Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 12 May 2014 (Monday) 12:59
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

16-35mm f/4L IS is here!

 
CollegeKid
Senior Member
475 posts
Joined Mar 2014
     
May 16, 2014 12:44 |  #541
bannedPermanent ban

js09 wrote in post #16908934 (external link)
metal > plastic > wood

simplistic




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,651 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3923
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
May 16, 2014 13:05 |  #542

CollegeKid wrote in post #16908947 (external link)
simplistic

Simplistic and false for many applications ;)

Go tell all canoe manufacturers they're marketing their products wrong as one example...


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-H1 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)www.LucasGPhoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
raptor3x
Senior Member
Avatar
728 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 78
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Rutland, VT
     
May 16, 2014 13:09 |  #543

Nick3434 wrote in post #16908816 (external link)
Now for lenses it doesn't matter as AF components will likely fail first, but I am not sure you can argue from a physics standpoint why a polycarbonate is better than a metal or alloy of some kind, that is all. Expansion and contraction of metals in a temperature range that humans and their gear exist in is more than reaching at straws for a point....

Basically any situation where strength-weight is important , orthotropic material properties are desirable, or fatigue failure is a major concern composites are superior to metals.

Nick3434 wrote in post #16908816 (external link)
I am not trying to drag this it as I know everyone is sick of it, but being realistic, let's not call it better unless specifically sighting weight as the criteria.

Also, sorry to nit-pick like this but the word you're looking for is citing, not sighting.


Bodies: X-T1, E-M1ii, G9 Lenses: µ.Z 7-14 2.8, µ.Z 12-40 2.8, µ.Z 25 1.2, X 18-55 2.8-4, µ.Z 40-150 2.8, µ.Z 45 1.2, µ.Z 60 2.8, µ.Z 75 1.8, PL 200 2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MJ23FE
Senior Member
495 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Sep 2006
Location: nj.201
     
May 16, 2014 13:13 |  #544

I just pre-ordered mine and I can't wait! This lens will get tons of use on my trip to Lebanon and Dubai in July.

Phoenicians and Romans and Crusaders! Oh my!

-Jalal


JZP
5DIII | BG-E11 | 16-35L IS | 24-105L | Σ50A | 135L | 28 1.8 | 50 1.8 | 85 1.8
30D | BG-E2 | 60 Macro | 10-22 | Tamron 17-50 2.8
Kenko Pro 1.4x TC | Lee | Singh-Ray | B+W

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
50,088 posts
Gallery: 161 photos
Likes: 6804
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
May 16, 2014 14:15 |  #545

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16908584 (external link)
So you're actually suggesting that when it comes to a ginormous lens like the 17-35mm f/4 IS it'd be "better" to be heavier?

Sure, more people on this forum seem to think adding the weight of a Battery grip helps "the feel" and "balance" than those of us who know the fact of it.. :lol:

Heck, I bet some of those that feel this new lens is too heavy insist on being "gripped" all the time. ;)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
50,088 posts
Gallery: 161 photos
Likes: 6804
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
May 16, 2014 14:20 |  #546

js09 wrote in post #16908934 (external link)
metal > plastic > wood

WOOD> metal > plastic

I'm a woodworker.. :cool:

Also, no one wants a plastic guitar. ;)

really, it all depends on the application.
Take flooring... who wants a metal floor? in winter?


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MJ23FE
Senior Member
495 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Sep 2006
Location: nj.201
     
May 16, 2014 14:33 |  #547

Main reason why I love a grip is for the grip! Before I got one for my 5D3 my hand always hurt because I felt the camera was too small. The extra battery and controls for portrait shooting don't hurt either!

Some friends hate the weight of my gripped 5D3 with 24-105. I don't mind it at all.

-Jalal


JZP
5DIII | BG-E11 | 16-35L IS | 24-105L | Σ50A | 135L | 28 1.8 | 50 1.8 | 85 1.8
30D | BG-E2 | 60 Macro | 10-22 | Tamron 17-50 2.8
Kenko Pro 1.4x TC | Lee | Singh-Ray | B+W

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,145 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 458
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
May 16, 2014 14:50 |  #548

Mornnb wrote in post #16908032 (external link)
Agreed, I find the 17-40mm to be consistently sharper than the 10-22mm, and the corners are sharper as well.

Plastic has a better weight to strength ratio.
Besides, if you drop metal it can bend, a quality plastic is going to scuff but it will retain it's shape.

