July 25, 2014, 10:18:10 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 ... 119 120 [121] 122 123 ... 171
1801
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 03, 2012, 12:07:46 PM »
It's most certainly Camera RAW program, which I figured.  It's not the camera.

1802
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 03, 2012, 11:58:48 AM »
Here's one thing I can say.  If you shoot the WB incorrectly in fluorescent or tungsten temps, you can't correct them in post 100%.  If the camera shoots at those temps to begin with, you can.

When you shoot in RAW it does not matter what WB setting you shoot in.  This is simply a preset that communicates to present the JPG rendition or is communicated to editing software to get you close to true neutral grey.

If you shoot in RAW the information in the data file is the same regardless of WB setting.  Much like the NR settings, sharpness settings and picture styles don't matter.  That's the point of RAW.... you have it all there to work with.... ;)

This is not true  :)  Even if you shoot RAW it is being generated depending on settings in your camera. For example, make 3 high ISO shots with different noise reduction settings (no / normal / high) and you'll see difference in RAW (I did this test on 7D, not sure if all cameras behave the same).

Thank you!  This is what I observed too.  I shot Cloudy for both, and obviously got the wrong color.  Ok.  I set to Tungsten in Camera RAW, 1dx was green, 5d3 wasn't.  Next, I shoot in Tungsten WB in camera, 1Dx is correct, 5D3 looks green.  Go figure.

1803
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 03, 2012, 10:55:22 AM »
It may be way better than the 5D3...

Oh, there's no question.  The 1D X is way better than the 5DIII...  Flash back a few years to how the 1DsIII had 'better color rendition' and 'better low ISO performance' and 'whatever' compared to the 5DII, despite the 5DII having a better sensor (according to Canon's white paper on the 5DII/50D).  The theme is the same - there are lots of features that make the 1D X better, but if your main criterion is IQ, you'll save a lot of $/£/€ by getting a 5DIII.

Ok.  I agree with this.  If IQ is similar, then the 1DX is better overall, over all aspects.  I also agree with the finer detail comment by wocka, I saw this myself in a few landscape shots.  I think the less 4mp is probably not an issue.  Only difference with the 1Ds3 is that camera had 21mp.  Perhaps not an issue.  Thanks.  I still would like to a do a macro shot of a flower with both and see the detail comparison. 

1804
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Camera Crossroads :)
« on: August 03, 2012, 10:51:01 AM »
Well, since yes, things have changed for me and it looks like it'll be a full sports contract for a university this whole school year.  I have ONE wedding on November 3, which by this time I'll have to cut all weddings out.  My question is whether I will need the 5D3 at all.  Or should I keep the 1D4 and pickup another 1DX.  I refuse to use the 1D4 for indoor sports if the 1DX is in my kit, I mean why not?  I don't need the reach but I do need the high ISO capabilities.  Outdoors, at low ISO though, I can use the reach.  I always carry two bodies, so my decision will be two 1DX's with either 1. 5D3, or 2. 1D4.  It is certain the one of my 5D3's and the 1Ds3 has to go.  Maybe the 1DX is so good I only need the 1DX and 1D4, two bodies.  Of course then I would only bring one body to volleyball, basketball, wrestling, and indoor track.  I'm thinking the 1DX is an okay replacement for the 5D3 even in resolution.  That's what I'm trying to determine.  It appears as though, when you take shots of say a wheat field, the detail is greater from the 1DX whereas the 5D3 seems to sort of blend the grass blades together.  This is irrelevent in sports though.

I'll probably at first keep a 1DX, a 1D4, and a 5D3 and if I need to do anything else later I will.  I will not be shooting tennis with a 1DX, way too loud.

1805
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 03, 2012, 10:06:34 AM »
I've the 1DX and 5D3 and within the ISO ranges of 400-51200 the 1DX smacks the 5D3 with a big wet comedy fish.

And those are the real ranges to test. I'm fed up seeing the 'here's the picture I took with both, what do you think' posts.

I've shot 5 weddings, some 8000 frames in total with the 1DX, almost the same number as the 5D3 and there is so much more than iso range that's an improvement. The Auto White Balance for one is superb. No real white balance corrections to do in post.

