Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5      
6
       7       8       end
  

Archive 2011 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors

  
 
Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #1 · p.6 #1 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


I am not qualified. I use the center point only. Like with all cameras I ever shoot the last 34 years. :-( sorry.

But next to that and next to shooting AL. Did YOU do 34 years ago? At ISO 6400 pushed?
I did. And there is no existing camera that gives that to me now, in better quality. Maybe 3Ds does. But for that extra amount I prefere to travel.

What now? Should we fight? Do you really care about outer points? If I see they do not work. I use what is working. Last shooting showed that D700s 51 AF points did not better. IQ at ISO 6.400 was not matching 5Ds IQ, too (of course, itīs 3 year old standard in resolution).
Yes, You may ask for more. and we all should. But we should not nail Canon to the cross, if they do not fullfill any of our wishes.

I use 5D II and the files are much to big. I cropp (seldom) 5%.
When I read people calling for 36MP to get crop freedom, I have to laugh. Itīs like asking for a Porsche at 300 mph to drive 180. There is a cause, why there is a viefinder in a DSLR: To find the optimal view. If you do not do it, of course a 70% Crop can make the image. But that is not what gear is made for, right?

5D MK II ist the best available (and afordable) camera imo up to date. So what is wrong in using it and beeing happy?

Ralph



Dec 07, 2011 at 12:46 PM
artd
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #2 · p.6 #2 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Sharona wrote:
A sincere, and possibly stupid question for those who want it: why the desire for more megapixels?


Since you asked, here are my answers

1. My commercial work is primarily architectural, and detail is critical. All of my architectural images are shot at low ISO on a tripod so having fewer megapixels with super high ISO capability is not useful at all to me. But even a very modest increase in resolution/detail is going to be beneficial. Architects are very picky with the imagery they use to represent their projects. The more subtle details that can be picked up the more immersive the image will look.

I abandoned 4x5 film some time ago in favor of a 5dII with Canon's excellent TSE lenses because the tradeoff in detail vs convenience and efficiency was worth it. However, that's not to say I think there isn't room for improvement. To those who say 'just get a MF digital back' it's not quite so simple. The 'cheaper' MF solutions may be fine for studio work but just are not appealing for architecture because you simply can't get a cheap system with wide angle lenses and movements. Have you actually priced out what a good technical camera with wide angle lenses and digital back costs? Compared to a Canon system with a set of TSE lenses, I can't justify that kind of investment given my current market.

2. My personal art work is primarily printed around 16x24 and up. You can't print that big from a 5dII at 300dpi without interpolating up. Yes the results are good and I've made acceptable prints up to 24x36. But they would be even better without interpoloation.

All that said, I agree that many photographers do not need more megapixels. And, for those photographers, there are already plenty of cameras out there to choose from with less megapixels.



Dec 07, 2011 at 01:27 PM
timpdx
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #3 · p.6 #3 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


RobertLynn wrote:
The new 5d could be 35mp, 10 fps, 4 cf slots, built in wifi, ISO 1,000,000. 100 all f/1.4 cross type ad points, weather sealed to work in a volcano, hurricane or 100 leagues under the sea, and $2000 bundled with a 20-120 f/2.0 is lens, and you guys would find a reason to bitch.


The MP is o.k., but why not 2 CF and 2SD? wimax instead, would also need sealing to work in vacuum of space, and that zoom both a) isn't wide enough and b) not F1.4



Dec 07, 2011 at 02:23 PM
AJSJones
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #4 · p.6 #4 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


artd wrote:
I abandoned 4x5 film some time ago in favor of a 5dII with Canon's excellent TSE lenses because the tradeoff in detail vs convenience and efficiency was worth it. However, that's not to say I think there isn't room for improvement. To those who say 'just get a MF digital back' it's not quite so simple. The 'cheaper' MF solutions may be fine for studio work but just are not appealing for architecture because you simply can't get a cheap system with wide angle lenses and movements. Have you actually priced out what a good technical camera with wide angle
...Show more
Complete ditto!
Flat stitching can help boost the print size for a given quality, and so could more pixels (I've got good glass for them) in the first place



Dec 07, 2011 at 02:34 PM
M Vers
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #5 · p.6 #5 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Ralph Conway wrote:
I am not qualified. I use the center point only. Like with all cameras I ever shoot the last 34 years. :-( sorry.


