ummm.... why -don't- they do that? this could possibly be one of the first interesting ideas that i've heard in this thread....
i mean yeah, it'd be like $300(+), and you'd lose a stop or more of light, and you'd... uhhh..... lose the shorter/wider focal length of those EF-S's...............
nevermind, i don't want a 1.6X EF-S adapter hahahhaaa
Seriously, the 1.6x extender doesn't help if you're already using a 1.4x to get the reach you need (I shoot a 300 + 1.4x on a 1.6 crop camera). Optically, stacking the extenders would be as bad or worse than having a single 2x extender plus you'd love AF unless you are using a pro body.
ISO1600 wrote:
ummm.... why -don't- they do that? this could possibly be one of the first interesting ideas that i've heard in this thread....
i mean yeah, it'd be like $300(+), and you'd lose a stop or more of light, and you'd... uhhh..... lose the shorter/wider focal length of those EF-S's...............
nevermind, i don't want a 1.6X EF-S adapter hahahhaaa
You don't want it? Fine with me. But erhh, you're twisting the intention I had with the proposed 1.6x extender. My point was that all those birders and wildlife shooters, who like the extended reach of APS-C, could go from 1.6x crop to FF and keep their extended focal range should they want to. Someone else came up with the idea to make it EF-S compatible, which is indeed a silly idea, for various reasons.
Losing a stop and a third isn't such a big deal, the market of 1.4x and 2x extenders seems to do just fine.
Tentacle wrote:
In other words, what Canon ought to do is make a 1.6x extender
All those folks who go full frame, but want to keep their APS-C derived extended reach would just slap on the 1.6x extender and live happily with their existing lens set untill, over time, they can invest into longer reach glass
Uh, why would anyone want a 1.6 extender? Already there are the 1.4x and 2x (plus third party). The EFS lenses are short, and it doesn't really make sense to put an extender on the 10-22. Even the 17-85 with an extender would only become 135 at f8. It would be cheaper and a lot better to get the 135/2, or a whole bunch of other options get you to that focal range with faster than f8 apeprture.
All the long glass takes the existing extenders.
Or did I miss the as some sort of smiley, and this is a joke?
Edit: Oh, never mind. I just saw some of the other posts.
timbop wrote:
Well, it's true that the 1.3 gives some of the added view, but at 1.3 an $1100 300/4L becomes 390mm. But, on a 1.6 crop it gets another 90mm yielding 480mm. For a wildlife shooter where the mantra is "your lens isn't long enough", that 90mm can be significant.
As a 1Ds owner with a 70-200/2.8L IS, I have been wanting more reach for years, and the 300/4L IS would have been the choice. However/therefore, I will be receiving my 300 today from B&H in the form of an Eos 30D... Not only do I get a 320/2.8L IS and a 448/4.0L IS (with the 1.4x TC II), for about the same price I get more pixels left over than I have cropping a 1Ds file, and an extra body to boot...
timbop wrote:
Oh, and Jeff is it time for this thread to die? Photokina is basically done, so all that's left is arguing about whether Canon execs should be falling on their swords. Although, it is a classic now since we reached the 2000 post milestone.
I'm thinking about changing the name to 'Unofficial PMA Rumors'. If I close this thread, it will immediately turn into dozens of Canon future/what's next/why no 1DsII/where's the 3D/I want a 400-5.6... Etc.
danmitchell wrote:
This has always seemed like a strange point to me. It seems that virtually all of us pick lenses to match our cameras, so when we move to full-frame bodies we (eventually, at least) adjust our lens collections to match - maybe lose the widest lens and pick up a longer tele.
Your line of thought ignores the fact that in order to get the equivalent telephoto lens (in many cases) would cost >$4k...
I think that there could simply be a "rumor" discussion area containing an ever shifting set of topics that fit the general subject.
Regarding this thread, part of me would like to see it locked since Photokina Rumors are now premature (since then next one is two years away - say, what do you think Canon will announce in 2008?! No, just kidding! Please don't go there!)
On the other hand, buried in the 250 screens of posts of varying interest there are a few things worth hanging on to - and, assuming that Canon delayed announcement of some stuff from Photokina to PMA, it could be relevant shortly.
Whatever... :-)
Dan
Who really likes the new unit of sensor resolution, the PPD (pixels per duck)! :-)
danmitchell wrote:
I think that there could simply be a "rumor" discussion area containing an ever shifting set of topics that fit the general subject.
Regarding this thread, part of me would like to see it locked since Photokina Rumors are now premature (since then next one is two years away - say, what do you think Canon will announce in 2008?! No, just kidding! Please don't go there!)
On the other hand, buried in the 250 screens of posts of varying interest there are a few things worth hanging on to - and, assuming that Canon delayed announcement of some stuff from Photokina to PMA, it could be relevant shortly.
Whatever... :-)
Dan
Who really likes the new unit of sensor resolution, the PPD (pixels per duck)! :-)...Show more →
I'll answer the last thing first, in true Monty Python Style™:
Would that be an African duck or a European duck?
As far as this topic goes: I would like to see it hang around, stickied and renamed to general rumor and slow-chat topic. It could serve as a sort of off-topic lightning rod to the other topics in this Canon Mount topic.
I second the idea exactly as presented by Tentacle.
As a voluntary contribution to that slow-chat: I think it was Hrow who wrote about cameras vs. women, something like this: "Too bad that the fast ones with big buffers are usually lacking in dynamic range." To downplay his sexiest joke, he then continued about men needing lighther bodies and less tendency to focus in ESPN.
Well, I didn't know what ESPN is (before someone posted a link to www.urbandictionary.com in another strict-to-the topic post ), so I was guessing what the letters might mean, and because he talked about male tendency to focus on ESPN, my top guess was "extremely sweet protruding nipples"
Koivulehto wrote:
I second the idea exactly as presented by Tentacle.
As a voluntary contribution to that slow-chat: I think it was Hrow who wrote about cameras vs. women, something like this: "Too bad that the fast ones with big buffers are usually lacking in dynamic range." To downplay his sexiest joke, he then continued about men needing lighther bodies and less tendency to focus in ESPN.
Well, I didn't know what ESPN is (before someone posted a link to www.urbandictionary.com in another strict-to-the topic post ), so I was guessing what the letters might mean, and because he talked about male tendency to focus on ESPN, my top guess was "extremely sweet protruding nipples" ...Show more →
Tentacle wrote:
As far as this topic goes: I would like to see it hang around, stickied and renamed to general rumor and slow-chat topic. It could serve as a sort of off-topic lightning rod to the other topics in this Canon Mount topic.
I've been pondering that for about 2 months now, which is how the 'Master' threads came to be. Still haven't come to a conclusion yet, still scratching!
My current thinking is that maybe a monthly 'Off-Topic Canon Banter' thread would be of value, a sort of free-form discussion thread, renewed monthly so they don't get too big or too boring (yes, that's a joke). The intent here is to streamline the forum from the many subtly off-topic topics (and tangents) that make it hard to find specific Canon info here in this relatively busy forum. That way, whatever 'Canon current event' of interest could have a place to be casually discussed, and wherever the tangents take the thread would be tolerated, as long as the rules of the site are abided by.
Hey, but back to Photokina: I wonder what all that Birth of a New Brand brouhaha was about. Can anyone fill me in on what product line was introduced? I must have missed it.
Tentacle wrote:
Hey, but back to Photokina: I wonder what all that Birth of a New Brand brouhaha was about. Can anyone fill me in on what product line was introduced? I must have missed it.
Perhaps they meant Nikon, Sony, Sigma and Fuji. They all seem to have given "birth" to more of a cutting edge generation of SLR's than Canon. :
Mariner wrote:
Perhaps they meant Nikon, Sony, Sigma and Fuji. They all seem to have given "birth" to more of a cutting edge generation of SLR's than Canon. :
I'm not quite sure that "cutting edge" is the right term, but the four have made significant strides forward. The advantage that the 20D shared over its competitors 2 years ago is no longer obvious, and it may have disappeared completely in some ways.
I don't understand all the angst about Canon not bringing out a new range this show.
They are certainly going to move to DIGICIII, and possibly to new sensors on their cameras.
The bigger the change the more difficult it is to get all your ducks in a row for it.
Now possibly they will make a complete mess of it, and put in horrendous software-based noise reductio to the detriment of real image quality, but I am pretty convinced that Canon at least feel that they are in the process of increasing both DR and noise performance.
If nothing happens by the spring, it might be time for some genuine concern.
Regards,
DaveMart
