Messages

1366

EOS Bodies / Re: DR and RAW bit depth on Canon's forthcoming...

« on: February 29, 2012, 01:31:29 PM »

As someone who also uses my 7D for landscapes, I use ISO 100 as well. I want that maximum DR, and having about two stops chopped off by crappy electronic noise is something I think many of the other landscape photographers who use a 7D is an entirely valid talking point. It should also be noted that for many things, like wildlife and bird photography, the key subject is usually only a part of the frame, and it other parts are blocked or blown it usually doesn't matter as much. When it comes to landscapes (which the 7D is entirely valid for, when you don't have $3000 to spend on a better performing full-frame camera), the whole entire image area matters.

You need every scrap of DR you can get your hands on. Far more often than not, you have to compromise on image quality by using graduated neutral density filters, which almost always create some kind of undesirable outcome to one degree or another (i.e. black mountain peaks, visible separation between sky and land where land or trees protrude through the flat horizon, etc.) When its obviously possible to NOT lose some two stops of DR to read noise because its been done by the competition, its entirely valid to ask for the same improvement and expect something be done by Canon to provide the same benefit to its customers...especially for the prices they seem to be asking for new gear (which is greater than inflation would indicate, if $3500 for a 5D III body is actually true.)

1367

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

« on: February 29, 2012, 02:49:29 AM »

Not to sure why you are quoting me here but in all cases if you're suggesting that the original poster should have remained silent about what he's heard then I don't understand the purpose of this website.

I nor has anyone said the information he posted is more valuable than what CR is posting, its just one more rumor that can help you forge your individual opinion.

I think the use of the word "CONFIRMED" in nice big type, and associating that big word with "canon rep", has given people the idea that its kind of "the word of god" and indeed more valuable than what CR is posting. At least, thats how it came off to me. I would imagine CR has a fair number of Canon Reps as sources of information, and the CR3 rating for the 5D III release this Friday has not changed. I'm less confident of it being a true CR3 after the date change, but I think most people trust CR more than random rumors like this one that claim superiority with big "CONFIRMATIONS" spoken by supposed canon reps. Its all well and good to speculate, but you can't expect this to be taken with more weight than what CR itself has to offer...

1368

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

« on: February 29, 2012, 01:08:12 AM »

I work for a big camera shop in Canada and Our rep Canon CONFIRMED to us today that its a rebel series thats is gonna be announce On friday March 2, 2012... probably T4-i

Something else he didnt want to tell me will be announcing in the next 2 month

Sorry For party stoping!

Thanks for the tip. Its intriguing, but in all honesty, hearing that a single canon rep has "confirmed" something holds a lot less weight for me than the filtered, sorted, ranked and validated rumors that CanonRumors.com has access to, and upon which it bases its rumor ratings.

I'm not sure the current CR3 about the 5D III is as accurate as we hoped after the date change (although the specs stayed the same, so I'm hopeful), I figure its more along the lines of a CR2.7 now...but I'd take a CR3 rumor from CanonRumors with more weight than an off-the-cuff rumor from Steven in Canada.

Hate to say it, but here is to hoping **** is wrong, and CanonRumors is right...and the long-awaited 5D Mark III finally gets announced on Friday!!!

1369

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

« on: February 29, 2012, 01:02:18 AM »

I have had 7Ds - the AF was not as good as I hoped - so got a 1D4 which is hands down better. Metering on the AF point is so usefull

The 1Ds3 has the pro AF too - this is now my weapon of choice except in low light.

I would have much preferred to get a 1D IV...but I have this whole thing about justifying the cost that makes it rather difficult at nearly six grand (at least at my level of photographic skill, which I'll admit is far lower than my technical skills.) I have not had a chance to use a 1Ds III. I imagine they might be getting rather cheap sometime soon here, so I might have to look into one of those. I guess for that matter many used 1D IV's might be going on the market once the 1D X hits in full force as well...so I might see if I can justify a used one of those. I'd prefer a 1.3x crop sensor to a FF sensor for the kind of stuff I'd use such a camera for anyway.

1370

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

« on: February 29, 2012, 12:51:09 AM »

I wouldn't really call the 7D's AF "pro" either in comparison to the 1D IV or 1D X AF, I tend to call it low-end pro, vs. high-end pro of the 1D IV or one of Nikon's D3 bodies. You could call it high-end prosumer, I guess it would be the same thing.

The point is...it makes a difference.

1371

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

« on: February 29, 2012, 12:39:26 AM »

Personally I think people have been so brainwashed about the 5DII AF system that even when presented withevidence to the contrary are in total denial. A can do frame of mind is needed to turn this into a will do reality - instead of a 'any other camera' is NEEDED to capture something moving.

