Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

5d=Dump my ef-s lenses?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:38:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
now, no?

More about : dump lenses

Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:38:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

And why would it go 'down the shitter' if there are thousands of 1.6
crop camera that will remain in use for a long time (not everyone is
'FF happy' and suffering the loss inherent to selling and buying a
not-yet announced camera!)
August 17, 2005 1:38:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ok now you have me scared. I have just bought a Canon 20D with the kit lens
( EF-S 18-55 MM ) . I am thinking of buying the following two lens.

( 1 ) Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Autofocus Lens .

(2 ) Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS Image Stabilizer USM Autofocus
Lens

As you can see this a heavy investment and makes me wonder if I can use the
lenses on the 5D if and when it comes out.
Any input would be helpful

Thanks
Ron.


"Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
> now, no?
>
>
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:38:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Yes, but I'll take it off your hands so you won't have to worry about
it. How about $ 60 before the price drops even further?

Dirty Harry wrote:
> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
> now, no?
>
>
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:38:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dirty Harry wrote:
> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
> now, no?


Not likely. And, it'll still do what it does now, when, if and as the
newer cameras are released.

--
John McWilliams
August 17, 2005 1:38:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I think only the EF-S lenses would be unusable on the 5d, based on the
specs - if all the EF-S lenses became worthless (unlikely) you would
only have to throw away your kit lens. Someone else can correct me, I
may be wrong, but that's my understanding at this point.
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:38:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
> now, no?

Tried to warn ya...
:( 
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:38:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
> now, no?

Nope. That's a nice lens, and even after the 5D and other lenses appear, the
20D is still a very nice camera due to it's smaller size and lighter weight.
It's also faster...

Don't panic, since most people will stay with the smaller sensor cameras
since the cost if much, much lower. Not everyone wants to spend over $3500
for a camera, and another $1000+ for a lens. I have a 20D, and plan to get a
5D, and have no plans whatsoever to sell either the 20D or the 2 EF-S lenses
I own.

>
>
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:38:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
> now, no?
>
>
No, because Canon will continue to build 1.6x bodies for the time being.
Canon execs have said that they envision a two tiered digital camera line,
1.6x and full frame.
For crying out loud, you're in a panic because a $3500 dollar camera may be
coming to market. It will not affect sales of the sub 1K Rebels, nor will
it affect greatly the sales of the $1500 20D and its successor.
--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:38:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> Ron writes ...
>
>I have just bought a Canon 20D with the kit lens
>( EF-S 18-55 MM ) .

This is an EF-S lens, which only works on some 1.6x crop sensor size
bodies.

>I am thinking of buying the following two lens.
>( 1 ) Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Autofocus Lens .
>(2 ) Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS Image Stabilizer USM
>Autofocus Lens
> ... makes me wonder if I can use the
>lenses on the 5D if and when it comes out.

Yes, these are great lenses and will work on all the EOS film bodies
and all the digital bodies. It's just the EF-S lenses that are limited
to small sensors. Good choice of lenses btw.
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:38:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

You have somewhat of a point. I have a 20D and had on order the 10-22
EFS. I found out about the 5D coming out and immediately cancelled my
order! I must at least wait to see what the reality of the '5D' will
be. We dont' really know for sure, especially the price. Will it really
by $3500 or maybe Canon won't want to 'step on the toes' of its
'professional' bodies and may go lower in price to avoid this (perhaps
<$3k). Remember, Kodak had full framers selling for $3500 to $4k for
the past few years!
Maybe Canon will surprise us with an 'offer we can't refuse' :) 
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:38:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in message
news:NFuMe.2779$ct5.1778@fed1read04...
>
> "Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
> news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
>> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
>> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
>> now, no?
>
> Tried to warn ya...
> :( 

Camera bodies are here and gone...but lenses are forever (relatively
speaking, of course), which is why I've been slowly building the dream lens
system I'll want when full-frame becomes affordable (and here we go!).

16-35 2.8 L
24-70 2.8 L
70-200 2.8 IS L
1.4x
2x
100mm Macro
50 1.4

Selling: 28-135 (any takers?)
Sold: 100-400 IS (sort of wish I had it back...)
Gave away: 75-300 IS (to my dad)
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:38:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"John McWilliams" <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:kOednZ2dnZ3BPDG5nZ2dneH3n96dnZ2dRVn-zZ2dnZ0@comcast.com...
> Dirty Harry wrote:
>> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
>> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
>> now, no?
>
>
> Not likely. And, it'll still do what it does now, when, if and as the
> newer cameras are released.

