April 19, 2014, 07:33:36 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 - Ivar

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
31
No comparison is bad or good, they just serve different purposes. Downsizing a bigger image compares how a camera reacts to the *same* amount of light - which wouldn't be the case without downsizing (assuming the same (area) size sensors and shot setup). At the same time looking resolving power, a smaller image has to be uppsized because downsizing would just throw the extra info away - detail wise there is no difference between two 600x400 pixels image one being 80MP MF the other G1X. All comparison have meanings done and interpreted properly.


Yes, turn my 36mp body into a 22mp body in order to make it look better.  Thats how DXO rationalizes the high per pixel noise into something usable.  Maybe if they resized it to one pixel it would be perfect.

The point is that there is no holy grail, and all the posting being done by those who just read articles and have zero experience with either camera is not very helpful.

Obviously, my D800 can take some amazing images at ISO 100 - 400, but just like the OP notes with his 5D MK III, as soon as you get into shadows and the ISO gets up over 400, you have to be more careful with exposures, and at very high ISO's, the 5D MK III has more DR than the D800.

32
It takes 6mp to 8mp to make a quality print.

Absolutely nice try.


33
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Delays [CR2]
« on: June 03, 2012, 10:03:55 AM »
Unfortunately not a very good test for deciding the high ISO capability - look at the shutter speed, there was plenty of good quality (studio) light, which absolutely doesn't reflect the intended use. It is the low light under which cameras start to break down in IQ.

There is some good news out there, though. Have any of you seen the recent series of sample images? I thought for sure someone was going to post the link because they have been there for 36 hours or so, but I haven't noticed anyone mention it yet.

http://www.fotomagazin.de/test_technik/testbilder/detail.php?objectID=6204&class=&thema

If you toggle through the photos at full screen size (not 1:1), it's impossible to tell any difference until beyond ISO 12,800. At 1:1 it is great, no worse than ISO 400 on cameras five-six years ago. The top of the regular ISO range, 51,200, actually does look usable as well--certainly better than 25,600 on the 5D3.

I am so excited because I was still grappling in my mind with the worry that I should have gone with the D4 (I already own complete systems of both Canon and Nikon, so the array of lenses isn't an issue for me).

34
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Delays [CR2]
« on: May 31, 2012, 05:46:04 AM »
You sound like any earlier Canon camera has had no FW update. Considering how complex the software has become, a FW update is rather a minor thing. Important is to get the HW right and the product 99% working.

P.S I'm willing to make a bet that the 1Dx gets its FW update as well, absolutely no doubt.

P.P.S Internet unfortunately works that way by making rare things seemingly to affect everybody and often. The reality for the D800 is the same as for the 5D3 - in the real world usage no problems for majority.

Perhaps Canon have learnt from Nikon's mistake of early release of the D800 and D4. They have just issued their first firmware upgrade to cure lockups and other issues.

Can you imagine the noise if Canon released the 1DX with those problems. The only hitch with the 5DIII was the non problem of the light leak which was blown out of all proportion.

The D800 issues are real nasty things - I would be sending the D800 back if this happened to me

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-11677-12641

35
I'm sorry but Canon would not have done such a thing, it just was not possible to get by without doing so.

What would have left of the 5D3 without its AF in the marketplace?

Other common declarations:

"There's no way Canon will ever put a 1-series AF system in a 5D3."

"We'll be lucky if Canon puts the 7D AF system in the 5D3."

"Canon will never put the 1Dx's AF system in anything other than a 1Dx."


Welp, Canon proved those claims wrong, addressed the most glaring weaknesses of the 5D2, but now the hot topic is DR and Canon still sucks.

36
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon to Announce 2 Cameras in June [CR2]
« on: May 16, 2012, 11:20:46 AM »
Realistically thinking Canon will put the G1X sensor into a body which has interchangeable lenses and call it mirrorless.

They can't really challenge their upper end cameras, can they?

37
> After DPREVIEW of D800 would you still get the Canon 5d mark iii?

I think no (single) review should force you to change systems or upgrade cameras.

That said, the D800 was exactly specs-wise what I was looking for in order to replace my dutily served 5D2.  I can't say how happy I'm currently, got it just today, the battery is charging.

