70D and Dxomark....

[Pi]

At first I didn't see much difference at low ISO, until somebody pointed out some parts of dark color cards. There you can see the advantage of Nikon at low ISO. The Canons have some nasty noise in some colors, even at low ISO. But they represent only a small part of the whole picture, the rest looks almost the same for both.

If you can see that without brightening the shadows, we have a real problem.

 

[Louis]

9 pages on how bad these sensors are yay, oh are you trying to defend them again? please

 

[sdsr]

As far as going into a scene with too much DR... what absolute non-sense... I've shot back in the days of 4x5 film, shot transparency, medium format, the early canon DSLRs which had what, 5 stops of DR? If a scene is too dark, brighten it, if you cant brigten it without over exposing something else, use flash, or even better off camera flash, or reflector or some other way to manipulate the light. Dear god son, this is photo 101, well maybe 102. This isn't hard.

In practice, it's often not merely hard but impossible; try doing any of those things inside Notre Dame Cathedral, in Times Square, in the alleys of Lugano or at your local farmer's market and see what happens....

I'll take you up on that challenge... pay my airfare and hotel stay, and I would LOVE to go out shooting and prove you wrong.

Seriously? Notre Dame, like most such sites in Europe, bans flash and tripods etc., while the use of such equipment as you mention in the other locations I listed would be rude, inconsiderate and risky even if physically possible. That's not to say one can't take excellent photos in such places (especially if you're not as shadow-phobic as the DR-obsessed seem to be), but you can't "brighten" them.

 

[Don Haines]

As far as going into a scene with too much DR... what absolute non-sense... I've shot back in the days of 4x5 film, shot transparency, medium format, the early canon DSLRs which had what, 5 stops of DR? If a scene is too dark, brighten it, if you cant brigten it without over exposing something else, use flash, or even better off camera flash, or reflector or some other way to manipulate the light. Dear god son, this is photo 101, well maybe 102. This isn't hard.

In practice, it's often not merely hard but impossible; try doing any of those things inside Notre Dame Cathedral, in Times Square, in the alleys of Lugano or at your local farmer's market and see what happens....

I'll take you up on that challenge... pay my airfare and hotel stay, and I would LOVE to go out shooting and prove you wrong.

Seriously? Notre Dame, like most such sites in Europe, bans flash and tripods etc., while the use of such equipment as you mention in the other locations I listed would be rude, inconsiderate and risky even if physically possible. That's not to say one can't take excellent photos in such places (especially if you're not as shadow-phobic as the DR-obsessed seem to be), but you can't "brighten" them.

and don't forget astrophotography.... just last night I was wishing I had a decent enough flash to light up Jupiter... plus that special shutter delay of 10294.415 seconds for the light to bounce back...... NOT!

 

[trav.cunningham]

Wow! I am new to this forum and I have two comments.
1. You all have way too much time on your hands. If you need something to do, I have lots of projects that need getting done.
2. I am surprised to see Nixon users on a Canon forum. What's with that? Shouldn't you be on a Nixon forum or something?
This thread has really turned me off to this forum.

 

[Don Haines]

Wow! I am new to this forum and I have two comments.
1. You all have way too much time on your hands. If you need something to do, I have lots of projects that need getting done.
2. I am surprised to see Nixon users on a Canon forum. What's with that? Shouldn't you be on a Nixon forum or something?
This thread has really turned me off to this forum.

Might I suggest you go look at the images section of the forum... there are some absolutely fantastic images there and it is both a great source of inspiration and a place to ask questions. It has helped many of us to become better photographers.... and the images are taken with everything from p/s cameras to $15,000 lens/body combo...

 

[Robert Welch]

I haven't read all the comments on this thread, heaven help me if I had that much time. But I feel like, after looking over the DXO info on the 70D, that Canon really hasn't advanced their sensor by a very great amount in the last 3 years, or since the 7D was introduced. From what I could tell with the DXO report, it appears to me that there might be very little noticeable difference in IQ between the older 7D and newer 70D.

Now that might be testament to the IQ of the 7D (although comparisons to Nikon's 7100 might temper that opinion some), but it also might be that Canon is less concerned with the IQ of the cropped sensor cameras, perhaps figuring--and possibly rightfully so--that those who are really concerned with IQ will probably go toward a full frame like the 6D anyway. So, with the 70D they focused on other features, and from what I can tell they did a fantastic job introducing new features that videographers in particular will be thrilled with. That was probably smart on Canon's part, as that is probably where they will see the biggest benefit from a sales perspective. How many photographers are going to upgrade from a 7D/60D to this new camera anyway? Many more videographers will, most likely.

