Canon's gaping system holes STILL exist

"Doug McDonald" wrote:
Just Shoot Me wrote:

do you mind if I ask what you don't like about full frame?

That the mirror is so big that EF-S lenses won't work.

So don't buy any EF-S lenses. They're dumb anyway: APS-C is supposed to be
"better" because you don't see the infelicities at the corner. But the
corners don't get cropped out of the APS-C image circle.

By selling such lenses Canon is pretty much committing to
selling cameras that use them for a long time ... or else
risking customer conniption fits leading to the "N" word

Canon has said that the entry level will be APS-C for a long long time, but
that everything else (except maybe a sports camera) will be full frame.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

"RichA" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Aug 21, 5:20 pm, "Just Shoot Me" wrote:
"Gino" wrote in message

...

I hope Canon don't make the 50D full frame!

"David J. Littleboy" wrote in message
...

And there will either be a new 5D fairly soon (probably 16MP, which is
a
big upgrade from 10MP), or the 50D will be full frame.

do you mind if I ask what you don't like about full frame?

Main problem with FF (aside from cost) is the optical "strain" it puts
on lenses. Sensors seem to be pickier than film when it comes to how
they respond to lenses, especially WA lenses.

FWIW, all the comparisons I've seen show FF to produce far better images
with film than wide angle lenses.

The problems is that wide angle images aren't as good as normal and tele
images. But this applies to APS-C as well, since all the wide lenses are
APS-C only.

This new 21 meg model will highlight any lens deficiencies.

Yes. But people who can afford the 1DsIII will have no trouble affording the
14/2.8 II (wider than anything available for APS-C), the 16-35/2.8 II, the
35/1.4, and the 50/1.2. Every halfway decent lens longer than 50mm will be
fine on the 1DsIII. 1DsIII users will be getting excellent images at every
focal length.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 18:33:58 -0700, RichA

[some crap]

And your point is?

Masturbation.

I mean beyond complaining that is.

Masturbation.

Rich, If you have such a great business plan for Canon why don't you
apply for the CEO's position?

He has no plan. He wouldn't know a plan if it painted itself
purple and danced naked on top of a harpsichord singing 'Plans
Are Here Again', to paraphrase Lord Blackadder.

RichA probably has never even held any SLR in his fingers, but
he has an *Oppinion* and thinks oppinion comes from opposition.

RichA gets cancer from thinking of the dirty word "plastics",
he gets rashes all over the body by thinking of the dirty word
"Canon" and he jerks off at any fault his excuse for a working
brain can find for trashing Canon. He'd probably blast them for
being earlier in the alphabet than Nikon, thus gaining an unfair
advantage, if he was able to grasp that concept for his typical
knee-jerk reactions.

RichA _might_ make a good comedian if he had the intelligence to
pull off the uneducated stereotypical hillbilly and to vary his
stream of derisive "comments" a bit more. But I am afraid he's
just a stupid perl script, or a monster with no more brain than
a cerebellum for the refleces he so treasures.

-Wolfgang

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 18:33:58 -0700, RichA wrote:
: The 40D is an upgrade on the 30D, no question. But it's no D200 and
: so Canon continues without a real prosumer, semi-pro body. Your
: choices are simple; $1300 for the 40D then a huge jump of $1500 to
: the 5D, which itself is technically inferior (build wise) to the
: 40D!!! In addition, the creaky old plastic toy 400XTi still exists,
: sitting at around $600 with NOTHING above it until you hit the twice
: as costly 40D.

Rich, have you by any chance ever actually used an XTi? Or even seen one up
close? My wife and I each got one last fall, and the quality of our pictures
has improved dramatically. The XTi is commendably feature-laden, and it uses
the same lenses as the 40D. What exactly would you like to see interposed
between the two? Unless it had some highly useful features that the 40D has
but the XTi doesn't have, what would be the point?

Bob

"Matt Clara" wrote in message
. ..
"David J. Littleboy" wrote in message
...

"Rita Ä Berkowitz" ritaberk2O04 @aol.com wrote in message
...
frederick wrote:

You seem to have conveniently forgotten the 1DsIII (to say nothing
of used 1DsIIs that'll be flooding the market shortly as the
commercial studios jump on the 1DsIII).

Good lord - which firmware upgrade do you need to make that an
"upgrade path"? Already DPreview forums are full of posts saying
"shall I return my 1dIII and get a 40D?".

Maybe this is the reason why the Mk III is going for $3,151 on the used
market! It seems it is going to be a buyer's market for all things
Canon in
the next several months. This even defies the depreciation curve
factored
into the 18-month rule.

http://cgi.ebay.com/_W0QQitemZ250154121512

That's a 1DIIn, you idiot.

I'm sitting this one out while I enjoy my Mk III's high ISO performance.
Canon did good with this beast. I can't wait to see what Nikon
introduces
next.

The only thing Nikon could do of interest would be a FF sensor.

Seriously, it's a great time to be into photography with all the
great products being introduced by both Canon and Nikon.

Well, Canon at least. But it's been a great time to be in photography
ever since the Mamiya 7 and Nikon 8000, which run circles around anything
24x36.


