« on: September 26, 2014, 07:59:24 PM »
The main advantage of a different (presumably more expensive) scanner would be speed. The LiDE models tend to be very slow.
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.
It makes little sense for Canon, Nikon and Sony to develop their own increasingly complex sensors for what is a diminishing market. If we want to see 100MP sensors with great DR and processors capable of handling the throughput or simply improved performance 22-36MP sensors and processors, it makes more economic sense for the technology to be developed collectively.
As I said, there are plenty of things he could have responded with, without responding with a load of BS. He could have said he thinks Canon sensors are excellent and meeting the company goals for IQ or something along those lines, and I wouldn't have had a problem. No one would have had a problem with that. He shouldn't have feigned lack of knowledge about where the measurements for DR come from...he knows damn well where they come from...because they come from everywhere.
Because that's exactly what it was...a bold faced lie.
I'm hoping that the "our sensors are the best" is just a case of chest beating where they don't want to be seen by outsiders to admitting that they equipment is second best. Inside, I'm pretty sure that the engineers would know the real deal but whether management listens to them or prioritises that kind of work is another thing.
Well, from that question and the response to it...I can only conclude that Canon is delusional about their sensor's dynamic range. They have been beat, handily, at both low and high ISO now.I wouldn't bet on that. If they interviewed 5,000 7D owners / prospective owners you can believe they have a good idea of how important IQ is to customers. This was not testimony under oath, nor a confidential therapy session -- it was a marketing interview. If Canon has any weaknesses, and particularly if they're working on solutions to those weaknesses, Maeda san would not tip his hand. His job is to talk up the cameras, while using generalities to assure customers and shareholders that great new stuff is on the way.
Can you please give me some advice on what questions my sister should ask wedding photographers when considering who she should hire?
Oh, and here's yet another wedding image I was processing from my 5D3 that I decided to throw out b/c by the time I corrected the 3EV vignetting of my 24/1.4 and then added 1.5 stops (b/c I underexposed by 1.5 EV to save the sky/clouds above my subjects), I had this wonder junk overlaid over my image:Which "wonder junk" are you talking about, the noise or something else? I see several different areas, and each could have a different cause.
My D810 wouldn't have even had the smudge related with this noiseIt's hard to know that for certain without side-by-side testing, though I wouldn't dismiss the possibility. It would be great to see the before/after, or better still this area of the photo at each stage of your PP so we know where the problem comes in.
I asked before...is this 'extra effort' necessary with every shot? Most shots? A few shots?
I've said this countless times now, but the point of having better data is a reduced workload. Sure, you can work and work and work and work and WORK the data from Canon cameras, with more and more tools, and eventually get a really good result. But, you worked it more, possibly a LOT more, and you spend more money on more tools, to get the same result that you can get from a file that started out being better. You may have even had to do more in-camera, using more IQ-degrading GND filters to balance contrast or what-have-you, to improve the quality of the data.
It isn't purely about the end results, although that's certainly what we all look to. The purpose of having better data is to minimize the work that occurs between camera and publication/print. According to Neuro, that's just "Missing the forest for the trees because I'm just looking at pixels." To me, it's how long do I have to spend journeying to get to the best spot in the forest. One path is rocky and difficult and takes three times as long going uphill...the other is even and level and winds through a more scenic part of the forest, and is a lot shorter.
You're basically on the right track, Dilbert. My guess is the 7D2's video will be optimized for producing excellent amateur video -- something mom & dad would be proud to show their child's grandparents. It should be easy to use, etc. It should have enough features to lure the some fraction into higher-end gear. Under no circumstances should it directly compete with their pro gear.Sadly, it sounds like moving the 7Dii to video is more important to Canon.
I have no idea why one would think this camera suggests "video is more important to Canon." Because honestly I see this camera as living proof that Canon actually couldn't care less about video. The video capabilities of this camera would have been interesting about four years ago. As it is now, for cinematographers, this camera is dead on arrival.
You're wrong - Canon cares a lot about video. Canon especially cares a lot about the folks in video that have money to spend. And Canon wants as much of that money as they can get (Canon is a corporation afterall.)
So why would Canon sell you a $1800 DSLR to do video when they have a $10000 video camera that they'd rather you buy instead?
Why is someone whose portfolio is full of glorified snapshots so concerned about his equipment?
Then go post about it on the sony forum? If we wanted sony crap we would have bought it. This thread is not for you.
I am really not interested to hear what you think i should do.
And if something is "crap" than it´s the EOS-M with it´s trias dated sensor and an awful AF....
And you're at the bottom of your class of trolls: your focus (on the topic) is very poor and jumps around a lot, and you're completely ineffective at persuading anyone of anything. I'm sure the editors of Camera Troll Digest are laughing your poor quality and outdated feature set.
personal insults will not make a shitty camera better... poor blind fanboys
be happy with an inferior and cheap product.