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 News & Rumors Camera Rumors and Predictions 
Thread started 26 Dec 2015 (Saturday) 09:01
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Is it me or is Canon too quiet right now

 
umphotography
THREAD ­ STARTER
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,699 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 2464
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Jan 29, 2016 08:01 |  #46

RichSoansPhotos wrote in post #17877313 (external link)
Why does the OP want the dSLR market to act like the smartphone market i.e. have a release every year or six months?


Thanks for trying to put your thoughts into my mouth. I DO NOT WANT A NEW DSLR RELEASE every 6 months.

But I do want Canon to have a sensor that has better DR, retention in darks and shadows, and to be able to perform closely to what the Sony Nikon sensors do for ISO performance......If they dont get it right with this update, they will be 6 yrs behind the curve with Sony sensor development

Personally I think Cell phone cameras are a waste of time.


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,634 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2502
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 3 years ago by Wilt. (10 edits in all)
     
Jan 29, 2016 09:33 |  #47

Let's consider the gestalt, the holism, the idea that systems and their properties should be viewed as wholes, not as parts,

The Sony EXMOR sensor might do well for high ISO low noise low light performance, but here is what dpreview.com says about the cameras that have that excellent low light chip:


Nikon D810
What we like:
 Unprecedented image quality at ISO 64, excellent IQ all around
 Excellent AF, particularly subject recognition and tracking
 Class-leading dynamic range
What we don't:
Low light AF significantly worse than competition
 Mirror/shutter shock can caused blurred images
 Limited, centrally-concentrated cross-type AF points
 Poor live-view / movie AF

The Nikon D810 is a professional level, full-frame DSLR. Like the D800 before it, the Nikon D810 sports a high resolution 36.3MP sensor, but omits the AA filter for maximum resolution. A new base ISO sensitivity of 64 offers unparalleled dynamic range, far outstripping the abilities of Canon's high resolution cameras, and even exceeding competitors from Sony, when it comes to shooting in tricky lighting situations. Note that in order to get maximal image quality out of the D810, we flipped the mirror up 3s prior to each exposure, and engaged electronic 1st curtain to eliminate any effects of the shutter opening on image sharpness.

Sony Alpha a7S
What we like:
 Small, light full-frame camera
 Great high ISO performance
 Strong video quality and features
 Tilting LCD
What we don't:
Slow AF in low light due to CDAF only
 Lower Raw dynamic range than a7
 No programmable Auto ISO
 Raw files can show compression artifacts
 4K requires external recorder

Sony a7S II
What we like:
 Incredible low-light sensitivity, particularly for video
 Internal 4K recording
 5-axis image stabilization
 Tilting LCD
What we don't:
Contrast Detect AF struggles in low light and with low contrast subjects
Small, finicky, mushy dials and buttons
 Poor battery life

Son a7R
What we like:
 Small, light full-frame camera
 Wide Raw dynamic range
 Great low-light image quality
 Tilting LCD
What we don't:
 Shutter shock is a serious concern
Slow AF in low light due to CDAF only
 No programmable Auto ISO
 Raw files can show compression artifacts

Sony a7R II
What we like:
 Nearly class-leading low light and dynamic range performance
 Internal 4K video
 Incredible AF precision and speed
 Stabilized sensor
 Tilting LCD
What we don't:
 Stop-motion playback makes it hard to follow action in continuous bursts
 Buffer takes too long to clear
Frustrating menu organization
Small, finicky dials

The repositioned and slightly cowled dials are a different story, and split opinion considerably, with some shooters finding them harder to access. The rear thumb dial, in particular, is too recessed, making it hard to turn in that your thumb will often brush past it rather than turning it. And when you do turn it, the 'clicks' and detents are so subtle that you often won't know exactly how many clicks you've turned the dial, which means it's not easy to dial in a specific exposure change of, say, three 1/3 EV shutter speed increments. The larger detents and more substantial clicks of a DSLR like the D810 mean that, despite fewer total increments you can dial in in one full left-to-right swoop with your thumb, you know exactly how much you changed your shutter speed or aperture, without having to check it every time. In other words, you can change exposure with precision, which we struggle to do with the dials on the a7-series cameras.

In fact, almost all the dials and buttons on the a7R II are more or less mushy, particularly the AF/MF toggle, as well as the back dial and its 4-way buttons. You think you've pressed it, when you haven't, or where at least the system didn't register your pressl Or perhaps you think you pressed the DISP (up) button on the 4-way dial, but you actually turned the (ISO) dial upwards as you went to press 'up', and changed your ISO from Auto to 50 and your screen goes dark. This can make for a frustrating experience, especially for landscape photographers wearing even light gloves. Dials, and to an extent buttons, simply need to be done a la Nikon D810-style, or perhaps O-MD E-M5/10 II style.

In addition to the electronic first curtain shutter, the a7R II offers a completely silent, fully electronic shutter mode. This can be useful when you want to shoot as discretely as possible but presents three potential drawbacks. Firstly, images can be affected by rolling shutter: objects can appear distorted if they move a long way as the sensor is 'scanning' down the scene. Secondly, banding can appear in images shot under artificial light where the lights flicker within the duration of the sensor being read. Finally, the use of electronic shutter can add some noise to the image.

On the a7R II, we do see a tiny amount of additional noise being added to the camera's images. After a 4EV push, there's definitely more noise in darker tones of the e-shutter images. Just to complicate matters, a look at the Raw files in an analytical tool shows that the camera is dropping to 12-bit mode, when you use the fully electronic shutter. So the obvious question is: 'does this additional noise come from this move to 12-bit read-out or from the electronic shutter itself?'

And as a comparison to the newer bodies' flaws, some older bodies from both Sony and Nikon
Sony SLT a99
What we like:
 In-body IS works with all lenses
 SLT allows camera to AF effectively during bursts
 Phase-detect AF in video
 Articulating LCD
What we don't:
 Small AF area coverage, with limited lens compatibility for extra AF points
 Phase-detect AF not compatible with manual exposure control in video mode
 No histogram in video mode
Outdated low light, high ISO performance
Like the Canon 5D Mark III, the Sony a99 is one of the older models in this roundup, and is starting to show it age when compared to more recent releases in terms of image quality, video specs and subject tracking capabilities.

[SIZE=3]Nikon Df[/SIZE]
What we like:
 Classic styling, lots of direct controls
 Good overall image quality
 Chart-topping high ISO performance
What we don't:
Disappointing AF performance in moderate to low light
 Small AF area coverage
 No option for video capture
The Nikon Df is a classically-styled full-frame camera with a 16 megapixel sensor (borrowed from the last-generation professional D4) and no video mode, simply to underline its retro intent.


So ALL of the Sonys and Nikons have low light AF issues, except for the most recent body, the A7R II. So while Canon might be '5 years behind' in the sensor, the ability to use the camera in low light suffered due to consistently theme of inferior AF performance, and we add poor menu and small controls to the mix. And even the most recent body, which addresses AF, have gootne WORSE than their predecessors from awkward UI menu and small buttons...how is this evolving as a professional's tool for all circumstances?!
It is devolving.

I am not defending Canon's situation. I point out that the grass is NOT always greener, as reflected in the dpreview comparison! and a lot of the EXMOR low noise is still software, which Nikon uses to outperform Sony with its own sensor.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,514 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 587
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Jan 29, 2016 10:09 |  #48

Charlie wrote in post #17876468 (external link)
it may seem that way, but it's hard to deny sony doing a 180 and completely shattering minds at this point, if you cant acknowledge it, you're probably not paying attention.

