rebel300 wrote:
You'll go for the upgraded camera......Are you saying you are the one and only judge of quality? The rest of us don't have a clue?
The Reb
I just sold my 300 2.8 IS and 85mm 1.2.... so the lens upgrade is guranteed at this point. My bank account will be dry for a while so a second body is out of the picture for quite a while. :-P
All I said was that after using the 1D for a year, the 1:1 image quality of the 10D was not what I'm used to, and a bit of a let down. This isn't to say that the 10D is a bad camera. It's a great camera, but I just expected more. I WISH the 10D was a mini-1D...... It would make a sweet backup...... but I just haven't found that to be the case.
I was watching the media chaos coverage of the Recall madness, and I am watching all the press photographers and what cameras they are using, more than half are using 1D cameras almost half the others are using 10Ds, whats up with that? To tell you the truth, my buisness if Wedding photography and I use the 10D, when I have to shoot continuosly, I have never run into frames per second or buffer limitations. Enjoy the camera.
Ben Horne wrote:
However, every time I have been tempted, I download some sample images on the net (dpreview.com), and I quickly change my mind. The camera just leaves a lot of fine detail unresolved.... detail that can't be brought back with sharpening. Maybe it's just the samples at dpreview that are that way, but I have yet to see any awesome looking 10D shots at 1:1. Maybe I'm spoiled by the sharp out-of camera images from
I think it is fairly inevitable that a 10D will have weaker image quality at 100% out of the camera then a 1D, considering the considerably smaller pixels (1.6 crop vrs 1.3 crop plus more pixels to boot). It also seems to have a more agressive (i.e. cheaper) AA filter which requires more sharpening to get comparable results.
But we don't actually view our pictures at 100% at 100 dpi other then for review/editing purposes. I am not convinced you will see much, if any difference, in print or web presentation. In fact, I think certain situations will favour the 10D, but only those with a lot of texture.
To be complete honest, I have gone back to 6x7 (Mamiya 7II) for some landscape. Now some of this is I find the more leisurely pace of landscape (or at least mine) suit the rituals of using MF nicely; it is part of the experience. Obviously I am a large format user waiting to happen Actually looking into 4x5 using a roll film back...I digress. It is also due to significantly better wide angle performance and much more friendliness to cropping. Anyway, I don't think the 10D is the be-all end-all (I actually still use my 1V for certain things due to the much better AF and ruggedness), but I think you short it on image quality, ignoring the other issues. You need to look at prints, preferably when you don't know which camera shot what
And dpreview is not always the best place to pick up samples...(though I don't know where you would for full res images)
...Are you saying you are the one and only judge of quality? The rest of us don't have a clue?
Actually looking into 4x5 using a roll film back...I digress. It is also due to significantly better wide angle performance and much more friendliness to cropping. Anyway, I don't think the 10D is the be-all end-all (I actually still use my 1V for certain things due to the much better AF and ruggedness), but I think you short it on image quality, ignoring the other issues. You need to look at prints, preferably when you don't know which camera shot what