Exactly, which explains why you have no issue with the camera. If the 5DII's AF performance were based off of the single center point it would be rated as phenomenal. In the real world, however, you need to look at it in it's entirely.

But next to that and next to shooting AL. Did YOU do 34 years ago? At ISO 6400 pushed?
I did. And there is no existing camera that gives that to me now, in better quality. Maybe 3Ds does. But for that extra amount I prefere to travel.


No where did I say anything about high ISO capability, so I'm confused as to why you're mentioning it...

What now? Should we fight?

I have no desire to "fight" you.

Do you really care about outer points?

I only use them 99% of the time, so yes, I do somewhat care.

If I see they do not work. I use what is working.

And here is where you loose me. What is it that you don't get about a 2.6K camera not having a completely reliable AF system? It should. Period.

Yes, You may ask for more. and we all should. But we should not nail Canon to the cross, if they do not fullfill any of our wishes.

Aside from the whole crucifixion thing, yes I believe people should berate Canon for cutting corners and recycling already lack luster features in order to cut costs and over differentiate product lines. A 2.6K camera should perform better than a $500 camera in every single important aspect.

I use 5D II and the files are much to big. I cropp (seldom) 5%.
When I read people calling for 36MP to get crop freedom, I have to laugh. Itīs like asking for a Porsche at 300 mph to drive 180.There is a cause, why there is a viefinder in a DSLR: To find the optimal view. If you do not do it, of course a 70% Crop can make the image. But that is not what gear is made for, right?


Wrong. Cropping is, at times, needed believe it or not. Not everyone has the luxury, or the cash, to frame a shot perfect every single time. Again, just because you hardly ever have the need to crop doesn't mean everyone else doesn't.

5D MK II ist the best available (and afordable) camera imo up to date. So what is wrong in using it and beeing happy?

Ralph


Did I ever say people shouldn't be happy to use the camera? If it makes you happy, so be it. If you think it's the greatest camera to date, so be it. If someone else disagrees because they use their cameras differently, do your best to understand that not everyone is you.



Dec 07, 2011 at 03:14 PM
RobertLynn
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #6 · p.6 #6 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Beat down on fm...

Tune in at 4 when the fight begins. The viewing is 10 bits a gander, and I am acceptable to receiving PayPal payments.



Dec 07, 2011 at 03:35 PM
Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #7 · p.6 #7 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


@M Vers:

Yes. Thank you. But if I where not me, I would have bought a camera that fits what that different person needs more. I accept anybody else, shooting a 1D ~, a Nikon, a Sony or a Pentax, or whatever. I accept photographers who use a 5D (MK II) without beeing happy with it, too.

But to your "wrong: Cropping is, at times, needed."
Yes, when I as a shooter did wrong. That is no and never was a question of luxury or the cash.

You may call me stupid or arrogant: But I use a DSLR, because it has a viefinder that gives me controll about how and what I shoot. Viefinder means "finding and defining the (right) view" - composing, controlling light, sharpness DOF and blur. If I do not use it (the viefinder) I can take a P&S. I could work with much cheaper and often more comfortabel gear.
I put a different focus screen in my body to be able to focus manually, too.
The 95 % coverage gives me enough "crop freedom" to correct my generally "turn left" without missing anything important in the image.
In BIF or sports it may be necessary. Cutting away more in shooting people/events to me means not doing my job as good as I should be able to do it.




