December 05, 2016, 03:53:18 PM

Author Topic: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]  (Read 74542 times)

thepancakeman

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 474
  • If at first you don't succeed, don't try skydiving
Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #255 on: July 18, 2012, 11:40:39 AM »
All I wanted to say that entry level DSLRs (no matter if crop or FF) with kit lens is a very heavy

Maybe you just need to start working out--my 7D with 70-200 f/2.8 IS has never seemed heavy to me.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #255 on: July 18, 2012, 11:40:39 AM »

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #256 on: July 18, 2012, 11:41:15 AM »
PS How good are radio flash on the 4/3? Or iso 3200 for the churches?

You'd be surprised how good e.g. E-M5 at ISO3200. It easily beats recent APS-C cameras and yesterday's FF (so no-one compares it to G12).
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_OM-D_E-M5/high_ISO_noise.shtml

Radio flash on vacation or for family photos? Don't make me lough. I rarely use it even with my 580EXII with DSLR (not really radio, but light control).
Most important use of my 580EXII is to bring up the shadows.

Well I take 2 flash and stands etc as default for simple pictures. Tomorrow I will be taking photos of my father and his new kitten - of course I will do flash

Why not take flash on vacation? -  There is plenty of room in the car

I would be very surprised if 4/3 got near the 5D2 at iso3200 never mind the 5DIII or 1DX.

How about a scrim/reflector in your kit? ::)
Have a large reflector

fman

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 40
Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #257 on: July 18, 2012, 11:43:22 AM »
I would be very surprised if 4/3 got near the 5D2 at iso3200 never mind the 5DIII or 1DX.

5DmkIII or 1Dx no, but it easily beats 5DmkII in JPG and comes very-very close in RAW at ISO3200:
JPG (pick the camera): http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/20
RAW: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/21
A result unimaginable just a year ago...

In video Pana G (G5, GH2) cameras beat any DSLR from Canon including 5DmkIII.

So I don't really see the reason not to travel light.
A pro work is different.

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #258 on: July 18, 2012, 11:52:18 AM »
I would be very surprised if 4/3 got near the 5D2 at iso3200 never mind the 5DIII or 1DX.

5DmkIII or 1Dx no, but it easily beats 5DmkII in JPG and comes very-very close in RAW at ISO3200:
JPG (pick the camera): http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/20
RAW: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/21
A result unimaginable just a year ago...

In video Pana G (G5, GH2) cameras beat any DSLR from Canon including 5DmkIII.

So I don't really see the reason not to travel light.
A pro work is different.

Shoot in jpeg  :o :o :o :o

Looked at the pictures in the link - and even the tiny web pics show the significant extra noise for the Olympus and the GH2 - so no cigar for the 4/3

I only do stills

Pro work? You mean get paid for family pictures?

tron

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2845
Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #259 on: July 18, 2012, 03:24:32 PM »

Are you really suggesting that a GH2 is better than my 1DS3 with 200 f/2?   ... then probably there is no point in any further discussion...

From flexibility/portability perspective a GH2 + a bunch of micro 4/3 lens (which still cost less, weighs less and takes less space in your bag) are way better than an 1Ds3 with 200 f/2.
So yes in 99.9999% of the cases yes micro 4/3 with a bunch of lens is better (for stills E-M5, for video GH2 or G5). For the remaining 0.0001% 1Ds3+ 200 f/2 wins big time (when you need extreme low light performance, background blurring etc.).

All I wanted to say that entry level DSLRs (no matter if crop or FF) with kit lens is a very heavy and space taking way for non pro usage. In most of the cases it's also a costly way. Far too many people have the misconception that for vacations, daily snapshots they need a DSLR and couple of expensive lens. In fact most would be better served with something smaller, lighter and most of the time less expensive.
Real pro usage is different. However that's probably not the target for an entry level crop or FF DSLR with crippled ergonomics and functionality.

If you are after something portable and cheap then clearly a P&S would be better than a 4/3 using your argument

However, weight and money are not everybody's priority. You might think that on vacation smaller, lighter and less expensive is 'better' but I dont want to come back with 'snaps'. I am going on vacation to France on Saturday and will be going round the chateaux and castles as well as some birding( my wife's hobby).

