Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 14   Go Down

Author Topic: Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs  (Read 105073 times)

AndreNapier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 422
    • Andre Napier Photography
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #40 on: December 20, 2007, 01:46:44 am »

There are at least 100 high-end Canons and die hard Canon owners for each MFD. In this fight no MFD has even any chance to get inside a ring. I hereby declare Canon undisputed and still Champion of the World, and now please everybody move back to their respective corners.
Next week featured fights:
Major League : Canon Vs Sony
Minor League : Phase  Vs Hasselblad
Andre

Sorry for the humor but it is getting really hard to take this seriously by now.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2007, 01:49:29 am by AndreNapier »
Logged

yaya

  • Guest
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #41 on: December 20, 2007, 01:47:33 am »

Quote
Yaya,
That might well be the case, but your argument is not convincing. If theory is at odds with practice, specifically with regard to these DoF issues, then please elaborate. Give us some details.

I don't have the luxury of being in a candy shop where I can test all sorts of expensive and exotic equipment to my heart's content. I rely upon forums like this to get useful information on equipment which might suit my purposes.

I might add, if I had bought a 1Ds3 my first priority would not be to see how it performed at f16, although eventually I would get around to testing the camera at that aperture and comparing the results at f8 or f5.6.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161919\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ray,

Many professional photographic dealers offer a "try before you buy" arrangement.

Buy A back and test it. And if it doesn't fit the purpose or does not fulfil that big promise, send it back.

You will then be able to post your results along with files that you have shot under any conditions that suited you, fair or not.

Yair
Logged

KevinA

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 979
    • Tree Without a Bird
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #42 on: December 20, 2007, 03:05:32 am »

Quote
Here we go again... while I do not generally see the point of this comparison,

The post is intended to sell more MF backs, it's advertising and marketing pure and simple. One thing it does prove is that in general photography a P30 is at no disadvantage to a P45. If the Canon was as good as a P30 then the world would be a strange place indeed.
For somethings the Canon will be better than a P45 for others it wont. This test shot could of been done with a Betterlight then the Phase might of looked wanting. How you get the advantage of a P45 onto paper compared with a Canon is probably the biggest weak link in the quality chain (that and clueless designers).

Kevin.
Logged
Kevin.

awofinden

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 173
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #43 on: December 20, 2007, 03:17:06 am »

I've owned both the canon 1ds mark 2 and the P21 and this test perfectly demonstrates the differences. I wish it weren't the case, the canon is a lovely camera to use, it's just not as sharp and doesnt have the latitude that the p21 has. Simple as that.
Logged

geotzo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 231
    • http://www.georgetzortzis.com
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #44 on: December 20, 2007, 03:17:43 am »

Quote
hi Rainer,

absolutely in accordance with you!

Cheers,
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161809\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Me too people. Things also evolve continuously. I am currently using both formats (a 1ds and a P25)  and one thing is for sure, that in a few years both will become out of date by some new tech Dslr or other format. Will that make these cameras bad in any way? I think not. We try to get the best we can for our demands and obviously our pockets. I remember those days I was taking pictures with an H5 !!! It now sounds like a joke and I clearly remember people with attitude claiming dslrs will never get there... what is wrong with them? I would never feel offended or anything like that if one said my x camera or system is no good, as long as I do the best I can with the right tools and those are the best of what I can afford. Its only electronics, no  offense...  
Happy holidays to all,
George
« Last Edit: December 20, 2007, 03:20:10 am by geotzo »
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6638
    • My gallery on Instagram
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #45 on: December 20, 2007, 04:08:11 am »

Quote
It's a matter of simple mathematics that the smaller sensor cannot compete with the larger sensor (of similar pixel count) unless the lenses used with the smaller sensor are better, that is, have a higher MTF response at the same spatial frequency.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161880\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


"Simple Mathematics" - isn't that an oxymoron ?

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6638
    • My gallery on Instagram
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #46 on: December 20, 2007, 04:24:26 am »

Jeff,

 Welcome back in the ring after your stint as a writer ! I see you are back at your fighting weight !

 Every test reflects the abilities and intentions of those who set it up. It Capture Integration are willing to do one and show the results, they should be thanked nicely for the effort, maybe informed politely of procedural mistakes, but I don't think they need free psychological counselling from an unlicensed practitioner

 I would like to thank Capture Integration for their work so far, and extend to all others an invitation to carefully criticize Capture's test process so future results become more informative.

