July 20, 2017, 08:44:14 AM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10
41
EOS Bodies / Re: Analysis of RAW samples at Fred Miranda show weak DR
« Last post by SecureGSM on Today at 04:36:30 AM »
1. +5EV is not a practical use case. I mean you can but you usually don't.... well, you should not :)
+3EV is a more reasonable use case to look at. I have posted the comparison image above but here it is again.

2. It seems strange that no one have noticed that 6D II image sharpness is better than the one of 6D, 5D III or 5D IV. look at the word " green" with little arrow undeneath (actually, right above), lines.  it could be just due to image to image variation, but also could be due to reduced AA filter strength. Interesting...




It's very surprising that the 6D mark II seems to perform even worse than the original 6D!

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3416153698/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-dynamic-range
42
EOS Bodies / Re: Analysis of RAW samples at Fred Miranda show weak DR
« Last post by SecureGSM on Today at 04:19:34 AM »
I beg your pardon...  :o

... Dont be a sheep get the real images...

43
EOS Bodies / Re: Analysis of RAW samples at Fred Miranda show weak DR
« Last post by SPKoko on Today at 04:11:13 AM »
It's very surprising that the 6D mark II seems to perform even worse than the original 6D!

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3416153698/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-dynamic-range
44
Canon General / Re: Gear for August Eclipse
« Last post by Valvebounce on Today at 04:09:26 AM »
Hi Folks.
A short article from Lens Rentals, might be worth a read if you are planning to shoot the eclipse, not much that hasn't been said already but some suggested settings that might help.

Cheers, Graham.
45
EOS Bodies / Re: Analysis of RAW samples at Fred Miranda show weak DR
« Last post by tomscott on Today at 04:01:55 AM »
When I decided to buy my first DSLR, I looked for advice in the forums.
I saw that Canon users or potential users were always disappointed: Nikon's D90 and D700 had less high-ISO noise than 50D and 5D2, for instance (less megapixel, BTW, but that was not relevant).
Then the 60D came: no AF Microadjustment, "plastic" body: the Nikon D7000 was better.
On paper the 6D was much worse than the Nikon D600.
Finally, the Dynamic Range (and 4k) drama exploded in the forums.
 
Nevertheless, Canon apparently had a good success, in spite of the disappointment read in the forums.
 
The 6D, for instance, after its defeat "on paper", sold much  better than the Nikon D600 (also due to the reliability problems of the latter) and than the Nikon D610.


And now?
Maybe Canon's Marketing experts think that the next Nikon models ((D6x0, D7x0) will be considered not reliable, that Pentax will not increase its market share in spite of a good product at a reasonable price.
But maybe Canon's Marketing did not consider that the potential 6DII buyers have two more options (even if the forecasts about Nikon and Pentax were correct), two options dangerous for Canon:
 1) switch to Sony
 2) don't adopt the 6DII, and choose an used 5D3 or a 6D classic instead, thus saving money.




... Or it will be just as usual: the Canon 6D II will prove to be, in the field, much better than it looks now, and even the people who are blaming it today will buy and appreciate it (esp. when its price will drop by 20-30% in the next months/quarters).
 
 
Time will tell.

This forum is not the target audience, this is the home of the complainers, trolls and its generally a pretty bad place for anyone looking to buy a canon product.

People who have the money for a new camera will buy a new camera regardless, their lenses work and its a new product with a 2 year warranty.

Most 'normal' people are not system switchers. Its like cars, if you like BMWs you buy BMWs. The new M3 and M4 got absolutely slated yet here in Manchester they are two a penny despite costing £65k.
46
EOS Bodies / Re: Analysis of RAW samples at Fred Miranda show weak DR
« Last post by tomscott on Today at 03:57:26 AM »
Tom,
appreciate the response. I think I understand now. you are refering to shadow lifting / highlight recovery improvement in relatively low ISO 6D II file (ISO 200), according to the link you have provided. 6D II performs better in that regard due to less to no fixed patern noise, noticeable at low ISO settings. I was looking at HIGH ISO RAW files only. I would imaging that your "wildlife in rain forrest" shots will be in the high ISO range rather than low? this is my understanding of situation.
Ok. If so, then the "clean shadow lifting" of the 6D II would be of a lesser consequenses to the outcomes. and here is a very sharp explanation:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=33003.msg676107#msg676107

"... And in case it's not obvious FPN is generally only an issue (when present) at the lowest ISO settings because once noise rises a bit it "drowns out" the FPN...."

