Two New Full Frame Cameras in 2014? [CR1]

[jrista]

We all have our individual wants and needs, but Canon (and all other big camera manufactures) are not into the tailor made trade. They listen to majorities. Remember which improvements the majority of 5DII users wanted? More megapixels and better low ISO performance weren’t high on that list. Better autofocus and higher fps were and that’s what we got. And even at + $500 compared to the high mp high dynamic range Nikon D800 they sell and probably outsell them.
Sales numbers, market share and profit, that’s what drives a company like Canon and there are no real indications that their current product range is hurting them in those areas so to them this is confirmation they made the right choices.

A new 5D next year? Don’t think so.
5D => 5DII 3 years;
5DII => 5DIII 3.5 years;
5DIII => 5DIV… 3 to 4 years probably.
So it will be well into 2015 and probably 2016 before we get a new 5D.

Agreed. I suspect we'll have a 5D IV announced late 2014, and delivered summer timeframe in 2015. Seems way too early to be getting the 5D III replacement.

I like Canon to take their time. As it has a positive effect on their next product tech wise. I won't be in the game for a 5DIV. The 5D3 still remains more camera than I ever can handle properly 8) So as improved high ISOs beyond 25k are my main interest, I will be glad to see the 5DIV's specs which will kinda forecast what the 5DV will be based on. 1/2 a stop to a full stop better high ISO by 2018 would be a tremendous leap for the 5DV. Till then I am well equipped. Still working on my first 10k frames with the 5D3.

Just out of curiosity, when you say half a stop to a stop better high ISO...what do you mean by that? I'm sure Canon could simply add a native ISO 51200 or even native ISO 102400, without really changing anything.

That said, physically, I think it is impossible for any camera to have a true two stops better performance than the current 5D III...not without significantly increasing pixel size, or increasing pixel size to some degree and maximizing Q.E. to nearly 100%. To achieve a literal reduction in noise by an actual full stop, one would need to either double the Q.E. (which would put it at 98%...so far, achieving Q.E. above 90% requires some significant and powerful cooling to keep the sensors at -80°C), or double the pixel area (which would require sensors with twice the pixel pitch, or four times the area...so pixels would jump from 6.25µm to 12.5µm...a megapixel count of about 5.5mp). Neither of these seem likely...the cooling isn't possible in a battery powered mobile package for Q.E. of over 90%, and the reduction in megapixel count to a mere 5.5mp would deter the majority of potential buyers (although I'm sure there are some low light fanatics who would absolutely LOVE to have a legitimate, low noise ISO 25600 and usable ISO 51200.)

Anyway...just curious what people mean, or think, when they ask for "two stops better high ISO performance". Are they just asking for two more stops of high ISO settings...or are they asking for two stops better noise performance at those higher ISO settings. The former is possible, the latter...probably not so much...not for a while for one stop better performance (we'll need either a radical breakthrough in circuit design and/or wafer materials...or incredibly efficient supercooling that fits into the area of a couple inches square), and two stops is probably impossible due to the physical nature of light and how it's handled by a sensor.

 

[jrista]

So you never heard of CFast 2.0 ...
http://www.sandisk.com/about-sandisk/press-room/press-releases/2013/sandisk-launches-world%E2%80%99s-first-cfast-20-memory-card/

Canon is also a supporter of the CFast 2.0 standard. Masaya Maeda, managing director and chief executive of image communication product operations at Canon said, "With extremely fast performance, CFast 2.0 memory cards will enable us to develop next-generation cameras with more powerful features, enabling future 4K Ultra HD video recording capability."

Yup, I'm not buying another CF camera unless it supports CFast.

The Nikon D800 is the first DSLR to use CFast cards.

Hmm. So, so far, it seems most of the speed improvement in CF cards has been to read speed. Even the fastest 1000x CF cards today still seem to have woefully slow write speeds (in the grand scheme of things). I haven't found anything on CFast yet that mentions write speed...does it improve it? Will we finally have write speeds topping 200mb/s? Or is it still going to be slower, even significantly slower, than read speed?

