have you checked that jpgs are being saved in srgb space?
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.
Look, there are probably two (maybe three) people on the planet who have actually exceeded the capabilities of the equipment they already own.
1) It does not matter who you are or who you think you are, you are not even a fraction as capable as the camera you already hold in your hand..
2) Spend your money on the only piece/s of equipment that will ever improve your photography - lenses.. If you have anything left over and just have to spend it on something, take a class or attend a symposium to learn how to be a better photographer.
Newcomer here... former 25 year Nikonite. Do all followers feel that this source is a legit one? I've been following the whole 7DMKII ambiguity since September of 2012. I have now been without a body since January anticipating the arrival...
Is the general belief that there will be no 7DMKII until 2014 and should I just get off the pot and get a 7D until such time?
The Sigma 35/1.4 is optically a little bit better than the Canon. However, resale values on Canon L lenses are generally higher than 3rd party lenses (and if/when Canon releases a 35L II, its much higher price will likely drive UP used 35L prices, meaning you'll likely be able to sell a used 35L for more than you paid).True about the resale value although I highly doubt that will be the case with the 35L, not with the sigma (and the fanbase it builds) around. There are people who would buy a canon lens just cause its canon but i doubt they'll be enough to stop the resale value from tumbling down even with a new lens announced.
It does. Use a lens at 1m, then at infinity - it is a different lens really. I have noticed this with my 17-55 - much better at 2-3m than at infinity.
Many people test lenses at close distances and make far reaching conclusions; and this is wrong.
Meh, I want to see a comparsion using equivalent focal lengths 210 and 200mm is fine.. but the framing must be exactly the same (subject takes up the same percentage on the sensor). Both images downsampled (never upsampled) to fit here on the site. Any crops (as long as there's no upsampling ) should be fine... ex: 100% on the sx50 and 55% on the 5D mark III (for equivalent sized images.)
other than that it's apples and oranges.
I think cropping the full frame would still look same or better. A 300 f/2.8 on a 1DX beats same lens on 7D. Are you stating that the crop would out resolve it in terms of actually visible image quality? Not just theoretical numbers?
Have you tested this using both cameras? Not being argumentative just wondering how you know this?
It does; they are; they haven't; and they don't.
Not only does the 1DX cropped beat the 7D, but the 5DIII cropped beats the 7D, and the 1DX beats the 5DIII.
Any time anybody starts mouthing megapickle measurebator myths, it's safe to assume they've never actually done any meaningful photography with the gear in question.
If you had exposed optimally for the look you wanted to end up with then either manufacturers camera could have done that, with ease. But you didn't, you underexposed both and one is better at sorting out your mistake than the other, Had you overexposed both then the Canon, in my experience, would have been a better file to give you the result you wanted, Canon RAW files have much better highlight recovery potential than Nikon RAW files do.
Learn how to expose optimally for the image you want and your equipments capabilities and stop relying on being able to post process the crap out of badly underexposed images when taken with a Canon. Ever notice that nobody ever complains about the highlight recovery of Canon? That is not true if you look at Nikon forums, all Nikon users know you must underexpose to get optimal results, start overexposing your Canon and your "issues" will largely evaporate.
Well, I wonder how ISO 51k RAW will look like in APS-C. Or even at 102k. If sometimes my 5D3 gets to its limits @ 25k and 51k. Might a thouroughly new sensor tech make that possible...? With these specs a next update of a 5D could see native ISOs 100-51200 (L 50, H1 102400, 204800) and an 1Dx (H1 204800, H2 409600) !!!
But, let's keep in mind what NL also added:
"Not from a well known source, so I'm still looking for confirmation of different aspects."