"Annie Leibovitz has used many camera during her long career, including the Hasselblad 6x6 medium format and the Mamiya RZ-67. Although both cameras use the same size 120/220 roll film, the Hasselblad produces square 6x6cm images on film, while the Mamiya RZ-67 produces 6x7cm rectangular images. To answer your question Annie currently shoots only digitally. On commercial jobs she brings along with her three different cameras and two of each. Usually she arrives with a Nikon D3, a Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III or a Canon 5D Mark II, as well as a Hasselblad H2D with a 20+ back. In her personal life she chooses to shoot with either a Leica D-Lux3 or a Canon G10."
She has apparently also used a Leica digital camera "for real":
I saw a show of hers recently that included many images done with digital camera. For the record - and feel free to not care! - while I like some of her work a great deal, I was not very impressed with the work I saw in that particular show. It might have been the context of the show's subject.
Also, I'm not making any commentary about whether or not photographers should care about what gear other photographers use, so just regard this as more information about a question that was raised earlier in this thread.
ggreene wrote:
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
show me the files and then we can discuss what we are looking at
"Annie Leibovitz has used many camera during her long career, including the Hasselblad 6x6 medium format and the Mamiya RZ-67. Although both cameras use the same size 120/220 roll film, the Hasselblad produces square 6x6cm images on film, while the Mamiya RZ-67 produces 6x7cm rectangular images. To answer your question Annie currently shoots only digitally. On commercial jobs she brings along with her three different cameras and two of each. Usually she arrives with a Nikon D3, a Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III or a Canon 5D Mark II, as well as a Hasselblad H2D with a 20+ back. In her personal life she chooses to shoot with either a Leica D-Lux3 or a Canon G10."
She has apparently also used a Leica digital camera:
I saw a show of hers recently that included many images done with digital camera. For the record - and feel free to not care! - while I like some of her work a great deal, I was not very impressed with the work I saw in that particular show. It might have been the context of the show's subject.
Also, I'm not making any commentary about whether or not photographers should care about what gear other photographers use, so just regard this as more information about a question that was raised earlier in this thread.
Mikael Risedal wrote:
She sounds like me and others who are using many different cameras in the daily work and use them as a tool, and not as a pillow.
Mikael Risedal wrote:
She sounds like me and others who are using many different cameras in the daily work and use them as a tool, and not as a pillow.
That's at least better than using them like a tool.
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?
Ok, I understand better all your messages now. But don't you know that you're not alone ? And maybe Canon doesn't care about your whining frustrations. But be happy, Sony has listened to you: you could keep all your L lenses and have that high resolution with giant DR that miss you.
Fortunately we're not on a disease forum. Pfff, O tempora, o mores.
ggreene wrote:
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.
Are they real photos, with shadows, highlights and so small details for pixel-peeping aficionados ? How can you succeeded in shooting that with a 1Dx ?! :')
Well, more seriously, did you make any comparison between your 2.8 zooms and primes with the 1Dx ? I enjoy my 24/L and 35/L with my 1Dx, but my back is less enthusiast with long walks !
Do we really care? Do we really care that Mr. Risedal has 11 Canon lenses but is still waiting for a Canon body that's good enough for him to use?
Salgado has produced a rather extraordinary exhibit and book partly using Canon (Canon replaced his medium format film camera). There's Patrick Demarchelier using Canon to photograph Beyonce for Vogue. There's Mario Sorrenti using Canon to photograph the 2012 Pirelli Calendar. There's Pete Souza using Canon for all his photography for the White House. There's Peter Read Miler using Canon for Sports Illustrated. Etc. I find it at least relevant that these distinguished photographers do their work with Canon. It suggests that Canon is ... um ... usable ... and has been for some time.
form wrote:
I don't recall Leibowitz using 35mm-format cameras...
