April 17, 2014, 11:58:45 PM

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 - dilbert

Pages: 1 ... 102 103 [104] 105 106 ... 158
1546
A darn... I was finally thinking to go for the 5D II (entry level FF ^^) and now and rumor of a new entry level full-frame... darn - couldn't you have waited a month with that rumor ? :P

Don't worry, it won't be announced or available in that period so buy the 5D2 anyway.

1547
There is definitely a market for a $2000 full frame camera.

Yes ... and the 5DII covers this market already.
It will also cover it during the holidays this year and in early 2013.

After that, the 5DIII will start dropping in price and in 18-24 months will sell (like hotcakes) for $2500.
When the price drops to that level (and below), it will leave room in the lineup for a new $3000-3500 body with 30+ megapixels.

So, as other posters have said, no room for a  NEW $2000 FF from Canon right now - and in the next four-five years.
Who knows after that.

I think the appeal of buying a 4 year old camera will quickly wane with the wider public given that newer cameras will have more capabilities. The 5D2 may still attract xxD and xxxD upgrades but it won't attract new people to Canon.

Lets imagine it is now October 2012. You've got $2000 to spend on a new camera body. You don't  own any other SLRs or lenses. For a lot of people, a 4 year old 5D2 is not going to be anywhere near the top of that list simply because it is now 4 years old.

I'd put the price range on this camera at $1999 - $2399.

The price will probably have more to do with the new xxD price than that of the 5D2 or 5D3.

1548
EOS Bodies / Re: So frustrated with new 5DmkIII - returning it!
« on: March 25, 2012, 08:14:27 PM »
2- Beleive or not over 50-70% of my shots are either soft or have way less details then my mkII ever had!  Either I have a bad unit or I am really dumb!  Or both!

It may be that your camera/lens combination needs to be calibrated.

You should set up a test subject and shoot with microfocus adjust set from -20 to +20 to see if there is a better setting than the current "0".

1549
I agree about the DR. I don't believe the 5DIII is a true competitor for the D800 and I think this new one will be. I don't understand why you think Canon doesn't have the tech to build a high mp sensor with good DR. For all we know, they may have been working on one for quite some time and waiting to release it.

People are getting too hung up on the term entry level. Think of it as a lower cost FF rather than entry level. A plasticky rebel type FF isn't going to make it into the xD line. This is their "Pro" line not consumer line. I believe this will be a direct D800 competitor and they will under cut Nikon's pricing and piss in their cornflakes. Their timing kind of sucks though.

If the 5D3 isn't the true competitor for the D800 then which product from Nikon is it meant to compete against?

1550
The big question is what sensor will go in an entry level full frame camera. Will Canon reuse the 18MP sensor from the 1DX in order to cut down on R&D costs or will a completely new sensor go in it?

The balancing factor here is that less experienced photographers appreciate more megapixels for greater crop flexibility to compensate for their ability to not quite get the framing right all of the time.

Quite clearly, Canon cannot put the 5D2's sensor in it because customers will balk at the idea of buying technology that is already 4 years old (there is some of this sentiment already with the 5D3.)

If the comments about the 7D being a "one-off" camera are true (and that there will be no 7D Mark II) then that opens up the "numbering" for Canon to have an 8D or 9D as a full frame camera.

The rule of thumb then becomes that an xD camera has a full frame sensor.

1551
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark
« on: March 24, 2012, 02:24:06 PM »
Personally, I don't see much groundbreaking about it besides the 36MP.

Imho the groundbreaking fact about the D800 is that they have 36mp and *still* get better noise and dr results which contradicts everything ever said about the disadvantages of high mp sensors. If they'd put in a 22mp sensor too, the big leap forward would be much more obvious because dr/noise would make the Canon sensors look like a past generation.

If Nikon/Sony were to make a 22MP sensor that used the same technology as the 36MP sensor in the D800 and that 22MP sensor were made to be a full-frame 35mm sensor, then I expect that you would have a sensor that blows the socks off of the one in the D800.

1552
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark
« on: March 24, 2012, 10:52:35 AM »
Here's the problem with DxOMark. They say about themselves:
Quote
To design DxOMark Scores, we have made choices about our photographic use cases and their associated image quality requirements (such as resolution, distortion, noise, dynamic range, etc.). It is clear that other photography experts may see things differently. We are very open on this site about the choices we have made so that anyone interested in creating a different scoring system can do so based on their own analysis of our DxOMark Scores and Measurement Database.

They apply arbitrary - and by their own admission, completely subjective - scores to a series of metrics to end up with one number.

The issue is that if you don't give the same priority to the metrics that they do, the scores can be moved substantially.

