Messages

256

Canon General / Re: Why you should take your camera to family Weddings

« on: October 03, 2012, 02:06:37 PM »

A couple things -- I kind of wish the actual photog was here to explain what actually happened.  I can say on a few weddings I have second shot, I have missed shots --- why?  Because I was not allowed to shoot on my own cards and one of theres took 2 shots then read full.  I had the pouch in my pocket so i quickly shifted cards but the moment got lost.  they weren't huge cards either, 1 8GB and 4 4 GB..  Later in the day I reformated the card and things it worked fine, but still --- sometimes there are errors.

I am just saying its real easy to throw the photog under the bus when he/she isn't here.  Even easier seeing as though we have not seen these pics that saved the wedding!

Other things too ---

2 weddings ago my second shooter had a rented lens - this lens worked fine but at times the camera would error out saying ---the lens contacts were dirty or just overused ---either way, through the night she had to take the lens off and put it back on again several times.  Just saying, lots can happen and this photog isn't here to defend him/herself - we don't know what went down and why it went down.

With that said though, really not sure why this tog didn't have a pouch of cards on him (ok, I can think of 1 reason --- if he had one of the card holders that closed via velcro, I would not want to be that guy making that velcro tearing noise at any point of the ceremony!)

To those who said just delete a few and switch to smaller file size...that isn't something you can do as the bride is coming down the aisle.  That's for the tail end, after snapping a few thousand dancing shots, but the B&G are still going off on the dance floor and you've fill all the other cards already ---thats when you delete and switch file sizes (I always shoot in mRAW at weddings, full size RAW is overkill I think for anything but the formals).  If your in that place, your only solution is to run run run (or, as someone else mentioned, this tog had 2 bodies, couldn't he have used the classic?  Or, just snagged the lens from the classic and put it on the mk2?  I think thats the biggest reason I wish this tog was here, because he/she had a solution ---hell that's why we have backup second bodies right? that didn't get used.  Or even easier ---why not just use the card from the classic?  Pretty easy and quick to make that switch.  So yeah, I have to wonder if there was some other problem that his this togs camera had, and when asked about it is was just easier to say ran out of memory than to explain error messages..

And finally, lets see these shots that 'saved the day.'  We're throwing this other tog under the bus based on a fishy excuse and the claim of day saving images that we haven't seen!!!!!

EDIT --- if your shots are good, and this guy did totally miss that ---instead of bragging here ---contact the tog and offer to sell him the shots!!!!

257

EOS Bodies / Re: Who said Canon cameras suck?!?

« on: September 29, 2012, 12:21:14 PM »

all this tech talk has gotten us away from the point, that being canon sucks (sarcasm)!!!.  Come on now, we all knowthere was no such thing as a good picture before the d800 came out, I mean forget the wonderful images taken by photogs and letys just study charts and graphs...or...wait...no...I'm gonna go shoot a wedding with my mk3 and maybe my 7d might get some action too! 

258

EOS Bodies / Re: Who said Canon cameras suck?!?

« on: September 27, 2012, 02:24:03 PM »

D800 complaints? Sure,

NO, the D800 has bloody marvellous AF. Fast and accurate. This rumor is a leftover of the QC problem they had with left focus alignment in the beginning. It's gone now. Get over it.
NO, it does very well indeed with high ISOs. Not compared to a 1Dx of course, but that's not a reasonable comparison, is it.
NO, the big files don't slow things down (unless you have a shitty computer or you're a sports photographer)

As to the OP's question - 'Who said Canon cameras suck?' - Well it sure wasn't me. They're excellent cameras. Get over it.

that's the hyperbole talking, to bring this down to earth here's a quote from a wedding forum, a nikon owner advising another nikon owner -

"As an owner of the D800, it never comes out at weddings, I stick to the D3s.   As Brady said, it is just far too slow of a shooter. Plus, the files sizes are too much of a hassle to drag around and edit. A 16 bit one layer tiff is 289.2 mb per file. I would be looking at a D700, D3 or D3s."