There are videos on YouTube of Annie Leibovitz using Canon (& sometimes with other brands & formats) to photograph:
Official Portraits of Queen Elizabeth II
Dream Portraits for Disney
Lady Gaga for Vanity Fair
Keith Richards for Luis Vuitton
Sean Connery for Luis Vuitton
Bono for Luis Vuitton
Meryl Streep for Vogue
Marion Cotillard for Dior
Rihanna for Vogue
Tim Tebow for Vogue
etc.
... so obviously she's not still waiting for Canon to produce an adequate DSLR.
zlatko wrote:
Do we really care? Do we really care that Mr. Risedal has 11 Canon lenses but is still waiting for a Canon body that's good enough for him to use?
Salgado has produced a rather extraordinary exhibit and book partly using Canon (Canon replaced his medium format film camera). There's Patrick Demarchelier using Canon to photograph Beyonce for Vogue. There's Mario Sorrenti using Canon to photograph the 2012 Pirelli Calendar. There's Pete Souza using Canon for all his photography for the White House. There's Peter Read Miler using Canon for Sports Illustrated. Etc. I find it at least relevant that these distinguished photographers do their work with Canon. It suggests that Canon is ... um ... usable ... and has been for some time.
There are videos on YouTube of Annie Leibovitz using Canon (& sometimes with other brands & formats) to photograph:
Official Portraits of Queen Elizabeth II
Dream Portraits for Disney
Lady Gaga for Vanity Fair
Keith Richards for Luis Vuitton
Sean Connery for Luis Vuitton
Bono for Luis Vuitton
Meryl Streep for Vogue
Marion Cotillard for Dior
Rihanna for Vogue
Tim Tebow for Vogue
etc.
... so obviously she's not still waiting for Canon to produce an adequate DSLR....Show more →
Good point! But you see, one can suspect Mr. Risedal for not shooting pictures such as Salgado, Leibowitz and others. And as we amateurs are trying to do…
Mr. Risedal is taking TEST pictures, he is lifting shadows in search for BANDING and NOISE. And to be sure to find his goal he is pixel peeping at 100%. And he is right, there are some banding and noise there in Canon cameras, more so than in the last generation of Sony-sensors. So he is right. It is also obvious that this is a major problem some photographers.
I am just an amateur, having some 25000 files from Canon 5D2 on my hard drives, and about 6000 files from 5D3. Noise related to raising shadows has caused a problem for me for about 5-6 times, and were caused by underexposure (photographers mistake..). Bur I must also say that I have learned how to properly expose for optimal results.
The world and our lives have enough problems, let us not produce or focus them unnecessary…
This thread has turned into an accumulation of fanboy comments defending Canon gear with side-track of which kind of gear certain well known photographers use. Guys, Mikael has some good points, and there is nothing wrong that he uses different sort of gear equipment. I am sure he bought Canon lenses at a time when Canon was leading the field - I would agree with this, at the time when Canon lead the FF field, I also bought most of my lenses.
Generally, I am convinced that those kind of threads with back-and forward going arguments in regard to the current lack of new FF sensors in Canon cameras will continue as long as no new Canon based consumer FF camera with high MP/high DR sensor is showing up for a competitive price.
As many pointed out above, you can manage with all kind of camera gear - but this is not the point also. This argumentation is often revealed by many Canon users as defensive argument for the lack of a camera with better sensor design (like "the 5D MkIII is good enough if you expose properly", "more MP are unnecessary" etc). Truth is - Nikon and Sony have something which Canon currently doesn't has, fact. If you like or need such camera with better sensor is another question.
Like many, I would love to see a 5D MkIII-sort of camera with a (maybe even better?) sensor like in the A7R or D800E. Best of both worlds.
retrofocus wrote:
This thread has turned into an accumulation of fanboy comments defending Canon gear with side-track of which kind of gear certain well known photographers use. Guys, Mikael has some good points, and there is nothing wrong that he uses different sort of gear equipment. I am sure he bought Canon lenses at a time when Canon was leading the field - I would agree with this, at the time when Canon lead the FF field, I also bought most of my lenses.
