Fat Dave
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.10 #2 · RG on 1D Mk IV autofocus performance | |
Many people seem to think because Rob finds the camera not focusing perfectly in some situations that he is implying it is incapable of taking good pictures.
Obviously he is not. In fact he clearly points out that in some circumstances, the camera takes a tight grip on critical focus and maintains it throughout the sequence, superior to how any other body performs. It's obviously quite capable in many circumstances, and he makes that point repeatedly.
Others seem to think that because Rob finds the camera not focusing perfectly in some situations, that this is some sort of insult to them personally, their skill level, their choice of gear, their sexual prowess, god knows what.
This is one man testing gear in his environment, using his methodology, and reporting his results. Nothing more, nothing less. He doesn't "slam" the camera. He reports in which situations he was able to get it to work well, and in which situations it struggled.
I'm a Canon shooter through-and-through, but if there's an issue that needs to be looked at, then why not look at it? I didn't believe it was POSSIBLE that the 5D2 could have a low-ISO cross-hatch noise problem in certain situations. Then I did some more thorough testing, with my own camera, using my own methodology, and lo and behold, low-ISO cross-hatch noise...
Somehow, this discovery didn't make me less of a man.
Do I hate Canon now? nope. Will I switch brands and go to the Dark Side? nope. Overall, I still think that Canon has the best tools for what I do, and by and large, I'm extremely happy. But I do think they need to fix some stuff. Nothing more, nothing less. None of the bodies are perfect - they all have their own strengths and weaknesses. Exploring these strengths and weaknesses help all of us in our purchasing decisions, as well as helping guide the manufacturers. I'm confused why this article has caused such a backlash from so many.
I'll just copy and paste my reply from the other thread:
-----
"Regarding the Nikon ads, I'll tell you that RobG is no Nikon fanboy. He shoots a ton with Canon still, as he has for eons. He's been playing with that nice fat 400/2.8 IS lately...
Secondly, if you've ever had the opportunity to talk with him, you'll know very quickly that he's an extremely analytical thinker. You may not find his tests to be the most scientific ever devised, as he devises tests that suit what he shoots. His goal, as with most people, is to find the best tool for the job. One of the best ways to try to establish which tool is best is to take a couple to a "job site", and try them, to see which one performs better.
Wickerprints (and others) noted that comparing different resolution cameras at 100% to compare focus were biased in favour of the lower-resolution camera. This is absolutely correct. However, as RobG noted in his article, "The EOS-1D Mark IV, on the other hand, produces many more frames that are too soft to use for anything, no matter how sweet the moment". It's not a matter of a slight bit of misfocus that may be unnoticeable on a lower-resolution sensor. It's a pure miss.
I had a chance to talk with Rob when he came back from his first tests of the 1D4 w/1.06 in the states. It's not a camera he dislikes inherently - in fact I think he WANTS it to be good. But when I asked him about the focus versus the multi-coloured "dot" Mark 3's, he asked me "well, how long have you got?" He has tested it extensively enough in his environment to know when it is more or less likely to misfocus (right down to what singlet colours perform best and worst, in myriad situations and lighting), and he knows how that compares to every other tool he's tried.
He's a skilled tradesman looking for the best tool for the job."
-----
|