As many noticed, with the 6D original lifting shadows by up to +2EV was never an issue ( low ISO). Yes, with 6D II one can, seems to, lift shadows by +3EV  without apparent colour cast or excessive Fixed Pattern Noise showing up in the output image. If that is what you are saying, then I do agree with you. Does this make 6D II a HIGH ISO killer? obviously not. And I was arguing the point that I do not detect any meanigful IQ improvement in HIGH ISO 6D II files. And I am particularly interested in ISO 3200 - ISO 6400 RAW file improvement.
Not too worry though. Thank you for your time and have a great day!  :)

p.s. https://www.dpreview.com/samples/5865039367/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-sample-photos

images: 2/118 and 5/118 if that is your use case, then noise levels in shadow lifted areas are not too bad.
my use case: images 22/118 and 23/118

p.s.2. : https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3416153698/canon-eos-6d-mark-ii-dynamic-range

I took the liberty of comparing noise levels at ISO levels 800-6400 between 5D III, 6D, 5D IV and 6D II. images are attached.




I am confused. Where do you get the notion that 6D II is much better at @shadow lifting" or high ISO performance than 6D original or 5D III???
Have you overlooked this chart :

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=33003.msg675894#msg675894

I am sure that you have heard about the Placebo Effect before. I do not want to elaborate te point but in in a few words: there is no meaningful difference between _properly_ processed 6D II and 6D original RAW files.
Sadly, It is a wishful thinking and nothing else.


Tell tale signs of the old sensor technology are banding and the difficult to remove colour noise and muddy purple casts in those lifted areas. I don't see this on any of the raw photos from the 6DMKII.

Is it just complaining for complaining sake?

So what if it is older tech they have obviously done something to remove the above factors and that is the main IQ issue with the 6D and 5DMKIII they both perform so similarly. The 6D was not better than the 5D in any real world situation when it came to IQ.

The quality of the extreme lifts weren't brilliant but the new one isn't showing any of these issues so it makes the camera a much better performer and a decent upgrade. You have to consider the resolution increase by over 25% and it's creating better images.

Spec sheets don't tell all I'm looking forward to seeing more images from the camera.

No offence I dont shoot from charts I make an assessment from what I can see.

Download the 6DMKII raw files and have a go yourself there are no signs of the issues from the 6DMKII.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/fd1i3ddjtaawqdm/IMG_3835%2035mm%20f6.3%20ISO%20200%20-%20Blown%20hilights%2C%20deep%20shadows%20%28LR%29.jpg?dl=0

Thats the whole point of the DR argument, the muddy purple casts with poor colour noise is the issue. As you say from one stop lift which is nothing in a high contrast scene.

Im sorry but you cant 'expose properly' in every scene. For example I shoot a lot of wildlife in rainforrests, you get high contrast shards of light and deep shadows under the canopy. I dont care who you are you cant expose the whole scene you have to try and protect the highlights or the shadows and on the older bodies it was hard work.

The fact you can push these new 6DMKII files more than 3 stops with no banding, muddy purple casts with no colour noise makes it obvious to me there has been huge improvement. Night and day compared to the 5DMKIII just for laughs 100 shadow and +3 on the exposure completely reveals detail with barely any penalty, not that I would do that but the fact if you now can.

I appreciate your efforts again.

These were shot on the 14th of July which is a week ago. Are these still the pre production unit or are they the real thing?

Are these places again, like the 5DSr posting images that arent showing the true results just to get some data out.

I dont know why im arguing because I wont buy this camera, just fed up of the CR negativism of every single product.

There seems to be a bandwagon all these companies jump on wanting these canon cameras to be rubbish. Dont be a sheep get the real images.

I will wait for more real samples before I make a final judgment. IMO most of these early reviews are not worth the pixels they are written on.

