The Canon Vs NikonSony and the future sensor tecnology.

[melchiorpavone]

Ah, you mean Kodak and Agfa silver halide sensor with grain and dangerous chemicals?!

Best regards
Erik

Dangerous chemicals? What do you mean?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

The main reason I ended up with the chemical darkroom was respiratory irritation. Several developer agents are known to cause allergies. Was considering print processors for a while.

I switched to digital 1995, first scanning film later using digital sensors. Never looked back to film and wet darkroom.

Best regards
Erik

Dangerous chemicals? What do you mean?

[melchiorpavone]

Hi,

The main reason I ended up with the chemical darkroom was respiratory irritation. Several developer agents are known to cause allergies. Was considering print processors for a while.

I switched to digital 1995, first scanning film later using digital sensors. Never looked back to film and wet darkroom.

Best regards
Erik

If you use liquids and a well-ventilated working area you should not have any major difficulties.

[robdickinson]

Both excellent shots. And I think I have a good answer on my hands. I wonder how much background work in both these shots.

BTW RobDickinson, I didn't realize you were in my flickr contacts, your photos are insane, the Milford Sound one blew my mind (and so did this one).

Thanks! It was a craaazy weekend for sure.

The D810 shooters were mostly working with Schnieder 50 pc super anglon tilt shift lenses, these are pretty stunning (despite the reviews! There all wrong lol) and you can easily see the 36mp detail advantage. My pano was with a 16-35f4L Is, a decent lens but certainly a step back.

I think I had to work a lot harder to get my image, both in capture and post. its that that hurts, time and effort, filters, risk, it all adds up to more missed shots, more shots ruined, less compositions etc.

Also check out Jay Daley's set from the weekend
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jaydaley/

[powerslave12r]

Thanks! It was a craaazy weekend for sure.

The D810 shooters were mostly working with Schnieder 50 pc super anglon tilt shift lenses, these are pretty stunning (despite the reviews! There all wrong lol) and you can easily see the 36mp detail advantage. My pano was with a 16-35f4L Is, a decent lens but certainly a step back.

I think I had to work a lot harder to get my image, both in capture and post. its that that hurts, time and effort, filters, risk, it all adds up to more missed shots, more shots ruined, less compositions etc.

Also check out Jay Daley's set from the weekend
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jaydaley/

Thanks a lot. I agree with the opportunity cost associated with canon bodies. I'm actually considering moving on from my 6D despite not wanting to let go of the TS-E24II.

The photos from your buddy look excellent!

[BernardLanguillier]

Some very nice images here!

Cheers,
Bernard

[John Koerner]

Thanks! It was a craaazy weekend for sure.

The D810 shooters were mostly working with Schnieder 50 pc super anglon tilt shift lenses, these are pretty stunning (despite the reviews! There all wrong lol) and you can easily see the 36mp detail advantage. My pano was with a 16-35f4L Is, a decent lens but certainly a step back.

I think I had to work a lot harder to get my image, both in capture and post. its that that hurts, time and effort, filters, risk, it all adds up to more missed shots, more shots ruined, less compositions etc.

Also check out Jay Daley's set from the weekend
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jaydaley/

Wow, the colors and detail are almost surreal ...

Those are splendid!

[Jim Pascoe]

I was gifted a Canon body and lens at 16 years old and that is what I went with.  At the time of the EOS mount appeared, I thought long and hard about which brand to go to.  Since back then the bodies were relatively inexpensive it came down to lenses and operation.  I love the old all manual Nikon FM body.  I also like the rendition of Nikon lenses.  I thought both about the advantages of the new mount, Canon's financial were with all and what would be a better long term investment.  Having played with both and having friends with Canon gear, I am glad I chose to go Nikon.

I agree with the complication of modern cameras.  My main bitch is that there is not a setting on a modern camera that is mechanical.  Everything is set electronically.  Hence, Why in the hell do we not have the ability to make all those settings and save them?  I'm talking like 10 different banks setting absolutely everything (around some base factory settings) that can be named and commented and selected on the massive screens on these things.  I don't have D4, but maybe they can do that now at the upper end.  I shoot everything from night sports to macro and I have to discipline myself after I shoot to reset the camera to some base configuration so I don't screw myself up.  I actually went back to shooting Shutter Priority for sports because every time I used Aperture priority and the dynamic ISO with a minimum shutter speed set, I would forget to turn that off and be shooting a candid at ISO 800 and shutter speed of 1/500th.

They are too complicated for sure and I have fond memories of my Mamiya RB67 and Nikon FM2's

However cameras move on and I would not go back - least not for professional work.  Even for my personal work I love digital too.  My main work camera for the past 12 years has been the EOS1ds series.  I mainly use Aperture priority, sometimes manual.  It is such an easy camera to use - almost impossible to accidentally change any setting.  I set whatever ISO I need, change the aperture with my index finger, exposure compensation with my thumb, and quickly flick across the focus point selector points.  I also use a few manual focus lenses though I find them not easy to use through the viewfinder at f2!  Almost the only time I will use a menu is to format the card or synchronise the clock with another camera.  The 1Ds 3 could not be easier to use.  I can change any of the main settings without moving my eye from the viewfinder and the whole camera feels like an extension of my mind.  Now you cannot ask more than that can you?  It's a heavy beast but if anybody wants one they can be picked up quite cheaply used.

My latest camera is an Olympus E-M1 - now if you want to see complicated.........

Jim

[billy]

I am extremely close to making that decision myself.

I shoot macro, and Canon has some key lenses there (i.e., MP-E65), and (at the time of my purchases in 2009) the EOS 7D was "it" is far as crop sensor cameras go ... but that was quite a few years ago.

The 7D was a game-changer for Canon, it stood out amongst the crowd ... and it has remained unchanged for years ... while the 5D went from II to III, the off-brand Crops caught up and passed it, as well as Nikon, and hell, even the Canon Rebels passed it.

The new 7D needs to re-define Canon and be a prelude of things to come. If the 7D isn't a game-changer again, a truly significant upgrade to give me something to buy myself for Christmas (lol), then I am going to go with the D800 as you did.

I am hoping Canon doesn't disappoint, because they have sat on their @$$ for too long IMO.

Jack

Canon Rumors site has something about the 7d2 posted, sounds like a pretty lame update.

http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/09/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-specifications-confirmed/

[John Koerner]

Canon Rumors site has something about the 7d2 posted, sounds like a pretty lame update.
http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/09/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-specifications-confirmed/

Hmmm, I don't know what planet you're on, but those specs are pretty awesome compared to the other APS-C choices. I mean, they pretty much blow any other APS-C out of the water. Remember, this is a crop camera (for under $2,000), and you're getting 65 AF points, 10 fps shooting speed, GPS, dual Sensors, 100% viewfinder coverage, etc. That is basically pro-level performance on a pro-sumer body. (In fact, it actually has overall specs that are superior to the $7,000 Nikon D4!)

I agree, if those "dual sensors" are Digic 6, that this would be slightly anti-climactic, but to call the sum total of those proposed features "lame," for the level camera it is, is itself lame. Can you show me any any other ~$2,000 APS-C camera that can touch those features? I didn't think so.

Regarding the specific issue of the sensor, if you actually practice the art of careful reading, you will note the article does say (and I quote), "There could still be some surprises, especially around the sensor."

So we don't actually know what sensor is going to be used, but IMO those specs are pretty awesome for any APS-C, period, and would pretty much match any of the current "pro-sport" $6,000 - $10,000 cameras being offered today. Thus, while the new 7D might not quite have the D810's sensor, as an all-around package it actually is the better camera.

Hopefully, the sensor "surprises" are pleasant for Canon aficionados ... but even with "just" dual-Digic 6 sensors, it's an awesome overall APS-C package.

Jack

[John Koerner]

In fact, the Nikon D4 itself doesn't have quite the sensor of the Nikon D810 ... but yet it is the more expensive camera (twice the price). Why? Because it is more versatile and can actually "do more" than the D810.

So here we have specs on the 7D II that actually rival, and in some cases surpass, the D4 ... making it, too, an overall more useful field camera than the D810 ... but yet for less than $2Grand. That's pretty strong.

Not everybody's photography centers around just sitting there composing landscape shots or shooting other static subjects.

