September 16, 2014, 06:03:25 PM

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 - jrista

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 299
46
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 13, 2014, 11:10:30 PM »

The 5D IV is now the real milestone...that's the one to watch. If Canon misses on the sensor IQ front for the 5D IV.........

I don't agree, the 1Ds was a groundbreaking camera, as were the 1Ds MkII and 1Ds MkIII. I can easily see Canon putting it all into a 1Ds MkIV/1DXs, then let that trickle down to the 5D MkIV.

Given their sensor output up until now I see the real reason for the 1 series 1DX "amalgamation" was Canon's inability to make that mythical >35MP, they couldn't make a 1Ds MkIV two years ago, who knows if they can now. I certainly know there is a heavy built up demand from 1Ds MkIII users, myself included, to upgrade our equipment, personally I am more interested in a 1DX MkII (22MP >10fps) than most 1Ds MkIII users who want >35MP and 6 or so fps.

But I believe the truth is most long term 1Ds MkIII users are more interested in the upgrade for business reasons than pure IQ issues, sure more whatever will be nice, but most of us have made good enough livings with what we have and our output is not limited by IQ.

I don't disagree that the 1D line is an important line of cameras for Canon, but I think the 5D line is their bread and butter pro body, and it's the one that competes with the D800s and D750s and A7rs. For those who DO care about IQ, who are also more likely than not to be UNable to afford the 1D line, I think the 5D IV is the milestone marker for those who are interested in the sensor IQ side of things.

If Canon doesn't step up and put a brand spankin shiny new sensor with some significant technological improvements on a smaller process, that greatly improves DR...even if it isn't a big MP camera...hell, it could be 24 mp in the 5D IV really...I think that tells those of us who want better sensor IQ whether were going to get it before 2019 or not. If not...hell, no freakin reason to sit around waiting for Canon to do something. It'll then be years before they do. It's way past time, and if they don't do it in the 5D IV, I don't think they are going to do it until it's way too late.

47
Lenses / Re: What New Lens are You Most Excited About?
« on: September 13, 2014, 10:14:38 PM »
How is the Metabones adapter with other Canon lenses? Does it work well? I am not sure that, if I added an A7r to my kit, that I'd stick with it. I am thinking it would probably be mostly a temporary thing, then I'd sell it and either get the A7r "Mark II" if one comes out soon, or if by some miracle Canon actually turns the 5D IV into a landscape behemoth with 40-50mp AND better Exmore-level DR (the former I think is likely...the latter I think is very unlikely from Canon at this point.)

The Metabones works well, I use it quite a lot these days with the TSE 17 & 24, plus the Zeiss Lenses (15,21,Otus 55, 135 & soon the Otus 85), I like the files from the a7r, certainly better than the 5DMK III, I have 2 5DMK III Bodies that I'm going to sell, I have used the 5D in my Underwater Imaging but recently bought a Housing for the a7r, smaller footprint, better Images.

Like yourself, waiting for Canon to develop that 50MP Sensor & stick into a 1D Body (need the robustness & weather proofing of the 1D line). But I think it's a couple years away at best, more chance of an improved a7r II before we see Canon go + 22MP.

Thanks. How is the A7r for underwater? I don't live near a body of water that has anything interesting in it, but years ago I worked with a guy who did reef photography with a film camera (that was just before the turning of the age to digital), and his stuff was amazing. I've loved it ever since. I bet an A7s would be phenomenal for the lower light levels in a reef.

48
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 13, 2014, 09:57:23 PM »
As an owner of the 7D, the specs just doesn't seem to make you want to buy this as soon as it comes out. The way I look at it, this camera represents the top of the crop line for Canon for then next 4 years --- 2018 -2019. It has no 4k, no RAW 1080p, no wifi and no sd uhs-ii.  Now don't get me wrong, Canon makes solid products and I know the 7D Mark II will be a solid product in terms of performance and reliability, but Canon is just playing this way too safe. They are heading to fall behind the competition.