True...assuming Canon continues the 1.6 crop line of bodies. So far, they
are indicating that this is their plan.
It looks like we'll soon have only full frame and 1.6.
August 17, 2005 1:38:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"RON" <joycegolf@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:EJ-dnbdg3Jz69Z_eRVn-pw@adelphia.com...
> Ok now you have me scared. I have just bought a Canon 20D with the kit
> lens ( EF-S 18-55 MM ) . I am thinking of buying the following two lens.
>
> ( 1 ) Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Autofocus Lens .
>
> (2 ) Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS Image Stabilizer USM Autofocus
> Lens
>
> As you can see this a heavy investment and makes me wonder if I can use
> the lenses on the 5D if and when it comes out.
> Any input would be helpful
>
Both lenses you mention are "L" lenses, so they will cover 24x36mm (film or
FF dSLR)
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:38:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"RON" <joycegolf@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:EJ-dnbdg3Jz69Z_eRVn-pw@adelphia.com...
> Ok now you have me scared. I have just bought a Canon 20D with the kit
> lens ( EF-S 18-55 MM ) . I am thinking of buying the following two lens.
>
> ( 1 ) Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Autofocus Lens .
>
> (2 ) Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS Image Stabilizer USM Autofocus
> Lens
>
> As you can see this a heavy investment and makes me wonder if I can use
> the lenses on the 5D if and when it comes out.
> Any input would be helpful
>
> Thanks
> Ron.
>
>

Believe me, you can. Both lenses you mention date from film cameras, though
the 24-70 overlaps into digital usage. They are both "L" lenses, and will
cover full frame nicely, as will any EF mount lens, as opposed to EF-S mount
lenses like your 18-55.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
August 17, 2005 1:38:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in message
news:D LuMe.2781$ct5.2749@fed1read04...
>
> "John McWilliams" <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:kOednZ2dnZ3BPDG5nZ2dneH3n96dnZ2dRVn-zZ2dnZ0@comcast.com...
>> Dirty Harry wrote:
>>> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I
>>> try
>>> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the
>>> shitter
>>> now, no?
>>
>>
>> Not likely. And, it'll still do what it does now, when, if and as the
>> newer cameras are released.
>
> True...assuming Canon continues the 1.6 crop line of bodies. So far, they
> are indicating that this is their plan.
> It looks like we'll soon have only full frame and 1.6.
I figured the 1.3X FOV was on the way out. It really made no sense making 3
sizes..
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 2:01:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
> now, no?
>
>

What makes you say that? Unless you're absolutely certain you need full
frame, there's no need to dump EF-S lenses. Besides, the 5D is NOT an
upgrade to the 20D. The 20D and Digital Rebel XT lines will continue so
EF-S lenses should hold their value just fine.

Mark
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 3:58:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <6UuMe.1116$sw6.576@fed1read05>, shadowcatcher@cox.net
says...
> "Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
> news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
> > Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
> > and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
> > now, no?
> >
> >
> No, because Canon will continue to build 1.6x bodies for the time being.
> Canon execs have said that they envision a two tiered digital camera line,
> 1.6x and full frame.
> For crying out loud, you're in a panic because a $3500 dollar camera may be
> coming to market. It will not affect sales of the sub 1K Rebels, nor will
> it affect greatly the sales of the $1500 20D and its successor.

While I think full-frame might make a larger presence in the market, I
feel cropped sensors will always be around because they are a lot
cheaper to make. We'll see 8 megapixel DSLRs going to $350 one of these
days, and they certainly are going to be 1.5x or 1.6x sensors.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 3:58:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Brian Baird" <no@no.thank.u> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d6c47aff991616398986d@news.verizon.net...
> In article <6UuMe.1116$sw6.576@fed1read05>, shadowcatcher@cox.net
> says...
>> "Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
>> news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
>> > Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I
>> > try
>> > and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the
>> > shitter
>> > now, no?
>> >
>> >
>> No, because Canon will continue to build 1.6x bodies for the time being.
>> Canon execs have said that they envision a two tiered digital camera
>> line,
>> 1.6x and full frame.
>> For crying out loud, you're in a panic because a $3500 dollar camera may
>> be
>> coming to market. It will not affect sales of the sub 1K Rebels, nor
>> will
>> it affect greatly the sales of the $1500 20D and its successor.
>
> While I think full-frame might make a larger presence in the market, I
> feel cropped sensors will always be around because they are a lot
> cheaper to make. We'll see 8 megapixel DSLRs going to $350 one of these
> days, and they certainly are going to be 1.5x or 1.6x sensors.
> --
> http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird

I think so, too...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 4:10:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dirty Harry wrote:
> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I
> try and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the
> shitter now, no?

Take it easy, grab a deep breath, and ask yourself:

1) Are you happy with the lens?

