Messages

61

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 12, 2013, 08:09:01 AM »

So David, please dont tell me that there are any differences between the two sensor, and now at 12800iso, we all know the difference at base iso and DR.
If you will  look at the rawfiles I can send them to you

Just out of curiosity, I set up a similar comparison on the DPR site and there is very little difference between the images.  IMO, none of the three cameras (D800, 5DII and 5DIII) produces a decent image at 12800.  All your test shows is that you can take two perfectly good cameras and make bad images with them and argue about which is worst.  I would rather make two optimal images and compare that -- no rules; you can do whatever you want.  That is, after all, how the equipment is actually used in real life.

Exactly.

62

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Megapixel Development Announcement in the Fall? [CR2]

« on: April 11, 2013, 11:23:19 PM »

...
You realize your last three points, DR, Low ISO Noise, and Shadow Recovery....are really all the same thing, right? Dynamic Range IS effectively a measure of noise,

No, DR is not a measure of noise. You could have 3 stops of DR and lots of noise. Similarly you could have 3 stops of DR and no noise. They are not combined.

Shadow recovery is simply a benefit of low ISO read noise. So, in your little table, there are really three points total: Live View, Silent Shooting, and Dynamic Range. The 5D III wins hands down on two points. The D800 wins hands down on one. If you throw in High ISO dynamic range (or High ISO SNR), then the 5D III wins on another point.

Or to rephrase this, Canon wins on using the camera but the Nikon wins on producing quality images. Personally, I don't even know why "Silent Shooting" makes it to the list.

A two-shot HDR blend will also take care of any DR problems you have quite nicely (if you push it to the extremes, a two-shot HDR blend could be separated by 10 stops (+5 and -5), allowing ~16-18 stops of DR in the final 32-bit HDR image...more than enough.) HDR blending is a simple ordeal these days as well. Is it less convenient? Sure, by a very small amount.

Sure, but you can do the exact same HDR tricks with the D800 and to even greater effect than with Canon.

Enough to warrant spending thousands, maybe tens of thousands, switching brands just to have the D800?

Probably not. Canon will figure out their sensor stuff soon enough, and they'll be back in the game.

What if Canon can't/don't figure it out?

How long has it been since the 5D Mark II came out now?
And in all that time, we haven't seen any evidence of a sensor that is any better - or rather Nikon have made great advances with their sensors, Canon haven't moved...

63

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 11, 2013, 09:48:46 AM »

A 2% difference.

Well, if that's not grasping at straws, what is?   

When it's less than 1% or not measurable.

Or in other words, Canon seems to be ignoring the photographer and going for the consumer (which kind of agrees with your statement above.)

Oh, I see.  Consumers don't care about IQ, but Photographers do, so they should all be using Nikon.  Wait, did I say that?  Somehow, I don't think so...

If you think Nikon has better sensor DR because they aren't 'ignoring the photographer', you're being terribly naive.   Canon and Nikon are publically traded companies.  Neither of them 'care about photographers' except insofar as photographers are consumers that buy their products.  Canon and Nikon care about profit.  In some countries (the US being one), it goes beyond caring - publically held compaines are legally obligated to maximize profit.  Canon just seems to be doing a better job at that, based on corporate reports.

Let me put it another way. Nikon is approaching the problem of maximising profit by providing products that give maximum benefit to the photographer that cares about the quality of their photograph in the belief that this is the #1 priority for camera purchases. Canon approaches the problem by adding bells and whistles that attract people whilst delivering a camera with a "good enough" attitude to photography itself.

It's not that it is poor but rather that there has been no improvement and it isn't as if there are no problems that need fixing.

No, there are problems that you want fixed (and so do I, admittedly).  Important distinction.  But they can clearly outsell Nikon despite those 'problems' so the only voice that matters - the market - has decided there no need to fix anything.

Right, because the majority of the people buying the cameras are consumers and not photographers.

64

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 11, 2013, 09:13:15 AM »

No, not grasping at straws, just simply considering all of the lenses that are available for a camera. If you want to limit yourself to only those lenses that the camera vendor makes, fine, but don't impose those restrictions on others.

There are many fine lenses that are made for use on Canon/Nikon that are not made by Canon/Nikon.

The grasping at straws part was more about the fact that considering the Sigma 35/1.4 gets you barely a marginal improvement, as I said - throwing away 13 MP instead of 14 MP.

A 2% difference.

If I was going to have a grudge, it would be because of something it them taking 4 tries to Canon's lens repair service to fix the IS in a 70-300 IS USM (non-L).

"Yeah we fixed it", "No you haven't, try again." "Fixed it this time.", "Put on a camera and it didn't work, try again." la la la

And with Nikon, that might be <wait 4 weeks> "Yeah we fixed it", "No you haven't, try again."<wait 4 weeks> "Fixed it this time.", "Put on a camera and it didn't work, try again."<wait 4 weeks> la la la

You're assuming that all Canon turn-a-rounds were speedy...

