April 20, 2014, 01:52:36 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 ... 104 105 [106] 107 108 ... 159
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.

dilbert, they also significantly improved the AF on the 5D3.

I feel the tests DxO runs is heavily biased towards Nikon anyways.  It's hard to believe not a single Canon camera is in the top 10, and the 7D isn't even in the top 50.

That is the interesting thing. According to DXO the 7D sensor rates very poorly but I'm not sure I could tell the difference between it and the D7000 sensor in an actual image.

And I'm really confused by the DXO rating on ISO. The real world images do NOT reflect what those numbers are saying. Maybe it has to do with upscaling or whatever (I don't know much about that however). Maybe someone can explain better.

Exactly my point... we are getting to worked up with numbers and not enough on final output/quality.  We're splitting hairs.

Would you all be saying that if it was the Canon 5DIII that scored 95 at DxO mark and was vastly superior to the D800?

dilbert, they also significantly improved the AF on the 5D3.

I feel the tests DxO runs is heavily biased towards Nikon anyways.  It's hard to believe not a single Canon camera is in the top 10, and the 7D isn't even in the top 50.

In the past they wrote an article on how the S95's sensor performed better than that of the D3s. Does that sound like bias towards Nikon to you?

They have no bias except towards good cameras. That Canon does not have any cameras in the top 10 says more about Canon than it does about DxO.

Haha V8 =)  As far as I can recall with the DxO goes, nikon's sensors, according to their tests, have always bested Canon's sensors, or at least in the last half decade or so... Whether it was D700 vs 5d2, 50D or 7D vs D300(s) or D90, etc... Coincidence?  maybe.  Bias based on testing method?  Maybe.  Nikon has better sensors?  maybe.  I definately am not going to start sensationalizing Canon or flaming DxO.  Frankly, if DxO tests the 5d3 and finds it better than the D800, i would be shocked.  But in the end, i think image quality on all these upper tier cameras are getting so good across the board that we are really splitting hairs with these numbers...  Do i think canon will release a big MP monster within 12-16 months?  I can definitely see it, after all they have a reputation for wanting to prove who's shlong is longer in that department, but in the end the 5d3 is a fine camera and I cant wait to shoot with mine.

Big MP monster is not enough. They also need to improve the quality of the output of the sensor right across the ISO range - exactly what they have not done (so far as we can tell) with the 5DIII.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC
« on: March 23, 2012, 12:19:11 PM »
It's too bad that lenses from Tamron/Sigma/Tokina don't come with a part that is easily swapped around to convert the lens from being a Canon mount to Nikon mount to Sony mount...

So in case anyone from Canon is reading (or someone that knows someone at Canon), this is the kind of sensor performance we are (or should I say were!) expecting with the 5DIII.

From all of the early testing thus far, it is quite clear that the 5DIII will be nowhere near the D800 in terms of sensor performance.

Just improving low-light, high-iso a little bit is not enough. Just giving us more FPS is not enough.

Especially when Canon's #1 competitor has just released a camera that gives photographers everything that they were looking for in the 5DIII with the exception of higher shooting speed.

I'll give Canon until the end of the year before I jump ship, which effectively means I'm going to jump ship because they cannot release a new FF camera with a sensor to at least equal the D800 in less than a year. But for a good while, there is just going to be a feeding frenzy around the D800 so it will be hard to come by and deals non-existent.

And if I had of placed an order for a 5DIII and it had not yet shipped, I'd be ringing up right now and canceling that order because the testing thus far puts the D800 miles and miles ahead of the 5DIII in terms of sensor performance.

EOS Bodies / Re: dpreview and the 5DmkIII
« on: March 23, 2012, 08:57:02 AM »
Maybe they haven't gotten a hold of a "production" 5DIII yet.  It's reaonable that they don't want to do their full blow evaluation using a pre-produciton version just in case it's tweaked out in some way.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark III Reviews
« on: March 23, 2012, 08:19:28 AM »
Wow, EOSHD really rips Canon a new one.

EOS Bodies / Re: Unofficial Canon Mirrorless Concept
« on: March 23, 2012, 01:26:40 AM »
What is the point of this?

It reads like someone's pipe dream.

This story is badly worded on this website. Given the attached picture (if that is of the new 70-200 Zeiss) then it is quite clear (from the distance markings on the lens) that it will be a cine lens.

The story blurb says:
Zeiss is rumored to be announcing a 70-200 f/2.8 at NAB in Las Vegas next month. This would be the first zoom lens Zeiss has produced for the ZE and ZF mounts.

Expect Zeiss to also announce new Cine CP.2 lenses at NAB.

What it should say is this:

"Zeiss is rumored to be announcing a 70-200 f/2.8 cine lens at NAB in Las Vegas next month. This would be the first zoom cine lens Zeiss has produced for the ZE and ZF mounts.

"Expect Zeiss to also announce two other new Cine CP.2 lenses at NAB."

Important information has been lost in the story blurb on this website.

From PR, comes this quote:

"Zeiss announced on Facebook and Twitter their plans for new cinelenses for 2012: new compact, lightweight zoom and prime CP.2 lenses plus a new line of anamorphics lenses."

Thus the zoom lens is not in the same category that the Canon 70-200L IS II is in.
It is not meant for photographers, but instead for videographers.

Zeiss lenses are always more expensive than Canon's but in this case, Canon doesn't have an equivalent cine lens. Given that their 70-200/2.8L II is less expensive than the 28-300L and that there is a 30-300 cine lens from Canon that is $47,000, anyone want to place bets on whether that lens from Zeiss will be under or over $50,000?

Street & City / Re: Right place, right time: Hollywood, CA
« on: March 19, 2012, 09:55:18 AM »
+10 and +10's ;D

Now you're making me wish that I posted this whilst karma was active!

apparently i have missed something :P. who are these women and what do they do that's so special?

What do they do that's so special?

Well, for most males, the answer is simple:



EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: I have a 5D Mk III.
« on: March 19, 2012, 08:12:14 AM »
How many photos has it taken?

Street & City / Right place, right time: Hollywood, CA
« on: March 19, 2012, 08:05:04 AM »
I don't know which category this photo belongs in.
Perhaps if there was one titled "A Man's Dream Come True"? ;)

It's of Bo Derick and Shania Twain on the day that Shania Twain was presented with a star along the Hollywood Blvd sidewalk.

This wasn't planned, so it was a stroke of good luck, not just to have my camera there but to see both of these Hollywood lovelies in the flesh.

Lenses / Re: Best third-party lenses
« on: March 19, 2012, 06:34:53 AM »
Tamron lenses are generally cheaper.  I can't think of any Tamrons currently on the market today that are better or don't have a Canon equivalent.  Maybe Tamron 18-270, which is the zoomiest of the superzooms.

The Tamron 70-300 VC Di is much better than the Canon 70-300 IS USM (non-L).

Sure, at three times the cost of the Tamron you can buy the Canon 70-300L, but you don't get three times the lens. In this category, the Tamron lens is heavier than the Canon non-L and significantly lighter than the Canon L.

My Tamron 17-50/2.8 is also lighter than my Canon 17-55/2.8 IS, but optically the Canon is just a tad better.

How do those two compare on price?

What hasn't been mentioned is the Sigma 50mm/1.4.
That's another Sigma lens that is quite clearly better than the Canon counterpart (50mm/1.4.)

Oh wow, straight from the owner's manual, too. Page 257. And from what I've read, it disables internal audio recording altogether, so you'll need a completely separate device to record audio.

Not really. If you're serious enough about using external recording for video then you're probably also recording audio separately too.

Pages: 1 ... 104 105 [106] 107 108 ... 159