And what does Canon do?

[Canonicon]

What is the point of this thread? This is a canon site. If you don't like what canon has to offer, then go to another forum. Pretty simple.

I have checked the forum rules and there is nothing about only posting positive things about Canon.

If you don't like what a poster has to offer, then go to another thread. Pretty simple.

I prefer tollerance over censorship.

+1

 

[wsmith96]

I'm cheap so I'll have to outsource, or as my company calls it, "right shoring"

The company I work for calls it right shoring. The staff all call it wrong shoring.

Personally, I agree with you. Problem is that I view my company's ledger from a different perspective than the executives. I'm sure they have a much clearer view than I do.

 

[wsmith96]

What is the point of this thread? This is a canon site. If you don't like what canon has to offer, then go to another forum. Pretty simple.

I have checked the forum rules and there is nothing about only posting positive things about Canon.

If you don't like what a poster has to offer, then go to another thread. Pretty simple.

I prefer tollerance over censorship.

That is true, there is nothing in the rule book that states that negative comments should not be allowed. But then again, neither is there a rule that states that a response like the one I gave is not allowed either.

I recommend you start tolerating.

 

[Canonicon]

What is the point of this thread? This is a canon site. If you don't like what canon has to offer, then go to another forum. Pretty simple.

I have checked the forum rules and there is nothing about only posting positive things about Canon.

If you don't like what a poster has to offer, then go to another thread. Pretty simple.

I prefer tollerance over censorship.

That is true, there is nothing in the rule book that states that negative comments should not be allowed. But then again, neither is there a rule that states that a response like the one I gave is not allowed either.

I recommend you start tolerating.

Your post was just trolling, correct.

If you don't like what canon has to offer, then go to another forum.

 

[wsmith96]

What is the point of this thread? This is a canon site. If you don't like what canon has to offer, then go to another forum. Pretty simple.

I have checked the forum rules and there is nothing about only posting positive things about Canon.

If you don't like what a poster has to offer, then go to another thread. Pretty simple.

I prefer tollerance over censorship.

That is true, there is nothing in the rule book that states that negative comments should not be allowed. But then again, neither is there a rule that states that a response like the one I gave is not allowed either.

I recommend you start tolerating.

Your post was just trolling, correct.

If you don't like what canon has to offer, then go to another forum.

No.

 

[Loswr]

Why has this made it to page 30?

Because there is an extremely high correlation between Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and frequency of internet postings.

Take some OCD, coupled with a matter of life and death, plus a lack of humour.... throw in some raging testosterone and keep the whole mixture simmering over a troll baited flame.... Add DR for seasoning.... and you get enough posts to choke the server.

Don Haines
Posts: 3084

And of those 3,084 posts, 3,083 have been cheerful, humorous, positive, constructive and/or peace-making. I'd say 3,084 were that way, but hey -- nobody's perfect.

I was going to ask Mitch if he is experiencing Deja Moo... (The feeling that you have seen this bull before)

Unfocused: 2044 Posts. The only reason for posting this is to start one of those quote within a quote within a quote sequences that can look pretty cool when they get to about 20-30 quotes. Time to have some fun, demonstrate the absurdity of this thread and maybe break the Internet!

Neuroanatomist: just a few posts, really.

What? No one else wants to play?

I spy something with my little eye...

I can't, I am on a self imposed exile for a week or so. But, intriguingly enough, I have a friend coming to stay who has a D800 (shame it isn't an 810 or E though) and a 24-70 so I am hoping to do some comparison images for my own piece of mind.

What better to make of such a thread than a kaleidoscope....

Good read to pass time... I wonder if the forum will eventually put a limit on how many levels you can quote, or run out of memory and crash...

Probably not—that's all just handled with CSS in your browser—but eventually it will probably get to the point where the innermost quoted message is only one character wide.

That would be fun!

Not a Kaleidoscope, and not an Aneurysm, it's a Squirrel!

Really?

thank god...this will surely get this thread closed. please, please, please, please.....>.<

How many generations is this ?

It does get to the point that someone will grab his camera and snap a picture of this extensive semi-natural phenomenon that best resembles the great piramids of Egypt in 2D representation (or not so sexy airial photography).

By the way... that is one fine squirrel!

It's funny how squirrels appear once there are enough nuts loose....

