November 27, 2014, 06:20:37 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 - messus

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
16
EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: September 20, 2012, 03:48:03 AM »
Canon has some catching up to do with respect to sensor performance as measured by http://www.DxOMark.com. Canon doesn't even come close to the top performing Nikons.  (High score is better.):

Pts Model
=======
96 Nikon D800E
95 Nikon D800
94 Nikon D600
81 Canon 5D III
79 Canon 5D II

(The Canon 1Dx is not yet rated.)
What are the chances that one of the reasons for the new sensor in the 6D is to catapult Canon's sensor performance into the mid 90's? I can't see Canon doing that considering the $3,500 EOS 5D III just came out and has a score of just 81. But Nikon's new $2,100 D600 kicks butt with a score of 94!

Sensor performance isn't everything... but, if I were to choose Nikon or Canon today, I wouldn't be choosing Canon.

I have said this many times. You CAN NOT compare dynamic range on ISO100, and assume everybody works in ISO100, and that this is the correct ISO to measure by, like DxO does. I RARELY go below ISO 1600 for my kind of work.

BTW! Anyone find it strange DxO has the finished analysis/review of the D600 days after it is released? And they still haven't finished they analysis/review of the 1D-X !?

Well I don't find it strange at all, DxO is tight with Nikon, everybody should know that by now. I will not be surprised if they rate the 1D-X below the Nikon D3100, and neither should you! Do not expose your low intelligence by actually believing DxO is the standard for measuring camera low light and dynamic range performance.

The 5D3 has a MUCH better dynamic range, not to mention the low light ISO performance, than the D800 above ISO600.

Who cares what the Nikonioans down at DxO says, not me!

Have a nice day everyone!


17
Lenses / Re: How do you update Canon lens firmware?
« on: September 01, 2012, 07:29:41 AM »
I have the EF 300 2.8 L II IS, and I want to upgrade the firmware from v.1.0.0 to v.1.1.1, which can be done through either the 5D3 or the 1DX.

Anybody know If the firmware is downloadable from somewhere? I cannot find it anywhere.
I can find though the firmware for the EF 40mm 2.8 lens. So Canon think it is ok for us to upgrade the 40mm ourself, but want to ruin us in shipping cost when sending the 300 II + 5D3 to service repair centre?

Kinda stupid that I should have to ship both my 5D3 and the lens, which is very costly and time consuming, to be able to upgrader the lens, when I can do the exact same procedure from home!! I mean why did Canon include this option in menus (to upgrade fw on lens through camera) when they do not release firmware files to the public??


18
EOS Bodies - For Stills / 1DX exposure metering in manual mode
« on: September 01, 2012, 06:46:30 AM »
Anyone else using the 1DX has discovered that displaying of exposure metering is gone in the top display when camera in manual mode?

You still have exposure metering displayed in viewfinder and LCD screen, but it is obviously more difficult to use, and uses more power (LCD screen on). Come on Canon what is the reasoning behind this?

Really annoying when working with landscape photography for me!!!! >:(

Has it always been like this on the 1D series?? (1DX is my first 1D series)


19
Lenses / Re: Canon 14-24 2.8 - With our powers combined....
« on: September 01, 2012, 06:43:17 AM »
Actually, very few who have tried a 14-24 are really that thrilled.  It is notorious for flare.
Sure, in the studio with controlled lighting, its very good, but, in the real world with a sun and reflections off cars, roofs, buildings, Flare Flare Flare, it seems to just grab it out of nowhere.

I find it hard to believe you know what you are talking about.
I among many, is using the Nikon 14-24 2.8 og my Canon FF bodies 5D2/5D3/1DX with an adapter.
And even if the lens becomes completely manual, and even cumbersome to operate, I still prefere it.

No lens is perfect, neither the Nikon 14-24 2.8, but even if it is a little prone to flares yes, it is still the overall best ultra wide angle lens on the market. Optically the Samyang 14/Rokinon 14 is slightly sharper in the corners, but it suffers from severe vignetting and moustache distortion in the center. I have them both.

The Nikon 14-24 on the Canon is my preferred choice in 90% of my usage scenarios, and I will continue to use it until Canon releases something equally good.

PS! The Nikon 14-24 should not be compared directly to eg. the Canon 16-35, since they are two completely different designs. The Nikon 14-24 is havy, big and bulky compared to the Canon 16-35, but still it is in another class optically. The Nikon 16-35 is comparable optically to the Canon 16-35.  But I would love to have a Canon 14-24 2.8 which performs optically comparable to the Nikkor, even if it becomes LARGE and HEAVY !!

20
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Manual Posted
« on: June 12, 2012, 08:28:30 PM »

1) Ron's numbers are wrong, sadly, check my proof video I posted in this thread. I have used the fastest memory card available, Lexar 128GB CF UDMA7 Pro, which I use daily with my 5D3. The 5D3 Canon also claim to be able to fully utilize any UDMA7 card with up to 167MB/s, which I have found to be wrong.
The 5D3 is capable of almost 100MB/s, about the same as the D4. (tested with speeds which allowed for continous shooting without the buffer stopping)

2) I am capable of shooting 33-34 RAW images at 6fps on my 5D3 with the Lexar UDMA7 card before buffer stops.

3) Seem like I am not entirely correct on the D4, (although I have read several places it could go higher), this guy is achieving 6-7 seconds continous shooting until buffer is full (at 05:45), this should mean 60-70 RAW files:
XQD + Nikon D4 full speed test

I have also done extensive speed testing on my own with the 5D3, 5D2, the D4, D800 and D800E, all with the Lexar 128GB UDMA7 CF Pro 1000x, since I work a lot with stop motion video in the dark, and need the cameras to be able to shoot as fast as possible without the buffer stopping. The 5D3 has about the same write speed as the D4. IMO the D4 is actually slightly disappointing in its computing power, taking into account its fast shutter mechanics. Still its buffer seem to be larger than the 1DX, since RAW files of D4 is actually 33MB compared to 28 on the 1DX.

With the price tag, and the shutter speed and the computing power availbale on the 1DX, I have to say I it is  disappointing Canon did not implement a bigger buffer, given also how cheap flash ram is these days, even if it might be enough for many people.

For my type of work, I am guessing the 1DX will still outperform the D4 (shooting as fast as possible without the buffer interfering), but thats not the only point. Even if my type of work is not what most people do, I also do regular work, such as wildlife and bird photography (BIF), and what If I am shooting an eagle diving down for a fish? This is a moment which could take much more than 3 seconds, sometimes 7-8seconds. But then the buffer on the 1DX is full..  :(

And if I have to turn down the shooting speed of the 1DX to not fill up the buffer, then what is the point of me spending 7000 dollars on the 1DX rather than just using my 5D3 ?

See, now you're going to make me go and buy a Lexar 1000x to get that 33-34 RAW on my 5D3.   8)

I'm assuming the 1Dx you had was a pre-production unit, so perhaps it's still got a firmware update to go before it's at full speed. (Maybe).

It's also kind of weird that the D4 being 16Mpix has a larger RAW file than an 18Mpix 1Dx or a 22Mpix 5D3????

And I totally agree with you on the fact that RAM is cheap....it would be next to nothing to implement a RAW buffer of 60 to 96 RAW images for a 5-8 second burst buffer.

Hehe... Those Lexar cards are expensive, but IMO to fully utilize the 5D3 (and the 1DX) you probably need one.

I agree about the file sizes and megapixels on D4/1DX, strange. Let us hope this is not an indication of the 1DX getting crushed by the D4 in DR! Those pics I have done with the cameras does not indicate that, but we need to see more extensive tests done under controlled environment and lightning conditions.

And yes I really hope the model I was using was an early pre-production model, and that the final model is improved a lot. But to be honest I doubt it. But nothing would please me more than my doubts being proved wrong!! :)

21
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Manual Posted
« on: June 12, 2012, 07:42:32 PM »
Jax, those lenses are extremely slow. They will most definitely shoot at a slower speed since the AF will take longer to lock on. And while I know my 1D MK IV never really gets 10 FPS unless I hit have the camera in one shot, I can use the AF stop button on my super-telephoto lenses to get the max burst speed. This works great for baseball if you want a shot of the ball leaving the bat. 12 FPS just means that I should get at least 10 in AI-Servo. I also noticed a frame rate increase when I updated my 70-200 f/2.8L IS to the newest version. The 70-200 f/2.8 IS II seems to give me an even faster frame rate than my 300 f/2.8 IS or 200 f/2.0 IS but maybe that is just me.

The buffer should hold around 50 RAW images, the 30 image buffer must have been an early model. Keep in mind we are still dealing with pre-production bodies. Lord knows what is inside those.