I wonder how many people who quote the 'useless' AF system have had real hands on experience without the use of a 'pro' AF system ie a 7D and a 5DII?

I wonder how many people HAVE to have the latest and greatest before they believe that a halfway decent photo can be taken?  Yet week in week out we see evidence of first class images produced on older technology - such as the 5D classic, 20D, 450D and the like

First off, shooting a photo of a sitting dog in low light is an entirely different story than shooting a fast moving bird that can and does change direction on a dime in low light just after sunset. For the record, I own both a 450D (which has an AF system about the same as the 5D II) and a 7D. I spent a LONG time trying to shoot birds with my 450D, most of the time right around sunset as my day job would never let me get out there sooner to shoot during broad daylight. I pushed that camera to the absolute limits, and it did ok, but I never once got a shot that I could call "professional". Within a week of owning and using the 7D, I was getting shots that I stopped dreaming were possible. Still nothing I would really call professional, not on the level of Art Morris and similar photographers, but good enough that I actually believe I can improve my skill and one day soon call some of my shots "professional".

There IS a difference with AF systems when it comes to AI Servo tracking performance, particularly when you have more higher-precision cross-type points. With the 450D, the camera would spend too much time trying to find that focus lock. I either missed focus completely because it would give up, or I wouldn't nail focus where I wanted it, and the key part of my subject would be just barely, but noticeably, out of focus. Since there was only one cross-type point in the center, it was difficult to track a moving bird across the sky where it may not always be dead on the center point. The advancements the 7D brought to the table were more than simply 19 cross-type points with broad frame spread, though. It brought some extremely useful dynamic point expansion features and configuration options that helped me tune the camera such that it could keep focus on my active subject, even if it moved away from the primary selected point. The 450D does not offer any of these options. Having experimented with the 5D II, it seems it has six AF assist points around only the center point that behave similarly to the 7D's point expansion mode, which is handy for center-point focus. The 7D brings that capability to any of its 19 AF points, along with a variety of other point selection modes that allow you to tune AF to different circumstances. I've used a friends 500D for AF tracking as well, and its about the same as the 450D, although it is certainly more usable in lower light with an extra stop of ISO.

So yes, I have used older Canon cameras that have far simpler AF systems. And I offer a resounding "Absolutely" to the fact that a more advanced AF system can offer a world of difference in whether you nail focus, or miss it by a mile, and how frequently you do so. The 450D could get it some of the time, the 7D gets it much more often than not. I would hope that a top-shelf PRO AF system would nail it 90% of the time or more for the money you spend on one.

No one has said the 5D II system is incapable of AF, but its a far cry from extremely capable for high speed, mid to low light action (i.e. bird photography at sunset, sports action indoors, etc.) I figure there are two ways to improve that...either stuff in more single-line AF points so they act like a net, or improve the precision of fewer points. Nikon's taken the brute force approach of packing in as many AF points as possible. Canon has taken the selective approach by making all points cross-type (and with the 1D X, they've taken a blend of both approaches.) There is no way you can claim that the 5D Mark II 9-pt/6-pt hidden assist AF system is a "professional" grade AF system...not compared to the 7D (for a low-end pro-grade AF system), and certainly not to any of the 1D line AF systems from the past 4 years or so. I'd be willing to put money on just about any current Nikon AF system, on a professional body or not, outperforming the 5D II's in any strenuous exercise.

I don't think its unacceptable to ask Canon to put an AF system on the 5D that correlates with its position in the Canon DSLR lineup. Its long held status as the pro body with marginally better AF than Canon's entry-level DSLR's, not even ranking as good as an xxD with their 9 cross-type points, and was considerably lacking compared to the 7D. Its understandable that the 7D would surpass the 5D line for a while given that its a newer body, but I don't think thats an acceptable thing for the long haul....the 5D deserves better than a bare-bones 9pt AF system with a single cross-type center point...and so do those who intend to spend $3500 or very nearly so street on the 5D III when its released.

So I really hope that the 61pt AF is real, I sincerely hope it gets 21 center cross-type points, and I truly believe the 5D III deserves at least the 100k RGB metering sensor, even if the advanced AF hooks the 1D X has are absent. I'd feel good about spending $3500 at least if that was what I was getting...it would feel legit, and worth while. I had a very hard time justifying the 5D II, and in the end I never could...for two years I've been playing with it in stores, borrowing from friends or other photographers out in the field to give it a try, drooling over it online...but I couldn't pull the trigger. Between the rumors about terrible fixed-pattern read noise at low ISO, and the extremely lackluster AF system...it just wasn't worth it. Given how the 7D has made it possible for me to finally start exploring the bird photography I've been floundering with for the same amount of time, I feel good about buying it, feel it was well worth the price, and am a true believer that AF systems do matter.

