Reading mode: Light Dark

careful now! Canon will suck you in! ..........

Go to last post
There was a test of lens MTF comparing the E20 to a variety of top-end zoom lenses on Canon and Nikon.

The E20 lens was far superior especially wide open.

The Zeiss 717 lens is at least comparable to the E20 lens based on resolution tests.

Bottom line: There is a huge difference between designing a lens that has to cover a 35mm frame and clear the mirror box, and designing a lens for a small-sensor digicam.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
 
Doug Thompson said:
It might not be a useless lens, but the max aperature does have an
influence on focus ability/speed, if I recall correctly.

In all my lurking on the CanonSLR forum reading about the
(mis)focus issues, this point seems to be brought up often: get a
fast lens to make sure you are getting as much light to the focus
system as possible. It doesn't matter what aperature you shoot at
with the F717, it is still using the f/2.0 to focus, it just stops
down later.
Click to expand...
For low light auto focusing yes this is true.

--
Shay

My Sony F707 & F717 Gallery: http://www.shaystephens.com/portfolio.asp
My F717 Observations: http://www.shaystephens.com/f717.asp

My New camera is almost here

 
TPW said:
Few people are going to buy L glass with the 300D. But even
mid-range consumer zooms will give better capabilities and results
than fixed lens systems. By the way, all you need to match the Sony
28-200 is the 18-55 EF-S lens, plus a 28-135IS or one of the less
expensive off brand 24/28-135 lenses. Then add on a decent tele
zoom like the 75-300 (IS or no IS), and a 50/1.8 and you have a
much more capable system coring in any lighting and most situations
than the 828.
Click to expand...
This is exactly what Canon wants people to think...caching caching!
 
Sorry david,

Do you really think the Canon name on the front of a Canon name means that it's better than the sony 717 lens? There are a few dogs out there with the canon name on it. Yes even a particular L lens.

The lens on the sony's are excellent ,small and cheaper to make cause of the size but the quality is there.
Your comment' s make you sound like you are brainwashed and don't have a clue!
John
david mingay said:
Dan Clark said:
And, if Canon can't manufacture the 10D without focusing problems,
what makes you think they can manufacture a LESS expensive, HIGHER
volume camera without the same problems?

Get a clue... You've been taken in by the Canon marketing hype.

Regards,

Dan.
david mingay said:
cx532 said:
The f3.5 aperture is slow and will be almost useless in anything
but bright light.
Click to expand...
What are you on about? the 300D gives you low noise at iso 1600,
and if you really need low light ability, combine that with the
(almost free) 50 f1.8 w...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
The 28-135 IS is one of Canon's bargains (my favorite walk about lens) but the edges are very soft. Lots of CA too.
John
david mingay said:
Do I have to say again that the CZ lenses on Sonys are not equal to
Canon 'L' glass, no matter what you or Sony would like to believe.

And I think you'll find that the 300D has a metal lens mount.
cx532 said:
To obtain the same 28-200 focal length range of the F828 with a
fast lens in the Canon line, you'll need a 17mm to 125mm lens. You
cannot get that with an f/2 max aperture at all, f/2.8 is what
you're going to have to settle for, and to get it you're going to
need three lenses. 17-35/2.8L is $1350, 24-70/2.8L $1250,
70-200/2.8L $1050. And then you will have to deal with an all
plastic body and lens mount vs a magnesium body with rigid lens
mounting
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
For starters! Thats exactly my point to the thread.
John
Shay Stephens said:
TPW said:
If you want to compare it another way, The shutter speed shooting
Sony 717 at ISO400/F2 is equal to that of Canon 300D shooting at
ISO1250/F3.5, and the 300D will give you lower noise (if the
perfermance is similar to 10D's, since the two use the same chip,
shouldn't be much difference).
Shay Stephens said:
.........Buy this new low cost Canon and there will be question
about wanting another lens for this camera one soon after you find
that it the supplied lens simply isn't sufficient to satisfy your
needs. It's a starter lens ,thats all.
The f3.5 aperture is slow and will be almost useless in anything
but bright light. Shortly after purchasing this lens you will
begin a never ending journey into the most confusing ,most costly
world of interchangeable lenses.
I've been there ,done that, and while I understand the advantages
of a dslr system much more clearly now, I also discovered the
dissadvantages .
Personally, I'm seriously thinking of switching back to either the
828 or the Minolta A-1.
John
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Shay

My Sony F707 & F717 Gallery: http://www.shaystephens.com/portfolio.asp
My F717 Observations: http://www.shaystephens.com/f717.asp

My New camera is almost here

Click to expand...
 
