April 21, 2014, 02:31:54 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 - fman

Pages: [1] 2 3
EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 30, 2013, 04:42:01 AM »
That was when I realized I really really really hated the EVF. I have spent 9 months with the OM-D and it has given me some great photos. But I just cannot put up with the EVF anymore.

Interesting, actually I like EVF especially in case of video where you see nothing in the viewfinder of the DSLR (so EVF or something like that has to be used, which negates the aim of touch screen...).

Btw how many days of experience do you have with the 70D? I could get my hands on one only on Monday this week...

But like I wrote, I have still both systems. I'm ready to accept if someone dislikes the EVF.

EOS Bodies / Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« on: August 30, 2013, 04:01:04 AM »
It's a bit disappointing to see that Canon fails to improve its APS-C sensor generations after generations, however it's still too little reason for me to swap my Canon system (although I use it less and less nowadays).

The much rumored Olympus OM-D E-M1 and 12-40 looks very interesting though and for me as casual shooter (I don't need any of the special glass that Nikon has no equivalent, in fact I don't need even glass that mFT has no equivalent) it looks much more appealing than any of the Canon APS-C offerings.

Olympus has sensational sensor stabilization system already now and the E-M1 is rumored to have also sensor based PDAF.  I don't know though if its similar or not what is introduced by Canon.

FF is a different story, the much bigger pixels mask the inferiority of the Canon sensor tech. but to invest a whole range of huge/pricy FF lens is something I'm unwilling to do.

So in short as time passes the behind the competition DR of Canon APS-C has started to loose quite much relevance to me as not only in that but in many other areas Canon APS-C has started to be behind the competition. Panasonic e.g. introduced also IBIS in GX7 and E-M1 is rumored to have also sensor PDAF.
So my lightweight mFT system can easily beat Canon APS-C for 99% of the time. Those who are after e.g. BIF shooting probably Canon is still the only way to go but for most what I use APS-C mFT starting to offer a lot more not just DR.
This is not measured at all by DxOMark...

EOS-M / Re: EOS M replaced my 5D kit
« on: August 07, 2013, 02:29:07 AM »
I found my GX1 to be a lot better replacement to DSLR than the M

14mm f2.5 for wide shots (28mm), adding Sony VCL-ECU1 for ultra wide (20mm)

20mm f1.7 for wide-ish normal with big aperture (40mm)

45mm f1.8 to tight portait shots (90mm)

The line up is a lot better than the dinky kit of M, those lenses are also smaller, light, have larger aperture.

Oh, forgot to mention the GX1 can actually focus, fast that is!

Speak of ultra-wide, nothing in the same weight/size range beats the Lumix 7-14.


14 2.5 -> 12 f/2 (24mm)
Considering Pana GX7 nowadays (but may reconsider the E-M5 successor).

Small, light and superb IQ (even wide open). AF is fast except for 20 1.7 but for that there is the 25 1.4 as an even better alternative.

EOS-M is lacking lens, focusing speed and recent mFT bodies have e.g. better shutter (1/8000).

Excellent (and very inventive) idea.
Unfortunately the resolution probably will be somewhat reduced, so real improvement should rather come from the sensor.
I hope that Canon will improve the sensor readout noise in future sensors so that there is no need for SW tricks.
Even the full well capacity is bigger for Canon sensors (due to bigger pixels) the readout noise is so high that in case of low ISO it cancels all the advantages of big pixels and limits the dynamic range.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Olympus OMD EM5 or 6D
« on: May 30, 2013, 02:47:11 AM »
6D (or any FF DSLR) wins in background blur and high ISO noise/DR (if you don't mind the shallower DoF, which in most case only disturbs me). The latest mFT bodies win in everything else (at least for me). Not even an mFT system is pocketable (because we're talking about several lens still).
The Oly E-P5 with its 1/8000 shutter speed and 1/320 flash sync. gives some hint what can be expected in the EM5 replacement which is due this autumn.

I have both Canon and mFT system for about a year now and I'm seriously considering entirely switching to that EM5 replacement. The reason is simple: I'm using Canon less and less nowadays (for portability reasons and recent small Canon bodies don't help in that as the lens are still huge compared to mFT; so actually from balance perspective it's getting even worse).
I'm happy with the amount of background blur that the Oly 45 1.8 can provide (though due to its FL it's mostly for outside) and the quality of blur I can compare only with Canon 50 1.2L which I also happen to own (and use on crop body).

The very powerful Canon flash system and the better balance with it is that I'll probably miss (as any good enough flash is just too big for the small mFT bodies).

EOS Bodies / Re: A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]
« on: April 16, 2013, 01:54:59 AM »
DXO tells us the sensor is useless, yet somehow people manage to take great pictures.

I managed to take great pictures 15 years ago with my SLR and yet I use DSLR nowadays (beyond micro 4/3).
I managed without mobile phone 20 years ago but I use it continuously nowadays.

