dvarnav wrote:
Obviously, but maybe idea is that Canon has made a better QC for the 5D cameras this time and the amount of the ready to sell cameras are low. If they tried to distribute their first batch equaly through all shops the small ones has enough to cover their most of their clients (10-20 over 30 preoderd) and big shops just covers the same amount of their clients over 300 preorderd. Thats why I always prefer the best small shop
Mine ships from the store tomorrow. Not one of the big boys at all, so perhaps that is correct that Canon is shipping to smaller dealers. They received 10 kits and 10 bodies. Seems like the 40D was the same way.
halse wrote:
B&H is now taking orders (or was, I placed mine about an hour ago)... they are charging at time of order so shipping should be relatively soon
Doesn't B&H always charge when you place an order, regardless of when it ships. So may not be an indication of it shipping soon.
I don't know of any mail order store who would charge your credit card on order .... unless they are shipping the item within a matter of days. If it is a back order, they will not charge your credit card until they have the item are ready to ship. For those ordering from outside USA this may not apply though.
CMOS wrote:
Doesn't B&H always charge when you place an order, regardless of when it ships. So may not be an indication of it shipping soon.
efgm wrote:
, he updated the test and used the same RAW converter (DPP).
We know the performance of the 1ds3 sensor and the 5d2 isn't far off. I don't think it will outperform the 1ds3 in noise performance, perhaps the 5d2 is around 1/2 a stop behind.
actuallly according to some tests I did last night which agree with Gabor's results and then comparing ours to his 1DsMkIII results (which I haven't touched so relying on his data) the 5DMkII actually appears to have as much as a stop better read noise at high iso and combine that with probably the same light collecting ability (or even a trace more with the new CFA) and it seems to me that it would be shocking if, even taking the worst case scenario, the 5DMk2 was not 1/2 stop better at high iso (at leat for luma noise, perhaps merely similar for chroma if the new CFA messed around too much) and it might even be a full stop better at ISO1600+.
at the lowest ISO it doesn't appear as if the 5DMkII should be any better, since the read noise seemed more or less the same, maybe the CFA reduction would give it a hair better DR at the cost of a tiny bit worse color discrimination and color noise.
anywy, if anything I think your supposition is very likely to be completely backwards
You guys don't pay "Use-Tax" on your internet purchases? I guess if you're not making any $ from your photography or your local laws don't require it, that is fine. But if in business...then just get a tax-exempt form and buy locally. Is everyone here not charging for their services? Just curious.
I called Amazon (yes there is a phone number...) and they say they do not have any stock yet. They can tell you if you are on the priority list (in red). That may be the first 50.
dvarnav wrote:
1600 is the upper limit that 5D MarkII sensor can make noiseless shoots? and after that only utilitising internal noise reducer (actually working only in JPG output files) could give near noiseless pictures?
The only reason that we could talk for a DSLR High ISO perfomance is in RAW mode. And of course in that maner we are see only the sensor side of the perfomance but remeber that its better to start with best sensor and optics performanc and then PP with a nice software.
Well I have to make some tests (Again) with my 1DMarkIII to see how it performs in 1600 and up ISO ....Show more →
It's not so much that it is bad above ISO1600, it seems pretty useable at even up to 6400 if you can handle some grain and 12800 for when you have no choice and 25800 is kind of ugly unless you have strong lighting. ISO1600 really seems pretty comfortable (perhaps even like almost like ISO400 on an xxD cam!) on this cam from my very limited experience and ISO3200 is nothing terrible, ISO6400 is definitely grainy but entirely useable, 12800 is getting a bit iffy and 25600 seems pretty poor from very limited usage.
it's that you are better off shooting at ISO1600 and then pushing 1,2,3,4 stops to get to ISO3200,6400,12800,25600 since the read noise seems to double for each step so what does using the official ISO3200 setting gain you? Maybe 1/8th of stop while chopping off a stop of range so why not just shoot ISO1600 underxposed 1 stop and then push it and pull back highlights. Granted it makes it harder to judge using the in cam histogram and all so for lower dynamic range scenes maybe ISO3200 at least is pretty sensible to still use.
and for jpg, every single ISO makes sense to use and same for movie mode, since pushing a processed file of 8bits is poor and i would be a nightmare to do it for movies anyway
Greg - check out this test .... scroll down to Post #17 for a more accurate comparison against the 1Ds Mk III. All that I want from the 5D II is a 1Ds III image quality for half the price .... and it does look like we are getting it!
bobbytan wrote:
My order was placed with Amazon on September 17. Still no word from them ... #@*!