Hi Dan,

I didn't mean for the term "suck you in " as in sucking anyone into a lousy camera . I'm confident the 300D will perform very well.

I specifically meant sucking those low ender dslr buyers into the lens game that Canon and the others play so well.

I agree with you that this camera isn't aimed at the 928 or the Minolta A1. Those high end digicams will survive anything the dslr makers can throw at them simply because of the high performance to cost ratio.
John
Daniel Jackson said:
johnd1 said:
.........Buy this new low cost Canon and there will be question
about wanting another lens for this camera one soon after you find
that it the supplied lens simply isn't sufficient to satisfy your
needs. It's a starter lens ,thats all.
The f3.5 aperture is slow and will be almost useless in anything
but bright light. Shortly after purchasing this lens you will
begin a never ending journey into the most confusing ,most costly
world of interchangeable lenses.
I've been there ,done that, and while I understand the advantages
of a dslr system much more clearly now, I also discovered the
dissadvantages .
Personally, I'm seriously thinking of switching back to either the
828 or the Minolta A-1.
John
Click to expand...
Hi John. I agree with your thought but I really think the 300D is
meant to be the AE-1 of the 70's, a mass market entry level camera
for Dslr that anyone can use with some additional features some may
use and most wont. If its like the AE-1 most never took it off
program and most never switched lens. As some get to use it and
feel their skills improving they may buy additional lens and use
more features or they may upgrade to a 10D or 1D. I don't think its
a camera to destroy the 828 as the 828 is a high end camera and the
300D is a low end camera. It may suck some people in that would
have gotten a 828 but it wont have all the bells and whistles.
Maybe I'm wromg but thats my opinion.
--
Scotty, I need more power! I'm givin it all she's got Jim!
http://www.pbase.com/daniel_jackson/root
Pbase supporter
Click to expand...
 
How can you say something so untruthful???? I’ve heard crazy, but your statement is without any basis.

The 717 lens produces a gross amount of chromatic aberration that I would never expect on the L lenses (with exception of just a couple). My 80-200 2.8 L keeps it’s 2.8 AND FOCUS throughout the ENTIRE zoom range. It also doesn’t show any CA.

It amazes me some of the statements people make in this world without any bases on knowledge of what they speak. You’d have people fooled into thinking sports photographers would prefer the 717 to a good L zoom on a Canon body. That AINT gonna happen!!!
Matthew Cromer said:
The Sony 717 Zeiss lens is a fantastic lens, fully equal to Canon L
glass in sharpness and contrast.

There is some barrel and pincushion distortion, which is to be
expected in any 5x lens, but it is easily corrected in software if
needed.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
Click to expand...
--



http://www.pbase.com/domotang
 
You may ask why I’m here. I just bought a used 717 as a small camera for trivial shooting purposes (theme parks, family outings). I love the camera, but I’m not going to be so naive to think that the lens qualifies against the Canon L lens lineup in terms of producing quality. I own L gear and know better.
Get real people. There’s no comparison.
Stephen Reed said:
How can you say something so untruthful???? I’ve heard crazy, but
your statement is without any basis.
The 717 lens produces a gross amount of chromatic aberration that I
would never expect on the L lenses (with exception of just a
couple). My 80-200 2.8 L keeps it’s 2.8 AND FOCUS throughout the
ENTIRE zoom range. It also doesn’t show any CA.
It amazes me some of the statements people make in this world
without any bases on knowledge of what they speak. You’d have
people fooled into thinking sports photographers would prefer the
717 to a good L zoom on a Canon body. That AINT gonna happen!!!
Click to expand...
--



http://www.pbase.com/domotang
 
One of my Canon lenses is the 28-155 IS. It kicks my 717 lens in contrast, minimal CA, and sharpness. The other benefit is the image stabilization (all for $350) and USM focusing.

I started frequenting this forum two weeks ago to get to know the 717 better. I thought the Canon forum was bad, but there are some really naive people in this Sony forum for sure.

