Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    1,680

    Newsflash...Don backs Canon Lenses

    Boys....you heard it here first. It would seem that Don has turned over a new leaf and will no longer recommend Tamron Lenses over Canon Lenses, when used on a Canon body.

    A Quote taken from the Don on the Sony Forum

    "Let me tell you a little teeny tiny secret ... SONY is a major shareholder in the TAMRON lens corporation ... and that TAMRON has made several previously labeled/packaged "Minolta"-lenses and "SONY"-lenses.

    SO ... bearing that in mind, which company would have a more "in-depth" relationship with the aforementioned SONY?

    TAMRON ... it just works better ... on a SONY. (You can also ask "Sparkie" how well Quantaray/SIGMA lenses hold up under the riggers of being mounted on a SONY body.) A lot of users prefer the TAMRON 17-50. The alternative isn't the SIGMA, but the SONY CZ 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 (which is almost double the cost).

    Hope this helps in your decision
    ."

    From this, I can only assume the same logic can be applied to Canon

    Calling Don....Calling Don
    Last edited by Honest Gaza; 07-01-2008 at 04:30 AM.
    Canon 5D MKlll & Canon 50D
    Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L USM | Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM | Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM | Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro | Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM | Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 | Canon 430EX Flash | Lowepro Mini Trekker AW | Lowepro Toploader 65 AW | Lowepro Slingshot 200AW | Kata 3n1-10

    Panasonic Lumix FZ200
    Panasonic Lumix TZ7 (aka ZS3)
    Panasonic Lumix FT3 (aka TS3)

    Ali Baba.....the Thief of Bad Gags

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    529
    LOL caught
    | Canon 7D| Canon 5D|Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM | Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS| Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 | Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II |
    my photos on flickr

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    1,313
    Hey!!! I just saw a pig fly by my window!!
    The respect of those you respect is greater than the applause of the multitude.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554
    I had some good luck with Canon and the TAMRON lenses, but nowhere near as nice as they work on the Minolta/SONY bodies. If you want to pay Canon's prices for their glass, you are welcome to. I was not interested in doing that and having to support "in-the-lens-IS" in every lens (and absolutely nothing for low-end PRIMES and MACROs). To me, that has always been a problem with Nikon and SONY. It should be and either/or ... for IS.

    Can you just imagine spending $2300 for a EF 85mm f/1.2L USM II lens ... mounted on an $8000 EOS 1Ds MkIII ... and still having to tolerate camera shake? With no solution at all, except going to a tripod?

    Then some person with A200 ($599) and a TAMRON SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Di ($400) takes a better image? Gawd ... not on my watch. This is so stupid a fight I cannot even stand it.

    If your lens doesn't have IS in it, you could use the "in-the-body-IS" to accomplish it.

    If your lens does have it ... the camera body's IS would shut off and lock the sensor, so the lens could do it.

    Has Canon done this? Uh, nope.

    Any plans to do it? Uh, still nope.

    Will Don ever buy a Canon system, again, that doesn't offer this option? C'mon, what do you think?

    Enjoy your photography, however expensive or difficult it is.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 07-03-2008 at 04:37 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Formerly South Wales. Now South Carolina.
    Posts
    7,147
    I would like in-body IS BUT I realise this won't be practical on say a 5D or a 1DMk3s for example. Larger sensors have superior optical quality.

    Thus I am happy to use in-lens IS instead.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    529
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    Can you just imagine spending $2300 for a EF 85mm f/1.2L USM II lens ... mounted on an $8000 EOS 1Ds MkIII ... and still having to tolerate camera shake? With no solution at all, except going to a tripod?

    It's $1750 and with a hole that wide you shouldn't need IS... your shutter speed should be high enough with all of that light blasting through! I see your other points, but in lens IS has it's advantages too, but it's been discussed already... no need for another battle.
    Last edited by droopy1592; 07-03-2008 at 06:00 PM.
    | Canon 7D| Canon 5D|Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM | Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS| Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 | Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II |
    my photos on flickr

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554
    BOTH ... you guys just are not glomming on to the entire idea ... you keep duking it out over one OR the other.

    WHY NOT BOTH?

    In the body & in the lens?

    Let the lens decide which one gets used!

    Please, read what I write and NOT what you think I am writing. I have been VERY clear about this item, over the past two years ... and you are STILL missing the point. Like they say, "You can lead a horse to water, but the mountain is not coming to Mohammad" or something like that.

    PARADIGM SHIFT! No battle, just TELL Canon to get off their disinterested rearends and do it! They are not seeing another dollar of my money until they do.

    I offer this as PROOF that "Common Sense" is not all that common.

    Enjoy
    Last edited by DonSchap; 07-03-2008 at 05:48 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    529
    Calm down buddy, I was mainly correcting your 85mm price and stating that it didn't need IS, lol.

    As for the In body IS vs LENS IS vs Both, well... with in lens IS being capable of more stops...

    haha let me quit. You have a interesting point but there are other issues. Who wants to buy an IS lens if they have an IS body. Look at the price dif between the 70-200 f/4L AND the f/2.8L with and without IS. Those two cases would work (since canon offers both), but canon would have to make tons more of the same lenses without IS because no one wants to pay for something they MAY find redundant.
    | Canon 7D| Canon 5D|Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM | Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS| Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 | Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II |
    my photos on flickr

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554
    But ... (and that's a big ol' but) you and the rest of the Canon "washed" have already committed to supporting IS-in-the-lens, because it is soooooo much better over in-the-body-IS, so this should be no issue at'all. RIGHT?

    If Canon cannot even do this for their smaller APS-C sensors, there is no way in hell they are planning it for the bigger ones, so the EOS 1 bunch is safe, too. Even SONY has taken a full year to introduce the A900 (due in September).

    Like I said, Canon does not have to worry about my return and using their lenses. Others can bear the pain of the cost and things are NOT getting any cheaper out there, last time I looked. Oops, there, I looked again. Nope, no cheaper.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 07-03-2008 at 09:26 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Crapville, Australia
    Posts
    5,148
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    But ... (and that's a big ol' but) you and the rest of the Canon "washed" have already committed to supporting IS-in-the-lens, because it is soooooo much better over in-the-body-IS, so this should be no issue at'all. RIGHT?

    If Canon cannot even do this for their smaller APS-C sensors, there is no way in hell they are planning it for the bigger ones, so the EOS 1 bunch is safe, too. Even SONY has taken a full year to introduce the A900 (due in September).

    Like I said, Canon does not have to worry about my return and using their lenses. Others can bear the pain of the cost and things are NOT getting any cheaper out there, last time I looked. Oops, there, I looked again. Nope, no cheaper.
    Hey Don, how much you wanna bet that Sony's FF camera won't have in-body IS either?
    Christian Wright; Dip Phot
    EOS 5D Mark III | EOS 600D | EOS-1V HS
    L: 14/2.8 II | 24/1.4 II | 35/1.4 | 50/1.2 | 85/1.2 II | 135/2 | 180/3.5 Macro | 200/2.8 II | 400/2.8 IS | 16-35/2.8 II | 24-105/4 IS | 70-200/2.8 IS II | 100-400/4.5-5.6 IS
    580EX II | EF 12 II | EF 25 II

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •