tt said:

From the article:
Canon G1X (14.0 x 18.7mm) 261.8mm2
Nikon 1 (8.8 x 13.2mm) 116.16mm2
P7100 (5.7 x 7.6mm) 43mm2

Canon's G1X has over twice the sensor area of the Nikon 1 and 6x the P7100.
Not exactly an apples to apples comparison

Click to expand...

Apples to apples in terms of who these cameras are designed for. They are all high end compact or small EVIL cameras. It's true that you can't exactly compare the sensors fairly but you can judge the capabilities of the camera fairly.

Just like it was fair to pit the Nikon D2x against the Canon 1Ds Mark II. Both were pro cameras but with very different sensor sizes.

Ellen Schmidtee said:

ro_n said:

Even Rebel/xxxD body's can stand a lot more than one may think.

Proven here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1tTBncIsm8#ws/

Click to expand...

I wonder how the photos taken after all that abuse look like.

Click to expand...

Actually there is a follow up video with cracked lens and all. The pictures weren't as bad as you would think.

Eugene said:

I currently own the 18-200mm, 18-55mm IS II, and the 50mm 1.8.
The body I'm using is a 450D, but I plan to upgrade to a 60D or wait for the 70D
My question is, which one would complement my current set of lenses the most?
I chose these 2 because they were in my budget, and obviously, I wanted L......

I shoot events, sports, streets, presentations, trips, etc.

Click to expand...

It's a matter of taste and your specific needs. If you ask me: neither of them. And this is one of the reasons I did not buy a 7D and went full-frame instead. f/4 on crop doesn't leave enough options for shallow DOF in my book. So with a crop camera I would have wanted the 24-70 for the zoom and the rest primes (kind of where I'm going anyway but that's a different story). So the savings in the end are marginal. I've never used the 17-40 and it doesn't appeal to me. I have the 24-105. It's pretty good and the range is useful but I'm not thrilled about the f/4 and don't like IS.

I'd go find a 24-70 while they're still available. It's roughly the equivalent of 35-100 and at 2.8 should be quite versatile even on crop.

D_Rochat said:

I wonder what sparked that fight? It reminded me of this video. Crazy Russians indeed.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/YRKybmBnfHs?rel=0

Click to expand...

that was soooo cheesy - and even worst - i started to watch funny wedding videos and lost about 15 mins of my life :-\

That's what I wanted to hear Thank you. I'm more relaxed now.

Replying to the previous user, I haven't had the time yet to really test the camera, but I think it is ok and sometimes I think it should produce less noise.

Sample pictures

Sky @ ISO 800 f/22, 1/400, 250mm (55-250mm)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23130736/IMG_0276.JPG


ISO 500, F/8, 1/500, 400mm (400mm fixed L)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23130736/original.JPG

Is that normal for those ISO levels?

thanks

Thank you for your replies! I think I'll stick to my old setup for now and see what this year brings. Maybe the new 7D will be comparable quality-wise to the 5dmkII, and if that won't be the case I might be able to get a used 5d for a modest amount of money. It seems cropped cameras still can't beat FF ones when it comes to quality, and that's a sad truth. Still looking forward for that new 7D.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

You can send your body in to Canon and they will adjust it to spec. Wide aperture primes almost always need MA due to the extreme depth of field.

Click to expand...

Thank you

CHL said:

Thanks - then I will do just that. For this trip I decided to travel light meaning one camera body and two lenses.....
/Claes

Click to expand...

Same thing happened to me on a trip to Oregon last fall... truly a bummer when you have beautiful waterfalls and fall foliage staring you in the face and you have nothing to capture it with!

It was the shutter on my XSi... it blew up after spending a day photographing the Oregon shoreline in heavy drizzle (I suspect that it wasn't a coincidence).

I sent it to Canon... and it was only $200 to fix... they got it right back to me and it works great (although I did realize that I was using my XSi in ways it wasn't meant for and bought a 7D). Now I carry both bodies with me all the time ;-)

An alternative could as well be the 24-105 f/4L in case you do not necessarily need the f/2.8. The IS compensates somewhat for the additional f-stop of the 24-70. On the long end the additional 35mm give you some more flexibility and it will also work on full frame should you upgrade one day.

I sold my copy some months ago in anticipation of the 24-70 Mk2 and did regret that decision more than once...

FYI, the Sony is noisy has hell, and the AF suck. It can't track a subject if it was life-depending. Plus, with all the mp's you get a noisy image compared, but even worse is it when you loose 30% of the available light at ALL times due to the translucent mirror.

So while it looks impressive on paper, using it in real life shows it has nothing on the 7d.

The 1d X and the D4 are the new pro-bodies from Canon and Nikon, it's not like NIkon owns the pro-segment and everything else. Canon was first with the pro-body, now Nikon is first with the d800, Canon is widely know, waiting for the anniversary in March, so I wouldn't be too worried.

And what has Nikon released of lenses the last year compared to Canon??

