http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/ You gotta know Fri, 19 Mar 2010 08:35:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-32688 Josh Wed, 25 Nov 2009 01:57:17 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-32688 What could I expect <a Paul Smith Belts to designs very good for me? What could I expect <a Paul Smith Belts to designs very good for me?

]]> http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-32432 Paul Smith Shoes Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:24:09 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-32432 Many people have alos become fans of <a href="http://www.newpaulsmith.com/paul-smith-shoes-c-518.html" rel="nofollow">Paul Smith Shoes</a> since they came into the market. I also one of them , I very like <a href="http://www.newpaulsmith.com/paul-smith-wallets-c-521.html" rel="nofollow"> Paul Smith Wallets </a> and <a <a href="http://www.newpaulsmith.com/paul-smith-belt-multi-stripe-100-leather-100-pewter- buckle-p-21559.html">Paul Smith Belts</a>,It designs very good. Many people have alos become fans of Paul Smith Shoes since they came into the market. I also one of them , I very like Paul Smith Wallets and <a Paul Smith Belts,It designs very good.

]]> http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-32255 brujel Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:00:51 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-32255 @ Ronald= the latest nikon 500mm f/4 have VR. it's already launched 3 years ago. where hav u been?? yes, it's far more expensive. but the result quality is better than 500mm L. the difference looks very clear if u use 2x TC. the result for 500mm L only acceptable when using 1.4TC. and C is also weird to only allow the cross type focusing sensor only work with 1Dseries and lens >f/4. that's mean with 500mm L series you can not activate 19 crosstype AF sensor.... @ Ronald= the latest nikon 500mm f/4 have VR. it’s already launched 3 years ago. where hav u been??
yes, it’s far more expensive. but the result quality is better than 500mm L. the difference looks very clear if u use 2x TC. the result for 500mm L only acceptable when using 1.4TC.
and C is also weird to only allow the cross type focusing sensor only work with 1Dseries and lens >f/4.
that’s mean with 500mm L series you can not activate 19 crosstype AF sensor….

]]> http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-30932 Ronald Sat, 31 Oct 2009 09:28:03 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-30932 1) I mainly use 500mm f/4 for birding. The Nikon teles doesn't have VR/IS. 2) Maybe Nikkor is cheaper in your part of the world, but where I live, it's definitely not the case. 1) I mainly use 500mm f/4 for birding. The Nikon teles doesn’t have VR/IS.
2) Maybe Nikkor is cheaper in your part of the world, but where I live, it’s definitely not the case.

]]> http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-30930 Orik Sat, 31 Oct 2009 08:27:31 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-30930 ??? Nikkors are usually cheaper (or the same price) than Canons. And they have VR where Canon has its IS. BTW, VR has less faults than IS (I have both systems and can compare). ??? Nikkors are usually cheaper (or the same price) than Canons. And they have VR where Canon has its IS. BTW, VR has less faults than IS (I have both systems and can compare).

]]> http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-30929 George A. Sat, 31 Oct 2009 08:20:52 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-30929 and yet. take into account that all images above were taken in pretty good lighting conditions. In a low light/night, it can be even worse. and yet. take into account that all images above were taken in pretty good lighting conditions. In a low light/night, it can be even worse.

]]> http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-30928 George A. Sat, 31 Oct 2009 08:17:51 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-30928 It seems the 6400 is a real limit for it. All higher than that looks unusable for normal shooting; only for emergency and paparazzi. It seems the 6400 is a real limit for it. All higher than that looks unusable for normal shooting; only for emergency and paparazzi.

]]> http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-30749 Ronald Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:12:34 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-30749 Too bad the Nikon lenses are so expensive and without VR. Too bad the Nikon lenses are so expensive and without VR.

]]> http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-30691 Anon Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:10:16 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-30691 Did I Mention How Incredibly Horrible This Crap Looks LOL!! I'm In Awe... Did I Mention How Incredibly Horrible This Crap Looks LOL!! I’m In Awe…

]]> http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-30690 Anon Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:07:56 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-30690 This Image Looks Like Big Ink Blotches Spread Across An Image... Its Looks Like Something You Would Find In A 3 Year Old's Coloring Book... Nikon Crushed Canon In The Noise Aspect... Don't Feel Badd Though I Mean At Least You Still Have Full HD To Play With Lol!! This Image Looks Like Big Ink Blotches Spread Across An Image… Its Looks Like Something You Would Find In A 3 Year Old’s Coloring Book… Nikon Crushed Canon In The Noise Aspect… Don’t Feel Badd Though I Mean At Least You Still Have Full HD To Play With Lol!!

]]> http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-30689 Chris B. Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:58:44 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-30689 The Nikon D3S 102,400 ISO shots look like the Canon 1D Mark IV's 25,600 ISO shots. The Nikon D3S 102,400 ISO shots look like the Canon 1D Mark IV’s 25,600 ISO shots.

]]> http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-30615 Agent420 Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:07:28 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-30615 I agree, it is a Positively Outstanding System. I agree, it is a Positively Outstanding System.

]]> http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-30607 Anonymous Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:18:38 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-30607 The funny thing is that in 5 years, everyone will be complaining about how awful and noisy ISO 1,638,400 is and wishing that it were as clean as ISO 102,400 on the 1D Mark VII. The funny thing is that in 5 years, everyone will be complaining about how awful and noisy ISO 1,638,400 is and wishing that it were as clean as ISO 102,400 on the 1D Mark VII.

]]> http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/1d-mark-iv-iso-12800-shot/comment-page-1/#comment-30603 Ed Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:06:44 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2981#comment-30603 Link us to some samples. Link us to some samples.

]]>