March 06, 2015, 02:43:57 AM

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 - Apop

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 11
EOS Bodies / Re: Why you shouldn't be worried about DR
« on: August 30, 2013, 02:45:37 PM »
I'm done, have fun.

 ankorwatt is ruining this place, you can't have a thoughtful conversation, you can't offer advice, you can't just talk to each other without his incessant DR is the only important imaging metric,  D800 this, QPcard that. I am out of here until he gets banned again, it just isn't fun, informative, or helpful.

Banning people because you do not agree with them?
If you dont like his opinion , dont read it ?

As long as there are no serious personal insults I see no reason why people should be banned .
His participation in topics is very selective anyway , I dont see many other comments from him that arent DR related.....

You running away from discussions or one sided arguments from a DR fixated person is rather weak!

Lenses / Re: Canon tele lenses vs Nikon tele lenses (Comparison)
« on: August 30, 2013, 02:39:37 PM »
Lens are why I bough Canon.  So this in not much of a surprise.  Not to mention in many cases the Canon Lens is also Cheaper than the Nikon lens it out performs.
+2 and nice to see the OP starting a Canon love thread :)

A lot of people seem only fixated on sensor performance.
Individual skill is hard to discuss, but there are other components responsible for a picture , like a lens

People usually focus on what they are missing in their gear( or on nikon/canon side)
And sometimes forget there are a lot of really good things already there.

If canon gets better sensors the coming years , I can see some trolls switch brands to make fun of nikons outdated lens designs and lack of sharpness.

Either way two competitive brands ensures we keep getting better gear at a fast pace ! , whether it is sensor performance, overall functionalities ( think wifi , gps , maybe 4k/raw video will be standard within a considerate amount of time) , lenses , or other related stuff (flashes / tc's )

The recently reignited debate about sensors performance and Nikon's superiority have led me to post this to make the canon users feel better!

If you shoot sports/wildlife you might want to take consecutive shots, FPS is important.
If you shoot raw, buffer may be an issue  .

Here is 3 seconds of action

3 seconds of action

d800 : 12 shots
d7100: 14 shots(at best, the buffer is terrible)
d600 :  16 shots
6d     : 14 shots (AF might be an issue)
5dIII: 18 shots
7d   : 24 shots
1d4 : 30 shots (if you want to buy, it must be second hand)
d4  :  30 shots (high price)
1dx : 36 shots (high price )

The only affordable nikon ( so excluding 5-6K$ cameras like d4) that has a decent enough frame rate and buffer IMO is the d600. Well the d600 lacks the AF system that the d7100 and d800 have..., it's autofocus is far inferior to those....

In the canon segment, I think the 7d, 5dIII and 1d4 are all wonderful alternatives (the 70d should have 16 shot buffer, so you might get 19-21 shots in 3 seconds).

The 5d3 focus system is better than that of the d600, the 1d4 focus system is also better.
I am not sure if the 7d/70d focus system trumps the d600.

All in all you have a lot more choice for sports/wildlife on the canon side!

Lenses / Canon tele lenses vs Nikon tele lenses (Comparison)
« on: August 30, 2013, 07:27:49 AM »
Lately there might be a few canon users that feel sad because of being confronted with owning inferior sensors.

I thought it could be fun to use the life work of The Digital Picture to compare some crops of canon and nikon lenses (with or without teleconverter) , to cheer those folks up!!!

You can have the best sensor out there, but if your lens is inferior, you may end up with equal or lesser shots!

******--First up canon 70-200 IS II and nikon 70-200 vrII
both @ f2.8 where it matters, im sure from f4 onward they are quite equal.

Now the first thing people who want more reach and own either of these lenses is to put the latest 2.0 TC's on (version 3 in both cases).

Wide open


Hmmm, looks like canon is sharper and less CA

******---- Next up is a tele that people might want to have because of speed and versatility with tc's
300 f2.8

Now with 1.4 converter

and 2.0 converter


Again, the canon sharper and less ca?