I think file size is not a problem for nowadays computer system.  For wedding you need to shoot many photos in low light.  I doubt D800 can handle low light as well as 5D3.  I believe many wedding photographers would like use 5D3, not D800.  However, if you are not taking photos in low light, D800 do give more advantage than 5D3.

 Note, the quote I was using there was from a nikon user, who shoots weddings and owns a d800, this person was giving upgrade advice to another wedding shooter.  I personally believe that the size of d800 files would be hard to work with when your trying to move quickly through 3000 shots, I also own a 5d3 and for wedding work its freaking fantastic.  Again though, you may feel at that file sizes are not too big, the point of the matter is that NIKON users feel the files are too big for wedding work --- again as the quote says "As an owner of the D800, it never comes out at weddings, I stick to the D3."  And likewise that's where the mk3 shines. 

259

EOS Bodies / 3dx?

« on: September 26, 2012, 08:23:32 PM »

anyone else seen this?  http://www.cameraegg.com/46-1-mp-canon-eos-3d-x-to-be-announced-before-photoplus/

260

EOS Bodies / Re: Who said Canon cameras suck?!?

« on: September 26, 2012, 06:12:11 PM »

D800 complaints? Sure,

NO, the D800 has bloody marvellous AF. Fast and accurate. This rumor is a leftover of the QC problem they had with left focus alignment in the beginning. It's gone now. Get over it.
NO, it does very well indeed with high ISOs. Not compared to a 1Dx of course, but that's not a reasonable comparison, is it.
NO, the big files don't slow things down (unless you have a shitty computer or you're a sports photographer)

As to the OP's question - 'Who said Canon cameras suck?' - Well it sure wasn't me. They're excellent cameras. Get over it.

that's the hyperbole talking, to bring this down to earth here's a quote from a wedding forum, a nikon owner advising another nikon owner -

"As an owner of the D800, it never comes out at weddings, I stick to the D3s.   As Brady said, it is just far too slow of a shooter. Plus, the files sizes are too much of a hassle to drag around and edit. A 16 bit one layer tiff is 289.2 mb per file. I would be looking at a D700, D3 or D3s."

261

EOS Bodies / Re: 46.1mp Canon DSLR Previewed at PhotoPlus 2012? [CR1]

« on: September 26, 2012, 04:51:32 PM »

Canon's pricing strategy with 5DMKIII proved to be fundametally wrong, so I really hope they learned their lesson...

Just curios, did you see sales numbers?

Sorry - I should've said IMO in my statement. No, I did not look at numbers. I rather look at the level of pricing in terms of competition offerings & their pricing, the fact that the street price of MKIII went down so fast and that much. Also the number of people who were waiting for the upgrade from MKII and who realized that MKIII is out of their financial reach. In Canada the MSRP was announced as $3800 and in just a few months ALL stores priced it down by $300. Is that not an indication of miscalculated pricing? Now as it went all the way down to sub $3K (again, I am aware that this is not MSRP but rather a street price), i see quite a number of early buyers are somewhat angry/frustrated as they paid the full price. I know many of them already paid it off with images taken, but hey if the price was lower initially - that would still be the same cam and extra few hundred $ in their pockets. I wonder if there was another camera model (with a 3-4 year cycle) which pricing was jumping that much in just a few months after the release. Market proved that the real value of the cam is quite below $3K. So yeah, IMO the pricing on MKIII was/is fundamentally wrong.

Early adopter here, got mine at the beginning of july and so far has shoot 6 weddings, 1 engagement shoot, about 20 events, and one other larger scale project for a website with it.  Could I have waited and spent a little bit less?  Sure I could have.  But, the camera has already paid for itself and then some..

On another note, the d800 vs the mk3 (that's your obvious price reference) - the mk3 is better compared to the d3, d3s, d4 and the d700 - the d800 is really intended for studio use, where the mk3 is designed to be a beast of a wedding camera. 

262

EOS Bodies / Re: Who said Canon sensors suck?!?

