March 01, 2015, 06:19:02 AM

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 - lola

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6
EOS Bodies / Re: New Full Frame Camera in Testing [CR1]
« on: June 07, 2012, 01:49:04 AM »
"Our Flagship model 1DX".

If its Canons "Flagship", then why is Canon adding more megapixels?

Shouldn't a "Flagship" cover all aspects if possible??

I thought the 1 series covered all aspects of photography as much as possible with the technology at hand?

They havent even delivered on their 1DX promise and already, there seems to be something better for landscape photographers?  >:(

I totally agree with you, the whole line-up messed up...

EOS Bodies / Re: New Full Frame Camera in Testing [CR1]
« on: June 06, 2012, 02:12:08 PM »
At $4k , how does Canon differentiate it from the 5d3? Maybe 5d3 goes to where it should be...$2500?  Otherwise, it's more likely to be closer to $5k.

Pulling the price of 5D3 to somewhere around $2500 would be kidding with the people who just bought it. I don't see it happening. Don't forget to take into account the prices of the newly released lenses...

EOS Bodies / Re: New Full Frame Camera in Testing [CR1]
« on: June 06, 2012, 01:24:23 PM »
I doubt Canon has the technology to compete with the current Sony sensors. If they did, they would most certainly use it building the sensor in 5D3.

This mystery camera is just an act of desperation... It will probably be a 5D3 in a 1D body with 40 megapixels and a $5000 price tag. Nothing to be excited about...

EOS Bodies / Re: What's your acceptable price for the 1Dx
« on: June 05, 2012, 02:59:25 AM »
$6800 is a reasonable price for a nuclear-blast-proof top-of-the-line camera.

Canon General / Re: Beliefs and myths.
« on: May 29, 2012, 09:09:36 AM »
Interesting topic! :) Here's my take...

* With all other factors being equal, more megapixels will give better IQ except in high ISO.
True, but I'm not sure about the high ISO exception anymore... The D800 surprised my with it's high ISO performance. I guess we'll have to wait and see some more new models.

* Raw files opened in Adobe or in DPP will have identical IQ.
Honestly, I have absolutely no idea on this... Probably I've ignored the topic all this time to keep my blind faith in Adobe applications intact... :)

* In real life situations the result from Zeiss lenses will be mostly indistinguishable from Canon lenses, all other factors being equal.
Looking at the MTF values of Zeiss lenses, I gotta think the above statement is false. It's gotta matter somewhere!

* The 5d3 is the camera to grab when getting the photo is of utmost importance rather than D800.
I don't think using the D800 is any trickier... I'd have to assume the above statement is wrong.

* Nikon makes better wide-angle lenses including wide-angle zooms than Canon.
I know some friends who are a little disappointed with the 16-35 but I personally have no experience on this...

* If the user understands Photoshop properly then Nik softwares are redundant.
True, but Nik and similar software also make life a lot easier, so I can't say they're totally useless.

* Film has lost the battle and digital rules and even looks better.
Defiantly true.

* Chromatic aberrations and lens vignette characteristics of a lens do not matter as these things can be fixed easily in Photoshop.
To some extent, true... As a general statement, false!

* The IQ of 1dx and 5d3 at ISO 100 will be same.
I doubt it... Two different sensors there and that's gotta mean some difference in IQ one way or another...

* Cropping in camera (1.6 factor) is not the same as cropping equal amount in post on a full frame camera.
If the FF camera has 1.6x more pixels than the crop camera, then it's the same thing. If not, see Neuro's explanation.

* Mac computers have no real advantage over PC when it comes to processing photos.
True. I happen to find PCs to be more powerful and versatile.

* 99.9 percent of equipment complaints are user errors including the 5d3 criticisms.
False. I've had my hands on many defected gear.

* Canon will announce a high megapixel camera within six months.
I believe so... Maybe a year if not 6 months.

* 1Dx will ship in reasonable quantities and will fill in the initial demand mostly.

* 5d3 will not eat into the sales of 1Dx.
True. 10fps and war-proof body is a must for some photographers and they will use nothing but a 1 series camera.

