Dantana said:

I think there is some great advice here from some very different points of view.

My advice would be to not sell any of your EF lenses until you have your new camera. I would get the kit with the 24-105 4 L. It's a great bargain and a very solid lens. Then try what you have on your new body and you will have a much better idea of what you need. The 35, 85, and 200 primes are all very useful lenses to a lot of people.

Just my 2 cents.

Click to expand...

More good advice. My first step into full frame was 5D3 kit with a 24-105. It is a very good lens and one that I still use. But, Dantana has probably offered the best advice so far. Get the feel of a FF body before you start re-vamping your lenses.

It's hard to fully grasp the difference between crop and FF without first-hand experience. It is as if lenses take on different personalities on crop vs. FF. In general, on FF, images can be sharper and pop my with small DOF -- plus the obvious perspective differences. It's a great idea to get accustomed to your lenses on a FF body before you get rid of them.

Sounds great but Being that the author is a field tester for Nikon? I don't have or plan on getting any Nikon gear but progress made is sure to follow in other camps so its a good thing. When the author says the ISO performance of the dx sensor is like ff I take that to mean a couple stops improvement.

RickWagoner said:

Fact is manufactures can boost MAX ISO numbers as high as they want to but it means nothing to IQ. When it comes to IQ the limits of high ISO it is more to do with the sensor size then anything else. Though as sensor manufacturing furthers so will higher quality ISO but this is very slow and little. high ISO on the 70D or 7d2 without the bull software is about 3200 imo at the highest. I am sure the D500 will better this a little at the least as it is a sensor created much later than the older 70D sensor.

Click to expand...

According this very well thought-through essay on the D500...

http://petapixel.com/2016/01/09/i-shot-with-the-nikon-d500-here-are-my-thoughts/

ISO 12,800 is outstanding and it can climb seven stops higher.

- A

blb529 said:

I shoot sports with a 7d and non-is 70-200 2.8. With the primary goal of getting better performance at high ISOs, I see 5 real options:

1) 7d mark ii - $1500 on Amazon.
2) Nikon D750 - $1800 on Amazon.
3) Nikon D500 - $2000.
4) Canon 6dii - ? wait and hope the new version is in line with the d750 which would make it viable for sports
5) Canon 5diii - currently, renovated bodies are $2000 on Canon's site with strong likelihood of falling a bit
more as release of 5d4 seems imminent.
6) Spend time learning how to fix high ISO shots in lightroom.

As, from a financial perspective, #6 is currently the only real option - #6 it is. But, in 6-8 months time, what direction do you think you'd go?

Click to expand...

Depends how high you want to go with ISO.

Noise-wise, Nikon's D750 is the best they have and the best in the list you gave above. 24mp gives you some cropping space for sports. It has 7fps which is very decent. The noise is low, clean images and high DR. It also has a fantastic AF system and 2 card slots.

For Canon, I'd skip the 5D3 - it still has great AF and IQ and it is a big leap over the 7D, but your money will be better spent in the next year if you hold out.

The 6D has better ISO performance than the 5D3, but the FPS is awful and the AF is lacking so I'd skip that too. (I know you didn't consider it, but threw it in there)

The 7D2 is a huge leap from the 7D you're currently using. Faster, better AF, and better image quality. Two card slots. Anti-Flicker if you're indoors for sporting event. The price has dropped that you can either just save the money over other cameras, or buy some glass.

The 6D2 is unlikely to have more than 6 FPS ...and in my view, 7 FPS is entry level for action. 8 and above preferred. 10-12 is king. It is also a huge mystery what AF it will have. If it gets the 5D3's...good. If not, then it is going to be weak. Image quality though will likely be superior to any of the choices above, including the D750. At best, it will be a reincarnation of the 5D3 with a superior sensor. But rumors say 1 card slot, so for me that's a no go. Also, it is unknown if it anti-flicker will be omitted from it. That to me is an awesome indoor sports feature. Who in this world enjoys shooting under those lights? Not me. Post-processing is a pain. That feature saves a lot of time and ups quality. Also, the 6D2 is probably 18 months out. Canon isn't announcing the 1DX for another month, and the 5D before summer. I can't imagine the 6D2 making it before the end of 2016. 80D could happen at the 2017 CES show.


D500 ...that thing has the speed we know that. No more resolution than the 7D2. While it has a hyped-up AF, in practice probably no better than Canon's AF. But a huge upgrade from your 7D. Two cards is good. The big deal is the huge ISO claims...

I for one, do not believe that Nikon has made a 1 to 1.5 stop leap in ISO performance from their previous generation crop sensors (D7200). I was comparing images of the 6D a full frame vs the D7200 on noise alone. ISO 6400 images are about the equal of the D7200's ISO 2500-3000. More than a stop better, but not 2 stops cleaner.

If Nikon's claims about the D500 are true, then the D500 will have EQUALED the high ISO noise performance of last generation's full frame cameras.

Um....NO.

I haven't seen that happen before. 2 generations? Yes. A crop that is two full generations/product cycles newer than a FF has equaled in noise. Seen that. Of course, a FF will always have a different perspective, more depth of field and will resolve better.

But hey, if it is true, then I'll get one when the price drops a little. Why wouldn't I want a high-speed crop with as good ISO as a 6D?

I'm not betting on that.

But to your question, I'd guess the Nikon will have better IQ at higher ISO than the 7D2 due to being newer sensor technology. At low ISO where there's little to no noise, they will be equal and the Canon has the edge since Canon has better glass. But that depends on what kind. Nikon's crop glass is good. Canon's advantage is the L glass.

I'd wait...


I'd wait to see if the D500 lives up to the hype. If it doesn't...

The 7D2 & D750 will only drop in price, and these are really capable cameras.


If you can live with losing 1fps and the loss of crop-zoom, the D750 is going to be a giant upgrade in terms of IQ over your 7D. If you want ultimate speed and crop factor, while still getting a big boost in IQ - the 7D2 is it. If having 10fps doesn't make or break your sports shooting, get the D750.

It depends. I wouldn't trade center sharpness for corners...but on my L glass, the corners aren't that bad.

The old Nikon 24-70 has fairly crappy edge clarity with bad chromatics. The center is ok.

I guess I'm spoiled by my Canon 24-70 II

I don't see the 24-70 as a landscape lens, studio lens, or anything where the entire frame needs to be as crisp as possible. This thing is a general purpose zoom, and a wedding photographer's workhorse. The ultimate people event lens. For that, you don't need razor sharp corners.

However, because the Canon is so sharp and has good contrast - it is good enough to do some landscape and studio shots. Certainly, specialty primes are better - but this thing is close enough. It does replace several primes though.

Nikon's isn't good enough to allow one to tinker seriously beyond what a 24-70 used to do. The Canon version is good enough to make you think twice about buying a prime for clarity. It makes primes useful only for their wider apertures.

Unfortunate that Nikon gave up center sharpness to fix the horrible edges. Maybe it was to also keep costs down with the VR? I can certainly see a Canon 24-70 IS hitting near $3K.

dilbert said:

When you're shooting in the dark, the glow from an illuminated top panel is far less intrusive than lighting up the entire back screen.

Click to expand...

Definitely, when my eyes have acclimatized to very dark shooting conditions then the rear-LCD can be painfully bright, even on the minimum brightness setting.

I think Paul Buff speed light accessories are made in US.

brianleighty said:

then let the ttl on camera flash fill in from there.

Click to expand...

Are you sure it will work? AFAIK fill-in works by taking an ambient light metering before the (pre-)flash is fired - if the AlienBee is not fired when the measurement is taken and/or the metering system doesn't take into account a brief flash light, fill-in won't work automatically. IMHO you would need all the lamps to take part in the TTL system, and set the proper ratios among group, or work out yourself how to merge the light sources and set each lamp, as suggested in another post.

The laso works great....i can trigger my off camera flash with the radio in my 430ex 3. The 600 ex3 will also do the same. If you use the laso...you need a master flash or transmitter on the camera...the 600 does not need a laso to be use off camera...it already has a built in receiver.

For lens either the 100-400II or 11-24. The nifty fifty does not count it for me. Price may be right but so what. A me too lens at a low price point.

