Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   Digital Photography (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f37-digital-photography.html)
-   -   Re: Looking for DSLR selection recommendation (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t962400-re-looking-for-dslr-selection-recommendation.html)

Trevor 07-04-2013 06:21 AM

Re: Looking for DSLR selection recommendation
 

"Alex M" <alex@spam.me.not> wrote in message
news:-qOdnTcWzbHIeEnMnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> I have a 24-105 F/4L, which I love, but would like to have something
> with more reach, especially on long end (no urgency, since 24-105
> would work most of the time). IS is highly desirable. I realize that
> with a superzoom I will be compromising several things, but still
> like a convenience of having an occasional "one lens for all" setup.
> The 18-200 that was stolen was working great in this mode.
>
> Looking at B&H, I see, among others.
>
> * Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, weight ~600g, $700
> * Tamron AF18-270mm f/3.5-6.3, ~450g, $420
> * Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3, ~480g, $400
>
> Any comments / suggestions on those / others to consider?



Yeah, forget the "one lens for all" idea and get a 70-200 f4LIS to go with
your 24-105. Swapping lenses occasionally for better performance is what you
buy an SLR for.

Trevor.



Wolfgang Weisselberg 07-04-2013 02:45 PM

Re: Looking for DSLR selection recommendation
 
Trevor <trevor@home.net> wrote:
> "Alex M" <alex@spam.me.not> wrote in message


>> I have a 24-105 F/4L, which I love, but would like to have something
>> with more reach, especially on long end (no urgency, since 24-105
>> would work most of the time). IS is highly desirable. I realize that
>> with a superzoom I will be compromising several things, but still
>> like a convenience of having an occasional "one lens for all" setup.
>> The 18-200 that was stolen was working great in this mode.


>> Looking at B&H, I see, among others.


>> * Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, weight ~600g, $700
>> * Tamron AF18-270mm f/3.5-6.3, ~450g, $420
>> * Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3, ~480g, $400


>> Any comments / suggestions on those / others to consider?


> Yeah, forget the "one lens for all" idea and get a 70-200 f4LIS to go with
> your 24-105. Swapping lenses occasionally for better performance is what you
> buy an SLR for.


Not necessarily.

You can easily buy a small DSLR and a megazoom for convenience
and weight, while still beating the megazoom compact camera.
That's a very legitimate use.

Additionally, it can then also be a backup body. (The 70D
should also beat most compact camera video capabilities even if
they have an AF-while-shooting (if the 70D works as advertized).
This may be rather important to some people.)

Oh, and in that vein: he can decide every time if weight and
convenience will matter more than the best image quality and
low light capability.

-Wolfgang

Tony Cooper 07-04-2013 04:40 PM

Re: Looking for DSLR selection recommendation
 
On Thu, 04 Jul 2013 12:22:53 -0400, Alex M <alex@spam.me.not> wrote:

>On 7/4/2013 2:21 AM, Trevor wrote:
>> "Alex M"<alex@spam.me.not> wrote in message
>> news:-qOdnTcWzbHIeEnMnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> I have a 24-105 F/4L, which I love, but would like to have something
>>> with more reach, especially on long end (no urgency, since 24-105
>>> would work most of the time). IS is highly desirable. I realize that
>>> with a superzoom I will be compromising several things, but still
>>> like a convenience of having an occasional "one lens for all" setup.
>>> The 18-200 that was stolen was working great in this mode.
>>>
>>> Looking at B&H, I see, among others.
>>>
>>> * Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, weight ~600g, $700
>>> * Tamron AF18-270mm f/3.5-6.3, ~450g, $420
>>> * Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3, ~480g, $400
>>>
>>> Any comments / suggestions on those / others to consider?

>>
>>
>> Yeah, forget the "one lens for all" idea and get a 70-200 f4LIS to go with
>> your 24-105. Swapping lenses occasionally for better performance is what you
>> buy an SLR for.

>
>I think you miss the point. I *am* looking for a "one lens" setup.
>This would be for occasional use, but exactly where swapping lenses
>is a pain I do not want. Also, for this occasional use I am leaning
>to APS-C camera, so a full frame lens adds some extra weight.


