DXO calls the D7200 "Super awesome greatness with frosting on top"
- Thread starter ahsanford
- Start date
syder said:Aglet said:
You're going to stick teleconverters on an f6.3 lens and use AF at f8? I guess Nikon teleconverters must not lose light unlike the crappy Canon ones
I guess I should've been more clear, no need for teleconverter with a 600mm on a crop body.
Or a 1.4x at most and the darn thing would likely still AF with that combo in decent light.
Upvote
0
I could not agree more. As I have stated numerous times before, I find it absolutely amazing that, instead of cheering for technology advances amongst the various suppliers out there, because it will/should result in better products also from Canon, we have the continuous tirades of why any improvement not originating from Canon is a useless feature. An example in this thread is the -3EV AF. When Canon provided -3EV on the centre point of the 6D and later the 7DII, it was a great feature. When Nikon offers -3EV at all 15 centre points, it´s actually quite useless ... :candc said:
Every time someone is making a point of a feature on a Sony or Nikon camera, that objectively is superior to what Canon offers, most notably sensors, we end up in a bashing for all the things that was not pointed out and all the features Canon has that Sony and Nikon does not have. Instead of demanding the same performance from Canon, on the specific area pointed out, we get a tirade of Canon-please-don´t-change-anything-we´re-so-happy arguments.
Ill repeat myself (I); It looks stupid ...
I´ll repeat myself (II): I do NOT want a Sony or Nikon camera, because there are numerous things I don´t like. But I expect Canon to provide the same or better performance in specific areas as Nikon and Sony (or any other supplier) offers, most notably sensors.
Upvote
0
Eldar said:
Correct, and let's see about d7200 street prices. As in the times when I had to decide between 60d and the then d7100, I find that Nikon is very, very competetive in the xxd segment and you really have to actively look for reasons to buy Canon when going "above Rebel, but below premium 7d2".
Lucky us that all these are all excellent cameras by now in any case, so probably there is no "bad" choice but just shades of "good".
Eldar said:I could not agree more. As I have stated numerous times before, I find it absolutely amazing that, instead of cheering for technology advances amongst the various suppliers out there, because it will/should result in better products also from Canon, we have the continuous tirades of why any improvement not originating from Canon is a useless feature. An example in this thread is the -3EV AF. When Canon provided -3EV on the centre point of the 6D and later the 7DII, it was a great feature. When Nikon offers -3EV at all 15 centre points, it´s actually quite useless ... :candc said:
I couldn't agree more, too!
I do sympathize for the notion that after having invested thousands of €€€ into some brand you are reluctant to ack the competition advancing ... and you feel attached to it after decades of shooting with the specific ergonomics. But senseless fanboisim only demonstrates that there really might be a problem for Canon here, or the reactions would be much calmer than people trawling the forum and crushing everyone who happens to mention usage cases of the Sonikon sensors.
Personally, I'm happy for whatever Sonikon does because without them, there would be no 6d at all and the 5d3 would still be at €3500+ ... now if they'd only build radio flashes, we might even see a 440ex-rt.
General rules of CR fanboism:
1. If you don't like Canon, go away and buy Sonikon, or at least don't voice your opinion in public.
2. If you don't own Canon (anymore), go away, too, you have no business commenting on it.
3. If rule 2 shouldn't apply, see rule 1 :->
Upvote
0
It is certainly a very interesting camera and once Samsung get a decent lens lineup to go with the body, I can see them providing a decent system. But they're not there yet. DPR seem to have rated the camera solely on its potential, not on its actual usability now. They reckon that any problems will be fixed with firmware updates and are therefore not worth taking into account. Likewise future lens availability.ritholtz said:
There's no doubt that Samsung have massive potential... I can see them being a major, major player in the camera market in the near future - more problems for Sony ahead, I feel. I suspect that DPR see the same thing and that there is a bit of politicking in their review - get in Samsung's good books now for future exclusives later on down the line.
Upvote
0
Marsu42 said:...Eldar said:...
I could not agree more. As I have stated numerous times before, I find it absolutely amazing that, instead of cheering for technology advances amongst the various suppliers out there, because it will/should result in better products also from Canon, we have the continuous tirades of why any improvement not originating from Canon is a useless feature. An example in this thread is the -3EV AF. When Canon provided -3EV on the centre point of the 6D and later the 7DII, it was a great feature. When Nikon offers -3EV at all 15 centre points, it´s actually quite useless ... :
I couldn't agree more, too!
I do sympathize for the notion that after having invested thousands of €€€ into some brand you are reluctant to ack the competition advancing ... and you feel attached to it after decades of shooting with the specific ergonomics. But senseless fanboisim only demonstrates that there really might be a problem for Canon here, or the reactions would be much calmer than people trawling the forum and crushing everyone who happens to mention usage cases of the Sonikon sensors.
Personally, I'm happy for whatever Sonikon does because without them, there would be no 6d at all and the 5d3 would still be at €3500+ ... now if they'd only build radio flashes, we might even see a 440ex-rt.
General rules of CR fanboism:
1. If you don't like Canon, go away and buy Sonikon, or at least don't voice your opinion in public.
2. If you don't own Canon (anymore), go away, too, you have no business commenting on it.
3. If rule 2 shouldn't apply, see rule 1 :->
Couldn't agree more with both of you, and this thread is perhaps the most pathetic I've seen on this forum.
Upvote
0
I agree with all of this.Marsu42 said:Eldar said:
Correct, and let's see about d7200 street prices. As in the times when I had to decide between 60d and the then d7100, I find that Nikon is very, very competetive in the xxd segment and you really have to actively look for reasons to buy Canon when going "above Rebel, but below premium 7d2".
Lucky us that all these are all excellent cameras by now in any case, so probably there is no "bad" choice but just shades of "good".
Eldar said:I could not agree more. As I have stated numerous times before, I find it absolutely amazing that, instead of cheering for technology advances amongst the various suppliers out there, because it will/should result in better products also from Canon, we have the continuous tirades of why any improvement not originating from Canon is a useless feature. An example in this thread is the -3EV AF. When Canon provided -3EV on the centre point of the 6D and later the 7DII, it was a great feature. When Nikon offers -3EV at all 15 centre points, it´s actually quite useless ... :candc said:
I couldn't agree more, too!
I do sympathize for the notion that after having invested thousands of €€€ into some brand you are reluctant to ack the competition advancing ... and you feel attached to it after decades of shooting with the specific ergonomics. But senseless fanboisim only demonstrates that there really might be a problem for Canon here, or the reactions would be much calmer than people trawling the forum and crushing everyone who happens to mention usage cases of the Sonikon sensors.
Personally, I'm happy for whatever Sonikon does because without them, there would be no 6d at all and the 5d3 would still be at €3500+ ... now if they'd only build radio flashes, we might even see a 440ex-rt.
General rules of CR fanboism:
1. If you don't like Canon, go away and buy Sonikon, or at least don't voice your opinion in public.
2. If you don't own Canon (anymore), go away, too, you have no business commenting on it.
3. If rule 2 shouldn't apply, see rule 1 :->
My problem/complaint is those who fixate on on particular aspect of a camera and ignore everything else. For example, DR. Nikon is ahead with DR... Period! To those who say that more DR is not a good thing, stop deluding yourself.... Would you be happier if Canon REDUCED DR? Of course not! We all want more.....
The point being, this is only one aspect of a cameras worth. For some, it is the most important aspect, for others it is secondary. It's importance is a personal thing.
Those who fixate on it as "the true measure of a camera" are delusional. Those who dismiss it are equally delusional. The truth is somewhere in the middle. Reality is that all the aspects matter and that all manufactures are striving to improve, and whatever choice you make now is a fine camera.
And to really put things in perspective, the lens you choose will have far more impact on your photography that the camera you choose....
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Eldar said:An example in this thread is the -3EV AF. When Canon provided -3EV on the centre point of the 6D and later the 7DII, it was a great feature. When Nikon offers -3EV at all 15 centre points, it´s actually quite useless ... :
Well, since I'm the only one who pointed out some realities of the practical utility of -3 EV AF (following your own initial erroneous reference to it), it appears you're referring to me. So, please point out where I've ever touted it as a great feature. I think I've been quite consistent in my disdain. Of course, some people like to use revisionist history to support specious arguments.
Eldar said:
Every time a new Canon camera comes out or is even mentioned, we get a tirade of DRoning. Some people just have difficulty accepting that their own personal needs/wants/priorities aren't necessarily representative of others'.
Marsu42 said:
Some people also seem to think their views represent the views of the majority of Canon's market, and that's what is truly ridiculous. Still, they continue to state that Canon 'has a problem' and must impove low ISO DR, or else. Or else what? Exactly. There are some people who've been making those statements here for years. I wonder...do they expect a different result from Canon? Doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result...that's one definition of insanity.