Dec 07, 2011 at 03:50 PM
artd
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #8 · p.6 #8 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


I would like to comment that if you crop only if you "did wrong" then that implies that you are satisfied to always stick with your DSLR's native 3:2 aspect ratio. And that's perfectly fine. But many photographers do not like to limit themselves to composing images in just 3:2. Just because a photographer crops their image doesn't necessarily mean they did anything wrong. It could simply be that their selected composition needs a different ratio.

Secondly, when shooting for clients a lot of times they are the ones who want to do the cropping. So I always try to give them images with as many pixels as possible. It's not an uncommon occurence for a graphic designer to take your perfectly composed photograph and then crop away half or more of it because they only want a piece of it in their layout. And if they put it in a layout for something that needs to be printed big and that tiny piece of an image gets pixelated when it's blown up, do you think the client will have a poor impression of a the graphic designer, or a poor impression of the photographer?



Dec 07, 2011 at 04:14 PM
Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #9 · p.6 #9 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Yes. Of course I mentioned the given aspect ratio. I did panorama shots myself, but I did them knowing it in camera using the maximum format.

Of course my customers are free to crop whatever they want. But even for that I want to give them the highest possible quality in using the whole format given (to me). When I did a catalouge shooting for "pregnant fashion" the graphic artist cut and arranged many shots. One did not see zhe crop in loosing quality. What would have happened when I already would have cropped the pics before.

Itīs part of the job, to talk to customers and find out what they need. And to shoot it, so they can use it. Of course I can shoot a couple kissing with a parfum flacon (?) on the desk in the background. But if this is important I would do another shot of that flacon, too. It would look horrible, if they crop it out of the first shot, resize it and arrange it to the shot for an ad.

I am sorry. I started photography in film times. And I developed my prints (b&w) myself.
The loss in quality of only doing a 20% crop in film days was horrible. On my first (analogue) exibition photographers came and ask me if I really shot al that pics in camera (because one could see the film negatives black border). I was astonished, because I believed all photographers do. Itīs not so obvious in todays 21MP shoots. That is a much higher resolution and even in higher ISO cleaner than ever in film days. But of course I still try to get the best possible technical results in using the format.

So If I want to shoot different from 3/2 aspect ratio, I think about my viefinders area before I start shooting to get the highest possible quality. I do not think, that is wrong.




Dec 07, 2011 at 04:46 PM
Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #10 · p.6 #10 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


artd wrote:
I would like to comment that if you crop only if you "did wrong" then that implies that you are satisfied to always stick with your DSLR's native 3:2 aspect ratio. And that's perfectly fine. But many photographers do not like to limit themselves to composing images in just 3:2. Just because a photographer crops their image doesn't necessarily mean they did anything wrong. It could simply be that their selected composition needs a different ratio.

Secondly, when shooting for clients a lot of times they are the ones who want to do the cropping. So I always try to give
...Show more

There are so many reasons one may want to crop that have nothing to do with poor technique, it's quite ludicrous we are even arguing about this with Ralph. He has clearly attained camera nirvana with the 5D II and I'm happy for him, but let's not get into silly arguments trying to justify our wants to him, it's pointless.

I will say I still enjoy using the 5D II, but it could be so much better in a few key areas.

Edited on Dec 07, 2011 at 04:58 PM · View previous versions



Dec 07, 2011 at 04:52 PM
RobertLynn
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #11 · p.6 #11 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Almost all of my photos are 5:4 or something close. I find 3:2 ratio boring, but I don't crop fight photos anymore...just too time consuming to crop several hundred photos to 5:4.


Dec 07, 2011 at 04:55 PM
M Vers
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #12 · p.6 #12 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Pixel Perfect wrote:
There are so many reasons one may want to crop that have nothing to do with poor technique, it's quite ludicrous we are even arguing about this with Ralph. He has clearly attained camera nirvana with the 5D II and I'm happy for him, but let's not get into silly arguments trying to justify our wants to him, it's pointless.

I will say I still enjoy using the 5D II, but it could be so much better in a few key areas.


