gabimaster wrote:
I meant "perfectly usable"(with a little help from my friend-"Neat Image"),DAAN B.ANYway,if they put in the camera such an option(iso6400 and iso 12800),this means the sensor it must be a lot more capable than the D300's sensor!!!
You haven't seen the 50D ISO 3200 RAW converted samples that suffered from severe banding and chroma/luminance noise? I guess "very clean ISO 3200" is very subjective indeed...
I have for now 2*30D bodies,and with this "tool"(that was released 28 months ago)I can obtain a pretty good(very usable 1600iso images-indeed I shoot only JPEGs,I am a wedding photographer),so I think an 3200ISO it has to be equally good.
Please,don't tell me the old b**d s*it that a real photo guy shoots only RAW,My experience allows me to control the exposure very well in all conditions and save some space for me on the CF.And to post-process an Jpeg that is 3,6-4,1 MB in cs2 it can be done very well,no necessary to shoot RAW(only maybe if are not sure on yourself).
gabimaster wrote:
I have for now 2*30D bodies,and with this "tool"(that was released 28 months ago)I can obtain a pretty good(very usable 1600iso images-indeed I shoot only JPEGs,I am a wedding photographer),so I think an 3200ISO it has to be equally good.
That is what I was saying... If you use the in-camera high ISO NR when shooting JPEG's, you will probably get usable results. Although I doubt the 50D will be one stop better regarding noise levels than the 30D, the in-camera high ISO NR should be better. I think that if you compare a ISO 1600 and ISO 3200 unprocessed RAW file from a 30D and 50D, you will not notice much difference. Maybe the 30D RAW file will look even better...
gabimaster wrote:
Please,don't tell me the old b**d s*it that a real photo guy shoots only RAW,My experience allows me to control the exposure very well in all conditions and save some space for me on the CF.And to post-process an Jpeg that is 3,6-4,1 MB in cs2 it can be done very well,no necessary to shoot RAW(only maybe if are not sure on yourself).
Relax, I won't... I shoot JPEG with my 1Ds3 too (although not all of the time)
Sometimes I shoot 6-8 wedding in a week-end,I should become a crazy guy for long time if I had used RAW, no time for such kind of work,and I can postprocess the Jpegs very well in cs2,women love the portraits with nice skin and repaired nose and stuff,etc.
Now that 50D is here, all of a sudden my 40D is junk and just doesn't seems to take good photos anymore, I'm losing all my clients to the photog next door who just pre-order the 50D from local camera store, i'm losing sleep every night and can't stop thinking about how bad my 40D perform anymore. I must have the latest and greatest, give me 60D right now....not 18mo later, so I can get my clients back and take great photos again!! I can't do without the latest and greatest if you know what i mean, with the 60D I can be the world greatest photographer again.
Daan B wrote:
That is what I was saying... If you use the in-camera high ISO NR when shooting JPEG's, you will probably get usable results. Although I doubt the 50D will be one stop better regarding noise levels than the 30D, the in-camera high ISO NR should be better. I think that if you compare a ISO 1600 and ISO 3200 unprocessed RAW file from a 30D and 50D, you will not notice much difference. Maybe the 30D RAW file will look even better...
My friend you are full of assumptions about the new canon cameras (all negative) Why don’t you wait until we have them in hand ( or at least a real test) - What is your purpose? I THINK you may have a very large serving of crow coming-
Maybe the 5DMII will surpass your 1DsM3 IQ. ha
My friend you are full of assumptions about the new canon cameras (all negative) Why don’t you wait until we have them in hand ( or at least a real test) - What is your purpose? I THINK you may have a very large serving of crow coming-
Maybe the 5DMII will surpass your 1DsM3 IQ. ha
T
As if there is yet any evidence to support either of your arguments . . .
Rockies Photo wrote:
I've stopped coming to the Canon Mount Forum, because of post' like these. Everybody is always bi*chin' about what should come out next, or the features of the current cameras' are not good enough to capture images. Blah Blah Blah..... Can't we just go back to the days of a body coming out every 3-5 years.
If you have stopped why you here? just a silly little question and myself I love my 30D, 40D and want the 50D these are great camera maybe not for some of the snobs in here that think you must own a MKIII to take good shots. They will never come out with the perfect camera because they want us to upgrade every year. They just add enough good stuff to make you interested.
trenchmonkey wrote: coffee thru the nose...thanks!
Monkey, that must have hurt a bit
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Ah but he is an astral projectionist by trade.
.... Hmmm an Out of Body Experience Ehhh....
Definitely a possibility.
tanglefoot47 wrote:
If you have stopped why you here? just a silly little question and myself I love my 30D, 40D and want the 50D these are great camera maybe not for some of the snobs in here that think you must own a MKIII to take good shots. They will never come out with the perfect camera because they want us to upgrade every year. They just add enough good stuff to make you interested.
I needed to blow off some steam, so to speak.
I've been told, that I have a DRY SENSE OF HUMOR
I'm guilty of doing the upgrade thing myself, except every body I have owned, has been used: 20D, 30D, 40D,.. 5D, I will probably buy a 5DII, once the price has fallen or another 5D, & I love FF.... 1D2, 1D2N, replace the N's, with a 1D3N/4, whenever I'm not poor ... Then one day, when I am old & have money to spare, I will buy an H3D Body, and travel the world on my bicycle
Unfortunately, currently speaking, I'm a poor college student, and buy 90% of my gear off the B&S boards, after it has depreciated for several years.
I suppose people compensate with their wallets, much like short fat bald men drive lifted gas guzzling SUV's with obnoxiously loud tail pipes - Yes, you need attention, we get it.
Maybe they should look at some photo history books and feel bad (or maybe even inspired?!?) comparing their $10k+ trail of cameras to what some people shot on film with cameras that lacked auto focus and meters.
Don't get me wrong, if you get your jollies by geeking out and pixel peeping and "getting the best image quality" that you can afford for your candid shots of your dog running around in the grass and your cousins ugly baby, take joy from the wads of cash you are giving to Canon. I love you for it, it means someday, maybe in a few years, when my camera can no longer be repaired, they'll have enough of your money for R&D to make more great cameras.
The message is, enjoy photography. Photography is great. Art is great. Expression is great. Memories are great.
But if your enjoyment stems for spending vast amounts of money on the latest greatest gizmo, maybe take up a new hobby, like, seeing how many starving childen in Africa you can feed. It will be much more rewarding. Maybe you can send me a $1 pinhole camera and discover something amazing in them.
coffee thru the nose...thanks! 
. But a compliment to my huevos is welcome.