December 20, 2014, 06:47:50 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 ... 126 127 [128] 129 130 ... 174
1906
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 600 f/4L IS II Review
« on: July 31, 2012, 11:52:47 PM »
It was interesting to see the high quality he got using the 1D4 - and of course 600+2x works and with 1.3 crop :D

+1

1908
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 5D MKII. Refurb or New?
« on: July 31, 2012, 09:32:35 PM »
I'd say get a new one.  The price difference isn't substantial enough, in my opinion.  For $300-$400 more, you can get a brand new one.

1909
EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX or 1D4
« on: July 31, 2012, 04:25:54 PM »
Only problem is indoor sports.  If I have the option of taking a 5D3 for a BACKUP camera, or a 1D4 for a backup, the 5D3 is going in the bag because I cannot afford high noise when most of my photos will be going as jpeg to a file and to a webmaster.  So my indoor sports combo is going to be 1DX/5D3.  Outdoors, you better believe it'll be the 1DX/1D4!

1910
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Is this a good time to buy 1D X?
« on: July 31, 2012, 02:07:13 PM »
I have never had an err80 and mine focuses very quickly and accurately in low light with AI Servo.  No issues here, just an awesome camera that has left me very satisfied with its speed and low light, high ISO performance.

Did you notice the shutter compared to even the 1D Mark IV?  I can't believe that shutter.  It goes very fast and doesn't vibrate the camera AT ALL.  I love clicking that thing!

1911
Lenses / Re: Your 70-200 f/2.8L IS II...
« on: July 31, 2012, 02:05:12 PM »
With a B+W UV filter on FF you will notice darkening of the corners in the sky on a sunny outdoor shot.  No problem since I crop.

1912
EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX or 1D4
« on: July 31, 2012, 01:36:28 PM »
Exactly.  The reason I have used the 1D Mark IV for sports is the speed, metering, and 1.3 crop factor.  I actually love that camera and despite having the 1DX, I am keeping my 1D4 so that I can shoot outdoor sports with two cameras this year.  For instance I'll have a football game at 1pm in the fall, and I have to run across the parking lot to do a soccer game (same university campus) at 4pm.  You better believe I'll have both cameras for that day, with different lenses on each.

1913
EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX or 1D4
« on: July 31, 2012, 11:26:11 AM »
Hi Everyone

I just want to hear an opinion from the forum readers, before I decided to buy which camera. Currently I am looking to buy the 1D bodies, I shoot birds, wildlife & landscape and I am not a wedding photographer.

I like the 1D4 because it offers good AF, reasonable ISO and autofocus available at f/8 and I don't mind getting a used body (it's cheaper). On the other hand the 1DX a new AF (autofocus only up to f/5.6) and ok I admit I like the new feature such as built in HDR for my landscape and multiple exposure (something interesting), but it's pricey.

So, in your opinion which one is better to get the 1DX or 1D4?

Thanks

Rgds
ReedZ

Well it depends.  Anything the 1D4 can do, the 1DX does better.  However, for price, if you are shooting sports in enough light, go with the 1D4.  If you do low-light sports/indoor sports, and weddings for instance, you'd get the 1DX or 5D3.  If you love the built-in HDR and ME modes, actually the 5D3 is better.  The 5D3 actually does very well in good light with AF and action/sports.  If you don't need that, and want only speed and fps, and AF-point linked spot metering, get the 1D4.  It's a tough choice for you.  Of course, if you spent the $6799 on a 1DX, seeing as how it's good for at least 400k actuations, it'd be a good, lifetime investment that you would never regret.  The 1DX, 1D4, and 5D3 are all fantastic.  Whichever you buy, the 1DX or 1D4, you'll be happy.  Be careful though about low-light with the 1D4, noise starts showing up pretty thick at ISO 6400.

1914
That's good to know.

1915
Lenses / Re: 35 1.4 vs 24 1.4 II
« on: July 30, 2012, 11:41:51 PM »
Neither are slow.  Shoot sports with the 50L or 85L and you'll see what I mean.  On a serious note, both lenses you question seem to focus very quickly for me.

1916
Fashion, and landscapes basically with the 5D3

When i took them back to the store they could visibly see the banding on the back lcd screen it was that bad. So they refunded them without question.

Some people believe i got bad copies - but I'm not game to buy a 3rd.

Metering is very very accurate on the 1DX - i believed it was 0.5 under each shot but if you look at the target points RBG values its protecting the target from blowing a channel - its rather interesting how they did it. It's not right to my eye but its correct via histo.

The 5D3 is basically identical to the 7D (which to my eye always looked good).

I've owned both so was just giving a little input to someone looking at moving up the series. It may not fall inline with everyones experiences but they are mine :)

I agree, if your 5D3's are gone and you have a 1DX, no need at all to have a 5D3 if you don't currently have one.  Here's what I'm going to do.  For football and track, which are outdoors, I'll shoot with the 1DX and 1D4.  For indoor sports, I'll use 1DX and 5D3.  No flash allowed anywhere in indoor sports, especially college.  And for night football games or night sports outside, I'll probably shoot with the 1DX/5D3 combo again.  Also, I can use the 1DX/5D3 combo for weddings.  My 1Ds3 is great for ISO 50-400 shots outside, and fantastic for landscapes, but that stuff doesn't make me any money.  I'd like to take on senior pictures, which in that case I could use the 1Ds3/5D3 combo.  However, I'm not narrow minded enough to believe that the 1DX's 18mp wouldn't be enough vs. the 5D3's 22.  Time will only tell and it could very well end up I sell some cameras and get another 1DX or even a newer camera that comes out.  I am impressed so far though, with the 5D3's and 1Ds3's color.  I did print a few mini-posters and those 21 and 22 mp's came in handy.  Sports though, who knows, I could end up having to shoot in jpeg.  Canon made too many good cameras :)

1917
I don't think the 1D X is underexposing. I think that the 5D3 is programmed to slightly overexpose in order to force everyone to use the ETTR technique to "boost" the perceived image quality.

Exactly like other have reported, my 1D X meters about 1/2 stop faster (shorter exposure time) than my 5D3. However, the result is a histogram that is dead center. For instance, take a photo of a low-contrast subject like a frame filled with green grass. You should get a peak smack dab in the middle of the screen when looking at the histogram.



I agree totally - I was under the impression that my 1DX was underexposing every shot I took by about half a stop but in fact it was perfectly exposing to the nth degree - not aesthetically pleasing but there are no blown highlights anywhere.

Got ya.  I saw this this evening while shooting a church with whites blown out by the evening sun (very harsh).  5D3 and 1D4 had a bit of purple fringing along white edges, 1DX did not.  Also on a landscape shot it did the same thing.  The 5D3 and 1D4 blew out the highlight, but the 1DX didn't and the distant house looked much sharper.

1918
Mate, I owned 2x5d3's and now a 1DX - there are massive differences in performance and IQ.

For one there is no rainbow noise in the low isos and 12K on the 5d3 is about the same as 40K on the 1DX (with better looking noise and no rainbow effect)

In good light there is no-competition in the af between 2 bodies - the 5d3 is fast - the 1dx is instant.

There is no slow down in af when in body processing is turned on or the battery levels go below 40% like on the 5D3 - the slow down in having focus priority for servo turns 5 fps to 3 - no hit on fps on the 1dx (3 cpus make sure of that)

The facial tracking and light meter on the 1DX is something else - it truly lives up to its 1Series designation.

I don't care for video so cant give input there.

Now the drawback is there is a bug with the AF on the 1DX (and it may extend to the 5D3) when shooting with the servo in low light - see my post http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=7820.0 which I am working with Canon in isolating. But setting the fps to 10 or lower - fixes 90% of the problem.

I don't own the 5d3's anymore - for Me anything above iso 400 isn't worth using, way too much pattern noise, and 3fps is useless to Me. I will be buying another 1DX shortly if Canon fix this bug.

What are you shooting?  I don't notice any difference at all in metering or IQ.  In fact, the 1DX out of camera looks a bit underexposed to me.  Could just be me though, but IQ?  No way.  You just want to see improvement in IQ, so you see it.  It's human nature.  Massive differences?  What rainbow effect?  I've been shooting two 5D Mark III's as well, since April and I have no idea what you are talking about, sorry.  ISO noise about 400???? Wow, did you get bad copies?

1919
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X ISO Shots
« on: July 30, 2012, 11:17:36 PM »
To add on, I don't think Canon intended there to be a huge difference between the 5D3 and 1DX.  I can appreciate the strengths of both.  I think the real comparison would be the 1DX vs. 1D4, which the 1DX was intended to replace.  I'd be really disappointed in Canon if the 1DX blew the 5D3 out of the water with regards to color, metering, and IQ.  What you are paying for primarily is the speed.  If I wanted AF-point spot metering I would have just kept using my 1D Mark IV.  Since I'm doing college sports this year, I'd like the speed.  Just as a disclaimer, that's the reason I personally bought the 1DX.  I knew going in the IQ was not better than the 5D3, and it isn't.  I agree that if you don't need the speed and AF-point spot metering, you really would have wasted your money over a 5D3.  If you need the exceptional speed and want to enjoy 1Ds3 or 5D3 IQ, it's the way to go.  You have to decide if the extra speed is worth double the price.

We'll find out however, with more testing.

1920
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X ISO Shots
« on: July 30, 2012, 08:49:42 PM »
I would say there is marginally less noise in the 1D X, but nothing to really use as a reason for going with the 1D X and only visible side by side. However, to me, the colour reproduction is better in the 1D X, as the MkIII has a slight yellow tinge. Again though, that would be easy to correct and could be done with a preset to save time. Most probably wouldn't benefit from the 1D X, but those that need the features (e.g. weather sealing, speed etc.) would happily pay the extra. AF accuracy may be similar, but the reported increased AF/tracking speed of the 1D X could be the difference in getting the shot, which alone would be worth the extra to pros that have to rely on it to get the shot.

Basically, the 1DX is a speed demon. 12 FPS and unsurpassed autofocus performance.

There are quite a number of other differences between the 1DX and the 5DIII, but none of them are any more significant to real-world shooting than the noise difference we see here.

Unless the 6 FPS of the 5DIII isn't fast enough for what you're doing, there's no reason to spend thousands more on the 1DX. But there are those for whom 6 FPS is painfully, unusably slow, and their biggest problem right now is wiping the drool off the back of their sniny new 1DXs.

I'm just wondering when we'll see the 1DXXX with its 24 FPS framerate and buffer limited only by card space...imagine what the cinematographers will do with that!

Cheers,

b&

Exactly.  I think the IQ and ISO is similar, the next logical thing to do would be to take some low light action, or just any sports for that matter.  Unfortunately my first football game isn't until late August.  But that really is where things will show up.  Low-light, real photography, with action.  I'm guessing these photos will show the advances of the 1D X.  I have a night football game in late August, but that's the best I can do for low-light sports, and the soonest.  If I can find a sports event soon, I will.  I am going to a car show this weekend.  I will shoot the car show with both cameras and process in post as normal, everything business as usual, no RAW files being posted, and do a real-world comparison.  I think that would be the next most meaningful step.

Pages: 1 ... 126 127 [128] 129 130 ... 174