Just as much as a 100Gb video file can take forever to read off a card, as higher megapixel cameras reach the market, its taking longer and longer to write them to the memory card. The D800 has pitifully slow write speeds, and when it's buffer is full, it can take a painfully long time before you can start shooting again. For a stills photographer, while read speed is important, write speed is just as important...

 

[100]

So you never heard of CFast 2.0 ...
http://www.sandisk.com/about-sandisk/press-room/press-releases/2013/sandisk-launches-world%E2%80%99s-first-cfast-20-memory-card/

Canon is also a supporter of the CFast 2.0 standard. Masaya Maeda, managing director and chief executive of image communication product operations at Canon said, "With extremely fast performance, CFast 2.0 memory cards will enable us to develop next-generation cameras with more powerful features, enabling future 4K Ultra HD video recording capability."

Yup, I'm not buying another CF camera unless it supports CFast.

The Nikon D800 is the first DSLR to use CFast cards.

Hmm. So, so far, it seems most of the speed improvement in CF cards has been to read speed. Even the fastest 1000x CF cards today still seem to have woefully slow write speeds (in the grand scheme of things). I haven't found anything on CFast yet that mentions write speed...does it improve it? Will we finally have write speeds topping 200mb/s? Or is it still going to be slower, even significantly slower, than read speed?

Just as much as a 100Gb video file can take forever to read off a card, as higher megapixel cameras reach the market, its taking longer and longer to write them to the memory card. The D800 has pitifully slow write speeds, and when it's buffer is full, it can take a painfully long time before you can start shooting again. For a stills photographer, while read speed is important, write speed is just as important...

Sandisk says:
The 120GB1 SanDisk Extreme Pro CFast 2.0 memory card is the world’s fastest memory card, with read speeds of up to 450MB/s2 (3000X) for maximum workflow efficiency and write speeds up to 350MB/s2 (2333X) for faster recording performance.

 

[jrista]

So you never heard of CFast 2.0 ...
http://www.sandisk.com/about-sandisk/press-room/press-releases/2013/sandisk-launches-world%E2%80%99s-first-cfast-20-memory-card/

Canon is also a supporter of the CFast 2.0 standard. Masaya Maeda, managing director and chief executive of image communication product operations at Canon said, "With extremely fast performance, CFast 2.0 memory cards will enable us to develop next-generation cameras with more powerful features, enabling future 4K Ultra HD video recording capability."

Yup, I'm not buying another CF camera unless it supports CFast.

The Nikon D800 is the first DSLR to use CFast cards.

Hmm. So, so far, it seems most of the speed improvement in CF cards has been to read speed. Even the fastest 1000x CF cards today still seem to have woefully slow write speeds (in the grand scheme of things). I haven't found anything on CFast yet that mentions write speed...does it improve it? Will we finally have write speeds topping 200mb/s? Or is it still going to be slower, even significantly slower, than read speed?

Just as much as a 100Gb video file can take forever to read off a card, as higher megapixel cameras reach the market, its taking longer and longer to write them to the memory card. The D800 has pitifully slow write speeds, and when it's buffer is full, it can take a painfully long time before you can start shooting again. For a stills photographer, while read speed is important, write speed is just as important...

Sandisk says:
The 120GB1 SanDisk Extreme Pro CFast 2.0 memory card is the world’s fastest memory card, with read speeds of up to 450MB/s2 (3000X) for maximum workflow efficiency and write speeds up to 350MB/s2 (2333X) for faster recording performance.

Awesome. Definitely looking forward to that, then. I wonder how long it will take to actually find it's way into cameras, though... UDMA 7 took a bit too long...

 

[100]

So you never heard of CFast 2.0 ...
http://www.sandisk.com/about-sandisk/press-room/press-releases/2013/sandisk-launches-world%E2%80%99s-first-cfast-20-memory-card/

Canon is also a supporter of the CFast 2.0 standard. Masaya Maeda, managing director and chief executive of image communication product operations at Canon said, "With extremely fast performance, CFast 2.0 memory cards will enable us to develop next-generation cameras with more powerful features, enabling future 4K Ultra HD video recording capability."