1A. If yes: keep it. Then ask yourself 2)Are you happy with your camera on
which the lens fits?
2A. If yes: keep it.
2B. If not: Sell the lot.

1B. If not: sell it.

Why would the value "go down the shitter" because of camera that is not even
here yet?

Sounds like a severe attack of panical photo fetischism.
August 17, 2005 5:32:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dirty Harry wrote:

> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
> now, no?

Yea I'm sure everyone is going to jump on a $3500+ body to make that lens
worthless. Do you think the fact they make the 1D causes this same lens to
be useless?
--

Stacey
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 5:32:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Stacey" <fotocord@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3mg0elF16vj06U11@individual.net...
> Dirty Harry wrote:
>
>> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
>> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
>> now, no?
>
> Yea I'm sure everyone is going to jump on a $3500+ body to make that lens
> worthless. Do you think the fact they make the 1D causes this same lens to
> be useless?
> --
>
> Stacey

"Worthless?"
That's not what he said at all.

But...For those using full-frame bodies...that lens will be
worthless......to them.
You seem to have a chip on your shoulder for some reason.
Too many political threads, perhaps.
:) 
August 17, 2005 5:39:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Brian" <ripcurl187@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1124232445.653277.288010
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:

> I think only the EF-S lenses would be unusable on the 5d, based on the
> specs - if all the EF-S lenses became worthless (unlikely) you would
> only have to throw away your kit lens. Someone else can correct me, I
> may be wrong, but that's my understanding at this point.

You are essentially right except fro throwing away the kit lens.

If someone owns a 20D + kit lens + EF lenses and they wish to upgrade to a
new FF or 1.3x Canon D-SLR then they either:

1. Keep the 20D as backup body and keep the kit lens.

Or

2. Sell the 20D with kit lens.

Either way the kit lens still works well with the 20D, so no need to throw
it away.


--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 16-August-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
August 17, 2005 6:31:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mark² wrote:

>
> "Stacey" <fotocord@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3mg0elF16vj06U11@individual.net...
>> Dirty Harry wrote:
>>
>>> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I
>>> try and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the
>>> shitter now, no?
>>
>> Yea I'm sure everyone is going to jump on a $3500+ body to make that
>> lens
>> worthless. Do you think the fact they make the 1D causes this same lens
>> to be useless?
>> --
>>
>> Stacey
>
> "Worthless?"
> That's not what he said at all.

"the value is going to go straight down the shitter" sounds close to the
same as "worthless" to me. What do you think "the value is going to go
straight down the shitter" means, that it's going to be worth more?

>
> But...For those using full-frame bodies...that lens will be
> worthless......to them.

And how many $3500-4000+ bodies will be sold vs under $1000 ones that this
lens WILL work on? IF they do release this expencive new body, it's not
going to change the fact this lens is very useable on the MAJORITY of canon
digital cameras.

> You seem to have a chip on your shoulder for some reason.

You seem to -see it- because you didn't like my opinions in that other
thread?

> Too many political threads, perhaps.
> :) 

Maybe because you got too beat up there rather badly?

--

Stacey
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 6:31:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Stacey" <fotocord@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3mg3u0F16er5iU3@individual.net...
> Mark² wrote:
>
>>
>> "Stacey" <fotocord@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:3mg0elF16vj06U11@individual.net...
>>> Dirty Harry wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I
>>>> try and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the
>>>> shitter now, no?
>>>
>>> Yea I'm sure everyone is going to jump on a $3500+ body to make that
>>> lens
>>> worthless. Do you think the fact they make the 1D causes this same lens
>>> to be useless?
>>> --
>>>
>>> Stacey
>>
>> "Worthless?"
>> That's not what he said at all.
>
> "the value is going to go straight down the shitter" sounds close to the
> same as "worthless" to me. What do you think "the value is going to go
> straight down the shitter" means, that it's going to be worth more?
>
>>
>> But...For those using full-frame bodies...that lens will be
>> worthless......to them.
>
> And how many $3500-4000+ bodies will be sold vs under $1000 ones that this
> lens WILL work on? IF they do release this expencive new body, it's not
> going to change the fact this lens is very useable on the MAJORITY of
> canon
> digital cameras.
>
>> You seem to have a chip on your shoulder for some reason.
>
> You seem to -see it- because you didn't like my opinions in that other
> thread?
>
>> Too many political threads, perhaps.
>> :) 
>
> Maybe because you got too beat up there rather badly?