I will have the 1DS3 and 1DS2 plus 40mm, 24-105, 70-200, 70-300, 17-40 and tse24, probably the 600, plus of course a couple of 580s and stands. On holiday one has the time and opportunity to get good pictures so a 4/3 would be a waste of time and effort.

The large whites are about high IQ as much as low light (I use flash anyway) and bg blurring.
There is no point of arguing. I believe that both of you are right. It depends on what someone wants more.
FF with many lenses mean the best possible photos.
Micro 4/3rds mean traveling light, worrying less and ... having the camera always with you!

I, for example,  am a 5DII owner. Also, I do have many lenses (except of the big whites lucky brian  :D ). I wouldn't go on vacation without some of my equipment especially in places I know I will have plenty of opportunities to take pictures.

However I always get tired of carrying it! I guess it's the price to pay for my preferences. So I can understand that someone can have fun with a tiny 4/3rds camera.

I will not buy one though because I do not wish to invest on a second system and I always think that the money for a 4/3rds system could go to a new lens  ::)

Rocky

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 769
Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #260 on: July 18, 2012, 03:39:31 PM »

I've been in places where even a small camera with a small lens was high risk to attract too much attention (hint: e.g. one of the new 7 Wonders of the World).
I am just curious which of the new 7 wonder of the world that a small camera will attract too much attraction. I have been in every continent  and a few "third world country" with my DSLR and a reasonable size bag on my shoulder and never have any problem to move around with the local.

Rocky

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 769
Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #261 on: July 18, 2012, 03:52:37 PM »
I'm always surprised at people who have never tried micro 4/3 and yet they are convinced that they need a FF DSLR with ultra fast lens to make good family/vacation photos (or a portrait cannot be good enough if the background is not melted to nothing).
Lack of confidence? Addiction?
I've been in places where even a small camera with a small lens was high risk to attract too much attention (hint: e.g. one of the new 7 Wonders of the World).
Pocketable P & S,  M4/3,  APS-C,  FF all has its own pro's and con's. I just cannot see why you think M3/4 is the family vacation system of choice. To start with, view finder of M4/3 is way below DSLR. AF and shutter lag of M4/3 is also slower than the DSLR.  These two alone will make me stay away from M4/3. If you pack the DSLR bag conservatively(one body with with 17-40mm, 28-135mm and 50mm f 1.8 and a few odds and ends) the bag can stay on the shoulder all day long.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2012, 04:25:40 PM by Rocky »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #261 on: July 18, 2012, 03:52:37 PM »

crasher8

  • Guest
7 Wonders whera big camera would be obtrusive?
« Reply #262 on: July 18, 2012, 04:09:23 PM »
Machu Picchu? Petra?

Rocky

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 769
Re: 7 Wonders whera big camera would be obtrusive?
« Reply #263 on: July 18, 2012, 04:14:27 PM »
Machu Picchu? Petra?
Machu Picchu, no problemo, even with a 70-300 on my camera. Petra, my friend went there with 5D and 4 lenses.

crasher8

  • Guest
Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #264 on: July 18, 2012, 04:32:51 PM »
So, what's the mysterious location? Unless the poster is referring to someplace other than what the world regards as the n7w .

Great Wall, Chitzen Itza, Taj Mahal, christ Redeemer , Colosseum?

fman

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 40
Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #265 on: July 18, 2012, 04:35:21 PM »
To start with, view finder of M4/3 is way below DSLR. AF and shutter lag of M4/3 is also slower than the DSLR.  Thes two alone will make me stay away from M4/3. If you pack the DSLR bag conservatively(one body with with 17-40mm, 28-135mm and 50mm f 1.8 and a few odds and ends) the bag can stay on the shoulder all day long.

The viewfinder of the GH2 (sure it's electronic, which means it's also bright) is comparable in size with the VF of the 1Ds and bigger than any of the APS-Cs.
Just scroll down a bit.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicDMCGH2/page3.asp

From my personal experience AF is also very fast except in very dark scenarios (where also DLSR had trouble without AF assist light from flash centre AF point with f/2.8 or faster lens).
Also in case of micro 4/3 you're not limited with AF to middle point, which is the only possibility in case of 5DmkII due to it's crappy AF point arrangement and archaic AF system.

