Messages

1

EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]

« on: April 16, 2013, 01:54:59 AM »

DXO tells us the sensor is useless, yet somehow people manage to take great pictures.

I managed to take great pictures 15 years ago with my SLR and yet I use DSLR nowadays (beyond micro 4/3).
I managed without mobile phone 20 years ago but I use it continuously nowadays.

Technology moves on. Not so Canon's APS-C sensor tech. They are still living in 2009.
The 18 MP is perfectly fine for me and I think for the most (the last thing I'd wish for more MP with Canon's sensor tech from 2009) but hopefully they improve the per pixel quality.

2

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T5i Leaks

« on: March 20, 2013, 10:46:45 AM »

Canon must be doing something right with their "crappy" sensors.

Nothing was wrong with the 18 MP Canon APS-C sensor when it was introduced. But since sensor technology has advanced. There were visible signs in Nikon D5100 then in OMD E-M5 and so on.
What IQ improvements are visible in recent APS-C Canons, let's say in the last 4 years? None that I've noticed.

Does anyone here seriously feels that Canon development in APS-C segment accelerates? 

How about the 5DmkIII that Canon was ready to introduce with SD card support but without UHS-I support? Has anyone heard about the issue? Then just check if Nikon D7000 has UHS-I support. Wait when was D7000 introduced? 2010? And when was 5DmkIII introduced?

So how true that not everything is about sensor...

3

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T5i Leaks

« on: March 20, 2013, 10:17:42 AM »

if you want to buy a competitive camera from canon today you have to pay 2800$ for the 5D MK3.

evertyhing below that you better buy a nikon product.. sad but true.

and i really wonder about the fanboys who still, after 4 generations of nearly identical APS-C bodys, defend canon.

how dum* must someone be to defend big corporations that want nothing more then screw you for your hard earned money.
and to the knee jerk who thinks about writing "then don´t buy canon".... that´s exactly what im doing!!

as most 550D users wrote.. there is no reason to update to a new xxxD model.

Sad, but so true.
I take most of the time only mFT stuff with me as that's smaller/lighter (and IQ wise I don't feel loosing anything). So that's with me in the 99% of the time.
In the rare occasions when I carry my bigger photo bag which has also 550D/T2i + an L zoom in it I use almost exclusively my mFT stuff (Canon stuff is hidden deeper in the bag and it's more trouble to take it out and I'm not up to that trouble  , no actually I'm not kidding).
The very rare cases when I used my Canon stuff during the last 1/2 year was because:
- The 580EXII is more powerful and recharges a bit faster than the flash I have for mFT (I could change that)
- Magic Lantern and because nothing comparable exist for mFT
- The Canon 100L, because I don't have macro lens for mFT (I could change that)

Sure the 5DmkIII would provide somewhat better IQ/better handling/more background blur etc. but I'm dead sure that not 2800$ worth for me personally.
Pro work is of course different. There you cannot afford not using the best stuff. But pros buys only 1 digit Canons, right?

So I'd be ready to pay for a reasonable spec'd and reasonable priced xxD but I'm not open to pay anything for a Canon APS-C body that not up to recent mFT bodies and smells like designed by the marketing department and engineers were not allowed to work on it.

Anything lesser than xxD from Canon is a joke and only Canon fan-boys (and folks working for Canon's marketing department) who never tried out anything else (take mFT for example) can truly believe that they are still competitive and worth their price.

4

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T5i Leaks

« on: March 20, 2013, 04:31:04 AM »

I think this is pretty inventive (maybe still not revolutionary), nothing like that I remember from Canon...

http://panasonic.co.jp/corp/news/official.data/data.dir/2013/02/en130204-6/en130204-6.html

5

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T5i Leaks

« on: March 20, 2013, 04:09:48 AM »

I cant honestly tell if a photo was shot with a Nikon or Canon.IQ seems good enough with both brands for me.

Even the IQ of mFT cameras have since long surpassed APS-C Canons. If just by a hair or more judge for yourself (don't take my word for it).
mFT has also superb compact size primes (just to name some: 12 f/2, 45 f/1.8; but really a long list). Try them once e.g. with Olympus OM-D E-M5 or any recent mFT camera. You'll be surprised...

6

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T5i Leaks

« on: March 20, 2013, 03:29:42 AM »

Pardon me but what's the leak?
This spec. is almost a direct copy from the previous generation (maybe there is a new processing engine so ISO range is extended for the sake of JPG but RAW is probably the same).
I'm slowly getting used to that Canon is either overpriced or under-specified (compared to e.g.  Nikon or mFT).

Some think that the number of pixels defines sensor technology.  That's why we had megapixel wars, because the uneducated masses think that more is always better.

