November 28, 2014, 04:48:26 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 - moreorless

Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 45
481
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5D Mark III/X Commercials Being Shot? [CR1]
« on: February 16, 2012, 01:07:47 PM »
So one is for 5dx and the other for 5d3? Cinema oriented commercial I understand for C product. But Euro2012? Another sport camera? Big fps, small MP etc.? Like small brother of 1dx? :)

If the 22mp rumour is correct then its certainly a camera with good potential for sports shooting, espeically if the 7D is phased out. Ultimately the 5D line is far more likely to benefit from advertsing and euro 2012 is the 2nd biggest sport event this year.

482
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III/X Information [CR1]
« on: February 15, 2012, 08:43:06 AM »
Canon is a very conservative company. They will not be doing anything revolutionary in the 5DIII/X. For video they there's not much more they can do other than tweaking the CODEC to improve the quality. You can be certain that they will not offer a clean HDMI output.

Regarding the sensor it seems that Canon has not been making as much progress on per pixel quality as the Sony/Nikon sensors over the past few years. The pixel quality of the Nikon D7000, Sony NEX-7, and D800 are pretty darn good. The early reports are showing that the D800 is producing noise similar to a D700 which is insane considering the D800's 4.88um pixel pitch compared to the D700's 8.45um. Canon has gone on record to claim that the 1DX has a 2 stop improvement in noise, for JPEG only, and will not go on record to say anything about RAW. This 2 stop improvement is also comparing the 1DX's 6.95um pixel pitch to the 5.7um pitch of the 1DIV. One can reasonably assume that Canon has not drastically improved the QE of their pixels and/or read out noise.

The 22MP specs of the rumored new 5D seems consistent with Canon's conservative strategy. I would expect no more than a 0.5 stop improvement in noise and better AF. Although this seems like something that most people are happy with here's the problem. Canon is going to rape us on the price. Looking at their latest pricing strategy for their lenses I wouldn't be surprised if these modest 5D improvements will come at a very steep price increase.

It seems that Canon's executive management has changed strategy to focus more on improving profit margins rather than gaining market share. The best way to do this is to drastically increase prices. They probably figure that it's time to harvest the benefits of the fantastic market share gain they have earned over the past 5 years. Now that people are locked into the Canon system it's time to jack up the price.

This seems to be an arguement based on very little hard evidense, some claims about two cameras that have yet to find there way into many peoples hands that offer very different features(most obviously high ISO capabilities).

The main negative of Canon's position to me seems to be that because all there DSLR sensors are made in house they tend to see the light of day less often. In reality we've not seen a new design since the 7D 2 1/2 years ago so its really impossible to judge whether they've kept up with Nikon/Sony's more recent advancements or not.

The pricing and features are really a total unknown aswell,  of course the 5D mk2 lagged behind the D700 in AF and build but offered superior resolution and video. In terms of lenses Canon's prices seem very similar to Nikon's while in many cases(70-200's, looks like the new 24-70 aswell) offering superior performance.

483
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Split? 5D X & 5D Mark III [CR1]
« on: February 14, 2012, 03:30:34 AM »
OTOH look at the D3x and D3s, now the former has wayyy more MP but guess which has the much greater low ISO DR? Also the D3x that has wayyy more MP.  So it's not so simple. If the 5D3 doesn't have a new readout technology then it could end up having 18MP and LESS low ISO DR, by a few stops even, than the D800.  Hopefully that won't be the case, although the fact that marketing isn't already bragging about 2 stops better real and 3 stops better usable DR in RAW for low ISO makes you wonder a little.

Anyway just pointing out that it is not as simple as to say we need it to be low MP so we can get say great low ISO DR. What technology they use matter a lot more than the MP count.

I agree its more complex than that which is why I believe as its wrong to dismiss these stats(based on those grounds anyway) or to hold views such as "downsized higher resolution will always equal lower resolution on noise performance".

484
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Split? 5D X & 5D Mark III [CR1]
« on: February 13, 2012, 05:02:06 PM »
The rumor doesn't make sense.
Why should the ISO range between the III and X be different? The ISO performace will be the same if the same technology is used since basic physics tells us that the pixle size has neglectable impact at high ISO performance.Why should the ISO range for the X version be the same as for 7D? The sensor is more than twice as large and will have more than 1 stop better ISO performace than 7D, and be better than 5Dmk2, even with no improvements what so ever. Will Canon release a new DSLR with a sensor that is worse that something they made already several year ago?

This rumor is obvioiusly not the truth.

Because this is clearly not the case.

