Some technical goodies
DXO Mark has posted some text results of the sensor in a pre production Rebel T2i/550D.
Take it for what it’s worth.
It shouldn’t be much of a surprise that things are about on par with the 7D, outside of ISO performance.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Canon/EOS-550D-pre-production
cr
|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
Take it for what it’s worth.
About to say the same thing. I don’t have that much faith in DxOMark. Their results tend not to have much practicality.
And it still says “3fps” for the EOS 7D…
Specs are virtually the same as the 7D.
The greatest difference is in the ISO.
Image is on par with the 7D. This rebel is turning out to be a great value.
My mistake. They corrected it to “8fps”.
Interesting exercise to compare the 550D (or the 7D) to the EOS 40D. 40D seems to be better in terms of SNR, Color range and tonal sensitivity.
Better than 50D, but so small prob not noticable esp at lower iso’s.
You’re not suggesting that Canon is stepping BACKWARDS in terms of IQ are you?!
Cue John Pelican/Duck/Goose et al
Canon must be Jewish…
Link broke – copy the 3 lines manually.
This is where I rise to the bait right?
Per pixel, yes, but the 550D does have almost double the number. If you use the “print” option instead of “screen” it will normalise for output area, and there the 40D is same or worse.
Nope. There’s a Jewish concept called yeridath hadoroth, which means “descending of the generations”. Basically, it means that your grandfather was holier than you, and his grandfather holier than him, etc.
So Canon’s just going with that flow. Each generation gets worse, you see!
Rob Galbraith words about the Canon 1d Mark IV autofocus performance:
“Add it all up and the conclusion is inescapable: the EOS-1D Mark IV has an AF system that is capable of greatness but is also so bewilderingly variable that there’s no way to trust it, especially for outdoor sports. Indoors, EOS-1D Mark IV autofocus performance has been less variable, but our results from speedskating and basketball are simply not up to par. If this is the best the company could muster, after the autofocus debacle of the EOS-1D Mark III, then it’s official: Canon has lost their autofocus mojo.”
Canon is done for, it’s so obvious now. They have lost at photography. They are just a video dslr company now. They are so far behind nikon for stills in terms of image quality, high iso performance, autofocus, etc etc. So they decided to just stick to video and work on that. It’s too bad, they made stupid moves by continously raising MP instead of focusing on image quality, all they cared about was having higher numbers on paper vs other companies.
Any photographer who has used both knows canon bodies can’t come close to nikon bodies at this point in time. The only reason most people are using canon these days is because they are trapped due to their investment in lenses.
Someone needs to make canon realize all this and tell them to stop worrying about having higher specs and focus on IQ!! Unless they want to sell cameras just to amateurs who think the higher the MP the better the camera.
Surprised by the large jump in S/N performance between the two. Would have expected them to be pretty much identical. We’ll have to see how the production version does I guess.
Also note how nikon’s older D90 beats canon’s newer APS-c bodies in all aspects of image quality… on the dxo mark website.
Is there anyone who can switch to nikon or has a choice, but willingly stays with canon? I would like to know their reason for it (considering price differences in lenses isn’t an issue and you don’t shoot videos).
I know many people doubt Rob Galbraith’s intentions, but Canon did mention that they reworked the 1D IV AF from the ground up. With something that’s brand new and not tried-and-true, there could always be unworked bugs in the system.
Canon used to be the envy of other companies for their AF. It seems like their competitors have caught up, if not, surpassed them in many ways. I love their glass, so I hope we’re at the bottom of the cycle (if there is such a thing) and Canon will be on the rise again soon… Still waiting for a 3D or 5D III!
I had high hopes for the T2i, but the sample photos on dpreview were disappointing. Soft and mushy, thanks to the pixel packed sensor. Why does canon keep doing this?
Also, Rob Galbraith has showed that the D3s AF is better than the 1d mark iv. The AF was that camera’s only hope…now it is not even in the same league as the D3s. Unless you shoot video which I don’t.
