|
LiquidRain posted:I imagine the actual target audience for this camera (landscape/studio) won't care so much about a lack of high ISO.
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 17:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:13 |
|
|
InternetJunky posted:I've got no idea what kind of features landscape/studio shooters want in the next generation canon body (aside from huge resolution), but would they really use the 1.3/1.6 crop modes? This sounds like a feature put in for wildlife/sports shooters, and they aren't going to touch a body that has that ISO range. It seems like a strange mix of features. Maybe it's for the five people who currently own a sigma 18-35 AND will buy this camera? Does seem like a weird feature for them to put on here - it doesn't even make sense in the way that Nikon & Sony's do (you can mount their APS-C lenses on FF cameras. Canon deliberately made it so you physically cannot)
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
Excited about the stronger CFA actually.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
I guess I can imagine them adding it since it is low cost/low opportunity cost to do so, even if it won't be particularly useful to most of the intended audience most of the time. From a PR standpoint it would be worse not to have it since Nikon already has it with their high MP camera, even if nobody's actually going to use it. Either that or it will have really nice frame rate or some sort of bracketing/in camera HDR that would be too hard to pull off with the whole sensor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
InternetJunky posted:It seems like a strange mix of features. Alternatively: It's Canon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
I suppose the crop modes in combination with the high resolution is for people that are turned off by fullframe cameras solely because of ~*~*reach*~*~. That's often the argument for tending towards the 7D series, despite wanting a 35mm sensor. And what EF-S bayonet lenses are there, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
Looks like some photography forum poster came up with a wish list in his spare time and is trying to pass it off as real. Full time job? Designing concept skyscrapers with trees on the roof.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
A Strange Mix of Features: the Canon Thread
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Yeah sounds like a bunch of made-up stuff tbh. Come on and release the 5d iv so I can score a used 5d iii already...
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
They'll have to release a new line of lenses to gouge money again, since I'm pretty sure most of their current lenses can't resolve 50mp that well. Either that or you'll be spending time with the Zeiss Otus lenses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:They'll have to release a new line of lenses to gouge money again, since I'm pretty sure most of their current lenses can't resolve 50mp that well. Either that or you'll be spending time with the Zeiss Otus lenses. Looking at these 50 mp photos on my 8 mp screen . . .
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
Because oversampling is a bad thing, amirite?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
The "sensor out-resolving lenses" thing is pretty overstated. More MP is never worse. There have been reviews that show that ok glass on a high mp body can rival excellent glass on a lower mp body when comparing the final output.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
It's the same pixel density as their 20MP APS-C cameras anyway. If that part of the image circle resolves fine on those sensors, the whole thing will resolve fine on this new one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 04:11
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:The "sensor out-resolving lenses" thing is pretty overstated. More MP is never worse. There have been reviews that show that ok glass on a high mp body can rival excellent glass on a lower mp body when comparing the final output. That would probably depend on the output size as well, though for most people who post on the web, it wouldn't matter so much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 04:18
|
|
|
I am trying to find a reason for anyone to ever use crop mode on a Canon camera and the only thing I came up with is like high volume shoots like races or something where you sell or distribute the photos afterward, need the reach, and need a lower file size. Like, when I shoot for Spartan Race they want the file size under a certain amount so I shoot small step compression jpg on my 5d3. I could feasibly imagine shooting something like that and using some sort of crop mode for extra reach when there is no time to crop, file size is a concern, and the files are delivered pretty much as-is to the end user. Other than that it is The Dumbest Thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 04:31
|
|
|
It's possible crop mode would be for a faster burst rate or something. I guess we'll find out next week when it's official. Speculating when it's this close (supposedly) seems kinda pointless. I'm still more curious to see if the 5D IV later in the year rumor comes to fruition, since this 5Ds isn't really doing it for me yet (though I never really shoot above ISO 6400, hm...). Star War Sex Parrot fucked around with this message at 04:57 on Jan 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:(though I never really shoot above ISO 6400, hm...).
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 07:42
|
|
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:You never really shoot period. I just buy gear new, store it nicely for a couple years, and unload it at cheap used prices to goons. Bring on the 5D IV!