Beaten? -By loads of verbal gas...yes.
Beat my sound debate? No.
:) 
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 6:33:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Mark B." <mbohntrash54@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:x72dnZ2dnZ1WiD-QnZ2dnR4Hn96dnZ2dRVn-yZ2dnZ0@comcast.com...
> "Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
> news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
> > Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I
try
> > and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the
shitter
> > now, no?
> >
> >
>
> What makes you say that? Unless you're absolutely certain you need full
> frame, there's no need to dump EF-S lenses. Besides, the 5D is NOT an
> upgrade to the 20D. The 20D and Digital Rebel XT lines will continue so
> EF-S lenses should hold their value just fine.
>
> Mark


Alright I guess I jumped the gun on this one. I was thinking I should get
rid of the 17-85IS and get the 28-135IS and then a wide angle full frame
lens. The efs lens really blows at 17mm.
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 6:33:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
news:mmxMe.227707$5V4.34986@pd7tw3no...
>
> "Mark B." <mbohntrash54@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:x72dnZ2dnZ1WiD-QnZ2dnR4Hn96dnZ2dRVn-yZ2dnZ0@comcast.com...
>> "Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
>> news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
>> > Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I
> try
>> > and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the
> shitter
>> > now, no?
>> >
>> >
>>
>> What makes you say that? Unless you're absolutely certain you need full
>> frame, there's no need to dump EF-S lenses. Besides, the 5D is NOT an
>> upgrade to the 20D. The 20D and Digital Rebel XT lines will continue so
>> EF-S lenses should hold their value just fine.
>>
>> Mark
>
>
> Alright I guess I jumped the gun on this one. I was thinking I should get
> rid of the 17-85IS and get the 28-135IS and then a wide angle full frame
> lens. The efs lens really blows at 17mm.
>
>
That being said, I cancelled my order for a 20D kit that included the 17-85
back last September, preferring to stick with lenses that would be matches
for full frame cameras. But the 1.6x sensors will continue for some time to
come, according to Canon.
BTW, nothing Canon makes is stellar on the wide end, wide open, or at least
as a zoom. My 16-35 L is a little soft at 16mm f2.8.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
August 17, 2005 1:13:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
> now, no?
>
>

Very interesting thread.

I seem to have missed something, otherwise why the panic?

Have Canon jumped the gun by announcing that this Body is going to be
released immediately, instead of making everyone wait 3 or 4 months?.

Have they omitted to issue a few pre-production models to the reviewers? If
so, that would seem like an enormous Marketing mistake.

I am not even aware of a press release advising of its, sub $1000, guide
price.

Where can I read up on what Canon have said about this Wonder Camera?

Roy G
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:13:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Roy" <royphoty@iona-guesthouse.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7dDMe.7806$9b6.1185@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
> "Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
> news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
>> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
>> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
>> now, no?
>>
>>
>
> Very interesting thread.
>
> I seem to have missed something, otherwise why the panic?
>
> Have Canon jumped the gun by announcing that this Body is going to be
> released immediately, instead of making everyone wait 3 or 4 months?.
>
> Have they omitted to issue a few pre-production models to the reviewers?
> If so, that would seem like an enormous Marketing mistake.
>
> I am not even aware of a press release advising of its, sub $1000, guide
> price.

Don't know where you heard anything about sub $1000...
....Try $3000+
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:25:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Roy" <royphoty@iona-guesthouse.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7dDMe.7806$9b6.1185@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
> "Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
> news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
> > Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I
try
> > and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the
shitter
> > now, no?
> >
> >
>
> Very interesting thread.
>
> I seem to have missed something, otherwise why the panic?
>
> Have Canon jumped the gun by announcing that this Body is going to be
> released immediately, instead of making everyone wait 3 or 4 months?.
>
> Have they omitted to issue a few pre-production models to the reviewers?
If
> so, that would seem like an enormous Marketing mistake.
>
> I am not even aware of a press release advising of its, sub $1000, guide
> price.
>
> Where can I read up on what Canon have said about this Wonder Camera?
>
> Roy G

I think there is going to be a press release or something on the 22nd.
August 17, 2005 1:26:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
news:HoDMe.229030$5V4.189815@pd7tw3no...
>
> "Roy" <royphoty@iona-guesthouse.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:7dDMe.7806$9b6.1185@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>.
>>
>> Where can I read up on what Canon have said about this Wonder Camera?
>>
>> Roy G
>
> I think there is going to be a press release or something on the 22nd.
>
What happens if there is no announcement?
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:30:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Brian Baird" <no@no.thank.u> wrote:
>
> While I think full-frame might make a larger presence in the market, I
> feel cropped sensors will always be around because they are a lot
> cheaper to make. We'll see 8 megapixel DSLRs going to $350 one of these
> days, and they certainly are going to be 1.5x or 1.6x sensors.

Also, (1) 8MP is as good as (ISO 100) or better than (ISO 200 and above)
35mm film, and 35mm film has been good enough for the vast majority of 20th
century photography, and (2) the boost you get on your telephotos is
appreciated by the vast majority of amateur photographers.

There's really no need for full frame or more than 8MP unless one has
pretensions at competing with the MF types in the art galleries, or at least
producing prints of that caliber. For the vast majority of uses, 8MP is
fine.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:30:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"David J. Littleboy" <davidjl@gol.com> wrote in message
news:D du0fr$p9$1@nnrp.gol.com...
>
> "Brian Baird" <no@no.thank.u> wrote:
>>
>> While I think full-frame might make a larger presence in the market, I
>> feel cropped sensors will always be around because they are a lot
>> cheaper to make. We'll see 8 megapixel DSLRs going to $350 one of these
>> days, and they certainly are going to be 1.5x or 1.6x sensors.
>
> Also, (1) 8MP is as good as (ISO 100) or better than (ISO 200 and above)
> 35mm film, and 35mm film has been good enough for the vast majority of
> 20th century photography, and (2) the boost you get on your telephotos is
> appreciated by the vast majority of amateur photographers.
>
> There's really no need for full frame or more than 8MP

That is, of course, assumes that all shots are framed perfectly, and fit
their intended, final form so that no cropping is ever necessary. I would
*love* the ability to significantly crop an image...and STILL have 8MP left
to work with. A 12.8MP sensor offers this very real option. It becomes
even more useful given that it's full-frame, and is therefore NOT simply
cramming more MPs into the same small space (which would lead to increased
noise, etc.).

>unless one has pretensions at competing with the MF types in the art
>galleries, or at least producing prints of that caliber. For the vast
>majority of uses, 8MP is fine.

Many of us DO have "pretensions" of this calibre.
Whether pretensions and...results...match up at any point is another matter
entirely.
:) 
August 17, 2005 1:30:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"David J. Littleboy" <davidjl@gol.com> wrote in message
news:D du0fr$p9$1@nnrp.gol.com...
>
> "Brian Baird" <no@no.thank.u> wrote:
>>
>> While I think full-frame might make a larger presence in the market, I
>> feel cropped sensors will always be around because they are a lot
>> cheaper to make. We'll see 8 megapixel DSLRs going to $350 one of these
>> days, and they certainly are going to be 1.5x or 1.6x sensors.
>
> Also, (1) 8MP is as good as (ISO 100) or better than (ISO 200 and above)
> 35mm film, and 35mm film has been good enough for the vast majority of
> 20th century photography, and (2) the boost you get on your telephotos is
> appreciated by the vast majority of amateur photographers.
>
Actually 35mm wasn't that hot in the 20th Century. Kodacolor X (ASA 80) in
the early 1970's was pretty poor. I recall seeing a few printed 8x10" and
they looked like colour confetti. 35mm improved during the 1980-90's to the
quality it is today. I have seen 6 mp enlarged in good quality so I agree
with you on the comparison. High quality lenses are still the most important
part of the equation!

> There's really no need for full frame or more than 8MP unless one has
> pretensions at competing with the MF types in the art galleries, or at
> least producing prints of that caliber. For the vast majority of uses, 8MP
> is fine.
>
Cameras like the Canon 1Ds mk.II are professional tools, well suited for
studio work. But the APS-C dSLR cameras are better suited for the average
hobby shooter. If a hobbiest can buy and use a higher priced camera to it's
full advantage, I won't deny him the pleasure of buying the best tools he
can afford.
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 1:30:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"David J. Littleboy" <davidjl@gol.com> wrote in message
news:D du0fr$p9$1@nnrp.gol.com...
>
> "Brian Baird" <no@no.thank.u> wrote:
>>
>> While I think full-frame might make a larger presence in the market, I
>> feel cropped sensors will always be around because they are a lot
>> cheaper to make. We'll see 8 megapixel DSLRs going to $350 one of these
>> days, and they certainly are going to be 1.5x or 1.6x sensors.
>
> Also, (1) 8MP is as good as (ISO 100) or better than (ISO 200 and above)
> 35mm film, and 35mm film has been good enough for the vast majority of
> 20th century photography, and (2) the boost you get on your telephotos is
> appreciated by the vast majority of amateur photographers.
>
> There's really no need for full frame or more than 8MP unless one has
> pretensions at competing with the MF types in the art galleries, or at
> least producing prints of that caliber. For the vast majority of uses, 8MP
> is fine.
>
> David J. Littleboy
> Tokyo, Japan
>
>
>
As far as the resolution question, I agree, but those of us who have wide
angle lenses left over from our film days, or feel that variable aperture
WAs that only fit on 1.6x cameras are a stopgap might argue the first part
of that statement.
I have a 16-35 f2.8L, which, by all accounts, is a better lens than the
10-22 f4.5-5.6 EF-S, and, anyway, is 2-3 stops faster. I'd like it to
behave like it did on a film camera, not like a 30-50mm lens...
And, by the way, I do have pretensions of showing in galleries, and do.
The resolution of this camera is secondary, to me, at least. Spot meter and
full frame are what I've been waiting for since the D30. 12mp just helps me
sell it to my wife, who is all about HUGE prints. The wide angle thing
helps too, she gets frustrated trying to get a good shot with the 16-35 and
the 15mm fisheye.
--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 18, 2005 12:58:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Darrell" <spam@this.eh> wrote:
>>
> What happens if there is no announcement?

