The Canon Thread
Oct 26, 2014 at 12:47 PM Post #2,672 of 2,715

Jon L

For him, f/1.2 is a prime number
Joined
May 20, 2003
Posts
4,342
Likes
601
 
From what I've read so far, sensor performance should be very similar to the 70D, which is quite good in Canon-land but still behind compared to the competition. 

 
This is exactly what I expected, but after looking at the RAW comparison photo's from DPReview, I must concede that Canon did *something* with the sensor such that 7D II RAW files look about one stop or a little less better in noise compared to 70D RAW.  In fact, 7D II RAW looks to me a bit better than the Nikon D7100 and Sony A6000!   In Canon-land, we will take any RAW improvement we can get 
biggrin.gif
 
 
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii/8
 
Oct 26, 2014 at 6:27 PM Post #2,673 of 2,715

MachBot

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 17, 2014
Posts
271
Likes
24
But still doesn't mention the fact that Canon is behind competition, the dynamic range won't be good I bet.

But we'll see.
 
Oct 27, 2014 at 5:32 AM Post #2,674 of 2,715

bhd812

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 4, 2003
Posts
7,091
Likes
21
I know you long time full frame users won't be impressed, but I had to pull the 70D kit at the price it is..remember this is my first SLR. For years i have used super zooms mostly Sony stuff for their high fps. Last year i got into photography a bit more seriously learning aperture, iso, shutter speed modes. There was three problems i had with super zooms that made me look into crop DSLR, one is the small sensor can't crop later at all, two is there is no buffer and three any iso is horrible. I shoot mostly small perching birds mainly and with any bird photography you need to be able to track the bird which means later you need to crop. I did not have time to go out looking for any birds but i did get to play around in the yard a bit. This was taken with the 55-250 stm kit lens. I need to learn how to use RAW and adjust it where i get most out of my photos first, then once i save up some cash i will upgrade the lens to either the 400mm 5.6 prime or the 100-400mm used. After some time if i feel the need to upgrade to the 7Dmarkii I will but for now i have plenty of time to learn photography better. 
 
 
 

 
Oct 28, 2014 at 12:30 AM Post #2,676 of 2,715

stang

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Posts
2,963
Likes
20
I wish the 7D II wasn't so expensive. Wouldn't mind upgrading my 1D III. My 6D is amazing though to say the least, so that keeps me occupied. Definitely one of the best purchases I have ever made. 
 
Oct 28, 2014 at 1:43 AM Post #2,677 of 2,715

liamstrain

Member of the Trade: The Audio Guild
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Posts
3,692
Likes
256
All the "behind the competition" comments strike me as a bit odd. We're mostly talking about situations and performance which: 

1. skirt the shoals of situations 99.9% of us will never have to deal with - much less where incremental improvements in performance will make a real difference in getting the shot. and

2. are a thousand times better than what the top cameras in the world could manage even 3 years ago. And those were cameras that were more than sufficient for National Geographic, SI, Conde Nast, and pretty much everyone who was not using Medium format digital or bigger. 
 
Would it be nice if Canon was pushing the envelope of what was capable? Sure. But I'm also be happy with stellar image quality (because that's what we have) and better glass in most instances than Nikon's offerings (with very few exceptions, the Nik 14-24/2.8 for instance). Most of this sounds like spec masturbation, and not grounded in actual shooting needs. 
 
Oct 28, 2014 at 7:16 AM Post #2,678 of 2,715

MachBot

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 17, 2014
Posts
271
Likes
24
All the "behind the competition" comments strike me as a bit odd. We're mostly talking about situations and performance which: 


1. skirt the shoals of situations 99.9% of us will never have to deal with - much less where incremental improvements in performance will make a real difference in getting the shot. and


2. are a thousand times better than what the top cameras in the world could manage even 3 years ago. And those were cameras that were more than sufficient for National Geographic, SI, Conde Nast, and pretty much everyone who was not using Medium format digital or bigger. 

Would it be nice if Canon was pushing the envelope of what was capable? Sure. But I'm also be happy with stellar image quality (because that's what we have) and better glass in most instances than Nikon's offerings (with very few exceptions, the Nik 14-24/2.8 for instance). Most of this sounds like spec masturbation, and not grounded in actual shooting needs. 