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 08:15
|
|
|
I think everybody is so starved for a new canon FF body, shits gonna get crazy. What is more interesting is how switching up crop modes will influence a person's lens selection KinkyJohn fucked around with this message at 12:00 on Jan 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 11:39
|
|
|
KinkyJohn posted:I think everybody is so starved for a new canon FF body, shits gonna get crazy. Speaking of, I recently switched from a 40D to a 6D and now a handful of my go to lenses don't really work anymore, mostly the Sigma 20mm f1.8 and 30mm f1.8. Does anyone have any recommendations for low-ish cost wide angle lenses. I'm open to zoom lenses, but I'd probably want to stick to something f2.8 or faster because I shoot a decent amount of concerts and need the wide aperture. Right now I'm stuck using my 50mm 1.8 and my cheap Sigma 24-60 f2.8, which is a decent lens, but not great.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
Sigma has an older 17-35 2.8-4 which is decent, though it distorts a bit at 17mm. I got one on KEH for $135. Otherwise you should really get the 17-40L For your fast normal prime I'd probably look at the Sigma 50 mm 1.4
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
The 24/2.8 IS is very good. 20/2.8 not so good. Samyang 24/1.4 & 14/2.8 are very good but manual focus Canon 24/1.4 and 14/2.8 are very good but very expensive
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
Tamron made a 17-35 2.8-4 as well that I use a lot. It has bee-powered autofocus, but is a decent lens and is rather inexpensive. I got mine for like $230 used.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:Samyang 24/1.4 & 14/2.8 are very good but manual focus
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
Thanks everyone. That Sigma 50 f1.4 is definitely on my list of lenses to buy. I like the 17-40 a lot, but I know I'll be shooting stuff where f4 just isn't going to cut it and I'd miss the shallow depth of field ability. The Canon 24mm f1.4 is a fantastic lens that I wish I could justify. I rented it once and loved it. I'd check out the Samyang version but I really need autofocus for concerts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
rockcity posted:Thanks everyone. That Sigma 50 f1.4 is definitely on my list of lenses to buy. I like the 17-40 a lot, but I know I'll be shooting stuff where f4 just isn't going to cut it and I'd miss the shallow depth of field ability. The Canon 24mm f1.4 is a fantastic lens that I wish I could justify. I rented it once and loved it. I'd check out the Samyang version but I really need autofocus for concerts. The 24/2.8 IS then I guess - it's autofocus and much more reasonably priced than the 1.4 (although 2 stops slower) - It's a great little lens, compact too. The extreme corners are not amazing wide open, but the midframe/border is very good and the center is excellent. Maybe give it a rental and see what you think.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 16:28
|
|
|
rockcity posted:Thanks everyone. That Sigma 50 f1.4 is definitely on my list of lenses to buy. I like the 17-40 a lot, but I know I'll be shooting stuff where f4 just isn't going to cut it and I'd miss the shallow depth of field ability. The Canon 24mm f1.4 is a fantastic lens that I wish I could justify. I rented it once and loved it. I'd check out the Samyang version but I really need autofocus for concerts. The Sigma 24 f1.8 is a nice lense. Not as fast on focus, but not usually an issue. Plenty sharp, and not that expensive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:It's possible crop mode would be for a faster burst rate or something. This + if you were to mount a crop lens you could store only what you need. It's basically a 20 minute software hack, I think it's a good idea, but not in any way something that makes or breaks the deal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 13:44
|
|
|
bolind posted:This + if you were to mount a crop lens you could store only what you need. It's basically a 20 minute software hack, I think it's a good idea, but not in any way something that makes or breaks the deal. Canon crop lenses physically don't mount on FF cameras. So unless they wanted to make third party lens use more expedient..
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 14:06
|
|
|
poo poo, I was confused, I think it must've been the review of the Sigma 18-35 where the guy mounts it up to a FF. Although the 10-22 will work with a few, simple mods.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 14:45
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:Canon crop lenses physically don't mount on FF cameras. So unless they wanted to make third party lens use more expedient.. Huh? All of my crop lenses mount to my 6D. They just vignette like nobody's business.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 15:03
|
|
|
bolind posted:poo poo, I was confused, I think it must've been the review of the Sigma 18-35 where the guy mounts it up to a FF. Yeah, you can pop the plastic ring out (or saw it off on the all plastic bayonet lenses) - some lenses don't protrude far enough back in the mirror box to make contact, and some do. Canon's approach here is mixed IMO. On the one hand, they can't do the crop mode like sony and nikon do to get APS users to step up to FF and keep using their lenses. On the other hand, if they hadn't done this, they wouldn't have been able to make that awesome 24mm pancake they just released. Shame that it took them over a decade to release a lens that fully realized the point of having that extra space.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 15:05
|
|
|
rockcity posted:Huh? All of my crop lenses mount to my 6D. They just vignette like nobody's business. Not Canon ones. Third party ones don't use the EF-S mount, Canon ones do. EF-S lenses physically won't fit on an EF mount camera - they have a protrusion out the back that the lens elements can slide back into (but only do on some)
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:Not Canon ones. Third party ones don't use the EF-S mount, Canon ones do. EF-S lenses physically won't fit on an EF mount camera - they have a protrusion out the back that the lens elements can slide back into (but only do on some) Ahhh that explains it, the ones that I've put on were both Sigmas.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
rockcity posted:Ahhh that explains it, the ones that I've put on were both Sigmas. Yup. Sigma, Tamron, Tokina et al don't bother to take advantage of the EF-S mount, because it would mean having to make a special version of the lens for Canon which would not be cost efficient for them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:Yup. Sigma, Tamron, Tokina et al don't bother to take advantage of the EF-S mount, because it would mean having to make a special version of the lens for Canon which would not be cost efficient for them. The Tamron 17-50 is an EF-S mount, though? Or at least, they swear that it doesn't fit FF cameras.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
ArcMage posted:The Tamron 17-50 is an EF-S mount, though? Or at least, they swear that it doesn't fit FF cameras. nah, it physically fits, but you'll get a circle image with very dark corners.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
There's a pretty cool writeup on what happens when you mount the Siggy 18-35 to a FF here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Comparisons/Sigma-18-35mm-f-1.8-DC-HSM-Lens.aspx#FULLFRAME Personally I think that you shouldn't buy it specifically to use on a FF body, but if you happen to have both on hand and the situation calls for it, I don't see why you wouldn't, it's not a complete disaster at the right focal lengths.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 10:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:13 |
|
|
The new EOS-M looks like it might be a decent camera. Big differences from the previous two. http://www.canonwatch.com/cw5-canon-eos-m3-images-tiltable-display-popup-flash/
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2015 06:56
|
|
