Home | Open Account | Help | 317 users online |
Member Login
Discussion
Media SharingHostingLibrarySite Info |
Railfan Technology > Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...."Date: 05/12/16 08:47 Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: Mgoldman Well - it's not looking good for Canon 5D Mark III owners impatient for
a long delayed upgrade. The hoped for jump in dynamic range looks more like only a step in a recently released test of the $6,000.00 Canon 1D X II by DP Review. This camera, like new Canon 80D has the imagining processor located on the sensor (like Sony /Nikon) which is said to be a key factor in improving the image quality, most notibly, the dynamic range (think detail in the shadows and /or the abillity to push the exposure when /where underexposed without introducing a bunch of noise. In a nut shell: Noticibly better then last year's Canon, but pales in comparison to this year's Nikon. The Nikon D750 is already a year old and priced roughly $1.600 less then the Canon 5D Mark IV which won't be availbale until November (after the peak Fall foliage /railfan excursion season). Unless.... the 5D Mark IV is based on something radically different than it's recently introduced older brother, the 1D X II. Canon catching up? Canon EOS-1D X II tested in our studio: http://www.dpreview.com/news/8090146652/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-ii-studio-tests?v=1&utm_expid=20106105-1.lXsXJU8CT2i23Ibvc1h0tg.1&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com /Mitch Date: 05/12/16 13:35 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: bioyans I wouldn't be too down on the 5DIV just yet, Mitch. Read the review carefully. RAW files at low ISO's in the 1DX came out BETTER than the D5. Where DPReview finds a lot of its faults, is in high ISO's and the JPEG processing. Even so, here's the summary of the review:
"It's important to keep these findings in context: the 1D X II produces very pleasing, nearly class-leading Raw and JPEG images for the most part, but it falls slightly behind in certain respects when compared to its best-performing peers." Since the 1DX is marketed primarily as a speed demon for professional photojournalists (such as sports photographers), I would expect the 5DIV to be right there with its competitors, when it gets released. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/16 15:53 by bioyans. Date: 05/12/16 14:12 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: Mgoldman bioyans Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > I wouldn't be too down on the 5DIV just yet, > Mitch. Read the review carefully. RAW files at > low ISO's in the 1DX came out BETTER than the > D5. But... the D5 is not exactly spectacular. Though it cost significantly more then the Nikno D750, there must have been a trade off - perhaps the speed? On the other hand, though the new improved sensor technology appears on the Canon 80D, and the new Canon 1D X II, maybe... just maybe, the new 5D Mark IV will fare better as the D750 did the D5. 'Course, we gotta wait till August to get a hint, and likely late October to get one into testing and late November or December before we see the data. Ugh... 2017 already - just in time for - snow? /Mitch Incidentally, note how clean the $1,300 dollar Nikon D7200 is! And that was introduced over a year ago. Date: 05/12/16 15:40 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: chessie-2117 We all have our camera preferences, and reasons for feeling camera brand A, is better
than camera brands B, C or D. My thoughts: 1) Unless we're making a living from this, (most aren't) the argument could be made that a top level point and shoot would work for many of us. Not a statement of fact, just and argument. 2) Unless we print a huge number of elaborate sized prints, the overwhelming majority can get along just fine with an upper level mirrorless system, or mid-level DSLR. Is spending a small fortune to be able to print one or two 20"x30" prints a year worth it? That's an individual decision, for the majority, I'd bet the honest answer is no. 3) If, like the majority of us, you post you photos on Flickr, Smugmug, RP.NET, here, whatever, almost NO ONE will say, geez, that's camera brand A, and the dynamic range is sooo much better. 4) Some accept only what they view as the best of the best, and greatest of the great, and it's all good. Sell you camera brand A get, take the cash hit, and buy camera brand B gear. 5) Some like Mitch, and a few others in this area, take images I'd kill to be able to compose, and see, and get camera settings dead right for the scene. The camera gear, IMHO, has little if anything to do with the end result, the user does it. Does it help to have top line gear, sure.Is it the be all/end all of success or failure, no, It's really the operator of said equipment. 