Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 11   Go Down

Author Topic: canon ?  (Read 48988 times)

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: canon ?
« Reply #80 on: December 25, 2014, 05:34:31 pm »

+1!

That really is the bottom line, Edmund.

Dear Eric,
 This reminds me of the joke about Goldmann Sachs, who for a long time had as a company motto that they did extremely well by making money for their customers, until one day they decided they were just going to make money for themselves :)

Edmund
« Last Edit: December 25, 2014, 05:52:16 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: canon ?
« Reply #81 on: December 25, 2014, 10:18:38 pm »

The D3x was great -ask Bernard

Yes, the D3x was great but it's so far behind the D810 it's not even funny.

The D3x was IMHO the first camera that made it possible to drastically reduce the usage of HDR techniques and was therefore a key milestone in the history of DSLRs. Unfortunately its high price point and bulky looks made it little appealing to many.

I am sure you would enjoy the 1Dx that appears to be an outstanding camera, but, at this point in time, why not wait for its successor?

Cheers,
Bernard

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: canon ?
« Reply #82 on: December 25, 2014, 10:44:47 pm »

Yes, the D3x was great but it's so far behind the D810 it's not even funny.

The D3x was IMHO the first camera that made it possible to drastically reduce the usage of HDR techniques and was therefore a key milestone in the history of DSLRs. Unfortunately its high price point and bulky looks made it little appealing to many.

I am sure you would enjoy the 1Dx that appears to be an outstanding camera, but, at this point in time, why not wait for its successor?

Cheers,
Bernard



Sorry, no more expensive untested new gear for me.
At the moment my old stuff is more than enough, and I look forward to the used market :)

Edmund

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

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3369
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: canon ?
« Reply #83 on: December 26, 2014, 05:51:36 am »

At the moment my old stuff is more than enough, and I look forward to the used market :)
+1 here. 2014 has been the first year I haven't bought any photographic hardware in over forty five years, all I've spent money on is film/ink/paper and one minor software upgrade.
The benefits of the latest 'cutting edge' kit are just too small to be worth the expense.
I've still shot lots of images I'm very happy with though.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: canon ?
« Reply #84 on: December 26, 2014, 10:08:28 am »

+1 here. 2014 has been the first year I haven't bought any photographic hardware in over forty five years, all I've spent money on is film/ink/paper and one minor software upgrade.
The benefits of the latest 'cutting edge' kit are just too small to be worth the expense.
I've still shot lots of images I'm very happy with though.

Sure, but it still is fun to shoot with the latest stuff!


This is a corrected version of the original image.





Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: December 30, 2014, 10:38:41 am by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3369
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: canon ?
« Reply #85 on: December 26, 2014, 01:20:38 pm »

it still is fun to shoot with the latest stuff!
I'm over that now. It's just kit.
Logged

dwswager

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1375
Re: canon ?
« Reply #86 on: December 26, 2014, 04:29:35 pm »

+1 here. 2014 has been the first year I haven't bought any photographic hardware in over forty five years, all I've spent money on is film/ink/paper and one minor software upgrade.
The benefits of the latest 'cutting edge' kit are just too small to be worth the expense.
I've still shot lots of images I'm very happy with though.

While I agree with this in principle, I would argue the 2nd point.  I love to hold onto gear because the longer I work with it the better I become utilizing it.

But 2 cameras this year seem to stand out.  The D810 and the 7DmkII.  If you think of the D810 as a minor refresh to the D800e, you would be mistaken.  It is better in dozens of ways that when all wrapped together make a camera that seriously could have been a D900.  I almost bit on the D800 and am just giddy that I waited because I would not have been able to afford an upgrade.  Anyone that owns a D800/D800e and cannot afford to upgrade should not try the D810.  It will make you cry.

And while it is a relatively inexpensive, cropped sensor camera, that really doesn't improve the sensor much (1 stop DR at high ISOs only) it does pack a variety of functional improvements over the 7D.  Least among these being the 65 all cross type sensor focus system and additional 2 fps.
Logged

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3369
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: canon ?
« Reply #87 on: December 26, 2014, 04:41:52 pm »

While I agree with this in principle, I would argue the 2nd point.
You could try, but you'd need to come up with some more compelling reasons than....
Quote
65 all cross type sensor focus system and additional 2 fps.
I only ever use the centre focus point on my 5Dii and then over-ride manually if required, as for an "additional 2fps" ? I only ever use the camera on single shot mode anyway.

I'm sure some folk might find this sort of feature an advantage, but it's just gilding the lilly for most people. Are they really seeing that much better results from these sort of minor incremental improvements ? I don't think so.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2014, 05:26:25 pm by Rhossydd »
Logged

dwswager

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1375
Re: canon ?
« Reply #88 on: December 26, 2014, 06:05:15 pm »

You could try, but you'd need to come up with some more compelling reasons than....I only ever use the centre focus point on my 5Dii and then over-ride manually if required, as for an "additional 2fps" ? I only ever use the camera on single shot mode anyway.

I'm sure some folk might find this sort of feature an advantage, but it's just gilding the lilly for most people. Are they really seeing that much better results from these sort of minor incremental improvements ? I don't think so.


LMBO.  Of the 2 cameras I listed, D810 and 7DmkII, you seem to have focused on the wrong camera considering your shooting style.  As a Full Frame camera shooter without the need to for all out frame rate, the the D810 is a massive upgrade from the 5DmkIII.  36 vesus 22 megapixels, 3 EV more DR, higher color depth and significantly better high ISO performance. 

I agree that the 7DmkII features are gilding the lily for probably 95% of all potential buyers, but for those that need the functionality it is a significant step up from the 7D.  And for the rest of us, the much better image quality out of the D7100 at half the price would be the way to go.
Logged

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3369
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: canon ?
« Reply #89 on: December 26, 2014, 06:54:34 pm »

massive upgrade from the 5DmkIII.  36 vesus 22 megapixels, 3 EV more DR, higher color depth and significantly better high ISO performance. 
"Massive upgrade" ? You're falling for the hype of the numbers.
The real issue here is whether you'll get a better photo hanging on your wall from it.
Do you print huge prints of images taken in low light with massive dynamic range than needs to tonally compressed ? If so, you're in a very tiny minority of photographers.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: canon ?
« Reply #90 on: December 26, 2014, 09:56:51 pm »

"Massive upgrade" ? You're falling for the hype of the numbers.
The real issue here is whether you'll get a better photo hanging on your wall from it.
Do you print huge prints of images taken in low light with massive dynamic range than needs to tonally compressed ? If so, you're in a very tiny minority of photographers.

If you consider the 5DII and D810 to be similar in performance, then the good news is that you'll indeed never have to buy another camera, they will all be identical by definition, be it a next generation Canon. ;)

The same applies to lenses, where is "good enough"?

That does make sense if you adhere to the whole LoFi philosophy and/or never felt the need to shoot with negatives in the film days. Most photographers I know shooting weddings, natural light portraits, architecture/interior, landscape,... do feel the need for more DR. Actually, the only guys who don't are studio shooters working with controlled light (product, fashion,...).

Another question is how you view the, probably universal, quest of craftman to continuously improve the "quality" of their work?

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: December 26, 2014, 10:27:36 pm by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3369
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: canon ?
« Reply #91 on: December 27, 2014, 05:29:28 am »

If you consider the 5DII and D810 to be similar in performance
Looked at objectively there's not a huge a mount of difference in the end results for the majority of photographers.
I doubt if you go to an exhibition of good prints you'd be able to pick out one contemporary digital camera from another. When I go to shows like the travel photographer of the year etc. where all the prints are the same size, printed to the same standard. Seeing differences between digital cameras is effectively impossible.

You might see these sort of differences when there really are 'massive upgrades' eg when resolution does effectively double(ie megapixels squared) like from a canon 10D to a Canon 5Dii, but for the minor upgrades along the way that just add a few more megapixels, the odd stop or two of speed or DR it doesn't really make any significant difference to the end result.

Quote
the good news is that you'll indeed never have to buy another camera
Right now I'm old and objective enough to hope that might be the case. I'd rather spend money travelling and taking photos than just buying new kit. It's a mug's game being sucked into the marketer's hype.

Quote
Another question is how you view the, probably universal, quest of craftman to continuously improve the "quality" of their work?
It's never a simple 'can it be better ?' issue. The question is 'Is it worth upgrading ?'
This 'massive upgrade' from a 5Dii to a D810 would cost me in excess of £10k to change system, for a difference I'd hardly ever be aware of it ? it makes no sense.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: canon ?
« Reply #92 on: December 27, 2014, 06:26:07 am »

Looked at objectively there's not a huge a mount of difference in the end results for the majority of photographers.
I doubt if you go to an exhibition of good prints you'd be able to pick out one contemporary digital camera from another. When I go to shows like the travel photographer of the year etc. where all the prints are the same size, printed to the same standard. Seeing differences between digital cameras is effectively impossible.

I was not trying to convince you to switch brand, the cost would indeed be very high. The differences would not be obvious if you print A3.

Cheers,
Bernard

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3369
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: canon ?
« Reply #93 on: December 27, 2014, 07:03:58 am »

The differences would not be obvious if you print A3.
Which is pretty much my point.

Very, very few people actually make prints bigger than A3. A fair number of those that do make prints bigger than A3 don't need high resolution anyway because they're printed on low resolution materials like canvas.

Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: canon ?
« Reply #94 on: December 27, 2014, 07:38:09 am »

Which is pretty much my point.

Very, very few people actually make prints bigger than A3. A fair number of those that do make prints bigger than A3 don't need high resolution anyway because they're printed on low resolution materials like canvas.

Agreed overall, but some canvas such as Lyve from Breathing Colors are able to reproduce very fine details.

I am looking as I write this at a 6 feet wide canvas print from a 250 megapixels file and people 1-2 kms away that are 2mm tall can very clearly be distinguished.

Cheers,
Bernard

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8914
Re: canon ?
« Reply #95 on: December 27, 2014, 07:58:31 am »

To add some fuel to the speculations, here is a recent interview with the Senior Managing Director Image Communication Business Division, Maeda Masaya.

Although the automatic translation is pretty poor, it looks like Lens performance (including Image Stabilisation, weight reduction, and resistance to mechanical impact forces, etc.) is still high on the To-Do list for 2015 and foreseeable future (rather than rely on postprocessing). There is a new lens line(?) under development. There seems to be a preference for an optical viewfinder rather than an EVF, and electronic shutters are not quite where Canon wants their quality to be, or so it seems. Medium format does not seem to be on the list, because there is still  alot of potential in the current sensor sizes, and it would require to manufacture a lot of new stuff anyway. There are also some suggestions that a high pixel count camera is in the works, but one never knows for sure with the Japanese (who have a had time to say no, and rather beat around the bush). I can't decipher whether Dynamic range is that important to Canon, who seem to also see a general slowdown in market acceptance of annual upgrades, which therefore might reduce their willingness to invest in that direction, who knows?

The article leaves me with more questions than clear answers, but I thought sharing it to be more useful than whining about the slow evolution.

Cheers,
Bart
« Last Edit: December 27, 2014, 08:06:21 am by BartvanderWolf »
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

dwswager

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1375
Re: canon ?
« Reply #96 on: December 27, 2014, 10:22:43 am »


Quote "the good news is that you'll indeed never have to buy another camera"

Right now I'm old and objective enough to hope that might be the case. I'd rather spend money travelling and taking photos than just buying new kit. It's a mug's game being sucked into the marketer's hype.


This is precisely why I bought the D810.  It was the 1st full frame DSLR, in my price range, that I wouldn't mind having for an extended period of time.  It's overall performance and functionality would be good enough.  While the D700 is a great camera, I would not want that level of performance to be my STICKING point.  And the D810 is currently cheaper ($2999) than the 5DmkIII ($3099)! 

And there are some significant ways where D810 has changed how I shoot because of its capabilities.  First, I shoot a lot of amateur sports.  The D810 can shoot in a 1.2x (24MP) and 1.5x (15.6MP) crop modes. The 5DmkIII would be about 9.6MP in 1.5x crop mode.  In the DX mode it shoots 6fps w/o the grip and 7fps with it.  This is equivalent to the D7100 (also no OLPF so very sharp) I currently use and the D300 I used previously.  I use the DK-17M 1.2x magnifying eyepiece so while the viewfinder is cropped, the eyepiece give most of that back.  In addition, I can decide if 15.6MP is enough and gain a little DOF if I want for some images.  Now I have one camera that can  perform well at all the tasks I have.  I haven't decided to sell the D7100 yet, but the D810 versatility makes that a viable option!

