The Canon EOS 70D is here

Yeah I’m a bit late but I actually work for a living here at Canon USA, so sue me. The EOS 70D is out, and you can see some of what’s to come with the 7D Mark II in there. Most importantly the new sensor with on-sensor phase detection autofocus, which, as far as I’m concerned is one of the best innovations we’ve had in a long while. This is going to open up a whole host of possibilities and new features, most of which Canon Inc. will introduce with the higher models.

I mentioned a few posts ago how I was wrapped up in an internal battle with Japan about the godawful 9-point autofocus system. Man that struggle alone lost me another 20% of my hair. I managed to convince Japan to step up the AF system on the lower models, and the 70D now has the same AF from the 7D, which is a big deal. Yes, take note, and you have me to thank for it.

Of course this means the 7D Mark II is gonna have to get the AF system form the 5D Mark III. Before you start smiling keep in mind that the price of the 7D Mark II is gonna be much higher than the 7D. But as far as I can see right now, it’s gonna be worth it. Especially with the frame rate we’re planning on having on it.

The only thing that concerns me right now is the image quality. But before I post about that I’m gonna wait for Japan to deliver the production firmware so I can be fair about it. I don’t know what it is with the Japanese and megapixels. I thought I had won that battle long ago with the 5D Mark III, but they keep on pushing it. I pray to God that the new medium format lineup gets ready soon so that the marketing department can masturbate all over the megapixels there while they leave the 35mm sensors where they are right now.

It’s a fucking shame that the 70D has the autofocus system that should have been in the 6D. Canon Inc. just completely fucked the 6D up by including such an ancient AF system on it. Mainly because of that crap autofocus system I can’t recommend that camera to people when they ask me. You’re just better off getting a 5D Mark III. And if you just can’t afford that, you better get the Nikon D600, tho it’s not that great compared to the 5D Mark III, which is still the best fucking DSLR in the history of human civilization, if we don’t look at the 1DX.

Van Niekerk

Van Niekerk – In theaters soon.

Van Niekerk, photographer by day and vampire slayer by night, did an ISO comparison between the 1DX, D4, 5D Mark III, 6D ad D600, which I think you should check out. It clearly shows the superiority of the latest Canon EOS models. Some of what he says:

1. To my eye, the Canon 6D and Canon 5D mark III behaved similarly in this aspect – high-ISO performance.
2. There is a definite (but not that an incredible) jump from the Canon 5D mark II, to these two cameras.

[..]
5. The Nikon D600 performed surprisingly poorly, especially if you think of how fantastic the Nikon D3s and Nikon D4 perform, and how the Nikon D3 was the high-ISO king for quite some time. The D600 that I had, did have the latest firmware, so I can’t explain the noticeable poorer performance compared to the other cameras.

Keep in mind that the 5D Mark III is slightly better compared to the 6D with regards to image quality for stills, and much better if you’re doing video (moire, aliasing etc.). Canon Inc. just fucked with the image quality on the 6D and totally sent everything to hell with the piece of crap 9-point AF system.

DXOMarkBut what’s even more interesting here about Van Niekerk’s observations is with regards to the Nikon D600. The reason is because this, AGAIN, proves that those goddamn motherfuckers at DxO Labs are fucking fooling the entire industry with their bullshit benchmarks. Just take a look at the screenshot below. You’d think that the D600 is so much better compared to the 5D Mark III and 6D based on those scores. Yet, in reality things are completely different, and I’ve shown this before with my analysis of the piece of crap D800.

DXO Mark Sucks Balls

DXO Mark Sucks Balls

If you’re a regular reader of this blog, this isn’t a surprise to you. Why people still take those morons at DxOLabs serious is beyond me. I’ve given up long ago to understand this shit. I have better chances understanding my wife to be perfectly honest with you.

Redneck ordering a Nikon D800

Yo’ kin’t go wrong wif a D800 acco’din’ t’them fuckwads at DXOLabs

Anyway, I’ve got a conference call that’s about to start with Tokyo regarding the new 14-24mm lens so until next time. Take care!