Don Haines said:
+1
I'll add that while I don't see anyone dismissing low ISO DR, I do see plenty of people dismissing everything else.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:Eldar said:An example in this thread is the -3EV AF. When Canon provided -3EV on the centre point of the 6D and later the 7DII, it was a great feature. When Nikon offers -3EV at all 15 centre points, it´s actually quite useless ... :
Well, since I'm the only one who pointed out some realities of the practical utility of -3 EV AF (following your own initial erroneous reference to it), it appears you're referring to me. So, please point out where I've ever touted it as a great feature. I think I've been quite consistent in my disdain. Of course, some people like to use revisionist history to support specious arguments.
-1
your example was the first one in this topic, and a rather poor and unlikely example at that.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Aglet said:neuroanatomist said:Eldar said:An example in this thread is the -3EV AF. When Canon provided -3EV on the centre point of the 6D and later the 7DII, it was a great feature. When Nikon offers -3EV at all 15 centre points, it´s actually quite useless ... :
Well, since I'm the only one who pointed out some realities of the practical utility of -3 EV AF (following your own initial erroneous reference to it), it appears you're referring to me. So, please point out where I've ever touted it as a great feature. I think I've been quite consistent in my disdain. Of course, some people like to use revisionist history to support specious arguments.
-1
your example was the first one in this topic, and a rather poor and unlikely example at that.
You're just supporting my point - there aren't any good and likely examples of the utility of phase detect AF at -3 EV. Period. Which makes the whole idea of touting it as an advantage a red herring.
Upvote
0
I regard -3 EV capable AF systems (or at least Some AF sensors) pretty much the same way as cars that can do 250 kph. While thT capability may have little practical use in itself, i do expect such a car to run smoother and better at 130 kph than a car with a top speed of 140 kph.
And -3 EV AF sensors are hopefully performibg really well at +3 EV where lesser AF systems may already start to struggle.
And -3 EV AF sensors are hopefully performibg really well at +3 EV where lesser AF systems may already start to struggle.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:Don Haines said:
Well, maybe not a hay wagon...
I know I'm late to this party, but didn't Lamborghini start out making tractors and other farm equipment?
PS: Don, I totally agree with the point you're making. Couldn't resist the tractor angle and pulling hay wagons.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:
not THIS point!
neuroanatomist said:
AF system performance is usually sped'd at the dark end using a particular lens, often a 50/1.4.
I don't see what lens Nikon spec'd for this measurement in this case so let's presume that 50/1.4 is implied so that means AF performance under a full moon. Great, that comes in handy.
It can also be a similar light level to an interior room in the evening without any direct lighting (sleeping baby picture anyone?)
Slap a small prime or slower zoom on that camera and now it's handicapped by 1, 2, even 3 or more EV of minimum AF light level. That -3EV AF rating opens up a lot more low, natural-light type shooting options using PDAF where it's actually still possible to hand-hold a hi-iso shot and get a usable image or quickly achieve focus while using a tripod.
Dismissing it as a "red herring" is simply unfounded.
You otta know there's plenty of other people shooting under plenty of different conditions than the ones you might engage in.
-3EV or better low light AF ability is a very welcome feature on any camera.
Upvote
0
-3 EV is just like DR. You don't need it a lot, but when you do, you REALLY do!
And look at the alternative.... Is there anyone arguing for less sensitivity?
Canon does some things better than Nikon. Nikon does some things better than Canon. When anyone makes an improvement, they are raising the bar and eventually the others will follow. Rejoice in the improvements, not ridicule them.
And look at the alternative.... Is there anyone arguing for less sensitivity?
Canon does some things better than Nikon. Nikon does some things better than Canon. When anyone makes an improvement, they are raising the bar and eventually the others will follow. Rejoice in the improvements, not ridicule them.
Upvote
0
Just to reduce your post to a couple of points;
No, the problem when a new Canon camera comes out or is mentioned is not tirades of DRoning, which in most cases are statements of disappointment that Canon keep on releasing cameras with sensor performance lagging behind the competition. The problem is the condescending, insulting and repetitive sand box bashing from a few low DR defenders, turning it into a war on anything but DR.
Who are the majority and who are the minorities? Interesting question. What Canon should be concerned with is that the market is shrinking. In a situation like that, it is a very peculiar strategy, unless it is lack of ability, to release products that does not beat the competition in every department possible, especially in the higher priority areas, like the sensor. Canon is good at a lot of things, but they are behind on sensors.