We all get to feel really really stupid, and wish we had exercised not only
better judgment but more extensive use of the subjunctive mood English is so
kind to provide for just these situations.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Anonymous
August 18, 2005 12:58:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

David J. Littleboy wrote:
> "Darrell" <spam@this.eh> wrote:
>
>>What happens if there is no announcement?
>
>
> We all get to feel really really stupid, and wish we had exercised not only
> better judgment but more extensive use of the subjunctive mood English is so
> kind to provide for just these situations.
>
Well, not all, DJ....some of us are so stupid we can't even feel stupid.
As to wishing for better judgement: Hah!

My prognostication is that no announcement will mean more speculation,
and both damning and praising Canon and its shills (!) for its
participation or non-participation as determined by the various and
sundry parties....

An announcement will cut down only on parts of the speculation, or so I
speculate...

--
John McWilliams
Anonymous
August 18, 2005 9:30:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Darrell" <spam@this.eh> writes:
> "RON" <joycegolf@adelphia.net> wrote:

>> Ok now you have me scared. I have just bought a Canon 20D with the
>> kit lens ( EF-S 18-55 MM ) . I am thinking of buying the following
>> two lens.
>>
>> ( 1 ) Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Autofocus
>> Lens .
>>
>> (2 ) Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS Image Stabilizer USM
>> Autofocus Lens
>>
>> As you can see this a heavy investment and makes me wonder if I can
>> use the lenses on the 5D if and when it comes out. Any input would
>> be helpful

> Both lenses you mention are "L" lenses, so they will cover 24x36mm
> (film or FF dSLR)

The designation to look for is "EF" (instead of "EF-S"), rather
than "L".

It is true that in Canon's current line-up, /all/ "L" lenses are also
"EF" lenses, so either designation would ensure fill frame coverage.
But as I understand Canon's lenms naming system, "L" means that the
lens is designed to very high optical standards, while "EF" means
full frame coverage (and "EF-S" means a mount that will only fit on
certain bodies with an 1.6x crop).

So, in theory, there may be at some point in the future exist an
"EF-S" lens that also carries the "L" designation.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
August 18, 2005 12:00:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 21:38:28 GMT, "Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com>
wrote:

>Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
>and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
>now, no?
>

Only if you plan to buy a FF camera? But you knew it wouldn't work on
one when you bought it.


******************************************************

"I have been a witness, and these pictures are
my testimony. The events I have recorded should
not be forgotten and must not be repeated."

-James Nachtwey-
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
Anonymous
August 18, 2005 12:02:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 15:27:27 -0700, "RON" <joycegolf@adelphia.net>
wrote:

>Ok now you have me scared. I have just bought a Canon 20D with the kit lens
>( EF-S 18-55 MM ) . I am thinking of buying the following two lens.
>
>( 1 ) Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Autofocus Lens .
>
>(2 ) Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS Image Stabilizer USM Autofocus
>Lens
>
>As you can see this a heavy investment and makes me wonder if I can use the
>lenses on the 5D if and when it comes out.
>Any input would be helpful

Well, I never bought any EF-S lenses for my 20D because I knew I would
be going to FF some day. If you don't know what lenses you can use
on a 5D maybe you don't need one.


******************************************************

"I have been a witness, and these pictures are
my testimony. The events I have recorded should
not be forgotten and must not be repeated."

-James Nachtwey-
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
August 18, 2005 4:34:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 20:58:36 +0900
"David J. Littleboy" <davidjl@gol.com> wrote:

> > What happens if there is no announcement?
>
> We all get to feel really really stupid,

Is it just me, or did the 5D photos look exactly like a 20D with only
the "5D" changed? On the other hand, the PDF spec/brochure looked
very genuine (but I didn't examine the copyright portions).