PS. I used to own the DiMAGE 7i. The lens on this camera was better than the 717 lens, but the 7i quality was junk.
Dan Clark said:
You'll waste your money on this camera and then spend $1000-$2000
to buy decent lenses that cover the same zom range as the 828 out
of the box. The Canon "L" series lenses are excellent lenses and
the only Canon lenses worth buying! Otherwise you'll get your
cheapo Canon 300D + lens and get poor pics and wonder "why do these
pics look awful, when the imager is so good?!?"

And, if Canon can't manufacture the 10D without focusing problems,
what makes you think they can manufacture a LESS expensive, HIGHER
volume camera without the same problems?

Get a clue... You've been taken in by the Canon marketing hype.

Regards,

Dan.
Click to expand...
--



http://www.pbase.com/domotang
 
John,

I think you are absolutely right. A plastic bodied camera that will crave lens, just like the 10D. So you save $400, or so, by going with the 300 and still wind up with a $3000 kit. That doesn't make any more sense, to me, today, than it did yesterday.

The worst part is that it uses the 10D's "Outstanding AF". Now there's a scary thought.

The 300 kit might be nice to have for a second camera. But, I wouldn't trade my 717 in for one. I will however do whatever I can to get an 828 :-)

Just my opinion,
Steve
johnd1 said:
.........Buy this new low cost Canon and there will be question
about wanting another lens for this camera one soon after you find
that it the supplied lens simply isn't sufficient to satisfy your
needs. It's a starter lens ,thats all.
The f3.5 aperture is slow and will be almost useless in anything
but bright light. Shortly after purchasing this lens you will
begin a never ending journey into the most confusing ,most costly
world of interchangeable lenses.
I've been there ,done that, and while I understand the advantages
of a dslr system much more clearly now, I also discovered the
dissadvantages .
Personally, I'm seriously thinking of switching back to either the
828 or the Minolta A-1.
John
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/slo2k
'The question is not what you look at, but what you see' - Thoreau
 
Steve Cavigliano said:
John,
I think you are absolutely right. A plastic bodied camera that
will crave lens, just like the 10D. So you save $400, or so, by
going with the 300 and still wind up with a $3000 kit. That
doesn't make any more sense, to me, today, than it did yesterday.

The worst part is that it uses the 10D's "Outstanding AF". Now
there's a scary thought.

The 300 kit might be nice to have for a second camera. But, I
wouldn't trade my 717 in for one. I will however do whatever I can
to get an 828 :-)

Just my opinion,
Steve
Click to expand...
Geez Steve, sounds like you have already made up your mind. I'm sitting here with the ol 707 watching all the hurrah going on and am going to wait for things to be evaluated by Phil, Dave, Steve etc. Then watch the forume some more- fun times.
JJ
 
johnd1 said:
Hi Dan,
I didn't mean for the term "suck you in " as in sucking anyone into
a lousy camera . I'm confident the 300D will perform very well.
I specifically meant sucking those low ender dslr buyers into the
lens game that Canon and the others play so well.
I agree with you that this camera isn't aimed at the 928 or the
Minolta A1. Those high end digicams will survive anything the dslr
makers can throw at them simply because of the high performance to
cost ratio.
John
Click to expand...
I knew what you meant John, I just feel, maybe wrongly, that a vast majority of the 300D users will be the same type that got the AE-1's in the 70's as a camera to have for family outings, birthdays vacations and will use it on auto mode and may never change a lens like probably 75% of the AE-1 users did. Granted some that get it will expand their horizons and learn to use the various modes and additional lens, flashes and may even move up to a 10D or higher. I've run into people that had the old AE-1's that feel the small P&S stuff is to small, cant do much, isn't a real camera etc.. and feel now with this entry level Dslr they may dip their toe in the water and give it a try.

--
Scotty, I need more power! I'm givin it all she's got Jim!
http://www.pbase.com/daniel_jackson/root
Pbase supporter
 
Stephen Reed said:
How can you say something so untruthful???? I’ve heard crazy, but
your statement is without any basis.
The 717 lens produces a gross amount of chromatic aberration that I
would never expect on the L lenses (with exception of just a
couple.
Click to expand...
Bull* .

The 717 lens produces very little CA. Far, far less than the 17-35L on the 10D, even with the Sony WA convertor attached.

There is a moderate amount of CA when using the lens with conversion lenses, but the base lens has very little.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top