Jack

[Paul2660]

If you prefer the APS-C format, John, you may be right.  Actually it's taken Canon way to long to get this camera to market, and the sensor may actually be the same sensor that's already in the 70D, or very similar.  It will be like you say interesting to see the DR that Canon can get, but I also know a lot Canon shooters both video and non that are disappointed that there is no swivel screen.  Hope that Canon gets an significant increase in DR on this camera.  No wifi also, which I found surprising especially after the excellent implementation of wifi Canon did with the 6D. 

To me the D810/D800 surpasses the D4/s in most ways.  If I need APS-C format, it's there and I still have close to 16Mp of pixels.  The frame rate on the D4s is much faster, but I can live with the new 5 to 6 on the D810 depending on the mode selected. 
Noise, to be honest, I find both the D4s and D810/D800 pretty close unless you take the camera above 6400, which I never do.  I would rather have the 2 D810, (close to it) than the 1 D4s and be limited to only 16MP.  However I fully agree it's a individual choice. 

Canon, hopefully will allow some guidance on if they are planning a full frame update in 2015. 

Paul

[barryfitzgerald]

It's likely the sensor is identical to the 70d which is decent but isn't a big step up over the previous ones, the main pull was the live view off the sensor.
Based on that info it's about in line with what I'd expect the AF system getting a fairly serious update, understandable considering the target market (and A77II's AF boost AF wise) I personally think Canon are right to go with GPS I use it..Sony were wrong to remove it and go with NFC and Wifi (fine have them but don't kill the GPS)

As far as market well there is room for APS-C, but it depends on the price too. I'll only pay so much for a crop sensor and a high price will only appeal to sports/wildlife shooters

[John Koerner]

If you prefer the APS-C format, John, you may be right.  Actually it's taken Canon way to long to get this camera to market, and the sensor may actually be the same sensor that's already in the 70D, or very similar.

Hi Paul;

If the specs on the 7D II are what that article says they are, I simply am right: there is no APS-C that comes close.

The specs basically rival all current pro-level, full-frame, sports-like cameras (D4 / 1Dx) ... at 1/4 the price ... let alone blow the doors of the other ASP-Cs. That is pretty freaking awesome any way you want to slice it.

And I do prefer APS-C for macro and telephoto, yes.
However, if I were a 100% landscape shooter, I would have the D810.

Regarding how long it took to come out, while I admit have been wanting an upgrade on my 7D for a year or so, I think the 7D was such a good camera for the money, that it pretty much just "stood there" as the benchmark for the APS-C class for quite awhile.

It will be like you say interesting to see the DR that Canon can get, but I also know a lot Canon shooters both video and non that are disappointed that there is no swivel screen.  Hope that Canon gets an significant increase in DR on this camera.  No wifi also, which I found surprising especially after the excellent implementation of wifi Canon did with the 6D.  

Regarding DR, having 2 Digic 6 sensors will already improve what it was, and having 65 AF points will make nailing key compositions easier as well. If the 7D II has some "new" sensor, so much the better, but already I am very pleased with what I read: I will basically be able to get a D4 or 1Dx specs for less than $2K.

Regarding the LCD, I don't really like a swivel-LCD, quite frankly, nor do I use wifi.

Still, all of this is speculation at this point, so we will see what it really has to offer soon.

To me the D810/D800 surpasses the D4/s in most ways.  If I need APS-C format, it's there and I still have close to 16Mp of pixels.  The frame rate on the D4s is much faster, but I can live with the new 5 to 6 on the D810 depending on the mode selected.

I am sure, to many, the D800/10 is the choice. If sensor is the key consideration.

However, when the sum total of features is added-up, then to Nikon (and, really, to most photographers out there), the speed/versatility and full complement of features found in the D4 makes it the better camera ... as the price reflects

And, sure again, there are plenty of fine shots that have been taken by 16 mpx ASP-Cs, but (let's be real) these lessor tools still aren't going to match the overall usefulness that this new 7D II looks to be.

To get those kinds of performance specs, at that price point, will definitely resonate with most people who are actually out there shooting sports/wildlife seriously (though maybe not 100% landscape/static shooters).

Noise, to be honest, I find both the D4s and D810/D800 pretty close unless you take the camera above 6400, which I never do.  I would rather have the 2 D810, (close to it) than the 1 D4s and be limited to only 16MP.  However I fully agree it's a individual choice.