Also, this guy is spot on with his thoughts.
http://www.kareldonk.com/karel/2010/02/09/canon-eos-1d-mark-iv-reviews-thoughts/
Heck even the review posted on this site for the 1d mk iv, the guy stated he would switch to nikon if he could. Does canon not realize all these things?
If you compare the D90 to the D300s, the D90 “beats” it too. Does that mean Nikon are going backwards?
I’m going to go out on a limb here. You’re not happy with Canon are you?
I can quite easily sell all my Canon gear and go buy Nikon, I have even thought about doing that. But then I realised the reason I was thinking about doing it was because of all the “Horror Stories” about Canon on the Internet. When I look at my own personal experiences with my Canon gear I’m more than happy with it. It does what I want, when I want and any shortfalls in performance are my fault not the camera’s. I just have to learn how to use that particular feature properly.
If you want to swap camps based on what other people write on the Internet then you go for it. Just sell all your Canon gear and go buy Nikon.
It’s really not that hard.
Sure you will lose out a bit when you have to sell second hand gear in order to buy new but think of the peace of mind you will have knowing you switched to a camera company that everyone on the Internet says you should invest in.
shut up….. DxO sure has more knowledge then you noob…..
and that has to do with the 550D you noob?
another idiot…..
shut up idiot
90% of the cameras is better than 90% of the photographers… If you really run into the so many problems with your camera, i suggest you find yourself something else to do. After all, we only started making decent pictures since the invention of the Nikon D3, right?
Bloody hell, for once I’m agreeing with you!
Many people are “Holier than thou” :)
I did just that, I switched to nikon and I am very happy. I can do things that I could not have done with canon. It’s nice to have shots that are in focus, my keeper rate for weddings went from 40% to 90%+ just because of the AF improvement from 5k mk ii to D700. Also the iso performance of d700 blows away the 5d mk ii, and yes that’s after downsizing the 5d mk ii file. I had both so i’m speaking from experience.
I was very frustrated with canon because they kept cramming pixels and not working on IQ and AF. I lost a lot of money thanks to canon!!
If canon comes out with the “3D”, that is FF with good AF and low mp and fast fps… they will be back in the game. The question is will they do that?? or will they just keep pushing pixels and put 32 mp in their next full frame and ruin that camera as well?
well d90 and d300s are practically the same sensor…the difference between them on the site was so little so i’m guessing that was just the +/- error in their test. But difference between nikon Aps-c and canon aps-c, or even nikon full frame and canon full frame is significant.
You can get great photos with any camera given you know what you are doing… Many of the best photographers I know shoot canon, but even they admit that nikon makes things easier.
A camera is just a tool, you can get the results you desire with all tools. Some tools make your job a lot more efficient and easier, and trust me nikon has done that for me. I tried very hard to not switch…but canon left me with no choice. I suggest you try both and then post your findings here.
Well, with an old but fine working 30D in my bag I can’t add more but my two cents…but I would also prefer a 16 MP FF over a twenty soemthing body. Call it 6D an I am in…
bklooger… How about you try both systems and then make your comments. To say I’m an “idiot” w/o trying both only makes you sound like an idiot.
Canon fanboys (and yes I used to be one as well), try both and see which one is better. This is not a subjective opinion…high iso performance, AF, image quality, and metering is not subjective…it’s clearly better one one system than the other. And trust me, canon is not that system.
If you’re getting results you desire with canon, great. But you don’t know what you’re missing out if you haven’t played around with nikon’s full frames with their 2.8 zooms. Speaking from a wedding/event photographers perspective, you’d have to be crazy to not switch to nikon if you were able to. I took a huge hit, but i’m glad I did because it was totally worth it.
+1
if they can do a 16mp FF i’m in.
Hey, after reading some complaints by certain individuals, I’m really starting to believe that very few photographers are Old school in thinking what we have now is superb compared to where we were with film cameras… Be that as is it may, first, the majority of photographers want their photographs to be printed, whether its in newspapers, magazines, periodical, catalogs, brochures, or even for their own scrapbook, so lets start there. The IQ of cameras and sharpness of cameras should be judged printed, not screen res. Guess what… When you do that, the 7D and the T2i and the 40D becomes a wash except that the first 2 have bigger files so you can do ALOT more with them at similar qualities. Secondly, there is people complaining about the quality of pictures from the newer cameras including the 50D and 7D and this new camera that hasn’t even been released. Why then do I use the 50D for almost all of my companies web photos, catalog photos, and periodical photos? If it is such a bad camera, how can I do that and get rave reviews from our customers and most important, management? Why do I use my 7D camera for architecture and my bigger clients? A few websites have even reviewed the 7D vs 5D II printed and guess what, in some situations, the 7D came out on top. Even DPR even went as far as saying that the 7D is better than nikon’s D300s. I do have specific gripes about my cameras and when I do, I personally contact them via CPS and voice my concerns and they either show me how to work around it or make note of it for their technical teams to figure out what is happening. If Canon isn’t for you, there are several companies willing to take your money. Just dont gripe to us about your issues trying to sway more people away to the dark side. The sky is not falling and get outside and start taking photos and enjoy the equipment that you got.
PS regarding Autofocus, anyone remember the D30 and D60’s autofocus system? I would gander to say we are lightyears better than that now.
I agree with you Alex. No doubt any dslr out today is far better than the film days. Like I said a good photographer can get excellent results whether they have a crappy AF or the most accurate AF out there.
The point I was making is, when todays cameras are compared side by side canon has slipped behind. I hope Canon see’s all the comments their users are making and improve their future cameras.
Definitely maybe a few years ago when Nikon first came out the D200 and D300 and started to smoke Canon in key category including autofocus, I would have definitely agreed that Nikon was ahead, but with the recent releases, especially the 7D where it is practically Neck to Neck printed wise with a camera 6mp smaller. I do think that instead of increasing MP and keeping noise equal, they should focus on improving noise, but for the ISO’s I work with and my uses, it works great for what I do. Also stitching on my architecture panos has improved dramatically with the roll/pitch it has.
I understand a lot of people saying they will never use video, but I vaguely remember watching a demo of 2 wedding photogs when the 5D2 came out stating that video opens a new dimension for clients and those who dont learn to adopt run the risk of being left behind. Since I got my 7D, I announced to all my clients the possibility of video and I got a rave response to the addition of video. That’s even more possible income from my same clients that I wouldn’t be getting otherwise.
Do keep in mind, i have played with Nikon’s D300s and D90 and 700 however I felt more comfortable with Canon’s cameras as a user preference. While I dont doubt for a minute that Nikon has good equipment, I would not say, professionally, that it is enough (for me) to warrant any thoughts of jumping ship.
Lastly, I highly doubt canon’s marketing has time or energy to patrol user forums looking for ideas, so if you have any questions, concerns, suggestions, I would contact them directly via phone or email or even their site surveys they have. I would think those comments get higher priorities than ranting on the internet.
Note on DxO’s point scale, 1/3 of EV is 5 points. Nikon should have about a 2.8 point benefit just from having a slightly larger crop sensor. With that in mind, just for fun:
Consumer crop sensor:
500D: 62.5
D90: 72.6, ok easy “win” for D90 there of 2/3 EV.
Top end crop sensor:
7D: 65.8
D300s: 69.8
Insignificant win for D300s. If you look through the individual charts, the D300s is better at low ISO, but loses ground at higher ISO.
Affordable FF:
5D2: 79.0
D700: 80.5
Insignificant difference
Top end FF:
1Ds3: 80.3
D3x: 88.0
D3x win by about half a stop. Bear in mind 1Ds4 should be out real soon now which might shake things up.
They don’t seem to have scores for 1D4 or D3s.
On that basis, if that single value is representative of what you want to get out, Nikon has an advantage in some areas of less than one stop equivalent. If that is enough to make or break your shots, fair enough, switch to Nikon. I’d dare say for most people, that is not the limit to getting a good photo, and totally fails to take into consideration everything else.
