PetKal
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.5 #5 · 1D XII hit the market? | |
I agree with GG's post above: we should be cautious about any new EOS cameras, particularly 1DXII at its exorbitant price.
We need to understand that many of 1DXII important "specifications" describe the camera's architecture, and NOT ITS PERFORMANCE. For example, Canon say the camera has so many cross AF points, and they might mention that the AF algorithm is performed by its dedicated Digic 87 CPU. Fine, we can sort of verify that, if we've got nothing more useful to do with our time, but what do such architecture specs tell us about the AF performance ? NOTHING ! NADA ! That is where the difficulty arises when dealing with suspect underperformance of your camera. If the performance spec doesn't exist, then how can you possibly show to Canon that your camera doesn't meet such (non-existent) specs ? Then your camera warranty claim becomes based on your subjective performance assessment, and perhaps you might reach an agreement with Canon as to what constitutes a reasonable performance warranty claim. However, Canon might also tell you that the camera meets their AF performance specifications, sorry pal, yet they would not reveal what those specifications are. Such unfortunate development of events might lead you to realize that your camera warranty is of limited value to you.
The systemic (design) underperformance of a new camera, particularly when it comes to Servo AF, is difficult to detect, let alone quantify, for the following reasons:
(1) The standard test methodology available to camera users does not exist.
(2) The pre-release reviews of new cameras is done by photographers whose business is to promote Canon's products. Those are the only folks to get pre-release cameras, right ? Giving such cameras to Nikon "ambassadors" to test and publish their findings would be a dumb marketing move by Canon, right ?
(3) Many camera users are in a poor position to assess the camera performance such as ServoAF/tracking because they either do not challenge that feature (e.g. landscape shooters), or they are lacking experience/aptitude to be able to make such assessment. In other words, their cameras may not work right, but people are not aware of it, or they think the problems they see here and there are due to user errors, or some such cause external to the camera.
Many may also believe that a flagship pro camera priced at $6,000 must be perfect a priori, so they are biased against seeing any under-performance, or again, they try to reason it away by attributing it to diverse external causes.
Lastly, there is another relatively common limitation with initial gear assessments, the results of which we see on this forum quite often : some people are primarily driven to show off their photography skill, such as it is, by posting a few of their best keeper shots in their reviews, instead of attempting an objective analysis, warts and all, as the first and foremost consideration.
|