Tethered shooting is very nice and Canon had the opportunity to cut the cord with this, but no such luck, no WIFI -- wild ..I guess they still want to sell 800 WIFI add-ons which is completely bonkers to purchase. Would be nice to have some 4k in this body and maybe Im pushing it a bit, but at a minimum throw in RAW 1080p, the magic lantern guys are whipping up Magic with RAW video, does canon do anything to integrate that no! just 1080p60 with the same washed out codec is a waste of time. I am 100% team canon but man, they don't even have a high MP body, another one clocking in at 20MP.

Coming out with this camera with SD UHS-I is the clearest indicator that canon will never adopt uhs-ii until 2019 -- sorry canon 5D MarkIV guys, this is a big sign of disappointment to come. I will remain with Canon for stills, but they offer zero for video. Since video is a non event, the new focusing system as awesome as it is will not be used by me since I wont use video Long story short, I held out for years hoping the world for the 7D2, but canon played it WAY timid.  I will just go full frame with a 6D. Canon, please stop stunting you products to protect your expensive Cinema Line by churning up tired features for the bottom end. 1080p60!!!!, wow how awesome...signing off.


Great first post. Wholeheartedly agree.

And now a particular someone will come and tell us how about how Canon is #1 in sales and don't need to innovate. Pretty pathetic if you ask me.

The simple fact of the matter is, if people aren't impressed, they will buy something else. And ultimately, that WILL affect sales. From what I just read in Canon and Nikon financial reports, Canon had losses on the ILC front (well, on their entire digital front, but ILC is important) last year, amounting to around 10%. At the same time, Nikon realized a 50% GAIN on the ILC front. Canon still sells more cameras, but I think things are starting to even out. P&S is obviously a dead market...it'll be totally dominated by smartphones in a few years, and it'll hardly exist as a market for Canon, Nikon, etc. So it seems people HAVE been voting with their pocketbooks...it just hasn't fundamentally changed the market dynamic yet.

People are still buying DSLRs and the new mirrorless cameras,  though, which makes that the big growth market for these companies. I don't think it will grow anywhere as fast as P&S cameras did, which in the long run should mean it's a more stable market...but I do think it will grow. Canon is projecting another loss for this year, of about 9%, while Nikon is currently projecting over 100% gains through 2016 (they expect to have 45% of the market, vs. their current 20%).

So, yes...Canon currently sells the most. I think the tides have already started shifting, though...as Canon has been losing ILC sales for the last couple of years, while Nikon made massive gains last year and is still projecting significant gains for the next couple of years. The 7D II, and soon the 5D IV, will indeed be major markers for Canon's future. The 7D II, which will still sell well, just probably not like hotcakes like the 7D did, is already received with lackluster commentary. The 5D IV will need to be a major powerhouse of a camera, capable of competing head to head with the D810 and A7r (including on the sensor IQ/DR front), or I think we'll continue to see losses on the Canon ILC front.

If the market trends that started last year continue through 2016 and 2018, Canon should most definitely feel the pinch. Either they will seriously invest in stills photography again, or they will just decide it doesn't matter an invest ever more heavily in the video front (where they are also facing some pretty serious competition...I think Sony's new cinema camera is going to give people looking at either the C100 or C300 some serious qualms.)

The 5D IV is now the real milestone...that's the one to watch. If Canon misses on the sensor IQ front for the 5D IV, it's likely going to be 2018 before we see any major improvements on that front from Canon, and there is really just no point in waiting that long. There will be generations of competitor products out before the 5D V, and technology will have moved so far it'll be a wonder if Canon is ever able to catch up. Might as well augment your Canon kit in the interim, and have better IQ NOW, than put it off for years. The A7s, maybe even despite it's gimped RAW format, is a pretty attractive option for landscapers who want phenomenal IQ and DR, in a package that will work with their existing Canon lenses.

49
Lenses / Re: What New Lens are You Most Excited About?
« on: September 13, 2014, 08:02:39 PM »
Yeah, from the images I've seen, the Otus lenses are amazing. I'm not sure the non-Otus lenses are that far above Canon's, but the Otus definitely seem to be.

