« on: January 25, 2013, 04:53:26 PM »
Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C?
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.
the only people who may know something are under NDA and test for canon.
Maybe that's really the reason Canon screwed up and still cannot reproduce the problem - they see af assist as a tool for shooting in pitch black conditions as the 5d3 af should be able to copy with just "low light" on its own? And probably the focus lag in dim light wasn't seen as a problem since the condition was considered to be unlikely.
.... 2L of Coke to mix it with.....
A move to mirrorless with an EVF would end my use of the 7D line forever. A move to mirrorless with EVF's on all Canon cameras would end my use of Canon...forever.
DEATH TO THE EVF!!!
Oh I am sure Canon has heard all this during that FD to EF switch...and they did it anyways.
Circa ~1987 Jrista's forerunners said... "If they make my current FD lenses obsolete with new EF mount bodies...I'll ..I'll... never forgive them... I will...I will... arhmmm... grunt... move to Nikon!!! *Huff* *Puff*... I mean it this time..."
Canon knows you will get over it... whimper a bit, lick your wounds, and buy the mirrorless line and what's more...praise the same thing you spited as the best thing ever in a year from the switch.
There is no shame in sucking it up and moving on.
Any purchases or reviews yet??
that is no review... not yet.
it´s a preview.
Whether it matters depends on whether it makes a difference to the sort of photography you do. I own a 5DII and, within the past couple of months I've rented the 5DIII, 6D and D600 (the latter two simultaneously). I haven't performed any properly controlled tests - certainly nothing compared to what someone conducting a serious review involving test charts, etc. - but merely used them as I would normally use a camera (except that with the 6D and D600 I kept switching back and forth, photographing the same thing from the same place at the same time). While the D600 made good photos, not one ever struck me as superior to those I took with the 6D in any way; at most the differences were fairly small/trivial, and where I had a preference it was for the Canon, mainly because I preferred the colors. So other features were decisive - Nikon's absurdly complicated controls, the weird greenish cast to the D600's monitor, its drab viewfinder (so what if it's 100%?), etc. Relatively trivial stuff I would put up with if it made noticeably better photos, but for my purposes it didn't. I will cheerfully concede that others may conclude otherwise.