15 thoughts on “The Canon EOS 70D is here

  1. Ready to get owned? Ok! Here it comes!

    > I managed to convince Japan to step up the AF system

    No, Sony and Nikon did by doing a better Job than Canon and Canon seen that people prefeer there Autofocus

    > and the 70D now has the same AF from the 7D

    It doesnt

    > Of course this means the 7D Mark II is gonna have to get the AF system form the 5D Mark III

    It doesnt

    > I don’t know what it is with the Japanese and megapixels

    Its because Sony can build Sensors with 36 Megapixels with the Same Noise then the 5D Mark II

    The best way to increase “focal length” is to use cropping

    If you have a 300mm Lense and 24 Megapixel and you crop down to Screen Resolution (FullHD right now) you will have 3600mm focal length!

    With 36 Megapixel you will have 5400mm focal length.

    So when i go into the mountain shooting eagles i dont carry a 500mm f/4.5 lense for sure😀 it would kill me! I take my good 70-300mm and just crop and everything is fine😀

    > I pray to God that the new medium format lineup gets ready soon

    You sure should read up what “rumor” means

    > Canon Inc. just completely fucked the 6D up by including such an ancient AF system on it

    They did not fucked up the 6D. The 6D was never designed for sports shooter and everyone else is fine with the AF

    > Mainly because of that crap autofocus system I can’t recommend that camera to people when they ask me

    My reason is that it is a 600 € Camera sold for 1600 € just because of 35mm full-frame. Thats a way better reason than your.

    > tho it’s not that great compared to the 5D Mark III, which is still the best fucking DSLR in the history of human civilization

    After using the 5D Mark III for 9 Months i can say that there are better Cameras out there

    > Van Niekerk, photographer by day and vampire slayer by night, did an ISO comparison

    As this guy profen to not have any knowledge abuot sensor technic or to compare ISO im likely to just skip this section, but i wont just to show how stupid he is

    > It clearly shows the superiority of the latest Canon EOS models

    It does not, this test shows nothing. Just nothing. This test shows how less Nikon cares about there JPEG Engine, nothing more.

    But the JPEG Engine of the EOS is shitty too, just less shitty then the Nikon one. So this test shows who have the less shitty JPEG Engine😀

    > There is a definite (but not that an incredible) jump from the Canon 5D mark II, to these two cameras.

    Only in the JPEG Engine, in the RAW the difference is at maximum 0,5 EV, so after noise reduction barely visible

    > The Nikon D600 performed surprisingly poorly

    The JPEG Engine of the D600 does

    > especially if you think of how fantastic the Nikon D3s and Nikon D4 perform

    They dont.

    > I can’t explain the noticeable poorer performance compared to the other cameras.

    Because its not

    Now stop here, its getting stupid.

    What is noise? What does Noise do?

    The only problem with noise is, you have to remove it. Thats the only problem with Noise. You use noise reduction to reduce it.

    The next problem is that noise reduction is killing details.

    So what now? Have a clear mind! Common!

    If you have 30% Less Noise on a 12MP Camera than on a 24MP Camera it means the 12MP is better?

    Its not! It have 30% less noise but 50% less details.

    So after noise reduction you still have 20% less details!

    What does it help you if you have less noise if you have less details in the end.

    I dont care abuot noise, i remove it. I just care about the details in the final image

    On the D600 you get _more_ Details in the _final_ image _after_ noise reduction than with the D4.

    So is the D4 really better? No!

    – It have less noise –> True
    – It have more details after noise reduction –> Not True

    Important is the final image, not the level of noise in the beginning.

    The NoiseDetail Level is important, not the bare noise level.

    If i Raw-Convert the D600 and the 5D Mark III the have about the identical level of Noise, but after Noise Reduciont (the identical on both) i still have slightly more details in the D600 image.

    So the D600 have more details in the End and that is what counts, that is what is important.

    Not what the shitty JPEG Engine shows, what your image will be like after RAW-Converting, only that is important.

    Get over it!

    > those goddamn motherfuckers at DxO Labs are fucking fooling the entire industry with their bullshit benchmarks.

    They are not fooling!

    There results are unusable but keep in mind.

    They tell you how they test and if you look at the test you can see that the tests are just completely stupid, not compareable between different Cameras and does not show anything.

    Neither there Lense nor Sensor Test give any sense, but they tell you!

    People just dont have enough technical background to understand that and think the DxO Mark shows something.

    They are not fooling the industry, the industry is just to stupid to know what they look at!

    You should not read technical benchmarks if you dont have technical knowledge.

    DxO Mark Sucks Balls, thats true.

    That doesnt mean the the 5D Mark III is better than the D800 or the D800 is bad or something like that.