Regarding the higher MP body...have you considered the A7r with EF adapter? Since the Zeiss lenses are all manual, it's not like AF is going to be an issue. You would get that nice high resolution, high DR, which would go GREAT with the Otus lenses.

Hi John, Yes, I actually purchased the a7r, The EVF is a little difficult to get used to for me, the lag thing is just annoying so it's mostly manual focus via live view, size is just perfect, the menu system is quite good, the Sensor & Images from the a7r are pretty good, it's such a pity Sony crippled the E system with too little lens support, I have the metabones VIII adaptor & the Otus 55 works very well on it, it's mostly just that lag in the viewfinder.

I've looked at the Pentax 645z & if they had a better lens line up I'de jump on board for Landscape & Portrait type Images, still nothing around quite like the 1Dx for Wildlife.

Such a shame Canon have dragged the chain on a +/- 40MP body, I do agree wholeheartedly with the comments you make on CR regards the DR of the Canon sensors versus the Nikon, I used the D800 for a while, wasn't happy at all with it, but I still keep my D3x so I can use the 14-24f/2.8, damn pity at the moment we couldn't pull the sensor out of the D810 & put it in the 5DMK III, I'm probably going to get slammed by the Canon puritanical brigade over the comment, but in my view Canon lately have been less about innovation and more about Status Quo. Real innovation seems too be coming from the likes of Sony, Pentax, Fuji etc, what would we give for the Sony 50MP sensor in a Canon 1 series body & 3 FPS, a lot.

Be nice to see Canon do a 40MP sensor, better DR or at least as good as the Nikon & drop a EVF similar to the Fujifilm  XT-1 into it, I guess this is enough to have me banned   ;) But we can dream & hope, in the meantime it's 1Dx, 5DMK III & the a7r ( I don't post the a7r Images anywhere here, it is after all a Canon centric site).

Thanks for the support. :) I agree, sadly, that I think Canon is much more about the status quo these days than continuing to innovate on the photography front. Very confusing, since they used to be so cutting edge and cranking out more improvements than anyone not all that long ago. I think a lot of the reason we're here today with DSLRs is thanks to Canon.

I'm trying to think of ways to clearly demonstrate the real-world differences between a D810, A7r and 5D III. A lot of people here say the know there are differences, but just don't really see them. To me, the differences are huge, and the more I mess around with D800 files, the more I realize the differences aren't just in the shadows. The shadows are incredibly clean, even when heavily lifted, compare to any Canon...but it doesn't stop there. Colors are richer (well, maybe just "purer") from the shadows to the highlights. The higher Q.E. translates into lower noise across the board, right into the highlights. The digital signal stored in a NEF is just better, has cleaner, less "dirty" data. I couldn't really see these differences until I had a 5D III...now that I do, it's almost plain as day...and it's surprising. I'm not saying the differences are like 50% or even 30%...but a 10% improvement in color fidelity is a meaningful, visible (even if slightly subtle at times) difference. The shadow noise difference is just massive....you get richer color really deep into the shadows, and you don't see color noise until you've lifted by several stops at least, and sometimes not until you start lifting shadows above the 5-stop mark. That is just mind-blowing to me. I "knew" it intellectually before...but the 5D III in relative comparison is so bad, it's just...a very stark, obvious difference.

Anyway, regardless of how the 7D II actually turns out when it hits the streets, I am probably going to add another brand to my kit. It's a bit of a bummer to hear about your experience with the A7r EVF...that was my feeling, has been my feeling for a long time regarding EVFs. I haven't tried Fujufilm's...never really been interested in Fuji cameras (innovative, but the results just don't seem to really top the competition in the end...like their X-Trans sensor...intriguing, but it is worse than an AA filter in that it causes more blurring than a simple OLPF.) I simply cannot afford the D810 and some Nikon lenses...not if I want to continue enhancing my Astrophotography anyway (I've got over $4000 earmarked for a new cooled astro CCD).

