AF might be way better, sensor barely at all, video mode only half fixed(?)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
#62
poker_jake85 said:
Glad I switched to Nikon, 3500 for an updated AF system is not right.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Nikon-D800-Review/Sensor-performance


http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7278/7008631235_7faa6f5330_o.png
Click to expand...

Haha, you say that yet there isnt even a comparison for the 5d Mark III yet. Talk about not having all the data! The images i posted say enough to me and thats real live data.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4728.0.html
 
Upvote 0
#63
Bosman said:
poker_jake85 said:
Glad I switched to Nikon, 3500 for an updated AF system is not right.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Nikon-D800-Review/Sensor-performance


http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7278/7008631235_7faa6f5330_o.png
Click to expand...

Haha, you say that yet there isnt even a comparison for the 5d Mark III yet. Talk about not having all the data! The images i posted say enough to me and thats real live data.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4728.0.html
Click to expand...

lol, downsized jpegs? Look at all the D800 full size samples.
 
Upvote 0
#64
I planned to reply with an image - for some reason it didn't feel good at all no matter the processing.

Then I understood - I did a testdrive today with one memory card, and the image was in fact from a 5D3 not from the D800.

Bosman said:
Haha, you say that yet there isnt even a comparison for the 5d Mark III yet. Talk about not having all the data! The images i posted say enough to me and thats real live data.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4728.0.html
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
#65
poker_jake85 said:
Bosman said:
poker_jake85 said:
Glad I switched to Nikon, 3500 for an updated AF system is not right.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Nikon-D800-Review/Sensor-performance


http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7278/7008631235_7faa6f5330_o.png
Click to expand...

Haha, you say that yet there isnt even a comparison for the 5d Mark III yet. Talk about not having all the data! The images i posted say enough to me and thats real live data.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4728.0.html
Click to expand...

lol, downsized jpegs? Look at all the D800 full size samples.
Click to expand...
Try uploading those to this site, cant do it, had to resize them. I am done doing all this work for complainers.
 
Upvote 0
#66
Bosman said:
poker_jake85 said:
Bosman said:
poker_jake85 said:
Glad I switched to Nikon, 3500 for an updated AF system is not right.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Nikon-D800-Review/Sensor-performance


http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7278/7008631235_7faa6f5330_o.png
Click to expand...

Haha, you say that yet there isnt even a comparison for the 5d Mark III yet. Talk about not having all the data! The images i posted say enough to me and thats real live data.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4728.0.html
Click to expand...

lol, downsized jpegs? Look at all the D800 full size samples.
Click to expand...
Try uploading those to this site, cant do it, had to resize them. I am done doing all this work for complainers.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt that, but taking photos of a photo in a book is hardly testing the camera and then downsizing. Just like with a high ISO D800 photo downsized to 5d size, it loses much of its noise.
 
Upvote 0
#70
poker_jake85 said:
Alker said:
Only AF is improved ???
No way...

Check this 25600 ISO Image.
Look at the Tanzania flag some much detail left...

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3202320681/download/1829153
Click to expand...

Not bad, but I've never had to shoot above ISO 3200 and that was in a dark bowling alley. So I don't understand the ISO performance over better sensor (color, DR). D800 with 14.4 stops of DR!
Click to expand...

Aha the DR numbers of the DXO guys......
Believe me there is more then DR numbers....
It's albout the photographer skills and no DR of 14 is making you or me a better photographer.

If it is like that then every photographer will buy the camera with the highest DR range and only confirmed by the DXO marks.....

Well it is not like this
 
Upvote 0
#72
Alker said:
poker_jake85 said:
Alker said:
Only AF is improved ???
No way...

Check this 25600 ISO Image.
Look at the Tanzania flag some much detail left...

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3202320681/download/1829153
Click to expand...

Not bad, but I've never had to shoot above ISO 3200 and that was in a dark bowling alley. So I don't understand the ISO performance over better sensor (color, DR). D800 with 14.4 stops of DR!
Click to expand...

Aha the DR numbers of the DXO guys......
Believe me there is more then DR numbers....
It's albout the photographer skills and no DR of 14 is making you or me a better photographer.

If it is like that then every photographer will buy the camera with the highest DR range and only confirmed by the DXO marks.....

Well it is not like this
Click to expand...

