Home · Register · Software · Software · 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       end
  

D850 has my attention
  
 
Mikehit
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #1 · p.6 #1 · D850 has my attention




relevant to anyone shooting at base iso or is it your fantasy that everyone only shoots hi iso


How about stepping into someone else's conversation and deliberately misinterpreting what is said? I suggest you go back and follow that line again


brian_sp wrote:
which seems to imply you have also seen 5d4 images pushed 4 stops that do have banding


Your powers of observation are amazing! I was merely countering a criticism of the 5D4 that is shows banding at a 4-stop push. Or are we only allow to respond in agreement to criticisms of the Canon gear?

brian_sp wrote:
seems rather strange or fanboi ish for you to be in a thread about the d850 trying so very desperately to defend canon



I was not the one who brought up criticisms of the 5D4 as a way of showing how good the D850 is. My apologies if I was not permitted to respond. This is a Canon forum after all....





Sep 14, 2017 at 02:38 PM
charlyw
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #2 · p.6 #2 · D850 has my attention


Colin F wrote:
Why did Canon not leave out the AA filter on the 5D4?


Leaving out the AA filter is only advisable if the lenses are bad enough to make the use of the AA filter redundant (optical laws govern that this will be the case for 100Mp on APS-C and around 250Mp on full frame as then even theoretical resolution limits in the visible light spectrum will prevent aliasing from occurring)... Soft lenses benefit more from leaving out the AA filter. So in consequence Nikon seems to have less trust in their lenses to deliver sharp images at wide apertures than Canon has...



Sep 14, 2017 at 03:06 PM
brian_sp
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #3 · p.6 #3 · D850 has my attention



How about stepping into someone else's conversation and deliberately misinterpreting what is said? I suggest you go back and follow that line again


Your powers of observation are amazing! I was merely countering a criticism of the 5D4 that is shows banding at a 4-stop push. Or are we only allow to respond in agreement to criticisms of the Canon gear?

I was not the one who brought up criticisms of the 5D4 as a way of showing how good the D850 is. My apologies if I was not permitted to respond. This is a Canon forum after all....



and yet again, there you go fighting way too hard to defend canon products




Sep 14, 2017 at 04:07 PM
brian_sp
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #4 · p.6 #4 · D850 has my attention


charlyw wrote:
Leaving out the AA filter is only advisable if the lenses are bad enough to make the use of the AA filter redundant (optical laws govern that this will be the case for 100Mp on APS-C and around 250Mp on full frame as then even theoretical resolution limits in the visible light spectrum will prevent aliasing from occurring)... Soft lenses benefit more from leaving out the AA filter. So in consequence Nikon seems to have less trust in their lenses to deliver sharp images at wide apertures than Canon has...



every time you open you post something it gets more bazaar than your last post
you are good for a laugh though



Sep 14, 2017 at 04:09 PM
Colin F
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #5 · p.6 #5 · D850 has my attention


While I maintain that I don't have GAS, and that my consideration of the D850 was and is due to my particular desire to achieve the best possible image quality using one of the less expensive Tamron/Sigma/Nikon ~150-600 zoom lenses as opposed to a big prime, this is perhaps a good read for all of us:

https://photographylife.com/the-camera-hype



Sep 14, 2017 at 04:29 PM
CanadaMark
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #6 · p.6 #6 · D850 has my attention


charlyw wrote:
Leaving out the AA filter is only advisable if the lenses are bad enough to make the use of the AA filter redundant (optical laws govern that this will be the case for 100Mp on APS-C and around 250Mp on full frame as then even theoretical resolution limits in the visible light spectrum will prevent aliasing from occurring)... Soft lenses benefit more from leaving out the AA filter. So in consequence Nikon seems to have less trust in their lenses to deliver sharp images at wide apertures than Canon has...


That is not true at all, nor is it the reason companies leave off the AA filter on cameras like the D850, 5DSR, Fuji X-Pro, Sigma DP, Pentax K, etc. In fact Canon's own marketing for the 5DSR directly opposes your comment.



Sep 14, 2017 at 05:05 PM
Mikehit
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #7 · p.6 #7 · D850 has my attention




and yet again, there you go fighting way too hard to defend canon products



Your critical faculties really are lacking aren't they. I am amazed at your inability to understand logic and assess and argument. Perhaps that is why you shoot Nikon instead of Canon...?



Sep 14, 2017 at 05:38 PM
cambyses
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #8 · p.6 #8 · D850 has my attention


charlyw wrote:
Leaving out the AA filter is only advisable if the lenses are bad enough to make the use of the AA filter redundant (optical laws govern that this will be the case for 100Mp on APS-C and around 250Mp on full frame as then even theoretical resolution limits in the visible light spectrum will prevent aliasing from occurring)... Soft lenses benefit more from leaving out the AA filter. So in consequence Nikon seems to have less trust in their lenses to deliver sharp images at wide apertures than Canon has...

CanadaMark wrote:
That is not true at all, nor is it the reason companies leave off the AA filter on cameras like the D850, 5DSR, Fuji X-Pro, Sigma DP, Pentax K, etc. In fact Canon's own marketing for the 5DSR directly opposes your comment.


Well, in a sense, you are both right!

1) To avoid aliasing, your spatial sampling frequency should be bigger than twice the maximum spatial frequency in the image (Nyquist Criterion).
2) Your spatial sampling rate is determined by the distance between two neighboring pixels, which itself is obviously determined by the total number of pixels and the sensor size (i.e., the sensor resolution)
3) The maximum spatial frequency (i.e., spatial bandwidth) is determined by the spatial density of your image and the optical resolution of your lens.

So AA filters are needed to ensure Nyquist Criterion is met and thus aliasing is avoided. But they are no longer needed if your sensor resolution (and thus your spatial sampling frequency) is large enough compared to your spatial bandwidth. And your spatial bandwidth will obviously be lower if your lens has a smaller resolving power.

So, yes, the reason that many cameras can get away without AA filters is that their sensors can out-resolve their lenses by enough margin that aliasing will not be an issue. But as pointed out, this is NOT unique to Nikon in any way, and does not mean they don't trust their lenses! It is just that their sensors have very high pixel density that can out-resolve their lenses without any major aliasing, much like Canon's 5DSR, or the other cameras that Mark mentioned.



Sep 14, 2017 at 06:07 PM
brian_sp
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #9 · p.6 #9 · D850 has my attention


Mikehit wrote:
Your critical faculties really are lacking aren't they. I am amazed at your inability to understand logic and assess and argument. Perhaps that is why you shoot Nikon instead of Canon...?


when you are able to talk logic let me know, i'd be interested in reading it, till then, babble on



Sep 14, 2017 at 06:43 PM
Mikehit
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #10 · p.6 #10 · D850 has my attention


brian_sp wrote:
when you are able to talk logic let me know, i'd be interested in reading it, till then, babble on


Try answering this one.
Where am I defending Canon? What have I said that defends their strategy. Please explain your logic.

By the way, by 'defending' I mean justifying. Because if buy 'defending' you mean 'understanding their strategy' then there are an awful lot of criminal psychologists who should be locked up for complicity.



Sep 14, 2017 at 07:48 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #11 · p.6 #11 · D850 has my attention


Mikehit wrote:
Is the discussion 'only' about base ISO? I only ask because there is plenty of comment about higher ISO as well, one of which you were replying to (and the OP referred to later on).
As I say, I have also seen 5D4 images pushed 4 stops without banding which, for me, calls into question the DPR tests.

So to say it is only base ISO that matters seems somewhat suspect.


In the context of the OP, base ISO isn't all that relevant....my summary of my thoughts (not directed at you Mikehit)

The original discussion was mostly geared towards Colin's 90% bird shooting and wondering about higher ISO in terms of noise, DR, lifting shadows. Knowing that from the beginning Colin is shooting bird photos (the same thing I shoot 90% of the time), I was trying to keep my discussion to practical points based off of some hard data from photonstophotos. Also the DPReview widgets help in comparing this between cameras and those aren't fully updated yet but they say they will be soon.