Edmund

Quote
I don't know you, your company or Lance from Adam. But from the first post, the "test" seemed to beg to have all the shortcomings pointed out. The fact that you (since Lance hasn't bothered to return) seem to to have a bit of a short fuse, I'm not sure that posting such tests is in your best interest...you would be better off sicking to retail sales rather than independent testers...being an impartial tester is not for the faint at heart...and you might want to spend some time reading the flak that Michael gets (that should be a clue) and he couldn't care less what "others" might think.

See, that's what you should expect when you stick your head up...bugs in your teeth!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161909\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

Frank Doorhof

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1522
    • http://
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #47 on: December 20, 2007, 04:26:03 am »

It will be an ever continueing battle from people who like one and like the other.
But mostly from people who don't use both.

ALWAYS it's the lens, well lenses can make a difference, a huge one, but not THAT huge, trust me I have shot with Sigma, Tamron and the most expensive L lenses, there is a difference and a big one.
But to say a 85mm 1.8 is a joke on a 1DsIII is like saying you can't make a photo without standing on your head.
The 85mm 1.8 was one of my most used portrait lenses because it was RAZORsharp and had great contrast.
Remember you are stopping down, not shooting wide open.

Than the questions about aperture.
As yaya mentioned, there is NO comparision.

I have shot pictures on f8.0 with the MF system that my Canon could not pull of on f4.0, and I could not really shoot higher than f11 (max f16) on my Canon without SOME form of softening (not really bad but it was there).
With the MF system I shoot alot of my studio work on f16.

The results here mirror my experience.
If you WORK on a file from a DSLR you can get very very close, so for some people it's a nobrainer buy the DSLR.
However if you want the absolute best and NOT have to work on your files buy into the MF system, it's as clear as day.

The problem is that there are so many variables that you can go on fighting forever.

Just take pictures with both and see
Logged

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #48 on: December 20, 2007, 05:41:01 am »

i can tell that i use both and that i tried to get out the maximum in terms of quality of both systems. i owned or own kodak 14n +  slr, canon 1ds1+2+ 5d, 22 + 33mp sinar backs, i have used for shorter periods much more tools and know how far i can come with 35mm, using adaequate lenses and postpro. therefor i resist myself so much if it is claimed that mf  will jump in your eyes for its quality advantages. it will not.
i made big productions, reproduced worldwide and printed in any sizes, with my old kodak slr camera, using it with greyfilters @ iso6 and mixing it with 4x5" slides which i scanned on my scanmate5000 drumscanner. used the 4x5" for the right light and the kodak for the right light. this camera was a beast but absolutely comparable with the 22mp backs of this time in terms of DR and noise,- if used at its iso6 setting. not in terms of resolution ( if not stitched ) and less of workflow speed. at that times the schneider 24xl or rodenstock 28HR were not existing and i needed wideangles at most, so mf was not an option for me.  ( i bought maybe 10 - 15   35mm WA lenses just to sell them immediately after,  for too much moustache distortions ).

if i look at this images today i would not have any problem to publish them wherever i want in terms of quality.
i still regularely publish images shot with a ( good sample ) of the 12-24 sigma lens on the 5d. doublepage printed and mixed in publications with my rodenstock HR lenses and the 33mp backs its not possible to see the difference, ( if the image has not to be cropped ). not  for my clients ( which could not be more demanding as they are ) not for  the printing houses or magazins.
funny not? but thats my reality, which is a demanding one.
never the quantity of my output leads me, but the quality.

i just have to refer to sw tools as  photoacute or photomatix. this are fantastic programs  to tune cameras and even if its just a canon G9 , printing results can be absolute on top,- if someone knows  to use and to postpro the files. of course   i would not like to shoot my architecture or museum shots with the g9 ..... but i want to bring the things to a realistic level to help people to have clear ideas about this stuff.

ofcourse there are advantages of MF and they are huge, but i rarely find that people writing and knowing about the real ones..... instead hyping comparations and weighting them wrong or repeating blindly marketing bs about 16bits , dr, colors , moirees or not , sw correction of lenses , cf and how to make it disappear and other things more.

anyway i dont like also that this mf forum is so much flooded now by people who are not using this gear, just speculating teoretically. they really cannt see the advantages if they never tried out this gear and it bores to discuss so much up and down with them. and there is a clear tendency to defend the gear someone already owns, does not matter if this is a mf camera or a 35mm camera. so many of the discussions at the moment about this decision questions or comparisons are very boring for me. here i went in because i think its not help to publish comparisons which are made with purposes which seem to be to sell one think....
its just water on the mules of people who want to defend blindly their canon stuff they own.