Same here! Ordered on the 17th. Anyone who ordered from Amazon and their order has shipped, please say so here so I can get even more flustered with anticipation.
skibum5 wrote:
It's not so much that it is bad above ISO1600, it seems pretty useable at even up to 6400 if you can handle some grain and 12800 for when you have no choice and 25800 is kind of ugly unless you have strong lighting. ISO1600 really seems pretty comfortable (perhaps even like almost like ISO400 on an xxD cam!) on this cam from my very limited experience and ISO3200 is nothing terrible, ISO6400 is definitely grainy but entirely useable, 12800 is getting a bit iffy and 25600 seems pretty poor from very limited usage.
it's that you are better off shooting at ISO1600 and then pushing 1,2,3,4 stops to get to ISO3200,6400,12800,25600 since the read noise seems to double for each step so what does using the official ISO3200 setting gain you? Maybe 1/8th of stop while chopping off a stop of range so why not just shoot ISO1600 underxposed 1 stop and then push it and pull back highlights. Granted it makes it harder to judge using the in cam histogram and all so for lower dynamic range scenes maybe ISO3200 at least is pretty sensible to still use.
and for jpg, every single ISO makes sense to use and same for movie mode, since pushing a processed file of 8bits is poor and i would be a nightmare to do it for movies anyway ...Show more →
Effectively increasing the ISO in CR or other software does essentially the same thing as increasing it in camera. It may look a bit different, depending on exactly what the differences are in how its being done, but it's the same concept.
i would say so (if, perhaps, slightly worse colors at ISO100-400, and this is jsut based on a guess about the CFA no real-world confirmation) and at high iso i would even say i'm really thinking based upon the true raw tests likely at least 1/2 stop better and myabe 1 stop better than 1DsMkIII!
bobbytan wrote:
Greg - check out this test .... scroll down to Post #17 for a more accurate comparison against the 1Ds Mk III. All that I want from the 5D II is a 1Ds III image quality for half the price .... and it does look like we are getting it!
Way to go! Order one from a store just across the border, so the overnight shipping is inexpensive!
dustinstone wrote:
It's still possible to support local retailers and not pay tax. I just had mine shipped to relatives in another state and will pick up tomorrow night.
Mel Gross wrote:
Effectively increasing the ISO in CR or other software does essentially the same thing as increasing it in camera. It may look a bit different, depending on exactly what the differences are in how its being done, but it's the same concept.
yeah, above ISO1600 this seems to be the case for just about every cam tested, no difference, in general concept, by just doing it yourself in software aside from the yourselif option lets you save highlights info that the in cam process would chop off for good.
below ISO1600 this is NOT the case, of course,particularly below ISO800, for the main ISO stops, in cam ISO settings the way to go for sure.
I don't know of any mail order store who would charge your credit card on order .... unless they are shipping the item within a matter of days. If it is a back order, they will not charge your credit card until they have the item are ready to ship. For those ordering from outside USA this may not apply though.
B&H does charge the card when the order is made, regardless of whether it's in stock, regardless of when it's shipped. That information is visible on the order form.
You guys don't pay "Use-Tax" on your internet purchases? I guess if you're not making any $ from your photography or your local laws don't require it, that is fine. But if in business...then just get a tax-exempt form and buy locally. Is everyone here not charging for their services? Just curious.
Don't know about your state, but in Illinois a professional photographer must pay state sales taxes on his professional equipment. The tax exemption only covers wholesale purchase of supplies that will be resold at retail to the final customer, such as frames, albums, mounts, et cetera.
Of course, everyone whether buying for business or for personal pleasure is expected to pay use taxes on anything purchased on the internet.
Skipping sales tax is essentially illegal in many states, and yes I know most people do it. However, some states have a formula for mail order and internet sales tax based upon your gross adjusted income that you use when filing your state tax returns. This is typically known as a state Use Tax. Many times it works out considerably less than the actual sales tax.
Of course I'd like to live in a state that has relatively low property tax and no state income tax like Texas.
