First, consider the source.....I wouldn't base anything on the DPR information without several additional confirming sites posting their perspective as well
While the images don't look good (they're out of focus), I'd be cautious. The DPR hacks probably don't know how to focus using AF, let alone adjusting focus manually. Wait until you see the results from a more professional site.
If however, this is as good as it gets, then the camera is over priced and Canon will continue to give us the same old over priced bodies. My expectation is as I've said before, Nikon is competition, Sony is not....
PS - at least they give you a 100% VF and 5 FPS. Canon? Not at that price...
To my humble eyes, after trying to catch up on this thread, there is still no contest, regarding any of the image sources above...
1DsIII still is far superior in IQ over A900.
Now, the price is also, higher, but how do you judge if you're willing to pay less for less quality? (given that we're still talking about ~3k$ to spend -> for that price you'd expect top quality).
I'd think that for someone willing to pay 3k$ in a DSLR, they'll look for all the details...
jamesf99 wrote:
First, consider the source.....I wouldn't base anything on the DPR information without several additional confirming sites posting their perspective as well
While the images don't look good (they're out of focus), I'd be cautious. The DPR hacks probably don't know how to focus using AF, let alone adjusting focus manually. Wait until you see the results from a more professional site.
If however, this is as good as it gets, then the camera is over priced and Canon will continue to give us the same old over priced bodies. My expectation is as I've said before, Nikon is competition, Sony is not....
PS - at least they give you a 100% VF and 5 FPS. Canon? Not at that price...
vcretoiu wrote:
To my humble eyes, after trying to catch up on this thread, there is still no contest, regarding any of the image sources above...
1DsIII still is far superior in IQ over A900.
Now, the price is also, higher, but how do you judge if you're willing to pay less for less quality? (given that we're still talking about ~3k$ to spend -> for that price you'd expect top quality).
I'd think that for someone willing to pay 3k$ in a DSLR, they'll look for all the details...
And while we are speculating i think we can reasonably expect the new 5d to be better that the 1Ds3 at high iso. So the price difference won't be a factor.
Marcus Watts wrote:
We have to wait and see. Nikon have only recently raised the bar, we wait for Canon's response.
If they don't come to the party then Nikon will be seen as the market leader. Canon won't let that happen.
Easy to go slow when you in front but the game is different now. We hope.
Thank you Nikon.
I actually think Canon locked in the 5d and 50d a year ago, but they were waiting on the sensor production to come up to speed. IOW, there was no D700, there was no a900, they were still lying to the world about AF problems and there was absolutely no reason to change their ways...
I know people don't like to hear it, but I still believe the 5d2 will have a good sensor and everything else will be mediocre, just like the current 5d. Canon is just not concerned yet, and the 50d should drive that point home to doubters. They upgraded what the HAD to upgrade, slapped a sensor in it, and they were done. The 5d will be the same with NO (as in zero) professional level features.
Sony's release is clearly aimed at the amateur market. They've priced it in a way that's it's not exactly accessible to all, but the Sony shooters will be all over it and even some Nikon/Canon users that want higher res will join the club. Canon, in their parsimonious way, will give us IQ only. When you look back in a few years, the IQ will matter more than how sucky the body is/was, and that's what Canon counts on; short term memory lapses...
I contend that the A-900 is noiser at iso 3200 than the current 5D based on the images in the link above. I would expect that the 5D II will blow them both away.
Marcus Watts wrote:
Also James for many professionals the current 5D has enough features for their needs.
I myself would be happy with more megapixels, some focus improvement though it would not sway my decision, in camera sensor cleaning.
What are you calling professional level features? Zero is a big call when as i say many pros will use the current 5D now.
There's some debate about where the lines are, but generally speaking when "pro features" are discussed they include (but not necessarily limited to) pro AF (again, what constitutes "pro" is kind of nebulous--you'll know it when you see it type thing), weather sealing, 100% viewfinder, solid body construction (compare the creaky CF door on the 5D to the solid door on the 1 series for instance), etc. If I had to give a loose definition of pro features I'd say that they're features above and beyond typical features that enable users to simply get the shot, no matter what lighting conditions, weather, equipment abuse, etc.
"... painfully bad, particularly the high ISO noise"
Not sure I agree. I downloaded the ISO 6400 image of the kid's coloured boots and really liked the "feel", alot like pushed slide film. Very "photographic".
Of course its very hard to tell on jpeg over the net, but I like the look of this camera. The in body IS would be very helpful for many, and the lure of Zeiss T* is powerful. I'm not in the market for a non Nikon/Canon body myself, but I have fond memories of Minolta glass and see in this new Sony camera the continuation of a great marque.
jamesf99 wrote:
I know people don't like to hear it, but I still believe the 5d2 will have a good sensor and everything else will be mediocre, just like the current 5d.
I think you donīt like to hear it, james. But I still care about IQ only (affordable). If the 5d2 would only offer 15MP and nativ ISO 3200 at the actual 5Ds 800 IQ and change nothing else, it still would be my choise against all other now existing cameras. If it offers me more resolution, affordable nativ ISO 6400 and a shutter lifetime of 200.000 cycles it will be my camera for the next 3-5 years, I guess. I can live with an external BG, even I would prefere an integrated one. I can live with the actual AF really good because its great. I can live without the features and whatever else that a camera makes "pro" level to you. Like thousends of "pros" already using a "sucking" 5D (single or next to their 1Ds) to make their earning are doing it, too.
You are right in one thing: looking back in a few years, the IQ will be the only thing for me that still matters. What you call a "sucky body" was and still is an exellent tool at an affordable price to me. Maybe my "short term memory lapses" give me the pleasure, you seem not be able to feel. I am sad about that for you.
But concerning me my "sucking" Canon tools helped me to become a photographer. By doing pictures, that my customers buy. Not by holding a "pro" body in my hands, I can not purchase.
Lets wait another few days. I am really sure, Canon will give me what I want and need. Maybe itīs good enough for you, too. I would wish you.
Ralph
Edited by Ralph Conway on Sep 09, 2008 at 07:11 PM GMT
