Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Talk [CR1]

[bdunbar79]

<I'll be happy to provide more tests and reviews on the superiority of Nikon's current AF implementation compared to Canon's.>

General statements like this are really disappointing.

You could say I shoot a lot of sports at a lot of venues. It's the same ole thing every time. Sidelines lined with 1Dx's and superteles, a few Nikons, no mirrorless. There's a big reason for that.

 

[bdunbar79]

I like these two statements best and I'm highlighting in bold:

"its non-central AF points will likely focus in dimmer conditions than any other DSLR out there, save for Nikon's own D750."

"But Nikon's algorithms for 3D tracking just seem to be better (Canon's iTR in the 7D Mark II is imprecise and laggy in comparison(...)""

Love it!

 

[neuroanatomist]

<I'll be happy to provide more tests and reviews on the superiority of Nikon's current AF implementation compared to Canon's.>

General statements like this are really disappointing.

+1

His previous "evidence" was a link to the one and only Northrup infomercial I've ever watched, where he used inappropriate settings (i.e., settings the manual recommends against) for the 5DIII AF system, and then "demonstrated" the D810's better performance in a "sports test" consisting of a subject walking slowly toward him.

Now his evidence is someone saying that, "Nikon's...algorithms just seem to be better."

Oh, and someone saying the D7200's off-center points will likeky focus better in really dim conditions. Let's just ignore the fact that we're talking about, for example, 1/15 s, f/2.8, ISO 12800 and higher, because those are great conditions to be using an APS-C sensor. But wait, it's Nikon so one can expose at 1/120 s, ISO 6400 to freeze subject motion then push the shot 4-stops in post Exmorify the shot.

But at least he'll, "...stop henceforth."

Edit: yes, I see you picked up on those definitive, empirically verifiable statements, too. :

 

[FEBS]

I take a lot of action shots and took several thousands of shots with the 5DIII to test it. Before testing I was 100% sure I would buy the 5DIII for this reason alone. But no. I still had to take three frames with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS L II and 300mm f/2.8 IS L to be sure of one in focus - exactly as with the 5DII.

Sure, there where more 5DIII shots in focus, but I could not have changed my shooting style because of that.

I like to spend my money better. So I "upgraded" to the new 300mm f/2.8 L IS II instead. Frankly, also not worth the upgrade price from the previous version. Still, I feel much better about holding the 300mm f/2.8 L IS II in my hands today than I would looking at two heavily discounted 5DIII's and the old supertele.

YMMV.

(Apart from this Canon's current AF implementation is far behind Nikon's and needs a serious upgrade on both the hardware and software side)

What do you want to say? If you can reach only 30% in focus with your 5DIII and the 70-200 2.8 II then or there is something wrong with your camera or lens, or your shooting style is not correct. Learn to use that combo. The 5D3 combined with lenses like 27-70 2.8 II, 70-200 2.8 II or 300 2.8 II are always in focus, and when it happens that you find a photo out of focus look what happened, it's men behind the camera that made an error. So, if you can only get 1/3 in focus on your 5D3 then you must look at yourself !!!

 

[bdunbar79]

I take a lot of action shots and took several thousands of shots with the 5DIII to test it. Before testing I was 100% sure I would buy the 5DIII for this reason alone. But no. I still had to take three frames with the 70-200 f/2.8 IS L II and 300mm f/2.8 IS L to be sure of one in focus - exactly as with the 5DII.

Sure, there where more 5DIII shots in focus, but I could not have changed my shooting style because of that.

I like to spend my money better. So I "upgraded" to the new 300mm f/2.8 L IS II instead. Frankly, also not worth the upgrade price from the previous version. Still, I feel much better about holding the 300mm f/2.8 L IS II in my hands today than I would looking at two heavily discounted 5DIII's and the old supertele.

YMMV.

(Apart from this Canon's current AF implementation is far behind Nikon's and needs a serious upgrade on both the hardware and software side)

What do you want to say? If you can reach only 30% in focus with your 5DIII and the 70-200 2.8 II then or there is something wrong with your camera or lens, or your shooting style is not correct. Learn to use that combo. The 5D3 combined with lenses like 27-70 2.8 II, 70-200 2.8 II or 300 2.8 II are always in focus, and when it happens that you find a photo out of focus look what happened, it's men behind the camera that made an error. So, if you can only get 1/3 in focus on your 5D3 then you must look at yourself !!!

I shot a tennis match with a 5D3/70-200 f/2.8L II IS combo once. I would be very close to the players on court and was using the silent shutter. I had about 640 keepers and missed critical focus maybe 10-15 times out of the session, at f/2.8. But hey what do I know? Tony Northup tested it and said otherwise.

 

[TheJock]

I noticed that there was someone who made a request to be deleted from this forum, the point was that there was no option to delete your own account and you have to ask admin.
I think there are a few people on here deserving of “ye olde hefty boot” from admin these days.
This is a Canon site where, if I’m not wrong; Canon owners come to discuss gear and seek knowledge from the fantastic and helpful people who frequent this site.
So why are there people who feel the need to come here and tell us how poor our preferred products are compared with the Sony’s and Nikons on the market?? I don’t feel the need to go anywhere near their specific pages because there’s nothing of interest for me, I choose Canon and I’m delighted with my choice.
…………..AND while I’m on my soapbox, there is still a noticeable and overwhelming percentage of Canon photographers at all major sporting events, suck it up Sony/Nikon fanboys!!!!