Mark brought up an interesting point in that even though photonstophotos' data shows DR essentially equal between 5D4 and D850 from ISO 100 upwards that when you do larger lifting of the shadows the 5D4 breaks down a lot more than the D850.

The graph I posted later (from photonstophotos) which is used to show how ISO invariant a camera is shows that the big issue with the 5D4 is the lack of invariance at ISO 120 - 160. I think (not certain) that this is why lifting the ISO 100 shadows in the DPReview widget shows a much better result for the D850.

The second DPReview widget allows you to compare ISO 6400 native in each camera to different amounts of pushes from lower ISOs. In my view of what I and Colin shoot this type of comparison is more relevant. I can look and say...what if I underexposed my shot by accident or by intention to protect the highlights?...I shot at ISO 800 and actually my subject should have been 3 stops up at ISO 6400? Well then the DPReview widget shows me that both cameras are invariant in that range (matches photonstophotos data) and I can increase the gain on the subject to an ISO 6400 equivalent and have no penalty vs if I had shot at ISO 6400 in the beginning. I also maybe would gain by having protected the highlights but in doing so I introduce ISO 6400 noise to the subject.....but assuming I was already wide open and needed a certain SS to freeze the subject, the light was requiring ISO 6400 on the subject anyways.

In the end I think that if you are wanting to push from low ISOs, the D850 is better, maybe a lot better even though the 5D4 has the same DR (obviously not at its non-existent 64ISO). On the other hand, if you are shooting in the ISO 800+ range and having to recover the entire image or shadows then both sensors seem to perform about equally. So I still think that for Colin's use case, he won't notice a big change in the IQ of raising shadows of bird shots at higher ISOs. Of course that isn't to say he shouldn't switch to the D850....I want to get a D850....until I read this this morning http://www.canonrumors.com/multiple-new-diffracitve-optics-lenses-coming-from-canon-in-2018-cr2/








Sep 14, 2017 at 08:06 PM
technic
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #12 · p.6 #12 · D850 has my attention


arbitrage wrote:
...
So I still think that for Colin's use case, he won't notice a big change in the IQ of raising shadows of bird shots at higher ISOs. Of course that isn't to say he shouldn't switch to the D850....I want to get a D850....until I read this this morning http://www.canonrumors.com/multiple-new-diffracitve-optics-lenses-coming-from-canon-in-2018-cr2/


If they wake up and finally update the 20 year old 4/300IS (or the 3.5/180 macro) with DO and state-of-the-art IS and AF (and at least maintain the maximum magnification) that could save me the trouble of moving to Nikon, because of their 4/300PF and the lack of suitable (high quality) long focal length close up options in the Canon lens line ;-)

Still thinking about that D850 (or D500, D7500) though because apart from the lenses, Nikon makes cameras that are far more my taste. Not worried about Nikon service because Canon service isn't worth much over here either ;-(



Sep 14, 2017 at 08:28 PM
Mikehit
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #13 · p.6 #13 · D850 has my attention


arbitrage wrote:
In the context of the OP, base ISO isn't all that relevant....my summary of my thoughts (not directed at you Mikehit)

The original discussion was mostly geared towards Colin's 90% bird shooting and wondering about higher ISO in terms of noise, DR, lifting shadows. Knowing that from the beginning Colin is shooting bird photos (the same thing I shoot 90% of the time), I was trying to keep my discussion to practical points based off of some hard data from photonstophotos. Also the DPReview widgets help in comparing this between cameras and those aren't fully updated yet but they say they
...Show more
A very good summation, arbitrage. Thank you.
Your comments highlight two problems when looking at camera spec sheets - first is that now, more than ever, any reply should really start with '...it depends...'. Second is that that camera itself is only one part of what you need to consider when buying into (or changing to) a specific system.



