jctriguy wrote:
I think you're missing the point. Canon and Apple are not all hype, they are backed by quality products that meet the needs of the consumers. If the vast majority of consumers are happy with the product, the company is doing a good job. Don't extrapolate the number of people on this forum that want high MP high DR sensors to the general public. Really it is the same 5-10 forum posters that always chime in looking to bash Canon for lagging behind. The overwhelming majority comes on the forums to say they are happy with the Canon 'system' since that is what a camera is. ...Show more →
+1...additionally, if it weren't for some of the quotes I'd never really know what they've posted. Though a new guy here, I really won't miss any of those posts as many just say pretty much the same things, very predictably so. The digital preview forum pretty much soured me away from that rhetoric.
gabimaster wrote:
but it's necessary to expose a problem if you want to address it( low ISO DR is the problem).
This will come as a shock to you, but the problem has been exposed a thousand times over in these forums. Your original post was uselessly inflammatory.
gabimaster wrote:
now even Toshiba can deliver at least 2 stops more DR at low iso, why a giant like Canon can't do it ?
Toshiba is just fabricating the chips. The circuitry on the chips is not their design or their technology.
Nikon has had at least four companies fab their chips.
retrofocus wrote:
self-declared Canon police like yourself
When you lie about what people write it does not increase your respectability.
You will be unable to find or quote in context any post where I declared myself Canon police or anything remotely close to that.
Just stop and accept that people can have different opinions about Canon from you. They might even accept the same facts as you and reach different conclusions. That does not make them "fanbois" or "police" or part of the marketing team.
Monito wrote:
This will come as a shock to you, but the problem has been exposed a thousand times over in these forums. Your original post was uselessly inflammatory.
This is a very good example why I call you Canon police and fanboy, Monitor! Why don't you accept that people express criticism? You have an attacking and unfriendly attitude here. Gabimaster was in no way imflammatory in his original statement.
retrofocus wrote:
This is a very good example why I call you Canon police and fanboy, Monitor! Why don't you accept that people express criticism? You have an attacking and unfriendly attitude here.
Wrong. I do accept that people express criticism. Many have criticized Canon in this thread in a thoughtful non-inflammatory way without accusing people of being "police". I have no objection to their calm deliberations; just your over-the-top personal attacks against people like jctriguy, Gunzorro, and PhilDrinkwater where you call them "police" for disagreeing with you and having a different opinion from you.
When you refer to "Monitor", is that incompetence on your part or are you calling people names like grade school kids? Whichever it is, it is not helping your case.
retrofocus wrote:
Gabimaster was in no way imflammatory in his original statement.
He was. Instead of calmly reporting the news and drawing his (incorrect) conclusion about Toshiba's capabilities, he was so angry that he shouted Canon's name twice and wrote the title inflammatory phrase. His conclusion is inflammatory because it is false: Toshiba is not "catching up" with Sony, just providing chip fab for other companies technologies.
gabimaster wrote: Re: Lack of inspiration for CANON
gabimaster wrote:
We all are waiting that Canon to match the DR from their sensors to the Sony's sensors. But guess what , is a new player in "town" :Toshiba. According to DXO Labs who just released Nikon D5200's review, the noise performance and DR from Toshiba's APS-C sensor is even better than that from Sony sensors. I guess everybody is catching up with Sony , everybody BUT CANON.
dynamic range is not SO BAD on Canon that I cannot take fantastic pictures at ISO 100
I suspect Canon will improve their sensors, but they are working fine now
I have had no problem getting great ISO 100 images with a 5D II, or now a 5D III
By properly exposing the image and not being forced to push the RAW file so much as to create noise.
chez wrote:
Even though I shoot Canon and get great photos, I still would love a high mpix large DR camera for landscapes. This would further allow me to push my skills into large landscape photos. The only other area I'm a little concerned with is Canon's latest pricing on their lenses. I feel they are pushing the extreme edges with their pricing and might start to alienate some new comers to the competition.
Yes. Totally understand. If I was into landscapes it's what I'd want too.
I do get where you're coming from on pricing. Personally I think the new 24-70 is a good price now and too expensive at launch. It'll come down. They always do. The new IS primes are pretty expensive though.
Gunzorro wrote:
retro -- You and Rickuz should start a Canon-haters club.
