Canon 7D Mark II - DXO, Tony Northrup, and You

[Loswr]

He is the larval form of Ken Rockwell.

+1



Direct quotes...

[quote author=Northrup D810 infomercial]
21:40 Chelsea: "Ok, I'd also say though, that..If someone has the Mark III and they're not pro, then I don't think its worth switching over."
[/quote]

Corollary: If you have the 5DIII and are a pro, you should switch.

Interpretation: The 5DIII is not the right camera for professional photographers.


[quote author=Northrup D810 infomercial]
21:51 Tony: "I think If you're putting pictures on Facebook, if you're sharing pictures electronically, it probably won't make much of a difference."
[/quote]

Corollary: If you're doing something other than posting pictures on Facebook (e.g., printing your images), then it probably does make a significant difference.

Interpretation: The 5DIII is okay for posting to Facebook.

It's worth noting that in this same review infomercial, his 'sports test' consisted of his co-host walking sedately toward him (even she didn't swallow that tripe, calling it a 'moving portrait'). In that test, he claimed D810 was far superior to the 5DIII's ~63% keeper rate (IIRC, low-sixties regardless). He was using an AF mode that Canon doesn't recommend for moving subjects, but even so...63%?!? Anyone buying that as a fair test? Servo AF on my PowerShot S100 does better...heck, I can manually focus on a walking subject at f/2.8 with a higher keeper rate.

Steve, you feel free to interpret those quotes or his 'testing' differently, especially if it better supports your preconceived notions. Don't fall on your face or hurt anything of yours that already has a crack, if you take my meaning.

 

[quod]

Steve, you feel free to interpret those quotes or his 'testing' differently, especially if it better supports your preconceived notions. Don't fall on your face or hurt anything of yours that already has a crack, if you take my meaning.

It's obvious that you have preconceived notions (i.e., "larval," "tripe," "infomercial," etc.), and you misstated Tony Northrup's review of the 5D3. Perhaps you could stop falling on your face, misstating others, and misinterpreting facts, yet again. :

 

[Loswr]

Steve, you feel free to interpret those quotes or his 'testing' differently, especially if it better supports your preconceived notions. Don't fall on your face or hurt anything of yours that already has a crack, if you take my meaning.

It's obvious that you have preconceived notions (i.e., "larval," "tripe," "infomercial," etc.), and you misstated Tony Northrup's review of the 5D3. Perhaps you could stop falling on your face, misstating others, and misinterpreting facts, yet again. :

Larval was not my word. Tripe is an appropriate term for a 'sports test' that involves portraits of a person walking slowly...my apologies if you're an avid fan of tortoise racing. Northrup's videos are a revenue-generating stream for him, information presented with the intent of getting people to buy his books/videos/etc. An infomercial by any other name...

Perhaps you could stop making spurious accusations and misrepresentations that serve mainly to make you look foolish. Actually, it's too late to prevent that.

 

[crashpc]

I absolutely looove to watch his videos!!!
They are soooo stupid, I can't believe that guy has got over 200k subscribers...

But, seriously, he had a point there about ISO being the most important factor and the 7DII being great.

He is the larval form of Ken Rockwell.

++++ You made my day :-D

Anyway it´s more difficult to judge and evaluate others acting and knowledge when you know way more. I could be rude about many coleagues with great luck not effing things up in their profession, but it wouldn´t do good to anyone. I believe each entity needs to find knowledge and practice itself. Cannot be taught. It has to be learnt. Anything...
Sometimes he does good job, sometimes he doesn´t. Whatever. If I don´t like it, it´s not my business. If someone follows his BS, I might point it out, but that´s it...

 

[AcutancePhotography]

I think that he makes excellent videos and I do not understand that bashing here

+1

Haters gotta hate . . .

What I don't understand are people who don't like or don't agree with his videos making threads calling attention to his videos. If you don't like his videos, ignore his videos. Simple.

 

[lintoni]

I think that he makes excellent videos and I do not understand that bashing here

+1

Haters gotta hate . . .

What I don't understand are people who don't like or don't agree with his videos making threads calling attention to his videos. If you don't like his videos, ignore his videos. Simple.

But... but... this is an internet forum!

 

[ahsanford]

What I don't understand are people who don't like or don't agree with his videos making threads calling attention to his videos. If you don't like his videos, ignore his videos. Simple.

It's a little more complicated than that. This gent is trying to fill a void out there and trying to educate the ignorant or short-sighted into how to rate the performance of photography products. As I said before, he's trying to be the pleasant voicebox that articulates what all this camera minutiae and ratings mean -- a Carl Sagan / Neil DeGrasse Tyson of photography, if you will. To my knowledge, no one else is parsing this down into simple terms for the masses to soak in (except for odd, one-off efforts I've seen on YouTube).

Though the guy seems to be well-intentioned (other than hawking his books), this forum has pointed out on numerous occasions that the dude isn't on top of things technically. So the comments are not just from haters and fanboys -- folks who care about the correct interpretation of the data are miffed as well.

But the scale of his visibility on the net is of concern. If it was ignorance on a forum-level of conversation, that's one thing. But the man is speaking as if things are so with high visibility across the photography community, and there is no loud, vocal rebuttal or alternative viewpoint. It would be like if there was only Fox News or only MSNBC on cable.

I personally don't dislike the man -- I just want him to get it right or have someone call him out when he doesn't. Call me crazy, but a bunch of photographers who watch his videos are thinking "Oh, man, I could do this so much better than this guy." I hope they follow that muse and put their perspective out there.

Again: I nominate Neuro to replace him, or -- oh, wow, even better -- Neuro to become his Ed McMahon or Andy Richter sidekick. His running comeback would be "No, Tony. That's not true, Tony. Bad Tony!" and he could explain where the guy got it wrong.

- A

 

[MichaelTheMaven]

What I don't understand are people who don't like or don't agree with his videos making threads calling attention to his videos. If you don't like his videos, ignore his videos. Simple.

To my knowledge, no one else is parsing this down into simple terms for the masses to soak in (except for odd, one-off efforts I've seen on YouTube).

I actually spend a good deal of my time doing camera reviews on Youtube and I try very hard to publish as accurate and as fair information as possible. (you can see my latest epic shootout between the 5D3 and the D750 here: http://youtu.be/EsZtUZvoeO0

From the side of the Youtuber, it is a lot of ridiculously hard work to create a Youtube channel. If you say one little thing wrong, even accidentally, you won't hear the end of it. Trust me I know first hand, and this is the risk we assume when we put information out there.

I have only watched a handful of Tonys videos, and I think he is making a good & sincere effort, on the other hand I have to agree that when anyone on youtube seeds incorrect information, it can be quite harmful. I have had many, many comments of my channel who repeat things they saw on other channels and I am left to correct this commenter because they believe something they heard, even if it was a simple misunderstanding. It feels endless. I can't tell you how many times I have had to correct someone who actually believes the concentration of light photons is greater on full frame cameras because tony said they "let in more light". I realize he was talking about surface area and greater sampling accuracy, but his audience hears "full frames let in more light", and interpret as they will.

The biggest problem with you tubers in general is imprecision in both comments and testing- it distracts from otherwise good content. Occasional careless personal statements thrown off the cuff like the 5D3 being good for Facebook comments do not help either. Once or twice, ok. Consistently? Not good for the long run.

I am also against any Youtube reviewer who gives advice or recommendations on cameras they haven't actually used in a real shooting situation. I understand the "preview" thing, but how in the world can they know about a camera's performance without actually using it?

Tony must work very hard so I can have no ill will towards him. I get it. He (as well as many others) do however need to be more careful and precise with what they are sharing. I have seen him in the past post corrections for errors, so that is definitely a good thing to see and at least lets me know he is trying to be sincere.