6) Shoot what you're happy with, and comfortable with. It's not a contest to get the BEST ever gear, the goal is a great image. Get out and do it, with a P&S, 6 year old DSLR, or Mirrorless System, camera phone, WHATEVER! JUST DO IT!! I'm done, thanks for reading. John R Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/16 15:48 by chessie-2117. Date: 05/12/16 19:11 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: exhaustED chessie-2117 Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > We all have our camera preferences, and reasons > for feeling camera brand A, is better > than camera brands B, C or D. > > My thoughts: > 1) Unless we're making a living from this, (most > aren't) the argument could be made that a top > level > point and shoot would work for many of us. > Not a statement of fact, just and argument. > 2) Unless we print a huge number of elaborate > sized prints, the overwhelming majority can get > along > just fine with an upper level mirrorless > system, or mid-level DSLR. Is spending a small > fortune to > be able to print one or two 20"x30" prints a > year worth it? That's an individual decision, > for the majority, I'd bet the > honest answer is no. > 3) If, like the majority of us, you post you > photos on Flickr, Smugmug, RP.NET, here, whatever, > almost > NO ONE will say, geez, that's camera brand > A, and the dynamic range is sooo much better. > 4) Some accept only what they view as the best > of the best, and greatest of the great, and it's > all good. > Sell you camera brand A get, take the cash > hit, and buy camera brand B gear. > 5) Some like Mitch, and a few others in this area, > take images I'd kill to be able to compose, and > see, > and get camera settings dead right for the > scene. The camera gear, IMHO, has little if > anything to do > with the end result, the user does it. Does > it help to have top line gear, sure.Is it the be > all/end all of success > or failure, no, It's really the operator > of said equipment. > 6) Shoot what you're happy with, and comfortable > with. It's not a contest to get the BEST ever > gear, the > goal is a great image. Get out and do it, > with a P&S, 6 year old DSLR, or Mirrorless System, > camera > phone, WHATEVER! JUST DO IT!! > > I'm done, thanks for reading. > > John R > I'll second those comments. Have fun, get out there and take some photos. Worrying about which camera has absolutely the best this or that is pretty academic as many will be easily good enough for the human eye to not see a difference between them in terms of image quality. Why would many pros use Canons if their image quality is substantially inferior? Similarly, how did i get a shot taken with a Canon enthusiast level dslr (70D) on the cover of a magazine? If you are unhappy with how your shots actually look, rather than just dissatisfied with some pixel-peeping dynamic range charts on a review website, change cameras, otherwise don't worry. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/16 19:23 by exhaustED. Date: 05/12/16 19:18 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: wa4umr I think Chessie-2117 nailed it. We get so wrapped up in specs some times in a car or camera, or stereo, or big screen TV, or ________________ (fill in the blank,) that we often overlook what’s important. Will the device do what I need it to do. I don’t need a car that will go 150 MPH. I don’t race and where else could I used that speed capability. I had a friend I served with in the Army that was going to buy a stereo receiver. He picked one over another because it had 58dB channel separation and the other one had 55dB. The truth is, you couldn’t tell the difference without lab equipment. Either receiver would perform quite well. If he was playing a dirty record (remember records?) it was going to sound pretty bad. Playing a brand new record and it would sound great.
Same thing with camera. We can buy the latest and greatest, the one with the greatest ISO range, or most pixels, or greatest dynamic range, or whatever. The question becomes, “What do I really need for the photos I take. I’d love to have a 5D or one of the other top dollar bodies but I can’t justify it. I take pictures mostly for my own pleasure. I share some on Facebook, Trainorders, or e-mail. I have done a few weddings for friends. I have a Canon 70D that works fine for me. The dynamic range allows most of what I need if I process the photos in RAW. If it doesn’t, then I messed up when I hit the shutter button. Most of the consumer grade bodies will do more than what 95% of us need. Like the guy with the stereo, it depends on what you are photographing and how you compose it. If you happen upon the latest GE demonstrator and you take a picture, it doesn’t matter if you have a cellphone camera, a bottom of the line 3-megapixel P&S, or a $6000 body and a $2000 lens, if there are three trees and a dump truck between you and the locomotive, it’s probably not going to be a very good picture. If you take you cellphone or the P&S and compose the picture properly and the lighting is decent, you can get a good picture. You might not be happy if you print it at 24x36 but who does that anyway. I have had two IOTD’s on Trainorders. One was taken with my Canon Rebel XTi and the other with the 70D. I’ve had pictures taken with a 3MP P&S and my Rebel printed in a local magazine. I’m not a professional but I try to compose and expose properly. I guess that if I depended on my camera to put food on the table and a roof over my head, I’d probably have a better camera. I’d also learn more about composure, lighting, and other technical aspects of the process. A regional professional photographer challenged himself to take at least one photo a day with his i-phone. He got some great photos. It was more the talent than the equipment. Date: 05/12/16 23:33 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: Mgoldman There are points I'm addressing that many seem to miss...