Not sure what you mean but if you think this pixel size itself has anything else than neglectable impact at high ISO performance then you believe something that is in contradiction with basic physics and proven facts.

The physics that larger pixels will have more light to work with seems pretty obvious and the facts are that sensors of the same generation show superior ISO performance per pixel when those pixels are larger. The recent NEX 7 comparisons I'v seen didnt seem to offer as good performance as the NEX 5 even downscaled so I'v rather sceptical of the idea that this will always even out noise.

ISO performance does seem like it can be targetted towards a specific range aswell with for example many users seeming to preffer the 1D4's higher ISO's and the 5Dmk2's lower ISO's. It would certainly seem to make sense to target the 5D X's performance towards lower ISO settings if its going to be a studio/landscape camera.

485
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Book Shows Up at Amazon France
« on: February 13, 2012, 04:46:11 PM »
A new book dedicated to a 5D Mark III has appeared on the Amazon.fr web site. The release date for the book is March 9, 2012. The book apparently comes from Pearson, which is pretty reputable.

Actually, it 'appeared' way back in November, and was discussed in this CR thread.

That its original appearance and resurfacing seem to mirror the D800's rumoured and actual release does seem somewhat credible though.

486
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Split? 5D X & 5D Mark III [CR1]
« on: February 13, 2012, 05:34:08 AM »
The rumor doesn't make sense.
Why should the ISO range between the III and X be different? The ISO performace will be the same if the same technology is used since basic physics tells us that the pixle size has neglectable impact at high ISO performance.Why should the ISO range for the X version be the same as for 7D? The sensor is more than twice as large and will have more than 1 stop better ISO performace than 7D, and be better than 5Dmk2, even with no improvements what so ever. Will Canon release a new DSLR with a sensor that is worse that something they made already several year ago?

This rumor is obvioiusly not the truth.

Because this is clearly not the case.

487
Lenses / Re: A Lens Roadmap? [CR1]
« on: February 12, 2012, 01:55:45 AM »
- EF-S 55-70 IS “testing”
Errrhhh... 55-70?  :o
Yes that seems very odd

If theres any truth behind it I can only imagine its a very large appature.

488
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Split? 5D X & 5D Mark III [CR1]
« on: February 10, 2012, 01:09:39 PM »
Splitting a line while merging another (1D series) doesn't seem very logical to me.
I'm sure we'll soon see 2 new DSLRs from Canon but I doubt they'll belong to the same line...

I don't really view the 1DX as "merging" a lineup but rather as the 1D line shifting to FF now that Canon has the tech to do so and keep 10+ fps and the 1Ds line being killed off.

The 1Ds mk3 seemed to me to be a camera that didnt fully know what its market was, alot of studio/landscape users felt they didnt need its double grip, fast AF or reasonable FPS and bought 5D mk2's instead. If this 5DX were to happen then it could be targeted much more specifically at those users  giving ultra high resolution, 100% viewfinder, widely spaced AF that was accurate more than fast, single grip body etc.

489
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon will end the 7D series life?
« on: February 10, 2012, 12:59:11 PM »
The arguement that Canon would kill the 7D and up the specs of the 70D to fill its boots never made sense to me, why would Canon kill the more credable brand in favour of the lesser brand when either could be used on the same product?

490
Lenses / Re: 36+ Mp EOS dSLR (rumored): How do existing EF lenses cope?
« on: February 10, 2012, 12:50:32 PM »
Exactly. I think checking lens MTF charts shall be a good hint. The lower the curves off-centre the likely to fail at the edges at very high Mps (FF sensor). There is a built-in correction for light fall-off in the EOS line but resolution is a different animal. I trust the forum's reassurance though.

This seems like a larger problem that people are making out to me considering a large part of the market for 36 megapixel is going to be landscape and other uses where edge to egde sharpness is desired. Alot of the non specialised lenses people use for landscape like the 17-40 and 24-105 already have problems with boarder sharpness at 21 MP.

I wonder if this is the main reason for the new 24mm and 28mm 2.8 IS's? perhaps Canon are antcipating that there current wide zooms are going to be found wanting for landscape shooting on a high megapixel camera so have designed these primes to allow those on a budget to fully exploit such a camera? would seem to explain why the appatures are relatively modest and why they have IS, the MTF's seem to suggest both will have strong boarder performance stopped down.

491
EOS Bodies / Re: When do you expect to see CR3 rated 5D/3D rumors?
« on: February 10, 2012, 01:50:13 AM »
I'd be supprized if we don't see some kind of annoucement from Canon in the next month or two, even if its a 1DX style preview of something that won't be released until the summer.

