46
EOS Bodies / Re: do crop sensors really add reach?
« on: October 18, 2012, 06:07:10 PM »
How is a 5D mk2 going to meet your need to not switch lenses as much?
May 24, 2013, 04:12:02 PM
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.
47
EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: October 18, 2012, 06:05:10 PM »
jrista, I think you have just shown that DxO should be completely ignored by every intelligent photographer.
Photographic hobbyists and professionals need test measurements that are highly relevant to their realistic needs in typical photographic situations.
What they DON'T need is a scientific measurement and subsequent aggregation that is completely inconsistent with their needs as a photographer. Complete with company-specific definitions and randomly chosen normalisation points, that one has to read all the fine print to get a grasp of how on earth they came up with that number, score, or ranking. Hello DxO!
Can you imagine a food nutrition analysis website published by scientists, where they publish highest scores for palm oil and birthday cake, and lowest scores for raw fish and broccoli. After delving several levels further into their website you find other surprising and almost bizarre scores and numerics. Then after delving another 40 pages into explanatory papers and definitions, if you are sufficiently scientific in mindset, you will discover that there are no flaws in their logic or measurement methods and their system is completely consistent within itself. How useful is this website? How misleading is it?
Photographic hobbyists and professionals need test measurements that are highly relevant to their realistic needs in typical photographic situations.
What they DON'T need is a scientific measurement and subsequent aggregation that is completely inconsistent with their needs as a photographer. Complete with company-specific definitions and randomly chosen normalisation points, that one has to read all the fine print to get a grasp of how on earth they came up with that number, score, or ranking. Hello DxO!
Can you imagine a food nutrition analysis website published by scientists, where they publish highest scores for palm oil and birthday cake, and lowest scores for raw fish and broccoli. After delving several levels further into their website you find other surprising and almost bizarre scores and numerics. Then after delving another 40 pages into explanatory papers and definitions, if you are sufficiently scientific in mindset, you will discover that there are no flaws in their logic or measurement methods and their system is completely consistent within itself. How useful is this website? How misleading is it?
48
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Considering switching to Nikon
« on: October 18, 2012, 05:23:56 PM »
yes, where is RGF? So much for starting a thread with the words "I want a serious discussion". 
As for friedmud, congratulations on your purchase mate, I hope you have great pleasure in this great hobby with your new kit.
However, looking at your reasons, you had better be prepared to switch straight back to Canon again the day their products match your needs better -- which could get expensive. And you have just walked away from the best lens kit in the land -- which can easily affect one's photo IQ.
My advice: if you are unhappy with IQ on the Canon side... try Sony! At least they make their own senors, so their product is fully integrated like Canon. And they have a range of AF Zeiss lenses to appreciate. But be prepared for your hobby investment to start spiralling.
Canon is still the best long term investment in terms of total system value and results, looking beyond the short-term leap-frogging of individual camera releases.
As for friedmud, congratulations on your purchase mate, I hope you have great pleasure in this great hobby with your new kit.
However, looking at your reasons, you had better be prepared to switch straight back to Canon again the day their products match your needs better -- which could get expensive. And you have just walked away from the best lens kit in the land -- which can easily affect one's photo IQ.
My advice: if you are unhappy with IQ on the Canon side... try Sony! At least they make their own senors, so their product is fully integrated like Canon. And they have a range of AF Zeiss lenses to appreciate. But be prepared for your hobby investment to start spiralling.
Canon is still the best long term investment in terms of total system value and results, looking beyond the short-term leap-frogging of individual camera releases.
49
EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: October 17, 2012, 08:59:56 PM »
Just want to post my thanks for posts #360-364, the additional perspective is useful to me.
50
EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: October 17, 2012, 03:14:06 AM »...As to the continued assertion that downsampling can not increase bit depth, ....
Is that the assertion? Or is the assertion that a 36 MP sensor with 13.2 bits of DR at 36 MP should be described as having 36 MP of resolution and 13.2 bits of DR?
51
Canon General / Re: Rockwell knocks one out of the park (no kidding)!
« on: October 17, 2012, 02:31:35 AM »Isn't there a difference between art and hobby too? ...
And an even bigger difference between art and profession!
52
EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: October 16, 2012, 05:51:30 PM »....<<to neuroanatomist, repeatedly>>...a link please to your scientific papers
Mikael, that is inappropriate and I think you should stop it. Everyone here is entitled to (a) their opinion, and (b) their anonymity if they choose it.
Discussions here can develop on the weight of the information and argument presented; there is no need to rely on the weight of authority. To do so would be short-cut thinking, relying on circumstantial evidence rather than the evidence itself.
53
EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: October 11, 2012, 02:24:22 AM »I encourage everyone to let Canon know of your disappointment with their recent sensor performance (compared to the competition). ...
No thank you, too busy making great shots with my 7D using its excellent sensor.
54
Canon General / Re: DxOMark vs. Reality
« on: October 11, 2012, 02:19:58 AM »This is 5dmk2 and d800 shooten against sun and clouds, exposed so the sky and clouds are visible,
same time, f-stop and 100iso
both images lifted in the same way in photoshop so we should be able to see country landscape.
DR
Sorry but this set is bull. Not a believable comparison at all.