« on: September 26, 2012, 03:45:05 PM »

What if you have a 1MP FF sensor with 10D technology and a 40MP FF sensor with 1DX technology.  Comparing them directly you are comparing noise at two different power scales as if the scales were the same.

The problem isn't the what, it's the how.  I'm not questioning the need for or the benefit of normalization.  What I'm saying is the way DxOmark is doing the normalization is flawed, because it generates normalized data that are impossible.

DxOMark is generating impossible data with their analytical method.  Either they don't know this, in which case their qualifications to analyze data must be questioned, or they do know this and have chosen not to change it, in which case their rationale for failing to adopt proper methodology must be questioned. 

it gives a fair relative comparison

C'mon, do I really have to put <sarcasm> or <tongue-in-cheek> or <yuk it up, these are the jokes> tags all over my posts?  Really?!?

apparently yes 

even more considering that you got some +1000000 100% correct replies too


anyway i have sooooooo many shots to edit and am growing tired of this thread, so i will go

I plus 1 billioned it cause I thought it was both funny and had a grain of truth in it...yeah it was obvious sarcasm!  LOL

So lets go back to some sense ---

"The 5d3 is designed to be a beast of a wedding/event camera.  It can handle most other stuff well too, but it is designed first and foremost as a wedding camera.  The D800 is designed to be a studio/landscape camera.  Both are very good at what they are designed to do.   Kind of just wish people would realize that and move on...lol"

What else should I say?  sorry that Canon made a camera that is quite awesome for what I do?  It's not that I don't see how more DR would be of help, but, for me, the High ISO and AF capabilities more than make up for it - for me. 

Now to point out again some other stuff I said earlier -

on one of the local wedding forums I visit, a nikon user was asking for some upgrade advice and this is what was said, which I find quite interesting and relavant to the whole 5d3 vs d800 debate:

" I've spent around 2-weeks exhaustively researching my next camera. I do not think that the D800 is good for weddings... it is extremely slow shooting and you are paying for a lot of resolution that serves minimal practical purpose in retail photography (i.e., a 12mp cropped file makes a gorgeous 24x36" canvas).

If you can handle a single card slot, I think the D700 is presently the best value camera in Nikon's lineup for weddings. I owned one and have used many others and never really had an issue with it.

I think the D3s is the best wedding camera on the market today. Fast shooting, exceptional AF, amazing high ISO capabilities and ample resolution... even in 14-bit uncompressed RAW, I have never hit the buffer (and I am one fast shooter)!

When I shoot events, I use a D3s as my primary camera and a D3 as my backup and feel very comfortable with that set up."

And,

"As an owner of the D800, it never comes out at weddings, I stick to the D3s. As Brady said, it is just far too slow of a shooter. Plus, the files sizes are too much of a hassle to drag around and edit. A 16 bit one layer tiff is 289.2 mb per file. I would be looking at a D700, D3 or D3s."

And,

"The D700 is amazing! All the features of the D3 that meant anything and was about $2k less. I love that camera. I still use mine today and it has been three years. The D800 is overkill for weddings. It should come out for portraits, maybe some details and that is it. It is total overkill for the rest of a wedding..."

There ya go, for all the rave reviews, there are many who are opting out of the d800.  Grass is always greener!

The grass is always greener...

263

EOS Bodies / Re: Who said Canon cameras suck?!?

« on: September 26, 2012, 02:04:29 PM »

...can push D800 (or, for that matter, D7000) shadows around "by an amazing 6 stops!!"

...can push Canon exposure around by at least four full stops when you overexpose.

OK, so to sum up:

• If you're the sort of photographer who routinely screws up by drastically underexposing your images, get a Nikon.
• If you're the sort of photographer who routinely screws up by drastically overexposing your images, get a Canon.
• If you're the sort of photographer who routinely screws up by drastically underexposing many of your images, and also by drastically overexposing the images which you didn't underexpose, get both a Nikon and Canon (ok, I suppose you could learn how to expose properly).
• If you're the sort of photographer who routinely doesn't screw up the exposure, you should be out taking pictures instead of reading this thread.  So go.