Technology moves on. Not so Canon's APS-C sensor tech. They are still living in 2009.
The 18 MP is perfectly fine for me and I think for the most (the last thing I'd wish for more MP with Canon's sensor tech from 2009) but hopefully they improve the per pixel quality.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T5i Leaks
« on: March 20, 2013, 10:46:45 AM »
Canon must be doing something right with their "crappy" sensors.

Nothing was wrong with the 18 MP Canon APS-C sensor when it was introduced. But since sensor technology has advanced. There were visible signs in Nikon D5100 then in OMD E-M5 and so on.
What IQ improvements are visible in recent APS-C Canons, let's say in the last 4 years? None that I've noticed.

Does anyone here seriously feels that Canon development in APS-C segment accelerates?  :D

How about the 5DmkIII that Canon was ready to introduce with SD card support but without UHS-I support? Has anyone heard about the issue? Then just check if Nikon D7000 has UHS-I support. Wait when was D7000 introduced? 2010? And when was 5DmkIII introduced?

So how true that not everything is about sensor...

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T5i Leaks
« on: March 20, 2013, 10:17:42 AM »
if you want to buy a competitive camera from canon today you have to pay 2800$ for the 5D MK3.

evertyhing below that you better buy a nikon product.. sad but true.

and i really wonder about the fanboys who still, after 4 generations of nearly identical APS-C bodys, defend canon.

how dum* must someone be to defend big corporations that want nothing more then screw you for your hard earned money.
and to the knee jerk who thinks about writing "then don´t buy canon".... that´s exactly what im doing!!

as most 550D users wrote.. there is no reason to update to a new xxxD model.

Sad, but so true.
I take most of the time only mFT stuff with me as that's smaller/lighter (and IQ wise I don't feel loosing anything). So that's with me in the 99% of the time.
In the rare occasions when I carry my bigger photo bag which has also 550D/T2i + an L zoom in it I use almost exclusively my mFT stuff (Canon stuff is hidden deeper in the bag and it's more trouble to take it out and I'm not up to that trouble  ;), no actually I'm not kidding).
The very rare cases when I used my Canon stuff during the last 1/2 year was because:
- The 580EXII is more powerful and recharges a bit faster than the flash I have for mFT (I could change that)
- Magic Lantern and because nothing comparable exist for mFT
- The Canon 100L, because I don't have macro lens for mFT (I could change that)

Sure the 5DmkIII would provide somewhat better IQ/better handling/more background blur etc. but I'm dead sure that not 2800$ worth for me personally.
Pro work is of course different. There you cannot afford not using the best stuff. But pros buys only 1 digit Canons, right?

So I'd be ready to pay for a reasonable spec'd and reasonable priced xxD but I'm not open to pay anything for a Canon APS-C body that not up to recent mFT bodies and smells like designed by the marketing department and engineers were not allowed to work on it.

Anything lesser than xxD from Canon is a joke and only Canon fan-boys (and folks working for Canon's marketing department) who never tried out anything else (take mFT for example) can truly believe that they are still competitive and worth their price.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T5i Leaks
« on: March 20, 2013, 04:31:04 AM »
I think this is pretty inventive (maybe still not revolutionary), nothing like that I remember from Canon...


EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T5i Leaks
« on: March 20, 2013, 04:09:48 AM »
I cant honestly tell if a photo was shot with a Nikon or Canon.IQ seems good enough with both brands for me.

Even the IQ of mFT cameras have since long surpassed APS-C Canons. If just by a hair or more judge for yourself (don't take my word for it).
mFT has also superb compact size primes (just to name some: 12 f/2, 45 f/1.8; but really a long list). Try them once e.g. with Olympus OM-D E-M5 or any recent mFT camera. You'll be surprised...

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T5i Leaks
« on: March 20, 2013, 03:29:42 AM »
Pardon me but what's the leak?
This spec. is almost a direct copy from the previous generation (maybe there is a new processing engine so ISO range is extended for the sake of JPG but RAW is probably the same).
I'm slowly getting used to that Canon is either overpriced or under-specified (compared to e.g.  Nikon or mFT).

Some think that the number of pixels defines sensor technology.  That's why we had megapixel wars, because the uneducated masses think that more is always better.

While I'm not wishing for more megapixels (I'd be even fine with less) I just could not help not noticing that despite the more megapixels Nikon APS-Cs have at least as good or better IQ at any ISO than the Canon (even on pixel level).

So if those uneducated masses that you started to talk about ever compare IQ wise Canon APS-C with other small sensor systems they can easily come to the same conclusion, but maybe I just misunderstood Canon's strategy with APS-C and they would like to quit from this market segment (and focus on the more juicy FF). Then well done Canon, very well done.

