What will be Kwun's newest camera?

Discussion in 'Badminton Photography' started by Cheung, Sep 4, 2009.

?

What will be Kwun's newest camera for badminton photography?

  1. Canon 7D

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Nikon D700

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Micro 4/3rds camera

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. None of the above but it will be Nikon

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. None of the above but it will be Canon

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. red00ecstrat

    red00ecstrat Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,985
    Likes Received:
    7
    Occupation:
    (Full Time) Coolie. (Part Time) Photojournalist.
    Location:
    Hong Kong S.A.R. China
    sorry! my reply was based on marky's picture!:p
     
  2. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    41,044
    Likes Received:
    2,066
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    regardless of whether there are merits in the u4/3 system or not, the biggest issues of the system right now is the availability of lenses.

    there are only a few u4/3 lenses in the market right now, and the prices are ridiculous.

    eg.

    Panasonic/Leica 25/1.4 - US$900
    Panasonic/Leica 45/2.8 macro - US$900
    Panasonic 20/1.7 - US$400
    Panasonic 14-45 - US$400

    the point of the system is to reduce size and material. then why do they cost so much? yes, i know, it is Leica blah blah blah. but i don't even need to pay so much for a lens. give us Canon/Nikon IQ and a $200-300 general purpose lens. then maybe there will be more buyers. with prices like these, no wonder even taneepak won't buy it and the system will head for failure as a result.
     
  3. drifit

    drifit newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,609
    Likes Received:
    6
    Occupation:
    PM
    Location:
    Selangor, Malaysia
    dear brother kwun,
    it is what we call "branded". driving a roll-royce is different category at driving a volkswagen. ;)
     
  4. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    41,044
    Likes Received:
    2,066
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    i just recently sold 3 lenses. 50/1.4, 100macro, and my beloved 135 f/2. now i have some extra funds on reserve. but yet, i don't know what or whether i will purchase anything.

    the mystery continues.
     
  5. Cheung

    Cheung Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    23,818
    Likes Received:
    4,791
    Occupation:
    wannabe badminton phototaker
    Location:
    Outside the box
    Oi!! 24-70 can find a home with me!
     
  6. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    25
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    I think there are more micro 4/3 lenses than the above 4 with more rumoured to be in the works.
    The greatest advantage of the mirrorless micro four thirds is a return to superlative wide angle lenses that were hitherto only available for rangefinder type of cameras. No more retrofocus wide angle designs which are technically inverted telephotos and not true wide angles. An added bonus to the best wide angle lenses is the reduced costs because now wide angle lenses can have their rear elements sit inside the camera body from their small size. Another plus of a mirrorless 4/3 is HD continous autofocus in video.
    Panasonic should also design their own lens in addition to those Leica design to cut down costs. After all Panasonic is the world's largest electronics company and they can do things at lower costs than others. Olympus and Leica lenses will not be cheap. Maybe aftermarket manufacturers like Sigma, Tamron, etc can cater for the lower end lenses, because not everyone wants an expensive and quality lens.
     
  7. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    41,044
    Likes Received:
    2,066
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    hopefully

    not true.

    with u4/3. they not only halved the flange distance, they also halved the sensor size. in order to achieve the same viewing angle, they need to use lenses 1/2 the focal length.

    a 35mm lens in say canon mount is a retro focus design.

    a 17.5mm lens in u4/3 (with 20mm flange distance) is also retro focus design.

    there is no benefit there.

    not true, any camera can do the same autofocus, not limited to mirrorless. just flip the mirror up and it is equivalent design.
     
  8. weeyeh

    weeyeh Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Singapore
    Check out the Lumix 7-14/4 (m4/3) vs. Olympus's own 7-14/4(4/3).
     
  9. ae86trueno

    ae86trueno Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    349
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Jakarta & Auckland
    :eek::eek::eek: Kwun you sold the 135 2.0 :confused::confused::confused: I thought 135 is a very good performer lens? going to Nikon? now I'm very curious :confused::eek:
     
  10. Mini Me

    Mini Me Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    540
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Poole
    come back to the dark side! :D
     
  11. ctjcad

    ctjcad Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,083
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    u.s.a.
    Uh oh...hmm..

    - kwun, are you giving up on badminton photography??..:confused::eek:
    - let's see, gone are the mid-range focal length lenses...hmmm, the mystery?? i'm guessing kwun is thinking of exploring lenses in either the telephoto range or the super wide-angle range..
    - psst, i saw this deal on amazon.com....the 85mm/1.2!!:p...i calculated & it should fall within the total budget of your 3 recently sold lenses..;)
    http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_1...5mm+1.2&sprefix=canon+85mm&sprefix=canon+85mm
     
  12. Gladius

    Gladius Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    3
    Occupation:
    Design Engineer
    Location:
    Singapore
    Yah.. I don't see the benefit either. In fact my handphone camera does the same thing, so does my 5 year old PnS camera..... :rolleyes:

    Why DSLRs stay off that ? Because its so damn slow... :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
     
  13. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    41,044
    Likes Received:
    2,066
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    that's not quite the comparison i am talking about though.
     
