jj_glos wrote:
Interesting you label Canon as self righteous and pompous, as that is more how I feel towards Nikon. Their customer service in the UK at least isn't well regarded and I didn't like how they dealt with the D800 and D600 issues. Canon may have dropped the ball with the 5D3 light leak but they quickly acknowledged it and produced a fix. They have been great in my dealings with them so far.
im discussing sensors , high resolution cameras, not customer service
AGeoJO wrote:
I thought the horse has been long dead by now.......
+1000, I thought so too Joshua...
I am a Nikon shooter but I am still amazed by some people's ability to still argue that X is "absolutely" better than Y. If you can't take amazing pictures with a 5DMKIII or a DX1 then I am sorry to say that it's no the camera's fault. Those cameras, as well as many other Canon ones, are more than enough for any photographer who shoots & prints his/her work. Proof: Award winning photographers did that with these bodies and even with less capable bodies, a glance at the alternative forum like the RX100 or OM image threads would give you a better idea. Another glance at the landscape/sports/wedding forums will also give you a better idea.
I am pretty positive if Canon introduces a 56MP sensor then many will start whining about the ridiculously large files that would require a hardware upgrade, just like some are doing that on the Nikon side right now. Again, much talk, less shooting.
baloney, show me where you are comparing different sensors, Sony, Toshiba, Canon etc etc
I've seen examples from fellow sports photographers shooting a D4 and a D800 as I was curious as to what they were getting beyond 10K ISO and I will take my 1DX output any day over them.
I am a Nikon shooter but I am still amazed by some people's ability to still argue that X is "absolutely" better than Y. If you can't take amazing pictures with a 5DMKIII or a DX1 then I am sorry to say that it's no the camera's fault. Those cameras, as well as many other Canon ones, are more than enough for any photographer who shoots & prints his/her work. Proof: Award winning photographers did that with these bodies and even with less capable bodies, a glance at the alternative forum like the RX100 or OM image threads would give you a better idea. Another glance at the landscape/sports/wedding forums will also give you a better idea.
I am pretty positive if Canon introduces a 56MP sensor then many will start whining about the ridiculously large files that would require a hardware upgrade, just like some are doing that on the Nikon side right now. Again, much talk, less shooting.
ggreene wrote:
Exactly, the whole scoring model is an arbitrary sham. Fortunately, you can at least see the actual measurements and get the truth. If I'm shooting in a cave like venue I know which sensor I want.
Worth repeating again: the scoring model is an arbitrary sham. The combined and calculated numbers are misleading.
As Phil writes:
"I think the overall DxO results are helpful. The graphs give you a good idea of what you can expect from a sensor. However I question whether photographers should be using their combined and calculated numbers to mean anything at all. They simply won’t match real world shooting experience." [emphasis added]
I've seen examples from fellow sports photographers shooting a D4 and a D800 as I was curious as to what they were getting beyond 10K ISO and I will take my 1DX output any day over them.
good for you. show me one comparison with the same exposure time/f-stop where the output from 1dx exceeds over d4
Mikael Risedal wrote:
I have 11 L lenses , paid since years back waiting for a Canon body with high resolution and great DR and no banding , Im not interested in a 18Mp sport camera , where are you Canon?
Canon is busy making cameras for photographers like Salgado, Leibovitz, Pellegrin, Gorman, Burnett and others. They seem to do ok with current and past Canon cameras.
lame arguments, yours self confidence seems not be at the top nowadays when Canon is far behind regarding sensors and resolution, DR, color resolution etc etc
so - please show me one comparison where 1dx exceeds over D4 IQ wise
I have both system
I don't recall Leibowitz using 35mm-format cameras...
FWIW, D800 vs 5d3...the 5d3, I have decided, has crappy, CRAPPY tracking in low light with the 35L and 50L, not sure about 24L or 85L yet. I mean BAD, bad bad tracking (worse with 35L). Also 50L takes forever to establish a one-shot lock when light drops to medium levels, only with 5d3. It does NOT have the same delays with the 5d2, and the 5d2 just tracks more accurately with both lenses.
D800 just locks faster (just like the 5d2 does) than the 5d3 in medium and low light, but the lenses Nikon makes...the 35 f/1.4g just doesn't focus nearly as fast as the 35L. However, I have seen how fast a lens can focus on the D800 (60 f/2.8g focuses and locks really fast and very reliably), so I know it's lens-specific and not camera-specific. 5d3, in contrast, takes longer to establish a lock with lenses that just lock faster with other Canon cameras. In the Canon case, it's camera-specific.
D800 has excellent noise handling from ISO100-1600. Past that, the D800 seems to switch gears to "chug" and the 5d3 and D800 are similar after resizing. 5d3 probably holds the dynamic range better past ISO1600 as long as you nail the exposure.
I believe that faster focus speed often = increased accuracy for the main reason of subject movement with one-shot/af-s.
I've tried multiple settings for 5d3 AF tracking and have still experienced the same issue of focus accuracy. I have missed a number of shots (including during last night's wedding when I gave the 5d3 another chance) during wedding receptions that - once again - forced me to bench the 5d3 for the remainder of the reception so I could have two cameras that could track dancing subjects well.
I have made similar comments about 5d3 focus issues before, but as I try it again my findings become more specific.
zlatko wrote:
Canon is busy making cameras for photographers like Salgado, Leibovitz, Pellegrin, Gorman, Burnett and others. They seem to do ok with current and past Canon cameras.
Mikael Risedal wrote:
I have 11 L lenses , paid since years back waiting for a Canon body with high resolution and great DR and no banding , Im not interested in a 18Mp sport camera , where are you Canon?
zlatko wrote:
Canon is busy making cameras for photographers like Salgado, Leibovitz, Pellegrin, Gorman, Burnett and others. They seem to do ok with current and past Canon cameras.
well some seems impressed that Leibovitz use a Canon, Im still waiting for a high resolution camera from Canon with low read out noise, great DR at base iso despite what he , she or whatever are using
I'm not waiting at all. I'm enjoying using my 1DX and my 2.8 zooms. I really don't have a big need for low ISO DR and I would prefer that Canon continue to target high ISO IQ.
My 1DX does at least in the 10K+ ISO comparisons I made with the D4 and D800 files that I saw. My own eyes are a much better indicator then charts and graphs. YMMV