While I'm not wishing for more megapixels (I'd be even fine with less) I just could not help not noticing that despite the more megapixels Nikon APS-Cs have at least as good or better IQ at any ISO than the Canon (even on pixel level).

So if those uneducated masses that you started to talk about ever compare IQ wise Canon APS-C with other small sensor systems they can easily come to the same conclusion, but maybe I just misunderstood Canon's strategy with APS-C and they would like to quit from this market segment (and focus on the more juicy FF). Then well done Canon, very well done.

Nevertheless my need for portable small system is fulfilled with mFT so it seems that I don't need to spend on Canon gear this year either.

7

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 100D Detailed Specs Appear

« on: March 18, 2013, 04:41:21 AM »

Such a pointless camera.

Yes, indeed. Canon marketing is getting very creative (or desperate?) to come up yet another camera that has the same old (tech) 18MP sensor used so many times in many different APS-C bodies (and it cannot compete anymore with latest micro 4/3 sensors).

Instead they should rather focus on enhancing their APS-C sensor so that it at least comes close enough to the latest micro 4/3 cameras (with superior picture quality compared to Canon APS-C) that not only have small bodies but many excellent and small/light lens to choose from.

8

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms 70D; Future of Semi-Pro DSLR is FF

« on: February 07, 2013, 06:58:05 AM »

I fear that it's not just the 0.5um process but Canon generally lacks behind sensor technology.

Canon is simply forced to push their customers to FF because they cannot compete in the APS-C arena (or in general with DSLR bodies with high pixel density=small pixels).

With equal pixel size Canon cannot compete with sensors using more inventive technology...

Defiine 'compete'.  Last time I checked, none of the manufacturers you're discussing sell naked sensors to consumers - they all sell cameras.  Since Canon sells more cameras than any other dSLR maker, I'd say they're winning the competition.

Canon is in a very comfortable position at the moment (I'd say too comfortable) but can they continue like that with a senor tech. that is getting more and more behind competition?
It has started with Sony sensors (found in many DSLRs like Nikon and Pentax) that have better dynamic range in low ISO than any of the Canons (FF included).
Panasonic is claiming now approx 1 full stop light utilization enhancement. Just imagine that technology appearing in m43 bodies (and please don't tell me that e.g. Olympus E-M5 not selling well).

I personally know people who have switched entirely to m43 (mainly but not exclusively from Canon; sure non pro users) and I myself have started to use m43 along with Canon and I have to tell that I'm very pleased with the results.
The Sony sensor that can be found in latest m43 bodies is it least as good as the latest APS-C Canons (despite the 2/3 stop disadvantage from sensor size) so from the pictures alone it would be hard to tell which system is used.
Thus apart form the slightly shallower DoF/more background blurring I don't see what advantage Canon APS-C has (note: FF is different). OK, maybe ergonomics but again for non pro usage that matters less.
 
The whole system is lighter and less bulky though, which is a huge advantage for me.
Most of the m43 primes are also very usable already wide open.
So from IQ perspective it's on par with current Canon APS-Cs. Add 1 stop advantage and it will leave Canon APS-C in the dust.

So to me e.g. the m43 is very competitive and brings me huge bulk saving at the price of 2/3 stop less background blur.
Sure it's not for everyone (e.g. long primes are missing so e.g. it's not for birders) but IMHO it very well covers 99% of the needs.
That's competitive enough for me.

9

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms 70D; Future of Semi-Pro DSLR is FF

« on: February 05, 2013, 09:51:25 AM »

And my last input, considering Canon sensors. What I learned from different articles is, that Canon is still using a 0.5um process for their CMOS sensors, while Sony has already upgraded to 0.18um. This is one reason why Canon lacks behind in sensor technology. But this is not a technology Canon has to develop, these are just machines they buy from other companys to produce their sensors. Canon already owns machines that are capable of a 0.18um process, but does not use them for CMOS sensors yet. So I expect Canon will make the switch pretty soon (maybe the high megapixel camera is a hint for that; Canon also said that at the moment 18MP APS-C sensors are ideal for them, which makes sense in this context).

I fear that it's not just the 0.5um process but Canon generally lacks behind sensor technology.
They are missing key inventions like e.g. this from Panasonic:
http://panasonic.co.jp/corp/news/official.data/data.dir/2013/02/en130204-6/en130204-6.html

Canon is simply forced to push their customers to FF because they cannot compete in the APS-C arena (or in general with DSLR bodies with high pixel density=small pixels).

With equal pixel size Canon cannot compete with sensors using more inventive technology...

10

EOS Bodies / Re: Where are you EOS 70D?

« on: January 24, 2013, 04:42:35 AM »

maybe it´s just impossible to improve the sensor with canons current 500nm manufacturing process?

they have kept improving it for what 8-10 years?

so until canon has a new manufacturing process online they would have no other choice then using the same sensor.

