August 27, 2014, 07:21:10 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - dilbert

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 188
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors sell the Camera?
« on: August 25, 2014, 05:35:52 PM »
Let me rephrase the question a bit for you...

And answer that by saying that since the 5DII, I haven't seen a Canon camera with a sensor that was significantly better enough for me to want to buy it or recommend it to anyone.
if you recommend a camera system based upon a sensor, then i wouldn't want a hear a recommendation from you anyways.

i would look at whether or not the system fits the person, support, service, used market in the area, what they want to shoot; and recommend based upon that.

a sensor? wont' be as relevant as the above would be in 2-4 years time.

In 2-4 years time, I expect people with Sony/Nikon cameras to be taking and editing photographs that Canon people simply can't - at least not with the same level of detail and color. I fully expect Sony/Nikon cameras to have 15, if not 16, bit ADCs in 4 years time. As for the system? They'll fill that in. The vast majority of users don't need more than a handful of lenses

actually what you stated is meaningless to 90% of photographers out there. but it only works your direction?

if the vast majority don't need specialized or an excellent ecosystem, they probably don't care about the sensor or what you think is important either.

I do find used markets, support services and general availability to be far more important than the "theory" you have on where  things will be in 2-4 years.

People will want something that gives them a better image than their mobile phone.

The choice is Canon, Nikon and Sony. Two of those three are now providing substantially better images.

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 04:39:01 PM »
Alright, time for some concrete evidence. Here is a 5-frame bracketed sequence I took yesterday of a sunflower field at sunset

to be honest, you overpulled anyways compared to that D800 picture, and there's something "wrong" with that D800 one, especially the sunflower to the left of center - AND you're only seeing it as a very small image so you can't tell if / how there is any artifact happening as you blow it up either.  and that sun doesn't look right on his shot either (unless that's a nuclear explosion that just went off)

point is, if you need 10EV of latitude such as this shot, it's always going to be tricky.

But it doesn't need to be - and more to the point, it isn't with a Nikon or Sony camera. So why should it be thus with a Canon camera?

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors Make the Camera?
« on: August 25, 2014, 03:51:12 PM »
...
So is this talk about Canon's sensors not being any good the result of some laboratory measurements or is it photography which is about seeing and that includes the finished print whether its on a wall or a page (but please, not on a computer screen, people).
So, please, Dilbert, what in the real world are you referring to when you criticize the Canon sensors?
And thank you again.

Look for posts from jrista. He posted some images (on CR) recently of shadow noise and detail from the D800 and 5DIII. Tell me if you need any more convincing after you've found that post.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors sell the Camera?
« on: August 25, 2014, 03:49:03 PM »
Let me rephrase the question a bit for you...

And answer that by saying that since the 5DII, I haven't seen a Canon camera with a sensor that was significantly better enough for me to want to buy it or recommend it to anyone.
if you recommend a camera system based upon a sensor, then i wouldn't want a hear a recommendation from you anyways.

i would look at whether or not the system fits the person, support, service, used market in the area, what they want to shoot; and recommend based upon that.

a sensor? wont' be as relevant as the above would be in 2-4 years time.

In 2-4 years time, I expect people with Sony/Nikon cameras to be taking and editing photographs that Canon people simply can't - at least not with the same level of detail and color. I fully expect Sony/Nikon cameras to have 15, if not 16, bit ADCs in 4 years time. As for the system? They'll fill that in. The vast majority of users don't need more than a handful of lenses - thus "a system" that has macro, T/S, etc, is meaningless to the average photographer that will buy a camera plus lens kit and use that for the next n years without buying anything else. How many people is that? There's a thread on here somewhere... the number of people that buy extra lenses is less than 10%. i.e the "system" is meaningless to 90%+ of the people that buy Canon cameras.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 03:36:20 PM »
nothing has really been innovative in camera systems for the last 30+ years.

Here we go again - digital sensors, image stabilization, USM focusing, predictive servo autofocus, diffractive optics, zooms that are outstanding optically, video, on-sensor phase-detection AF.

Nothing innovative?

I think rrcphoto meant his comments to be ironic.........

not really. i would love a camera company to do something totally radical.  take a playbook out of thom hogan's thoughts on camera systems and surrounding ecosystems.

However I'm surprised people expect this level of "innovation" and think canon's doing nothing though - what more can they do that they haven't done already?

Surprise us.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors sell the Camera?
« on: August 25, 2014, 02:59:20 PM »
Let me rephrase the question a bit for you...

And answer that by saying that since the 5DII, I haven't seen a Canon camera with a sensor that was significantly better enough for me to want to buy it or recommend it to anyone.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 02:58:05 PM »
So, why the heck should I keep waiting, when a D810 is right there, it already has everything I need, and is for sale on the market today?

Because you might only have to wait two weeks or so to see what Canon has been up to lately.  At least that might give a clue as to future directions.

