24 - 70 2.8L USM

Skip M wrote:
"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...

"Skip M" wrote:


You very well may, the 1.3x could be seen as an excellent compromise
between
the edge performance of the 1.6x and the wide angle performance of full
35mm
frame...


But Canon have announced that their future digital SLR line will
comprise only full frame and 1.6X sensors.



I wasn't going to say that... ;-)


Did Canon release that info before or after they released the new 1DMKII
"N", which is also a 1.3X camera? Locally, there's a great deal of
interest in the camera.

"nick c" wrote in message
...
Skip M wrote:
"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...

"Skip M" wrote:


You very well may, the 1.3x could be seen as an excellent compromise
between
the edge performance of the 1.6x and the wide angle performance of full
35mm
frame...


But Canon have announced that their future digital SLR line will
comprise only full frame and 1.6X sensors.



I wasn't going to say that... ;-)


Did Canon release that info before or after they released the new 1DMKII
"N", which is also a 1.3X camera? Locally, there's a great deal of
interest in the camera.

Before. Last year, or early this year, some time, there was an interview
with a Canon exec who said that Canon would pare their offerings down to two
sensor sizes, one of them full frame. The inference, there, since they've
put so much into R&D for the EF-S mount, is that it is the 1.3x mount that
is the short timer...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

"Skip M" a écrit dans le message de
news:IHE5f.2876$UF4.1994@fed1read02...
"nick c" wrote in message
...
Skip M wrote:
"nick c" wrote in message
news


I can well imagine that you're happy with the 5D and the thought of
getting one has passed my mind. However, (correct me if you think I'm
off
base) I think I get the best from my lenses using the 1DMK2 with its
1.3X
factor.


You very well may, the 1.3x could be seen as an excellent compromise
between the edge performance of the 1.6x and the wide angle performance
of full 35mm frame...


Thanks Skip. That has been my thought too and I decided to not get the
5D.
FWIW, that seems to be the opinion of the fellows at the camera store.



The primary reasons we made the leap from our 20D bodies to the 5D was the
full frame and spot meter. If we had the 1D mkII, instead, I'm not sure
the
change would have been made, 1.3x, spot meter, 8 fps, 8mp vs 1x, center
spot
meter, 3 fps, 12mp isn't a compelling argument. 1.6x, partial spot, 5
fps,
8mp vs the above could be, especially when we can keep the 20Ds for the
occasions they fit the situation best.

While the price of toys is an issue, for me the 1.6X is the clincher, I like
long teles and even a modest 300mm works like a 480mm.

Jean

Skip M wrote:
"nick c" wrote in message
...

Skip M wrote:

"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...


"Skip M" wrote:



You very well may, the 1.3x could be seen as an excellent compromise
between
the edge performance of the 1.6x and the wide angle performance of full
35mm
frame...


But Canon have announced that their future digital SLR line will
comprise only full frame and 1.6X sensors.



I wasn't going to say that... ;-)


Did Canon release that info before or after they released the new 1DMKII
"N", which is also a 1.3X camera? Locally, there's a great deal of
interest in the camera.


Before. Last year, or early this year, some time, there was an interview
with a Canon exec who said that Canon would pare their offerings down to two
sensor sizes, one of them full frame. The inference, there, since they've
put so much into R&D for the EF-S mount, is that it is the 1.3x mount that
is the short timer...


Thanks for the info. I had heard about this before but the folks who
told me weren't certain they were right. I can understand the need to
make a full frame digital as comparisons seem to relate to full frame. I
can somewhat understand the "S" lens view point because of the success
of the Rebel series. But the bottom line to me reads .... hang on to the
1.3X as it is the best compromise. Now I'm beginning to wonder about a
1DMKII "N" if or when the price is right.

"jean" wrote in message
...

"Skip M" a écrit dans le message de
news:IHE5f.2876$UF4.1994@fed1read02...
"nick c" wrote in message
...
Skip M wrote:
"nick c" wrote in message
news


I can well imagine that you're happy with the 5D and the thought of
getting one has passed my mind. However, (correct me if you think I'm
off
base) I think I get the best from my lenses using the 1DMK2 with its
1.3X
factor.


You very well may, the 1.3x could be seen as an excellent compromise
between the edge performance of the 1.6x and the wide angle
performance
of full 35mm frame...


Thanks Skip. That has been my thought too and I decided to not get the
5D.
FWIW, that seems to be the opinion of the fellows at the camera store.



The primary reasons we made the leap from our 20D bodies to the 5D was
the
full frame and spot meter. If we had the 1D mkII, instead, I'm not sure
the
change would have been made, 1.3x, spot meter, 8 fps, 8mp vs 1x, center
spot
meter, 3 fps, 12mp isn't a compelling argument. 1.6x, partial spot, 5
fps,
8mp vs the above could be, especially when we can keep the 20Ds for the
occasions they fit the situation best.

While the price of toys is an issue, for me the 1.6X is the clincher, I
like
long teles and even a modest 300mm works like a 480mm.

