Oh my.. The competition in the 24-70mm f/2.8 zoom lens segment seems to be extremely busy at the moment. Sigma should have an 24-70mm ART lens announced any day now, and now Tamron is rumoured to announce a new 24-70mm G2 this week too, according to canonrumours.com. (also here)
Interesting enough, both are rumoured to start shipping with an initial price tag of 1299 USD.
I guess I will have to wait for some real life test and reviews before deciding then. I used the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 VC a lot on my 60D, and it was an excellent lens. If the new Tamron proves to live up to this, I might be interested.
Additionally, Sigma released some MTF charts that people "wise" in such things seems a bit disappointed about. I never decide on lenses based on MTF charts, so my advice: Wait for some real reviews by trusted sources.
I just heard of this almost magical camera gadget that seems to be the next big thing on Kick-Starter, Arsenal.
It is a gadget that can help you select the optimal camera settings, by analyzing the subject, light etc. and make you get perfect pictures every time.
Although I find the technology behind this gadget fascinating, I can't help thinking that this is yet another attempt to dumb it down.
Photography is, among many other things, a matter of learning a craft. Figuring out what works and what doesn't and to keep striving towards mastering the craft.
Perhaps this thingy can help beginners understand the craft better?
Personally, I would not use it, even if it could make life easier.
But that is just a personal choice. I WANT photography to be challenging. I want to feel stupid when I fail and I want to feel awesome when I succeed.
Using an add-on Superior-Auto Mode does not seem like the best way to challenge yourself.
I came across a couple of interesting discussions over at POTN recently. Essentially they were discussions about why fancy, expensive cameras that were targeting the enthusiast/pro segments had a "green box"/Auto setting, as the people that would be the potential users would know better and choose manual mode or Shutter/Aperture Priority and if they didn't they should by a more beginner-oriented camera.
In my book such a point of view is extremely elitist. You don't have to do anything because others say so when it comes to photography. You don't have to use manual just because you bought an expensive camera. You don't have to stick with a beginners camera because you prefer to shoot in Auto mode.
It's your camera. Use it and have fun!
If you are trying to perfect your composition and don't want to be bothered with all the technical stuff, then my all means go ahead and do so. Then, when you want to go beyond what is possible in Auto mode, I strongly encourage you to learn how to expose properly in full manual, and explore the differences between Aperture and Shutter priority to be able to better choose the right mode for the right situation.
But most of all, have fun doing so.
See some of the discussions mentioned here, here and here.
Ever so often the various Photography Blogs and Photography News sites run an article about why Full Frame is the king of the camera, why Micro 4/3 is the future, why Medium Format is the shit or why an iPhone is all you need (PetaPixel, I'm looking at you)
Usually the articles result in a cascade of enthusiastic and/or angry fanboy comments and I don't have one moment of doubt that that is exactly what the editors wanted. These polarized articles are designed to split people up in Teams that are Pro/Con because that drives traffic to their sites.
But guess what?
It's not about the camera. Shot with a Medium Format Hasselblad if you want to (and can afford it) ..or an iPhone if that suits you better. All that matters is how you put your gear to good use and gets the most of it.
Now, I am not saying that gear doesn't matter. It does. But discussing which sensor format or camera system that rocks the most is like discussing whether a nailclipper or hedge trimmer is the best tool in the world.
I recently wondered "Why am I posting pictures at all?" It does not make me rich. Or famous. So why bother?
I guess part of the answer is a need to be recognized. But the sad truth is that the Internet is flooded with pictures and the chance that mine would stand out is quite small, no matter how hard I try. So why bother?
Another part of the answer is that photography is about creating. And if you create you want the stuff you create to be "used". If not, why bother? Creating without purpose doesn't really make sense.
So, even though posting pictures to this site, or social medias doesn't make me rich and famous, it does serve a purpose. To keep my desire to create alive.