Isn't it amusing how these GAS threads always circle back to this! To think I'm now beginning to consider an R version camera.
Jack
No Jack, we must resist the GAS. If you give in, I have to give in.
Upvote
0
Isn't it amusing how these GAS threads always circle back to this! To think I'm now beginning to consider an R version camera.
Jack
Have you ever heard of the concept of time? The 6d sensor is for todays standard not good anymore, but by the time it was released it was great. If you release a sensor that's about the same in terms of DR range 5 years later than yes, it's a crippled sensor. Obviously every sensor of every camera will at one point in time be outdated, but if you are already outdated by the time you release the sensor, despite being capable of delivering a much better product, it's a shitty/crippled sensor.
We don't appreciate personal attacks on posters. If you have something of value to say just say it. Otherwise just go back to being an anonymous lurker.Someone is angry!
I suggest you stick to taking you cat photos with your flawed 6D mkii and leave the adults to taking real photographs with their equally flawed 'other Canon' cameras that subtract all the 'niceties' of the Nikon you aspire to. Oh by the way it's 42 years of wisdom shooting with a camera - with film and digital.
Canon should employ you as the head of their R'n'D department.
I can see it now....Your / Their, next camera the EOS D850 ....as it has "niceties".
Have a lovely day.
It's been great looking into your creative realm.
Everything on the 6D2 is better than on the 6D, with the exception of the sensor. Could Canon have made the sensor better? Of course they could have.... Could they have made it better and sold it at the same price? Only Canon knows.... Do they have the manufacturing capacity to have mass produced a better sensor? Only Canon knows....r.v. crip·pled, crip·pling, crip·ples
1. To cause to lose the use of a limb or limbs.
2. To disable, damage, or impair the functioning of: a strike that crippled the factory.
I can’t get behind the philosophy that something which is merely unimproved over time is “crippled.”
It 6D was good enough, then 6D2 is “no better than good enough.”
Could they have used a better sensor? Yah sure probably. But does the dynamic range of the camera (the more appropriate consideration since nobody outside canon likely has sensor-level performance measurements) impair use of the camera in any significant way? Probably not. Ergo, it isn’t crippled.
Define resolution any way you want, but you are absolutely and categorically wrong about the standard convention about defining resolution. Look at tabulated resolution measurements: they are in line pairs per mm or lines per picture height. Or they are in MTF values scaled to unity. Doubling the number of pixels in a sensor just increases the possible lines per picture height or line pairs per mm by the square root of 2. The resolution of a sensor depends on the linear dimension of each of its pixels, which scales with the square root of the total number.
People do indeed talk about the resolution of a sensor in terms of number of pixels, but they are missing what really determines resolution. Quote from Wikipedia: "For practical purposes the clarity of the image is decided by its spatial resolution, not the number of pixels in an image. In effect, spatial resolution refers to the number of independent pixel values per unit length." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_resolutionThat's all true, but when we talk about sensors, images, monitors, the conventional notion is just the pixel count or dimensions in pixels. What you've described below is all true, but for resolution as in lines per mm
No Jack, we must resist the GAS. If you give in, I have to give in.
Oh dear. Canon don't just make cameras and the cameras they make do sell...
Why? Its because they are the Toyota of the camera world. Their products might not be the best compared with other manufacturers (depending on what you define as "best") but they make and sell (thousands of) the most popular cameras on the market because they are reliable and do what they are meant to do.
So off topic a little,...
Two members one who wanted a 50mm lens and another whose title suggests that he studies brains have been missing post wise since mid September anyone know why?
So off topic a little,...
Two members one who wanted a 50mm lens and another whose title suggests that he studies brains have been missing post wise since mid September anyone know why?
Picked this thread to ask as it is active.
So off topic a little,...
Two members one who wanted a 50mm lens and another whose title suggests that he studies brains have been missing post wise since mid September anyone know why?
Picked this thread to ask as it is active.
People do indeed talk about the resolution of a sensor in terms of number of pixels, but they are missing what really determines resolution. Quote from Wikipedia: "For practical purposes the clarity of the image is decided by its spatial resolution, not the number of pixels in an image. In effect, spatial resolution refers to the number of independent pixel values per unit length." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_resolution
It's the spatial resolution that governs my choice of lens and sensor, and I know that doubling the number of pixels increases the resolution of my images by up to 1.414 times and not two times.
I know we all want to have "our camera" released next, but that just is not going to happen. Wait your turn and be happy for those that this model is aimed at, and while you wait, please enjoy some cat pictures taken with a flawed 6D2
I agree. Just about any camera can be used. A 75 megapixel camera is moving towards more specialized use, and in the right hands and conditions should be able to do much better than a general purpose camera like the 6D2.To be honest, I think 6DII is a great camera and your cat pictures are nice, but they don't really show 6dII advantages, same pictures could've been taken on a good phone, micro 4/3 or a crop camera. People will not think "wow, and those were taken with 6DII? wow..."
Think how detailed the whiskers could be from a 75MP camera!To be honest, I think 6DII is a great camera and your cat pictures are nice, but they don't really show 6dII advantages, same pictures could've been taken on a good phone, micro 4/3 or a crop camera. People will not think "wow, and those were taken with 6DII? wow..."
Check the recent resolution tests by photozone.de (opticallimits.com). They now routinely do Canon FF MTFs on both a 5DSR and 21 mpx. Even an f/4 zoom is getting close to the extra 50% resolution http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1047-canon70200f4is2?start=1 The same is more true for the best wide aperture primes and to a good extent Even for the softer 150-600mm of lower aperture where diffraction is coming into play.That's all true Alan, I'm well aware of the math behind it, note however the spatial resolution makes sense only when we take the whole system into account, i.e. camera+lens. In most cases, the lens is the limiting factor. Doubling the pixel count may not improve the actual spatial resolution by 1.414, there may be no improvement at all depending on the lens(es) you use. I wonder how many Canon lenses are able to resolve all actual 30Mp of 5DMkIV, for example.