November 26, 2014, 07:43:25 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.

Messages - V8Beast

Pages: 1 ... 50 51 [52] 53 54 ... 70
EOS Bodies / Re: So frustrated with new 5DmkIII - returning it!
« on: March 25, 2012, 08:28:23 PM »
Me too!  I was having such high hopes!  Hopefully a different unit will be better!
I'm very keen to hear how you new unit goes because so far I'm concerned about the IQ of the images too
I'll probably wait unti proper raw converters are out before i look at taking it back
I think canon need to get a firmware update out STAT that fixes the horrid in camera jpeg processing too
I think i'd be happier with jpegs out of a rebel than this thing puts out

Ouch. Sounds like your 5DIII is performing like a dud so far. What specifically about the IQ is so bad? If the jpegs look worse than a Rebel, I'm hoping I'm not in for disappointment when my 5DIII shows up this week.

That you two are still arguing around this point puzzles me greatly.  You both have valid arguments and understand the limitations of the equipment.  From my point of view, you both are in agreement, even if it's from different perspectives. :)

I have no beef with LetTheRightLensIn. Anyone who can tolerate my bad jokes on the internet if cool in my book :) Seriously, though, he makes some good points even if we have to agree to disagree on other points.

I wish I had a FF Canon body that performed like that cheap little Nikon for low ISO IQ!
If V8 Beast had such a camera, he could simplify his shooting by being able to leave some of those reflectors in the van. :)

Nonsense. I quite enjoy trying to train an assistant on how to catch the sun at the correct angle with a reflector without having it get blown away in the wind :D Good times.

If an entry-level FF camera pans out, it would certainly explain why Canon priced the 5DIII at $3,500. It would make for a great backup body as well for those using a 5DIII as a primary body. Maybe this will be the mega-resolution FF body people are waiting for. It would make a lot of sense to pack it full of MP, regardless of whether or not it improves or degrades IQ, since it would have to lure those accustomed to getting 18 mp Rebel for $500.

« on: March 25, 2012, 02:51:55 PM »
The reason images might look slightly soft (i.e. not tack sharp) with a high resolution sensor like the D800's or the 7D's is because the sensors are outresolving the lenses at most apertures.

That makes sense. That said, the guy commenting on the LensRental website was complaining about the measures that must be taken to avoid vibration-induced softness, whether it's due to a long shutter speed, camera shake, mirror vibration, long focal lengths, or all of the above. If you jump up to a high MP sensor as in the D800 and experience softness due to any of those issues, anyone who understands the most elementary of photography techniques should be able to figure out what went wrong. If you can't, why on earth would you buy a $3,000 camera? To criticize Nikon about this, as if they're responsible for someone who gets in over their head with equipment they obviously don't know how to use properly, is just silly.

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5Diii ISO and Portrait Tests
« on: March 25, 2012, 12:57:27 PM »
This thread is useless without the model's phone number ;D

The big question is, how do you market an entry-level full-frame camera? If I'm an entry-level consumer that equates image quality to megapixel count, I'd expect a $2,000 camera to have substantially greater resolution than a $500 Rebel.

« on: March 25, 2012, 12:48:09 PM »
According to this test, if you're a portrait photographer, or someone who shoots at wide open apertures, the 14 megapixel advantage of the D800 over the 5DIII is negligible? I rarely shoot wide open, but I just want to make sure I'm interpreting the data correctly.

Too bad they didn't get to put the 5DIII through the same battery of tests. If I carried through with my D800 purchase, which I'm not at this point, the 70-200 VRII was going to be my primary workhorse lens, so it's interesting to see how poorly the performed compared to the primes. Plus, with long lenses I usually shoot stopped down to f/8 or f/11, negating the D800's resolution even more.   

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: 600EX-RT Flashes now in stock
« on: March 25, 2012, 12:09:42 AM »
I walked back to 300' (the other goal post on the field) and was able to shoot nearly 100% of the time assuming camera and flash were used at a normal shooting height.

Thanks for the comprehensive writeup. I wasn't too impressed with the advertised range of these flashes at first, but it looks like Canon  had underrated them. A 300-foot range is very impressive. Yes it's pricey, but Canon's new RF system eliminates several third-party add-ons from your camera bag, which also means there are fewer batteries to worry about.

@V8Beast: I'd save your breath, man. LTRLI, regardless of how he may have started out on this forum, has essentially become a troll.

It's all good. He makes some good points, and I make some bad jokes, so it's a good tradeoff :D

1. on track testing, is still testing, not 'real world' races and sure it is important, once you get down to a car on the road and drivers you are into a super complex scenario, far beyond measuring single things which is more like what dynamic range is

A race track is hardly a lab. It's where you see if all the theoretical elements of the car you designed on computers, on the dyno, and in the wind tunnel stands up in real life. Track testing is very much a real world scenario, as it eliminates all the other factors outside of vehicle performance (driver skill, pit crew performance, tire degradation, pit strategy, good ol' luck)  that can affect which position a car finishes the race in. How quickly you can bust off a single lap in qualifying is largely viewed by engineers as the ultimate yardstick of performance.   

2. you can bet all the teams would be wayyyy behind where they are if not for lab tests, so many more parts and specific little bits would take so much longer and waste sooo much more money to develop

Very true, which validates the importance of off-track R&D. Like I said before, the trick is finding an ideal balance of lab and track testing :) Ferrari - along with some camera tech heads - seem to lack this balance :)

But the low ISO dynamic range is wayyy behind Exmor sensors though and even quite a bit behind the best non-Exmor stuff Nikon is doing (D4), I really thought they'd have at least gotten it to D4-level.... I do find that quite disappointing. For the landscape-type shooter, the 5D3 really adds virtually nothing over the 5D2 (for stuff relying on AF or better body response it should be much better than the 5D2 though).

That's fair enough. Let's just say that the D800 is the king of resolution and DxO DR, while for some the 5DIII is a better all-arounder. I can see how the 5DIII might be a disappointment if you're a landscape shooter, but then again I can see how the D800 would be a disappointment if you're a Nikonian who was expecting it to be a baby D4. At any rate, both are great cameras that will far exceed the abilities of many photographers.   

Based on DxO perhaps Canon is falling behind on sensor tech. Maybe Nikon stole all of Canon's best engineers :) Who knows. I supposed the 1Dx is the wild card right now, and maybe it will have some pleasant surprises up its sleeves for the pixel-peeping faithful :)

EOS Bodies / Re: What are you shooting first on your 5Dm3?
« on: March 24, 2012, 04:55:32 PM »
A '69  Boss 302 Mustang :)

The resolution and ISO performance of the D800 is very impressive, but where's the color, contrast, and sharpness? The overall IQ doesn't look much better than what you can get out of a 7D.

Those of us asking for more dynamic range didn't just decide to ask it because we saw a difference on some test chart.

That might apply to you, but not everyone else. There are tons of posts on here where people are going poo poo over the 5DIII based not on how poorly it performed in the field, and how its poor DR was the difference between capturing a great image and coming home with a junk image, but based on the DxO findings alone. Am I the only one that finds that bizarre? 

I do regularly hit scenarios where I really wish I had the 3 more stops DR (although certainly for many shots it won't make any difference at all, as well). And I think the same goes for most doing the same.

I'd venture to say all photographers run up against situations like this. I do all the time. My point is that there's always a disconnect between lab tests and field results, and right now, I'm having hard time actually seeing the 3 stop DR advantage of the D800 in the sample images that are rolling out. Your results may vary :) Come on, three stops of DR is HUGE. The difference should be very obvious outside of the lab, should it not?