Nevertheless my need for portable small system is fulfilled with mFT so it seems that I don't need to spend on Canon gear this year either.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 100D Detailed Specs Appear
« on: March 18, 2013, 04:41:21 AM »
Such a pointless camera.

Yes, indeed. Canon marketing is getting very creative (or desperate?) to come up yet another camera that has the same old (tech) 18MP sensor used so many times in many different APS-C bodies (and it cannot compete anymore with latest micro 4/3 sensors).

Instead they should rather focus on enhancing their APS-C sensor so that it at least comes close enough to the latest micro 4/3 cameras (with superior picture quality compared to Canon APS-C) that not only have small bodies but many excellent and small/light lens to choose from.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms 70D; Future of Semi-Pro DSLR is FF
« on: February 07, 2013, 06:58:05 AM »
I fear that it's not just the 0.5um process but Canon generally lacks behind sensor technology.

Canon is simply forced to push their customers to FF because they cannot compete in the APS-C arena (or in general with DSLR bodies with high pixel density=small pixels).

With equal pixel size Canon cannot compete with sensors using more inventive technology...

Defiine 'compete'.  Last time I checked, none of the manufacturers you're discussing sell naked sensors to consumers - they all sell cameras.  Since Canon sells more cameras than any other dSLR maker, I'd say they're winning the competition.

Canon is in a very comfortable position at the moment (I'd say too comfortable) but can they continue like that with a senor tech. that is getting more and more behind competition?
It has started with Sony sensors (found in many DSLRs like Nikon and Pentax) that have better dynamic range in low ISO than any of the Canons (FF included).
Panasonic is claiming now approx 1 full stop light utilization enhancement. Just imagine that technology appearing in m43 bodies (and please don't tell me that e.g. Olympus E-M5 not selling well).

I personally know people who have switched entirely to m43 (mainly but not exclusively from Canon; sure non pro users) and I myself have started to use m43 along with Canon and I have to tell that I'm very pleased with the results.
The Sony sensor that can be found in latest m43 bodies is it least as good as the latest APS-C Canons (despite the 2/3 stop disadvantage from sensor size) so from the pictures alone it would be hard to tell which system is used.
Thus apart form the slightly shallower DoF/more background blurring I don't see what advantage Canon APS-C has (note: FF is different). OK, maybe ergonomics but again for non pro usage that matters less.
The whole system is lighter and less bulky though, which is a huge advantage for me.
Most of the m43 primes are also very usable already wide open.
So from IQ perspective it's on par with current Canon APS-Cs. Add 1 stop advantage and it will leave Canon APS-C in the dust.

So to me e.g. the m43 is very competitive and brings me huge bulk saving at the price of 2/3 stop less background blur.
Sure it's not for everyone (e.g. long primes are missing so e.g. it's not for birders) but IMHO it very well covers 99% of the needs.
That's competitive enough for me.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms 70D; Future of Semi-Pro DSLR is FF
« on: February 05, 2013, 09:51:25 AM »
And my last input, considering Canon sensors. What I learned from different articles is, that Canon is still using a 0.5um process for their CMOS sensors, while Sony has already upgraded to 0.18um. This is one reason why Canon lacks behind in sensor technology. But this is not a technology Canon has to develop, these are just machines they buy from other companys to produce their sensors. Canon already owns machines that are capable of a 0.18um process, but does not use them for CMOS sensors yet. So I expect Canon will make the switch pretty soon (maybe the high megapixel camera is a hint for that; Canon also said that at the moment 18MP APS-C sensors are ideal for them, which makes sense in this context).

I fear that it's not just the 0.5um process but Canon generally lacks behind sensor technology.
They are missing key inventions like e.g. this from Panasonic:

Canon is simply forced to push their customers to FF because they cannot compete in the APS-C arena (or in general with DSLR bodies with high pixel density=small pixels).

With equal pixel size Canon cannot compete with sensors using more inventive technology...

EOS Bodies / Re: Where are you EOS 70D?
« on: January 24, 2013, 04:42:35 AM »

maybe it´s just impossible to improve the sensor with canons current 500nm manufacturing process?

they have kept improving it for what 8-10 years?

so until canon has a new manufacturing process online they would have no other choice then using the same sensor.

I'm ready to accept that QE can be improved with getting rid of the current 500nm manufacturing process (http://www.chipworks.com/blog/technologyblog/2012/10/24/full-frame-dslr-cameras-canon-stays-the-course/), however Canon sensors have huge reading noise at low ISO (which limits the dynamic range).

Can that also be improved just by changing the process?

I fear that Canon sensor tech cannot keep up with e.g. Sony not just because of a single reason but a multitude of reasons so probably the cure is also not that simple...but let's hope that they can fix it and don't introduce any new APS-C body with the old (by now basically obsolete) tech 18MP Canon sensor.

Pages: [1] 2 3