So easy to say, "MY image quality standards are higher than YOURS" when you're anonymous and can say whatever you want. You can as easily say that you've flown to Jupiter and back ... with the same level of conviction, and just as much credibility. But I'll grant you that your standards for pushing 4- or 5-stop underexposed nearly-black frames and rescuing them from the trash are higher than mine. You'll win that argument every time.
Could Canon's IQ be higher? Of course! But the fact remains that Canon meets the IQ standards of some of the very best photographers.
Dude, I'm yankin' your chain because you're arguing silliness!
What the heck does who I am vs your gaggle of celebrities have to do with anything?!?
If I'm loading a roll of 24 or larger into my printer, there's better be some damn good image quality or it's gonna start to show.Sorry for pickin' on you Keith, but you posted a good example for my argument back on page 1 of this thread.
If you take that otherwise lovely shot of photographers capturing the sweet lines of that backlit P-51 against a colorful sky, and try to print it much bigger than 12 inches wide, you're going to be treated to a bunch of ugly Canon-brand shadow noise that will be visible. (see my post on the next page) To ME that detracts from the image, therefore it does not meet MY standards of image quality. It was apparently shot with a 5d3, I don't know how it was processed. If you're only printing "little pictures" or posting online then it's fine, the downsampling hides the problem.
I DO KNOW that if he'd shot that with any other brand at the moment, those shadows would be a lot cleaner and the image would stand up better to close scrutiny when printing it huge.
Do you now understand what I mean when I say I have higher image quality standards?
It means I would not use a noisy Canon for such a shot. I've learned that by experience, not by listening to fanboys.
That doesn't mean you can't use that same noisy Canon for plenty of other shots and still get good results where shadow noise will not be a problem; it would then likely meet my high standards for IQ.
So if your precious gaggle of high ranking professional photographers is satisfied with using Canon gear then they're going to run into the same limitations Keith did if they try a shot like that.
So, how would you like to summarize that?.. (hopefully not by take some personal shots at Keith's abilities)