Ralph Conway wrote:
So if D4/D3s are near to perfect, how it comes that 5D2 is nearly as good at much higher pixel rates.
Because pixel counts don't matter as much as many people think when it comes to high ISO noise performance so long the counts are not radically different and crossing certain tipping points.
With new sensor types there is a bit more freedom to improve.
and tachyons would be a different sort of beast anyway since they can never go slower than light speed so they wouldn't really even count in the traditional sense anyway
and it's better to not think of it as a speed limit in terms of mph, if you look at how the laws are constructed it's directly built in in a much deeper way that like it must stop at 23455454545.454545 or something
skibum5 wrote:
They look a bit waxy canon in cam jpgs, the ISO1600 has DNR waxy look like an over-cooked blu-ray disc.
But Canon samples have been poor since post 1Ds2 release.
That was some crap promo materials. Makes me not even care about it anymore. They should have put something more polished together. That video was garbage.
I've seen the 1DX at ISO 25k and it's clean. The light was good though. Regardless, this image gallery is pretty meh. Weird that the first two images are sideways.
Ralph Conway wrote:
20 years later physicians "createt" new elementar pieces, moving faster then light, to keep their own theoretical system NOT break together.
I'm afraid you're mistaken. CERN has recorded some events that look like C has been exceeded; that's far from being proven as yet.
Even tho I've booked one for purchase I'd have to say ...Yaaaawn.
Not that the quality of the images are that bad,,they just aren't "really impressive"... but I'm more so wondering if these action pics are "one of one" shots or how many were oof..?
gpchase wrote:
Even tho I've booked one for purchase I'd have to say ...Yaaaawn.
Not that the quality of the images are that bad,,they just aren't "really impressive"... but I'm more so wondering if these action pics are "one of one" shots or how many were oof..?
I ordered mine too but I did it because the 1dx suits my shooting style, period. Not interested in anything else. Grass always greener on the other side. Human nature dictates we want something that is newer and presume to be better, and that might be so but that might not be suited for my style of shooting.
I am excited that there are so many offerings out there and completion generates innovations and improvements for us all and in a lot of cases we don't need or use it.
For a $6900 camera these samples sucks, they simply aren't any better than the 1Ds3 and 5D2. if this is all they can pull off from 3 processors then it's going to be that much harder to justify the high price one has to pay for this damn thing.
mttran wrote:
Best Canon defense now is 50% off of all CAMs, i don't mind to get 1Dx for 4K
A 1Dx would sell for $3,400 then, about what it's really worth...
Actually canon should add an extra 10% off (60% total) all cams and lenses as an early bird special for the next 6 months. Would come close to making up for the last 5 years of "innovation", or more popularly understood as "enabling an old feature they had previously crippled and selling it as something new".
Canon pisses on our heads and tells us it's raining....
I really don't understand why people are surprised.
Historically, canon's series 1 samples have always been bad to very bad.
Which is surprising in itself.
So given their track record, I would be surprised if the 1Dx samples were actually good.
I almost didn't buy the 1DMIII because of the underwhelming samples canon provided at the time.
Glad I bought it.
IQ wise, best canon camera I ever owned.
fraga wrote:
I really don't understand why people are surprised.
Historically, canon's series 1 samples have always been bad to very bad.
Which is surprising in itself.
So given their track record, I would be surprised if the 1Dx samples were actually good.
I almost didn't buy the 1DMIII because of the underwhelming samples canon provided at the time.
Glad I bought it.
IQ wise, best canon camera I ever owned.
You're right of course. Canon's samples are always poor (the original 5d samples were really bad too). i think the only ones that impressed - at the time - were back in 2003/04 when the 10d was still "new".
Regardless, I remain thoroughly unimpressed by the 1Dx as it's currently advertised (features/price). it's not a camera I'll be buying or lusting after (unless they make it available with the early bird special).
Than it is time for Canon to change it! Show samples that makes sence. That helps to decide. Give a phoptographer the camera and pay him (I still have free time and I am not really expensive) to shoot, what your cameras are promised to be created for - Ken Rockwell does not - to get some samples that sell your gear. Nobody needs to see a 100 ISO shot of an (even beautiful) japanese dancer/aktress. That can be done with every D1100.
Damn you Canon. This pictures are a huge turn-off from their flagship camera. What do they do, throw engineers into the field and say "go take some pics" and then just post them?
But Nikon is not better. Concerning D800 I saw a couple of 100 Iso shots and one ISO 640.
They are more beautifull but do not tel anything about the camera. Any P & S does great shot in ISO 100 up to 800.
jamesf99 wrote:
You're right of course. Canon's samples are always poor (the original 5d samples were really bad too). i think the only ones that impressed - at the time - were back in 2003/04 when the 10d was still "new".
Regardless, I remain thoroughly unimpressed by the 1Dx as it's currently advertised (features/price). it's not a camera I'll be buying or lusting after (unless they make it available with the early bird special).
I though some of the 1Ds2 samples looked pretty good too. But yeah, mostly they make the cameras and lenses appear to be heading for disaster and then as soon as the first copies arrive in stores and people start posting suddenly the output looks 10x better.
It is odd that Canon does that.
Maybe they are afraid people will start returning bad copies non-stop if their first few snaps don't match some top quality samples Wouldn't a bigger concern be scaring people off though Then again most people seem to wait for real user samples anyway so I guess they don't fear that.
Ralph Conway wrote:
But Nikon is not better. Concerning D800 I saw a couple of 100 Iso shots and one ISO 640.
They are more beautifull but do not tel anything about the camera. Any P & S does great shot in ISO 100 up to 800.
but as you say at least they are a bit more beautiful and they don't post in cam jpgs with NR set to waxworks
edit: not total waxworks, but something a bit plasticky from the low and mid ISO shots, not like a nice RAW processed image looks and the high ISO model had some true signs of wax works forming
suspicious.
Wouldn't a bigger concern be scaring people off though