December 22, 2014, 08:10:51 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 - Aglet

Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 73
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« on: March 30, 2013, 02:40:52 AM »
I don't understand how somebody can claim to not post their best work on their retail website? I fully understand not posting your work in forums, I only post test shots and snaps that illustrate a particular point, but to claim you are better than your retail website sounds a bit of a stretch.
cuz, I have a job, a family, and a life.
I don't have time to push my web site or market myself harder right now
nor spend hours/day here

Really?  But you do have time to argue stupid and meaningless, and unfounded points on a rumors website?  Oh the irony.

Fortunately I don't need 14 stops of DR because for the most part, I know what I'm doing.  Not always, but for the most part.  And to stupidly assign blown/clipped highlights to Canon cameras.  You have time for that too.  If you have trouble with highlights and shadows, they offer photography courses.  I suppose though, those with Nikon cameras don't need photography courses because the sensor allows them to do everything exactly correctly, whereas with Canon you don't have this luxury.  With your busy life though,  you probably wouldn't have time for any of that either.

Good job.

What can I tell you , I feel compelled to teach and recalcitrant students are so challenging. ;)

Canon General / Re: Think I need a 12 step program
« on: March 30, 2013, 02:25:27 AM »
Bottom line..... THERE IS NO CURE.

Keep Calm...and Canon On  ;)

and then I found Nikon and was additionally afflected with NAS (Nikon Acquisition Syndrome).  In one year I bought as much as it took me 5 years buying Canon stuff.  I was slow to start....  My Canon 24-70L II will ship once my dealer (B&H) is back to dealing again.

oi... Ditto. 2012 was at least $15k in new Nikon and  a bit of Pentax gear.  Offset by only a few $k return from selling off some Canon bodies that had been annoying me, a couple unused lenses, and less than a $k in print sales.
I'm certainly not cured of anything either but now that I have what I like, I've really slowed down. 2013 is only likely to trade/upgrade one or 2 Nikon bodies and add one more Pentax, 2 if they bring out a FF body.

Sorry Canon, you didn't get one penny from me last year and it's not looking too good this year unless I see a really good sale price on a 6D/kit.  Actually, this year's looking good for me selling off more glass.  Will likely have a net inflow from liquidating inventory.

Oh, and thanks, OP, for starting this thread. (my most enjoyable expenditures in a long time)

I went FF with a Nikon D600 and I'm very happy. While Canon can still hold an edge in the pro segment, Nikon offers much more in the enthusiast segment. I experienced that first-hand.

However, I'm still in the market for a fast crop body for my wildlife shooting. I would be happy to buy a Canon body to pair with the 70-300 L or the 100-400 L. However, if Canon keeps going on offering less for more money, I'll switch completely to Nikon. The D7100 is a hell of a camera at a very reasonable price point; the D5200 is even better value for money, and the flip screen is nice for macro shots and a couple other things. I'm also interested in Sony: their 70-400 is a great lens and the traslucent mirror thing allows them to reach 12 fps on the a77.

If you need a good camera now, buy a D5200 or a D7100. You're hardly going to regret it. I'm planning this purchase in around 1 year from now. We'll see how the situation will look like...

ditto Pentax.  Excellent enthusiast cameras, pro-capable certainly, tho a smaller overall ecosystem of accessories.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« on: March 29, 2013, 02:01:36 PM »
I don't understand how somebody can claim to not post their best work on their retail website? I fully understand not posting your work in forums, I only post test shots and snaps that illustrate a particular point, but to claim you are better than your retail website sounds a bit of a stretch.
cuz, I have a job, a family, and a life.
I don't have time to push my web site or market myself harder right now
nor spend hours/day here

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« on: March 29, 2013, 01:59:09 PM »
Neat, my question is why shoot mid-day? I dont know what situation you were in but afternoon light is less harsh. A d800 shot at noon will look blown out and uglier than a P&S shot done at the proper time.

I was shooting from noon till dawn, and by now I know where it gets tricky - in high contrast I need a fill flash (fill light in LR just isn't the same), and action shots (i.e. high shutter = high iso = less dr) are out of the question or it looks like a p&s.

But good :-> to hear the d800 also doesn't do it, I cannot say how big the real world advantage is at low iso - I just have one guy in mind that posted beach volleyball shots here and said the d800 really made the difference.

And to think I didn't have as many stops of DR as the D800.  Man what my photos could have been...

Please do take not I'm not saying you cannot do good high contrast shots with Canon - it just takes more thought, equipment, knowledge & postprocessing and some limited scenes simply are dr-limited.

