April 20, 2014, 08:28:15 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 ... 61
766
EOS Bodies / Re: New Canon 5D mark III raws
« on: March 06, 2012, 10:25:52 PM »
(The D800 would offer 50% more MP and perhaps a solid 2.5 stops better dynamic range at ISO 100 and perhaps between 1/3 stop worse to 1 stop better performance at high ISO. Based on that, the D800 most likely does have an all around better sensor, although it is not set in stone yet.*)

How do you figure the D800's DR is 2.5 stops better than the 5DIII? Just curious.

767
EOS Bodies / Re: New Canon 5D mark III raws
« on: March 06, 2012, 08:34:44 PM »
Super clean at high ISO speeds and tack sharp to boot. Considering the disparity between the jpeg and raw sample images, maybe the in-camera noise reduction and sharpening is to blame for the underwhelming jpegs. Hopefully all the people that were freaking out can relax a bit now  :D

768
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon: 22 megapixels is enough for EOS 5D Mark III
« on: March 06, 2012, 12:15:14 PM »
Take my own example - I'm making reasonable money using an ancient 40D to do events work. This week I delivered some shots to a company who I know will just use these images in newsletters and online. Megapixels are utterly irrelevant in this fairly typical situation - indeed, the client prefers smaller jpgs than the 10MP 40D produces just for ease of sharing and sending!  ???

Where I am losing out is in low light performance - losing shots due to poor ISO quality or to camera shake from longer than ideal exposure times, means my keeper rate is pretty lame. That's why I was holding out for a new (ideally full frame) EOS before upgrading, so a mkIII that promises to improve these qualities over its highly respected predecessor is definitely what I'd like to see.

IMHO, your experience reflects those of most working photographers. I'm far from the best photographer out there, but I'm fortunate enough to earn a living doing this. From a creativity and logistical execution standpoint, I find the low-light and dynamic range limitations of the current crop of DSLRs are far more of hindrance than the sheer number of megapixels that are available. Most pro photogs I know fall into this same category. I think Canon knows this, and geared the 5DIII for this market segment instead of catering to pixel peepers.

Even so, I do acknowledge that the truly bad@ss mofos in this business (commercial photogs, high-end fashion photogs, etc) really do need a ton of resolution. From what I've observed, however, they have so much budget at their disposal that they're already shooting medium format. These are guys with so much budget, a lot of them don't even own their equipment. They just rent out gear, and bill their clients for it. I'm sure the form factor and convenience of a 35mm body would be appealing for them if the resolution and IQ were up to snuff. That said, this elite realm of photography represents such a small percentage of the market that I don't think there's a sense of urgency to prioritize the development of such a product.

That's not to say Canon won't develop a mp monster, but considering the specs of the 1Dx and 5DIII, they obviously felt the bulk of the market wanted all-around performers with great low-light abilities.

769
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon: 22 megapixels is enough for EOS 5D Mark III
« on: March 06, 2012, 11:04:44 AM »
I'm kind of looking forward to the Nikon fan bois posting 100% crops from their D800 with a 50mm lens and requiring 1/200 to get a non-blurry picture when hand held and the screams associated with that.

This point is overblown. The D800 has an anti-vibration mechanism built into the shutter to reduce blur. If Nikon didn't point out the potential effects of blur as a consequence of pixel density in their literature, I wonder how many Canon fan boys would even bring it up? The funny thing is, if someone were to actually read that same piece of literature, they'd realize that when using the D800 in Auto ISO, it selects a minimum shutter speed equivalent to the reciprocal of the focal length.

In other words, even for those that rely on a monkey mode like Auto ISO, Nikon feels they have enough skill to steadily hand-hold a camera using one of the oldest and most elementary rules of photography: minimum shutter speed = 1/focal length.

770
Yes, not so much because it's the better body, but because Canon has more market share.

771
EOS Bodies / Re: More new 5D MK III sample pics from Bert...
« on: March 05, 2012, 03:19:36 PM »
These are simply stunning. Kudos to Canon for creating a low-light beast. The ISO performance seems similar to the D3s despite having twice the resolution.

772
EOS Bodies / Re: Apparently, Nikon users are switching to Canon...
« on: March 04, 2012, 11:28:22 PM »
Guess you're one of those pro photographers who are doing REALLY well and has really deep pockets.  Its not about 'compromise', its about ROI ... as in any business.

I'm not into labels. I don't walk around claiming to be a "pro." I'm just some dude who needs quality gear to earn a living. I'm hardly getting rich doing what I do, but considering the ROI that any new body will bring, whatever sum of money I stand to lose by testing out the 5DIII and D800 is a drop in the bucket, especially when you consider that it will be in service for 3-4 years.

773
EOS Bodies / Re: Apparently, Nikon users are switching to Canon...
« on: March 04, 2012, 11:08:47 PM »
No pro would switch at this point in time, period. These are brand new cameras and completely untested. In 4-7 months, that could change. Anyone switching, based on specs and demo shots, isnt a pro in my book.

Is that right? I'm not waiting 4-7 months. I have both a 5DIII and a D800 on pre-order, and will decide which one to keep based on my own research. If you make a living with your equipment and are pushing the limits of your equipment with every assignment that comes your way, you don't have the luxury of waiting around or basing your purchasing decision on someone else's review of the camera you're interested in. Unless a person reviewing a camera shoots the exact same subject matter that I do, using the exact same technique in the field, using the exact same technique in post production, then their opinion is of limited value at best.

774
Bigger files means increased storage requirements. I've already filled several 1TB hard drives with photos from my 5DII & 7D. 40+ mp would be ridiculous!

I don't care too much about those factors, as disk space and computer hardware is cheap. However, for the type of shooting that I do, a low-light beast like the 5DIII gives me more flexibility in terms of practical use and creativity. Once mine gets here, I will take advantage of its high ISO performance all the time, whereas having a ton of megapixels would be nice, but for editorial work, it would only be a factor in 1 out of 10 shots that actually make it to print.

775
EOS Bodies / High ISO comparo: 5DIII vs. D800
« on: March 02, 2012, 07:11:12 PM »
You could see this one coming from a mile away. These 5DIII images have already been posted here. Just change the number in the URL from "01" to "18" to download them all.

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/01_cinc_big.jpg


Here are some high ISO test images from the D800:

http://mansurovs.com/nikon-d800-high-iso-image-samples

There aren't many direct ISO comparisons (ie 1600 vs. 1600) in these samples, but my own worthless opinion is that the 5DIII at 25,600 looks almost as good as the D800 at 6400, and the 5DIII looks substantially better at 6400 than the D800 at 6400. So, my unscientific conclusion is that the 5DIII tops the D800 by 1.5 to 2 stops.

Discuss :)

776
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D III high ISO samples
« on: March 02, 2012, 04:57:53 PM »
I ran one of Canon's ISO 25,600 samples through LR3 and indiscriminately cranked the noise reduction slider all the way to the right. IMHO, the result is a perfectly printable image and the resolution makes up for the loss of detail due to smearing in all but the largest of prints.


777
Waawaaa. You gotta pay to play. Just looking at the high ISO sample images of the MKIII, I'm happy to pay a $500 premium for it over the D800. This thing is a low-light monster. 

778
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D III high ISO samples
« on: March 02, 2012, 04:28:39 PM »
I just downloaded the high ISO images from DPR.  All the images were taken at 3EV, so they are real low light images.

On my screen, I could see the noise at ISO 102400, but the 8.5 X 11 prints were sharp and clean.  I then printed 3 more, 51200, 25,600, 12800, and they also suprised me.  I could show any of these prints to someone, and they would not suspect that they were high ISO unless they had a magnifier.

These were jpegs with no additional processing by me, I would expect RAW to be better.

I certainly plan to use the ISO 25600 freely whenever I absolutely need it in low light for a fast shutter speed.

Canon has done some real work on the blacks, I can move the black slider in LR4 all the way to the right without seeing any banding.


No kidding. I think this is the test you're referring to:

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/albums/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-low-light-iso-samples

I'm trying to be as unbiased as I can, but I had a very hard time picking up on any noticeable noise up to ISO 25,600. Only at 102,400 does it become objectionable. I'm starting to suspect that my eyes are bad or my monitor is broken :D  Like you said, the noise in the blacks is almost non-existent. It looks like the native ISO range is a legit representation of the MKIII's true low-light capabilities.

Kudos to Canon for creating a high-speed, low-light monster. I didn't think I'd ever say that about any 5D  :D


779
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D III high ISO samples
« on: March 02, 2012, 04:14:31 PM »
Not to date myself too much who was raised/trained and shot professionally with film, The ISO 25600 shots are cleaner than the old 1600 ISO film...  the old film, at high ISO was A) very expensive, and B) almost unusable for anything bigger than a 4x6, and even that look like it was sneezed on.  Technology with every new camera never ceases to amaze me.

Werd. The 5DIII's ISO 1600 samples are FAR cleaner than 200 speed film. That kind of progress just boggles my mind. In fact, I'd say the ISO 1600 shots compare favorably to ISO 200-400 on my 5DC despite the fact that the MKIII has twice the resolution. I'm equally impressed with the dynamic range as well, especially in that image of the glaciers.

I was going to test the 5DIII side by side with the D800 once I got my hands on them, but with results this good, I might just cancel my D800 pre-order outright.

780
EOS Bodies / 5DIII pre-order thread
« on: March 02, 2012, 01:31:57 AM »
With all the hoopla surrounding the 5DIII, who actually put their money where there mouths are and put in a pre-order? Me  :D

My order went in at 12:10 EST at B&H. Hopefully that was fast enough to get one of the first batches.

Pages: 1 ... 50 51 [52] 53 54 ... 61