I'm in the former group of photographers, I mainly shoot full frame bodies. I do have a 7D (and older 40D) just for odd things, which I was looking at the 70D to see if perhaps it might offer something that I would be willing to upgrade for. However, it appears there would be no real benefit for me to do so, as I'm not using these cameras for video. I will see what happens with the eventual 7DmkII release, but I don't really expect it to have anything that will really make me want to go there either. The 7D is a well rounded camera, as demonstrated by it's longevity and continued success. It looks like it will still be awhile before we see significant improvements with the cropped sensors, at least for photographers.

 

[rpt]

ok, ok, people. Lets just all calm down a bit here. Instead of complaining about how the 70D isn't earth shattering, let's all go look at people's photography, give some C&C, and actually put our opinions to use helping somebody better their photography vs. trying to get the last word. : :

Good try. Valiant try too. As You can see it is a wild party out here. Just pick a good seat, break out the popcorn and you favourite poison and observe. And occasionally smile and wave.

 

[Etienne]

I know everybody has invested in lenses and accessories, so jumping ship is not practical, but here is what that 3 stop of extra DR can mean (5D3 on top, D800 on the bottom):

Is there really only one image on the internet that DR people use. This is the same image that gets posted every time D800 shadow detail is mentioned. I'm starting to think this whole issue is faked

 

[Rockets95]

Cognitive dissonance is very high with Canon customers who just shelled out a couple of Gs on their imaging equipment. They will try to justify by saying that "I always expose properly, so who cares about pulling shadows", "I shoot JPG anyway", "I like how Canon feels in my hands", or "Canon sells way more cameras".

Cognitive dissonance is very high with Nikon customers who just shelled out (more than) a couple of Gs on their imaging equipment. They will try to justify by saying that, "I don't really focus on anything in the left side of the field," and, "The sharpness of my images isn't affected by the CA endemic to my lenses, that can be fixed in post," and, "I like lots of buttons," and, "A smaller, less successful, non market-leading company like Nikon treats me better (and no, I don't mind waiting almost a month for a service when needed)."

You beat me to it!

 

[Zv]

Wow! I am new to this forum and I have two comments.
1. You all have way too much time on your hands. If you need something to do, I have lots of projects that need getting done.
2. I am surprised to see Nixon users on a Canon forum. What's with that? Shouldn't you be on a Nixon forum or something?
This thread has really turned me off to this forum.

Oh those pesky "Nixon" users and their DiRty politics! Boo!

;D

 

[tcmatthews]

I really do not understand the need to compare it to a Nikon. They do not even make their own sensors. So technically Canon make much better sensors than Zero.

Canon has shown little sensor improvement in 4 years and Sony has shown little sensor improvement on there SLRs in two years.

Both have been focusing on phase detection on the sensor. And for that Canon clearly killed it with the 70D on sensor focus. We have yet to see what Sony is up to. I might buy a 70D. I use live-view allot. I needed it last year so as fare as I am concerned it is a year late. I use my Canon mostly for wildlife and Macro. So a 70D would be an upgrade but I really need a 100-400L preferably a updated model.

If it does not materialize I will likely buy a 70-200 2.8L. Either way it looks like it will be Lens be for camera again.

I still have not deiced if I am going full frame Canon but I am using my NEX more and more. I am finding it meets my general needs more than canons current SLRs. (Mainly size and ability to use existing FD lens) It is not that it is less noisy so much as I fine the noise that exist less objectionable. So I might be shooting full frame NEX and Crop Canon in the future.

 

[zlatko]

I just don't trust any anonymous person to give me a reliable opinion, let alone to instruct others about a camera's technical details.

I disagree with that statement, see also next paragraph. It is up to you to decide whether to "trust" it or not. The source does not matter - you either agree with the logic, or you do not. To put it in more bluntly - you either get it or not. It is not trust, it is understanding. Now, it is another thing whether you trust DXO measurements or nor because you cannot repeat them with just a mental experiment.

On the other hand, people without "technical" skills need to trust somebody. Nothing wrong with being the artistic type; photography is an art, after all, and the world would be a very boring place without those people.

The source does matter because photography is not a course in logic. Photography is art and craft, so depth and breadth of practice with the tools matters quite a lot. One doesn't build a boat with logic, but with actual tools and materials, and the result is a real boat that either works or doesn't; the same goes for photography. While a person may have good reasons to remain anonymous, anonymity cancels out or at least seriously diminishes any claim to authority, experience, wisdom or taste.