If you exclude the "OMG, 1080p in the 5DII" and look at the very slow evolution of Canon's DSLRs then it is pretty easy to accurately guess where Canon will go next...

i.e. not very far.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 02:56:45 PM »
...
So, why the heck should I keep waiting, when a D810 is right there, it already has everything I need, and is for sale on the market today? I don't like Nikon ergonomics, but I could solve my landscape photography problem today if I wanted to. I'd prefer to have a high DR Canon camera, but one simply does not exist, and no one has the first bleeding clue as to when it might potentially exist. So, I'm done waiting. I think everyone else who has been waiting and really wants more DR should stop waiting as well. :P

I'm also thinking that maybe a Sony A7r plus lens Metabones Mark III could do the trick.

That gives me a foot hold in the mirrorless market and I don't have to fully commit to Sony (i.e. buy lenses.)

The only part I'd be concerned with is the ability of the A7r to hold a long/heavy lens on a tripod.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 11:29:53 AM »
Very disappointing specs after so long a wait. IMO, minor evolutionary improvements.

That is how Canon operates. Look at their product development over the last 11 years and you'll see the same minor increments from one model to the next. If you're looking for revolutionary development then you've bought into the wrong camera system/brand.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 11:23:28 AM »
...Canon's sensor is a major issue.

And why are people still denying it?

...I (and anyone else) is an idiot for not thinking Canon's sensors are good enough.

Here's the thing...Canon's sensors are good enough.  Good enough to produce stunning images.  Good enough to produce award-winning images.  Good enough be part of the camera system chosen by a majority of photographers worldwide for the past 11 years. 

The fact that they aren't good enough for you and a small number of other people certainly doesn't indicate that Canon's sensor is a 'major issue'.

Well jrista is also now on that list. So it would seem that the list of people that it's not good enough is growing.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 07:21:46 AM »
....
This has NOTHING to do with DXO here, BTW. Just to be very clear. This has everything to do with WHAT PHOTOGRAPHERS ARE ACHIEVING IN REAL LIFEa with the D800. I posted actual real world, artistic photographic examples, not some lab test of a step wedge or a bunch of numbers on paper (things you guys are often ragging on me about) and you guys are STILL denying it. Well...I guess what they say is true. Denial is the most predictable of human behaviors...

I've been harping on about this for ages except that I use DxO as the measuring stick and you're using photos posted by people online. In both cases they amount to the same thing: Canon's sensor is a major issue.

And why are people still denying it? Because you and neuro have been long arguing that DxO's measurements are bad and so any discrepancy between the Nikon and Canon cameras is also flawed. But now you've stumbled across more pictures from real life photographers that show that whilst DxO numbers may leave something to desire, the difference they describe between the two brands is accurate.

You've made your bed in arguing that I (and anyone else) is an idiot for not thinking Canon's sensors are good enough. Use HDR, use better technique, real world doesn't need that many stops because of screen/print issues. Blah blah blah. On and on the two of you have argued about how Nikon's advantage isn't real.

And now you've woken up and discovered that the song you sang has put all of those around you to sleep and they don't want to wake up. Why should anyone feel sorry for you about facing denial from others posting here?

Maybe you'd like to print those words out on paper - or write them down - and post a video of you eating that paper :-D

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 23, 2014, 04:51:06 PM »
in other words, "fine detail CMOS sensor" is just marketing speak for ... nothing. It's like saying that a ripe lemon is yellow.
It's more like saying that a ripe lemon is Amarillo morning sunshine..... sounds much fancier than yellow :)

Love it!!

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 23, 2014, 03:12:27 PM »
20.2MP “Fine Detail” CMOS  Sensor (I want more information on this)

= No OLPF or anti-aliasing filter in front of the sensor.

= Nope.  The 70D and 5DIII are both described by Canon as having a 'fine detail CMOS sensor', both have an AA filter.

did not know canon calls their sensors "fine detail CMOS sensors".

so it seems this part of the rumor does not indicate anything new.

in other words, "fine detail CMOS sensor" is just marketing speak for ... nothing. It's like saying that a ripe lemon is yellow.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 23, 2014, 03:06:00 PM »
...
The differences are subtle to non-existent at ISO 400 and up. However, I have processed Exmor images (some of them from people on these very forums who were willing to share theirs), and there is no question that you do have considerably more editing latitude with an Exmor. A D800 allows more shadow lifting. Now, I can deband a 5D III image, and the differences drop...however, the D800 images still contain more detail and usually still have less noise in the shadows. Here is an example of a 5D III vs. a D800 from Fred Miranda's examples back when he first reviewed the 5D III and D800 (he was the first guy to clearly demonstrate with actual images the difference, and this was the first time I believed the D800's editing latitude advantage):
...
The D800 obviously maintains the detail lead, and it still has less noise, but the 5D III image doesn't look like crap anymore. I could probably reduce shadow noise even further, however if I did I would start eating away at even more detail, and at this level, it isn't "chew your hand off at the wrist" annoyingly bad. It's actually quite decent in the grand scheme of things...a considerable amount of DR has been recovered (maybe a stop or so, definitely not the full 2.2 stop difference between the two cameras.)

This has been obvious to some folks (like myself) since the early days of the D800 - when people started posting images with a large natural dynamic range and posting 100% crops of those shadows vs the same scene with the 5D3. It's why folks like myself are furiously upset with the 5D3's sensor being no better in this respect than the 5D2's.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 23, 2014, 01:21:35 AM »
No mention of DPAF in the feature list?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 188