Choosing the Right Camera System

[synn]

I really think you should actually try the cameras for a while before you form these opinions. Paper specs can only tell you so much.

For example, the AF module in my D800 focuses even with an 8 stop ND on it. That's about as bright as moonlight. The D750's AF module is an updated version of that module and I can't expect it to do any worse.

Or how about the fact that you don't even need to look away from the viewfinder on a nikon to do exposure compensation. If you switch on "Easy exposure comp." in the menus, in both S and A modes, the secondary dial would do the compensation without pressing any additional buttons.

Make no mistake, I am not discouraging you from going for the canon if that's what your heart is set on. Just saying that the reasons you use to eliminate the Nikon don't quite add up on scrutiny.

[Guillermo Luijk]

Part of the advantage to a FF system is I would say is that you need to ETTR less for fast moving scenes with bright highlights since your noise threshold is lower.

It seems carved deep in many people's beliefs that FF has better IQ than any smaller sensor, no matter what technology is involved. Let's make things clear: in the 6D you need to ETTR more to avoid shadows noise than in the E-M1. The D750 beats both the 6D and the E-M1 by a good amount (in the case of the E-M1 this was expected according to the difference in sensor size):




This means that if in your application ISOs over ISO800 are not involved, you don't need to ETTR more on the Olympus than on the Canon, despite the Canon sensor being 4 times larger.




It also means Canon sensors today have lost the dynamic range battle. Tomorrow, who knows?. A FF sensor is better than a smaller one only comparing equivalent technologies, but technologies vary from one brand to another and from one year to another.

My personal opinion is that with today's top sensor technologies, the only two strong reasons to prefer FF over smaller formats are the ability to achieve shallow DOF and the possibility to use legacy 35mm lenses in their native focal length. Image IQ is now secondary for most applications vs size, weight, price, lens availability, second hand market,...

Regards

[allegretto]

1) I think you're being very hard on Walt. It's his choices, now at least three of you have had your say. Some great deal.to say in fact

2) you can show mw all kinds of spec sheet and DxO stuff. My personal experience is that only of size does your Oly win between the Canon and it.

3) Cameras are a tool. Some inspire one photographer, some another

4) Amazing that this forum has soooooo many anti-Canon folks. It's a great line of cameras and glass. Where the power button is puts you off on the 6D...? Really...? Well first, I never accidentally hit a remote power button. In fact, many cameras have "outboard" power buttons. Talk about tenting at relevance... Is this what you think about when you entertain a system purchase?

5) Sadly Walt, you might consider locking this thread again. You were right it's come back to a shoving match by the Nikonistas.

You Nikon guys are right. Nikon makes a fine system. But so do others. Including Canon. You're entitled to your bias of course... as he is to his. New features and 127000 cross-focus points are not deal makers for me. I shoot action just fine with limited focal points over several systems. Count your pixels, multiply by focal points and raise to a power of the fps and that's how to rate a camera system..., right?

Glad I got something out of the early posts

[Guillermo Luijk]

4) Amazing that this forum has soooooo many anti-Canon folks.

I am a Canon user, both APS and FF. I am simply not so blind biased towards any brand as you are. And I don't have an E-M1, nor ever had any Nikon.

[allegretto]

I am a Canon user, both APS and FF. I am simply not so blind biased towards my camera as you are.

and what exactly is my "blind bias"?

[Guillermo Luijk]

and what exactly is my "blind bias"?

When someone talks about anti-Canon guys when he is just shown objective measurements, you are clearly biased.

[allegretto]

When someone talks about anti-Canon guys when he is just shown objective measurements, you are clearly biased.

well ya know... I had a cup of coffee and considered your point.

the nicest thing I can say is that we both appear biased if that's how you define "bias".

- According to you, I'm affected since you can show me bench-data that you feel you also see in the pictures that bothers you, and so you bring out your broad brush and paint Canon and by association users as myself as biased and likely at least "wrong" if not intellectually suspect.