I shoot landscapes and i'll definitely appreciate a sensor with better dynamic range.

That being said, canon's glass is what kept me pondering.
 
Oct 29, 2014 at 9:04 AM Post #2,679 of 2,715

bhd812

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 4, 2003
Posts
7,091
Likes
21
  Skip the 100-400 and get the 400 F5.6 if you need the reach else get the 70-300 L IS :) 

70-300 L IS has better iamge quality and less service issues especially with regards to the push-pull zoom mechanisms. 

That's what i was thinking. I played with the 100-400 but never cared that much about the sharpness. There are rumors of a new one coming in November and i won't be buying anything before then anyway. I will have to rent the 70-300 though, your suggestion makes sense. 
 
Nov 8, 2014 at 5:18 PM Post #2,681 of 2,715

castleofargh

Sound Science Forum Moderator
Joined
Jul 2, 2011
Posts
9,486
Likes
4,877
might want to give a shot at DXO8 http://www.dxo.com/intl/dphotographer
 
not saying it's amazing as the tools are limited(no mask, no brush) even compared to lightroom, and it's slow.  but hey, for free it's worth every penny ^_^ .
 
the actual version is V10, that you can try for 30days. mainly with better noise treatment, and some funky "clearview" tool that's good at making postcards, but not doing anything we can't do with another software or a little time on our hands. I've updated because it's a lot less laggy(still not fast, just less laggy). and also because I'm desperate to find any alternative to adobe, given their renting license system that didn't please me too much.
 
Nov 10, 2014 at 2:48 PM Post #2,682 of 2,715

Jon L

For him, f/1.2 is a prime number
Joined
May 20, 2003
Posts
4,342
Likes
601
 
btw Canon just announced their new 100-400 mkii.

 
This is one of the few times I have been pleasantly surprised by a Canon lens release, mainly due to many people calling this lens vaporware and "unicorn" for some time and due to the reasonable MSRP, which is sure to become even more reasonable in a year or two for street prices.  I will be getting one eventually 
biggrin.gif

 
http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/11/introducing-the-canon-ef-100-400-f4-5-5-6l-is-ii/
 
Dec 12, 2014 at 9:55 PM Post #2,683 of 2,715

hyogen

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 11, 2012
Posts
787
Likes
48
Almost 2 years ago now I sold all my humble audiophile gear and bought myself a full frame D600--  check out my website which I just completely remade www.justinleewedding.com  I really have the D600 to thank, but I did waste incredible amount of time fixing skin tones and correcting white balance.  I got better at it near the end I guess..  I'm really proud of my work in the past 2 years, but must say thank you to a few people in this thread including leftnose and Jon L.  The honest advice and criticisms really helped drive me and even now I'm pushing myself to be better with each shoot.  
 
I was on the verge of switching to the 5D3, until I read this review:  http://shotkit.com/nikon-d750/  An open admission about how Nikon colors aren't as good for skin tones as Canon colors.  If you're happy with 5D3's dynamic range and AF and have heavily invested in lenses, I see no point in switching but it's nice to know the new Nikons are getting closer to Canon's skin tones.  There are a couple Canon lenses I really envy as well for the price they go for compared to Nikon including 45mm f/2.8 TS-E, 135 f/2, and 85 f/1.2.  
 
 
First few shots of having my D750 since last week.  
 

 

 

 
 
Below are some of my last shots with the D600 which I was very happy with, but overall I disliked skin tones and auto WB inconsistencies with the D600.  The AF was lacking a little bit to keep up with my events sometimes as well.  I have 0 complaints with the D750 so far.  
 





 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



 





 
Dec 14, 2014 at 6:59 AM Post #2,685 of 2,715

MadCow

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Posts
297
Likes
12
There are a couple Canon lenses I really envy as well for the price they go for compared to Nikon including 45mm f/2.8 TS-E, 135 f/2, and 85 f/1.2.  


I thought the 45mm was the worst among the four Canon TS-E lenses?
 
And speaking of TS-E, I just recently acquired this one:
 

 
Two test shots right after getting the lens:
 

 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top