One notorious example are shots with the sun in the frame - the corona is more or less pronounced according to dr range (unless you do hdr bracketing) and/or the front shadows have more definition. Since I really like backlit nature scenes maybe I stumble across it more often than others.

blown and clipped on both ends is lovely if you're going for that sort of look
I prefer mine
append - those are pretty much straight out of camera, BTW

I've done this before on numerous canon bodies, similar results.
Using long exposure noise reduction INCREASES OVERALL NOISE.
BUT, it does what it's designed to do, remove hot pixels.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« on: March 29, 2013, 02:27:33 AM »

Please view this thread to grasp how real photographers use timing, placement, and effort to get what they want. No amount of DR will ever change that.

I still haven't seen any photos posted from yourself on this topic BTW.
Not sure what you're really trying to poke at there
you can see a few potential landscape sorts posted elsewhere, peruse attachments for yourself.;area=showposts;sa=attach;u=31446
This is not a forum where I care to post my best work.  Neither is my web site.
But I'll let you look at my portfolio if you're visiting my part of the planet.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« on: March 27, 2013, 10:31:36 PM »
As usual, no response yet.

you saw this on the other thread, no?...

Please do, I have been dying to see some optimally exposed shots where the DR of a Canon has substantially ruined a shot yet a Nikon capture would have been perfect.
Here is one from a recent shoot of a prison complex:

The common area on the first floor is illuminated by a skylight. The dark gray cell doors on the second level have no lighting on them at all. Exposing correctly for the highlights in this scene severly underexposes the doors. There is no way to set up any additional lighting. Lifting the shadows on the doors in post leads to very obvious pattern noise on the doors. The eventual solution is blending multiple exposures. If this had been shot with an Exmor sensor simply lifting the shadows in a single exposure would not have been a problem.

Another example:

This image was exposed to capture the colors along the horizon. But because of dynamic range limitations, the water that should have been dark blue in the lower left corner was instead black. This requires lifting the shadows again. On the first 20x30 inch print I made, the shadow banding was clearly evident:

I had to go back, reprocess the image multiple times, blend exposures, apply noise reduction with debanding, apply a manual blur brush, and apply grain to even things out.  Again, with a better sensor, this processing scenario would have been greatly simplified.

(A longer explanation can be found at this link: )

I will just add one more note: "ruined" is your term, not mine. And it's a loaded term. I don't think Canon images are "ruined" by not having more dynamic range. But there are circumstances where it becomes problematic.

..Canon will figure out their sensor stuff soon enough, and they'll be back in the game.

i still really hope they do, I might buy one of their cameras again.  Even the 6D is improved enough to be tempting.

..What I want to know is who put an exponential curve on my buying habits?
that's pretty common
but sounds like you're also working with a large constant attached to the exponential part. :)
I was just explaining to the other half recently... if I sold all my camera gear, i could pay off the mortgage and then start over again..
I didn't like the way her eyebrows went up when I said that...  :-X

My principle in purchasing electronics is to buy what you need and skip two or three generations. For sensors I went from 300D to 5D3. My next purchase of the body is going to be several years down the road. Unless I inherit a million dollars (US or AUS) - fat chance of that happening!  :)
In other electronics, me too. I still have, and regularly use, a Sony XBR TV I bought in 1985 or 86.  I've only just retired a Sony SLV-R5UC S-VHS VCR after 20+ years of use.  It still works but I no longer feel compelled to record anything with it and I have a different deck for playback.
I'll keep some of my cameras like that too, i suspect my 40D will be buried with me;  I'm rather fond of it.  Or maybe I'll take the Konica, it doesn't need batteries. ;)
Other cameras and lenses will come and go, as suites my needs, since the technology is making for very compelling improvements quite often.  In other areas, I buy the best i can afford and take care of it and it generally serves me well for a very long time.
I think I'm actually reaching that point with camera gear too.  I'm still on the lookout for something that fills a niche i might want to work in, but overall, the gear I have now is at a point where I could do almost everything i'd want to do with it and not suffer any serious compromises or work-arounds like I had to just a year or 2 ago.
I've noticed this when I go on a road trip lately.  I no longer have a trunk full of gear, each bag containing something best suited to a narrow range that optimized its performance.  I'm down to a much smaller, more manageable pack size and I'm not left facing compromises as often.
The only remaining niche I'd like to refill is a good, fast camera, like the 7D (but better), for working with longer FL lenses.
The 60D can work with my 100-400mm lens well enough for still shots but I'd like a better AF system for moving subjects, like the 7D's or better, with good hi ISO performance, like the 60D or 7D or better, but also with better low ISO, like the 6D at least, or preferably one of the competitor's cameras.  And I don't want to spend more than $2k for that ability.  When I do, I expect it may also replace some gear I'm using now, so I can improve hardware capabilities while also reducing the inventory I carry.
So that's my hope, a 7D2 or 70D that I can afford and that will also fill the speed AF and low light niche yet still provide better low ISO performance too.  Since I'm in no rush, I can wait to see what Canon, or others, offer later this year.

I have always found FPN to be comparatively easily removed, lets face it, it is fixed pattern noise, subtracting a dark frame can usually deal with it if NR can't. Banding when lifting shadows can be problematic, particularly with non optimally exposed images, hence my request for optimally exposed examples.