The light sensitivity for a low cost camera is amazing. you can shoot at ISO 3200 with little noise, and even ISO 6400. I noticed the samples on DPR taken at Iso 3200. They normally stick to ISO 800 with one noisy one at ISO 1600 for cameras in this price range.
Iso 3200 on this camera looks more like ISO 800 on my 40D.
This is a sign of things to come on the 1DS MK IV, and the 5D MK III.
Let’s be honest. If I have someone asking me about getting started into photography today, I will steer them toward Nikon first. I have never done that before, but seeing how little Canon seems to care about IQ, compared to other aspects, I can’t see them changing. They have lost their way and eroding the confidence of their user base.
The 60D will have the same unimpressive 18mp sensor and a whole generation’s opportunity will be lost. If they can fire the person’s in charge and get some new direction, things can change pretty quickly. So there is some hope…
I guess I’ll be holding onto my 40D for a lot longer, while watching Sony and Nikon…. I for sure won’t be buying anything else Canon.
P.S.
I know, I am going to be called an idiot, etc. by the usual folks who refuse to even discuss the possibility that Canon is going in the wrong direction.
Instead of just calling names, how about defending Canon. What is your defense?
Care to elaborate on your IQ claims when the 7D is rather neck and neck with the D300s, 5DII is neck and neck IQ wise with the D700s, and so on and so forth… If you were to mention High ISO, Autofocus count, etc… then maybe just maybe you may have a point. But as pointed out above, printed, the 7D has similar quality to even the 40D but with 6 extra MP to play with and crop with… While cropping may add boo’s from the crowd, I shot a wedding recently, from a head and shoulders photos to do a close up of the eyes in PP and was still able to produce 5″x7″ prints with no interpolation, or lower res printing (below 300dpi). Especially with the beginner, there is nothing that Nikon does that Canon doesn’t have something to compete with. Plus, given Nikons higher price point, it’s even easier to get nice L glass than Nikons comparable glass.
you switch from 5D MK II to D700 because of AF and High MP and now if Canon make 16MP FF body with same AF as 5D you will switch back? your a tard… gimme a break idiot.. i switch from 5D MK I to 40D because of AF, then brought 450D as my Back-up, last Nov. I receive my 7D (free from Canon), and I am waiting my 1D MK IV now (free again from Canon). I am lucky guy because i am a son of high ranking gov’t official here in our Country. all my current gears were from canon free, some were still bete Ver. just return 2 of them. I am not an NDA so i didn’t break any rules
are you going to switch? why? lol XD
As you were quoting Rob garlbarith’s comments; I’m interested to know your comments… lots of people are being too easily influenced by internet reviews these days; especially those who’s test is also questionable (not saying Rob’s review is).
Take one camera, the 50D… now… that is a great camera I’ve used and fallen in love with… too bad that its not mine XD; I used to thought that 50D was sub par to the 40D… but no…. its great and is even better than the celebrated 40D IMHO.
I’m sure every AF system has limitations right… no question that the d3s or the d3x do have their limitations too right? maybe just not exposed as much as canon does? I dunno… lol
that’s good stuff, good for you. I’m sure that nikon cams has their limitations too :) you have to find it and tell to us lol XD.
good response Alex
+1
One’s decisions is naive and many people decisions are better… usually is the case… but if many decisions comes from people who wanted perfection… then the many people are may also be one’s decision.
dude, I suggest try to remember when you first start photography. Im sure you will be out and about to find out which one suits your need best according to your budget be it nikon or canon :) my first DSLR purchase was a nightmare XD hahahaha… nikon… canon… nikon… canon… canon won me :D
Uhh, WITTY! :)
Alex makes some good points.
I got started Canon with the Digital Rebel. The one that brought DSLR to those of us who couldn’t afford pro equipment. At the time, Canon clearly owned the high-ISO IQ in that market, so that is what I bought. My Nikon friends envied my camera’s sensor performance.
