Specularist
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.9 #1 · Image Quality - A850 or D700 | |
I'll respond to a few comments before this thread slinks into the depths...
m_appeal wrote:
I haven't seen anything that would lead me to the conclusion tha 7d is better at ISO 1600. What images have you seen that make you think that?
Various online images including the sample shots at Imaging Resource. There's not much in it, but the 7D seems to have less chroma noise. After appropriate post-processing the full-frame Sonys do seem to have lower mid-tone noise (and better colour and fine detail), but I'm fairly sure the 7D has it licked in the shadows at high ISO (i.e. more dynamic range). Still, the difference is less than I had in mind when I posted earlier.
douglasf13 wrote:
The D3x already doesn't "blow the A900" out of the water, so I'm not sure a D700x will. While the D3x certainly has a better handle on shadow noise due to the 14bit processing (which may simply be multisampling from the 12 bit data,) the A900 has better color resolution. I know quite a few shooters who use both cameras, and prefer the A900 to the D3x in many instances. I agree that the D3x is probably the best all around camera, but it isn't the best at everything.
Agreed, but I think a D700 with D3X image quality would seriously cut into full-frame Sony sales. A lot of A850/A900 buyers are disaffected Nikon users (I shoot Nikon, by the way). You don't hear about many Canon users switching to Sony, because they have a high-pixel-count body in the 5D Mark II. Subtleties like viewfinder quality, colour rendition, and even dynamic range aren't big sellers in this market. Megapixels, video, frames per second, and an ISO knob that goes to 11 are. The 5D Mark II has been a huge success for Canon: much more so than the original 5D. I put that down to video and megapixels.
pascal03 wrote:
Just out of curiosity, which of these 3 camera's do you actually own or have used for more than 3 months ?
None of 'em. How can you tell? 
Kit Laughlin wrote:
A comment or two: yes, the VF is "only" 95%, but is is huge and bright, and its AF is excellent AND the Live View is excellent for work that is more critical than what 95% gives you. In architectural and product work (except for quick and dirty) it is Live View all the time for me (TS lenses in particular), and the results are fast to achieve and 100% reliable, and all parts of the image can be checked, unlike the 5DII, and at sub-pixel level if you need it.
Yes, for most people it's a perfectly good viewfinder, and Live View is great. The trouble for me is I want fast manual focus, and for that I need a good matte focusing screen. Nikon doesn't offer one, and that's a serious omission in a camera that is otherwise so sophisticated and well-designed.
As for adjusting ƒ-stop and shutter speed, I just can't see anything easier than front or back command wheels (and you can reset the standard function of either if you have a preference; you can set auto ISO to kick in at any minimum shutter speed; and there are other ways to, including direct exp. comp.—what were you looking for? The degree of customisation is large enough for me, at least, so I am not sure what you mean here. cheers, kl
I just meant that the D700 is extremely complicated, partly because it offers such an extreme degree of personalisation. Do we really need so many gadgets and gizmos to—ultimately—set an f-stop and shutter speed? I certainly don't. I suppose I prefer the approach that German designers take: choose the solution that is obviously the best and make the customers use it. 
foto-z wrote:
Why single out the EOS lens range as having some class-leading lenses? I can't think of any that are still in production (the long discontinued EF 200mm f/1.8 L USM was regarded as best in class but that's a rarity).
Well, I think Canon doesn't get enough respect for its optical prowess. The telephotos are all pretty great, and they've recently proved they can make world-class wide-angles and sell them at prices that must seriously worry Nikon and Sony: prices that can be afforded by determined amateurs. As far as I know, the 17 mm TS-E is the widest rectilinear lens ever (taking the 67.2 mm image circle into account), and it's pretty spectacular in optical quality. This should be an ultra-exotic lens, but it costs less than a camera on which to use it!
|
but I think more and more of the prospective buyers who are looking at Canon are taking a long hard look at Sony as well.
henrik add one more to your list 