More Canon 5D info

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by deryck lant, Aug 16, 2005.

  1. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    deryck lant, Aug 16, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. deryck  lant

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    "deryck lant" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > http://www2.photim.com/info/Sommaire.php
    >
    > Translated:
    >
    > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=14646521
    > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=14646528
    >
    > Looks like at last Canon will have a zoom lens that can cope with
    > full frame digital requirements. The 24-105 f/4 L IS will probably
    > retail around 1,500 euro.


    Man, $5K for a body and lens! I may have to wait on the lens, and may sell
    the 28-135, as well. But hey, it could be worth it.

    >
    > Deryck
     
    Kinon O'Cann, Aug 16, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    "Kinon O'Cann" <> wrote in message
    news:pSoMe.5$...
    >
    > "deryck lant" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> http://www2.photim.com/info/Sommaire.php
    >>
    >> Translated:
    >>
    >> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=14646521
    >> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=14646528
    >>
    >> Looks like at last Canon will have a zoom lens that can cope with
    >> full frame digital requirements. The 24-105 f/4 L IS will probably
    >> retail around 1,500 euro.

    >
    > Man, $5K for a body and lens! I may have to wait on the lens, and may sell
    > the 28-135, as well. But hey, it could be worth it.
    >
    >>
    >> Deryck

    >
    >

    That would make for a heck of a "kit," now wouldn't it?

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Aug 17, 2005
    #3
  4. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    "deryck lant" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > http://www2.photim.com/info/Sommaire.php
    >
    > Translated:
    >
    > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=14646521
    > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=14646528
    >
    > Looks like at last Canon will have a zoom lens that can cope with
    > full frame digital requirements. The 24-105 f/4 L IS will probably
    > retail around 1,500 euro.
    >
    > Deryck


    Why doesn't the 24-70 f2.8L cope with full frame digital requirements?

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Aug 17, 2005
    #4
  5. "Skip M" <> wrote:
    >
    > Why doesn't the 24-70 f2.8L cope with full frame digital requirements?


    It does. The 1Ds/1Ds2 users report that it's flipping amazing.

    FWIW, check out this guy's lens reviews.

    http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/index.htm


    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Aug 17, 2005
    #5
  6. deryck  lant

    Guest

    deryck lant wrote:

    > Looks like at last Canon will have a zoom lens that can cope with
    > full frame digital requirements.


    That Canon has been making normal 35mm lenses that covered the "full
    frame" for decades is just another one of those hoaxes, like how we
    never went to the Moon, right?
     
    , Aug 17, 2005
    #6
  7. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    "David J. Littleboy" <> wrote in message
    news:ddtutq$a3$...
    >
    > "Skip M" <> wrote:
    >>
    >> Why doesn't the 24-70 f2.8L cope with full frame digital requirements?

    >
    > It does. The 1Ds/1Ds2 users report that it's flipping amazing.
    >
    > FWIW, check out this guy's lens reviews.
    >
    > http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/index.htm
    >
    >
    > David J. Littleboy
    > Tokyo, Japan
    >
    >

    I rather thought so. I've been totally blown away by the imagery I've
    gotten from that lens and my 20D. I'm going up to the Central Coast for a
    week starting Labor Day Weekend, and shooting some film with it. Can't
    wait...

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Aug 17, 2005
    #7
  8. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    The message <sRuMe.1113$sw6.290@fed1read05>
    from "Skip M" <> contains these words:

    > "deryck lant" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > http://www2.photim.com/info/Sommaire.php
    > >
    > > Translated:
    > >
    > > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=14646521
    > > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=14646528
    > >
    > > Looks like at last Canon will have a zoom lens that can cope with
    > > full frame digital requirements. The 24-105 f/4 L IS will probably
    > > retail around 1,500 euro.
    > >
    > > Deryck


    > Why doesn't the 24-70 f2.8L cope with full frame digital requirements?


    The 24-70 f2.8L is an excellent lens but shows a couple of stops of light
    fall off in the corners on the D1s2 shown in an in-depth technical review
    in The British Journal of Photography. There is also some colour fringing
    in the corners.

    Deryck
     
    deryck lant, Aug 17, 2005
    #8
  9. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    "deryck lant" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The message <sRuMe.1113$sw6.290@fed1read05>
    > from "Skip M" <> contains these words:
    >
    >> "deryck lant" <> wrote in message


    >> >
    >> > Looks like at last Canon will have a zoom lens that can cope with
    >> > full frame digital requirements. The 24-105 f/4 L IS will probably
    >> > retail around 1,500 euro.
    >> >
    >> > Deryck

    >
    >> Why doesn't the 24-70 f2.8L cope with full frame digital requirements?

    >
    > The 24-70 f2.8L is an excellent lens but shows a couple of stops of light
    > fall off in the corners on the D1s2 shown in an in-depth technical review
    > in The British Journal of Photography. There is also some colour fringing
    > in the corners.
    >
    > Deryck


    http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/24_70/index.htm

    On the other hand, why do you think the 28-105 f4 L is going to be any more
    capable? The 24-70 came out about the same time as the 1Ds, so I'd presume
    it was designed with that camera in mind...

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Aug 17, 2005
    #9
  10. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    The message <VmFMe.1211$sw6.228@fed1read05>
    from "Skip M" <> contains these words:


    > "deryck lant" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > The message <sRuMe.1113$sw6.290@fed1read05>
    > > from "Skip M" <> contains these words:
    > >
    > >> "deryck lant" <> wrote in message


    > >> >
    > >> > Looks like at last Canon will have a zoom lens that can cope with
    > >> > full frame digital requirements. The 24-105 f/4 L IS will probably
    > >> > retail around 1,500 euro.
    > >> >
    > >> > Deryck

    > >
    > >> Why doesn't the 24-70 f2.8L cope with full frame digital requirements?

    > >
    > > The 24-70 f2.8L is an excellent lens but shows a couple of stops of light
    > > fall off in the corners on the D1s2 shown in an in-depth technical review
    > > in The British Journal of Photography. There is also some colour fringing
    > > in the corners.
    > >
    > > Deryck


    > http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/24_70/index.htm


    > On the other hand, why do you think the 28-105 f4 L is going to be any more
    > capable? The 24-70 came out about the same time as the 1Ds, so I'd presume
    > it was designed with that camera in mind...


    The excellent William L Castleman didn't specifically test for light fall-off.
    You need specialist equipment to measure it.

    As you know Canon use the market to beta test their products. Only after the
    24-70 hit the market did it receive the baptism of fire. Also the higher res
    the camera so defects become more obvious as shown with the D1s2.

    Canon are now well aware of the digital full frame requirements and will
    design
    for it.

    I expect the new 24-105 f/4 L IS to make a super kit lens with the 5D. Will
    make a killer combination for wedding large group shots and landscape
    photography.
    Would be the equal picture quality wise to the D2X with 17-55 f2.8, but much
    better in low light.

    Deryck
     
    deryck lant, Aug 17, 2005
    #10
  11. deryck  lant

    Mark² Guest

    "Skip M" <> wrote in message
    news:VmFMe.1211$sw6.228@fed1read05...
    >
    > "deryck lant" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> The message <sRuMe.1113$sw6.290@fed1read05>
    >> from "Skip M" <> contains these words:
    >>
    >>> "deryck lant" <> wrote in message

    >
    >>> >
    >>> > Looks like at last Canon will have a zoom lens that can cope with
    >>> > full frame digital requirements. The 24-105 f/4 L IS will probably
    >>> > retail around 1,500 euro.
    >>> >
    >>> > Deryck

    >>
    >>> Why doesn't the 24-70 f2.8L cope with full frame digital requirements?

    >>
    >> The 24-70 f2.8L is an excellent lens but shows a couple of stops of light
    >> fall off in the corners on the D1s2 shown in an in-depth technical review
    >> in The British Journal of Photography. There is also some colour fringing
    >> in the corners.
    >>
    >> Deryck

    >
    > http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/24_70/index.htm
    >
    > On the other hand, why do you think the 28-105 f4 L is going to be any
    > more capable? The 24-70 came out about the same time as the 1Ds, so I'd
    > presume it was designed with that camera in mind...


    The 24-105 has greater than 4:1 zoom ratio, compared with the less than
    approx. 3:1 ratio of the 24-70. If anything, this would likely lead to more
    problems with the 24-105. It's saving grace MAY be it's smaller aperture,
    which would prevent the revealing of trouble. The only fair comparison will
    be against the 24-70 stopped down to f4. I'd put my money on the 24-70...
    :) -But the new lens will likely still get me eventually simply due to it's
    more convenient all-around nature.
     
    Mark², Aug 17, 2005
    #11
  12. deryck  lant

    Guest

    deryck lant predictably babbles;

    >> Why doesn't the 24-70 f2.8L cope with full frame digital requirements?

    >
    > The 24-70 f2.8L is an excellent lens but shows a couple of stops of light
    > fall off in the corners on the D1s2 shown in an in-depth technical review
    > in The British Journal of Photography. There is also some colour fringing
    > in the corners.


    Answer the question, nitwit: why doesn't the 24-70/2.8L "cope with
    full frame digital requirements"? One presumes that any defects
    present in the lens would be just as observable should one choose to
    use it with a film body.
     
    , Aug 17, 2005
    #12
  13. deryck  lant

    Guest

    deryck lant wrote:

    >> http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/24_70/index.htm

    >
    >> On the other hand, why do you think the 28-105 f4 L is going to be any more
    >> capable? The 24-70 came out about the same time as the 1Ds, so I'd presume
    >> it was designed with that camera in mind...

    >
    > The excellent William L Castleman didn't specifically test for light
    > fall-off. You need specialist equipment to measure it.


    Gee, you need "specialist equipment" to measure a "1 to 2 stop"
    falloff? But even if your blather is meaningful, rather than raise
    red-herrings like this, why not answer the questions that are being
    posed of you?

    In this case: "why do you think the 28-105/4L is going to be any more
    capable?"

    Either there is evidence you can cite or there is not.

    > As you know Canon use the market to beta test their products.


    As you know, "derck lant" is a sycophantic market-watching lamebrain
    who can't defend his own statements.

    > Only after the 24-70 hit the market did it receive the baptism of fire.


    Useless: you can say the same about anything.

    > Also the higher res the camera so defects become more obvious as shown
    > with the D1s2.
    >
    > Canon are now well aware of the digital full frame requirements and will
    > design for it.


    Why? Or are you just talking out of your ass?

    > I expect the new 24-105 f/4 L IS to make a super kit lens with the 5D.


    Evidence?

    > Will make a killer combination for wedding large group shots and
    > landscape photography.


    Baseless speculation.

    > Would be the equal picture quality wise to the D2X with 17-55 f2.8, but much
    > better in low light.


    How can an f/4 lens be "better" in low light than an f/2.8 lens?
     
    , Aug 17, 2005
    #13
  14. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > deryck lant predictably babbles;
    >
    >>> Why doesn't the 24-70 f2.8L cope with full frame digital requirements?

    >>
    >> The 24-70 f2.8L is an excellent lens but shows a couple of stops of light
    >> fall off in the corners on the D1s2 shown in an in-depth technical review
    >> in The British Journal of Photography. There is also some colour fringing
    >> in the corners.

    >
    > Answer the question, nitwit: why doesn't the 24-70/2.8L "cope with
    > full frame digital requirements"? One presumes that any defects
    > present in the lens would be just as observable should one choose to
    > use it with a film body.
    >

    One would think so, wouldn't one...

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Aug 17, 2005
    #14
  15. "deryck lant" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    SNIP
    >> Why doesn't the 24-70 f2.8L cope with full frame digital
    >> requirements?

    >
    > The 24-70 f2.8L is an excellent lens but shows a couple of stops
    > of light fall off in the corners on the D1s2 shown in an in-depth
    > technical review in The British Journal of Photography.


    Since you didn't provide a link to, or a quote from, the article:
    - Did they compare the light fall-off with a film capture by the same
    lens? That would have shown the influence of the sensor.
    - Did they compare with fixed focus lenses of the same focal length,
    same manufacturer? Lens design is bound by a few restrictions, like
    having to allow room for the mirror.

    > There is also some colour fringing in the corners.


    Yes, it's a zoom which makes it extremely difficult to optimize at all
    focal lengths. Fortunately, a larger frame will require less
    magnification, which will reduce the visibility of fringing (whether
    from CA or Raw conversion) in output. Also, some Chromatic Aberrations
    are easy to fix in post-processing, applications like RSE 2005 do it
    by default.

    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, Aug 18, 2005
    #15
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. mark23
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,832
    mark23
    Jun 30, 2003
  2. Rob
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,201
  3. Mcploppy ©

    More info on RPC from BT Openworld support

    Mcploppy ©, Aug 11, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    443
    Mcploppy ©
    Aug 11, 2003
  4. PeterPan

    Wanted Info on UK-Info, & WebDesign

    PeterPan, Nov 27, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    888
  5. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    610
Loading...

Share This Page