*****--- People with more money in their pocket might want a 500 f4

1.4 converter


******--- People that love little birdies ( and are body builders in nikon's case) 600mm f4

1.4 converter


Also to take into consideration is the weight.
nikon 600 f4 : 5.1kg
nikon 500 f4 :3.88kg
nikon3002.8: 2.92kg
Canon 600 f4: 3.92kg
canon 500 f4: 3.19kg
canon 3002.8:2.35kg

Nikon users might say Tele lens sharpness is close and the differences aren't big.
Unless TDP cheated on the crops, it looks like quite a reasonable difference , ESPECIALLY with TC's

Nikon users might say it doesn't matter , but thats like canon users saying more DR isn't useful.
Nikon users might argue they are strong , and don't care about the extra weight, but it means you can carry other things....!

I am unaware about AF speed on the different lenses, It is probably close as well....

Feel free to add some more comparisons!, if you look carefully (to the nikon users) you might be able to find a Nikon lens that is actually sharper than the Canon equivalent !

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 30, 2013, 06:40:03 AM »
The 70D...has not improved and is slightly worse than the 9 year old 20D. 

Oh, I think it's a little better.  I hope your analysis really was quick, because I'd hate to think you wasted even more time.  Per-pixel SNR?  Funny, I haven't seen that phrase on the display placards at Best Buy or my local camera shop.  I wonder why?  I know...because notwithstanding a minuscule number of DR-obsessed Canon-bashing forum jockeys, no one who buys cameras cares.  The 70D is a massive improvement over the 20D in 99.9999% of ways that matter to people. Canon will sell loads of 70D bodies, quite likely more than the D7100 by a wide margin.

DxOMark measures sensors, but people buy cameras, not bare silicon sensors.  You can rehash DxOMark data until hell freezes over, it doesn't change the fact that Canon has been outselling Nikon for years, nor the fact that the 5DIII outsells the D800.  The obvious conclusion is that 'better' sensors (where 'better' is defined as low ISO DR) have not helped Nikon or Sony sell more cameras.

You clearly have not done your homework.........
Nikon d800 is a much better sensor than the 5dIII
It has many more MP, much more DR, less noise in RAW
It also has more buttons , so it must be more sophisticated
More importantly the canon does not even have a built in flash....
So more money to spend on that
Does canon finally have a built in time-lapse feature? and automatically makes a movie...?
The d800 has, it's for pros

You are just a canon fanboy with fancy equipment .....
Only because you own a 1dx you feel superior to the rest of us and try to annoy us with dorky comments!( CR GEEK)
I can assure you I only changed from nikon d800 to canon because my skills could not handle such a superior product, my skill set was way to limited for the sensor of the d800 :-(
I only bought it because nikon had the 200-400 and the d800 was significantly cheaper than the 5dIII when introduced, in the end it cost me potential shots of something I am likely to never encounter again....
so i have a personal issue with nikon poor fps and buffer!

That nikon has sold less d800's than canon sold 5dIII(if true), is clearly because the d800 is more of an exclusive product....., people buy sensors just as much as people buy engines

Nikon is the c63 amg, more power, better engine, where the 5dIII is a m3, it handles better but slightly less power in a straight line (landscapes), as soon as you hit a circuit (sports/wildlife) things might be different;).
But as long was we discuss them sitting in the pit lane, the d800 clearly wins ....

If you never are on the circuit you are likely to enjoy the c63 more!

But really , this topic only comes up because people like trolling
Cameras get replaced a lot more than lenses, why don't we see 50 topics about the relatively poor teles from nikon?, heavy , not as well built , less sharp , not loving tc's ?

And female friendly bodies, if your a MAN and you have HANDS, it is impossible that the feel of a d800 is better than a 5d3, just impossible!

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 29, 2013, 01:02:41 PM »
Nikon picked up their game for sensors.

I think you mean Sony picked up their game, and Nikon came along for the ride.

love you neuro

How about the Nikon-designed D4 sensor? It doesn't have the Exmor's DR but it's still 1 1/2 stops higher than the 1DX at base ISO.

