April 23, 2014, 04:05:01 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 - bdunbar79

Pages: 1 ... 116 117 [118] 119 120 ... 163
Good point.

Even the landscape shots are darker.  Before I imported as JPEG to this site, I had to slide the exposure bar to the right +0.50.  The 1D4 I didn't touch; it was right on.  The 5D3 was a tad darker than the 1D4, but not nearly as much as the 1DX.  I did center-weighted average metering 5 feet in front of my camera, on the ground, and then I did center-weighted on the sky just above the horizon.  Same thing for all 3 cameras.

This confirms my theory that the 1Ds3 and 1D4 metering was exceptionally accurate.  Of course, accuracy is actually subjective here, but it was noticeable to me when I looked at the photos.

I only shoot RAW.  How do I get a RAW onto this website?

Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8 II vs. 85mm 1.2 II - general opinion
« on: July 30, 2012, 10:30:57 AM »
On a ff the 200 f/2 is the lens to beat

And the one that CANNOT be beaten :)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Recording Media on the 1D X
« on: July 30, 2012, 10:27:39 AM »
I'm thinking maybe the conversion?  I don't know.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X ISO Shots
« on: July 30, 2012, 12:05:14 AM »
Can you see any difference up close?

The auto focus in the 1DX is much faster.  The shutter is super fast.  I actually like it more than the 1D Mark IV.  The 5D Mark III seems to struggle a bit in lower light or objects with little contrast, but the 1D X has been hitting those.

The downside is that the two do not expose and meter the same.  The 1D X looks wrong.  It isn't metering the same as the 5D Mark III and I actually think, compared to the 1D4 and 5D3, it is slightly underexposing.  Auto ISO in manual mode gives different ISO values on the two cameras, the lower being on the 1D X and thus it does look a tad underexposed.  More into that later.

I will next compare outdoor shots again with plenty of light of a church. 

So far other than the 1D body and the faster shutter and burst rate, I really don't see much advantage over the 5D3.  The ISO performance by my indoor examples are not significant enough.  They are super close up through 10,000 or 12,800.  The landscape shots really weren't different enough among the 1DX, 5D3, and 1D4 to really say any difference there, other than the pleasing extra detail present in the 1D X images. 

I'll do two more tests.  The normal shooting situation of a church, and then some action/sports.  Those will really be the true tests, so stay tuned.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X ISO Shots
« on: July 29, 2012, 11:00:28 PM »
So if you do draw any conclusions, I would suppose you'd say the 1D X is slightly better than the 5D Mark III?  I don't even think we need to do the ISO comparison test with the 1D Mark IV; we already know the answer.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X ISO Shots
« on: July 29, 2012, 10:59:15 PM »
5D Mark III ISO 25600 no NR

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X ISO Shots
« on: July 29, 2012, 10:56:22 PM »
Finally the whole scene at 80% NR:

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X ISO Shots
« on: July 29, 2012, 10:55:37 PM »
Next is 12800 and then the mug crops at 25600:

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X ISO Shots
« on: July 29, 2012, 10:53:56 PM »
Same shots with the 5D Mark III:  You decide.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X ISO Shots
« on: July 29, 2012, 10:26:23 PM »
ISO 51200 with crops and NR applied:

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X ISO Shots
« on: July 29, 2012, 10:21:03 PM »
Next is a large ISO 25600

EOS Bodies - For Stills / 1D X ISO Shots
« on: July 29, 2012, 10:12:35 PM »
I took several ISO shots with the 1D X indoors, in fluorescent light.  I did 6400, 10000, 12800, 25600, and 51200.  I then cropped the mug I was shooting at ISO 51200 and did no NR, and then 80% NR in Camera RAW.  I then show the whole scene at 80% NR in Camera RAW.

I will post the 5D3 and 1D4 images next.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: July 29, 2012, 08:41:15 PM »
f/22 doesn't matter here.  The cameras are focused at the same distance, about 5ft.  I wanted a very deep DOF where f/22 gives the best without (me) noticing diffraction and yes f/11 and f/22 are different at a focusing distance of 5ft.  I was not focused at infinity.  I was not looking for a speed comparison in this test, I was looking at what camera might give me the best color rendition on a landscape shot out of camera with no processing.  The 1D X won.  I post-processed each the same and the 1D X looks better, and there is more detail in the grass.  It also metered differently than the 5D3 and 1D4.  This goes for the RAW and processed TIF and/or JPEG.  So, at f/22, shutter 1/125s, ISO 200, focused at 5ft landscape shot, the 1D X looks better to me.  Next will be an f/8 shot of a church, in enough light.  Then, indoor shots at high ISO.  And finally some sports/action shots.  Obviously in sports/action, I cannot replicate images because they are changing, so I'll probably have to shoot a whole game and get an average of what looks best.

Pages: 1 ... 116 117 [118] 119 120 ... 163