Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?

[Loswr]

If more people start "spouting the same sort of crap" then maybe it isn't "crap."

You or anyone else stating that Canon sensors produce unusable images, images suitable only for Facebook, images suitable for printing at only up to 8x10" or 13x19", etc., is spouting crap. Period.

Where are you getting that from? Have you actually read anything I've written? My primary concerns are about aesthetics and the amount of time required to work a photo to achieve that aesthetic goal. I also said that WITHOUT a lot of work, large prints have mushy shadow detail...not that the images are ONLY suitable for printing at 8x10 or 13x19.

Your still twisting my words, Neuro. That is absolutely NO better than what your twisted words are trying to imply I am saying.

Others have pointed out that the work required doesn't seem to be as extensive as you suggest. I've printed (well, had professionally printed, not at home) images at much larger than 13x19", without 'mushy red blotchy shadows' (although they weren't from a 5DIII).

To be honest, I've read much – but not all – of what you've writing. I'm not a fan of 'the wall of words'.

Seriously, if you think Exmor is your salvation, visit lensrentals.com and try out a D810 for a few days. Let us know how it turns out.

 

[Don Haines]

So why no EVF on the 7D2 ???

Because EVF still sucks for action and sports.

If you watch the Super Bowl, World Cup, etc on Television, tell me how bad it was ??? 'cuz they use cameras with EVFs.

Realize that the EVFs used in high end cinematography equipment are VASTLY superior to the kinds of EVFs currently found in ML cameras. VASTLY superior. Also vastly more expensive. Just one of the EVFs used in a RED Dragon camera costs more than most of the DSLRs we buy today.

the monitor (7 or 8 inches) on top of those cameras goes for about $10,000......

 

[Orangutan]

So why no EVF on the 7D2 ???

Because EVF still sucks for action and sports.

If you watch the Super Bowl, World Cup, etc on Television, tell me how bad it was ??? 'cuz they use cameras with EVFs.

Realize that the EVFs used in high end cinematography equipment are VASTLY superior to the kinds of EVFs currently found in ML cameras. VASTLY superior. Also vastly more expensive. Just one of the EVFs used in a RED Dragon camera costs more than most of the DSLRs we buy today.

the monitor (7 or 8 inches) on top of those cameras goes for about $10,000......

In part that's due to the limited production runs. Of course, that's just the monitor: there's probably video processing gear as well. All that takes CPU and electrical power. These are just engineering issues to be worked-out, and pro-quality EVF will replace reflex at some point, though I'm becoming less confident about when.

 

[Loswr]

These are just engineering issues to be worked-out, and pro-quality EVF will replace reflex at some point, though I'm becoming less confident about when.

No doubt. We're pretty far from that point, though, for many reasons. From a dSLR standpoint, it's not just the mirror directing light up to the OVF, it's also the submirror directing light down to the dedicated AF sensor. Canon's DPAF is a step in the right direction, but image sensor-based AF isn't yet ready to replace dedicated PDAF for tracking fast action.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

No, highlight tone priority changes the way JPEGs are rendered in the camera.

No.

Highlight Tone Priority (HTP)
All cameras have a fixed dynamic range, from shadow to highlight, that they can capture. HTP shifts some of the available dynamic range from the mid-tones to the highlights to produce smoother tones, with more detail in bright areas. This helps prevent JPEG images with overexposed highlights that can’t be recovered. HTP is also useful to RAW shooters who process their images with Canon’s DPP software. Most third-party RAW processing software will not recognize Highlight Tone Priority.
When the camera is set to HTP, the lowest available ISO will be 200. The HTP setting will be indicated by a D+ symbol in the LCD display. Avoid using HTP in low light or when shooting subjects with heavy shadows because it may cause more noise to appear in those areas.

http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/app/pdfs/quickguides/CDLC_EOS_Cfn_QuickGuide.pdf

No, all it does is underexpose 1 stop secretly and then shift the mid-tone point and roll off highlights differently for in-cam jps and it sets a flag to tell RAW converters to do the same. You can get the exact same thing out of underexposing 1 stop and then using an altered tone curve.

 

[unfocused]

I've printed (well, had professionally printed, not at home) images at much larger than 13x19", without 'mushy red blotchy shadows' (although they weren't from a 5DIII).

The largest prints I happen to have on hand right now are 16 x 24 from a 7D. I had some from a 5DIII, but they are no longer in my possession. Shadows look good from a viewing distance of about 6 inches (which of course is closer than anyone will ever look at a printed picture of that size). My eyes won't focus much closer than that. Maybe people should try MPix. That's where I print.

 

[Orangutan]

No, highlight tone priority changes the way JPEGs are rendered in the camera.

No.

Highlight Tone Priority (HTP)
All cameras have a fixed dynamic range, from shadow to highlight, that they can capture. HTP shifts some of the available dynamic range from the mid-tones to the highlights to produce smoother tones, with more detail in bright areas. This helps prevent JPEG images with overexposed highlights that can’t be recovered. HTP is also useful to RAW shooters who process their images with Canon’s DPP software. Most third-party RAW processing software will not recognize Highlight Tone Priority.
When the camera is set to HTP, the lowest available ISO will be 200. The HTP setting will be indicated by a D+ symbol in the LCD display. Avoid using HTP in low light or when shooting subjects with heavy shadows because it may cause more noise to appear in those areas.

http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/app/pdfs/quickguides/CDLC_EOS_Cfn_QuickGuide.pdf

No, all it does is underexpose 1 stop secretly and then shift the mid-tone point and roll off highlights differently for in-cam jps and it sets a flag to tell RAW converters to do the same. You can get the exact same thing out of underexposing 1 stop and then using an altered tone curve.

That's basically what I copied/pasted from Canon's material. Were you saying "no" to me or to Dilbert?

 

[luckydude]

Put another way, it took Nikon two generations to come up with a camera that approaches the 5DIII in overall utility...and I bet the 5DIII outsells the D810 just as it did the D800/E.

Same thing one step up – it took Nikon until the D4s to approach the 1D X.

810 doesn't just approach the 5d3, in tech, it pulls out and passes it and flips the bird at it on the way by.

I wonder if Canon has the 'nads to play leap-frog now.

I'll play. I agree that nikon has a pretty nice sensor, the DR is very nice. But other than the 14-24, is there any other nikon lens that is better than what you can get from Canon? I'm biased, I've got a lot of money in canon glass but I'm also pretty crazy happy with that glass.

On the other hand I might be stupid, cf the 400mm DO II thread, I have the 400mm DO and I love that lens. Yeah, it has some issues, but it's awesome in how light it is and how sharp it is. If I want the crazy good bokeh then I get out the 200mm f2, if I want reach and light? 400mm DO and the 1.4x. I own the 600mm II and I can tell you that I've taken easily 100x more shots with the 400mm. The 400mm DO is a walk around lens, it is that light and that is a game changer. 600mm is tripod and gimbel. And it does what it does really well (and takes both the 1.4x and 2x TC well). But you aren't going to walk around and hand hold it very long.

Did I miss the point? Is it about the sensor? Not for me. It's about the glass. Nikon might have the best sensor now but they do not have the best glass. Sensors come and go. Who amongst us has more money in bodies than glass?

All that said, I am hoping that the 7D II has a kick ass sensor and I'd like to see some improvements in the 5D and 1DX sensors. I'm grumpy that Nikon (cough, sony) has better sensors in some ways.

Stepping back a bit, sometimes I think that I'm just a greedy pig and Canon has made me that way by producing better and better glass and bodies. Did you ever stop to think how awesome it is to have what we have? The tech is amazing. Personally, if time stopped and the 5DIII was the last body I ever got to use, yeah, I'd have issues, but holy crap is that a good body. It just works and works really well. I've played with nikon bodies and while they have places where they are better than canon, as an all around body, the 5D is pretty darn good.