The "walk-around" lens can be the best choice in many situations. I
have an 18/270 Tamron lens as my walk-around lens. I'll put that on
when I don't have a particular type of thing in mind to shoot and I
don't want to carry my camera bag with different lenses. It's great
flexibility for both wide angle and zoomed in shots.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando FL

J. Clarke 07-04-2013 05:13 PM

Re: Looking for DSLR selection recommendation
 
In article <ntOdnRNHO_T8PEjMnZ2dnUVZ_oqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
alex@spam.me.not says...
>
> On 7/4/2013 2:21 AM, Trevor wrote:
> > "Alex M"<alex@spam.me.not> wrote in message
> > news:-qOdnTcWzbHIeEnMnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> >> I have a 24-105 F/4L, which I love, but would like to have something
> >> with more reach, especially on long end (no urgency, since 24-105
> >> would work most of the time). IS is highly desirable. I realize that
> >> with a superzoom I will be compromising several things, but still
> >> like a convenience of having an occasional "one lens for all" setup.
> >> The 18-200 that was stolen was working great in this mode.
> >>
> >> Looking at B&H, I see, among others.
> >>
> >> * Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, weight ~600g, $700
> >> * Tamron AF18-270mm f/3.5-6.3, ~450g, $420
> >> * Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3, ~480g, $400
> >>
> >> Any comments / suggestions on those / others to consider?

> >
> >
> > Yeah, forget the "one lens for all" idea and get a 70-200 f4LIS to go with
> > your 24-105. Swapping lenses occasionally for better performance is what you
> > buy an SLR for.

>
> I think you miss the point. I *am* looking for a "one lens" setup.
> This would be for occasional use, but exactly where swapping lenses
> is a pain I do not want. Also, for this occasional use I am leaning
> to APS-C camera, so a full frame lens adds some extra weight.


I believe that the Sigma is the only one of the bunch that has full-time
manual focus override and that the rest require that one flip the
autofocus off to do manual focus. I find lack of override to be enough
of an annoyance that, barring some huge difference in performance that I
do not believe is present among them, that would be the decisionmaker
for me.

Otherwise I'd go for the Tamron for the extra 20 on the long end.

However I have not used a camera with Canon's new touchscreen focus-
point selection--that might make the override less important to me and
might not--I'd have to use it for a while to be sure.

Trevor 07-05-2013 05:31 AM

Re: Looking for DSLR selection recommendation
 

"Tony Cooper" <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:o09bt8h5b8fqll4qbe6sp42ca2sl2vfjko@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 04 Jul 2013 12:22:53 -0400, Alex M <alex@spam.me.not> wrote:
>>On 7/4/2013 2:21 AM, Trevor wrote:
>>> "Alex M"<alex@spam.me.not> wrote in message
>>> news:-qOdnTcWzbHIeEnMnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>> I have a 24-105 F/4L, which I love, but would like to have something
>>>> with more reach, especially on long end (no urgency, since 24-105
>>>> would work most of the time). IS is highly desirable. I realize that
>>>> with a superzoom I will be compromising several things, but still
>>>> like a convenience of having an occasional "one lens for all" setup.
>>>> The 18-200 that was stolen was working great in this mode.
>>>>
>>>> Looking at B&H, I see, among others.
>>>>
>>>> * Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, weight ~600g, $700
>>>> * Tamron AF18-270mm f/3.5-6.3, ~450g, $420
>>>> * Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3, ~480g, $400
>>>>
>>>> Any comments / suggestions on those / others to consider?
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, forget the "one lens for all" idea and get a 70-200 f4LIS to go
>>> with
>>> your 24-105. Swapping lenses occasionally for better performance is what
>>> you
>>> buy an SLR for.

>>
>>I think you miss the point. I *am* looking for a "one lens" setup.
>>This would be for occasional use, but exactly where swapping lenses
>>is a pain I do not want. Also, for this occasional use I am leaning
>>to APS-C camera, so a full frame lens adds some extra weight.


Well I'd probably buy a Rebel SL1 then, and the Tamron is the lightest if
that is your main requirement.


> The "walk-around" lens can be the best choice in many situations. I
> have an 18/270 Tamron lens as my walk-around lens. I'll put that on
> when I don't have a particular type of thing in mind to shoot and I
> don't want to carry my camera bag with different lenses. It's great
> flexibility for both wide angle and zoomed in shots.


