Messages

1

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Talk [CR2]

« on: October 09, 2012, 05:03:39 AM »

On a serious note- I know we all like a nice rumor and to imagine what we can get in the future- but are the 5DIII/1Dx/1DsIII so bad that the Canon shooters who need high megapixels are out of work until the 46MP comes out?

I really like this statement, it reveals a lot about what photographers need, want and dream about.
I love my 5dmkiii, it may not be perfect in any one way, but it's perfect for its versatility in all the different ways I use it. It rarely leaves me wanting anything else. I am currently in a situation where I need to invest in a proper system for high-res art reproduction; in other words, Medium Format.
 
After doing some tests with Hasselblad H4D 50(not multi-shot) and Nikon D800, I was completely convinced DSLRs could soon match or exceed medium format, especially if lenses improve and 16bit color is a part (as was once rumored about the new 1D-S, or whatever you want to call it.)
I saw that the H4D was obviously better in two aspects: transitions/handling of highlights and color. The Nikon kicked ass in high iso and darks; basically handling noise.
The resolution is different but I wouldn't dare say it's all that important of a difference. The Nikon has actually exceeded MF in some ways, it is a brilliant new camera. But it still misses on a couple things, and it really just comes down to color.


The 1D-S is a very interesting prospect if it can traverse both of those cameras. It would be one more step closer to best of both worlds. Even if it had maximum usable iso of 1600 out of 3200, that means a lot more versatility than MF. With 16bit it would also challenge MF's color, which is the ONLY reason I am considering buying one for art reproduction. If my clients were ok having almost-perfect color, I'd get the Nikon, I would save a lot. But almost-perfect isn't enough,
so if Canon were to have a high MP, 16bit camera for 9000, I would be more than happy to get it (assuming it would actually be as good).
That's why, for me, this rumor is interesting. It could save me 10,000+ in the end, but I guess one can only dream...


I think for most, pros or amateurs, the cameras that are available today are more than capable and better than we ever thought possible, but every time something new or special comes along, we see opportunity and are inspired. So although I don't think anyone is out of work without the camera, a lot of new exciting work will be created once it is available.

2

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]

« on: August 22, 2012, 11:21:01 AM »

  If you're that bothered by the skin tone reproduction by today's DSLRs, hire a professional processing lab to do the final touches on your shots.

If you're recommending something like that, you're really not getting my point...

I get the feeling some are obsessed with matching Nikon and their mega pixels and not worried about the conversation of how a photo can look... however minute the change can be.
I hear it time and again, when you have MF quality, the difference is there. When you have a dslr, most will try to appease themselves and insist MF, for some tech/scientific/'I read somewhere' reason, is not worth it and not even advantageous anymore.
I'm very happy with the 5dmkiii, very happy... it's much better than I thought it would be over the 5dmkii. But, there's always room for improvement, usually in aspects very difficult to make better, unlike MP which is where all the attention gets placed.
You don't have to be a high paid fashion/car photographer to be able to appreciate that.
 

3

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]

« on: August 22, 2012, 09:34:29 AM »

I think the lack of people talking about bit depth is surprising, I think it should be the main thing to consider, more so than mp. I'd much rather have 16bit version of 5dmkiii than a 14bit higher mp camera. It's the main aspect I'm considering investing in medium format.

I think it's not talked about much because it just won't happen for another generation of canon pro bodies,probably... but like you, I would be more than happy to be wrong!

You might want to have 16 bits, and you might feel better if you had. But chances are that your images  would not be any better.

All investigations that I have seen suggests that current 14-bit cameras tend to be noise-limited (photon/electronics noise is large enough that the quantization noise (error) is dwarfed), and that the 15th and 15th bit of 16 bit raw files contain only random noise. Random noise needs not be recorded, it can be recreated in your computer at any time at much lower cost.

I would much rather have good image quality, or at least, some measurable and relevant indicator of image quality (such as dynamic range at base ISO), rather than some random PR-driven spec that few people understand, such as the number of bits in an A/D-converter.

-h

My point, as I hoped others would notice: there is a real, tangible, visible difference in MF files vs dslr files when it comes to colour. (think transitions/gradations/subtleties in skin tone) It's not necessarily 'more' ,like mega pixels, but rather higher sensitivities... and yes, of course there's factors that allow this, like larger pixels and great lenses, but that's what I'm saying I'd love to have in my dslr... larger pixels (the 1Dx has large pixels) with higher colour sensitivity. And I'd be fine if that meant a loss in hi iso and speed.

And the idea that few people understand all the tech behind it, I agree. I am one of them, trying to learn more. But I'm definitely not convinced that the progression to 16 bit is a bad idea. It needs to be implemented properly, and I wouldn't be surprised if it became something we all understood a bit better in the coming year or two...

4

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]

« on: August 21, 2012, 03:23:08 PM »

I think the lack of people talking about bit depth is surprising, I think it should be the main thing to consider, more so than mp. I'd much rather have 16bit version of 5dmkiii than a 14bit higher mp camera. It's the main aspect I'm considering investing in medium format.

There is much debate about the "16-bit myth." From what I've read on the matter, I don't believe that a 16-bit camera would produce any tangible improvement over a 14-bit camera, because those extra bits are not actually doing anything useful, just quantizing noise.

I don't mean to say the difference is enormous, and it comes down to it being a small/modest development, but I have seen many examples of medium format 16 bit sensors delivering beautiful, more natural skin tone renditions due to the ability to capture more colors; I've noticed for a while dslrs often have a somewhat, and sorry for maybe not describing this appropriately, but, plastic tonal renditions from light to dark especially over skin tones (the range of tone seems flatter, local, less subtle variations).
Much like every iteration of cameras today, once you have that little bit more/better/broader range of information/techinik, you are happy to have it and will notice the difference the more you use it.

5

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 3D X [CR1]

« on: August 21, 2012, 12:19:45 PM »

Looks like whoever sent this rumour to Craig also sent it to Keith Cooper over at Northlight Images (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_3d.html) along with some embellishments:

• 16 bit RAW
• Dual DIGIC 5+
• "Its a new type of body,looks like a mini 1DX, it has a integrated portrait grip but its a bit thinner and significantly shorter and also lighter (no rear lcd panel)"

Sorry, but (1) and (3), as well as the heat dissipation business sound a lot like b*ll*cks to me.  It's a bit soon after the launch of the 1D X and 5D MkIII to start suggesting that their technology is out of date.  As for the mini integrated portrait grip, perhaps they've seen the illustrations from NL and added them on to their imaginary spec list?

Naturally, I will be more than please if I am eating my words in a month or so...!  [/list]

I think the lack of people talking about bit depth is surprising, I think it should be the main thing to consider, more so than mp. I'd much rather have 16bit version of 5dmkiii than a 14bit higher mp camera. It's the main aspect I'm considering investing in medium format.

I think it's not talked about much because it just won't happen for another generation of canon pro bodies,probably... but like you, I would be more than happy to be wrong!