artd wrote:
gabimaster wrote:
artd ,on that scenario, I agree with you that the extra DR from D800's sensor it will be a huge benefit, but onestly, how often you have in a photo a very dark subject in a very bright landscape to push the shadows up in LR or other Raw converters so much ?
(4-5 stops ).

It's not just about having a dark subject against a bright background. It's about having blocked up shadows in the composition. When I'm exposing to keep the highlights from blowing, that happens quite a bit. Sometimes it's not a big deal and sometimes it is. How often? Often enough.




In the discussions about DR, there seems to be a common misconseption that the D800 only has an advantage if you need to push the shadows more than 4 stops.

Even if Canon files can be pushed up to 4 stops in most cases before a total breakdown, the quality of EXMOR files in the same situation is much cleaner and with much better color fidelity and even detail. If you are used to only Canon files, you don't know what you are missing.

The Canon files do not start showing banding at a certain level that is predictive. When you get it, is dependent on the scene, and with the 5DII we never got to any conclusion about what exactly provoked it.

jj_glos wrote:
I keep seeing the 97% VF being listed as a big issue when shooting landscapes, as you may get something in the frame that you do not wish. Which is a fair point, however isn't LiveView the preferred method for landscapers these days?

Ah dunno, but I mainly shoot landscape and love making prints and 97% is just fine unless you only view images on your computer screen. Why? Standard print sizes--11x14, 16x20, etc.--are cropped. Even when I print a "full frame" size like 12x18 or 13x19 the mat covers way more than 3%. The fact is I've learned to compose a little loose so I don't lose important details at print levels.

alundeb wrote:
artd wrote:
gabimaster wrote:
artd ,on that scenario, I agree with you that the extra DR from D800's sensor it will be a huge benefit, but onestly, how often you have in a photo a very dark subject in a very bright landscape to push the shadows up in LR or other Raw converters so much ?
(4-5 stops ).

It's not just about having a dark subject against a bright background. It's about having blocked up shadows in the composition. When I'm exposing to keep the highlights from blowing, that happens quite a bit. Sometimes it's not a big deal and sometimes it is. How often? Often enough.




In the discussions about DR, there seems to be a common misconseption that the D800 only has an advantage if you need to push the shadows more than 4 stops.

Even if Canon files can be pushed up to 4 stops in most cases before a total breakdown, the quality of EXMOR files in the same situation is much cleaner and with much better color fidelity and even detail. If you are used to only Canon files, you don't know what you are missing.

The Canon files do not start showing banding at a certain level that is predictive. When you get it, is dependent on the scene, and with the 5DII we never got to any conclusion about what exactly provoked it.


+1, that what i see from D600 and D800 files when playing their tone curves compared to my 5d2 & 1ds2

Gochugogi wrote:
jj_glos wrote:
I keep seeing the 97% VF being listed as a big issue when shooting landscapes, as you may get something in the frame that you do not wish. Which is a fair point, however isn't LiveView the preferred method for landscapers these days?

Ah dunno, but I mainly shoot landscape and love making prints and 97% is just fine unless you only view images on your computer screen. Why? Standard print sizes--11x14, 16x20, etc.--are cropped. Even when I print a "full frame" size like 12x18 or 13x19 the mat covers way more than 3%. The fact is I've learned to compose a little loose so I don't lose important details at print levels.

+1

100% VF is an appreciated feature. But nothing I ever really needed for shooting people.
I guess I would cry when it would be a VF coveradge of 90%. But 97%? Nothing one would not get familar with after the first 100 shots, imo. Even if one shoots static from tripod it does not look like the problem to me, that it might has been in film times, where every 10th millimeter counted and lost film areas resulted in worse quality. If there is realy something horrible in the not displayed pixels, I would cut it away. Nobody will ever realise the quality loss in a 3% smaller image.

Ralph

Played with the D600 yesterday. Black focus points, small and flimsy. I had hoped for more.

Psychic1, when you will spend couple of hours with the new 6D, I bet you suddenly will love D600.

I would not be sure about that. For me the 6D VF with its 11AF points in the old fashioned way felt much more comfortable to me than 1D Xs, 5D IIIs or D800s. As far as I remember D600s VF is managed the same way, isnt it?

Ralph

artd wrote:
“I already can shoot my TS-Es on my current NEX with a crop sensor…”

Is the strength of the NEX mount sufficient for the TS-E’s weight?
Which adapter are you using? Is there one reasonably priced? I find adapter prices surreal.

gabimaster wrote:
Psychic1, when you will spend couple of hours with the new 6D, I bet you suddenly will love D600.

I do not see a 6D in my future

I see one in mine.

Ralph Conway wrote:
I see one in mine.
Here also Ralph, I'll wait for your full hands-on review and images.
I've seen your work up on your website, quite impressive!
I've never been a portrait guy and really admire that gift/talent, your's shines on those pages!

6D, 6D, 6D or maybe a 5D2 or a 5D3...if my next coding job pays well

Well, if the 6D doesn't appeal to you its your last chance to get a new 5D2 for $1,799:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1153632

5D II is still a fantastic camera. Passed first time by a couple of the new stuff introduced/announced this year. All of them are (some much) more expensive.
Only D600 can and 6D will hold (nearly) with this price. I would purchase one if I would not already own it. But I do and I prefere to wait for another two month to get the 6D. Its about 300$ more but the better choice (for me), if the specs keep what is promised. The only step back is 100K shutter cycles instead of 150K, imo

Psychic1 wrote:
gabimaster wrote:
Psychic1, when you will spend couple of hours with the new 6D, I bet you suddenly will love D600.

I do not see a 6D in my future


I'd rather a pair of 3D's than a 6D any day

6D is announced. So it will come. Somewhen
3D is still a rumor started half a decade (?) ago. Maybe I lost some of my imagination capacitie.
But 3D does not feel like ... anything ... yet.
Or did you mention D3s?

StillFingerz wrote:
Ralph Conway wrote:
I see one in mine.
Here also Ralph, I'll wait for your full hands-on review and images.
I've seen your work up on your website, quite impressive!


We should call the author of those pictures Meister Ralph.

Thankx for so much honor. In the future those kind of pictures will be mentioned to be done the "con-WAY"

And your duck pic style might be called "petkalic"

Well, with the 5D2 going out for £1500 I might be able to pick up a new 6D for £1200 when the 6D2 comes out. Now that would be a "wow" moment!

Any knews about the timeframe for the new 6D II?