aljaz_.

But, why not also the full frame sensors? You could just automatically cut off the corners of the photograph if the sensor moved off the frame. Instead of a blurry full-frame 22mpix picture you end up with a sharp 18mpix crop of it. And you still retain the full-frame possibility by turning the stabilisation off.

Looks quite real. Does the 22mpix translate into 22K$?

There?s the 24mm tilt-shift lens as well. Often admired and may be an interesting choice if you?re dedicated to Canon. As for alternatives, there are many. Buying a nikon 24mm lens and a cheap body is one. Splashing for a Leica packet is another. Some excellent Zeiss-Contax lenses also exist. No need to despair, hence.

> ...the 1Ds Mark ll (which everyone's expecting to be announced at Photokina)...

 

I don't expect that. And I know some more folks who don't.

 

 

> ...which is a better option?...

 

You may also try to manually crop your image obtained with the 300mm lens on a D20 to simulate a field of view of a 500mm lens or higher. You just need to trust your focusing accuracy...

1. Eos 1D and 1D MkII both have the crop factor of 1.3. There is no EOS DSLR with the crop factor of 1.5

 

2. The crop factor applies neither to the focal length of the lens neither to the aperture. It does affect the field of view, though.

 

3. No idea but it feels like 40 when you're off to do portraits in the evening light.

Bob, you're such a rumour guy lately. I think I'll report you to Bob. Do you realize that your 16-50 L is about to become a confirmed fact in the course of jumping to photozone, dpreview, ..., and back to photo.net? ;-))

Mine 50e shows the half-filled battery sign when battery is close to stop and the empty battery sign when it is too weak to deliver.

 

Btw, what battery issues are there with 50e?

Nicely versed, Puppy Face. I thought that MkII owners were all crowding in behind the football pitch. But then again, remember that one asking what lens on his/her MkII would be incospicious enough to take candids in NYC...

It's on the drawing board?

10D, EF 35/2.0

24mm f1.4 if money is no concern, 14mm f2.8 for a very wide group of people, or 16-35mm f2.8 if in need of a zoom.

So, the Medium Op Tech Hood Hat, the Great Big Giotto Rocket Air Turbo Blaster, one lens, and a large number of paired lens caps, it is .. But, why would a prime lens get damaged when in camera bag?

Do they have any more? Any nice eos 1hv or 3 bodies for 200gbp? Any discounted MkII's that nobody wants to use following the switch of brand? Surely I could accomodate one of those useless ef 200 f1.8's that never satisfied at sports events. 1000gbp?

That's curious, my 50 f1.4 is sharp at f2.0.

 

Nevertheless, I'm sure that you can gain enormously in terms of sharpness by taking one Canon 50mm lens over the other. In particular, the 50mm macro wide open must by all means be sharper wide open, compared with 50mm f1.4 around its sweet spot.

Take just a body and test all the lenses you can think of at the savvy stores downtown Manhattan. Pick one at b&h and another at adorama. Have an adventure and try to get a third one in some Brooklyn store.

 

Why not taking the 24-70L and one of the f1.4's for low light? You'll be conspicuous with the Mark ii anyway.

I believe the quality of the build will be at most fair on each of the examples but that the performance of all of them will be very good considering the price. To figure out if your sample is below the standard (for this lens) you'll need at least another sample anyway.

NO NEED TO YELL!! You may want to specify what you intend to use the lens for. Otherwise you'll hear that there certainly are many other options, such as 70-200 IS +1.4 tc, 300 4L, and then also the 28-80 4-5.6, maybe an option of buying a Nikon instead, or perhaps a lot of film, notwithstanding just getting out of the expensive hobby altogether and having a nice holiday instead.

On the question whether the superzoom on D30 will be superior to the Olympus 2100UZ: most likely it will, unless the 10x zoom on your Olympus is seriously exceptional. You don't need to invest into separate lenses to get better quality than 2100UZ.

 

However, what Richard, above, refers to may be of interest to you nevertheless: in the slr world the superzooms most often are of the poorest performance. Virtually any combination of non-super zooms is better and, as the discussion suggests, may be cheaper.

Now that you know, in one number, how a 2-D object looks like, what misterious use will this number have?

Now, this story about the mirror lock up and across the eos line I would like to hear. What is it again?

Mine exhibited precisely this, after it suddenly landed on the floor. Could not move it past 0.6 although the usm seemed to work, sort of. The usm had to be replaced and all was fine afterwards. Costs were around 100 usd.

Is there a rumour about a clear 2600*4000 pixel digital projector at a price of 70$ coming soon?

With zoom lenses: the larger the ratio between the max and the min angle the bigger are distortions and more difficult it gets to make such a lens good. This may explain why often lenses with a very large ratio are of a low quality and price.

The difference between the lenses you mention may be more than their angle coverages. Have you checked any comparisons in regard to sharpness, contrast, color rendition, flare resistance, etc?

A few threads below it appared from the discussion that 85mm perspective is not much different from the 100mm one. My impression is that you'd cover most of your 70mm-100mm needs with one of the extreme perspectives. That is, I think you are fine with this break. Many people do with two or three prime lenses.

 

You could also think of which lens you may take next and it may well be one of the prosumer ones, such as e.g. the 28-105 f/3.5-4.5.

I find the 100mm more useful outdoors, unless you have a really small street.

 

Really, see how it compares to your other lenses. If you are used to 85mm than take it. I got 100mm because it reaches a tad longer for candids and is closer to the mid of my 70-200, for moments when that one is too obtrusive. I's a cheaper compromise to having both 85 and 135.