Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
ulrikft wrote:
Do you think that the 50d will have _noticeable_ better IQ than the d300?
I did not see enough pics to say something like that. But those 1600/3200 ISO pics I saw seem very equal to me. Based on a even smaller sensor, additional 3MP resolution and an intro price of € 400 less, I feel again, that Canon did it better.
ulrikft wrote:
The myth about the 5d having just as good IQ as the d3 and the d700 is just that: a myth, it has comparable (even better) resolution at iso100, that is not the same thing. When it comes to dynamic range, iso quality etc.. well?
Not that well. ISO up to 1600 D700/D3 does not look better. ISO 100 looks worse. Higher ISO starting at (calculated at 5D) 3200 is better a bit. DR might be better at 14 BIT. The advanteges will shurly be eaten up, if you think about 5D is using an allready 2 generations older image processor and a/d converter. Even the old sensor would have same or better performens than D3/D700 I guess, if the camera would use an 14bit a/d converter and Digic IV. But the new one will not use a three year old sensor technologie.
ulrikft wrote:
People talk about "iq" and "other features" as totally unrelated to each other, that is not how it is. To GET that ultimate IQ, features ARE important. Handling, weather sealing etc.
Weatehr sealing does not have any influence to IQ. AF of 40D is great. as far I read 50Ds AF is even faster. Handling surely might have an influence. But there is nothing wrong with the 30D/40D/5D handling for me. I guess it will neither be with 50D (nothing has changed in the body) or with the 5D successor.
ulrikft wrote:
It reminds me of how a few american friends of mine view cars :P Horsepowers and max speed is their test for a car. I prefer to take handling, gearbox, gas milage... well, lot of other features into the equation, beacause they count. Talking about "they got features" as it is a negative thing...
Its not mentioned like what it reminds you. I like to get features. And I want to get them. But not in main. First I want a tool, I can work with have my pleasure and do my job.
Second I have to be able to pay for it. And third I want to have a good feeling, too.
I guess most if not all pictures I did with Canon gear I could have done with Nikon, Pentax or other brands stuff, too. Give me a Pentax and one week, I will do still my pictures. And they will look good. Maybe perfect in internet size. But that is not what I shoot for. The Nikon IQ and resolution of D3/D700 would have produced excellent results at my last job. D30 did, too. I purchased it last year for a 6th of the price I would have had to pay for the D3 (D700 is only 4th, but did not existing a year ago). The only "viewable" advantage for that job given by Nikon where the + 4MP, cause I had to produce 8 36x24" prints, too. 100% of the job was done with 70-200 4.0 L IS.
Great lens, great camera, great results.
I trust in me and Canon gear. I thought about purchasing a 5D. At its price its still unbeatable (for me). It would give me the secure resolution for prints like those I had to do and an excellent IQ up to ISO 1600/3200. At a great price and no extra costs concerning lenses. But of course I decided to wait.
The new 5D is comming.
Features I would like to get additional are a 200.000 shutter cycle, improved AF, an integrated grip, overworked ergonomy, an adjustable auto ISO range, 100% preview based on the raw pic and some more. But all that would not be "neccessary. It would be nice gimmicks to me. If the 5DII gives me nothing of that but 15-16MP, ISO 6400 at 5Ds 1600 quality at € 2300-2500, it will be my choise anyway.
I guess what is comming is much more than that.
|