* New equipment may not make better pictures but certainly do help in making better pictures and people should stop criticizing people who want to buy new gear.
Hell yeah! :)

* People who regularly visit photo forums or for that matter ‘pixel peep’ can also be wonderful photographers.
Most probably! I believe there are many amateurs here who are more knowledgeable than many pros...

* Manuel focusing can be learned with practice and once second nature, it is almost as fast as shooting with auto focus for subjects not moving so fast.
I doubt it...

* It is ok to use auto exposure modes available in camera and that does not make anyone a lesser photographer.
Probably ture...

Since I do commercial work, I have to ignore the "No insurance + $2000 budget" part and answer the question's "start from scratch" part.

Yes, I'd probably see it as an opportunity to switch to Nikon. I'd go with a D800 body, Nikkor AF-S 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR and Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II lenses.

They would sum up around $6250 and allow me to do 99% of my work.

I feel, I'd probably miss Canon's ergonomics but be happier with image quality and overall.


I never assumed that you had a 5D3, where did that come from?

Look here for the 6fps


    10fps is far important for me.

Since when 5D3 shoots at 10fps.?

If a picture does not have 14DR then there is no need for a 14DR camera. So you would be wasting your money buying a D800 just for the DR (which wont show in prints either)

It's a discussion on 5D3!!!!! It's not assuming you have one!
You said you wanted 10fps, and I said 5D3 doesn't have it!

Gee, man!

I don't feel the strength in me to continue this debate anymore... I give up!
Dynamic range is dog-crap, resolution is pig-crap... Long live Canon!

'Better' is a subjective word that implies personal taste/requirements w.h.y.

If fps is a requirement for a person then if camera delivers the required fps then it is clearly better for that person than one that doesn't

In my case and Keith's clearly we feel the need for fps. Therefore the D800 fails at that point.

5D3 measuring up to your needs doesn't change the fact that it's an overpriced camera that disappointed many people.

Thank you - yes I do understand DR, and yes DPP gives you the DR of your photo. I shoot RAW and DPP gives the DR of the raw image.

Shame you didn't read my equipment line - else you would have spotted that I dont have a 5DIII

Dont worry just buy yourself a D800 and imagine you are getting 14DR even though there is no need for 14DR in the majority of images.

I never assumed that you had a 5D3, where did that come from?

Oh, I will buy a D800... Just waiting for Photokina, just in case Canon accidentally comes up with some serious camera without stuff like rate button and in-camera HDR that you'd expect Sony or Samsung would come up with... If they don't; then what the hell, a D800 and a Nikkor 70-200 sums up around $5000 and should cover fashion shots just fine for starters...

And by the way, what are the facts you're basing on when saying Nikon's DR is imaginary and there's no need for 14 stops of DR? I'd really like to hear that.

Quote from: lola
[DR is] the very essence of image capture!

Oh, is that right, now?

Firstly: any problems with the DR in these images, from my "lowly" 7D?

This to this.


this to this.

I'll answer for you. No, there isn't.

The fact is, DR isn't nearly the unattainable Holy Grail that the whiny, incompetent, malcontent trolls on here would have you believe - and the 5D Mk III is a damn' sight better than the 7D.

Secondly: the base ISO DR advantage of the Noink is just that - the base ISO DR advantage. As soon as you're north of 100 ISO, things are more or less even, and eventually actually become a 5D Mk III advantage as ISO increases.

I never, ever shoot at base ISO, because - for me - shutter speed is always infinitely more important than some notional DR advantage at ISOs I never use: and besides, the images above prove that there's all the DR any reasonable person could reasonably want in any Real World situation - you've just got to know how to get to it, and many don't.

More to the point, I've yet to see the image from any of the whiners that "only" the D800 could produce - and that's because it doesn't exist.

Frames Per Second matters: the wing position of this Short eared owl is "perfect" - not because of any Ninja-like reflexes on my part that allowed me to react to the millisecond to capture the perfect wing position, but because my 7D had the FPS to get just the right moment: I would literally have had only half the likelihood of getting this image if I'd been shooting the D800, and in my experience of bird and sport photography, 6 fps is the lowest frame rate that I would happily work with.

Getting the point yet? The D800 is a nice enough camera, but a complete and utter irrelevance in my world, delivering precisely no useful performance improvements whatsoever for my photography.