but esp. the canon 1dsmk3 seems to me a great tool. on par with the 22mp backs in most respects,- but system immanent not available with the same lenses than this backs can be used. this is for me the biggest limitation, i need shiftable lenses and there are really immense differences between the 35mm stuff and the schneider or rodenstock lenses. i dont know much about the other mf lense because they live in the shade of my work. i own a contax with many lenses and newly use a sinar m as well,- but to be honest..... i never compared them seriously with my canon lenses ( as i never did with my leica stuff as well. i simply liked the leicas in the film days which are over for me ).
i usually take out the mf gear and the results are great. if i need i take out the 5d and the results are printably..... but of course the files are not on par with my sinar backs. i prefer 33 or 39 mp resolution also ...... and sometimes (!) i even need it. just smetimes.... but this times have paid my backs easily.
e.g. i just had last summer an unforseen exhibition. i had a large shooting in genebra and the client felt in love with the images and organized an exhibiton of 18 motifs of the shooting. all made in best quality in a size of 160x2,20mtr. i sold all 18 images and i hardly doubt that i could have done this with my 5d.

but on the other hand i am nearly sure that i would not make bad work with 35mm as well. using than the 1ds3, zoerk adapters with pentax lenses from 35 mm up. zoerk adapter with a mamiya 28mm lens, 24mm olypmpus shift lens, 12-24 sigma and some more and stitching and stacking a lot. unfortunately the system than  wouldnt be so much cheaper ...... so why not to take the "real" stuff and work 100% faster and still better.

anyway. i am tempted to make some "free" production some time in the sooner future with my g9 using the sw i named above. just love this little camera.

at the moment i do the contrary. i shoot mines in south spain. all  shots with sinar e75lv, gottschalt, contax and sinar m. all treated as HDR images, the resulting quality is incredible.

so i am afraid i will remain a little bit contradictorily.


[attachment=4325:attachment]
« Last Edit: December 20, 2007, 05:55:34 am by rainer_v »
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

Frank Doorhof

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1522
    • http://
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #49 on: December 20, 2007, 06:17:03 am »

Wonderful shot.

I have never really looked at the marketing side of things, I do post them for people to point out difference.

The main reason for ME was pure own interest.
My customers couldn't care less I'm afraid, although it does help to show up with a different camera than the rest

The BIG plus for me is the bigger sensor and the depth I get in the pictures, I have always called this the 3D effect, the problem is that many people don't see it and only look at 100% crops or pixelpeep.
The second thing for me was dynamic range and the sharpness out of the cam.

During the workshops I shoot to a PC and students are amazed with the fact that I pull shadow detail out of the setups WITHOUT photoshop while their files (1DsII/5D/40D/D3 etc.) are blocked up.
Also the sharpness is something they immediatly see.

The 3D effect is hard to see in certain setups, but when you have the right light it's stunning.

I recently was in LA and did some personal shooting there in for example Joshua tree and the backparts of LA, I shot with both the 5D and the Mamiya + leaf.
Resolution wise both cameras are hardly seen apart on A2 prints, the leaf is more detailed but not as much as most would expect.
HOWEVER, when you look at the depth in the pictures, or better maybe the sense of being there again the MF system wins hands down.

It's easy to explain.
You can shoot with a 35mm a wonderfull wide angle like shot without the strange artifacts a 15-20mm will give you on the DSLR.

For portraits I love to use the 120mm macro for example, with the DSLR I was always stuck at 100-135mm (FF) to get the best results. And that gives a totally different picture than the 120mm on the MF system.

So to be short, there are differences.
The question is do you see them or do you need them.

To be honest PURE economical I think the MF system is for MOST appliances not a good choice, but I also want to have the feeling I'm getting the absolute best out of my sessions for myself and than..... well the choice is easy
Logged

Sean H

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 332
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #50 on: December 20, 2007, 09:41:36 am »

Quote from: rainer_v,Dec 20 2007, 06:41 AM
"i can tell that i use both and that i tried to get out the maximum in terms of quality of both systems."

Rainer, this is an important point that you make.  No one system can do everything all the time and people need to realise that.


Quote
"I just have to refer to sw tools as  photoacute or photomatix. this are fantastic programs  to tune cameras and even if its just a canon G9 , printing results can be absolute on top,- if someone knows  to use and to postpro the files. of course   i would not like to shoot my architecture or museum shots with the g9 ..... but i want to bring the things to a realistic level to help people to have clear ideas about this stuff."
"I just have to refer to sw tools as  photoacute or photomatix. this are fantastic programs  to tune cameras and even if its just a canon G9 , printing results can be absolute on top,- if someone knows  to use and to postpro the files. of course   i would not like to shoot my architecture or museum shots with the g9 ..... but i want to bring the things to a realistic level to help people to have clear ideas about this stuff."

That's another good point and I appreciate what you and the other professionals have done for us, teaching us and helping us learn, giving us tips. It has been very valuable for those of us who are about to enter the world of DMF photography.

Quote
"anyway i dont like also that this mf forum is so much flooded now by people who are not using this gear, just speculating teoretically. they really cannt see the advantages if they never tried out this gear and it bores to discuss so much up and down with them. and there is a clear tendency to defend the gear someone already owns, does not matter if this is a mf camera or a 35mm camera. so many of the discussions at the moment about this decision questions or comparisons are very boring for me. here i went in because i think its not help to publish comparisons which are made with purposes which seem to be to sell one think....  k....
its just water on the mules of people who want to defend blindly their canon stuff they own.

Your observations match mine. I don't know why people are like that. Perhaps some of it is defending the decision that they made not to get DMF; perhaps some of it is jealousy or envy. I think that it was Nickolaas DB who said something on the forum that having a high-rez DMF camera/back was like having a rolls royce or high end mercedes...and other people have compared them to porsche. Perhaps some people feel insecure about their non-DMF purchase(s) or their work and feel the need to defend not having a DMF camera? Or maybe they think that we are crazy for owning one or planning to buy one (in my case) and try to point that out, many times not in the most polite manner.

I am grateful to the photographers here, who have given me their advice and time. That is something that is priceless. I also thank them for the shots they have shared with me, taken with a high-rez DMF - they are amazing

Quote
but on the other hand i am nearly sure that i would not make bad work with 35mm as well. using than the 1ds3, zoerk adapters with pentax lenses from 35 mm up. zoerk adapter with a mamiya 28mm lens, 24mm olypmpus shift lens, 12-24 sigma and some more and stitching and stacking a lot. unfortunately the system than  wouldnt be so much cheaper ...... so why not to take the "real" stuff and work 100% faster and still better.
but on the other hand i am nearly sure that i would not make bad work with 35mm as well. using than the 1ds3, zoerk adapters with pentax lenses from 35 mm up. zoerk adapter with a mamiya 28mm lens, 24mm olypmpus shift lens, 12-24 sigma and some more and stitching and stacking a lot. unfortunately the system than  wouldnt be so much cheaper ...... so why not to take the "real" stuff and work 100% faster and still better. so i am afraid i will remain a little bit contradictorily. [/QUOTE]


Rainer, its ok to be contradictory about your tools and work -- that is what real life is like. We need different tools for different situations and you use whatever you think is best. Your website is a tribute to good photography with DMF. It speaks for itself. I was impressed by the shot that you posted, presumably from a mine in Spain. It was stunning and would make a great poster!

Kind regards,

Sean
« Last Edit: December 20, 2007, 09:50:05 am by Sean H »
Logged

jpjespersen

  • Guest
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #51 on: December 20, 2007, 10:14:46 am »

This statement lacks thought.

Quote
...One thing it does prove is that in general photography a P30 is at no disadvantage to a P45. If the Canon was as good as a P30 then the world would be a strange place indeed.
For somethings the Canon will be better than a P45 for others it wont. This test shot could of been done with a Betterlight then the Phase might of looked wanting. How you get the advantage of a P45 onto paper compared with a Canon is probably the biggest weak link in the quality chain (that and clueless designers).

Kevin.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161928\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6638
    • My gallery on Instagram
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #52 on: December 20, 2007, 10:56:26 am »

If a 39 MP back without micro-lenses or anti-alias filter is in any way comparable to a 22MP dSLR then the lens mounted on that back must be a piece of junk. It's time the MF manufacturers gave us a better class of glass.

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #53 on: December 20, 2007, 11:02:05 am »

Quote
If a 39 MP back without micro-lenses or anti-alias filter is in any way comparable to a 22MP dSLR then the lens mounted on that back must be a piece of junk. It's time the MF manufacturers gave us a better class of glass.

Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=162009\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
there are fantastic glasses out. asidethe rodenstock and schneider which mayn cant use for shooting the wrong subjects ( anyway i am happy about that .... ) my contax lenses as well my sinarm lenses are really great. suppose the same bout hassy and ( most ) mamiya lenses ...
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

MarkWelsh

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 79
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #54 on: December 20, 2007, 11:29:19 am »

Quote
Ah but Ray, then the exposure would be different as well.  Do we change ISO to compensate and add noise?  Add a ND Filter and thus more glass?  Change shutter speeds?

Yes . . . you change shutter speed. The 35mm lens should be two stops wider open to make allowance for the smaller format.
Logged

jing q

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 594
    • we are super
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #55 on: December 20, 2007, 12:35:27 pm »

Quote
Yaya,
That might well be the case, but your argument is not convincing. If theory is at odds with practice, specifically with regard to these DoF issues, then please elaborate. Give us some details.

I don't have the luxury of being in a candy shop where I can test all sorts of expensive and exotic equipment to my heart's content. I rely upon forums like this to get useful information on equipment which might suit my purposes.

I might add, if I had bought a 1Ds3 my first priority would not be to see how it performed at f16, although eventually I would get around to testing the camera at that aperture and comparing the results at f8 or f5.6.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161919\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ray ray ray. haven't we gone over this before.
spend less time on the internet with these forums and go try a camera
if you need some contacts on who to approach in Asia to try a medium format system, I"ll be happy to provide you with some.
Logged

thsinar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2066
    • http://www.sinarcameras.com
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #56 on: December 20, 2007, 12:39:33 pm »

I've invited him since a long time!

 

Thierry


Quote
if you need some contacts on who to approach in Asia to try a medium format system, I"ll be happy to provide you with some.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=162041\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Thierry Hagenauer
[email protected]

TMARK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1841
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #57 on: December 20, 2007, 01:57:26 pm »

This is my first post and is a bit of a rant, so please forgive me.

All this testing is useless.  Only YOU can decide if a back/camera will meet your needs.  YOU have to test the equipment in your workflow and under your tyoical shooting conditions.  

The stark reality is that it doesn't really matter which system you use.  It all comes down to how you work, how much you need to crop, and the final destination for your shots.

I shoot beauty for magazine publication, not for an LCD. The differences between the Canon and Phase backs, while very apparent on an Eizo and before any post work, disapears once the files are retouched and sent to print on a crappy web press somewhere in the midwest.  

Case in point:  I don't own a back. I rent two or three times a month, usually a flavour of Leaf and always on someone else's dime. I was shooting on location when the A22 I rented refused to talk to my AFd (turned out the AFd was the culprit).  Half hour later still no love.  I finished the shoot with my 1ds2 (which I own).  I processed the files and sent them to the client and then the approved shots to the retoucher (who bitched about the Canon color and abrupt high contrast tonal transitions), and what do you know, they look as good as MFDB files in print. Not as large, sure, but for a full page in a mag they look just fine.  

My advice: If you are a hobbiest, have at it.  You have no ROI to think about and no overhead keeping you up at night.  If you intend to make money, really look at your needs. Landscape, movements, etc. MFDB (or really, film) makes some sense.  Fashion, street, commercial work outside of major markets, 1ds2 will be fine. For products and beauty, MFDB is becoming the norm.  But remember, you don't have to BUY a back.  Rent backs on the client's dime.  Even $500 editorial jobs will pay for extensive rentals.

And for all the testers out there debating whether He-Man could beat the Hulk in a cage battle underwater, at night, in zero gravity, let me tell you how most photographers test gear.  First, we id a problem with whatever we are using now.  For me, on a 1ds2, it was DR, flat color and tonal gradations, and the time it took to fix these problems in post or the way it made me change how I light. I rented a Sinar 54m in 2003 and shot a model test.  Problems solved: plenty of shadow detail, smooth tonal  transitions, amazing color.  I still have these images in my book.  I did not shoot a parking lot, a brick wall, my cat (yes I have a cat), a step wedge or some goof ball from my Camera Club.  I test gear as if I were shooting a job, which reveals more to me than any Step Wedge shot in 1/3 stop brackets.  Food for thought.  Enjoy
Logged

snickgrr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 270
    • http://
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #58 on: December 20, 2007, 02:30:30 pm »

Quote
AMEN to TMARK!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=162086\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You've got another Amen, here brother.
Logged

canmiya

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 158
    • beyond stills
Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs
« Reply #59 on: December 20, 2007, 02:32:23 pm »

Quote
AMEN to TMARK!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=162086\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
i'll second that!!!
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 14   Go Up