1) All things being equal (or in many cases, slightly more costly for Canon gear), I question why anyone not already heavily invested in Canon gear would opt for a Canon based on the test samples above. Apples to apples, fps, focus points, megapixels, and other specs and features are typically, as stated, very similar between most brands at similar price points The differnece in dynamic range, however, is huge (especially when the better of the two is often the cheaper of the two). More for less or less for more? 2) It's not about the latest and greatest, nor the most expensive camera out there. I'd trade my $3,500.00 5D Mark III (which I purchased reconditioned for $2,500.00 direct from Canon) in a heartbeat for an $1,800.00 Nikon D750. 3) The thought that most would be hard pressed to see the difference in dymanic range of 11.2 vs 14.7 is false. Anyone who has ever taken a photo of a black steam engine on an overcast day knows that. You'll end up with two results based on your camera choice. Canon = black blob /white sky, Nikon = black steam engine with visible drivers, rods and plumbing /white sky. Granted, you could push /dodge and use filters to bring that detail back but you'll quickly find yourself exponentially increasing what ever noise you already have. I can not tell you how many images remain unprocessed on my hard drive or the number of images where the best option (which is at times viable) is to simply burn the shadows and details black rather then attempt to bring such to light.. This is clearly evident in the samples above as well as photos below. Now... does any of this matter if you are shooting with the Sun at your back? No. Does it matter if you are shooting on a cloudy day with out shadows? No. Does it matter for flash photography? No. Does it matter if your goal is getting published in or on a magazine cover? No. I've had a cell phone shot featured in a magazine - and a cover shot that I hesitated to post on line. But, if you want to shoot on the dark side, into the Sun or any other high contrast scene, clearly, the current crop of Canon cameras will be a limiting factor. And while flash photography is not typically an issue, think how nice it would be to be able to push underexposed areas not lit by the flash or in the shadow of the subject with a camera that allows for silky smooth noise free use of the shadows and high- light filter (otherwise known as fill light - and akin to dodging a negative in the dark room) despite a 5 to 6 stop push? Incidentally, pretty much across the board, the Nkon brand (with their Sony sensors) have better color depth as well. This spec would, however, be much harder to distinguish than dynamic range. Below - first two, my own with a 7D and next, the 5D Mark III, followed by my good friend Kevin's shot I'm sure he'd be fine with me posting here borrowed from RP taken with a Nikon with the same dynamic range as the $1,300.00 Nikon D7200. /Mitch Date: 05/13/16 04:04 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: exhaustED I have to say i don't like the shot taken with the Nikon, it looks over-processed and unnatural to me. We all have different tastes and that over-processed look seems pretty fashionable at the moment, i see it in a lot of landscape shots. I like a photo to be an accurate representation of what my eye sees but that's just me.
Effectively the shot is backlit and the nearside of the loco looks like it has been enhanced in post-processing and that is giving the artificial look i think. In my opinion i would have always considered that to be a compromised shot due to the backlit nature and i wouldn't ever expect it to be a great shot because of that. Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/13/16 04:14 by exhaustED. Date: 05/13/16 09:30 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: Mgoldman exhaustED Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > I have to say i don't like the shot taken with the > Nikon, it looks over-processed and unnatural... I hear what you are saying though you are overlooking the point I am attempting to illustrate. The much higher dynamic range of the Nkon to the that of the Canon is drastic. It's not "just a spec" and it is clearly visible even on a small online image. Typically, the more you pay, the more you get in features, convenience, durability and flexibility. However, no amount of money spent on a Canon will get you the dynamic range that can be had on even a low cost Nikon. To loosely quote the above linked review: The new upgraded sensor technology featured on Canon's new $6,000.00 flagship 1D X II is no match for the likes of the $1,800.00 Nikon D750 or the latest Sony sensors. (However) the 1D X II is a step forward for Canon. Here's another example below. Without the higher dynamic range this image, or at least, the subject, suffers from very noiisy recovered shadow detail along with a softening associated with the requirement to get heavy handed with noise reduction. Good enough for FB? Sure! A magazine photo - perhaps. But worth the current $1,000.00 premium over what I could get with a Nikon D7200? I don't think so. /Mitch Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/13/16 09:32 by Mgoldman. Date: 05/13/16 10:38 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: exhaustED So do you think you'll maybe jump ship to a Nikon? If so a D7200 or a full frame?