1372

EOS Bodies / Re: If 5d3 really is 22Mp, what will low light (ISO) performance likely be?

« on: February 28, 2012, 09:25:49 PM »

Just to point out, no one knows the dynamic range of any of the new Canon cameras yet. So far, Nikon, via Sony Exmor sensors, is outperforming Canon sensors by around two full stops on the DR front, and offers FAR lower noise at low ISO levels than any Canon sensor (shadow recoverability with a Sony Exmor is unbelievable, where as Canon sensors exhibit pronounced and detail-obliterating fixed-pattern or banding noise.)

I think the assumption has so far been that because Canon increased their maximum ISO, that DR would also increase. I don't think such an assumption is safe. It could very well be that Canon's new sensors still lose around 2 stops of DR at low ISO (where DR is highest) because of read noise introduced by their electronics (particularly ADC.) If thats the case, Nikon will still be winning the DR war thanks to Sony Exmor technology.

1373

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

« on: February 28, 2012, 09:05:53 PM »

@Maxis Gamez: Just out of curiosity, did you write an article for NatureScapes.net recently? If so, your photography is great...I loved your sunset silhouette shots...fantastic. Anyway, your article made me put Florida on my list of photography destinations, particularly for birds. I don't have anywhere near your experience, but bird photography has also engulfed almost every moment of my work lately.

1374

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

« on: February 28, 2012, 08:55:39 PM »

Personally, I'm too heavily invested in Canon lenses to switch brands.

This is something else I don't understand. I will be happy to adopt a Nikon LANDSCAPE set up if I can't get what I want from Canon but I can easy leave my current Canon set up for Bird Photography.

Why does everyone always have the thought of always "jumping ship" instead of having an open mind to use both systems?? After all, they are just tools to create images.

I have no problems using both systems, in fact that will help me even more during my workshops and seminars.

Well, you might be more unique in that then. Personally, I wouldn't like not having the option of interchanging all of my gear amongst all of my cameras. Not only that, if you start out with one brand, and want to add another, its more costly to do so...you have to buy gear you may already have for the alternative brand, and when it comes to high quality glass, that stuff doesn't come cheap. Almost all of my kit is professional level gear, I have one, maybe 2 lenses that are not L-series, I only buy professional grade bodies so the 7D and either the 5D III or possibly whatever Canon releases end of year will be my second body, and whatever the professional upgrade path for those is in the future is what I'll take...so not cheap stuff. If I wanted to pick up a Nikon "landscape" camera, I'd have to pick up the camera body and at least one or two lenses, extra batteries, possibly different memory cards of they use XQD, separate items for things like remote shutter releases, lens filters, extra battery chargers (such as those that can work off of a car cigarette lighter outlet), etc. to the tune of several thousand dollars. Even if you don't fully "jump ship", the cost is still considerable, and the effort to find all the appropriate accessories for both brands can be considerable. Not the most viable option for most customers.

I am not at the point where I'm completely dissatisfied with Canon...however if they don't demonstrate a will to step up and really compete with their growing competition, and simply find it easier to sit happy on increasingly dated technology, increasingly limited feature sets, etc. relative to the competition, its going to be increasingly hard not to go on an all out crusade against Canon's tactics all over the net and encourage Canon owners to jump ship with (good reason, even)....put some real bottom-line pressure on Canon to get their act together and offer some real value for the prices they are asking of their customers for "modern" gear. (Assuming the 5D III body only is indeed $3500 list, even street price is going to be atrociously expensive if the AF system, FPS, and metering system are not competitive vs. what Nikon and the rest of the competition have to offer.) I don't think I'd be alone in that crusade either...

1375

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

« on: February 28, 2012, 08:31:44 PM »

People talk all the time about the AF of the 5D MKII not being so great and so on but with a good technique anything can be possible. Here are few images.

I love my 5D MKII that's for sure!

First off, great photos. Love the bald eagle, fantastic shot!

As for "anything can be possible", sure, but thats not the point. Every one of your shots is center focused, and thats one of the complaints I've heard from many bird photographers that the 5D II AF doesn't really offer much in the way if in-flight AF tracking without limiting composition options. Generally speaking, better, faster AF systems improve the amount of keepers as well, limiting how frequently you encounter out of focus shots and the like. Finally, the ability to AF track at a high framerate increases the chances of getting an awesome shot with intriguing pose or other characteristics in focus.