That lacks the resolution ! , 16mp just doesn't cut it for full frame

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 29, 2013, 12:58:48 PM »

Its the art you create with it that matters.

+1. but painters totally complain about their brushes.

Ehm in that analogy i think the brush would be the lens and the sensor the paint/thingy where you paint on ( piece of paper:p)

Or lens the paint plus brush and the paper the sensor

Or the body the brush , the sensor the paint , but then the lens would be the paper hmmmmm

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 29, 2013, 10:42:33 AM »
more DR will make up for shooting at the wrong ISO? (maybe even 2 high, that costs DR you know;) )

In many situations, yes, to a large extent.

If you shoot at ISO 100 instead of, say, ISO 800, and push in RAW conversion, more DR will make you shot very close to the ISO 800 one. You may get some posterization but, say, a 16 bit sensor would be completely free of that. There are many such examples on the web. Try that with a Canon sensor.

Now, will more fps, and anything else you mention, make up for the strong shadows noise?

Shadows are generally not my subject :(
And again I am not arguing against the superiority of Nikon's sensors.
I shot extensively with a d800 for 8 months, I did not switch because I did not like having such a good sensor!

The flaming is just fun to join in with the rest of the monkeys for once :D

And to answer your question, for me getting 30 instead of 12 shots ( 1dmkiv now , previously the d800)
Can make quite a big difference.
When i am out, I am hoping or waiting for a moment that I am likely to never encounter again.

Having 18 additional frames where that moment might be captured (2.5 times as many frames) is something I took into consideration.

Additionally once the buffer is full the d800 should drop to around 1fps, when the 1dmkiv can sustain around 4.
On previous occasions I had a full buffer on some exiting moments (adrenaline makes one trigger happy), being 'stuck' with 1 fps can feel quite limiting.

Before the d800, on the d7000 with a 45mb/s SD card it was even worse when i was shooting raw to one slot and jpg to another!

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 29, 2013, 09:10:35 AM »
Clearly, you don't understand the benefits of more DR.  If you did, you'd know that trumps all those petty concerns that you mention.  ::)

Owww, so more DR will make up for missed shots :D?
more DR will make up for shooting at the wrong ISO? (maybe even 2 high, that costs DR you know;) )
more DR will make up for the ergonomics and lens designs
more DR will make up for less memory buffer than my Alzheimer suffering grandma
more DR will it make up for all the older folks with money to buy the big lenses who are breaking their backs on the 5 kg 400/600 lens from nikon? let them enjoy 3.8 kilos from canon!
more DR will it make up for the cramps in my hands at the end of a day of shooting ?
more DR will it make up for the inferior IQ big teles from nikon !?
more DR will it fix my filter holder?
more DR will it automatically selects the best AF mode ( 5 point 9 poin dynamic 19 /51 /3d or?)
more DR will it increase my FPS?
more DR will it make my lens mount more buffed and make me feel like a man again?
more DR will it be more DR above ISO 1000/1600?
more DR will it give me GPS and wifi?
more DR will it let me switch from all af points ->af on button <-> to selected af point with * button? ( essentialy effortless switching from using ALL af points to a zone or center point with expansion) <--- this rocks on canon and eveyone not using it yet should!

more DR will it give me white lenses?
more DR will it give me fluorite elements without spending 18k$ on a 800 f5.6?
more DR will it give me ''cheaper'' telephoto options (300f4IS 400 f5.6)
more DR will it give me a good 70-300 L
more DR will it give me a wheel on the back of my camera? my carpal tunnel syndrome was fueled by pressing the buttons so much on the back if my nikons , that with bad ergonomics messed me up!
more DR will it make the buttons on the nikons need less pressure to actually do something!?
more DR will it make me a better photographer?
more DR will it make my camera look sexy?
more DR will it make it to a canon body any time soon?
more DR , i want it

3 seconds of action

d800 : 12 shots of 36MP awesomeness, gotta hope for right AF setting and ISO(16 in dx crop)
d7100: 14 shots(at best) => 24 mp awesomeness
d600 :  16 shots 24MP => 10.6mp in crop ( 9.4 in canon equivalent)
6d     : 14 shots 20mp good IQ but probably OOF(i hope the center point is good )<-
5dIII: 18 shots (with proper ISO and AF)
7d   : 24 shots (with proper ISO and AFmaybe) And twice the pixels on target compared to d600!

1d4 : 30 shots (with proper ISO and af+ exposure)

d4  :  30 shots (probably really good!, but wrong ISO and AF mode due to position of switches, also less pixels on target than the 1dx and a LOT less than the 1d4 !!!! 9.46 when cropped to 1d4 equivalent

1dx : 36 shots (proper everything , including more resolution than d4)

Sounds like for sports and wildlife you need a 1dx ....
If you cannot afford one get a 1dmkiv
If you heavy and inferior nikon lenses get a D4!(I think it has the best buffer of the the three though)

Above ISO 800/1000 where you often are when shooting wildlife, is the Nikon DR still THAT much superior to the canon?

300 f2.8 : Better and lighter on canon side ( even according to dxo!)
400 f2.8 : Better and lighter on canon side (Equal to dxo, but they compare 36/24 mp cameras with 22)
500 f4    : much better & lighter
600 f4    : much better & lighter

Teleconverter performance? Night and day!

300 f2.8 IS II 2xIII TC equals or bests the 400 f2.8 from nikon + 1.4 !
600+2x looks like the 600 from nikon +1.4 tc

No doubt when you shoot landscapes/architecture or whatever other boring stuff (j/k) that a d800/d800e with 14-24 is Mount Everest

But Canon in other departments (sports/wildlife) is just OLYMPUS MONS !!!! (MARS).

Ow boy now i feel so good about my choice for canon, I will need to do this more often

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 29, 2013, 08:43:57 AM »
Well sensor superiority is not on top of the list for everyone I guess.
Let me try to join in on the trashing and bashing, it could be fun

I like the pictures i am getting now, even though i know the d800 can take better pictures, but i found it quite awkward when handholding a d800 with 200-400 f4, to change the ISO settings (top left of the camera), I could not find how to assign it to any of the other buttons.
The same to change autofocus points, hard to reach that switch.... and the smaller mount from the nikon's don't make you feel more secure holding such a lens by the camera body.

The af-on switch needs too much pressure and is often awkward placed for people with normal hands, the body doesn't feel like an extension but something you really need to grab tightly to hold on to , Sucks when you have carpal tunnel syndrome( I don't but imagine you do :/)

Did anyone ever hold a nikon tele? did you look at the laughable filter holder which is situated in some poorly glued on weather sealing attempt , I've seen several where the filter holder had to be reglued.
After 2 weeks of using my newly purchased 200-400 it was already moving about and the glue actually had melted a bit.

4fps? really? that just sucks for wildlife, so you look at the d600 5.5 fps , could do.... , oh wait that has some old auto focus system, no dedicated af on button, and only SD card slots... It's ergonomics are a bit better than the d800 even tho it's smaller

Luckily there is a newly introduced d7100 ! with state of the art 24mp DX sensor...
Amazing image quality out of that AA filter lacking sensor, superb dynamic range...
More fps than the d600, it actually has 6!, you start shooting and after 1 second the buffer is full :/
Even with the fasted 95mb sd card it drops to around 3 fps afterwards, need to change to 12 bit to achieve somewhat better results ( or jpg!!!).

The FPS and buffer , placement of the ISO/AF buttons makes me think they don't consider people shooting wildlife in raw format with reasonably heavy lenses

Lenses / Re: Would you sell a 500mm f/4 IS for a 300mm 2.8?
« on: August 29, 2013, 08:00:26 AM »
I have done exactly this....

Changed my 500 f4IS to a 300 f2.8 IS II, without paying extra.