492
EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next? Lenses & Cameras
« on: February 09, 2012, 03:48:46 PM »
Now that the cat is out of the bag, we keep hearing (well maybe more Graig then us!) more and more of the high MP camera some dream of being part of the 2012 line up.  I think it will come after the 5DX or 5DIII and am sure it will blow the D800 out of the water. My two cents.

Well my to cents concerning the rumor " I have heard there will be a very high megapixel camera some time in 2012, possibly in the 40mp range and it won’t be the “5D Mark III":

This is marketing crap to torpedo D800 sales, e.g. people switching systems from Nikon to Canon. *Developing* a high MP camera is not exactly the same as having it in the release pipeline like Nikon, is it? And the updated primes they just released are not high MP but for video - the segment in which Canon is in ahead.

If Canon would be even in the general vicinity of a Camera of the D800 type, they'd call it 5DIII. If this really is released w/ 22MP, we'll know there's no high MP variant on the horizon.

It seems a little silly that people accept one rumour as gospel and dismiss the other out of hand. If Canon were looking to feed info to kill D800 sales I'm guessing this isnt the form it would take.

Why would Canon definately call a high megapixel body the 5D mk3? to me the 5D brand say"high megapixels" but rather "the FF body is the broadest appeal" and I'd argue that if the "22 MP" specs we've seen are real they represent something with a boarder appeal than a 40+ MP camera with limated FPS and ISO performance.

493
EOS Bodies / Re: 40MP Canon that's not the 5D3?
« on: February 09, 2012, 04:26:16 AM »
If there's any truth to the rumors that the 5DIII will remain in the 21-22 mp range, this makes a lot of sense. The question is whether or not a 40 mp body will offer the balance of resolution and AF of the D800, and the bigger question is price.

I'd question whether many users really want a combination advanced/quick AF, 4-5 fps and high megapixels, the 1ds mk3 and D3x both offered that and had limated sucess. The 1DX and potentially the 5D mk3 seem like they offer more of a balance with boosted ISO and FPS so does Canon need to chase that market anymore?

Personally I'd say the ideal landscape/studio camera would be...

5D sized body with 1D level build/sealing.
40+ megapixels
ISO performance focused on clean lower settings, max 800-1600 would be enough.
100% viewfinder
Fewer high quality AF points spaced as widely as possible.

Compaired to Nikon I'd say Canon maybe better equiped to go up directly agenst Medium Format with lenses like the 14mm 2.8, 17/24 TSE's, 85mm 1.2, 70-200 2.8 IS and from the sound of it the new 24-70 2.8 aswell.

494
EOS Bodies / Re: Specialised cameras or a good all rounder?
« on: February 08, 2012, 12:47:48 PM »
I'd agree that a middle of the road approach is generally better than a choice of cameras on both extremes.
 

I'd say that the more expensive a camera is the more focused on a specific task it should probabley be considering that it will be more likely to be bought by professionals or amatures with a serious interest in one aspect of photography.

For FF DSLR's I think sports/jurno/wildlife body needs to be at the top given that its the area where such cameras can claim to provide the highest performance, then a high megapixel landscape/studio body somewhat cheaper as it will not be able to compete with MF for performance and finally a good all round body as the cheapest.

What exactly makes a "good all rounder" is I spose whats up for debate, personally I'd say that ISO performance is probabley more in need of an upgrade friom the 5D mk2 than megapixels. How many people often print at A2 or larger to really exploit 36 megapixels? my guess is not that many, espeically as 18X12 is where most comsumer printers max out. By comparison takling pics of moving subjects indoors does very quickly move you to pretty high ISO's unless your willing to work with a very large appature.

Quote
But I assume Nikon have done their market research.  Imagine a situation where you had a choice of three cameras - low light / allrounder / big MP count.  I'd suspect that most people would choose the big MP option.  Some would choose the low light option.  The allrounder would probably be a sales flop?

The impression I get is that Sony are ultimately the ones behind the decision to go with 36 megapixels. I'd guess we'll probabley see it in a new FF body from them reasonabley soon and going for a headline grabbing high megapixel count is probabley viewed as a good way to increase market share.

495
EOS Bodies / Re: Latest Canon disappoints wants me to switch over to Nikon.
« on: February 08, 2012, 10:50:12 AM »
I'd point out that the Nikon 24-70 doesnt have IS and costs $1900, whats more with Nikon you don't have the option of a good quality F/4 normal zoom given the 24-120's shortcomings compaired to the 24-105's.

When your dealing with these monster megapixel counts my guess is that theres going to need to be more of a movement back towards tripods anyway to get the best out of them.

Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 45