Yup, I'm not buying another CF camera unless it supports CFast.

The Nikon D800 is the first DSLR to use CFast cards.

Hmm. So, so far, it seems most of the speed improvement in CF cards has been to read speed. Even the fastest 1000x CF cards today still seem to have woefully slow write speeds (in the grand scheme of things). I haven't found anything on CFast yet that mentions write speed...does it improve it? Will we finally have write speeds topping 200mb/s? Or is it still going to be slower, even significantly slower, than read speed?

Just as much as a 100Gb video file can take forever to read off a card, as higher megapixel cameras reach the market, its taking longer and longer to write them to the memory card. The D800 has pitifully slow write speeds, and when it's buffer is full, it can take a painfully long time before you can start shooting again. For a stills photographer, while read speed is important, write speed is just as important...

Sandisk says:
The 120GB1 SanDisk Extreme Pro CFast 2.0 memory card is the world’s fastest memory card, with read speeds of up to 450MB/s2 (3000X) for maximum workflow efficiency and write speeds up to 350MB/s2 (2333X) for faster recording performance.

Awesome. Definitely looking forward to that, then. I wonder how long it will take to actually find it's way into cameras, though... UDMA 7 took a bit too long...

Canon (Masaya Maeda) say they'll use it for the next generation camera's.
A big megapixel 1D body and anything with raw video and/or 4K video are likely candidates.

 

[pedro]

We all have our individual wants and needs, but Canon (and all other big camera manufactures) are not into the tailor made trade. They listen to majorities. Remember which improvements the majority of 5DII users wanted? More megapixels and better low ISO performance weren’t high on that list. Better autofocus and higher fps were and that’s what we got. And even at + $500 compared to the high mp high dynamic range Nikon D800 they sell and probably outsell them.
Sales numbers, market share and profit, that’s what drives a company like Canon and there are no real indications that their current product range is hurting them in those areas so to them this is confirmation they made the right choices.

A new 5D next year? Don’t think so.
5D => 5DII 3 years;
5DII => 5DIII 3.5 years;
5DIII => 5DIV… 3 to 4 years probably.
So it will be well into 2015 and probably 2016 before we get a new 5D.

Agreed. I suspect we'll have a 5D IV announced late 2014, and delivered summer timeframe in 2015. Seems way too early to be getting the 5D III replacement.

I like Canon to take their time. As it has a positive effect on their next product tech wise. I won't be in the game for a 5DIV. The 5D3 still remains more camera than I ever can handle properly 8) So as improved high ISOs beyond 25k are my main interest, I will be glad to see the 5DIV's specs which will kinda forecast what the 5DV will be based on. 1/2 a stop to a full stop better high ISO by 2018 would be a tremendous leap for the 5DV. Till then I am well equipped. Still working on my first 10k frames with the 5D3.

Just out of curiosity, when you say half a stop to a stop better high ISO...what do you mean by that? I'm sure Canon could simply add a native ISO 51200 or even native ISO 102400, without really changing anything.

That said, physically, I think it is impossible for any camera to have a true two stops better performance than the current 5D III...not without significantly increasing pixel size, or increasing pixel size to some degree and maximizing Q.E. to nearly 100%. To achieve a literal reduction in noise by an actual full stop, one would need to either double the Q.E. (which would put it at 98%...so far, achieving Q.E. above 90% requires some significant and powerful cooling to keep the sensors at -80°C), or double the pixel area (which would require sensors with twice the pixel pitch, or four times the area...so pixels would jump from 6.25µm to 12.5µm...a megapixel count of about 5.5mp). Neither of these seem likely...the cooling isn't possible in a battery powered mobile package for Q.E. of over 90%, and the reduction in megapixel count to a mere 5.5mp would deter the majority of potential buyers (although I'm sure there are some low light fanatics who would absolutely LOVE to have a legitimate, low noise ISO 25600 and usable ISO 51200.)