His 24-105 *is* a good walkaround lens IMO. You can crop a bit if necessary,
and I personally don't need 270mm for "walk around" purposes. YMMV.


Trevor.



Robert Coe 07-05-2013 09:24 PM

Re: Looking for DSLR selection recommendation
 
On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 15:31:33 +1000, "Trevor" <trevor@home.net> wrote:
:
: "Tony Cooper" <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote in message
: news:o09bt8h5b8fqll4qbe6sp42ca2sl2vfjko@4ax.com...
: > On Thu, 04 Jul 2013 12:22:53 -0400, Alex M <alex@spam.me.not> wrote:
: >>On 7/4/2013 2:21 AM, Trevor wrote:
: >>> "Alex M"<alex@spam.me.not> wrote in message
: >>> news:-qOdnTcWzbHIeEnMnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com...
: >>>> I have a 24-105 F/4L, which I love, but would like to have something
: >>>> with more reach, especially on long end (no urgency, since 24-105
: >>>> would work most of the time). IS is highly desirable. I realize that
: >>>> with a superzoom I will be compromising several things, but still
: >>>> like a convenience of having an occasional "one lens for all" setup.
: >>>> The 18-200 that was stolen was working great in this mode.
: >>>>
: >>>> Looking at B&H, I see, among others.
: >>>>
: >>>> * Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, weight ~600g, $700
: >>>> * Tamron AF18-270mm f/3.5-6.3, ~450g, $420
: >>>> * Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3, ~480g, $400
: >>>>
: >>>> Any comments / suggestions on those / others to consider?
: >>>
: >>>
: >>> Yeah, forget the "one lens for all" idea and get a 70-200 f4LIS to go
: >>> with
: >>> your 24-105. Swapping lenses occasionally for better performance is what
: >>> you
: >>> buy an SLR for.
: >>
: >>I think you miss the point. I *am* looking for a "one lens" setup.
: >>This would be for occasional use, but exactly where swapping lenses
: >>is a pain I do not want. Also, for this occasional use I am leaning
: >>to APS-C camera, so a full frame lens adds some extra weight.
:
: Well I'd probably buy a Rebel SL1 then, and the Tamron is the lightest if
: that is your main requirement.

What is the point of that camera? Does Canon really need another low-end DSLR?
Does it suggest that they've effectively given up on the M series after only
one release?

:
: > The "walk-around" lens can be the best choice in many situations. I
: > have an 18/270 Tamron lens as my walk-around lens. I'll put that on
: > when I don't have a particular type of thing in mind to shoot and I
: > don't want to carry my camera bag with different lenses. It's great
: > flexibility for both wide angle and zoomed in shots.
:
: His 24-105 *is* a good walkaround lens IMO. You can crop a bit if necessary,
: and I personally don't need 270mm for "walk around" purposes. YMMV.

Like the OP, I have the 24-105 and APS-C cameras. I think the 24-105 is too
long to be a good walkaround lens on an APS-C body. I use it as a "street
photography" lens, because there a longer lens tends to make you less
conspicuous. IMO the correct APS-C walkaround lens is the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8.
On a FF camera, OTOH, the 24-105 is a fine walkaround lens. I sometimes see
myself as a FF wannabe, which is one reason I bought the 24-105.