No, the point of me saying this is because lots of people are arguing that "Canon cameras sell well, so obviously 18MP is enough" or "... so obviously the DR isn't important." In a sense they're right, but it appears that it isn't the IQ that is selling the camera - it is the bells and whistles.

In a sense?  No need for a qualifier there.  As I've stated before, people buy cameras not sensors.  Their reasons for choosing one camera over another are as varied as the people themselves.  Canon recognizes that people buy cameras, not naked sensors, and they design their cameras accordingly.  The fact that they continue to outsell Nikon across the lineup quite clearly indicates that they know what they're doing in terms of camera design (including the sensor). 

Or in other words, Canon seems to be ignoring the photographer and going for the consumer (which kind of agrees with your statement above.)

Saying 'it isn't the IQ that is selling the camera' is an unrealistic over-generalization.  The problem is that some people seem to suggest that simply because the sensor in a Nikon camera offers a couple of extra stops of DR, that means the IQ of the sensor in a Canon camera is unacceptably poor.

It's not that it is poor but rather that there has been no improvement and it isn't as if there are no problems that need fixing.

65

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 11, 2013, 07:31:53 AM »

You're not listening (and/or perhaps you didn't properly comprehend what I wrote.)

All that mattered was that one camera had a touch screen and the other didn't. MP be damned.

Ok, I hold my hands up. I didn't properly comprehend what you wrote. However, your anti Canon stance on this forum frankly has become a tad tedious, and I don't think I speak solely for myself when I say that. I am not for a moment saying that we shouldn't complain or raise issue with things that we dislike about Canon cameras. But the manner of some of your postings suggests you have some grudge against Canon. Or am I again misunderstanding you?

If I was going to have a grudge, it would be because of something it them taking 4 tries to Canon's lens repair service to fix the IS in a 70-300 IS USM (non-L).

"Yeah we fixed it", "No you haven't, try again." "Fixed it this time.", "Put on a camera and it didn't work, try again." la la la

No, the point of me saying this is because lots of people are arguing that "Canon cameras sell well, so obviously 18MP is enough" or "... so obviously the DR isn't important." In a sense they're right, but it appears that it isn't the IQ that is selling the camera - it is the bells and whistles. When the reason for choosing a 650D over something else is the touch screen, then as long as the camera has enough pixels for facebook and WiFi to upload, well who cares about PASM, etc?

66

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 11, 2013, 06:33:37 AM »

No, she didn't care about picture quality. The 650D could have produced images half as good as the Nikon but the touch screen, well that's just like new phone that has a touch screen and "iPad" that has a touch screen, so why would anyone want one of those prehistoric things with knobs and stuff?

Has DxOMark quantified that the Canon images are only 50% as good as the Nikon?

You're not listening (and/or perhaps you didn't properly comprehend what I wrote.)

All that mattered was that one camera had a touch screen and the other didn't. MP be damned.

67

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 11, 2013, 05:57:10 AM »

Overheard today:

"My wife wants to buy Canon because it has touch screen."

i.e. for her that is the killer feature of the Canon 650 and it is things like this that let Canon get away with not improving IQ.

Canon are adding bells and whistles to their camera rather than improving its abilities to take better photos.

The real answer to that is the so-called "IQ" of the Canon equipment is essentially the same as that of Nikon (Pentax, Sony, Oly..., pick your favorite).  The output of the equipment when used properly will be essentially indistinguishable.  So she was correct, pick the gear based on price and feature set. 

No, she didn't care about picture quality. The 650D could have produced images half as good as the Nikon but the touch screen, well that's just like new phone that has a touch screen and "iPad" that has a touch screen, so why would anyone want one of those prehistoric things with knobs and stuff?

68

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 11, 2013, 12:38:05 AM »

Overheard today:

"My wife wants to buy Canon because it has touch screen."

i.e. for her that is the killer feature of the Canon 650 and it is things like this that let Canon get away with not improving IQ.

Canon are adding bells and whistles to their camera rather than improving its abilities to take better photos.

69

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 11, 2013, 12:35:31 AM »

According to DxOMark, the best prime and best zoom from each are:

Canon 300mm f/2.8L IS II on 5DIII - 22 P-Mpix
Nikon 85mm f/1.4G on D800 - 22 P-Mpix

You're wrong or rather you've quoted incomplete information. If you look here:

Then you will see that the Nikon D800 with the Sigma 35/1.4 bests the Nikon 85/1.4G with a P-MPix score of 23.

Grasping at straws, are we?  I was comparing Nikon vs. Canon lenses, and last time I checked, Nikon doesn't make the Sigma 35/1.4.

