I didn't email anything to you . I posted it in this forum
deadeyedick wrote:
dcmiller
Online
Image Upload: On
Registered: May 22, 2002
Total Posts: 2671
Country: United States
p.116 #5 · Canon 5DII rumors thread
You know it CW, and I know it.....but you"re pushing it uphill trying to convince the less capable, ...or perhaps the more photographically challenged
Don't be a dick, Dick.
I agree with both deadeyedick and dcmiller..
Dick has a good point, but used not-too-politically-correct words in support of CW. A statement like "less educated in real-world specifics of the 1D MK-III camera" would be a less harsh description that gets the point across without actually implying the people who don't fully understand the situation are a bunch of babbling idiots. (Uuummm, I'm sure some actually are but helimat appears to have humbled himself quite appropriately)
Now I will actually contribute to part of the ongoing conversation about video...
dcmiller is spot on in realizing that LiveView was the prototype testing grounds for the video feature. Some have stated they fear/believe the video feature will take away from overall image quality. Having an electronics engineering background myself, I understand how the latest advances in the sensor chips is making this possible while ALSO increasing the overall image quality.
The concerns are justified though, the engineers are given goals by the Marketing department who we know doesn't always think they way photographers do. The time engineers spend on the Video features is time NOT spent on other aspects of camera performance, so yes some features we want will be delayed or have reduced performance because Canon knows they MUST have a video mode that competes with Nikon and Sony and.....
deadeyedick wrote:
You know it CW, and I know it.....but you"re pushing it uphill trying to convince the less capable, ...or perhaps the more photographically challenged who haven't the skills to identify the magnatude of the problem. ...sure suits Canon to have this level of inexperience waffling on about how wonderfully their mk 111 works.
This is not only way off topic, but it's as arrogant as all get out. Sure, the camera doesn't work for lots of people, sure it's got a flaw. Sure you're angry (apparently deeply). But do ya gotta call everyone "less capable...photographically challenged... inexperienced" who doesn't see the problem in their use? Cripes man, get over yourself. Maybe. Just maybe, there are circumstances under which the problem is not a problem?
Now can y'all please get back to arguing over whose fantasy specs are real and whose fake?
It's really more concise to just tell Dick not to be a dick.
Non video users may not be aware that Canon also brands their video processor Digic. So there's apparently design overlap. The codec is implemented and the hardware is probably already optimized.
But do we care about video? I do if it approaches what is currently considered pro quality. (Which is more than just saying 1080p).
V
stockriderman wrote:
Just because you don't notice it, doesn't mean it doesn't have it. I have a friend who only noticed it when he went to the track to photograph race cars. His backup 40D outshined the 1D III 4 to 1 in the number of keepers. All had the same lens.
Going back to that short week when I had my 5D, 40D, and 1D3 (blue dot), I would rank their tracking capability in the same order - 5D, then 40D, then 1D3. I tested the heck out of that 1D3 and then sent it back. I hope that Canon has straightened out that AF glitch.
No, Sean, you've got a good one. I believe that there are plenty of good 1D3's out there. I bought mine back in early February, and I made an effort to test it relentlessly. It had focus issues, unfortunately. Sent it back. But I know plenty of others that bought, and tested good working units. They are happily photographing with their Mk3's now.
Perhaps I was overcautious, but spending $4000+ on a body that probably won't earn it's price (I'm not really in the business, though I may sell a shot once in a while), I thought it wise to really test the he** out of it during the return period. 7 days and 1000 shots later, I decided that despite it's strengths (and it has a lot), the body I had wasn't going to cut it.