  14. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    41,044
    Likes Received:
    2,066
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    yse it is. and it was painful to have to part with it. :( it is what i would call a *perfect* lens. fast aperture, fast AF, extremely sharp even wide open, and compact. i unfortunately don't use it very often.

    the darkside is unfortunately very very expensive. the lens prices are ridiculous. even though image quality is outstanding, money don't grow on trees here. :(

    also, the prime lenses selection are relatively boring compare to Canon.

    haha. i am just re-prioritizing my lenses. badminton photo is fun but i don't do it quite often enough to justify owning a $1000 that get used twice a year. similarly for my macro, excellent lens, but don't use it often enough for the price.

    as for what i will replace it with, i don't know as of right now. maybe i should save up the money for rainy days, or maybe something else will strike my fancy in the future.

    do try to poison me. i am not very immune, but not with a $1800 lens, ok? ;)
     
  15. ctjcad

    ctjcad Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,083
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    u.s.a.
    ^^So..^^

    - what lens(es) are you going to use to take baddy photos, since your primary lenses are no more?? are you going with a third party brand (sigma, tamron)?? or are you just going to rent lens(es) for baddy pics??..
    - you can come down south and cover the U.S. Open. That way you'll use 'em thrice, instead of twice, a yr...;)
    - i feel bad for your beloved 1DMkIII. Just sitting there all alone; i think it needs a very fine companion......how abt the 200/1.8?!?!..hah:p:eek::D
    Hmm, I hope it's not the next one to go?!?!..:eek::(
     
    #95 ctjcad, Sep 16, 2009
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2009
  16. ae86trueno

    ae86trueno Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    349
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Jakarta & Auckland
    wow impressive :) However, I think 85L 1.2 is not good enough for Badminton on the AF speed. I have not tried it but from what I heard in Canon's forum, 85 1.2 is quite a slow AF lens so it might not be good enough for Badminton, I think 85 1.8 is better lens. Its sharp, cheap, and very fast focusing.
     
  17. ae86trueno

    ae86trueno Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    349
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Jakarta & Auckland
    I see, I actually was thinking to get 135L2.0 (price tag about 1.9k here) as well but everytime I think about it, and its just for hobby (my case) I don't think it will do justice.
     
  18. ctjcad

    ctjcad Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,083
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    u.s.a.
    Off topic-True...

    ..the 85/1.2's AF is not as fast, no rumor, at least not as fast as other higher IQ Canon lenses. However, it compensates the "slowness" by having a large aperture opening; thus we could lower the ISO esp. for those DSLRs not capable of producing cleaner pictures taken @ higher ISOs.
    For 85/1.8, it'll be perfect for the newer generation DSLRs (capable of cleaner results @ higher ISOs/taking pics in low light).
    Overall, it's not a bad lens even for taking baddy pics.
    But the "beast" lens of 'em all is defo the 200/1.8..:cool:
     
    #98 ctjcad, Sep 16, 2009
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2009
  19. Mini Me

    Mini Me Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    540
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Poole
    nikkor 28mm/1.4 isn't a boring lens! i'm using it as my "shooting in available darkness" lens :D being able to shoot handheld indoors/night time f/1.4 @ 1/30s rocks! though the price of the lens wasn't so attractive :D
     
  20. weeyeh

    weeyeh Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Singapore
    No. But that does show some benefits of dropping the mirror. The biogons, as anther example, cannot be used with any SLR due to the rear element intruding beyond the mount. Actually, they can but MLU is needed which means you essentially shoot blind.

    Well... I didn't see any benefits to AF either when I started photography in the mid 80's. I can MF much faster and accurately than any AF system at that time and my hit rate was much much higher if I do zone-focussing (than to leave camera to AF hunt or reframing). In fact, I never needed AE -- why bother? I'm nail exposures on slides with the spot meter using zone system. This method of working is much more predictable that even when I moved to AF/AE capable camera, I optimise the settings to do MF/ME/spot.

    With slowing eyes/brain and lack of practice, I start to use more AF/AE. I still do MF/ME most of the time but I keep forgetting something. These technologies makes photography easier and allows the photographer to focus on the subject.

    CDAF will need more time to mature but unlikely to ever be faster than PDAF. The question is how fast do you really need it? CDAF is almost defacto for any video work but those do not really need fast AF.

    I do not shoot sports so have no use for extremely fast AF. The times I did was before CAF so I adopted a wait and snipe strategy (Nikomat if I recall correctly). I do appreciate the need for good consistent CAF and motor drive -- better possibilities.

    However, since I'm no professional sports photographer, there are compromises I can live with and others which I cannot. You obviously understood the limitations and compromises hence power to your choice.. perhaps others can do the same as well.

    Back to the thread... what's Kwun's requirements?? He did state a figure of USD1800.
     

Share This Page