The rear element need not float to mean you cannot use a teleconverter. It basically just has to be in the way. Plenty of Canon lenses have the rear element in the way, but not floating.

Nikon and Canon make their teleconverters this way, and 3rd party manufactures do not seem to. I would asume Canon/Nikon do t for IQ reasons and 3rd party goes their way for cost/compatibility reasons. But I don't see this changing.

Those two videos is yet another fine example showing just how much easier Canon are to use, just look at how he pushes button like a madman, moving from one side to another on the D4.

And for those who haven't tried, have a go with that Nikon joystick, it's loose and ultra non-responsive. Buttons placed all wrong, for example, the ISO-button is on the top left, try holding a 300mm f2,8 and changing the ISO, yes, I know you can configure another button for it, but that's not the point. The point is that they placed it where they saw best. Which they have done with the rest of the camera also. And when changing the darn function-wheel, it must be unlocked first, which is awkward at best, and holding down buttons while scrolling the tiny wheels. useless!! With the buttons to change mode's on the 1d's, there is no need to lock them.

The small top wheel and buttons at the index finger on the 1-series combined with the big wheel and set-button on the back with the perfectly constructed joystick is a breaze to use for all functions, and you don't have to change the position of your hands once. To change mode while on a large lens, use your thumb up. Maan, I'm glad I am a Canon-guy, lol!

Add VERY long and complicated menus, an also color-coded , which is fantastic for us that are color-blind.

MOST $

EF 90mm TS-E if your making enough $$$ (or just have some xtra cash). But it odes come with a learning curve.


BEST DEAL

The good old and trust 50mm 2.5 & only $250 or so is a bargain. Sharp. And you can got some nice detail as well. (only at 1/2, doesnt do 1:1 without the convertor but you may not need it).

Just make sure you have the room to back up for those big items!

what's wrong with the 30d?

Wow. Innavigable just got redefined. That site have an index?

Click to expand...

That site needs a bit of help. I research elsewhere then call their 800 to see if they have it. Excellent top notch service however.

danski0224 said:

I would strongly suggest the EF-s 17-55 f2.8 as the go to "all around" lens on a 7D.

Click to expand...

Um, I know this isn't the topic - but I tried a 17-55 and will (if at all ef-s) buy the newer 15-85 instead because the reviews are correct: the 17-55 is extremely prone to lens flare which is very bad at wide angle and outdoor shots. My recommendation is: go to an electro store, put on a 17-55 and point it toward a bright light...

Roger is an evil man... He'll put things in front of you that you can't afford, and have a sh*t eating grin from ear to ear...

I've rented for fun, I've purchased from them and I've even returned a purchase.

00ducky said:

cps_user said:

The new one might be something very good in terms of IQ. Also, it's about 15% lighter and a bit shorter, and it has better sealings. Some don't like the fact that it has a 82mm filter thread - personally, I seldom use filters (and I'm quite demanding on my gear as a wedding photog ).

However, the old one surely produces fine images as well, so it's your choice whether the difference in price (twice as much - ouch) is worth it! They do the same thing, essentially - a 2.8 zoom in the 24-70 range without IS.

Do make sure that the copy you're getting is a good one - my copy was not good at 2.8 and I had to sell it. It seems IQ on the MK1 varies a lot, depending on the copy you have so check this first before buying.

Click to expand...

How do I know if its a good copy or not? I would be buying new from BH Photo, and having it shipped. Or is there a better way?

Thanks for tips. I'm leaning more to the Mk II but the cost is a downer.

Click to expand...

Going to the store and trying it out in person can help, but even then you might not notice something. Just be sure to keep the box/packaging/paperwork, in case you have to send it back to B&H for an exchange.

In the spirit of the recent Canon roadmap that was posted I thought I would also post my own roadmap for upgrades.

I'm probably one of the most obsessive photographers about image quality. The reason being that I do photoshop retouching for many of the top photographers in the world. When it comes to editing an image, having the most sharpness, the lowest noise and the highest resolution is absolutaly critical. You can do a lot more with extremely high image quality than you can with low image quality.


For my own purposes I've found that I need at least a minimum of 16 megapixels for cropping, and the lowest noise possible. I also need all 16 of those megapixels to be tack sharp.

With that said here is my roadmap:

Body: I expect Canon to release something with 5D body size with at least 18 MP and much better noise handling than the current 5D II. My number one complaint with the 5D II is the banding noise, and the low dynamic range due to low iso noise, which impacts my style of shooting. It seems likely that Canon will do a 18 MP (1DX sensor)-22 MP body with amazing noise and dynamic range performance (and amazing video) and a 36-45 MP body for the landscape guys.

I will be going for the lower noise body. Noise to me is a significantly more pressing issue than megapixels so I prioritize that as long as I have enough room to crop. I love high MP medium format files but you have to prioritize.