    The D800 have about 0,5 EV more noise (thats about 30%) than the 5D Mark III but it have 50% more detal.

    So again and again

    After you applied noise reduciont, the noise reduction will kill more details on the D800 as it have more noise.

    You have to kill 30% more details with NR as you have 30% more Noise, but you have 50% more details from the beginning.

    So after noise reduction you still have 20% more details.

    Not the Noise Level is important, the NoiseDetail Level is important!

    The D700 for example have way less noise than the D800, but the D800 have 3-times more detail, but not 3-times more Noise.

    The D800’s NoiseDetail Level is much better than the D700’s and the D4’s

    The only Camera which have really more Noise is the Sony A99

    It have 24 Megapixels (about 9% more detail) but 0,5 EV more Noise (30%) so the NoiseDetail Level is worse than the 5D3 and the D800

    But you know what? In my oppinion its stell the best camera out there.

    I know it when i put on my 14mm Samyang Lense and i have Fokus Peeking, bright Viewfinder even at f/16 and Image Stabilisation.

    The Image Stabilizer on the 14mm lense gives me about 4 EV stabilisation, so even when i have 0,5 EV more noise my final image will have 3,5 EV less noise than the 5D Mark III.

    The D800 have the more advanced Sensor than the 5D3
    The A99 have the more advanced technic/features than the 5D3

    And both are way cheaper than the 5D3

    But in the and all those cameras are still fucking smiliar in terms of Image Quality.

    You should really _not_ and i repeat _not_ choose the D800 just because it have a better sensor (Dynamic, Noise/Detail Level) and you should decide against the 5D3 in case of that.

    I still think the 5D3 is better than the D800 as i can produce better images with it, even when it have the worse sensor. Just because the Handling is so much better.

    And i produce the best images with my A99, even when the SLT Mirror takes away 0,5 EV light and increases the noise, just because, for me, the handling is the best.

    So do _not_ take your camera by Sensor Technic, in the end its still about the same on all (0,5 EV difference really doesnt matter in real world shooting), do _only_ take your camera by the Handling!

    And i think the least people will take the D800 than as the handling is just fucked up completely. Even the D600 is way better thant he D800 in terms of Handling.

      • Vamp you really need to download Neil’s images on his site, they are all shot in RAW but evidently you did not bother and just want to praise Nikon, the 5D III is a fantastic camera with great detail and files out of camera look superb.

    • > No, Sony and Nikon did by doing a better Job than Canon and Canon seen that people prefeer there Autofocus

      If it wasn’t for me you’d still be shooting with the 9-point AF system on the 5d mark III.

      > It doesnt

      It does.

      > It doesnt

      It does.

      > Its because Sony can build Sensors with 36 Megapixels with the Same Noise then the 5D Mark II

      Have you seen my D800 posts and image comparisons? It sucks.

      > The best way to increase “focal length” is to use cropping

      No it’s not, it’s buying a longer lens!

      > You sure should read up what “rumor” means

      You’ll understand soon enough.

      > They did not fucked up the 6D. The 6D was never designed for sports shooter and everyone else is fine with the AF

      The 6D was never designed for any kind of shooter. that’s the problem.

      > My reason is that it is a 600 € Camera sold for 1600 € just because of 35mm full-frame. Thats a way better reason than your.

      That too, but it sucks horsedick to begin with. So the price doesn’t matter.

      > After using the 5D Mark III for 9 Months i can say that there are better Cameras out there

      yeah, the 1DX.

      > As this guy profen to not have any knowledge abuot sensor technic or to compare ISO im likely to just skip this section, but i wont just to show how stupid he is

      clearly you don’t know what you’re talking about.

      > It does not, this test shows nothing. Just nothing. This test shows how less Nikon cares about there JPEG Engine, nothing more.

      Yeah their jpeg engine is crap. But there are raw files available.

      > On the D600 you get _more_ Details in the _final_ image _after_ noise reduction than with the D4.

      Both the D600 and D4 suck balls. So i don’t get your point.

      > So the D600 have more details in the End and that is what counts, that is what is important.

      Nope. no. I talked about noise in my D800 posts. More megapixels with more noise is pointless. Always will be.

      > They tell you how they test and if you look at the test you can see that the tests are just completely stupid, not compareable between different Cameras and does not show anything.

      Who the fuck reads how they test? people just look at the scores and think that’s reality. Evil motherfuckers are misleading everyone!

