Messages

286

EOS Bodies / Re: Nikon D800 vs Canon 5d3 sample images.

« on: March 05, 2012, 02:03:16 PM »

Either way, both companies should be ashamed with the quality of photography skill demonstrated in these samples. Half the people on this site could do better. 

287

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Is the 5DM3 better for video?

« on: March 04, 2012, 12:51:34 AM »

Mobius was probably the worst of the demos, and an embarrassment to filmmaking. He could have done much better with the baller c300. So if he is going to comment on a camera he hasn't used, then why should we care?

288

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 suffers from the black dots problem of the early 5D2

« on: March 02, 2012, 04:53:53 PM »

It has been suggested that this is an artifact of sharpening.  I'm gonna test this once I get home.

289

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 suffers from the black dots problem of the early 5D2

« on: March 02, 2012, 02:07:13 PM »

Here it is at 400% magnification.

290

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 suffers from the black dots problem of the early 5D2

« on: March 02, 2012, 01:51:25 PM »

This image ?

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dmk3/downloads/02.jpg

I see noise in the second pic (it's taken at 6400ISO, so it's what you'd expect).

Okay, I'm seeing some halos around the stars in the first pic. Is this what you are referring to?  Could this just be a JPEG artifact?

<a href="http://s1241.photobucket.com/albums/gg507/HurtinMinorKey/?action=view&amp;current=blackHalo.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1241.photobucket.com/albums/gg507/HurtinMinorKey/blackHalo.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

291

EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price

« on: March 02, 2012, 12:24:35 PM »

The price relative to the d800 makes sense.  Canon won a lot of market share with the 5d mkII, so they figure they can price a camera which is the same overall quality(with different strengths) above the competition because of switching costs.  Canon must feel that 700 is less than the switching cost, and they are probably right. 

292

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 5DM3 for video?

« on: March 02, 2012, 12:16:20 PM »

^Thank you for correcting my math.

The comparison to Blu-ray is a bit deceiving though. Because Blu-ray is a finalized product in compressed form. You need more information to do post production work. But either way, 90Mbs looks good. I just hope they don't nerf it when they realize that it outclasses the C300 in this one aspect.

293

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 5DM3 for video?

« on: March 02, 2012, 12:29:37 AM »

it does look like it beats the c300 in bitrate though. The way I interepret the specs is 10.1 MBs (80Mbs), so that looks like 30fps @4:2:2. Anyone else agree?

294

EOS Bodies / Re: Introducing the Canon 5D Mark III

« on: March 02, 2012, 12:19:03 AM »

What's the max bit-rate on the video?

295

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Full Spec List?

« on: March 01, 2012, 11:55:25 AM »

All I can say is, thank God they moved the on/off switch.

296

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Full Spec List?

« on: March 01, 2012, 11:48:58 AM »

With the new processor we should be able to get a better chroma sample: 4:2:2. It should be able to handle somewhere between 80-100 Mbps, which would be very nice.   

Also, my guess is that they have applied the tweaks that limit the well known image artifact issues of the mkII.

If they can do this, I'll be happy.

297

EOS Bodies / Re: How many of you actually have money to buy the new 5D Mark III?

« on: February 29, 2012, 07:02:15 PM »

My wife is the real Photog, so if I get her the new 5d mkIII, then i get her old mkII. 

298

EOS Bodies / Re: NO 5dM3 On Friday * CONFIRMED By a canon Rep Today

« on: February 29, 2012, 12:18:14 PM »

I don't think they'd be building that massive stage in Shanghai just to announce B-list product.  We're gonna see 5D something.

299

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]

« on: February 28, 2012, 07:05:35 PM »

I'm all for supporting meaningless causes.

300

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Building kit around 5D Mark II...

« on: February 28, 2012, 02:56:08 PM »

They are definitely not sharper, but they are significantly less expensive.

I don't know about that, I used the 50 1.4 and didn't see much of a difference between it and my 50L.  The 50mm f/2 Makro is definitely sharper than my 50L.

I will concede this point.