How is the Metabones adapter with other Canon lenses? Does it work well? I am not sure that, if I added an A7r to my kit, that I'd stick with it. I am thinking it would probably be mostly a temporary thing, then I'd sell it and either get the A7r "Mark II" if one comes out soon, or if by some miracle Canon actually turns the 5D IV into a landscape behemoth with 40-50mp AND better Exmore-level DR (the former I think is likely...the latter I think is very unlikely from Canon at this point.)

50
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Dual Motor For Autofocus on STM Lenses
« on: September 13, 2014, 08:34:22 AM »
Here is a translation from the linked source:

Quote
The continuous shooting speed reduction due to narrowing

Canon EOS system of several, including the adopted electromagnetic diaphragm, continuous shooting speed when you've narrowed down I will be lowered. Even without continuous shooting, release time lag of when you've narrowed down so lowered, It is a specification that anxious. Canon It is a thing of the patent applications that accelerate the narrowing and opening recovery time by two motorized. Reduction of continuous shooting speed by narrowing has been pointed out as disadvantages of EOS, but such concerns I might not.

Pretty bad translation, but it seems to make it clear that this patent has to do with increasing the speed at which the aperture stops down, reducing shutter lag, thereby increasing the maximum potential speed for continuous shooting.

I do not believe this particular patent is related to providing smooth continuous aperture control (which would be valuable for video)...it does indeed sound like a shutter lag related thing.

51
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 13, 2014, 12:53:53 AM »
Poor and sub-par IQ can both be defined and quantified in a reasonable manner.

poor
po͝or,pôr
adjective
2. worse than is usual, expected, or desirable; of a low or inferior standard or quality

What is 'usual'?  Expected or desirable by whom?  Still a value judgement.  Who sets the standard for image quality?
You're correct that people can come here to vent, but they cannot expect everyone to agree with their position.  I suspect you'll find a few people here who disagree with your belief that Canon sensors produce images of a low or inferior quality.  Maybe more than a few?   ::)

Rent a D810, shoot and post all the RAW images you want, I bet you find that the Exmor images have more DR and less noise in the shadows, especially when those shadows are pushed.  But we know that already.  Will you prove it actually matters to others?  That's the real issue.  We already know it doesn't seem to matter to Canon, as far as can be judged by their sensors over the past several years.

There's more to image quality than the pixels that make up the sensor.  That's an argument that I frequently use to refute those who claim that Canon must improve their sensors.  I have to say, you summed up that argument very eloquently...

tell me Jrista, image quality, what is it more than the sensor and the measurements for example DXO does?
color quality/ color resolution
resolution lp/mm
dynamic range
noise and high iso properties

Proper focus (AF system)
Non-blurry frame (FPS/AF system)
Correct frame (FPS)
Pixels on subject (pixel density)
Subject size, clarity, and noise levels in cropped frame (pixel density)

If any of the above are wrong, it doesn't really matter how good the sensor is. There is more to IQ than just the technical design of each pixel in a sensor.

I've never stopped believing there are other factors that affect IQ. The thing that's changed, is I realize that there are limits to how much those things can improve IQ. One you get a clearly focused shot (AF), once you get the right shot of the right moment (FPS), once you gather enough detail (pixel density)...then the only thing left that can improve your IQ is the quality of the data. Even at high ISO now, it seems that things can be improved...quite significantly even (something I honestly did not think was possible...not to the degree it's been done.)

There are also certain kinds of photography where the AF system, frame rate, even the meter, are quite meaningless. So regardless of whether you have the best or the worst AF system or meter...eh, it simply doesn't matter. Image quality still matters, though...and when all the other factors become meaningless, that one becomes particularly meaningful.

While I think Canon may not long hold onto the title, a title I do believe they still hold, for best AF system or fastest frame rates, they currently do excel at those things. Their metering was a bit lacking in some ways, however as they appear to be trickling down iTR (at least to pro-grade cameras), I think that problem has been solved. They have decently high resolution sensors, certainly nothing to complain about on that front, and it's likely there will be increases in pixel density with the 5D IV and subsequent cameras.

