January 29, 2015, 07:39:21 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 - x-vision

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 33
EOS Bodies / Re: More 6D sample images - with RAW files.
« on: December 02, 2012, 12:34:51 PM »
Here is what you asked for: iso3200 and 6400 comparisons

Many thanks.

There's no discernible difference At ISO-3200 but at ISO-6400 the 6D seems a trace better.
Look at the black patches at the bottom of the frame to see the difference (between the circuit board and the grey card).

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: December 01, 2012, 01:37:49 PM »
One thing missing....what is your expected/suggested price for the 7D MKII?

$1699, same as the 7D at introduction.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: December 01, 2012, 12:30:17 PM »
they will not trump the 5d3 so res is below 22, noise is terrible as usually with crop.

Agree about the resolution. I believe the 7DII will have 20mp.

Not sure about the noise, though.
As previous rumors suggested, the 7DII might indeed use newer sensor tech.
If that's the case, I'm expecting ISO performance on par with the 1DIV.

In general, all those recent 7DII rumors suggest a 1DIV ... at a 7D price.
Hmm, don't know about that.

Since wishlists and speculations are fun, here is what I think we can expect from the 7DII:

  • Sensor: a better 20mp sensor with ISO on par with the 1DIV.
    Positive surprise: ISO is even better.

  • Frame rate: remains the same at 8fps.
    Positive surprise: maybe 8.5fps or 9fps.

  • AF system: same as on the 7D but a tad snappier.
    Positive surprise: more AF points (maybe 27 or 33; certainly not 61).

Overall, the 7DII will be a warmed-over 7D but with a better sensor and other minor improvements.
The 7DII will be like the 1DIV ... but only in image quality.

Other than that, it will remain a 7D: an excellent offering but not a 1D series.

There, you heard it here first  8).

EOS Bodies / Re: More 6D sample images - with RAW files.
« on: December 01, 2012, 12:03:23 PM »
Opened with capture one 7.0.1 (preliminary support)

Many thanks.
How about the same but both the 6D and 5DIII at ISO-6400.

There's no doubt that the 6D is better than the 5DIII at super high ISOs.
I'm also interested to find out what 'happens' at ISO-6400.

EOS Bodies / Re: First Round of EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: November 27, 2012, 10:30:41 AM »
from the B&H link:
"the DIGIC 5+ processor also delivers overall speed and power to the 6D and utilizes dual 4-channel A/D converter"

Looks like the same 8-channel setup to me. At the minimum, I'm betting on dual DIGIC 5 (non '+').

According to Canon CPN Europe, it's a four-channel readout. See the 'Key technologies' section here: 

But you might be right, after all, that both the 6D and 5DIII have an 8-channel readout.

In any case, if you've seen the size of the Digic 5+, you know that Canon is not going to use two of these in a non-1DX body.

EOS Bodies / Re: First Round of EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: November 26, 2012, 10:39:10 PM »
The 1D X has dual Digic 5+, so presumably that's needed for 18 MP at 14 fps.  Guess what?  18.1 MP x 14 fps = 253.4 MP/s, and that value divided by the rumored 24.2 MP equals 10.5 fps, very close to the rumored 10.2 fps

Right. I'm sure that this is how this lame 7DII rumor came into being in the first place.

But the 7DII will not have dual Digics. Take my word for it.
It will have a single Digic 5+, same as the 5DIII and the 6D.

Here's another math that you can do:
The 1DX has two Digic 5+ processors and a 16-channel readout (official specs).
And the 5DIII has a single Digic 5+ and an 8-channel readout (again, official specs).
Therefore, it can be concluded that the Digic 5+ processor has an 8-channel readout.

Also, the 6D is capable of 20mp @4.5fps with a single Digic 5+ ... and just 4 readout channels (again, official specs).
This puts the throughput of the Digic 5+ processor at 20*4.5/4 = 22.5 MP/s per channel.
That's a throughput of 180 MP/s total for all 8 channels on the Digic 5+ processor.

Realistically, Canon will not go over 10fps in 7DII and will not put dual Digics in it.
So, I'd say that the 7DII will be spec'd anywhere between 16mp @10fs and 22mp @8fps ... with a single Digic 5+.

