> From: Chip Louie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > IMO, Canon in the last few years has started to drive the high-end market > > with gee-wiz technology to get people to buy it's pro products (newer is > > better, NOT!). > > > First it was music with CD's then it was operating systems with Windoze, > > then movies fell with the compromise that is DVD and DD 5.1, now it's > > photographs falling to bits... > > The list has been kind of quite lately so I though this might > > help it along.
Well, I am unsure if this will "help it along," as suggested but I can't agree with much of what you say. The 400 DO: I was interested in this lens initially. No so much for what it is, as I did not figure it a viable replacement for the EF300/2.8L IS which I have already. The latter is more versatile and, with the EF1.4, the same speed and only a little heavier. The price of the DO lens, if it really reflects Canon's manufacturing costs, does not bode well for what I truly was interested in, a 600/4 DO or even an 800/5.6 DO. It seems doubtful these will be happening soon and, if they did, the cost would be prohibitive. That the 400 DO does not live up to the EF series in sharpness and contrast seem to be less debatable with time and that is truly unfortunate. That hardly seems to justify a slam against Canon's strong suit which, as I see it, is innovation and leading edge technology. I bought a pair of Canon's IS binoculars a couple of years ago. I was so impressed that, when it came time to buy a 300/2.8, I could not see buying Nikon, the brand I had been using since 1972. I have been delighted with my Ef300/2.8L and EF600/4L IS lenses and the Canon wireless flash system. IMO, these are leading edge products that Nikon is not competing with. I personally am not prepared to sacrifice image quality for convenience. So no DO lens for me. No 1D either, at least not yet. The cost of these tools is too high for me to be willing to accept anything other than the best image quality possible. Still, I yearn for digital and feel it will "get there" before too many more years. Still, I do not agree with you, Chip. These are tools, whose compromises are acceptable for many, photojournalists especially. Also, I consider both "a work in progress." The DO will either get better, or fall precipitately in price. The concept will not likely survive as a single, image-compromised, inordinately expensive lens. Digital will supplant film in the not too distant future for just about everyone. Not yet, no. That I agree on but "photographs falling to bits." A bit much that last one! :>) I hope Canon continues to be the pioneer in bringing new concepts to the marketplace. It was IS that brought me into the fold and, years after they brought it to market, there are still no real competitors. As for the other remarks, I was never convinced that there was ANYTHING superior about vinyl over CDs! Would I ever go back to "the phonograph?" You gott'a be kidding! "Windoze," well I fight with it daily too but how can you slam it as if it is worse than DOS? That is where it truly evolved from . . . and it continues to evolve. Innovation is Canon's very reason for being for being, IMO. I hope they don't change!. -- Terence A. Danks Nature & Wildlife Photography http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/danksta/home.htm * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