I know cropping is a useful feature, but when the APS-C IQ hasn’t improved in three-four years (compared to earlier Canon bodies) then I begin to get bummed. I expect each new camera in the series to improve in that area. The 7D/T2i is worse than a 40D as you get to ISO 800 and higher. Clearly Canon’s goals don’t align with mine. They are megapixel focused and I am wanting to shoot near 5D2 ISO performance with a 60D. But that is not likely with the 18 megapixel sensor.
I was prepared to step up to the 7D if the high ISO was a great improvement. Instead, it is the same and even slightly worse than my 40D and the images are soft when stopped down. Both of these negatives, for me, are a result of too many megapixels.
My disappointment is more with Canon on Canon. I want them to be besting their previous models and instead it appears the 50D and now likely the 60D, will not improve on the 40D ISO performance. Is Canon just saying “the 40D was good enough” and now we will work on other features? Are they worried about cannibalizing the 5D2 market if they made great strides in APS-C?
I understand where you are coming from but from my standpoint who started with the first D30 then 10D-30D-50D then 7D… I will give you that the 50D’s performance isn’t that most breathtaking, however it is still a very good camera when used to it’s strengths. Last summer with my 50D i photographed a series of panoramas while on my trip in england and (all shot at low ISO’s and within the diffraction limits) and entered a West coast regional photo competition just for giggles and placed them in 3 separate catagories and won 1st, 2nd, and 3rd (in their respective catagories). The camera isn’t bad, it’s just an evolution. The IQ of the 7D is on par with the 40D, especially when printed, and it’s got 1.5 times the resolution, which in some peoples eyes, especially with Canon’s eye’s, is a big improvement. Is it “besting” the previous models (well yes, the 50D, but is still roughly on par with the 40D).
Also for what it’s worth, the majority of my clients that ask for web only prints, I have no fears what so ever in shooting at 1600 or 3200. Guess what? No one ever has complained about my work and I have been getting more and more work. Also, regarding noise, I want to say it was luminous landscape or one of those review sites that said the 7d’s noise pattern was more realistic than the XXD cameras… so when you look at them, it’s more natural and pleasing compared to the electronic noise we are used to seeing. Is it still there, yes, is it an improvement, only the end user can answer that.
While I understand that there are improvements that can be made and I have desires for better cameras down the pipeline, personally, for me, it is a step in the right direction. Now if you want to have your voice heard, instead of posting hundreds of posts on various forums voicing your displeasure, I would recommend contacting Canon’s technical support… even if it’s possible to improve noise… make them aware that it is an issue, even if all they can say is “no” at that time… it will get in their minds… Send them emails through their website… go to their trade shows they attend if ones near you and talk to their reps… If you are a full time professional and meet the eligibility requirements, join CPS… They ask for feedback on a somewhat regular basis.
Remember when the 7D came out, it said in the PR that they went off of user comments to shape this camera (or to that extent)… A lot of people sounded off saying that they obviously weren’t listening to them (regarding MP, AF, etc)… Well they were listening… to the pro’s who are on CPS in which the stated issues aren’t (to them) major issues because they work around them. For what it’s worth I would bet my entire paycheck they listen to direct comments, emails, phone conversations a lot more than any forum on the internet.
It’s not always the camera. You need an amount of skill and luck to get a good shot. For example… I use a compact camera and I can do really niec wide angle shots. White balance is accurate and all. There is noise in the sky at ISO80 but which idiot would zoom in to 150%…
And my 200 dollar compact has sharper images than the D60 I tried which was soft when using a 55-200mm. No noise in the sky for the D60. Just… way too blur!
but how serious are the dxo tests ?
the super nikon D40 better then 1d
just another nikon fanboys,
It’s a fitting tribute to your lack of knowledge that you hold DXOMark in high esteem. Well trolled sir. Hats off to you.
Finally somebody who gets it! Don’t you all realize that the sensor that would top all DXOMark tests would be one that has 1MP/1KP/1pixel resolution. Reductio ad absurdum.
You are using “print” view, are you?
I did not undersand what are you traying to say. You’ll never switch to nikon if you can have Canon for free… (and, to say everything: “Who cares if you had them for free?!”).
It’s been almost 1 1/2 years since the launch of the Nikon D90. And Canon has yet to produce an APS-C camera that is on par with it, if not better. Shame on you, Canon.
Before I get flamed, I’m talking IQ, Dynamic Range and High ISO performance here. Who cares about all the bells and whistles and gimmicks the 550d or the 7d have if it can’t deliver a still image that is on par with the D90, even though the D90 is only 12Mpix?
Although I don’t see were a D40 is better than a 1D: You have to compare the “print” results.
Yes, the D90 is slightly better than 7D/550D. Seems as if Nikon hast the better technology here. But: the difference is not that much (again: be sure to compare “print” results).
this website also says the 400d takes about as good of photos as the 7d at low iso.
whatever, dude. measure all the stats you want, it doesn’t look the same.
Well said!
thanks Alex and dude, this discussion has certainly educate me better and give me insight to pro world. I want more of these kind of discussion in this forum actually :); so that reading this forum would be a time well spent.
“Let’s continue by looking at the EOS 7D next to arguably its most direct competitor in the market place – the Nikon D300S. In our studio test shot both cameras deliver excellent sharpness on a pixel level but, due to its additional six megapixels of nominal resolution, the Canon inevitably resolves more detail. Having said that you’ll have to get close to a 100% magnification and use stopped-down high-quality lenses to spot the differences in a print or on your computer screen. Tone curve and color characteristics are not too dissimilar either, with the Nikon producing slightly higher saturation at default settings.”
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos7d/page22.asp
vs.
“the D90’s default output is very soft, having had very low levels of sharpening applied. Canon (450d), meanwhile, takes the opposite approach, delivering very crisp (and contrasty) images at its default setting. Other than that, there’s little to choose between the two.”
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD90/page27.asp
cr is great entertainment, but these msg boards are a waste of time.
i think these people jerk off to charts and statistics more than they take photographs.
Nicely trolled sir. Top hats off to you.
DxO is reliable for their in-depth measurements, just not for their general-purpose abstractions. I’m told if you’re a real photographer, the proof is in the print, not in the file, but DxOMark decides on their dynamic range, color, and low-light iso scores based on their screen (pixel-peeping) marks. On their print scores, where everything is normalized to 8 megapixels, Canon typically scores about the same as Nikon, barring the 1D3/1Ds3 disaster cameras.
The 550D marks seem interesting. It look as though the sensor sacrifices some performance in the low-ISO range for slightly better performance at the high-ISO range. Hopefully, Canon will improve the 550D from the pre-production model so it’s marginally better than the 7D.
show us a sample comparison between the D700 and the 5D2. Be sure you compare the 5D2 properly by having the 5D2 first perform noise reduction, then downscale to reduce resolution. This way you retain more detail than downscale first/NR second.
I’d agree for different reasons; I don’t think Canon, holistically, is better or worse than Nikon. There are trade-offs between them, to be sure: the T1i is cheaper than the D90, but the D90 has better ergonomics, Canon’s high-megapixel approach yields more detail at lower ISOs, whereas Nikon has better dynamic range, and so on, but at high ISOs, Nikon after post-processing is exactly the same quality as Canon after post-processing.
For the photography newbie, however, Canon’s high-ISO is unusable without post-processing. Nikon’s high-ISO is workable out of the box, so Nikon beats Canon in this regard. We don’t all have octo-core machines for picture editing and we don’t all have the time to wait for Lightroom or another RAW converter to clean up Canon’s philosophical decisions, and because Canon has a larger file-size, Canon’s high-MP pictures require better systems than its Nikon counterparts.
Only the default JPEG output is soft, bud. Take a look at the raw images, then have your say. And better not get me started on the lame white balance Canon can’t seem to get rid of.
And by the way, D90 is the best APS-C camera to date. Its rated #1 on the DxOMark APS-C scale and #15 on the entire scale with a score of 72.6. The Canon 5D has 70.9.
Go figure.
My bet is Canon will not make a 3D which in my mine are the following specs:
18MP FF
8FPS
Pro AF
Pro weather seals
5D size body with optional wireless grip.