These companies have different goals. Leica is in the business of creating high quality luxury items, Canon is in the business of creating high performance and high reliability tools.
That is to say, Canon desires to make a robust and lightweight lens for the best tool possible in the field, while Leica desires to make a luxury item that feels 'nice' to hold in the hand.

leica and sigma have one thing in common. AF issues :D.

you slay me pilgrim! you still haven't bought the 24-70L II even after your $1800 price target has been hit? methinks you just like to complain friend ;)


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
light_pilgrim
Senior Member
Avatar
922 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 149
Joined Jan 2012
     
May 16, 2014 15:08 |  #549

Charlie wrote in post #16908740 (external link)
optech straps use plastic connectors... those are plenty good.

I'm sure a late model plasticky honda civic is a million times better build than an old hunk of metal ford pinto.

the original 24-70 was a huge hunk of steel, yet it's not as reliable as the new mark 2 version.

Why do you compare something very new to something very old? Compare old plastic phone to an iPhone 5s. Or compare old plastic laptop to a new MacBook air. Compare Canon plastic lenses to the new Zeiss or Leica metal lenses. Compare Canon bodies to the Leica T metal body.


www.lightpilgrim.com (external link) ||1x.com (external link) ||500px.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
corndog ­ cabernet
Senior Member
Avatar
366 posts
Gallery: 73 photos
Likes: 768
Joined May 2010
Location: State of chaos
     
May 16, 2014 15:12 as a reply to  @ ed rader's post |  #550

js09 wrote in post #16908934 (external link)
metal > plastic > wood

CollegeKid wrote in post #16908947 (external link)
simplistic

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16908977 (external link)
Simplistic and false for many applications ;)

Go tell all canoe manufacturers they're marketing their products wrong as one example...

Here are two personal anecdotes. One photographic, one not.

About two years ago my 7D and EF400 f5.6 fell over while mounted on a tripod, onto hard dirt. We're talking about a 4' tip-over. This seemingly small event cost me about $800. as the (metal) hood on the lens bent and wouldn't retract and the top plate on the camera (magnesium) cracked. I am certain that had both these items been plastic no physical damage would have happened. BTW, Canon isn't bashful about their charges in these matters.

Years ago, while installing stage equipment, a co-worker dropped a milwaukee drill with a metal housing onto a hard floor from a 12' ladder. The housing cracked rendering the expensive drill useless. A month later I did a similar thing with a plastic housed Makita yielding but a small scratch.

Horses for courses, as they say




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
light_pilgrim
Senior Member
Avatar
922 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 149
Joined Jan 2012
     
May 16, 2014 15:20 |  #551

gnome chompski wrote in post #16908886 (external link)
I admit, the first time I picked up the new 24-70 mk2 I was shocked at how "cheap" it felt. However, that was my knee jerk reaction. Like most people, I have been conditioned to believe that metal is superior, heavy is reliable blah blah blah. I try to keep an open mind. The plastics Canon/Nikon use are not Tupperware plastics. They are engineered plastics. Im not after the most light weight thing out there, as I like some weight for balance. I think thats what felt off to me regarding the 24-70 Mk2. I was used to Mk 1 that weighed a ton. I would adapt and it would be fine. My Tamron 90mm VC macro is plasticy as heck. But Its also light weight and easier to manage at 1:1.

There must be a reason why most recent and out of the box product from Leica was designed from a single peace of metal and manufactured by Porsche. I still believe that the most important thing is the ability to produce great results and ability to be used in all conditions. For a lot of people a single shot is worth more than anything and you need to rely on your gear. I think Canon and Nikon do very good and you can fully rely on it. For me the way the gear looks and feels is also important. It is not just a tool, it is something that helps the dialogue between a subject and a photographer.

Can you honestly for one second imagine that people would appreciate this product to be made of plastic, the body and the lens? Why do you believe it is essential for Leica to use a very complex manufacturing process to come up with something like this if they could do it much cheaper, faster and easier if it was plastic?