Date: 05/13/16 11:28 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: Mgoldman exhaustED Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > So do you think you'll maybe jump ship to a Nikon? > If so a D7200 or a full frame? Both excellent cameras. I grungingly may hold out till October /November to see if the 5D Mark IV leapfrogs the recently introduced 80D and 1D X II in regards to the dynmamic range. Canon finally made the switch to follow behind Sony /Nikon in putting the processor ON the sensor which prevents the signal loss that hampered dynamic range but Canon has yet to match or exceed the quality of the Sony /Nikon sensor in terms of dynmamic range. This despite a four year wait and introduction of the camera a year later then the recent new crop of Nikon cameras. If they do, I'll stay the course, pay the premium to avoid selling all my gear and starting fresh. If not, I'll jump on the bargain that the D750 is. Lol, not gonna wait for an as yet unannounced D760. Full frame would seem the best choice for those looking for the least amount of noise when shooting in circumstances with low light, a situation I find myself shooting more often then not. The next debate: The new small mirrorless cameras seem to be evolving quite well - built in image stablization good for 2 seconds, light weight - and, of course, the Sony cameras already have the Sony sensors similar to what they sell to Nkon. A debate for another time. /Mitch Date: 05/14/16 09:20 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: bioyans Mgoldman Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > The next debate: The new small mirrorless cameras > seem > to be evolving quite well - built in image > stablization good > for 2 seconds, light weight - and, of course, the > Sony > cameras already have the Sony sensors similar to > what > they sell to Nkon. A debate for another time. > > /Mitch But nowhere near the lens quality and lineup, that you currently have with Canon. Metabones does make an adaptor, so you can use your Canon "L" glass on the Sony body, but friends who have shot with both said the ergonomics on Sony's cameras are HORRIBLE. Features that should be readily accessible are buried in submenus, buttons aren't in optimpal locations, etc. There are always trade offs. Date: 05/14/16 13:06 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: Mgoldman bioyans Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > Mgoldman Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > The next debate: The new small mirrorless > > cameras seem to be evolving quite nicely... > But nowhere near the lens quality and lineup, that > you currently have with Canon. Metabones does > make an adaptor, so you can use your Canon "L" > glass on the Sony body, but friends who have shot > with both said the ergonomics on Sony's cameras > are HORRIBLE. Features that should be readily > accessible are buried in submenus, buttons aren't > in optimpal locations, etc. There are always > trade offs. Yeah - I heard the same - and that there is a tradeoff in the focusing speed. As for availability of lenses - how many phototraphers really own more then 3 or 4 lenes? Wide, all purpose, telephoto and perhaps a trusty 50 mm prime. Chances are, your 5ht, 6th and 7th lens choices would readily be available as well. I don't know that you could easily get (expensive) 2.8 and faster lenses, at least for a mirrorless camera, but, you might not have a need, at least if you are not shooting action shots at night. As for the trade-offs, yup - but I place image quality above all else. 'Course, convenience features may mean getting the shot you otherwise may have mised. /Mitch Date: 05/15/16 20:52 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: cr2581 Hey Mitch,
If you stop shooting steam and Amtrak, I promise all of this misery will go away ....... LOL !!! GP Date: 05/16/16 00:32 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: Mgoldman cr2581 Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > Hey Mitch, > > If you stop shooting steam and Amtrak, I promise > all of this misery will go away ....... LOL !!! > > GP So true, lol! I could even move out West where it's always sunny and just use my I-Phone's camera! /Mitch Date: 05/17/16 20:23 Re: Canon EOS 1D X II analysis: "I'm no Nikon...." Author: engine3420 Mgoldman Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- > cr2581 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Hey Mitch, > > > > If you stop shooting steam and Amtrak, I > promise > > all of this misery will go away ....... LOL !!! > > > > GP > > So true, lol! > > I could even move out West where it's always > sunny > and just use my I-Phone's camera! > > /Mitch I know people who do that............... Chris |