Bob

J. Clarke 07-06-2013 03:29 AM

Re: Looking for DSLR selection recommendation
 
In article <vbdet8tnforqphcbfvdas1hbv1goldkuam@4ax.com>, bob@1776.COM
says...
>
> On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 15:31:33 +1000, "Trevor" <trevor@home.net> wrote:
> :
> : "Tony Cooper" <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote in message
> : news:o09bt8h5b8fqll4qbe6sp42ca2sl2vfjko@4ax.com...
> : > On Thu, 04 Jul 2013 12:22:53 -0400, Alex M <alex@spam.me.not> wrote:
> : >>On 7/4/2013 2:21 AM, Trevor wrote:
> : >>> "Alex M"<alex@spam.me.not> wrote in message
> : >>> news:-qOdnTcWzbHIeEnMnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> : >>>> I have a 24-105 F/4L, which I love, but would like to have something
> : >>>> with more reach, especially on long end (no urgency, since 24-105
> : >>>> would work most of the time). IS is highly desirable. I realize that
> : >>>> with a superzoom I will be compromising several things, but still
> : >>>> like a convenience of having an occasional "one lens for all" setup.
> : >>>> The 18-200 that was stolen was working great in this mode.
> : >>>>
> : >>>> Looking at B&H, I see, among others.
> : >>>>
> : >>>> * Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, weight ~600g, $700
> : >>>> * Tamron AF18-270mm f/3.5-6.3, ~450g, $420
> : >>>> * Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3, ~480g, $400
> : >>>>
> : >>>> Any comments / suggestions on those / others to consider?
> : >>>
> : >>>
> : >>> Yeah, forget the "one lens for all" idea and get a 70-200 f4LIS to go
> : >>> with
> : >>> your 24-105. Swapping lenses occasionally for better performance is what
> : >>> you
> : >>> buy an SLR for.
> : >>
> : >>I think you miss the point. I *am* looking for a "one lens" setup.
> : >>This would be for occasional use, but exactly where swapping lenses
> : >>is a pain I do not want. Also, for this occasional use I am leaning
> : >>to APS-C camera, so a full frame lens adds some extra weight.
> :
> : Well I'd probably buy a Rebel SL1 then, and the Tamron is the lightest if
> : that is your main requirement.
>
> What is the point of that camera? Does Canon really need another low-end DSLR?
> Does it suggest that they've effectively given up on the M series after only
> one release?


The point is that they have a proven product line, the Digital Rebel
series, that makes money for them, and an unproven product line, the
mirrorless camera, that may or may not make money for them. You seem to
want them to try to force consumers to buy the mirrorless by
discontinuing the Rebel series. Personally that would not drive me to a
mirrorless, it might drive me to a higher end Canon model or to a
different brand.

> : > The "walk-around" lens can be the best choice in many situations. I
> : > have an 18/270 Tamron lens as my walk-around lens. I'll put that on
> : > when I don't have a particular type of thing in mind to shoot and I
> : > don't want to carry my camera bag with different lenses. It's great
> : > flexibility for both wide angle and zoomed in shots.
> :
> : His 24-105 *is* a good walkaround lens IMO. You can crop a bit if necessary,
> : and I personally don't need 270mm for "walk around" purposes. YMMV.
>
> Like the OP, I have the 24-105 and APS-C cameras. I think the 24-105 is too
> long to be a good walkaround lens on an APS-C body. I use it as a "street
> photography" lens, because there a longer lens tends to make you less
> conspicuous. IMO the correct APS-C walkaround lens is the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8.
> On a FF camera, OTOH, the 24-105 is a fine walkaround lens. I sometimes see
> myself as a FF wannabe, which is one reason I bought the 24-105.
>
> Bob




Trevor 07-06-2013 06:52 AM

Re: Looking for DSLR selection recommendation
 

"Robert Coe" <bob@1776.COM> wrote in message
news:vbdet8tnforqphcbfvdas1hbv1goldkuam@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 15:31:33 +1000, "Trevor" <trevor@home.net> wrote:
> : Well I'd probably buy a Rebel SL1 then, and the Tamron is the lightest
> if
> : that is your main requirement.
>
> What is the point of that camera? Does Canon really need another low-end
> DSLR?
> Does it suggest that they've effectively given up on the M series after
> only
> one release?


Er it's the smallest/lightest available proper DSLR, the M continues as a
compact mirrorless alternative.
Personally I think options are good, even though I am not in the market for
either.


> : > The "walk-around" lens can be the best choice in many situations. I
> : > have an 18/270 Tamron lens as my walk-around lens. I'll put that on
> : > when I don't have a particular type of thing in mind to shoot and I
> : > don't want to carry my camera bag with different lenses. It's great
> : > flexibility for both wide angle and zoomed in shots.
> :
> : His 24-105 *is* a good walkaround lens IMO. You can crop a bit if
> necessary,
> : and I personally don't need 270mm for "walk around" purposes. YMMV.
>
> Like the OP, I have the 24-105 and APS-C cameras. I think the 24-105 is
> too
> long to be a good walkaround lens on an APS-C body. I use it as a "street
> photography" lens, because there a longer lens tends to make you less
> conspicuous. IMO the correct APS-C walkaround lens is the Canon 17-55mm
> f/2.8.


Or the 15-85 if you want more reach at the expense of a slower aperture.