      > They are not fooling the industry, the industry is just to stupid to know what they look at!

      It’s both!

      > DxO Mark Sucks Balls, thats true.

      You bet your ass it is.

      > The D800 have the more advanced Sensor than the 5D3 The A99 have the more advanced technic/features than the 5D3

      I beg to differ. Really.

      > And both are way cheaper than the 5D3

      Because they suck. You get what you pay for!

      > But in the and all those cameras are still fucking smiliar in terms of Image Quality.

      BAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA. check my D800 posts!

      > I still think the 5D3 is better than the D800 as i can produce better images with it, even when it have the worse sensor. Just because the Handling is so much better.

      BAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. It’s not because of the handling you dimwit. it’s because of the superior technology. Jesus fucking christ man.

      > And i produce the best images with my A99, even when the SLT Mirror takes away 0,5 EV light and increases the noise, just because, for me, the handling is the best.

      Oh God, why?

      • No i did not downloaded the RAW Files, i thought its in JPEG to be honest.

        If someone would do an RAW-Test he wouldnt come to this conclusion so i did not expected that.

        But how does it tend out? Look at the comments of the post, he was to stupid to develop the RAW Files😀

        People found out if you develop the RAW-Files in the _identical_ way the result is different!😀 ha! What did i said! No one who have any knowledge of Sensor Technic or RAW Development could come to such a conclusion so i just assumed its in JPEG

        I now looked and them and guess what? I could not reproduce what he said!

        > 3. The Canon 1Dx looks to be at least a stop better than the Canon 6D and 5D mark III.

        I can not reproduce!!! The 1D-X have 1 Stop less noise but it have 20% less Detail.

        If i downscale the 5D Mark III Image to the size of the 1D-X its only a _bit_ more than 0,5 EV

        I wrote a very long part about Noise/Detail Level and you just ignored it, how could you just ignore the most important fact i wrote about? Oh right! You wanted Canon to be the winner😀

        The 5D Mark III still uses the old technology from the 5D just a _bit_ improved where Sony, as the absolute leader in Image Sensor development (especially in Movie Industry), gave Nikon a brand new Sensor for the D800 with a brand new design.

        Canon does not put any money or afford into Sensor Technology, and they know it! Canon knows that they made a mistake and the 70D is the first camera since the 5D having a new design.

        If Canon have the best Image Sensors and best Quality tell my why Canon did official accepted they have not and made a better one?

        Im just tired of your shit, really! Im tired! Except of facts, i can always only read your “opinion”

        Im tired of bringing up facts and you just do nothing than writing your “opinion”. Every 12 year old boy can do that, i dont need to read your blog.

        I will unsubscribe as there is _nothing_ relevant or important than an old man who thinks he is it.

        I’ll just leave that Quote here for the final word from me

        “although I stated everything I did in RAW was the same, in the Nikon RAW I forgot to take off the default blacks of +5”

      • > But how does it tend out? Look at the comments of the post, he was to stupid to develop the RAW Files

        If you look at the RAW files the noise performance and detail/sharpness are the same between the 5D3 and D600. DXO Mark is blatantly misleading. And the colors on the 5D3 are better.

        > I can not reproduce!!! The 1D-X have 1 Stop less noise but it have 20% less Detail.

        Using good software to upscale 1DX pix and proper sharpening, it looks as good as the 5D3 and better at high ISO due to lower noise.

        > I wrote a very long part about Noise/Detail Level and you just ignored it, how could you just ignore the most important fact i wrote about? Oh right! You wanted Canon to be the winner😀

        I fucking ignored it because you should go and read my goddamn D800 posts where I elaborate on the noise/detail stuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        > Im just tired of your shit, really! Im tired! Except of facts, i can always only read your “opinion”

        If you want facts go on the Canon Inc. website. People were getting facts for years and look how it turned out for them. Isn’t DXOMark giving you facts too? HUH?!?! Aren’t the US government and the NSA/CIA giving people the facts every day???!?! I suggest you examine your definition of facts. Here there’s no bullshit. My opinion is a lot more fact than those aforementioned facts!

        > I will unsubscribe as there is _nothing_ relevant or important than an old man who thinks he is it.

        Are you gonna run to your mommy too after you unsubscribe? Are you gonna tell her that mean old Westfall guy was being mean to you? Because I totally wasn’t.