Sure, anything is possible...but its more the ease of getting that great shot than it simply being possible that having a nice AF system brings to the table.

You do understand that the 5D MKII was designed for landscapes, studio and pretty much anything that doesn't move fast. So why the argument over a slow AF if most people including myself uses the camera specifically for that. In fact, I often create landscapes in manual focus.

That's why we have the 7D and Mark IV.

PS: Some of the images I create with the 5D MKII were created using all 9 focusing points. Again, a good understanding of your camera availability and a good focusing including tracking, the camera will perform just fine.

I use it all the time with my Canon 800mm with great success. Check out my website to see more images created with this camera and 7D. www.gvisions.org

Thanks!

Sure, we all understand that the 5D II AF was not designed for action on any level. The complaint I think most potential 5D III buyers have is that Canon has been extremely lax with the AF on the 5D line, in comparison to the competition. Most prosumer Nikon bodies have far more advanced AF than on any xxxD, xxD, and even the 5D II body. A lot of Canon users, including myself, ask the question:

How can Canon keep calling the 5D line a professional camera body when its been perpetually gimped by the most atrocious AF system Canon has to offer, outperformed by all cross-type 9-pt AF of the xxD line, the all cross-type 19-pt AF of the 7D, obviously all the 1D bodies (even those a couple generations old), as well as most Nikon bodies (which have anywhere from 30 to over 50 AF points these days!!)

I think most 5D II owners have used the camera for still scenes because it just wasn't readily capable for most action scenes, but thats a limitation imposed by Canon, not necessarily the owners of 5D II's. I can completely understand many people ditching the 5D line in favor of any one of Nikons prosumer or semi-pro bodies, simply because they are more capable in a general sense these days. For those of us who are heavily invested in Canon lenses, it can be rather frustrating to see the competition racing past Canon in terms of features (particularly AF), yet be stuck using something or having new options that is perceived as inferior.

Personally, I'm too heavily invested in Canon lenses to switch brands. I like a lot of things about Canon cameras, so I wouldn't likely switch even if I had the option. But it is still irksome to see Nikon significantly outperforming Canon in the ISO/read noise/DR department, putting advanced AF systems in almost ALL of their cameras, offering better full-color metering systems on most of their cameras (the 1D X is the FIRST Canon body to get such a thing, and here's to hoping the 5D III gets the new 100k pixel metering and AF assist system as well), etc.

Canon needs to compete. They have demonstrated they can with the 1D X...now they need to prove they WILL with all the rest of their cameras released from here on out. AF is just a talking point when it comes to the things Canon has dropped the ball on relative to the competition.

1376

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

« on: February 28, 2012, 07:34:33 PM »

People talk all the time about the AF of the 5D MKII not being so great and so on but with a good technique anything can be possible. Here are few images.

I love my 5D MKII that's for sure!

First off, great photos. Love the bald eagle, fantastic shot!

As for "anything can be possible", sure, but thats not the point. Every one of your shots is center focused, and thats one of the complaints I've heard from many bird photographers that the 5D II AF doesn't really offer much in the way if in-flight AF tracking without limiting composition options. Generally speaking, better, faster AF systems improve the amount of keepers as well, limiting how frequently you encounter out of focus shots and the like. Finally, the ability to AF track at a high framerate increases the chances of getting an awesome shot with intriguing pose or other characteristics in focus.

Sure, anything is possible...but its more the ease of getting that great shot than it simply being possible that having a nice AF system brings to the table.

1377

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

« on: February 28, 2012, 03:09:57 PM »

...we used to have to drop $5K in order to get our hands on Canon's pro AF (on a cropped sensor, no less).  Now they're releasing a product with the pro AF at a projected $3.5K ...

So, Canon has announced the spec for the 5DIII's AF system?  I must have missed that...  Even if it has the same number of points as the 1D X (and even that is still a rumor), that doesn't mean it's 'pro AF'.  I hope that's what it means, yes, but I'm not holding my breath - the 1-series AF is about more than the number of points.

sure, neuro, we're dealing with rumors here.  but I'm addressing people's complaints about a rumor, so I figured taking the content of a rumor at face value is acceptable and even necessary if we're going to have it be a point of discussion.  if the rumors aren't valid points of discussion, what are any of us doing here?

To Neuro's point, the rumors have NOT stated that the 5D III AF is actually "pro AF". It simply states its 61pt, and that IS still a rumor, even if its a solid one. As Nero stated, the 1D X AF is about more than just AF points. Its about what type of points, how each type of point is distributed, what kind of camera logic drives the AF, how configurable it is, etc.

