April 16, 2014, 10:05:35 PM

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 - gabriele

Pages: 1 [2] 3
16
EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price
« on: March 14, 2012, 07:07:44 AM »

It's funny that hwne you washx clithes what really comes out imn the dryer.

What about writing in english so everybody could understand you?

17
EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price
« on: March 14, 2012, 06:52:23 AM »
Because I want to. When I put the full list I got flamed and accused of being a rich kid
unctionality.

Well you skipped all the other questions and answered in a manner that also you tainted the questions you tried to answer to me.

You didn't tell me what kind of pictures you take when shooting with a 1200mm lens with a flash at f/8 ISO 400, this makes me quite curious.

You don't consider the 52D better in picture quality than the 1Ds3 because you don't want to consider better performance in low light as a pro, ok do as you wish but still you can't say the 1Ds3 performs better because as you  can also see in DxO graphs they're EXACTLY the same at low ISO.

And it hasn't been proven erroneous that the 5D2 gives better performance than the 1Ds3, this because you don't want to consider high ISO. If you don't want to consider something as a pro is your own thing, but it's not objective. If I let you notice the pros of a camera and you don't want to see them is another matter.
If you use long lenses and you don't need high ISO performance I really don't see the point for you to own a FF camera, even worse you say you own 2 FF cameras. The point of FF cameras is mainly using wide angle lenses and have better picture quality especially at high ISO and possibly a better bokeh.
You'd better use just a 7D or a 1D4 and end this since FF seems not suited for your uses.

The only functionality you're supposed to lose (and it's not for sure since as I already said Canon said it's not final) compared to a 1D series with the 5D3 is the f/8 focus, all the other things are gains.
But since you say own more cameras than a camera store I don't think getting another one just to have fun will be a problem for your big fat wallet (of course if what you say is true).

18
EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price
« on: March 13, 2012, 05:53:39 PM »
You have it your way - I am sticking to my 5D2 priced series 1.

F/8 is the real bonus to me - yes I do use the 2x on a F/4 lens or is it a 1.4 x on a 5.6? That was a dealmaker for me

All the other things you mention are not relevant to me - as I said I use this at iso400 or less for studio type work. I dont do video either.

I feel you have no experience of a 1Ds3 and certainly none of a 5D3 so your 'way better than a 1Ds3' is not based on fact or experience just hearsay and a spec sheet.

I have quite a good experience with 5D2 and not such a long experience with 1Ds3 but I used it for some time.
I didn't notice picture quality difference (and I've been using it at low ISO).

The weird thing is that you say you don't use ISO more than 400 but then you say you need focus at f/8, this somewhat doesn't make sense beside maybe you shoot always under direct sunlight or in a studio where I doubt you'll ever need a TC, also why on your signature it says EOS 40D + 18-55 + 55-250?
I don't get how you say you use a 1Ds3 and a 5D2 but not nice lenses, I mean the only very good lens that won't work used together with a 1.4xTC is the 800 f/5.6L

My sig shows the 40D because I have one

I also have a couple of long white lens and flash. Put the two together and you end up shooting outdoors at F/8 @ 1/2000 @1200mm without a problem. Try 100-400 + 1.4 for a f/8 - perhaps ypu dont consider the 100-400 good?

I have never said that I have poor lens - in fact the only non L lens I have are the 50 f/1.4 and the 85 f/1.8 apart from my 2 old ef-s that came with my old 40d.

I am not suggesting the 5DIII is poor - just disagreeing with your statement that the 5DIII is 'way  better' than the 1Ds3. If I was to replace the 1Ds3 it probably would be with a 1DX and keep my 1D4 as a backup.

So let me recap: you say you own a 1D4, a 1Ds3, a 5D2 and a 40D and since you say you reach 1200mm at f/8 this makes me think you use a 600 f/4 which is a uber expensive lens, and then you comment about 3500 bucks being a lot? And also why you put in your signature your worst camera with worst lenses?
But also, I would like to know how you get 1/2000 at f/8 at 400ISO if not only under strong sunlight. Also I would like to know what do you do with a 1200mm lens and a flash, what kind of pictures do you take?
I never said 400ISO is bad, what I said is that the old 5D2 behaves practically the same as the 1Ds3 at low ISO (so 1Ds3 is no better than 5D2 in picture quality at low ISO), but behaves better at high ISO and that the 5D3 is 2 stops better than the 5D2 so even way better than the 1Ds at high ISO, also I underlined the new features of the 5D3 which makes it better than the 1Ds3:

WAY better performance in low light
Better AF (as said already f/8 could be not that important and it's not final since Canon said they're considering this matter).
1 fps faster
Slightly better resolution
Way more functions also including multiple exposures, HDR, more options for braketing, better screen and so on.
Better overall price even considering the used market the new 5D3 is at least 1000 dollars less expensive than an used 1Ds3.

You can say whatever you want but you know that a 5D3 (without considering the apparently so important for you f/8 focus) with a battery grip is a better overall camera compared to a 1Ds3.

19
EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price
« on: March 13, 2012, 05:18:02 AM »
You have it your way - I am sticking to my 5D2 priced series 1.