Makes one wonder if he is just a troll.... posts are exclusively anti-Canon pro-Nikon (Sony type N)
55
Canon General / Re: DxOMark vs. Reality
« on: October 10, 2012, 09:22:44 AM »....I know, that most of you simply do not care about facts, but for the rest, who are more open minded, I explain (once more).
DxO Analyser is not made for the photographers. It is for the engineers and technicians. ...
And what do they do with it?
56
Canon General / Re: DxOMark vs. Reality
« on: October 10, 2012, 09:19:30 AM »IIRC, the DxOMark website says (somewhere) that their sensor scores can only be used to compare sensors of the same resolution (MP). So, first decide the resolution of sensor you are interested in (need), then compare sensors of that resolution.
It's a great point, and thanks for mentioning it!
@dtaylor, it's at the bottom of this linked page, which is easily accesed from the About tab. Of course, that page also states, "Sensor Overall Score AND resolution are two independent metrics of sensor performance." Since the Sensor Overall Score is based on image data normalized to a fixed resolution (8 MP), and since the greater the resolution of the sensor relative to that fixed value, the greater the differential impact of that normalization, that would seem to make the Sensor Overall Score a dependent measure, not an independent measure. But it's been a while since I took basic statistics, so maybe they've changed the definition of an independent measure since then...
well spotted! Half way down the same page says "So before comparing cameras with Sensor Overall Score, it is important to first determine the resolution you are looking for (which largely depends on the size of the screen or the print you intend to use or produce). Once you choose an appropriate resolution, the Sensor Overall Score becomes a fair and powerful tool with which to make comparisons." My memory was pretty good from a couple of years back!
Quote
@tnargs, if anything, that just makes the main point of post #1 even stronger.
yes, my point
57
EOS Bodies / Re: what happened with Canons APS-H sensor with 120megapixel?
« on: October 09, 2012, 10:11:52 PM »Maybe it was so depressed over its lack of DR compared to Nikon that it OD'd on sleeping pills. LOL....
Make that 'compared to Sony'.
I wonder where Nikon's latest announcement is over THEIR latest sensor development?
Oh, here it is, an article on nikon.com on the development of their D3 sensor! And guess what, they make a big fuss over the superior IQ from developing the sensor in-house: "...we took advantage of the fact that the sensor was being developed in-house to investigate how best to match the CMOS sensor with the capabilities of the NIKKOR lens, and were thus able to bring out the full capabilities of the photographic lens. In this way we succeeded in obtaining a high level of image quality. Further, with the sensor being fitted to our flagship camera model, we have been able to incorporate functions and technologies that are effective for producing a high level of image quality without any compromise. "LOLOLOL
58
Canon General / Re: DxOMark vs. Reality
« on: October 09, 2012, 09:56:20 PM »
IIRC, the DxOMark website says (somewhere) that their sensor scores can only be used to compare sensors of the same resolution (MP). So, first decide the resolution of sensor you are interested in (need), then compare sensors of that resolution.
Post #1 doesn't seem to recognise this.
Post #1 doesn't seem to recognise this.
59
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Considering switching to Nikon
« on: October 09, 2012, 03:32:20 AM »
You seem to have an inflated opinion of Nikon lens IQ and an inflated opinion of Canon lens prices.
"Canon's 24-105 is probably better than Nikons 24-120." Probably?? The Nikon is widely regarded as a terrible lens.
You deliberately put this on a Canon forum so I will give the only fair comment: Don't Do It!
If you want a serious discussion why not post what 2 kits you are thinking of buying and what kit you have now, and what your photographic aim is.
Picturesbyme is right: you don't have to switch camps to get great photos. So why do it?
"Canon's 24-105 is probably better than Nikons 24-120." Probably?? The Nikon is widely regarded as a terrible lens.
You deliberately put this on a Canon forum so I will give the only fair comment: Don't Do It!
If you want a serious discussion why not post what 2 kits you are thinking of buying and what kit you have now, and what your photographic aim is.
Picturesbyme is right: you don't have to switch camps to get great photos. So why do it?
60
EOS Bodies / Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« on: October 08, 2012, 08:25:53 PM »....Recently I had a few photos with a somewhat dark sky where it literally looks like it is raining because of the vertical noise bands in the more solid areas of the sky.
Send your unprocessed cr2 files and your camera to Canon and get it fixed. I have the same body and I have never had a dark sky 'literally look like it is raining'. You say it is 'recent' and 'a few photos', so get it looked at.
Quote
I've been trying to just "push on" with my 7D... but the continued poor IQ out of my camera and the prices on everything Canon releases going up... and then the announcement of the 6D (which doesn't fit what I'm looking for) all adds up to me selling my gear and moving to Nikon.
You mean Sony type N. Given your emphasis on sensor performance, that's the new name for Nikon. (Wouldn't it be neat if Sony took over Nikon and produced two camera ranges, the alpha and the nu?)
Quote
I hope that people who stick with Canon end up getting what they want eventually... I would love to wait but I can't deal with what's coming out of my camera right now...
Most Canon users are getting what they want NOW, thank you. Some Canon, Leica, Sigma, Pentax, Olympus, Sony and Sony type N users are not getting what they want; it's a generic disease.
P.S. if your objection to a 5D III is price, jumping to Nikon makes no sense given their pricier and optically inferior lens range. You will lose out in dollars (and in imaging results (sensor + lens) if you are a chronic pixel peeper, although I maintain excellent and satisfying photos are available from any of the major brands).