Not because they can’t, but because they won’t, and to Canon’s loss. The fact is the above camera is exactly what I want. I am in a holding pattern, just using what I already own, and renting when I need to, but I’m on the fence and waiting for the D700 replacement.
I think Nikon will get to the above specs faster than Canon.
No, you need to look at the Print tab!
And it also states that it does not take banding or resolution into account.
if it’s that easy, and only $770, then why bother with 7d or 550d for $200-$1000 more?
ken rockwell says screw it and get a d40 if you can find one!
5D MII and 1Ds line are still good when it comes to IQ
Inst… D700 is a stop better than 5d2 AFTER 5d2 is down sized, before that I would say it’s 1.5 stops better.
I can not only show you samples of that, I can show you samples of canon’s BEST $5000 dollar body..their 1d mk iv, shot at 6400 iso at f4 in a well lit place, and compare that to nikon’s 2 year old d700 shot at f 2.8 in a poorly lit enviroment…and the d700 STILL is a stop better, and that’s AFTER downsizing it. Yes it’s that bad with canon. I can upload photos if you really want me to spend the time to do so… otherwise you go try it out yourself with both cameras side be side.
Canon has blotchy color noise while nikon’s noise is more like fine grain. It’s amazing how d700 is better in terms of AF, noise performance, and IQ and costs 2350 while canon’s newest 1d mk iv is a lot worse in everyway except video and costs 5000. If people have an option, they must be either canon fan boys or just plain stupid to go with canon. I was one of those stupid people at first. A little knowledge and experience goes a long way, try both that’s all I say. Not asking you to take my word for it.
dxO means nothing, please check it again , even Nikon D3000 is better than pro beautiful Nikon D2Xs in every area tested , ha ha ha .( their raw is not pure raw) get real nikon fanboy,only amateur or fanboy as you believe than d90 make better pictures even from old canon 5d.
the dpreview of the d90 shows the not slight difference between d90 and d300 in raw.
Ha ha…
I was just explaining the yeridath hadoroth concept.
bklooger is koogle
Shut up, mamzer!
Nikon D90 have much better sensor and DR than mamiya ZD . , close to hasselbald H3DII39???? ha ha ha, just a dreamer or idiot would think d90 is better than most top end dslr, DXO scale only useful4 comparing cameras for the same brand, I quess.
Man what a kick in the ballz this new camera is the 7D owners! From what i’m seeing out there in webland, is that the only REAL difference between these cameras is the frame rate and weather sealing. Well guess what, i’m not going penguin wranglin’ in Antarctica and neither am I trying to capture said penguin trying to escape the jaws of a shark or something!
I’m all for inovation and advancement that’s not my issue here. My point is that it seems like an out right slap in the face to loyal customers, – the 7D is barely 6months old and a cheaper alternative has come out. Wouldn’t it just have been easier to drop the price a bit in order to chase the “average consumer” market? Canon I think should at the very least offer a partial credit towards a lens or something to 7D owners.
The rebels have a track record for providing similar features or more features than the xd or xxd cameras. The 7d will have features the rebels still don’t have including better construction, fast drive, focusing points and drives, 3stop metering in vf rather than 2, electronic leveler with roll and pitch, strobe control, focus priority over drive, control dial, LCD, etc. The only thing the rebel has that the 7d doesn’t that I would like is auto iso control. If these differences aren’t enough to apease you, feel free to downgrade bodys and get some nice L glass
Right on. People need to stop with all the pixel peeping and start looking at the big picture. Literally.
Of course, I wouldn’t doubt that a good majority of the complainers are just elitist techno-dweebs with nothing better to do. How many complainers here are actually full-time photographers, I’d love to know.
TAKE SOME DANG PHOTOS ALREADY AND STOP LOOKING AT NUMBERS. IF YOU HAVE ANY SKILL AT ALL YOU COULD TAKE GREAT PHOTOS WITH ANY CAMERA THAT FUNCTIONS PROPERLY.