I'd prefer if Canon puts 16mp/10fps in the 7DII but it's more likely that they will go for 20mp/8fps.

One thing is certain, though: the dual Digic V spec is fake and this whole 7DII rumor is a lame [CR0] rumor.

EOS Bodies / Re: First Round of EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: November 26, 2012, 08:29:23 PM »


This spec is enough to tell that the rumor is fake.

The Digic 5+ processor is a dual-core (quad-core?) Digic.
So, no need to put two Digic 5s in a camera when a single Digic 5+ will do.

This is [CR0].

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's roadmap
« on: November 25, 2012, 03:13:33 PM »
Canon have an inflated price structure ...


Canon released very good products this year, actually.
But most (all?) of them are overpriced.

EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF
« on: November 21, 2012, 11:04:49 PM »
Ditto if the new 7D as an APS-C camera had IQ = to the 1Dmk4 it would be pretty awesome.
However I would not hold my breath for this being the case

1DIV-level of performance shouldn't be all that difficult to achieve with a 1.6x sensor made on a newer tech.
Provided that MPs are kept in check, of course.

The question is, what will Canon do with the 7D successor.
Will they go for a more pro-oriented body or a more general-purpose body?

If the former, I could see the 7DII using an improved 16-18mp sensor, which I'm sure will match the 1DIV in image quality.

But Canon might as well decide to crank up the megapixels.
In that case, it's hard to tell if the 7D successor will be even called 7DII  :-*.

EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF
« on: November 21, 2012, 07:04:50 PM »
Question: If Canon does implement this tech in a 7D.2, could that APS-C camera produce lower noise at low ISO than current FF cameras?

Even if the 7DII sensor is made on the rumored new tech, the best we can hope for is performance similar to the 1DIV and 5DII. 
Just consider that for 1 stop better ISO performance, the sensor needs to be 2x better, basically.

It's not the same sensor.  Canon's web site describes it as a new design.

Of course it's not the same - it's 20 MP, not 22 MP.  But if it uses the same production technologies found in the 5DIII and 5DII, the IQ should only be marginally different, if at all.

There are rumors flying around that parts of the 6D sensor are made using a new production technology.
So, some improvement seems likely. We'll see how much.

Here's the 6D studio shot at ISO-6400. And here's the 5DIII shot.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: dpreview 6D samples
« on: November 19, 2012, 07:29:24 PM »
What are you talking about?

I just compared the 6D at ISO-6400 vs the 5DIII at ISO-6400 ... and the 6D is cleaner and with better colors.

Overall, the 6D image quality is shaping up as better than the 5DIII.

EOS Bodies / Re: February & March are Announcement Months for Canon [CR2]
« on: November 19, 2012, 06:15:18 PM »

Canon seems to do well regardless of whether their technology is the best or not.

Aah. You must have missed the discussion about the last quarterly results from Canon and Nikon.

DSLR sales at Canon were down for the quarter (compared to 2011), while Nikon's sales were up.
Canon blamed it on the strong yen and delayed introductions.
(How is the strong yen affecting Canon but not Nikon ??? )

The fact that Canon is down for a quarter is certainly not a big deal.
But if you are down while the competition is up, then you have reasons to be concerned.

Overall, Canon was not doing all that well last quarter.
They've been overpricing left and right in the last year - but if the last quarter is any indication, their overpricing strategy is not working out.

EOS Bodies / Re: February & March are Announcement Months for Canon [CR2]
« on: November 19, 2012, 03:40:22 PM »
You plain and simply stated, as quoted above, that Canon does not have "BSI technology". Having technology does not mean it has to be fabricated in a sensor.

What if Canon's R&D team just simulated this BSI technology on their CAD/CAM workstations?
And then filed a patent based on this research.
Would you say that Canon has a BSI technology?

Lets stop mincing words.

A good, common sense definition of 'having a technology' is that you have products based on this technology.
Alternatively, 'having a technology' might just mean that you have filed a single patent based on paper research.

It can be argued that both of these are valid definitions.

So, when I said that Canon does not have a BSI technology, I was actually quite correct - as per the common sense definition above.

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 33