F/8 is the real bonus to me - yes I do use the 2x on a F/4 lens or is it a 1.4 x on a 5.6? That was a dealmaker for me

All the other things you mention are not relevant to me - as I said I use this at iso400 or less for studio type work. I dont do video either.

I feel you have no experience of a 1Ds3 and certainly none of a 5D3 so your 'way better than a 1Ds3' is not based on fact or experience just hearsay and a spec sheet.

I have quite a good experience with 5D2 and not such a long experience with 1Ds3 but I used it for some time.
I didn't notice picture quality difference (and I've been using it at low ISO).

The weird thing is that you say you don't use ISO more than 400 but then you say you need focus at f/8, this somewhat doesn't make sense beside maybe you shoot always under direct sunlight or in a studio where I doubt you'll ever need a TC, also why on your signature it says EOS 40D + 18-55 + 55-250?
I don't get how you say you use a 1Ds3 and a 5D2 but not nice lenses, I mean the only very good lens that won't work used together with a 1.4xTC is the 800 f/5.6L.
Notice also how the new AF is still better than the old one as  the review on CR homepage today is noticing, so maybe f/8 is not everything and in any case you don't know if things will change with a firmware update, as Canon said they're considering it.
Other thing is that I checked the prices of the old 1Ds3 on eBay...welll they range from $4,450 to $4,750 and those are mainly used bodies so tell me how is that less expensive than a 5D3 which new comes at $3500.
No one told you to change your camera, I would be happier too if the 5D3 was less expensive and this is why I'm not switching yet, but I was only mentioning facts.

20
EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price
« on: March 12, 2012, 08:02:56 PM »
Look at the graphs not just the final numbers.
11.9 vs 12 is no big deal.

By the way you're missing the point: I'm saying the 5D3 will be better than the 1Ds3 and at a lower price, don't you agree with this?

Lower price - no, because the 1Ds3 is only available used now and is not much more in the UK than the new 5D2. The indications so far is that at low ISO the 5d3 is not better than the 1Ds3.

If you need high ISO then clearly the 5D3 will be better - unless you also need AF at f/8 (as I do)

Bottom line is that all 3 bodies are very good - perhaps when the 5D3 is delivered and tested we might get a better idea of the 5D3's performance - I very much doubt that your assertion that it is 'way ahead of the more pricey 1Ds3' will prove true

You have to be fair and compare the price of a new body to the price of a new body, when the 1Ds3 came out was way more expensive than the actual price of the 5d3, which I suspect, will be lowered to 3200.
The f/8 thing is not final yet, beside you will only need it using lenses less bright than f/4 used with a 2xTC, 5D3 looks better than the 1Ds3 under so many aspects:
Focusing system
ISO performance for sure and probably dyanamic range
Burst mode
Video mode and connections
HDR
Ev bracketing
Flash control
Screen (probably irrelevant matter though).

So if you just put a battery grip on a 5D3 you'll get an overall better camera than a 1Ds3 at a better price.

21
EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price
« on: March 12, 2012, 07:09:33 PM »
Look at the graphs not just the final numbers.
11.9 vs 12 is no big deal.

By the way you're missing the point: I'm saying the 5D3 will be better than the 1Ds3 and at a lower price, don't you agree with this?

22
EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price
« on: March 12, 2012, 06:10:40 PM »

I just dont see the numbers that support your conclusion - up to iso 400 the 1Ds3 is better than the 5D2 - from the DxO tests.

The native iso on the 1Ds3 is 1600.

I dont see that having 2 stops more improves the IQ as DR starts dropping of at about iso 800, regardless of sensor.

Having both bodies to compare against each other I have found, to me, that the 1Ds3 gives much smoother graduations of skin tones at iso 400 and less than the 5D2. You would expect that as the 1Ds3 was aimed at studio use.

As I said initially, I doubt if there would be obvious differences on prints with the iso up to 400.

Well looking on the graphs on DxO you see the dots are perfectly aligned between 1Ds3 and 5D2 on ISO tests, but then the 5D2 gains quite a good margin after 400ISO, which is something to notice.
You have also to consider different custom styles between cameras with different settings (as it is also noted in my previous post with the link the 1Ds3 tends to oversaturate the reds).
As I was saying before since there's apparently no difference in ISO performance below 400ISO between 5D2 and 1Ds3, the new one is going to be better especially at high ISO.
If you can shot at 1600 ISO with the same quality of 640 and you need it, wouldn't you say it's a better sensor (and also with slightly better resolution)?

23
EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price
« on: March 12, 2012, 08:09:23 AM »

Well comparing the 5DII and the 1Ds3 upto iso400 the 1Ds3 is clearly better than the 5D2, not by much - but definitely not way worse (DxO measurements)

Better AF for the 5D3 - well more points and the AF point - 1Ds3 is essentially the same as the 1D4.  The 5D3 doesn't have the grip nor the weatherproofing. 1Ds3 has AF for f/8 ....