I AM A CANON SHOOTER BUT WOULD BE THRILLED TO HAVE A SIMILAR NIKON INSTEAD. I WOULD ADJUST ACCORDINGLY. HOLY CHRIST WHEN WILL IT END?
IF SOME OF YOU HAD TO SHOOT AN IMPORTANT EVENT ON FILM YOU WOULDN’T STAND A CHANCE. THE BEST PHOTOGRAPHERS I KNOW LEARNED ON FILM AND SHOOT DIGITAL NOW MAKING MONEY AND WONDERFUL SHOTS AND ONLY UPGRADE ACCORDINGLY IF IT MAKES SENSE.
KEEP RACKING THE CHARTS AND TAKING BRICK WALL PHOTOS TO TEST SHARPNESS! YOU’LL BE AN A-LIST PHOTOGRAPHER IN NO TIME. LOL
I’ve been a 40D user for about 2 months now. I’ve been ridiculously happy with the high ISO performance. I can shoot at 1250 without any worry of noisy pictures. It’s nice. Before the 40D, I shot with the T1i, and though it was a great camera, wasn’t cutting it for night club photography, which is where I make all my money. If those test shots on dpreview are true to life, those ISO 1600-3200 shots looks pretty solid. Although I’d feel really bad backtracking back down to a rebel body, it seems like the image quality may be sufficient for what I shoot. I REALLY love my click wheel and magnesium body though. Crap..
another an idiot nikon fanboys, I just switched from nikon d3 to canon rebel, and bla bla bla
there is some trickery here at the dxo site- of course you can get great high ISO low noise results- just reduce the output (or saturation) of the sensor at high ISO. guess what? no/less noise. if that is built into the hardware, then we are all fooled and you have the run all the tests over. dxo obviously has no controls whatsoever. they dont measure which sensor is better- they measure the output after hardware processing. nikon recently can process out the chromatic abberations on their lenses and will process the noise, too. and so, it is all about the processing. one day, the processor will be so fast, so good, you couldn’t tell what the sensor was doing anyways. just like the popular photography tests in the old days- take it all with a grain of salt because if dxo is right, my old 20d is just nearly as good as a 4th gen camera.
by the way, kenrockwell is an idiot. he has been pandering about his newfound leica for over a year and then he realizes nobody gives a crap about that stuff unless youre a rich guy like him making money off schmucks like me visiting his website. before that, he was gushing about using film and that nikon was god and he only needed his 18-200vr for everything. once in a blue moon, he’ll mention canon and put an amazon link on it. use your stuff- you’re getting old and stale and so is your equipment. this new stuff doesnt matter if you only shoot 100 shots all year.
all digital photo stuff is great these days- a sunny day shot from a point and shoot can be enlarged 30×40 and still look great- ive done it. its all about what is appropriate. if you can afford a 5d mark ii, then buy it. if you like the weight and size of a rebel, then get it. ive had all the L lenses ever made, but after i got married, 90% of it was sitting on the shelf, so im down to using the latest rebels and 5 odd lenses and you know what? i still print 30×40 and shoot weddings when im invited. if i had more time, i would get the probodies in a pinch, but its overkill for me. like getting a hummer to go to the supermarket.
youre the kind of photographer that grew up in the internet age, where you dont even need a 2MP camera to upload pictures onto the internet. i bet you never printed anything outside of walgreens and costco and that you commute in a leased bmw and live in condo or large house in the burbs.
where is the dxo chart where they test canon sensors and they turn out to be #1? i bet there is a way to test it that way. what? now manufacturers are going to make cameras to get better on an unfounded dxo test? that is what they did to pcs and you know what? macs are always better. Funny thing is- all the 1080p video that is being captured- consumers have no way of burning it to DVDs, only to Bluray, but the fact is, there is no affordable bluray burners out yet!!! only toast (for mac) can burn 1080p to a dvd to play your HD video. welcome to the beginning! you think video on an slr is a fad? ask any wedding photographer what is changing the industry and also budding indie filmakers… they’re all using canon.