retrofocus wrote:
But saying that current Canon sensors are still perfectly fine in comparison to competitive products out there is simply wrong.
No it isn't, because there is more competing than just sensors. Do you think all the pros using a 1DX for their particular field of photography believe there is a better camera for their needs?
phibes wrote:
Hopefully we don't need to wait until mid November to find out. I bet in a few days some raws will be in the wild ... the truth lies within raws
IR already has RAWs up, only ISO100-400 though.
Banding at low ISO seems to be gone, which is great.
Read noise seems likely to be identical to 7D at best, so not so great (but with the banding gone, the usable DR will be higher).
Glen_C wrote:
I would bet the farm on your opinion holding up.
Tekkies on forums tend to speak for the masses when they don't relate to the masses in any way.
The thing is the thirst for more low ISO DR has NOTHING to do with being a techie. People don't want it just to measure some number higher in the lab. They want it because they are nature people at heart and nature has a lot of high DR scenes available that either become a pain to shoot or take tons of PP time to handle the less DR you have available.
And there is a lot, lot more room for Canon to improve DR than their is for them to improve SNR (which is already like 50% efficient for a Bayer sensor that is not overly color-blind).
It probably does matter more for the 5D4 than the 7D2 though (although I'm sure plenty of users who will have the 7D2 as their one and only body wouldn't have minded the DR upgrade).
curious80 wrote:
Except of course that video frames are typically shot at a shutter speed of something like 1/60s which is way too low to freeze the motion in sports. So you will get frames out of your video with nicely blurred motion which won't be of much use as stills.
You could bump the shutter speed way up in video too (although when treated as video it tends to look weird then).
molson wrote:
This is precisely why Canon continues on their established course of product development, and coincidentally, why they still have the lion's share of the camera market. They tend not to listen to the 1% of the market that lives vicariously through internet forums (or is that fora?)
It's more that they have nice lenses and a nice UI and ML saved the day with 5D3 RAW video and some people are heavily invested and there are a lot of fanboys in Canonland (it seems to me far more than in Nikon land) and bulk of body sales come from lowest end Rebels anyway; and who is to say the sales would not be a much bigger percent of market share had they done some things differently? Or that eventually larger numbers won't become fed up and stop buying (if the 5D4 lacks 4k and lacks improved DR I bet it will sell a lot less than it would have otherwise and you'll start seeing more shift to Nikon and more buying of sony add-on bodies).
B Landau wrote:
Now that Canon has again shown that they have made no meaningful improvements in sensor technology I will be going to the A7R as well.
If they don't have something by spring yeah all my money will go to some mix of GH4/A7R/A7S/D810/Ninja Shogun/whatver new thing Nikon/SONY have out by then and such, not quite sure what, but I definitely won't get the 5D4 if it has the same old same old DR and also lacks 4k.
The SOny and GH4 can use Canon lenses.
It would be nicer if Canon just did instead of having to mess with a mix of this and thats, but at least the options, even if in Frankenstein form, are out there now. It's not the most efficient to use a mix of bodies and lenses either monetarily or physically, but the options are there now, lots of amazing stuff around.
skibum5 wrote:
You could bump the shutter speed way up in video too (although when treated as video it tends to look weird then).
Exactly - you will get the stills but video will not be of much use. So as someone else said you get one or the other.
And it will be an electronic shutter so you will still enjoy the nice jello effect on your moving subject specially at 4K where the sensor readout will take longer than the 1080P.
AGeoJO wrote:
Any words on the usage or absence of AA filter on this new camera? Anyone?
I'm 99% sure it has an AA filter. IMO that is a good thing. I'm not fond of Nikon's doing away with the AA filters. IMO it's too soon and marketing stunt that hurts more than it helps.
diverhank wrote:
I'm not a techie guy...it gives me a headache just thinking about it. But I often wonder what's the fuzz about the Canon sensor being lacking...when I can routinely get great results at ISO 10000 and above with some minimal post photoshop processing? Makes it very hard for me to imagine having to switch to another brand...
Imagemaster wrote:
No it isn't, because there is more competing than just sensors. Do you think all the pros using a 1DX for their particular field of photography believe there is a better camera for their needs?
Yes but he specifically was talking SOLELY about sensors.
skibum5 wrote:
When someone says Canon lenses are awesome though, do you then come back with but the system is more than just the lenses?
The system "is" more then just the lenses. Isn't that a given? I like Canon's bodies, lenses, flashes, and support.
One particular feature on one particular component in one particular segment of Canon's products is not going to bring down the company no matter how many times low ISO DR proponents try to predict such.
Klaus Priebe wrote:
DR plays a role with every type of photography not just landscapes. When looking at the 7DII with the same old sensor tech makes me think there is nothing better for landscape photographers in new Canon bodies that may be introduced.
The a7r may not be a good sports camera but I can put just about any lens made on the body and with over 14 stops DR its a beauty to shoot with.
Even more so when pulling out detail in shadow areas where the Canon sensors fail miserably.
Klaus,
First, at this point it is pre-mature to say that the 7DII incorporates an "old sensor" technology. Even if it is so, I am convinced that Canon will be able to pull every little oomph that the sensor has and it will probably be the best sensor Canon has to offer. It may not be enough for landscape shooting but still any improvement of the existing sensor is an improvement. At the same time, I am also confident that Canon will eventually introduce a FF camera with a new sensor technology to match that of the Sony Exmor. When that will be? Who knows. Maybe it is around the corner but maybe another year.
You are preaching to the choir with respect to the A7r. I am an early adaptor of the camera. I know what the camera can do and again, I would not use it for wildlife regardless how good the sensor is. Just IMHO.
ggreene wrote:
The system "is" more then just the lenses. Isn't that a given? I like Canon's bodies, lenses, flashes, and support.
One particular feature on one particular component in one particular segment of Canon's products is not going to bring down the company no matter how many times low ISO DR proponents try to predict such.
It's the same degree of a given as a system is more than just the sensor.
On the 7D2, Canon basically used the same 5D2 to 5D3 strategy, with big changes to the AF system, better weather sealing/body strength, and higher FPS. However, sensor improvements were not as significant.
Fred Miranda wrote:
On the 7D2, Canon basically used the same 5D2 to 5D3 strategy, with big changes to the AF system, better weather sealing/body strength, and higher FPS. However, sensor improvements were not as significant.
It worked before and it's going to work again.
The specs are too compelling to ignore IMO. AF and metering could be better than 1D X and the bonus of GPS, intervalometer, 1080p @50/60fps etc. Too bad it's not going on sale for another 2 months.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
The specs are too compelling to ignore IMO. AF and metering could be better than 1D X and the bonus of GPS, intervalometer, 1080p @50/60fps etc. Too bad it's not going on sale for another 2 months.
I agree. I remember you wrote a while back you would be getting the 7D2 if the 5D3 AF system was added to it. Canon did better than that!
Fred Miranda wrote:
On the 7D2, Canon basically used the same 5D2 to 5D3 strategy, with big changes to the AF system, better weather sealing/body strength, and higher FPS. However, sensor improvements were not as significant.
It worked before and it's going to work again.
True enough. The 7D2 appears to be another great Canon camera with an OK Canon sensor, just like the 5D3. And I'm sure they'll sell lots. But if they try this again with the 5D4, they won't sell one to me.