That club already exists - it's called the Alternative Gear Forum. The only reason Canon is tolerated by some over there is that the EF mount allows them to put real glass on the camera, like Zeiss and Leica etc. But the Sony E mount on mirrorless cameras is much more versatile, so many have already switched over completely.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
That club already exists - it's called the Alternative Gear Forum. The only reason Canon is tolerated by some over there is that the EF mount allows them to put real glass on the camera, like Zeiss and Leica etc. But the Sony E mount on mirrorless cameras is much more versatile, so many have already switched over completely.
Good point . I just wish I could use Canon glass on a Nikon camera
Of all DSLR bodies offered to us right now, my first choice would be 6D. If that would not exist I am pretty sure I would purchase a 5D III. If I would need more speed the 1D X would be the solution. Beside the fact that MY needs in DR where already served with cameras some generations ago. Leading AF system/highest sensitive AF for AL, fantastic high ISO performance, best ooc JPEGs, convincing ergonomics, great silent mode and wifi/gps already implemented. All at affordable prices ... I do not see any "lack of inspiration" in Canons actual DSLR setup. Since the last three bodies (less than one year) Nikon now leads in DR. And the OP and some of you really name this a "lack of inspiration". In wich world do you live?
Ralph Conway wrote:
Of all DSLR bodies offered to us right now, my first choice would be 6D. If that would not exist I am pretty sure I would purchase a 5D III. If I would need more speed the 1D X would be the solution. Beside the fact that MY needs in DR where already served with cameras some generations ago. Leading AF system/highest sensitive AF for AL, fantastic high ISO performance, best ooc JPEGs, convincing ergonomics, great silent mode and wifi/gps already implemented. All at affordable prices ... I do not see any "lack of inspiration" in Canons actual DSLR setup. Since the last three bodies (less than one year) Nikon now leads in DR. And the OP and some of you really name this a "lack of inspiration". In wich world do you live? ...Show more →
In the landscape world where there has been very little, in fact almost zero progress in the last 5 years. For your shooting Ralph maybe there has been progress, but surely you must understand not everyone has your needs. Right now I shoot with a 5d2 and looking at the latest releases, 5d3, 1dx and 6d, I see nothing that improves on the 5d2 for landscape shooting. I am awaiting for the high mpix better DR camera to emerge from Canon. I just hope I don't need to wait another 5 years.
I don't care how much gear I have invested in a system if a camera manufacturer is not improving the technology for my main priority in photography I'm looking for other options. I certainly would not be waiting around for 5+ years. If Canon's 1D4 did not turn out to be a solid reliable body I was prepared to move to Nikon. Call me impatient but I do not see the value in staying with a system that is not satisfying my photographic needs.
ggreene wrote:
I don't care how much gear I have invested in a system if a camera manufacturer is not improving the technology for my main priority in photography I'm looking for other options. I certainly would not be waiting around for 5+ years. If Canon's 1D4 did not turn out to be a solid reliable body I was prepared to move to Nikon. Call me impatient but I do not see the value in staying with a system that is not satisfying my photographic needs.
It's notnlike I don't get great photos with the 5d2...I do. It's just it would be nice to move onto the next plateau. I rented the D800 for a week and know what is possible with more pixels and expanded DR. I am sure Canon will release their version sometimes this year.
RobDickinson wrote:
chez if you shoot night scenes then the 1dx/6d/5d3 are an improvement.
Have not yet, but am off to Kauai in May and am going to give some night sky shots a try. Definately, it will not be my gear that will hold me back from getting nice images of the night sky.
ggreene wrote:
I don't care how much gear I have invested in a system if a camera manufacturer is not improving the technology for my main priority in photography I'm looking for other options. I certainly would not be waiting around for 5+ years. If Canon's 1D4 did not turn out to be a solid reliable body I was prepared to move to Nikon. Call me impatient but I do not see the value in staying with a system that is not satisfying my photographic needs.
chez wrote:
In the landscape world where there has been very little, in fact almost zero progress in the last 5 years. For your shooting Ralph maybe there has been progress, but surely you must understand not everyone has your needs. Right now I shoot with a 5d2 and looking at the latest releases, 5d3, 1dx and 6d, I see nothing that improves on the 5d2 for landscape shooting. I am awaiting for the high mpix better DR camera to emerge from Canon. I just hope I don't need to wait another 5 years.
I don't think anyone has an issues with your needs.
However, when people (not you) tell me I'm various forms of an idiot for being happy with my equipment... well that's when things get a little heated because I'm not I'm as able to determine my needs as you are yours and they are theirs.