We are a long way from where I grew up. Pentax K1000 in high school (their equipment). Canon AE-1. All the point and shoots (which are quite good, I've got an Olympus TG1 that I love for camping/fishing). Maybe this will put things into perspective. I've got a son who has gotten the photo bug. He went through my 40D, 7D, T4i, I knew he got it when he came to me and said "Dad, the 40D really sucks. The 7D is good but the T4i has a better sensor for landscape". He's 12. Now 13, his birthday present (he picked it out) was the Samsung NX300 with the kit lens and the 18-200mm lense.

He played with that stuff, loved it, but we shoot hockey a lot. He tried that camera and then came back to me and asked "hey dad, can I use the 5D and the 200?" (5DIII and 200mm f2). Here he is at Junior Olympics:

http://www.mcvoy.com/lm/2013-07-hockey-huntington/July-17-people/6.html

There ya go. It's all about what you use and we can talk all we want here but when a kid wants to use the good stuff, I think he's a better judge than anyone.

 

[jrista]

To be clear, I have never said I want to jump ship. On the contrary, I really WANT to stay with Canon. For the same reasons as LuckyDude...I have a lot of money in Canon class, and aside from the 16-35 (very poor in the corners), I love it all. The 600 f/4 II is unsurpassed.

What I really want is Nikon-level sensor quality in a Canon DSLR body. I don't want to have to buy multiple kits, especially when I have a gazillion accessories for Canon. It might start with the D810 and a 14-24...then, you find a reason to get another lens, then a flash, then a cable release, then...on and on. IMO, my personal opinion, it would suck having a kit with two brands. You end up replicating cost, just do you can have something for a more niche purpose.

There is also the Nikon customer support issue. I've heard 10x as many nightmare stories about Nikon CS compared to Canon CS. I've had EXCELLENT support from Canon CS when I needed it, with fast turnaround. That's another reason I'd rather NOT add Nikon to my kit, and another reason I'd prefer Canon fix their noise problems and deliver a camera that meets the modern needs of modern landscape photographers. (There is more to this end of the argument as well...Nikon manufacturing quality, with spots on lenses, spotty AF behavior, unwillingness to acknowledge such defects half the time, etc.)

It would be most ideal to have Exmor-level IQ in a Canon body. Then you can have the best of everything all in a single brand. That is what I personally want. That's what I'm asking for. I hope, but frankly don't believe, Canon will deliver it. I expect that it MIGHT arrive in some camera a couple generations from now...however by that time, it'll be way beyond too late. :

 

[dtaylor]

What I really want is Nikon-level sensor quality in a Canon DSLR body.

You have the budget for a $12k lens but you haven't ordered one of the Sony A7's yet?

If you can afford a lens that's the price of a small car...if HDR landscapes are that important to you...if you really believe Exmor will revolutionize how you shoot HDR landscapes...then order the A7 or A7R and an EF adapter.

You don't even have to switch. You don't have to give up your Canon lenses, or your DSLRs in situations where you need fast AF and shooting. (And please don't tell me you always need to push shadows 5 stops so the Sony doesn't solve anything. Most scenes don't have that great of a luminance range.)

Shooting sports, action, any scene that doesn't require shadows pushed 9,001 stops? Grab the 5D3.

Shooting landscapes or interiors from a tripod? Grab the Sony. That should hold you over until Canon changes their ADC architecture.

Problem solved.

 

[jrista]

What I really want is Nikon-level sensor quality in a Canon DSLR body.

You have the budget for a $12k lens but you haven't ordered one of the Sony A7's yet?

If you can afford a lens that's the price of a small car...if HDR landscapes are that important to you...if you really believe Exmor will revolutionize how you shoot HDR landscapes...then order the A7 or A7R and an EF adapter.