People are still comparing the 5D MK III to the 1DX, they are completely different monsters. In my testing I saw only a little more than 1 stop improvement in high ISO with the 5D3 over the 5D2. I've downloaded and played with several 1DX files and they look absolutely phenomenal. The 1DX probably has at least a 3-stop advantage over the 5D2.

This is a great year for Canon and I'm excited to finally get a camera body that combines my favorite features of the full frame bodies with the pro sports bodies. At one point I almost switched to Nikon but this is truly the year the be a Canon shooter. I'm already in love with the radio capabilities of the 600EX-RT.

I know I'm a noob to the forum but here are my credentials :)
http://markwebbphoto.com/

I am sorry Mark, but your assumption of 50 RAW files until buffer stops on 1DX is wrong, read my post and watch my video. Buffer stops camera from shooting after 35-36 frames. I wish it was twice as big.

Also, I have tested the 1DX and compared it to my 5D3, 5D2, and the D4, D800,D800E.
No way if the 1DX has a two stop advantage on the 5D3 as you claim, the 1DX has maybe 1/2 stop
advantage on the 5D3. And even if this is good, and just as good as the D4, I was hoping for more from the 1DX. I have lots of RAWs from all cameras, even underexposed to try to lift shadows and check DR in post.

Some beautiful photos at your webpage, great work btw! :)



22
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Manual Posted
« on: June 12, 2012, 07:16:44 PM »
Page.120.

The one thing that dissapoints me with the 1DX is the buffer size and the number of RAW frames possible to store during a high burst.
The 35 frames takes only 3seconds, 3 !!!!! to fill the buffer..

Anyway, there seem to be something strange going on, since shooting m-RAW mode actually decreases the number of possible burts
 shots to 26, while shooting s-RAW mode increases the number to 39. I understand it takes some computing time to resize the RAW, but this will also happen while downsizine to s-RAW. Hence it is strange that the number of frames possible during m-RAW is "only" 26,
which is a ridicilously small number which you will reach within 1.5sec !!  Why could not Canon install a 3 x bigger buffer when the rest
of the camera is built for speed?? (shutter/cpu).  The D4 can shoot up to 3 times more frames than the 1DX.

I have tested the 1DX with the fastest memory card currently available on the planet (Lexar 128G 1000x Pro UDMA7 150/150MBps),
and the buffer was still full after 35frames continious shooting.

Too bad Canon!! :(

That seems to conflict with this report:

http://www.ronmartblog.com/2011/10/hands-on-canon-eos-1d-x-lots-of-photos.html

Quote
When I read about the 12fps performance of this camera I was excited – especially given the larger image size – but I was also worried as my 10fps performance of the 1D Mark III & IV has always been significantly limited by its puny buffer. In my early testing with what I was told was a slow CF card, I was able to get 52 full-size RAW frames in burst mode before the buffer started to stutter. That’s up from 30 in the 1D Mark IV, so that’s promising given the significantly larger file sizes. However, I would have really loved to have seen that number closer to 100 for RAW. RAM is pretty cheap, so I’m always frustrated there isn’t a way to add RAM or do something to overcome this limitation. With that gripe aside, the 52 RAW frames is going to be usable enough in most practical scenarios so this is a welcome relief. This also means that sRAW or JPEG only shooters will find themselves with an endless supply of buffer for sports shooting.

Indeed, and check Ole Salomonsen comments back then in that thread!!! (which he (Ron) called BS!! )

I re-read those comments to get a refresh on that, but dug further to some reliable sources.  When you tested the 1Dx, where and when did you get to test it?

Here's what I'm finding odd on your comments:

1) the 1Dx manual states in RAW the burst is 35 images with a regular card and 38 with a UDMA 7 card.  If the data xfer rate of 167MB/sec (max) for UMDA7 is supported, as stated in the specifications for the 1Dx, then I would expect that Ron's numbers of approx 50-55 RAW images to be about right.  Your statements would have you believe that zero data made it out of the Lexar UDMA7 card, something not possible.

2) I know from experience with my 5D3, I can shoot approx 19-20 RAW images at 6 fps on a SanDisk Extreme Pro 32GB UDMA6 card before the buffer stutters.  The 5D3 manual states it's RAW burst is 13 images, 18 when using UDMA7.  I have not used a UDMA7 card in the 5D3 yet but would expect a little better performance than I have observed.

3) The D4 numbers you claim are highly questionable given reliable testing.  For example, they totally conflict with Rob Galbraith's documented testing.  That testing shows in a 30 second period the D4 using a Lexar 1000x 32GB UDMA7 was able to write 86 RAW+Jpeg images, with a max RAW data rate of 61.4MB/s.  In the same testing with the same card on the 5D3, it could write 75 RAW+Jpeg images with a max RAW data rate of 80.2MB/s .