To the OP: RE The advice to keep the EF-S lenses and sell them with
the 1.6 sensor bodies is good advice.

Jeff
Anonymous
August 18, 2005 5:37:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Confused" <somebody@someplace.somenet> wrote in message
news:nlv8g1dp09kvgdv4i6nvpmbqam2dksfr5l@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 20:58:36 +0900
> "David J. Littleboy" <davidjl@gol.com> wrote:
>
>> > What happens if there is no announcement?
>>
>> We all get to feel really really stupid,
>
> Is it just me, or did the 5D photos look exactly like a 20D with only
> the "5D" changed? On the other hand, the PDF spec/brochure looked
> very genuine (but I didn't examine the copyright portions).
>
> To the OP: RE The advice to keep the EF-S lenses and sell them with
> the 1.6 sensor bodies is good advice.

It is significantly different.
Prism housing, generally more rounded countours, visibly larger rear screen,
button pacement (slightly different), grip material on both sides/front of
camera, no pop-up flash, visibly larger viewfinder...etc. Taka another look
with a second image of the 20D. You'll see a lot of differences if you look
carefully.

Mark
Anonymous
August 18, 2005 9:55:50 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> Well, I never bought any EF-S lenses for my 20D because I knew I would
> be going to FF some day.

I was going to go this route but got fed up swaping my kit lens for a 35-70
for practically the same shots so I ended up getting the EF-S 17-85 (for a
very good price :) 

My plan is to flog it at a loss of about £50-100 when I do get a full frame
body which I still think is a bargain for the convienience it has given me
since buying it.

> If you don't know what lenses you can use
> on a 5D maybe you don't need one.

:)  Agreed, if you haven't fully understood the technology then odds are you
won't be getting the best out of it (not that I am either).

Having said that if you can afford it why not........I'd sure love to be in
the position where I could buy the best and learn how good it is as I go
along...
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 1:01:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Confused" <somebody@someplace.somenet> wrote in message
news:nlv8g1dp09kvgdv4i6nvpmbqam2dksfr5l@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 20:58:36 +0900
> "David J. Littleboy" <davidjl@gol.com> wrote:
>
>> > What happens if there is no announcement?
>>
>> We all get to feel really really stupid,
>
> Is it just me, or did the 5D photos look exactly like a 20D with only
> the "5D" changed? On the other hand, the PDF spec/brochure looked
> very genuine (but I didn't examine the copyright portions).
>
> To the OP: RE The advice to keep the EF-S lenses and sell them with
> the 1.6 sensor bodies is good advice.
>
> Jeff

No, the front of the prism is distinctly different, more like the 1D/DsmkII,
the distance between lens and hand grip seems greater, and the command dial
is slightly differently mounted.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 2:23:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dirty Harry wrote:
> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
> now, no?
>
>