You don't even have to switch. You don't have to give up your Canon lenses, or your DSLRs in situations where you need fast AF and shooting. (And please don't tell me you always need to push shadows 5 stops so the Sony doesn't solve anything. Most scenes don't have that great of a luminance range.)

Shooting sports, action, any scene that doesn't require shadows pushed 9,001 stops? Grab the 5D3.

Shooting landscapes or interiors from a tripod? Grab the Sony. That should hold you over until Canon changes their ADC architecture.

Problem solved.

I HAD the budget for a $12k lens. That budget came out of some preferred company stock I sold. I have also explained on many occasions why I have no interest in Sony bodies. You can scan back in this thread to find that.

I also have an endless list of photography needs and wants. Four grand for a QSI 683WSG-8 CCD camera. Another grand or few for an 8-10" telescope. Longer term I want to get 16-20" telescope, which necessitates another $20k investment in a high end equatorial mount on top of the $7k-$10k investment in the telescope.

On top of that, I have a bunch of other Canon lenses I have been putting off for years. The TS-E 17mm and 24mm. The MP-E 65mm. (Either that, or one of those really nice bellows: Novoflex Castbal T/S) The 85L. I'd like to pick up a few more flashes, from Canon's RT system, and start doing Hummingbird flash photography (the last couple years I've been bulking up my yard with flowers that attract them in the first place. )

I'm not made of money. Have to pick and choose.

Now, if Canon DOES release a nice high DR FF camera early next year...I can just sell the 5D III and buy the new and improved model. The overall cost then would be minimal. Hell of a lot less than adding a D810 and lens to my kit, and not really offsetting to any of my other goals.

 

[dtaylor]

This has absolutely nothing to do with technique. My technique is not the problem. Neither is it an exposure problem.

No, it's a problem of what you have built up in your mind. You imagine that with Exmor you could just ditch bracketing, HDR, GND. You can't. The cases were Exmor lets you get away with a single exposure are relatively rare. They come up. They are not the majority.

If your blend/HDR/GND shot is correct then you should NOT have to push shadows or deal with shadow noise. In my blends my shadows are typically brighter then I want them to be, and one of my final steps is pulling them back down. I have never struggled with shadow noise in a blend where I had a properly exposed frame for the shadows.

This is where your Photographic DR is unhelpful. Your Photographic DR tells you nothing about the literal, physical capabilities of the hardware.

Except, of course, for the system's DR :

However, given Canon's trend...I fully expect RN at low ISO to INCREASE. The 7D had 8.6e-. The 70D has 13.5e- (and with smaller pixels to boot!)

Yet the 70D has...observably...2 more stops of total DR. Once again trying to convert sensel SNR ('engineering DR') to actual system photographic DR fails :

IMO, HDR, sky replacement, tonemapping, manual blending, etc. shouldn't be necessary unless you have a truly extreme situation.

Landscapes involving bright skies and shadowed foregrounds have more then 13 stops of luminance range and require management (HDR; blending; GND) with ANY modern camera. Interior shots with windows also often require this.

Outside of this most scenes have less luminance range.

It's entirely possible I like to shoot scenes with more dynamic range. It's also entirely possible my standards are higher than yours (that's not an insult, people have different standards).

It's entirely possible your beliefs about the difference Exmor would make are based on little more then imagination, and it's time for you to buy/rent a Nikon or Sony and find out

 

[dtaylor]

I'll never buy a Sony camera so long as they use a lossy compressed file format. Maybe that's just more of the high standards crap...I dunno. But, there it is.

You'll never buy a camera that's relatively cheap ($1,300 for the A7), can use your lenses, and solves the problem which you have spent countless hours making...hundreds?...thousands?...of posts about because of a file format that maybe, on rare occasion, might result in an artifact, even though otherwise the camera completely eliminates the noise and artifacts you're so upset about???

I'm done...I'm out...no more SoNikonSuperMegaDR threads. I can't help these people. They need therapists, not sensors.