- According to me, photography is far more than a spec sheet. having worked in Consumer and Professional Electronics years ago. I've seen many a spec sheet. However good a Marketing tool, in many cases, especially in something as interpretive as Photography, the spec sheet, whether put out by the Company or derived by "Independent Sources" does not tell the story.

You really think your POV is the only valid one I guess.

I think different

Bias? Well only if you'll admit to yours too.

BTW, why don't you switch brands?

[synn]

I don't consider myself to be a hater of anything. I just use what works for me. This is why I have a (much hated on this forum) phamiyaleaf system and a Nikon kit in addition to that. I might add a sigma DP to the arsenal soon. Or maybe a Sony. Whoever that makes what I need. I also regularly process canon files for other folk. I know how they behave in post.

Trust me, I would much rather recommend (and did) a Sony mirror less to the OP than a Nikon, but it seems that he only wants to choose between two brands. All we are saying is, if he sold his oly kit to get a monumental rise in IQ from a full frame setup, he will be a tad disappointed with a 6D. Would he have more creative possibilities due to the extensive lens lineup? Absolutely. More than any other brand can offer. But the files themselves will be lacking. This is not an opinion, but a fact.

All that said, the best camera is the one you forgot at home. Shot this with a 5D2. Could have been better, but client is happy. Who am I to complain ?
http://www.sandeepmurali.com/p332193870/h521f3888#h521f3888

[Nick Walt]

Woah, dudes! I leave the room for half an hour and everyone is fighting!

synn, I agree that I really need to spend more time with the cameras. I have handled then in store for a few solid hours and this is based on those perceptions.

I had the opportunity to configure the easy exposure setting on the D750 and it worked as advertised in aperture priority mode. However, the display isn't as sophisticated as the E-M1, which shows the scale and a +- value, as well as the camera's suggested exposure.

I also thought the Canon's display was clearer than on the Nikon, too.

I am aware that the Canon has a lower dynamic range than the Olympus, but I've seen the noise from m43 and it just cannot hold a candle to the full-frame in the 6D, unfortunately. I took images from the D750 and 6D to compare noise characteristics. It's not just the noise difference I see but overall tonality and acuity at higher ISOs.

The little Oly sensor just gets stressed quickly, long before the 6D's.

[BernardLanguillier]

Ah, okay. I also found the display of the metrics in the viewfinder of the 6D to be better, with more clarity. When I spun the rear wheel (on the outside of the 8-way controller) there seemed to be more precision as it interacted with the two displays. Easier to adjust exposure compensation and other things. I thought it would be the opposite. I really like the joystick on the D610 and D750.

Surprisingly, I found the 8-way controller to be easy to use and I preferred the design of the menu system in the 6D. Again, the combination felt more precise and easier to manipulate. Not something I expected from just looking at it. I like the fact that the D610 has the joystick up near the top, next to the thumb.

The dials on the D750 were disapointing when compared to those on the E-M1. I preferred the dials on the D810, and the rear wheel on the 6D after using the side of my thumb instead of the tip. The haptics of the wheel is surprisingly good when used this way.

I found the rear display on the 6D to be a bit clearer than the D750, and when I looked at the highlight warning on both cameras the 6D was easier to spot them. Although, both had flashing black over the highlights and the Olympus was orange and easier to see.

Compared to the E-M1, the tilting rear display seems cheap and plasticy, adding to the sense of imprecision to the camera body. Although, the grip created a similar balance that I experienced with the E-M1. The similarity between the two was immediately apparent despite the difference in size. In contrast I didn't like the 6D as much and it pulled more on my wrist. But I was prepared to hold it more with my left hand to compensate.

I found the top display on the 6D to be a bit easier to isolate information. Although this kind of thing can be overcome by familiarity it can still be distracting if you never get used to the layout. It's like muscle memory, if you have it one way it can be hard to feel comfortable another way. When I ride a motorbike I am instinctively more comfortable taking fast left corners than I am taking fast right corners - I'm a lefty in this way.