You're selling Nikon short. I've owned many cameras, and none are more
functional or well built than my D200. Further, the enlarged feature set
of the newly announced 40d are a direct response to the D200--you should
write Nikon a thank you note and hope that they continue to produce
exciting, high quality products. It's good for everybody.

ps. I bet my Nikon still drives more nails than your canon... ;-)



Oh, but you can't respond to that. Of course not, it doesn't help you slam
Nikon (for no good reason). Asshole.

--
www.mattclara.com

On Aug 23, 12:50 pm, Robert Coe wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 18:33:58 -0700, RichA wrote:

: The 40D is an upgrade on the 30D, no question. But it's no D200 and
: so Canon continues without a real prosumer, semi-pro body. Your
: choices are simple; $1300 for the 40D then a huge jump of $1500 to
: the 5D, which itself is technically inferior (build wise) to the
: 40D!!! In addition, the creaky old plastic toy 400XTi still exists,
: sitting at around $600 with NOTHING above it until you hit the twice
: as costly 40D.

Rich, have you by any chance ever actually used an XTi? Or even seen one up
close? My wife and I each got one last fall, and the quality of our pictures
has improved dramatically. The XTi is commendably feature-laden, and it uses
the same lenses as the 40D. What exactly would you like to see interposed
between the two?

Something that doesn't remind me of a recalled Chinese toy painted
with lead-based paint?
Honestly, if you want to know, how about a Canon "D80?"

On Aug 23, 10:09 am, Wolfgang Weisselberg
wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 18:33:58 -0700, RichA

[some crap]

And your point is?

Masturbation.

I mean beyond complaining that is.

Masturbation.

Rich, If you have such a great business plan for Canon why don't you
apply for the CEO's position?

He has no plan. He wouldn't know a plan if it painted itself
purple and danced naked on top of a harpsichord singing 'Plans
Are Here Again', to paraphrase Lord Blackadder.

RichA probably has never even held any SLR in his fingers, but
he has an *Oppinion* and thinks oppinion comes from opposition.

RichA gets cancer from thinking of the dirty word "plastics",
he gets rashes all over the body by thinking of the dirty word
"Canon" and he jerks off at any fault his excuse for a working
brain can find for trashing Canon. He'd probably blast them for
being earlier in the alphabet than Nikon, thus gaining an unfair
advantage, if he was able to grasp that concept for his typical
knee-jerk reactions.

RichA _might_ make a good comedian if he had the intelligence to
pull off the uneducated stereotypical hillbilly and to vary his
stream of derisive "comments" a bit more. But I am afraid he's
just a stupid perl script, or a monster with no more brain than
a cerebellum for the refleces he so treasures.

-Wolfgang

Another sour old German. Do you reek of garlic as well?

"RichA" wrote in message
ups.com...
The 40D is an upgrade on the 30D, no question. But it's no D200 and
so Canon continues without a real prosumer, semi-pro body. Your
choices are simple; $1300 for the 40D then a huge jump of $1500 to
the 5D, which itself is technically inferior (build wise) to the
40D!!!

but how would the pictures differ if the same person used both the 40d and
the 5D
in indoor type shooting and sometimes poor light?

"Doug McDonald" wrote in message
...
Just Shoot Me wrote:
"Gino" wrote in message
...
I hope Canon don't make the 50D full frame!


"David J. Littleboy" wrote in message
...
And there will either be a new 5D fairly soon (probably 16MP, which is
a big upgrade from 10MP), or the 50D will be full frame.

do you mind if I ask what you don't like about full frame?

That the mirror is so big that EF-S lenses won't work.


Looking at Canons web site I believe that full frame would be good for those
looking to do Macro or Tilt-shift.. I guess that kicks the 5d out of my
choices.
back to wondering if its the 30d for me or waiting for the 40d which seems
to be worth the wait.
wish I knew how long a wait for the 40d.

On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 11:05:45 -0700, RichA wrote:
: On Aug 23, 12:50 pm, Robert Coe wrote:
: On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 18:33:58 -0700, RichA wrote:
:
: : The 40D is an upgrade on the 30D, no question. But it's no D200 and
: : so Canon continues without a real prosumer, semi-pro body. Your
: : choices are simple; $1300 for the 40D then a huge jump of $1500 to
: : the 5D, which itself is technically inferior (build wise) to the
: : 40D!!! In addition, the creaky old plastic toy 400XTi still exists,
: : sitting at around $600 with NOTHING above it until you hit the twice
: : as costly 40D.
:
: Rich, have you by any chance ever actually used an XTi? Or even seen one up
: close? My wife and I each got one last fall, and the quality of our pictures
: has improved dramatically. The XTi is commendably feature-laden, and it uses
: the same lenses as the 40D. What exactly would you like to see interposed
: between the two?
:
: Something that doesn't remind me of a recalled Chinese toy painted
: with lead-based paint?
: Honestly, if you want to know, how about a Canon "D80?"

Other than its incompatibility with Canon lenses, what does differentiate the
D80 from the XTi? I'm not just pulling your chain; I really know very little
about the Nikon product line. My last Nikon was an F-2.

And am I supposed to infer from your answer that you actually have used an XTi
enough to know what you're talking about? Frankly, I still have my doubts.

Bob