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.
Actually, Nikon can start (re)naming their cameras as DXO4, DXO800 etc.LOL! That's a good one.
Ironically, Nikon's DX are trouncing Canon's flagship 1DX in DXO. My head hurts.
at 500 px even my old casio looks good.
it´s not that it´s not good enough.. it´s normal to want the BEST for your money.
so you see what you pay and you see the DXO score.... and then you look at nikon.
of course the DXO score does not tell you about the whole camera... just the sensor.
Forget the scores.
I shot all of these college football photos at ISO 8,000, f/2.8, 1/1,250 sec on my 1DX.
http://www.herald-dispatch.com/multimedia/galleries/musports/x746103246/Gallery-Marshall-vs-UCF-game-action
High school stadiums are usually much worse. The night shots in this gallery were at ISO 16,000, 1/640-1/800 sec, f/2.8.
http://www.herald-dispatch.com/multimedia/galleries/sports/x1363969376/Gallery-Class-AAA-Region-IV-soccer-championships-at-Cabell-Midland
Sorry about the compression but our website is a little behind the times. Anyway I love the 1DX and everything it does. I don't touch the 1D MK IV anymore but still keep my 5D MK II for wide angles below ISO 3,200.
I'm sure the people at Nikonrumors are saying DXO is the greatest and most accurate tests ever.
If the tables were turned and the 1DX was the camera scoring a 95 instead of the D800, people at Canonrumors would revere DXO.
No one likes to be on the losing end, and if anything, this should be a wake up to Canon to step their game up since Sony sensors are kicking their Butt, on both the stills and the video end. Since I'm more on the video end, not sure if you guys heard about the new Sony F5, close in price to the Canon C300, but about 5x the camera. The C300 is not even remotely in the same league.
The story line has been repeating over and over this year, Canon needs to step up on all fronts. Fortunately, they can ride on their name for a while, but soon, people will expect results.
a little "real" life use...
Any chance the IS version is actually an f4L lens?
I'm soooo ticked off right now. I paid $2899 fro Beach Camera for the 5D3 a few weeks ago, and if I had only waited I could have gotten it for $2799. According to my calculations (e=mcsquared pi=3.14 etc etc) I paid an extra .50 per actuation. Darn darn darn!
Dells are junk. Avoid them at all costs.
I am also curious as why you would say this.
I'm another satisfied Ultrasharp user.
Would not call them junk, they are good value IPS panel, if you do not want to spend a fortune on a super pro monitor, then why not ?
I work both a Dell 2709W (PVA) and a NEC NEC PA271W (IPS). The most obvious difference is the resolution (1920 vs 2560); yes the electronics and colour fidelity are better on the NEC, but I got the DELL for 500 Euro while the NEC is 1000 Euro, so for the price, it's very decent. Though the finer pitch on the NEC shows more appealing images, the 16/9 format is clearly a step back from the 16/10 of the DELL.
If you have space on your desk, and are on a budget, the DELL 30 inches might be an option. If you want absolute professional quality, then go for a NEC spectraView 30 inches or the Quato Intelli Proof 300 excellence.
IMO, 16/9 format is not a good ratio for photography, hence I am advising 30 inches screens for a more comfortable 16/10. My next screen will be for sure a 30 inches.
I picked up the Dell Ultrasharp U3011, it's a 30" monitor with a res of 2560x1600. Check out the specs on Dell's site.
+1 for the Dell Ultrasharps!
They are IPS panels at fair prices. I use the U2410 and couldn't be more happy. Print colors are a perfect match.
Yep, they were rated I think #1 last year. At first I was wanting to get the 27", but I lucked out because when I was looking online there was a one day sale where the 30" was the same price as the 27". Done deal.
Dell 27 "is a good display but lacks the color accuracy of the best screens, and you can not easily calibrate the hard ware and profile as you can do with Eizo CG and others pre press monitors
Here is a link to the best test center regarding monitors http://www.flatpanelshd.com/reviews.php
and rec monitors photo http://www.flatpanelshd.com/focus.php?subaction=showfull&id=1229341472
I don't for the life of me understand why Canon designed and released a camera the caliber of the 5D3 without a UHS-1 high speed SD slot. Totally unacceptable for a camera that will otherwise still be relevant in all other ways for the next 3-5 years.
So you have to wonder, who benefits from this? CF media? A small inconvenience to help Canon sell another camera upgrade in the future? It just doesn't make much sense. Does Canon really secretly hate SD and thinks that UHS-1 performs so poorly that they don't want people using it when CF already works so well? Oh, but wait! The 6D will have a UHS-1 slot. Hmm. Will this help give the 6D a little more acceptance for those who can't afford the 5D3?
Oh forget it. I'm getting a headache. Where's that liquour cabinet key again?
Look how much you've missed in the meantime.
But that's the question: How much would you have *really* missed with a 5d2? Sure, if you do sports then it's a no-brainer, but for many other applications is hard to say - 5d2 + another $1300 L lens or a 5d3?