Canon already does extremely well our flat out excels at all the other factors that have a significant impact on IQ. I don't have any issues with the 5D III AF, it's frame rate is good (could be better, but no slouch), it's pixel density is good, and when framed well, it's high ISO IQ is great. So, yeah...I think Canon nailed all the other aspects I listed when replying to Mikael there. There isn't anything to complain about on that front. Canon delivered, and when it comes to action shooting...I still don't think there is a better place to go (yet...I'm still pretty impressed with the new AF system from Sony, and the A7s has demonstrated that there are still some very amazing things that can be done on the high ISO front...adding two more stops of DR at ISO 51200 is pretty surprising to me).

There is only one area where Canon doesn't do well...one area where they fall farther behind the competition every time the competition releases a new camera. The term-that-shall-not-be-spoken is the the one area where Canon has some significant room to improve. It's the only thing left to complain about...and I really, really, really, REALLY, for a very, very, very, VERY long time...have wanted more TTSNBS. In a Canon camera.

I think it's sad that people like me are forced to look elsewhere to satisfy their needs. Seems that's the case though. Just don't expect us to go quietly...we'll kick and scratch and scream until Canon finally delivers on the TTSNBS front, because we love Canon.

52
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 12, 2014, 11:51:34 PM »
Yes, in this day and age there is still a reasonable correlation between quantity and quality, but emotions and enthusiasm tend to run away with us, they inflate the quantity thus lowering the quality.

The funny thing is so much of this repeated antagonism could be so easily "proven" one way or another. I am a results guy, I am not overly interested in the tech of the gear though it can be interesting as a diversion, I am interested in the physics of photography, perspective and how that interacts with focal length and format size, I am also interested in system capabilities, like the RT flash system and what it can do with what camera etc as well as AF customization, for instance, but most importantly I want images, I am a sight driven animal and most photographers are.

Were I a mod I'd lay down the law, I'd ban (as an example) "DR" posts from Jrista and Dave Taylor until they posted their own comparison RAW files for everybody to see. If Dave wants us to believe there is little difference via his step wedge then post them, if Jon thinks there is >2 stops of DR then post the RAW files and prove it. If Dave wants to point out that is not "DR" but "editing latitude" then let him post the post processing steps he took to those linked RAW files, easy!

I have posted hundreds of images and several videos here, almost all of them have been illustrative images that reinforce my point. We can, and will, argue forever but it will never illustrate our belief like a couple of RAW files will.

In brief, we could cut through 95% of the bullsh!t here if we had a three post and prove it moratorium, you can say what you like for three posts, after that prove it with RAW images illustrative images and any post steps.

I totally agree that physical evidence would cut through a lot of the excess words. I don't know if they would end the debates.

It's just not as easy as following the words you just wrote down, though. If money was no object, I'd already have a D800, D810, A7r, A7s, 1D X, and a whole host of other cameras. I'd be sharing RAW images all over the place.

Even doing that...I still think there are certain people who would find ways of dismissing it all, effectively rendering the "solution" to the problem moot. I'd still take all the test photos and share the RAWs, but in the long run, I don't know that it would actually settle anything. When I actually started planning a rental next weekend of a D810...the guy who originally demanded I prove my claims with actual data then turned around and pleaded that I simply not bother.

I think part of the problem is people have their ideas, and they are often simply unwilling to change their opinion about things. When faced with evidence, then that is very often where the conversations take a turn for the worse, things get more personal. I think Dean's raws were quite good...I think they were properly exposed and demonstrated the issues well. They weren't extreme in any way, not like some of Mikael's "examples"...but they still demonstrated the issues well. Even those were dismissed. Maybe they were dismissed because of the kind of guy Dean was, I don't know. Anyway, I thought it was great that someone who actually had all the gear we so often hotly debate and was willing to share some comparison photos...and, well, here we are... :P If I took 500 different comparison images next week with a rented D810, I don't really think it would get us anywhere...it might with some people, but in the long run, I think there are just people here who don't care about it the way you do, or I do...it's not actually about the facts. It's about long held personal opinions that aren't going to change...

53
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon announced D750
« on: September 12, 2014, 11:08:08 PM »
I can only hope the buffer can handle a decent amount of photos in RAW. I LOVE my wife's D7100 but the buffer is terrible. You only get 7-8 shots max in RAW...