WOW!!@!!!!!!  +1,000,000,000,000 ....

264

EOS Bodies / Re: Who said Canon cameras suck?!?

« on: September 26, 2012, 02:02:46 PM »

Technology is a race.  You don't lead every lap.

of course .. but when you are second place you normaly don´t have the most expensive products... 

Well there is a fact.  Canon's 5D is more expensive than Nikon's D800.  And if sensor DR and resolution were the sum total of the equation, it wouldn't make sense.  However, based on my own spec sheet review and reports from actual users of both, the 5DIII is more versatile.  So does paying more for a camera that can perform well in more situations make sense?  It at least starts to.    At that point, you have to look at what you shoot and decide if the extra money is worth the extra functionality.  All everyone wants to talk about is the sensor and the price.  Everything else gets forgotten.  Kudos to whoever posted the wedding camera discussion.  Its refreshing to see that somewhere on the 'net there are people who can analyze the situation with a wider angle lens (pun intended).

-Brian

TY man, with all the negativity and single minded DR discussions here,  then seeing those posts go up on the other forums it seemed like info people here should see!

The 5d3 is designed to be a beast of a wedding/event camera.  It can handle most other stuff well too, but it is designed first and foremost as a wedding camera.  The D800 is designed to be a studio/landscape camera.  Both are very good at what they are designed to do.   Kind of just wish people would realize that and move on...lol

265

EOS Bodies / Re: 46.1mp Canon DSLR Previewed at PhotoPlus 2012? [CR1]

« on: September 26, 2012, 12:38:42 PM »

my take --- what they will unveil in october will probably be a 1d style camera with a 1d style price, and similar to the 1dx this will be announced but not available till summer 2013.  In the meantime, they will also unveil the tricle down too.  If they are indeed not only bringing in a new sensor, but a new naming scheme, then it would make sense to have a body scaled to each price niche, so the XXDFDDXX will be aimed at high end pros and have a price tag of about 7-8k.  Then they will have a lower end pro body in the 2.5-4.5k range, and eventually we'll see rebel style version in the $750-1500 range. 

Think about last year, the 1dx wass announced early, but not seen for a long while.  The mk3 was announced and on the market very quickly (which makes sense, most in the market for a 1dx probably needed about a year to allocate enough $$$ to snag one).  My guess is we'll see something similar here.

266

EOS Bodies / Re: Who said Canon cameras suck?!?

« on: September 26, 2012, 12:23:04 PM »

Technology is a race.  You don't lead every lap.

of course .. but when you are second place you normaly don´t have the most expensive products... 

Ok, lets think about this.  Imagine if, and we don't know if this is true, if, both canon and nikon put the same $$$ into R&D on both the d800 and the 5d3.  Dollar for dollar from sensor dev on through parts and manufaturing to shipping and advertising.  Dollar for dollar match.  Now, nikon, who is trying to catch up to canon, decides to sell their body at a lower profit margin in order to climb their way back.  Nikon needs to do that to catch.  Canon has no incentive to under-price their products --- BECAUSE THEY ARE THE MARKET LEADER!

Reality is that nikon didn't put in all the $$$ canon did in R&D due to the deal with sony for sensors.  All that savings rolls into a lower retail price, which if canon matched then they'd be taking a loss on the first few production rounds.

And you know what?  I am happy for all of this!  The better nikon can be the better canon will be, and thus the cycle repeats itself.  So yeah, I am routing for nikon because the more they advance the more canon will too --and this benefits all of us!

267

EOS Bodies / Re: Who said Canon cameras suck?!?

« on: September 26, 2012, 12:01:45 PM »

on one of the local wedding forums I visit, a nikon user was asking for some upgrade advice and this is what was said, which I find quite interesting and relavant to the whole 5d3 vs d800 debate:

" I've spent around 2-weeks exhaustively researching my next camera. I do not think that the D800 is good for weddings... it is extremely slow shooting and you are paying for a lot of resolution that serves minimal practical purpose in retail photography (i.e., a 12mp cropped file makes a gorgeous 24x36" canvas).