The point, made before, is that when we buy a body costing $2-3k or more, we should NOT have to F-round in photoshop to remove pattern noise.  Just because you can, doesn't mean we should.  Nor should we be settling for sub-par performance when options abound that perform better.

Some of us just have high higher standards and we're trying to hold Canon to a higher standard than they've been providing.  I don't care about photoshop work-arounds that waste my time.  Getting it right to start with sometimes means getting it with a non-Canon camera.

I told Canon directly, then voted with my wallet.  Takes less time for me to hit my local shop, buy a competitor's camera and shoot and post-process however I want, without any concern for pattern noise.  That a competitor's camera costing as little as $400 has no FPN is telling.  That some of Canon's own products aren't particularly affected by it is also somewhat telling.
The ONLY mfr that has a problem with FPN with current products is ... can you guess?
The reason it's griped about is?... some of us are tired of paying serious money for serious gear when it has a serious weakness.

I think we are missing an option here. We need an option "I'll survive with my current gear thank you"...

I'd go with that. :)

I think that's implied by the second option but yes, there are those who will use what they have until they wear it out and then they'll shop for a replacement.
Taking that into consideration, I doubt many of those who use their cameras until they're worn out are paying a lot of attention to these debates.


One of the 7D Mark II / 7D X (or whatever called) prototypes has a new sensor design in it. One prototype has two old processors in it, an other prototype has the new one in it.

But you will definetely see a new image enhancement technology (even in the new high megapixel FF). But Nikon is not sleeping. The new top of the line Nikon performs very well and is very well tested.

The image quality is a big step up like the D7100 compared to the D600.

Nikon's been very impressive so far and they still have 2 flagship bodies that haven't yet been updated.
So we're expecting a lot from the D400 and D4x! :)
Canon may have market-share, but Nikon's winning mindshare with impressive sensor performance. (& some are waking up to Pentax as well, FWIW, and Fuji, and Olympus, and Sony)

The 70D satisfaction poll had me thinking this would be a more interesting poll and, since someone there suggested it, this should expand on the happy vs unhappy binary with a little more variety of options.

I had a 7D, loved the AF, viewfinder, built-in level, and overall performance of it.  However, i sometimes used this camera for landscape type shots because it was what I had with me when the scene presented itself and I was often disappointed with serious shadow banding if I tried doing much with the image in post.
I sold my 7D while it still got a good resale price and have been hoping a new 7D Mark II would arrive this summer with an improved sensor, hopefully providing cleaner low and high ISO performance.  If the AF improved over the original, that's an added bonus.  Once I got accustomed to the way it worked I was able to get adequate AF hits of birds, and even some bugs, in flight.  Sometimes even in low light.

I had a couple 60Ds.  I kept one of them because it's a nice light compact camera that makes a good walk-around or travel camera.  If I were to buy a 70D it would have to be all that, possibly even back to the body design of the 20/30/40/50D, AND have greatly improved sensor performance.  I'd not buy it if it offered; more video features, WiFi, GPS, a bucket full of firmware features but no sensor improvement.

I have not yet chosen to replace my 7D with a competitor's camera, mostly because of one lens there's no good substitute for, the EF 100-400mm L IS.  I could use a competitor's fast 70-200mm with a 2x adapter but that would likely cost me more than a new Canon body so I'm still undecided to pick a solution in this area.  There may even be perfectly viable options in the micro/four-thirds range to do this job but I'm in no hurry.

So...  Things to think about before voting, or buying.

• If a 70D shows up with a better sensor than the original 7D or 60D, and an improved AF system over the x0D line, maybe even comparable to the original 7D, it would have to be priced competitively with a used, original 7D to be worthwhile to some, depending on what their intentions are for such a camera.

• What level of sensor and AF performance improvements might you want from a 70D or a 7D Mark II to entice you to buy one?

• If the 70D doesn't have sensor performance improvements over the 18MP sensors that Canon has supplied over the past few years, will you still consider buying it if all it provides are some extra features like raw video out, WiFi or GPS?

• If the 7D Mark II gets an AF system comparable to the 5D Mark 3, maybe 10 fps, but does not get much, if any, improvement in sensor performance, will you still buy it?

• What is the minimum set of improvements, over the previous body being replaced, would you say is enough to warrant Canon releasing this as a product with a new badge on it?  Would that make you buy it?

• Are you considering cameras from competitors like Sony, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus or others?

• Have you already purchased a camera from one of the competitors because it offers better performance in some way compared to what Canon is currently offering?... or is rumored to supply?

• Or have you had enough of the rumors of future Canon products, looked at available competitor's products, and still decided that it's time you tried a full-frame camera instead? (even though they have different trade-offs compared to crop sensor cameras)

Any other viewpoints you'd like to present, share and discuss are welcome, of course.
And Canon, watch this thread. :)

Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 73