JPL

Ok, but if you had read my post to the end before commenting on it you would have seen that I am talking about the f4 version of this lens.

Grammieb1 Loc: New Orleans

I'm sorry. I missed that part. The better Canon Lenses should handle the new cameras very well. I am happy with my present cameras & I won't be in a hurry to change any time soon, but I have many lenses that I feel could handle any changes I might make. I can't see anyone getting a new camera if they don't have the glass that suits their purposes first. I think that other than being a good photographer, good glass is the second best way to improve images. Canon offers a lot of different options to choose from. Bab

Dana C Loc: Buhl, Idaho

While I am sure others will disagree, I don't think people viewing great photographs can see the difference between 8 MP and 50 MP.
I think that supposed upgrades are designed to sell more cameras to more people with GAS more than they are to improve upon what the naked eye sees in a photograph,

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

It most definitely does as Nikon owners have been rubbing in for a while now. I have heard IQ over and over ad nauseum. Now it is bad or no big deal or not worth the effort. Interesting how quickly the tune has changed. Why is this?

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

The "why" of it is just that people in general don't realize exactly what the point of it all is.

The number of pixels is a small part, but the resolving ability is a much bigger issue.

The idea that one cannot see the effect of using a 50MP sensor is hilarious. The claim that most (or worse yet, no) lenses available today from Canon (or Nikon) are up to such a camera are equally hilarious!

Here's an interesting chart showing the "resolution" of a few cameras.
Note that the Canon 5DS does not have the highest resolution. And also that the camera that does is a low end entry level model!

Do we hear people saying there are no Nikon lenses good enough to work with a D3200? Or a Nikon D7100? Are people complaining that Canon doesn't sell a lens good enough for the 7D2, that has virtually identical resolution to the 5DS?

All that these folks are aware of is that 50MP is a bigger number, They don't know what that actually means...

Marionsho Loc: Kansas

Interesting. Thanks.
Cell phones were advertised as having upwards of 20 MP! Maybe a year and a half ago. My photo teacher, at the time, wondered how many pictures the camera would hold. I later pointed out that it's unlimited. Cloud storage and all. I always wondered how good the images were, and what kind of resolution numbers they attained.

Henry 47

Camera takes.EF and EF-S lenses.
You can always shoot at lower res and use high res when needed.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

I was looking at the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 II lens and it seems to be a better lens than the Nikon equal. So why would Canon lenese not be able to resolve yet there is no question about Nikon lenses doing so? Yet the canon lens is superior in being able to resolve detail etc. I am not a tech person but this does not make sense.

Don Fischer Loc: Antelope, Ore

My own though on this is that Canon is banking on the idea of 50 mps to sell the camera. I have an old D70 that I blew up a photo of a deer with and the lab that did it said I could go to 20x24! My D5000 I have no idea how big a photo I can make but I'm sure quite a bit bigger. I have read where anything over 12-15 pic's doesn't give much more than the 12-15 pic's. If you look, the D1X only has 18 pic's and the D4s Nikon only 16 pics. Not sure the advantage of pixels beyond that being that much of a selling point!

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Then why do the Nikon and Sony fans rub in that more pixels are better. This has been a strong theme over and over for some time now. Except that with the Canon 50 mp camera it is no longer an issue and anything over 12-15 mp is all that is needed? So now those 36 mp or whatever cameras are total overkill and do no better than my 18 mp camera? That these 36mp cameras are just Madison Ave. hype to sell cameras and are really not needed as far as quality of photos. And oh yes the Canon lenses cannot match the resolution needed but miaculously all the Nikon ones will? This has been humerous to see that mp now have nothing to do with quality but only every other factor but mp now.

Don Fischer Loc: Antelope, Ore

i think that pixels has to do with resolution. The bigger the photo the more pixels you need. And the more pixels the smaller you can crop a photo. How big a photo are you looking at making? How big a crop do you need? I think 36 is over kill to, what's the need? For me, more important than all those pixel's is a faster focus and ability to shoot more than 3 or 4 fps. I haven't found anything I needed to crop smaller than my D5000's pixels gal do for me and still get a big photo. I think the only reason we've got to 50 poxel's is because they sell so many camera's. The 1DX and the D4 are the top of the line camera's for Canon and Nikon yet neither has over 18 pixels. Why is that? You would think the flagship camera in their line would have the best of everything.

Ranjan Loc: Currently Cyber-Nation!

Both Nikon and Canon (and Sony, Samsung, Panasonic too, now) have been laughing their way to the bank, while we fans fight with one another and provide FREE advertisement and promote the camera manufacturers who do their best to weasel out of quickly fessing up to any imperfections that happen to rear their ugly heads in their marketed models! :roll: