Canon is getting owned in sensor technology

[typho]

I wouldn't trust 90% of information you see on any one site on the internet... Then again, there are plenty of formal and informal reviews, lots of conclusive info, and even digivalrev, predominately nikon fans had to side slightly towards the 5d3... While the sample pics on canon's website wasn't earth-shattering, photos people are posting with the actual camera from real photographers are.

I agree. Well, I did talk to a Canon representative and he stated that he now feels comfortable taking pics at 800 ISO, which made me raise an eye-brow. It seemed like everyone else was talking about bigger numbers on the net.
Since all the talks on the net are so biased I have to rely on "probably scientific" measurements like DxO and take into account factors they don't measure such as FPS (canon!), grip/handling (canon!), raw-m (canon!) and better downsampling in videos to avoid moire (canon!). I also feel a bit more comfortable with canon lenses, although I don't really know why.
Everyone is telling that there's no need to switch camps but if you have to choose because you own no gear of either company, it's a real tough decision.

At 6400 what happened to the detail???

I did see some of that stuff. But I have to admit I don't intend to take pictures at 6400 ISO. I might need it in video, not sure. Again, not an easy decision in any case.

 

[unfocused]

This thread went downhill fast.

No. It started in the gutter and went downstream from there.

Honestly, I'm thrilled that Nikon is aggressively competing with Canon. It will only make for better cameras in the future.

But, let's be honest. The cheapest DSLR is way more than adequate for 90% of situations, regardless of brand. The 5D II and the D700 were more than adequate for probably 98% of situations. Now, the 5DIII and D800 are going to be more than adequate for 98.4% of situations. The margins continue to shrink as the technology matures and advances. That's just the way the world works.

People need to keep a little perspective here.

 

[awinphoto]

This thread went downhill fast.

No. It started in the gutter and went downstream from there.

Honestly, I'm thrilled that Nikon is aggressively competing with Canon. It will only make for better cameras in the future.

But, let's be honest. The cheapest DSLR is way more than adequate for 90% of situations, regardless of brand. The 5D II and the D700 were more than adequate for probably 98% of situations. Now, the 5DIII and D800 are going to be more than adequate for 98.4% of situations. The margins continue to shrink as the technology matures and advances. That's just the way the world works.

People need to keep a little perspective here.

Couldn't have said it better myself +1000

 

[nitsujwalker]

This thread went downhill fast.

No. It started in the gutter and went downstream from there.

Honestly, I'm thrilled that Nikon is aggressively competing with Canon. It will only make for better cameras in the future.

But, let's be honest. The cheapest DSLR is way more than adequate for 90% of situations, regardless of brand. The 5D II and the D700 were more than adequate for probably 98% of situations. Now, the 5DIII and D800 are going to be more than adequate for 98.4% of situations. The margins continue to shrink as the technology matures and advances. That's just the way the world works.

People need to keep a little perspective here.

Well said.

 

[birdman]

I like the quote of OP "Canon is a decade behind in sensor technology"

Hahaha. Really? 10 years ago there were not even full frame DSLRs were there? I know my Powershot S30 (3.0 MP) dates from that time. CMOS were not even predominate, were they? Get a clue, dude. I have a 5d2, a D800 on order, and both Canon and Nikon glass. I have owned both cameras. Started with Nikon D80, then Canon 40d, then Nikon D700, then Canon 5d2. Each generation has leap frogged the other, and frankly if Nikon is indeed in the lead, it will one day be surpassed.

What some people don't realize is that Nikon has Sony sensors. Nikon builds the processors, shutters, and body. Canon builds the whole camera. Anyway, Dxo reduces all tests to 8MP doesn't it? How does that measure real world examples. Go to dpreview.com and look at Full-size D800 RAWs vs. 5d2 vs. 5d3 vs. D4 all at same ISO. This will give you an inkling. Frankly, I am disappointed at how little ALL CAMERAS appear to have improved. The "otherwordly" detail of the D800 is lost on me. I just don't see it.

What's more important to me is Nikon's better UWA lens options. Canon has better glass on medium to long telephotos. Choose your liking.

 

[typho]

The guys on the other side of the fence are a little more down-to-earth Some of the posts here smell a lot like jealousy.

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/04/19/dxomark-verdict-nikon-d800-95-canon-5d-mark-iii-81.aspx/#more-38344

Sorry for the link though

 

[Weldon]

I wonder how many retards will pay $500 or so for the Mk III when it's just been destroyed by the D800.

