« on: August 30, 2014, 08:50:24 AM »
Sunny day is the key point. 7D.
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.
A 12mp sensor would have better high ISO performance,
No, it wouldn't. This myth just won't go away.Quoteutilize the center of lens elements,
Which is wrong on two levels - every pixel uses all of the lens elements. You may have meant "image circle" instead of lens elements. Secondly, using the "sweet spot" is nearly always detrimental compared to using the entire image circle because of increased enlargement.QuoteAnd also, a 12 mp crop sensor is 150% of the "reach" and 16mp is 200% of the "reach"... As you put it.
"Reach" means "resolving power" and it goes with the square of pixel count. You want to double resolving power? You need four times as many pixels.
Whatever... my opinions are derived from "field" observation... and interestingly I have found that most things being equal, larger pixels translate to higher ISO noise usability.... and that the center of images are always sharper and have less distortion than the edges. But who needs field observations when we have all of these "theoretical" photographers here on the forum to prove us all wrong??
While it is a very cool video, not sure what the 7D2 has to do with it, other than simply trying to sucker people in and/or start a fight.
D800 -> D810
The 5dm3 is looking really old.
Not as old as that whine.
must be a damn good vintage...
but i bet its corked
It has better dynamic range (if you don't know how to maximise DR in Canon files), but that does not equate to "better image quality", and the 5D Mk III lacks for nothing in terms of overall IQ compared to the Nikon at the image level.
How many of these "Is Nikon better?" threads does this forum have to endure? I mean really...is Nikon paying people for this?
You are a sad person - is Canon paying you?
still a rumor, people. don't take it as if Canon itself listed these specs.so many people spewing their venom over something that is:
1 - NOT official announced
2 - a RUMOUR (this one is important)
3 - NOT tested and reviewed
people always commented "i want less MP for better ISO capabitilies" and blahblah, now that this rumor surprised everyone with "only" 20MP and not 24MP, it's not good. again.
the fact of the matter is, that newer CPU's always make some leap forward in regard of noise in High ISO shots. Digic6 should be no exception. what this rumour also reports, is:
- 10 FPS (same as 1D4)
- 65 AF point (BETTER than 1D4)
- Dual Digic6 (BETTER than 1D4)
- more MP (BETTER than 1D4)
but who cares about that. all you people see is that it supposedly has 20MP.
These threads crack me up. I am sure Nikon will bring out something a lot of people will love. While it is true that the Df didn't become mainstream (and I personally dislike the look and the concept), many people bought and loved it.
It is good for both camps that the companies are competing. Why bash something that hasn't even come out yet? I do feel that the Nikon lineup has a gap where a versatile FF dSLR equivalent to the 5DIII can sit, the same way Canon users can use a high megapixel, high DR one.
It's recently come to my attention that a business in my area has taken one of my photos from an editorial piece,
What venue was your photo used in an editoral piece? When you submitted it to the venue, was there something in the fine print that gave this venue some rights? Some venues are sneaky like that.
You also need to know whether the company took the picture from the venue or did the venue give the picture to the company.
I agree with the other posters. Contact all the parties and in a civil manner ask what happened. It could have been a simple mistake/misunderstanding.
Good advice, many people just wouldn't think about this, they just see an image, like it and use it. Often, not always, there's no bad intent, they simply don't realise.