Did someone really just try to revive the topic on the pointless discussion it was about for 30 pages? This is kind of fight fire with fire.... stop the bullshit with.... I kinda prefer piramids and kaleidoscopes. However, my ultimate goal would be to actually make it look like a squirrel ;D

Let's not off topic too much otherwise the admin might lock it up. We are totally discussing on the topic. Canon two generations behind? Nah, wait till you see the dual pixel + dual sensitivity sensor is out. The patent regards to this is very interesting. This is the next gen. dual pixel sensor. They've managed to make the two half pixels having different FWC and sensitivity so it gives you high and low sensitivity at the same time without losing resolution. Just like human eye, rods and cones anyone? : I am personally looking forward to this solution and how it compares with Sony's exmor.

Canon two generations behind? No. Two generations ago, Canon was two generations ahead. It took Nikon that long to catch up.

Let's stay focused here people (says "unfocused") We are starting to annoy the trolls. Yes!

perhaps we need nested squirrels to kill this thread...

Aren't there some rules about squirrels on this forum, regardless of whether they have a nest or not?

Just Checking to see if this post makes the original one drop to 1-pixel wide.

Yeah! Even Jon is showing a sense of humor. There is still hope.

RLPhoto, were you upset that I put a Squirrel in your Kaleidoscope? Or that I didn't play by the standard rules of I Spy? (giving a hint before revealing the subject)

Still going? Even the squirrels are shaking their fists!

I think we may have completely swallowed the original post now. I don't even see it at all...

I think this thread has gone nuts

 

[unfocused]

By the tone on these forums, you would think no one wants anything better than what they had five or ten years ago...

...most people on this forum have little to complain about because they have better cameras. Canon cameras will continue to improve. Those improvements aren't necessarily going to be in areas where you want to see them, and they aren't likely to be in areas where a small minority of buyers want to see them.

Everyone wants something better. That's why we follow a site that focuses on predictions of what the next release will be. It's just that, as Neuro says, the majority of people on this forum are more realistic than the handful of trolls and obsessive whiners.

We recognize that the state of the art today means that there really isn't a dime's worth of difference between Nikon and Sony or even between APS-C and Full Frame. We each have our individual preferences, but that is exactly what they are: individual preferences. And, most people on this forum don't obsess over the tiny differences and pretend that those differences have any real bearing on their ability to create quality pictures.

We also don't presume that when Canon doesn't precisely meet our individual desires that that means they are doomed.

It isn't about one person's opinion. If a thousand, ten thousand, a million "pixel peepers"...demanded Canon change something...do you think Canon would ignore them?

Of course Canon would not ignore a majority opinion like that...If there had really been a million people clamoring for something for years, Canon would already have responded. Yet they haven't. Why not? Because there simply aren't that many people clamoring for it.

Again, Neuro is spot on. There are maybe a dozen people on this forum who are disgruntled. And, even among those that are unhappy, they can't seem to agree on what they are unhappy about. Do they want more megapixels? Do they want a mirrorless full-frame camera? Do they want to be able to shoot directly into the sun and get shadows perfectly exposed? Do they want an APS-C sensor that performs better than a full-frame sensor?

It's embarrassing to admit but I've followed this forum for longer than most here (with the possible exception of Neuro) and the arc of criticism is a bit amusing.

Prior to each release of a camera body there is always a group that stakes out their "demands" and predicts that if the next release doesn't meet that demand, it will be doom for Canon.

One of two things always happens. If Canon fails to meet their demand, we are treated to thread after thread declaring how terrible the company is – and Canon just keeps on selling cameras.

But, the real amusement comes in when Canon actually satisfies the need. Then, there is a stampede to change the goal posts.

So long as Canon had more megapixels than Nikon, we were lectured about how much better Nikon was and how all Canon cared about was cramming more megapixels into their cameras. So the most recent generation of full frame Canon put a greater emphasis on ISO performance over megapixels. And, suddenly the complaints started to roll in: Canon is behind! They don't have enough megapixels. We are doomed!

When the 5DII was current, the critics zeroed in on auto focus. Canon has terrible autofocus! No one can get a decent picture with a 5DII because of its autofocus! Canon improved the autofocus in the 5DIII. So, suddenly, that was unimportant to the complainers and we started to hear -- The 5DIII isn't any better than the 5DII in dynamic range!

But, what has unquestionably happened over the years, is that cameras have gotten better, the differences have gotten smaller and the areas of weakness have gotten increasingly narrow and marginalized.

 

[unfocused]

Why has this made it to page 30?

Because there is an extremely high correlation between Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and frequency of internet postings.