I hope there is less noise in this new 7D II than the 7D I had.

It took a gazillion nice shots with my original 7D, but I wanted better in some cases. Especially low light.

I got rid of my 7D earlier in the year, in anticipation of this new one coming out. Haven't even shot in a couple of months. By the end of this year, I am either going over to Nikon (if the 7D II doesn't impress me), or I am going to upgrade to the 7D II (if it does). As far as an overall package, I am already sold on what it can do (if the reports are accurate). I already know that, as an APS-C, strictly on the issue of the sensor, it is not going to surpass the D810 to the pixel-peeper committee (any more than the twice-as-much D4 does). However, as an overall field tool, the 7D II already blows the D810 away, so if the image quality legitimately passes the old 7D, it is already a huge bargain in my eyes. Especially at that price point.

And even more especially when compared to every other ASP-C on the market.

Canon, hopefully will allow some guidance on if they are planning a full frame update in 2015.  
Paul

I am curious to see the next iteration of their full-frame as well.

Jack

[robdickinson]

I'm right on the precipice of leaving canon bodies.

Over the next couple of months I will either move entire over to nikon D810, supplement my 6d with a sony a7 of some description, buy a miracle new canon ff body.

I dont want to shift mounts, quite heavily invested in canon mount lenses, but the sony path is fraught with issues.

Least likely? the new canon body.

I have a d810 coming on loan from Nikon for trial.

[John Koerner]

I'm right on the precipice of leaving canon bodies.
Over the next couple of months I will either move entire over to nikon D810, supplement my 6d with a sony a7 of some description, buy a miracle new canon ff body.
I dont want to shift mounts, quite heavily invested in canon mount lenses, but the sony path is fraught with issues.
Least likely? the new canon body.
I have a d810 coming on loan from Nikon for trial.

If the majority of what you do is landscape, I don't blame you, because the ONE thing the D810 excels at is the #1 thing you need.

However, if you're a nature photographer (i.e., you photograph living things that move), or a sports photographer, then the new 7D II is pretty exciting. Especially for the money.

Here is a specs comparison I just drafted-up:



Bright Green = Best In Class
Medium Green = Tied for Best

It's pretty much a landslide for the 7D II, IMO, as far as best features for the least money.

Sure, the D7100 is a little cheaper, but it doesn't stand out over "everyone else" in a single category.

By contrast, the 7D II actually stands out in any number of ways and (presumably) is under $2000 ...

Jack

[NancyP]

I am stoked about the 7D2 as a wildlife camera. If the price of $1,800.00 is right, this might be the best-value-for-money upgrade from a 60D and 400mm F/5.6L combo (budget birding combo). Yes, it would be ideal to be shooting songbirds with a 1DX and 600mm f/4 L IS II, but that would be ten times as expensive an upgrade. Seeing as I am also shooting with a 6D and scavenging to fill focal length coverage gaps with ancient film-era all-manual lenses from the back of the closet, I don't see that I am going to go out and get a D810 or Sony A7r plus Schneider 50mm TS lens or monster Otus either. Hey, I need to spend some money on trips and a seminar or two (NANPA this February?) to improve the brain and eye!

P.S. Those old manual lenses are rather pleasing to use - yes, I am sure that a low-priced or mid-priced modern 100mm lens can have better resolution etc than the 40 year old Nikkor 105 f/2.5 - but I just have fun with the old-time manual lenses. Gateway drug to a Zeiss 135mm f/2.8 Apo? Perish the thought!

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

If you regard the crop factor as an advantage when shooting wildlife, which I would suggest is a reasonable thing to do, I would suggest that you also check the pixel pitch. The pixel pitch is the deciding factor how much resolution you get from a telephoto lens. I would say the Nikon D7100 is a small bit ahead the 7D with 3.9 micron pitch versus 4.2.

There are lot of other factors involved, like the excellent 200-400 lens you mentioned with 1.4X extender built in, accuracy of autofocus etc.

Best regards
Erik

If the majority of what you do is landscape, I don't blame you, because the ONE thing the D810 excels at is the #1 thing you need.

However, if you're a nature photographer (i.e., you photograph living things that move), or a sports photographer, then the new 7D II is pretty exciting. Especially for the money.