Embarrassing really. I'd say Canon always have printers to fall back on, but the ones in my office seem to be broken most of the time.

Wow this is a real good statement.
Thank you for your input.

By the way you are at the wrong forum.

This is for you :

http://www.sesamestreet.org/

Canon G12.

Lolz

hahahahah Funny, you think I have a G12 ??
No the camera type will change depending on how many posts you made...

Eh, where did I write that? That's a pretty low trick faking posts.

But you have got a G12, haven't you.

Lol

Yes you DID LIAR !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You have deleted your post, it's a good thing I have quoted your post.

children, children! Please! If you wish to have a scrap, maybe the playground is better suited?

I shoot with the G10. Tough little body. Great camera... great sensor!

 

[ippikiokami]

I wouldn't trust 90% of information you see on any one site on the internet... Then again, there are plenty of formal and informal reviews, lots of conclusive info, and even digivalrev, predominately nikon fans had to side slightly towards the 5d3... While the sample pics on canon's website wasn't earth-shattering, photos people are posting with the actual camera from real photographers are.

I agree. Well, I did talk to a Canon representative and he stated that he now feels comfortable taking pics at 800 ISO, which made me raise an eye-brow. It seemed like everyone else was talking about bigger numbers on the net.
Since all the talks on the net are so biased I have to rely on "probably scientific" measurements like DxO and take into account factors they don't measure such as FPS (canon!), grip/handling (canon!), raw-m (canon!) and better downsampling in videos to avoid moire (canon!). I also feel a bit more comfortable with canon lenses, although I don't really know why.
Everyone is telling that there's no need to switch camps but if you have to choose because you own no gear of either company, it's a real tough decision.

At 6400 what happened to the detail???

I did see some of that stuff. But I have to admit I don't intend to take pictures at 6400 ISO. I might need it in video, not sure. Again, not an easy decision in any case.

Don't get me wrong typho. If you get the D800 you'll be extremely happy. But for anyone to say to get the 5d III and they wouldn't be equally as happy unless they have a specific reason to need 36 mp then that would be ridiculous.

For me the high iso made a huge difference. It's what stopped me from switching. While my main deal is fashion. I earn quite a bit from weddings and already that ISO handling has been killer for me. Also there are different ideas I can incorporate in low light situations even with my fashion shoots that i would not been able to before. Another benefit I didn't really consider in the past.... Flash battery! Being able to safely bump it to a much higher iso means I use much less flash battery for the same picture.

 

[Canihaspicture]

You know, for 40+MP and two DIGIC 5+ chips to keep framerate up I would spend a little more cash than for the 5d Mark III... especially with 4x4 binning on video and an option to crop... come on Canon it'd be so easy to release such a camera right now.

 

[helpful]

That is just sour grapes talking. The "pop" you talk about with 5Diii is its lack of DR. High DR images have flatter look and you can post-process (the horror!) to make it fit your levels.

Let me get the record straight. High DR does not a better photograph make. The DR should fit the artwork being created. Needing to post-process removes detail that would have been present if the scene was shot at a lower DR to begin with.

The DR needed in a picture varies with the picture. A lower DR means higher contrast and detail in the picture at a cost of restricting the range of bright to dark.

A painter knows that whatever the light range in stops, it needs to be represented graphically by a range from dark to bright.

For years photographers have extolled the virtues of taking photos on cloudy days or at the sweet light near sunrise or sunset. What does that result in... surprise, surpise... lowering the dynamic range.

A lower DR is not a technical problem with a picture anymore than slide film (lower DR) versus negative film (higher DR). For many photography needs, lower DR is needed. For many other photography needs, higher DR is needed.

Conclusion: one cannot say that a camera is "better" because of a difference in dynamic range. One can only say that the camera with a higher dynamic range is better for photos with a larger range of bright to dark, but not as good for photos in cloudy lighting. On the other hand, the camera with lower dynamic range is better for photos with a smaller range of bright to dark (like slide film). Both cameras still record 14 bits of information, so mathematically neither one of them is inferior as far as the total amount of information recorded in the RAW image.

 

[dlleno]

what we need to discuss is the impact that the higher DR RAW capture has upon creating the desired results in post. what are those differences and how important are they to the finished product in real situations.

 

[poias]

For some people here, the facts make them uncomfortable. Sensor performance is what it is. Nikon has taken over Canon long time ago. Now, the gap is even widening. Canon has to innovate, especially in their sensor technology.

Canon's JPG technology might allow them to squeeze every bit of potential from their archaic technology, but that will leave them behind. The intent of my post was to reflect that fact. Some people get emotionally insecure when introduced with the fact. Denial and red herring are not going to solve Canon's inability to innovate their technology. Canon customers should demand more.

 

[altenae]

For some people here, the facts make them uncomfortable

Make gearheads uncomfortable.
Not me.
My eyes tell me enough.
No need for numbers.

-----
www.wildlife-photos.net
www.scramble.nl
www.planepix.nl

 

[poias]

For some people here, the facts make them uncomfortable

Make gearheads uncomfortable.
Not me.
My eyes tell me enough.
No need for numbers.

-----
www.wildlife-photos.net
www.scramble.nl
www.planepix.nl

If not for "gearheads" (people looking for better technology), you would be painting the scenaries/portraits with a brush, rather than click a button and instantaneously imprint it onto a sensor/film. :

 

[altenae]

For some people here, the facts make them uncomfortable

Make gearheads uncomfortable.
Not me.
My eyes tell me enough.
No need for numbers.

-----
www.wildlife-photos.net
www.scramble.nl
www.planepix.nl

If not for "gearheads" (people looking for better technology), you would be painting the scenaries/portraits with a brush, rather than click a button and instantaneously imprint it onto a sensor/film. :

Sure

 

[Abraxx]

While reading this thread I felt like mentioning my 2 cents too.

I was on vacation with my wife and had the chance to try out the D800 and the 5D3 (again, this time production models),
and beside all the specs on paper and the new released DxO sensor test results I saw today, I (we) significantly prefered the 5D3.
It was just a better Allrounder, custom settings C1..., far better grip, faster setting changes, dial + touch dial, used high ISO very often, better placed ISO button, nicer-punchy color, better WB in artificial dim light conditions, better AF, far(!)better Displays, faster menu response, faster overall, very silent, quicker buffer cleaning, better pics on 27''screen (non scientific comparison ) etc
I could use the Canon for all our purposes (even Street, BIF or Church and similar.....), the Nikon only for Landscape and Wild but not moving.
So yes on paper the Nikon looked great, but when using...aaargh
for us taking fotos must be fun,
using(!) the Nikon was arkward while taking fotos and even more so in PP!

By the way, El Corte Ingles Palma de Mallorca had several Body D800, 5D3s and 5D3 Kits on stock, yet at very high prices (over list prices...).

 

[moreorless]

For some people here, the facts make them uncomfortable. Sensor performance is what it is. Nikon has taken over Canon long time ago. Now, the gap is even widening. Canon has to innovate, especially in their sensor technology.

Canon's JPG technology might allow them to squeeze every bit of potential from their archaic technology, but that will leave them behind. The intent of my post was to reflect that fact. Some people get emotionally insecure when introduced with the fact. Denial and red herring are not going to solve Canon's inability to innovate their technology. Canon customers should demand more.

The DR at low ISO does seem to be an area where nobody can match Sony but as I said expecting drastically improved high ISO performace from Canon seems unrealistic to me considering Nikon havent been able to achieve it with the D4 either.

We've not really seen much evidense either way about Canon lagging behind technically when it comes to keeping decent ISO performace while increasing resolution in the same fashion Sony have. Both the 1DX and the 5D mk3 seem to be limated in resolution by processing speed being able to achieve the required FPS rather than Canon's ability to make a higher MP sensor.

 

[dunkers]

Pick a camera.
Love it.
Use it.


And also, it is Sony that is beating Canon in sensor tech. Not Nikon.

 

[skitron]

For some people here, the facts make them uncomfortable. Sensor performance is what it is. Nikon has taken over Canon long time ago. Now, the gap is even widening. Canon has to innovate, especially in their sensor technology.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2010/8/24/canon120mpsensor

Announced almost 2 years ago no less...

 

[Ivar]

Both the 1DX and the 5D mk3 seem to be limated in resolution by processing speed being able to achieve the required FPS rather than Canon's ability to make a higher MP sensor.

btw processing speed is SLOWER in the 5D3, compared to the Nikon D800: 6 * 22 vs 4 * 36