19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 4 … 9 10 end

Archive 2009 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

skibum5
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #1 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

gabimaster wrote:
Sorry, DaaN B,IT wont have IS,and I think that inside of you,you already know it.It can't be f/2.8 and IS because it will kill 24-105L.I decided for 24-105L because of the focal range and IS to help the maximum f/4.0 aperture,if there was a 24-70 f/2.8 and IS I would never made that choice.So they wont do it.Sorry!

why in the world do they care about saving the 24-105??

Who cares, that is like saying they won't put better AF in 1 series so they can save the Rebel!

Aug 18, 2009 at 12:55 AM

rscheffler
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

Jay Adeff wrote:
The 1D-MKIII replacement will be announced because:

1D announced Sep 2001 in time for the 2002 Winter Olympics.
1D-MkII announced Jan 2004 in time for the 2004 Summer Olympics.
1D-MkIIn announced Aug 2005 in time for the 2006 Winter Olympics.
1D-MkIII announced Feb 2007 allowing enough time for Nikon to kick Canon's butt for the 2008 Summer Olympics.

It's not too hard to figure out that the 1D-MkIV will be announced now in time for the 2010 Winter Olympics (hopefully not allowing enough time for Nikon to surprise them again).

I've always suspected that the Mark III was rushed into an earlier release to preempt the D3 and mute its impact on the recent Nikon to Canon switchers. But the AF debacle had the opposite effect, giving many a good reason to switch back. Whatever the reason, I don't think Canon could have waited much longer anyway since the IIn wasn't much of a change over the II and it would have been nearly four years without anything significant. I'm sure Canon knew Nikon had something coming...

The timing now is right for a Mark IV, or even a Mark IIIn (920k display, UDMA, increased buffer capacity, silent AF upgrade, would be my wish), in advance of the winter Olympics. If it is announced now, delivery will begin later in September or October and give sufficient time for production to ramp up and fill the early adopter orders. With the original 1D, deliveries didn't really start to trickle out until the end of November 2001, which didn't leave a lot of time before the Olympics. Back when the Mark III was announced, even with the general knowledge that there could be some problems with it, supply was very tight for over six months. If a Mark IV announcement is made in a couple months from now, then it will be that much more difficult to get enough of the cameras out there. Admittedly, the number of photographers at the Olympics will not be the entire world supply that Canon can manufacture by that time, but the earlier the announcement, the more time everyone covering the games will have to get to know the camera better. I wouldn't want to go into an endurance event like the Olympics with a brand new, relatively unknown camera. Plus, considering the general vibe about the Mark III, there's a good chance that if the IV is proven to be a great performer, there will be a lot of pent up demand from a lot of Canon users sitting on the fence about the III - either those who never bought one, or those who have the camera but are still not entirely satisfied with it (yours truly included).

Given the recent 200 f/2 and 800 f/5.6, we could also see the rest of the super-tele line upgraded, or at least the 300 & 400, which are by far the most popular sports telephotos.

A new 70-200 2.8 IS would make a lot of sense too since that lens has a fairly so-so reputation among many sports photographers and is outclassed by the f/4 IS in all ways except maximum aperture. Plus Nikon just updated theirs. A long shot, but maybe a 135L IS...? Maybe f/1.8 to rival the Zeiss/Sony?

It will be interesting to see in a couple days who got their guesses the closest.

Aug 18, 2009 at 02:13 AM

saaketham
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #3 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

With all these tech advancements on the camera side, are these manufacturers neglecting lenses? I mean, we have cool lenses, but the coolest ones are HEAVY, and COSTLY. Can they not spend some $ on R&D on coming up with smaller and lighter versions of a 24-100mm f/3.5 and a 100-300mm f/4 with stellaer quality? I still use an old (bought used) 30D and I don't see much reason for upgrading. I was considering upgrading later when the 60D comes out, with 1080p video, but my experience with a rented 500D and HD-Video left me feeling let-down. I didn't really get the hang of focusing continuously and the quality was ok, but not easy without costly tripods, etc.

Aug 18, 2009 at 02:22 AM

aaronlam
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #4 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

Jay Adeff wrote:
It's not too hard to figure out that the 1D-MkIV will be announced now in time for the 2010 Winter Olympics (hopefully not allowing enough time for Nikon to surprise them again).

Do people still watch the Olympics? haha. j/k

But seriously... bet there is more printed images on Football, Soccer, Baseball etc. I could be wrong.

Aug 18, 2009 at 02:31 AM

rscheffler
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #5 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

saaketham wrote:
With all these tech advancements on the camera side, are these manufacturers neglecting lenses? I mean, we have cool lenses, but the coolest ones are HEAVY, and COSTLY. Can they not spend some $ on R&D on coming up with smaller and lighter versions of a 24-100mm f/3.5 and a 100-300mm f/4 with stellaer quality? I still use an old (bought used) 30D and I don't see much reason for upgrading. I was considering upgrading later when the 60D comes out, with 1080p video, but my experience with a rented 500D and HD-Video left me feeling let-down. I didn't really get the hang of focusing continuously and the quality was ok, but not easy without costly tripods, etc.

I think that's an issue of physics and optics. Those cool lenses tend to be the really fast primes, and how can they possibly be made much smaller if the front elements need to be that large to collect the light? And the larger the recording medium (i.e. film or sensor), the larger the lenses become. This is where the micro four-thirds system makes a lot of sense and addresses some of these issues. But even with four-thirds lenses like the 150 f/2 or the 35-100 f/2, those are still large lenses.

In part I think Canon is addressing this with the recent line of f/4 zooms. They're smaller, lighter, less expensive than similar f/2.8 lenses and with recent high ISO sensor improvements, not near the liability f/4 used to be even a couple years ago.

10 years ago the 800 f/5.6 wouldn't have made sense when everyone was shooting with Velvia 50 or maybe pushing film up to ISO 200 or even 400, and is perhaps a reason Canon didn't transition it from the FD mount during the EOS film era. But now with digital and relatively clean files at ISO 800 or even 1600, it opens up possibilities for lens development.

100-300 is interesting, but how many will buy it over a 100-400 mkII? If there is a new 70-200 f/2.8 II that performs very well with the 1.4x TC, it will be a much more popular 100-300 solution for many, many photographers because they also want a 2.8 zoom... yet wouldn't consider a 100-300 f/4. So it's kind of a strange spot in Canon's line-up - one that can be covered by a couple other lenses already.

But I wouldn't mind seeing a very nice, sharp, compact 300 f/4 DO.

Aug 18, 2009 at 02:49 AM

PetKal
Online
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #6 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

rscheffler wrote:
But I wouldn't mind seeing a very nice, sharp, compact 300 f/4 DO.

Ron, that lens would probably be priced at $2,000 US or more, and I reckon its IQ would be inferior to the present 300 f/4 IS, not to mention 300 f/4 non-IS. Not a winning formula from the consumer's viewpoint.
The 300 f/4 non-IS is perfect in many ways.......IMO light and compact enough, excellent IQ, fast AF drive....and a well preserved copy could be had for about $700 US or lower. Now, that's a winning proposition in my eyes.

Aug 18, 2009 at 03:20 AM

saaketham
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #7 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

I liked the Sigma 100-300mm f/4 lens I had for a while, but the IQ was not close to the 70-400mm f/2.8 or f/4. The focal length was just right though. Many times, with my 70-200mm f/2.8, I've wished I could zoom more, without having to carry and manage yet another "gadget" in the form of the 1.4x or 2x TCs. I'd be happy with a 100-400mm f/4 with the same IQ as the 70-200mm series.

Aug 18, 2009 at 03:24 AM

Ransome
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #8 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

n0b0 wrote:
I think eventually all lenses would come with IS and besides, some people will still prefer the extra reach of the 24-105, not to mention it's the kit lens for premium bodies so you never know.

Not to mention, the 24-105 @ f4 will be cheaper than the 24-70 @ f2.8.

Aug 18, 2009 at 03:34 AM

AbramG
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #9 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

Unless the future 1DmkIV is leagues better, I'd be perfectly happy getting a 1DmkIII again, I was so absolutely pleased with the IQ of that camera. Maybe it'll get down to a reasonable level (it's already getting close!)

Aug 18, 2009 at 03:37 AM

ohyeah
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

Well we know there's going to be at least one announcement that Canon's admitted to, at least one lens (but I'd bet two, minimum) with their new IS technology. Question is, will it be a new lens, or a Mark II, or both? I'm hoping for a 24-70 f/2.8L IS myself.

Edited on Aug 18, 2009 at 03:56 AM · View previous versions

Aug 18, 2009 at 03:52 AM

M Vers
Online
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #11 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

Daan B wrote:
How about the 24-70L IS?

Not sure if this is a joke or not but I'd definitely be very interested in one of these. If it performs even marginally better than the 24-70 with the addition of IS and sells at or around $1700 I'd most likely end up picking one up. I'd of course like to see other lenses as well--including a 135/2 IS, 50/1.4II, 200-400/4 IS, 250/3.5 IS with 1:1 and a 400/4 IS (non-DO) but the 24-70 IS, for me, is the stand out.

Aug 18, 2009 at 03:55 AM

rscheffler
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #12 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

PetKal wrote:
rscheffler wrote:
But I wouldn't mind seeing a very nice, sharp, compact 300 f/4 DO.

Ron, that lens would probably be priced at $2,000 US or more, and I reckon its IQ would be inferior to the present 300 f/4 IS, not to mention 300 f/4 non-IS. Not a winning formula from the consumer's viewpoint.
The 300 f/4 non-IS is perfect in many ways.......IMO light and compact enough, excellent IQ, fast AF drive....and a well preserved copy could be had for about $700 US or lower. Now, that's a winning proposition in my eyes.

Yes, it would be more expensive but I think Canon could make it sharper than the current 300 f/4 IS, which I own, and which I don't consider to be one of their better telephoto lenses. Maybe, considering past DO lenses, it might have lower contrast and colour saturation in certain situations, but that can be compensated for in post production. As it stands now, I wonder if Canon sells many 300 f/4s when many photographers seem to prefer the 70-200 w/1.4 TC or the 100-400 instead. It's possibly a reason Canon hasn't touched it since it was released in 1997. Yet a 300 f/4 DO perhaps could be made to about the size of a 200 2.8, which would create a unique niche. I would buy one.

AbramG wrote:
Unless the future 1DmkIV is leagues better, I'd be perfectly happy getting a 1DmkIII again, I was so absolutely pleased with the IQ of that camera. Maybe it'll get down to a reasonable level (it's already getting close!)

I'd be surprised if there is a significant difference in the overall design of the IV. Likely evolutionary changes, such as higher resolution display, UDMA, higher resolution sensor, latest Digic, video, tweaked AF.

The III will without doubt drop in price, as all digital cameras do once a replacement is announced, but you'll only have a very limited window of opportunity to buy one new before stock runs out and you have to buy used.

Ron

Aug 18, 2009 at 04:05 AM

Pixel Perfect
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #13 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

rscheffler wrote:
PetKal wrote:
rscheffler wrote:
But I wouldn't mind seeing a very nice, sharp, compact 300 f/4 DO.

Ron, that lens would probably be priced at $2,000 US or more, and I reckon its IQ would be inferior to the present 300 f/4 IS, not to mention 300 f/4 non-IS. Not a winning formula from the consumer's viewpoint.
The 300 f/4 non-IS is perfect in many ways.......IMO light and compact enough, excellent IQ, fast AF drive....and a well preserved copy could be had for about $700 US or lower. Now, that's a winning proposition in my eyes.

Yes, it would be more expensive but I think Canon could make it sharper than the current 300 f/4 IS, which I own, and which I don't consider to be one of their better telephoto lenses. Maybe, considering past DO lenses, it might have lower contrast and colour saturation in certain situations, but that can be compensated for in post production. As it stands now, I wonder if Canon sells many 300 f/4s when many photographers seem to prefer the 70-200 w/1.4 TC or the 100-400 instead. It's possibly a reason Canon hasn't touched it since it was released in 1997. Yet a 300 f/4 DO perhaps could be made to about the size of a 200 2.8, which would create a unique niche. I would buy one.

The 300 f/4L IS seems to be rather variable in IQ. Mine was sharp at f/4.5 and good wide open and my 100-400 is sharp wide open even at 400mm, which many would say is impossible.

However, it's pretty lame that these lenses haven't at least had updates of the IS if nothing else. Most manufacturers make running updates, but not lens makers. We are about to get 5th gen IS and we still have 1996 clunkers commanding top dollar.

If we are making wish list, I'd rather see a 100-300 f/2.8 DO IS or 150-420 f/4 DO, than 300 f/4 DO, but only for size and weight. DO lenses will be much dearer than conventional lenses so either of those would be in $5.5k-$7K range at a minmum. Even a 300 f/4 DO would be over $2K.

Aug 18, 2009 at 04:41 AM

saaketham
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #14 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

If Sigma can make a decent 100-300mm f/4 for less than $1000, then can't Canon make a 100-300mm f/4 IS for $1400?

Aug 18, 2009 at 04:46 AM

RobertLynn
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #15 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

Daan B wrote:
gabimaster wrote:
Even if it will be released a MK2 version of the 24-70mm L, I don't think it will have IS.

Oh, we can hope it zooms internally, is sharp over the entire zoom range at f/2.8 (as sharp as f/4 and f/5.6) and in the extreme corners... and has a 4 stop IS too... and is less heavy and bulky than the current 24-70L

You in fantasy land?

Aug 18, 2009 at 06:12 AM

skibum5
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #16 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

M Vers wrote:
Daan B wrote:
How about the 24-70L IS?

Not sure if this is a joke or not but I'd definitely be very interested in one of these. If it performs even marginally better than the 24-70 with the addition of IS and sells at or around $1700 I'd most likely end up picking one up. I'd of course like to see other lenses as well--including a 135/2 IS, 50/1.4II, 200-400/4 IS, 250/3.5 IS with 1:1 and a 400/4 IS (non-DO) but the 24-70 IS, for me, is the stand out.

yeah 50mm 1.4 II with RING usm would be quite nice

Aug 18, 2009 at 06:20 AM

Lance Couture
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #17 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

skibum5 wrote:
yeah 50mm 1.4 II with RING usm would be quite nice

That would be *sweet*.

Aug 18, 2009 at 06:37 AM

gabimaster
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #18 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

skibum5,don't say something bad about 24-105L,the wedding photographers will become mad on you

; now seriously talking,24-105 is at least equal with 24-70L in terms of IQ that is produced in the pictures;yes,is producing a little bit more distorsion at 24mm on the full frame bodies and is not a f/2.8,but I bought it instead of 24-70 because of his very useful focal range and,I say again,extremely high IQ (I use it on a 30D and a 40D which I own for the moment).

Aug 18, 2009 at 07:29 AM

DmitriM
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #19 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

Aug 18, 2009 at 07:30 AM

Lars Johnsson
Online
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #20 · 19 August-watch the Canon statements!!!!

DmitriM wrote:
M Vers wrote:
Daan B wrote:
How about the 24-70L IS?

Not sure if this is a joke or not but I'd definitely be very interested in one of these. If it performs even marginally better than the 24-70 with the addition of IS and sells at or around $1700 I'd most likely end up picking one up. I'd of course like to see other lenses as well--including a 135/2 IS, 50/1.4II, 200-400/4 IS, 250/3.5 IS with 1:1 and a 400/4 IS (non-DO) but the 24-70 IS, for me, is the stand out.

The problem is, Canon doesn't have a very reliable IS mechanism. Just look at their 17-55IS lens. They all fail within 3 years of use.
Which is sweet deal for Canon since their warranty is only 1 year. They should've recalled the lens after all the claims started to come in.

I have owned / own seven different IS lenses. None have failed yet. And the oldest is about 7 years old. So I don't belive they are unreliable and fail within 3 years

Aug 18, 2009 at 06:11 PM

1 2 3 4 … 9 10 end
FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 … 9 10 end