Take some OCD, coupled with a matter of life and death, plus a lack of humour.... throw in some raging testosterone and keep the whole mixture simmering over a troll baited flame.... Add DR for seasoning.... and you get enough posts to choke the server.

Don Haines
Posts: 3084

And of those 3,084 posts, 3,083 have been cheerful, humorous, positive, constructive and/or peace-making. I'd say 3,084 were that way, but hey -- nobody's perfect.

I was going to ask Mitch if he is experiencing Deja Moo... (The feeling that you have seen this bull before)

Unfocused: 2044 Posts. The only reason for posting this is to start one of those quote within a quote within a quote sequences that can look pretty cool when they get to about 20-30 quotes. Time to have some fun, demonstrate the absurdity of this thread and maybe break the Internet!

Neuroanatomist: just a few posts, really.

What? No one else wants to play?

I spy something with my little eye...

I can't, I am on a self imposed exile for a week or so. But, intriguingly enough, I have a friend coming to stay who has a D800 (shame it isn't an 810 or E though) and a 24-70 so I am hoping to do some comparison images for my own piece of mind.

What better to make of such a thread than a kaleidoscope....

Good read to pass time... I wonder if the forum will eventually put a limit on how many levels you can quote, or run out of memory and crash...

Probably not—that's all just handled with CSS in your browser—but eventually it will probably get to the point where the innermost quoted message is only one character wide.

That would be fun!

Not a Kaleidoscope, and not an Aneurysm, it's a Squirrel!

Really?

thank god...this will surely get this thread closed. please, please, please, please.....>.<

How many generations is this ?

It does get to the point that someone will grab his camera and snap a picture of this extensive semi-natural phenomenon that best resembles the great piramids of Egypt in 2D representation (or not so sexy airial photography).

By the way... that is one fine squirrel!

It's funny how squirrels appear once there are enough nuts loose....

Did someone really just try to revive the topic on the pointless discussion it was about for 30 pages? This is kind of fight fire with fire.... stop the bullshit with.... I kinda prefer piramids and kaleidoscopes. However, my ultimate goal would be to actually make it look like a squirrel ;D

Let's not off topic too much otherwise the admin might lock it up. We are totally discussing on the topic. Canon two generations behind? Nah, wait till you see the dual pixel + dual sensitivity sensor is out. The patent regards to this is very interesting. This is the next gen. dual pixel sensor. They've managed to make the two half pixels having different FWC and sensitivity so it gives you high and low sensitivity at the same time without losing resolution. Just like human eye, rods and cones anyone? : I am personally looking forward to this solution and how it compares with Sony's exmor.

Canon two generations behind? No. Two generations ago, Canon was two generations ahead. It took Nikon that long to catch up.

Let's stay focused here people (says "unfocused") We are starting to annoy the trolls. Yes!

perhaps we need nested squirrels to kill this thread...

Aren't there some rules about squirrels on this forum, regardless of whether they have a nest or not?

Just Checking to see if this post makes the original one drop to 1-pixel wide.

Yeah! Even Jon is showing a sense of humor. There is still hope.

RLPhoto, were you upset that I put a Squirrel in your Kaleidoscope? Or that I didn't play by the standard rules of I Spy? (giving a hint before revealing the subject)

Still going? Even the squirrels are shaking their fists!

I think we may have completely swallowed the original post now. I don't even see it at all...

I think this thread has gone nuts

Despite my earlier response, this is a far better one.

 

[scyrene]

Most new threads seem to be transparent attempts to rekindle the 'Canon is failing' narrative. I suppose some of it is frustration - although since nothing has been officially announced, that's rather premature. Tiresome.

+1

The trolls and DRones don't have real facts to fuel their ire, so they're gnawing old bones. If it's any consolation, when the announcements are actually made, we can look forward to a freshly-fueled round of complaint threads. Of course, that'll be nothing compared to the 7DII/X hitting the streets...then the lens-cap-shooting-5-stop-pushing folks (the small handful of them, that is) will post many threads showing the 'terrible IQ' and whining about how it's a bad camera and Canon really blew it and they're doomed and everyone will switch to Nikon or Sony. Meanwhile, the 7DII/X will be very popular with buyers, produce great images in capable hands, and life in the real world will go on.

I'm actually quite excited. It might be the next camera I buy, for daytime bird photography

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Mods:

If people keep doing this stupid nexted replies, can we please close this thread?

This type of nonsense does not accomplish anything.

 

[unfocused]

Mods:

If people keep doing this stupid nexted replies, can we please close this thread?

This type of nonsense does not accomplish anything.

Actually, it does accomplish quite a bit. It clearly identifies the thread as a troll thread, mocks the trolls and demonstrates that the best response to trolls is humor.

 

[Lawliet]

mocks the trolls and demonstrates that the best response to trolls is humor.

Selfmocking trolls? Well, that kind of recursion is topically invariant.

 

[jrista]

By the tone on these forums, you would think no one wants anything better than what they had five or ten years ago. (I know that isn't true, it doesn't seem logical that the photographers on this forum wouldn't want a better camera in their hands......yet if it really is....wow...)

Are you being disingenuous, or is it actually your contention that Canon cameras have not improved? The T5i/700D is not a better camera than the T1i/500D? Is the 70D not a better camera than the 40D? The 5DIII...not a better camera than the 5DII? How about the 1D X...not a better camera than the 1DsIII?

If you honestly believe those cameras are no better than their predecessors, that's surprising...and rather sad. The reality is that Canon cameras have improved substantially over the years – most people on this forum have little to complain about because they have better cameras. Canon cameras will continue to improve. Those improvements aren't necessarily going to be in areas where you want to see them, and they aren't likely to be in areas where a small minority of buyers want to see them.

I think that many (most?) of Canon cameras have gained certain features, yes. Is that an improvement? I guess it depends on whether you use the features. How many Rebels got the 18mp sensor? Far too many? Sure...Canon cameras have changed. That's not, and never has been, my point. My point is, for all the features on those cameras that have changed...the quality of the images they produce really has't. Even the increases in high ISO on those lower end cameras (and even the 60D, 70D...let's hope to God not the 7D II) have not really changed from an IQ standpoint. The maximum selectable ISO settings have changed...but the IQ at those ISO settings hasn't changed much...minor differences in color noise here and there.

It's the differences in IQ that I'm referring to. Features are a dime a dozen. They come...sometimes they go...a subsequent version of a feature might be minimally improved over a prior version. Some may be frivolous or otherwise unwanted/unused by many people (i.e. I would never use an articulating screen...too afraid it would snap off or something like that.)

We use cameras to take pictures. When it comes to taking pictures, most Canon cameras have not changed much in YEARS as far as IQ is concerned. The 5D III, 6D, and 1D X definitely improved high ISO quality...however, when you run the numbers, they barely maintained a minimal lead over the competition that, today, seems to again have been surpassed. To achieve their temporary crown as far as high ISO performance goes, they had to make certain tradeoffs that affect IQ in other ways...such as weakening their CFA. That actually has a fairly severe impact on the color noise these cameras produce. Something that rapidly becomes apparent even with minor (1 stop maybe, which is trivial) shadow recovery.

Canon has made progress on certain fronts, for sure. Their AF system is currently, IMO, one of the best on the market, and it certainly matters a ton for certain types of shooting. Their meter on the 1D X is finally competitive...if the 7D II really gets it, that would be AWESOME, IMO. Those things both mean more in-focus shots with better exposure. However, at their core...fundamentally...when it comes to photography at ISO settings under 800...Canon's IQ hasn't changed. THAT is what I'm referring to.

Now that I'm back into landscapes, I've noticed how truly far behind the times Canon's sensor IQ is. Canon, in my honest opinion, is not just "behind." At this point, I think Canon is dead last. In pretty much every way, ever aspect, Canon's core sensor technology, the design, the results at lower ISO, are many, many years behind the rest of the industry. So far behind, in fact, that Nikon has now become the new preferred DSLR for astrophotography! I thought that astrophotography would be the realm of Canon forever thanks to the fact that they maintain a much more linear signal behavior than SoNikon (who by default clip, rather than offset, to black point). A hacker removed the black point clipping, resulting in far superior signal linearity in Exmor-based cameras. It's so good that the guy regularly refers to Nikon cameras that have black-point fixed Exmors (and I think Toshibas) as "CCD linearity and quality"...and the results from them are STUNNING.

Astrophotography has even swiched...that was a true stronghold of Canon DSLRs, there are a dozen modding companies out there that will mod Canon DSLRs for astro. The D800 and D5300 both have become two of the most popular DSLR cameras now for astro, and people are even imaging at ISO 100 on them!

When I see things like that, when I see major strongholds of Canon cameras that I honestly NEVER thought would ever shift to other brands, shifting over to the competition...it is just a real-world indicator of the state of Canon sensor technology. It's way, way behind. At low ISO, I really do think it comes in dead last now...