I am wondering if those that really like the way Nikon designs the control systems on its cameras would like the Olympus or the Canon, or even the Ricoh GR (which I liked and found quite remarkably intuitive after just spending five minutes with it). There were features that made themselves apparent just through exploring without thinking to deliberately get a result. It's one of those devices where you just go wow, that is just so cool. You marvel at the ingenuity in the design.

The E-M1 is like that. This is also how I found the 6D, although to a much lesser degree. Yet, significantly more so than the Nikon, which is why I reacted to it so strongly. I wanted to like the design ethos because the grip was awesome and the technologies are kick ass. But it just got in my way too much and wasn't fun when compared to the others. I kept saying that if I am serious about photography all this wouldn't matter. But what if the next Nikon was the same and I just became more weary?

So, I'm okay about getting something good enough, perhaps second hand, with the perception that the system will evolve in the way I like. Following on this line I would buy a full-frame E-M1 even if the lense range was not well developed. I trust Olympus' design choices enough that I would commit. Alas, no full-frame now or in the foreseeable future.

Understood.

Apologies, but I don't see a single point in your list that affects significantly actual image capturing abilities.

The only conclusion I can draw from your decision to focus on these points is that your interest is not in capturing images but in handling cameras in a way not related to the the capture of photographs.

That is of course fine, but we would have saved time had you told use from the onset that photographic outcome isn't a priority of yours.

Cheers,
Bernard

[allegretto]

All we are saying is, if he sold his oly kit to get a monumental rise in IQ from a full frame setup, he will be a tad disappointed with a 6D. Would he have more creative possibilities due to the extensive lens lineup? Absolutely. More than any other brand can offer. But the files themselves will be lacking. This is not an opinion, but a fact.

No, it's not FACT. It's your considered preference or opinion. I have likely been shooting as long as you. No, I'm not a pro, but I do seem to be able to discriminate between images. I pay spec sheets no mind and see photos as I see them. Then judge based on what I see, not a diode. In fact, I'm "sighted bias' it is our spec sheet that is "blind" in truth.

To my eye the 6D is a more pleasing image at Base ISO with better toning on both LR and C1 than many cameras out there. once you push gain it is clearly superior to most, if not all smaller sensors in terms of noise, color acuity and detail.

You may see it differently and I have no call for any disagreement. But to wave a sheet of paper in front of me and tell me "forget your lyin' eyes..."?

Wont happen. I like my outcomes. Hope you like yours, that's all. We just don't agree on endpoint. If you look at pictures and like what you see it's all good. these are pointless arguments

[Guillermo Luijk]

On another forum, at my request a Canon 6D and Nikon D750 holder performed a test over the same scene in order to compare high noise ISO. Both cameras were set at f/5 and 1/400, ISO51200, so received the same amount of photons (fair comparision). In this situacion the Nikon won by a narrow margin. Pure RAW data interpolated with DCRAW without white balance nor colour profiling conversion. To compare noise all that is irrelevant.


These were the two JPEG embedded in the RAW files:




These were the RAW histograms (the 6D showed lower RAW levels):




Noise comparision (100% crops):

[allegretto]

I'll assume you meant to settle the discussion but you see

- I don't have access to the original here, so cannot judge balance. So "real" isn't in play here. Both images are nice
- Noise is slightly greater in the 6D, but seems similar and clean up should be no problem with either. No?
- Last I checked 750 was FF, no?
- Is the Canon not as "pushed" in gain in that graph? Or are you showing me a stop more DR? Either way... not sure what that means to me. If I push that cr2 on exposure and take down the luminance/saturation I bet they would be very close indeed. But can't know for sure.

What is it about using what you like that seems so alien? I happen to like both images. Either will do for the setting chosen. With skin tones I'm afraid I do not like the Nikon/Sony weighing. Far too red/maroon/org for me it seems. I think Canon much more pleasing. You could show me all the graphs you want. BTDT.

