Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: 10D owners - time to go Nikon?  (Read 3321 times)
Tim Gray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2002



WWW
« on: August 19, 2004, 05:39:16 PM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']So if a 10d owner is going to switch to Nikon, why don't they just buy a 20d?[/font]
Logged
boku
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493



WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2004, 08:02:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
[font color=\'#000000\']Canon has offically released the on the new EF-S lenses. info . 10D owners appear to be left out in the cold - you have to buy a 20D to use the lenses.[/font]
[font color=\'#000000\']I have a 10D and lenses that make me not need EF-S anything. And, when I can afford, I can use them on a 1D Mk2. I'm set. Why would I switch to Nikon?

Sounds like you are just anti-Canon or pro-Nikon.

The expansion of the EF-S line will motivate zero people to buy a Nikon.[/font]
Logged

Bob Kulon

Oh, one more thing...
Play it Straight and Play it True, my Brother.
DaShiv
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


« Reply #2 on: August 19, 2004, 11:59:41 PM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']Maybe you would've been happier if Canon didn't release the new lenses at all.

It's quite possible that the new lenses take advantage of the shorter back focus distance of the EF-S mount (in addition to the smaller imaging circle of course) to allow for focal lengths as short as 10mm on a conventional DSLR. I'm not even sure whether there are any wider rectilinear DSLR lenses out there--Olympus has an 11-22mm lens for their 4/3 system, but that has an even smaller imaging circle to fit its 2.0x apparant FOV multiplier compared to 35mm film lenses, compared to Canon's 1.6x.

If the new EF-S lenses do make full use of the shorter back focus distance as part of the EF-S specs, then the lens's rear elements would protrude too deeply into the camera's body and would not have been able to clear the 10D's larger mirror anyway. Which would lead back to my first sentence. [/font]
Logged
Jim Larson
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #3 on: August 20, 2004, 10:50:42 AM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']I have concerns as well. . .but my concerns are based upon the trend that is being established by the last five lens releases after the 17-40/4L. (the 17-40/4L is a great lens)

we have. . .

. . .18-55/EF-S which is now released at $169 or so (a decent kit lens)

. . .the 70-300/DO-IS which carries a $1300 "L" price tag, but image quality that is somewhat middle of the road.

. . the 28-300/L, which being a 10x zoom no one expects to be stellar image wise, but no one expected it to be $1000+ over the previous 35-300/L.

. . the 10-22/EF-S. A much anticipated lens. But slow as molassas and. . .$800. For this cost, you would expect this to be a "L" lens.

. . .the 17-85/EF-S IS. A non-anticipated lens, but very ing rational from a marketing perspective. But $600?

The EF-S lenses are smaller and should be cheaper to make than full frame EF lenses. Although the lenses are wider, one would not expect the result to be more expensive than traditional EF offerings.

I am eagerly awaiting lens reviews of the two new offerings. I am concerned that Canon lenses are making a step change in cost and a (negative) step change in quality.

Time will tell.[/font]
Logged
r42ogn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 47



« Reply #4 on: August 21, 2004, 03:55:56 AM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#008080\']Speaking as someone who still uses an EOS 3 as well as a 10D I only want to buy lenses for full frame - I still live in the hope of a more affordable "3Ds" 11 million pixel, full frame, DSLR.

IMHO, after over a year using both, I have come back to thinking that slow slide film gives better images than the 10D and am enjoying the flexibility of digital AND the beauty of slides.[/font]
Logged
paulbk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 469



« Reply #5 on: August 22, 2004, 07:12:51 PM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']As usual Im out of the loop. What is a new EF-S lenses? How is it different from Canons 35mm L series.... i.e. whats the big deal?

I agree with boku. I have a very nice line of L series that work fine. And will likely spend a lifetime learning to use them effectively. At least in my case, these lenses are not limiting in anyway. Now its up to *me*.

Further, I love my 10D. Love it! The 20D review did not tempt me one bit. If and when I upgrade, itll be to something like the 1D mk2.
paul[/font]
Logged

paul b. kramarchyk
Barkhamsted, Connecticut, USA
Edward
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 134


« Reply #6 on: August 19, 2004, 04:30:23 PM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']Canon has offically released the on the new EF-S lenses. info . 10D owners appear to be left out in the cold - you have to buy a 20D to use the lenses.[/font]
Logged
Edward
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 134


« Reply #7 on: August 19, 2004, 06:03:40 PM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']>So if a 10d owner is going to switch to Nikon, why don't they just buy a 20d?

Spite and aggravation:-)

But you are right.  A new 20D and 10-22 is still a lot cheaper than a Nikon Digital and their 12-22.  Wonder what the spot market for a 10D is going to be?[/font]
Logged
Edward
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 134


« Reply #8 on: August 19, 2004, 10:07:31 PM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']I am a Canon fan, it just irratates me that the new lenses will not fit the 10D.  Since I like real wide angle, that leaves me with the Sigma 12-22 as my only choice, unless I buy the 20D.[/font]
Logged
Edward
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 134


« Reply #9 on: August 20, 2004, 07:50:13 AM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']> Maybe you would've been happier if Canon didn't release the new lenses at all.

Philosophers say that choice does not always lead to happiness.[/font]
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5170


« Reply #10 on: August 20, 2004, 02:34:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
[font color=\'#000000\']A new 20D and 10-22 is still a lot cheaper than a Nikon Digital and their 12-22.[/font]
[font color=\'#000000\']Strange choice of lenses for the price comparison; I would have looked at the more mainstream "wide to tele" standard zoom options.

The Canon 17-85 f/4-5.6 EF-S IS looks to be significantly more expensive than either the Nikon 18-70 f/3.5-4.5 DX the Olympus 14-54 f/2.8-3.5, and is about 2/3 stop slower than the Nikon, and over one stop slower than the Olympus.

On the other hand, the Canon has a wider zoom range (5x vs 4x) and IS.

On the third hand, IS does nothing to overcome the f/5.6 restriction on DOF control, and is of little or no help with moving subjects.[/font]
Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 916



« Reply #11 on: August 20, 2004, 08:18:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
[font color=\'#000000\']. . the 10-22/EF-S. A much anticipated lens. But slow as molassas and. . .$800. For this cost, you would expect this to be a "L" lens.[/font]
[font color=\'#000000\']Slow as molasses? It's an f/3.54.5. No speed demon but no tortoise either. It's 1.34 stops down from the Canon 20mm & 1635mm at the long end. Not too bad. At the short end...well, there's no competition besides the Sigma 1224mm, which is f/4.5 at 12mm.

IMO this is by far the most interesting of the three new EF-S lenses. I dig w i d e.  :cool:

-Dave-[/font]
Logged
Edward
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 134


« Reply #12 on: August 21, 2004, 11:42:37 AM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']What do you do with the slide images? I like slides a lot, but by time I get them scanned, deal with the dust and crud from processing, I think the 10D images look better in the final prints. I am still agnostic on this, and am thinking about going back to film for wide angle shots.[/font]
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad