August 21, 2014, 05:00:25 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 - jocau

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
16
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Picture quality questions 6D.
« on: March 17, 2013, 02:51:38 PM »
You will have to do some postprocessing for this, but it can be VERY easy with Alien Skin Exposure 4. Just choose one of the presets and there you go. They offer a very big list of presets (analog look).

17
Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?
« on: March 14, 2013, 06:29:21 PM »
electronic motor control of the aperture blades.(100% electrical contacts between the camera and lens)
wide, high quality lens selection.
fast AF.
option of using nikon, and other glass with adaptors.
ergos-a quick look at the back of their flash units makes much more sense to me than what is on nikon gear.

 that all still applies, but when i moved into the canon system i would have also said that nikon's camera offerrings where a joke. that's not so now. now they have their act together, but then, they were pretty bad. (digital up until the D3) i now have a 1n, but when i REALLY shot film i used a pentax so i can't say.

Also, canons look very nice. they are smooth and modern, nikons look like tractors.

I LOLed because it's sooo true. :D

18
EOS Bodies / Re: Cost of Canon 5D mk III
« on: February 10, 2013, 08:04:02 AM »
Actually it's quite easy. If you REALLY want the 5D3 and don't have the money for it, then just wait until you have the money for it or wait until the price drops. Over here in Belgium the price of the 5D3 is 2.859 EUR which is 3,820.62 USD. So even more expensive. I'm still deciding between a 6D (1.759 EUR / 2,350.64 USD) and a 5D3 (2.859 EUR / 3,820.62 USD).

19
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS 6D Rating by DXOMark
« on: December 13, 2012, 02:26:01 PM »
If you have to raise your exposure by 4 stops afterwards, you are not 'very good' at nailing the exposure... Then again, it's nice to be able to do that without introducing a lot of noise.
Wow! Another clueless self proclaimed expert, making a fool out of himself with the "proper exposure-comment".

Unbelievable! :D That's all I have to say.

I'm no expert at all, but I never ever had to go past +2EV. Probably because I'm not a landscape shooter. I'm also a person who thinks that shadows need to stay true to their nature i.e. being dark and not revealing a lot of detail.

20
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS 6D Rating by DXOMark
« on: December 13, 2012, 01:50:26 PM »
If you have to raise your exposure by 4 stops afterwards, you are not 'very good' at nailing the exposure... Then again, it's nice to be able to do that without introducing a lot of noise.

21
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS 6D Rating by DXOMark
« on: December 12, 2012, 03:22:07 PM »
Nice to see that the 6D has a better DR score than the much more expensive 5D3 and 1Dx. Weakest point of the 6D is its AF system. But then again, people could shoot sports back in the days when cameras were manual focus only. Makes me wonder if we have become noobs because we need a great AF system (e.g. 5D3) to shoot sports nowadays...

22
Canon General / Re: Is canon going to come back?
« on: November 29, 2012, 01:32:42 PM »
Well I'm also one of those guys that worries a lot about Canon lagging behind a lot in sensor technology/performance. That's why I recently played around a bit with a D90 and a D7000 (last summer I wanted to buy the D7000 before I even held it because of its sensor performance). I must say that Nikon DSLR's are a thing of the past for me now. I really didn't like holding those Nikon DSLR's. In my opinion Canon has way better ergonomics (the grip is the best example of this). What I want to say is: don't judge a camera system only by its sensor. Do I wish that Canon made better/competitive sensors? Yes. Can I live with a better sensor but inferior ergonomics? No. Ain't no fun in shooting pictures with a camera that I don't like to hold in my hands...

23
EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF
« on: November 23, 2012, 01:35:26 PM »
I get usable 12,800 Color and 25,600 B&W's out of my MK3. How much more ISO performance could one really need?!

That kind of performance in a APS-C sensor would be groundbreaking.

Because every new month/year, is a month/year closer to new Canon sensor technology. And they have been lagging behind Sony sensors for quite some years now. So maybe they are almost ready to strike back...

24
EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF
« on: November 23, 2012, 12:19:25 PM »
I'm also looking forward to the 6D (and will probably buy it). I'm just scared that the next APS-C sensors from Canon will be so good that they are better than the 6D sensor when it comes down to DR and low ISO noise.

25
EOS Bodies / Re: [Poll] Canon Reign Supreme Again?
« on: November 04, 2012, 05:18:58 PM »
What I meant with that is that it's more logical from a technical point of view. Not that I or any other person prefers very good performance at low ISO. Everybody knows that raising ISO means more noise and less DR.

Got it, thanks for clarifying.

You're welcome. :)

26
EOS Bodies / Re: [Poll] Canon Reign Supreme Again?
« on: November 04, 2012, 05:02:57 PM »
It's more logical that the low ISO performance is great than that the high ISO performance is great.

...makes the assumption we can all shoot at low ISO most of the time, as you apparently can (and here I'm assuming that with current FF sensors, ISO 1600 isn't 'high').  For those of us that routinely need to shoot at greater than ISO 3200, your logic doesn't apply. That's the bias to which I was referring.

Ideally, we'd have great performance at low and high ISO, and everyone would be happy. That's solidly in the fanciful land of 'IF' for now.

What I meant with that is that it's more logical from a technical point of view. Not that I or any other person prefers very good performance at low ISO. Everybody knows that raising ISO means more noise and less DR.

Take a look at these 2 examples:

1) a runner with a heartbeat of 70 bpm (low ISO)
2) a runner with a heartbeat of 180 bpm (high ISO)

Which one most likely has to stop to catch his breath?

27
EOS Bodies / Re: [Poll] Canon Reign Supreme Again?
« on: November 04, 2012, 03:32:25 PM »
I think that most people would always like to use the lowest possible ISO value. If they could freeze motion at ISO100, they would use that ISO value.

If?  How does that work, exactly?  A scene has a given amount of light.  At ISO 100 with the widest aperture usable for the required DoF (or the widest available on the lens), that means a given shutter speed. If that's not fast enough to freeze motion, one can add light (frequently not an option), raise ISO, accept a blurry shot, or give up and go home.  Maybe your 195,000 € car budget could be used to buy a magic wand that alters optical physics?

... that's the reason why people can rather live with bad high ISO performance. It's more logical that the low ISO performance is great than that the high ISO performance is great.

Which people?  You?  Not me. I shoot indoors in ambient light a lot. Much of my outdoor shooting is birds/wildlife at dawn and dusk or under overcast skies, often at f/5.6 or f/8 (and please don't suggest a faster lens - I'm using a 600mm f/4L IS II with a 1.4xIII or 2xIII for the necessary reach).  So for me, without access to that magic wand, the lowest ISO I can often get away with is 1600, and I'm usually at ISO 3200 - 6400.  I can't live with bad ISO performance.

Your 'logic' seems to have a high level of personal bias...

Why such an aggressive attitude in your post? I know it's not possible, that's why the sentence is started with the word "if". And no it's not personal bias. Most of my shots are at ISO800-1600. I would rather have them shot at ISO100 but that's not an option. So I like very good performance at high ISO (hence the reason why I'm probably going to buy the 6D), but I also want very good performance at ISO100. And the latter is where Canon is trailing behind...

28
EOS Bodies / Re: [Poll] Canon Reign Supreme Again?
« on: November 04, 2012, 10:28:32 AM »
Sensor-wise Canon is getting crushed by Nikon/Sony/Pentax. No doubt about it. It's about time they bring out new DSLRs with competitive sensors, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

The 'market' buys cameras not sensors. Market share-wise Nikon/Sony/Pentax are getting crushed by Canon. 

But...crushed?  If we believe DxOMark Scores as gospel (meaning we care about DR and color depth only at ISO 100, and we reduce all of our images to 8 MP), then a 13-14 point difference means less than a 1 stop advantage.  That's crushing?

The D800 is almost 3 stops better than the 5D3 @ ISO100 (DR). Considering that each stop extra, is the same as "twice as much", I call the difference HUGE. Let's go out and buy a car. Your budget is 30.000 euro and mine is approximately 90.000 euro. Let's see who will have the nicest car... And up to (and including) ISO400 the difference is still at least 1 stop. So yeah I call that "being crushed".

The only part where Canon really kicks ass imo (except for lenses) is their autofocus system. But this is only true for their 2 most expensive cameras i.e. 5D3 and 1Dx (only talking about their current camera lineup). Don't get me wrong. I like Canon a lot (held a D7000 in my hands recently and I didn't like the grip at all), but it makes me sad to see how bad their sensors are compared to the sensors of the competition.

Maybe you're right, Canon cannot compete at low ISO with noise and DR.  But Nikon cannot compete at high ISO with Canon, not even close.  This aspect is much, much more important to myself, being a sports photographer.  Everyone has different needs.  Sensor tech lower?  Okay, but in real-life I choose not to buy the D4 simply because I get a much higher keeper rate with the 1D X.  The argument has to go both ways.  I understand that low ISO and DR are much, much more important to others.  Why is it okay that Nikon doesn't compete at high ISO but not okay that Canon doesn't compete at low ISO?  They both lack one or the other.  And please I cannot take another chart.  The D4 vs. 1DX issue has already been tested in the field thoroughly in real-life.

I think that most people would always like to use the lowest possible ISO value. If they could freeze motion at ISO100, they would use that ISO value. People also know that raising ISO means more noise and less DR. Keeping those things in mind, I think that's the reason why people can rather live with bad high ISO performance. It's more logical that the low ISO performance is great than that the high ISO performance is great.

29
EOS Bodies / Re: [Poll] Canon Reign Supreme Again?
« on: November 04, 2012, 10:17:41 AM »
Considering that each stop extra, is the same as "twice as much", I call the difference HUGE. Let's go out and buy a car. Your budget is 30.000 euro and mine is approximately 90.000 euro. Let's see who will have the nicest car...

With 2.7 stops (base-2 exponents), your budget would be closer to 195,000 € compared to my 30,000 €.  That means you could pay for a Ferrari...but in this analogy, you'd be getting the Ferrari engine with the transmission and suspension of a Ford.  Might make for a bumpy ride.  :P

Little price miscalculation on my side... Well that would mean an Audi R8 vs a BMW 316i. Still a HUGE difference. :p

30
EOS Bodies / Re: [Poll] Canon Reign Supreme Again?
« on: November 04, 2012, 09:21:15 AM »
Sensor-wise Canon is getting crushed by Nikon/Sony/Pentax. No doubt about it. It's about time they bring out new DSLRs with competitive sensors, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

The 'market' buys cameras not sensors. Market share-wise Nikon/Sony/Pentax are getting crushed by Canon. 

But...crushed?  If we believe DxOMark Scores as gospel (meaning we care about DR and color depth only at ISO 100, and we reduce all of our images to 8 MP), then a 13-14 point difference means less than a 1 stop advantage.  That's crushing?

The D800 is almost 3 stops better than the 5D3 @ ISO100 (DR). Considering that each stop extra, is the same as "twice as much", I call the difference HUGE. Let's go out and buy a car. Your budget is 30.000 euro and mine is approximately 90.000 euro. Let's see who will have the nicest car... And up to (and including) ISO400 the difference is still at least 1 stop. So yeah I call that "being crushed".

The only part where Canon really kicks ass imo (except for lenses) is their autofocus system. But this is only true for their 2 most expensive cameras i.e. 5D3 and 1Dx (only talking about their current camera lineup). Don't get me wrong. I like Canon a lot (held a D7000 in my hands recently and I didn't like the grip at all), but it makes me sad to see how bad their sensors are compared to the sensors of the competition.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4