I think Nikon has a winner with this new body though.

Yeah, Nikon buffer is something I would worry about if I was picking one up for action shooting. I don't think it would ever matter to me for landscapes, but I really love how Canon's buffer works. Even after you fill it, the frame rate simply drops, but you can still keep shooting. On Nikon's, it's often like you hit a brick wall, and have to dismantle it brick by brick before you can continue...  :o

54
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 12, 2014, 11:06:42 PM »
jrista,

You might be able to type 100wpm, but I wish you would learn the difference between you're and your, you're always typing your when you mean you're.

LOL + 100000000

That also goes for everyone who does the same.

Yeah, I know I have that problem. Bad habit I formed nearly two decades ago. Try breaking a habit that old, especially when you type like the wind. You don't actually think about the words your typing...the majority of them are automatically placed onto the screen by your hands through procedural memory. :P

Hmm... Explains a lot.   ;D

Has the thread officially degraded in to a grammar thread. If so I need to start running my posts through spell and grammar check in word.  ::)

Not really, but when miscommunication, misunderstandings, and hyper over analysis is all mixed in with the emotions people show here it helps if those that do actually have English as a first language and wish to be understood were a bit better at basic communication. I have my faults too, as well as many spelling and punctuation errors, and I am often misunderstood because of it. If we all try a little harder to write what we actually mean in a way that is grammatically correct and less prone to misinterpretation the temperature might lower somewhat, which I think would be a good thing.

I agree. Honestly, when I'm not whipping out 5000 words per post, I do try to pay attention to my old bad habits. It's not like I'm intentionally trying to be confusing.

55
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 12, 2014, 10:42:54 PM »
jrista,

You might be able to type 100wpm, but I wish you would learn the difference between you're and your, you're always typing your when you mean you're.

LOL + 100000000

That also goes for everyone who does the same.

Yeah, I know I have that problem. Bad habit I formed nearly two decades ago. Try breaking a habit that old, especially when you type like the wind. You don't actually think about the words your typing...the majority of them are automatically placed onto the screen by your hands through procedural memory. :P

56
Lenses / Re: What New Lens are You Most Excited About?
« on: September 12, 2014, 10:22:57 PM »
The Otus 85 to go with my other Zeiss Lenses, then hopefully an Otus 35f/1.4.

Just don't see Canon anytime soon developing lenses that stand next to the Zeiss Lenses (15/21/55/135 & soon 85), would love Canon to develop a 14-24f/2.8 as good as the Nikon, but that also seems Pie in the Sky.

My wait for a +/- 40MP Body from Canon also seems to be part of the Pie mentioned above, love my 1 Dx, the 5DMK III is Ok, but a 36 to 45 MP Sensor that works as well as the Sony 50MP in the Pentax 645z, that's a worthwhile wait, starting to look like that old movie, "A Bridge to Far".

Yeah, from the images I've seen, the Otus lenses are amazing. I'm not sure the non-Otus lenses are that far above Canon's, but the Otus definitely seem to be.

Regarding the higher MP body...have you considered the A7r with EF adapter? Since the Zeiss lenses are all manual, it's not like AF is going to be an issue. You would get that nice high resolution, high DR, which would go GREAT with the Otus lenses.

57
Quote
Troll much?  How well will the D750 work with Canon lenses...or are they no reason to buy a 7DII? 

Trolling would be spending days on the forum, constantly engaged in brand wars with little regard for objectivity. Know anyone who fits that description?

I'm giving my sincere feelings. This will be my next camera, and I'm choosing it over the 7DII.

I'd have warned you away from saying anything like that publicly on these forums...but...I apparently missed my window of opportunity to give you that warning before you were caught, belittled, and insulted. My sincere apologies. ;) I'll try harder next time.

58
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed
« on: September 12, 2014, 09:02:19 PM »
You were sounding quite reasonable and logical for a moment, and then this:

The latter claim, about poor/sub-par/unacceptable IQ, however, isn't untennable. It can actually be demonstrated.

