@Cryve: I do not think better processing on camera can improve RAW IQ only JPEG.
So that would mean a 7D MkIII with a stop of DR improvement and no AA filter would be a 'big deal' for some users. And that's fair enough, I was, and said, I was just playing devils advocate for the fun of it.If you had read my posts and tron's you would see that both of us find that the 5DSR with its absence of an AA-filter has better IQ than the 7DII. And that is not just below iso400 but goes up to iso 1000 or more.
better dynamik range
better high iso performance (achivable trough bsi or even better proccesing: double digit 8 proccesors)
But nobody else makes an APS-C with appreciably higher DR over 400 iso or high ISO performance.
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 7D Mark II,Canon EOS 80D,Nikon D500,Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II,Pentax K-5 IIs,Sony ILCE-6500
What makes you think Canon will?
No, aove 400iso the D500 is never close to 1 stop of DR better than the 7D MkII.The nikon d500 is about 1 stop better. Could be because it has a bigger sensor, but if not i would appreciate it from canon aswell.
Only the d500 and 7dii are specialy made for high iso, maybe thats why the other cameras dont offer appreciable higher dr at higher isos.
No, aove 400iso the D500 is never close to 1 stop of DR better than the 7D MkII.
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 7D Mark II,Nikon D500
From 800 up there is a fag paper between them.
The D500 has two pluses over the 7DII that I would like to see the 7DIII catch up with. Firstly, is the IQ. But, secondly, the more important is the AF - it is much better because of Nikon's algorithms that detect movement. I was in a bird hide last weekend next to a guy with a D500 and 300mm f/2.8 and 1.4xTC. He was able to get sharp shots of a kingfisher zipping across against a background. There is no way I could even attempt to capture that.
Yes. He showed them to me on the screen. I have some in flight where I have been lucky because I have prefocussed on them perching and they have flown off sideways. His shot was of one coming towards us diagonally.Are you serious? He was actually tracking a kingfisher against a background. I have been able to get some sharp shots of kingfishers flying in front of a distracting background but it involves prefocusing where I think they will fly and just letting rip when they take off.
You are in a photon limited region when the DR or S/N decreases with decreasing light. If they don’t, then the circuitry is much noisier than than the shot noise from the photons. The sensor is clearly photon limited when DR or S/N increases linearly with decreasing iso. As light levels increase and you approach base iso you can clearly see how the poorer sensors have DR level off while the best sensors are still in the linear region.Could be, i am not completly sure.
At some point we are photon limited anyway, i dont know at what point though. maybe we are already and it only comes down to sensor architecture changes to increase the pixel size and light amount gathered (with bsi for example). Does anyone know?
That's crazy. But i would like to see the whole series to see if it really was tracking it against a distracting background or if there were just one or two lucky shots. I have my doubts any camera could accurately track a target like that. Even with a superior af system. But i would love to be proven wrong.Yes. He showed them to me on the screen. I have some in flight where I have been lucky because I have prefocussed on them perching and they have flown off sideways. His shot was of one coming towards us diagonally.
I mentioned that up to about ISO 1000 5DsR (which has the same pixel density with 7DII) is better than 7DII (at pixel level) which makes Post Processing much easier for me.
It is down to luck - and, to be fair, the skill of the photographer.That's crazy. But i would like to see the whole series to see if it really was tracking it against a distracting background or if there were just one or two lucky shots. I have my doubts any camera could accurately track a target like that. Even with a superior af system. But i would love to be proven wrong.
I saw them, believe me please. Here is a link to an earlier post where I gave a link to the album of a guy arbitrage who now shoots with Nikons and A9 to get such shots routinely https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...anon-has-a-hard-time.35824/page-2#post-744081That's crazy. But i would like to see the whole series to see if it really was tracking it against a distracting background or if there were just one or two lucky shots. I have my doubts any camera could accurately track a target like that. Even with a superior af system. But i would love to be proven wrong.
I saw them, believe me please. Here is a link to an earlier post where I gave a link to the album of a guy arbitrage who now shoots with Nikons and A9 to get such shots routinely https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...anon-has-a-hard-time.35824/page-2#post-744081
https://www.flickr.com/people/100907765@N08/
You took part in that thread. Rather than admit that he could take such shots, there was the usual flak sent up and the conversation turned to the noise in one of the shots.
If you don't want to believe what I saw and that Nikon and Sony can outperform Canon in difficult tracking situations, so be it - it doesn't make a damn of difference to me.
Sorry, I don't know for sure but it was probably a zone focus. (When I track birds in flight, I use the centre 9 points, which is great against a clear background. You have to be very precise if you stick to the centre point.) Where the Nikon scores is that the AF recognises movement and so can pick up a moving object against a static background. I have been using a Sony RX10 IV as all-purpose travel camera and am very taken with its AF. It recognises objects and remains glued to them, be they flying or on the ground. Point the camera at a bird on the ground and its shape gets surrounded by little green dots in the viewfinder and it gets locked on as it hops around. The same is true for a flying bird. Canon should start using these more sophisticated algorithms.Do you know what focusing 'case' he was using. When it comes to quick birds darting around I tend to use single point but keeping that on a little kingfisher or swallow is basically impossible. Can he actually track a little bird against a background with a zone focus case?