Exactly. There are a lot of pros using crop camera when they think it best serves their needs. Not all pros have unlimited budgets to waste on gears that don't buy them the results. On the other hand there are quite a few pro wanna be wasting thier money to buy (or dream about) expensive gears and got nothing in return.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Is Canon *really* supporting the 1.6x?
- Thread starter Montana500
- Start date
riderfanreturns
Leading Member
if they annouce another EF-S lens with IQ similar to the recent 17-55 F2.8 IS then its even clearer they are commited to the 1.6 crop format.
I've got to admit a 40D with a 1.3 crop (with no price increase) does sound tempting!
I've got to admit a 40D with a 1.3 crop (with no price increase) does sound tempting!
riderfanreturns
Leading Member
meant to say:
I've got to admit a 40D with a 1.3 crop (with no price increase)
does sound tempting (if they aren't commited to APS-C)!
I've got to admit a 40D with a 1.3 crop (with no price increase)
does sound tempting (if they aren't commited to APS-C)!
Montana500
Veteran Member
I think you need a date or something.
Montana500
Veteran Member
Everything ok?
LOL. No, just pointing out the obvious to those who lack perspective. Canon does support EF-S. They will continue to produce EF-S. People who think Canon should offer every EF-S lens under the sun, otherwise they'll throw a hissy fit, simply need to grow up. And people who think that Canon isn't supporting EF-S, and will dump it in the near future, causing the value of EF-S lenses to plummet 90% (ahem...Montana500) should grow up, too. Or, people who want "a letter of some sort letting users know their EF-S lenses won't go down 90% in value" (ahem...Montana500, again) from Canon need to grow up, too. As for "some official word that new EF-S lenses are being worked on", Canon's been giving official word of their continued interest in developing EF-S lenses for quite some time now. Here's just one example taken from this interview with Takaya Iwasaki, Canon representative for Central East and North East Europe, Sub-Sahara Africa and Middle East in 2004:
http://www.e-fotografija.com/artman/publish/article_440.shtml
"Jernej: Are you planing to introduce some high end EF-S lenses in the near future?
TAKAYA: Definitely. We are always planing 5 year spans so within the next 5 years we will develop high and mid end or even some completely unique EF-S lenses. But those are based on requests of professional photographers, however at the same time DSLRS are getting more popular with non professionals, therefore we have to develop lenses for both markets. It is not a question of timing, but as a leader of professional photography industry we are always thinking of high end products and new technology."
And perfect evidence to support Takaya's comments back in 2004 were the introduction of the excellent 60/2.8 EF-S macro in 2005, and the superb 17-55/2.8 EF-S IS in 2006. But of course, none of this is going to mean anything to the likes of Montana500, because he is still going to believe that Canon doesn't really support EF-S, LOL! And when Canon introduces the 40D with 1.6x, along with new EF-S lenses to go with it, Montana500 is still going to want a letter from Canon telling him that "EF-S lenses won't go down 90% in value".
LOLOL. Are you refering to this comment I made: "On the other hand, if you seriously think that Canon is going to give up on EF-S, then do yourself a favor and unload your Canon equipment now." I think that was a perfectly reasonable suggestion for someone who is obviously seriously concerned with Canon's continued support of EF-S. If you think that suggestion of action is a "personal attack", you're being pretty thin-skinned and delusional.
And then, you have the hypocrisy to make this following comment, one that has absolutely no relevance to the topic we are discussing, which clearly is a personal attack:
And then, you have the hypocrisy to make this following comment, one that has absolutely no relevance to the topic we are discussing, which clearly is a personal attack:
Nice try. Apperently, it is you who needs to try to stay on topic and to avoid personal attack comments that have no relevance to what we are discussing. I would have gladly entertained a well constructed rebuttal to any of my comments, but all you could muster was "you need a date or something", along with an admonishment about making personal attacks?! Geez, pal. You make it way too easy...
The point I'm making is you can't lump every photographer into some convenient category. Not all xxxD users are the same. And certainly not all are cheapskates. That's kind of a nasty thing to say to anyone who spends less than tens of thousands of dollars on camera bodies and lenses.
The EOS 30D is a two year old model that will probably get replaced soon. It costs several hundred bucks above the price of a 400D/XTi body. I can e-bay the XTi body if I like and not take such a loss on it compared to selling a 30D to get its successor (or better yet whatever succeeds the 5D).
I chose the non-IS version of the 70-200 f/2.8L because the copies of that lens are consistently sharper from one copy to the next. Since I shoot a lot of stuff from a sturdy tripod I didn't need to spend $600 more for IS.
I haven't bought the 10-22 yet. I may do so. It's a lens I can use on that XTi body and get greater wide angle coverage than I would by going with the 16-35 f/2.8L. I'd have to get a full frame body like the 5D for the 16-35 to match the coverage of the 10-22. Whenever I'm able to move up to a FF body, I can easily sell the EF-S lens for most of what I paid to get it brand new.
But then again, I may not buy that lens at all. I'm also thinking about the 100-400L zoom lens, or even the 400 f/5.6L prime. Who knows? I might get a "wild hair" and buy some other primes like the 135L instead.
BMA
Veteran Member
Have you ever considered that the dropping of FF by the other manufacturers has driven buyers to Canon? Canon's FF sales are massively up over the past few years. this means more $$ for supporting developement of lenses. Canon has even had cronic shortages of some of the more popular L series lenses. The demand is there for FF so they will support it. Canon is also doing very well in the crop sensor market. This also provides more $$ for development. Canon as a company puts a higher percentage of income into development than the other camera companies.
--
Bryan - click, click, click, click, moo, click, click...
--
Bryan - click, click, click, click, moo, click, click...
DocDAT
Veteran Member
I agree, it's the most rediculous thing I've heard yet!
Yup - and some of these wannabes are proselytizing their FF religion on these forums.
FF is for the Pros and for those to whom money nor gear weigh is not an issue. For the rest of us, there's cropped body and EF-S. That's hell of a market for anyone to take seriously. 10-22 and 17-55 are convincing examples that Canon is taking it seriously.
Timo
Timo
Roman Menyhart
Member
Olympus was very successful with their E-1 range for nature photographers who didn't want to carry excessive weight. So there is a market for a 1.6, i.e. EF-S range of lens for xxD range of Canon SlR's. Owning a 30D or 20D and buying L lenses means carrying a LOT of weight that is just not used. The reason to go for the crop factor is to have less equipment to carry around. It's about making cameras that perform well smaller. Olympus has a lead in this market until Canon creates a good EF-S lens. I almost feel cheated by Canon with my 20D, as the only reason the camera doesn't perform to my expectations is that there is NO excellent EF-S lens out there. And don't give me the stuff about how non-L lenses good are. There is a huge difference in quality (unless you take the 50mm 1.4 EF) which is still small and has excellent optical quality (even though for hundreds of users it the focusing jamms and sending to canon means -200EUR). OK, enough ranting... just my thoughts.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum