IMO there's a snow ball's chance in hell of this being a 1.3x cropper.
I'm still interested if it's only 1.6x if the AF is a clear step up over the 50D/40D and the noise at least to ISO 800 is good and no worse than 50D at the pixel level.
fraga wrote:
I beg to differ.
Iso 50 can be useful in some situations.
When using very large aperture lenses (for shallow DOF) in good light, for example.
Or to drop the shutter speed to give the idea of motion (when shooting a river or a waterfall, for example).
Know what you mean, but until now, you get EXACTLY the same result by overexposing ISO 100 by 1 stop.
The same can also be said about H1 and H2, so this L may be a gimmick only.
But I hope not.
...the medium of internet forums discussion doesn't lend itself well at all to conversational discourse. it's more like dropping argument grenades, and coming back every once in a while to see what you've hit.
(wasn't i just railing about analogies being odious?)
garyvot wrote:
The answer is simple: to some, the image quality and affordable entry into full-frame are way more important than a high framerate, a short mirror blackout time, or "pro" AF (however you define it). Sure, those things are nice, but they aren't the primary motivations for people who love the 5-series.
The endless debate is pointless because you are talking past one another, and seem to have fundamentally different views on what is most important in a camera...
I think we have similar views in all honesty. We both think that AF, IQ and responsiveness are important. I'm merely stating that the 5D doesn't feel rebel like, and he's stating that it's sluggishness feels rebel like to him. Neither one of us is talking past each other.
It may seem to me that I don't feel the speed and responsiveness are important, however I truly do. It's just that at this point in time, I can't go and buy cameras willy nilly to fill up the house. I bought the tools to do the work I intended on doing most of the time, and what's sad is, I should have bought tools to do "sports" jobs first, because I"m shooting more of those now.
It will be a very fun week, first all the speculation, then the actual announcement, then the complaints about lack of this or that will ensue. I love Canon Release announcements, it makes the month fly by so fast!
Just looking at the picture posted above by Teamspeed I notice a "problem".
The lower left of the picture shows this to be a 7D and also have some kit lens with IS and USM.
The picture of the camera with lens mounted very much appears to be the EF-S 18-135mm IS. I don't think (from the rumours, of course) that the 18-135 is USM. Also the picture shows a 72mm filter size, and from the leaked (unverified) pictures of the 15-85IS USM and 18-135IS the diameter of the 18-135 doesn't look that large.
So based off of the earlier rumours and pictures I would say this latest doesn't seem to fit in.
orangefirefish wrote:
Okay that one is just clearly a fake... I'm pretty sure the 18-135 is supposed to be an EF-S lens....
Not so sure about that. The long end of the focal length kinda confuses me. Why 135? And what's the point when Canon had just released the 18-200mm last year?
That box photo looks fairly believable and if it's true, there doesn't seem to be any built in flash.
Don't shout at me for not having read every post here, but the received wisdom seems to be the 7D is effectively an EF-S mount APS-C crop sports camera, right?
...a baby 1D, that will take the cheapo crap EF-S zooms?
So why 18 meg? Isn't that rather overegging the pudding for a sports shooter?
n0b0 wrote:
Not so sure about that. The long end of the focal length kinda confuses me. Why 135? And what's the point when Canon had just released the 18-200mm last year?
That box photo looks fairly believable and if it's true, there doesn't seem to be any built in flash.
musclepics wrote:
Haha, I've never heard of people wanting something to cost MORE
I always here this crap about Canon camera such as the 5D not having "pro" autofocus. Will somebody please direct me to the wiki or whatever that defines "pro" autofocus?
People here used to complain that it was the number of AF points, but now that we have a large number, it's still possibly being considered not "pro AF".
As far as I'm concerned, the 5D has "pro" autofocus, and so does the 5Dii. Why? Because the most successful pro wedding photographers I know use them both exclusively. With that said, "pro AF" is still a completely arbitrary term.
This thread is hilarious. If the camera was 12MP, people would complain it's too few (like on the Nikon boards), then when it's 15MP or 18MP, people complain it's too many. 9 AF points are too few to be pro. 19 AF points are too many to be pro at a certain price point.
I picture most of the complainers at these FM hardware forums looking like Statler and Waldorf , the old guys in the balcony on the Muppet Show who complained about everything. ...Show more →
Actually, I SHOOT WEDDINGS with a 5D. I'm not talking about the 5d, or the 5d2 for that matter. For that environment, the 5D is fantastic. I was talkng about AF assist points for tracking erratic subjects, like smaller birds in flight, stunt aircraft, or FM members.
From personal experience, I was at the atlantic city airshow last week and my 50D without assist points had trouble with the stunt planes. I switched to the 1dm2, and all was fine. My point is that I am HOPING that they didn't eliminate a key attribute like AF assist points to cut a few bucks off the price, because then for sports and small BIF it will likely not be any better than the 50D. That would be a shame..
the "-" in EF-S is missing on the picture... as far as I can see it says EFS, not EF-S like on real lenses.
My guess would be a fake 28-135 IS USM picture (72mm filter size, "1" photoshopped in and USM edited out).
Let's hope they did!