Lenses:


Wide Angle Zoom:

(current) Canon 16-35mm F/2.8 II L - It's the best that's offered with autofocus. I tried an adapted 14-24mm Nikon F/2.8 AF-S and did not like the lack of autofocus. It's nearly as good, though not as wide.

Normal Zoom:

Canon 24-70mm F/2.8 II L - I was dissapointed that this lens lacked a lot of features, it had no IS was not a reverse zoom design like the I version and that it extended when it zoomed. However the image quality that's being reported is nothing short of stunning. So that won me over.

Tamron 24-70mm F/2.8 VC - I'm going to use this lens for low light situations, in effect replacing my 24-105mm with two lenses instead of one. It was An amazing suprise from an unlikley source. This lens means that photographers can get a full stop more light when shooting hand held. It's the equivalent of a F/0.7 lens. Sharpness will be a concern but this is less of a priority in low light.

Telephoto Zooms:

(current) Canon 70-200mm F/4.0 IS L - I chose this lens because while the 70-200mm F/2.8 II IS L is fantastic, I found that the DOF is not usable at those focal lengths and I was always shooting at F/4.0. F/2.8 is better suited to a wider angle lens, so the advantage was in weight.

Macro:

(current) Leica 100mm APO Macro - Self Explanitory, it's an incredible lens.


Primes:

(current) Canon 24mm F/1.4 L II - Amazingly Sharp Lens

(current) Canon 85mm F/1.2 L II - Amazingly Sharp Lens

(current) Canon 50mm F/1.4 - My impression of the Canon 50mm F/1.2 L was that it was too soft so I went with this. I really think Canon needs to release several new 50mm lenses. There have been rumors circulating about this for several years.

Canon 50mm F/1.8 IS - If they release this lens, it will be the king of low light, and hopefully tack sharp. If so that will be my 50mm prime.


I look forwards to reading any reactions you guys may have to my roadmap. I've thought this through very carefully so I'm looking forward to any comments or criticisms.

Thanks.

Brian is right. The 7D + 55-250 combo does a surprisingly good job tracking in bright light.
Low light, forget it.

Some examples. Note, bright light.

anyone thinks with the release of the newer models, and uploading via flicker and youtube video shooting, that there will be a major hit as to the hype, i mean at the end of the day everything tends to get edited anyway, and even thou the quality is there, are there any computers from the average user that can print that quality as to be a night and day comparison, well i for one don't think so, the average user really don't care about all this quality hinge as for the pro's this only separates us from the crowd, but even so for the process is far more over the hill that what we can get out of it as is.
I see this happening anytime something new comes out, i mean lets be real here before there was 5d mark 2 there was the original 5D classic and even at that time when I had mine was the same story. Also even thou its all fine and dandy to talk about all the new tech on the cameras, there will always be a newer model any, I fine that we should concentrate more on fulling mastering our current technology and use it to its max vs letting the cameras think for us and making our decisions, cameras of today are fully functional computers with a glass on the front, its cool all the way to have these computers doing some work but after all its only a tool and a master at what you do, will always over power the tool. Like the saying goes, control your camera don't let your camera control you.
We will be having this same debate in 5 more years from now. The mark 2 will be a fine camera for another 10years +.

jrista said:

Viggo said:

Why would you need more than 12 fps? Then you need highspeed video instead.

And the other problem which is much bigger is, how the heck to you AF between 20 fps? TO make a motor that flips the mirror for 20 fps isn't a problem.

This also a cost issue, who would pay 9000 usd for a aps-c with 20 fps?

Click to expand...

Why would it cost $9000? One of the most significant cost factors is sensor size. It costs 10-20x as much to make a FF sensor than an APS-C sensor, so I'd figure a high speed APS-C action camera would cost only as much as a FF, and then only because of marketing, not necessity.

As for mechanics, flipping a mirror that fast IS a problem, which is why Canon can only do 14fps in mirror-lockup mode. I assume the same thing for an APS-C sensor. You could do clever things with AF as well...you probably wouldn't need to AF between every single frame since its almost real-time...ever other would be just as effective as a 1D X at 12fps.

Click to expand...

I agree that future performance will be limited more by physical constraints rather than signal processing. The cost between a FF and a APS-C sensor might be a few hundred bucks, but the curtain/shutter mechanics would have to be redesigned to support faster frame rates (assuming same linear speed over a smaller sensor size). It might be easiest to start designing it using the 1DX as a starting point. If so, the price wouldn't be that different from the 1DX.

Isn’t it fluoride that gets you those sparkly clean pics?

presentation of this lenses in Lensrentals.com

http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/wide-angle/canon-24mm-f2.8

http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/wide-angle/canon-28mm-f1.8

http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/wide-angle/canon-17-40mm-f4l

difficult ¡¡

For comparison, I did move to Canon from Sony, and their Zeiss 16-80 f/3.5-4.5 was nice. It's not constant aperture either, but that bit more aperture on the long end did help at times.

So, why fixed aperture? Why not even faster variable on the wide end like the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4?