> On a FF camera, OTOH, the 24-105 is a fine walkaround lens. I sometimes
> see
> myself as a FF wannabe, which is one reason I bought the 24-105.


It's fine on an APS-C too if you prefer slightly longer to slightly wider.
And makes a good team with the 10-22mm on those cameras IMO.
But I'm not so averse to changing lenses though.

Trevor.



Robert Coe 07-06-2013 11:35 AM

Re: Looking for DSLR selection recommendation
 
On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 23:29:19 -0400, "J. Clarke" <jclarkeusenet@cox.net> wrote:
: In article <vbdet8tnforqphcbfvdas1hbv1goldkuam@4ax.com>, bob@1776.COM
: says...
: >
: > On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 15:31:33 +1000, "Trevor" <trevor@home.net> wrote:
: > :
: > : "Tony Cooper" <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote in message
: > : news:o09bt8h5b8fqll4qbe6sp42ca2sl2vfjko@4ax.com...
: > : > On Thu, 04 Jul 2013 12:22:53 -0400, Alex M <alex@spam.me.not> wrote:
: > : >>On 7/4/2013 2:21 AM, Trevor wrote:
: > : >>> "Alex M"<alex@spam.me.not> wrote in message
: > : >>> news:-qOdnTcWzbHIeEnMnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com...
: > : >>>> I have a 24-105 F/4L, which I love, but would like to have something
: > : >>>> with more reach, especially on long end (no urgency, since 24-105
: > : >>>> would work most of the time). IS is highly desirable. I realize that
: > : >>>> with a superzoom I will be compromising several things, but still
: > : >>>> like a convenience of having an occasional "one lens for all" setup.
: > : >>>> The 18-200 that was stolen was working great in this mode.
: > : >>>>
: > : >>>> Looking at B&H, I see, among others.
: > : >>>>
: > : >>>> * Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, weight ~600g, $700
: > : >>>> * Tamron AF18-270mm f/3.5-6.3, ~450g, $420
: > : >>>> * Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3, ~480g, $400
: > : >>>>
: > : >>>> Any comments / suggestions on those / others to consider?
: > : >>>
: > : >>>
: > : >>> Yeah, forget the "one lens for all" idea and get a 70-200 f4LIS to go
: > : >>> with
: > : >>> your 24-105. Swapping lenses occasionally for better performance is what
: > : >>> you
: > : >>> buy an SLR for.
: > : >>
: > : >>I think you miss the point. I *am* looking for a "one lens" setup.
: > : >>This would be for occasional use, but exactly where swapping lenses
: > : >>is a pain I do not want. Also, for this occasional use I am leaning
: > : >>to APS-C camera, so a full frame lens adds some extra weight.
: > :
: > : Well I'd probably buy a Rebel SL1 then, and the Tamron is the lightest if
: > : that is your main requirement.
: >
: > What is the point of that camera? Does Canon really need another low-end DSLR?
: > Does it suggest that they've effectively given up on the M series after only
: > one release?
:
: The point is that they have a proven product line, the Digital Rebel
: series, that makes money for them, and an unproven product line, the
: mirrorless camera, that may or may not make money for them. You seem to
: want them to try to force consumers to buy the mirrorless by
: discontinuing the Rebel series.

I don't know where I said that, but it's increasingly hard to see what Canon
has planned for the future of the Rebel line. There always seem to be several
Rebels, with only minor differences in features and price; and one would think
that the line would be getting squeezed at the low end by the M and at the
high end by Canon's other DSLRs. Ask yourself why you would buy a T5i instead
of a 70D (unless you needed it tomorrow). And who's going to buy enough SL1's
for Canon to make money on it?

: Personally that would not drive me to a mirrorless, it might drive me
: to a higher end Canon model or to a different brand.

I don't guess Canon's trying to "drive" anybody anywhere. But I don't
understand their increasingly confusing product line. (Of course I don't
understand Nikon's either. They turn out camera after camera but studiously
avoid making the one that everybody says they want: the "D300 successor".)