Sep 14, 2017 at 08:44 PM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #14 · p.6 #14 · D850 has my attention


technic wrote:
If they wake up and finally update the 20 year old 4/300IS (or the 3.5/180 macro) with DO and state-of-the-art IS and AF (and at least maintain the maximum magnification) that could save me the trouble of moving to Nikon, because of their 4/300PF and the lack of suitable (high quality) long focal length close up options in the Canon lens line ;-)

Still thinking about that D850 (or D500, D7500) though because apart from the lenses, Nikon makes cameras that are far more my taste. Not worried about Nikon service because Canon service isn't worth much over here either ;-(


---------------------------------------------
Yes it always comes down to deciding if one should jump ship or wait it out a little longer. I did want to say that after using my 100-400II (+/- TC) a lot more recently for bumblebee semi-macro at close to MFD, I am much more in agreement with your findings about the close up performance of the 100-400II....sorry way of topic

Mikehit wrote:
A very good summation, arbitrage. Thank you.
Your comments highlight two problems when looking at camera spec sheets - first is that now, more than ever, any reply should really start with '...it depends...'. Second is that that camera itself is only one part of what you need to consider when buying into (or changing to) a specific system.


If Canon didn't have a couple lenses that I cherish, namely my 400DOII, 200-400/1.4 and 100-400II, I would make a full switch to Nikon based on the current body lineup of D500, D850 and D5. I would have to do a lot of selling to be able to switch fully. I will continue to pick and choose from Nikon's lineup like I do currently with D500 and 200-500. D850 and 300PF are the two items that attract me most. Of course pretty likely Canon will throw together a 300/4 DO sometime next year anyways. Again, always hard to determine if one should be jumping ship or waiting out the tide.



Sep 14, 2017 at 08:55 PM
CanadaMark
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #15 · p.6 #15 · D850 has my attention


arbitrage made a good summary but I think it would be prudent to add one detail, especially in the context of BIF (thanks for trying to keep the discussion on track) - the D850 is producing that level of IQ with over 50% more resolution. That is quite something, and ideal for BIF.

If we further look at the feature set from a BIF perspective, it is offering 2.5 times the buffer depth (or 5X if you believe people on DPR getting 90+ frames 14bit LC RAW), better AF (directly from the D5), better build quality, AF point linked spot metering, and 30% more FPS (with grip). If you want to try and match every one of it's main features with a Canon body, at the moment you need at least 4 of them:

7DII - to get at least 9FPS at ~20MP crop
5DSR - for the ultra high MP
1DXII - for at least 9FPS full frame, pro AF, deep buffer, AF point linked spot meter, etc.
5DM4 - for the closest possible DR comparison and 4K video.

Obviously all those things aren't deal breakers to everyone, but the level of all-roundness Nikon has packed into the D850 is unprecedented even when looking within it's own lineup as well.



Sep 14, 2017 at 10:06 PM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #16 · p.6 #16 · D850 has my attention


CanadaMark wrote:
arbitrage made a good summary but I think it would be prudent to add one detail, especially in the context of BIF (thanks for trying to keep the discussion on track) - the D850 is producing that level of IQ with over 50% more resolution. That is quite something, and ideal for BIF.

If we further look at the feature set from a BIF perspective, it is offering 2.5 times the buffer depth (or 5X if you believe people on DPR getting 90+ frames 14bit LC RAW), better AF (directly from the D5), better build quality, AF point linked spot metering,
...Show more

All good points...I think we all realize that the D850 is the closest ever to the "do it all" DSLR. That is why it has impressed not only Nikon users but many Canon users as well.

And actually the 1DX2 takes care of the DR (almost equal to 5D4 except at ISO 100) and has better 4K video than the 5D4. Funny thing is that in Canada a CPS 1DX2 is $6700. A D850 with 9FPS is $5460....getting close....but you need long glass or good birding locations to fill those 20MPs on the 1DX2.