Ok, so with that excellent lens not made by Nikon, the D800 is only throwing away 13 MP instead of 14 MP.  Woot.

No, not grasping at straws, just simply considering all of the lenses that are available for a camera. If you want to limit yourself to only those lenses that the camera vendor makes, fine, but don't impose those restrictions on others.

There are many fine lenses that are made for use on Canon/Nikon that are not made by Canon/Nikon.

70

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 10, 2013, 11:41:15 AM »

Perceptual MPix: a much simpler tool to score and compare lenses
P-Mpix is the unit of a sharpness measurement. The number of P-Mpix of a camera/lens combination is equal to the pixel count of a sensor that would give the same sharpness if tested with a perfect theoretical optics, as the camera/lens combination under test.
For example, if a camera with a sensor of 24Mpix when used with a given lens has a P-Mpix of 18MPix, it means that somewhere in the optical system 6Mpix are lost, in the sense that as an observer you will not perceive the additional sharpness that these 6Mpix should have added to the photos if everything was perfect.

According to DxOMark, the best prime and best zoom from each are:

Canon 300mm f/2.8L IS II on 5DIII - 22 P-Mpix
Nikon 85mm f/1.4G on D800 - 22 P-Mpix

Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II on 5DIII - 21 P-Mpix
Nikon 70-200mm f/4G ED VR on D800 - 21 P-Mpix

So, by DxO's criteria and definition, Canon's best prime and zoom lens are basically not limiting system resolution (within a 1 MP margin of error).  However, Nikon's best prime and zoom on the D800 are resulting in the 'loss' of 14-15 MP....resulting in a perceived sharpness of even Nikon's best lenses on the D800 as no better than Canon's best lenses.

Interestingly, while the D800 appears to be 'too much' for Nikon lenses in that the lenses are clearly limiting overall system resolution, we don't know from these data if we're at the limit of the Canon lenses.

You're wrong or rather you've quoted incomplete information. If you look here:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Which-lenses-should-you-choose-for-your-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-vs.-Nikon-D800-Competition-is-closer-than-expected


Then you will see that the Nikon D800 with the Sigma 35/1.4 bests the Nikon 85/1.4G with a P-MPix score of 23.

71

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 09, 2013, 05:48:18 PM »

You need look no further than DxOMark.  After all, no one else does.

I wonder, though...when you factor in the lenses - the 64% increase in MP count doesn't help the D800 resolve better than the 5DIII, so how much is the 33% increase of the Nikon APS-C vs. Canon's 18 MP going to help?

It's not just about megapixels.

It is also about DR and cleanliness of the raw image.

Nikon's full frame sensors seem to be free of the banding pattern noise that is found in 5D2/5D3/6D.

72

Lenses / Re: Aftermarket tripod rings vs OEM

« on: April 08, 2013, 10:57:56 PM »

I was curious how you guys felt about aftermarket tripod rings (like the ones found on eBay) vs the Canon OEM ones. Of course you can get the aftermarket ones cheaper and the couple that I have used seemed decent quality and build. BUT, that is a lot $$$ (equipment) to trust to something that make break easier than the OEM brand. I am not talking about super heavy lenses. My biggest lens is the EF 70-300L and I have an aftermarket ring for it.

Which ring did you get?

73

Lens Gallery / Re: Sigma 35mm f/1.4

« on: April 08, 2013, 10:57:20 PM »

Why so few images in this "Gallery" thread? I thought everybody sold all of their L lenses and ran out and replaced them with Sigz!
...
This lens is pretty rad.

It wouldn't matter. It could be the best lens in the world but there is such a high proportion of buying Canon meaning buying perfection (irrespective of actual quality) here that they won't recognise it.

74

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 08, 2013, 11:45:28 AM »

I should probably just ignore this thread, but I hope you showed your friends this from DXOMark:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Which-lenses-should-you-choose-for-your-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-vs.-Nikon-D800-Competition-is-closer-than-expected

There was a thread dedicated to this here in CR last week.  Turns out even DXO, when they connect the lens to the camera and evaluate the "system" are seeing that Canon and Nikon are a lot closer than it would appear.  Roger/lensrentals found something similar when selecting his camera.

Thanks, I hadn't read that article by DxO yet.

It looks like the Sigma 35/1.4 trumps all of Canon's current 35mm lens offerings at present in terms of IQ.

75

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

« on: April 08, 2013, 11:43:57 AM »

Dilbert, I'm genuinely interested. For somebody who obviously dislikes Canon and all it stands for, why are you still posting here? So you can educate newcomers to come towards the light (eg, Nikon) before they settle for any of Canon's rubbish?

It's been a little sad to watch the evolutionary descent from human to troll.

Well you can blame Canon for that.