Our needs are different.
However, and I've maintained this all along and believe it, your needs are in the minority. High dr at low ISO is a relative niche. I suspect that's why canon hasn't tackled it. That's what I mean when earlier I'm saying its not a big (business) mistake since canon lost a few % of people to Nikon this time and gained some others but if they'd released a camera with poor focussing they'd have lost a lot more. So their development $ went elsewhere than the sensor. We all only have a certain amount of money and decisions needs to be made.
Given that dr was on the canon questionnaire recently though I'm sure they are well aware of the issue. And I voted for it, for those of you who need it
chez wrote:
Extremes on either end are just noise. Both systems are very capable in the right hands. Indicating one system is "well" in front of the other is just fanboism.
Fanboism??
Is that a new word i havnt heard of before?
Some basic facts as opposed to your continued slagging of the Canon system.
Noted you still did not respond on the discussion on DXO's weaknesses for only categorizing cameras in one ISO bracket.
The current gen Canon lenses are up to 25% lighter than the opposition..ie Nikon with better IQ and converter AF performance far in excess of Nikon.
The Canon AF works in conditions unheard of in the past. The Nikon module has issues and has had issues with low contrast targets now for almost 4 years.
Canon's hi ISO DR is better as is the Hi ISO noise control.
So which part of that is fanboism whatever that means.
People get tired of the continual whining of a small number of people whom are to never be satisfied.
For that they post in every topic slagging off Canon at every opportunity.
Yes at low the DR is not as good as Nikon but for a lot of people it is as good if not better at the ranges they shoot at.
I seriously think you should sell up and buy Nikon.
Then you can go and whine about the AF performance,the slow response time, the soft corners and the slow response time on the D800..
Hey but you will have good DR thats all that matters right??
Since the possible has been proven in the field, seen first hand; Nikon/Sony Exmor in this case, the whine pours freely as it should for those that understand the beauty, importance, of it's taste, but can't afford/hassle to sell their fine crystal for a goblet less usable.
Inspiration comes in all forms, sometimes it is something new for a few/many, often the feel of the old/trusted inspires as well. Dynamic range is a big deal, life saver for it seems many, just not everyone.
There is no convincing those that need/want the latitude of the Exmor technology that Canon isn't behind in this respect. And there's really no need for those that don't 'require' this new tech to defend their tech; even with it's refinements/advancements that still satisfies/inspires.
The question/thought posed, put forth, is little different then the film vs. digital argument. Many find pleasure and frustration in both, this doesn't make the merits of either better or worse. We're just talking preference, comfort, the effort any of us are willing to extend to 'our' creative process.
Yes for some Canon does not inspire as of late, for others just having one in hand is a pleasure. Two camps/groups and there's no need to byte each others heads off, defend stance. We're adults right, discussion is good as it enlightens, allows one to learn from an other's experiences... ugly is just ugly, helps no one.
dehowie wrote:
Fanboism??
Is that a new word i havnt heard of before?
Some basic facts as opposed to your continued slagging of the Canon system.
Noted you still did not respond on the discussion on DXO's weaknesses for only categorizing cameras in one ISO bracket.
The current gen Canon lenses are up to 25% lighter than the opposition..ie Nikon with better IQ and converter AF performance far in excess of Nikon.
The Canon AF works in conditions unheard of in the past. The Nikon module has issues and has had issues with low contrast targets now for almost 4 years.
Canon's hi ISO DR is better as is the Hi ISO noise control.
So which part of that is fanboism whatever that means.
People get tired of the continual whining of a small number of people whom are to never be satisfied.
For that they post in every topic slagging off Canon at every opportunity.
Yes at low the DR is not as good as Nikon but for a lot of people it is as good if not better at the ranges they shoot at.
I seriously think you should sell up and buy Nikon.
Then you can go and whine about the AF performance,the slow response time, the soft corners and the slow response time on the D800..
Hey but you will have good DR thats all that matters right??
Your posts just dig you deeper into that fanboism void. If you would have read a few of my posts, I said I am happy making prints with my current Canon gear and am awaiting Canon's high mpix great dynamic range camera. You on then other hand just attack others and valiantly defend your positions.
Enough said on this as I don't feel like being dragged down that sewer hole that these discussions without any real information end up.
. I just wish I could use Canon glass on a Nikon camera