The 5D4 gets 36 RAWs to a 1066x CF card (TDP testing) (Canon's rating must be using some abysmal card). D850 supposedly gets 51. So still better but not 2.5x. If people are getting 90 that is very good news. However Tony Northrup could only get 40 to XQD in his testing. (Not sure what is up with that as he said he used 14bit LC not UC).

But in the end I still can't mount my 400DOII on it (and a few others) so that still makes my Canon bodies useful to me.

Canon does still need to get their ducks in a row with camera bodies...maybe someday.....





Canon DSLR division in the front




Sep 14, 2017 at 11:58 PM
IndyFab
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #17 · p.6 #17 · D850 has my attention


Personally the 5DSR II better sensor, more FPS/ buffer and a flip screen and DO lenses is where my hopes lie with Canon when and if they decide to do it. Otherwise the D850 "Do it All" looks good wright about now.


Sep 15, 2017 at 01:30 AM
Mikehit
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #18 · p.6 #18 · D850 has my attention


CanadaMark wrote:
arbitrage made a good summary but I think it would be prudent to add one detail, especially in the context of BIF (thanks for trying to keep the discussion on track) - the D850 is producing that level of IQ with over 50% more resolution. That is quite something, and ideal for BIF.

If we further look at the feature set from a BIF perspective, it is offering 2.5 times the buffer depth (or 5X if you believe people on DPR getting 90+ frames 14bit LC RAW), better AF (directly from the D5), better build quality, AF point linked spot metering,
...Show more

I agree with the general tone of your post, and the D850 is a very tempting proposition. But I am not sure the difference between 7fps and 9fps is that significant (very little helps but having gone from 7fps to 10 fps to 14 fps I am not sure what 9 will let you do that 7 can't). And you need to spend another grand to get you that 9fps which is actually a nice idea because the camera effectively becomes modular. But whether the AF performs the same as the D5/D4 is another matter - as an example the 7Dii had the AF system of the 1Dx and the 5DIV has the AF system of the 1Dx2, but things like power management, algorithms and processing power all influence it and those two models do not perform as well as the relevant 1D model. This is where bench tests give you little to no true assessment of its capabilities and you need to wait for real-world reviews.




Sep 15, 2017 at 07:03 AM
Paul Mo
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #19 · p.6 #19 · D850 has my attention


D850 - a man's camera!

https://fstoppers.com/originals/nikon-d850-men-only-195822



Sep 15, 2017 at 01:39 PM
CanadaMark
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #20 · p.6 #20 · D850 has my attention


arbitrage wrote
All good points...I think we all realize that the D850 is the closest ever to the "do it all" DSLR. That is why it has impressed not only Nikon users but many Canon users as well.

And actually the 1DX2 takes care of the DR (almost equal to 5D4 except at ISO 100) and has better 4K video than the 5D4. Funny thing is that in Canada a CPS 1DX2 is $6700. A D850 with 9FPS is $5460....getting close....but you need long glass or good birding locations to fill those 20MPs on the 1DX2.

The 5D4 gets 36 RAWs to a 1066x
...Show more

The 1DX2 got a good DR bump, the 5DM4 still has a bit more. Therefore, if you wanted to get as close as possible to the DR of a D850 with a Canon, and with the closest possible resolution, you would need a 5DM4. That was my only point with that.

The cost for 9FPS is being exaggerated by many (this is not directed at you). Nobody needs to use a $350 USD Nikon battery charger, so even if you wanted to use OEM for everything else, you are already down to $640 from $940 USD. Once reputable third party options come out (which they have already confirmed are coming), using the D810 accessory pricing as an estimator, you are looking at under $300 for everything. If your quality third party battery fails, it only does so in your $90 grip not your camera. Historically there haven't been any issues with the major third party brands and I wouldn't expect that to happen this time around either. So you are looking at either $640 all Nikon or under $300 all third party. Sure you can spend the $940 USD but it's not necessary and I don't imagine many people will be doing that. Furthermore, if the body had native 9FPS and cost $3999 I don't think too many people would be complaining but now I am speculating.

People on DPR are saying if you take out the SD card and turn off Auto ISO, you can get 90+ 14bit LC RAW's out of a D850 before it slows down. I am not able to confirm this myself but it's a nice option if it's true.


Mikehit wrote
I agree with the general tone of your post, and the D850 is a very tempting proposition. But I am not sure the difference between 7fps and 9fps is that significant (very little helps but having gone from 7fps to 10 fps to 14 fps I am not sure what 9 will let you do that 7 can't). And you need to spend another grand to get you that 9fps which is actually a nice idea because the camera effectively becomes modular. But whether the AF performs the same as the D5/D4 is another matter - as an example the
...Show more

The only problem with that FPS argument (again, not directed at you, lots of people use the same general argument) is that it applies to any two cameras and is entirely dependent on the user's needs. Why go to 3 to 4 or 6 or 7 from 5FPS if small increases are not noticeable? Why go from 12-14 or 9-10? It's all relative. No matter what, extra frames increase your chances of capturing the perfect moment, especially for BIF or sports. Where the cutoff point or point of diminishing return is for your personal use is entirely subjective. For me, the 7FPS on the D850 was immediately apparent coming from 6FPS on my D810, and 7 to 9 is even more noticeable. I have used a 1DX2 as well and 14FPS is nuts. All the same arguments were made about megapixels back when 12MP was a lot, and DR (ongoing) - but nothing changes the fact that more of each is always better, all else being equal, including FPS

See above comments about grip cost - not many people are going to be spending $940. If you do need to purchase the grip, you are still getting something no other DSLR on the market can do which is 9FPS at 46MP and it's reasonable that a premium be paid for exclusive features.

The AF is the same as the D5, including all back-end processing. This has been subjectively confirmed by users of both as well as from Nikon reps which is not surprising as Nikon went out of their way to make a big deal out of it. It's not just the physical AF modules that are similar (this is the approach Canon takes, and to an even greater extent, Nikon pre-2016), the entire AF chain from start to end is the same as the D5. If there are any differences due to secondary factors like battery voltage, they are small enough that nobody can clearly demonstrate it. Canon's best AF is one thing you will never get in a 5D or 7D Canon body unless they change how protective they are with the 1-series. Nikon took a chance on this in 2016 and I don't think it's been cannibalizing too many D5 sales because the market separation is high enough.

The 7D2 and 1DX AF systems were actually quite different. Not only did they not have the same back-end processing, but they don't even have the same AF point layout. The 7D2 had only 1 high precision dual cross type AF point, the 1DX had 5. The 1DX had 20 high precision off-center cross AF points, the 7D2 had none. On top of all this, the 1DX can link the spot meter to any AF point, the 7D2 cannot. There are other differences too, but we do not need to look very far to see they are in fact very different systems.

The 5DM4 and the 1DX2 AF systems are also not identical. First, the 1DX2 has two DIGIC 6+ processors and one DIGIC 6, so already, the overall processing power of the camera is well in favor of the 1DX2 (5DM4 uses one DIGIC 6+ and one 6). Second, I have never heard any user of both say the 5DM4 system was identical, only that the 1DX2 was better. Lastly, the 1DX2 of course has AF point linked spot metering, and the 5DM4 does not. There may be other differences as well but I don't recall off the top of my head.

None of those clear differences exist between the Nikon variants - they are fully identical as far as anyone can tell and that coincides with Nikon's own claims. If there are tiny differences due to secondary things like battery voltage, they are small enough that nobody has been able reliably identify them yet, and Nikon has vehemently said the complete systems are identical. When using old screw drive lenses, however, the D5 series bodies are faster as they use a higher torque motor to drive the lens.



Sep 15, 2017 at 04:12 PM
1       2       3              5      
6
       7       end






FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5      
6
       7       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password