Bob

J. Clarke 07-06-2013 03:05 PM

Re: Looking for DSLR selection recommendation
 
In article <2gvft8hqcq57b6gv4lgkvtgn06civofqsm@4ax.com>, bob@1776.COM
says...
>
> On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 23:29:19 -0400, "J. Clarke" <jclarkeusenet@cox.net> wrote:
> : In article <vbdet8tnforqphcbfvdas1hbv1goldkuam@4ax.com>, bob@1776.COM
> : says...
> : >
> : > On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 15:31:33 +1000, "Trevor" <trevor@home.net> wrote:
> : > :
> : > : "Tony Cooper" <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote in message
> : > : news:o09bt8h5b8fqll4qbe6sp42ca2sl2vfjko@4ax.com...
> : > : > On Thu, 04 Jul 2013 12:22:53 -0400, Alex M <alex@spam.me.not> wrote:
> : > : >>On 7/4/2013 2:21 AM, Trevor wrote:
> : > : >>> "Alex M"<alex@spam.me.not> wrote in message
> : > : >>> news:-qOdnTcWzbHIeEnMnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> : > : >>>> I have a 24-105 F/4L, which I love, but would like to have something
> : > : >>>> with more reach, especially on long end (no urgency, since 24-105
> : > : >>>> would work most of the time). IS is highly desirable. I realize that
> : > : >>>> with a superzoom I will be compromising several things, but still
> : > : >>>> like a convenience of having an occasional "one lens for all" setup.
> : > : >>>> The 18-200 that was stolen was working great in this mode.
> : > : >>>>
> : > : >>>> Looking at B&H, I see, among others.
> : > : >>>>
> : > : >>>> * Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, weight ~600g, $700
> : > : >>>> * Tamron AF18-270mm f/3.5-6.3, ~450g, $420
> : > : >>>> * Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3, ~480g, $400
> : > : >>>>
> : > : >>>> Any comments / suggestions on those / others to consider?
> : > : >>>
> : > : >>>
> : > : >>> Yeah, forget the "one lens for all" idea and get a 70-200 f4LIS to go
> : > : >>> with
> : > : >>> your 24-105. Swapping lenses occasionally for better performance is what
> : > : >>> you
> : > : >>> buy an SLR for.
> : > : >>
> : > : >>I think you miss the point. I *am* looking for a "one lens" setup.
> : > : >>This would be for occasional use, but exactly where swapping lenses
> : > : >>is a pain I do not want. Also, for this occasional use I am leaning
> : > : >>to APS-C camera, so a full frame lens adds some extra weight.
> : > :
> : > : Well I'd probably buy a Rebel SL1 then, and the Tamron is the lightest if
> : > : that is your main requirement.
> : >
> : > What is the point of that camera? Does Canon really need another low-end DSLR?
> : > Does it suggest that they've effectively given up on the M series after only
> : > one release?
> :
> : The point is that they have a proven product line, the Digital Rebel
> : series, that makes money for them, and an unproven product line, the
> : mirrorless camera, that may or may not make money for them. You seem to
> : want them to try to force consumers to buy the mirrorless by
> : discontinuing the Rebel series.
>
> I don't know where I said that, but it's increasingly hard to see what Canon
> has planned for the future of the Rebel line. There always seem to be several
> Rebels, with only minor differences in features and price; and one would think
> that the line would be getting squeezed at the low end by the M and at the
> high end by Canon's other DSLRs. Ask yourself why you would buy a T5i instead
> of a 70D (unless you needed it tomorrow). And who's going to buy enough SL1's
> for Canon to make money on it?


Canon has usually had a lower priced and a higher priced Rebel--for a
while the major difference between them was that the lower-priced had
crippled firmware, but the current strategy has real differences that
make sense--the lower-priced version is physically smaller and had a
fixed display for example--the latter is an obvious cost saving and
using it to make the whole thing smaller is reasonable fallout from that
decision.

> : Personally that would not drive me to a mirrorless, it might drive me
> : to a higher end Canon model or to a different brand.
>
> I don't guess Canon's trying to "drive" anybody anywhere. But I don't
> understand their increasingly confusing product line. (Of course I don't
> understand Nikon's either. They turn out camera after camera but studiously
> avoid making the one that everybody says they want: the "D300 successor".)


They basically have five lines, the entry-leven 3-digit line, the
"prosumer" 2 digit line, the "pro" 1 digit APS-C line, and the full-
frame "1D" and "5D" lines. The "M" line is a new addition, their first
experiment with a mirrorless. It may or may not stick.



All times are GMT. The time now is 05:11 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.