I do not regret it at all , the bare 300 is great and light, super fast AF  and f2.8
With a 1.4 converter it's hard to notice the difference in IQ and AF speed compared to the bare 300, it is faster than the 500 f4 was bare( sharper imo as well).

The 2xIII converter still gives quite fast autofocus , about on par what I had with the bare 500, but it sometimes hunts a bit more for BIF (1 cycle) , the IQ is still good as well. It's hard to quantify the differences in IQ , but I definitely feel it is equal or better than the 500 IS+1.4 converter.

It gives a lot of flexibility, I would not mind to pay a bit extra for the swap either.
The digital picture crops and online reviews of the performance with tc2III made me decide to try it.

420 f4 vs 500 f4

600 f6.3 vs 500 f4

700 f6.3 vs 600 f6.3

So if you can live with a little less reach I would definitely consider it !

here is a 100% crop from a falcon(? english term) i think.
600mm f6.3 ISO 400 1/2500

another 100% crop again 600mm 6.3 ISO 400

100% crop from naked lens

( I was battling a bit with uploading and converting to proper JPG size, Some ''quality'' may have disappeared )

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 29, 2013, 03:12:45 AM »
It is what it is, and apparently most of the sensors are inferior to the nikon's(or sony) in almost every aspect.
Whether it is noticeable or not in real world usage is not really that relevant.

For a photographer, whether it is noticeable or not in real world usage is absolutely relevant.

No it's not, because you apparently stopped reading, here is what it said.

it is what it is, and apparently most of the sensors are inferior to the nikon's(or sony) in almost every aspect.
Whether it is noticeable or not in real world usage is not really that relevant.

It only matters that you are happy with the images you are getting, despite maybe not having the best equipment out there.... ///////

If your not happy you will probably try out a different camera/brand or lens(es)
I was not happy with the d800 because of the 4fps, missing too many moments, Canon had the 1dmkiv as an interesting alternative, where i felt nikon did not offer something similar, hence I am now shooting canon and more happy with the images i get. Despite them lacking the resolution, DR etc that the d800 had, and it's quite noticeable on a retina screen.

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 29, 2013, 02:55:16 AM »
I do not find it to be a problem — ever. 

Fair enough. I do not find to be a problem most of the time. But when I do, I wish it was not a problem  :), and that happens often enough to be a problem.


I know these topics get pushed on DPReview, where anonymous know-it-alls try to convince everyone that Canon cameras suck. 

Some of those "anonymous know-it-alls" are John Sheehy, Bob (bobn2) and Joe James (Great Bustard); Joe posted here a few weeks ago. They also happen to be some of the most knowledgeable people there, with a few others who share their opinion but are less active.

and others are physics guys, at least one of word class level (responsible, in part, for one of the great advances in string theory)

Sheldon cooper?

or maybe edward witten

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 29, 2013, 02:51:15 AM »
I don't really get why canon users need to defend their far inferior sensor.....Envy?

It is what it is, and apparently most of the sensors are inferior to the nikon's(or sony) in almost every aspect.
Whether it is noticeable or not in real world usage is not really that relevant.

It only matters that you are happy with the images you are getting, despite maybe not having the best equipment out there....

Looking at it from a canon users perspective (now) , I am just happy that Nikon is totally destroying canon in the sensor department , It means canon will sooner or later have to follow with better sensors.

All the time some of you spend trying to bash Nikon or defend canon, you better spend that time working so you can add a d800 with 14-24 to your kit ;)

Lighting / Wildlife Photography , To flash or not?
« on: August 28, 2013, 01:29:27 PM »
Do you use flashes for wildlife photography? ,

Personally I am still not sure if I should purchase a flash, during the day it can be really handy, but at night I wonder if I disturb the animals?, even the ones who can 'handle' it.

What are your thoughts on the use of flash?

Btw, what is the max shutter speed you can use?, if the flash sync speed is 1/200th, does this mean you can only use up to 1/200th of a second shutter speed with flash?, or is that for when the flash is not attached to the camera but triggered wireless ?

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 11