 

[Sporgon]

I'll never buy a Sony camera so long as they use a lossy compressed file format. Maybe that's just more of the high standards crap...I dunno. But, there it is.

You'll never buy a camera that's relatively cheap ($1,300 for the A7), can use your lenses, and solves the problem which you have spent countless hours making...hundreds?...thousands?...of posts about because of a file format that maybe, on rare occasion, might result in an artifact, even though otherwise the camera completely eliminates the noise and artifacts you're so upset about???

I'm done...I'm out...no more SoNikonSuperMegaDR threads. I can't help these people. They need therapists, not sensors.

Better still get a used D800, they now have the depreciation curve of a falling brick. You can now get a used D800 in the UK for half the price of a D810, yet a used 5DIII is like rocking horse shit, unlike the bull shit that jrista has spouted on this thread. I'm sure Alan at Dale Photographic would be quite happy to send this one out to him:

http://www.dalephotographic.co.uk/mall/departmentpage.cfm/DalePhotographicOnline/_142512/1/Used%2520Digital%2520Cameras

 

[jrista]

I'll never buy a Sony camera so long as they use a lossy compressed file format. Maybe that's just more of the high standards crap...I dunno. But, there it is.

You'll never buy a camera that's relatively cheap ($1,300 for the A7), can use your lenses, and solves the problem which you have spent countless hours making...hundreds?...thousands?...of posts about because of a file format that maybe, on rare occasion, might result in an artifact, even though otherwise the camera completely eliminates the noise and artifacts you're so upset about???

I'm done...I'm out...no more SoNikonSuperMegaDR threads. I can't help these people. They need therapists, not sensors.

I don't even believe there are yet 100 posts on the subject. If I've written 50 posts on the subject, it would be surprising. You guys are just as crazy with your wild exaggerations and twisting of words...anything to preserve your pristine view of Canon. Which is fine...you can keep seeing your gear and the company that makes them however you like.

BTW, I never asked for, nor needed, your "help". You don't even seem to understand the fundamental underlying concepts if you really, honestly think that the 70D has more DR than any other Canon camera on the market. I don't think anyone else here agrees with you on that point, and certainly no one anywhere else on the net, reviewers or forum goers, would agree with you either. I think you've twisted Photographic DR into something that handily "proves" (in your own mind) that Canon is right up there with their competitors, when that is the farthest thing from the truth.

However, I'm not really here to prove anything to anyone. I'm just...ticked off and frustrated. Canon's core technology hasn't changed in years. It's been fundamentally the same since I first got into photography, I've been longing for them to deliver a powerhouse landscape camera since before the 5D III was even announced (basically, since I first learned about the K-5's then-magical DR, and not long after that the D7000's DR, which got all the limelight, but in actuality was never as good as the K-5's I don't think.) We have two weeks until Photokina. I guess we'll see the REAL state of Canon technology then. I hope for a 1-2 stop improvement in DR somewhere. I hope for a fundamental shift in sensor technology, how it's fabricated, how it's designed. I expect...well, nothing significant anywhere...really. I truly HOPE I'm wrong...

I don't get much chance to go out and photograph landscapes anyway. When I do, I rarely get the kind of lighting and weather I want. Good landscapes are always a couple hours drive away at least. Figure I'll just focus on what I can do in the limited time I have...and what my current gear doesn't drive me up a wall fiddling with NR for: Birds, Wildlife, Macro, Astrophotography.

 

[jrista]

I'll never buy a Sony camera so long as they use a lossy compressed file format. Maybe that's just more of the high standards crap...I dunno. But, there it is.

You'll never buy a camera that's relatively cheap ($1,300 for the A7), can use your lenses, and solves the problem which you have spent countless hours making...hundreds?...thousands?...of posts about because of a file format that maybe, on rare occasion, might result in an artifact, even though otherwise the camera completely eliminates the noise and artifacts you're so upset about???

I'm done...I'm out...no more SoNikonSuperMegaDR threads. I can't help these people. They need therapists, not sensors.

Better still get a used D800, they now have the depreciation curve of a falling brick. You can now get a used D800 in the UK for half the price of a D810, yet a used 5DIII is like rocking horse S___, unlike the bull S___ that jrista has spouted on this thread. I'm sure Alan at Dale Photographic would be quite happy to send this one out to him:

http://www.dalephotographic.co.uk/mall/departmentpage.cfm/DalePhotographicOnline/_142512/1/Used%2520Digital%2520Cameras

$2800 bucks...in the UK. Throw in currency conversion fees (3%), import tarifs (3-6% or so), and shipping costs...and it tops $3100. For a used body? Hmm... Stills smells a bit expensive.

 

[RLPhoto]

Again jrista, I don't see it. You've have no reason at this point not to adopt the a7r, it's a fantastic camera with basically identical IQ that doesn't require a full adoption. I like end results and the a7r gives a better end result than 5d3 for your landscapes.

Call it in, and hang up the phone on the DR posts. I mean you probably could have wrote war & peace with a stop wedge by now.

 

[Ruined]

Again jrista, I don't see it. You've have no reason at this point not to adopt the a7r, it's a fantastic camera with basically identical IQ that doesn't require a full adoption. I like end results and the a7r gives a better end result than 5d3 for your landscapes.

Call it in, and hang up the phone on the DR posts. I mean you probably could have wrote war & peace with a stop wedge by now.

I think all jrista wants is the DR of the Sony sensors in Canon bodies, because the Sony bodies have a wealth of disadvantages that far outweigh the sensor (IMO at least). You can't take a picture with just a sensor, and Sony is inferior with nearly all of those other aspects of the camera/lens. If Canon incorporates an improved sensor in a future EOS camera, it would be the best of both worlds.

 

[tss68nl]

I think all jrista wants is the DR of the Sony sensors in Canon bodies, because the Sony bodies have a wealth of disadvantages that far outweigh the sensor (IMO at least). You can't take a picture with just a sensor, and Sony is inferior with nearly all of those other aspects of the camera/lens. If Canon incorporates an improved sensor in a future EOS camera, it would be the best of both worlds.

So now we're bashing one company or the other, for not incorporating the tech of the other company?

You know what? I like McDonalds fries better, but the burgers I find tastier at Burger King. Should I now go whine online about how they do not adopt eachothers formulas? Can I now say that McDonalds is now two generations behind because the McChicken isn't up to par with the Grilled Chicken Barbeque, which is the second generation of superior Chicken sandwiches after the Grilled Chicken Classic?

Make a choice, and be happy with it.

 

[dtaylor]

You don't even seem to understand the fundamental underlying concepts if you really, honestly think that the 70D has more DR than any other Canon camera on the market.

I never said that. I said it had more then the 7D.

I don't think anyone else here agrees with you on that point, and certainly no one anywhere else on the net, reviewers or forum goers, would agree with you either.

Imaging Resource Imatest results for 70D in ACR: 13 stops total DR
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-70d/canon-70dA5.HTM

Imaging Resource Imatest results for 7D in ACR: 11.5 stops total DR
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E7D/E7DIMATEST.HTM

:

I think you've twisted Photographic DR into something that handily "proves" (in your own mind) that Canon is right up there with their competitors, when that is the farthest thing from the truth.

I think I've said...repeatedly...that Exmor sensors have a bit more DR and noticeably more shadow latitude and that this sometimes matters. Just not all the time, and not to the degree you believe.

I think I've also...repeatedly...documented that I'm using the standard definition that's in every work on the subject dating back to Adam's formulation of the zone system.

I'm just...ticked off and frustrated.

But not enough to buy something to solve it :

Canon's core technology hasn't changed in years.

Then write letters to Canon USA and Canon Japan. Print and mail them. I'm of the opinion...perhaps false...that printed letters in these situations get more attention then emails and web forms.