Sure there is some shutter lag. Never even bothered to look up the specs.

With the listed lens you cover less, and you have also only one fast prime.

Video compared:
http://www.eoshd.com/content/7631/panasonic-gh2-vs-5d-mark-iii

I like  micro 4/3 as currently there is the biggest choice of both lens and bodies. Both very capable.

fman

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 40
Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #266 on: July 18, 2012, 04:38:58 PM »
Why not take flash on vacation? -  There is plenty of room in the car

Oh I forgot to ask, do you always travel by car overseas?  ;D
I really envy you then.

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #267 on: July 18, 2012, 04:44:33 PM »

I like  micro 4/3 as currently there is the biggest choice of both lens and bodies. Both very capable.

I am sure you get great enjoyment from your 4/3 which is good.

However you have to understand and accept that your preference is not the same as others.

Perhaps I am am at the other extreme as I will carry around 2 x 1 series all day complete with fast lens and other equipment

Certainly for family pictures I go for the best photos I can - they are worth it and I wont take snaps of them.

Just because we dont agree with your choice doesn't make us wrong - just different.

I live in the UK so anywhere in Europe is accessible by car. Occasionally I go by motorbike so I leave the tripod behind and just take the one body and 3 or 4 lens - for example 17-40, 24-104, 70-200, 600 if I am landscaping. If I am going to the MotoGPs clearly they will be different.

« Last Edit: July 18, 2012, 04:48:47 PM by briansquibb »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #267 on: July 18, 2012, 04:44:33 PM »

Rocky

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 769
Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #268 on: July 18, 2012, 05:04:05 PM »
To start with, view finder of M4/3 is way below DSLR. AF and shutter lag of M4/3 is also slower than the DSLR.  Thes two alone will make me stay away from M4/3. If you pack the DSLR bag conservatively(one body with with 17-40mm, 28-135mm and 50mm f 1.8 and a few odds and ends) the bag can stay on the shoulder all day long.

The viewfinder of the GH2 (sure it's electronic, which means it's also bright) is comparable in size with the VF of the 1Ds and bigger than any of the APS-Cs.
Just scroll down a bit.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicDMCGH2/page3.asp

From my personal experience AF is also very fast except in very dark scenarios (where also DLSR had trouble without AF assist light from flash centre AF point with f/2.8 or faster lens).
Also in case of micro 4/3 you're not limited with AF to middle point, which is the only possibility in case of 5DmkII due to it's crappy AF point arrangement and archaic AF system.

Sure there is some shutter lag. Never even bothered to look up the specs.

With the listed lens you cover less, and you have also only one fast prime.

Video compared:
http://www.eoshd.com/content/7631/panasonic-gh2-vs-5d-mark-iii

I like  micro 4/3 as currently there is the biggest choice of both lens and bodies. Both very capable.
Try to pan you camera a few times conscecutively. The delay in EVF will give you head ache.   The OM-D is supposed to have the best EVF. It did gave me head ache. The lack of one fast prime can be make up with lower high ISO noise.

May I quote Brian Squibb ( I assume that is his name):
"I am sure you get great enjoyment from your 4/3 which is good."
"However you have to understand and accept that your preference is not the same as others."
"Just because we dont agree with your choice doesn't make us wrong - just different."

tron

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2845
Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #269 on: July 18, 2012, 06:07:01 PM »
I live in the UK so anywhere in Europe is accessible by car. Occasionally I go by motorbike so I leave the tripod behind and just take the one body and 3 or 4 lens - for example 17-40, 24-104, 70-200, 600 if I am landscaping. If I am going to the MotoGPs clearly they will be different.
You leave the tripod behind and take 17-40, 24-104, 70-200, 600 ?
600??? That one 600 f/4L IS which let me think: is so small that I guess you carry it in your pocket...  ;D
« Last Edit: July 19, 2012, 08:18:19 AM by tron »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]
« Reply #269 on: July 18, 2012, 06:07:01 PM »