Getting back to F1, Ferrari has gone from mopping everyone one up in the early '00s to struggling to keep up with McLaren and team Red Bull since the FIA banned off-season and in-season testing. They have their own freakin' track in Fiorana, Italy that they can't even use anymore. I'm sure if they could get back to doing some on-track, real world testing, their F1 program would be much more competitive. Furthermore, one of the new scrub F1 teams designs their cars entirely on computer. They don't do much testing at all, because they don't have the funds to do so. And guess what? They suck, and are always getting lapped within the first half of a race.

Whether it's in photography or F1, there needs to be a balance between lab testing and field testing. Unfortunately, the only thing many people seem to care about are lab results, and last I checked, you don't hang lab results on your wall and you sure as hell don't sell lab results to a client.

Many people are now raving about the awesome 5D3 AF, and quite a few of the ones who are now going on about how awesome it is are the very same people who called those of us who called out the prior non-1 series AF stuff like pathetic Nikon trolls or silly little people who just need to learn how to shoot properly or told us that is was absurd to ask for top AF in something that wasn't a 1 series. So us know-nothing Nikon trolls perhaps helped get them the very thing they are raving about now and said was impossible to even think of hoping for.

This is the body rumor forum, not a serious how to take better photos forum, so I don't know that it is a bad thing to call Canon out here

I have no problem calling Canon out when it needs to be called out. Before the karma system went away, I had the smites the prove it :) I just find it odd that people are talking about the 5DIII like it's something to wipe your @ss with when you run out of toilet paper based solely on the lab tests conducted by a single group of tech heads. That's not to say lab tests are useless, but rather they're not nearly as useful as determining the strengths and shortcomings of your equipment based on how you actually use it in the field.

I'm sorry, but when some posts images that they took of their girlfriend's hairy arm pit, and marvels at how much detail they can see in every last pungent follicle at 100%, I can't take them seriously. The D800 appears to be a terrific camera, but I doubt that's the intended use Nikon engineers had in mind when they designed it. Maybe that's your idea of creating art if you have a strange armpit hair fetish, but I other strange fetishes to attend to that don't involve photography ;D 

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Mother of God - D800 scores 95 DxOMark
« on: March 24, 2012, 02:43:28 PM »
I congratulate Nikon on producing a stellar camera in the D800. Now can someone please post sample images taken with both a D800 and a 5DIII, where the D800 made them a better photographer? I have a feeling that I'll be waiting for a long time.
Even when you do pixel peep, people reach different conclusions based on their biases. If this is someone's idea of enjoying photography, I find it quite pathetic.
To my eyes, however, the real-world benefits of its awesomeness are tough to spot in most of the images taken with it so far.
And yet you'd already decided that the D800 was the way to go, purely on the basis of spec sheets.

Thanks for digging that up for me, although you could have figured out that I ordered up a D800 (and a 5DIII for that matter) right here on Canon Rumors. I'm sorry you find how I choose to spend my own money so offensive.

It is interesting to read back to see how much my opinion has changed in the last couple of months. When I posted that, the rumor mill was swirling with a 5DIII with only a slightly improved AF and a 3-4 FPS burst rate. It didn't look like Canon would address my two biggest gripes with the 5DII, but they delivered big time. I never dreamed that Canon would put its flagship 61-point AF system and a 6 FPS burst rate in the 5DIII, but they did.

For me, the D800 is a camera whose specs are very impressive, but my enthusiasm has fizzled now that sample images from the wild are coming in. The 5DIII, on the other hand, is a camera whose rumored specs seemed very underwhelming at a time, but that changed once Canon seriously upped the AF and FPS ante, and it has impressed me more by the day as real world sample images start rolling in. 

Hopefully that's OK with Mr. KeithR, but if not, I don't care. How someone chooses to spend their own money is none of my business.

Difference between a pro and an amateur

The amateur will do anything for the right photo
The pro will do anything for the right money


You have it all wrong. I see lots of amateurs that have much nicer gear than many of my pro photog buddies. That must mean that the main difference between a pro and an amateur is that amateur has more money ;D

Pages: 1 ... 50 51 [52] 53 54 ... 70