All we know at this point is that a solid CR3 rumor states "61pt AF". Assuming anything more is, well, just wild speculation, and is neither rumor nor fact. It may well indeed be on topic here...but I think its important to be realistic...the 5D III has not been rumored to have professional grade AF on the level of the 1-series bodies.

1378

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

« on: February 28, 2012, 01:42:53 PM »

(Which is apparent when people wonder how well lenses may deal with a 36mp FF Nikon sensor...despite the fact that its less dense than the 18mp Canon APS-C.)

Fine, but don't forget that while the resolving power of a sensor does not vary spatially across the surface, the resolving power of a lens varies across the image circle, being highest in the center and lowest at the periphery.  So...I think that being concerned about how lenses will deal with a higher density FF sensor, even if not as high a density as current APS-C sensors, is valid given that the APS-C sensor is 'seeing' only the higher-resolving portion of the image circle, whereas the corners of the FF sensor extend to the edges of the image circle where lens performance is worst.  Not going to matter much for a 300/2.8, but for a 17-40mm, which is already getting mushy at the corners on the 5DII...

Certainly, and its a point I try to touch on when I can. I think I've mentioned a few times that I'm referring to lens-center resolution. Its more difficult to evaluate corner sharpness, as falloff curves vary widely across Canon's lens lineup (across any lens lineup.) Falloff is often not linear by any means either. Whey I say that there are only a few Canon lenses that approach perfection, I mean center-to-edge resolution is nearly perfect. I think the only two lenses I've seen that solidly exhibit near-perfect replication accuracy center-to-edge (at least theoretically...I have not yet seen real MTF's for these lenses) are the yet to be released 500mm L II and 600mm L II. The 300 f/2.8 L may be another one, possibly the 70-200 f/2.8 L II (contrast seems great to edge, but sharpness does fall off a bit more), and I'd have to do some digging to see if there are any more...there are not many. Most Canon lenses do very well in the center, but some of the best fall off terribly in the corners. The original 16-35 L had atrocious corner sharpness and contrast vs. its excellent center sharpness, and even the Mark II version has less than stellar corner performance. I believe one of the reasons Canon is upgrading their line of lenses lately is to improve resolution characteristics across the board. It makes sense, for the very reasons you've stated...center-to-edge has to improve across the board to accommodate higher density sensors, particularly larger sensor formats.

1379

EOS Bodies / Re: DR and RAW bit depth on Canon's forthcoming...

« on: February 28, 2012, 01:19:45 PM »

According to one Canon interview (which I can't put my finger on) there's two stops more of DR to be wrung from the image processor than the sensor, before physics says there's a limit.

Absolutely...its not exactly the sensor thats the problem, its the ADC. I believe that actually resides in the Digic image processing chip (I'm not 100% certain of that, I've heard conflicting things, and I don't know what patents of Canon's to look at to figure out which is true), rather than in the sensor (at least for current Canon sensors.) If Canon has changed their approach, and put the ADC on-sensor with their new generation of sensors, and even partially taken the Sony Exmor approach of parallelizing ADC, then we could very likely see an improvement. I don't know enough about CMOS electronics to understand exactly why the ADC burns shadow detail and injects so much fixed-pattern noise. There are also other noise sources, such as thermal, which can be introduced by hot components. That would become more of a problem with high speed cameras, however it can be addressed with proper cooling devices, passive or active.

Cameras are more than sensors (though reading some threads you'd never believe it) Other components have a massive influence on image quality, and it's a mistake to overlook their importance.

Sure, its not just the sensor, its the whole image processing pipeline. I guess I've been using terms loosely, although in the case of Sony Exmor sensors, they definitely pack column-parallel ADC on-chip, and however they designed them, they introduce very little noise (about a third of what the 7D's introduces.) Once the analog signal is converted into digital, its just 1's and 0's, and your not going to see any further introduction of noise...at worst, you might digitally amplify noise (like increasing exposure in post), but with RAW that is obviously not going to happen in-camera.

1380

EOS Bodies / Re: DR and RAW bit depth on Canon's forthcoming...

« on: February 28, 2012, 02:21:19 AM »

I wouldn't be surprised if modern DSLR's, particularly Sony Exmor, had better DR. The pixel densities (pixel pitch) of 60mp FF MF, or 40mp cropped MF, are about the same as a Canon 5D II. From what I understand, the read noise on an MF sensor is just about as bad as on the 5D II, however if they start wiht 16 bits, and lose two stops to read noise, they would still end up with a solid 13-14 stops of DR, which is still about 2 stops better than any Canon sensor. They might lose out just a bit to a Sony Exmor at that point, as Sony consistently pulls off about 13.8 stops of DR.