38
At the same shutter speed, the same sized print (or downsize of a bigger image) would NOT be different no matter the density (22MP vs 36MP).

True, in order to benefit even more from a higher density sensor, it is advisable to use higher shutter speeds in such fast action situations.

Again, a 36MP sensor is no worse recording image than a 22MP at the same shutter speed, it can only be better.

Here's a scenario for you that think they're equal in noise. When you increase pixels you also need to shorten your shutter speed to not show motion blur. I tried the D800 and I had to have at least 1/2500s to freeze a bike messenger I tried outside the shop where I work, that means going to 3200 iso whereas with the 5d3 I had iso 1250 and around 1/1000s, no motion blur on either, but I was over a full stop higher in iso , making the image, of course, more noisy and less DR (that some of you are EXTREMELY conserned about).

39
They are different options.

Not everybody needs high FPS and extremely fast AF.

Not everybody needs 36MP and high DR.

What is your compromise? And set of lenses you already have?


------------------------------------------------------
This is personal and completely subjective:

While Canon has undoubtedly a good camera, I feel their camera development attitude 1) is too carefully weighted (crippled if you wish) and 2) is lacking a clear lead in the competition and 3) priced relatively high
Add on that the mystery of releases: 1Dx delays, lenses delays, printer delay (Pro 1), missing high MP sensor ..

It is not that the 5D3 wouldn't do all the things I need, but rather I'd support somebody who has the heart for photography, so that one could not sense things being left out for marketing reasons.



40
EOS Bodies / Re: Up the game
« on: May 07, 2012, 04:10:58 AM »
The 5D2 was a revolutionary camera at the time announced.  I consider this pretty big deal.

Please name ONE thing that was better with the 5d2 than the 5d3?

41
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Mirrorless Information? [CR1]
« on: May 06, 2012, 03:15:30 AM »
Also, a better DR than the 5D3 would be nice.

Come on Canon, go full frame or don't bother.

+24.36

42
Is it blurred @4K as in the the 5D3 at 1080p?



43
EOS Bodies / Re: LR4.1 RC to blame. Check this out!
« on: May 02, 2012, 03:09:19 PM »
This is LR (tried to go more neutral in color temp):



initial version by the OP:


44
EOS Bodies / Re: 1d X field test
« on: May 02, 2012, 09:07:37 AM »
Now that is ridiculous .... are you telling that moving sharpness sliders is of no help for the 5D3 files?

The default settings are what they are, default. Every camera needs different sharpening + it is also dependant what is on the scene and what is your own perception of sharpness.

At least for my 5D2 LR shines, I also had no problems with available 5D3 RAW files.

Because we all felt the 1dx sample shown from the original post were really soft!  So we jumped to the spftness issue from the 5dmkiii issue that was discussed before which were mostly driven by the dpp software.

...and apparently, soft RAW conversions is also an issue with LR.

Bang on!  I would never have doubted that LR was giving bad result and had very naively concluded that something was wrong with the camera somehow.  It will teach me that just because LR support a camera RAW file, it does not mean it actually do it well!   :-[

LR4 gives me great result with the mkii (tried comparing it to dpp again last night for the mkii) but for the mkiii it is a totally different story.  The only sad thing in this (for me at least) is that i hate the workflow in dpp, i dont find you can do as much as with LR, and I also find dpp sucks big time at NR...

45
From Canon's recent launches, it is obvious that they are trying to build a portfolio around DLSR based movie cams. I would not be surprised to see a 5DC... Perhaps with a much weaker AA filter to improve resolution, better codec... After all, the only real complain about the 5DIII's video capability is the resolving power.
But the biggest complaint is still about the lack of DR improvement. This is what they will take care of first, if they aren't stupid.

i have a bad feeling they will just go crazy with MP 45 and yet with the same old poor DR and zero fps and thus be worse than D800 in every way other than a space eating extra few MP

Unfortunately I think the same. Too late too little with high price - they still plan carefully which features go where, there doesn't seem to be desire to push limits. At this I'm not even sure if Canon is capable of making a decent sensor. On top of all, announced early delivered who knows when.

p.s. there is absolutely nothing wrong with higher prices as far as they match the marketplace reality. Why not pay more for objectively premium product.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10