LeeSimms wrote:
5D3 = terrible sensor. That must be why so much godsmack work is done with that camera.
This weekend thousands of weddings will be shot and brides who get 5D3 files will be no more or less satisfied than brides who got D750 files.
Reality check — you're in pixel peeper nerd town now
I can name like 20 people who switched because the D750 is unequivocally better.
I edit for mostly people who shoot canon... either they have way to much money to pay me, or they cannot seem to get things right...
I spend more time fixing needless stuff out of Canon cameras than I care to talk about.
This is all just my opinion obviously and I could care less what Canon does but they are way behind Sony/Nikon and everyone knows it. I highly doubt the 5d4 will come along and magically all the problems will go away. If that was the case why wouldn't they plot the improved sensor in the 5Dr or s? 6 months isnt going to make a difference.
LeeSimms wrote:
5D3 = terrible sensor. That must be why so much godsmack work is done with that camera.
This weekend thousands of weddings will be shot and brides who get 5D3 files will be no more or less satisfied than brides who got D750 files.
Reality check — you're in pixel peeper nerd town now
The fact is, Canon sensors have been drastically behind the curve for about 4-5 years now... at least. That's the point people are making. You can keep spewing fanboy arguments; but if you ask people what's more important, increasing megapixels or improving long overdue dynamic range and shadow issues (just to name two), the truth comes forward. Keep denying it if you want. It doesn't change the facts. lol
The Sony sensor is ok if you're heavily boosting shadows when using low ISOs. The images I've played around with showed low grain, but the colors completely fell apart. It's nothing more than a parlour trick IMO.
I have no problems boosting shadows by 1.5 stops with my 5D3. If I'm missing by more than that once or twice on a wedding day, I have no business shooting weddings professionally.
This camera will have the MP but the proof will be in the DR which is what is so great about the D8x0 cameras.
The specs really make me wish nikon would update their D3 era af points: on this camera most of the points are cross and 5 double cross while with nikon you just get a small centre column of cross points.
ZachOly wrote:
The Sony sensor is ok if you're heavily boosting shadows when using low ISOs. The images I've played around with showed low grain, but the colors completely fell apart. It's nothing more than a parlour trick IMO.
I have no problems boosting shadows by 1.5 stops with my 5D3. If I'm missing by more than that once or twice on a wedding day, I have no business shooting weddings professionally.
Interesting to call it a parlour trick. I'd call it a minor feature in the big scheme of things, since on prints, which crushes DR anyway, one will be hard pressed to see DN difference in a single shot.
And I can tell that I bought the 7d2 for sports and wildlife, with the same sensor and new exposure technology as 5ds/r and it exposes without flash better than any canon ever, including the 1dx. I have mine set to auto iso, it has ec feature in auto iso, I set my max to iso 12,800, it has no banding, it gets me useable 8x10's I'm selling with 70-200 f2.8 L in kids cave light gym at 10 fps and 92% hit rate. The huge number of cross types cover almost the entire frame. Pro 1dx AF and 10 fps and best efficient iso sensor (considering physical small size) canon has made to date to catch up - see Northrup's chart in video - 7d2 is leading Canon on sensor iso efficiency.
And Northrup is a bit bias because he's already switched to D810 for his production. What he's missed is that you'll be able to put a 35 f2 IS or a sigma 35 f1.4 art on the Canon 5ds/r and shoot loosely and it will act like a 24-70 for existing 20 mpxl files when you crop in post.
Also, the resolution and colors of the 5ds/r with the best lenses will be true medium format, versus being on the cusp of medium format. Fashion and studio and scape photographers will love this with the best lenses. Native file size it is 20x30 - dpi 290. A 1.5 or 2 times 16 bit stair interpolation is easy with this. Also, the improvement in shutter and pod stability should make bracketing the bomb in scapes for huge Dynamic Range.
Northrup is also missing that Canon lowered the 5d3 to $2549 to compete with the d750 price range. He also misses that a new 5d4 will likely be released in the fall in this same general price range that will deploy the canon optimized iso sensor on a ff sensor versus the 7d2 crop sensor and the new 5ds/r ff sensor. I'd expect a movie optimized 5d4 also with 4k video that allows extraction of 8 mpxl stills from the video.
If I started back up shooting weddings - vs occasional --which I don't need to since I'm retired from that kind of scene - it would be with a new 5d4 in the fall as the primary and the 5ds/r as the second camera
hardlyboring wrote:
I can name like 20 people who switched because the D750 is unequivocally better.
I edit for mostly people who shoot canon... either they have way to much money to pay me, or they cannot seem to get things right...
I spend more time fixing needless stuff out of Canon cameras than I care to talk about.
This is all just my opinion obviously and I could care less what Canon does but they are way behind Sony/Nikon and everyone knows it. I highly doubt the 5d4 will come along and magically all the problems will go away. If that was the case why wouldn't they plot the improved sensor in the 5Dr or s? 6 months isnt going to make a difference. ...Show more →
When the 5D came out, scores of Nikon shooters jumped ship (go back and read all those forum posts if you weren't shooting then). Some folks just like something new as it keeps them interested in the game (maybe they're sick of the same reception music night after night). Nobody's going to loose any business if they're shooing a 5D3.
