I didn't say it was awful, but I owned an A7 up until a few days ago and it's definitely the weakest high ISO camera from the current FF generation, just look at the DXO data and that doesn't even include the severe amp glow once you reach 12.8K. That said, what the heck is going on with the blocky background in these photos? Also, these are all from an A7R. I've owned both and the A7R is defintely better than the A7 at high ISO. The A7 is a bit of a red-headed stepchild in the A7 line.
whumber wrote:
I didn't say it was awful, but I owned an A7 up until a few days ago and it's definitely the weakest high ISO camera from the current FF generation, just look at the DXO data and that doesn't even include the severe amp glow once you reach 12.8K. That said, what the heck is going on with the blocky background in these photos? Also, these are all from an A7R. I've owned both and the A7R is defintely better than the A7 at high ISO. The A7 is a bit of a red-headed stepchild in the A7 line.
Mirrors my experience with it. Plus the noise on all of Sony's cameras looks irregular and more like artifacts than a smooth organic noise.
Those artifacts are usually produced (at least some) by vignetting correction. A7 and A7R are not "top" Sony cameras. Neither Sony consider them as such.. (see prices).
Ah yes, the 6D released in 2012 with 2007 sensor technology and 2003 AF system. In contrast to other manufacturers who go for a retro look, packed with modern features, Canon went for the retro feature set with cutting edge pricing.
Geoff D F wrote:
Ah yes, the 6D released in 2012 with 2007 sensor technology and 2003 AF system. In contrast to other manufacturers who go for a retro look, packed with modern features, Canon went for the retro feature set with cutting edge pricing.
And you are one of the poor minority that can't take decent photos with such retro features?
Just a thought but do you guys remember the 5d mark II n? If they are really discontinuing a camera so early, it might be to just do a minor refresh like that.
Perhaps the camera was so popular compared to what was expected that they ran out of components or parts a bit sooner than expected, and hence a minor refresh with a few parts changes / updates rather than a redesign of something that is still selling well.
jctriguy wrote:
FYI...you just posted Sony shots, you forgot the comparison shots...
Hi JC and whumber, not meant to be any comparison here. Those are hi iso bonus for people who mainly loves ~3 stops more DR than canon sensor in low iso. Beside 5x7 snapshots, I hardly shoot anything above 400.
I would be fairly surprised if they discontinued the 6D this quickly, especially at this junction (right before Canon's big holiday selling period).. but if there's a better FF option (read: more than 1 AF point, uses CF cards) coming out to replace the 6D, I'm happy to be wrong.
There are people right now in 2014 getting awesome shots with the 1Ds2+85L combo. They don't seem to be held back by not having the latest and greatest gear.
ggreene wrote:
There are people right now in 2014 getting awesome shots with the 1Ds2+85L combo. They don't seem to be held back by not having the latest and greatest gear.
Nobody is saying this, ggreene. Why the DR theme pops up so often now in threads here is simply because of the refusal of many fanboys here to accept that there is better sensor technology out there which many customers prefer to have. That Canon currently has no new sensor in sight of appearance adds to this behavior.
I grant that not everyone "needs" a new sensor with better resolution and DR. You can still take great photos with a Rebel XT-based 8 MP sensor if you use it within its technical limits. And that's absolutely okay - but those who don't need the newer sensor technology out there should understand that others very well have a need for it and that it is meanwhile standard for FF sensor based cameras with brands of Nikon and Sony.
Thing is that I rather have the option to make use of higher DR and more resolution and not using it than to find myself limited there.
Simply its not the refusal to accept it, its the bombardment of the whining and crying that Canon does not have an equivalent for the past 2 years. Yes we know that and there's nothing we can do about it so we're make the best of what we have, but the persistent of exmor trolling and daily "Canon lacks a 50 meccapickles with 50 stops of dynamic range" crying would result in, as expected, a negative reaction from the community. We have people here (not pointing fingers) that chime just to inject this off-topic discussion.
mttran wrote:
This is not what you want to say. Canon is good last decade and we want better than good in next decade
Nice shot! Some people just outright believe they cant take photos without Sony sensors -_-
panicatnabisco wrote:
Simply its not the refusal to accept it, its the bombardment of the whining and crying that Canon does not have an equivalent for the past 2 years. Yes we know that and there's nothing we can do about it so we're make the best of what we have, but the persistent of exmor trolling and daily "Canon lacks a 50 meccapickles with 50 stops of dynamic range" crying would result in, as expected, a negative reaction from the community.
What you call trolling is just that people express their dissatisfaction with Canon's current path in regard to sensor development. I already criticized the lack of a better FF sensor in the 5D MkIII after it was released in 2012. It seems to me that one side just clearly brings the issue on the table what Canon brand defenders (we can discuss the reasons for this, but this would go too far off topic) now determine as trolling. Sounds like that some only want to see Canon glorified but not criticized at all. I simply see Canon in a mixed position - they make a good variety of high quality glass, but they are lacking now severely behind in newer sensor technology in their DSLR cameras and so far fully in better mirrorless systems (Nikon is in the same boat with the latter).
. You can't argue with non-comparison shots can you?