skibum5 wrote:
I do notice quite a few sports shooters horrendously blow out bright parts of uniforms to get better exposures on faces at times. With superb DR they might learn and be able to not overexpose so much.


Or just properly expose with what they have and learn a little LR. Seriously, you don't need an Exmor sensor to recover faces in a sports photo. If you simply use the selective tool you can avoid blowing out all the other bright parts of the photo.

ggreene wrote:
skibum5 wrote:
I do notice quite a few sports shooters horrendously blow out bright parts of uniforms to get better exposures on faces at times. With superb DR they might learn and be able to not overexpose so much.


Or just properly expose with what they have and learn a little LR. Seriously, you don't need an Exmor sensor to recover faces in a sports photo. If you simply use the selective tool you can avoid blowing out all the other bright parts of the photo.

Mostly, but with really extreme backlighting and really bright uniforms sometimes faces can get a trace dodgy looking though if they are lifted back up, usually it is a least passable though and certainly many times no issue at all.

Most likely they don't have the luxury of any PP at all bar cropping the image and sending the jpg straight in. Far more important to have a properly exposed face than worry about a blow out on the uniform...

GoGoGoGo wrote:
What a thread!

I am hoping for ISO 25, a true 50 ISO will do.

A new sensor that does not do high iso but that does high DR.

A 5 or 7 frame HDR mode that yields a final raw image.

Weather sealing, and a new sturdy body.

Give me all of this and I'll be happy with a new 46MP sensor.

+1000000, Move over AF & Hi-ISO lover...your honeymoon is over. It is now the time for DR Low-ISO lover to move in

retrofocus wrote:
RobertLynn wrote:
Pixel Perfect wrote:
retrofocus wrote:

Why do people here always say such a camera must be more than $3K?! Hello, please look at Nikon what they are pricing the D800 for! Is there any justification otherhan putting his technology in a 1D body to ask for a higher price tag than what the competition already does?

You do know we are talking about a Canon camera don't you. Canon thinks a 5D III is worth $500 more than a D800, so you seriously think they suddenly think yeah a 46MP camera that shoots 6fps with dual digic V+, with all the other goodies from the 5D III won't demand a rather large price premium. It'll be $1K dearer at least.

Canon couldn't careless what Nikon's pricing is IMO.

I think the 5d3 is worth $500 more than a d800.

Do you want to sell your 5D III and try to keep prices up....? I think by far the 5D III is much less worth than the D800 given that people who like the 5D III use the camera for a different kind of photography compared to most of the D800 users.

Interesting read over in the Nikon forum. Apparently it is pretty hard to sell a used D800 these days, prices aren't staying very high on that end either.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1166385

ggreene wrote:
skibum5 wrote:
I do notice quite a few sports shooters horrendously blow out bright parts of uniforms to get better exposures on faces at times. With superb DR they might learn and be able to not overexpose so much.


Or just properly expose with what they have and learn a little LR. Seriously, you don't need an Exmor sensor to recover faces in a sports photo. If you simply use the selective tool you can avoid blowing out all the other bright parts of the photo.

Precisely. It is very easy to blow out this stuff if you simply let the AE system make the decisions. In reality the blown out faces and uniforms are not because someone is trying to compensate for the lack of an Exmoor sensor! Funny! They just didn't realize that when you have, say, white uniforms under bright lights than you need to move the exposure compensation dial just a bit!

Dan

gdanmitchell wrote:
ggreene wrote:
skibum5 wrote:
I do notice quite a few sports shooters horrendously blow out bright parts of uniforms to get better exposures on faces at times. With superb DR they might learn and be able to not overexpose so much.


Or just properly expose with what they have and learn a little LR. Seriously, you don't need an Exmor sensor to recover faces in a sports photo. If you simply use the selective tool you can avoid blowing out all the other bright parts of the photo.

Precisely. It is very easy to blow out this stuff if you simply let the AE system make the decisions. In reality the blown out faces and uniforms are not because someone is trying to compensate for the lack of an Exmoor sensor! Funny! They just didn't realize that when you have, say, white uniforms under bright lights than you need to move the exposure compensation dial just a bit!