If you can handle a single card slot, I think the D700 is presently the best value camera in Nikon's lineup for weddings. I owned one and have used many others and never really had an issue with it.

I think the D3s is the best wedding camera on the market today. Fast shooting, exceptional AF, amazing high ISO capabilities and ample resolution... even in 14-bit uncompressed RAW, I have never hit the buffer (and I am one fast shooter)!

When I shoot events, I use a D3s as my primary camera and a D3 as my backup and feel very comfortable with that set up."

And,

"As an owner of the D800, it never comes out at weddings, I stick to the D3s. As Brady said, it is just far too slow of a shooter. Plus, the files sizes are too much of a hassle to drag around and edit. A 16 bit one layer tiff is 289.2 mb per file. I would be looking at a D700, D3 or D3s."

And,

"The D700 is amazing! All the features of the D3 that meant anything and was about $2k less. I love that camera. I still use mine today and it has been three years. The D800 is overkill for weddings. It should come out for portraits, maybe some details and that is it. It is total overkill for the rest of a wedding..."

There ya go, for all the rave reviews, there are many who are opting out of the d800.  Grass is always greener!

268

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon

« on: September 23, 2012, 12:48:51 PM »

From my point of view it is evident that sony/nikon sensors are superior to canon's. I would love to have my 5d III with the D600 sensor.
It is hard to believe that the majority of canon users are not disappointed with the increasing gap in sensor technology between Nikon and Canon.

I'm not a fan of either brand. I'm just a Canon user with a lot of glass and therefore married for good or bad. Right now, things are going bad.

I can see wanting the D800 sensor, but the d600?  Actually, I can't even really see wanting that sensor.  I've said it before and will say it again ---  reading this makes one wonder whether I should do things like, present a wedding gallery to a client filled with images or have all the images sent to dxo, have them rated and send the test results to the client cause obviously that's what matters? 

I honestly don't see why people keep beating this dead horse.  It's dead, and its been beaten, now your beating on it more ---  But I gess it needs to be said again---for this round of bodies canon seems to have chosen to leap ahead in high ISO performance (while also putting a ton into lens dev, putting out a dedicated cinema line.  And if the recent rumor is true, canon does have a 46.1 mp body in the final dev stages), AF and processor power.   Nikon/sony went for MP's and DR.  Like it or not, thats where we are NOW.  Will it be that way forever, no, canon will catch up in DR and nikon will catch up in high ISO, then we'll wait for the next round of dev.  Until then, go take some freaking pictures!!!!

269

EOS Bodies / Re: 46.1mp Canon DSLR Previewed at PhotoPlus 2012? [CR1]

« on: September 22, 2012, 05:48:50 PM »

that sounds to be an impressive body!  And actually, this has me liking the 6d a little bit more...  The 'new' 6d sensor may very well be based on this sensor?  Either way, this isn't what I need, but yeah, I do want...lol

270

EOS Bodies / Re: 1dmk4 vs 5d3

« on: September 21, 2012, 02:49:30 PM »

The 1DIV is still a very pricey camera body.

Personally, I'd wait for the 7D2, which might just be a 5D3 with a firmware tweak (similar to the Nikon DX mode on FF bodies) - an always on crop mode So it may have same ISO, LP-E6 batteries, 61-point AF, DIGIC5+ etc. for just $2,299

I could go for a 5D Mark III-esque camera with APS-C.  Let's just hope the noise would be a tad down.  All at the low, affordable price of $4999 .

while that would rock, the 7d2 is nothing but a rumor as of now (and the 5d tweak wouldn't work - unless it was like a 12 mp camera!  My guess is it will be a newly designed APS-C sensor with digic 5+, but who knows if the ISO would be effective....either way, as far as we know the 7d2 is a myth.  I will keep my eye on the rumors for specs, but, if I have the $3500 ready to go (or less if more of these ebay/adorama style deals pop up), then i'm not gonna wait for canon.