ok boomer!Lol. Thanks so very much for sharing your pithy knowledge. You may return to your troll cave now, and let the grown-ups talk.
Upvote
0
ok boomer!Lol. Thanks so very much for sharing your pithy knowledge. You may return to your troll cave now, and let the grown-ups talk.
Don’t know that it will be intentional replacement because the new stuff gets better. It’s just that the new stuff will be whats available when existing equipment wears out. Kind of happens organically.I'm not suggesting that you are. What I am saying is that if you look at the wildlife photographers who have been successful in getting their images into the public eye over the last few years there does not appear to have been a rush to the high mp version of the camera make that they choose to use. Inevitably this will change in the future as models become both high mp and offer the specifications that they want, but to my mind it shows that other aspects of the cameras performance were more important to them than just high mp, and I'm not specifically talking about amateur bird photographers, where 'crop factor' and high pixel density do seem to be valued.
The Bird Photographers of the year were announced a week or so ago https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...otographer-of-the-year-2021-winners-announced
The Nikon D850 and D500s were the most prominent bodies. Gordon Laing said at the end of the review of the R3 it’s not aimed at wild life shooters.
Before making that decision, it might just be a good idea to compare the two directly. Gordon Laing's choice was to use the R5, but he is only one point of view.The car AF gives away the use and also the eye thing. Still for wildlife I would use the R3 over the R5 any day. Stacked sensors are really just that much better and I like foxes, deer, bears, snakes, anything not a bird.
Speaking strictly for myself, when I bought the 1DX2 it was a serious conundrum of what compromises to prioritize and the only alternative in Canon was the 5D4 and I wanted more FPS and video features. That purchase served me reasonably well but left a bad taste when it was recently sold. It did not prevent me from acquiring some sweet photos but that was to a large extent because I also sprung for the 400 DO II and ended up shooting at 800mm almost exclusively (some quality loss) because of the 20 MP.I'm not suggesting that you are. What I am saying is that if you look at the wildlife photographers who have been successful in getting their images into the public eye over the last few years there does not appear to have been a rush to the high mp version of the camera make that they choose to use. Inevitably this will change in the future as models become both high mp and offer the specifications that they want, but to my mind it shows that other aspects of the cameras performance were more important to them than just high mp, and I'm not specifically talking about amateur bird photographers, where 'crop factor' and high pixel density do seem to be valued.
Before making that decision, it might just be a good idea to compare the two directly. Gordon Laing's choice was to use the R5, but he is only one point of view.
Watch the long FroKnowsPhoto video review. Around 40 minutes in, a very very brief explanation, like maybe 30 seconds. Basically it looks like the same sort of customization the 5D IV has.I am so excited about the customizable Q menu!
Been hopping between the different reviews. Would you mind sharing where you saw this?
"A good wildlife photographer doesn't significantly crop, if you have to, the photo goes in the bin because you weren't close enough." - It goes in the bin, because there wasn't enough pixel density. If there'd been enough pixels to crop and the shot was fantastic, why, really, honestly, why would anyone 'bin it'?A good wildlife photographer doesn't significantly crop, if you have to, the photo goes in the bin because you weren't close enough. Unless there is something exceptional or rare that you want proof of. I know a few PhaseOne pros that don't crop beyond something distracting on the edge of the frame or to straighten a horizon.
Why would you waste your time trying to make a good frame and then hack off a bunch of the data? That's a waste of the photographer's time and quite frankly lazy.
I'm just talking about pros, not folks that are on a tight budget and learning.
The a1 is better and also faster, 120 focus calculations per second VS 60 for the R3. Look forward to Nikon's Z9 though. IMO Canon's best camera is still the r5 due to its size, features and performance.I have tried the Z6, R6, R5, and A9ii. While the Sony doesn’t have any lenses it had the best EVF latency when tracking fast moving squirrels. Second I would say was the Z6. The R6 and R5 aren’t bad and I wouldn’t say they where worse than the Z6. But nothing comes close to a stacked sensor just now, stacked sensors put mirrorless ahead of DSLR. The battle is between the R3 and Z9, currently there is nothing as good as the R3 on the market until Nikon shows it’s hand.
Doesn't it just become an argument in irrelevant statistics? Who says 120 is 'better' than 60, surely the only relevant measure of AF is shots in focus?The a1 is better and also faster, 120 focus calculations per second VS 60 for the R3. Look forward to Nikon's Z9 though. IMO Canon's best camera is still the r5 due to its size, features and performance.
The a1 is better and also faster, 120 focus calculations per second VS 60 for the R3. Look forward to Nikon's Z9 though. IMO Canon's best camera is still the r5 due to its size, features and performance.
I just put in a preorder on Amazon, as well as a small box store online shop. Hope to get this one soon!
Amazon is saying "This item will be released on November 30, 2021". Hopefully thats not the release date for everyone
That is completely unacceptable and hard to believe - reason for a complaint for sure.Hopefully they put a box around the retail packaging. I had preordered the 100 Macro, and they slapped a label on the retail box and shipped it that way for contents anyone could see, while beating up the retail box in the process.
Hate when they do that. Never order my camera gear on Amazon, but just hate that regardless.Hopefully they put a box around the retail packaging. I had preordered the 100 Macro, and they slapped a label on the retail box and shipped it that way for contents anyone could see, while beating up the retail box in the process.
Ordered my RF 100-500 from Amazon as they were the only ones with availability. The lens box was in a larger box surrounded by air-bag packaging, quite well protected. That's not always the case with Amazon, of course.Hate when they do that. Never order my camera gear on Amazon, but just hate that regardless.
it's simple math, it takes half the time for the A1 to acquire focus when compared to anything else on the market at that price point. It basically performs double the amount of calculations so there is less opportunity to miss your shot when compared to let's say the r3 or r5 and even the a9. If your shots are still not in focus, I am afraid it's "user error".Doesn't it just become an argument in irrelevant statistics? Who says 120 is 'better' than 60, surely the only relevant measure of AF is shots in focus?
So you believe that speed is synonymous with accuracy? In practice, the opppsite is usually true.it's simple math, it takes half the time for the A1 to acquire focus when compared to anything else on the market at that price point. It basically performs double the amount of calculations so there is less opportunity to miss your shot when compared to let's say the r3 or r5 and even the a9. If your shots are still not in focus, I am afraid it's "user error".
No it isn't simple maths, the random statistic of x somethings per second is meaningless when the x's being measured are different. Is a Sony calculation the same and/or as accurate as a Canon calculation? But more to the point how relevant is that frequency, number, or accuracy when translated to in focus shots?it's simple math, it takes half the time for the A1 to acquire focus when compared to anything else on the market at that price point. It basically performs double the amount of calculations so there is less opportunity to miss your shot when compared to let's say the r3 or r5 and even the a9. If your shots are still not in focus, I am afraid it's "user error".
ive ordered from them before plenty and and it was always double boxed. I would have definitely been pissed if I was you!Hopefully they put a box around the retail packaging. I had preordered the 100 Macro, and they slapped a label on the retail box and shipped it that way for contents anyone could see, while beating up the retail box in the process.
I think it definitely depends on which distribution center you get and stuff. Which is odd there's so much variability since the bigger the business the more standardized things become.ive ordered from them before plenty and and it was always double boxed. I would have definitely been pissed if I was you!