FF mirrorless..... ok that blew away some minds right there, then they came back, did 4K, IBIS, one of the best sensors on the market for low iso AND high iso work, unprecedented full frame compatibility.... you bet people are paying attention at this point. Hard to complain about their lens lineup, they have zooms covering 16mm - 240mm native mount, high end, low end glass, fast primes from 25mm to 85mm, and if that's not enough, adapt whatever the hell you want. Who would have thought that sony, known for their proprietary stuff, has a camera system that's easily the most adaptable digital back to ever exist, it's the exact opposite of what sony is known for.

sony's lens situation..... they've made 15ish lenses for FF users, which can also be used in nex E mount. They're definitely providing photographers what they want, and IMO only a few lenses away from a complete lineup, but if you're willing to adapt, sony's already there. Need 16-200 f4, already here. Need 24-200 f2.8's? grab the canon/A-mount/nikon versions. Want native stuff? well you've got to wait a bit. You want a tiny setup, well then, 28-70, 28, 35, 55, voigtlander.

Hmmmm.....I kind of agree with you, but I also agree with Wilt.

On your side of the ledger you are correct that the Sony A7rII is a very tempting camera for a number of reasons. So there is that.

One note that I guess would be on both sides of the ledger is that the A7rII is primarily tempting because it can adapt Canon lenses pretty well. Stuck with just the Sony lens offerings and I would not even give the camera a second look. Sorry, but that really is just how thin the lens offerings are.

Still with your side of the ledger, the main reason Sony doesn't have a complete lens line for the camera is that the mount and format combination is relatively new. You cannot invent and industrialize a full set of 65 lenses like Canon offers overnight.

But now to Wilt's point, Sony has a long history of great products here and there but they don't have a great history of support and 'stick-to-it-ness' if you get what I mean. And their quick bounce from A-mount to NEX to E-mount (APS-C) to E-mount (FF) is a lot more of the same. They clearly didn't have a roadmap when they started, and as somebody thinking about buying $20,000 worth of photography gear in a system that would worry me.

What happens if Canon comes out with a sensor that rivals the Exmor? What if Canon releases a mirrorless body around that sensor that performs like the A7rII.....or maybe some kind of hybrid SLR/mirrorless system that matches the Sony except it can track? Sony still sits in a precarious postition in that they have one great product that is driving most of their adaptation. And if Canon or Nikon makes a move that suddenly cuts off a lot of the draw of that product.....well, ask the NEX adoptors what to expect.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,634 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2502
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 3 years ago by Wilt. (8 edits in all)
     
Jan 29, 2016 10:18 |  #49

JeffreyG wrote:
What happens if Canon comes out with a sensor that rivals the Exmor?

Going again to dpreview.com, we see Nikon, Sony, and Canon (5DII) comparisons on Dynamic Range.


  • With DR max, the Sony has 10.3EV range and the Nikon has 11.6EV, the Canon has 10.3
  • With DR Auto, the Sony has 9.5EV and the Nikon has 10.5EV, the Canon has 10.3EV
  • With DR Off, the Sony has 9.5EV, the Nikon has 9.5EV, the Canon has...9.6EV?!

We see that the fundamental chip performance is apparently NOT what is responsible for wider DR from the Sony and Nikon. Turn on the software processing and Nikon beats Sony with their own chip, and that is where Canon 5DII fell behind!

As soon as photobucket comes back up from maintenance, I will edit this post, to add screen shots of the actual dpreview graphics depicting the above numbers. Unfortunately such a comparison is not available for any of the newer bodies.

[edit to add photos of step wedge comparison] Here are the screen shots of dpreview.com tests, depicting the step wedges from which I obtained the above numbers...

With NR Max:
IMAGE: http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i63/wiltonw/POTN%202013%20Post%20Mar1/NR%20Max_zpshdq19put.jpg

With NR Auto:
IMAGE: http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i63/wiltonw/POTN%202013%20Post%20Mar1/NR%20Auto_zpsc8x0fu3s.jpg

With NR off:
IMAGE: http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i63/wiltonw/POTN%202013%20Post%20Mar1/NR%20off_zpsai3ooa7j.jpg

You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,202 posts
Gallery: 1640 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10332
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Jan 29, 2016 10:30 |  #50

I'm still waiting and watching to see the final form of the EOS-M system. I'm fine with it being APS-C and EF-M mount. I'd love to see it evolve to having a body mounted EVF or OVF with non-Live View AF (even a crude old system, doesn't need to be super fancy) with another stop or so of ISO performance.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Qlayer2
OOOHHH! Pretty Moth!
Avatar
941 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 121
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Jan 29, 2016 10:39 |  #51

Wilt wrote in post #17877625 (external link)
Going again to dpreview, we see Nikon, Sony, and Canon (5DII) comparisons on Dynamic Range.


  • With DR max, the Sony has 10.3EV range and the Nikon has 11.6EV, the Canon has 10.3
  • With DR Auto, the Sony has 9.5EV and the Nikon has 10.5EV, the Canon has 10.3EV
  • With DR Off, the Sony has 9.5EV, the Nikon has 9.5EV, the Canon has...9.6EV?!

We see that the fundamental chip performance is apparently NOT what is responsible for wider DR from the Sony and Nikon. Turn on the software processing and Nikon beats Sony with their own chip, and that is where Canon 5DII fell behind!

As soon as photobucket comes back up from maintenance, I will edit this post, to add screen shots of the actual dpreview graphics depicting the above numbers. Unfortunately such a comparison is not available for any of the newer bodies.


I'm not sure I agree with those figures- how does dpreview calculate DR? I prefer to use sensorgen.info (external link) which is the data without any interpretation.

Base ISO for the most recent of each:

5d mk III: 11.0 at base ISO:
http://www.sensorgen.i​nfo/CanonEOS-5D-Mark-III.html (external link)

6d: 11.5 at base ISO:
http://www.sensorgen.i​nfo/CanonEOS-6D.html (external link)

D810: 13.8 at base ISO:
http://www.sensorgen.i​nfo/NikonD810.html (external link)

D750: 13.9 at base ISO:
http://www.sensorgen.i​nfo/NikonD750.html (external link)

A7s: 12.9 at base ISO:
http://www.sensorgen.i​nfo/SonyA7S.html (external link)

A7R- 13.5 at base ISO:
http://www.sensorgen.i​nfo/SonyA7R.html (external link)

Explanation of how they arrive at their DR measurements:
http://www.sensorgen.i​nfo/Calculations.html (external link)

The A7ii, A7rii and A7sii have not been tested yet.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,634 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2502
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 3 years ago by Wilt. (4 edits in all)
     
Jan 29, 2016 10:52 |  #52

Qlayer2 wrote in post #17877657 (external link)
I'm not sure I agree with those figures- how does dpreview calculate DR?

It will become clearer to you when I can post the photos from which I derived the numbers. They photograph a step wedge, show the midtone, and the highest and the lowest tones which can be differentiated on the step wedge. Each step is 1/3EV apart, so if you take

( Darkest Step - Brightests Step ) / 3 = DR (in EV)

The numbers I showed earlier are approximations, as dpreview puts the markers at intermediate points, and it is somewhat difficult to differentiate a point at 2.3EV vs. 2.5EV, which is the source of my need for appromixation.

The real point, even if you challenge the numbers themselves (that is, does Sony have 12EV or 13EV of DR?), is that the RELATIVE performance holds true because the same test is done for all of the products which were compared!


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,817 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5827
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jan 29, 2016 11:08 |  #53

JeffreyG wrote in post #17877617 (external link)
Hmmmm.....I kind of agree with you, but I also agree with Wilt.

On your side of the ledger you are correct that the Sony A7rII is a very tempting camera for a number of reasons. So there is that.