Didn't use one brand of guitar either. Different sounds for different ... well, sounds

[Nick Walt]

Bernard, I appreciate your sentiment and clearly if anyone really desires to take photographs they'll use whatever they can get their hands on. I agree with that sentiment, to a point.

Guillermo, those images are interesting. Are there any comparisons at 800/1600/3200/6400?

[rpsphoto]

Nick,

If I were starting fresh I would look at the Sony A7r and the Zeiss lenses designed for that mount.

Michael Reichman, in his article about the Pentax 645z, makes the point that how a camera feels and operates will often trump technical specs in his decision making. That works for me as well.

Best of luck,

Bob

[Guillermo Luijk]

Guillermo, those images are interesting. Are there any comparisons at 800/1600/3200/6400?

Yes he made shot at all high ISOs. Since SNR doesn't change above ISO1600-ISO3200 for a given exposure I just picked the highest ISO in the set to compare SNR.

If the links still work here you are:

Nikon D750
https://mega.co.nz/#!yJo3jKqR!0ugrN_...u49UIlarJ1YF7A

Canon 6D
https://mega.co.nz/#!iJg2hKKQ!3YGUVp...0AN0dHOUJhUOjU

[Guillermo Luijk]

I'll assume you meant to settle the discussion but you see

- I don't have access to the original here, so cannot judge balance. So "real" isn't in play here. Both images are nice
- Noise is slightly greater in the 6D, but seems similar and clean up should be no problem with either. No?
- Last I checked 750 was FF, no?
- Is the Canon not as "pushed" in gain in that graph? Or are you showing me a stop more DR? Either way... not sure what that means to me. If I push that cr2 on exposure and take down the luminance/saturation I bet they would be very close indeed. But can't know for sure.

What is it about using what you like that seems so alien? I happen to like both images. Either will do for the setting chosen. With skin tones I'm afraid I do not like the Nikon/Sony weighing. Far too red/maroon/org for me it seems. I think Canon much more pleasing. You could show me all the graphs you want. BTDT.

Didn't use one brand of guitar either. Different sounds for different ... well, sounds

You were upset from the very beginning everytime someone gave some info that didn't put your beloved camera at the top. This is not new, forums are full of fanboys. I am not wasting my time in those discussions, sorry.

[Jim Pascoe]

Guys, guys, guys..... Please! 

We are talking cameras here - it's not rocket science.  I cannot seriously believe anyone thinks there is more than a smidgen difference in image quality between Nikon and Canon - or even Sony or Pentax for that matter. Even the Oly or Panansonic are good enough most of the time.  Unless you have a very specific requirement - perhaps a tilt-shift lens or a particular need for 36 megapixels.

Nick - I said it before - you are over thinking all this.  You're only buying a camera not the company.  Don't try to speculate the future intentions of any of the companies.  Whatever body you buy, within three years you will be changing it because it will be soooo dated.  They all take good pictures - if you have the skill.  Just see which one fits your hand and eye the best - you will not go wrong.

Jim

[Fine_Art]

Or buy a used cockpit so you have more dials.

[allegretto]

You were upset from the very beginning everytime someone gave some info that didn't put your beloved camera at the top. This is not new, forums are full of fanboys. I am not wasting my time in those discussions, sorry.

I'm not a bit upset. I'm not a fanboi. Have Canon, Leica and Sony right now, use them all frequently.. had Nikon up until about a year ago with a great body, the D4. Have Oly on the shelf but rare/almost never use it anymore.

Considering a GH4 for video, but don't think I want to go deep into smaller sensors

You're the one who is itching to prove others "wrong". Should a buy a car like yours? Drink a beverage like yours? Wear clothes your style because you do?

I want everyone to like their equipment and have fun, be creative. You're the rigid one. Just re-read what we each wrote... no upset at all, I like what I like, and hope you do too. My message hasn't changed, you keep escalating. and now you're calling me names. not compelling stuff I'm afraid.