don't think that applies to this lens at all.

Firstly, the weather sealing is REAL. And a lens you can comfortably use in the rain is still better than a lens you can't use in the rain! A lens doesn't take very good pictures if it's sitting in your camera for fear that water might get into it.

Secondly, are you really dismissing the value of improved image stabilization as something you only use to take pictures of figurines on your desk? Sorry, but the rest of us shoot out in the real world, were any improvements in images stabilization are welcomed.

Thirdly, you make claims about the IQ of this lens; can you please show us the rests of the extensive testing you've done with this lens?

Fourthly, there's not much point in comparing it to other zooms with much shorter zoom ranges. This is no 18-55 lens. It's an 18-135 lens.

You: armchair whiner.

Link | Posted on Jun 16, 2014 at 15:05 UTC
Total: 2427, showing: 861 – 880
« First‹ Previous4243444546Next ›Last »