So, given documented testing by a known method and source of information that is also well know for his like of Nikon, the 5D3 is out performing the RAW xfer rate of the D4 by about 19MB/sec on the same card.  I seriously doubt the 1Dx would be slower than the 5D3.  In combined RAW+Jpeg, the D4 manages just 11 images more than the 5D3 in 30 seconds of shooting despite the 5D3's RAW+L-Jpeg rated burst capacity of 7 images.  And let's not forget the 5D3 is a 22Mpix image....the D4 is 16Mpix, about 30% smaller.

This does not agree with your claims of the 1Dx or the D4's image rates and burst capacity.  The D4 is barely outperforming RAW+Jpeg compared to the 5D3.  So, can you tell us when you tested the 1Dx, where and when did you get to test it with the Lexar 1000x card?

Further, if anyone is wondering why M-RAWand S-RAW numbers seem odd, it because M-RAW is a 10M image which requires more processing (size reduction to a non-multiple of the RAW and processing to handle that).  S-RAW you will note is exactly 1/4 of the original RAW (4.5M vs. 18M), so the math is far simpler, thus the greater burst ability.

D4 Performance:

http://robgalbraith.com/bins/camera_wb_multi_page.asp?cid=6007-12444

5D3 Performance:

http://robgalbraith.com/bins/camera_wb_multi_page.asp?cid=6007-12452&sort_col=raw&sort_dir=DESC

Additional hands on that do not agree with the D4 statements by the poster:

http://www.slashgear.com/nikon-d4-vs-canon-1d-x-burst-depth-continue-shutter-hands-on-videos-13209249/

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/nikon-d4/nikon-d4A6.HTM

http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-cameras/nikon-d4-body-only/4505-6501_7-35117818.html

1) Ron's numbers are wrong, sadly, check my proof video I posted in this thread. I have used the fastest memory card available, Lexar 128GB CF UDMA7 Pro, which I use daily with my 5D3. The 5D3 Canon also claim to be able to fully utilize any UDMA7 card with up to 167MB/s, which I have found to be wrong.
The 5D3 is capable of almost 100MB/s, about the same as the D4. (tested with speeds which allowed for continous shooting without the buffer stopping)

2) I am capable of shooting 33-34 RAW images at 6fps on my 5D3 with the Lexar UDMA7 card before buffer stops.

3) Seem like I am not entirely correct on the D4, (although I have read several places it could go higher), this guy is achieving 6-7 seconds continous shooting until buffer is full (at 05:45), this should mean 60-70 RAW files:
XQD + Nikon D4 full speed test

I have also done extensive speed testing on my own with the 5D3, 5D2, the D4, D800 and D800E, all with the Lexar 128GB UDMA7 CF Pro 1000x, since I work a lot with stop motion video in the dark, and need the cameras to be able to shoot as fast as possible without the buffer stopping. The 5D3 has about the same write speed as the D4. IMO the D4 is actually slightly disappointing in its computing power, taking into account its fast shutter mechanics. Still its buffer seem to be larger than the 1DX, since RAW files of D4 is actually 33MB compared to 28 on the 1DX.

With the price tag, and the shutter speed and the computing power availbale on the 1DX, I have to say I it is  disappointing Canon did not implement a bigger buffer, given also how cheap flash ram is these days, even if it might be enough for many people.

For my type of work, I am guessing the 1DX will still outperform the D4 (shooting as fast as possible without the buffer interfering), but thats not the only point. Even if my type of work is not what most people do, I also do regular work, such as wildlife and bird photography (BIF), and what If I am shooting an eagle diving down for a fish? This is a moment which could take much more than 3 seconds, sometimes 7-8seconds. But then the buffer on the 1DX is full..  :(

And if I have to turn down the shooting speed of the 1DX to not fill up the buffer, then what is the point of me spending 7000 dollars on the 1DX rather than just using my 5D3 ?



23
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Manual Posted
« on: June 12, 2012, 06:32:29 PM »
Video file attached shows buffer of 1D X stop after 36 frames using the fastest memory card on the planet as of today. I had to downsize the video file to 480x270 mpeg2 and compress it heavily to be allowed to upload it here with the file size limit of 4096KB. The Lexar Pro UDMA7 card is mine, I am using it on my 5D3. I brought the card with me to a photography show here in Norway where they had the 1DX. I put my Lexar UDMA7 Pro card into the 1DX and my friend filmed while I kept the trigger until the buffer was full.