Joke's on me though — I should know better than to feed a troll.
The switch to 5D was worth it though. That camera had magical files compared to everything else.
I shot with a guy who shot a 5D, and I spent months trying to get my d300 (and eventually d700) to look like what was coming out of the 5D. I never got close.
After he bought a couple of 5DII's, he did the same thing - tried to get them to look like 5D files. He ended up just sticking with the 5D for most of the day.
JHerr wrote:
The switch to 5D was worth it though. That camera had magical files compared to everything else.
I shot with a guy who shot a 5D, and I spent months trying to get my d300 (and eventually d700) to look like what was coming out of the 5D. I never got close.
After he bought a couple of 5DII's, he did the same thing - tried to get them to look like 5D files. He ended up just sticking with the 5D for most of the day.
had the 5dc for 5 years. yes, iso 100-400 and raw colors amazing when you hit.
but yikes - with 5dc, banding sets in with pushing files that come from a rudimentary exposure system... also no af way to consistently hit rule of thirds without center point and recomposing...then shallow dof can be off.
go to The Digital Picture site and read bryan's review of the 7d2. I've found it to be better than the 5dc in almost every way. No banding. hi iso on par with 5d2. AF points at edge of frame - Bryan hits 10 fps on his daughters face riding horse 30-40 mph toward him at edge of frame. -3ev center point on 7d2 - 5dc sucks with that. The exposure system of the 7d2 is better than the 1dx. Happy camper with 7d2- works with my odins and 55-250 stm and with my lights set up around the room I can pop candids from across the room all day long
After he bought a couple of 5DII's, he did the same thing - tried to get them to look like 5D files. He ended up just sticking with the 5D for most of the day.
A lot of people say the 5D Classic files look better than those of the 5D2 or 5D3, at least in good light. About a week back I happened across a website - probably couldn't find it anymore - where they were showing the sensitivities of the different 5D sensors in the red, green, and blue channels. As I recall, Canon made a change after the Classic to have a significantly increased sensitivity in the green channel, which could affect skin tones, for one.
D. Diggler wrote:
You using that for wedding work?
Retired Enjoying 70-200L and hopefully soon 100-400 II. Might re-enter in fall with 5ds/r and 7d2 as second camera. Shooting indoor sports with 7d2 at the moment - 2 events so far. Hitting 92% at 10fps. No banding. Iso on par with 5d2. Appears to work with my odins. Auto iso and EC in manual. Exposes better than 1dx. Dual slots.The 5d4 will likely get the same 7d2 sensor technology and get an additional stop of high iso improvement. Also we may see 4K video in the 5d4 where one will be able to extract 8 mpxl photographs. Canon is optimizing what they have.
LeeSimms wrote:
Joke's on me though — I should know better than to feed a troll.
Doug likes his cameras, and he's a fan of the latest and greatest, but he also knows his shit, is talking sense and is undoubtedly not a troll. If you read carefully Lee you'll note that Doug specifically states that his post is 'just his opinion'.
Calling long-term members who offer a lot to this forum 'trolls' is not a good look in my view.
Competition is good, I know this is more of a landscape camera, but the ISO seems low. I"m sure it will be a excellent, I think everybody new this was coming since they have made new lenses with more resolving power.
Tony, we all like our cameras, and we've all been here for years (I joined in 2006). If I crashed a thread about a new Nikon, said their widely-used and respected wedding camera had a "terrible" sensor ... what would you call me? But it's ok because I like my cameras? Did I miss something?
But he is not the only one that thinks the 5D3 sensor is way behind other sensors out there. I have been shooting with the 5D3 since 3 days before the official launch date, and while the camera was a massive upgrade over the 5D2 and over is a great camera, it just does not hold a candle anymore to what the other tech out there is doing. I have been shooting nothing but Canon's since 2000, and I just bought my first Nikon 2 days ago because of this.
Behind the D750 certainly, but not "terrible" — in 2012 engadget called it simply incredible in every way — game changing — godsmack images are made with it everyday — not terrible — besides, it's laughable that anyone with a history of Leica digital cameras could call ANY Canon product "terrible", lol. But that's a special kind of crazy I won't touch.
I'll stop. New rules — brand bashing is ok now.
Heck, when Nikon brings out a line of wireless radio flashes that don't sputter grease or have weird light flares, I'll probably switch too.
Enjoying 70-200L and hopefully soon 100-400 II. Might re-enter in fall with 5ds/r and 7d2 as second camera. Shooting indoor sports with 7d2 at the moment - 2 events so far. Hitting 92% at 10fps. No banding. Iso on par with 5d2. Appears to work with my odins. Auto iso and EC in manual. Exposes better than 1dx. Dual slots.The 5d4 will likely get the same 7d2 sensor technology and get an additional stop of high iso improvement. Also we may see 4K video in the 5d4 where one will be able to extract 8 mpxl photographs. Canon is optimizing what they have.