Here is a specs comparison I just drafted-up:



Bright Green = Best In Class
Medium Green = Tied for Best

It's pretty much a landslide for the 7D II, IMO, as far as best features for the least money.

Sure, the D7100 is a little cheaper, but it doesn't stand out over "everyone else" in a single category.

By contrast, the 7D II actually stands out in any number of ways and (presumably) is under $2000 ...

Jack

[John Koerner]

I am stoked about the 7D2 as a wildlife camera. If the price of $1,800.00 is right, this might be the best-value-for-money upgrade from a 60D and 400mm F/5.6L combo (budget birding combo). Yes, it would be ideal to be shooting songbirds with a 1DX and 600mm f/4 L IS II, but that would be ten times as expensive an upgrade.

I don't mind the expense, if I am getting something for the money. Again, if I were shooting only landscape, I would for sure go with the D810.

But not so as a wildlife photographer. The most important lens I can think of, and one which I am insanely committed to *wanting* to spend nearly $12,000 on, is the Canon 200-400 with the built-in 1.4x extender  

If the 7D has all of those specs, and remains a 1.6x crop, my wildlife focal shooting range with that combo (when I am done saving/spending) will be 320-896 mm, which is almost mind-boggling as to its flexibility.

If I saved and bought the D810 + Nikkor 200-400, I would only have a 200-400 mm. Is the resolution of the Nikon combo going to be 'that' noticeable on a book/website/magazine-sized image? I doubt it. How big do I need to blow-up a photo of a hummingbird, a butterfly, or a mountain goat? I doubt there will be any legitimately-noticeable difference in image quality ... but I do not doubt for a minute that I would be FAR better served, as a wildlife shooter, with DOUBLE the range available on a 7D II + 200-400/1.4x combo ... plus DOUBLE the FPS shooting rate. (Ditto that for a sports photographer.)

It is a more advanced, flexible overall combo than even the same 200-400 on a Canon 1Dx ... or possibly anything else.

Seeing as I am also shooting with a 6D and scavenging to fill focal length coverage gaps with ancient film-era all-manual lenses from the back of the closet, I don't see that I am going to go out and get a D810 or Sony A7r plus Schneider 50mm TS lens or monster Otus either. Hey, I need to spend some money on trips and a seminar or two (NANPA this February?) to improve the brain and eye!

LOL, honestly, if I were going to get a manual lens like the Otus, which pretty much is NOT for movement, but for precision (static) shots, I would put it on a D810, not a 7D II

P.S. Those old manual lenses are rather pleasing to use - yes, I am sure that a low-priced or mid-priced modern 100mm lens can have better resolution etc than the 40 year old Nikkor 105 f/2.5 - but I just have fun with the old-time manual lenses. Gateway drug to a Zeiss 135mm f/2.8 Apo? Perish the thought!

With controlled macro, I prefer manual focus. Wish the Zeiss 100 macro was 1:1 ...

Jack

[John Koerner]

Hi,
If you regard the crop factor as an advantage when shooting wildlife, which I would suggest is a reasonable thing to do, I would suggest that you also check the pixel pitch. The pixel pitch is the deciding factor how much resolution you get from a telephoto lens. I would say the Nikon D7100 is a small bit ahead the 7D with 3.9 micron pitch versus 4.2.

I definitely consider the 1.6x an advantage for wildlife photography, for the previously-stated reasons you mention

Thanks for the reminder on the pixel pitch (versus the old 7D of 5 years ago); my grid was versus the proposed new 7D II. (The old 7D is still a stout camera.)
It will be very interesting to see what the final, actual specs are on the new 7D II, compared to these others, once it comes out.

Curious though; on your chart the pixel pitch is 4.9 on the D810, and 4.2 on the old 7D, but only 3.9 on the D7100. Are you saying less is better?

Hi,
There are lot of other factors involved, like the excellent 200-400 lens you mentioned with 1.4X extender built in, accuracy of autofocus etc.
Best regards
Erik

Exactly, which is why I made that little matrix and tried to articulate all of the factors.

Each camera may have an advantage or two ... but, as a whole package, at least to the wildlife photographer, I think the 7D + 200-400 will be *the* ultimate combo.

I hope it comes out actually as good (or better) than it's speculated to be

Jack