I'm ready to accept that QE can be improved with getting rid of the current 500nm manufacturing process (http://www.chipworks.com/blog/technologyblog/2012/10/24/full-frame-dslr-cameras-canon-stays-the-course/), however Canon sensors have huge reading noise at low ISO (which limits the dynamic range).
http://www.sensorgen.info/

Can that also be improved just by changing the process?

I fear that Canon sensor tech cannot keep up with e.g. Sony not just because of a single reason but a multitude of reasons so probably the cure is also not that simple...but let's hope that they can fix it and don't introduce any new APS-C body with the old (by now basically obsolete) tech 18MP Canon sensor.

11

EOS Bodies / Re: Where are you EOS 70D?

« on: January 24, 2013, 03:45:33 AM »

I wouldn't call it a "bad" sensor. Roger Clark has some interesting comparisons of IQ between the 7D and a number of other cameras, including the 5D II, 1D IV, etc. The 7D in those comparisons is actually good, captures more detail, just as much if not more light, all despite the added noise. On a size-normal basis, the 7D tends to outperform even the 1D IV until higher ISO settings.

It is not a "great" sensor, but technically and statistically speaking neither is it a "bad" sensor...it is just a middle-ground sensor that neither "wows" like the D800 nor truly sucks like a cheap P&S with a 16mp microsensor with pixels barely large enough to accommodate the wavelengths of light its supposed to be capturing. I don't think any of that actually changes your point, however... ;P

The current 18 MP Canon sensor is not particularly bad (but not good either), especially when compared with other Canon sensors.

It's rather that Canon's sensor tech lags years behind Sony that can be found e.g. in Nikon D5100/7000 or Olympus OM-D E-M5 (which is despite the smaller sensor size is as good or better than the 18MP Canons).

So when compared with Sony sensors it becomes visible that all that years passed brought no IQ improvement to Canon sensors (high ISO noise, dynamic range) and it would be particularly bad that 70D re-used the same old tech meaning 2 more years with no IQ improvement whatsoever for APS-C Canons.

Oh and I'm not wishing for more megapixels...that would be the worst thing to happen IQ wise.

I would not mind Canon using Sony sensors for APS-C bodies if they cannot keep up in sensor tech.

12

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

« on: July 18, 2012, 04:38:58 PM »

Why not take flash on vacation? -  There is plenty of room in the car

Oh I forgot to ask, do you always travel by car overseas? 
I really envy you then.

13

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

« on: July 18, 2012, 04:35:21 PM »

To start with, view finder of M4/3 is way below DSLR. AF and shutter lag of M4/3 is also slower than the DSLR.  Thes two alone will make me stay away from M4/3. If you pack the DSLR bag conservatively(one body with with 17-40mm, 28-135mm and 50mm f 1.8 and a few odds and ends) the bag can stay on the shoulder all day long.

The viewfinder of the GH2 (sure it's electronic, which means it's also bright) is comparable in size with the VF of the 1Ds and bigger than any of the APS-Cs.
Just scroll down a bit.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicDMCGH2/page3.asp

From my personal experience AF is also very fast except in very dark scenarios (where also DLSR had trouble without AF assist light from flash centre AF point with f/2.8 or faster lens).
Also in case of micro 4/3 you're not limited with AF to middle point, which is the only possibility in case of 5DmkII due to it's crappy AF point arrangement and archaic AF system.

Sure there is some shutter lag. Never even bothered to look up the specs.

With the listed lens you cover less, and you have also only one fast prime.

Video compared:
http://www.eoshd.com/content/7631/panasonic-gh2-vs-5d-mark-iii

I like  micro 4/3 as currently there is the biggest choice of both lens and bodies. Both very capable.

14

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

« on: July 18, 2012, 11:43:22 AM »

I would be very surprised if 4/3 got near the 5D2 at iso3200 never mind the 5DIII or 1DX.

5DmkIII or 1Dx no, but it easily beats 5DmkII in JPG and comes very-very close in RAW at ISO3200:
JPG (pick the camera): http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/20
RAW: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/21
A result unimaginable just a year ago...

In video Pana G (G5, GH2) cameras beat any DSLR from Canon including 5DmkIII.

So I don't really see the reason not to travel light.
A pro work is different.

15

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

« on: July 18, 2012, 11:21:09 AM »

PS How good are radio flash on the 4/3? Or iso 3200 for the churches?

You'd be surprised how good e.g. E-M5 at ISO3200. It easily beats recent APS-C cameras and yesterday's FF (so no-one compares it to G12).
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_OM-D_E-M5/high_ISO_noise.shtml

Radio flash on vacation or for family photos? Don't make me lough. I rarely use it even with my 580EXII with DSLR (not really radio, but light control).
Most important use of my 580EXII is to bring up the shadows.