JR said:clean ISO 12k or 25k seem like heaven!
quite temporary heaven though
(these things develop quite fast nowadays in photograpy)
Upvote
0
JR said:clean ISO 12k or 25k seem like heaven!
If these cameras (like 1DX and D4) are designed for Olympics, I wonder which sports they are planning to shoot at 51K ISO and higher?
kirillica said:If these cameras (like 1DX and D4) are designed for Olympics, I wonder which sports they are planning to shoot at 51K ISO and higher?
And new canon lenses to resolve detail at these higher MP's ?alipaulphotography said:A direct 1DX competitor.
So nikon are going for:-
D4 - Low MP, big FPS, High ISO
D800 - High MP, low FPS, average ISO.
So the 5DMKIII will be high MP to compete?
t.linn said:The focus points working down to f/8 caught my eye and lead me to believe this is fake. That's one of the few gripes about the 1DX. Seems highly unlikely that Nikon just happens to add 9 of them as Canon eliminates this capability.
I think you're absolutely rightMark D5 TEAM II said:Not only that, but Nikon has *never* published their AF specs like that before (f/8 & f/5.6-sensitive AF sensors are only found in Canon spec sheets), in the same way they have never published very detailed white papers like Canon routinely does for every new model they release. This rumor is just Noink fanboi wishful thinking BS. Heck, the D800 hasn't even been announced yet and they are already inventing stuff about the D4.
Edwin Herdman said:To be sure, the D90 came first with DSLR video, but Canon's been out there trying to solidify their core competency by designing and producing their own sensors. This has been, and remains, a shaky part of Nikon's business model (though not as bad as all the MF manufacturers who were apparently reliant on Kodak sensors).
traveller said:If this rumour did turn out to be true, it'd make you wonder if Canon and Nikon had signed a cooperation agreement. Apparently, quite a lot of that goes on in Japan anyway...
Is that an honest question? I don't get it. Your lenses should be good on any compatible body. It's Nikon's business strategy I'm worried about (for their sake).obnoxiousmime said:Edwin Herdman said:To be sure, the D90 came first with DSLR video, but Canon's been out there trying to solidify their core competency by designing and producing their own sensors. This has been, and remains, a shaky part of Nikon's business model (though not as bad as all the MF manufacturers who were apparently reliant on Kodak sensors).
I have some Zeiss ZF.2 lenses. Does this mean they will not be optimal on future Nikon bodies with the Sony sensor?
I would have to agree. Most of these spec numbers are marketing hype and mean very little in actual usage. My 1D Mark IV can shoot in the 100,000 range but I hate the images that come out of it. I rarely push it past 6400 ISO and those would be extremely rare cases where I absolutely have to come back with an image and flash was prohibited.JR said:wickidwombat said:at such high iso i doubt there will be a whole lot of difference between the 2 to be honest, I would expect great things from iso 100,000. I think we might see usability of images hit the ceiling in the 25k range
but noise tollerance is such a subjective thing as has been previously discussed. I think it will be spec bragging rights and thats about it.
I agree with you on the 25k range. The point for me will not be so much how high each machine goes in terms of ISO (like 51k versus 102k) but how clean they each are at ISO 12,800 and ISO 25,600. Being somewhat limited to a usable ISO 3200 currently with my 5D, hell a clean ISO 12k or 25k seem like heaven! I really hope this new sensor Canon has delivers !
NormanBates said:"Uncompressed video out through the HDMI port" doesn't mean RAW
it can mean anything between 4:2:0 8bit uncompressed to 4:4:4 10bit uncompressed (I think no HDMI external recorder goes beyond that)
even that higher standard is not RAW: it needs to have a picture style baked in (but on 4:4:4 10bit it can be so flat that in practice it's the nearly as good)
DarkKnightNine said:I would have to agree. Most of these spec numbers are marketing hype and mean very little in actual usage. My 1D Mark IV can shoot in the 100,000 range but I hate the images that come out of it. I rarely push it past 6400 ISO and those would be extremely rare cases where I absolutely have to come back with an image and flash was prohibited.JR said:wickidwombat said:at such high iso i doubt there will be a whole lot of difference between the 2 to be honest, I would expect great things from iso 100,000. I think we might see usability of images hit the ceiling in the 25k range
but noise tollerance is such a subjective thing as has been previously discussed. I think it will be spec bragging rights and thats about it.
I agree with you on the 25k range. The point for me will not be so much how high each machine goes in terms of ISO (like 51k versus 102k) but how clean they each are at ISO 12,800 and ISO 25,600. Being somewhat limited to a usable ISO 3200 currently with my 5D, hell a clean ISO 12k or 25k seem like heaven! I really hope this new sensor Canon has delivers !
LetTheRightLensIn said:DarkKnightNine said:I would have to agree. Most of these spec numbers are marketing hype and mean very little in actual usage. My 1D Mark IV can shoot in the 100,000 range but I hate the images that come out of it. I rarely push it past 6400 ISO and those would be extremely rare cases where I absolutely have to come back with an image and flash was prohibited.JR said:wickidwombat said:at such high iso i doubt there will be a whole lot of difference between the 2 to be honest, I would expect great things from iso 100,000. I think we might see usability of images hit the ceiling in the 25k range
but noise tollerance is such a subjective thing as has been previously discussed. I think it will be spec bragging rights and thats about it.
I agree with you on the 25k range. The point for me will not be so much how high each machine goes in terms of ISO (like 51k versus 102k) but how clean they each are at ISO 12,800 and ISO 25,600. Being somewhat limited to a usable ISO 3200 currently with my 5D, hell a clean ISO 12k or 25k seem like heaven! I really hope this new sensor Canon has delivers !
Yeah those numbers are in good part just a game. Sometimes you might glean a little about how things might differ compared to previous models, but even then you can't be sure. Heck Nikon had an ISO6400 camera back in the pre-20D days I think and we know Nikon could barely, if even, handle ISO800 in a usable fashion then and even Canon got rough at ISO1600 and yet they said they had an ISO6400 cam and what one person thinks is a good point another may differ on by a stop or two. Canon used to be a bit more conservative as to claims in the past then but then switched gears, probably to not sound bad on paper in comparison to other marketing blurbs.
Joe J7771 said:I saw the 1DX at Photoplus, and on the LCD screen, ISO25k images were stunning. I'd say they are on par with ISO400-800 from a 1DS MKII. I'm not one to blow smoke up a company's ass, in fact I feel that Canon has severely dropped the ball on anything made post-1D MKII (with the exception of the 1DS MKIII). I still use 1D MKII and 1DS MKII's, and have yet to feel the need to invest in anything newer, that would take care of both in one (and FF).
Until now. After fully examining it at Photoplus, the 1DX answers all my qualms with a DSLR about still photos, other than faster flash sync speed. Well done, Canon.