One note that I guess would be on both sides of the ledger is that the A7rII is primarily tempting because it can adapt Canon lenses pretty well. Stuck with just the Sony lens offerings and I would not even give the camera a second look. Sorry, but that really is just how thin the lens offerings are.

Still with your side of the ledger, the main reason Sony doesn't have a complete lens line for the camera is that the mount and format combination is relatively new. You cannot invent and industrialize a full set of 65 lenses like Canon offers overnight.

But now to Wilt's point, Sony has a long history of great products here and there but they don't have a great history of support and 'stick-to-it-ness' if you get what I mean. And their quick bounce from A-mount to NEX to E-mount (APS-C) to E-mount (FF) is a lot more of the same. They clearly didn't have a roadmap when they started, and as somebody thinking about buying $20,000 worth of photography gear in a system that would worry me.

What happens if Canon comes out with a sensor that rivals the Exmor? What if Canon releases a mirrorless body around that sensor that performs like the A7rII.....or maybe some kind of hybrid SLR/mirrorless system that matches the Sony except it can track? Sony still sits in a precarious postition in that they have one great product that is driving most of their adaptation. And if Canon or Nikon makes a move that suddenly cuts off a lot of the draw of that product.....well, ask the NEX adoptors what to expect.

I dont think canon had the roadmap to start with either, or do they? Canon is a tricky guy in that it will sell APS-C to lure you into buying FF, and I think their lens lineup proves it. Only recently do they have a 24mm EF-s lens, and it's only 2.8. Pretty much any mirrorless system has the 20-35mm covered with a fast lens, as those are considered standard lenses. To this day, if you are a crop shooter, you've got the 24stm or 24L. slow primes like those really annoy me, and have little place in photography IMO.

Having face detect, IBIS, and the 100/135f2, do you know how awesome that combo is? I really love shooting with that combo, since I never had it in canonland. ALways struggled with whether to take out the 135 or 70-200ii. Hated that the 135 never had IS, not particularly happy with carrying around the 70-200ii in any scenario. Since I always pair the lens with something wider, the zoom does little for me. I know someone will chime in saying that I'm defeating the purpose of mirrorless! and really I'm not. I understand the limitations of long lenses, they just cant be made that small. My EF 100f2 is a little bitter than the 85batis, not as sharp, more CA, but hell, it's pretty damn good, cost less than the metabones adapter :rolleyes:, and does an excellent job resolving the 42mp sensor.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - 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 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,817 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5827
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jan 29, 2016 11:13 |  #54

Wilt wrote in post #17877678 (external link)
It will become clearer to you when I can post the photos from which I derived the numbers. They photograph a step wedge, show the midtone, and the highest and the lowest tones which can be differentiated on the step wedge. Each step is 1/3EV apart, so if you take

( Darkest Step - Brightests Step ) / 3 = DR (in EV)

The numbers I showed earlier are approximations, as dpreview puts the markers at intermediate points, and it is somewhat difficult to differentiate a point at 2.3EV vs. 2.5EV, which is the source of my need for appromixation.

The real point, even if you challenge the numbers themselves (that is, does Sony have 12EV or 13EV of DR?), is that the RELATIVE performance holds true because the same test is done for all of the products which were compared!

wilt I have a few raw file comparisons of the sony A7r sensor vs the 6D at base ISO in a backlit situation. The canon sensor deteriorates WAY before the sony when you start pulling exposure/shadows. It's not a huge deal, as I could usually work around it, however, some will be annoyed to no end.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - 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 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,634 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2502
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 3 years ago by Wilt. (7 edits in all)
     
Jan 29, 2016 11:15 |  #55

Charlie wrote in post #17877702 (external link)
I dont think canon had the roadmap to start with either, or do they? Canon is a tricky guy in that it will sell APS-C to lure you into buying FF, and I think their lens lineup proves it.

If you have the perspective of the HISTORY of APS-C, it is more apparent.


  1. APS-C was invented simply because FF sensors could not be made
  2. Eventually FF sensors could be made, but not as affordably as the smaller APS-C -- an axiom of any seminconductor manufacturing is that
    more area = exponentially more difficult & expensive to make a working circuit! if the error rate in a circuit is 10% per cm2 it is harder to get one good larger chip.
  3. FF lenses existed before APS-C, APS-C simply allowed the same lenses to be used on two different formats, so why 'duplicate' a FF lens lineup with an APS-C lens lineup, when they work on both?!
  4. Canon did come out with some APS-C lenses because they could make less expensive lenses that cover only the smaller image circle of APS-C, making those cameras more affordable to hobbyists and snapshooters. And APS-C demanded shorter FL, so the very short FL lenses HAD TO BE created, where they did not exist before...10mm-15mm.

CharlieOnly recently do they have a 24mm EF-s lens, and its only 2.8.[/QUOTE wrote:
=CharlieOnly recently do they have a 24mm EF-s lens, and it's only 2.8.

Because although it is made for APS-C, the distance of the mount from the focal plane still forces a 'retrofocus optic', which limits max aperture at affordable cost!


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,514 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 587
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
Post edited over 3 years ago by JeffreyG.
     
Jan 29, 2016 11:25 |  #56

Charlie wrote in post #17877702 (external link)
I dont think canon had the roadmap to start with either, or do they? Canon is a tricky guy in that it will sell APS-C to lure you into buying FF, and I think their lens lineup proves it. Only recently do they have a 24mm EF-s lens, and it's only 2.8. Pretty much any mirrorless system has the 20-35mm covered with a fast lens, as those are considered standard lenses. To this day, if you are a crop shooter, you've got the 24stm or 24L. slow primes like those really annoy me, and have little place in photography IMO.

No, in this Canon did (does?) have a strategy and they have stuck with it since the beginning. They recognized FF as out of reach for the amateur and prosumer (using Canon defined terms) and so they released a lower cost APS-C line of cameras starting with the D30. This was followed by the D60, 10D and finally the dRebel at which point they got to work on a set of EF-S lenses to fill in the gaps that the smaller format created in the existing lens line (UWA like the 10-22, fast wide zoom like the 17-55, slow consumer wide zoom like the 18-55, slow prosumer zoom like the 17-85 etc. etc.).

One gap you might not grasp if you were not buying this stuff 10-15 years ago was that while the smaller sensor made the cameras affordable, they cut off the wide end of the lens range. So Canon had lenses like the 28-70/2.8L and then 28-135 IS available, but these were not 'wide angle' zooms anymore on a D30.

For a while guys were buying the UWA zooms like the 17-40L to use as a wide-angle stopgap lens on their APS-C bodies, but Canon fixed all that with EF-S.

And yeah, Canon would love to encourage people to move up from APS-C to FF. If you want to spend the money, they are happy to take it. But this is not an invalidation of their overall dSLR strategy at all. Looking at the total set, EF-S and EF lenses fit together with the bodies to create a comprehensive set of equipment for a pretty broad range of budgets.

Having face detect, IBIS, and the 100/135f2, do you know how awesome that combo is? I really love shooting with that combo, since I never had it in canonland. ALways struggled with whether to take out the 135 or 70-200ii. Hated that the 135 never had IS, not particularly happy with carrying around the 70-200ii in any scenario. Since I always pair the lens with something wider, the zoom does little for me. I know someone will chime in saying that I'm defeating the purpose of mirrorless! and really I'm not. I understand the limitations of long lenses, they just cant be made that small. My EF 100f2 is a little bitter than the 85batis, not as sharp, more CA, but hell, it's pretty damn good, cost less than the metabones adapter :rolleyes:, and does an excellent job resolving the 42mp sensor.