The simple fact is that DxOMark's conclusions are no more objective than simply looking at the images and picking the one you like best.

Note that the above comment relates to the "DxO score", not how the measurements for DR, etc.

And whilst they do have a subject score and methodology, they do apply the same procedure to all of the cameras that they test.

1553
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark
« on: March 24, 2012, 09:03:00 AM »
That sound.... that loud rumbling... it's the sound of a herd of Canon landscape photographers rushing to buy a D800 and a 14-24/2.8. It crushes on MP and it crushes on DR. It will happen, and all the defensive fanboy snottiness isn't going to change that.

I don't shoot landscape. The D800 is the wrong camera for me, but all the signs point to it being killer.

If I were you I'd settle for commenting on the area of photography that you do engage in.

1554

And you bought it for what reason?

It is better to do the research before you purchase rather than after

I couldn't agree more. And how do you research a camera that has not been released? You can't.
Would you buy a car without taking it for a test drive?

1555
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark
« on: March 24, 2012, 12:12:31 AM »
That is for in-camera produced JPEG files only, which means the software in the camera is better, not the hardware.

If that's referring to me saying 'stop or two better', i thought that RAW was a stop better, JPG was 2-stops better?

Or we'll just have to wait for the 5D3 DxO results...

Go and read the Chuck Westfall interview, he is very guarded about what he says with respect to improved sensor performance.

Thus far, all the evidence points to the 5D3 being about the same as the 5D2 for ISO 100 through to 400.

1556
EOS Bodies / Re: I'm Sad but I'm going to hang in there...
« on: March 23, 2012, 10:31:27 PM »
I have to agree with a lot of what you are saying.  I switched from a D300 to a 5DII because it was just a stunning leap in technology and image quality that Nikon could not match.  Well not for less than $8000.  And I'd been a Nikon shooter for 10 years.   Minolta for 15 years before that.

Now my 5DIII is in the mail, and I see the report on DXO that the D800 is the new #1 sensor.  And I read the lackluster reports on the 5DIII.  Hmmm.  I have $20K in Canon lenses sitting on the shelf behind me, and shot 160K photos with my 5DII.  And I am wondering if I am going the right way.

Various industry observers noticed about 3 years ago that Canon was just offering the same old camera each time, with a tweak here or there - they weren't making any big leaps or advancements.

The proof of that is what we see now. Canon will be the last to the party with the mirrorless compact cameras and the 5D3 is almost the same as the 5D2 in terms of IQ.

There's no sign of any significant innovation in anything Canon has produced recently except the G1X.

1557
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark
« on: March 23, 2012, 10:24:21 PM »
The biggest problem with most of the canon sensors is that the performance 'plateaus' at lower ISO, like iso100 isn't much better than iso200 or iso400. The D3X pretty much went in a straight line, and the D800 does too (just a bit better than the D3X).

Something tells me that they haven't fixed it though, because canon marketers would be all "4-stop improvement in image quality at low iso". They've told us high-iso is a stop or two better than 5D2, and i'd believe that.

That is for in-camera produced JPEG files only, which means the software in the camera is better, not the hardware.

1558
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark
« on: March 23, 2012, 10:16:18 PM »
...
So the D800 is about the same as the 1ds3 then at low iso ...... big news item 'Nikon catches up with 4 year old Canon tehnology'

No, the 1Ds3 never had DR like the D800 does at low iso.

The 1ds3 outruns the 5DII which is just behind the D800 .....

Are you looking at the same camera?

1Ds3..
Color Depth   24 bits
Dynamic Range  12 Evs
Low-Light ISO   1663 ISO

5D2
Color Depth 23.7
Dynamic Range 11.9
Low-Light ISO   1815 ISO

D800
Color depth 25.3
Dyamic Range 14.4
Low-Light ISO  2853 ISO

Perhaps the most damning of all is the DR - as can be seen in the graph below.

In some of the other graphs, the D800 is close to a full stop better than either the 1Ds3 or 5D2.

That means the D800 at ISO 200 is generating images as good as the 5D2 at ISO 100.

This isn't "just a little bit better", it is significantly better and what we expected/wanted from the 5D3.

1559
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark
« on: March 23, 2012, 09:52:22 PM »
The first thread on this topic has already been deleted by the site admins... wonder how long this one will survive.

1560
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark
« on: March 23, 2012, 08:09:41 PM »
...
So the D800 is about the same as the 1ds3 then at low iso ...... big news item 'Nikon catches up with 4 year old Canon tehnology'

No, the 1Ds3 never had DR like the D800 does at low iso.

Pages: 1 ... 102 103 [104] 105 106 ... 158