By the way, this will be my last post on this thread. Have a good night!
My only reference to -3EV at that point was that it only came in the 6D, with a "if I´m not mistaken" attached, which you corrected. Thank you. I don´t believe that is an "erroneous reference". But since you bring it up; In your world -3EV is apparently a red herring. It is not in mine and probably not in a few others amongst us in the minority, especially if I could get 15 focusing points instead of just one. I see lots of low light, slow shutter speed, low ISO situations, maybe even with a tripod, where that can be very handy. But then again, I am just one of the peripheral photographers, living on the side of the famous majority.neuroanatomist said:
No, the problem when a new Canon camera comes out or is mentioned is not tirades of DRoning, which in most cases are statements of disappointment that Canon keep on releasing cameras with sensor performance lagging behind the competition. The problem is the condescending, insulting and repetitive sand box bashing from a few low DR defenders, turning it into a war on anything but DR.
Who are the majority and who are the minorities? Interesting question. What Canon should be concerned with is that the market is shrinking. In a situation like that, it is a very peculiar strategy, unless it is lack of ability, to release products that does not beat the competition in every department possible, especially in the higher priority areas, like the sensor. Canon is good at a lot of things, but they are behind on sensors.
By the way, this will be my last post on this thread. Have a good night!
Upvote
0
msm said:
Well, I guess there is brand attachment all over the net, and I find CR (apart from the usual trashy Sonikon vs. Canon threads) very reasonable as at the end of the day, 99% of users agree it's about the right tool for the individual requirements. Differences seem to be about how/where to voice these preferences.
neuroanatomist said:
Sure, I absolutely agree - it's a common human fallacy to think the rest of the world thinks the same, a lot of psychological phenomena can be explained that way.
It's just that the reverse conclusion imho is equally invalid - just because Canon is the market leader doesn't mean people (even Canon users) don't want or "need" features unavailable to them. Example: You shot with movement has blown whites even when properly exposed, this means you "need" more dr, though it's a matter of preference how vital it is.
Last not least, another human fallacy is to prefer things that we have more information about - from a psychological perspective the grass is *not* greener on the other side. For this very reason alone a bias towards Canon should be substracted from posts in a Canon forum, i.e. long time Canon users taking the pain to talk about shortcomings don't chose the easy, but the hard way out.
Upvote
0
You're equating top speed with high speed stability. Anyone who has had enough experience with sports cars would tell you that the one is not necessarily an indicator of the other any more than frame rate or ergonomics is an indicator of high IQ, DR, or noise levels.AvTvM said:
Upvote
0
Not everyone shoots with ambient only. -3Ev can be useful for flash photography in a dark environment. Subject can be completely flash-lit but ambient light is very low. (e.g. you shoot with ST-E3 on camera triggering off camera flashes.)
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Eldar said:
You're right - my apologies for ignoring your uncertainty.
Eldar said:
Again, consider what -3 EV means in terms of absolute light levels. Consider further your statement, "...lots of low light, slow shutter speed, low ISO situations, maybe even with a tripod," relative to the example I gave of f/2.8, 1/15 s, ISO 51200 which is -3 EV. Say you shoot at f/1.4, your ISO is 12800. Is that low? Maybe ISO 1600 is low, so that's a 1/2 s exposure. Are those common use cases for you?
Eldar said:
Expressing disappointment is perfectly acceptable...if only it were the norm to stop there. But it is almost universally followed by predictions of doom for Canon...claims which are patently nonsensical.
By the way, who are these 'low DR defenders' you mention? I hope you can appreciate the difference between explaining the reality of the situation (cold, hard sales numbers - which is what drives business decisions) and personal desires.
Personally, I'd love more DR. And higher frame rates. Sharper lenses. Lower costs. Less noise. More MP. The list goes on. But I have to live in the real world, as do we all - even those lost in the pipe dream of having their cake and eating it, too.
Eldar said:
You run a business. If your market was shrinking dramatically, what would you do about it? What could you do about it? Is your R&D budget unlimited? Canon's is not. I don't think it's lack of ability, rather it's about prioritization of finite resources. It seems that their prioritization choices don't match yours, but then again...it's not your money.
Eldar said:
Absolutely true on both counts. But being behind doesn't mean being poor quality. It's apparent that good enough in one metric and class-leading in many others is a recipe for leading the market.
Upvote
0