In general looking at these systems, I try to avoid getting stuck on one particular lens here or there. I mean, you love the 135L but I've been completely happy since I sold mine and started using the 70-200/2.8 IS II. Similarly, somebody else might love the TS-E 17, but that does not mean Nikon is a bad camera choice for everyone just because they don't offer that lens.

To my mind, to be a complete FF camera system you probably need:
UWA zoom
Fast wide zoom (your basic 24-70/2.8)
Fast long zoom (your basic 70-200/2.8)
Long zoom (80-400 or 100-400 etc.)

And then you need to hit the primes at the right focal lengths. A lot of people across a system wide view are going to want 24/1.4, 35/1.4, 50/1.4 85/1.4 and 135/2.

And then macro, TS-E....there is a bunch of other stuff that is really nice to have and will be make or break for certain folks, but if you have the above list available I think you can say you offer enough of a system to cover most people.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
werds
"Yes, Sire. You'll shut your trap!"
Avatar
613 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 64
Joined Mar 2014
Location: Delaware
     
Jan 29, 2016 11:32 |  #57

Not quiet anymore http://www.product-reviews.net …specs-not-groundbreaking/ (external link)


Gear: Nikon D750, Nikon D7200, Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS, Sigma 50-150 2.8 OS HSM EX , Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR1, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Tamron 28-300mm Di VC PZD, Tamron 16-300mm VC PZD, Tamron 150-600 VC, Nikon AF-S 50mm 1.8, Nikon SB-900
POTN Seller Feedback (and other)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alliben
Senior Member
Avatar
304 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 157
Joined Apr 2011
     
Jan 29, 2016 13:21 |  #58

Also, "EOS 80D to be Announced in February [CR2]

Read more: http://www.canonrumors​.com …bruary-cr2/#ixzz3yf8BWIXZ (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
THREAD ­ STARTER
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,699 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 2464
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Jan 29, 2016 13:35 |  #59

A list of the main Canon EOS 1D X MK II specs:
20.2MP CMOS sensor with dynamic range improvement
61-point AF system, expanded range, 41-point cross-type, all of the distance measuring points can be selected
At f/8, 61 points can be selected
Continuous shooting up to 16 fps (live view mode)
Dimensions: 158mm x 167.6mm x 82.6mm
Dual DIGIC6 + processor
Dual pixel CMOS AF
Dual pixel CMOS AF, enables smooth AF with 4K video
Dust and water resistant
GPS built-in
Improved AI AF accuracy and motion tracking Servo AF III +
New mirror drive system that enables high-speed continuous shooting
USB3.0 terminal, HDMI terminal
Video 4K 60fps, possible internal recording at CFast2.0T media
Weight: 1340g
Wi-Fi option (WFT-E8)


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RichSoansPhotos
Cream of the Crop
5,981 posts
Likes: 38
Joined Aug 2007
Location: London, UK
     
Jan 29, 2016 13:38 |  #60
bannedPermanent ban

umphotography wrote in post #17877485 (external link)
Thanks for trying to put your thoughts into my mouth. I DO NOT WANT A NEW DSLR RELEASE every 6 months.

But I do want Canon to have a sensor that has better DR, retention in darks and shadows, and to be able to perform closely to what the Sony Nikon sensors do for ISO performance......If they dont get it right with this update, they will be 6 yrs behind the curve with Sony sensor development

Personally I think Cell phone cameras are a waste of time.


OK, fine you don't want words put into your mouth, which wasn't intended

As far as I know, Nikon uses Sony sensors. But as I know, it's really hard to make exposure -5. I don't ever get the reason why the exhaustive need for better DR the way I see it, though I'm not expecting you to have the same opinion, I don't ever try to under expose my images, albeit, most of my images are mainly concerts and festivals where it is expected to get dark and it's hard to expose correctly




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

18,198 views & 34 likes for this thread
Is it me or is Canon too quiet right now
FORUMS News & Rumors Camera Rumors and Predictions 
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 Rooster7
973 guests, 302 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.