Dan

They are not blowing out the faces. Just the brighter parts of uniforms at times because they are trying to not get the faces too dark.

A lot of it is simply that some are still shooting jpg where you can't really do much to raise the faces back up if they are underexposed so they just blow out the uniforms. Under extreme backlighting and especially if helmets are also involved, even shooting RAW, sometimes it can make keeping the brights in check while keeping the faces very clean not quite possible without more DR although it is generally more a of a landscape issue.

Most of the guys on the sidelines actually do, believe it or not, know about M mode and Av + EC. Shocking.

ggreene wrote:
skibum5 wrote:
I do notice quite a few sports shooters horrendously blow out bright parts of uniforms to get better exposures on faces at times. With superb DR they might learn and be able to not overexpose so much.


Or just properly expose with what they have and learn a little LR. Seriously, you don't need an Exmor sensor to recover faces in a sports photo. If you simply use the selective tool you can avoid blowing out all the other bright parts of the photo.

I shoot a lot of sports, and the deadlines don't allow us to bring the photos into LR and play with them...until after the deadline.

gdanmitchell wrote:
ggreene wrote:
skibum5 wrote:
I do notice quite a few sports shooters horrendously blow out bright parts of uniforms to get better exposures on faces at times. With superb DR they might learn and be able to not overexpose so much.


Or just properly expose with what they have and learn a little LR. Seriously, you don't need an Exmor sensor to recover faces in a sports photo. If you simply use the selective tool you can avoid blowing out all the other bright parts of the photo.

Precisely. It is very easy to blow out this stuff if you simply let the AE system make the decisions. In reality the blown out faces and uniforms are not because someone is trying to compensate for the lack of an Exmoor sensor! Funny! They just didn't realize that when you have, say, white uniforms under bright lights than you need to move the exposure compensation dial just a bit!

Dan

I shoot in manual most of the time, and if there is a time when I don't, it's usually because I'm in Tv mode with A ISO. I don't have the luxury of being able to bring the photos into LR before I am to turn them in for printing. I can after I send any sports photos to media (in attempts to sell them myself), but when I have a blown highlight, it's because that was the required exposure to get a face lit up enough.

RobertLynn wrote:
I shoot a lot of sports, and the deadlines don't allow us to bring the photos into LR and play with them...until after the deadline.

How is a Sony Exmor sensor going to help you then? All the examples I have seen are recovering details in post.

ggreene wrote:
RobertLynn wrote:
I shoot a lot of sports, and the deadlines don't allow us to bring the photos into LR and play with them...until after the deadline.

How is a Sony Exmor sensor going to help you then? All the examples I have seen are recovering details in post.


Oh My......before you criticize a product you should know something about it. The Exmor sensor will give you close to two stops better DR right out of the camera. The reason you can push these files so much is because of how clean they are....or lack of banding you might say......

Peter Le wrote:
ggreene wrote:
RobertLynn wrote:
I shoot a lot of sports, and the deadlines don't allow us to bring the photos into LR and play with them...until after the deadline.

How is a Sony Exmor sensor going to help you then? All the examples I have seen are recovering details in post.


Oh My......before you criticize a product you should know something about it. The Exmor sensor will give you close to two stops better DR right out of the camera. The reason you can push these files so much is because of how clean they are....or lack of banding you might say......

+1, healthy pixels...if used correctly, IQ should be like shapshots from your eyes that none of canon cam can do this

Peter Le wrote:
Oh My......before you criticize a product you should know something about it. The Exmor sensor will give you close to two stops better DR right out of the camera. The reason you can push these files so much is because of how clean they are....or lack of banding you might say......

I was not really criticizing it as I would like more DR as much as anyone. It's just that almost all the examples I see are people showing huge recovery from very dark areas in post. So the Exmor is capable of SOOC detailed faces in extreme backlit situations with no post?

ggreene wrote:
RobertLynn wrote:
I shoot a lot of sports, and the deadlines don't allow us to bring the photos into LR and play with them...until after the deadline.

How is a Sony Exmor sensor going to help you then? All the examples I have seen are recovering details in post.