Jean


Wait until your 16-35 acts like a 26-56... ;-) That was the clincher for
us. Of course, different horses for different courses. And we're in the
position to keep our 20Ds for the times the need for reach exceeds the need
for width.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

"nick c" wrote in message
...
Skip M wrote:
"nick c" wrote in message
...

Skip M wrote:



But Canon have announced that their future digital SLR line will
comprise only full frame and 1.6X sensors.



I wasn't going to say that... ;-)


Did Canon release that info before or after they released the new 1DMKII
"N", which is also a 1.3X camera? Locally, there's a great deal of
interest in the camera.


Before. Last year, or early this year, some time, there was an interview
with a Canon exec who said that Canon would pare their offerings down to
two sensor sizes, one of them full frame. The inference, there, since
they've put so much into R&D for the EF-S mount, is that it is the 1.3x
mount that is the short timer...


Thanks for the info. I had heard about this before but the folks who told
me weren't certain they were right. I can understand the need to make a
full frame digital as comparisons seem to relate to full frame. I can
somewhat understand the "S" lens view point because of the success of the
Rebel series. But the bottom line to me reads .... hang on to the 1.3X as
it is the best compromise. Now I'm beginning to wonder about a 1DMKII "N"
if or when the price is right.



Might not be a bad idea...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

"Skip M" a écrit dans le message de
newsL66f.2999$UF4.1509@fed1read02...
"jean" wrote in message
...

"Skip M" a écrit dans le message de
news:IHE5f.2876$UF4.1994@fed1read02...
"nick c" wrote in message
...
Skip M wrote:
"nick c" wrote in message
news


I can well imagine that you're happy with the 5D and the thought of
getting one has passed my mind. However, (correct me if you think
I'm
off
base) I think I get the best from my lenses using the 1DMK2 with its
1.3X
factor.


You very well may, the 1.3x could be seen as an excellent compromise
between the edge performance of the 1.6x and the wide angle
performance
of full 35mm frame...


Thanks Skip. That has been my thought too and I decided to not get
the
5D.
FWIW, that seems to be the opinion of the fellows at the camera
store.



The primary reasons we made the leap from our 20D bodies to the 5D was
the
full frame and spot meter. If we had the 1D mkII, instead, I'm not
sure
the
change would have been made, 1.3x, spot meter, 8 fps, 8mp vs 1x, center
spot
meter, 3 fps, 12mp isn't a compelling argument. 1.6x, partial spot, 5
fps,
8mp vs the above could be, especially when we can keep the 20Ds for the
occasions they fit the situation best.

While the price of toys is an issue, for me the 1.6X is the clincher, I
like
long teles and even a modest 300mm works like a 480mm.

Jean


Wait until your 16-35 acts like a 26-56... ;-) That was the clincher for
us. Of course, different horses for different courses. And we're in the
position to keep our 20Ds for the times the need for reach exceeds the
need
for width.

I'm happy with a 17-40 (28-64 in 35mm speak) and right you are, can't please
everyone all the time.

Jean

On 2005-10-16 02:07:58 -0700, "Robbie" said:

From everything that I have read, this seems to be a great all around "L"
lens. I am using a 20D. There is a 45.00 rebate making the price 1114 over
at B&H. Besides the price being the most obvious downside, would others here
steer away from this lens in lieu of a different model? I really want good
sharp images, and the range seems fine (24-70). I will be going from the
18-55 kit lens into this, so I expect the results will be obvious. I should
also be able to use this lens on future versions (like the 5D), right?

Thanks in advance for any comments or suggestions.

Did you consider the 24-105 f4L IS?

Cheaper, lighter, excellent optics, with image stabilization.

You lose a stop, so it depends on whether you want the shallower DOF of
the 2.8.

I have the 24-70. Excellent lens. Also fairly heavy. Balances well
on a 1D body... it will be a fair bit heavier than your 20D body.

On 2005-10-17 03:45:30 -0700, "Douglas..." said:

Cockpit Colin wrote:
"Robbie" wrote in message
news:_%t4f.1231$oy3.961@trnddc04...

Thanks for the information. Yes, I have taken many shots at the 18 mm
setting. I am going to miss that... Maybe I will see if they make a "L" that
covers the 18 - 50+ range.


If you really need a very wide angle lens, plan "B" might be to shoot a
couple of shots with the 24-70 and stitch them together with one of the
several excellent stitching programs available out there?

I could be wrong, but I suspect that the 24-70 USM F2.8 would be the
"staple diet" lens of many Canon photographers. I wouldn't part with
mine for love nor money (well OK, probably both, but it would have to
be a lot of both!)

For what it's worth I recently bought my 24-70 - did a few test shots -
and then put the kit lens on an auction site the very same day - and
can honestly say I've never been happier to see the ass-end of a hunk
of junk.



SO which gym did you enroll in to get the strength to wield a camera
with one of these dinosaurs on it?

Haha.

I did a 5 hour hike with a 70-200 f2.8L IS on a 1D.

Yes, my bicep was sore the next day.