howard wrote:
I do not understand this TC analogy at all.
Case 1: 18 Mpx at full-frame with (say) 400 mm lens. Costs 1 stop of light and puts extra elements in the optical path.
Case 2: 18 Mpx at 1.6 crop with (say) same 400 mm lens. No cost in light, no interference with the optical path, and a slight increase in effective focal length.
Sensel (pixel) image quality will be the deciding factor, excluding consideration of user interface, AF performance, and durability issues.
The SL1 weighs 407 grams vs 225 for the 1.4x III, so the weight penalty is 14 - 8 ounces = 6 oz.
Monito wrote:
Case 1: 18 Mpx at full-frame with (say) 400 mm lens. Costs 1 stop of light and puts extra elements in the optical path.
Case 2: 18 Mpx at 1.6 crop with (say) same 400 mm lens. No cost in light, no interference with the optical path, and a slight increase in effective focal length.
Sensel (pixel) image quality will be the deciding factor, excluding consideration of user interface, AF performance, and durability issues.
The SL1 weighs 407 grams vs 225 for the 1.4x III, so the weight penalty is 14 - 8 ounces = 6 oz.
But which Canon FF camera has 18mp? And what if you already have the 7D or 60D, how does this "TC" work then?
On B&H is just talks about Hybrid CMOS II and that is just the contrast based AF system on it (which is supposedly still slower than competition by a long shot, even as hybrid?) and nothing to do with BSI or better DR/SNR. So there doesn't really seem to be evidence for a new sensor for the DSLRs. Not that I was expecting one before late 2013 anyway. It didn't seem to make sense they'd have them ready yet, at this point seeing what was put in 5D3/1DX and other info.
RobDickinson wrote:
You also effectively loose a stop with a crop body anyway
Nope. No light loss. [Assuming you mean "lose" a stop.]
You gain depth of field with smaller sensors, but there is no light loss. In other words, you can make the same telephoto picture (or so similar that there is no effective difference for almost all photos) at a stop faster shutter speed than you would need to use on a full-frame plus tele-converter.
I was refering to the SX270 and SX280 HS...both sport the Digic 6 and BSI-CMOS sensor...I just highlighted the new bling from all four cameras released not individual ones geeeeeeez loosen up those shorts a bit
howard wrote:
Neither. With a crop sensor you just lose the outer areas of the image (~60% in the case of APS-C compared with FF).
(Please don't show me a link to "equivalence", I am familiar with that flawed concept).
I'd assume the loss of a stop was in reference to high ISO being better in a FF sensor, meaning a FF with 1.4x would effectively give you the same IQ as a crop with no extender. Just guessing at the original meaning though.
M Lucca wrote:
Why go full throttle when the nearest competition is committing self-mutilation by way of terrible QC and poor customer service.
I agree about the poor quality and customer service for some Canon products, but that is everywhere. There is very little competition in many product types, but everything seems to be mediocre and going nowhere.
EB-1 wrote:
I agree about the poor quality and customer service for some Canon products, but that is everywhere. There is very little competition in many product types, but everything seems to be mediocre and going nowhere.
EBH
I think his comment was meant to be a sarcastic reference to Nikon's reported poor QC, but which I think is overblown.
Sven Jeppesen wrote:
You can't compare the AF like that between so different cameras. It's not like a cross-type AF point is the same thing in all bodies. The 6D cross-type AF also have a vertical AF line with f/2,8 sensitivity. So it has both cross and a extra line.
Well, this is exactly how it works in xxxD world since 400D. They also have high precision ("f/2.8 sensitivity") in the center point.
snapsy wrote:
I was going to write the exact same thing. Last year some friends asked me to shoot some baby photos. I took a 5DM3, D800, and a OM-D. I was expecting to use the situation to compare the AF performance of the 5DM3/D800 but after 10 shots with each I realized neither body could AF fast enough for this not-so-fast moving baby. Lighting was f/1.4 1/160 ISO 3200 mixed tungsten and both DSLRs took 3-4 seconds to lock every time. I took out the OM-D with the Pany 25mm f/1.4 and it locked focus within 1 second every shot. And even though it was close-quarter shooting I could still get adequate DOF on the OM-D @ f/1.4 whereas I'd have to stop down to f/2.8 to get the same DOF on the FF bodies, meaning in this situation the FF sensors provided zero advantage over the OM-D in terms of noise....Show more →
My experience too. Face detection + CDAF = winner for OM-D.
Having said that, I have to admit I love the extra shallow DOF on the 5D3/6D.
Those comparing to m43 are missing a huge point - Canon doesnt have crap for small form factor compared to m43. Compare the SL1 and Tamron 60mm/2 to an OMD and 45/1.8...no freaking comparison, and m43 wins the total system bulk/weight by a mile.
Not saying SL1 is pointless, but youre buying a tiny body with a real immature lens selection to backup the entire concept of the camera!
It is not just bodies alone. Actually, physically hold an Olympus 48/1.8. Its freaking tiny, sharp wide open.
Heres hoping Canon extends their pancake lineup, as I really enjoy their 40mm on my 5d3 but IMO the lens is completely pointless on any crop over 1.3.
Edit - please dont take my "freakins" as antogonistic, more like italics but I am on an Ipad so it is hard to format .
It is well established that nikon (sony) sensors are better for DR & resolution. But just because its a plateau doesnt mean its a bad place to be, some of the most wonderful places in the world are a plateau and some peaks are downright scary ;-)
Canon has not improved sensor significantly since T2i/60D/7D for 1.6x cameras, but just like your daughter, I am quite happy with my t2i backup (which will be primary for the next couple of weeks given that the big brother 5DIII is @ canon for final warranty cleaning & checkup). It produces might fine photos.
Now if you see a significant difference in sensor performance under controlled tests between t2i & 7D and are positive that its not due to sensor variations, I am all ears.
darknite wrote:
Hey Thedutt What plateau are you talking about? Thats a serious question, not sarcasm BTW. I'm still stuck in the 1DII and XTI world for a little while, but look forward to the release of the 7DII
Is it the 18MP sensor? The MP count alone?
My son's 7D seems to produce better images than my daughter's T2i, both have 18 MP
cputeq wrote:
Those comparing to m43 are missing a huge point - Canon doesnt have crap for small form factor compared to m43...
It is not just bodies alone.
Thom Hogan hints at the same thing. He is very impressed with the size and weight of the SL1, but Canon/Nikon really need to improve on their selection of EF-S/DX prime lenses. At least Nikon has a DX 35 mm f/1.8 lens.