I would be surrpised if in real life you would see any difference in prints between the 5D2/3 and 1Ds3 using iso of 400 or less. It is all too easy to dismiss old technology when shiny new stuff comes out - and easy to overlook the features lost on the way


Personally I stopped looking at DxO measurements and I firmly believe they're quite biased (usually they tend to give more to Nikon than Canon). Beside this, still looking at DxO, the 5D Mk II seems to perform better than the 1Ds3, especially in dynamic range. For low ISO they're pretty much the same, but then the 5D2 becomes better at high ISO.

I found several tests about the 5D2 sensor being better than the one on the 1Ds3, here's one:
http://www.akelstudio.com/blog/canon-1ds-mark-iii-v-s-5d-mark-ii-is-there-is-any-difference-in-image-quality-in-studio-test-run/

Note I'm talking only about picture quality, not functions, AF and so on which are better on the 1Ds3 of course.

In any case this makes the 5D3 better than the 1Ds3 since it is already better than the 5D2 by about 2 stops.

24
Strongly disagree. Probably you have never tried a 5D mark II, otherwise you woud definetely notice the difference on a 100% crop picture.
Full frame cameras have way better picture quality, that becomes even more noticeable if you raise the ISO and compare it to crop cameras.

I think you're missing the point.  Yes, if you view a 7D image and a 5DII image as 100% crops, the 5DII image will have a lot less noise.  But for a given focal length, the 5DII will have far fewer pixels on target.  The question at hand is comparing the noise in a 7D shot to a shot taken with the same lens on a 5DII and then cropped to the same FoV as you'd get with the 7D.  When you do that (and since I have both cameras, I have done it), you find that the images have pretty similar noise, but you've got 18 MP from the 7D and only 8 MP from the 5DII. Now, if you take both of those resulting images and print them at a fixed size, say 8x10", you'll be downsampling the 7D image more, and it will actually appear to have less noise than the 5DII image.

Obviously, the above only applies when you're limited by focal length. If you can use a lens with a 1.6x longer focal length on the 5DII so you don't have to crop, you'll get a much better image from the 5DII (assuming the 5DII's AF is able to keep your subject in focus).

Well the point was "Do FF cameras perform better in low light conditions"...the answer is  YES.
We're not talking about crops but final picture quality, if you want to zoom in more get a more powerful lens.
Thinking the way you do you should (to do a fair comparison), zoom in a 7D picture the same amount you zoom in a 5D Mk II picture and then compare the noise, or just compare standard 100% crop noise on both.
If you can't get a more powerful lens most likely you can get closer to the subject, which is something that lot of photographers seem to have forgotten since the advent of zoom lenses.

25
EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price
« on: March 11, 2012, 02:55:49 PM »
Well considering that adding a battery grip makes this camera way better than the way more pricey 1Ds Mk III probably that's the reason for the high price.
Still I'd exchange it anytime for my 5D Mk II if I could, but yes it's quite pricey at the moment...who knows maybe in the future.

Way better? Not so sure about that - particularly up to iso400

Well actually the 5D Mark II has already a slightly better sensor compared to the 1Ds Mark III (quite subtle in most of the cases but still a little bit better).
Talking about functions of course the 1Ds Mk III is waaaay better than the 5D Mark II, maybe it has something more also compared to the 5D Mark III speaking of functions, but there are also lot of other functions available solely on the 5D Mark III and not on the 1Ds Mark III.
So since the new camera is about 2 stops better than the new one, it would be obviously better than the 1Ds Mark III for noise performance and picture quality, plus you get a better AF and faster burst mode.

26
EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price
« on: March 11, 2012, 05:55:07 AM »
Well considering that adding a battery grip makes this camera way better than the way more pricey 1Ds Mk III probably that's the reason for the high price.
Still I'd exchange it anytime for my 5D Mk II if I could, but yes it's quite pricey at the moment...who knows maybe in the future.

27
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Teases Exclusive Screening at NAB 2012
« on: March 11, 2012, 05:50:34 AM »
I've been invited directly from Canon too, same day but the even will be held in Rome, Italy inside the studios.
It looks like it's going to be more something about trying the new 5D Mk III and 1DX, I don't know if there will be something more.

28
EOS Bodies / Re: Here's an Invite for March 2, 2012
« on: February 29, 2012, 09:39:36 AM »
Where does this invite come from?
I'm from Italy and I know nothing about this event, nor anything is written on the Canon Italy webpage...
Still it's written in Italian...quite weird, isn't it?

29
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Split? 5D X & 5D Mark III [CR1]
« on: February 10, 2012, 11:01:36 AM »
I would totally go for the "standard" 5D Mark III, we don't need more megapixels, we need even better high ISO handling, better focusing and burst speed.

30
Although FF does have better high ISO, if you crop the noise is magnified and in general an uncropped 7D image will be less noisy than a 5DII image cropped to the same FOV.

Strongly disagree. Probably you have never tried a 5D mark II, otherwise you woud definetely notice the difference on a 100% crop picture.
Full frame cameras have way better picture quality, that becomes even more noticeable if you raise the ISO and compare it to crop cameras.

Pages: 1 [2] 3