The only thing I like about the D800 over the 5D Mk III is the pixel density - but that doesn't get close to outweighing its practical shortfalls in every other context that matters to me.
But you're doing what so many on here do: you assume that what you shoot is what everyone else shoots, that what you want from a camera is all anyone could want from a camera, and that this is therefore all that matters when evaluating one body against another.

Well, you're wrong. Completely, utterly, and unequivocally wrong.

1. Calling people who are asking for better image quality "whiny, incompetent, malcontent trolls" doesn't make you look/sound pro. That's yesterday's trick.

2. Please excuse me for not sharing your low standards for image quality. The shared photos are probably good memories to you but mean absolutely nothing to me in terms of image quality. I would have to quit the business if I delivered the skull and bicycle quality shots to my clients.

I do understand - and even sometimes feel - the need for a high-fps, fast camera. What I don't understand is; how your need of a high fps camera makes the 5D3 a better camera than the D800.

I kindly ask you to quote the post where I've implied that what I shoot is what everyone else shoots, that what I want from a camera is all anyone could want from a camera, and that this is therefore all that matters when evaluating one body against another.

Please don't defend a company as if it's your family business... That way you're missing the whole point; the point that Canon is selling a camera which is below competition spec-wise and above competition price-wise. I don't recall anyone calling the 5D3 crap...

Do you drive a Mercedes or a Ford.

the choice here is:  if a "truly excellent" Mercedes cost USD/€ 2.900 and a "quite good" Ford cost USD/€ 3.300 ... why would anyone in their right mind get the Ford?  :o

It really all comes down to Canon's pricing of the 5D3. It is at least 500 too high, no matter which way one looks at it. And even though there are a ton of people who don't care and will buy anyway, that pricing decision is going to bite Canon in the back, as soon as initial market demand is satisfied.

And the pain will be even greater, if/when Nikon comes out with a FF D600 at around 1500.

I totally agree... If 5D3 was priced somewhere around $2700, there wouldn't even be a D800-5D3 debate... People would simply see them cameras of different segments... Now, along with the expensive new lenses, people who have invested deeply in Canon feel insulted somehow, thinking that Canon, backed up with the market share, is milking them!

Have you checked what DR you are currently using then?
Here is a picture from the weekend - 7DR taken with a 11DR camera.
So what possible benefit would the (so called) 14DR give me?
I believe you're missing the conception of DR... Please read this article for starters.

10fps is far important for me.
Since when 5D3 shoots at 10fps.?

You have to remember that the 14DR is not a straight from the camera 14DR, it is a pp'd image to get it (it is a DxO fabricated number).
Since DxO measures sensor performance, of course they work on post-processed RAW images, what's wrong with that? Don't tell me you're hanging on to JPEG dynamic range in D800-5D3 debate...

Out of the camera the D800 doesn't manage 12DR so in reality the D800 buys very little extra DR.
If by saying "out of the camera" you mean shooting JPEG, that's even worse because if you're leaving how your photos will look to a software engineer, you shouldn't even be discussing dynamic range...

Sorry that reality doesn't match your Nikon fuelled dreams
There's no need to dream of cameras, they are simply tools; just like phones, mp3 players, cigarette lighters, etc... I just go and buy whatever fits my needs... Canon now, Nikon tomorrow, something else the other day... Don't get too attached...

Do you drive a Mercedes or a Ford.

It is your personal choice - but please dont try to make out that we are foolish in our choice just because it is different from yours

Blonde vs. brunette is personal choice, not Mercedes vs. Ford. It's simply a matter of how deep your pockets go! You may not afford a Mercedes but thinking a Ford is "better" is just foolish...

Camera 1 - sports, general purpose

1. I need 10fps
2. I dont need more mps
3. I dont need more DR
4. I dont want ff

Camera 2 - portrait

1. I need 5fps
2. 21mps is enough
3. I dont need more DR
I would prefer a 300 f/2.8 II to a d800

How is it even possible not to want more DR?!?!? It's not a preference or personal taste, it's the very essence of image capture! This is no different than saying, for example: I don't want a camera capturing the color red, it's no big deal since I have all the other colors... That's amazingly and unbelievably... well... I don't want to pick a word for here...

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6