Generally, I am convinced that those kind of threads with back-and forward going arguments in regard to the current lack of new FF sensors in Canon cameras will continue as long as no new Canon based consumer FF camera with high MP/high DR sensor is showing up for a competitive price.
As many pointed out above, you can manage with all kind of camera gear - but this is not the point also. This argumentation is often revealed by many Canon users as defensive argument for the lack of a camera with better sensor design (like "the 5D MkIII is good enough if you expose properly", "more MP are unnecessary" etc). Truth is - Nikon and Sony have something which Canon currently doesn't has, fact. If you like or need such camera with better sensor is another question. ...Show more →
As always, you are quick to label people who have different opinions. Should people label you? What would that label be?
These kinds of threads will continue forever. The A7r didn't stop anyone complaining, it just gave more for people to complain about. Poking holes in Sony raw compression, vibration, etc.
jctriguy wrote:
These kinds of threads will continue forever. The A7r didn't stop anyone complaining, it just gave more for people to
complain about. Poking holes in Sony raw compression, vibration, etc.
Exactly. Retro himself has already posted that Canon must match MP with the next Nikon/Sony sensor or he will not be happy so even if Canon releases a similar sensor to the D800 the grumbling will continue unabated.
If you always want to have the best FF sensor then you need multiple systems because there is an ebb and flow to technology and who is in front at any given moment.
jctriguy wrote:
As always, you are quick to label people who have different opinions. Should people label you? What would that label be?
That is the sort of thing that upsets me most about the nature of some posters' forum participation. It is fine to persistently and strongly hold a point of view that differs from that of others - in fact, it is a good thing in many cases.
But responding to another person who also has a point of view - just one that isn't your point of view - by questioning their personal integrity, their taste, whether they are serious photographers, their ability to think, and more is classic poor behavior in discussion and argumentation. The use of the ad hominem (all too frequently combined with the straw man argument) as the final stab in an argument is not, as the writer may think, seen as the final and authoritative discussion-ending point but rather as a tacit admission that the person resorting to the personal attack is probably trying to divert attention from the fact that he/she has nothing else to offer.
There is a small number of forum participants whose ad hominem attacks on the people (as opposed to the ideas) they disagree with are so consistent and predictable that I decided some time ago to never respond to them. (The person to whom you were responding is not necessarily in that category, and I might actually agree with some of his thoughts about cameras. There is at least one other person in this thread who is - his first and only response to my thoughts, here and in other threads, is essentially always to make up straw man characterizations about me and then insult the imaginary character he has invented. No thanks.)
And, to those who engage in this stuff, stop and think and realize that in nearly all cases you actually know next to nothing about the people whose character you so casually insult and about whom you post personal accusations. Not every person with whom you disagree is a fool, a thoughtless jackass, or a "fanboy."
Persistently and directly calling out this boorish behavior and those who use it might improve the quality of the discussion here a great deal. If that isn't possible, at least don't take the bait. Ignore them.
gdanmitchell wrote:
That is the sort of thing that upsets me most about the nature of some posters' forum participation. It is fine to persistently and strongly hold a point of view that differs from that of others - in fact, it is a good thing in many cases.
But responding to another person who also has a point of view - just one that isn't your point of view - by questioning their personal integrity, their taste, whether they are serious photographers, their ability to think, and more is classic poor behavior in discussion and argumentation. The use of the ad hominem (all too frequently combined with the straw man argument) as the final stab in an argument is not, as the writer may think, seen as the final and authoritative discussion-ending point but rather as a tacit admission that the person resorting to the personal attack has nothing else to offer.
There is a small number of forum participants whose ad hominem attacks on the people (as opposed to the ideas) they disagree with are so consistent and predictable that I decided some time ago to never respond to them. (The person to whom you were responding is not necessarily in that category, but there is at least one other in this thread who is.)