The images have miles more clarity to them too, despite losing 4 mp I can retrieve detail I could only dream of with the 5D3, the hair on peoples heads and pollen on flowers being good examples.

ISO1600 - F5 - 1/160




I'm tired of reading "1D-body syndrome" claims whereby the 1DX just destroys the 5D3.  I have seen absolutely NO image ever so far, where this is true, including yours.  Look at Bryan Carnathan's review even.  He says the same thing.  Can you show us please?  We know you think the 1DX is the greatest thing ever, but why?  Can someone please put two photos together to show this?  I cannot.  I've pushed each camera to their limits and I can see no IQ advantage at all.  It may be way better than the 5D3, but can someone show us?

1806
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 02, 2012, 11:27:59 PM »
Here's one thing I can say.  If you shoot the WB incorrectly in fluorescent or tungsten temps, you can't correct them in post 100%.  If the camera shoots at those temps to begin with, you can.  Interesting.  It's probably Camera RAW though and not the camera itself, I'm guessing.  What else was interesting, is that when I shot in Cloudy and processed the 5D3 image to Tungsten, it corrected almost there.  The 1DX didn't come close as it was rather green tinted.  This is just interesting playing with these RAW files.

Highlights still can blow in the 1DX images, but not as easily as in the 5D Mark III.  And yeah, it seems the shadows look better from the 5D3 vs. the 1DX, although I suppose that could be from cropping and having less MP's.  Tomorrow I won't crop one of them and examine this. 

1807
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 02, 2012, 11:07:28 PM »
Thanks.  My last test will not push either camera.  I will take both to the car show this weekend and we can just casually examine each photo and maybe reach a conclusion or not.  Pushing the cameras is hard to do and it's doubly hard to see any differences in performance with two very high performers anyways. 

It is kind of frustrating because if you remember when the 1Ds Mark III was new you COULD push each camera and see a huge difference as the 1Ds3 just outperformed everything at the time.  Oh well, I think each are great and seem to have their places for use.

I promised you low ISO so I'll do some car show photos but I also want to test the green hue/shadow issue I've noticed on the 5D Mark III in the shade at high sun.

1808
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 02, 2012, 10:38:02 PM »
In these harsh conditions, both camera's photos are equally awful and I don't see any enhanced performance of one or the other.  At least with minimal processing I can't.  I don't think the determing factor for any sane person is going to be high ISO or IQ differences, because they just don't exist.  Speed, shutter durability, AF-point linked spot metering = 1DX.  High MP, high ISO, price = 5D Mark III.

I just am not going to find anything.  I mean, we can argue that the shadows are cleaner on the 1DX or we can pull more detail out of the 5D3's shadows, etc., but it's not significant enough.  The last test will have to be low ISO's, where we saw more green hueing in the shadow areas when people, on a sunny day, were standing in the shade, on the 5D Mark III.  I want to see if the 1DX does this or not.

1809
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 02, 2012, 10:33:09 PM »
1DX shot:

1810
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 02, 2012, 10:32:34 PM »
Well the white balance was still wrong, so I changed from fluorescent to tungsten, which seemed to be a better match.  Both still had a green tint to it some places.  Also, I had to turn NR up to 80% to get rid of background noise in the shadows.  However, that degraded the 5D3 image more than the 1DX.  However, it looks like the 5D3 got the colors correct.

1811
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 02, 2012, 10:27:46 PM »
1DX photo post processed:

1812
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 02, 2012, 10:26:50 PM »
So finally, I took the worst lighting, the recliner shot, and post processed each exactly the same way again.


1813
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 02, 2012, 10:21:13 PM »
Second photo:

1814
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 02, 2012, 10:20:18 PM »
Here are two photos identically shot and identically post processed:

High res versions:

1815
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX vs 5D3
« on: August 02, 2012, 10:14:16 PM »
I was merely looking at exposures.  I can't comment on detail.  You'll have to look at RAW images for that.  I cannot post big enough files on here to do anything further meaningful.  I'm going to post process them right now and post one from each set, around 3MB.

Pages: 1 ... 119 120 [121] 122 123 ... 171