To get photos off the camera you can, of course, copy files from the card(s). However, the D500 also includes Nikon's new SnapBridge technology that utilizes a bluetooth connection between the camera and a smart device, such as a mobile phone. Once paired, SnapBridge provides an 'always on' connection to the camera and supports features such as automatic upload of images and the ability to embed GPS data from a phone into EXIF data. Also, thanks to NFC it's possible to perform 'tap to connect' procedure to pair a device. This is similar to the system Samsung has implemented on recent NX cameras and we're looking forward to using SnapBridge on the Nikons.

Click to expand...

A little more info on this new SnapBridge technology.

Source: DPReview: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4531466610/top-5-hands-on-with-nikon-d500?slide=5

Can't wait for this to be seriously tested and pushed to its limits with reviews etc.

My 28-300 has now graduated from my 1DS3 to my 5DS R, and will stay there unless my 100-400 goes on temporally. For all the naysayers of the 28-300 it is still a very good lens. I would be first on the block for the 24-300 if it ever gets released.

I could see Canon wanting to compete with Sigma and producing a new 50mm L but Canon sell a lot more consumer kit than their top of the line stuff. A new 50mm 1.4, if it's the same price, would make sense as I'm sure it would be a popular seller. After all, the new 50mm 1.8 is actually better in many ways than the old 50mm 1.4 and a new 50mm 1.4 might just make people opt for it over the cheaper lens.

Another option is the Phottix Laso Transmitter it also has AF assist.

KrisK said:

Is this forum moderated?

Click to expand...

Only lightly. They try to keep the content PG-13 ("family-friendly"), and will intervene for really strong personal attacks. There's little or no moderation for thread hijacking. We have our own variation of Godwin's law here: as a CR discussion grows longer, the probability of a devolution to an argument over low ISO DR approaches 1.

expatinasia said:

sanj said:

Don't think so. 4k was already in full swing in my area of work and from the moment I bought 1dc it has been renting out. So much so that it has made me so much money that I sold off by 1dx which had become redundant. I have shot considerable video with 1dc as second camera on several feature shoots.

Click to expand...

sanj, I think you are a bit of a visionary in that regard. How would you like to see the 4K performance you now have in the 1DC differ/improved/upgraded in the 1DX II?

9VIII said:

The problem is that they launched the 1DC at all.
Paying $6,000 for a firmware update is obscene.

Click to expand...

True, paying US$ 6,000 more for the 1D C over the 1DX was a big call.

Having said that, here we are all in early 2016 awaiting Canon's announcement of the 1DX II which will in all reality be almost the same as the 1DC but with better FPS, tracking, and tweaks to all the other things which have made the 1DX so great. And most likely for around US$ 6,499 or US$ 6,999.

I do think they were ahead of their time when they launched the 1DC.

Thankfully I do prefer the name 1DX II when compared to 1DC II, so that's good start already!

Click to expand...

I would prefer better bit rate - color depth.

Jeffrey said:

Sold all of my Canon gear. Bought a Nikon D810, a couple of Nikon lenses, and continue shooting medium format.

Click to expand...

It would be interesting to read about your experience about usability, picture quality, satisfaction of your customers and (which I hope will not materialize) the quality of the customer service. I bet many people are considering the same move. My excel sheet told me "DON'T!". So I didn't. According to Ken Rockwell 8), both systems are as good as their user or better. He is a reliable source.

jrista said:

neuroanatomist said:

jrista said:

If I really wanted mirrorless, and I do want mirrorless....I want it for the benefits it has to offer. Smaller bodies, potentially smaller lenses, etc.

Click to expand...

That's fine, but I suspect Canon believes there might be consumers out there who have a different opinion than you...and that seems like a reasonable belief.

Click to expand...

At the moment, Canon believes the concept has merit. A patent isn't a product on a shelf. I suspect the idea will evolve before it actually becomes a product, because I think a lot of people would have issues with the design as currently done.

Click to expand...

Agreed, and there seems to be general agreement that this design would not make a viable product.

Two impressive offerings. But they both leave me cold. One is too big and the other is not FF. Moving on. 5DIV up next with even more for Canon to catch up. This should be good.