At least someone else gets it. Ah, to be objective.



Dec 07, 2011 at 05:12 PM
Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #13 · p.6 #13 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Pixel Perfect wrote:
There are so many reasons one may want to crop that have nothing to do with poor technique, it's quite ludicrous we are even arguing about this with Ralph. He has clearly attained camera nirvana with the 5D II and I'm happy for him, but let's not get into silly arguments trying to justify our wants to him, it's pointless.

I will say I still enjoy using the 5D II, but it could be so much better in a few key areas.


camera nirwana?
OMG!

I am happy with 5D MK II because it fullfills my needs in doing my shootings.
Of course I would love any enhancement in a 5D III (most ISO). But it does not make any sence, to cry, does it? Canon would not add some cross point outer AF points to my exiting camera. Or exchange the sensor to a ISO 51K one, right?

So long there is nothing else I have to get along with what exists. And in that 5D MK II is a great tool, I can work with. If Canon offers 1D X for about € 3000 I would be in camera nirwana for a week or two.
Than I would tell them what I need in the next generation.

When I was young I was in computer nirwana and as a "responsible person" I told the mother company a 22 pages dossier what to change for next generation computer needs. They changed 3 items after 2 years. A faster main processor, a new housing and video not working any longer for the rest of the world (excep US and Japan - what made 9% of world sales).

Do not tell me about "nirwana". Just tell me who gives me more than 5D MK II to do my job and I will purchase that.

Have a great night
Ralph



Dec 07, 2011 at 05:16 PM
Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #14 · p.6 #14 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


RobertLynn wrote:
Almost all of my photos are 5:4 or something close. I find 3:2 ratio boring, but I don't crop fight photos anymore...just too time consuming to crop several hundred photos to 5:4.


First time I am not with you, Robert.
I find 4/3, 5/4 boring. 3/2 is nice. 3,5/2 or 4/2 would be better (for me).



Dec 07, 2011 at 05:20 PM
Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #15 · p.6 #15 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


M Vers wrote:
At least someone else gets it. Ah, to be objective.





Dec 07, 2011 at 05:20 PM
M Vers
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #16 · p.6 #16 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Ralph Conway wrote:
I am happy with 5D MK II because it fullfills my needs in doing my shootings...


With such a slow frame rate the 5DII must be horrid for shootings...at least for drive-by's.



Dec 07, 2011 at 05:26 PM
Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #17 · p.6 #17 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


M Vers wrote:
With such a slow frame rate the 5DII must be horrid for shootings...at least for drive-by's.


I am old ... and slow. That pic was done with a Rebel XT (maximum 3FPS) - of course a horror for drive byīs. I only did one shot:

http://www.ralphconway.com/gallery/street/images/02.jpg

Not your gear makes you a photographer. Its you what you make with your gear.



Dec 07, 2011 at 05:44 PM
M Vers
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #18 · p.6 #18 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


...Joke fail


Dec 07, 2011 at 06:13 PM
Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #19 · p.6 #19 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


upon your reaction I think it worked well. If you do not do sports but portraits a 10 FPS will not give you a beter picture than a singleshot does.


Dec 07, 2011 at 06:24 PM
Sharona
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #20 · p.6 #20 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


artd wrote:
Since you asked, here are my answers

1. My commercial work is primarily architectural, and detail is critical. All of my architectural images are shot at low ISO on a tripod so having fewer megapixels with super high ISO capability is not useful at all to me. But even a very modest increase in resolution/detail is going to be beneficial. Architects are very picky with the imagery they use to represent their projects. The more subtle details that can be picked up the more immersive the image will look.

I abandoned 4x5 film some time ago in favor of a
...Show more

Thank you for answering my question. I can see how large art prints would benefit from more megapixels, I just wonder how many is enough and when does it become too many? Not to encourage more arguing here, though.....



Dec 08, 2011 at 10:02 AM
1       2       3              5      
6
       7       8       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5      
6
       7       8       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.