This means Ron here:
http://www.ronmartblog.com/2011/10/hands-on-canon-eos-1d-x-lots-of-photos.html

is probably wrong, since I tested the 1DX with a faster card than him, at a later date than him,
meaning the camera at least should have the same or newer firmware than at the time of him testing.


24
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Manual Posted
« on: June 12, 2012, 02:14:26 PM »
I am trying to upload and attach a video I shot when testing the 1DX buffer, proving it can only handle 35 frames, but uploads does not seem to work on this forum.

Filetype I am trying to upload is mpg, did also try with flash (flv), still not working..

25
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Manual Posted
« on: June 12, 2012, 01:17:50 PM »
Page.120.

The one thing that dissapoints me with the 1DX is the buffer size and the number of RAW frames possible to store during a high burst.
The 35 frames takes only 3seconds, 3 !!!!! to fill the buffer..

Anyway, there seem to be something strange going on, since shooting m-RAW mode actually decreases the number of possible burts
 shots to 26, while shooting s-RAW mode increases the number to 39. I understand it takes some computing time to resize the RAW, but this will also happen while downsizine to s-RAW. Hence it is strange that the number of frames possible during m-RAW is "only" 26,
which is a ridicilously small number which you will reach within 1.5sec !!  Why could not Canon install a 3 x bigger buffer when the rest
of the camera is built for speed?? (shutter/cpu).  The D4 can shoot up to 3 times more frames than the 1DX.

I have tested the 1DX with the fastest memory card currently available on the planet (Lexar 128G 1000x Pro UDMA7 150/150MBps),
and the buffer was still full after 35frames continious shooting.

Too bad Canon!! :(

That seems to conflict with this report:

http://www.ronmartblog.com/2011/10/hands-on-canon-eos-1d-x-lots-of-photos.html

Quote
When I read about the 12fps performance of this camera I was excited – especially given the larger image size – but I was also worried as my 10fps performance of the 1D Mark III & IV has always been significantly limited by its puny buffer. In my early testing with what I was told was a slow CF card, I was able to get 52 full-size RAW frames in burst mode before the buffer started to stutter. That’s up from 30 in the 1D Mark IV, so that’s promising given the significantly larger file sizes. However, I would have really loved to have seen that number closer to 100 for RAW. RAM is pretty cheap, so I’m always frustrated there isn’t a way to add RAM or do something to overcome this limitation. With that gripe aside, the 52 RAW frames is going to be usable enough in most practical scenarios so this is a welcome relief. This also means that sRAW or JPEG only shooters will find themselves with an endless supply of buffer for sports shooting.

Indeed, and check Ole Salomonsen comments back then in that thread!!! (which he (Ron) called BS!! )


26
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Manual Posted
« on: June 12, 2012, 01:15:07 PM »
Looking at page 393, it looks like the 1Dx is going to use the same codec as the 5d3(same data-rate), so I doubt their will be any improvement in the video.  That's absurd for the amount of horsepower this thing has. Totally nerfed.

Agreed! Let's just hope the guys at Magic Lantern get things going fast on the 1DX. (1080p/60, 4K video, clean HDMI out)

Still kinda an expensive camera to buy to rely on and wait for Magic Lantern (or others) to enable higher video bitrate, and clean HDMI out!

Canon need to understand it does not help if they cripple the 1DX for features to prevent canibalizing their video department, as long as the competition gives us the features (Nikon=clean HDMI out) there is always a risk of some users jumping ship.

Probably not going to happen for Magic Lantern. They tried to get it working for the 7d which has dual Digic processors which was a problem for them. They have it booted on the 5d3, although it's so far from even having an Alpha release it'll probably be a year unless they can get someone devoted full time to develop on it. If they can eventually figure out multiple Digic cameras, then it may be possible to come to the 1DX, but it probably won't happen.

You are probably right. And the more I think about it, I am considering canceling my 1DX preorder since it IMO is simply not worth it given too few extra benefits compared to the 5D3. (weather sealing put aside). No noticable improvement in high ISO performance, DR or picture quality from what I can see from my own testing. And, in particular due to the dissapointingly low buffer of the 1DX you will in many cases not be fully able to utilize the shutter speed improvements on the 1DX over the 5D3.