And, to those who engage in this stuff, stop and think and realize that in nearly all cases you actually know next to nothing about the people whose character you so casually insult and about whom you post personal accusations. Not every person with whom you disagree is a fool, a thoughtless jackass, or a "fanboy."
Persistently and honestly (but calmly) calling out this boorish behavior and those who use it would likely improve the quality of the discussion here a great deal. If that isn't possible, at least don't take the bait. Ignore them.
Dan, maybe I should clarify why I said the term "fanboys" - this group of people here in this forum is exactly not doing what you mentioned here by accepting an independent opinion especially when it might turn out negatively or less positive for Canon. There are some who purposely try to intervene each criticism - if facts don't help, they return attacking the person in a different way or simply try to distract from the well made points by changing/moving the topic into a different direction. Sometimes it is a whole wolf pack (or called in a humorous way Canon police) which acts like this at once. There are about 5-7 people which I count into this category who are present here mostly in this forum. This is not about having a different opinion, just the opposite is true - they do everything to make someone with a different opinion than theirs (which is always in agreement with anything Canon does for some reason) to be quiet. I agree with you that the best way to handle them is simply to ignore.
ggreene wrote:
Exactly. Retro himself has already posted that Canon must match MP with the next Nikon/Sony sensor or he will not be happy so even if Canon releases a similar sensor to the D800 the grumbling will continue unabated.
If you always want to have the best FF sensor then you need multiple systems because there is an ebb and flow to technology and who is in front at any given moment.
And that's exactly it, and nothing wrong with it: owning multiple brands and formats is the way to go if you are chasing a broad range of imaging. Canon (or Nikon) can function as our main gear, but nothing does it all. It's just a fact that these two do the most, and IMO Canon has a much better overall system, especially considering CPS and repairs. I'm all for keeping abreast of trending gear and innovations.
ggreene wrote:
Retro himself has already posted that Canon must match MP with the next Nikon/Sony sensor or he will not be happy so even if Canon releases a similar sensor to the D800 the grumbling will continue unabated.
Let's assume Canon will at some point launch a 5D MkIV (or whatever name it will carry) with an improved sensor - the absolute minimum which I would accept is the same sensor performance what current models like the D800(E) or SonyA7R already do. Canon should better step up and make something better than what the market currently already has. Seeing the incremental moves in recent times on the other hand, I have the feeling that a new camera body - if it even comes - might have no better resolution and DR-wise compared to the competition.
If you always want to have the best FF sensor then you need multiple systems because there is an ebb and flow to technology and who is in front at any given moment.
Yes, currently it is a good idea to diversify depending on the needs. Personally I am just waiting for more reviews in regard to the new Sony A7R - currently I find the issues observed with the adapters concerning since I am using tillt/shift lens photography quite often. But Sony releases cameras very quickly, so I wouldn't be surprised to see a second generation camera body and better designed adapters next year, too. And maybe we see something happening on Nikon's front, too. Definitely exciting times ahead!
retrofocus wrote:
This thread has turned into an accumulation of fanboy comments defending Canon gear with side-track of which kind of gear certain well known photographers use. Guys, Mikael has some good points, and there is nothing wrong that he uses different sort of gear equipment. I am sure he bought Canon lenses at a time when Canon was leading the field - I would agree with this, at the time when Canon lead the FF field, I also bought most of my lenses.
The point is that those well known photographers are using Canon gear for real work. Moreover, they are *choosing* Canon gear for their work when they could choose any brand. They aren't using it for tests, but rather for work that will represent them to their clients and the public. Their reputations and their careers stand or fall based on the photographs they produce. If that still says nothing to you, then I don't know how to explain the significance any better. You are welcome to find more significance in talk about nanometers, low ISO dynamic range, etc. Those points don't detract from the ability of current and past Canon gear to produce outstanding work under a wide range of conditions. If "leading the field" boils down to just one or two parameters of a sensor, then we are ignoring a lot of other parts of the system.