Thus inspired I think I''ll go shooting just for fun tomorrow.

I have been too busy lately to indulge in detailed CR posts. But I will repeat my personal surprise and satisfaction with the SL1. I purchased mine as an impulse buy on sale in the spring of 2014 for the purpose of hiking with it at Philmont that summer. I was pleasantly surprised at how much I came to enjoy using it in comparison with my other bodies... 30D, 40D, 60D, 70D, 5D, 6D, 5D3, etc. I originally planned to just take the 30D or something. I'm really glad I got the SL1 instead. It's a lot smaller, lighter and the IQ is good. Very good for a small kit!!

When not hiking, I use it as a 'grab & go' body for just about everything in lieu of a P&S unless it's a dinner party or something where I need try pocketability.

Reading the reviews yesterday, and
Ken Rockwell says it best on performance:
http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/d5.htm[/b]

Sad to me is that there is zero innovation here; while Canon adds new features like the ability to shoot-through flickering arena and stadium lighting, the D5 seems like the same thing as a D4s with one more frame per second.

Disheartening is that the same horrible Custom Settings Bank system has not yet been replaced with any real way to save and recall camera settings immediately, and the scariest thing is that Nikon moved the critical MODE button to the left side of the camera, making what used to be the MODE button now the ISO button. I expect we will be able to reprogram these, but if not, I'll be darned if I'll have to use a second hand to swap between Program and Aperture Priority and Manual modes.

Click to expand...

Pros are bought-into a system and don't change brands unless all their gear gets lost or damaged at once. If you're new to this, I'd get the equally professional Canon 1DX instead. The 1DX is a better camera, it's available today, just as fast at 12 FPS and sells for almost $2,000 less. By "better," I mean overall handling and customer support and how it feels, handles and sets up in the field (see also Canon vs. Nikon). If I was starting from scratch, I'd go 1DX, pocket the cash and never look back.

Click to expand...

With additional devaluation of the Yuan, prices on items imported from China are going to drop. Generally, this affects items produced in China, but this leaves companies like Canon in a bind. China is a huge market, so Canon can't really afford to raise prices in China and lose sales.

Gray market importers will be able to purchase cameras in China using US dollars (Euros, Pounds, etc) and get a lower price. Canon's response is to sue gray market importers, but that is not going to help. Buyers can order directly from China at lower prices as well.

Sporgon said:

daniela said:

I read the following on www.photozone.de, when they wrote an review of the 24-70L 4 IS:
The focus point shifts SUBSTANTIALLY when stopping down. Or in other words: the lens suffers from residual spherical aberrations (RSA). In close focus situations this is rather poisonous and the problem was affecting images taken at more conventional distances. The user who supplied the lens checked this behavior with a 2nd lens and this focus characteristic was the same here. This is NOT (sufficiently) compensated by the AF. We did AF reference checks during the MTF analysis and there's a decrease in measured resolution (= increase in focus shift) from f/4 to smaller apertures.

Is this Issue known for this lens?

G
Daniela

Click to expand...

Never noticed it. If you read the photozone summary they say something about the 'problem' being solved later.
When Lens Rentals did a 'tear down' of the 24-70 IS they said they'd never come across a lens with so many adjustable elements. It seems to me that those early ones were not optically optimum and hence the "it's no good at 50 mil" reports. At 50 mil mine is as good as the 24-105 in the centre and better at the edges.

Click to expand...

I can't say I've ever noticed it in practice either.

There are a few older threads which discuss the 24-70 4L IS which you might find worth a read. Here are links to some:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=27345.msg541086#msg541086
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=19744.msg536044#msg536044
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=26224.msg516809#msg516809
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21846.msg419018#msg419018
(I think I have linked to specific messages in those threads, but that wasn't intentional - it is just the way it has worked out after I used the forum search function.)

I also agree with what ahansford says in an earlier post about the macro mode.

I had the 'current' 28-300L for a while, I quite liked it but ultimately opted for the better IQ of the 24-70/2.8 II plus the 70-300L. If they can bring a 24-300L with the IQ of the 70-300L, I'd strongly consider it.

Glad you got it sorted, enjoy your lens!