I'll give you 50 bucks for it.
August 19, 2005 3:12:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Gisle Hannemyr" <gisle+news@ifi.uio.no> wrote in message
news:q5pssbc45w.fsf@nelja.ifi.uio.no...
> "Darrell" <spam@this.eh> writes:
>> "RON" <joycegolf@adelphia.net> wrote:
>
>>> Ok now you have me scared. I have just bought a Canon 20D with the
>>> kit lens ( EF-S 18-55 MM ) . I am thinking of buying the following
>>> two lens.
>>>
>>> ( 1 ) Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Autofocus
>>> Lens .
>>>
>>> (2 ) Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS Image Stabilizer USM
>>> Autofocus Lens
>>>
>>> As you can see this a heavy investment and makes me wonder if I can
>>> use the lenses on the 5D if and when it comes out. Any input would
>>> be helpful
>
>> Both lenses you mention are "L" lenses, so they will cover 24x36mm
>> (film or FF dSLR)
>
> The designation to look for is "EF" (instead of "EF-S"), rather
> than "L".
>
> It is true that in Canon's current line-up, /all/ "L" lenses are also
> "EF" lenses, so either designation would ensure fill frame coverage.
> But as I understand Canon's lenms naming system, "L" means that the
> lens is designed to very high optical standards, while "EF" means
> full frame coverage (and "EF-S" means a mount that will only fit on
> certain bodies with an 1.6x crop).
>
> So, in theory, there may be at some point in the future exist an
> "EF-S" lens that also carries the "L" designation.
>
The "L" simply means the use of at least one Flourite element in the lens.
Flourite is hard to work with therefore it ends up as an expensive to make
optic.
August 19, 2005 3:14:45 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in message
news:7k6Ne.3013$ct5.1226@fed1read04...
>
> "Confused" <somebody@someplace.somenet> wrote in message
> news:nlv8g1dp09kvgdv4i6nvpmbqam2dksfr5l@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 20:58:36 +0900
>> "David J. Littleboy" <davidjl@gol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> > What happens if there is no announcement?
>>>
>>> We all get to feel really really stupid,
>>
>> Is it just me, or did the 5D photos look exactly like a 20D with only
>> the "5D" changed? On the other hand, the PDF spec/brochure looked
>> very genuine (but I didn't examine the copyright portions).
>>
>> To the OP: RE The advice to keep the EF-S lenses and sell them with
>> the 1.6 sensor bodies is good advice.
>
> It is significantly different.
> Prism housing, generally more rounded countours, visibly larger rear
> screen, button pacement (slightly different), grip material on both
> sides/front of camera, no pop-up flash, visibly larger viewfinder...etc.
> Taka another look with a second image of the 20D. You'll see a lot of
> differences if you look carefully.
>
Has a lot of similar lines to the EOS-1V. Could have been a quick Photoshop
job as a placekeeper until the real photo was supplied by Canon. The
copyright in the PDF lists some other product.
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 4:08:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <cJuMe.2780$ct5.836@fed1read04>, Mark²
<mjmorgan@cox.?.net.invalid> writes
>
>"Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in message
>news:NFuMe.2779$ct5.1778@fed1read04...
>>
>> "Dirty Harry" <nopsam@nojust.com> wrote in message
>> news:o 1tMe.228703$s54.65445@pd7tw2no...
>>> Hmm glad I just spent 600 bucks on this efs 17-85 IS...not. Should I try
>>> and dump it off asap...the value is going to go straight down the shitter
>>> now, no?
>>
>> Tried to warn ya...
>> :( 
>
>Camera bodies are here and gone...but lenses are forever (relatively
>speaking, of course), which is why I've been slowly building the dream lens
>system I'll want when full-frame becomes affordable (and here we go!).
>
>16-35 2.8 L
>24-70 2.8 L
>70-200 2.8 IS L
>1.4x
>2x
>100mm Macro
>50 1.4
>
>Selling: 28-135 (any takers?)
>Sold: 100-400 IS (sort of wish I had it back...)
>Gave away: 75-300 IS (to my dad)
>
>
I share your philosophy; I have an extensive set of EF lenses, and have
been seriously missing a very wide angle on my 10D. I had been vaguely
tempted by a 10-22 EF-S if I could be sure that removing the -S rear
extension (I believe the 10D could take -S lenses if Canon had thought
of it sooner). However, I have, like you, decided to hold out for a full
frame sensor body. I had been budgeting for a 1DsII nest year, but they
are almost £5,000 over here. The 5D may well fit the bill.

David
--
David Littlewood
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 4:17:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <3mg3u0F16er5iU3@individual.net>, Stacey <fotocord@yahoo.com>
writes
>
>>
>> But...For those using full-frame bodies...that lens will be
>> worthless......to them.
>
>And how many $3500-4000+ bodies will be sold vs under $1000 ones that this
>lens WILL work on? IF they do release this expencive new body, it's not
>going to change the fact this lens is very useable on the MAJORITY of canon
>digital cameras.
>
Majority? Well, let's see.

Works on:

EOS 300, EOS 350, EOS 20D

Doesn't work on:

EOS D30, EOS D60, EOS 10D, EOS 1D, EOS 1D II, EOS 1Ds, EOS 1Ds II, EOS
5D

I suppose, if you mean the numbers sold, rather than the number of
models, you could be right.

David
--
David Littlewood
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 4:17:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"David Littlewood" <david@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:NecpJtH++bBDFwOF@dlittlewood.co.uk...
> In article <3mg3u0F16er5iU3@individual.net>, Stacey <fotocord@yahoo.com>
> writes
>>
>>>
>>> But...For those using full-frame bodies...that lens will be
>>> worthless......to them.
>>
>>And how many $3500-4000+ bodies will be sold vs under $1000 ones that this
>>lens WILL work on? IF they do release this expencive new body, it's not
>>going to change the fact this lens is very useable on the MAJORITY of
>>canon
>>digital cameras.
>>
> Majority? Well, let's see.
>
> Works on:
>
> EOS 300, EOS 350, EOS 20D
>
> Doesn't work on:
>
> EOS D30, EOS D60, EOS 10D, EOS 1D, EOS 1D II, EOS 1Ds, EOS 1Ds II, EOS 5D
>
> I suppose, if you mean the numbers sold, rather than the number of models,
> you could be right.
>
> David
> --
> David Littlewood

You forgot, under "does not work on," D6000, D2000, DCS1, DCS3.

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