Anyway...just curious what people mean, or think, when they ask for "two stops better high ISO performance". Are they just asking for two more stops of high ISO settings...or are they asking for two stops better noise performance at those higher ISO settings. The former is possible, the latter...probably not so much...not for a while for one stop better performance (we'll need either a radical breakthrough in circuit design and/or wafer materials...or incredibly efficient supercooling that fits into the area of a couple inches square), and two stops is probably impossible due to the physical nature of light and how it's handled by a sensor.

Well, thank you jrista for your tech background. Then, my little dream is over. I meant better IQ. Lacking your technical background, I couldn't recognize the physical realities. Then I just hope they don't increase the MP count as long as they remain with their type of sensortech. But I also understand, that Canon can't decrease it without getting into 1Dx territory. Anyway my 5DIII will remain a great allround camera for quite a while. I will surely welcome your assessment once another 5D hits the shelves. Regards, Peter

 

[dgatwood]

Now if you're willing to change to a completely incompatible card format like CFast ...

So you never heard of CFast 2.0 ...

Heard of? The entire last paragraph was about CFast. Calling CFast CompactFlash is roughly equivalent to calling SATA IDE. CFast is not compatible with existing CF cards or readers, which makes it a relatively expensive standard for users to adopt, because no low-end CFast cards exist, as far as I can tell.

Worse, in spite of that added expense, the critical write performance is not that much better than SD, at 350/450 MB/s versus 240/260 MB/s for SD. And the SD standard currently supports up to 316 MB/s data rates (without further tweaks), but nobody is bothering to build parts at those speeds because little to no camera hardware would be capable of actually pushing that much data yet.

Further, even if the cameras had chipsets that could push that much data, the number of users who would benefit from >12 fps continuous RAW shooting is dwarfed by the number of users who would benefit from the comfort of having a backup of every photo.

Like I said, I'd expect to maybe see CFast in 4K cameras for supporting RAW. I don't see any obvious benefit to adopting it in still cameras until they get fast enough that the cards are in danger of becoming the main bottleneck. Right now, the SD cards are fast enough to handle 12-14 RAW files per second at 20-odd megapixels in continuous shooting mode without any buffering at all. That's more data than any DSLR actually supports, AFAIK. There's no benefit to building faster cards until there's a camera that actually has to buffer data at those rates.

 

[Ruined]

I would like to see following out of 5D4:

Wifi
GPS
DPAF
Touchscreen for DPAF focus
Touchscreen for Pinch to Zoom image preview, quicker image proofing
Articulating screen if they are able to make it durable for creative shooting purposes
Image quality improvement
Dual SD slots that fully support UHS II standard
micro USB 3.0 cable support for faster cable transfers to PC

 

[dgatwood]

I would like to see following out of 5D4:

Wifi
GPS
DPAF
Touchscreen for DPAF focus
Touchscreen for Pinch to Zoom image preview, quicker image proofing
Articulating screen if they are able to make it durable for creative shooting purposes
Image quality improvement
Dual SD slots that fully support 135mbps SD cards
mini USB 3.0 cable support for faster cable transfers to PC

I would tweak that to say "Dual SD slots that fully support UHS-II (up to 316 MBps)". 135 millibits per second (about 16.8 kilobytes per second) isn't very fast. ;D

But otherwise, yeah, that would be a really nice enhancement to the 5D line.

 

[Ruined]

I would like to see following out of 5D4:

Wifi
GPS
DPAF
Touchscreen for DPAF focus
Touchscreen for Pinch to Zoom image preview, quicker image proofing
Articulating screen if they are able to make it durable for creative shooting purposes
Image quality improvement
Dual SD slots that fully support UHS II standard
micro USB 3.0 cable support for faster cable transfers to PC

I would tweak that to say "Dual SD slots that fully support UHS-II (up to 316 MBps)". 135 millibits per second (about 16.8 kilobytes per second) isn't very fast. ;D

But otherwise, yeah, that would be a really nice enhancement to the 5D line.

Ha ok done

 

[jrista]

That said, physically, I think it is impossible for any camera to have a true two stops better performance than the current 5D III...

The 36MP Nikon D800 already offers 2 points of DR above what the 5D3 does with comparable noise.
The D800's pixels are 4.9um, the 5D3's are 6.25um.
So not "better" but "the same" for smaller.

This is the opposite of what I'm talking about. At low ISO, dynamic range is limited by read noise. Canon has gobs of read noise at low ISO thanks to their ADC.

What I am talking about is noise performance at high ISO. Read noise is practically non-existent at high ISO for most cameras, meaning that noise at high ISO is completely dominated by photon shot noise. The only ways to reduce photon shot noise are either using bigger pixels (which is roughly the same as downsampling in post), or improving Q.E. You will notice in those charts that once you get past ISO 800, DR falls off in linear fashion, and there is little difference between the two cameras. To get a true two stop improvement in high ISO performance, you would have to shift the plotted lines upwards on the graph. The only way to do that, really, is to increase Q.E. At best, with Q.E. currently around 50% or so, it is impossible to get a full stop better noise performance at high ISO, let alone two stops.

 

[jrista]

That said, physically, I think it is impossible for any camera to have a true two stops better performance than the current 5D III...

The 36MP Nikon D800 already offers 2 points of DR above what the 5D3 does with comparable noise.
The D800's pixels are 4.9um, the 5D3's are 6.25um.
So not "better" but "the same" for smaller.

This is the opposite of what I'm talking about. At low ISO, dynamic range is limited by read noise. Canon has gobs of read noise at low ISO thanks to their ADC.

Yes and it is easily visible in dark tones.

And again, that isn't what we are discussing. Low ISO factors are well known, and have been beaten to death. Read noise, not photon shot noise, dominates at low ISO. Some newer sensors have very low read noise at low ISO, hence their improved DR. That has nothing to do with how a sensor performs at high ISO, however...which is dominated by photon shot noise.

Quantity of light converted into charge in a given time interval is what matters at high ISO. You can increase that quantity/time ratio by doing one of two things: increase pixel area (or, downsample in post)...or increase Q.E. (which is the ratio of photons converted into charge in a photodiode). Since Q.E. in modern sensors is already between 50-60%, and stops refer to changes by powers of two, at best, assuming manufacturers find a way to achieve 100% Q.E. at room temperature, we could see one true stop of better high ISO noise performance. For sensors that already achieve over 50% Q.E., we can't even hope to see one true stop better.

 

[AvTvM]

I am not interested in this constant regurgitation of theoretical tech mumbo jumbo. It has no immediate practical relevance to a photographer.

Photographers are interested in the images they can capture using the gear available today.

Today's situation is simple and clear:

• Currently Nikon D800/E and Sony A7R have way more resolution at all ISO settings than any Canon EOS camera. This is usefuly in many images and shooting contexts.
• D800/E + A7R have way more DR at the most frequently used low ISO settings. This is useful in many images and shooting contexts.
• D800/E and A7R images have not more noise but very slightly less DR at ISO settings 3200 and 6400 compared to any Canon EOS currently on the market (including 5D III and 1Dx). In practice it is a wash.
• And from ISO 12800 upwards - if one ever needs it - IQ is basically a tie between Nikon D4 and 1Dx

Canon is lagging behind Nikon/Sony in sensor capability and should do everything they can to close the gap as soon as possible. Or leapfrog Sony/Nikon ... if they are able to. Canon should not rely much longer solely on other strengths of their eco-system (mainly: UI and lenses), since this is a high risk strategy. After all, to most photographers, image quality is the single most important and central feature of any image capturing device.

Therefore a 5D IV should have significantly higher resolution and significantly better DR compared to 5D III sensor at ISOs 100, 200 and 400. Plus some further improvements in IQ at higher ISO settings (if possible in addition to low ISO improvements). Plus of course, all the other features needed to make it 100% competitive in 2014/15.

 

[Orangutan]

I am not interested in this constant regurgitation of theoretical tech mumbo jumbo. It has no immediate practical relevance to a photographer me.

FTFY.

Photographers are interested in the images they can capture using the gear available today.

True dat. And also how to budget for their future gear purchases.

Today's situation is simple and clear to me:

FTFY

• Currently Nikon D800/E and Sony A7R have way more resolution at all ISO settings than any Canon EOS camera. This is usefuly in many images and shooting contexts.
• D800/E + A7R have way more DR at the most frequently used low ISO settings. This is useful in many images and shooting contexts.
• D800/E and A7R images have not more noise but very slightly less DR at ISO settings 3200 and 6400 compared to any Canon EOS currently on the market (including 5D III and 1Dx). In practice it is a wash.
• And from ISO 12800 upwards - if one ever needs it - IQ is basically a tie between Nikon D4 and 1Dx

None of which means anything if:

• You need AF speed/accuracy more than IQ/DR
• Your budget does not allow you to switch from your current gear collection
• Your shooting style does not depend on these qualitative differences

Canon is lagging behind Nikon/Sony in sensor capability and should and I want them to do everything they can to close the gap as soon as possible to accommodate my preferences.

FTFY

Canon should would not rely much longer solely on other strengths of their eco-system (mainly: UI and lenses), since if this is a were high risk strategy. After all, to most photographers me, image quality is the single most important and central feature of any image capturing device, and I feel that I'm unable to take satisfactory photos with a current model Canon.

FTFY

Therefore I would like a 5D IV should to have significantly higher resolution and significantly better DR compared to 5D III sensor at ISOs 100, 200 and 400. Plus some further improvements in IQ at higher ISO settings (if possible in addition to low ISO improvements). Plus of course, all the other features needed to make it 100% competitivetechnically superior and lower-priced than all other competing models in 2014/15.

FTFY

 

[RLPhoto]

I am not interested in this constant regurgitation of theoretical tech mumbo jumbo. It has no immediate practical relevance to a photographer.

Photographers are interested in the images they can capture using the gear available today.

Today's situation is simple and clear:

• Currently Nikon D800/E and Sony A7R have way more resolution at all ISO settings than any Canon EOS camera. This is usefuly in many images and shooting contexts.
• D800/E + A7R have way more DR at the most frequently used low ISO settings. This is useful in many images and shooting contexts.
• D800/E and A7R images have not more noise but very slightly less DR at ISO settings 3200 and 6400 compared to any Canon EOS currently on the market (including 5D III and 1Dx). In practice it is a wash.
• And from ISO 12800 upwards - if one ever needs it - IQ is basically a tie between Nikon D4 and 1Dx

Canon is lagging behind Nikon/Sony in sensor capability and should do everything they can to close the gap as soon as possible. Or leapfrog Sony/Nikon ... if they are able to. Canon should not rely much longer solely on other strengths of their eco-system (mainly: UI and lenses), since this is a high risk strategy. After all, to most photographers, image quality is the single most important and central feature of any image capturing device.

Therefore a 5D IV should have significantly higher resolution and significantly better DR compared to 5D III sensor at ISOs 100, 200 and 400. Plus some further improvements in IQ at higher ISO settings (if possible in addition to low ISO improvements). Plus of course, all the other features needed to make it 100% competitive in 2014/15.

Very interesting. How has this affected your photos? That is if you don't mind sharing a few photos.

 

[Loswr]

I would like to see following out of 5D4:
Dual SD slots that fully support UHS II standard

All quite possible since they're gimics that will attract feature-buyers...

Dual card slots are a gimic? That's pretty dilbert-y, even for you.

Today's situation is simple and clear:

• Currently Nikon D800/E and Sony A7R have way more resolution at all ISO settings than any Canon EOS camera. This is usefuly in many images and shooting contexts.
• D800/E + A7R have way more DR at the most frequently used low ISO settings. This is useful in many images and shooting contexts.
• D800/E and A7R images have not more noise but very slightly less DR at ISO settings 3200 and 6400 compared to any Canon EOS currently on the market (including 5D III and 1Dx). In practice it is a wash.
• And from ISO 12800 upwards - if one ever needs it - IQ is basically a tie between Nikon D4 and 1Dx

Today's situation is simple and clear:

• Currently Canon 5DIII and 1D X have better AF than any Nikon or Sony camera.
• 5DIII has a faster frame rate than D800/E + A7R, 1D X has a faster frame rate than D4. This is useful in many images and shooting contexts.
• Above ISO 1600, settings which are commonly used by many photographers, D800/E + A7R + D4 have no DR advantange over 5DIII + 1D X.
• Generally speaking, Canon has better lenses where there are equivalent options, and more unique lens offerings than Nikon.

Canon is lagging behind Nikon/Sony in sensor capability and should do everything they can to close the gap as soon as possible...

Nikon and Sony have been lagging behind Canon in market share for years, and have been trying to do everything they can to close the gap…but they've failed.

 

[AvTvM]

FTFY.

Thanks, but no thanks.

got it, OrangUtan ... from your apparent love for red ink and in-text corrections you must be an old-style school teacher by profession and a Canon fan-boy by vocation. Too bad I am not one of your students.

I therefore ask you politely to refrain from defacing my posts and twisting my words using bolded bi-color full text quotes. It is bad style and hurts my readers' eyes.

@ RLphoto: No, I won't ever show any of my images here. And not necessary ... since the shortcomings and limitations in Canon's sensor tech and subsequent image quality relative to better camera gear can be seen and studied in a large number of images readily available on the net.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

Hmmm ... sing glories of DR, as if it is the God of all things photography ... but when asked to share at least a few images to show how Canon sensor has affected, just give lame excuses and run for cover ... now that's a lame clever way of avoiding, which helps no one, other than come across as a biased DR fanboy. If Canon Rumors is supposedly for Canon fanboys, why do the DR fanboys hang around here? why don't they c0pulate in DR forums? wait there is no such forum coz DR in sensors holds no value for those who really know how to work DR with proper lighting and diffusion. Photographers worth their salt don't crib about "mommy my camera ain't got DR, I can't take photos without a new Sony sensor, but I still like to come and crib in Canon forums".

 

[Orangutan]

you must be an old-style school teacher by profession and a Canon fan-boy by vocation. Too bad I am not one of your students.

Wrong on all counts. I'm not a teacher, nor am am I a fan-boy, nor am "old-style" in most ways. In fact, if I were to start my kit today I might well buy Nikon since their current offerings suit my current style of photography just as well as Canon.

The difference for me is that I don't expect Canon to do anything other than attempt to make a profit. I am not offended when they don't produce the equipment I want to buy at a price I consider "fair." Unlike you, I do not presume that everyone does photography the same way I do, nor do I believe I know how others do photography, nor what equipment other people want. On the contrary, I assume that Canon is capable of effective market research and analysis, and will produce the products that will make them a profit.

There is one and only one option open to me: I can use my money as I see fit. I can choose to buy more Canon gear...or not. At some point I could choose to sell my Canon gear and buy another brand...or not. Telling others what they should expect from Canon is...well...silly.

It is entirely legitimate for you to express your preference for future Canon equipment. It's not legitimate for you to presume to speak for the silent masses suffering under the yoke of (slightly) lower DR or IQ.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

FTFY.

Thanks, but no thanks.

got it, OrangUtan ... from your apparent love for red ink and in-text corrections you must be an old-style school teacher by profession and a Canon fan-boy by vocation. Too bad I am not one of your students.

I therefore ask you politely to refrain from defacing my posts and twisting my words using bolded bi-color full text quotes. It is bad style and hurts my readers' eyes.

@ RLphoto: No, I won't ever show any of my images here. And not necessary ... since the shortcomings and limitations in Canon's sensor tech and subsequent image quality relative to better camera gear can be seen and studied in a large number of images readily available on the net.

the funny thing about this is that when I search for images to gain inspiration, I see wonderful images coming from each of these systems. If it were that obvious then you wouldn't see plentiful examples of amazing images. Therefore I have to agree with the rewrites of your post because it is clearly mainly an issue for you. So much so that you seem to be embarrassed by your images - which is a shame because I like many others here are making wonderful images using canon gear - hell, even the lowly 6d continues to impress me. So, I'd say its time to post some real images man, not shots of test shots, not intentionally underexposed imaged lifted 6 stops to show what happens when you push an image too far...real examples of how canon gear's shortcomings are ruining all of your images. Others here aren't scared to post, why are you????