It wont. All DSLRs can handle the 7-9 EVs of DR rendered in JPEGs.

chez wrote:
Scratched LP stuck playing the same line over and over.

The same thing can be said about folks that glorify the Exmor sensor.... Not that the sensor was not impressive but somehow I have been hearing all those arguments ad nauseam .

ggreene wrote:
Peter Le wrote:
Oh My......before you criticize a product you should know something about it. The Exmor sensor will give you close to two stops better DR right out of the camera. The reason you can push these files so much is because of how clean they are....or lack of banding you might say......

I was not really criticizing it as I would like more DR as much as anyone. It's just that almost all the examples I see are people showing huge recovery from very dark areas in post. So the Exmor is capable of SOOC detailed faces in extreme backlit situations with no post?

No... it is not the all great end all sensor...it is just better then what we are used to.....does it cover all lighting conditions perfectly........of course not. It just seems to cover more of them....and seems to make the others easier do deal with. For those of us that shoot at ISO100 most of the time.....this sensor excels at low ISO's. What I and many others wish for is a Canon version of this.....with Canons better .....ergonomics, menues, lens, customer service, on and on.

AGeoJO wrote:
chez wrote:
Scratched LP stuck playing the same line over and over.

The same thing can be said about folks that glorify the Exmor sensor.... Not that the sensor was not impressive but somehow I have been hearing all those arguments ad nauseam .

Yes, but they aren't arguments...they are truths. All I hear from a few people here is that we are all whiners if we want Canon to come out with technology that matches what is available in other cameras. From my view, there is nothing wrong with wanting something that is available in other cameras. It's not like wishing for something that has not yet been developed.

If it is for studio, an electronic shutter is more important and useful than high MP sensor.

It's one thing to discuss sensor technology, especially if it is backed up with technological points. It's a good thing.

It is entirely another thing to go on ad nauseum claiming Canon doesn't know how to make good cameras, muttering vague threats about switching, mumbling about crippling / delaying, claiming the writer knows more about how Canon should run their business than Canon, endlessly forecasting Canon's demise, and breathlessly trumpeting every little price tick as proof that Canon of the writer's genius.

That's the whining.

Canon knows the whiners want a better sensor. Canon also knows that the mostly silent photographers too would like a better sensor while they are out making their photos. Canon is obviously constrained by patents and similar issues, otherwise they would just copy the technology. If anyone thinks that Canon is not actively working on developing better sensors now (and has been for some time), let them speak up so that we can laugh at them.

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." -- Arthur C. Clarke. We have arrived at this point in the minds of many on this forum because they post incessantly as if all Canon has to do is wave a magic wand to deliver better sensors. They conclude that either Canon is grossly incompetent or evilly sabotaging their own business.

Everyone would like a better sensor and everyone knows everyone would like a better sensor.

someone in this thread wrote: one it will by Canon design have some gosh awful non-sense compromises, and two it will be priced out of the reach of most everyone.

someone in this thread wrote: More people will go for a D800(E) in this kind of scenario. As many, I only hope Canon is not delaying this further to come up with a high MP studio/landscape camera for <= $3K.

someone in this thread wrote: Nothing in canon camp really excites me last 7 years, except the 50mm f1.0 i got couple month ago.

someone in this thread wrote: If they don't wake up.....yes. If it really takes Canon more than half a year now to come up with such kind of camera, I only hope that other manufacturers like Sony also see this as a chance and come up with great new DSLR technology. If then Canon still asks for unreasonable prices for such kind of camera, they will get the bill. I hope they learned their lesson from the original overpricing of the 5D III and don't repeat this mistake again.

... and this completely illogical statement:

someone in this thread wrote: I think by far the 5D III is much less worth than the D800 given that people who like the 5D III use the camera for a different kind of photography compared to most of the D800 users

that they think that simply because it is used for different purposes it is worth less. And then after starting a discussion on how bad the 5D III is, this:

someone in this thread wrote:Let's not go again into the discussion how good/bad the 5D III is, it won't lead anywhere.

That's just this thread. There are many other such threads.

Thank you, Monito. This is the cause why I stopped following this thread.