 

[Pi]

I'm starting to think this whole issue is faked

It must be. There is no way Canon can be that bad.

 

[zlatko]

I do not find it to be a problem — ever.

Fair enough. I do not find to be a problem most of the time. But when I do, I wish it was not a problem , and that happens often enough to be a problem.

I know these topics get pushed on DPReview, where anonymous know-it-alls try to convince everyone that Canon cameras suck.

Some of those "anonymous know-it-alls" are John Sheehy, Bob (bobn2) and Joe James (Great Bustard); Joe posted here a few weeks ago. They also happen to be some of the most knowledgeable people there, with a few others who share their opinion but are less active.

Sorry, I don't know those people.

I was referring to anonymous people who can and do say whatever they want without any accountability — no one knows who they are or what, if any, photography experience they have. Such people can dominate a forum with their purported (but unseen) expertise. I just don't trust any anonymous person to give me a reliable opinion, let alone to instruct others about a camera's technical details.

The accountability is the logic of their arguments. And if you are not able to follow the arguments and explanation anyone gives then why does it make more sense to trust some random people with no credentials at all who simply always make Canon sound the best in all cases over those with some decent scientific/engineering backgrounds who say that sometimes Canon is the best at something and sometimes not, especially if the latter set are mostly agreeing upon what they are saying and the former set's claims seem more random?


Mr. Zla Tko(? or are you anon too )

I've just added my web site as my signature. Did not intend to be anonymous.

 

[Famateur]

Crap...I'm out of popcorn. Be right back... :

 

[MichaelHodges]

I know everybody has invested in lenses and accessories, so jumping ship is not practical, but here is what that 3 stop of extra DR can mean (5D3 on top, D800 on the bottom):

Is there really only one image on the internet that DR people use. This is the same image that gets posted every time D800 shadow detail is mentioned. I'm starting to think this whole issue is faked

I'm starting to believe this post is a parody.

 

[starship]

Re: 70D and Dxomark.... canon´s sensor not even on par with nikon´s D7000

I had been hopeful. but it looks like, that canons 70d sensor isn´t worth to be my next investment.

the new live view autofocus is pretty innovative. I appreciate, that we get back AF microadjustment und an updated AF-system.

but i´m sorry to say. the sensor-quality isn´t (at least) on par with the sony sensor of a nikon D7000. even more lagging behind nikon´s D7100. 2ev less dynamic range and 1/3ev in the high-iso area. thats remarkable, when you consider, that the sony sensor of the D7000 has been released back in 2010.

well, all in all. I won´t buy the 70d.
maybe a 7d mk2 will have a competitive sensor.

 

[Chosenbydestiny]

Right, but you're supposed to be a photographer first and an editor second. DR doesn't help you when you're actually taking your shot, though it might give you peace of mind knowing the very basics of exposing an image is no longer relevant.

That is missing the greater point. It does help you when you are taking a shot since you need to be able to judge whether a certain shot might have too much DR for the camera to handle and whether you need to get into multiple exposures or graduated filters etc., or when that is not possible which can be the case, to realize the shot may struggle to process well.

Sure better DR can be nice when it comes to rescuing blown shots or shots where the exposure wasn't quite dead on but it is mostly about much more than that. If a scene has a lot DR it may exceed the camera's ability no matter how perfectly you expose.

It's not at all just about people who make a mess of exposure all the time simply wanting to be able to escape that. It's rather little about that.

I think that's still nit picking it, and that it's relative. Shouldn't we be using our own eyes to judge whether a shot can be handled by our gear or not? I'm not by any means a landscape shooter by profession but I do shoot landscape with a set of filters from time to time. I never looked at a scene thinking I couldn't take it because it might look worse when zoomed in, or if I'd have a hard time in post. I suppose if you market your work towards other photographers it might be a bigger deal, but certainly not in the real world.

 

[Chosenbydestiny]

Re: 70D and Dxomark.... canon´s sensor not even on par with nikon´s D7000

I had been hopeful. but it looks like, that canons 70d sensor isn´t worth to be my next investment.

the new live view autofocus is pretty innovative. I appreciate, that we get back AF microadjustment und an updated AF-system.

but i´m sorry to say. the sensor-quality isn´t (at least) on par with the sony sensor of a nikon D7000. even more lagging behind nikon´s D7100. 2ev less dynamic range and 1/3ev in the high-iso area. thats remarkable, when you consider, that the sony sensor of the D7000 has been released back in 2010.

well, all in all. I won´t buy the 70d.
maybe a 7d mk2 will have a competitive sensor.

And you didn't buy a Nikon because...