Second, I shoot a lot of multi-shot images.  Not true panoramic, but 3-6 shot images.  With previous cameras it was automatic to do this with the camera in vertical orientation to give enough vertical resolution, especially allowing for alignment and stitching losses around the outside.  Not always the case with the D810.  Now I make a decision on each case depending if it is something I might want to print super large or just large.  I can execute in 2 to 3 landscape shots what might have taken 3 to 6 verticals previously.  This is especially convenient with rapidly changing light conditions!  It gives me the choice of more resolution or more efficient capture that I didn't have before.

Another thing I gained is the ability to do a lot more available light photography.  While the D7100 sensor is better than the 5DmkII and most cropped sensor cameras, it really topped out at about 1600 ISO for my tastes.  The D810 is usable for me out to 4800 and even 6400.  I'm just not so quick to pick up the speedlights or even hook up the White Lightnings as I was with the D300 and even the D7100.

I don't care about people switching brands as I'm not a Nikon Fan Boy.  I am very vocal of criticism of Nikon when they pull stupid like not releasing updates to the massively popular D300 or D700 for example.  And I stuck with Nikon during a long drought where Canon was just out classing them.  But there is a reason someone previously commented on the hallowed D810.  After just a month or so with it, I am finding out just why it is hallowed.  This thing is a massive step ahead of any other general use DSLR.
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: canon ?
« Reply #97 on: December 27, 2014, 10:51:21 am »

Sure, but it still is fun to shoot with the latest stuff!

*

*

*

Cheers,
Bernard


Honestly, there is nothing distinguishably excellent about those shots, Bernard, compared to what some other camera could have achieved.

The truth is, you could have got the exact-same qualitative results with just about any modern camera, and no one would know the difference.

In fact, 99.99% of all magazine cover shots, awarded photography, etc. were all taken with cameras that are "less than" what today's cameras are capable of.

I do think it's good that camera manufacturers continue to strive for improvements on their equipment, but the truth is any of today's top models/lens combos is capable of stellar shots ... and so to split hairs over DR etc. is a bit daft, really.

With the level of equipment today, being at the right place, at the right time, is going to be more important to a person's taking great images than "which" of today's top cameras he brought.

Jack
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: canon ?
« Reply #98 on: December 27, 2014, 10:59:11 am »

This 'massive upgrade' from a 5Dii to a D810 would cost me in excess of £10k to change system, for a difference I'd hardly ever be aware of it ? it makes no sense.

I agree.

In truth, the images Bernard typically posts from his hallowed D810 aren't anything that couldn't be duplicated with a D700 or a 5D MkIII.

I am sure there are certain situations where the qualitative difference might be noticeable, but in most of what Bernard posts I don't see the need for a D810 over anything else that is currently available.
Logged

CptZar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 157
Re: canon ?
« Reply #99 on: December 27, 2014, 11:44:13 am »

Well, there is a difference in requirements for photographing objects with leaves as the background, where DR is never a problem, and landscape photography where high dynamic range is very much appreciated.

That is why ND Grads are very basic filters for landscape photography. They are especially useful for darkening skies. And they are used very frequently. Sony sensors like in the D810, are able to get a scene right without the use of those filters, as heir dynamic range covers it, most of the time.

Now you, Jack are very keen on nature photography, and dynamic range is obviously no the point where you feel your camera is lacking. For you AF, and fast usability is of much more importance.

That is not splitting hairs, but facts. Can't you live with the fact, that there are differences in systems, and at the given moment Canon is not on the lead in terms of sensor design? There is lots of guys here, who know a lot about sensors technology and you may find will a lot of post concerning the matter. Maybe, Canon will come up tomorrow with a new shining 50MP sensor which will satisfy those who demand more DR. But as of today there is none.

DR is not a virtue by its own by the way. But it gives you much better control over the RAW files during post production, without  color noise  like in the shadows of the present Canon line up. 

This is what Diglloyd writes when testing the 5DMKIII:

Start Quote:
To see streaking pattern noise at ISO 100 is disturbing for a $3500 camera, but this example shows clearly that the Canon 5D Mark III made little progress in this regard over its predecessor.

Uniform grain-like noise is not objectionable. But any kind of pattern noise is disturbing, and greatly reduces the versatility of image making.

To have pattern/streaking noise at ISO 100 shows that the camera has poor quality electronics. Since the Canon 5DM3 costs $1000 more than the 5DM2 and has had 3 years for development of higher sensor quality, this is astonishing.

End Quote

Cheers


Jan



  

« Last Edit: December 27, 2014, 12:14:13 pm by CptZar »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 11   Go Up