47
When I decided to buy my first DSLR, I looked for advice in the forums.
I saw that Canon users or potential users were always disappointed: Nikon's D90 and D700 had less high-ISO noise than 50D and 5D2, for instance (less megapixel, BTW, but that was not relevant).
Then the 60D came: no AF Microadjustment, "plastic" body: the Nikon D7000 was better.
On paper the 6D was much worse than the Nikon D600.
Finally, the Dynamic Range (and 4k) drama exploded in the forums.
 
Nevertheless, Canon apparently had a good success, in spite of the disappointment read in the forums.
 
The 6D, for instance, after its defeat "on paper", sold much  better than the Nikon D600 (also due to the reliability problems of the latter) and than the Nikon D610.


And now?
Maybe Canon's Marketing experts think that the next Nikon models ((D6x0, D7x0) will be considered not reliable, that Pentax will not increase its market share in spite of a good product at a reasonable price.
But maybe Canon's Marketing did not consider that the potential 6DII buyers have two more options (even if the forecasts about Nikon and Pentax were correct), two options dangerous for Canon:
 1) switch to Sony
 2) don't adopt the 6DII, and choose an used 5D3 or a 6D classic instead, thus saving money.




... Or it will be just as usual: the Canon 6D II will prove to be, in the field, much better than it looks now, and even the people who are blaming it today will buy and appreciate it (esp. when its price will drop by 20-30% in the next months/quarters).
 
 
Time will tell.
48
EOS Bodies / Re: Analysis of RAW samples at Fred Miranda show weak DR
« Last post by Mikehit on Today at 03:43:43 AM »
The thing is, Aglet, you are complaining about what you want to see. Canon's objective is to give the market what the market needs. Not you.

If the 6DII is a commercial success (as even you seem to say it will) then surely that vindicates Canon's position and shows your view is is one of narrow self interest?
49
Lenses / Re: Two New Big White Lenses Coming Next Year [CR2]
« Last post by Jopa on Today at 03:37:35 AM »
the off centre sharpness can be improved a bit, but not by much. A price hike is almost in order. Look a the Nikon's 70-200 latest and greatest price. Honestly, I do not see much point in upgrade. I am very happy with my 70-200 L II lens.

p.s. I purchased my lens slightly used from a very nice old gentleman living in Mornigton, Victoria, Australia, for A$1,500,00 (US$1,200) with a bonus Canon 2x Extender II included. Brian is now in his late 80's and no longer is able to walk mid to long distances due to ongoing lungs issues :(
I would like to take this opprtunities to express my gratitude to all older generation forum members. We have so much to learn from you, guys. Thank you for your patience and generocity!

I use this lens as a wedding portrait machine, usually wide open. While I hate its weight after a longer use, I love the output of that lens. Centre sharpness is amazing, borders could be better, but I won't pay over 2500 € for that. If thye could somehow make it under 1 kg of weight though, that would be some feat! But physics is merciless I'm afraid...

The sharpness on the 5DsR is mind blowing. I'm seriously considering to sell the 200/2 because of the versatility (and usability) of the 70-200 II.
50
Lenses / Re: Two New Big White Lenses Coming Next Year [CR2]
« Last post by Khalai on Today at 03:17:06 AM »
the off centre sharpness can be improved a bit, but not by much. A price hike is almost in order. Look a the Nikon's 70-200 latest and greatest price. Honestly, I do not see much point in upgrade. I am very happy with my 70-200 L II lens.

p.s. I purchased my lens slightly used from a very nice old gentleman living in Mornigton, Victoria, Australia, for A$1,500,00 (US$1,200) with a bonus Canon 2x Extender II included. Brian is now in his late 80's and no longer is able to walk mid to long distances due to ongoing lungs issues :(
I would like to take this opprtunities to express my gratitude to all older generation forum members. We have so much to learn from you, guys. Thank you for your patience and generocity!

I use this lens as a wedding portrait machine, usually wide open. While I hate its weight after a longer use, I love the output of that lens. Centre sharpness is amazing, borders could be better, but I won't pay over 2500 € for that. If thye could somehow make it under 1 kg of weight though, that would be some feat! But physics is merciless I'm afraid...
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10