Obviously, but it certainly doesn't hurt. Think about taking a landscape at dusk shooting a sunset. Extra DR will help grab detail, may not need a gnd filter, also less pp after. A high DR is still better than a low one.
 
Upvote 0
#73
poker_jake85 said:
Alker said:
Only AF is improved ???
No way...

Check this 25600 ISO Image.
Look at the Tanzania flag some much detail left...

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3202320681/download/1829153
Click to expand...

Not bad, but I've never had to shoot above ISO 3200 and that was in a dark bowling alley. So I don't understand the ISO performance over better sensor (color, DR). D800 with 14.4 stops of DR!
Click to expand...

Except at ISO 3200 you aren't getting 14.4 stops of DR, it's closer to 9.7. Check DxOMark, although we don't have the 5d3 numbers in yet, and it will (based on what I've heard/seen historically) be less than the D800 at the same ISO.
 
Upvote 0
#74
briansquibb said:
Alker said:
It's albout the photographer skills and no DR of 14 is making you or me a better photographer.
Click to expand...

Yeh yeh - all the old cliches

A good photographer with poor kit will never be better than a good photographer with good kit.
Click to expand...

No but a good photographer with poor kit will be better than a less good photographer with good kit.

And remember a Camera with a DR of 12 is not less then a camera with a DR of 14
Not true you say....check the numbers....

I will find the link of the guy (DPREVIEW) who makes pictures with a 40D and rebel.
His pictures are awesome and he won a lot of prices..

Not because DR but because he was a born photographer with the correct feeling about compositions, etc.

All the b.ll about the DR numbers of DXO...come on
 
Upvote 0
#75
Drizzt321 said:
poker_jake85 said:
Alker said:
Only AF is improved ???
No way...

Check this 25600 ISO Image.
Look at the Tanzania flag some much detail left...

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3202320681/download/1829153
Click to expand...

Not bad, but I've never had to shoot above ISO 3200 and that was in a dark bowling alley. So I don't understand the ISO performance over better sensor (color, DR). D800 with 14.4 stops of DR!
Click to expand...

Except at ISO 3200 you aren't getting 14.4 stops of DR, it's closer to 9.7. Check DxOMark, although we don't have the 5d3 numbers in yet, and it will (based on what I've heard/seen historically) be less than the D800 at the same ISO.
Click to expand...

I see that but hopefully I won't need 3200 ISO to shoot landscapes ::)
 
Upvote 0
#77
briansquibb said:
A good tripod works wonders for the DR.

A landscape at 3200 - you must be joking, what is wrong with iso 100? You will at least get good DR then
Click to expand...

I was joking (sarcasm on the net doesn't work). I don't think I've ever shot a landscape over ISO 400 and even at 400 it's rare.
 
Upvote 0
#78
poker_jake85 said:
briansquibb said:
A good tripod works wonders for the DR.

A landscape at 3200 - you must be joking, what is wrong with iso 100? You will at least get good DR then
Click to expand...

I was joking (sarcasm on the net doesn't work). I don't think I've ever shot a landscape over ISO 400 and even at 400 it's rare.
Click to expand...

A ;) gives the clue so we can understand ... 8) 8) 8)
 
Upvote 0
#79
briansquibb said:
poker_jake85 said:
briansquibb said:
A good tripod works wonders for the DR.

A landscape at 3200 - you must be joking, what is wrong with iso 100? You will at least get good DR then
Click to expand...

I was joking (sarcasm on the net doesn't work). I don't think I've ever shot a landscape over ISO 400 and even at 400 it's rare.
Click to expand...

A ;) gives the clue so we can understand ... 8) 8) 8)
Click to expand...

lol, I must have misused the ::) face then.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GirlsAreBeautiful
From 5D Mark III to R5 Mark II - photographer review - first 1 month and a half - 12k shots
Replies
30
Views
1K
GirlsAreBeautiful
GirlsAreBeautiful
L
PowerShot V1 first impressions and sample images
Replies
12
Views
6K
Loswr
L
S
135mm SHOOTOUT! Detailed Analysis of the Hand-Holdability and General Sharpness of the RF135/1.8, the RF100-500/4.5-7.1, and the EF135/2
Replies
24
Views
10K
Loswr
L
axtstern
R7 and the Viltrox Speedbooster
Replies
3
Views
8K
axtstern
axtstern
Coffy83
Is the R6 really better than the R..for people like me?
Replies
11
Views
5K
Ozarker
Ozarker
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu