« on: June 26, 2014, 06:30:25 AM »
are you still glad when you're pushing out the shadows in post processing knowing that you've spent a fortune on buying a great camera with almost the same sensor as the previous model?It's not the same sensor, you gained a lot more ISO-performance. Canon had just another approach for their new sensors. While Nikon (=Sony) tried to improve the dynamic range and resolution, Canon was into the ISO-direction the last few years. The next step for Canon will be the DR again, I guess.
>Doesn't canon sensors need improvements?They did, but not in your wanted direction. They invented the DPAF on the 70D for example... an invention which easily catches a lot of engineers. As a company you have ressources for innovation, but you have to choose your next steps. A DR of maybe 11.5-12 stops should be enough for the moment, ISO 1600 wasn't at that time.
>I don't care who makes it, i care on doing my job better.Your job depends on 1 or 2 stops of DR? Did you try to use HDR or gradient Filters? I know that a better sensor can save a lot of work, but I can't imagine that there are unresolveable jobs for a 1DX/5D3.
Don't complain if canon re-sells the same sensor in the next model with USB3 and 4k as a new feature which is useless for photographers.I'm not too lucky with Canon in the last few years, but remember that there was a tsunami, a radioactive fallout (especially for canon-locations) and a cut down power-support for companies. Let them come out with a new performance next year and everyone is happy again. Sigma is a good example for that.
By the way, canon is still selling more bodies than anyone else... they make something right, I think. And their sensors aren't oily