And if Canon think I am gonna ruin myself with 15000 dollars to get clean HDMI out from the 1D C, they have to think twice. I know of other ways of getting what I want, even if it is drastic and expensive, it may still be cheaper than spending 15000 on the 1D C.

Hey let's hope ML at least get's things going for clean HDMI out on the 5D3, and maybe even short bursts of 4K video.



27
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Manual Posted
« on: June 12, 2012, 11:54:07 AM »
Page.120.

The one thing that dissapoints me with the 1DX is the buffer size and the number of RAW frames possible to store during a high burst.
The 35 frames takes only 3seconds, 3 !!!!! to fill the buffer..

Anyway, there seem to be something strange going on, since shooting m-RAW mode actually decreases the number of possible burts
 shots to 26, while shooting s-RAW mode increases the number to 39. I understand it takes some computing time to resize the RAW, but this will also happen while downsizine to s-RAW. Hence it is strange that the number of frames possible during m-RAW is "only" 26,
which is a ridicilously small number which you will reach within 1.5sec !!  Why could not Canon install a 3 x bigger buffer when the rest
of the camera is built for speed?? (shutter/cpu).  The D4 can shoot up to 3 times more frames than the 1DX.

I have tested the 1DX with the fastest memory card currently available on the planet (Lexar 128G 1000x Pro UDMA7 150/150MBps),
and the buffer was still full after 35frames continious shooting.

Too bad Canon!! :(

28
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Manual Posted
« on: June 12, 2012, 11:48:33 AM »
Looking at page 393, it looks like the 1Dx is going to use the same codec as the 5d3(same data-rate), so I doubt their will be any improvement in the video.  That's absurd for the amount of horsepower this thing has. Totally nerfed.

Agreed! Let's just hope the guys at Magic Lantern get things going fast on the 1DX. (1080p/60, 4K video, clean HDMI out)

Still kinda an expensive camera to buy to rely on and wait for Magic Lantern (or others) to enable higher video bitrate, and clean HDMI out!

Canon need to understand it does not help if they cripple the 1DX for features to prevent canibalizing their video department, as long as the competition gives us the features (Nikon=clean HDMI out) there is always a risk of some users jumping ship.

29
EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX sample RAW images
« on: May 22, 2012, 08:39:39 AM »
I have few but not from a final version. Canon allowed me to use one for 24hrs last month!

Yeah the Canon representatives kept saying that the final version would have much better images.

I simply do not believe that!

The hardware is finished (sadly since I was hoping for 3xlarger buffer, f/8 autofocus and, headphones out and clean HDMI out).
So only improvementes likely to be done is in software. And I don't need any hidden noise reduction to be applied as I would prefer to preserve details/sharpness and do NR in post myself.

It's a great camera, hey most likely the best DSLR in the world!! But still we want more?! :) Thats the way it should be! :)


30
EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX sample RAW images
« on: May 21, 2012, 12:35:44 PM »
I have LOT'S of RAW files from the 1DX, 5D3, D4, D800, D800E, I took them all myself during a photography stand here in Norway.
I have been trying to compare (in a non scientific way) shots done with all cameras of a similar scene, with different ISO's, and also underexposed down to EV -2 and lifting shadows after.

The 1DX is maybe 1/2 stop better than the 5D3. About same quality as D4.
The 1DX might be slightly better in the shadows than the 5D3, slight less banding.

The D800/D800E is impressive taking into account the huge resolution,
still nowhere close as being that much better than the 5D3 in the shadows as some tests say.

The 1DX (and the D4) is a pricy camera, but I think you pay for getting speed and AF, not just SNR/DR.

IMO all cameras are good on ISO/DR, and the differences are so small it makes little sense for anybody
to claim any camera is substantially better than another. IMO, at ISO25600 things are starting to get useless,
regardless of what camera you use (maybe at ISO12800 on D800).

So not a big difference between the 1DX and D4?  IS one of them better at high ISO or they are really the same?

Hard to tell as the lightning conditions changed as I switched from the D4 to the 1DX, also I missed a little on the focus with the D4, but I think they are pretty similar wrt SNR.

I did a second test shootout between the 1DX and the 5D3, with a fellow photographer, and we both feel the difference between the two in SNR/noise are almost not visible. Maybe, MAYBE 1/2 stop in favour of the 1DX. Don't expect miracles from the 1DX!! But I own the 5D3, and I am still going for the 1DX due to the speed. Still the buffer stops very quick even if I tried with the fastest memory card available on the planet (Lexar 128GB 1000x UDMA7 (150MBps/150MBps).

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4