And at times it truly does seem as though no one here realizes the differences, or just want to put their heads in the sand as far as the differences go. Canon is still a profitable company, they are still dominant...but, will things stay that way if the competition's technology keeps offering advantages (often significant advantages) over Canon's? I've brought up Nokia before, because the analogy between Nokia and Canon grows stronger every time a company releases a new camera. It doesn't matter if your the most profitable company or sell the most products. That can all change in a heartbeat! Apple was a nothing, a nobody company that had a niche of die-hard followers...then they released the iPhone. That one move, even though it took a few years to fully have a real, solid impact on the competition, took out (pretty much completely) TWO top-end companies that used to dominate that market: Nokia and RIM. RIM is pretty much dead...no one is interested in BlackBerry anymore (and it used to be called CrackBerry!!) Nokia sold off one of their core businesses to Microsoft...god only knows what Nokia will do now...how long they will still be around.

Canon's luck could change very rapidly. It hasn't happened yet. It didn't happen right way with Nokia and RIM...but it DID eventually happen once disruptive technology was introduced to the market. Canon is facing a disrupted market. Will they be the next Nokia a couple years from now?

It isn't about one person's opinion. If a thousand, ten thousand, a million "pixel peepers" (read: people who care about getting improved IQ) demanded Canon change something (and not necessarily on forums...in writing, in person, at conferences to Canon reps, whatever)...do you think Canon would ignore them?

Of course Canon would not ignore a majority opinion like that. But...people here on CR forums have been claiming for years that Canon needs to improve 'sensor IQ' (a bandbuggy – it's not really big enough to be called a wagon – onto which you've only recently jumped). If there had really been a million people clamoring for something for years, Canon would already have responded. Yet they haven't. Why not? Because there simply aren't that many people clamoring for it.

I think people are clamoring for it. However they are clamoring for other products. The sheer number of new Nikon DSLRs being used with the black point hack in astrophotography (where Nikon cameras used to be completely shunned with the nickname "Star Eaters") is an indication of how quickly things can change. When people ask what DSLR they should get as a beginner for AP? You used to hear an ubiquitous "Get a TNi camera, get it modded for astro, nothing better than that!" Today? The tone has shifted considerably. The D5300 is becoming the new favorite for the cheaper entry-level options. The D800 has been touted as a CCD-quality imager when the black point clip is removed...something that has NEVER been said about any Canon DSLR. You used to never see anyone imaging with Nikons...I see new images from people using Nikon cameras every day now. I also see cameras from Sony, and there are hackers working on the black point issue for them...mirrorless sony FF cameras are actually very appealing for astro imagers because of the significantly lower weight, which often allows the use of much smaller, more portable mounts.

So, people are clamoring...for the exits. Astro is a niche, certainly. It won't change things fundamentally, not for a while (and in the long run, the really good stuff is still dominated by mono CCD cameras). But that's just one example where I've seen people, a lot of people, who really are looking for better IQ...and picking alternative brands. A lot of the portraiture photographers I know have switched from Canon to either Nikon or Pentax (depending on whether they just want improved IQ, or want both better IQ and a good selection of small "unintimidating" pancake lenses.)

I think if you honestly believe there isn't a trend towards better IQ, your not looking and observing what's going on around you. I'm not saying Canon camera have disappeared from the streets. However, I HAVE seen a greater diversity of cameras than I used to...several years ago, it was pretty much Canon. Pretty much every landscape photographer I knew or encountered had a 5D II. Today, most of them have the D800, some the D600 or the A7/r. Those are trends...they are observable in real life. It isn't a purely Canon-dominated world out there where they have over 48% of the market...things are diversifying, and while not everyone is going to Nikon, they aren't always choosing Canon anymore.

I don't think Canon has "responded" because I don't really think that's Canon's way...they never seem to respond directly to the competition. But more than that, I think they haven't had the capability of actually improving their sensor technology. Not so far, anyway. Don may be right...Canon may be waiting for a wind-down on small form factor sensors on their better fabs before ramping up the fabrication of larger sensors on smaller processes. I certainly hope so...because I honestly don't want to see Canon become the next Nokia or RIM in 2018.

 

[Lawliet]

I think if you honestly believe there isn't a trend towards better IQ, your not looking and observing what's going on around you. I'm not saying Canon camera have disappeared from the streets. However, I HAVE seen a greater diversity of cameras than I used to...several years ago, it was pretty much Canon. Pretty much every landscape photographer I knew or encountered had a 5D II. Today, most of them have the D800, some the D600 or the A7/r. Those are trends...they are observable in real life. It isn't a purely Canon-dominated world out there where they have over 48% of the market...things are diversifying, and while not everyone is going to Nikon, they aren't always choosing Canon anymore.

Same idea for fashion/glamour & advertisment - those used to be 5D2-dominated, something in the 80% range. Well, today 2/3rds are not Canon. And if you talk to the people you hear that status quo this trend will continue as tax depreciation allows.
Now this doesn't show up in the sales figures as the gear has already been bought. But it would be wise to consider the implications for the next cycle.

 

[psolberg]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: sony and others breaking the stagnant canon/nikon status quo is welcomed, overdue, and inevitable. This means better products at better prices for everybody.

 

[scyrene]

And at times it truly does seem as though no one here realizes the differences, or just want to put their heads in the sand as far as the differences go.

I respect you a lot, and have found your input on this forum very useful. But sensor performance at low ISO really isn't a priority for some/many of us. It's not burying our heads in the sand, it's prioritising what's important to us.

I've dabbled in astro work. But light pollution is by far the biggest factor holding me back - and I suspect, most UK-based folk. I'd be much better off sinking money into learning to drive and going to a remote spot, or some other way of getting my gear out to darker skies, than buying a Nikon and hacking it. A better sensor isn't gonna help if I'm limited by other factors.

Ditto wildlife. What limits me is disposition (I'm not a getting-up-before-dawn person, to get out to the best spots), and ability to travel. After that, autofocus, focal length, and high ISO quality are all far more important than anything else. A D8xx would get me more reach through cropping, but that's about it.

Image quality is massively important - but a little less noise isn't that big a deal to some of us. That's not belittling your position, nor is it wilful ignorance of reality. It's an assessment based on needs and desires. (And for example, I expose to the right as much as possible - so higher ISO quality is more important than shadow raising, because I prefer to lower the exposure in post, not the other way round).

 

[Loswr]

It's the differences in IQ that I'm referring to. Features are a dime a dozen. ...

We use cameras to take pictures. When it comes to taking pictures, most Canon cameras have not changed much in YEARS as far as IQ is concerned.

We use cameras to take pictures, not just sensors (where have I heard that before? : ). Of all the pictures taken with a dSLR, what fraction would you say we're shot without autofocus? Less than 2%? Less than 0.2%? The 40D got a big AF boost, in the T4i that was improvement reached the entry-level line. The 7D had the best APS-C AF available, now in the xxD line, and if the rumored spec is true, the 7DII will once again have the best APS-C AF system. The 1D X and 5DIII have top AF systems, and both are significant improvements over their predecessors.

Better AF – more cross-type points, spread further across the frame, f/2.8 accuracy in the center, those 'dime-a-dozen' features translate directly to a higher rate of in-focus images. So...does a blurry, misfocused image with 13 stops of DR have better IQ than a properly focused image with 2 stops less DR? Are you going to take a blurry, misfocused image and lament over noise when you push the shadows...or just delete the image?

For the small minority (there's that word again) who's shooting style depends primarily on the sensor...tripod users shooting static scenes, Canon sensor IQ has improved only slightly...and as the many award-winning, awe-inspiring landscape scenes shot with Canon cameras will attest, the sensor IQ was excellent already.

I think people are clamoring for it. However they are clamoring for other products. The sheer number of new Nikon DSLRs being used with the black point hack in astrophotography...

I didn't say people aren't clamoring for it. I said not many people, as in a minority of dSLR buyers, are clamoring for it. "The sheer number of ... DSLRs being used ... in astrophotography...," LOL. I know you later acknowledged it's a niche, but thanks for the laugh on the way there...

 

[Lee Jay]

I need the sensor to be as good as possible, but at high ISO, not low ISO. My Rebel T2i is good enough at low ISO.

 

[Loswr]

My Rebel T2i is good enough at low ISO.

Clearly, you are neither dramatically underexposing nor pushing your shadows several stops. Get with the program!!

 

[Lee Jay]

My Rebel T2i is good enough at low ISO.

Clearly, you are neither dramatically underexposing nor pushing your shadows several stops. Get with the program!!

Actually, I do sometimes. This is an example I use for something else, but this was shot in raw, many of the raw pixels in the ceiling were blown so it isn't underexposed, I just had to push the shadows a lot. This was shot on the T2i.