When will Canon release a new f1.2 80mm ?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by n, Nov 27, 2004.

  1. n

    n Guest

    I was in a shop again looking at this and comparing it to the 50mm
    f1.4.

    I will echo everything people said in reply to a previous post I made.

    *BIG* difference in price! The f1.2 is about $1000 more expensive than
    the $400 f1.4 The f1.2 is *much* heavier. So heavy that you would take
    that weight into consideration if you were taking it out with you. As
    people mentioned in reply to an earlier post, the auto focus is very
    slow on the f1.2 going from eg a 2 meter shot to a 4 meter shot. I
    didn't seem to be able to spin that manual focus ring to speed up
    focusing. Probably i just didn't have the nack.

    I tried to look at sharpness of the picture on the 1.2 by taking a
    shot of my shoe and looking at the eyehole by zooming in on the led
    after the shot. I had the shutter speed at 160th. I didn't think it
    was particularly sharp. I had the eyelet in the center and locked on
    with autofocus. Why might i have got the impression that it was not
    sharp? (I was using a canon 10d, and i was not inside the minimum
    focus distance. It wasn't hand shake i think - that lens has Image
    Stability (IS).) Why?

    I took another shot of a bag under light and that was great, very
    sharp. I also checked how good the Auto FOcus was in poorer light by
    taking a shot under my cloak. It had no problem locking on and i was
    surprised and impressed to see where it had focused there was much
    detail to be seen sharply in an area that was in focus.

    The whats the word, brocage? (out of focus) behind some head shots i
    did was fantastic and really threw the subject into the fore of the
    picture. THe 50mm trying to get the same effect i had to get a lot
    closer to the subject and the effect is similar but not quite as
    pronounced. I think i felt that the 1.2 was brighter but that might
    have been delusional. :)

    I was tempted to get the 1.2. I wanted it but i managed to get out of
    the shop without parting with any money. I was thinking, this lens
    must have been out a while now and surely they will bring out an
    update or similar model without the weight or a bit cheaper. I thought
    about getting the 1.4 but it wasn't the one i really wanted, though it
    would be very, very handy to have with my f2.8 70-200mm when the light
    gets bad. BUt then again, it would be $300 on something i didn't
    really want.

    What I would like to know is when will canon bring out new lenses?
    Where do we get forewarned?? OR is it only every 2 years at photokina?
     
    n, Nov 27, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. n

    Skip M Guest

    "n" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I was in a shop again looking at this and comparing it to the 50mm
    > f1.4.
    >
    > I will echo everything people said in reply to a previous post I made.
    >
    > *BIG* difference in price! The f1.2 is about $1000 more expensive than
    > the $400 f1.4 The f1.2 is *much* heavier. So heavy that you would take
    > that weight into consideration if you were taking it out with you. As
    > people mentioned in reply to an earlier post, the auto focus is very
    > slow on the f1.2 going from eg a 2 meter shot to a 4 meter shot. I
    > didn't seem to be able to spin that manual focus ring to speed up
    > focusing. Probably i just didn't have the nack.
    >
    > I tried to look at sharpness of the picture on the 1.2 by taking a
    > shot of my shoe and looking at the eyehole by zooming in on the led
    > after the shot. I had the shutter speed at 160th. I didn't think it
    > was particularly sharp. I had the eyelet in the center and locked on
    > with autofocus. Why might i have got the impression that it was not
    > sharp? (I was using a canon 10d, and i was not inside the minimum
    > focus distance. It wasn't hand shake i think - that lens has Image
    > Stability (IS).) Why?
    >


    Psssst, the 85mm f1.2 doesn't have IS...

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Nov 27, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "Skip M" <> wrote in message
    news:d88qd.177656$hj.32119@fed1read07...
    > "n" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >I was in a shop again looking at this and comparing it to the 50mm
    > > f1.4.
    > >
    > > I will echo everything people said in reply to a previous post I made.
    > >
    > > *BIG* difference in price! The f1.2 is about $1000 more expensive than
    > > the $400 f1.4 The f1.2 is *much* heavier. So heavy that you would take
    > > that weight into consideration if you were taking it out with you. As
    > > people mentioned in reply to an earlier post, the auto focus is very
    > > slow on the f1.2 going from eg a 2 meter shot to a 4 meter shot. I
    > > didn't seem to be able to spin that manual focus ring to speed up
    > > focusing. Probably i just didn't have the nack.
    > >
    > > I tried to look at sharpness of the picture on the 1.2 by taking a
    > > shot of my shoe and looking at the eyehole by zooming in on the led
    > > after the shot. I had the shutter speed at 160th. I didn't think it
    > > was particularly sharp. I had the eyelet in the center and locked on
    > > with autofocus. Why might i have got the impression that it was not
    > > sharp? (I was using a canon 10d, and i was not inside the minimum
    > > focus distance. It wasn't hand shake i think - that lens has Image
    > > Stability (IS).) Why?
    > >

    >
    > Psssst, the 85mm f1.2 doesn't have IS...
    >

    Real photographers don't need no stinkin' IS ;)
     
    Darrell Larose, Nov 28, 2004
    #3
  4. n

    Skip M Guest

    " Darrell Larose" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "Skip M" <> wrote in message
    > news:d88qd.177656$hj.32119@fed1read07...
    >> "n" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> >I was in a shop again looking at this and comparing it to the 50mm
    >> > f1.4.
    >> >
    >> > I will echo everything people said in reply to a previous post I made.
    >> >
    >> > *BIG* difference in price! The f1.2 is about $1000 more expensive than
    >> > the $400 f1.4 The f1.2 is *much* heavier. So heavy that you would take
    >> > that weight into consideration if you were taking it out with you. As
    >> > people mentioned in reply to an earlier post, the auto focus is very
    >> > slow on the f1.2 going from eg a 2 meter shot to a 4 meter shot. I
    >> > didn't seem to be able to spin that manual focus ring to speed up
    >> > focusing. Probably i just didn't have the nack.
    >> >
    >> > I tried to look at sharpness of the picture on the 1.2 by taking a
    >> > shot of my shoe and looking at the eyehole by zooming in on the led
    >> > after the shot. I had the shutter speed at 160th. I didn't think it
    >> > was particularly sharp. I had the eyelet in the center and locked on
    >> > with autofocus. Why might i have got the impression that it was not
    >> > sharp? (I was using a canon 10d, and i was not inside the minimum
    >> > focus distance. It wasn't hand shake i think - that lens has Image
    >> > Stability (IS).) Why?
    >> >

    >>
    >> Psssst, the 85mm f1.2 doesn't have IS...
    >>

    > Real photographers don't need no stinkin' IS ;)
    >
    >
    >

    Ahem, yes, we do... ;-)

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Nov 28, 2004
    #4
  5. n

    n Guest

    bump
     
    n, Dec 11, 2004
    #5
  6. n

    Guest

    In message <>,
    "n" <> wrote:

    >bump


    Do many people actually read usenet in such a manner that "bumping"
    serves any purpose?

    I read news in such a manner that I mark threads "watch" or "ignore" as
    soon as I encounter them. The ones marked "watch" get news messages
    read in their entirety, in threaded order, whether or not anyone "bumps"
    them.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Dec 23, 2004
    #6
  7. n

    Jim Redelfs Guest

    In article <>, wrote:

    > In message <>,
    > "n" <> wrote:
    >
    > >bump

    >
    > Do many people actually read usenet in such a manner that "bumping"
    > serves any purpose?
    >
    > I read news in such a manner that I mark threads "watch" or "ignore" as
    > soon as I encounter them. The ones marked "watch" get news messages
    > read in their entirety, in threaded order, whether or not anyone "bumps"
    > them.


    I've read use(less)net for YEARS. What is "bumping"?

    :)
    JR
     
    Jim Redelfs, Dec 24, 2004
    #7
  8. n

    Joe Makowiec Guest

    On 24 Dec 2004 in rec.photo.digital, Jim Redelfs wrote:

    > I've read use(less)net for YEARS. What is "bumping"?


    It's an artifact of webfora. Webfora tend to be sorted by date. If a
    post in a webforum hasn't been answered in what the OP considers a
    reasonable amount of time (anywhere from 3 minutes to a couple of days),
    the post can be moved back to the top of the pile using a 'bump'. Just
    don't ask my opinion of the practice...

    --
    Joe Makowiec
    http://makowiec.org/
    Email: http://makowiec.org/contact/?Joe
     
    Joe Makowiec, Dec 25, 2004
    #8
  9. n

    Jim Redelfs Guest

    OT Posting Conventions (was: When will Canon

    In article <Xns95C9EDE841AE1makowiecatnycapdotrE@24.24.2.166>,
    Joe Makowiec <> wrote:

    > What is "bumping"?
    >
    > It's an artifact of webfora. Webfora tend to be sorted by date. If a
    > post in a webforum hasn't been answered in what the OP considers a
    > reasonable amount of time (anywhere from 3 minutes to a couple of days),
    > the post can be moved back to the top of the pile using a 'bump'.


    Gee, that sounds "handy". <sigh>

    If my post isn't read or responded to to my satisfaction, I can just simply
    BUMP it back to the top of the heap? Sheesh! :(

    > Just don't ask my opinion of the practice...


    I can imagine. I think it stinks and have never KNOWN of it. I HATE reposts.
    That's all this is: An easier way (lazier way) to post the SAME message.

    Thanks for bringing me up to speed.

    :)
    JR
     
    Jim Redelfs, Dec 25, 2004
    #9
  10. n

    Guest

    In message <>,
    Jim Redelfs <> wrote:

    >I've read use(less)net for YEARS. What is "bumping"?


    Bumping is when you make a content-less post to keep the post visible or
    alive, in systems where only the most active threads with the most
    recently posted articles are easy to see.

    DPReview, for example, uses forum software that doesn't automatically
    keep track of what you've read in such a way that you can only read what
    you haven't already read. It only changes the color of links that
    you've already been to (in your computer) or keeps track of which
    threads you've posted to (on their server). Bumping makes it more
    likely for you to see the articles in the thread at all. It is against
    the rules of most forums.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Dec 26, 2004
    #10
  11. n

    Guest

    In message <Xns95C9EDE841AE1makowiecatnycapdotrE@24.24.2.166>,
    Joe Makowiec <> wrote:

    >On 24 Dec 2004 in rec.photo.digital, Jim Redelfs wrote:


    >> I've read use(less)net for YEARS. What is "bumping"?


    >It's an artifact of webfora. Webfora tend to be sorted by date. If a
    >post in a webforum hasn't been answered in what the OP considers a
    >reasonable amount of time (anywhere from 3 minutes to a couple of days),
    >the post can be moved back to the top of the pile using a 'bump'. Just
    >don't ask my opinion of the practice...


    My opinion of the web forum software is lower than that of this
    practice. After reading usenet with nn, trn, Agent, Xnews, the web
    forum software in common use is pathetic, and makes it a significant
    chore to follow threads.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Dec 26, 2004
    #11
  12. n

    Confused Guest

    On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:56:22 GMT
    In message <>
    OFF TOPIC FOLLOWUP:

    > > I've read use(less)net for YEARS. What is "bumping"?


    When something or someone is "bumped" from a list, that person or
    thing is removed from a list and replaced. For example: a song that
    is bumped off of the top ten list by another song. Or a person gets
    bumped off a waiting list by someone else. One could also be bumped
    further down a list or toward the back of a line. One can be moved or
    placed at the head of the line, resulting in everyone else being
    bumped back one position.

    On the other hand, there was this popular fad dance called "The Bump"
    where people would bump (rumps) while dancing. (Not to be confused
    with bumping heads, a frequent occurrence on this and many other
    USENET groups. ;^)

    BTW - Does anyone know if Canon will release a new f1.2 80mm ?

    (Someone wanted to know.)

    Jeff
     
    Confused, Dec 26, 2004
    #12
    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. Silverstrand

    Sharkoon Silent Eagle 2000 80mm Case Fan

    Silverstrand, Oct 3, 2005, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    911
    Silverstrand
    Oct 3, 2005
  2. Nick

    80mm Fan need some advice

    Nick, Feb 18, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    613
    John and Pat
    Feb 22, 2004
  3. Bjarne Dollerup
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,137
    steve
    Nov 25, 2003
  4. Emre Tuvay

    Nikon D70 + 28-80mm AF-G or Canon EOS 300D + 18-55mm

    Emre Tuvay, Apr 22, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,110
    NightStar
    May 15, 2004
  5. ShibbyShane

    Canon 28-80mm lens noise

    ShibbyShane, Feb 23, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    1,601
Loading...

Share This Page