How can it actually be demonstrated that current Canon sensors have poor IQ, sub-par IQ, or unacceptable IQ?  All of those are value judgements.  Who are you to determine what constitutes 'poor' or 'unacceptable' to anyone but yourself?  You didn't state 'have lower DR than' or 'have more shadow noise under certain conditions than', did you?  Those can be demonstrated.  No, you stated 'unacceptable IQ' can be demonstrated.  Unacceptable to whom?  Unacceptable for what use?  Not your call.  Not DxO's call, but at least they're not foolish enough to make such an unfounded and indefensible claim.

On the bright side, Mikael would be very proud of you right now.  Good job!

Nice. Way to fan the fire, man. You just can't stop. You even managed to throw in another equivalency with Mikael in there. Very nice. There is a reason these threads drag on forever...and a reason they get so nasty. You.

All that really needs to be done here is remove the word "unacceptable." That's the only really subjective term there. Your reading far too much into a short little sentence than was ever intended. Poor and sub-par IQ can both be defined and quantified in a reasonable manner. Of course poor and/or sub-par IQ refers to 'lower DR' and 'have more shadow noise'. Oh, my mistake, I didn't explicitly and specifically clarify that point, crossing every t and dotting every i. You are just finding a way to dice up a simple comment into something that you can turn around on it's head and make an issue out of.

I offered an olive branch, and you smacked it away. Well, I'm not going to rescind the offer of peace...but you just proved who is keeping these threads nasty. Good day, Neuro.

59
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you need a really high ISO?
« on: September 12, 2014, 08:55:02 PM »
One thing that hasn't changed is that size matters.  The low-light CMOS sensor you linked is FF...the 7DII/X won't be.

The affordable body for low-light shooting is called the 6D – you can buy one today at retailers everywhere!

Quite a good point:
Canon 6D vs Canon 70D: Noise Comparison (Low Light, High ISO) Video

The quite new 70D is an enormous step for CANON... is not that much for me.

Neuro, your comment is a strong point. We all know the well size DOES matter. However I started this topic with another intention. As I see my start wasn't that clear.

Need for ISO not as a general. Of course FF is better - MF the best. What I mean as next iteration of a model.
Let me rephrase: Will 7Dm2 finally jump over current CANON CMOS performance?

So far what we see recently is everything else but a good update over the under 50% QE. So far the statistics show that QE of about 55% a steady increase to be expected. Meanwhile some rivalry cameras can show off with QE of 67%.

I at least hope that the there will be some improvement over the older 7D  as there is between the 6D and 7S.

I know there are from different vendors, but I hope you get my point. ;-)

Neuro is dead on here...bigger sensors really trump for low light performance.

I also just had an interesting thought, watching that video. There is kind of a double negative for cropped sensors when it comes to gathering light. They have a smaller sensor...but to get the same framing as a larger sensor, you also have to be farther from your subject.

Light falloff is inverse squared distance. When you move back to frame a subject the same with an APS-C...your increasing the distance from sensor to subject. Not only is the sensor gathering less light in total than the FF...it's gathering even less light than that as light is falling off continuously over the greater distance to subject.

I'd never actually thought about this before...but it might be something to think about. If the things your interested in can be photographed close...then getting a FF camera like the 6D is going to be that much better.

60
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: And people say Canon is behind??
« on: September 12, 2014, 08:40:38 PM »
Too little, too late.  To clarify for those of you who don't understand why this isn't a D700 replacement, and to reiterate on Neuro's point that the camera is 2 years late: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/d750-too-little-too-late.html

I agree with his assessment of Nikon's product positioning and differentiation. I call that the schizophrenic Nikon model naming scheme. It is rather odd, confusing, and inconsistent. There often isn't enough to differentiate Nikon camera models from each other. If he is indeed right about how minimally different the D750 is from both the D610 and D810, I think they just wasted another model name, and are just going to make it more confusing for customers to decide on which one to buy (with the budget minded ultimately going to the D610, and those for whom money is little object going for the D810). After the initial preorders, I wonder how D750 sales will fare.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 299