IMAGE: http://static.leica-camera.com/var/leica/storage/images/media/media-asset-management-mam/global-international/photography/t-system/features/leica-t-details-kompatibel-mit-system-1/1133786-1-eng-MA/LEICA-T-DETAILS-KOMPATIBEL-MIT-SYSTEM-1_teaser-crop-480x320.png

IMAGE: http://www.kaisernchen.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Leica-T.jpg

www.lightpilgrim.com (external link) ||1x.com (external link) ||500px.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,135 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6197
Joined Sep 2007
     
May 16, 2014 15:28 |  #552

light_pilgrim wrote in post #16909276 (external link)
Why do you compare something very new to something very old? Compare old plastic phone to an iPhone 5s. Or compare old plastic laptop to a new MacBook air. Compare Canon plastic lenses to the new Zeiss or Leica metal lenses. Compare Canon bodies to the Leica T metal body.

if you must, I had two cars similar year, one a truck with metal bumper, and the other a lexus with plastic bumper. My wife knicked up the lexus god knows how many times, but the bumper's physical shape was fine, while my metal bumper truck would park into a pole and get permanent damage.

For the intended usage, metal may have an advantage, such as mounts, but lenses typically get bumped into stuff, and plastic would be better in those areas.

Metal or plastic hood, which would be your choice?

plastic cant be that bad, remember the 3000 ft drop? A rebel survived.
http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/84560​2 (external link)

feeling cheap vs low quality are two different things.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,135 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6197
Joined Sep 2007
     
May 16, 2014 15:32 |  #553

corndog cabernet wrote in post #16909283 (external link)
Years ago, while installing stage equipment, a co-worker dropped a milwaukee drill with a metal housing onto a hard floor from a 12' ladder. The housing cracked rendering the expensive drill useless. A month later I did a similar thing with a plastic housed Makita yielding but a small scratch.

Horses for courses, as they say

yup, I had a ryobi drill back in my construction days, and it took a very hard tumble from a two story building, onto concrete. You can see that the plastic flexed really hard and returned to it's shape, and still works. Metal casing would have busted no questions asked.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
light_pilgrim
Senior Member
Avatar
922 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 149
Joined Jan 2012
     
May 16, 2014 15:32 |  #554

ed rader wrote in post #16909233 (external link)
leica and sigma have one thing in common. AF issues :D.

you slay me pilgrim! you still haven't bought the 24-70L II even after your $1800 price target has been hit? methinks you just like to complain friend ;)

OK:-) Select my posts on this forum and see where I am complaining.
Folks might not understand and especially on this forum, but I really prefer to have less gear. 95% of my portraits I do with 70-200 II and I just LOVE this lens so much! It is so good...I can't say it enough.
24-105 I use for Landscapes. It is not perfect, but it is universal and I have been on many trips where I used this lens all the time (Italy, Iceland, Costa Rica, etc).
24-70 II will not change much for me as I have 24-105. I do not think that in real life people will see any difference. I was thinking about replacing 24-105 with 24-70 II, but I just know it will not change anything for me....on the contrary, it will take away 70-105 which is very important. So I guess no GAS for me.

One lens that I was to see and want to purchase is the Canon version of 14-24 F/2.8. I started thinking that if Sigma will produce this lens and if it will be as good as 35 and 50 Art, then I am all for it! It can be a MF lens....as I will only use it for landscapes and will anyways focus manually via LiveView all the time.

I started thinking that Sigma might indeed release the 14-24 faster than Canon.


www.lightpilgrim.com (external link) ||1x.com (external link) ||500px.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
light_pilgrim
Senior Member
Avatar
922 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 149
Joined Jan 2012
     
May 16, 2014 15:35 |  #555

Charlie wrote in post #16909314 (external link)
if you must, I had two cars similar year, one a truck with metal bumper, and the other a lexus with plastic bumper. My wife knicked up the lexus god knows how many times, but the bumper's physical shape was fine, while my metal bumper truck would park into a pole and get permanent damage.

For the intended usage, metal may have an advantage, such as mounts, but lenses typically get bumped into stuff, and plastic would be better in those areas.

Metal or plastic hood, which would be your choice?

plastic cant be that bad, remember the 3000 ft drop? A rebel survived.
http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/84560​2 (external link)

feeling cheap vs low quality are two different things.

Let me say it this way - I prefer my car bumper being plastic and my photo gear being metal. I use them differently:-)
Design and quality build is extremely important.

I think Canon and Nikon did not get it yet. Did you notice the recent trend? Many companies like Google, Apple or Leica started hiring people from fashion/design industry because times are gone when people did not care about the bulk or look of the gear. This trend will continue and I would love Canon to acknowledge it. You have to admit that the new Sigma lenses look awesome and it would be great if Canon followed this path.


www.lightpilgrim.com (external link) ||1x.com (external link) ||500px.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

258,741 views & 2 likes for this thread
16-35mm f/4L IS is here!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Tomx72
1060 guests, 269 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.