    • Dude, Nikon is fucking dead to us. Right now all we’re looking at is Sony. And Tamron and Sigma with their new lens lineup.

  2. LOL oh well looks like the canon haters at DxO Mark did it again, I never believe their crap numbers anyway which have no meaning in real world shooting, heck they even gave the EF 70-200 2.8 IS L a better score than the EF 70-200 2.8 IS L II lens LMFAO…………

  3. Thank you Chuck for acknowledging that you’re looking at Sony, and Tamron & Sigma lenses; Nikon is a non-factor. LOL! Thank you.

    1st off: Nikon
    Nikon gets nearly every sensor they have from Sony…and still find a way to fuck up a camera! The D600 oil issue is like “WTF?? You don’t have to even worry about the sensor and you still find a way to fuck it up!? You had one job! One job!” LMAO! How do you fuck that up?? And the way they handled the real issue that it IS, was straight jackassary. Deny, deny, deny, offer one free cleaning, go fuck yourself dry.

    And their ergonomics are practically unusable for so many people its not even funny. The grip is as shallow as Kim Kardashian, and holding the damn thing for more than 5mins causes hand cramps if you have anything larger than extra-medium hands. The D800 feels just as uncomfortable to hold. And why, WHY does Nikon have to put so many damn buttons on their cameras??? They shouldn’t even need a menu system because every damn function has it’s own button! It’s like the Death Star firing room crammed onto a camera body!

    If you supposedly have the best sensors on the market, and you don’t even spend your time or money developing and making them, why the hell aren’t you destroying Canon??? Why the hell are you having focusing issues (and deny, deny, …)?? Why the hell can’t you get your damn WB right??! Why the hell don’t you realize that dumb ass screen protector will haze over time and become an issue (maybe they realize their LCD screens aren’t very accurate so that’s why they put a piece of plexiglass over it). The D800 might be a landscape shooters dream, but so many prefer the 5d3 because it makes getting the shot easier! Hand holding the D800 is crippled BECAUSE of the resolution. It is just too many damn pixels! You’re stuck using the camera on a tripod because you can’t use slower shutter speeds hand held, VR or not. That makes the camera less practical to use because you can’t use it well AND easily for EVERYTHING. It BETTER cost less than the 5d3!!

    It’s like buying great engines for your cars from someone else, but you insist on making the outsides look like Subaru. Sure, some people will love it, but the majority won’t or will simply tolerate it. And you’ll end up having a smaller market share than you really should, despite what the forums and “pros” say about your gear. You’re lens selection should be ridiculous, because you don’t have to worry about the sensors! LMAO!!! Nikon is a bright, shining example of how to fuck up a competitive advantage. They shoot up steroids, put on 6″ heels and a prom dress, then try to win the 40 yard dash. Even the way they put their lenses on is ass backwards. Righty tighty, lefty loosey, unless you’re Nikon. The cameras are black with a red accent strip and white letters, sold in a gold and black box. Who’s running this clown show???? Nikon should be on FAILblog.

    2nd: Tamron and Sigma lenses
    This is pretty much a no brainer and needs no elaboration with the recent work from both companies. Tamron gives consumers a 24-70 stabilized option when Canon comes out with a $2000+ 24-70mkII. Considering Canon loves HDSLR so much, a stabilized 24-70ii should have seemed like an obvious move, but no, they drop an extremely sharp, but extremely expensive mkii on the masses and basically hand over market share to Tamron who does stabilized for $1000 less. The 24-70 f4IS is like a consolation prize Canon tossed out. But coming in at about the same price as the Tamron f2.8 seemed more like a ‘here! now leave us alone’ move. The Tamron 70-200VC is a very viable option to the 70-200ii, and Tamron’s warranty is really good and service is even faster now (3 business day policy going in effect).
    I’ll go out on a wild limb and guess that the majority of people who buy lenses are not pros making a living from it, and as such, Tamron’s 24-70 & 70-200 give you a quality set of stabilized zooms for $2800; just a few hundred more than ONE of the Canon options (good as they may be). Hell, even pros making a living from it are picking up the 24-70VC BECAUSE it has VC. That is a misstep on Canon’s part. I have no doubt a 24-70ISii for $2300 would have sold DAMN well. At least then you’re not just giving away business to Tamron like you don’t give a shit. Instead Canon gives us primes like the 35 f2 IS, obviously aimed at the video heads. Really? Now you want to put IS on a lens?
    And Sigma. Sigma was the red headed stepchild with QC issues that made you think whoever was in charge of QC at Sigma had a mom and dad who probably had the same mom and dad. Now, Sigma is the elephant in the room. They are making lenses sharper and less expensive than Canon, and laughing all the way to the bank. Hell, I never would have even considered a Sigma before, but I’ll be damned if the 30 1.4 Art and 35 1.4 Art lenses I rented weren’t damn fine and I wouldn’t think twice about getting now! And a USB dock?? Are you serious!? Whoever is in charge there woke up one Christmas morning, and what happened some say, was that that man’s nuts grew three sizes that day!
    There is no way Canon is sitting with a smug, douchey, “I don’t care” attitude at the thought of a new Sigma 135 1.8, 85 1.4, 24-70OS, and/or 70-200OS. If I were Canon and had more than just a brain stem, I would be waking up in cold sweats at the thoughts of some of those options! Because people WILL switch, let me tell ya!

    And 3, Sony:
    Sony has always been a little overpriced and full of themselves IMHO. They were worse than Nikon Subaru because those glue eaters stubbornly stuck with memory sticks and nonstandard hotshoes forever! Being stubborn and sticking to your guns only works…when your shit works! NOBODY liked that shit! Even Sony shooters complained about it! Sticking with it for so long only made you look like they were always painting the corporate office walls with the windows closed, everyday. I guess somebody finally got the bright idea to stop sniffing paint or open the window because all of a sudden they realized sticking with that proprietary crap was like being in “Titanic”. Jack was dead and still stuck to the wood Rose was barely floating on. You gotta let that fucker go.
    I admire Sony for not being afraid to push the envelope, they were just pushing it on the wrong side. They were a shopping cart with a bad wheel. Their menus made no logical sense the average person could discern. Why are you trying to make your menus like Sudoku puzzles?!?! You know shit is bad when the people loyal to your brand say “yeah, shit is bad” LOL!!
    But someone there woke up and said, enough is enough and the SD cards and standard hotshoe came. The translucent mirror which robbed the camera of light is going away. I swear, it was like whoever was in charge of the photography division, didn’t actually know anything about photography! “I’ve heard photography was about light, but I didn’t think it meant light going into the camera so I didn’t have a problem breaking it up into 2 parts. Why is the mirrorless NEX better than the SLT when they use the same sensor? I’m confused can you show me the diagram again? Why do we need more than a handful of lenses? I still don’t know why my wife needs more than one pair of black heels”. FML!!!
    IBIS? Fucking brilliant. Facial tracking so I don’t have to focus and recompose, brilliant. Face recognizing programming to make that person the focus point, are you serious?! Sony has some tech, and they’re not afraid to drop it into their bodies, and now that they have Olympus, they very well may have people who actually know something about photography and will open up their lens lineup (but with Tamron and Sigma, you already have options available) and correct their insane menu logic. The Sony cart could very well be getting its goofy wheel aligned. Not saying they’ll be great at everything (ie. sports, tracking probably will take a while for the tech to get there) but I’ll be damned if I don’t see Sony getting their shit on track. A FF NEX? Are you serious! Whoa! Mirrorless is not going away, that’s a fact. People are wanting smaller and lighter, that’s a fact. Sony is on the inside track. Hell, I’m a Canon shooter and I’m watching Sony with extreme interest.
    Damn that was long! LOL!!!

    • Yeah Nikon had a lead and then completely fucked it up. We’re still wondering exactly what the hell happened. All of a sudden it was just major fuckup after major fuckup. But they should really consider stepping out of the business right now, cuz the way we’re heading right now, they don’t stand a chance. There’s no chance in hell they’ll ever be able to compete with the EOS cinema lineup. And everyone knows video is where things are heading right now.
      Sony is a different story, and yes they have some really good tech, but execution is seriously lacking. So we’re watching them, you can never know that they somehow get their act together in the future.
      And Sigma and Tamron are doing good stuff. Personally I have to admit I’m kinda happy they’re getting serious about their products, because Canon Inc. quite frankly needs the competition right now. Canon Inc. has been taking the entire industry up the ass for the last few years with the exorbitant prices. Our lenses are way overpriced. The 24-70 f/2.8 II is an excellent lens, though it lacks IS, but is it worth $2300? Nope. The margins on the latest products are insane. So yeah, I for one welcome Sigma and Tamron and hope they keep it up.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s